previous next

[432] “ὅτι Ζηνόδοτος καθόλου περιγράφει” (ejects) “τὴν ὁμιλίαν τοῦ Διὸς καὶ τῆς Ἥρας” (432-58, or 431-61?) His An.ground was that Hera had left Ida and gone to Olympos (15.79), and we have heard nothing of her return; to which Ar. replied, “ὅτι πολλὰ κατὰ συμπέρασμα λέγει ὁ ποιητὴς σιωπωμένως γεγονότα”. A more important consideration for us lies in the probability that the whole of the “Διὸς ἀπάτη” is of later origin than the present passage. We have therefore no special ground for regarding Hera as anywhere but with Zeus; possibly the poet thinks of both as still on Olympos, just as in the very similar scene 22.167-87. See note on 677. There are no linguistic faults, and the only serious objections are those which apply to the single passage 444-49 (see note on 445). It is true that the lines 439-44 occur in other passages, and that there seems to have been a tendency on the part of later rhapsodists to interpolate scenes in Olympos. This does not justify any serious doubt as to the position of the passage in the original form of the Sarpedon episode. See also note on 666.

The Iliad, edited, with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices. Walter Leaf. London. Macmillan. 1900.

The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.

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):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: