καὶ μὴ ᾿ξατιμάζητον, sc. “τοὺς φυτεύσαντας”: “"and that ye may not utterly scorn your parents, because the father (εἰ =“ὅτι"”) is blind from whom ye, such evil sons, have sprung—for your sisters did not thus.” τυφλοῦ has the chief emphasis: the father's blindness emboldened the impiety of the base sons, while it only stimulated the devotion of the daughters. For the gen. cp. 1322.—Others understand: “"do not think it a light matter that ye have been such sons of a blind sire"” (εἰ as after “θαυμάζω, ἐλεῶ”, etc.): but this sense for ἐξατιμάζητον seems much less natural. ἔφυτον is the MS. reading, as 1696 “ἔβητον”, 1746 “ἐλάχετον”: and there are about 10 other places in Attic writers where the MSS. give “-τον” for the 2nd pers. dual of secondary tenses. Against this group is to be set a smaller group (of some 9 passages) in which “-την” is established, “εἰχέτην ἤδη”, O.T. 1511, being the only one proved by metre. Curtius (Verb 1. 80, Eng. tr. 53) would leave the normal “-τον” where, as here, the MSS. support it. Though Attic usage, misled by the analogy of “-την” in the 3rd pers., sometimes admitted it in the 2nd, it also (he thinks) retained “-τον”. The tendency of recent editors has been to write “-την” everywhere. But, in the absence of better proof that “-τον” had been wholly discarded, a consensus of MSS. seems entitled to the benefit of the doubt. I cannot find any evidence on this point from the best source,—inscriptions.
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.