ON THE FRAGMENTS OF SOPHOCLES AND A FORMER paper of mine on the fragments of Aeschylus will be found in the first No. of the Journal of Philology: I have since gone carefully through those of Sophocles, Euripides and some others, and from a variety of remarks which the abundant materials supplied by M. Nauck's work can hardly fail to suggest, select the following: Soph. Aegeus, fr. 23. πῶς δῆθ ̓ ὁδοῦρον ὅμοιος ἐξέβης λαθών; perhaps όμορος. Soph. Aleadae, fr. 85. ὁ δ ̓ εἰ νόθος τις γνησίοις ἴσον σθένοι, For Sei read oud' ei. The meaning seems to be, 'bastards and the children of true marriage have sometimes equal authority;' the convenționally inferior with the conventionally superior: but goodness is not therefore to be tested by its possessing the marks conventionally assigned to this superior nature. Do not suppose that what has this stamp of conventional genuineness is the only truly good. A fragment of Euripides illustrates the sentiment, Andromeda, 142: ἐγὼ δὲ παῖδας οὐκ ἐρῶ νόθους λαβεῖν. Soph. Danae, 170. γόνοιον μήλων κἀφροδισίαν ἄγραν. Perhaps γονεῖα. Soph. Ελένης ̓Απαίτησις, 150. For γραφίοις read γραφίδιοις. Soph. Eumelus, 203. ἄση γὰρ ἡ ῥυπαρία, ὅθεν καὶ ἀσάμινθος (ασάμεθα cod.) ἐν ᾗ τὴν ἄσην μινύθοντε ἐνεορεῖ. For ἀπῆξε πέμφιξιν οὐ πέλας φόρου Hermann conjectured ἀπῆξε πέμφιξ ὡς ἰπνοῦ σελασφόρου ; possibly for ὡs we should read ἐξ. Soph. Larisaei, 351. ὡς καὶ τύραννον πᾶς ἐγγίζεται φυγεῖν. Nauck, ἐπεύξεται : perhaps ἐπιζητεῖ. Soph. Lemniae, 355. ταχὺ δ ̓ αὐτὸ δείξει τοὔργον ὡς ἐγὼ σαφῶς. This has been variously altered: Meineke is probably right in reading τάχ ̓ αὐτό; for ὡς ἐγώ he reads ὡς δοκῶ; Bergk, οἶδ' ἐγώ; Hense ὡς λέγω; may it not be right as it is ? the fact shall soon shew clearly of itself in accordance with me.' Soph. Nauplius, 396. ἐφεῦρε δ ̓ ἄστρων μέτρα καὶ περιστροφὰς Perhaps στιλπνά, an Homeric word, Il. xΙν. 351. Soph. Nauplius, 398. τῷ γὰρ κακῶς πράσσοντι μυρία μία νύξ ἐστιν· εὖ παθόντα θ ̓ ἡτέρα θανεῖν. This is what the MS. reading ele érépa points to: the meaning is obscure, but not hopeless: 'to a man in misfortune one night is enough: if he has been fortunate, death is not removed by more than two nights.' It is a reflexion on the valuelessness of life; it is either unhappy, and then the smallest amount of it is enough: or happy, and even then death is not more than two steps removed. The construction is κατὰ σύνεσιν; and out of μυρία in the second clause this general idea of enough is supplied; the participle assumes the accusatival form before the infinitive. Soph. Ποιμένες, 458. καὶ μὴ ὑβρίζων αὐτίκ ̓ ἐκ βάθρων ἕλω Perhaps μή σ'. Soph. Scythae, 501. Schol. Apoll. Rhod. IV. 223 : ἐν δὲ τοῖς Σκύθαις ὁ Σοφοκλῆς ἑτερομήτορα τῆς Μηδείας τὸν Αψυρτον λέγει, พ οὐ γὰρ ἐκ μιᾶς κοίτης ἔβλαστον, ἀλλ ̓ ὁ μὲν Νηρηίδος τέκνον ἄρτι βλάστεσκεν ἣν Εἰδυῖα πρίν ποτ ̓ Ὠκεανοῦ κόρη τέκεν. Merkel, who seems right in supposing these lines to be iambic, Journal of Philology. VoL. IV. 18 not, as Valckenaer, trochaic, reads in 3, βλάστεσκεν ἄρτι τέκνον. I would propose, ἦν ἄρτι βλαστή, τὴν δ ̓ Ἰδυῖα πρίν ποτε Ωκεανὶς οὖσ ̓ ἔτικτεν. 'Idvîa is Valckenaer's, and is proved to have been an existing form by the lines of Hesiod quoted by the Scholiast on Apoll. R. III. 242: Read, for φύσιν. Αἰήτης δ' υἱὸς φαεσιμβρότου Ηελίοιο Soph. Tereus, 528. θνητὰ φρονεῖν χρὴ θνητὴν φύσαν Tyro Fr. 593. σπασθεῖσ': the MSS. reading is surely right: it is the natural sequence of θέρος θερίσθῃ ξανθὸν αὐχένων ἄπο, ‘and then when she has thus had her hair torn away. The genitive ποταμίων ποτῶν is either dependent on λειμώνι, or more probably perhaps on σκιᾶς εἴδωλον. Phaedra Fr. 614. σύγγνωτε κἀνάσχεσθε σιγῶσαι τὸ γὰρ So the MSS., I think, rightly: ἐν γυναικί = ' where a woman is concerned.' Ib. Fr. 616. τὸ δ ̓ εὐτυχοῦν πάντ ̓ ἀριθμῆσαι βροτῶν οὐκ ἐστὶν οὗτος ὅντιν ̓ εὑρήσεις ἕνα. So the MSS. Perhaps εὐτυχοῦντα : the construction would seem to be, τὸ δ' ἀριθμῆσαι εὐτυχοῦντα πάντα οὐκ ἐστὶν οὗτος ὅντινα ἕνα βροτῶν εὑρήσεις, that a man should reckon up all prosperity-there is no one mortal thou wilt find to do this.' Fr. 644. Hesychius, II. p. 250 : κηρίωμα ὁμίλημα· ἔστι γὰρ τὸ κηρίον ᾧ προσεικάζει τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς τῶν Φινειδῶν. Perhaps for ὁμίλημα, for which Dindorf proposes λήμη, we should read ὀφθαλμολήμη. Incert. Fr. 875. For ἠελίοιο κτείρειε ἐμέ it seems likely that we should read ἥλι ̓ οἰκτείροις ἐμέ. Eurip. Aeolus, 21. On the last line, τοῖσιν πένησιν χρώμενοι πειθώμεθα, Nauck conjectures πεπώμεθα: rather πετάμεθα. ̓Αλέξανδρος, 53. For νόμῳ δὲ γαῦρον αὐτὸ κραίνει χρόνος, perhaps νόμῳ δὲ γαῦρον τὸ κραίνει χρίνος, what time ratifes is conventionally proud,' i. e. has a conventional right or title to be proud. Alope, 112. τί δῆτα μοχθεῖν δεῖ γυναικεῖον γάμον Meineke changed γάμον φρουροῦντας to γένος φρενοῦντας. I think γάμον φρουροῦντας need not be altered, what need to waste time in keeping a guard on women's marriages?' i. e. in watching to prevent their unfortunate or pernicious attach ments. Andromeda, 151. τὸ δαιμόνιον οὐχ ὁρᾷς ὅπῃ μοῖρα διεξέρχεται; στρέφει δ ̓ ἄλλους ἄλλως εἰς ἡμέραν. In the second line read, μοῖρ ̓ ἀεί; in the third, ἄλλοσ ̓ ἄλλους seems metrically preferable to ἄλλους ἄλλοσ ̓, as Hermann and Fritzche propose. Antiope, 200. καὶ μὴν ὅσοι μὲν σαρκὸς εἰς εὐεξίαν |