장음표시 사용
441쪽
Some specia dissiculties an inconsistencio in this Boo ars the followingain 31 ἐκ τοι δυωδεκάτη hos , in Word ἐκ si refer, not. a me Should expect, tothe eventa ast nauale s . , ut to the da os Hector' death, though theroade does no dimove this tili much later 107, 4133. The anno cemon ByZeus that riam ill e scorte by Hermes to the tent of Achilles 152 158 an ita repetition to Priam by Iris 181 187 appea tora ignored by the poetin the following cenes unies me Maum that Priam doubie ita authenticitya cominifrom Zeusin. Priam does O mali use of this information to quietthe alarmis Hecabe 20 208, 220 ff. i, ut spealis of the possibilit os losingliis life o his ournen 224 ff. in in a Way that is inconsistent Wit in previousaasurance. His demeanor hen Herme meet him 358 ff. alio mo signfis his expectin aucti an Acori. Finalty me are expressi told 332 f. that Zeus Wa move to endinermes is compassion at the forior appearance of Priamand the herat a they cro Aed the plain No intimation salven that horis here carrying out an intention preViousty formed ano expressed There canae litiled ubi that 152 158 and 181 187 ars interpolations. nother hint of the late origi of this Book is found in 734 f. Where theraeath of Astyanacis for Ahado ed. His unhappy fate is here depicte in a manner entiret different in conception romine correspondin passage in X 484-506. Butuus suci a violent deat of the oung prince mas described by Arctinus in the Ἱλίου Πέρσιε, an is Leaches in the λια Μικρά, an it is no impossibi that the poetifima composing unde the innuence of these epica of the later Cycle thoum solate a date a thia implies is not generali acceptet. probatile opinion in reference to the last two Book of themia is that the Αθλα Ιατρικλου and the greater partis the work of a later poetis
eat genius Wh Wishe to ive thealia a more humane conclusion, an topain the character of Achilles in foster color than the sterne manner of the Homeri age required Theriret partis, o the other hane mustie ascribello stili another composer, ides talent. CRITICA NOTEs vi. s. Aristarchus reiecte these Verses a commonplace, an a meakening
the descriptionis Achilles' grief. e also objecte to ἀνδροτητα for νορέαν se on X 363 an to the oro των μιμνησκεμνος 9 after ἐτάρου μεμνημένos 43. Se Scholi ed. Dindori ii 274 ost modern editor agre in this udment. 13. For inferences a to in home of the wet, se Criticia Noteii 227. 17. AH. 3, mitti severat modern editore, omit τέ Seein X 339.20 f. Nauc follows Aristarchus in rejectin theae verses Chriat belloves that the res here is merely the kinis an animal. A there is nomine evi- dono that the post a familiar it this origina significatio of the mordi
442쪽
Christiold that 20 1 are an interpolation Leas holda the fame vie , arguing 1 that the verae are unnecessaryn 2 ibat the aegis ould e profane bycontactisit a corpse; 3 that the aegis in Homer is a Ahield, notis hin; 4 that it belong to Zeus, notrio Apollo; 5 that a different means of preaer ing the bodnisalven ii 18 191. 2 30 Aristarchus ejecte these versis o the round 1 that the thres divinitie named mere of such great importanc that to mention them meretras exception to the generat intemen πῆσιν ἐήνδανεν is almos absurd; 2 that the Judgmentis Paris is notanown to Homer; 3 that νείρεσσε 29 is used in an unusual senae; η that μαχλοσύνη 30 is no an Homeri mord; 5 that
Aphrodite ais Paris no μαχλοσύνην, ut τὴν κα λίστην των τετε Ελλήνων
54. his interpretationis κωφὴν γαιαν is accepte bymonro an Leai Buteven mit the supportis Η 9 cf. εἰ γαρ ὁ μιν θανον γα τε καὶ οὐδὲν, Soph. l. 244hitia scarcely be regarde as certain, and the Word may eaAtly be referret to the arthritself, hic is utrage by the dramin of the corpse ver ita
116. his is rejected by ochly. Fic ascribes it to his Ioni redaction, Ontheamund that it domino fuit the context. ut Peppmulier in his commentar defendarit. 119. For the subjV. ἰήνη Aeemale, Anticipasom Subjv. 23. 13 132. Theae versea ere rejected by Aristarchus, hien heca e theadvice give Aeem unbecominifrom the lipsis a mother. But theis excisionis impossibi mithout a change in the texti 129. It is Hain from Nich. Eth. iii 13, 111 b that Aristolle recogniged theae verses as Homer'S. The are ablydefonde by ochi an Peppmulier. 152 158. These verses are bracheted ecause the informatio thusalven to Priam is ignored by the poet i 203-208, and 220'. a mellis in 358 ff. In
443쪽
3324 Zeus a move in aeno Hermes solet is pity, and no referancoria there made to thia provioua intention. 154. The motricia dissiculi in tho quantityi δε es. X 236 is remove by the conjecture of Berier δε ε ξει, fras, ξει 183. Leas cassa this . Milliant dimovery, and adda that it is importantis inoming that at in timo of the compositionis a comparativel late portionis the poema the 'as an actuat, independent, and stili living sound in the epic dialeci.' Seo Μ. 391, 402 41 q. An object for ἄξει is certaint needed. II 645, here ΜSS. ea μὰ ἀπιτε- ἔλωνται, ut severat scholara Cobet, Nauch, Monro agre that the conat. shouldae completoli reading μή, ἀπε.
163. The ordiam,ά ia apparentinuerived uom baros, hic meant originalty rille impressionis a seia, and the any mar or impression Aristarchus explaine ita uae here a referein to the ouuine of the formos the wearer visibi through the χλαίνη. M Roche and F. agre Wit thesis of Arista chus, hic is in basia of the interpretationalven in the note. 181 187. Brachetet for the fame remon a 15 168.18s f. On μαξα an πειρι α se Grashos, Fuhriseis 29, an meme in Curtius, Studieri ix. 458 ff. 206. In viis of the explanation in tho note in morda, αυήσει seem stranget used here, an καὶ ἐσόψεται φθάλμοισιν forma a mea anticlimax. The conj. 'κφνει for, αυήσει is Ver attractiis. 213. ντιτα ἔργα is in best-attestin maling. There iaciem aut rit for aντιτά. The forme readincia supporte by 61 While the iample νιτις loea notoccur las here But mos modem scholara Beiser, e maeler, Lange, Nauch, Delbrilak, Ficli, Christ, onmi, influenced by the nee o a Wich. γένοιτο, rea aν τινά. ma Roche, F., and Leas With AH. ,Ἀντιτα. 215. Seo the fui an satisfactor discussionis κελσω - βαθύκολπος in Helbig 21 ff. Where in explanationalven in the note is sustianeo. 221. The interpretationis θυοσκω give in the note laser uncertain sinceauch an inspectionis the victims common in later Greekhia mentionestio herosis in Homeri
232. his interrupta Min ἔφερεν the anaphori aerios rit noe 2293, and ἐκ δέ 233, 234 . omover, Wit 232 inserteo, me inould in ly ἔφερε an not ἔξελε in 233 and 234. But inicia inconsistent Wit 275, Where licia state that
444쪽
verae in accountis theran ualis of χέρνιβον.
ino verae is genuine. 382. Berior an Christ follow in Sur. Pal. an othor ΜSS. in readin Da τοι τάδε περ σόα μίμνη instea of the uinia ordor. 385. ost modern scholare reject thia verse, ut eas defenda it. The sud-lennes Wit Whic Hermes bro A through Priam' mas of reticenceruario his identityri a te distrangs, and the thought in the last partis the verse is feeblyan obscuret expressed There is thereiore good nound for Oubting the authenticu of the verae. 1 385 be omitted the following ana eris Priam, in whic he doctares himself to e the mineri Hector, gain much in esseclisenem, Since in confession the comes solet a the resultis an oviburs of paternia Deling.
445쪽
491. Mitho neglected di in ἐπι- ελπσαι, se Μ. 390 p. 367. 8. H. - τῶν referri aia the sonaci vo lenen in Momor ahly . But inicis not consistent milh των δ' οὐτινά φημι λελειφθαι 494. 4ss. H. η, With Leas, adopi the mining of tW MSS. αὐτM. The Gangeha much to recommen it. 506. his is insint case of the mld. δρέγεσθαι Wit χεῖρε or χειραs. Ela Where the act is sed Henco it is perhapa euer, mithmea an othera, totali χειρ a x Pan translate, o reac mitti the and, i. e. to lin myiandio the lipsis him ho Alemmymon' cf. 99. ut tho Paraphrast in Schol. V. an many modern scholare prefer in construction si ἀνδρος παιδοφινοι ποτὶ στιμα δρέγεσθαι - κυσε χειρα 4783. Jordan remaris that it is precisely this kim, upo the and which ad alia hi sons, hic maris the extrem selfabasemon of the agedaing. ut thia interpretation, like the one in the note, is at variance Wit the ordinar ei δρέγεσθαι. 514. Thia verse, constructed after X 43, an perhapsu 140, a righuyrejected by Aristarchus, a carrying out the thought of 513 With to much fulunem an cause the se of γυίων here is entiret inconsistent Wit in usualaignificationis the word See App. on, 627.
519. his queation doea no Mem to e introduce appropriatet is ine
446쪽
precedin thought. Ita content, too iaciem natura in tho mout of Achilleathan in that os Hecabe 20 205.527. On this allegory, and eapecialimitu interpretation is Plato Rep. ii. 37si,so Schmidi, Mhia d. alteri Griech. i. 79, and Leas' note. 532. The interpretationis βούβρωστις in the note is also giveiis La Roche, FF., and Othera Leas finor another explanationis in Schol. hic themord is the samerus οἶστρος. Aesch. Prom. 681.544. For νω, eas refer in translation ut o εα es. ἀνάγεινὶ, ut a Roche, F., and ackemam fossoW the interpretation in the note. 550. Zenodotus rein las ista, hic Christ adopta an Bruma defenda Problem d. Hom. Mikruth 53i. i. 551. O the subjV. πάθησθα, se Hale, Anticipatora Sui v. 17. 556 f. Theae Verses ere rejected by Aristarchus, since a much detan iano auit te rom Priam, and the are not appropriatorio in impatient mood of the age hing. oreover, πρωτον is careel intelligibie. The soli ingverse 568 i Wantinii modiSS., and wa probabi interpolate in orde tofumi What Was apparenti necessarnio complete the meaning of ἔασας, hichmas no rightly underetood Theran illat borroWing of the mordacia ala seen in the fac that αμιν standa here mithout meaning. 583. ut o could Priam, sitiin Within tho κλισιη, se What Wasming on ithout sincerat a night Lea ans era by explaining νισφιν ἀειράσας, not ringin him into the μαρον, ut tarin him into nother
586. O the clauso it mi, se Lange i. 418 , ho mines the sub V. ἀλιτνrαι coordinate, o Min the opi immediatet preceding, ut it thenna claus eis μ . . . δοι 583 . The sub v is certaint Ver strange See Μ. 298. Hermerden, to avoid the hiatus, propose ἀλιτοι - ea objectat thia a too feeble, an regares the verae a the interpolationi a rhapsodiat who thought 585 not sussicienti explicit. 5M. On the prominenco here given to the ranaom se Schnoidemin Ueber die Hom. Naivetat 46.597. ut lutis is kno to the exac meaning of κλισμ4s as OmPared With θρινος, excepi that it Was apparenti a loWe seat, more emit mOVed, and of les dignity Sos Helbig 11 ff. 122 ff. 811 La Roche, follo in the Schol. explain this a meaning that e made tho hearis of the eopte achar a stone, that therinould notaury the victima. ut thia chardi consistent Wit 612, an it is clea that in omeWay theseopte mere involve in the punishment of iobe. 61 617. These versea interrupi the ours of thought, and were rejected by Aristophanes an Aristarchus Scholia d. indor ii 2933. Aster the spe er, in 13, has returne to the tarting oint of the narrative 602ὶ the applicationis the comparison to the present siluation 61 f. should follom in harmon mit 601 f. me verses inserte contain a formis in myth Whic ia
447쪽
inconsistent Wit in previous narrative, and whic has no application to tho presentiam. also Leas' note. 617. Profossor Sayco holo that in figure referre in in the note repreaenis the great goodem es Carchemiah, and that in cartouches engraved by ita fide, parti inmittit an parti in Egyptia charactera, hoW that it Was carve in the tim o Ramae Sesostris himseu See Pausanias i. I, 5 Quint. Smyrii. 299'. Job on Soph. M. 831 Ramae in Mum. Heu Stud. iii. 61 ff. 62s f. orlac friuolo a xxx. 57 rematas that theae Verses hos comceptionis tho beaut of Achilles hic putarit above even that o Helen formiam, in has augere una in to Eorro A at Achilles' handa, is force toadmire him, even at the moment Whenae sis for the retur of his son'. v. Helbig 426 noticos that in genuine Helleni admiration o beaut Manda out a conspicuo inhere M in an later expression. 681 thoim. ἐκπέμψειε, eemiae, Anticipatora Sis . 34, 1. 687. πωδέ τοι ia the realingis imo ΜSS. and of Eustathius. It is adoptodis AH. an Leas. ther ΜSS. an edd. have παιδες οἱ though his us es in articio is dissicultato parallel. 693. Wanun in the est ΜSS. CL 349 51, here impi ἐν ποταμ is et, Without further description. 721. The beat upporte realing, accordiu to La Roche, is ἀοιδω θρηνούς i. e. θρηνέωλJ, ἐξάρχου or τε στονόεσσαν ἀοιδήν. - μὲν ω θρήνων. DimtZer has adopte this, and defenda it in his Hom. Abha Eunoen 388 f. in chlas objection to this realing are the n uia use of θη-os and the --Ηomericordor in ἐξάρχου or e. The ordinar readincis θρήνων ἐξάρχου or τε στονόεσσαν ἀοιδην - μὲν ω' ἐθρήνων. ut a vi μὲν ωα alWaya begina a clauso in Homerthe change adopte by Berier' Pe militer, an La Roche from,SS. D L,L 3. in or μὲν δὲ θρήνων Aeem necessary. See Bero, Grisin. Lid. i. 350 and Leas' note. tria uncertain Whetherior not the sonchere mas accompanie is
723 76. Variova scholare avo ough in Go that insae lamenta es Andromache, Hecabe, and Helen aro atrophi in composition. Von Leutach Philolo a xii. 38 ff. notico that the lamentis Hecabe falla naturali intofour strophe of three verae oach, and is means of rejecting certain Verses, sinterpolatin, he extende the amo principi to the other lamenta. ea halregarde the laments as a commati dialogue etWeen in three omen singlyand the chorus o Trojan momen Christ, in the firs editionis his Merris, adopte a similar Vie , ut in the secon edition e confine the strophicare gemen to the lamentis Hecabe. Peppmdlle regares the lamenta Mexamples of the ancientis vos. The Obos, he sva consiste of three parta, the ἀρχή, ὀμφαλοs, and σφρηγιs Thus in the lament of Andromache me have
740 7453, si verses. In the lamentis Hecabe the divisiona consisti three, fix, and three verses, respectiVely in that os Helen es three, seven, and three,
448쪽
from in prevalence of hor syllabis in Greeli, an eapeciali in the pio language Learing out os consideration in stat foot of ac verae, hic iaalWay a sponde or trochee, an comparing the number of dactyla an spon- es in theirat sive foet, me find that 75 per c d of the feet are dactyl and 24 vescemit sponde . ut vince the fifth oot is conventionali a lactyl it ould perhapa be more instructive to confine the comparison to the sint laurfeet, here the poet,a unirammeled by rulo. In these in dactyla are 70 pem cent of the Whol number of fee and the spondem 2s per cera. or bout 2 dactylario one spondee.'
449쪽
61 per cffret. It thus appears that more than one-hal o ali the verses in Homer tali underi lire out of the large number 32 of possibi arrangementa. It is intorestingi note that in Vergilini eight ye cent of the Verses are include unde thesethree forms, the prevallinitorins in his poema being
37 per cerat. Spondato verses are frequent in the Alexandrine Doeis, but thendo not occur in Nonnus, and are ver rare in Vergit onemst os oue perient. .
450쪽
Onlymine per cent of Homeric verses fiat under these thres formη. Tho do locontrast thus hoWn is irai significant of the wide dissere e in character belWeen the hexameter of Homer an Vergil.
In discussing the Homeri caesura an diaeresi tW potnis of vie Ahouldbe clearly distinguished. Whereve a Word end within a verse a stiret reakoccurs in themow of the rhythm. Is his coincides Wit the en es a metricia foo it is called a diaeresis, but is it comes Within adoo it sanoWmas a caesura. It is obvious, then that at the en os ver Wor in a verse, except the last, there is either a caesuram a diaeresis, an is a verso could bo found consistingpurei os monosyllabiecit mira contain no leas than atrieen caesuras and diaereses X 123 containa eight caesura besides one diaeresis . Is me discussine subject a from the formal or mechanicat Standpoint, e ma recor every casei caesura or diaeresis, and Eo endeavor to ascertain the law of arrangement hic the post may have followed. Η, investigate Domini stand-point nomotice la tine of the meaning of the worda oris thesauses in thought whic occur But bicit is common in spe in o Homeri caesurario refer, notrio the very numero iam os mechanicia caesura, but to the species caesura or diaeresia Whic coincides it that natura pause in the thought hichis found in mos Homeri verses, here the voice of the reciter resis for amoment. Thiaria What is usuali meant by the caesuram a verae, thoum foro sine of clearnes the term versesaush icto e referret. A secondproblem, thereiore lario investigat at Whatioint in the Verae, hether caesura o diaeresis, in me prefers to mali his hi pause. In his case me inhon notice of the many caesura or diaereses at hic there is no ause in thethought, ut confinetur attention to the ne place or omelime two Where
Disserences of opinio ma aris acto here the pause in an particular verso hould e placet, ut it is lain that the mos important ausos millusuali coincide Wit maris of punctuation. The folloWin table is heroforo offere M a stio contribution to the discussion It hoWA the number of times that maris of punctuation occur in T-Ω at the evera caesuras and diaereses of the verse, according to the ex of this edition. For the salie of brevi mo distinctio is made belWeen masculine an feminine caesuras exceptin the thir foot. Vera position o Punctuatio mina in T-Ω.
c, caesura, a in diaeresis, m in masculine, sin feminine 1 - 11rat mot, etc.