Sir Richard C. Jebb, Commentary on Sophocles: Philoctetes

---

---

οὐχ is equivalent to a repetition of “οὐδένα”. For ὅστις ἀρκέσειεν, cp. 693 f. “παρ᾽ ᾧ...ἀποκλαύσειεν” (where, as here, the sentence is negative). I. T. 588 ff. “οὐδένα γὰρ εἶχον ὅστις Ἀργόθεν μολὼν” | “εἰς Ἄργος αὖθις τὰς ἐμὰς ἐπιστολὰς” | “πέμψειε”. And in a positive sentence, Soph. Tr. 903“κρύψασ᾽ ἑαυτὴν ἔνθα μή τις εἰσίδοι”. The relative clause with the optative is, in such instances, virtually a final clause (as here, ‘no one to help’). Instead of such an optative, we usually find in Attic the fut. ind., even after a secondary tense; as if here we had “οὐχ ὅστις ἀρκέσει”: e.g. H. 2. 3. 2 “ἔδοξε τῷ δήμῳ τριάκοντα ἄνδρας ἑλέσθαι, οἳ τοὺς πατρίους νόμους συγγράψουσι”.

The origin of this use of the optative is disputed. (1) According to one view, it is an extension of the deliberative use. From the direct question, “τίς ἀρκέσῃ”; comes the indirect “ἀπορῶ ὅστις ἀρκέσῃ”: and, after a secondary tense, “ἠπόρουν ὅστις ἀρκέσειεν”. ( H. 7. 4. 39 “ἠπόρει ὅ τι χρήσαιτο τῷ πράγματι”.) In “οὐδένα εἶχον ὅστις ἀρκέσειεν” the interrogative sense of “ὅστις” has passed into a purely relative sense, and the clause has become final. For this view, see Sidgwick A. in Classical Review, vol. v. p. 148, 1891. (2) Others hold that this optative is simply a potential, equivalent to the optative with “ἄν”. Prof. W. G. Hale, after a full discussion, decides for this view: see Transactions of American Phil. Assoc., vol. XXIV. pp. 156—205, 1894.

νόσου κάμνοντι συλλάβοιτο, put a helping hand to the disease, i.e., help to lighten its burden, for me in my suffering. As “λαμβάνομαί τινος”=to lay hold on a thing, so “συλλαμβάνομαί τινός” “τινι”=to lay hold on it along with another person; i.e., to help him with it. Eur. Med. 946“συλλήψομαι δὲ τοῦδέ σοι κἀγὼ πόνου”. Thuc. 4. 47§ 2 “ξυνελάβοντο δὲ τοῦ τοιούτου οὐχ ἥκιστα”, they mainly contributed to such a result. Cp. id. 4. 10 § 1 “οἱ ξυναράμενοι τοῦδε τοῦ κινδύνου.”

πάντα δὲ σκοπῶν: “δέ” here=“ἀλλά”: Ant. 85 n.