[118] κακὰ ῥάπτομεν, ‘devised mischief.’ Eustath. “τὸ μὲν κακὰ ῥάπτειν διαλελυμένως λεχθὲν οὐκ ἐπὶ ψόγῳ ἐτέθη. τὸ μέντοι σύνθετον ἡ κακορραφία, ἐπίψογον”. Cp. Od.16. 421“τιὴ δὲ σὺ Τηλεμάχῳ θάνατόν τε μόρον τε”
“ῥάπτεις . . οὐδ᾽ ὁσίη κακὰ ῥάπτειν ἀλλήλοισι”. Compare the phrases “ὑφαίνειν δόλον”, and similar Latin uses with texere, consuere, nectere.ἀμφιέποντες. It is possible to take this as governing an unexpressed object, ‘plying them with every form of stratagem.’ So we find it in tmesis, Il.11. 482“ὥς ῥα τότ᾽ ἀμφ̓ Ὀδυσῆα Τρῶες ἕπον”. But comparing the isolated clause Il.5. 667“τοῖον γὰρ ἔχον πόνον ἀμφιέποντες” (see also Il.2. 525; 19. 392), it seems better to join “δόλοισι”, closely with “κακὰ ῥάπτομεν”, and to take “ἀμφιέποντες” as a picturesque participial addition to the sentence, ‘busying ourselves about them.’ Cp. “στόρεσαν λέχος ἐγκονέουσαι” Od.7. 340.So “φέρουσα” Od.1. 136, 139; 4. 133; “φέρουσαι” 14. 207. Classen (H. S. 86） compares such usages with the frequently occurring participles “κιών, ἰών, βιβάς, παραστάς, μολών, ἐλθών, λαβών”, both in Epic and Dramatic writers. Ameis quotes from Lobeck, Aj. 57 “‘participia παρών, μολών, ἔχων, ἰών saepe φράσεως ἕνεκα addi atque ita ut tum inter se permutari tum omitti possint.’”
