Page images
PDF
EPUB

Critical and Explanatory Remarks on the HiPPOLYTUS STE

PHANE PHORUS of EURIPIDES, With Strictures on some
Notes of Professor MONK.

NO. III.

V. 47. ή δ' ευκλεής μεν, αλλ' όμως απόλλυται

Φαίδρα το γαρ τήσδ' ου προτιμήσω κακόν,
το μή ου παρασχεϊν τους έμούς εχθρούς έμοί

δίκην τοσαύτην, ώστε μοι καλώς έχειν. Kamov," says the Professor, “ pro xaxon habent E. P. Schol. Aristoph. Ran. 314. probantibus Marklando et Heathio, et sic edidit Brunck. Utrumque xarby. xoxox Lascaris. Sed Aldi et ceterorum Codd. lectionem xaxoy defendunt Æsch. Eum. 637. πατρος προτιμά Ζεύς μόρον, 737. Alcest. 773. των εν Αδμήτου κακών Ovoĉy potisão: deinde Codd. nonnulli tou deine oú mendose : constructio rò un ou 7. subaudita præpositione frequens est apud Atticos: vid. Soph. Trach. 622. Eur. Phoen. 1192.: pessime Valckenaerius post apotiñow distinctionem posuit.” 1. I must first observe that I agree with the Professor in the propriety of rejecting the stop, which Valckenaer

puts
after

TEPOTILÝow, so as to connect xcxòx with what follows, thus making two complete sentences. The reason, which Valckenaer gives, is this : « Mutata fuit distinctio, quia jungenda videbantur xaxòv, To je m'y ou TapaOxelv, etc.: fateor lectionem istam (xanov) esse speciosam, sed hac admissa versu tamen sequente tò res ou Topao xeiv necessario requiritur; qui modus loquendi Veneris esset, indignabundæ, ante infinitivum, in talibus usitatum, omittentis voces ou xaxov, vel DEIVÓV érti, vel harum similes : quia tamen in optimis legitur Codd. xxxòv, servandum existimavi, jungendumque cum sequentibus :-xaxòv, ut in Or. v. 478. véracy us xaxoy und sidevas.” 2. But I beg leave to remark that the Professor is too severe upon Valckenaer, when he says—« Pessime post potiuñow distinctionem posuit ;" for, resolved as Valckenaer was to retain xxxòv, upon the authority of the best MSS., his good sense suggested to him this change in the punctuation, because it restored perspicuity to the passage, and violated no usage whatever of the tragedians. 3. I do not, however, approve of the Professor's retaining xzxóv. The sense of the passage, if we reject the punctuation of Valckenaer, clearly requires xard-For I will not suffer any consideration about the dignity of her character to stand in the τα 4 of a satisfactory revenge upon my enemies : το τήσδε καλόν refers to eủxiens, as Heath has seen, whose words are these : “Ap. Schol. etiam ad Aristoph. Ran. v. 317. qui hunc versum laudat, legitur xanòv, quomodo legendum vel ipsa clausulæ hujus NOL. VII. Cl. Jl. NO, XV.

F

sententia satis monet; vox enim hæc ad ea, quæ præcesserant, 8 eŭxasns uèv, manifeste spectat.” So too thought another learned man, as will appear by the following note : «Schol. ad Ranas v. 317. aúpa tis ei ÉTVEUVE PLUOTIxwtáty (quem adfert etiam Schol. Eurip. ad Hec. v. 444. legens één VEVOE) observat, ultimam in aupa produci, ut et in palepa, quod posterius probat auctoritate Euripidis,

Φαίδρα το γαρ τήσδ' ου προτιμήσω καλόν : respicitur hic procul dubio ad Hipp. v. 48. ubi tamen in fine xxxòv legitur in editis, et ap. Schol. utrumque ferri potest : xanov tamen præcedenti versui, quo de Phædra Venus dicit,

ήδ' ευκλεής μεν, αλλ' όμως απόλλυται

Φαίδρα, melius cohærere videtur, dum in sequentibus propositi rationem reddit,

το γαρ της ου προτιμήσω καλών
του μη ου παρασχειν τους έμούς εχθρούς έμοι

δίκην τοσαύτην, , e quibus per se liquet quod hic ap. Schol. post palopu sit distinctio ponenda : ceterum idem potuisset Sch. probare ex Eurip. de v. aüga, vid. in Hecuba v. 444.” Misc. Obss. V. 11. T. 1. p. 107. Válckenaer hímself admits this reading to be a specious," and it is supported by the authority of the Scholiast upon Aristophanes, though it must be confessed that the Scholiast upon Euripides found κακόν in his copy s for he says, Ου το ταύτης κακόν έμπροσθεν θήσομαι, μή τιμωρήσασθαι τους εχθρούς, αντί του, μη φροντίσω της απωatics aútñs. 4. Musgrave defends xaxòv, and says : “ MS. E, Lib. P. et Lasc. xanov, ut emendandum censet Marklandus : mihi vulgata potior videtur : si xadov recipitur, delendæ erunt voces Mens : alioqui dicet Venus, se Phædre decus non majoris facere, quam Hippolytum inultum relinquere, quod admodum ineptum est : deinde, cum proprie dicantur ngotipão ba quæ bona sunt, habet quiddam exquisitioris elegantiæ contrarius verbi usus, sc. cum potiuão la dicuntur mala : vid. Æsch. Agam. v. 1424. Eum. v. 643. et 744. Aristoph. Ran. p. 155. Nostrum Alcest. v. 774." As to the second reason, which is here assigned by Musgrave for retaining xaxov, I value it not a rush. As to the first reason, I value that a little more; for the plain interpretation of the passage, which I have given above, does not make the reading of maaòy at all incompatible with vin

, oů, which is merely a strong negative, and this double negative is frequently used after a negative in the precedent clause, as in the Phoen. 1183. quoted by Valckenaer,

ΜΗΔ' άν το σεμνον πύρ νιν ειργάζειν Διός,
το ΜΗ ΟΥ κατ' άκρων Περγάμων ελεϊν πόλιν. .

1

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

arE

We

say in English, Nothing shall prevent me from doing it, whereas in Greek it is, Nothing shall prevent me so that I shall not do it. Thus too in the (Edipus at Thebes, v. 1400.

ουκ ήνεσχόμην το μη ποκλείσαι τουμόν άθλιον δέμας. 5. I agree with the Professor in reading to ten oủ, and not too un ou, for the reason assigned by Valckenaer, (but omitted by the Professor) “ Sophocli præsertim frequentatur etiam initio senariorum to rent ou per ouvex úvrow iambus ; nusquam, si bene memini, reperietur apud Atticos poetas Toll verhou,” and I understand ώστε before το μη ου παρασχεϊν, as in the other two passages from the Edipus at Thebes, and the Phænissæ. And for such an explanation I have the authority of Brunck, who reads xanoy, and

says : “ Sensus est, Quod autem illius in rem est, non tanti faciam, quantum cavebo, ne inultus evadat inimicus meus : subauditum videri possit napà, pre, sed articulus Tò hic tantumdem valet ac Cote [in fact ürte is understood,] ut in illo Phan. 1181.

και τοσόνδ' εκόμπαο
μηδ' αν το σεμνον πύρ νιν ειργάθειν Διός

το μή ου κατάκρων Περγάμων ελεϊν πόλιν, ,
ubi sciolus, quem forte turbasset rarior constructio, scripsisset,
ut hic multis in libris legitur, toŰ ou : nam sipyábe genitivum
regit
, ut agotiuậy : veram lectionem dedimus :

altera procul 6. The question is not, as the Professor (who found his references in Musgrave's and in Valckenaer's notes,) seems to think, about the use of προτιμάν with μόρον, ουδέν κακών, or other analogous expressions, (for this needs not to be disputed,) but the real point is the connexion of the words-oυ προτιμήσω το καλόν, Or κακόν τήσδε, with the two subsequent lines, το μη ου παρασχεϊν X. 7. 8., and this connexion is to be maintained only by the reading of xanòv, as we have seen. Valckenaer has well illustrated the meaning of apotiuğv here : « Attico more scribendi significat, Hujusce enim commodum non curabo, sic nempe ut illud anteponam meæ vindictæ, sæpius absque tali respectu 7 fotiñous notat opova Tioas, vel sógov Exew: vid. L. Bos. Animadvv. ad Joseph. p. 89. quo hic sensu legitur in Eurip. Heraclid. 883. Tò gòv apotiuñv : parum distat in Elec. ν. 114. τούμόν δ, ουχί τoυκείνου σκοπώ v. 1330. opa uni toujov, árld xal tò gòv, et in Eurip. Androm. V. 256. qui v. etiam Apotią sic adhibuit in Alc. v. 761. et alibi, ut Æsch. Eum. 644. 744. 'Agam. 1424. Sophocles, Aristophanes, ceterique." V. 237. όστις σε θεών ανασειράζει, ,

και παρακόπτει φρένας. . Here the Professor says: “ Tagaxóttei pevas, delirare facit : ΜΟΙΑ Τro quidem παρακόπτειν, perinde ac παραπαίειν, signifcat deli

dubio corrupta.

rare, sed nescio an alibi verbum activo sensu, ut hic, adhibeatur :
hinc tamen παράκοποι Φρενών, insanientes, Bacch. 33. et simpliciter
παράκοπος, αmens, Bacch. 1000. ΑΕsch. Prcm. 601. ad quem locum
Blomfieldius existimat vocabulum proprie de citharædo usurpatum
esse contra tempus pulsante." I shall first cite the following
examples : “ μανίαις φλέγων, Λύσση παράκοπος : Εur. in Βacch.
ν. 32. τοι γάς νυν αυτάς εκ δόμων οίστρησεγω μανίαις, όρος δ' οικούσε
παράκοποι φρενών, As. in Agam. v. 487. τίς ώδε παιδνός, η φρενών
xexoupévoc, quis ita est stolidus, vel mente læsus? Apud eund. in
Eumen. ν. 330. per synonymiam, παρακοπα, παραφορά, Φρενοδαλίς,
delirium, insania, amentia, et παρακόπτειν, insanire, ut in Hip-
pocr. Ep. 12. initio, ου παρέκοπτε Δημόκριτος : sic παραπαίειν apud
Nostr. in Pluto v. 508. et in Pace v. 89.” Bergler's Note on the
Thesmophoriazus v. 688. V. 11. p. 1046. As to Mr. Blom.
field's notion, which Professor Monk seems to approve, Voca-
bulum proprie de citharædo usurpatum esse contra tempus pulsant
I should be glad to see upon whose authority Mr. Blomfield
rests for this novel idea : he certainly did not receive it from those
works, which he so frequently quotes, Hesychius, Suidas, the
Etymologicum Magnum, nor from the commentators upon them;
nor from Photius, nor Zonaras, nor from H. Stephens. Suidas gives
a very different, and, as I think, a much truer account,
Παρακεκομμένος, μαινόμενος, εξεστηκώς, παράφρων, και παρακεκομ-
μένα, Καμοί γάρ έστιν αμπέλια παρακεκομμένα, αντί του, μηδέν
εντελές έχοντα, από μεταφοράς των αδοκίμων νομισμάτων, άπερ παρά-
τυπα λέγεται, και παρακεκομμένα και νύν δε ειώθασι λέγειν παρα-
χαράκτας, τους παρακόπτοντας, όθεν και Παράσημος ρήτωρ,

ανδράσια μοχθηρα, παρακεκομμένα,

άτιμα, και παράσημα, και παράξενα. If Mr. Blomfield will look into H. Stephens's Thes. Gr. Ling., he will see that H. Stephens thought the same as Suidas : [tapalXÓTTO, perperam cudo, falsum nummum percutio, monetam non bonam cudo, idem quod παραχαράττω, unde παρακεκομμένον νόμισμα, nummus non bonus, sed adulterinus, (ut Cicero loquitur) nummus subaratus, ουκ ορθώς κοπέν, seu κοπέν τω κακίστα κόμματα, και κεκιβδηλευμένον, ut Aristophanem loqui supra dictum fuit, seu νόμισμα πονηρού κόμματος, quod et παράτυπον et παράσημος, necnon παρακεχαραγμένον και κίβδηλον, in qua significatione vulgata lexica ex Luciano afferunt κίβδηλα, και νόθα, και παρακεκομμένα, moneta adulterina et falso percussa, sed metaphorice plerunque capitur, Lucianus in Leriph. εί τι ξενίζοι και το καθεστηκός νόμισμα της φωνής παρακόπτοι, Ιdem Lucianus Hermotimo, κατά τους άργυρογνώμονας διαγνώσκειν ά τε δόκιμα και ακίβδηλα, και απαρακεκομμένα. Ιdem de Historia scrib. 'Αργυρομοιβικώς έκαστα εξετάζοντας, ως τα μεν παρακεκομμένα ευθύς απορρίπτειν, παραδέχεσθαι δε τα δόκιμα και έννομα και ακριβή τον τύπον.” Η. Stephens very properly concludes

[ocr errors]

the article with saying, “ Videtur mapaxóttw pro defraudo manasse ab illis, qui monetam subæratam et adulterinam bonce permutant, et ita homines fraudant ac decipiunt.V. 363.

πάθη Mέλεα θρoυμένας. « Cf.,” says the Professor, after Valckenaer, « Esch. Suppl. 117. τοιαύτα πάθεα μέλεα θρoυμένα Λέγω λιγέα βαρέα δακρυοπετή.” But neither Valckenaer, nor the Professor, nor Mr. Blomfield, whose words will be cited below, have remarked that these words in the Hippolytus are cited by Eustathius, as Abresch upon the passage in the Supplices of Eschylus remarks : « πάθεα θρεόμενα, ut ap. Eurip. Hipp. v. 363. unde suppresso poetæ nomine citat Eustathius ad ΙΙ. 2. p. 337. 1. 8. simulque ex Medea ν. 51. θρεομένη σαυτή κακά.” The words occur in p. 494. 1. 22. Ed. Rome, Τού δε θρόος προυπόκειται ρημα το θρέω, ήγουν συνθορύβω, βοώ, η λαλώ, οίον Πάθεα θρεομένης, και θρεομένη σαυτή κακά, εκ δε του θρόος συνήρηται ο θρούς, εξ αυτών δε ο αθρόος, και ο άθρους.

δε ο αθρόος, και ο άθρους. I add Phaenisse ν. 1350. μεγάλα μοι θρoεις πάθεα. The verb occurs in the Seven against Thebes, v. 78. Ed. Blomfield,

θρούμαι φοβερά μεγάλα τ' άχη, where Mr. Blomfield says : « θρέομαι, Iamentor, θρεομένη, θρηνούσα, Hesych. Fwho also has θρέειν, θροεϊν, θρεόμενον, ολοφυρόμενον] ex Eurip. Med. 50. αυτή θρεομένη σαυτή κακά, Anacreon. ap. Schol. in Hephest. p. 124. Ed. Gaisford, θρεοκαρδίων ανδρών. [Thus too Alberti upon Hesychius has—« Vide Interpp. ad Anacr. c. 61. ubi θρεοκάρδιος, quod adde Lexicis”]: hinc θρήνος, lamentum funebre [the Schol. A. in Sev. ag. Theb. ν. 78. θρέομαι, ήτοι θρηνώ, βοώ φοβεράς μεγάλας θρηνωδίας,] et θροέα, de quo ad Prom. dixi.” We have in the Prom. v. 617.

ταν ταλαιπώραν ώδ'

έτυμα προσθροείς, where the Schol. B. says, προσθροείς, προσφθέγγη, προσαγορεύεις, and Mr. Blomfield says, " προσθροέω, alloφuor, θροέω infra 628. θρόει, Φράζει τα δυσπλάνω παρθένω.” ' Here Mr. Blomfield adds : «θροέω, loquor, vid. 617. Αgam. 104. κύριός είμι θροεϊν όδιον κράτος αίσιον budpõv 'Exteréwv, Philoct. Sophocl. 209. pro susurro Anyte Antholog. 1ν. 12. 103. αδύ τοι έν χλωρούς πνεύμα θρoεί πετάλοις.” The passage in the Agamemnon, to which Mr. Blomfield refers, is, as Stanley observes, quoted by Aristophanes in Ranis v. 1308. The following passages are quoted in Beck's Index Euripideus, Or. 187. θροει, τις κακών τελευτα μένει, Ιb. 1248. Hipp. 571. et Τr. 1239. τίνα θρoείς αυδάν, Οr. 1265. έχομεν ως θρoεις, Phen. 1350. [quoted above], Hipp. 212. Rhes. 38. et Tr. ubi bis reperitur, τί θρoείς Iphig. Α. 143. εύφημα θρόει, Ιb. 1345. ου ψευδή θροείς, Rhes. 12. Ιb. 454. τι το σήμα θροεϊ, Ιon, 784. φίλα θρoείς, Ιb. 454. άφατον, άναυδητον λόγον εμοί θρoείς. Photius has θρούς, ήχος, φωνή

« PreviousContinue »