previous next

[15] The apodosis begins with this line, cf. 2.188 “ὅν τινα μὲν . . κιχείη, τὸν δ᾽ . . ἐρητύσασκε”. It might seem better to expunge “δ᾽” in the next line on account of the “ϝ” of “ϝερύσας”, and make the apodosis begin there, as Nauck seems to propose; but “δησάσκετο” is hardly possible after “ζεύξειεν”, even if “ἐπεὶ . . δησάσκετο” in itself be admissible; nor can I find any instance of an iterative in -“σκω” in a dependent relative clause, the regular use of the form being in principal clauses only. ἐπεὶ ζεύξειεν, after he had yoked: the opt. is iterative as in Od. 2.105 “νύκτας δ᾽ ἀλλύεσκεν ἐπὴν δαΐδας παραθεῖτο”: compare 8.270 with note, the only other instance of this iterative opt. with “ἐπεί” in H. See H. G. § 309. For the dragging see note on 22.396.

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: