νόσου μαλαχθῇς: the gen. as after verbs denoting cessation or respite: Ai. 274“κἀνέπνευσε τῆς νόσου”: Eur. Or. 43“σῶμα κουφισθῇ νόσου”: so λωφᾶν, etc. ξὺν τοῖσδε τόξοις, with its aid: cp. Xen. An. 3. 2. 8“σὺν τοῖς ὅπλοις...δίκην ἐπιθεῖναι αὐτοῖς”. But “σύν” with dat., in ref. to arms, is oft. no more than ἔχων with acc.; e.g. Il. 11. 251“στῆ δ᾽ εὐρὰξ σὺν δουρί.” πέρσυς φανῇς: the phrase suggests the glory of the exploit; cp. 1064: Thuc. 2. 11“κάλλιστον...πολλοὺς ὄντας ἑνὶ κόσμῳ χρωμένους φαίνεσθαι”. The language here is not strictly logical. It implies that, before the “παῦλα” can come, he must not only have been relieved (“μαλαχθῇς”), but also have taken Troy. The explanation seems to be simply that the writer was thinking of the victory as an event which was to follow closely on the cure. So, having used “μαλαχθῇς”, he subjoined “καὶ...πέρσας φανῇς”, instead of making the second statement independent of “πρὶν ἄν” (e.g., “καὶ ἔπειτα πέρσας φανεῖ”). It is much as if one said, ‘You will never be cured until you find health and glory at Troy,’—instead of, ‘find health at Troy,—where you will also find glory.’ Schneidewin and others compare Ai. 106—110: “θανεῖν γὰρ αὐτὸν οὔ τί πω θέλω...πρὶν ἂν...νῶτα φοινιχθεὶς θάνῃ”. The parallel would be closer if, there, we had “φοινιχθῇ καὶ θάνῃ”,—meaning “φοινιχθῇ: καὶ ἔπειτα θανεῖται”. We cannot remove the difficulty by supposing that “μαλαχθῇς” denotes merely alleviation, not cure; for the poet clearly thinks of the cure as preceding the victory (919 f.: 1345 ff.: 1424 ff.).
This text is part of:
Table of Contents: