[184] ἄλγεα. This is the accusative in apposition to the foregoing clause. Such an accusative is really epexegetical, and may well be compared with the proleptic use of adjective and substantive, as “ἄταν οὐρανίαν φλέγων”, or “διδάσκειν τινὰ ἱππέα”. Some Latin writers, as Virgil and Tacitus, imitated this accusative. But the characteristic case in Latin is the dative, as ‘exitio’ or ‘terrori’ compared with the Greek “χάρμα γενέσθαι. χάρμα” and “πῆμα” are among the words most frequently used in such apposition; as “ἥ μιν τέκε πῆμα βροτοῖσι” Od.12. 125, “γυναῖκ᾽ εὐειδἔ ἀνῆγες”
“ἐξ ἀπίης γαίης νυὸν ἀνδρῶν αἰχμητάων”,“πατρί τε σῷ μέγα πῆμα πόληί τε παντί τε δήμῳ”,
“δυσμενέσιν μὲν χάρμα, κατηφείην δὲ σοὶ αὐτῷ” Il.3. 48 foll., “Μενέλαον . . ὅν τις ὀιστεύσας ἔβαλεν τόξων εὖ εἰδὼς”,
“Τρώων ἢ Λυκίων, τῷ μὲν κλέος ἄμμι δὲ πένθος” Il.4. 196, which looser apposition of the accusative to the general idea of the clause closely resembles the present passage; as also does “ἤ τις Ἀχαιῶν”
“ῥίψει χειρὸς ἑλὼν ἀπὸ πύργου, λυγρὸν ὄλεθρον” Il.24. 734, or “θάνατόν νύ τοι ὅρκἰ ἔταμνον” Il.4. 155.Closely connected with this usage is the familiar Homeric construction “θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι”, where “θαῦμα” is the epexegetical accusative in apposition, while the infinitive defines the sphere of “θαῦμα”, like the Lat. equivalent ‘mirabile visu.’ The accusative that thus resumes the action of the foregoing words is common in the Greek tragedians, as Aesch. Ag.224“ἔτλα δ᾽ οὖν θυτὴρ γενέσθαι θυγατρὸς, γυναικοποίνων πολέμων ἀρωγάν”. Compare also Choeph. 199Aesch. Ag., 200; Eur. Orest.1105; Eur. Alcest.7; Androm. 290 foll.; Elect. 1261, etc. For the general sentiment of the passage compare Livy 3. 72 “‘hoc socios audire, hoc hostes; quo cum dolore hos, quo cum gaudio illos!’”
