[366] Nitzsch interprets “ὅθεν κέ τις, κ.τ.λ.” by ‘mendacia componentes usque eo unde quis mendacia ea esse neutiquam amplius sentiat,’ i. e. carrying their invention to a pitch of perfection, at which no one can detect them. This is identical with the words of Schol. T. “β. ὅθεν τις οὐκ ἂν διασκοπήσειεν οὐδὲ προΐδοιτο ὅτι ψεύδεται”. But we must remember that Odysseus has just been entertaining his hosts with stories of marvel in the land of Hades, where no mortals could go and test the truth of his narration. He is like the bold assertor about the sources of the Nile, of whom Herodotus (2. 23) says, “ὁ δὲ . . λέξας ἐς ἀφανὲς τὸν μῦθον ἀνενείκας οὐκ ἔχει ἔλεγχον”. Not that Alcinous intends to throw discredit on his adventures, but he seems gently to remind him of the doubtful veracity of some travellers' tales. According to this, ὅθεν … ἴδοιτο might exactly be interpreted by “ἐξ ἀνελέγκτων”, cp. Thucyd. 1. 21; 5. 85. Curtius suggests as the etymology of ἠπεροπεύς the Skt. apara=‘otherwise,’ ‘different,’ and root “ϝεπ”=‘speak.’ For the Homeric constructions with ἐίσκω cp. Hom. Od.9. 321; also Hom. Il.13. 446“ἦ ἄρα δή τι ἐίσκομεν ἄξιον εἶναι”
“τρεῖς ἑνὸς ἀντὶ πεφάσθαι”, and 21. 332 “ἄντα σέθεν γὰρ”“Ξάνθον δινήεντα μάχῃ ἠίσκομεν εἶναι”. The common construction, of course, is “ἐίσκειν τινί τι”.
