τἀπὶ Τροίᾳ πέργαμ̓: cp. 353 n. οὐ μή ποτε πέρσοιεν. Helenus said, “οὐ μὴ πέρσετε”. It is certain that οὐ μή was used with the 1st or 3rd pers. of the fut. indic. in strong denial,—having then the same force as “οὐ μή” with the subjunctive, which was the commoner construction. There is no need, then, for changing “οὐ μὴ πέρσοιεν” into “οὐ μὴ πέρσειαν” (as though he had said “οὐ μὴ πέρσητε”). In oratio obliqua after a secondary tense this fut. indic. with “οὐ μή” could be retained (as if here we had “πέρσουσιν”): or it could be represented by a fut. inf. (as if we had “ἔφη αὐτοὺς οὐ μήποτε πέρσειν”). See the examples in n. on O. C. 177. οὐ δηποτε πέρσοιεν would be a weaker reading.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents: