εἰσέβην suits the imagery of ἀγόντων (see on 253): cp. Aesch. Suppl. 470 “ἄτης δ᾽ ἄβυσσον πέλαγος οὐ μάλ᾽ εὔπορον ι τόδ᾽ ἐσβέβηκα”. After ἀντειπεῖν and like words the person gainsaid is denoted by the dat.; the argument, by “περί τινος” or “πρός τι”. Here we begin with a neut. dat. οἶς (instead of “πρὸς ἃ” or “περὶ ὧν”), which implies a personification of the “λόγος”. Then, at the end of the sentence, ἐμοί is pleonastically added, by a sort of afterthought. This double dative, though irregular, does not seem to warrant the change of “ἐμοί” into “ἔχειν.” ἐμοί gives greater vividness to the thought of the dead brought face to face with the living. ἂν with ἀντειπεῖν. ἐγὼ οὐδὲ: cp. 939.
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.