ἀείδειν and ἔσπετε seem incompatible; but the parallel with xxxi. 1 (“ὑμνεῖν ἄρχεο”) suggests that “ἔσπετε” may be used irregularly for “follow,” i.e. “go on to” sing. The sense would be very appropriate, if the two hymns were not only the work of one poet, but were recited on the same occasion, as might well be the case; cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. iii. 1. 2 “ἕπεται διελθεῖν”. Ebeling's translation dicite ut canam does violence to the Greek. Most editors accept Bothe's “εὐειδῆ”, but this would not be corrupted to “ἀείδειν”. If there is any corruption, “ἀϊδίην” may be suggested: if the alternative form “ἀειδίην” were written, “ἀείδειν” would easily result as a metrical correction. “ἀΐδιος” is of two terminations in Scut. 310, xxix. 3, but of three Orph. h. x. 21, lxxxiv. 6. “ἔσπετε”, at all events, is sound; for its regular use cf. xxxiii. 1, Il. 2.484 etc.τανυσίπτερον: the epithet seems to imply lateness of composition. There appears to be no other example of a winged Selene in literature, and the type is very uncertain in art; Roscher (Lex. ii. 3140) doubtfully identifies a winged goddess on a gem (MüllerWieseler ii. 16, 176a) as Selene-Nike. The attribution of wings to Selene is rather due to a confusion with Eos than with Nike. Even when she drives a car, Eos is regularly represented as winged.
This text is part of:
View text chunked by:
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.