previous next

[10] 10-11 were omitted by Rhianos and Aph., “ἴσως ἐπεὶ οὐκ ἦν Μυρμιδὼν Πάτροκλος, Λοκρὸς γὰρ ἦν ἐξ Ὀποῦντος”, Did. But for an oracle the prediction was sufficiently near the fact, and there must have been such an ambiguity or Achilles would not have doubted. Cf. also P 410, T 328. With the former passage there is a clear contradiction, see note there.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: