James Adam, The Republic of Plato

ὡς Χρύσης γενόμενος: ‘as if he had been transformed into Chryses,’ not merely ‘in the person of Chryses’ (Jowett). In ‘simple narrative’ he is Homer: when Chryses begins to speak, he becomes Chryses. Cf. 393 B ὥσπερ αὐτὸς ὢν ὁ Χρύσης (‘as if he himself were Chryses’).

ἐλθὼν -- αἰδεσθέντας. Il. I 17—21. The emphatic αὐτοὺς accurately represents Homer's ὑμῖν μέν. For λῦσαι H. Wolf conjectured ἀπολῦσαι; but Plato is closely following Homer, who has λύσαιτε. τὸν θεόν is Apollo.

ταῦτα δὲ -- βέλεσιν. Il. I 22— 42. The paraphrasis is accurate, and Plato leaves nothing essential out. There is no sign that his text differed from ours in this passage.

μὴ -- οὐκ ἐπαρκέσοι . ἐπαρκέσοι presupposes ἐπαρκέσει in the narratio recta: Homer has μή νύ τοι οὐ χραίσμῃ σκῆπτρον καὶ στέμμα θεοῖο. It is usual to regard this sentence as final: if so, it is the solitary instance in Plato where the future after a final μή must be admitted. See Weber in Schanz's Beiträge II 2, p. 60 and Goodwin MT. pp. 45, 91. The nearest parallel is Euthyph. 15 D ἀλλὰ καὶ τοὺς θεοὺς ἂν ἔδεισας παρακινδυνεύειν, μὴ οὐκ ὀρθῶς αὐτὸ ποιήσοις, where μή depends on a verb of fearing. It is better, both in point of grammar and of sense, to regard this sentence also as expressing apprehension (‘for fear lest’), although no verb of fearing is present. It is not final in any proper sense of the word. Bekker read ἐπαρκέσειε, saying that Θ has ἐπαρκέσειεν.

μὴ ἐρεθίζειν. Valckenaer's conjecture μή ἑ ἐρεθιζειν (μή μ᾽ ἐρέθιζε in Homer) is attractive in view of τὰ ἃ δάκρυα in 394 A for Homer's ἐμὰ δάκρυα, and because it provides an object for ἐρεθίζειν. Plato uses the pronoun tolerably often (e.g. in I 327 B, X 617 E, Symp. 175 C, 223 B): other Attic writers seldom, if ever (Kühner-Blass Gr. d. Gr. Spr. I p. 592). It is not however clear that ἐρεθίζειν could not be used without an object expressed, and I therefore revert to the MS reading.