τί δ᾽ ἔστι; Cp. O. T.1144“τί δ᾽ ἔστι; πρὸς τί τοῦτο τοὔπος ἱστορεῖς”; (n.). Here, as there, a mark of interrogation must follow “ἔστι”, since “τίς” can stand for “ὅστις” only in an indirect question. τοῦ, causal gen.; so “τίνος” Ph.327(n.). ἐφίστασαί με, makest me to <*>lt, τήνδε βάσιν (acc. of respect), in this movement (towards the house). For the second acc., cp. Ph.1242“τίς ἔσται μ᾽ οὑπικωλύσων τάδε”; (n.): ib. 1301 “μέθες με...χεῖρα”. Schol.: “τίνος ἕνεκεν τὴν πορείαν καὶ τὴν εἴσοδον ἱστᾷς καὶ κωλύεις”; The midd. “ἐφίσταμαι” does not elsewhere occur in a causal sense (except in the aor., as Xen. Cyr.8. 2. 19“φρουροὺς ἐπεστησά μην”). But the causal use of “καθίσταμαι” ( Aesch. Eum.706“φρούρημα γῆς καθίσταμαι”, Thuc.2. 6“τά τ᾽ ἐν τῇ πόλει καθίσταντο”) appears to warrant a like use of “ἐφίσταμαι”, where, as here, the context helps to explain it. Cp. also Plat. Tim. 63 C “γεώδη γένη διϊστάμενοι”, ‘separating.’ [But we cannot properly compare O. C.916“παρίστασαι”, ‘you bring to your own side,’ ‘subjugate’: nor Plat. Rep. 565C “ἕνα τινὰ...δῆμος εἴωθε...προΐστασθαι ἑαυτοῦ”: where there is a special reason for using the midd.] The midd. “προσορωμένα” in Soph. O. C.244 is similarly unique, and has a like justification. A fact which confirms this view is that “ἐφιστάναι, ἐφίστασθαι” were regularly used with ref. to a halt. Xen. An.2. 4. 26“ἐπορεύετο δὲ ἄλλοτε καὶ ἄλλοτε ἐφιστάμενος. ὅσον δὲ χρόνον τὸ ἡγούμενον τοῦ στρατεύματος ἐπιστήσειε, τοσοῦτον ἦν ἀνάγκη χρόνον δἰ ὅλου τοῦ στρατεύματος γίγνεσθαι τὴν ἐπίστασιν”. (For “ἐπίστασις”, ‘a halt,’ cp. Soph. Ant.225 n.) Polyb. 16. 34. 2 “ἐπιστήσαντες...τὴν ὁρμήν”. Diod.17. 112“τὴν ὁδὸν...ἐπιστήσας”. Plut. Cim.1“ἐπιστήσας...τὴν πορείαν”. Arrian 5. 16. 1 “ἐπέστησε τοὺς ἱππέας τοῦ πρόσω”. Another explanation is: τοῦ με ἐφίστασαι, ‘why hast thou come close up to me, τήνδε βάσιν (cogn. acc.), with this (hurried) step?’ But: (1) instead of με, we should then expect μοι: which Madvig, indeed (Adv. 1. 227), proposed, though with the further (and needless) change of τοῦ to ἐφ᾽ οὗ. Cp. O. T.776“πρίν μοι τύχη” | “τοιάδ᾽ ἐπέστη”. The acc. με is not adequately defended by fr. 155, “τίς γάρ με μόχθος οὐκ ἐπεστάτει”; where the acc. is like that which can follow “ἐπιβαίνειν” as = ‘to assail’ ( Ai.138“σὲ δ᾽ ὅταν πληγὴ Διὸς”... | ...“ἐπιβῇ”): ‘what trouble was not ever coming upon me?’ (2) “τήνδε... βάσιν” here refers more naturally to the movement in which Deianeira is stopped than to a movement which the “ἄγγελος” makes towards her.
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.