ξὺν τῷ θεῷ. Those who write “ξύν τοι θεῷ” here do so on the ground that “σὺν θεῷ”, not “σὺν τῷ θεῷ”, is the regular phrase when the sense is general, ‘with the divine aid’; whereas in O. T. 146“σὺν τῷ θεῷ” refers to a particular god (Apollo). But there is an arbitrary rigour in this doctrine. “ὁ θεός” often means ‘the divine power’ generally: e.g. frag. adesp. 471 “ὁ γὰρ θεὸς μέγιστος ἀνθρώποις νόμος”: and 496. 2 “πόρρω γὰρ ἑστὼς ὁ θεὸς ἐγγύθεν βλέπει”. And this very phrase, “σὺν τῷ θεῷ”, occurs once, at least, in a passage where the context plainly indicates that the sense is general, viz. Eur. fr. 490 “σὺν τῷ θεῷ χρὴ τοὺς σοφοὺς ἀναστρέφειν ι βουλεύματ᾽ ἀεί”. There, indeed, as here, Nauck changes “τῷ” to “τοι”, but without any warrant. ἵδοιμι κ.τ.λ. The question whether the MSS. have lost a syllable here depends on the view taken of 369. I have given reasons for thinking that the second “οὐκ” in that verse is genuine; from which it would follow that there is a defect here. Bellermann, indeed, is content to hold that Sophocles neglected an exact correspondence; but this seems very unlikely. L. Dindorf's remedy “ἴδοιμι <μήν> νιν”, has this advantage over the others (cr. n.), that it gives a light adversative force, and so fitly responds to v. 383, “ξὺν τῷ θεῷ κ.τ.λ.” ‘Triumph, like defeat, is the gift of heaven.’—‘Yet would that I could see him,’ etc. The next best conjecture is perhaps that of Apitz, “ἴδοιμί νύν νιν”.
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.