The Tragedies of Euripides Part 90

[39] The Cambridge editor aptly refers to Hecub. 464.

[40] These participles refer to the preceding a????a?t?? ?e????.

[41] See on Heracl. 721.

[42] The Cambridge editor would omit these two lines.

[43] Cf. vs. 107. ?at' a?t?', ?a p??t??? ??t?d? d?a????e? e?a?. On a???

(Brodaeus' happy correction for ?a???) the Cambridge editor quotes Nicander Ther. 146. ????? te fa?a??, ?a? t???ee? a???, and other pa.s.sages. The manner of hunting the purple fish is thus described by Pollux, i. 4, p. 24.

They plat a long rope, to which they fasten, like bells, a number of hempen baskets, with an open entrance to admit the animal, but which does not allow of its egress. This they let down into the sea, the baskets being filled with such food as the murex delights in, and, having fastened the end of the rope to the rock, they leave it, and returning to the place, draw up the baskets full of the fish. Having broken the sh.e.l.ls, they pound the flesh to form the dye.

[44] ef?a?e????. Cf. Cycl. 300. Hel. 783. Ed. Camb.

[45] Compare Orest. 255 sqq.

[46] ??t???? is probably corrupt.

[47] Cf. Lobeck on Aj. 17. Hesych. ?????? t??? ?a?att???? (i.e. ???????) e????t?, p?? t?? t?? sa?p????? e??ese??. Virg. aen. vi. 171. "Sed tum forte cava dum personat aequora concha."

[48] "Moriamur, et in media arma ruamus." Virg. aen. ii.

[49] Such seems to be the sense, but e?e??e?ae? is ridiculous, and Hermann's emendation more so. Bothe reads e?e???ae?, which is better. The Cambridge editor thinks that the difficulty lies in pet???s?.

[50] I would omit this line as an evident gloss.

[51] See the Cambridge editor.

[52] Reiske's emendation, ??s?a for ???a, seems deserving of admission.

[53] The Cambridge editor would omit these lines.

[54] This line also the Cambridge editor trusts "will never hereafter be reckoned among the verses of Euripides."

[55] Such is the proper sense of a?t??e?sa.

[56] ??? is ??fe?ata.

[57] Read ?as????t??.

[58] I read t??? e? and t??? d' with the Cambridge editor. Hermann's emendation is unheard of.

[59] This clause interrupts the construction. d?a??te? must be understood with all the following sentence, as no finite verb is expressed except epe?asa?.

[60] I have partly followed Hermann, reading epea??? ... ap??a???, but, as to reading ??p??? for ?????, the Cambridge editor well calls it "one of the wonders of his edition." I should prefer reading ???? with the same elegant scholar.

[61] I follow the Cambridge editor in reading d?d?a?, from Ovid, Ep. Pont.

iii. 2, 71. "Protinus immitem Triviae duc.u.n.tur ad aram, Evincti geminas ad sua terga ma.n.u.s."

[62] "_displays while she offers_" i.e. "_presents as a public offering_"

ED. CAMB.

[63] I am but half satisfied with this pa.s.sage.

[64] Read eses?e d? ?at? with the Cambridge editor.

[65] We must read ?? with Porson.

[66] Probably a spurious line.

[67] Read ??????? ?', _ay, from Mycenae_, with the Cambridge editor.

[68] Hermann seems rightly to read ??? ?' e?.

[69] Dindorf rightly adopts Reiske's emendation s? t??d' e?a.

[70] The Cambridge editor rightly reads t??? with an accent, as Orestes obviously means himself. Compare Soph. Ant. 751. ??d' ??? ?a?e?ta?, ?a?

?a???s' ??e? t???.

[71] Such is the force of d?.

[72] I would read e?ep?a?at? with Emsley, but I do not agree with him in subst.i.tuting ?a???. The oxymoron seems intentional, and by no means unlike Euripides.

[73] The Cambridge editor would read est' ??t?? ?????.

[74] But ?a???, as Matthiae remarks, is taken in two senses; as a preposition with ???a????, _ob improbam mulierem_, and as a substantive, with a?a??? added. Cf. aesch. Choeph. 44. Lucretius uses a similar oxymoron respecting the same subject, i. 99. "Sed _casta inceste_ nubendi tempore in ipso Hostia concideret mactatu maesta parentis."

[75] This pa.s.sage is very corrupt. The Cambridge editor supposes something lost respecting the fortunes of Orestes. Hermann reads ?e? de ??pe?s?a?

????, ?? t' ??? af??? ??. But I am very doubtful.

[76] These three lines are justly condemned as an absurd interpolation by Dindorf and the Cambridge editor.

[77] This seems the easiest way of expressing ?a? s? after s? d'.

[78] I am partly indebted to Potter's happy version. The Cambridge editor is as ingenious as usual, but he candidly allows that conjecture is scarcely requisite.

[79] i.e. thou seemest reckless of life.

[80] p??st??p?, this mode of offering supplication, i.e. this duty of sacrifice.

[81] Diodorus, xx. 14. quotes this and the preceding line reading ??????

for pet?a?. He supposes that Euripides derived the present account from the sacrifices offered to Saturn by the Carthaginians, who caused their children to fall from the hands of the statue e?? t? ?asa p???e? p????.

Compare Porphyr. de Abst. ii. 27. Justin, xviii. 6. For similar human sacrifices among the Gauls, Caesar de B.G. vi. 16, with the note of Vossius.

Compare also Saxo Grammaticus, Hist. Dan. iii. p. 42, and the pa.s.sages of early historians quoted in Stephens' entertaining notes, p. 92.

[82] Cf. Tibull. i. 3, 5. "Abstineas, mors atra, precor, non hic mihi mater, Quae legat in maestos ossa perusta sinus; non soror, a.s.syrios cineri quae dedat odores, et fleat effusis ante sepulchra comis."

[83] This must be what the poet _intends_ by ?atases?, however awkwardly expressed. See Hermann's note.

[84] Compare vs. 468 sq.