θέμις σέ γ᾽ εἶναι. The MSS. here agree in the nominative. Vauvilliers suggested that “ἐστί” might be supplied, taking σέ γ᾽ εἶναι in the sense of “σέ γ᾽ ὄντα”, and comparing “ἑκὼν εἶναι”, etc. This may be rejected, as may also Reisig's “δυσσεβέστατ᾽ ἄν”, with εἴη for “εἶναι”: for then we should require “οὐδὲ” in 1189. Is θέμις, then, indeclinable in this phrase? That is now the received view. It rests, however, solely on the fact that our MSS. have θέμις, and not θέμιν, here, and in four other places, Plat. Gorg. 505D, Xen. Oec. 11 § 11, Aelian Nat. An. 1. 60, Aesch. Suppl. 335. Porson believed that, with Dawes, we ought to read θέμιν. That is my own opinion; but, as the question must be considered doubtful, I have preferred to leave θέμις in the text, and to submit the evidence in the Appendix.
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.