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.
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.