The simple answer would have been: —“that you prompted him to make his present charge”: but this becomes: —“that, if you had not prompted him, he would never have made it.” ξυνῆλθε: Aristoph. Kn. 1300 “φασὶν ἀλλήαις συνελθεῖν τὰς τριήρεις ἐς λόγον,” “the triremes laid their heads together”: Aristoph. Kn. 467 “ἰδίᾳ δ᾽ ἐκεῖ τοῖς Λακεδαιμονίοις ξυγγίγνεται”.τὰς ἐμὰς the conject. τάσδ᾽ ἐμὰς mars the passage: “he would never have described this slaying of L. as mine.” οὐκ ἂν εἶπε τὰς ἐμὰς Λαΐου διαφθοράς = οὐκ ἂν εἶπεν ὄτι ἐγὼ Λάϊον διέφθειρα, but with a certain bitter force added;—“we should never have heard a word of this slaying of Laius by me.” Soph. has purposely chosen a turn of phrase which the audience can recognise as suiting the fact that Oed. had slain Laius. For διαφθοράς instead of a clause with διαφθείρειν, cp. Thuc. 1.137 “γράψας τὴν ἐκ Σαλαμῖνος προάγγελσιν τῆς ἀναχωρήσεως καὶ τὴν τῶν γεφυρῶν ... οὐ διάλυσιν.”
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.