previous next

[345] The following passage — to 360 — is clearly out of place; there appears to be no other case of such a lengthy and superfluous recapitulation in H. Perhaps it may have originally formed the proem to this book, and been superseded by the more elaborate passage which now begins it. On the other hand the imperf. ἐτεύχετον implies a relation with what has gone before; hence it has been also suggested that we have here the original introduction to the “Διὸς ἀπάτη” in the next book. It is noteworthy that the entire MS. authority is for “τετεύχετον” or “τετεύχατον”. The former seems to be meant for an aor., though this is not possible, on account of the stem-vowel; it could at most be a thematic pluperf., which is, of course, the same thing as an imperf. The perf. is quite out of place in this connexion. For the termination -“ετον” in the 3rd person of a historic tense see H. G. § 5 ad fin.

The Iliad, edited, with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices. Walter Leaf. London. Macmillan. 1900.

The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.

Creative Commons License
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.

hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: