ἡγεῖται. The sentence “γερονταγωγεῖ, πολλὰ μὲν ... ἀλωμένη, πολλοῖσι δ᾽ ὄμβρ. μοχθοῦσα”, is so far regular and complete: then we should have expected “ἡγουμένη”, introducing a comment on the whole sentence. Instead, we have ἡγεῖται, which draws “μοχθοῦσα” to itself, and thus breaks the symmetry of the antithesis. The substitution of a finite verb for a second participial clause is freq. in Greek; but is usu. managed as if here we had “πολλὰ μὲν...ἀλωμένη, πολλοῖς δ᾽ ὄμβρ. μοχθεῖ, ἡγουμένη” etc. Cp.
(instead of “ἀμφισταμένη”): Ph. 213 ff. “οὐ μολπὰν...ἔχων,—...ἀλλὰ...βοᾷ” (instead of “βοῶν”): Lys. or. 12 § 15 “ἐδόκει μοι ταύτῃ πειρᾶσθαι σωθὴ̂ναι, ἐνθυμουμένῳ ὅτι, ἐὰν μὲν λάθω, σωθήσομαι:, ἐὰν δὲ ληφθῶ, ἡγούμην” etc.: and O. T. 1134 n. See also Ai. 806 (n. on ζητεῖτ̓). τὰ τῆς. There are only three other instances in Soph. of the art. so placed: Ph. 263 “Φιλοκτήτης ὃν οἱ ι δισσοὶ στρατηγοί”: Ant. 409 “κόνιν σήραντες ἢ κατεῖχε τὸν ι νέκυν”: El. 879 “κἀπὶ τοῖς ι σαυτῆς κακοῖσι”. Close cohesion in thought and utterance is the excuse for this, as for the elision of “δ᾽, τ᾽, ταῦτ᾽” at the end of a v. (O. T. 29 n.).“οἰκονομῶ θαλάμους πατρός, ὦδε μὲν
ἀεικεῖ σὺν στολᾷ,
κεναῖς δ᾽ ἀμφίσταμαι τραπέζαις
”
