Thomas W. Allen, E. E. Sikes, Commentary on the Homeric Hymns

[539] Either the latter half of the line is corrupt, or there is a lacuna. “ἰθύν” is no doubt genuine; it means “direction,” either locally or tropically (cf. Il. 6.79 “, δ 434, π” 304). The simplest emendation proposed is that of Matthiae “κατ᾽ ἐμὴν ἰθύν γε μάλιστα”, where, however, “γε μάλιστα” is very feeble; Verrall's “τὰ μάλιστα” (anticipated by D'Orville) is equally weak. Baumeister's “καὶ ἐμὴν ἰθύντε θέμιστα” (a syncopated imperative like “φέρτε”) is ingenious, but the substitution of “θέμιστα” for “μάλιστα” is hardly justified. On the whole it is preferable to assume a lacuna; in J. H. S. xvii. 251 f. a line was supplied such as “δείκνυσθε θνητοῖσι, σὺ δὲ φρεσὶ δέξο θέμιστα” (a homoeoteleuton may have caused the omission).

540-41. The sense is again obscure. Matthiae Ilgen and Hermann connect these lines with 539; i.e. receive (expiate the sin of) men, if any crime by word or deed, shall have been committed. But this is plainly wrong; “ἠέ” cannot stand for “εἰ”, as Baumeister saw, and moreover the threat in 364 certainly refers to some crime committed, not by the visitors to the temple, but by the priests themselves. Instead of “ἠέ” Franke and Baumeister read “εἰ δέ” which makes good sense: “but if there shall be any vain word or deed (annoy you) and insolence, as is common among men.” We must either accept this alteration, or assume that the lacuna after 539 contained a hypothetical clause (“εἰ” with a future). If we may suppose a lacuna of two lines, the latter may have run e.g. “εἰ δέ τις ἀφραδίῃς οὐ πείσεται, ἀλλ᾽ ἀλογήσει” (cf. Il. 15.162).

τηΰσιον: on the derivation and meaning see Brugmann I. F. xi. 105 sq., Solmsen Untersuchungen p. 38.