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 luuar 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 ἂψ 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 ήερόεντος ἠλύθομεν, Κρόνου υἱὲ ἄναξ, ἀνάελπτα παθόντες. 650 655 660 656. Είδμεν 656. πραπίδης 658-9. Transposed 652. ὑπὸ δεσμοῦ 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. 652. ἀπὸ δεσμοῦ. Many good copies give iò, 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 ὑπὸ, but against the MSS. The sense is rather weakened by omitting this line ; remember, it was through me that you returned from prison.' 6 655. οὐκ ἀδάητα, ' what is well known to us, viz. ὅσα ἀγαθὰ ὑπὸ σοῦ ἐπάθομεν.— πιφάσκομαι, identical with πιφαύσκομαι, (πιφα-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 R 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 ἠερόεντος ̓́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 pri 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, Τιτῆνές 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 665 670 664. ἐξάων ? 669. φάροσδε 672. Γεκάστῳ 664. ὡς φάτο. ἐπῄνεσαν δὲ Ν. qu. 666. μάχην τ' Ν. 669. ἐρέβευσφϊ Ν. Ζεὺς ἐρέβευσφιν Ald. φάος τε Ν. 673. μελέεσσι Ν. οἵ τοτε MSS. vative &, which merely means the reversal of some quality, as ανόμοιος is the converse of ὅμοιος. 661. ἀτενεῖ νόφ, 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 p 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' Ald. ἐπῄνεσσαν ? ξάων LN, ούτε οὔτε ζεὺς ἐρέβεσφϊν L. 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 πασσάλω, 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. πέτρας ἠλιβάτους στιβαρῇς ἐν χερσὶν ἔχοντες, Τιτῆνες δ' ἑτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγγας προφρονέως, χειρῶν τε βίης θ' ἅμα ἔργον ἔφαινον ἀμφότεροι, δεινὸν περιίαχε πόντος ἀπείρων, 675 γῆ δὲ μέγ ̓ ἐσμαράγησεν, ἐπέστενε δ ̓ οὐρανὸς εὐρὺς σειόμενος, πεδόθεν δ ̓ ἐτινάσσετο μακρὸς Όλυμπος 680 ῥιπῇ ὑπ' ἀθανάτων, ἔνοσις δ ̓ ἴκανε βαρεία Τάρταρον ἠερόεντα, ποδῶν τ' αἰπεῖα ζωὴ ἀσπέτου ἰωχμοῖο βολάων τε κρατεράων· 677. Γέργον 678. δεινὸν περιίαχε 675. στιβαρὰς LN, Ald. περίαχε MSS. 677. προφρονέων Ν. 682. Γιωὴ 678. δεινὸν δὲ 682. ποδῶν δ ̓ αἰπεῖά τ' ἰωή L, Ald. (gl. L, φωνή.) κρατεάων Ν. ἀσπεύτου ἰοχμοῖο Ν. ὁδὸν αἰτίατη κρατεάων Ν. 683. 675. The best copies seem to give στιβαρὰς, and so the Schol., μεγάλας, καθ' ὑπερβολὴν (this referring to ἠλιβάτους), στιβαρὰς, ἰσχυράς. But inf. v. 692 we have χειρὸς ἀπὸ στιβαρῆς, and v. 715, τριηκοσίας πέτρας στιβαρῶν ἀπὸ χειρῶν. Of course, πέτρας is a greater hyperbole than πέτρους would have been, and especially with ἠλιβάτους, steep and inaccessible rocks. Photius, ὀροτύπους, τους γίγαντας· ὅτι ταῖς τῶν ὀρῶν κορυφαῖς ἔβαλλον. Apollodorus also says (i. 6, 1), ἠκόντιζον δὲ εἰς οὐρανὸν πέτρας καὶ δρυς ἡμμένας. The giant Polyphemus tore oft' and threw at Ulysses κορυφὴν ὄρεος μεγάλοιο, Od. ix. 481. 676. The resemblance of this verse to Il. xvi. 563 can hardly be accidental; οἱ δ ̓ ἐπεὶ ἀμφοτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγ γας. So also Il. xii. 415, 'Αργείοι δ' ἑτέρωθεν ἐκαρτύναντο φάλαγγας. 678. Van Lennep calls the vulgate reading περίαχε an Aeolic crasis for περιΐαχε, citing the authority of Choeroboscus in Etym. Μ. p. 92, 9. Certainly the elision of the . in περὶ is very rare, though we have περοίχεται inf. v. 733, if the reading is to be relied on. Guietus conjectured δεινὸν δ ̓ ὑπερίαχε. Generally, but not always, ἰάχειν takes the digamma. The present passage (674 8) seems to have been tampered with, perhaps by the insertion of the Homeric verse 676. In this case προφρονέως will belong to κατέσταθεν. On the whole it seems most probable that for οἳ τότε κ.τ.λ., we should read οἱ δ ̓ ὅτε Τιτήνεσσι κατέσταθεν—δεινὸν περὶ Γίαχε κ.τ.λ., the apodosis commencing with this verse. Otherwise we might read δεινὸν περὶ δ ̓ ἴαχε πόντος, as sup. v. 69, περὶ δ ̓ ἴαχε γαῖα μέλαινα. In Scut. Η. 451, ἀλλὰ μέγα ἰάχων, there is certainly a digamma, and ib. 382 for μεγάλ ̓ ἴαχον we might read μέγα ἴαχον. 679. ἐσμαράγησεν, crashed, viz. with the noise of the burled rocks. Cf. inf. ν. 693. 682. The common reading ποδῶν αἰπειά τ' ἰωὴ, οι ποδῶν δ ̓ αἰπεῖά τ' ἰωὴ, was corrected by Hermann. It is retained by Schoemann, who punctuates Τάρταρον ηερόεντα ποδῶν, αἰπεῖά τ' ἰωή. But ποδῶν is thus quite out of its natural place. It is manifest that iwn here has the digamma, and that the τ' was inserted from ignorance of it. In I. x. 139, τὸν δ' αἶψα περὶ φρένας ήλυθ' ἰωὴ, the old reading was probably ἦλθε Γιωή. Compare Il. iv. 276, ὑπὸ Ζεφύροιο ἰωῆς, and xvi. 127.—ἰωχμοῖο, a secondary genitive; the far-ascending noise of feet from the incessant pursuit and from the hard blows of the missiles. The clause is exegetical of ἔνοσις βαρεία. The 7 in ἰωχμὸς is long, as in Scut. Η. 154, ἐν δὲ προίωξίς τε παλίωξις τε τέτυκτο, 685 ὡς ἄρ ̓ ἐπ ̓ ἀλλήλοις ἵεσαν βέλεα στονόεντα. φωνὴ δ ̓ ἀμφοτέρων ἵκετ ̓ οὐρανὸν ἀστερόεντα κεκλομένων· οἱ δὲ ξύνισαν μεγάλῳ ἀλαλητῷ. οὐδ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἔτι Ζεὺς ἔσχεν ἑὸν μένος· ἀλλά νυ τοῦγε εἶθαρ μὲν μένεος πλῆντο φρένες, ἐκ δέ τε πᾶσαν φαῖνε βίην· ἄμυδις δ ̓ ἄρ ̓ ἀπ ̓ οὐρανοῦ ἠδ ̓ ἀπ' Ολύμπου ἀστράπτων ἔστειχε συνωχαδόν· οἱ δὲ κεραυνοὶ ἴκταρ ἅμα βροντῇ τε καὶ ἀστεροπῇ ποτέοντο χειρὸς ἄπο στιβαρῆς ἱερὴν φλόγα εἰλυφόωντες ταρφέες, ἀμφὶ δὲ γαῖα φερέσβιος ἐσμαράγιζεν καιομένη, λάκε δ' ἀμφὶ πυρὶ μεγάλ ̓ ἄσπετος ὕλη. ἔζεε δὲ χθὼν πᾶσα καὶ Ωκεανοῖο ῥέεθρα, 690 695 687. ἴσχε Γεὸν 689. ἀπὸ Γορανοῦ ? 694. καιομένη 692. Γειλυφόωντες 695. ῥέεθρα 688. πλήντοι Ν. ἀστεροπῇ εὖ π. L, Ald. 695. ἔζεσε Ν. 685. δ ̓ ἵκετ' LN, Ald. 691. ἀστραπῇ π. Ν. Ald. φλόγα εἰλ. Ν. 686. This is rather a weak verse, and perhaps spurious. It is excluded by Dr. Flach. The entire passage, describing the contest of the Titans, is in a more florid and descriptive style than Hesiod commonly adopts. It was the opinion of Heyne that a fragment from an ancient Titanomachia had been inserted here. Goettling regards 687-712 as the addition of a later writer, desirous to magnify the exploits of Zeus. It may be remarked that the article in οἱ δὲ κεραυνοί, ν. 690, is hardly consistent with the early epic usage. 687. οὐκέτι ἴσχεν. “Significat poeta Jovem antea vim suam quasi cohibuisse, ut illam omnem exsereret in hac postrema bellum conficiente pugna.” Van Lennep. 688. εἶθαρ, an epic form of εὐθύς.— πλῆντο, a passive aorist of πλῆμι, πίπλημι. So Scut. Η. 146, τοῦ καὶ ὀδόντων μὲν πλῆτο στόμα. 690. συνωχαδόν, συνεχῶς, continuously. The termination is the same as in περισταδόν, and the long @ results 690. συνωλαδὸν Ν. 692. φλόγα θ' L, from σύνοχοs being pronounced σύνοκχος after the Aeolic dialect, as we have k λόχοιο sup. v. 178. 691. ἴκταρ, πλησίον, close to the enemy. “Ita ut pervenirent, ab ἵκω.” Van Lennep.-Hesychius too derives it (inv.) from ἱκνεῖσθαι. ἀστεροπῇ ποτέοντο seems the most probable reading, and is preferred by Van Lennep. Goettling gives ἀστραπῇ εὖ ποτέοντο. 692. φλόγα. Most of the copies add θ', which may be compared with the false reading αἰπεῖά τ' ἰωὴ in v. 682, as resulting from the lost digamma. Compare Fελικώπις, Γέλικες βουs, with our word welkin. In Il. xi. 156, ὡς δ ̓ ὅτε πῦρ ἀΐδηλον ἐν ἀξύλῳ ἐμπέσῃ ὕλῃ, πάντῃ τ' εἰλυφόων ἄνεμος φέρει, the context allows the omission of the τε. But in Scut. Η. 275, τῆλε δ ̓ ἀπ' αἰθομένων δαΐδων σέλας εἰλύφαζε, there is no digamma.The whole description here, especially the boiling of the sea in v. 695, seems to have been written by one who had seen the effects of a torrent of lava falling into an adjoining bay. |