τίς γάρ ποθ̓, the indignant exordium, is immediately followed by the relative clause concerning Iolè, ἥ having a causal force,—as we might say, ‘What! when she...’ etc. Cp. n. on O. C.263“κἄμοιγε ποῦ ταῦτ᾽ ἐστίν; οἵτινες βάθρων κ.τ.λ.” Then, instead of “ταύτην” or “τήνδε”, as antecedent to ἥ, the speaker bitterly says, ταῦτ̓, ‘all this,’—the horrors which, for him, are embodied in Iolè. Cp. O. T.1492“ἀλλ᾽ ἡνίκ᾽ ἂν δὴ πρὸς γάμων ἥκητ ἀκμάς”, | “τίς οὗτος ἔσται, τίς παραρρίψει, τέκνα”, | “τοιαῦτ᾽ ὀνείδη λαμβάνων”; It would miserably enfeeble the passage to alter ταῦτ̓. The ethic dat. μοι implies, ‘as I have seen.’ θανεῖν, without “τοῦ”: cp. Ant.1173“αἴτιοι θανεῖν” (n.): μόνη μεταίτιος means that she alone shared the blame with Heracles (cp. 260 n.). σοὶ δ̓ is more probable than σοί τ̓ here, where the antithesis is marked. ὡς ἔχεις ἔχειν: Dem. or. 3 § 8 “ἐχόντων ὡς ἔχουσι Θηβαίων”: Soph. O. C.273“ἱκόμην ἵν᾽ ἱκόμην”: O.T. 13<*> n. ὅστις μὴ … νοσοῖ: the optat., on a<*> count of “ἕλοιτ᾽ ἄν”: the relative clause is equiv. in sense to a protasis, “εἰ μὴ νοσοῖ”: see on O. C.560.For the form “νοσοῖ” (instead of “νοσοίη”), Ph.895 n. ἀλαστόρων: O. C.788 n. Such a marriage would imply that some “ἄτη” had deranged his mind ( Ant.622).
This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
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.