Sir Richard C. Jebb, Commentary on Sophocles: Oedipus at Colonus

1 The Greek title of the play is Οἰδίπους ἐπὶ Κολωνῷ,—the prep. meaning at, as in such phrases as ἐπ᾽ ἐσχάρῃ (Od. 7.160), ἐπὶ θύραις, etc. It is cited by the authors of the Arguments as ὁ ἐπὶ Κολωνῷ Οἰδίπους (pp. 3 ff.). The earlier play was doubtless called simply Οἰδίπους by Sophocles,—Τύραννος having been a later addition (cp. O. T. p. 4): but the second play required a distinguishing epithet, and the words ἐπὶ Κολωνῷ must be ascribed to the poet himself. The traditional Latin title, Oedipus Coloneus, is from Cic. De Sen. 7.21, where it occurs in the accus., Oedipum Coloneum. Did Cicero intend Coloneum to represent Κολώνειον or Κολωνέα? In other words, ought we to pronounce Colonēüs or Colonēūs? 1. In favour of the former view, which seems much the more probable, we may observe two points. (i) In De Fin. 5. 1 § 3 Cicero writes: Cic. Fin. 5.1.3““Nam me ipsum huc modo venientem convertebat ad sese Coloneus ille locus, cuius incola Sophocles ob oculos obversabatur; quem scis quam admirer, quamque eo delecter.”” There, locus Coloneus, as a periphrasis for Colonus, represents τόπος Κολώνειος, not τόπος Κολωνεύς. (ii) Κολωνεύς (properly, a demesman of Colonus, Corp. Inscr. 172. 42) would not have been appropriate in the title of this play, since it would have implied that Oedipus had been resident at Colonus. In the Γλαῦκος Ποτνιεύς of Aeschylus (Nauck, Trag. Fragm. 34-41) Glaucus was supposed to have had a fixed abode at Potniae. On the other hand, Coloneus, as=Κολώνειος, might well have been used by Cicero to express the same sense as ἐπὶ Κολωνῷ (which would have been more closely rendered by ad Colonum),—"at Colonus," ‘connected with it.’ The Greek adjectives in ειος which Cicero transliterates usually answer to names of persons, not of places (as De Fin. 2. 7 § 20 “Aristippeo”; ib. § 22 “Epicurea”); but here he could hardly have used Colonensis, which would have suggested a native or inhabitant of the place.

2. While decidedly preferring the view just stated, I must, however, also notice what can fairly be said in favour of the other view,—that by Coloneum Cicero meant Κολωνέα. (i) In Tusc. Disp. 5. 12 § 34 he has Zeno Citieus=Κιτιεύς (for which Gellius uses Citiensis): in De Div. 2. 42 § 88 “Scylax Halicarnasseus”=Ἁλικαρνασσεύς (for which Livy uses Halicarnassensis, and Tacitus Halicarnassius);—as similarly, he sometimes retains Greek forms in ίτης or ιάτης ( De Nat. 1. 23 § 63 “Abderites Protagoras”: ib. § 29 “Diogenes Apolloniates”). Hence, the nomin. Oedipus Coloneus, if it had occurred in Cicero, might well have stood for Οἰδίπους Κολωνεύς. (ii) With regard to the accus. of Latin adjectives taken from Greek forms in εύς, cp. Cic. ad Att. 3 § 10, “Venio ad Piraeea; in quo magis reprehendendus sum, quod homo Romanus Piraeea scripserim, non Piraeeum (sic enim omnes nostri locuti sunt).” It may, indeed, be said that, if he wrote Piraeea, he might also have ventured on Colonea: but more weight seems due to the other fact,—that, if he had represented Κολωνέα by Coloneum he would have been warranted by Roman usage. It is just possible, then, that by Coloneum Cicero meant Κολωνέα, though it seems much more likely that he meant Κολώνειον. [The form Κολώνειος does not seem to be actually extant in Greek. In the scholia on vv. 60, 65 of the play the men of Colonus are called Κολωνιᾶται, probably a corruption of Κολωνῖται. The latter term was applied by Hypereides to the artisans frequenting the Colonus Agoraeus (Pollux 7. 132), and is miswritten Κολωναῖται in Harpocration.]

2 See note on v. 375.