πόλεις ὄλλυσιν, ἥδ᾽ is far better and more spirited than “πόλεις τ᾽ ὄλλυσιν ἠδ᾽”: it is also strongly confirmed by the similar passage, 296 ff., where we have “τοῦτο—τόδ᾽—τόδ᾽”, just as here “αὕτη...ἥδ᾽... ἥδ᾽”. When “πόλεις” had become, as in L, “πόλις”,—a corruption found also in Aesch. Pers. 489,—“τ᾽” may have been added for metre's sake. To “ἠδέ” itself there is no objection: it was certainly used in iambics by Soph. (fr. 253, fr. 503), no less than by Aesch. ( Aesch. Cho. 1025, Aesch. Eum. 414), and by Eur. ( Eur. Hec. 323, H. F. 30).— Campb. reads πόλεις τ᾽ … ἥδ᾽, and regards the anacoluthon as making the lines ‘more expressive.’
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.