previous next



ἵν᾽ αὐτὸς ἦν πρόσουρος, where he was his own sole neighbour. So when a man sends no “ἀγγελία” before him, he is said to arrive as his own “ἄγγελος”: when no herald precedes him, he is “αὐτὸς κῆρυξ” (n. on 500). Cp. Aesch. Cho. 866μόνος ὢν ἔφεδρος” | “δισσοῖς”, ‘his own sole supporter against two foes,’ i.e., there is no “ἔφεδρος” at his back, to fight the man who vanquishes him. Lucian Timon 43 “θεοῖς θυέτω καὶ εὐωχείσθω, μόνος ἑαυτῷ γείτων καὶ ὅμορος” (where “ὅμορος” strongly suggests that Lucian was thinking of our passage). Martial 5. 24. 8 Hermes (the gladiator) suppositicius sibi ipse, ‘his own substitute,’ i.e., never requiring one, because never defeated. Seneca Herc. Fur. act 1 sc. 1 Quaeris Alcidae parem? | Nemo est nisi ipse. Massinger, Duke of Milan act 4 sc. 3, ‘And, but herself, admits no parallel.’ —Remark that “ἑαυτῷ” (which Meineke sought to represent by changing ἦν to οἱ) is not needed, since πρόσουρος=‘near the borders,’ i.e., ‘neighbour to the place’ (in which Ph. was), and thus represents, not “γείτων” simply, but “γείτων τῇ χώρᾳ”. For the Ionic form cp. “ὅμουρος, ξύνουρος, τηλουρός” ( Soph. O. T. 194 n.).

οὐκ ἔχων βάσιν, without the power to walk; cp. 632ἄπουν”. —Bothe's πρόσουρον οὐκ ἔχων βάσιν (‘hearing no footstep of neighbour’) is plausible at first sight. Then “αὐτὸς ἦν” =‘he was alone’ ( O. C. 1650 n.). But the vulgate is far more forcible. By his πρόδουλονβάσιν Seyffert meant, ‘having no foot to serve him.’—The conjecture, “οὐχ ἔχων βάσιν” | οὔτιν᾽ ἐς ἔγχωρον (‘having access to no neighbour’) is very weak. Those who adopt it (cp. cr. n.) join “κακογείτονα” with “στόνον”: see next n.


hide References (4 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (4):
    • Aeschylus, Libation Bearers, 866
    • Sophocles, Oedipus at Colonus, 1650
    • Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus, 194
    • Sophocles, Philoctetes, 632
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: