ἀδελφὸν … ἁλώσομαι. Didymus (circ. 30 B.C.) said this verse was condemned as spurious ‘by the commentators’ (“ὑπὸ τῶν ὑπομνηματιστῶν”). I believe it to be undoubtedly genuine. One modern argument against it is that Antigone should here speak only one verse. But these two verses express the resolve on which the action of the play turns: it is an important moment in the dialogue. And, at such a moment, Soph. often allows a stichomuthia to be broken by two or more verses for the same speaker. See the stichomuthia in 401—406, broken by 404 f.: O. T. 356-369, broken by 366 f.: ib. 1000—1046, broken by 1002 f. and 1005 f.: O. C. 579-606, broken by 583 f. and 599 ff. Further, verse 46 is Sophoclean in three traits: (a) ἀδελφόν emphasised by position as first word, with a pause after it: cp. 72, 525: O. T. 278 “δεῖξαι”: O. C. 1628 “χωρεῖν”. (b) οὐ γὰρ δή in rejecting an alternative: O. T. 576 “ἐκμάνθαν᾽: οὐ γὰρ δὴ φονεὺς ἁλώσομαι”. Cp. O. C. 110 n. (c) The phrase with the aor. part.: Ai. 1267 “χάρις διαρρεῖ καὶ προδοῦσ᾽ ἁλίσκεται”. Lastly, v. 45, if alone, would be too bald and curt.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.