previous next

εἰ χρή. All our MSS. have χρή (which Campbell retains); but, as between and εἰ in such a case, their authority is small: thus in Aesch. Cho. 994, where εἴτ̓ is certain, L gives the senseless ἤτ̓. Epic usage allows ἠὲ (), answered by ἦε (), in an indirect question:

ὄφρα δαῶμεν
ἐτεὸν Κάλχας μαντεύεται, ἦε καὶ οὐκί

. But is there any Attic example of this construction? Three instances are indeed alleged from Aesch. (P. V. 780, Cho. 756, 890), but they are most doubtful: see Appendix. Attic usage prescribed εἰ (or εἴτε) as = whether, introducing the indirect question: the correlative or was usu. εἴτε, but sometimes, as here, .

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 (5 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (5):
    • Aeschylus, Libation Bearers, 756
    • Aeschylus, Libation Bearers, 890
    • Aeschylus, Libation Bearers, 994
    • Aeschylus, Prometheus Bound, 780
    • Homer, Iliad, 2.299
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: