previous next

[226] ἑωσφόρος is not an Epic but an Attic form; and if correct is a proof of the lateness of this passage. The only Epic form for “ἕως” is “ἠώς” (“ἠϝώς”), and the synizesis is very violent (Pindar I. iv. 24 has “Ἀωσφόρος” as a dactyl however). Hence Menrad (p. 170) conj. “εὖτ᾽ ἠοσφόρος εἶσι”, and is followed by Fick (“αὐόσφορος”), and others. (Similarly in Hes. Theog. 381Rzach corrects “τίκτ᾽ ἠοσφόρον” for “τίκτεν ἑωσφόρον” of MSS.) The change is less arbitrary than it appears, for we find the sequence “εὖτε .. τῆμος” with asyndeton also in Od. 13.93 “εὖτ᾽ ἀστὴρ ὑπερέσχε φαάντατος, ὅς τε μάλιστα ἔρχεται ἀγγέλλων φάος ἠοῦς ἠριγενείης, τῆμος δή, κτλ”. Brandreth conj. “ἦμος δ᾽ ἀστὴρ εἶσι”, supposing that “ἑωσφόρος” is a gloss which has crept into the text; this has been again conjectured by Peppmüller, van L., and finally Agar. εἶσι, cf. 22.27; φόως ἐρέων, B 49.

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 References (3 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (3):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: