Aeschylus: Septem contra Thebes

144 Pages·1985·9.712 MB·English

by  G.O. Hutchinson

AESCHYLUS
SEPTEMCONTRA
THEBAS
Edited
with lntroduction and Commentary
by
G. 0. HUTCHINSON
CLARENDON PR.ESS OXFOR_p
1985
1
J
Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford OX2 6DP
Oxford New York Toronto
Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi
CONIVGI OPTIMAE
Kuala Lumpur Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo
Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town
Melboume Auckland
and associated companies in
Beirut Berlin lbadan Mexico City Nicosia
Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford University Press
Published in the United States
by Oxford University Press, New York
© G. 0. Hutchinson 1985
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced,
stored in a retrievalsystem, or transmitted, in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without
the prior permission of Oxford University Press
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Aeschylus
[Septem contra Thebas] Aeschylus: Septem contra Thebas.
I. Title II. Hutchinson, G. 0. III. Aeschylus:
Septem contra Thebas.
882'.01 PA3825.S4
ISBN 0-19-814032--0
Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication Data
Aeschylus
Septem contra Thebas.
Text in Greek; introd. and commentary in English.
Bibliography: p.
Jncludes index.
1. Seven against Thebes-Drama. 2. Thebes (Greece:
Ancient city)-Drama. I. Hutchinson, G. O. II. Title.
PA3825.S4 1985 882'.0J 84-20787
ISBN 0-19-814032--0
Set by Asco Trade Typesetting Ltd., Hong Kong
Printed in Great Britain at
the University Press, Oxford
by David Stanford,
Printer to the University
PREFACE
THIS work endeavours to hold together what cannot
properly be disjoined, the understanding of the play and the
understanding of its details. If any reader should feel that his
appreciation of the Septem has been at some points, in some
degree, enhanced, I am well rewarded.
The book is intended, in the first instance, for scholars; but
much of it will prove accessible to undergraduates.
The text and apparatus are my own responsibility. The
apparatus contains almost no new evidence. I have merely
examined the papyri afresh. My reports ofthe medieval MSS
are in essence a selection from the collations of Dawe and
Page; older collations are made use of here and there. Ifmy
version of this difficult text differs substantially from Page's,
that is not (I may be permitted to stress) from any eagerness
to diverge and be novel. The text, such as it is, has emerged
naturally from my reflections and my work, such as they have
been. I do mention, and indeed admit to the text, some
suggestions ofmy own, but not, I hope, through vanity. The
conjectures are closely bound up with my thought about each
passage: hence I must incline to cite them and sometimes to
receive them into the text. I have attempted to receive them
a little less freely than I should have had another proposed
them. I do not imply, when I print a conjecture in the text,
~hat the hand ofthe poet has been restored with certainty. I
imply only that the MSS are corrupt and that the conjecture
would offer an acceptable solution.
. The commentary seeks to illuminate, and, perhaps, to
mterest; exhaustive fullness is deliberately eschewed. The first
version, in which I sorted matters out for myself, formed a
horrid object, twice the size ofits descendant. In producing a
work less repellent to the reader, I have excluded a good deal
in the way of ancient instances and modern bibliography, of
answers to possible objections and explanations of conceiv-
viii PREFACE PREFACE ix
able counter-examples. Not all my om1ss10ns, therefore, From 1981 I held a Research Lectureship at Christ Church.
spring from ignorance or obtuseness. On the other hand, That noble and genial Society afforded ideal conditions for
failure to refer to a scholarly work should certainly not be work, and much friendly stimulation.
interpreted as a sign of contempt; explicit disagreement, still I must thank also: Dr G. W. Bond, who read a section ofthe
1 less. work and made telling observations; Dr A. L. Brown, who
Earlier commentaries are not referred to with any great magnanimously placed at my disposal some notable ideas on
frequency. There seemed little to be gained from obtruding the text; Dr D. M. Lewis, who answered authoritatively
the names of commentators at every turn. I have mentioned several questions about inscriptions; and Mr P. J. Parso?s,
the opinions which in my view need considering. My own who helped me greatly with the papyri of the play and w1th
debt to these commentaries has, I confess, been Iimited; I fragments A and B of the tetralogy.
expected to leam from them far more than I did. Blomfield, The thesis was examined in September 1983 by Dr J •
Tucker, and Groeneboom assemble useful parallels. The brief Diggle and Mrs P. E. Easterling, with beneficial effect. Their
notes of Hermann and Weil are sometimes helpful. I have particular comments led to numerous improvements. They
derived much more profit from the notes in Wilamowitz's also caused me to restore some ofthe material I had omitted,
edition: that work, like Page's, I have always had open in andin other ways helped to make the work more serviceable.
front ofme. lt was handed to the Oxford University Press in March 1984.
A peculiarity in my treatment of citations should be no I am indebted to the Delegates for undertaking its publica
ticed. When I list a number ofancient passages, I often violate tion, and to the Press Reader for acute and learned correc
chronological sequence and the like, with the object of putting tions. Professor M. L. West has enabled me to put right, at a
first particularly palpable or significant examples. In this late stage, still further errors.
connection it should be bome in mind that I generally refer In the commentary, unpublished contributions ~rom ~e
to Aeschylus' works without his name, even when another scholars I have mentioned are distinguished by the mseruon
author's name has preceded. I insert his name only when the of a title before their names; but the kind assistance which
other author produced a work denoted by the same abbrevi each has rendered extends well beyond the items thus
ation, or when fragments are in question. For the purposes of acknowledged. Tacit approval should never be inferred, in
reference, I treat the Prometheus Bound as a work of Aeschylus. any area: I have often differed from my advisers. And so one
I think it is most likely not by him, but stand back from the would expect when the author is Aeschylus, and when the
certainty of square brackets. commentator is young.
The faults and imperfections of this book, many and great
G.O.H.
as they are, should be attributed entirely to its parentage, not
to the environment in which it had the luck to grow up. As a Exeter College
D. Phil. thesis, it occupied three and a half years, from 1979, Oxford
all spent in Oxford. The whole of the monstrous first version October 1984
was read patiently and critically by Professor H. Lloyd-Jones.
He gave freely from his !arge resources: his delicate feeling for
textual criticism, his remarkable knowledge ofGreek poetry,
and his much-valued faculty of generous encouragement.
CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS xiii
INTRODUCTION
1. The Tetralogy XVII
II. The Septem xxx
III. The Transmission ofThe Text xi
SYMBOLS AND CONVENTIONS IN THE
APPARATUS liii
TEXT
COMMENTARY 41
INDEXES 223
ABBREVIATIONS
Greek authors, inscriptions, and papyri are referred to more
or less as in LSJ. Periodicals are normally referred to as in
t L'A nnee philologique. Kl. S., Ges. S., and Ausgew. S. denote
throughou t Kleine, Gesammelte, and Ausgewählte Schriften.
ABV J. D. Beazley, Attic Black-Figure Vase
Painters, Oxford 1956.
ARV2 J. D. Beazley, Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters,
2nd edn., Oxford 1963.
Barrett, Hipp. W. S. Barrett, Euripides Hippolytos, Oxford
1964.
Burkert, GR W. Burkert, Griechische Religion der
archaischen und klassischen Epoche, Die
Religionen der Menschheit, XV, Berlin
1977•
CEG P. A. Hansen, Carmina epigraphica Graeca
saeculorum VIII-V a Chr. n., Texte und
Kommentare, XII, Berlin 1983.
Dale, LMGD2 A. M. Dale, The Lyric Metres ofGreek
Drama, 2nd edn., Cambridge 1968.
Dawe, Goll. R. D. Dawe, The Collation and /nvestigation
and Inv. of the Manuscripts of Aeschylus, Cambridge
1964.
Denniston, J. D. Denniston, The Greek Particles, 2nd
GP edn., Oxford 1954.
Diggle, Stud. J. Diggle, Studies on the Text of Euripides,
Eur. Oxford 198 I.
Doc. A(,,c. M. Ventris andJ. Chadwick, Documents in
Gr.2 Mycenaean Greek, 2nd edn., Cambridge
1973·
Fehling, D. Fehling, Die Wiederholungsfiguren und ihr
Wiederh. Gebrauch bei den Griechen vor Gorgias, Berlin
1969.
FGE D. L. Page, Further Greek Epigrams:
xiv ABBREVIATIONS
ABBREVIATIONS xv
Epigrams Before A.D. 50, revised by R. D.
PVAp A. D. Trendall and A. Cambitoglou, The
Dawe andj. Diggle, Cambridge 1981.
FGH F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Red Figured Va ses ef Apulia, Oxford 1978.
Historiker, Berlin and Leiden 19 23- Schwyzer Gr. E. Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik,
FHG C. Müller, Fragmenta Historicorum Gr. Munich 1939-53.
Graecorum, Paris 1853-70. SLG D. L. Page, Supplementum Lyricis Graecis,
Fraenkel, Ed. Fraenkel, Kleine Beiträge zur klassischen Oxford 1974.
Kl.B. Philologie, Rome 19 64. Taplin, O. Taplin, The Stagecrafl ef Aeschylus,
Gart. Phil. A. S. F. Gow and D. L. Page, The Creek Stagecr. Oxford 1977. .
Anthology. The Garland ef Philip and Some TrGF R. Kannicht, S. Radt, B. Snell, Tragicorum
Contemporary Epigrams, Cambridge 1968. Graecorum Fragmenta, Göttingen 1971- .
GVI W. Peek, Griechische Vers-Inschriften, I, Thalman, W. G. Thalmann, Dramatic Art in
Berlin 1955. ... Dram. Art. Aeschylus's Seven against Thebes, Yale
HE A. S. F. Gow and D. L. Page, The Creek Classical Monographs, 1, New Haven and
Anthology. Hellenistic Epigrams, Cambridge London 1978.
1965. Wackernagel, J. Wackernagel, Vorlesungen über Syntax, 1.
KB,KG R. Kühner, Ausführliche Grammatik der Vorl. und 2. Reihe, 2. Aufl., Basle 1926-8.
griechischen Sprache, 3. Aufl., Teil I besorgt West, GM M. L. West, Creek Metre, Oxford 1982.
von F. Blass; Teil II besorgt von B. Gerth, Wilamowitz, U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff,
Hanover 18 90-19 04. Aisch. Int. Aischylos. Interpretationen, Berlin 1914.
LSAG L. H. J effery, The Local Scripts ef Archaic Wilamowitz, U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff,
Greece, Oxford 1961 . GV Griechische Verskunst, Berlin 1921 .
LSJ H. G. Liddell and R. Scott, A Greek Wilkens, K. Wilkens, Die Interdependenz zwisc~en
English Lexicon, 9th edn., rev. H. Stuart Trag. u. Tragö"dienstruktur und Theologie bei Aischylos,
J ones, Oxford 1940, Suppl. 19 68. Theo!. Bochumer Arbeiten zur Sprach- und
ML R. Meiggs and D. M. Lewis, A Selection of Literaturwissenschaft, XI, Munich 1974.
Creek Historical Inscriptions to the End ef the Williger, Spr. E. Williger, Sprachliche Untersuchungen zu den
Fifth Century B.C., Oxford 1969. Unt. Komposita der griechischen Dichter des 5.
PP, PPSupp. A. D. Trendall, Paestan Pottery, Rome Jahrhunderts, Forschungen z. gr. u. lat.
1936; 'Paestan Pottery: A Revision and a Grammatik, VIII, Göttingen 1928.
Supplement', PERS NS 7 ( 1952), df.
Pritchett, Gk. W. K. Pritchett, The Creek State at War, ' ' The following editions of the Septem are referred to in the
St. at War California 1974-9. introduction or commentary by their author's names: 'A.'
RE Real-Encyclopädie der Altertumswissenschaft, denotes an edition of all the extant plays of Aeschylus.
Stuttgart 1894-.
Rascher Robortello, F., Venice 1552 (A.).
W. H. Roscher (ed.), Ausführliches Lexikon
Brunck, R. F. P., Strasburg 1780 (with other tragedies).
der griechischen und römischen Mythologie,
Schütz, C. G., 2nd edn., London 1823 (A.).
Leipzig and Berlin 18 84-19 3 7.
Blomfield, C. J., 4th edn·., London 1829.
xvi ABBREVIATIONS
Bothe, F. H., 2nd edn., Leipzig 1831 (A.).
Hermann, G., Leipzig 1852 (A.). INTRODUCTION
Hartung,]. A., Leipzig 1853.
Weil, H., Giessen 1862.
I. The Tetralogy
Dindorf, W., 5th edn., Leipzig 1869 (A. and the other Attic
dramatists). THE Septem formed part of a larger whole. Without reflecting
Paley, F. A., 4th edn., London 1879 (A.). on its relation to that whole, we shall not properly understand
Verrall, A. W., London 1887. it. lt will be appropriate to ponder first on the other plays in
Wecklein, N., Leipzig 1902. the tetralogy, with our eye on matters pertinent to the Septem.
Sidgwick, A., Oxford 1903. We may start from the dust offragments and mount to the air
Tucker, T. G., Cambridge 1908. of conjectures. In the assemblage of fragments each item is
Wilamowi tz-Moellendorff, U. von, Berlin 19 14 (A .). followed, where necessary, by a brief discussion of how the
Groeneboom, P., Groningen 1938. text should read, and what play is in question.
Mazon, P., 6th edn., Paris 1953 (A.).
Murray, G., 2nd edn., Oxford 1955 (A.).
Page, D. L., Oxford 1972 (A.). A (fr. 169 M, TrGF Did C 4 a; P. Oxy. 2256 fr. 2)
Lupa§, L., and Petre, Z., Bucharest and Paris 19 81. ]ü [
] [
Where no collection offragments or other source is indicated 0ecxy ]evifou (467 BC) "Q)..[ u] µmcxöoc; [ 011 ]ex[
fragments and the Iike are numbered as by the followin~ Alcrx,6)..]oc; Acxion Olö[i]1t0Öt 'E1t'tcx t1ti 0itßcxc; [
edit?r~. Aeschylus, Mette; Sophocles, Rad t ( TrGF iv); ] Ö&U't&poc; i\ptcr'ticxc; 'tcxic; 'tOÜ 1tcx- [
Eunp1des, Nauck, ~~-~re no play is named, otherwise: Antiope, ]u 'tpcxyonö[i]cxtc;. 'tp{[ 'tO ]c; [Ilo ],,u- [
Page_ (Select Papyrz, m); Cretans, Erechtheus, Oedipus, Austin; ] Auicoupye[{ext ]'t[& 'tp ]cx)..oy{cxt. [
Hypszpyle, B?nd; Phaethon, Diggle. Menander, Sandbach; ] [
other comed1ans, Kock. Sappho and Alcaeus, Voigt (with the ] [
n?mbers of Lobel-~age in brackets where they differ);
Pmdar and Bac~h_yhdes, Snell-Maehler; other Iyric poets, Supplevit Lobel 3 0qßcx,; nac (cf. Ar. Ra. 1021, Plu. 2. 715 E, al.):
0iißaic; npc (cf. :E E. Ph. 751, :ES. OC 1375, etc.)
Pag~ ( Poetae M elzci Graeci). Iam bic and elegiac poets, West.
H~s1od, Me~kelbach-West; Epic Cycle, Allen; Minyas, Cf. part of the hypothesis to the Septem in M: t6i6ax.8TJ tm 0&crytvou~
'01..uµmaöi OTJ'. tvilca Aaton Ol6bco6i 'Eie-ca tni 0qßac; :Ecpiyyi cra-cupucj\i. ß
Kmke~; Ant11:1achus, Wyss; Ennius, Vahlen; Dionysius
'Apicr-clmv Il&pcr&i TaV'ta1..mi ( ) Ila1..aicr-caic; cra-cupucoic; "tOic; ßpa-clvou
B~ssancus, Livre~. Callimachus, Pfeiffer. Presocratics, na-cp6c;. y ßo1..ucppacrµrov AuKoupy&{ai -c&-cpa)..oy{ai.
Diels-K~anz; . Lys1as, Gernet-Bizos; Hellenica Oxyrhynchia, 1.Alcrxu1..o)u (Snell, Gnomon 25 (1953), 438) is the most likely supplement.
Bartoletti; Anstotle, Rose; Aristophanes of Byzantium, 0l6bco]u[c; (Lobel) and 'Yn60&mc;) 1A ato]u (Zuntz, Hermes 111 (1983), 261)
Nauck. require letters to be invisible which ought to be visible. Strictly this is not a
l'>n68&mc;, for in a tragic hypothesis the didascalia would not be followed by
The letters used in denoting certain scholia refer to the the plot. We may probably assume that the title ofthe play appeared to the
arrangement oft?e following editions. Homer, Erbse; Pindar, right of Alcrx_iJ)..o ]u or above it. On either supposition 'En-ca tni 0qßac; ought
Drachmann; Anstophanes, Koster-Holwerda; Theocritus, to have left some trace: this title may be excluded. lt is perhaps a little more
Wendel. For the scholia to the Septem see p. Iiv.
xix
xviii INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
E (fr. 173 M; Et. Gen. s.v. &1tcxpyµcx'tcx, R. Reitzenstein, lnd. lect.
attractive to have the heading 'centred' in rclation to the main column,
and so to have the title on the right rather than above. If this were so Rostock. 1890/ 1, 4)
considerations of symmetry would give :üj,iy!; or Aaioc; a slight advanta~
Ö'tl 6& lCCXi tyeUOV'tO (sc. o{ 601.ocpOVT)O'CXVW;) 'tOÜ cxiµcx'tO<; Atcr
over Ol6btouc;. But the matter remains wholly uncertain.
3-7. How exactly the didascalia was worded in the papyrus matters little. XUA.O<; tv 'tcxic; ßeppmßimv (fr. 310 M) ia'tOpei JCcxi tv 't©t
Fr. 3 indents the date and the )ist of victors, which begins evuca[ cn )axu>..[o;; t1eepi(!) Acxico1t
cf. also fr. B5. If we suppose the same arrangement here, the following
supplements are the most plausible: 3 t1tl lipxov• 0ea-y) (Snell) ... (011' ßeppatß{mv Reitzenstein: npöc; llßtmv tv t<iit [ TtEpi) Acnrot Reitzenstein
l!-t&l) a['. (Kakridis's seminar), 4 tv!Ka A!crxu)..] (Kakridis), 5 I:cj,ryy! aatu.]
(Snell), 61tatp0 (Parsons) Opatlvo] (Snell), 7 cj>pacrµrov] (not cj>pacrµ0>v ]). These words appear only in MS A. The Etymologicum Magnum mentions A.,
but not the works.
The second corruption presupposed by Reitz~nstein is strang~; his ~lter-
B (fr. 169 M; P. Oxy. 2256 fr. 1)
native tv t<iit nept Aatou would be an imposs1ble way of dest~atmg a
[ 6 1tpo1..oy{-
drama. Presumably the passage in A. concemed the murder_ ofLams. No~
] ,cov A~[ioc; the custom is associated with premeditated murder, not with such horm
][ ]7 [ cide as Oedipus perpetrated (cf. fr. F). Cf. AR 4· 479 ii 8tµ1c; aö8tV'tTltcrt
] . [ 60)..oKtacr!ac; {A.<XEcr0!ll, Ar. Byz. fr. 78 o{ cj,oveucrcxvrec; t~ tTttßou)..ijc;, e! al.;
Rohde, Psyche, App. 2,Jebb, App. on S. El. 445, R. C. T._Parker, Miasma
]'tcx 1t[p]6aQ>[mx
( 1983), 107f. One would imagine that it was used ~th reference to
Acxt[oc; 5 brigands or the like falsely believed to have murdered Latus. Perhaps such
mistakes might seem more in place in the Oedipus. One might then read, say,
Supplevit Lobel.
tv t<iit (0!6!1to61 tTti t<iiv cj>oveucrmrov toöc;) TtEpi Aaiov.
This is evidently part of the prefatory matter to the Laius. Snell supposed this
fr_agment t? c~me beneath fr. A, after an interval (Gnomon 25 ( 1953), 438). F (fr. 172 M, 173 N; l: S. OT733)'
S1_nce the utle m fr. Ais_ u_nknown, and since fr. B would not share any fibres
~'.th fr. A, the supposllton can neither be confirmed nor refuted. Mette 1tepi Acxuli6cx cl>TJai 'tTIV crx,tITTTtV 666v, 6 6t Alcrx,u1..oc; 1tepi ßo't
Joms fr. A, and then fr. 4, and then fr. B into a continuous whole: weshould vicxc; OÜ'tcot;· <-
the~ leam _that the Laius had a chorus ofold Theban men. But bothjoins 81tfj1µev [ 'tfj<; 66oii] V-) 'tpO'X,TJA.CX'tOV
are 1mposs1ble.
axm'tfi<; JCet..eu0ou 'tpio6ov, fv0cx cruµßolct<;
'tplCÖV 1C8A.ttl8COV ßO'tVtCX6cxc; ftµeißoµev.
C (fr. 175 M, 121 N; Hsch. ex 6993) olitcoc; LG: oli'tco cj,tJcr{ MR I CTtT}Etµ&V GMR: -EltJµ&V L tiic; 66oü L:
tc; niv 66oü GMR: non sana esse percepit Hartung 3 KEA.E68cov Brunck
&pcxxvou·&1t' eöeeicxc; 6 &pcxxvric;·Aiaxu1..oc; Acxico1.
(et GMR?): KtA.Eu8ov L (hie, non 2) Ootvta6ac; Bruhn (ed. S. OT, p. 12 n.
1): -6cov
o&tcoc; is not part ofthe quotation: it goes with cj,tJcr! understood. Cf. l: S. Tr.
D (fr. 171 M, 122 N; ~Ar.V. 289e)
266, 1167. . ..
(tnu'tpt~ic;) &1to 't~V tJCn8eµevcov 1tcxtöicov tv XU'tpcxu;· füo lC<Xi I. 1:i\; 66oü or 66oii is probably a gloss on KEA.Eli8ou. tp{o6ov 1s also susp1c1ous,
since it makes 'tpt<iiv KEA.Eli8cov painfully redundant. lt may be a gloss on
~0<1>0~1.ric; 'tO ~Kn8evm xu'tpi,eiv e11.eyev tv ßp1cxµco1 (f r. 532) ic<Xi
crx1cn:i'jc; KEA.Eli8ou.
Alaxu11.oc; Amco1 Kcxi <l>epe1Cpcx'tri<;.
tö b:tt8tva1 Weil: 6:1t0Kteiva1 Aaicot Dindorf: )..a~ro C!lepe1epa"'~ ( ). 1 The readings ofGMR are selected from V. de Marco, Att. Ace. Linc., ser.
Koster ··•~ vi, 6 (1937), 2. 49·
xxi
INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION
X.X
3- DcnVIÜall;: the meeting of the roads is at Potniae; it is unlikely that two I (fr. 181 M, 235 N; Ath. 15. 674-D)
roads to Potniae are crossing ('tpu:i>v K&Ä.&u80>v Ilo'tvtc!l&ov). For the metrecf.
Pers. 332, Eu. 107. AtaxuÄ.oc; 6' &V tci>l Auoµ&VCOl Ilpoµ118&i (fr. XVla Griffith)
This description leading up to the encounter ofOedipus and Laius will acxcpci>c; cl>llmv Ö'tt tni [ 't&] Ttµijt TOÜ IlpoµT)8&roc; TO~ O"t&cpcxvov
have been spoken by a member ofLaius' entourage, or by Oedipus himself.
n&ptti8&µ&v 'tijt 1e&<j>cxÄ.ijt, &vn1to1vcx töu k&ivou 6&aµou, 1ecxito1 &v
lt could have occurred in either thc Oedipus or the laius. One may note,
however, that Potniae would fumish a good context for fr. G; this might be Tijt &mypcx<j>oµtv111 I:cptyyi slmilv· _
a reason for guessing that fr. F too comes from the Oedipus. At Potniae there TCÖt 6& ~tvcot ys [ cnt<j>cxvov] ( - v) &pxcxiov O"t&<j>oc;
was a sanctuary of Demeter and Kore, where the Thesmophoria were 6saµrov &p1cnoc; &K Ilpoµ118tcoc; A.6-you.
cclebrated (so, in effect, Paus. 8. 9. 1). The word µUCJ't\KCX would be normal
enough in relation to such a festival (see Burkert, GR 365). Potniae was an Kal'tOl (Kai)? I ate~V0V expu l1"t W C"l l 2 aplat0V Nauck
important place in the story, and some description of it would seem · · 1 • • 'He says it in the Prometheus Unbound,
perfectly plausible. On the other hand, Demeter does not appear in the 1Cad'to1.The force of the parncip e is. h , Cf. g6 c de; & 't1'lv
parodos of the Septnn among the divinities ofThebes, and so the Theban although he does say much the same elsew ~!'to\ d~?."Jilamowitz) Kai
cult ofDemeter is unlikely to have provided the context for the mention of Äcoplxav 't66' 4itol11ae 'tOÖlrl'Ypaµµa ßoasl611moc;, (
mysteries. tv njl Al8\01tla\ 1toUaKlc; aö'tijc; µVTJµoVEOOac;. · Ath naeus weil·
1. (cn:t~vov]:Weil's lil'ywov does not suitdth~ contex~mWha; one rathe;
Athenaeus is now talking about garlan s m gener · "th N ck
0 ld then read &plat0V W1 au ·
G (fr. 178 = 116 M, p. 28 N; l: Arist. EN 1117a10 [Comm.in aexpptaetcotvs ~1ss as uvpeprobr, tee.dg .b 1ytt palBtte~c;v. ovn,e ww :1uc h m ust have been interpolated in
Arist. Gr. xx 145]) the accusative for a reason.
601e&i yap AlaxuÄ.oc; A.ty&iv µuan1ea nvcx fv T& Tcxic; To~6T101 xcrl
·1&p&icxtc; 1ecxi tv l:tO"Ucpro1 Il&'tpo1euÄ.1aTijt 1ecxi 'lcp1-y&v&icx1 xai Ol8i-
1to6t. tv yap TOuTotc; 1t<iO'l 1t&pi A11µilTpcxc; A.tyrov Tci>v µuO"t11emv J (fr. 183 M, 237 N; Hsch. 1e 314-1)
1t&p1&py6t&pov ä1tt&a8cx1 ( ) .
• cxi 6 - 6ci>v
1CVoüc;· 6 SlC 'tOÜ &!;ovoc; tixoc;· A.&)'&'tOfl 6& lCCXi 1CVOTJ. 1C 't©V 7tO
µoat1Kci>v Schneidewin: -Kcotep<ov a1t't&a8a\ fo\K& Aldina 'lf6<1>oc;, ehe; AtaxuÄ.oc; l:clnyyi.
h" h Lobel cautiously connected
Compare perhaps P. Oxy. 2255 fr. 35, w ic
with this fragment:
H (fr. 182 M, 236 N; Ar. Ra. 1287) ]_ ~Q1[.)~XVQlµ1tQ[
]q,v6l.[
I:<j>iyycx 6uacxµ&p1ixv 1tputcxv1v Kuvcx 1t&µ1t&1
I: ad loc.: l:cpiyycx 6uacxµ&ptäv· SlC l:cptyyoc; AtcrxuÄ.ou.
:E4>{yya 6uaaµcpu'iv vt: lemma te caret R l:. K (r.-f. hydria, Würzburg Inv. ZA 20, Earlier Mannerist.
Publ. E. Simon, SHAW 1981. 5)
The scholion on 1289 makes it clear that the whole line must be said to come
from the Sp~inx. In this song lines from different plays of A. are flung The Sphinx stands on a rock, with a front paw raised. Five
together, with no necessity for syntactical connection. lt is not likely elderly satyrs express alarm. They are seated on covered
ther~fore that Aristophanes took 1teµ1t&\ from Ag. 1 1 1 ( the next line after the
chairs, hold sceptres, and wear decorated rohes and purple
refram)-unless we are to reckon with some error ofmemory. The subject
of the verb must have been a divinity: for the various possibilities cf. C. diadems.
Robert, Oidipus (1915), i. 15ar.