Thomas W. Allen, E. E. Sikes, Commentary on the Homeric Hymns

[20] Νομὸς βεβλ́ηαται ω<*>ιδ̂ης: the MSS. appear to give a case of the Ionic perf. plural taken for a singular. Smyth Ionic § 613. In Il. 16.243 Zenodotus read “οἶος ἐπιστέαται” against which Aristarchus protested (“ἀγνοεῖ ὅτι τὰ τοιαῦτα ῥήματα πληθυντικά ἐστι”). In Od. 3.438 several MSS. have “θεὰ κεχαροίατ᾽ ἰδοῦσα”, in Il. 11.660 one reads “βεβλήαται μὲν ὁ τυδείδης”. Aratus 817 (Maass) has “καὶ μᾶλλον μελανεῦσα καὶ εἰ ῥηγνύατο μᾶλλον”; conversely in the plural “κεχείμανται φρένες” Pind. Pyth.ix. 56, “κέκρανται συμφοραί” Eur. Hipp.1255. Eur. Itis therefore possible that the text may be correct, although all editors since Wolf and Barnes have accepted “νόμοι” or “νομοί”. There is a doubt as to which of these two words should be adopted; Smyth (Melic Poets p. lviii) reads “νόμος”, in the sense of ‘strain,’ ‘tune,’ a meaning which first occurs in Alcman fr. xxv “ὀρνιχῶν νόμως”. The specific meaning ‘nome’ may have been developed from this more general use. On the whole, however, “νομός” “range” is perhaps preferable, on the authority of Il. 20.249, Hes. Op.401“ἐπέων νομός” (note the singular). For “βάλλεσθαι” (mid.) = lay (as a foundation) cf. Pind. Pyth.vii. 4, Pind. Nem.i. 8.None of the emendations of “βεβλήαται” are convincing. ὠδῌ̂ς may be kept; cf. h. Dem. 494 with 495.