οὐ γὰρ ἄλλ᾽ ἔστ̓, ἀλλ᾽ ἃ κ.τ.λ. L's reading, “οὐ γαρ άλλ̓” (sic) “ἔσθ᾽ ἃ” clearly points to the reading in the text, since ἀλλ̓ might easily have been omitted by a scribe who mistook it for a repetition of ἄλλ̓. And “Γ” confirms this. For ἄλλος closely followed by “ἀλλά”, Seyffert cp. Od. 8. 311“ἀτὰρ οὔ τι μοι αἴτιος ἄλλος”, | “ἀλλὰ τοκῆε δύω” (cp. ib. 11. 558). Remark that this reading is further corroborated by the form of the statement. It is peculiarly Sophoclean to have three clauses, in which the second is opposed to the first, and the third repeats the sense of the first,—as here ἃ βαστάζω= ταῦτ̓: see on Ant. 465.—A's reading ἄλλα γ᾽ ἔσθ᾽ ἃ is weaker, and also less likely to have generated L's.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents: