previous next

φύτοῤ, Dindorf's correction of “φύσαντ̓”, gives an incomparably better verse than Fröhlich's τὸν φύσαντ᾽ οἴκτιῤ. It is very improbable that οἴκτιῤ would have been corrupted into the aor. partic.; but a rare word, such as φύτοῤ, would easily have become φύσαντ̓. Dindorf is clearly right in holding that the “ν” of “φύτωρ” would be short, though metrical convenience might sometimes cause it to be lengthened in such compounds as “ἀμπελοφύτορα” (Anth. 6. 44), which could not otherwise come into a hexameter. He might have added that the verse, “ἀθάνατοι δὲ Πτέρωτα, διὰ πτεροφύτορ᾽ ἀνάγκην”, is prefaced by Plato with the remark that it is “οὐ σφόδρα τι ἔμμετρον”,— a comment which, as W. H. Thompson observes, may apply to the “υ_” no less than to the “δε^” (Phaedr. p. 252 C). Hesychius has “φύτορες: γεννήτορες”. For the spelling “οἰκτίρας”, cp. 464 n.

ἀνεπίφθονον: schol. “ἀνεμέσητον, ἐφ οὐδείς σε μέμψεται ὡς πατροκτόνον”.

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 (2 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (2):
    • Plato, Phaedrus, 252c
    • Sophocles, Trachiniae, 464
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: