Sir Richard C. Jebb, Commentary on Sophocles: Trachiniae

---

---

ὡς ἔοικεν, οὐ νεμεῖν, instead of “οὐ νεμεῖ”. The verb which ought to have been principal is attracted into the relative clause. Cp. Her.4. 5“ὡς δὲ Σκύθαι λέγουσι, νεώτατον ἁπάντων ἐθνέων εἶναι” (instead of “ἐστὶ”) “τὸ σφέτερον”. Id. 6. 137“ὡς δὲ αὐτοὶ Ἀθηναῖοι λέγουσι, δικαίως ἐξελάσαι” (instead of “ἐξήλασαν”). Sophist. 263 D “παντάπασιν, ὡς ἔοικεν, ἡ τοιαύτη σύνθεσις...γίγνεσθαι” (instead of “γίγνεται”) “λόγος ψευδής”. Phileb.20D “τόδε γε μήν, ὡς οἶμαι, περὶ αὐτοῦ ἀναγκαιότατον εἶναι” (instead of “ἐστὶ”) “λέγειν” [for “εἶναι” can hardly depend on the word “ἀνάγκη” higher up]. I. T. 52 “καθεῖναι” (instead of “καθῆκε”) after “ὡς ἔδοξε”. But Aesch. Pers.188“τούτω στάσιν τιν̓, ὡς ἐγὼ ᾿δόκουν ὁρᾶν”, | “τεύχειν”, is more complex, as the fusion is between (1) “ἐδόκουν” (3rd plur.) “τεύχειν”, and (2) “ἔτευχον, ὡς ἐγὼ ἐδόκουν ὁρᾶν”. In Latin, too, this natural laxity occurs: Offic. 1. 7 § 22 ut placet Stoicis, quae in terris gignantur ad usum hominum omnia creari (instead of creantur).

Paley would get rid of the irregularity by making ὡς exclamatory (‘how!’): but this is impossible. The text is clearly sound, though it has been much suspected (cr. n.).

νεμεῖν … μοῖραν: “μοῖρα” is the share of respect due to a person: cp. Plat. Crat. 398C “μεγάλην μοῖραν καὶ τιμὴν ἔχει”: and Soph. O. C.277Append. For “νεμεῖν”, cp. 57 “νέμοι...ὤραν”.

θεῶν ἀρὰ (like “θεῶν Ἐρινυες”, Ant.1075), —the vengeance sent by the gods, in answer to the father's imprecation (1202). In this objective sense, the Curse is itself the agent of retribution: cp. O. T.418“δεινόπους ἀρά”: Aesch. Theb.70“Ἀρά τ̓, Ἐρινὺς πατρὸς ἡ μεγασθενής”: and the Eumenides call themselves “Ἀραί” ( Aesch. Eum.417). Sometimes, again, the “Ἀρά” is distinguished from the power which it calls into action: Soph. El.111“πότνἰ Ἀρά”, | “σεμναί τε θεῶν παῖδες Ἐρινύες”. A transition from the latter idea to the former may be seen in Soph. O. C.1375 f., where Oed. summons his own imprecations to be his “ξυμμάχους”.