Sir Richard C. Jebb, Commentary on Sophocles: Philoctetes

---

---

τί μ᾽ οὖν. With Nauck, I adopt Wakefield's transposition here, while recognising that much may be said for τί οὖν μ̓. Two questions are involved, and should be kept distinct; viz. (1) whether Tragedy ever used the licence, denied to it by Porson ( Phoen. 892), of hiatus after “τί”: and (2) whether Sophocles is likely to have written “τί οὖν μ̓” rather than “τί μ᾽ οὖν” here. As to (1), the strongest instance is Aesch. Theb. 704“τί οὖν ἔτ᾽ ἂν σαίνοιμεν ὀλέθριον μόρον”; where “τί δ᾽ οὖν, τί νῦν, τί δῆτ̓” are all improbable. It would seem, then, that Aesch. , at least, sometimes admitted the hiatus; so that, if we transpose “μ̓” here, it does not necessarily follow that the same transposition should be made in Aesch. Eum. 902“τί οὖν μ᾽ ἄνωγας τῇδ᾽ ἐφυμνῆσαι χθονί”; But the prevailing character of Sophoclean verse certainly favours “τί μ᾽ οὖν” rather than “τί οὖν μ̓”. As against conjecturing “τί νύν μ̓”, it is well to note Soph. Tr. 1247“πράσσειν ἄνωγας οὖν με πανδίκως τάδε”; Soph. Ai. 1364“ἄνωγας οὖν με τὸν νεκρὸν θάπτειν ἐᾶν”; though no argument can be drawn from the fact that “οὖν” precedes “με” in those places. Cp. 733, 753, 917. See Appendix.

τί … ἄλλο, sc. “ποιεῖν”: cp. 310, and n. on Ant. 497“θέλεις τί μεῖζον ἢ κατακτεῖναι μ᾽ ἐλών”;