previous next

[368] μάχηι ἔνι ὅσσοι is the reading of Aph., and for all we know to the contrary of Ar. also; in the absence of Schol. A we cannot, however, be sure. It has the merit of being perfectly plain, and the (legitimate) hiatus in the bucolic diaeresis would account for a change. Zen.'s “μάχης ἐπὶ τόσσον” makes no sense, and in the vulg. “μάχηι” (or “μάχης”) “ἐπί θ᾽ ὅσσοι” the “θ᾽” is patently a stop-gap for the sake of the metre. It is just possible that we might read “μάχης ἔπι, ὅσσοι” taking “μάχης ἔπι” to mean on the battlefield; for this quasi-local sense of “μάχη” cf. “μάχης ἐπ᾽ ἀριστερά”. But “μάχηι ἔνι” is much more natural. Most edd. write “μάχης ἐπί θ᾽ ὅσσον”, and explain it as= “ἐφ᾽ ὅσον τε μάχης”, over so much of the fight; but in the absence of evidence to the contrary such a ‘displacement’ of “τε” may be pronounced impossible. Nor is there analogy to justify us in writing “μάχης ἐπὶ ὅσσον” with hiatus between the preposition and its case. Brandreth writes “μαχης υπερ, ὁσσοι”, Lachmann “μάχης ὅσσον τ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἄριστοι”.

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: