The array of variants on this line (nowhere equalled in the Iliad) is less formidable than it looks. The favourite “προφανείσας” is naturally out of court, the short “-ας” being unknown in Epic, though regular in Doric. Several MSS. seem to aim at “νῶϊν .. προφανεῖσιν”, but this is evidently a conjecture. Thus we are reduced to the choice between προφανέντε and “προφανείσα”. Both are possible, but the former is preferable as being more likely to be changed, on account of the hiatus and perhaps the masc. form. The masc. dual used as feminine is of course common enough in Attic, and is supported here by “πληγέντε” in 455; cf. Hes. Opp. 199 “προλιπόντ᾽ ἀνθρώπους αἰδὼ καὶ νέμεσις” (for Attic see Soph. O. C. 1676 with Jebb's note in Appendix). There remains the undoubtedly harsh constr. of the acc. after “γηθεῖν”: we have 9.77 “τίς ἂν τάδε γηθήσειε”; but 13.352 “ἤχθετο γάρ ῥα Τρωσὶν δαμναμένους” is perhaps more to the point. There are several cases of similar constr. in Trag.: Soph. Aj. 136 “σὲ μὲν εὖ πράσσοντ᾽ ἐπιχαίρω”, Soph. Phil. 1314, O.T. 936, Eur. Hipp. 1339 “τοὺς γὰρ εὐσεβεῖς θεοὶ θνήσκοντας οὐ χαίρουσι”. See H. G. § 245. Zen.'s “ἰδὼν ἐς δοῦπον ἀκόντων” would (with “προφανέντε”) make things smoother, but this again has all the look of a conjecture. For πτολέμοιο γεφύρας see 4.371.
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.