previous next

ὤλλυθ̓: for the impf., cp. 252διωλλύμην”.

The MS. text here is ὤλλυθ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ἀναξίως: τόδε θαῦμ᾽ ἔχει με. A comparison with the antistrophe (701 f.) strongly confirms Erfurdt's transposition, “θαῦμά μ᾽ ἔχει”, and Dindorf's insertion of “τοι” after “τόδε”, since τόδε τοι θαῦμά μ᾽ ἔχει then corresponds with the certainly genuine words in 702, τότ᾽ ἂν εἰλυόμενος. The next question is how ὤλλυθ᾽ ὧδ᾽ ἀναξίως should be reconciled with the MS. words “ἕρπει γὰρ ἄλλοτ᾽ ἄλλᾳ” in v. 701. Hermann's change of εἷρπε γὰρ to εἷρπε δ̓ has been generally received; it is gentler than that of ὤλλυθ̓ to ὠλέκεθ̓ (Dindorf), or to ὤλλυτο τῇδ̓ (Campbell). It is less easy to decide whether ἀναξίως or ἄλλᾳ should be altered. Keeping “ἄλλᾳ”, Dindorf changes “ἀναξίως” to “ἀτίμως”, and Wecklein to “ἀεικῶς”: Linwood proposed “ἀνοίκτως”. We must then suppose that “ἀναξίως” was a gloss, since such a corruption of the letters would be difficult. But it seems better to keep “ἀναξίως”, and to suppose, with Campbell, that “ἄλλᾳ” has come from ἀλλαχ.—See Appendix.

hide References (1 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (1):
    • Sophocles, Philoctetes, 252
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: