Οβριάρεῳ δ ̓ ὡς πρῶτα πατὴρ ὠδύσσατο θυμῷ Κόττῳ τ' ἠδὲ Γύῃ, δῆσε κρατερῷ ἐνὶ δεσμῷ, ἠνορέην ὑπέροπλον † ἀγώμενος ἠδὲ καὶ εἶδος καὶ μέγεθος· κατένασσε δ ̓ ὑπὸ χθονὸς εὐρυοδείης· 620 ἔνθ' οἶγ ̓ ἄλγε ̓ ἔχοντες ὑπὸ χθονὶ ναιετάοντες εἴατ ̓ ἐπ' ἐσχατιῇ, μεγάλης ἐν πείρασι γαίης, δηθὰ μάλ', ἀχνύμενοι, κραδίῃ μέγα πένθος ἔχοντες, ἀλλά σφεας Κρονίδης τε καὶ ἀθάνατοι θεοὶ ἄλλοι 617. βριάρεω δ ̓ ὡς τὰ πρῶτα LN, Ald. ἀγόμενος Ν. 622. εἴτ' ἐπ ̓—μεγάλοις Ν. 617 seqq. The contest between the Olympian gods and the Titans, or the change from the old to the new dynasty, is related at length.-Cottus, Briareus, and Gyes, were the hundredhanded giant sons of Gaea and Uranus, sup. v. 149. For their treatment of their father they had been threatened with punishment (sup. v. 209, 210), and the threat is now about to be executed, on the principle that an undutiful son (Cronus) will himself have an undutiful offspring (Zeus).— Οβριαρεύς, another form of the name, is recognised in Etym. M. p. 346, 38, and indeed is sufficiently defended by the analogy of βριάω compared with ὄβριμος. Here the metre requires Οβριάρεως, while in v. 149 and 714 either form is admissible. It occurs also inf. v. 734, where the common reading, Κόττος τε καὶ ὁ Βριάρεως μεγάθυμος, though a manifest solecism, is retained by Gaisford. But here the MSS. give Βριάρεῳ δ ̓ ὡς πρῶτα (so Van Lennep), or Βριάρεῳ δ ̓ ὡς τὰ πρῶτα (Gaisford). L. Dindorf conjectured Οβριάρεφ, which Goettling says is found in two MSS. To make Βριάρεφ a spondee by synizesis is quite out of the question.πατὴρ, viz. Uranus. πρῶτα ἀδύσσατο, ‘when first he was enraged against them.' This corresponds to σφετέρῳ ἤχθοντο τοκῆϊ ἐξ ἀρχῆς, sup. v. 155. Homer has the form ὀδύσσομαι more than once.—δῆσε, see v. 157. 619. ἀγώμενος, • being awed at. Compare ἀγαίεται, Opp. 333. The genuineness of this and the next verse is doubtful. It does not appear that ἀγώμενος or ἀγᾶσθαι is elsewhere found ; and the form looks like the coinage of a post-epic interpolator, on the model of the Homeric ἀγάασθε, ἠγάασθε, ἀγάασθαι, from ἄγαμαι. Again, ὑπὸ χθονός and ὑπὸ χθονὶ, in the same sense, should hardly stand in two consecutive verses. Thirdly, ǹdè kal eldos is a violation of the digamma; and lastly, ἠνορέης ὑπερόπλου occurred sup. v. 516. Dr. Flach's conjecture is very probable, αγαιόμενος ἰδὲ Εεῖδος.—κατένασσε, see Opp. 168. sup. v. 329. 622. ἐπ ̓ ἐσχατιῇ, in the far west, where Atlas also was punished (sup. v. 517), and where the Hesperides abode, who seem in some way to have been associated with woe and gloom, since they were the daughters of Night, and sisters of Mauos and 'Oïfùs, v. 214—5. The west is also called πείρατα γαίης in v. 335 and 518. Even Tartarus itself was by some placed in the furthest parts of the west. Hence Hades is called Εσπερος θεὸς, Soph. Oed. R. 177. Compare inf. v. 729. 731, and 653, where ζόφος (connected with ζέφυρος) means the darkness of the sunless west. The schol. explains ἐν πείρασι γαίης by ὑποκάτω τῆς γῆς.—The reading of the Emmanuel MS., μεγάλοις, is supported by v. 335, πείρασιν ἐν μεγάλοις. 623. This verse is regarded as spurious by Heyne. But, as Goettling remarks, we require the addition of δηθὰ μάλα, for a very long time, because they were at length brought back to the light. We might indeed omit v. 622, and read ναιετάεσκον in v. 621. [οὓς τέκεν ἠύκομος Ρεῖα Κρόνου ἐν φιλότητι,] Γαίης φραδμοσύνῃσιν ἀνήγαγον ἐς φάος αὖτις· αὐτὴ γάρ σφιν ἅπαντα διηνεκέως κατέλεξε, σὺν κείνοις νίκην τε καὶ ἀγλαὸν εὐχος ἀρέσθαι. δηρὸν γὰρ μάρναντο, πόνον θυμαλγέ ̓ ἔχοντες, Τιτῆνές τε θεοὶ καὶ ὅσοι Κρόνου ἐξεγένοντο, ἀντίον ἀλλήλοισι διὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας· οἱ μὲν ἀφ ̓ ὑψηλὴς Οθρυος Τιτῆνες ἀγαθοὶ, οἱ δ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἀπ ̓ Οὐλύμποιο θεοὶ, δωτῆρες ἐάων, 626. φάρος 632. ȧyaFFoí 628. κείνοισι L., Ald. 632. όρθνος Ν. δοτήρες εάων Ν. 626. φραδμοσύνῃσιν, the oracular warnings, ἐννεσίησι sup. v. 494. Apollodor. i. 2, 1, μαχομένων δ ̓ αὐτῶν ἐνιαυτοὺς δέκα, ἡ Γῆ τῷ Διὶ ἔχρησε τὴν νίκην, τοὺς καταταρταρωθέντας ἂν ἔχῃ συμμάχους· ὁ δὲ τὴν φρουροῦσαν αὐτῶν τὰ δεσμὰ Κάμπην ἀποκτείνας ἔλυσε. 627. σφιν, viz. to the gods; whereas σφέας above means the imprisoned giants.—ἅπαντα διηνεκέως, had told them the whole matter in detail, viz. (to use the words of Aeschylus, referring to the same event, Prom. 220,) is οὐ κατ ̓ ἰσχὺν οὐδὲ πρὸς τὸ καρτερὸν χρείη, δόλῳ δὲ τοὺς ὑπερσχόντας κρατεῖν. —ἄρεσθαι, ' that they would win glory, an Homeric phrase. The aorist infinitive follows verbs of promising or hoping, by a kind of prolepsis peculiar to the Greek mind, when an expected act is contemplated as realised. Perhaps ἀρεῖσθαι. See Opp. 455. 629. δηρὸν γὰρ κ.τ.λ. For the other Titans (not the hundred-handed ; compare 134 with 147) had long been contending with the Cronidae, or new Olympian powers. What the cause of the dispute was, Hesiod does not expressly say; but inf. v. 882, it is said to have been about their prerogatives, τιμάων κρίναντο. Aeschylus is more explicit, Prom. 207, ἐπεὶ τάχιστ ̓ ἤρξαντο δαίμονες χόλου, στάσις τ ̓ ἐν ἀλλήλοισιν ὠροθύνετο, οἱ μὲν θέλοντες ἐκβαλεῖν ἕδρας Κρόνον, ὡς Ζεὺς ἀνάσσοι δῆθεν, οἱ δὲ 625 630 633. οἱ δ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἐπ ̓ Ν. τοὔμπαλιν σπεύδοντες, ὡς Ζεὺς μήποτ' ἄρξειεν θεῶν. It was on condition of assisting Zeus against the rest, that these three Titans, (the hundredhanded, whose bodily strength surpassed theirs, were liberated. A similar legend (from the ἱεροὶ λόγοι) is recorded in ll. i. 401, where Thetis is said to have summoned Briareus to the aid of Zeus, whom the other gods were for putting in bondage. By the Cronidae are meant primarily Zeus and his brothers and sisters (sup. v. 453), with those of the elder gods whom he could win over to his cause, against the rest of the Titans headed by Cronus himself. Aeschylus (who perhaps had the Theogony in a much more perfect condition) says that Prometheus sided with Zeus, being unable to persuade the other Titans, Prom. 212. It is clear from v. 624-6 that the offspring of Rhea, viz. the elder gods, sided with Zeus; and in v. 883 it is stated that they agreed to confer the sovereignty on Zeus, whom Hesiod therefore does not represent as a τύραννος or usurper. 632. ἀγανοί. It is probable that this word is nearly a synonym of ἀγαθοί. As the v appears to have represented F, we have ἀγαθ, ἀγαF, as variants of the root. Curtius however, Gr. Et. 172, thinks the root γαν, γαρ, more nearly allied to γέγηθα and gaudeo.) οὓς τέκεν ἠΰκομος Ρεῖα Κρόνῳ εὐνηθεῖσα· 635 640 645 638. Είσον 643. μετέειπε 645. ὡς Γείπω Flach τελευτὴν Ald. 638. πολέμοιο L. 637. ἦν om. L, Ald. 639. άρμενα L. 642. νέκταρ τ' Ν, Ald. 641. ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν Ν. qu. πᾶσιν ἐνὶ στ.? 634. Of this verse the same may be said as of 631. 648. 668, and indeed many others, that they are not improbably interpolated by rhapsodists. The present verse occurred as v. 625. 636. πλείους, full or solar years, as contrasted with the lunar; or the great cyclic years of 99 lunar months. See on Opp. 617. Van Lennep suggests that the poet may have alluded to the duration of the Trojan war. 638. This verse, which is unnecessary to the context, was perhaps made up from Il. xv. 413, ὣς μὲν τῶν ἐπὶ ἴσα μάχη τέτατο πτόλεμός τε. It also occurs in Il. xii. 436. Both passages were indicated by Wolf. 639. παρέσχεθεν, viz. Κρονίδης in v. 624, the intervening passage (627-638) being virtually a parenthesis. The giants were there released from Tartarus by Zeus, and now they are entertained by him. Hence κείνοισι refers to Briareus and his fellow-giants. Goettling would prefer παρέσχεθον, viz. θεοὶ in the next verse, or νέκταρ τ ̓ ἀμβροσίη τε, so that παρέσχεθεν would be for παρεσχέθησαν. Neither of these is necessary, though Van Lennep is inclined to approve the latter, and Dr. Flach adopts it. 642. There is an appearance of tautology here, which may have resulted from two recensions being mixed together. Perhaps either 641-2 or 642-3 should be ejected, or only v. 642, in which case we must read πάντων τ ̓ ἐν στήθεσσιν κ.τ.λ. (So Dr. Flach edits.) 66 646. “ Quod hic dicitur μάλα δηρὸν, supra v. 636 erat δέκα πλείους ἐνιαυτοὺς, et quod hic ἤματα πάντα, supra erat συνεχέως.” Goettling. ὑμεῖς δὲ μεγάλην τε βίην καὶ χεῖρας ἀάπτους φαίνετε Τιτήνεσσιν ἐναντίοι ἐν δαὶ λυγρῇ, μνησάμενοι φιλότητος ἐνηέος, ὅσσα παθόντες ἐς φάος αψ ἀφίκεσθε δυσηλεγέος ἀπὸ δεσμοῦ ἡμετέρας διὰ βουλὰς ὑπὸ ζόφου ἠερόεντος. Ως φάτο· τὸν δ ̓ ἐξαῦτις ἀμείβετο Κόττος ἀμύμων δαιμόνι', οὐκ ἀδάητα πιφάσκεαι· ἀλλὰ καὶ αὐτοὶ ἴδμεν, ὅ τοι πέρι μὲν πραπίδες, πέρι δ ̓ ἔστι νόημα, ἀλκτὴρ δ ̓ ἀθανάτοισιν ἀρῆς γένεο κρυεροῖο. ἄψορρον δ' ἐξαῦτις ἀμειλίκτων ἀπὸ δεσμῶν σῇσιν ἐπιφροσύνῃσιν ὑπὸ ζόφου ἠερόεντος ἠλύθομεν, Κρόνου υἱὲ ἄναξ, ἀνάελπτα παθόντες. 650 655 660 656. Είδμεν 656. πραπίδης 658-9. Transposed 652. ὑπὸ δεσμού LN, Ald. 655. πιφάσκεν Ν. Ν. 657. γένετο Ν. 658. ὑπὸ δεσμῶν Ν. in L, Ald., which give σῇσι δ' ἐπιφροσύνῃσιν ὑπὸ κ.τ.λ. ἠλύθαμεν Ν. 649. ἀάπτους. See v. 150. Opp. 148. 651. μνησάμενοι. Compare v. 503.— ἐνηὴς, kind, cordial, is an Homeric word of very uncertain etymology. 6 652. ἀπὸ δεσμοῦ. Many good copies give rò, from under,' as inf. v. 669. For δυσηλεγὴς see Opp. 506. 653. Gaisford marks this verse as spurious, after Wolf, and he gives and for ind, but against the MSS. The sense is rather weakened by omitting this line ; remember, it was through me that you returned from prison.' 655. οὐκ ἀδάητα, ' what is well known to us, viz. ὅσα ἀγαθὰ ὑπὸ σοῦ ἐπάθομεν.— πιφάσκομαι, identical with πιφαύσκομαι, (πιφαF-σκω,) contains the reduplicated root φαξ. Van Lennep gives πιφαύσκεαι with three or four MSS. (The Emmanuel MS., according to my collation, has πιφάσκεν, not πιφαύσκεο.) 656. ὅ τοι Hermann for ὅτι.—πέρι, ad. verbially, for περισσῶς, should be ac cented on the first syllable, as representing περίεισι. 657. ἀρῆς, scil. βλάβης. Cf. Scut. H. 29. The meaning seems to be, that Zeus had hitherto protected the other 660. gods in the long war with the Titans. For the masculine form κρυεροῖο Goettling compares inf. v. 696, τοὺς δ ̓ ἄμφεπε θερμὸς ἀϋτμή. We might compare the feminine ἀγανώτατον, sup. v. 408, but that the verse may be of a later insertion. 658-9. The MSS. and edd. (with the single exception of the Emmanuel MS.) give these two verses in inverted order, σῂς δ ̓ ὑποφραδμοσύνῃσιν ἀπὸ ζόφου κερόεντος ̓́Αψορρον δ ̓ ἐξαῦτις κ.τ.λ. There are various readings σῇσι δ' ἐπιφροσύνῃσιν, σῇς δ' ἐπ., and ἄψορρον without the δέ. The reading in the text is that of Goettling and the MS. Emm. (N). Van Lennep gives σῇσι δ ̓ ἐπιφροσύνῃσιν— ἄψορρον ἐξαῦτις, remarking that this is a better order of the words; 'It was by your thoughtfulness too that we returned from the darkness of the prison.' The hiatus however in ἄψορρον ἐξαῦτις seems objectionable, even though δυσηλεγέος ἀπὸ δεσμοῦ in v. 652 is not very unlike it. Dr. Flach agrees with Van Lennep, but excludes v. 658. 660. ἀνάελπτα supplies an example of ȧvà used as the full form of the priR τῷ καὶ νῦν ἀτενεῖ τε νόῳ καὶ ἐπίφρονι βουλῇ ῥυσόμεθα κράτος ὑμὸν ἐν αἰνῇ δηϊοτήτι μαρνάμενοι Τιτῆσιν ἀνὰ κρατερὰς ὑσμίνας. Ως φάτ'· ἐπῄνησαν δὲ θεοὶ, δωτῆρες ἐάων, μῦθον ἀκούσαντες· πολέμου δ ̓ ἐλιλαίετο θυμὸς μᾶλλον ἔτ ̓ ἢ τοπάροιθε· μάχην δ' ἀμέγαρτον ἔγειραν πάντες, θήλειαί τε καὶ ἄρσενες, ἤματι κείνῳ, Τιτηνές τε θεοὶ καὶ ὅσοι Κρόνου ἐξεγένοντο, οὖς τε Ζεὺς Ερέβεσφιν ὑπὸ χθονὸς ἧκε φόωσδε, δεινοί τε κρατεροί τε, βίην ὑπέροπλον ἔχοντες. [τῶν ἑκατὸν μὲν χεῖρες ἀπ ̓ ὤμων ἀΐσσοντο πᾶσιν ὁμῶς, κεφαλαὶ δὲ ἑκάστῳ πεντήκοντα ἐξ ὤμων ἐπέφυκον ἐπὶ στιβαροῖσι μέλεσσιν.] οἱ * δ ̓ ὅτε Τιτήνεσσι κατέσταθεν ἐν δαὶ λυγρῇ 664. ἐξάων ? 669. φάξοσδε 664, ὡς φάτο. ἐπῄνεσαν δὲ Ν. qu. 666. μάχην τ' Ν. 669. ἐρέβευσφι Ν. Ζεὺς ἐρέβευσφιν Αld. φάος τε Ν. 673. μελέεσσι Ν. οἵ τοτε MSS. vative à, which merely means the reversal of some quality, as ανόμοιος is the converse of ὅμοιος. 661. ἀτενεῖ νόῳ, with stedfast resolve, with unflinching allegiance. 668. This verse occurred also at v. 630 and 648. Here it is not necessary, though it rather assists the syntax of the next verse. 669. Ερέβευσφιν vulgo, and so Van Lennep. Goettling, after L. Dindorf and some MSS. gives Ερέβεσφιν. In Il. ix. 572, Bekker edits ἔκλυεν ἐξ Ερέβεσφιν, and we may compare the common form στήθεσφι, which no one would write στήθευσφι. The old genitive was ἐρέβεσος, and thus the suffix is added to the crude form as in νεικεστῆρα, Opp. 716, where see the note. It is to be observed that i was not peculiar to the dative, but was commonly added to the genitive also ; thus we have in Homer ἐκ πασσαλόφι κρέμασεν Od. viii. 67, ἀπ' 672. Γεκάστῳ 665 670 ἐπῄνεσσαν ? ξάων LN, Ald. οὔτε ζεὺς ἐρέβεσφϊν L. οὔτε φάος δὲ L. φάως δε Ald. ἐσχαρόφιν ib. vii. 169, ἀπὸ νευρῆφιν ΙΙ. xiii. 585, ἐξ εὐνῆφι ib. xv. 580. In most cases this termination may be explained either in the instrumental or the local sense; e. g. ἐκ πασσαλόφι κρεμάσαι = ἐκκρεμάσαι πασσάλφ, ‘to hang up by a peg;' ἐξ εὐνῆφι ἀνίστασθαι, “ to get up on one's bed in order to leave it.' 671-3. These three verses occurred before, v. 150-2, with ἄπλαστοι for πᾶσιν ὁμῶς. Gaisford and Flach enclose them in brackets after Wolf. Goettling and Van Lennep think them genuine here. 674. κατέσταθεν. Though a war is often said καθίστασθαι, e.g. Thuc. i. 1, init., the sense here seems rather to be, stood opposite to, ex adverso constiterunt; and the dative thus depends on the implied notion of avrío Van Lennep well compares Herc. Fur. 1168, ἐς πόλεμον ὑμῖν καὶ μάχην καθίσταται. |
0 Reviews Reviews aren't verified, but Google checks for and removes fake content when it's identified Write review |