previous next

ὡς μή μ᾽ ἄτιμονοὕτως ἀφῇ με. The objection to ἀφῇ γε is that a second γε (though possible, see on 387) is here weak after θεοῦ γε. As to its place after ἀφῇ, that is paralleled by 1409. On the other hand a repeated με, in the utterance of impassioned entreaty, may be defended by 1407 ff. “μή τοί με... μή μ᾽ ἀτιμάσητέ γε”: cp. Tr. 218ἰδού μ᾽ ἀναταράσσει εὐοῖ μ᾽ κισσός”:

ἐμοὶ μέν, εἰ καὶ μὴ καθ᾽ Ἑλλήνων χθόνα
τεθράμμεθ᾽, ἀλλ᾽ οὖν ξυνετά μοι δοκεῖς λέγειν


Elmsley's conjecture “οὕτως ἀφιῇ”, which Hartung adopts, is unmetrical. “ἵημι” has ι^ always in pres. subj. and opt.: Il. 13.234μεθίῃσι μάχεσθαι”: Hom. Hymn. 4.152προίῃ βέλεα στονόεντα”: Theogn. 94 “γλῶσσαν ἱῇσι κακήν”: Od. 2.185ὧδ᾽ ἀνιείης”. In Aristoph. Lys. 157τί δ̓; ἢν ἀφίωσιν ἄνδρες ἡμᾶς, μέλε” (so the MSS.), Kuster brought in a gratuitous error by writing “ἀφίως᾿”, which Dindorf has adopted. (As Chandler says, “ἀφίωσι” is a false accent for “ἀφιῶσι”. Accent., 2nd ed. § 794, cp. § 820.) In the pres. indic., imper., inf., and part., ι_ is normal, but Homeric verse usually has ι^ in thesis (as when “ἵενται” ends a line); and the part. “ἱείς” (“ι_” in Aristoph. Eq. 522) occurs with “ι^” in Trag. (Aesch. Th. 493, etc.). Cp. El. 131 n.

ἀφῆται (Blaydes) would mean “"let go hold of"” (with gen., O. T. 1521τέκνων δ᾽ ἀφοῦ”), not “"dismiss."

τοῦ θεοῦ γε, Poseidon (1158): γε emphasises the whole phrase, to which “ὄντα” would usu. be added (cp. 83): cp. O. T. 929ὀλβία γένοιτ;, ἐκείνου γ᾽ οὖσα παντελὴς δάμαρ.

προστάτην: cp. on 1171.

οὕτως, so contemptuously: cp. O. T. 256, Ant. 315.

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: