Prologue. At daybreak (v. 100) on the morning after the fall of the two brothers and the flight of the Argives, Antigone calls Ismene forth from the house, in order to speak with her apart. She tells her that Creon has forbidden the burial of Polyneices, and declares her resolve to perform it herself. Ismene declines to assist, and endeavours to dissuade her. Antigone then goes alone to the task.

The words κοινὸν (kindred) αὐτάδελφον (very sister) form a single emphatic expression (‘my sister, mine own sister’), not a climax (‘kinswoman, and sister’)— κοινόν strengthening αὐτάδελφον much as in 535 κοιναί γε πατρὸς ἀδελφεαί ('yea, very sisters of their sire'). κοινόν refers simply to birth from the same parents (cp. 202): it will not bear the added moral sense, ‘having common interests and feelings’: that is only implied, in so far as it may be a result of kinship. αὐτάδελφος (subst. below, 503, 696) is merely a poetical strengthening of ἀδελφός, and does not necessarily imply (as it might here) what prose expresses by ἀδελφὸς ὁμοπάτριος καὶ ὁμομήτριος (Lys. or. 32 § 4) : thus Apollo, son of Zeus and Leto, can address Hermes, son of Zeus and Maia, as αὐτάδελφον αἶμα καὶ κοινοῦ πατρός (Aesch. 89).

κάρα : the periphrasis (as with κεφαλή) usu. implies respect, affection, or both (cp. Horace's tam cari capitis Odes 1.24.2 ).—The pathetic emphasis of this first line gives the key-note of the drama. The origin which connects the sisters also isolates them. If Ismene is not with her, Antigone stands alone.

ἆρ’ οἶσθ’ … τελεῖ ; For the various interpretations and emendations, see Appendix. The soundness of the text is doubtful, but no proposed correction is probable. I read ὅ τι , pron., not ὅτι , conjunction, and supply ἐστί. In the direct question, τί ὁποῖον οὐ τελεῖ; we understand ἐστί with τί. In the indirect form, it is simplest to say οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅ τι οὐ τελεῖ: and we certainly could not say, οὐκ οἶδ’ ὅ τι [ἐστὶν] ὁποῖον οὐ τελεῖ, if ὅ τι came immediately before ὁποῖον. Here, however, the separation of ὅ τι from ὁποῖον by Ζεὺς τῶν ἀπ’ Οἰδίπου κακῶν makes a vital difference. The sentence begins as if it were to be, ἆρ’ οἶσθ’ ὅ τι Ζεὺς οὐ τελεῖ; But when, after an interval, ὁποῖον comes in, the Greek hearer would think of the direct form, τί ὁποῖον οὐ τελεῖ; and so his ear would not be offended. This, too, suggests the answer to the objection that Ζεύς ought to follow ὁποῖον. Certainly Eur. 525, οὐκ ἔστ’ Ὀδυσσεὺς ὅ τι σὲ κἀμὲ πημανεῖ , would be parallel only if here we had ἆρ’ οἶσθα, Ζεύς (without ὅ τι). Nor could we have (e.g.) ἆρ’ οἶσθ’ ἥτις Ζεὺς τῶν νόσων ὁποίαν οὐ τελεῖ; But, since ὅ τι might be acc., Ζεύς seems to follow it naturally; and when, afterwards, the sentence takes a shape which makes ὅ τι nom., the ear does not return on Ζεύς as on a misplaced word, because the whole is felt as=τί Ζεὺς ὁποῖον οὐ τελεῖ;—The main objection to reading ὅτι , and taking ὁποῖον as substituted for the direct ποῖον (‘that he fulfils—what not?’) is the shortness of the sentence.

τῶν ἀπ’ Οἰδ. κακῶν , the ills derived from Oed. (cp. 1088 λύπας τᾶς ἀπ’ ἐμοῦ ): i.e. the curse upon the Labdacidae (594) which he had inherited, and which he bequeathed to his children in a form intensified by his own acts,—the parricide, the incest, the imprecation upon his sons. That imprecation finds a further fulfilment in Creon's edict. ἔτι ζώσαιν does not mean, ‘living wearily on,’ but simply, ‘still living’ (not yet dead), so that ἔτι is almost pleonastic, as in 750 ἔτι ζῶσαν , and so 305. Sometimes, indeed, the use of ἔτι with ζῆν is more emphatic, as in 990 ἔτι ζῶν...ἐφίετο (while yet alive), Eur. 8 πυρὸς ἔτι ζῶσαν φλόγα (still smouldering).

Paley ( 10. 16) regards these three verses as interpolated, because (1) Antigone, like Ismene, should have only seven verses: (2) the words only repeat vv. 2, 3: (3) the double negative offends. But we have no warrant for requiring such a correspondence; and this is not repetition, but development. On (3), see below.

οὔτ’ ἄτης ἄτερ . I translate as if οὔτ’ ἄτην ἄγον (or the like) stood in the text, since there can be no doubt that such was the general sense; but I leave the traditional words, οὔτ’ ἄτης ἄτερ, thinking no emendation sufficiently probable to be admitted. A discussion will be found in the Appendix. Here, the following points may be noted. (1) This seems to have been the only reading known to Didymus of Alexandria, circ. 30 B.C. (2) It certainly does not yield any tolerable sense. (3) But the phrase ἄτης ἄτερ is not, in itself, at all suspicious: cp. 48 πημονῆς ἄτερ : Aesch. 377 βλάβης ἄτερ , 703 ἄτερ πημάτων: 1148 κλαυμάτων ἄτερ: 683 αἰσχύνης ἄτερ : 338 τί δ’ ἄτερ κακῶν; Eur. 841 οὐκ ἄτερ πόνων . (4) The gentlest remedy would be οὐδ’ for the second οὔτ’ : ‘nothing painful and not-free from calamity’ (=nothing painful and calamitous). The mental pain was accompanied by ruin to their fortunes. I think this possible, but not quite satisfactory. (5) One word, instead of ἄτης ἄτερ, might seem desirable: I had thought of ἀτηφόρον (cp. δικηφόρος). (6) Donaldson's ἄτην ἄγον can be supported by fr. 325 ὅτῳ δ’ ὄλεθρον δεινὸν ἁλήθεῑ ἄγει, and fr. 856. 5 ἐν κείνῃ τὸ πᾶν, | σπουδαῖον, ἡσυχαῖον, ἐς βίαν ἄγον. (7) But no emendation has yet been made which, while giving a fit sense, also accounts palaeographically for ἄτης ἄτερ being so old. We cannot assume marginal glosses (as ἀτηρ\\) in MSS. of 30 B.C.

αἰσχρόν , shocking the moral sense: ἄτιμον , attended by outward marks of dishonour,—as Oedipus imagines his daughters exposed to slights at the public festivals ( 1489 ff.). Thus αἰσχρόν in a manner balances the subjective ἀλγεινόν, as the external ἀτιμία corresponds with the ἄτη. Cp. 1283 ff.

ὁποῖον οὐ … οὐκ ὄπωπα . The repetition of the negative is warranted by the emphasis: cp. 416 οὐχ ὁ Τυδέως γόνος, | οὐδ’ οὑμπολητὸς Σισύφου Λαερτίῳ, | οὐ μὴ θάνωσι: 1014 οὐ πῦρ, οὐκ ἔγχος τις ὀνήσιμον οὐκ ἐπιτρέψει ; Aesch. 1634 ὃς οὐκ, ἐπειδὴ τῷδ’ ἐβούλευσας μόρον, | δρᾶσαι τόδ’ ἔργον οὐκ ἔτλης αὐτοκτόνως : and so oft. after οὐ μά, as 626. We need not, then, change οὐ (in v. 5) to ὂν, with Blaydes, nor οὐκ ὄπωπ’ to εἰσόπωπ’ with Todt.

τῶν … κακῶν , sc. ὄν, possessive (or ‘partitive’) gen. with ὄπωπα ,—‘which I have not seen as belonging to, being in the number of,’ our woes. For the omission of ὄν cp. 694 ἔστιν δ’ οἷον ἐγὼ γᾶς Ἀσίας οὐκ ἐπακούω .

αὖ is oft. thus joined with the interrogative τίς (‘what new thing?’): cp. 1172, 1281: 357 νῦν δ’ αὖ τίν’ ἥκεις μῦθον... | φέρουσα … ; ib. 1507 τί δ’ ἐστίν ...νέορτον αὖ;

πανδήμῳ πόλει , the whole body of the citizens: so 1141, 982: πανδήμου στρατοῦ 844 . For the adj. compounded with a noun cognate in sense to the subst., cp. βίος μακραίων ( 518), εὐήρετμος πλάτα ( 716 n.).

θεῖναι , not θέσθαι. τίθημι νόμον denotes simply the legislative act as such; hence it is fitting when the lawgiver is supreme or absolute; as Athena says, θεσμὸν...θήσω ( Aesch. 484). τίθεμαι νόμον further implies the legislator's personal concern in the law; hence it is said of legislative assemblies (Ar. 4. 1. 9): but it can be said also of the despot, if his interest is implied: Plat. 338E τίθεται δέ γε τοὺς νόμους ἑκάστη ἡ ἀρχὴ πρὸς τὸ αὑτῇ ξυμφέρον, δημοκρατία μὲν δημοκρατικούς, τυραννὶς δὲ τυραννικούς.

τὸν στρατηγόν . Creon is already βασιλεὺς χώρας (155), having become so by the fact of Eteocles falling (173). She calls him στρατηγός because that was the special capacity in which, as king, he had first to act; but the title serves also to suggest rigour. The poets sometimes speak of the δῆμος as στρατός ( Pind. 2. 87, Aesch. 566).

ἔχεις , cognitum habes: 318 οὐδ’ ὄνομα πρός του τῶν ξυνεμπόρων ἔχεις;

κεἰσήκουσας , simply ‘heard’ (not, ‘given heed to’), as 1645, 318, 351, 424.

τῶν ἐχθρῶν κακά , ‘that evils belonging to (proper for) our enemies are coming upon our friends’; i.e. that our brother Polyneices is to share the doom of the Argive dead, by being left unburied. As appears from vv. 1081 ff., Soph. supposes that burial was denied to the slain foemen generally, and not to Polyneices alone. No legend was more familiar at Athens than that of Theseus recovering the Argive corpses from Creon ( ). Cp. 1162, where, as here, ἐχθρῶν are the Argives,—the πολέμιοι in their relation to individuals. Ismene, too, seems to understand the Argives; in her reply verses 11—14 refer to φίλους, and vv. 15—17 to ἐχθρῶν. It is rare that ἐχθρῶν should have the art., while κακά has none; but cp. 365: 1530 τέρμα τοῦ βίου .—We might take τῶν ὲχθρῶν κακά as ‘evils planned by our foes’ (i.e. by Creon): cp. 422 τά γε | κείνων κάκ’ ἐξήρυκε: ib. 512 τὸ κείνων κακόν . So schol., τὰ τῶν ἐχθρῶν μηχανήματα ἐπὶ τοὺς φίλους ἰόντα. But (a) the authorship of the decree having been already named, we now expect a hint of its purport: and (b) ἐχθροί being the natural persons to hurt φίλοι, the antithesis loses point. Some join στείχοντα τῶν ἐχθρῶν, ‘coming from foes’; which is open to the objections just mentioned, and also to this, that, after such a verb as στείχειν, the simple gen. ought to denote place ( 152 Πυθῶνος ἔβας ), not agent.

μέν does not answer to the δέ in 15, but merely gives a slight emphasis to ἐμοί ; cp. Xen. 1.4.12 ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἶδα (though others may know).

Ἀντιγόνη , placed as in 1 n., 1415; while once ( 507) the anapaest is in the 4th place.

φίλων , objective gen. with μῦθος , tidings about them: cp. 221 ἀνδρὸς αἴθονος ἀγγελίαν : ib. 998 ὀξεῖα γάρ σου βάξις . In 1161 f. σοῦ...μῦθον (where the gen. is objective) = ‘speech with thee.’

ἐξ ὅτου , referring to a definite time, as 1092, 345, 326, 493, like ἐξ οὖ ( 1201, 38, 661, 1337). It refers to an indefinite time below, 457. The brothers had fallen on the preceding day.

δυοῖν … δύο . The addition of δύο would have more point if two pairs were in question, each consisting of one brother and one sister (as, e.g., one might say, ‘the two husbands were taken from the two wives’): yet it is not pointless, since it helps to suggest the isolation of the sisters. As Greek (esp. tragic) idiom loves to mark reciprocity by a repeated word (73 φίλη...φίλου, 267 κοινὸς ἐν κοινοῖσι ), so it also loves to mark coincidence or contrast of number, whether this is, or is not, especially relevant (cp. 14, 55, 141).

θανόντοιν is clearly required here, though our MSS. have θανόντων. So in 1297, where νῷν ἐπελθόντοιν is certainly right, L has ἐπελθόντων (with οι written over ω as a correction). A plur. noun can stand with δύο ( 12.73), and in 16.428 we have αἰγυπιοὶ γαμψώνυχες ...κλάζοντε. But I have been able to find only one proper parallel for such a combination as δυοῖν ἀδελφοῖν θανόντων, viz., a verse of an unknown poet, fr. adesp. 153 in Nauck p. 679 Αἴαντε δ’ ὁρμήσαντες ἐκ συνωρίδος: and this has survived because Herodian cited it as a solecism ( 3. 244): ἔδει γὰρ ἐπενεχθῆναι δυϊκῷ δυϊκόν. In that verse, too, the license had an obvious metrical motive, which did not exist here. Cp. 55 f. ἀδελφὼ δύο...αὐτοκτονοῦντε; 58 λελειμμένα ; 62 μαχουμένα .

διπλῇ χερί , i.e. each by the other's right hand (as in 1425 θάνατον ἐξ ἀμφοῖν =ἐξ ἀλλήλοιν ): so 170 διπλῆς μοίρας, a doom given by each to the other. Cp. 206 θανάτους...διδύμαιν χειροῖν , a murder done by two right hands (that of Clytaemnestra and that of Aegisthus). Distinguish the use of the plur. διπλοῖ for δύο, as 51, 1233.

ἐπεί , temporal, ‘since’ (like ἐξ οὗ), as oft. in Her.and the poets. So also ὅτε ( Thuc. 1.13 ἔτη δ’ ἐστὶ...τριακόσια...ὅτε...ἧλθε ).

ἐν νυκτὶ τῇ νῦν , last night: so νυκτὸς τῆσδε 21 (cp. ib. 209): νυκτὶ τῇδε 644 : while ‘tonight’ is τῆς ἐπιούσης νυκτός (Plat. 46A). The Argives, having on the preceding day lost all their leaders except Adrastus, fled shortly before dawn (cp. 100).

ὑπέρτερον here simply = πλέον (cp. nihil supra).

As οἶδ’ εὐτυχοῦσα = οἶδ’ ὅτι εὐτυχῶ, so the participles εὐτυχοῦσα and ἀτωμένη are epexegetic of οὐδὲν ὑπέρτερον, = οὔθ’ ὅτι εὐτυχῶ οὔθ’ ὅτι ἀτῶμαι. Of ἀτᾶσθαι we find only this pres. part. (below, 314, 384, Eur. 182) and ἀτώμεσθα 269 .

ᾔδη : see on 1525. καλῶς has a slightly ironical tone ( 1008), glancing at Ismene's apathy.

αὐλείων πυλῶν , the outer door (or gate) of the court-yard, the αὔλειοι (or αὐλῆς) θύραι of the Homeric house ( 18.239), in distinction from the θύραι μεγάρου, or inner door from the court into the men's hall. This was the αὔλειος θύρα, or front door, of the later Greek house, in distinction from the μέταυλος θύρα leading from the court to the inner part. The tragedians commonly use the more stately word πύλαι, rather than θύραι, for these outer doors of the palace: cp. Eur. 431 πύλας τε σεμνὰς ἀνδρὸς ὀλβίου τινὸς | προσῆλθον : ib. 438 πρὸς αὐλείοισιν ἑστηκὼς πύλαις.

ἐξέπεμπον , ‘sought to bring thee forth’: the act., since she had herself fetched or called Ismene; the midd. meaning to summon by a messenger, 951 τί μ’ ἐξεπέμψω δεῦρο τῶνδε δωμάτων ; cp. on 161, 165. The imperf., because she speaks of the motive present to her mind while the act was being done: cp. 770 τότ’ ἐξεώθεις κἀξέβαλλες , n.

τί δ’ ἔστι ; marking surprise ( 319 n.). δηλοῖς is not intransitive, the thing shown being expressed by the partic. in the nomin., just as below, 242 (cp. on 471), Thuc. 1.21 ὁ πόλεμος οὗτος ...δηλώσει...μείζων γεγενημένος . There is a really intransitive use of δηλόω in [Andoc. ] or. 4 § 12 δηλώσει δὲ ἡ τῶν συμμάχων ἔχθρα πρῶτον , etc., unless δηλώσεται should be read there; but the speech is a work of the later rhetoric (see , 1. 137). Not one of the few instances adduced from classical Greek requires δηλόω to be intransitive: Her. 2.117 (subject τόδε): 5. 78 (ἡ ἰσηγορίη): Plat. 483D (ἡ φύσις). In Her. 9.68 δηλοῖ τέ μοι ὅτι πάντα... ἤρτητο..., εἰ καὶ τότε...ἔφευγον , the real subject is the clause with εἰ (the fact of their flight shows me).

καλχαίνουσ’ ἔπος τι (for the enclitic τις placed before its noun, see on 280 f.), ‘that thou art troubled by some tidings.’ The verb is intrans., ἔπος being the ‘internal,’ or cognate, accus. ( 1326 νοσεῖς τόδ’ ἄλγος ): for its sense cp. 302 τίς δ’ ἔσθ’ ὁ κείνῳ τοῦτο τοὔπος ἀγγελῶν; From κάλχη, the purple limpet (perh. connected with κόχλος, κόγχη), comes καλχαίνω, to make, or to be, purple: then fig., to be darkly troubled in mind: Eur. 40 ἀμφὶ τοῖσδε καλχαίνων τέκνοις . Hence perh. Κάλχας, the seer who darkly broods on the future. The descent of this metaphor is curious. φυρ, the root of πορ‐φύρ‐ω, signified ‘to be agitated,’—like heaving water, for instance (Skt. bhur, Lat. ferv-ere, Curt. § 415). In 14.16 ff. a man's troubled hesitation is likened to the trouble of the sea just before a storm, while as yet the waves are not driven either way: ὡς δ’ ὅτε πορφύρῃ πέλαγος μέγα κύματι κωφῷ (not yet breaking in foam)...ὣς ὁ γέρων ὥρμαινε δαϊζόμενος κατὰ θυμόν. The Homeric image is thus subtler than that of a storm in the soul ( Volvere curarum tristes in pectore fluctus, Lucr. 6. 34 ). (2) Then πορφύρω is said of the mind itself: 21.551 ἔστη, πολλὰ δέ οἱ κραδίη πόρφυρε μένοντι , ‘was troubled.’ (3) From πορφύρω, as=‘to be turbid,’ came πορφύρα as=simply ‘the dark’ (purple-fish and dye): and then in later Greek the verb took on the specific sense, ‘to be purple.’ (4) κάλχη = πορφύρα: and hence καλχαίνω

is figuratively used like the Homeric πορφύρω. In πορφύρω the idea of trouble precedes that of colour: in καλχαίνω, vice versa.

οὐ γάρ , ‘what, has not,’ etc., introducing an indignant question, as 1348, 249.

τὼ κασιγνήτω … τὸν μὲν … τὸν δέ , partitive apposition (σχῆμα καθ’ ὅλον καὶ μέρος), the whole, which should be in the genitive, being put in the same case as the part,—a constr. freq. in nom., but rare in accus.: cp. 561: Thuc. 2.92 δύο ὑποσχέσεις τὴν μὲν βουλόμενος ἀναπρᾶξαι, τὴν δὲ αὐτὸς ἀποδοῦναι .

The place of τάφου before τὼ κασιγνήτω shows the first thought to have been,— ‘of a tomb, he has deemed our two brothers, the one worthy, the other unworthy’: but προτίσας , which has taken the place of a word in the sense of ἀξιώσας, substitutes the idea of preferring one brother to the other. Thus τάφου is left belonging, in strict grammar, to ἀτιμάσας only; for the genit. with which, cp. 49.

ἀτιμάσας ἔχει =a perfect, 577.

σὺν δίκῃ | χρησθεὶς δικαίᾳ καὶ νόμῳ , the reading of our MSS., was a clumsy attempt to mend a corrupt text, in the sense: ‘having treated (him) in accordance with righteous judgment and usage.’ The lateness of the corruption is shown by χρησθεὶς as= χρησάμενος, since in classical Greek χρησθῆναι is always pass., Her. 7.144 (the ships) οὐκ ἐχρήσθησαν , Dem. or. 21 § 16 ἕως ἂν χρησθῇ (ἡ ἐσθής); of oracles being delivered, 604, 355: in Polyb. 2. 32 ἐβούλοντο συγχρῆσθαι ταῖς...δυνάμεσι, συγχρησθῆναι is found, indeed, in some MSS., but is manifestly corrupt. Several conjectures are discussed in the Appendix. It is most improbable that vv. 23, 24 have grown out of one verse, either by the interpolation of v. 24, or by the expansion of v. 23. For it is evidently essential to the contrast with vv. 26—30 that the honours paid to Eteocles should be described with emphasis. Were v. 23 immediately followed by v. 25, the effect would be too bald and curt. I read σὺν δίκης | χρήσει δικαίᾳ καὶ νόμου , ‘with righteous observance of justice and usage’ [νόμῳ could be retained, but would be harsh; and the corruption of δίκης would have caused that of νόμου]. δίκης , following σύν , was changed to δίκῃ , and then χρήσει became χρησθείς , in an attempt to mend the sense. σὺν χρήσει δικαίᾳ δίκης καὶ νόμου = δίκῃ καὶ νόμῳ δικαίως χρώμενος. For the latter, cp. Antiphon or. 5 § 87 χρῆσθαι τῇ δίκῃ καὶ τῷ νόμῳ. Eur. 316 οὐδὲν τῇ δίκῃ χρῆσθαι θέλει . The substantival periphrasis (σὺν χρήσει τινός for χρώμενός τινι) is of a common kind; e.g. Thuc. 2.39 διὰ...τὴν ἐν τῇ γῇ ἐπὶ πολλὰ ἡμῶν αὐτῶν ἐπίπεμψιν : 5. 8 ἄνευ προόψεως...αὐτῶν (=εἰ μὴ προΐδοιεν αὐτούς).—Schütz (1876, p. 176) proposed χρῆσθαι δικαιῶν , ‘deeming it right to treat (him) in accordance with justice,’ etc.: where, however, to supply αὐτῷ is most awkward: I should prefer τῷ (instead of καὶ) νόμῳ. 1526 is an instance in which καὶ seems to have supplanted an article (ταῖς) after the sense had become obscured. But χρῆσθαι δικαιῶν τῷ νόμῳ appears somewhat too prosaic and cold, and, in so lucid a phrase, would δικαιῶν have been likely to become δικαίᾳ?

νόμου , of funeral rites, cp. 519: so νόμιμα (Thuc. 3.58), τὰ νομιζόμενα ποιεῖν (iusta facere): Plut. 38 κηδείας τῆς νενομισμένης, the usual obsequies.

τοῖς ἔνερθεν ἔντιμον νεκροῖς , ethic dat., in their sight ( 8 πᾶσι κλεινός , cp. 1446). The dead repelled the spirit of the unburied from their converse: 23.71 (the shade of the unburied Patroclus to Achilles) θάπτε με ὅττι τάχιστα, πύλας Ἀΐδαο περήσω. | τῆλέ με εἴργουσι ψυχαί, εἴδωλα καμόντων, | οὐδέ μέ πω μίσγεσθαι ὑπὲρ ποταμοῖο ἐῶσιν.

θανόντα … Πολυνείκους νέκυν , by enallage for θανόντος, but also with a reminiscence of the Homeric νεκύων κατατεθνηώτων: cp. 515 ὁ κατθανὼν νέκυς.

ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι = προκεκηρῦχθαι, as in 203. The compound with ἐκ usu. = ‘to banish by proclamation’ ( 430 n.).

τὸ μὴ … καλύψαι , instead of the ordinary μὴ καλύψαι: cp. 443: 1739 ἀπέφυγε... | ...τὸ μὴ πίτνειν κακῶς . Though τὸ μὴ καλύψαι might be viewed as subject to ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι, the latter was probably felt as an impersonal pass. The addition of the art. to the infin. is freq. in drama: cp. 78, and 47 n.

ἐᾶν δ’ . Since τινά can mean πάντα τινά, it is not necessary to supply πάντας as subject for ἐᾶν, though in 238 ff. we have μήτ’ ἐσδέχεσθαι μήτε προσφωνεῖν τινα,...ὠθεῖν δ’ ἀπ’ οἴκων πάντας.—L has ἄταφον ἄκλαυτον . For this order it may be said, that a tribrach contained in one word forms the second foot in 1235 πότερα , ib. 1314 πατέρα, Aesch. 1 χθόνιε. Also, ἄταφον thus gains a certain abrupt force, and the order corresponds with καλύψαι...κωκῦσαι. But against it we may urge:—(1) The other order was the usual one: 22.386 κεῖται πὰρ νήεσσι νέκυς ἄκλαυτος ἄθαπτος : Eur. 30 | ἄκλαυτος, ἄταφος. (2) On such a question of order no great weight belongs to L, in which wrong transpositions of words certainly occur; e.g. 156, Ph. 1332: 1088. Here some MSS. give ἄκλαυστον ἄταφον. There is no ground for distinguishing ἄκλαυστος, as ‘not to be wept,’ from ἄκλαυτος, ‘not wept’ (see 361 note in Appendix on γνωτός and γνωστός). L gives the form without sigma here, as below, 847, 876, and in 1708; but the sigmatic form in 912.

θησαυρόν : schol. ἕρμαιον, εὕρημα, taking it as merely ‘treasure trove’; but here ‘treasure’ evidently implies ‘store’ (cp. 37 θησαύρισμα); the carrion-birds can return again and again to their feast.

εἰσορῶσι , when they look down upon it from the air. There is no ground for saying that εἰσορᾶν was specially ‘to eye with desire’: in Xen. 5.1.15 οὔτε πυρὸς ἅπτομαι οὔτε τοὺς καλοὺς εἰσορῶ , it is simply ‘look at.’ The conjecture εἰσορμῶσι , to be taken with πρὸς χάριν βορᾶς, ‘swooping to the joy of the feast,’ is not only needless, but bad. Far finer is the picture of the birds pausing in their flight at the moment when they first descry the corpse below.

Take πρὸς χάριν βορᾶς with γλυκὺν θησαυρόν, not with εἰσορῶσι: lit., a welcome store to the birds, when they look upon it, with a view to pleasure in feeding. For the sensual use of χάρις cp. 254 A τῆς τῶν ἀφροδισίων χάριτος.

πρὸς χάριν is used either adverbially or with a genitive. (1) As an adverb, it means literally, ‘with a view to gratification’: hence (a) when the χάρις is one's own, ‘at pleasure,’ as Philoctetes calls the birds ( 1156) κορέσαι στόμα πρὸς χάριν, to glut their beaks on him ‘as they will’: ( b) when the χάρις is another's, ‘so as to give pleasure,’ ‘graciously,’ as 1152 σὺ πρὸς χάριν μὲν οὐκ ἐρεῖς . (2) A genitive after πρὸς χάριν can denote (a) that in which the χάρις consists, as βορᾶς here: or (b) the person or thing whose the χάρις is, as below, 908, τίνος νόμου...πρὸς χάριν; ‘in deference to what law?’ Eur. 538 νόμοις τε χρῆσθαι μὴ πρὸς ἰσχύος χάριν , ‘not at the pleasure of force,’— i.e. not so that force can do what it pleases. Here, πρὸς χάριν βορᾶς differs from a simple χάριν βορᾶς by implying the same notion as the adverbial πρὸς χάριν in 1156 quoted above: ‘to feast on at their pleasure.’—Eustathius on 8.379 (p. 719. 9) defines carrion-birds as τοῖς πρὸς χάριν ὁρῶσι βορᾶς τῆς ἀπὸ τῶν σαρκῶν. It cannot be doubted that he was thinking of our passage, and that his text, like ours, had εἰσορῶσι: but, using the simple ὁρῶσι, he has made a new phrase, ‘looking to pleasure in food,’ and his words afford no argument for joining πρὸς χάριν with εἰσορῶσι here.

σοί , like κἀμοί , depends on κηρύξαντ’ ἔχειν (for which see 22). Creon's edict, addressed to all Thebans, touches the sisters first, since, as the nearest relatives of the dead, they were most concerned to see that he received burial. Antigone speaks with burning indignation. She says, in effect:—‘Thus hath Creon forbidden thee and me to render the last offices to our brother.’ The parenthesis λέγω γὰρ κἀμέ is prompted by the intense consciousness of a resolve. To her, who knows her own heart, it seems wonderful that Creon should even have imagined her capable of obeying such an edict. It is a fine psychological touch, and one of the most pathetic in the play.

τὸν ἀγαθόν , ironical, as 385 Κρέων ὁ πιστός , 873 ἁγαθοὶ στρατηλάται.

λέγω γὰρ κἀμέ (instead of κἀμοί), a constr. most freq. when the acc. is a proper name, as Dem. or. 24 § 6 προσέκρουσ’ ἀνθρώπῳ πονηρῷ...Ἀνδροτίωνα λέγω . So 9, 1261, Aesch. 609, Eur. 642. On the other hand cp. Dem. or. 8 § 24 παρ’ ὧν ἂν ἕκαστοι δύνωνται, τούτων τῶν τὴν Ἀσίαν ἐνοικούντων λέγω, χρήματα λαμβάνουσιν : Aesch. fr. 169 ἀλλ’ Ἀντικλείας ἆσσον ἦλθε Σίσυφος, | τῆς σῆς λέγω τοι μητρός. In 569 where L has Ἐριβοία (sic) λέγω, most edd. now give the dat.

Two other explanations may be noticed. Both make σοι enclitic. (1) Taking σοι as ethic dat. with τοιαῦτα : ‘There is the good Creon's proclamation for you,—aye, and for me too, for I count myself also amongst those forbidden’ (Campbell). Thus κἀμοί is not, like σοι , a mere ethic dat., but rather a dat. of interest. Such a transition seems hardly possible. (2) Taking σοι as ethic dat. with ἀγαθόν : ‘your good Creon, aye and mine, for I own I too thought him so’ (Kennedy). But Antigone is too much occupied with the edict itself to dwell with such emphasis at such a moment on the disappointment which she has experienced as to Creon's amiability.

νεῖσθαι pres. ( 5.88): Eur. has νεῖσθε ( Eur. 737) and νεόμενος (in lyr. 723): otherwise the word is not tragic.

τοῖσι μὴ εἰδόσιν , synizesis, as 263, 535, 1155 ὡς μὴ εἰδότ’ αὐτόν , 321 καὶ ξυμφορά τοι μὴ εἰδέναι .

παρ’ οὐδέν : cp. 466: 983 ταῦθ’ ὅτῳ | παρ’ οὐδέν ἐστι . The addition of ὡς serves to mark Creon's point of view more strongly: cp. 732 ἥκω γὰρ οὐχ ὡς δρᾶν τι βουληθείς , n.

ὃς ἂν … δρᾷ , the antecedent τούτῳ being suppressed,=a dat., τῷ δρῶντι: cp. Isocr. or. 18 § 37 προσήκει βοηθεῖν ὑμᾶς οὐχ οἵτινες ἂν δυστυχεστάτους σφᾶς αὑτοὺς ἀποδείξωσιν ἀλλ’ οἵτινες ἂν δικαιότερα λέγοντες φαίνωνται . That such a relative clause was felt as practically equivalent to a noun-case may be seen from Thuc. 2.62, where it is co-ordinated with a dative: αὔχημα μὲν...καὶ δειλῷ τινὶ ἐγγίγνεται, καταφρόνησις δέ, ὃς ἂν καὶ γνώμῃ πιστεύῃ. Thuc. uses this constr. esp. in definitions, as 6. 14, τὸ καλῶς ἄρξαι τοῦτ’ εἶναι, ὃς ἂν τὴν πατρίδα ὠφελήσῃ .

προκεῖσθαι : cp. 481: 865 νόμοι πρόκεινται.

δημόλευστον = λευσθέντα ὑπὸ τοῦ δήμου, the epith. of the victim being transferred to the doom: 357 ὁ ῥιπτὸς Ἰφίτου μόρος . Cp. Aesch. 1616 δημορριφεῖς...λευσίμους ἀράς . Death by public stoning would mean that the transgressor was execrated as a traitor to the commonweal: see n. on 435.

σοι ethic dat.: so 62 and 761 τοιαῦτά σοι ταῦτ’ ἐστίν.

ἐσθλῶν , gen. of origin with πέφυκας, from a good stock: 1062 ἐὰν τρίτης ἐγὼ | μητρὸς φανῶ τρίδουλος n. Cp. fr. 601 (race cannot be relied upon, since often) πέλεται | οὔτ’ ἀπ’ εὐγενέων ἐσθλὸς οὔτ’ ἀχρείων | τὸ λίαν κακός.

ὦ ταλαῖφρον , ‘my poor sister’: cp. ἄνολβος (1026), δύσποτμος ( 888), μέλεος, etc.

εἰ τάδ’ ἐν τούτοις : cp. 1443 ταῦτα... | ...τῇδε φῦναι. The plur. ἐν τούτοις means either (1) ‘in these circumstances,’ as here, and Plat. 101C: or (2) ‘meanwhile,’ inter haec, as Plat. 220B. The sing. ἐν τούτῳ usually=‘meanwhile’; more rarely ‘in this case’ (Thuc. 1.37), or ‘at this point’ (id. 2. 8).

λύουσ’ … ἢ ’φάπτουσα , ‘by seeking to loose or to tighten the knot,’—a phrase, perhaps proverbial, for ‘meddling in any way.’ She can do no good by touching the tangled skein. The Greek love of antithesis naturally tended to expressions like our ‘by hook or by crook,’ ‘by fair means or foul,’ ‘for love or money,’ ‘good or bad,’ etc. Cp. 1109 οἵ τ’ ὄντες οἵ τ’ ἀπόντες (n.): Eur. 800 ἀπόρῳ γε τῷδε συμπεπλέγμεθα ξένῳ, | ὃς οὔτε πάσχων οὔτε δρῶν σιγήσεται , which is plainly colloquial,—meaning ‘who will not hold his peace on any terms’; for though πάσχων suits the recent imprisonment of Dionysus, δρῶν could not mean definitely, ‘as a free agent.’ Similarly we may suppose that some such phrase as οὔτε λύων οὔτε ἅπτων ( Plat. 417E τὸ δὲ ἅπτειν καὶ δεῖν ταὐτόν ἐστι ) was familiar as=‘by no possible means.’ If ἐφάπτουσα is sound, the poet has refined a colloquialism by modifying ἅπτουσα into ἐφάπτουσα, just as τί δρῶν ἢ τί λέγων (cp. Aesch. 660) appears in 71 as ὅ τι | δρῶν ἢ τί φωνῶν. Some find a reference to weaving;—‘by loosening the web, or fastening a new thread’; but, though the phrase may have been first suggested by the loom, it was probably used without any such conscious allusion. Quite different from our passage is 1317 εἰ μὴ ξυνάψων ἀλλὰ συλλύσων πάρει , ‘not to embroil the feud, but to help in solving it’: cp. Eur. 670 τίνας νῦν τέχνας ἔχομεν ἢλόγους | σφαλεῖσαι κάθαμμα λύειν λόγου ; ‘to loose the knot of controversy.’ —Another view makes the phrase refer to Creon's edict: ‘seeking to undo it, or to tighten it,’—i.e. to break it, or to make it more stringent than it already is (schol. λύουσα τὸν νόμον, ἢ βεβαιοῦσα αὐτόν). But, though Antigone has not yet revealed her purpose, too great callousness is ascribed to Ismene if she is supposed to doubt whether her sympathy is invited against or for such an edict.—The act. ἐφάπτειν is rare: 933 τοὔργον ὡς ἐφάψειεν , that he had imposed the deed on her (by his fierce reproaches): Pind. 9. 60 μὴ καθέλοι νιν αἰὼν πότμον ἐφάψαις | ὀρφανὸν γενεᾶς. Was Porson right in conjecturing εἵθ’ ἅπτουσα ? For it, we may observe:—(1) An opposition of the simple λύειν and ἅπτειν suits a proverbial phrase: (2) ἤ and εἰ are elsewhere confused, as 80 (n.): (3) the single εἴτε is found in 517 λόγοισιν εἴτ’ ἔργοισιν , 236 πατρῴας εἴτε βαρβάρου ; Against the conjecture is the fact that εἴθ’ ἅπτουσα would have been much less likely to generate the ἢ θάπτουσα of our MSS., since the intermediate εἰ θάπτουσα, being obviously unmeaning, would have been likely to cure itself.

προσθείμην : cp. 767 προσθέσθαι χάριν , n.

πλέον , ‘for thine advantage’: 37 οὐδὲν ἐξειδὼς πλέον , n.

ξυμπονήσεις is the more general word,—‘co-operate’; ξυνεργάσει , the more explicit,—‘help to accomplish the deed.’

ποῖόν τι κινδύνευμα , cognate acc. to the verbs in 41: cp. 344 κακὰ | ὑπερπονεῖτον , n.

Read ποῦ γνώμης...εἶ (from εἶναι): cp. 390 ποῦ ποτ’ εἶ φρενῶν . The question between ποῦ and ποῖ here is one of sense, not of idiom. ποῖ γνώμης ...εἶ (from ἰέναι) would mean, ‘to what thought will you have recourse?’ Cp. 170 ποῖ τις φροντίδος ἔλθῃ ; (n.), 705 οὐκ ἔχω...ποῖ γνώμης πέσω . But the meaning here is, ‘what can you be thinking of?’

εἰ sc. σκόπει .—Join ξὺν τῇδε χερί : she lifts her hand.

κουφιεῖς , take up for burial: cp. 1410 πλευρὰς σὺν ἐμοὶ | τάσδ’ ἐπικούφιζ ' (the dead Ajax): and the common phrase ἀναιρεῖσθαι νεκρούς.

ἦ γὰρ marks surprise ( 64). The absence of caesura in the first three feet allows each of the two important words (νοεῖς θάπτειν) to fall slowly from the astonished speaker's lips.

σφε = αὐτόν, as 516, 1226. σφε can be s. or pl., m. or f.: νιν, s. or pl., m., f. or n.

ἀπόρρητον , acc. neut. in appos. with θάπτειν σφε: Plat. 507E ἐπιθυμίας...πληροῦν, ἀνήνυτον κακόν.

πόλει , ‘to’ or ‘for’ (dat. of interest), not ‘by’ (dat. of agent), though the latter might be supported by Eur. 1657 ἐγώ σφε θάψω, κἂν ἀπεννέπῃ πόλις .

τὸν γοῦν ἐμὸν κ.τ.λ. To the question—‘Do you really mean to bury him?’—the simple answer would have been, τὸν γοῦν ἐμὸν ἀδελφόν, ‘I certainly mean to bury my own brother.’ But the word ἐμόν —reminding her that he is equally brother—prompts the insertion of the reproachful clause, καὶ τὸν σόν, ἢν σὺ μὴ θέλῃς . Thus the contrast between τὸν ἐμόν and τὸν σόν anticipates the emphasis on the word ἀδελφόν . The whole thought is,—‘I will certainly do my duty,—and thine, if thou wilt not,—to a brother.’ Since ὁ ἐμός is the same person as ὁ σός, this thought can be poetically expressed by saying, ‘I will certainly bury my brother,—and thine, if thou wilt not’: for the tribute rendered to him by one sister represents the tribute due from both. Remark that γοῦν often emphasises a pers. or possessive pron. (as here ἐμόν): 565 σοὶ γοῦν: 527 πρὸς γοῦν ἐμοῦ : 626 τὸ γοῦν ἐμόν : 1499 τὰ γοῦν ς '.— Two other versions are possible, but less good. (1) Taking τὸν … ἐμὸν καὶ τὸν σόν as=‘him who is my brother and thine,’ and ἢν as=‘even if.’ But for this we should expect τὸν γοῦν ἐμόν τε καὶ σόν, and κἄν. (2) Taking καὶ with ἤν , ‘I will bury my brother, even if thou wilt not bury thine.’ But (i) the separation of καί from ἤν is abnormal: (ii) the mode of expression would be scarcely natural unless ὁ ἐμός and ὁ σός were different persons.

ἀδελφὸν … ἁλώσομαι . Didymus (circ. 30 B.C.) said this verse was condemned as spurious ‘by the commentators’ (ὑπὸ τῶν ὑπομνηματιστῶν). I believe it to be undoubtedly genuine. One modern argument against it is that Antigone should here speak only one verse. But these two verses express the resolve on which the action of the play turns: it is an important moment in the dialogue. And, at such a moment, Soph. often allows a stichomuthia to be broken by two or more verses for the same speaker. See the stichomuthia in 401—406, broken by 404 f.: 356-369, broken by 366 f.: ib. 1000—1046, broken by 1002 f. and 1005 f.: 579-606, broken by 583 f. and 599 ff. Further, verse 46 is Sophoclean in three traits: (a) ἀδελφόν emphasised by position as first word, with a pause after it: cp. 72, 525: 278 δεῖξαι : 1628 χωρεῖν . (b) οὐ γὰρ δή in rejecting an alternative: 576 ἐκμάνθαν’· οὐ γὰρ δὴ φονεὺς ἁλώσομαι . Cp. 110 n. (c) The phrase with the aor. part.: 1267 χάρις διαρρεῖ καὶ προδοῦσ’ ἁλίσκεται . Lastly, v. 45, if alone, would be too bald and curt.

ὦ σχετλία , ‘over-bold.’ The word primarily means ‘enduring’ (&\sqrt;σχε, σχεθεῖν). Hence: (1) Of persons, (a) ‘unflinching,’ in audacity or cruelty,—the usu. Homeric sense, as 9.494 σχέτλιε, τίπτ’ ἐθέλεις ἐρεθιζέμεν ἄγριον ἄνδρα ; So 369, Ph. 930 ὦ σχέτλιε, Eur. 741

σχετλία τόλμης. (b) ‘Suffering,’=τλήμων, as Aesch. 644 (of Io), Eur. 783. Neither Homer nor Soph. has this use. (2) Of things, ‘cruel,’ ‘wretched,’—a use common to all the poets: so 887 σχέτλια γάρ (‘'tis cruel’), 879.

οὐδέν , adv.: μέτα = μέτεστι : τῶν ἐμῶν (masc.) with εἴργειν only: cp. 536 ἀλλ’ οὐ μετῆν αὐτοῖσι τήν γ’ ἐμὴν κτανεῖν . Plat. 19 C ἐμοὶ τούτων... οὐδὲν μέτεστι. For the plur. cp. 1448 ὀρθῶς τῶν γε σῶν τελεῖς ὕπερ (‘thou wilt meetly render the last rites to thine own,’—Iocasta).

νῷν ethic dat. with ἀπώλετο (cp. 81 βέβηκεν ἡμίν ). ἀπεχθής , hateful to mankind for his involuntary crimes. ἀπώλετο , ‘died,’ not merely ‘was disgraced’ (cp. 59 ὀλούμεθ’): she is speaking of the deaths which had left them alone. But ἔπειτα in 53 is merely ‘then,’ ‘in the next place,’ and need not mean that Oedipus died before Iocasta. Here Soph. follows the outline of the epic version, acc. to which Oed. died at Thebes: see Introd. to pp. xvi ff. The poet of the (11. 275) makes him survive his consort's suicide, and no version appears to have assumed the contrary. The knows nothing of his exile from Thebes, or of the sacred honour which surrounded the close of his life, as the story is told in the later

πρὸς … ἀμπλακημάτων … ἀράξας , ‘impelled by them to strike his eyes’: cp. 1236 (τέθνηκε ) πρὸς τίνος ποτ’ αἰτίας;

αὐτοφώρων = ἃ αὐτὸς ἐφώρασεν (cp. fr. 768 τὰ πλεῖστα φωρῶν αἰσχρὰ φωράσεις βροτῶν), detected by himself, when he insisted on investigating the murder of Laïus (cp. 1065). Elsewhere αὐτόφωρος = φωραθεὶς ἐπ’ αὐτῷ τῷ ἔργῳ, ‘taken in the act’: Thuc. 6.38 κολάζων, μὴ μόνον αὐτοφώρους (χαλεπὸν γὰρ ἐπιτυγχάνειν), ἀλλὰ καὶ ὧν βούλονται μέν, δύνανται δ’ οὔ: and so in the adv. ἐπ’ αὐτοφώρῳ λαμβάνειν etc.

ἀράξας , with the golden brooches (περόναι): 1276 ἤρασσ’ ἐπαίρων βλέφαρα.

αὐτὸς αὐτουργῷ χερί , emphatic, like αὐτὸς πρὸς αὑτοῦ (1177), but not strictly pleonastic, since αὐτός =‘by his own act,’ i.e. ‘of his free will,’ while αὐτ. χερί refers to the instrument, ‘with hand turned against himself.’ Cp. on 56.

διπλοῦν ἔπος , a two-fold name (for the same person): as conversely Aesch. 209 ἐμοὶ δὲ μήτηρ...Θέμις | καὶ Γαῖα, πολλῶν ὀνομάτων μορφὴ μία . Valckenär on Eur. p. 153 cites Heracleitus 21 (of Hera) διπλοῦν ὄνομα φύσεως καὶ συμβιώσεως, ‘a name signifying at once birth and marriage’ (since she was coniunx lovis et soror). Seneca 389 mixtumque nomen coniugis, nati, patris. (The feeble v. l. πάθος for ἔπος meant, ‘a double calamity,’ since both mother and wife perished.)

ἀρτάναισι : cp. 1264 πλεκταῖσιν αἰώραισιν ἐμπεπλεγμένην .

δύο … μίαν : see on 13 .

αὐτοκτονοῦντε is not literally, ‘slaying themselves,’ or ‘slaying each other,’ but, ‘slaying with their own hands’: the context explains that the person whom each so slew was his own brother. So either (1) suicide, or (2) slaying of kinsfolk, can be expressed by αὐθέντης, αὐτοκτόνος, αὐτοσφαγής, αὐτοφόνος, etc. The compound merely expresses that the deed is done with one's own hand, implying that such a use of one's own hand is unnatural. The object of the deed may be one's own life, or another's. This ambiguity of the compound is illustrated by 1175 f. αὐτόχειρ δ’ αἱμάσσεται .—XO. πότερα πατρῴας ἢ πρὸς οἰκείας χερός; ‘by his father's hand, or by his own?’

κατειργάσαντ’ , plur. verb with dual subject, as oft., even when another verb with the same subject is dual, as Xen. 6.1.47 ὡς εἰδέτην...ἠσπάσαντο : Plat. 294E ὅτε παιδία ἤστην ...ἠπίστασθε: see 343 n.

ἐπαλλήλοιν χεροῖν , ‘with mutual hands,’—each brother lifting his hands against the other. It is hard to believe that Soph. would here have written ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοιν , ‘against each other,’ when χεροῖν would seem a weak addition, and the double οιν would be brought into harsh relief by the independence of the two words. The verse is in every way better if we can read ἐπαλλήλοιν as an epithet of χεροῖν . Now we know that the word ἐπάλληλος was in common use at least as early as the 2nd century B.C. In the extant literature it seems always to correspond with ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοις as=‘one on top of another’ ( 23.47 κείατ’ ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισι ), being used to mean, ‘in close order’ or ‘in rapid sequence’ (as Polyb. 11. 11 ἐν ἐπαλλήλοις τάξεσι, in close ranks: Alciphro 3. 6 τὰς ἐπαλλήλους πληγάς, the showers of blows). An exception might, indeed, be supposed in Philo Judaeus 3, p. 692, where he is saying that the continuity of human record has been broken διὰ τὰς ἐν ὕδασι καὶ πυρὶ γενομένας συνεχεῖς καὶ ἐπαλλήλους φθοράς: which Adrian Turnebus rendered, propter illas eluvionum et exustionum continuas et alternas (‘mutual’) interneciones. But Philo was evidently (I think) using ἐπάλληλος in its ordinary sense, and meant merely, ‘owing to the continuous and rapid succession of calamities by flood and fire.’ It by no means follows, however, that a poet of the 5th cent. B.C. could not have used ἐπάλληλος in a sense corresponding with ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοις as= ‘against each other,’—the more frequent and familiar sense of the words, as in the Homeric ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισιν ἰόντες, ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισι φέρον πολύδακρυν Ἄρηα ( 3.132): cp. Aristoph. 50 ἐπ’ ἀλλήλοισιν αἴρεσθαι δόρυ . The use of ἐπάλληλος here may have been partly prompted by a reminiscence of Aesch. 931 ἐτελεύ|τασαν ὑπ’ ἀλλαλοφόνοις χερσὶν ὁμοσπόροισιν (cp. Xen. 3. 8 ἀδελφοὺς... ἀλληλοφόνους).

νῦν δ’ αὖ . Though in L δ’ has been inserted by a later hand, it is found in A, and its omission by the first hand in L (which has made other such oversights) cannot weigh much against it. Some of the recent edd. omit it: but the effect of νῦν αὖ without it would here be intolerably abrupt. For αὖ (‘in our turn’) cp. 7.

μόνα δή , ‘all alone’: 1063 μόνη με δὴ καθεῖλε : 992 ἁπάντων δή : so esp. with superlatives, ib. 858 πανύστατον δή : Thuc. 1.50 μεγίστη δή .

ψῆφον , the pebble used in voting, then, the vote; here (as below, 632) applied to the resolve or decree of an absolute monarch. Cp. 606 μή μ’ ἁπλῇ κτάνῃς | ψήφῳ, διπλῇ δέ , i.e. not by thine own royal voice alone, but by mine also.

τυράννων , i.e. Creon: allusive plur., as 67: 366 n.

κράτη , the powers of the king, as 173 (cp. 392 n.). The disjunctive ἢ (for which Axt proposed καὶ ) means: ‘if we offend against this edict, or (in any way) against the royal powers.’ It could not mean: ‘if we infringe his edict, or (by persistence after warning) come into conflict with his power.’

τοῦτο μὲν is not governed by ἐννοεῖν , but is adv., ‘on the one hand,’ answered by ἔπειτα δ’ (63) instead of τοῦτο δέ, as elsewhere by τοῦτ’ αὖθις (167), τοῦτ’ ἄλλο ( 605), εἶτα ( 1346), or δέ ( 441).

ὡς , with οὐ μαχουμένα , marks the intention of nature as expressed in sex,—‘showing that we were not meant to strive with men.’ This might be illustrated by Arist. 's phrase, βούλεται ἡ φύσις ποιεῖν τι, in regard to nature's intention or tendency ( 4. 10, etc.).

οὕνεκ’ , ‘that’ (as 708, 1395, and oft.): not, ‘because,’ as some take it, supplying χρή with ἀκούειν.

ἐκ , as from the head and fount of authority; so 264 κἀκ τῶνδ’ ἄρχομαι : cp. 67 n.

ἀκούειν , infin. expressing consequence (‘so that we should hearken’), without ὥστε, as 1076 ληφθῆναι. We find ἀκούω τινός, ‘to obey a person,’ but not ἀκούω τι, as ‘to hear (and obey) a command.’ Here ταῦτα and ἀλγίονα are accusatives of respect, ‘in regard to these things,’ as πάντα in 340, τῶν κρατούντων ἐστὶ πάντ’ ἀκουστέα, ‘I must obey the rulers in all things.’ If the accusatives were objective, the sense would be, ‘to hear these taunts’ (or, ‘to be called these names’): cp. 607, 1235.

ἐγὼ μὲν οὖν . μέν (with no answering δέ) emphasises ἐγώ (see on 11), while οὖν has its separate force, ‘therefore,’ as in 483, 664. The composite μὲν οὖν (‘nay rather’) would be unfitting here.

τοὺς ὑπὸ χθονός , the gods below (451), and also the departed spirit of Polyneices,—which, like the spirit of the unburied Patroclus ( 23.65), can have no rest till sepulture has been given to the corpse. Cp. 1775 τῷ κατὰ γῆς (Oedipus): for the allusive plur., 1419 ζῶσιν οἱ γᾶς ὑπαὶ κείμενοι (Agamemnon). In ref. to the nether world, Attic writers regularly join ὑπό with gen., not dat.: 841 ὑπὸ γαίας... ἀνάσσει : 1097 τόν θ’ ὑπὸ χθονὸς | Ἅιδου...σκύλακα : 249 A τὰ ὑπὸ γῆς δικαστήρια . Indeed ὑπό with dat. is altogether rare in Attic prose, except as meaning (a) under an authority, as ὑπὸ νόμοις, or (b) under a class, as Plat. 205B αἱ ὑπὸ πάσαις ταῖς τέχναις ἐργασίαι . In poetry, Attic and other, it is freq. also in the local sense: cp. 337 ὑπ’ οἴδμασιν.

βιάζομαι τάδε , pass. with cogn. acc., as 1073 βιάζονται τάδε. Cp. 1366 κἄμ’ ἀναγκάζεις τάδε; and below, 219.

τοῖς ἐν τέλει βεβῶσι = τυράννων in 60, i.e. Creon. βεβῶσι , as 1094 μοίρᾳ μὲν οὐκ ἐν ἐσθλᾷ | βεβῶσαν : 1358 ἐν πόνῳ | ταὐτῷ βεβηκώς . Elsewhere Soph. has the simple phrase: 1352 κλύειν...τῶν ἐν τέλει , and so 385, 925. οἱ ἐν τέλει are ‘those in authority,’ —τέλος meaning ‘final or decisive power,’ as Thuc. 4.118 τέλος ἔχοντες ἰόντων , ‘let the envoys go as plenipotentiaries.’ Pindar's τέλος δωδεκάμηνον (‘an office held for a year’), 11. 10, is perh. poetical. As synonyms for οἱ ἐν τέλει we find (1) οἱ τὰ τέλη ἔχοντες, Thuc. 5.47, and (2) τὰ τέλη simply,—‘the authorities,’ sometimes with masc. part., as Thuc. 4.15 ἔδοξεν αὐτοῖς...τὰ τέλη καταβάντας βουλεύειν . 6. 5 has τὰ μέγιστα τέλη, ‘the highest magistrates’ (like Thuc. 1.10 ἔξω τῶν βασιλέων καὶ τῶν μάλιστα ἐν τέλει : cp. 2. 10).

τὸ γὰρ | ...πράσσειν : for the art. in the 6th place, with its noun in the next v., cp. 78 : 231: 265, 351: 674.

περισσὰ πρ .: cp. 780: so 617 περισσὰ δρᾶν, = πολλὰ πράττειν, πολυπραγμονεῖν.

οὐκ ἔχει νοῦν οὐδ. = ἀνόητόν ἐστι: prop. of persons, as 553 γυναῖκα νοῦν ἔχουσαν .

ἔτι , ‘yet,’—at some future time: so 66 (κἄμ’ ἐπαυχῶ) ἄστρον ὣς λάμψειν ἔτι : 257 δουλώσειν ἔτι (he vowed that he would yet enslave him).

πράσσειν … δρῴης (instead of πράσσοις): for such substitution of a synonym cp. 54 ἄρξεις...κρατεῖς (n.): 1501 σαφὴς ...ἐμφανής . With δρῴης we have a double ἄν , the first after the negative, the second after the emphatic ἐμοῦ γ’: cp. 339 n.—Objection has been made to ἡδέως on the ground that it ought to mean, ‘with pleasure to yourself.’ Wecklein, indeed, takes that to be the sense, supposing γε to be misplaced; i.e. the proper order would have been, ἡδέως γε ἂν ἐμοῦ κ.τ.λ.: but the position of <)μοῦ in the verse sufficiently shows that γε must go with it. ἐμοί γ’ (Meineke) would leave μέτα awkward: and ἀσμένης (Lehrs) would not have been displaced by ἡδέως , which the old scholia confirm. All the difficulty has arisen from failing to distinguish between (1) οὐκ ἂν ἡδέως δρῴης, and (2) οὐκ ἂν μετὰ ἐμοῦ ἡδέως δρῴης. In (1) ἡδέως could mean only, ‘agreeably to yourself.’ But in (2) it is ambiguous; for the statement is equivalent to saying, ‘your co-operation with me would not be agreeable’; i.e. to you, or to me, or to either of us,—as the context may imply. Here, as the emphatic ἐμοῦ γε indicates, she means ἡδέως ἐμοί. Cp. Plat. 426C ὃς...ἂν σφᾶς...ἥδιστα θεραπεύῃ , i.e. ‘whoever serves them most acceptably’ (not, ‘most gladly’). Aristoph. 79 πῶς δῆτ’ ἂν ἥδιστ’ αὐτὸν ἐπεγείραιμι ; (i.e. most pleasantly for him).

ἴσθ’ from εἰμί: ‘be such as thou wilt,’—show what character thou wilt. Cp. 1049 οὗ γὰρ τοιούτων δεῖ, τοιοῦτός εἰμ’ ἐγώ: ib. 1271 τοιοῦτος ἦσθα τοῖς λόγοισι : 1024 ἄσκει τοιαύτη νοῦν δῑ αἰῶνος μένειν : 435 ἡμεῖς τοιοίδ’ ἔφυμεν.

όποία σοι δοκεῖ =( τοιαύτη) ὁποίᾳ (or ὁποίαν) εἶναι δοκεῖ σοι, the relative being attracted into the case of the suppressed antecedent. This was the more natural since ὁποία σοι δοκεῖ, ‘of any kind you please,’ was felt as almost one word, ὁποιαδήποτε; just so ὃς βούλει (quivis), instead of οὗτος ὃν βούλει, Plat. 517A μήποτέ τις τῶν νῦν ἔργα τοιαῦτα ἐργάσηται οἷα τούτων ὃς βούλει εἴργασται : 432 A ὥσπερ αὐτὰ τὰ δέκα ἢ ὅστις βούλει ἄλλος ἀριθμός.—Those who read ἴσθ’ (from οἶδα ) ὁποῖά σοι δοκεῖ compare 1055 ἀλλ’ εἰ σεαυτῇ τυγχάνεις δοκοῦσά τι | φρονεῖν, φρόνει τοιαῦτα . But εἰδέναι is not φρονεῖν. In Attic, ἴσθ’ ὁποῖά σοι δοκεῖ could mean nothing but ‘know such things as seem good to thee.’ It could not mean (a) ‘Have such sentiments as seem good to thee’: nor (b) ‘Be wise in thine own wisdom.’ The Homeric phrases, πεπνυμένα εἰδώς (‘wise of heart’), ἀθεμίστια εἰδώς, ἤπια οἶδε (‘he has kindly feelings,’ 13.405), etc., have no counterpart in the Attic usage of εἰδέναι. In 301 δυσσέβειαν εἰδέναι, and in 960 δοκοῦντος οὐδὲν εἰδέναι κακόν, the verb means simply ‘to know.’

θάψω , emphatic by place and pause: see on 46 ἀδελφόν.

φίλη … φίλου , loved by him, as he is loved by me: 267 κοινὸς ἐν κοινοῖσι : ib. 620 ἄφιλα παρ’ ἀφίλοις.

μετ’ αὐτοῦ κείσομαι , i.e. in the same world of the dead (76). The repetition of μετά serves to bring out the reciprocity of love more strongly: φίλη μετ’ αὐτοῦ κείσομαι, μετὰ φίλου (κειμένη),— instead of the simpler φίλη μετὰ φίλου κείσομαι.

ὅσια πανουργήσασ’ : having broken a human law in a manner which the gods permit,—viz., in order to observe a divine law. Creon uses the word πανουργίας below, 300. ὅσια is peculiarly appropriate since the word was familiar where duty to heaven was distinguished from duty to man: cp. Polyb. 23. 10 παραβῆναι καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς ἀνθρώπους δίκαια καὶ τὰ πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺσὅσια. The phrase is an ὀξύμωρον (a paradox with a point), like ‘splendide mendax’; i.e. the qualification ( ὅσια) seems contrary to the essence of the thing qualified. Cp. Milton (), ‘Men of the most renowned virtue have sometimes by transgressing most truly kept the law’; which is not an oxymoron, because the words, ‘most truly,’ suggest an explanation by showing that ‘kept’ is not used in its ordinary sense.

ἐπεὶ κ.τ.λ. : (I will obey gods rather than men), for the other world is more to me than this.

τῶν ἐνθάδε = ἢ τοῖς ἐνθάδε: 567 τῆς ἐς αὔριον | οὐδὲν πλέον μοι ς οῦ (=ἢ σοὶ) μέτεστιν ἡμέρας (n.).

κείσομαι , though we have had the word in 73. For other examples of such repetition, see n. on 554, and cp. below 163 ὤρθωσαν, 167 ὤρθου: 207 ἔκ γ’ ἐμοῦ, 210 ἐξ ἐμοῦ: 613, 618 ( ἕρπει): 614, 625 (ἐκτὸς ἄτας).

σοὶ δ’ is better than Elmsley's σὺ δ’ , since the primary contrast is between their points of view: ‘if it seems right to thee, dishonour the dead,’ rather than, ‘do thou, if it seems right, dishonour the dead.’ Remark, too, that the simple εἰ δοκεῖ (without dat. of pron.) is usually a polite formula, ‘if it is pleasing to you (as well as to me)’: 526 ἀλλ’ εἰ δοκεῖ, πλέωμεν: ib. 645 ἀλλ’ εἰ δοκεῖ, χωρῶμεν : ib. 1402 εἰ δοκεῖ, στείχωμεν.

τὰ τῶν θεῶν ἔντιμα , the honoured things of the gods; the laws which are theirs (454 θεῶν νόμιμα), held in honour (by them and by men). τὰ τοῖς θεοῖς ἔντιμα (25, 239 ἔντιμος τούτοις ) would have presented the gods only as observers, not also as authors, of the laws.

ἀτιμάσασ’ ἔχε (cp. 22), ‘be guilty of dishonouring’: cp. 588 μὴ προδοὺς ἡμᾶς γένῃ , and n. on 957.

ἐγὼ is slightly emphasised by μέν (see on 11), which goes closely with it, and does not here answer to the following δέ .

ἄτιμα ποιοῦμαι = ἀτιμάζω: cp. 584 δῑ οὐδενὸς ποιεῖ.

τὸ δὲ | ...δρᾶν : see on 67 τὸ γὰρ | ...πράσσειν. The inf. with art. is strictly an acc. of respect (‘as for the acting..., I am incapable of it’), but is practically equiv. to the simple inf., ἀμήχανος δρᾶν: see n. on 47 οὐδ’ ἐμοὶ...τοὐξανιστάναι... | ...ἐστὶ θάρσος .

τάδ’ ἂν προὔχοιο , ‘thou canst make these excuses’ (sc. εἰ βούλοιο): Aesch. 1394 χαίροιτ’ ἄν, εἰ χαίροιτ’· ἐγὼ δ’ ἐπεύχομαι . For προέχεσθαι as= προφασίζεσθαι cp. Thuc. 1.140 ὅπερ μάλιστα προὔχονται . So πρόσχημα = πρόφασις ( 525).

δὴ , ‘now,’ as the next thing to be done: cp. 173.

τάφον χώσουσ’ , prop. to raise a mound on the spot where the remains of the dead had been burned: 7.336 τύμβον δ’ ἀμφὶ πυρὴν ἕνα χεύομεν . So 24.799 σῆμ’ ἔχεαν ,—after placing the bones in an urn (λάρναξ), and depositing this in a grave (κάπετος). She speaks as if she hoped to give him regular sepulture. This is ultimately done by Creon's command (1203 τύμβον...χώσαντες), though the rites which Antigone herself is able to perform are only symbolical (255, 429).

Join οἴμοι ταλαίνης , ‘alas for thee, unhappy one’: 1399 οἴμοι κελεύθου τῆς τ’ ἐμῆς δυσπραξίας, | οἴμοι δ’ ἑταίρων : but the nom. when the ref. is to the speaker, as 1143 οἴμοι τάλαινα τῆς ἐμῆς πάλαι τροφῆς.

μὴ ’μοῦ προτάρβει (or, as some write it, μὴ ἐμοῦ) is clearly right. If we read μή μου προτάρβει, then the emphasis is solely on the verbal notion. ‘I fear for thee.’—‘ not so: make thine own fate prosperous.’ But the stress on τὸν σόν renders it certain that the poet intended a corresponding stress on the preceding pronoun: ‘Fear not for me— make thine own fate prosperous.’ And μὴ ’μοῦ is no more objectionable than μὴ ’γώ in 472. προτάρβει , as 89 (with gen. πατρός). Distinguish προδείσας, ‘afraid beforehand,’ 90 (n.).

ἐξόρθου here=‘straighten out,’ i.e. guide in a straight or prosperous course: cp. 167 ὤρθου πόλιν, 675 ὀρθουμένων. Elsewhere ἐξορθόω is usu. ‘to correct, amend’ (Plat. 90D); more rarely, like ἀνορθόω ( 51), ‘to set upright’ (τὸ πεσόν, Plat. 862C). In the figurative uses of ὀρθός and its derivatives the context must always guide our choice between the notion of ‘upright’ and that of ‘straight.’

ἀλλ’ οὖν … γε . In this combination ἀλλά is like our ‘well’; οὖν =‘at any rate’ (i.e. if you must do it); and γε emphasises the word which it follows. Cp. 233 ἀλλ’ οὖν εὐνοίᾳ γ’ αὐδῶ , ‘well, at any rate (i.e. though you will not listen to me) it is with good-will that I speak.’ 1305.

κρυφῆ δέ : here δέ = ἀλλά: Thuc. 4.86 οὐκ ἐπὶ κακῷ, ἐπ’ ἐλευθερώσει δέ.

σὺν δ’ , adv., sc. κεύσω: cp. 1288 ὅδ’ ἦν ὁ πράσσων ταῦτα, σὺν δ’ ἐγὼ παρών.

αὔτως (adv. of αὐτός, see on 931), in just that way—‘likewise’: 1040 ὧδ’ αὔτως ὥς μ’ ὤλεσε .

καταύδα , sc. τὸ ἔργον, ‘denounce it.’ The word occurs only here, the pres. used in this sense being καταγορεύω ( Thuc. 4.68 καταγορεύει τις ξυνειδὼς τοῖς ἑτέροις τὸ ἐπιβούλευμα ): aor. κατεῖπον.

πολλόν : this Ionic form occurs also 1196 πολλὸν δ’ ἄρσεν’ ἐκτεμόνθ’ ὁμοῦ | ἄγριον ἔλαιον , though in no other places of tragedy. And Soph. also used the epic form πουλύπους in a trimeter, fr. 286 νόει πρὸς ἀνδρί, σῶμα πουλύπους ὅπως | πέτρᾳ, κ.τ.λ. Porson on Eur. 618 wished to read in our verse either πλεῖον (which is inadmissible, as Nauck observes, 2. 27), or μᾶλλον, which some edd. receive. But πολλὸν is manifestly better than μᾶλλον.

σιγῶσ’ is explained by ἐὰν … τάδε , while the thought is strengthened by πᾶσι : she is to tell the news to all.

θερμὴν ἐπὶ ψυχροῖσι κ.τ.λ.: ‘thou hast a hot heart for chilling deeds’; i.e. in thy rash enthusiasm thou art undertaking deeds which might well chill thy soul with a presage of death. ἐπί with dat. here=‘with a view to’ ( Xen. 3.5.18 ἐπὶ τούτοις ἐθύσαντο ): not ‘in,’ like ἐπ’ ἔργοις πᾶσι 1268 (n.). Cp. 157. θερμήν has suggested ψυχρά, and the thought of the dead has helped (cp. 621 νέκυς ψυχρός ). In Aesch. 693 δείματα are said ἀμφάκει κέντρῳ ψύχειν ψυχάν (to chill,—where Meineke's ψήχειν, ‘to wear,’ is improbable). Cp. Aristoph. 1191 στυγερὰ τάδε κρυερὰ πάθεα : Eur. fr. 908 κρυερὰ Διόθεν | θανάτου πεμφθεῖσα τελευτή. For the verbal contrast, Schütz cp. 4. 15. 21 in re frigidissima cales, in ferventissima friges, and 465 ardentem frigidus Aetnam Insiluit. He thinks that Ismene (hurt by vv. 86 f.) implies, ‘and a cold heart for thy living sister,’ to which Ant. rejoins by v. 89. But θερμήν is not ‘affectionate,’ and Ant. seems to mean simply, ‘love and piety banish fear.’— Some understand, ‘with a view to joyless things’ (cp. on 650): but this would be weak.

ἁδεῖν , an aor. inf. used in 3.173, as also by Solon (fr. 7 ἔργμασιν ἐν μεγάλοις πᾶσιν ἁδεῖν χαλεπόν), Her., and This Pind. is the only place in classical Attic where any part of the aor. ἕαδον occurs.

εἰ καὶ δυνήσει γ’ , yes, if (besides having the wish to please them) you shall also have the power. καὶ goes closely with δυνήσει : cp. 283 εἰ καὶ τρίτ’ ἐστί . Such cases must be carefully distinguished from those in which εἰ καί form a single expression; see p. 296.

Since οὐκοῦν (‘well, then’) precedes, δὴ is best taken as giving precision to ὅταν ,—‘so soon as.’

πεπαύσομαι , ‘I will cease forthwith’: so 587. Cp. the perf., 1279 εἰ δὲ μή τι πρὸς καιρὸν λέγων | κυρῶ, πέπαυμαι, ‘I have done.’

ἀρχήν , adv., ‘to begin with,’ ‘at all,’—in negative sentences; often placed, as here, before the negative word; 439 ἀρχὴν δ’ ἂν...οὐκ ἂν...ἐπέστεφε : 1239 ἀρχὴν κλύειν ἂν οὐδ’ ἅπαξ ἐβουλόμην: Her. 3.39 ἔφη χαριεῖσθαι μᾶλλον ἀποδιδοὺς τὰ ἔλαβε ἢ ἀρχὴν μηδὲ λαβών . In affirmative sentences the art. is usually added: Andoc. or. 3 § 20 ἐξῆν γὰρ αὐτοῖς καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐῶσιν Ὀρχομενίους αὐτονόμους εἰρήνην ἄγειν : so Isocr. or. 15 § 272.

ἐχθαρεῖ , pass.: so, from liquid stems, 230 ἀλγυνεῖ: 272 φθερεῖσθαι : 1155 πημανούμενος . The ‘midd.’ fut. in ς affords numerous examples, as below, 210, 637, 726: see n. on 672 and 1185.

ἐξ ἐμοῦ , ‘on my part’ (cp. 95), rather than simply ‘by me’ (cp. 63).

ἐχθρὰ...τῷ θανόντι προσκείσει δίκῃ , ‘thou wilt be subject to the lasting enmity of the dead.’ The word προσκείσει means literally, ‘wilt be attached to...,’ i.e., ‘wilt be brought into a lasting relation with’; and ἐχθρά defines the nature of that relation. The sense is thus virtually the same as if we had, ὁ θανὼν ἐχθρός σοι προσκείσεται, ‘the enmity of the dead will cleave to thee.’ The convertible use of προσκεῖσεθαι is illustrated by 1243 ἀνδρὶ πρόσκειται κακόν, as compared with 1040 ᾧ σὺ πρόσκεισαι κακῷ , and ib. 240 εἴ τῳ πρόσκειμαι χρηστῷ . Here, προσκείσει expresses merely the establishment of the permanent relation between the two persons. It does not mean, ‘you will be brought, as his foe, into dependence on him’ (i.e. under the power of his curse); as in Eur. 185 τῷ πρόσκειμαι δούλα τλάμων ; ‘to whom have I been assigned as a slave?’ (i.e. by the casting of lots:— the answer is, ἐγγύς που κεῖσαι κλήρου). Nor, again, ‘you will press upon the dead as his foe,’ i.e. be hostile and grievous to him: for, as δίκῃ shows, the punishment is to be hers, not his. The idea might have been expressed in a converse form by τὸν θανόντα ἐχθρὸν προσθήσει (cf. Xen. 2.4.12).

Lehrs proposed Δίκῃ, i.e. ‘you will fall under the chastisement of justice.’ Donaldson, following Emper, reads ἐχθρᾷ... δίκῃ, as iure inimicorum apud mortuum eris: i.e. on the part of the dead you will be deemed to have only the rights of a foe. This is impossible. The ordinary reading is sound.

ἔα , one syll. by synizesis, as 1451 (n.).

τὴν ἐξ ἐμοῦ δυσββουλίαν , the folly proceeding from me, the folly on my part, for which I bear the sole blame: 619 ἀλλ’ ἡ γὰρ ἐκ σοῦ δυσμένεια καὶ τὰ σὰ | ἔργ’ ἐξαναγκάζει με , ‘it is the enmity on thy part,’ etc. 631 μὴ πρὼ| λέγοις ἂν τὸν πόθον τὸν ἐξ ἐμοῦ, | πρὶν εἰδέναι τἀκεῖθεν εῖ ποθούμεθα . Cp. 453 n.

τὸ δεινὸν τοῦτο , ironical: cp. 376 (Electra in answer to her sister's warnings) φέρ’ εἰπὲ δὴ τὸ δεινόν.

πείσομαι γὰρ οὐ : for the position of the negative (which belongs to the verb, not to τοσοῦτον), cp. 223, 125 προσέβα γὰρ οὐκ ἄν . We still write οὐ here, not οὔ, because the sentence runs on without pause: but 255 τυμβήρης μὲν οὔ, 545 ταρβήσει γὰρ οὔ , since in each case a comma can follow the negative.

μὴ οὐ , not μή, because the principal verb πείσομαι is negatived: 283 n. She means, ‘even if I have to die, at least I shall not suffer the worst of evils; which is not death, but an ignoble death.’ Cp. frag. adesp. 61 οὐ κατθανεῖν γὰρ δεινόν, ἀλλ’ αἰσχρῶς θανεῖν.

τοῖς φίλοις δ’ ὀρθῶς φίλη , ‘but truly dear to thy friends,’—i.e. both to the dead brother and to the living sister. The words are especially a parting assurance ( ἴσθι ) that Ismene's love is undiminished. ὀρθῶς = ἀληθῶς, as Diphilus frag. incert. 20 τὸν ὀρθῶς εὐγενῆ. Others make φίλη active,—‘a true friend to thy friends’ (i.e. to Polyneices): which is certainly the fittest sense in Eur. 609 ὡς ἀπ’ εὐγενοῦς τινος | ῥίζης πέφυκας, τοῖς φίλοις τ’ ὀρθῶς φίλος (Orestes, when he devotes his life to save his friend's). But here the other view is decidedly preferable.

Parodos. For the metres see Metrical Analysis. The framework is as follows. (1) 1st strophe, 100 ἀκτίς to 109 χαλινῷ=1st antistrophe, 117 στὰς to 133 ἀλαλάξαι. (2) 2nd strophe, 134 ἀντιτύπᾳ to 140 δεξιόσειρος=2nd antistrophe, 148 ἀλλὰ γὰρ to 154 ἄρχοι. Each strophe and each antistrophe is followed by an anapaestic system (σύστημα) of seven verses, recited by the Coryphaeus alone, in the pauses of the choral dance. The fourth and last of these systems, following the second antistrophe, announces the approach of Creon.

The is the only play of Sophocles which has a Parodos beginning, in the older style, with a regular anapaestic march. But something of the same character is given to this ode by the regularity of the anapaestic systems. In the Parodos of the , on the other hand, though anapaests similarly divide each strophe from each antistrophe, the systems are of unequal lengths, and the general character is wholly different, being rather that of a κομμός: see n. on 117.

The fifteen Theban elders who form the Chorus have been summoned to the palace by Creon,—they know not, as yet, for what purpose (158). They greet the newly-risen sun, and exult in the flight of the Argives.

The ode vividly portrays the enormous sin of Polyneices against his country, and the appalling nature of the peril which Thebes has just escaped. We already know Antigone's motive. This is a dramatic prelude to the announcement of Creon's.

ἀελίου , Dor. for the epic ἠελίου, with α— as usu. (808, 1245), though it is sometimes used with ă, as 835, Eur. 1252.

τὸ κάλλιστον ...φάος . Two constructions are possible; I prefer the first. (1) Θήβᾳ φανὲν τὸ κάλλιστον φάος, the art. going with the superlative, which it emphasises,—‘the very fairest,’—a common use, as 289B οὐχ ἡ καλλίστη παρθένος αἰσχρὰ φανεῖται; 17.415 οὐ μέν μοι δοκέεις ὁ κάκιστος Ἀχαιῶν . (2) τὸ Θήβᾳ φανὲν κάλλιστον φάος, the art. going with φανέν. This seems awkward. When a voc. is followed by a noun or partic. with art., this is normally in direct agreement with the voc., as ὦ ἄνδρες...οἱ παρόντες (Plat. 337C), as if here we had ἡ φανεῖσα. The Schol., who prefers this constr., shirks the difficulty by his paraphrase, ὦ τῆς ἀκτῖνος τοῦ ἡλίου φῶς, τὸ φανὲν κ.τ.λ.

ἑπταπύλῳ : epithet of Θήβη in 11.263, Hes. 161, as ἑκατόμπυλοι in 9.383 of Θῆβαι Αἰγύπτιαι.

τῶν προτέρων : cp. 1212f.: Thuc. 1.10 στρατείαν...μεγίστην...τῶν πρὸ αὐτῆς . Tacitus 1. 50 solus omnium ante se principum. Milton 4. 322 Adam, the goodliest man of men since born, | His sons, the fairest of her daughters Eve. Goethe 5. 101 Von ihren Schwestern die beste.

ἐφάνθης with an echo of φανέν (παρήχησις): cp. 794 στόμα | ...στόμωσιν.

χρυσέας , with υ^ as 157, 188. So Pind. 4.4 ἔνθα ποτὲ χρυ^σέων Διὸς αἰητῶν πάρεδρος . The υ^ was admitted by the lyrists, and from them borrowed by the dramatists, though only in lyrics, and even there only occasionally. Homer never shortens the υ: for, as χρυσέῳ ἀνὰ σκήπτρῳ ( 1.15) shows, the Homeric χρυσέης (etc.) must be treated as disyll. by synizesis.

βλέφαρον = ὄμμα: Eur. 543 νυκτός τ’ ἀφεγγὲς βλέφαρον (the moon). Cp. Job iii. 9 (Revised Version), ‘neither let it behold the eyelids of the morning.’

Διρκαίων . The Dircè was on the w. of Thebes, the Ismenus on the E. : between them flowed the less famous Strophia: Callim. 76 Δίρκη τε Στροφίη τε μελαμψηφῖδος ἔχουσαι | )Ισμηνοῦ χέρα πατρός (alluding to their common source S. of the town). Though the Ismenus, as the eastern stream, would have been more appropriately named here, the Dircè is preferred, as the representative river of Thebes: so Pindar, ‘the Dircaean swan,’ expresses ‘at Thebes and at Sparta’ by ῥεέθροισί τε Δίρκας...καὶ παρ’ Εὐρώτᾳ ( Pind. 1. 29). Cp. 844.

τὸν λεύκασπιν...φῶτα , in a collective sense: so ὁ Πέρσης, the Persian army, Her. 8.108, etc. Cp. Aesch. 90 ὁ λεύκασπις λεώς (Dind. λευκοπρεπής): Eur. 1099 λεύκασπιν εἰσορῶμεν Ἀργείων στρατόν . The round shield, painted white, which the Argive soldier carried on his left arm, is the λευκῆς χιόνος πτέρυξ of 114. The choice of white as the Argive colour may have been prompted by a popular association of Ἄργος with ἀργός .

The words τὸν λεύκασπιν Ἀργόθεν answer metrically to 123 πευκάενθ’ Ἥφαιστον ἑλεῖν. Instead of Ἀργόθεν (¯˘¯) we therefore require ¯˘˘¯. The short final of λεύκασπιν is legitimate, the metre being Glyconic (see Analysis Metr.). In the antistrophic verse, the H of Ἥφαιστον is ‘irrational,’ i.e. is a long syllable doing duty for a short: and Nauck is incorrect in saying that the metre ‘requires’ (though it admits) a choriambus beginning with a consonant. The simplest remedy is to read Ἀργόθεν ἐκ | βάντα φῶτα , and to suppose that, after the loss of ἐκ, βάντα and φῶτα were accidentally transposed. Cp. 1088 where σθένει ’πινικείῳ is certainly the right order, but the MSS. reverse it. (See also above on v. 29.) Dindorf reads ἐκ φῶτα βάντα, assuming tmesis: but tmesis of ἐκ in Soph. occurs elsewhere only before μέν ( 1053) or δέ, and there was no motive here for interposing φῶτα. Hermann reads Ἀργόθεν ἔκ as=ἐξ Ἀργόθεν: but elsewhere ἐκ comes before, not after, such forms (ἐξ Αἰσύμηθεν, 8.304: ἐξ ἁλόθεν, ἐξ οὐρανόθεν, etc.). If Ἀργόθεν is not genuine, then it was probably a gloss on some other form in ‐θεν. Had γᾶς Πέλοπος (or Δαναοῦ) been in the text, a scholiast would have been more apt to paraphrase with ἀπ’ or ἐξ Ἄργους. This is against such conjectures as Ἀργέϊον, Ἀργογενῆ, Ἀργολικόν, Ἰναχίδαν, Ἰνάχιον, as is also the fact that βάντα suggests a mention of ‘the place whence.’ Ἀπιόθεν (Ahrens) would mean ‘from Ἄπιος,’ but we require ‘from Ἀπία’ sc. (γῆ, the Peloponnesus, 1303 n.), i.e. Ἀπία—θεν: cp. Ὀλυμπίαθεν. I had thought of Ἰναχόθεν , which Mekler, too, has suggested, though he has not supported it by argument. The points in its favour are: (a) the order φῶτα βάντα can be kept: (b) after ‘Dircè's streams’ in v. 105 a reference to the Argive river would be appropriate: (c) ἀργόθεν might have come in either as a gloss, or a corruption of the letters αχόθεν, if ιν had dropped out after λεύκασπιν. But I hesitate to displace Ἀργόθεν, esp. when a direct mention of Argos here so naturally corresponds with the direct mention of Thebes in v. 101.

πανσαγίᾳ (only here)=πανοπλίᾳ, modal dat. σάγη (for accent, cp. Chandler § 72)=‘what one carries,’ and so, generally, ‘equipment’ ( Aesch. 560 ξένῳ γὰρ εἰκώς, παντελῆ σάγην ἔχων ), or, specially, body-armour: Aesch. 240 ἔγχη σταδαῖα καὶ φεράσπιδες σάγαι (opp. to the light equipment of the τοξότης).

φυγάδα πρ. , proleptic, with κινήσασα , ‘having stirred to flight,’ etc. cp. 1292 ἐξελήλαμαι φυγάς.

πρόδρομον , ‘running forward,’ i.e. ‘in headlong haste’: Aesch. 211 ἐπὶ δαιμόνων πρόδρομος ἦλθον ἀρ|χαῖα βρέτη. In prose, always of precursors (as heralds, or an advanced guard).

ὀξυτέρῳ...χαλινῷ , ‘in swifter career,’ dat. of manner with φυγάδα πρόδρομον. Cp. 1067 (where the Attic horsemen are described rushing in pursuit of the Thebans), πᾶς γὰρ ἀστράπτει χαλινός, ‘the steel of every bridle flashes,’—as they gallop on with slack reins. So here, the χαλινός, which glitters as the horse rushes along, is poetically identified with the career itself, and thus is fitly joined with ὀξύτερος. The phrase seems happy in this context. The Argives began their retreat in the darkness (16): when the sun rises, the flashing steel of their bridles shows them in headlong flight.

ὀξυτέρῳ does not mean (1) ‘in flight swifter than their former approach’; nor (2) that the reins are shaken ever faster on the horses' necks. ὀξυτόρῳ (L) was a mere blunder: it could only mean ‘piercing’ (the horse's mouth), not, ‘giving a sharp sound,’ when the reins are shaken.—Cp. Aesch. 122(describing the Argive besiegers) διάδετοι δέ τοι γενῦν ἱππιᾶν | κινύρονται (μινύρονται L. Dind.) φόνον χαλινοί. 152 ὄτοβον ἁρμάτων ἀμφὶ πόλιν κλύω. Our passage suggests horsemen rather than drivers of war-chariots: perh. the poet imagined both, as in 1062 πώλοισιν ἢ ῥιμφαρμάτοις | φεύγοντες ἁμίλλαις .

The MSS. have ὃν...Πολυνείκης . If this were sound, it would be necessary to suppose that after ἀμφιλόγων a dipodia has been lost, such as Nauck supplies by <ἤγαγεν· ἐχθρὸς δ’> ὀξέα κλάζων. For (1) a verb is wanted to govern ὅν, and (2) the description of the eagle, beginning with ὀξέα κλάζων, clearly refers to the Argive host, not to Polyneices only. But if, with Scaliger, we read ὃς ...Πολυνείκους , no such loss need be assumed. The correspondence between anapaestic systems is not always strict, and the monometer ὀξέα κλάζων could stand here, though the anti-system has a dimeter in the same place (129). The MS. reading ὃν...Πολυνείκης probably arose from a misunderstanding of the scholium:—ὅντινα στρατὸν Ἀργείων, ἐξ ἀμφιλόγων νεικέων ἀρθείς, ἤγαγεν ὁ Πολυνείκης, οἷον ἀμφιλογίᾳ χρησάμενος πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν· διὰ βραχέων δὲ εἶπεν αὐτό, ὡς γνωρίμου οὔσης τῆς ὑποθέσεως. The Schol. wrote ἀρθείς, to agree with Πολυνείκης, and not ἀρθέντα, to agree with στρατόν, because it suited the form of his paraphrase, οἷον ἀμφιλογίᾳ χρησάμενος πρὸς τὸν ἀδελφόν. By διὰ βραχέων δὲ εἷπεν αὐτό, the Schol. meant not merely the indefiniteness of νεικέων ἐξ ἀμφιλόγων, but also the compactness of Πολυνείκους | ἀρθεὶς ἐκ νεικέων for ὅντινα στρατὸν ἤγαγεν ὁ Πολυνείκης. But a transcriber, noticing that the Schol. joined ἀρθείς with Πολυνείκης, might easily infer that ὃν...Πολυνείκης ought to stand in the text, and might take διὰ βραχέων as meaning that the verb ἤγαγε could be understood.—L has the Doric γᾷ, and presently γᾶν, ὑπερέπτα, which I keep: see Appendix.

Πολυνείκους … νεικέων , playing on the name, like Aesch. ( Aesch. 577 , Aesch. Th. 658, Aesch. Th. 829): as elsewhere on that of Ajax ( 432 αἰάζειν ), and of Odysseus (fr. 877, πολλοὶ γὰρ ὠδύσαντο δυσμενεῖς ἐμοί, have been bitter).

ἀρθείς , ‘having set forth’: so Her. 1.165 ἀερθέντες ἐκ τῶν Οἰνουσσέων ἔπλεον : 9. 52 (of a land-force) ἀερθέντες ...ἀπαλλάσσοντο. Attic prose similarly uses the act. ἄρας, either absolutely, or with dat. (ταῖς ναυσί, τῷ στρατῷ), or, more rarely, with acc. (τὰς ναῦς Thuc. 1.52). Here the choice of the word suits the image of an eagle soaring.

νεικ. ἐξ ἀμφιλόγων , lit. in consequence of contentious quarrels, i.e. his claims to the Theban throne, against his brother Eteocles. Eur. 636 ἀμφιλόγους ὀργὰς (contentious moods) ἀκόρεστά τε νείκη: 500 ἀμφίλεκτος...ἔρις. The prep. as 620 ἐκ σμικροῦ λόγου .

ὀξέα κλάζων : Homeric, 17.88 (of Hector) ὀξέα κεκληγώς: 16.429 μεγάλα κλάζοντε (of vultures fighting): so Aesch. 48 (the Atreidae) μέγαν ἐκ θυμοῦ κλάζοντες Ἄρη.

αἰετὸς εἰς γᾶν ὣς ὑπερέπτα seems clearly right. If ὥς is omitted, we have a metaphor instead of a simile, with harsh effect. If we read αἰετὸς ὥς, and omit εἰς, γᾶν ὑπερέπτα could mean only, ‘flew over the land,’ not, ‘flew over the border into the land.’ Further, it is better that the flow of these descriptive verses should not be broken by a paroemiac before v. 116. No argument either way can be founded on v. 130 (where see n.), since, even if it were a paroemiac, that would not require a paroemiac here.

ὑπερέπτα . The act. strong aor. ἔπτην (as if from ἵπτημι) occurs simple only in the (210, if sound) and the Anthol.: compounded, only in the tragic lyrics and in late prose. Cp. 1307.

λευκῆς χιόνος πτ. , ‘a wing white as snow’ (the white shield, see on 106); genitive of quality (or material), equiv. to an epithet: cp. 533 τόλμης πρόσωπον (a bold front): 19 ἄστρων εὐφρόνη (starry night): Eur. 1491 στολίδα...τρυφᾶς (a luxurious robe): ib. 1526 γάλακτος...μαστοῖς (milky breasts).

στεγανός , pass. here, ‘covered’; but act. in Aesch. 358 στεγανὸν δίκτυον : cp. Xen. 7.1.33 αἱ ἀσπίδες...στεγάζουσι τὰ σώματα.

ὅπλων … κορύθεσσι . The image of the eagle with white wings, which suited the Argive descent on Thebes, here passes into direct description of an invader who comes with many ὅπλα and κόρυθες,—the shield, spear, and helmet of heavy-armed troops. For the dat. in ‐εσσι cp. 976 χείρεσσι. ἱπποκόμοις , ‘with horse-hair crest’ ( 13.132 ἱ. κόρυθες ). For ξύν denoting what one wears or carries, cp. 207, 1258, 30 πηδῶντα πεδία ξὺν νεορράντῳ ξίφει . There is no real difference here between μετά and ξύν : Donaldson refines too much in suggesting that μετά means merely ‘by their sides,’ while ξύν ‘denotes a closer union’ (i.e. ‘on their heads’).

In στὰς δ’ ὑπὲρ μελάθρων there is a momentary return to the image of the flying eagle,—‘having stayed his flight above my dwellings,’—before swooping. The words do not mean that the Argive army was posted on hills around Thebes: the only hills available were to the N. of the town. The Ἰσμήνιος λόφος (Paus. 9.10.2), on which Donaldson places the Argives, was merely a low eminence close to one of the city gates. Thebes stood on a low spur of ground projecting southward, and overlooking the plain. Sophocles has elsewhere described the Argive besiegers, with topographical correctness, as having ‘set their leaguer round the plain of Thebes’ ( 1312 τὸ Θήβης πεδίον ἀμφεστᾶσι πᾶν ). Struve's πτάς (a participle not found elsewhere except in composition with a preposition) seems improbable, and also less forcible.

The words φονώσαισιν ἀμφιχανὼν... λόγχαις once more merge the image of the eagle,—as at v. 115,—in literal description of a besieging army, save in so far as the figurative ἀμφιχανών suggests a monster opening its jaws. The word was perh. suggested by 23.79 ἐμὲ μὲν κὴρ | ἀμφέχανε στυγερή (hath gaped for me—i.e. ‘devoured me’). These transitions from clear imagery to language in which the figure is blurred by the thought of the object for which it stands, are thoroughly Sophoclean: cp. n. on 866.

φονώσαισιν : the word is not rare in later writers, but in classical Greek occurs only here and 1209 φονᾷ, φονᾷ νόος ἤδη. Cp. τομάω ( 582).

ἑπτάπυλον στόμα , prop. the access afforded by seven gates: fr. 701 Θήβας λέγεις μοι τὰς πύλας ἑπταστόμους (sevenmouthed as to its gates). Nauck changes στόμα to πόλισμ’ to avoid hiatus: but cp. 1202 βασιλεὺς καλεῖ | ἐμός , n.

ἔβα , emphatic by place: cp. 46.

πρίν ποθ’ , ‘or ever,’ as 17. αἱμάτων , streams of blood, as Aesch. 1293 αἱμάτων εὐθνησίμων | ἀπορρυέντων (with ref. to one person). Soph. has the plur. only here: Aesch. and Eur. use it several times each, either in this sense, or as=‘deeds of bloodshed’ (once as=‘slain persons,’ αἵματα σύγγονα, Eur. 1503).

γἑνυσιν might be locative dat., ‘in’; but seems rather instrumental, ‘with.’ After πλησθῆναι the missing short syllable is best supplied by τε (Triclinius). The constr. is, πρὶν (αὐτός ) τε πλησθῆναι, καὶ Ἥφαιστον στεφάνωμα πύργων ἑλεῖν. For τε irregularly placed, cp. 258 n.

στεφάνωμα : Eur. 910 (of Troy) ἀπὸ δὲ στεφάναν κέκαρσαι | πύργων: cp. n. on 15.

πευκάενθ’ Ἥφαιστον , the flame of pine-wood torches ( Verg. 11. 786 pineus ardor ). Cp. 1007, 2.426. σπλάγχνα δ’ ἄρ’ ἀμπείραντες ὑπείρεχον Ἡφαίστοιο.

τοῖος , introducing the reason; 947 n.

ἐτάθη , lit. ‘was made intense,’ here suggesting both loud sound and keen strife. Cp. 12.436 ἐπὶ ἶσα μάχη τέτατο πτόλεμός τε : 23. 375 ἵπποισι τάθη δρόμος: Aesch. 574 τεῖνε δὲ δυσβάϋκτον | βοᾶτιν τάλαιναν αὐδάν.

πάταγος , clatter of arms (a word expressive of the sound), as distinguished from βοή, a human cry; cp. Her. 7.211 οἱ δὲ βάρβαροι ὁρέοντες φεύγοντας βοῇ τε καὶ πατάγῳ ἐπήϊσαν . The Argives began to retreat in the night: at dawn, the Thebans made a sally in pursuit of them, and turned the retreat into a rout.

ἀντιπάλῳ δυσχείρωμα δράκοντος , a thing hard to vanquish for him who was struggling against the (Theban) dragon, —i.e. for the Argive eagle. The two readings between which the MSS. fluctuate, viz., ἀντιπάλῳ ... δράκοντι and ἀντιπάλου … δράκοντος , arose, I feel sure, from ἀντιπάλῳ … δράκοντος (V has ἀντιπάλω...δράκοντος). For the gen. after this adj., cp. Pind. 8. 94 μένος γήραος ἀντίπαλον, a spirit that wrestles with old age: Eur. 922 ὑμεναίων γόος ἀντίπαλος , wails contending with marriagesongs.

The interpretation of the passage turns primarily on two points.

(1) The δράκων certainly means the Thebans,—the σπαρτοί ( 1534) sprung from the dragon's teeth sown by Cadmus, and thence called δρακοντογενεῖς (schol.), Ovid's anguigenae ( 3. 531): cp. 1125 ἐπὶ σπορᾷ δράκοντος. Poetry often represented a struggle between an eagle and a dragon or snake (δράκων could mean either, the ‘dragon’ being conceived as a sort of huge python); as 12.201, 4.4. 11.

(2) The δυς in δυσχείρωμα must refer to difficulty experienced by the vanquished Argives, not by the victorious Thebans. The word must mean, then, ‘a thing hard to overcome,’ not, ‘a victory won with difficulty.’ So δυσχείρωτος is ‘hard to subdue’ (Her. 7.9), as ἀχείρωτος is ‘unsubdued’ (Thuc. 6.10), and εὐχείρωτος ‘easy to subdue’ (Xen. 5.3.4). Cp. δυσπάλαιστος, δυσπάλαμος, δύσμαχος, etc., used with poetical irony to express the irresistible. In 560 θανάσιμον χείρωμα is a deed of deadly violence: in Aesch. 1022 τυμβοχόα χειρώματα are works of the hand in mound-making. In itself, δυσχείρωμα might mean ‘a thing achieved with difficulty’; but here the irony is clearly pointed against the routed Argives: the poet does not mean that the Thebans won with difficulty. Thus δυσχείρωμα is here the opposite of what Aesch. calls εὐμαρὲς χείρωμα, a thing easily subdued: Aesch. 1326 δούλης θανούσης, εὐμαροῦς χειρώματος. The Theban πάταγος Ἄρεος was a thing which the Argives could not overcome.

Those who read ἀντιπάλῳ … δράκοντι explain either (a) ‘a hard-won victory for the dragon foe’: but this gives a wrong sense to δυσχείρωμα: or (b) join the dat. with ὲτάθη : ‘a din was raised by the dragon foe (cp. 22.55 Ἀχιλῆϊ δαμασθείς ), a thing hard (for the Argive) to subdue.’ But δυσχείρωμα, placed as it is, cannot be thus dissociated from the dat. ἀντιπ. δράκοντι and mentally referred to another dat. which is left to be understood.

Those who read ἀντιπάλου … δράκοντος understand (a) a thing on the part of the dragon foe which was hard (for the Argive) to overcome; i.e. ‘an irresistible onset of the dragon foe.’ But such a construction of δυσχείρωμα with the gen. seems impossible, esp. when there is no dat. to help it out. Or ( b) ‘a hard-won victory of the dragon foe’; which gives a wrong sense to δυσχείρωμα.—The form of the word is in one respect unique. Every similar neuter noun compounded with δυς is from a verb so compounded: as δυσέργημα, δυσημέρημα, δυσπράγημα, δυσσέβημα, δυστύχημα, δυσφήμημα, δυσχέρασμα, δυσχρήστημα, δυσώπημα. But there is no such verb as δυσχειρόω, ‘to subdue with difficulty.’ The noun has been boldly coined to express δυσχείρωτον πρᾶγμα.

μεγάλης : 1350 μεγάλοι... λόγοι: Plat. 95B μὴ μέγα λέγε : Verg. 10. 547 Dixerat ille aliquid magnum.

ῥεύματι : Aesch. 88 μεγάλῳ ῥεύματι φωτῶν (so ib. 412 ῥεῦμα Περσικοῦ στρατοῦ ). Eur. 1437 παῦσαι διώκων ῥεῦμά τ’ ἐξορμῶν στρατοῦ . The transposition ῥεύματι πολλῷ is unnecessary. In the same dipodia an anapaest must not precede a dactyl, nor a dactyl an anapaest; but a spondee can be followed by a dactyl, as 146 δηλῶ δ’. οὐ γὰρ ἂν ᾦδ’ ἀλλοτρίοις .

χρυσοῦ καναχῆς ὑπεροπλίαις , ‘in the haughty pride of clanging gold.’ ὑπεροπλίαις seems a certain correction of ὑπεροπτίας (see cr. n.), and has justly won its way with recent edd. The word is fitting, since ὑπεροπλία is prop. ‘overweening confidence in arms’; and Soph. has used the epic plur. with the epic ι—, 1.205 ᾗς ὑπεροπλίῃσι : so too Theocr. 25. 138 σθένεϊ ᾧ | ἠδ’ ὑπεροπλίῃ Φαέθων

μέγας. In post-Homeric poetry ὑπέροπλος is a freq. epith. of overweening strength (ἠνορέη, βίη, ἥβη, etc.).—Other readings are:—(1) χρυσοῦ καναχῇ θ’ ὑπερόπτας, ‘and haughty in the clang of gold.’ This involves an improbable change; the subst. ὑπερόπτης, too, is unsuitable here, and cannot be defended by Theocr. 22. 58 πρὸς πάντα παλίγκοτος ἠδ’ ὑπερόπτης . Wecklein, reading ὑπερόπτας, keeps καναχῆς in the sense, hoffärtig auf : but a genit. after ὑπερόπτης could not denote that in which one takes pride. (2) χρυσοῦ καναχῆς ὑπερόπτης, or ‐όπτα, i.e., ‘Zeus, a despiser of the clang of gold.’ (3) χρυσοῦ καναχῆς ὑπέροπτα, adv. neut. plur. (as 883), ‘advancing haughtily in a great stream of clanging gold.’ But the adv. comes weakly at the end, and χρυσοῦ κ. is harshly joined with π. ῥεύματι.—Aesch. , too, gives prominence to gold in picturing the Argive chiefs: Capaneus has golden letters on his shield ( Aesch. 434), Polyneices has the image of a warrior in golden armour, with a golden legend (644, Aesch. Th. 660).

καναχῆς , of metal, as 16.105 πήληξ βαλλομένη καναχὴν ἔχε .

παλτῷ πυρί , i.e. with the thunderbolt which Zeus brandishes in his hand before hurling it: Aristoph. 1714 πάλλων κεραυνόν, πτεροφόρον Διὸς βέλος.

βαλβίδων ἐπ’ ἄκρων , at his topmost goal, i.e. at his goal on the top of our walls. ἄκρων might mean merely ‘uttermost,’ but is rather associated in the poet's mind with the object meant by βαλβίδων. In Eur. 1180 Capaneus is struck by Zeus at the moment that he is surmounting the γεῖσα τειχέων, the coping of the walls. The βαλβῖδες were the posts, to which a rope was attached, marking the point from which runners in the double foot-race (δίαυλος) set out, and to which they returned: hence both starting-point and goal.

ὁρμῶντα : for the partic. as subst., without either art. or τις, cp. 697 δύναιτ’ ἂν οὐδ’ ἂν ἰσχύων φυγεῖν : Plat. 498A ΚΑΛ. εἶδον. ΣΩ. τί δέ; νοῦν ἔχοντα λυπούμενον καὶ χαίροντα ; The name of Capaneus could be left unmentioned, since the story was so famous. No leader of the Argive host, except Polyneices, is named in this play. The attack of Capaneus was said to have been made at the Ἤλεκτραι πύλαι on the s. side of Thebes ( Aesch. 423 , Paus. 9.9.8). His fall from the scaling-ladder, as the lightning struck him, was often represented in art.

νίκην , cogn. acc. with ἀλαλάξαι , to raise the cry ἀλαλαί for victory: Aristoph. 1763 ἀλαλαί, ἰὴ παιήων, | τήνελλα καλλίνικος .

ἀντιτύπᾳ , restored by Porson ( p. 169) for ἀντίτυπα, is certainly right. Adjectives in ος, compounded with a prep., are oft. of three terminations in epic poetry, as ἀμφιελίσση, ἀμφιρύτη, ἀντιθέη ( 13.378), ἀμφιβρότη ( 2.389), ὑποδεξίη ( 9.73), etc. The dramatists could admit some such forms, esp. in lyrics; thus they have ἡ ἐναλία as well as ἡ ἐνάλιος, ἡ ἐννυχία as well as ἡ ἐννύχιος.

As regards the sense, ἀντίτυπος was regularly used of hard surfaces, which, as it were, repel that which strikes them (for the accent ἀντίτυπος, not ἀντιτύπος, though the sense is act., see on 460). 5. 40 οἱ...ἐν ἀντιτύποις περίπατοι. Lucian 13 τὴν ἀντίτυπον οὕτω καὶ καρτερὰν τοῦ λίθου φύσιν. So, fig., Plat. 420D τὸ...ἀναγκαῖον καὶ ἀντίτυπον , what is necessary, and what resists us.

τανταλωθείς , ‘swung,’ that is, sent flying through the air from the edge of the wall on which he was just setting foot. The word expresses the force with which the thunderbolt struck him, just as ἀντιτύπᾳ expresses the crash when he struck earth. This form of the verb occurs only here. Arist. uses both ταλαντεύομαι (pass.) and ταλαντεύω (act. intr.) as ‘to sway to and fro.’ The Schol., explaining by διασεισθείς (i.e. ‘with a rude shock,’ which is substantially right) quotes Anacreon 78 [ἐν] μελαμφύλλῳ δάφνᾳ χλωρᾷ τ’ ἐλαίᾳ τανταλίζει (where the subject was perh. a god, or the wind).

πυρφόρος , ‘torch in hand’: so of Prometheus ( 55, where see n.) and Artemis ( 207). Aesch. 433 φλέγει δὲ λαμπὰς διὰ χερῶν ὡπλισμένη· | χρυσοῖς δὲ φωνεῖ γράμμασιν, πρήσω πόλιν.

βακχεύων : so oft. Eur. as 898 Λύσσα βακχεύσει: but this is the only place where Soph. connects evil frenzy with the name of a god whom this same Ode invokes (154).

ῥιπαῖς...ἀνέμων . Capaneus, breathing fury and slaughter, is likened to a deadly tempest. For ῥιπαί, ‘blasts,’ cp. 929 and 1248 n. So Aesch. 63 πρὶν καταιγίσαι πνοὰς | Ἄρεως.

εἶχε δ’ ἄλλᾳ τὰ μέν , ‘but those things indeed’ (the threats of Capaneus) ‘went otherwise’ (than he had expected): ἄλλα δ’ ἐπ’ ἄλλοις μέγας Ἄρης ἐπενώμα, ‘while to others great Ares assigned various dooms,’ etc. The poet has described how smote the most formidable foe. As to the other Argive chiefs, he briefly adds that struck them down by various deaths: i.e. they perished, not by a stroke from heaven, but in the course of battle. In L's reading, εἶχε δ’ ἄλλαι τὰ μὲν ἄλλαι τὰ δ’ ἐπ’ ἄλλοις , one cause of corruption has evidently been a confusion between alternative modes of expressing ‘some’ and ‘other,’ viz. (1) by doubled ἄλλος, (2) by τὰ μέν, τὰ δέ. It is in favour of our reading (Erfurdt's) that it helps to account for this, since it supposes that τὰ μέν was answered by ἄλλα δέ . Cp. 1671 οὐ τὸ μέν, ἄλλο δὲ μή : 6.147 τὰ μέν τ’ ἄνεμος χαμάδις χέει, ἄλλα δέ θ’ ὕλη | τηλεθόωσα φύει . It is immaterial that, here, τὰ μέν means, not, ‘some things,’ but, ‘those things’; since the latter is its first sense also where we render it by ‘some.’ Further, with regard to ἄλλᾳ , remark that this form of adverb is used elsewhere also in ref. to the course ordained by gods or fate: O. C. 1443 ταῦτα δ’ ἐν τῷ δαίμονι, | καὶ τῇδε φῦναι χἁτέρᾳ: Aesch. 511 οὐ ταῦτα ταύτῃ μοῖρά πω τελεσφόρος | κρᾶναι πέπρωται . For other proposed readings, see Appendix.

ἐπενώμα : Aesch. 310 λάχη τὰ κατ’ ἀνθρώπους | ὡς ἐπινωμᾷ στάσις ἁμά , apportions.— στυφελίζων ( στυ^φελός, ‘firm,’ στυ—/φω, to compress), ‘striking heavily’: 1.581 ἐξ ἑδέων στυφελίξαι .

δεξιόσειρος , ‘right-hand trace-horse,’ here means a vigorous ally, who does more than his own share of the work. Ares has brought the Theban chariot victoriously through the crisis of the race against its Argive rival. In the fourhorse chariot-race the four horses were harnessed abreast: the two in the middle were under the yoke (ζύγιοι), being called ὁ μέσος δεξιός and ὁ μέσος ἀριστερός (schol. Aristoph. 122): the two outside horses drew in traces ( σειραῖοι). The chariot went down the right-hand side of the course, turned sharply from right to left at the distance-post (καμπτήρ, νύσσα), and came back down the left side. Hence, at the turning-point, the right-hand tracehorse had most work to do; and the best horse was put in that place. Cp. 721 (at the turning-post) δεξιόν τ’ ἀνεὶς | σειραῖον ἵππον εἶργε τὸν προσκείμενον. Plat. 4. 6 ἁρματηλατοῦντα δεῖ ἐγγὺς μὲν τῆς στήλης κάμψαι, quoting from 23.336 the precept τὸν δεξιὸν ἵππον | κένσαι ὁμοκλήσαντ’, εἶξαί τέ οἱ ἡνία χερσίν. Cp. Aesch. 842 ζευχθεὶς ἕτοιμος ἦν ἐμοὶ σειραφόρος (said by Agam. of Odysseus): and cp. ib. 1640.

The old v.l. δεξιόχειρος , explained by the schol. γενναῖος καὶ παραδέξιος, is read by Musgrave, Hartung, and Pallis. Hartung A. renders it ‘der Starke,’—understanding it as ‘the strong and deft striker.’ Neither δεξιόχειρος nor δεξιόχειρ seems to occur, though ἀριστερόχειρ (left-handed) is found in late Greek.

ἑπτὰ λοχαγοί . In 1313 ff. the list agrees with that of Aesch. ,— Amphiaraus, Tydeus, Eteoclus, Hippomedon, Capaneus, Parthenopaeus, Polyneices. (Adrastus, who escaped, is not counted as one of the seven.) Capaneus, though not slain by human hand, is included, since he was vanquished. Amphiaraus, according to the legend which Soph. recognises in 837, was swallowed up by the earth, but seems here to be reckoned among those who fell in fight (cp. n. on 1313).

ἴσοι πρὸς ἴσους , instead of saying simply πρὸς ἑπτά,—a common idiom: Eur. 750 ἴσους ἴσοισι πολεμίοισιν ἀντιθείς : Her. 1.2 ἴσα πρὸς ἴσα : 9. 48 ἴσοι πρὸς ἴσους: Plat. 774C ἴσα ἀντὶ ἴσων .

Ζηνὶ τροπαίῳ , to Zeus who makes a τροπή, or rout, of enemies. Eur. 671 ὦ Ζεῦ πατρῷε καὶ τροπαῖ’ ἐχθρῶν ἐμῶν . So he is invoked after a victory, 867.(In 303 ὦ Ζεῦ τροπαῖε is usu. taken as=ἀποτρόπαιε, ‘averting.’) In his relation to war, Zeus was worshipped also as Ἀγήτωρ (esp. at Sparta), Ἄρειος (at Olympia, etc.), Στράτιος, Χρυσάωρ (in Caria), Στήσιος or Ἐπιστάσιος (the Roman stator, stayer of flight).

πάγχαλκα τέλη , ‘tributes of panoplies,’ as 238 Heracles dedicates βωμοὺς τέλη τ’ ἔγκαρπα Κηναίῳ Διΐ, i.e. ‘dues of fruits,’—alluding to the τέμενος of which the produce was given to the god ( ib. 754). Not, (1) ‘complete suits of armour’: nor (2) ὁπλιτικὰ τάγματα, ‘troops of warriors,’ as Eustath. took it (p. 686. 16), led perh. by Aesch. 47 δίρρυμά τε καὶ τρίρρυμα τέλη .

It was the ordinary practice to set up a τρόπαιον (old αττ.τροπαῖον) after a victory, on the spot where it had been won, or, in the case of a sea-fight, on the nearest land (Thuc. 2.92). Such a trophy ordinarily consisted of shields, helmets, and weapons, conspicuously displayed on wooden supports, and dedicated, with an inscription, to a deity. Cp. Eur. 1473 (of the Thebans after the victory) οἱ μὲν Διὸς τροπαῖον ἵστασαν βρέτας (i.e. a wooden image of Ζεὺς Τροπαῖος), | οἱ δ’ ἀσπίδας συλῶντες Ἀργείων νεκρῶν | σκυλεύματ’ εἴσω τειχέων ἐπέμπομεν. Part of the armour would be affixed to the walls of Theban temples (cp. Aesch. 577, 276).

πλὴν τ. στυγεροῖν , ‘wretched’ (as 166): not, ‘hateful,’ nor, ‘filled with hate.’ Of the seven Argive leaders, Polyneices was the only one who could not properly be said to have been vanquished, since he was not more vanquished than victorious. But, in excepting him, the poet associates him with the brother who was his victim as well as his conqueror. Thus ἑπτὰ...ἔλιπον..., πλὴν τοῖν στυγεροῖν, is a lax way of saying, ‘defeat befell each of the seven Argive leaders, except in the case of the two brothers,’—in which an Argive leader and a Theban leader slew each other.— πατρός , etc., gen. of origin (38).

καθ’ αὑτοῖν = κατ’ ἀλλήλοιν. Cp. Dem. or. 40 § 29 ὧν ἂν ἐν αὑτοῖς διενεχθῶσι γυνὴ καὶ ἀνήρ . Plat. 347D λέγοντάς τε καὶ ἀκούοντας ἐν μέρει ἑαυτῶν.

δικρατεῖς λόγχας , two spears, each of which was victorious over the wielder of the other. So 251 δικρατεῖς Ἀτρεῖδαι , two Atreidae, each of whom is a king. That is, δικρατεῖς is equiv. to two distinct epithets (δύο and κρατοῦσαι): cp. 1055 διστόλους...ἀδελφάς , two journeying sisters: ib. 17 πυκνόπτεροι = many, and feathered (n.): see 846 n.

στήσαντε , having set in position, levelled, against each other. The Homeric δόρυ was chiefly a missile; here the λόγχη is used for thrusting.

ἀλλὰ γάρ , like ἀλλ’ οὐ γάρ ( 988 n.), can be used with or without an ellipse. Here there is no ellipse, since ἐπέλθωμεν follows (153), and γάρ , introducing the reason given by ἦλθε,= ‘since.’ Below, 155, there is an ellipse, —‘But (let us cease), for Creon comes’; where γάρ might be rendered ‘indeed. ’

μεγαλώνυμος : schol. ἡ μεγάλην περιποιοῦσα δόξαν: the personified Nikè is ‘of great name,’ because victory is glorious.

πολυαρμάτῳ implies warlike renown, as well as wealth and splendour (cp. 845). Already in 4.391 the Cadmeans are ‘urgers of horses’ (κέντορες ἵππων): so 24 Βοιωτοὶ πλήξιπποι: Pindar 6. 85 has πλάξιππον...Θήβαν, 7. 20 φιλαρμάτου πόλιος (as elsewhere χρυσάρματος, εὐάρματος). Critias , speaking of the inventions for which various cities were famous, says (fr. 1. 10) Θήβη δ’ ἁρματόεντα δίφρον συνεπήξατο πρώτη.

ἀντιχαρεῖσα , with gladness responsive to that of Thebè. The goddess Nikè has come to meet the victors, and their joy is reflected in her radiant smile. (We can imagine her descending towards them from the sky, like the winged Nikè of Paeonius found at Olympia.) The doubts which have been felt as to ἀντιχαρεῖσα disappear if it is observed that χαρεῖσα here refers to the outward manifestation of joy, not merely to the feeling in the mind. Thus ἀντί expresses the answer of smile to smile, as in ἀντιλάμπω of light to light, or in ἀντιφθέγγομαι of sound to sound. I do not take ἀντί here to mean merely ‘over against,’ as when Pind. 3.19 says ἤδη γὰρ αὐτῷ... | ...ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντέφλεξε Μήνα, the (mid-month) moon showed the light of her eye over against him. —Not (1) ἴσον αὐτῇ χαρεῖσα (schol.), i.e. merely, ‘rejoicing as Thebes does,’ which extenuates ἀντιχαρεῖσα into συγχαρεῖσα. Nor (2) ἀντὶ τῶν κακῶν χαρεῖσα, i.e. rejoicing in requital of past troubles.

ἐκ...πολέμων τῶν νῦν , ‘after the recent wars.’ For ἐκ , cp. 271 ἐκ πολλοῦ σάλου | εὕδοντ’, sleeping, after long tossing on the sea. For νῦν referring to the recent past (=‘just now’), cp. Dem. or. 18 § 13 ἡλίκα νῦν ἐτραγῴδει καὶ διεξῄει : Xen. 7.1.26 ἀναμνησθέντας τὰ νῦν ἤδη γεγενημένα (i.e. the events of the Peloponnesian war, which had ended four years before).

θέσθαι (L), as infin. for imperative ( 481 n.), has a certain solemnity which seems to make it better here than θέσθε , though the latter is not excluded by ἐπέλθωμεν. The last syll. of θἑσθαι answers to the second of ἐχθίστων in 137; each is an ‘irrational’ syllable (- for ˘): see θεῶν, monosyll. by synizesis ( 964 n.).— παννυχίοις , since a παννυχίς was esp. grateful to the city's tutelar god Dionysus (1147), whose rites are νύκτωρ τὰ πολλά (Eur. 486 ).

ὁ Θήβας (gen. sing.) ἐλελίχθων , = ὁ τὴν Θήβης χθόνα ἐλελίζων, shaking the ground of Thebes (with his dances): for the objective gen., cp. 333 λόγων αὐτάγγελος.

Βάκχιος = Βάκχος, as Eur. 225 τὴν δ’ Ἀφροδίτην πρόσθ’ ἄγειν τοῦ Βακχίου , and oft.

ἄρχοι sc. τῆς χορείας (schol.). Cp. 1146.

ἀλλὰ … γάρ : see on 148.— Κρέων , monosyll. by synizesis, as πλέων 1.183; in Aesch. 1493 ἐκπνέων is a spondee. Cp. 1073 *(πέας , a monosyll.

Μενοικέως ,=˘¯¯, as 1003 Θησέως (¯¯), and so oft.

νεοχμὸς νεαραῖσι . Neither adj. is suspicious; new events have made a new ruler; and the doubled adj. is quite in the poet's manner. Cp. 1266 νέος νέῳ ξὺν μόρῳ: 735 νέας | βουλὰς νέοισιν ἐγκαταζεύξας τρόποις : 475 οἰὸς...νεαρᾶς νεοπόκῳ μαλλῷ : ib. 1259 γέρων γέροντι συγκατῴκηκεν πίνος : 613 καινῷ καινὸν ἐν πεπλώματι , etc. Though νεαρός usu.= ‘young,’ it occurs also in the sense of ‘novel,’ as in Pindar's νεαρὰ ἐξευρεῖν ( 8. 20). Three views of the metre have been taken. (1) That v. 156 should be enlarged to a dimeter by supplying one anapaest or its equivalent. (2) That v. 156 should be reduced to a monometer by omitting νεοχμός or Μενοικέως. (3) That both v. 156 and v. 160 should be made dimeters by supplying three anapaests or

their equivalents. See Appendix I prefer the first of these views. An anapaest or spondee, meaning ‘ruler,’ has probably dropped out before νεοχμός . Seyffert's κρείων is at first sight attractive, as accounting for its own disappearance; but, since it is the same word as Κρέων— which had an epic form Κρείων, as conversely Pind. and Aesch. use κρέων—this would be rather a feeble pun than a strong παρήχησις. Either ἄρχων or ταγός is possible.

θεῶν … συντυχίαις , fortunes sent by the gods,—the possessive gen. denoting the authors, just as it can denote the parents: cp. 1116 πότμος...δαιμόνων: fr. 37 τὰς δὲ δαιμόνων τύχας | ὅστις φέρει κάλλιστ’, ἀνὴρ οὗτος σοφός. (In 34 δαιμόνων συναλλαγαῖς is different.) ἐπὶ συντυχίαις means that the fortunes are the conditions which have made Creon king: this ἐπί with dat. of attendant circumstance sometimes=our ‘in,’ as 1268 ἐπ’ ἔργοις πᾶσι (n.), sometimes ‘for,’ as Aristoph. 406 πῖν’ ἐπὶ συμφοραῖς (i.e. to celebrate them), cp. 1230: here we could say, ‘under the new dispensations of the gods.’ (Distinguish 88 ἐπὶ ψυχροῖσι as =‘for’ in the sense ‘with a view to.’)

μῆτιν ἐρέσσων , consilium animo volutans, ‘turning it over’ busily in the mind. ἐρέσσειν, to ply the oar, is fig. said of putting a thing in lively motion, as Eur. 139 ἐρέσσων σὸν πόδα . Then also of activity in speech, as 251 ἐρέσσουσιν ἀπειλάς , ‘they ply threats’ (utter them repeatedly and loudly): or, as here, in thought. Cp. 231.—(, ‘speeding his counsel hitherward,’ i.e. coming to disclose it: ‘ advolvens, i.e. patefacturus,’ Ellendt.)

σύγκλητον , specially convoked;—implying that there were other and regularly appointed seasons at which the king met the γέροντες in council. At Athens four meetings of the ἐκκλησία were regularly held in each πρυτανεία (a period of 35 or 36 days): these were κυρίαι (though the term may once have been restricted to the first of them), or νόμιμοι. An extraordinary meeting was σύγκλητος or κατάκλητος. Pollux 8. 116 σύγκλητος ἐκκλησία ἣν ἐξαίφνης ἐποίουν μείζονος χρείας ἐπιλαβούσης· ἐκαλεῖτο δὲ καὶ κατακλησία, ὅτι καὶ τοὺς ἐκ τῶν ἀγρῶν κατεκάλουν ( down to the ἄστυ). Arist. 3.1. 10 ἐνίαις γὰρ οὐκ ἔστι δῆμος, οὐδ’ ἐκκλησίαν νομίζουσιν ἀλλὰ συγκλήτους: ‘in some States there is no popular body, and they have no regular assembly, but only meetings on special occasions.’ σύγκλητος is one of those words which, though a technical term at Athens, could still be used by Attic poets without any prosaic local allusion being felt,— just as they used πρύτανις, ἐπιστάτης, ἄρχων, ψήφισμα, etc.

προὔθετο is another example. The presidents of the ecclesia were said γνώμας προθεῖναι when they invited a discussion. Thuc. 6.14 ὦ πρύτανι ... γνώμας προτίθει αὖθις Ἀθηναίοις , ‘lay the question again before the assembly.’ 3. 42 τοὺς προθέντας τὴν διαγνώμην. Cp. Xen. 4.2.3 τῆς πόλεως λόγον περί τινος προτιθείσης . Lucian 19 has προὔθεσαν οἱ πρυτάνεις ἐκκλησίαν, ‘gave notice of’: but for this the usual phrase was that of Aeschin. or. 2 § 60 προγράψαι τοὺς πρυτάνεις ἐκκλησίας δύο. Here, λέσχην is

not the meeting, but the discussion which is to take place there: thus the poet's phrase, true to Attic usage, corresponds with γνώμας προθεῖναι rather than with ἐκκλησίαν προθεῖναι. Herod. uses λέσχη of a public discussion (9. 71): cp. 167. The midd. προὔθετο suggests Creon's personal interest in the question: the active would denote the mere act (see on 8 θεῖναι). Cp. 1249. προτίθεσθαι more oft. denotes what one proposes to oneself.

κοινῷ κ. πέμψας , lit. having sent (notice of the meeting) by means of a summons addressed to each of us. The κήρυγμα is the mandate which κήρυκες carried to each of the fifteen elders,—not, of course, a public proclamation: cp. 164. For the absolute πέμπω, cp. Thuc. 5.43 πέμπει εὐθὺς ἐς Ἄργος ἰδίᾳ : and so oft. (Not, ‘having sent for us,’ μεταπεμψάμενος: cp. on 19.)

First ἐπεισόδιον. Creon, the new king, enters from the central door of the palace. Recognising the loyalty which the elders had shown to his predecessors, he expresses his own conception of the duty which a king owes to the State. He then announces the edict which, in accordance with that conception, he has published concerning the two brothers. The Chorus submissively acknowledge his right to do so, but express no approval. A guard now arrives (223), and announces that the king's edict has already been violated by an unknown hand, which has strewn dust upon the corpse of Polyneices. Creon dismisses him with threats of a dreadful death for him and for his fellows, if they fail to discover and produce the offender.

ἐκ πάντων , (chosen) out of all, δίχα adv. (with ἱκέσθαι) apart from them: cp. 656 πόλεως . . ἐκ πάσης μόνην, 1137 τὰν ἐκ πασᾶν τιμᾷς: 1351 ὅν ποτ’ ἐκ πολλῶν ἐγὼ | μόνον προσηῦρον πιστόν . In other places, where δίχα is prep. with gen., we find it similarly connected with another expression of like purport, as 749 ἐκ...κύκλου | . . μεταστὰς οἷος Ἀτρειδῶν δίχα.

ἔστειλ’ ἱκέσθαι : lit., by means of messengers I caused you to set forth, so that you should come (epexeg. inf.): 60 οἵ σ’ ἐν λιταῖς στείλαντες ἐξ οἴκων μολεῖν. But στέλλεσθαι (midd.) ‘to summon to oneself’ ( 434): cp. n. 860.— τοῦτο μέν , answered by τοῦτ’ αὖθις: see 61 n.

σέβοντας , like μένοντας (169), part. of the imperf.,=ὅτι ἐσέβετε: so 1192: 835 τοῦ παρόντος (n.): and cp. on 1565 f.

θρόνων . . κράτη , powers belonging to the throne: cp. 60, 173.

ἡνίκ’ Οἰδίπους κ.τ.λ. The only obscurity arises from the use of the plur. κείνων in 168. κείνων παῖδας ought to mean, ‘the descendants of Laïus and Oedipus,’ viz. Eteocles and Polyneices. But, as the sentence stands, it must mean, ‘the offspring of Laïus and of Oedipus respectively’; viz. Oedipus, the son of Laïus; Eteocles and Polyneices, the sons of Oedipus. The relative clause, ἡνίκ’ . . ὤρθου πόλιν , induced the poet to add immediately the other relative clause to which the same person is subject, viz. ἐπεὶ διώλετο , instead of inserting, after ὤρθου πόλιν, words expressing their loyalty to Oedipus. We might, indeed, suppose that, after ὤρθου πόλιν, we were intended to supply mentally, καὶ τὰ ἐκείνου θρόνων κράτη σέβοντας. But against this is the fact that, after τοῦτο μέν . . τοῦτ’ αὖθις ,—‘in the first place’ . . ‘in the second place,’

καί (in κἀπεὶ) would scarcely have been thus used to introduce a distinct third clause. Evidently καί links ἡνίκα ὤρθου to ἐπεὶ διώλετο.

ἐμπέδοις φρονήμασιν , with steadfast sentiments (of loyalty), modal dat., as oft. προθυμίᾳ, εὐνοίᾳ, φρονήματι (Thuc. 2.62), etc. Hartung, whom some recent editors follow, adopts ἐμπέδους on the strange ground that Soph. must otherwise have written ἐμμένοντας. But μένοντας ἀμφὶ τοὺς κείνων παῖδας=‘remaining around them,’ and the modal dat. is added no less legitimately than the causal dat. in Eur. 701 δειλίᾳ μένειν , ‘to remain through cowardice.’ Soph. could have said ἐμπέδους φρονήμασιν, as he has said συντρόφοις | ὀργαῖς ἔμπεδος ( 639): but ἐμπέδοις is better here, both (a) because a series of accusatives has preceded, and (b) because, as μένοντας has already marked their constancy, we now want an epithet for their φρονήματα.

ὅτε causal, 918 n.

πρὸς διπλῆς μ. : cp. 14 n.: for πρὸς, 51 n.: for διπλῆς . . μίαν , 13 n.

παίσαντες . . πληγέντες . In Attic prose the verb ‘to strike’ usu. had as pres. τύπτω (or παίω), fut. τυπτήσω (or πατάξω), aor. ἐπάταξα, aor. pass. ἐπλήγην. The aor. of παίω is mainly a poetical word, used in tragedy, more rarely in comedy, and by Xenophon. In Attic prose ἔπαισα is usu. the aor. of παίζω. Meineke proposed πλήξαντες here, but that aor. (except in comp. with a prep.) is almost unknown to classical αττιξ. παισθέντες, again, though that aor. pass. occurs twice in Aesch. , is very rare.

αὐτόχειρι … μιάσματι , the stain of a kinsman's murder (see on 51, and cp. 1176): cp. Aesch. 849 κακὰ | αὐτοφόνα. σύν , as 1266 νέῳ ξὺν μόρῳ: 1663, σὺν νόσοις: Pind. 2. 42 σὺν ἀλλαλοφονίᾳ.

ἐγὼ . . δή , I now: where δή nearly=ἤδη , 968 n. Aesch. 3 (after Gaia came Themis) ἣ δὴ τὸ μητρὸς δευτέρα τόδ’ ἕζετο | μαντεῖον.

κράτη : cp. 166 .

γένους κατ’ ἀγχιστεῖα τῶν ὀλ. , by nearness of kinship to the dead, γένους ἀγχιστεῖα forming one notion, on which the genit. τῶν ὀλ. depends, as on words meaning ‘near.’ The neut. plur. ἀγχιστεῖα (only here) would most properly mean ‘rights’ or ‘privileges’ of such nearness (cp. ἀριστεῖα, πρωτεῖα, etc.), but seems here to be merely a poetical equiv. for the abstract ἀγχιστεία. In Attic law ἀγχιστεία was any degree of relationship on which a claim to an inheritance could be founded in the absence of a will otherwise disposing of it. To claim an inheritance under a will was ἀμφισβητεῖν κατὰ διαθήκην: to claim on the ground of relationship, ἀμφισβητεῖν κατ’ ἀγχιστείαν. συγγένεια, consanguinity, might, or might not, constitute ἀγχιστεία: e.g. Isaeus says of the relationship of mother to son that it is συγγενέστατον μὲν τῇ φύσει πάντων, ἐν δὲ ταῖς ἀγχιστείαις ὁμολογουμένως οὐκ ἔστιν (or. 11 § 17), since a mother could not inherit from her son. (See , pp. 331, 344.) Creon succeeds as the nearest male relative. Aesch. , Soph. , and Eur. ignore the Boeotian legend which gave a son, Laodamas, to Eteocles (Her. 5.61), and a son, Thersander, to Polyneices (id. 4. 147, etc.). The sisters represent the ἐσχάτη ῥίζα (599).

ἀμήχανον δέ . ‘You were loyal to the kings whose successor I am. Now ( δέ ) a man cannot be really known until he has been tried in office. (I do not, therefore, ask you to pledge your loyalty to me until I have been so tested.) I will, however, tell you the principles which I intend to observe.’ Thus δέ merely marks the transition to a new topic. It is not directly adversative, as if he meant: ‘You were loyal to my predecessors, but I do not yet ask you to be loyal to me.’ On that view, however, the general connection of thoughts would remain the same.

Demosthenes, in his speech on the Embassy (343 B.C.), quotes this passage (vv. 175—190) as illustrating maxims

which Aeschines had violated, though, accustomed as he had been to play tritagonists' parts, he ought to have known them by heart (or. 19 § 247).

ψυχήν , ‘soul,’ the man's moral nature generally: φρόνημα , the ‘spirit’ of his dealing in public affairs, according as his aims are lofty or mean, his policy bold or timid (cp. 207 τοιόνδ’ ἐμὸν φρόνημα): γνώμην , the intellectual aspect of the man, his ability and judgment. In Her. 5.124 ψυχὴν οὐκ ἄκρος , 3. 14 διεπειρᾶτο αὐτοῦ τῆς ψυχῆς, the word=‘fortitude.’ But the usage of Soph. favours the more general sense here: cp. 227, 929, 1361 σκληρὰν...ψυχήν , 219 σᾷ δυσθύμῳ τίκτουσ’ αἰεὶ | ψυχᾷ πολέμους . Plato has the phrase τῆς ψυχῆς τὴν γνώμην for ‘the intellect’ ( 672 B).

ἀρχαῖς , duties of administration. It might be explained as a generic plur. of ἀρχή, in the sense of ‘sovereignties,’ as Isocr. or. 3 § 15 αἱ μοναρχίαι , § 16 τὰς τυραννίδας , etc.: but it seems truer to say that the Athenian poet was thinking of public offices or magistracies. νόμοισιν has a general sense: the king is concerned with νόμοι both as νομοφύλαξ and as νομοθέτης: but, as the context suggests, it is of law- giving that Creon is more particularly thinking. Tournier has suggested ἀρχῇ τε καὶ θρόνοισιν, but we must recollect how largely the language of Attic tragedy is tinged with democratic associations.

ἐντριβής , exercitatus: Plat. 769B ἐντριβής γε οὐδαμῶς γέγοια τῇ τοιαύτῃ τέχνῃ.

φανῇ ‘be found,’ without ὤν, as Pind. 5. 107 πέφανταί θ’ ἁρματηλάτας σοφός: Thuc. 1.8 Κᾶρες ἐφάνησαν (were found to be). Not: ‘be revealed, by being conversant.’ Cp. Arist. 5.3 πολλοὶ γὰρ ἐν μὲν τοῖς οἰκείοις τῇ ἀρετῇ δύνανται χρῆσθαι, ἐν δὲ τοῖς πρὸς ἕτερον ἀδυνατοῦσιν. καὶ διὰ τοῦτο εὖ δοκεῖ ἔχειν τὸ τοῦ Βίαντος, ὅτι ἀρχὴ ἄνδρα δείξει· πρὸς ἕτερον γὰρ καὶ ἐν κοινωνίᾳ ἤδη ὁ ἄρχων . Besides Bias of Priene, others of the ἑπτὰ σοφισταί,—as Chilon, Pittacus, Solon,—had this saying ascribed to them. Plut. 30(Sulla ) εἰκότως προσετρίψατο ταῖς μεγάλαις ἐξουσίαις διαβολὴν ὡς τὰ ἤθη μένειν οὐκ ἐώσαις ἐπὶ τῶν ἐξ ἀρχῆς τρόπων (as not allowing characters to be constant under the influence of habits formed in office), ἀλλ’ ἔμπληκτα καὶ χαῦνα καὶ ἀπάνθρωπα ποιούσαις . Shaksp. ii. 1. 12 He would be crown'd:— How that might change his nature, there's the question....The abuse of greatness is, when it disjoins | Remorse from power.

ἐμοὶ γάρ . A ground for the preceding statement is introduced by γάρ , though the compression of the thought slightly obscures the connection. ‘A man cannot be known until he has been tested in power. (γὰρ) a man in power may easily be deterred, by fear of unpopularity, from pursuing the counsels best for the State: and if he is so deterred, think him worthless.’ πᾶσαν … πόλιν , the whole city, as 656 πόλεως ... ἐκ πάσης, 776 πᾶσα...πόλις, 851 ἐν πάσῃ πόλει (in the hearing of all the city). In prose the art. would have been added (cp. Thuc. 7.29 τῇ πόλει πάσῃ , 4. 87 ξυμπάσῃ τῇ πόλει, 2. 65 ἡ ξύμπασα πόλις); but its omission in poetry being so common, it is strange that πᾶσαν should have been suspected here.

μὴ … ἅπτεται , not οὐ, since the relative clause is general (‘such an one as does not...,’ Lat. qui with subjunct.): cp. 1175 ἃ μὴ | χρῄζεις . Instead of ὅστις μὴ ἅπτεται we should more often find ὅστις ἃν μὴ ἅπτηται: yet the instances of the indic. after ὅστις in general statement are not rare even in prose; cp. Thuc. 2.64 οἵτινες...ἥκιστα λυποῦνται, ἔργῳ δὲ μάλιστα ἀντέχουσιν : ib. ὅστις λαμβάνει.

ἐκ φ. του : cp. 111 νεικέων ἐξ ἀμφιλόγων.

ἐγκλῄσας ἔχει (cp. 22),=a perf., in the sense ‘has shut once for all,’ ‘keeps shut.’ Distinguish the prose idiom, Dem. or. 9 § 12 Φερὰς...ἔχει καταλαβών , has seized, and keeps.

νῦν τε καὶ πάλαι , an emphatic formula (‘seems, and has always seemed’), 676, 966: cp. 1049 πάλαι δέδοκται ταῦτα κοὐ νεωστί μοι : 9.105 οἷον ἐγὼ νοέω, ἠμὲν πάλαι ἠδ’ ἔτι καὶ νῦν .

μείζον’ : whoever recognises a friend more important than his country, —i.e. with stronger claims upon him: ἀντὶ τῆς...πάτρας instead of the simple gen., or ἤ with accus., as 576 ὥστε μήτιν’ εἰσιδὼν | στέρξει γυναῖκα κεῖνος ἀντὶ σοῦ πλέον . Cp. 638 (γάμος ) μείζων φέρεσθαι, more important to win: 772 τῷ γὰρ ἂν καὶ μείζονι | λέξαιμ’ ἂν ἢ σοί ..., ‘to whom more important,’ i.e. with a better claim on my confidence,— nearer and dearer. μεῖζον (which was written by the first hand in L) is specious, —‘a more important thing,’ a greater good: cp. Eur. 784 μέγα γὰρ ηὑγένειά σου , 209 ἡ Λάκαινα μὲν πόλις | μέγ’ ἐστί. But Demosthenes, at least, seems to have read μείζον’: for, in applying the verses to Aeschines, he paraphrases thus (or. 19 § 248): τούτων οὐδὲν Αἰσχίνης εἶπε πρὸς αὑτὸν ἐν τῇ πρεσβείᾳ, ἀλλ’ ἀντὶ μὲν τῆς πόλεως τὴν Φιλίππου ξενίαν καὶ φιλίαν πολλῷ μείζονα ἡγήσατο αὑτῷ καὶ λυσιτελεστέραν, ἐρρῶσθαι πολλὰ φράσας τῷ σοφῷ Σοφοκλεῖ.

οὐδαμοῦ λέγω : Aesch. 497 θεοὺς δέ τις | τὸ πρὶν νομίζων οὐδαμοῦ, τότ’ ηὔχετο . Eur. 210 Σκῦρον οὐδαμοῦ τίθης (nullo in numero habes). Xen. 1.2.52 ὥστε μηδαμοῦ παρ’ αὐτοῖς τοὺς ἄλλους εἶναι πρὸς αὐτόν , ‘so that the rest were nowhere with them in comparison to him.’ So οὐδενὸς λόγου (or ἐν οὐδενὶ λόγῳ) ποιεῖσθαι, ἐν οὐδεμιᾷ μοίρᾳ ἄγειν, etc.

ἐγὼ γάρ . Here, as in ἐμοὶ γάρ above (178), γάρ introduces a reason; but here, again, the connection is obscured by the form of the sentence. The reason is contained in τοῦτο γιγνώσκων κ.τ.λ. (188). ‘I have no esteem for a man who prefers popularity or private friendship to the good of the State (178— 183); for (184) I well know that all private welfare depends on the welfare of the State; and so I should never commit the faults which I have just condemned in others.’— ἴστω is confirmed against the conjecture ἴστωρ (or ἵστωρ) by those passages in which it is joined with an accus., as 7.411 ὅρκια δὲ Ζεὺς ἴστω , 15. 36 ἴστω νῦν τοδε Γαῖα, etc.

οὔτ’ ἂν σιωπήσαιμι . Applied to the actual case, Creon's words mean, ‘I should never be deterred by fear of popular murmurs (cp. 692 ff.) from publishing such an edict as this against burying Polyneices, when I clearly saw that otherwise a disastrous precedent would be set. And though Polyneices was my nephew, I should never allow myself to recognise as friend or kinsman a man who had borne arms against the country.’

στείχουσαν ἀστοῖς . Demosthenes paraphrases this by στείχουσαν ὁμοῦ (or. 19 § 248); whence Dobree and Shilleto surmised that he read ἆσσον (cp. 312 στείχουσαν ἡμῶν ἆσσον ). Now I think that I can explain why Demosthenes so paraphrased. He is applying the verses to Aeschines (see above, n. on 182): τὴν δὲ ἄτην ὁρῶν στείχουσαν ὁμοῦ, τὴν ἐπὶ Φωκέας στρατείαν, οὐ προεῖπεν οὐδὲ προεξήγγειλεν. The ἄτη which Aeschines saw approaching was the interference of Philip in the Sacred War,—his action against the Phocians. If Demosthenes had said στείχουσαν ἀστοῖς, this must have seemed to refer to the fellow-citizens of Aeschines, —the Athenians. The orator therefore modified the poet's phrase by substituting ὁμοῦ ,—a word vague enough to suggest the concern of other Greek states besides Phocis in the peril.

ἀντὶ τῆς σωτηρίας , added for emphasis; ‘ruin, and not welfare, which a king is bound to promote.’ (The art. τῆς is merely generic, as in τὴν ἄτην.) So 267 φανεὶς δὲ δοῦλος ἀνδρὸς ἀντ’ ἐλευθέρου , a slave, and not a free man (as he ought to be): 1490 κεκλαυμέναι | πρὸς οἶκον ἵξεσθ’ ἀντὶ τῆς θεωρίας .

ἄνδρα δυσμενῆ χθονός ; cp. Plat. 213 B τὸ φίλον ἂν εἴη φίλον τοῦ φιλουμένου...τὸ μισοῦν ἄρα πάλιν ἐχθρὸν τοῦ μισουμένου. Andoc. or. 1 § 96 (in a νόμος) πολέμιος ἔστω Ἀθηναίων.

ἐμαυτῷ with φίλον . Some MSS. of Dem. (or. 19 § 247) give ἐμαυτοῦ in the quotation, but here the dat. is clearly better. θείμην ‘hold’ (rather than ‘make’): cp. Tyrt. 12. 1 οὔτ’ ἂν μνησαίμην οὔτ’ ἐν λόγῳ ἄνδρα τιθείμην.

ἡ σῴζουσα , ‘who bears us safe.’ σῴζειν was esp. said of a ship or its captain: cp. Plat. 511D ἐὰν.. ἐξ Αἰγίνης δεῦρο σώσῃ , if she (ἡ κυβερνητική) has carried us safely from Aegina to Athens.

ταύτης κ.τ.λ. It is only while she remains upright, as we sail on board of her, that we can make real friends. ὀρθῆς (like ὤρθωσαν in 163) refers to the ship maintaining a safe stability, as opposed to capsizing: the contrast is given by ὑπτίοις..σέλμασιν..ναυτίλλεται in 716 (where see n.). So 12. 25. 5 ut rectam teneamus (navem) .

τοὺς φίλους ποιούμεθα , we make the friends (whom we really make): since friends made at the cost of endangering or wrecking the ship of the State cannot properly be considered friends at all: they are φίλοι ἄφιλοι. For the use of the art., cp. Thuc. 2.40 οὐ..πάσχοντες εὖ ἀλλὰ δρῶντες κτώμεθα τοὺς φίλους . The thought is like that ascribed to Pericles by Thuc. 2.60 , ἐγὼ γὰρ ἡγοῦμαι πόλιν πλείω ξύμπασαν ὀρθουμένην ὠφελεῖν τοὺς ἰδιώτας ἢ καθ’ ἕκαστον τῶν πολιτῶν εὐπραγοῦσαν ἀθρόαν δὲ σφαλλομένην. καλῶς μὲν γὰρ φερόμενος ἀνὴρ τὸ καθ’ ἑαυτὸν διαφθειρομένης τῆς πατρίδος οὐδὲν ἧσσον ξυναπόλλυται, κακοτυχῶν δὲ ἐν

εὐτυχούσῃ πολλῷ μᾶλλον διασῴζεται. ‘Pericles Thucydidis 11. 60 Sophoclem videtur respexisse, vel eum Sophocles,’ is Dobree's remark ( 2. 37); but there is no adequate ground for such a view. The verbal coincidence of ὀρθῆς with ὀρθουμένην may well have been accidental. What is really common to poet and historian is the general sentiment of Periclean Athens. For another example of this, cp. 116 n.

νόμοισι , here, rules of conduct, principles, as 1043; cp. 907.

αὔξω , pres. (used also in Attic prose): the Attic fut. was αὐξήσω. The pres. here expresses purpose (‘I intend to make Thebes prosperous’). Cp. Plat. 731A φιλονεικείτω δὲ ἡμῖν πᾶς πρὸς ἀρετήν· ὁ γὰρ τοιοῦτος αὔξει τὰς πόλεις .

ἀδελφὰ τῶνδε , the more usu. constr.: but 1262 ἀδελφὰ τούτοισιν (n.). This use of the word is freq. in Attic prose, as 276 D ὅσα τούτων ἀδελφά.

τῶν ἀπ’ Οἰδίπου . In regard to origin, ἐκ is properly said of parents, ἀπό of ancestors: Isocr. or. 12 § 81 τοὺς μὲν ἀπὸ θεῶν τοὺς δ’ ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν θεῶν γεγονότας . Cp. 466, 471, 1066; 260 παῖ πατρὸς ἐξ Ἀχιλλέως. 202 χθονίων ἀπ’ Ἐρεχθειδᾶν . But poetry oft. has ἀπό of the parent, as 571 κἀφ’ ὅτου πατρὸς γεγώς : while, again, ἐκ oft. denotes merely the stock (including progenitors above the parent): cp. 1056: so ἀγαθοὶ καὶ ἐξ ἀγαθῶν ( 246 A), etc. The poetical indifference on this point is well seen in fr. 104, where τοὺς μὲν δυσσεβεῖς κακῶν τ’ ἄπο | βλαστόντας is opposed to τοὺς δ’ ὄντας ἐσθλοὺς ἔκ τε γενναίων ἅμα | γεγῶτας.

δορί was the ordinary Attic form, occurring in prose (as Thuc. 1.128, 4. 98), and was prob. used by Soph. as well as δόρει , which metre requires in 620 (n.), 1314, 1386: cp. n. on 1304.

τὰ πάντ’ ἐφαγνίσαι , to perform all due rites over the grave; i.e. to make the proper offerings to the dead (ἐναγίσματα, 402 n.), esp. libations, χοαί. For ἐπί in the compound cp. 440 χοὰς | οὐκ ἄν ποθ’, ὅν γ’ ἔκτεινε, τῷδ’ ἐπέστεφε : 484 τάσδ’ ἐπεύχεσθαι λιτάς , i.e. ‘over’ the rite. ἐφαγνίσαι is the reading of L; the force of the prep. is rightly given in the glosses, ἐπὶ τῷ τάφῳ ἁγνίσαι τὰ πάντα, and ἐπὶ τῷ τάφῳ ὁσίως ποιῆσαι. Though ἐφαγνίζειν is not elsewhere extant, there seems no reason to question it. ἀφαγνίσαι has been preferred by some, merely because that compound is recognised by the old grammarians (Suid. , Hesych., Phrynichus in Bekk. 26). But ἀφαγνίζειν meant esp. to purify from guilt (expiare): Paus. 2.31.8 (of Orestes at Troezen) ἐκάθαιρον καὶ εἱστίων, ἐς ὃ ἀφήγνισαν, ‘until they had purged him.’ Similarly in midd., Eur. 1145 πρὶν ἂν θεοῖσι τοῖσι νερτέροις | ἀφαγνίσηται , until she has made expiatory offerings to them. So ἀφαγνεύω in Plut. 943C (the souls of the good are to suffer only so long) ὅσον ἀφαγνεῦσαι καὶ ἀποπνεῦσαι τοὺς ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος..μιασμούς (‘to purge away’: perh. we should read ἀφαγνίσαι). The force of ἀπό is thus the same as in ἀφοσιοῦσθαι, and in ἀφιερώμεθα as used by Aesch. 451 (‘I have been hallowed,’ i.e. purified). The case of κἀφαγιστεύσας below (247) is different from that of ἐφαγνίσαι here: it is, I think, for καὶ ἀφαγιστεύσας.

τοῖς ἀρίστοις , implying that, in his case, the αὐτόχειρ μίασμα (172) is to make no difference. Cp. 1379, where Odysseus offers to join in funeral honours to Ajax (notwithstanding his offence), μηδὲν ἐλλείπειν, ὅσον | χρὴ τοῖς ἀριστοῖς ἀνδράσιν πονεῖν βροτούς.

ἔρχεται κάτω : the χοαί were supposed to pass through the earth, and to be drunk by the spirits of the dead: Aesch. 164 ἔχει μὲν ἤδη γαπότους χοὰς πατήρ: cp. 10.94, Eur. 535 ff. The dat., as 711 χρησμὸς..ἦλθε Λαΐῳ .

L has Πολυνείκην here, but Πολυνείκη in 375. Both forms are sound. From about 400 B.C. the Attic tendency of proper names in ‐ης was to pass from the 3rd to the 1st declension. Attic inscriptions of circ. 410—350 B.C. give the acc. in -ην more often than that in -η. From c. 350 to 30 B.C. the gen. in -ου is far more frequent than that in -ους. Even proper names in -κλέης, which kept the acc. in -κλέα to c. 300 B.C., afterwards formed it in -κλῆν. (No Attic inscript. gives -κλῆ.)

λέγω : see n. on 32 λέγω γὰρ κἀμέ.

γτ=ν πατρῴαν . . καὶ θεοὺς . . πρῆσαι : cp. Aesch. 582(of Polyneices) πόλιν πατρῴαν καὶ θεοὺς τοὺς ἐγγενεῖς | πορθεῖν, στράτευμ’ ἐπακτὸν ἐμβεβληκότα. But πέρσαι, for πρῆσαι, would be a needless change here. ‘To burn his country’ means ‘to burn his native city’: so 1421 πάτραν κατασκάψαντι , when thou hast laid thy native city in ruins. θεοὺς πρῆσαι is to burn the gods' temples and the ancient wooden images (βρέτη) therein: cp. Her. 8.109 ἐμπιμπράς τε καὶ καταβάλλων τῶν θεῶν τὰ ἀγάλματα . Aesch. 809 οὐ θεῶν βρέτη | ᾐδοῦντο συλᾶν οὐδὲ πιμπράναι νεώς.

θ. τοὺς ἐγγενεῖς , of the race, here in a large sense, of the Cadmean stock: while θεοὶ πατρῷοι are usu. rather the gods of one's own family ( 756 n.). Cp. 428 πρός νυν θεῶν σε λίσσομαι τῶν ἐγγενῶν.

κατελθών , not καταχθεὶς ὑπὸ τῆς πόλεως: on the shield of Polyneices, Dikè was portrayed saying, κατάξω δ’ ἄνδρα τόνδε ( Aesch. 647).

γ)θέλησε μέν … ἠθέλ. δέ , rhetor. epanaphora ( 610 φθίνει μέν . . φθίνει δέ ). Since πάσασθαι cannot govern γῆν . . καὶ θεούς, ἠθέλησε μὲν should in strictness have preceded γῆν.

πρῆσαι . Prose would have used ἐμπρῆσαι, though Thuc. has the pres. part. of the simple form (6. 94 πίμπραντες ).

κατ’ ἄκρας , here in its proper sense, of a town being sacked ‘from top to bottom’ ( 13.772): cp. 1241 n.

αἵματος κ. πάσασθαι (πατέομαι), denoting the extreme of savage hatred; 4.35 ὠμὸν βεβρώθοις Πρίαμον : 24. 212 τοῦ ἐγὼ μέσον ἧπαρ ἔχοιμι | ἐσθέμεναι: Theogn. 349 τῶν εἴη μέλαν αἶμα πιεῖν.

τοὺς δὲ … ἄγειν , as if τῶν μέν had preceded αἵματος. 1228 ὅσα | κεύθει, τὰ δ’ αὐτίκ’ εἰς τὸ φῶς φανεῖ . 117 στρέφει, τὸ δ’ αὔξει . 22.157 παραδραμέτην, φεύγων, ὁ δ’ ὄπισθε διώκων .

The traditional ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι τάφῳ can be explained only by supplying λέγω or the like. But in 196 κρύψαι and ἐφαγνίσαι depended on κηρύξας ἔχω in 192 (I have proclaimed to the people). It would be intolerably awkward to communicate the second part of the proclamation in an oblique form with the principal verb unexpressed: —‘() it has been proclaimed.’ The choice lies between (1) Musgrave's ἐκκεκήρυκται τάφῳ , and (2) Nauck's ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι λέγω . In favour of (1) remark:—(a ) τάφῳ is not, indeed, necessary with κτερίζειν , which can be used absolutely; as 11.455 αὐτὰρ ἐπεί κε θάνω, κτεριοῦσί με δῖοι Ἀχαιοί , ‘will give me funeral honours’: but, as the main point is that a τάφος is given to one brother and refused to the other, the addition of τάφῳ to the more general term κτερίζειν is plainly desirable here. (b) The misplacement of μήτε is due to the thought of κωκῦσαι having come only after τάφῳ had been uttered (μήτε κτερίζειν μήτε having been preferred to μὴ κτερίζειν μηδέ), and is not bolder than (e.g.) the misplacement of τε in 1411 f. αὐδὴν τὴν Ἡρακλέους | ἀκοῇ τε κλύειν λεύσσειν τ’ ὄψιν. (c) The MS. error may have arisen from a reminiscence of ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι in 27. The line of Carneades ( L. Diog. 4. 64), τοῦτον σχολῆς τῆσδ’ ἐκκεκηρῦχθαι λέγω, is no argument for λέγω in the text of Sophocles. What could the parodist have made of τάφῳ ? The tragic solemnity of the decree was the point of the parody, which uses ἐκκεκ . in a different sense from the poet's (‘I proclaim that he is banished from this school’: see on 27).

ἐᾶν δ ': see on 29. Construe, ἄθαπτον, αἰκισθέντ’ ἰδεῖν , mangled for all to see, δέμας καὶ πρὸς οἰωνῶν καὶ πρὸς κυνῶν ἐδεστόν , in the body (acc. of respect) which birds and dogs devour. L favours αἰκισθέντ ': but this is a point on which our MSS. have little weight. Reading αἰκισθέντ ', it would be also possible to take ἐδεστόν as masc., with a slight pause after it; but this seems less good. With αἰκισθέν τ’, δέμας is accus. in appos.: leave him unburied, a body eaten (etc.), and mangled. Some recent edd. prefer this.

δέμας of a corpse, as 903, 756, Eur. 40 etc.: in Hom. always of the living, who has σῶμα only of the dead: in Attic σῶμα is said of either.

ἰδεῖν : the aor. inf., as in the epic θαῦμα ἰδέσθαι, since the aor. suggests the moment at which the startling sight catches the eye, whereas the pres. inf. would suggest continued gazing.

φρόνημα : on 176.

ἔκ γ’ ἐμοῦ , by an act of mine (cp. 63, 93), while ἔν γ’ ἐμοί in a negative sentence=(not) if I can help it ( 153).

The MSS. have τιμὴν προέξουσ’ ..τῶν ἐνδ. , shall have honour before the just, schol. ἕξουσι πρὸ τῶν δικαίων. Such a constr. of προέχω occurs nowhere else. But the objection to rendering, ‘shall have the advantage of the just in honour’ ( τιμήν as acc. of respect) is that, after προέχειν in this sense, the point of advantage was regularly expressed by the dat.: see examples on 1007. τιμῆ ( PallisA. ) is most probable, since either TIMHI or τιμηι might easily have become the accus. before the verb. Hermann read προσέξους ' (which I do not understand) because of the hiatus (but cp. 351 προεῖπας , ib. 107 αὐτοέντας ); and because the honours claimed for Polyneices are only equal, not superior. But Creon's meaning is explained by vv. 514 ff.: the honour is greater for a public foe than for a patriot.

τιμήσεται : cp. on 93.

I print Dindorf's κἀς for καὶ in v. 212, not as thinking it certain, but because, with the least change, it gives a satisfactory construction. Soph. has this crasis in fr. 428 φίλων τε μέμψιν κεἰς θεοὺς ἁμαρτάνειν. Cp. Plat. 538B παράνομόν τι δρᾶσαι ἢ εἰπεῖν εἰς αὐτούς (‘with regard to them’). For the place of the prep., cp. 367, 734 Δελφῶν κἀπὸ Δαυλίας . With the MS. reading, the accusatives in v. 212 must be governed by σοὶ ταῦτ’ ἀρέσκει as=σὺ ταῦτα δρᾶσαι διανοεῖ. Greek was bold in constructions κατὰ σύνεσιν, and might possibly have tolerated this: but it seems improbable. In the apparently similar instances the periphrasis for the transitive verb always contains a noun directly suggestive of that verb: as Eur. 572 τοῦτο κἄμ’ ἔχει πόθος = τοῦτο κἀγὼ ποθῶ : Aesch. 814 φθορὰς... ψήφους ἔθεντο : 533 γένος...νέωσον αἶνον: 289 ζωπυροῦσι τάρβος ...λεών: Dem. or. 19 § 81 τεθνάναι τῷ φόβῳ...ξένους . Nor can the accusatives in v. 212 be explained as mere accus. ‘of respect’; nor as if, by a euphemism, παθεῖν were understood.—There is much in favour of the view that Κρέον in v. 211 has displaced an infin., such as παθεῖν, λαβεῖν, λαχεῖν, ποιεῖν, or τὸ δρᾶν. In v. 1098 L has εὐβουλίας δεῖ, παῖ Μενοικέως, λαβεῖν, where later MSS. have Κρέον in place of λαβεῖν: see n. there. If Κρέον is not genuine in v. 211, then it is much more likely to have been a mere gloss on παῖ Μενοικέως than a corruption of a similar word. The conjecture κυρεῖν, then, merits no preference; though the acc. ταῦτα could stand with it ( Aesch. 714 κυρούντων...τὰ πρόσφορα, Eur. 699 ἐπ’ ἀκταῖς νιν κυρῶ ).—Brunck wrote ταὔτ ', understanding ἀρέσκει (με ) ταὐτὰ σοί, ‘my view is the same as yours.’ But ταῦτ’ is right. The Chorus say—‘Such is my lord's pleasure. And, of course, he can do as seems him good.’ Their tone is sufficiently interpreted by vv. 216, 220, 278. Cp. Her. 1.119 (Harpagus to Astyages) ἔφη... ἀρεστὸν εἶναι πᾶν τὸ ἂν βασιλεὺς ἔρδῃ. The Chorus do not oppose Creon; but they feel a secret misgiving; they wish at least to remain passive.

In παντί πού γ’ the enclitic που closely adheres to παντί, and γε emphasises the whole expression; as in 1506, ὅστις πέρα πράσσειν γε τῶν νόμων θέλει , the γε emphasises the whole phrase πέρα πράσσειν. The transposition σοί γ’ … που is open to the objection that παντί, not σοί, claims the chief emphasis. παντί που πάρεστι has also been proposed. But ἔνεστι is slightly more suitable to this context, because more suggestive of tacit disapproval. ‘It is possible for you’ (‘but we doubt whether it is expedient’). πάρεστί σοι is generally said rather when the speaker means, ‘it is easy for you,’ or ‘it is open to you,’— in seconding a wish of the other person, or in making an offer to him. 364 τἄλλα μὲν πάρεστί σοι | πατρῷ’ ἑλέσθαι. Cp. 766. — παντί που μέτεστί σοι, which some prefer, is still less suitable here. It would imply a right shared by the King with some other man or men (cp. on 48).—Though the antecedent ( ἡμῶν) to χὡπόσοι ζῶμεν is understood, πέρι can stand at the end of the verse, since such a relative clause was felt almost as a noun-case: see on 35. Cp. Eur. 560 ἦ θίγω δῆθ’ οἵ μ’ ἔφυσαν ; (=τῶν φυσάντων).

ὡς ἂν … ἦτε can be explained only by an ellipse of ἐπιμελεῖσθε or the like. After verbs of ‘taking care,’ the usu. constr. is ὅπως with fut. indic.; but ὡς ἄν with subj. is sometimes found, as 9. 2 ἐπιμελεῖσθαι ὡς ἂν πραχθῇ...ἢν μή τις ἐπιμελῆται ὡς ἂν ταῦτα περαίνηται. In elliptical phrases, where a precept or charge is given (ὅρα, etc., being understood), the regular constr. is ὅπως with fut. ind., as Lys. or. 1. 21 ὅπως τοίνυν ταῦτα μηδεὶς ἀνθρώπων πεύσεται . The elliptical ὅπως μή with subjunct. is different,—‘take care lest,’ —a deferential way of hinting an objection (Plat. 430D), like the simple elliptical μή with subjunct. 1180. Since, however, ἐπιμελεῖσθαι could be followed by ὡς ἄν with subjunct., it is conceivable that Soph. should write ὡς ἂν σκοποὶ ἦτε instead of the usual ὅπως σκοποὶ ἔσεσθε. I cannot think, with Wecklein, that the sentence is broken off, as though Creon said,—‘ ye may be watchers of my mandate,’—being about to add, μὴ ἐπιχωρεῖτε.—Dindorf's πῶς ἂν … εἶτε is supported by usage, as 765 πῶς ἂν μόλοι δῆθ’ ἡμὶν ἐν τάχει πάλιν ; Nauck ( 11. 79) refuses εἶμεν and εἶτε to tragedy, but is not convincing. In 1046 εἰδεῖτ ' (for εἰδείητε) is certain: and εἶτε for εἴητε is strictly parallel. εἶτε occurs in 21.195 ποῖοί κ’ εἶτ’ Ὀδυσῆι<*> ἀμυνέμεν, εἴ ποθεν ἔλθοι ; In Eur. 921 ἦμεν might replace εἶμεν: though in 349, at least, the opt. εἶμεν seems required. But πῶς ἂν εἶτε is here less fitting than ὡς ἂν ἦτε, because a request is less suitable than an injunction.

σκοποί , φύλακες, who watch to see that no one breaks the edict.

νυν is better than νῦν .

τῶν εἰρ ., the commands: cp. Aesch. 1620 σωφρονεῖν εἰρημένον , Her. 7.26 εἴρητο συλλέγεσθαι...στρατόν .

πρόθες τοῦτο , set him this as a task (cp. 1249), βαστάζειν , for him to take in hand (suscipiendum); the act. inf. as 231 πόνον...ἀντιδίδωσιν ἔχειν . For the lit. sense of the verb cp. 827 ὥς με βαστάσῃ | πεπτῶτα (raise me).

τοῦ νεκροῦ γ’ : but ἐπίσκοποι τῶν ἀστῶν are still needed.

τί δῆτ’ ἂν … ἐπεντέλλοις = τί δῆτ’ ἂν εἴη...ὃ ἐπεντέλλεις; cp. 647 μέγ’ ἂν λέγοις δώρημα : 26.

The reading ἄλλῳ is a bad one, for the contrast is between commands, not persons; and an awkward ambiguity would arise, since τοῦτο might then seem to mean the watching of the corpse.

ἐπιχωρεῖν , accedere, to join their side: Thuc. 4.107 δεξάμενος τοὺς ἐθελήσαντας ἐπιχωρῆσαι... κατὰ τὰς σπονδάς . 133 τούτῳ τῷ ἐπιγράμματι ἐπεχώρησε καὶ ὁ τόπος ἐκεῖνος (corroborated it).

ἀπιστοῦσιν = ἀπειθοῦσιν: 381, 656.

τάδε, cogn. acc.: cp. 66.

ὃς (instead of ὥστε) ἐρᾷ , a constr. most freq. in negative sentences, usu. with ὅστις ( Dem. or. 1 § 15 τίς οὕτως εὐήθης ἐστὶν...ὅστις ἀγνοεῖ ), or ὃς ἄν and opt. ( Plat. 360B οὐδεὶς ἂν γένοιτο οὕτως ἀδαμάντινος, ὃς ἂν μείνειεν ). But it occurs also in affirmative sentences, as Eur. 170 ἐς τοῦτο δ’ ἥκεις ἀμαθίας ...ἣ...τολμᾷς . Cp. Her. 4.52.

καὶ μὴν (lit., ‘and verily’) here confirms the last speaker's remark by adding an assurance that disobedience does indeed mean death; while γε after μισθός emphasises that word. ‘And I can tell you that the

requital of disobedience is that.’ For καὶ μήν so used, cp. 836, 1004 f., 556.

τὸ κέρδος , ‘gain,’ i.e., as ἐλπίδων shows, the prospect of gain, with the generic art. (cp. 1242): so fr. 749 τὸ κέρδος ἡδύ, κἂν ἀπὸ ψευδῶν ἴῃ.

διώλεσεν , gnomic aor.

ἐρῶ μὲν οὐχ : cp. on 96.

ὅπως = ὅτι, as 548: cp. 963 μηκέτ’ ἐλπίσῃς ὅπως | τεύξει . This use is rare in Attic prose (for after θαυμάζω, etc., ὅπως =‘how’), though freq. in Her., as 2. 49 οὐδὲ φήσω ὅκως...ἔλαβον. Yet cp. Plat. 296 E οὐκ ἔχω ὑμῖν πῶς ἀμφισβητοίην...ὅπως οὐ πάντα ἐγὼ ἐπίσταμαι.

τάχους ὕπο is the reading of the MSS. Aristotle quotes this verse as an example of a προοίμιον used by the speaker to avert a danger from himself, and gives it thus:—ἄναξ, ἐρῶ μὲν οὐχ ὅπως σπουδῆς ὔπο ( 3. 14§ 10). Hence some edd. adopt σπουδῆς, as coming from a source older than our MSS. But, since τάχους is free from objection, such a change is unwarrantable. Aristotle's quotations seem to have been usually made from memory, and his memory was not infallible. To take only three examples cited by Bellermann, we find: (1) 256 ἀλλ’ ἡ βία γὰρ ταῦτ’ ἀναγκάζει με δρᾶν , quoted 4. 5 ἀλλ’ ἡ βία με ταῦτ’ ἀναγκάζει ποιεῖν: (2) 774 ἐμοὶ πατὴρ μὲν Πόλυβος ἦν , quoted 3. 14§ 6 ἐμοὶ πατὴρ ἦν Πόλυβος: (3) 911 μητρὸς δ’ ἐν Ἅιδου καὶ πατρὸς κεκευθότοιν , quoted 3. 16§ 9 with βεβηκότων as last word. So 9.592 κήδε’ ὅσ’ ἀνθρώποισι πέλει τῶν ἄστυ ἁλῴη· ἄνδρας μὲν κτείνουσι , is quoted 1. 7§ 31 with ὅσσα κάκ’ substituted for the first two words, and λαοὶ μὲν φθινύθουσι for the last three.

ἐξάρας (α—), aor. part., not pres., because, as ἐξ- shows, the notion is, ‘having set in nimble movement’ (at starting). Cp. Eur. 342 μὴ κοῦφον αἴρῃ βῆμ’ ἐς Ἀργείων στρατόν.

φροντίδων , possessive gen. with ἐπιστάσεις , halts belonging to thoughts, i.e. caused by them. Others understand, ‘halts for thought’ (made in order to reflect),— which is less simple. Cp. 1. 3 (p. 407a 32) ἡ νόησις ἔοικεν ἠρεμήσει τινὶ καὶ ἐπιστάσει (halt) μᾶλλον ἢ κινήσει.

ὁδοῖς , locative dat.; cp. 553 ὁδοῖς | ἐν ταῖσδ ', ‘in this my coming.’

κυκλῶν = περιστρέφων.

ψυχὴ γὰρ ηὔδα κ.τ.λ. The naïveté consists in the direct quotation of what his ψυχή said, rather than in the statement that it spoke; thus Hor. 1. 2. 68 (quoted by Schneid.) is really similar,—Huic si...Diceret haec animus. Take πολλὰ with μυθουμένη only. I do not think that ηὔδα...μυθουμένη was meant to mark garrulity; the language is not homely enough: rather it is simply,— ‘found a voice, speaking many things.’ ἔφη λέγων is not similar ( 757).—Cp. Launcelot Gobbo in Shaksp. 2. 2: Certainly my conscience will serve me to run from this few my master. The fiend is at mine elbow and tempts me...My conscience says, ‘Launcelot, budge not.’ ‘Budge,’ says the fiend. ‘Budge not,’ says my conscience.

τάλας … τλήμων , nom., not voc., because each is rather a comment (‘hapless that thou art!’) than properly an address: so 185 ὦ τλάμων , ib. 753 ὦ τάλας ἐγώ , Eur. 61 ὦ μῶρος.

μένεις is better than μενεῖς , since, ‘are you tarrying again?’ (his halts having been frequent, 225) is more graphic than, ‘will you tarry again?’— αὖ cannot mean here, ‘on the contrary’ (i.e. instead of going on).

πῶς … οὐκ , as 937, 976, etc.

ἀλγυνεῖ , pass.: cp. on 93 ἐχθαρεῖ.

ἑλίσσων , turning over and over in the mind: cp. on 158 ἐρέσσων.

ἤνυτον (sc. τὴν ὁδόν), gradually made my way (impf.); whereas ἤνυσα would have suited a quick journey. Cp. this impf. in Plat. 127C οὐδαμῇ ταύτῃ ἤνυτον , ‘they could make no progress by that means.’ Soph. has this tense also in 319 (ἔργον ἤνυτον): cp. below, 805. In Dem. or. 21 § 104 our MSS. give οὐδὲν ἤνυε. For the use of the verb in ref. to journeys, cp. Thuc. 2.97 (ὁδὸς ) ἡμερῶν ἀνδρὶ εὐζώνῳ τριῶν καὶ δέκα ἀνύσαι. The Attic pres. seems to have been ἀνύτω as=‘to accomplish,’ or ‘to make way,’ but ἀνύειν as=‘to hasten.’ 413 μή νυν διάτριβ’ ἀλλ’ ἄνυε: 606 ἀνύετον: though in 606 οὐ μέλλειν | χρή σ’, ἀλλ’ ἀνύειν, some MSS. have ἀνύτειν (see Pors. on 463). This is the distinction meant by the grammarian in Bekk. 411. 28 ἁνύττειν (sic ) οἱ Ἀττικοὶ ὅπερ ἡμεῖς, ἁνύειν δὲ τὸ σπεύδειν. (The aspirated forms lack good evidence.) Cp. ἀρύω, Attic ἀρύτω.

σχολῇ βραδύς , reluctantly and slowly; the opposite of σὺν σπουδῇ ταχύς ( 1223), with eagerness and speed. σχολῇ oft.=‘at a slow pace’ (πορεύεσθαι, Xen. 4.1.16; ὑποχωρεῖν, Thuc. 3.78). As βραδύς could mean ‘sluggish’ ( 306), we might here refer σχολῇ to pace, and βραδύς to reluctance; but, though the common use of σχολῇ in regard to pace helps to make it suitable here, it is better, in this context, to give σχολῇ the moral and βραδύς the physical sense. For σχολῇ combined with another word in such an expression, cp. Polyb. 8. 30 σχολῇ καὶ βάδην ποιεῖσθαι τὴν πορείαν. There is no lack of point. Such a messenger ought to have come σπουδῇ ταχύς.—The conjecture σπουδῇ βραδύς is (I think) not only wrong but bad. It would mean, ‘slow in my haste’; eager to arrive, yet moving slowly. σπεῦδε βραδέως, to which it is supposed to allude, meant, ‘never remit your efforts, but advance circumspectly towards your aim’: festina lente (on which see Erasmus in the ); Eile mit Weile; Goethe's Ohne Hast, ohne Rast. (σπεῦδε βραδέως was a favourite maxim of Augustus, Suet. 25; Gellius 10. 11 § 5, on whom, as often, Macrobius has drawn, 6. 8. 9.) The frightened and irresolute φύλαξ, —sent, sorely against his will, on a hateful errand,—had no more σπουδή than Mr Facing-both-ways. Wecklein, keeping σχολῇ, supposes the Guard to mean, ‘this was a case of σχολῇ βραδύς, not σπουδῇ βραδύς,’—an improbably obscure and feeble jest at such a critical moment. The variant given by the schol., σχολῇ ταχύς , would be an oxymoron, designedly comic; ‘I took my time about hurrying,’ ‘'twas but a laggard haste that I made.’ A cheerful epigram of this sort would better suit a mind more at ease.

τέλος γε μέντοι , at last, however; γε emphasising the word before it: 442 n.

ἐνίκησεν , impers., as Thuc. 2.54 ἐνίκησε δὲ...λοιμὸν εἰρῆσθαι (the opinion prevailed that...): Her. 6.101 ἐνίκα μὴ

ἐκλιπεῖν τὴν πόλιν. That μολεῖν should not be regarded as the subject to ἐνίκησε, is shown by such an example as Her. 8.9 ἐνίκα τὴν ἡμέρην ἐκείνην αὐτοῦ μείναντάς τε καὶ αὐλισθέντας μετέπειτα νύκτα μέσην παρέντας πορεύεσθαι , where the length of the interval excludes such a view. The personal constr. occurs below, 274; cp. Thuc. 2.12 ἦν...Περικλέους γνώμη...νενικηκυῖα .

σοί with μολεῖν . In Attic prose a dat. of the person after ἔρχομαι is freq., and oft. can be rendered (as here) only by ‘to,’ though it is properly rather a dat. of interest. Thus Thuc. 1.13 Ἀμεινοκλῆς Σαμίοις ἦλθε =‘ A. came to the Samians,’ though the primary notion is, ‘the Samians enjoyed the advantage of A. 's coming’ (to build triremes for them). So id. 1. 27 ὡς αὐτοῖς...ἦλθον ἄγγελοι: Plat. 321C ἀποροῦντι δὲ αὐτῷ ἔρχεται Προμηθεύς . In poetry this dat. is freely used after verbs of motion, but the idea of interest is always traceable; cp. 186 n. Aesch. 358 ἀλλ’ ἦλθεν αὐτῷ Ζηνὸς ἄγρυπνον βέλος . So here, μολεῖν σοί is not strictly a mere equiv. for μολεῖν πρὸς σέ, but implies Creon's interest in the news. The notion is, ‘to come and place myself at your disposal.’ For the emphatic place of σοί , cp. 273 (and 46 n.): for the pause after the first syllable of the verse, 250, 464.—κεἰ, ‘and if’: not ‘ even if.’ If καί were taken as=‘ even,’ there would be a very harsh asyndeton, whether the stop were at σοί, or (as Nauck places it) after μολεῖν. It is true that καί could mean ‘ even,’ without causing an asyndeton, if we adopted Wecklein's tempting φράσων for φράσω δ ': but the latter is confirmed by 302 εἰ καὶ μὴ βλέπεις, φρονεῖς δ’ ὅμως (where see n.),—δέ introducing the apodosis after a concessive protasis. For κεἰ as=‘and if,’ cp. 447, 1057. The transposition κεἴ σοι is improbable, as destroying the significant emphasis and pause on σοί.

τὸ μηδέν , what is as nought, — a tale of simple discomfiture: since he can only report the deed, without giving any clue to the doer. Cp. 1107 κἂν τὸ μηδὲν ὦ : 1275 ἤδη τὸ μηδὲν ὄντας ἐν τροπῇ δορός .

τῆς ἐλπίδος , not ‘hope,’ but ‘the hope’—defined in next v.

δεδραγμένος is certain. 13.393 κόνιος δεδραγμένος (and 16. 486). Diod. 12. 67 δράξασθαι καιροῦ. (Cp. Shaks. f. 1. 49 Gripe not at earthly joys. ) Here the phrase is meant to be homely. The v.l. πεφραγμένος was simply an attempt to mend L's πεπραγμένος . We should require the dat. with it. The gen. cannot be justified by instances in which poetry uses a gen. of the agent without ὑπό, after pass. part., as 807 φωτὸς ἠπατημένη , Eur. 497 πληγεὶς θυγατρός , etc.

τὸ μὴ παθεῖν ἄν = ὅτι οὐ

πάθοιμι ἄν, depending on ἐλπίδος...δεδρ. as= ἐλπίζων: for the art. with infin., cp. 78 n.

τὸ μόρσιμον : i.e. if you do kill me, then it was my destiny to be killed.

ἀνθ’ οὗ , on account of which: 264 ἀνθ’ ὧν : 585 ἀνθ’ ὅτου.

τὸ γὰρ | πρᾶγμ’ : cp. on 67. γάρ prefaces the statement: 277 n.: cp. below, 478, 999.

εὖ γε στοχάζει κ.τ.λ.: ‘yes, you take your aim well, and seek to fence yourself round against the charge.’ The mark at which the man aims is his own safety; and this is explained by the next phrase. Commentators have made difficulties by assuming that the metaphors of στοχάζει and ἀποφράγνυσαι must be harmonised into a single picture,—as of an archer shooting from covert. But in fact there is a rapid transition from one to the other; the second interprets the first; and all that is common to them is their military source. στοχάζομαι was familiar in a sense akin to that which it has here: cp. Plat. 178B στοχαζόμεν οι τοῦ συμβουλευομένου ἄλλα λέγουσι παρὰ τὴν αὑτῶν δόξαν (trying to hit the thought of the person who consults them): Polyb. 6. 16 ὀφείλουσι δὲ ἀεὶ ποιεῖν οἱ δήμαρχοι τὸ δοκοῦν τῷ δήμῳ καὶ μάλιστα στοχάζεσθαι τῆς τούτου βουλήσεως. So here the verb suggests a designing person, whose elaborate preamble covers a secret aim. Creon is quick to suspect bribery (221). Cp. 1033 ὥστε τοξόται σκοποῦ | τοξεύετ’ ἀνδρὸς τοῦδε. Schneidewin thought that στοχάζει might here be a term of hunting or war, with ref. to the erecting of nets on poles, or of palisades. στοιχίζειν was so used, of nets in hunting ( 6. 8). But στοῖχος is from rt στιχ, while στόχος is from a probably distinct rt σταχ (στάχυς ), στεχ (perhaps lengthened from στα). In Aristot. 3. 14§ 10 the citation of v. 223 is immediately followed by the words τί φροιμιάζῃ; which Nauck (with Bergk) substitutes for εὖ γε στοχάζει here. But, though the schol. there says that Creon spoke them, they evidently belonged to some other passage, which Arist. cites as a second example: perh. to Eur. 1162 τί φροιμιάζει νεοχμόν; ἐξαύδα σαφῶς . A schol. on Arist. l. c. says, τὸ δὲ τί φροιμιάζῃ ἐν τισὶ τῶν ἀντιγράφων οὐ κεῖται (i.e. in some MSS. of Arist. ); which looks as if the words had been deleted, in such copies, by readers who could not find them in

κἀποφράγνυσαι . Inscriptions of the 5th cent. B.C. show φάρξαι (not φράξαι) to have been the old Attic aor. (Meisterhans p. 89), and so ναύφαρκτος, etc.: but the analogy of the pres. φράττω recommends φράγνυμι rather than φάργνυμι. For the constr., cp. Thuc. 8.104 ἐβούλοντο ἀποφάρξασθαι αὐτοὺς οἱ ἐναντίοι (to shut them off).

τὸ πρᾶγμα , so soon after 239: cp. on 76.

δηλοῖς δ’ ὥς τι ς. : see on 20 .

τὰ δεινά , dangers,—i.e. the κακὰ ἔπη (277) which he brings: γάρ (yes, I am cautious) for, etc.

ποτ ', tandem aliquando, 335 n.

ἀπαλλαχθείς , ‘having been removed,’ i.e. ‘having taken yourself off’; cp. Aristoph. 484 ἆπ’ ἄν, ὦ πρὸς τῶν θεῶν, ὑμεῖς ἀπαλλαχθεῖτέ μου ;

καὶ δή , without more ado: 31 n.

θάψας , because the essential rite was the throwing of earth on the body: cp. on 80, and below, 256.—The καί in κἀπί is ‘and’ (rather than ‘both,’ answering to καί in 247); it introduces an explanation of θάψας.

διψίαν , as Aesch. 495 πηλοῦ ξύνουρος διψία κόνις : Lucr. 2. 376 bibula...arena.

κἀφαγιστεύσας (καὶ ἀ.) ἃ χρή , i.e. having made the due offerings, perh. flowers ( 896), or στέφη of wool. We may doubt whether the poet thought of any χοαί as having been poured by Antigone at this first visit; see n. on 429.—ἀφαγιστεύσας and ἐφαγιστεύσας are equally possible; but I prefer the former, because here, as v. 256 suggests, the idea is that of ἀφοσιωσάμενος,—having avoided an ἄγος by satisfying religion: see on 196 ἐφαγνίσαι.

ἀνδρῶν : he does not think of women.

οὔτε του γενῇδος … οὐ δικέλλης . For the enclitic του so placed, cp. 20 n.: for οὔτε … οὐ , 972 n. γενηΐς, γενής (only here), is prop. an adj., an implement with a γένυς (jaw), or blade: 485 ἀμφάκης γένυς , the two-edged blade (of a bronze axe). Hesych. γενῇδα· ἀξίνην, πέλεκυν (referring, as the acc. shows, to some other passage): and here the γενῄς is prob. the same as the ἀξίνη below (1109), which was to be used in raising the mound (1203). We may render ‘pickaxe,’ since this properly has a blade as well as a point. The γενῄς would break the hard surface. Then the earth would be thrown up (ἐκβολή) with the δίκελλα , which was a sort of heavy two-pronged hoe, used, like the Roman ligo or bidens, in hoeing up soil: the μάκελλα (μία, κέλλω to drive forward) being a like tool with one prong. The σμινύη was like the δίκελλα, a two-pronged hoe. ‘Mattock’ is the nearest word for it. ‘Spade’ would better suit ἄμη (or the Homeric λίστρον), though this was prop. rather a shovel. For the combination cp. Shaks. 5. 3. 11 'Tis you must dig with mattock and with spade.

δικ. ἐκβολή , throwing up of earth by mattock (possessive gen. denoting the subject, γῆ ἣν ἡ δ. ἐκβάλλει): ἐκβ. , abstract for concrete, like τροφή for θρέμμα ( 1 n.). In Greek μοδ. ἐκβολάδες is a mining term, ‘out-put.’— The epithets στύφλος (‘hard,’ cp. 139), and χέρσος ‘dry,’ tell something which the preceding words, and the following ἀρρώξ , would not alone have told; viz. why no foot-prints were traceable.

ἐπημαξευμένη , lit. ‘traversed (i.e. furrowed) by a carriage’ with its (four) wheels, =τροχοῖς ἁμάξης κεχαραγμένη: ἐπ‐ , not ἐφ‐ , since as Eusth. says (on 18.485) τὸ...ἅμαξα οἱ μὲν παλαιοὶ ψιλοῦσι, οἱ μέντοι νεώτεροι Ἀττικοὶ ἐδάσυναν. (Cp. n. on ἀπήνη, 753.)

ἀλλ’ ὁ ἐργάτης ἄσημός τις ἦν : for τις added to the predicate, where the subject has the art., cp. 618, Aesch. 491 ὁ σηματουργὸς δ’ οὔ τις εὐτελὴς ἄπ’ ἦν : Aristoph. 726 ὡς φιλόπολίς τίς ἐσθ’ ὁ δαίμων καὶ σοφός . Not: ὁ ἐργάτης τις (the doer, whoever he is) ἄσημος ἦν, like ὁ κύριός τις ( 288 n.).

It is still the early morning of the day on which the drama opens. The Argives having fled in the night, Creon had published his edict shortly before dawn. Antigone had done her deed in the short interval between the publication of the edict and the beginning of the watch over the corpse. ὁ πρῶτος ἡμεροσκόπος , the man who took the first watch of this day, was the first who had watched at all. If a sentinel had been near the body, Ant. must have been seen. The other men were somewhere near. (Afterwards, they all watched, Ant. 413. ) ἡμεροσκ. , in prose ἡμεροφύλαξ (Xen. 7.2.6), as opp. to νυκτοφύλαξ (id. 7. 2. 18).

δείκνυσι … παρῆν : historic pres. combined with past tense; cp. Lys. or. 1 § 6 ἐπειδὴ δέ μοι παιδίον γίγνεται, ἐπίστευον ἤδη καὶ πάντα τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ ἐκείνῃ παρέδωκα.

δυσχερές , not merely ‘perplexing,’ but ‘distressing’ ( 1395), since they foreboded punishment. So δυσχέρεια, molestia ( 473).

ὁ μὲν answered by σημεῖα δ’ (257).

τυμβήρης μὲν οὔ (cp. on 96), not entombed: i.e. there was no τύμβος, indicating that the ashes had been buried beneath it (1203): the body itself lay there, though covered over with dust. τυμβ. , prop., ‘provided with a mound,’ but below, 946, merely=‘tomb-like’; and so in Ar. 889Euripides says τυμβήρεις ἕδρας, ‘seat on a tomb.’— λεπτὴ δ’ … ἐπῆν , instead of λέπτῃ δὲ κόνει κεκαλυμμένος (as in Soph. 545 δοξάζων μὲν οὔ, | τύχῃ δὲ...ὁρμισθείς): for this introduction of a new finite verb, where a participial clause was expected, cp. 813 ff.

ἄγος φεύγοντος ὥς sc. τινος ( 629 οὔτοι κακῶς γ’ ἄρχοντος , n.): the gen. is not absol., but possessive, denoting the author: ‘as of (i.e. from) one avoiding.’ ἄγος , the guilt incurred by one who passed by an unburied corpse without throwing earth on it: οἱ γὰρ νεκρὸν ὁρῶντες ἄταφον, καὶ μὴ ἐπαμησάμενοι κόνιν, ἐναγεῖς εἶναι ἐδόκουν. Aelian 5. 14 νόμος καὶ οὗτος Ἀττικός, ὃς ἂν ἀτάφῳ περιτύχῃ σώματι ἀνθρώπου πάντως ἐπιβάλλειν αὐτῷ γῆν· θάπτειν δὲ πρὸς δυσμὰς βλέποντας. So, too, Aelian says of the hawk, 2. 49, νεκρὸν δὲ ἄνθρωπον ἰδὼν ἱέραξ, ὡς λόγος, πάντως ἐπιβάλλει γῆν τῷ ἀτάφῳ· καὶ τοῦτο μὲν αὐτῷ οὐ κελεύει Σόλων, ὡς Ἀθηναίους ἐπαίδευσε δρᾶν (though our schol. ascribes the precept to a prehistoric Βουζύγης): and of the elephant, 5. 49 τὸν ἐλέφαντα θεασάμενος ἐλέφας νεκρὸν οὐκ ἂν παρέλθοι, μὴ τῇ προβοσκίδι γῆν ἀρυσάμενος καὶ ἐπιβαλών, ὁσίαν τινὰ ἀπόρρητον ὑπὲρ τῆς κοινῆς φύσεως τελῶν (‘fulfilling some mysterious law of piety imposed by Nature’), καὶ φεύγων ἄγος· εἶναι γὰρ τὸ μὴ δρᾶσαι τοῦτο ἐναγές. It was remembered as a disgrace to Lysander that, having put to death some prisoners of war, οὐδὲ ἀποθανοῦσιν ἐπήνεγκε γῆν (Paus. 9.32.6). Cp. id. 1. 32. 5 πάντως ὅσιον ἀνθρώπου νεκρὸν γῇ κρύψαι. Hor. 1. 28. 33 precibus non linquar inultis, Teque piacula nulla resolvent...licebit Iniecto ter pulvere curras.

θηρός , here a wild beast, as dist. from domesticated animals (cp. 1081): more often the term excludes only birds and fishes.

του with θηρός also: Eur. 370 οὔτ’ ἐλπίδος γὰρ οὔτε του δόξης ὁρῶ | θάρσος παρ’ ἡμῖν.

οὐ σπάσαντος . The negatives in 257 affect ἐλθόντος: and οὐ stands with σπάσαντος as if we had simply οὐκ ἐλθόντος, οὐ σπάσαντος, σημεῖα ἦν. οὐ is not here an irregular substitute for οὔτε, as in 250: this would be so only if we had οὔτ’ ἐλθόντος. Either οὐδὲ σπ. or οὔτε σπ. would be correct, but the latter would suppose an οὔτε understood before ἐλθόντος. For σπάσαντος of rending, cp. 1003. It could not mean, ‘having cast up earth’ over the body (as Triclinius took it). The point is that the body must have been covered before the beasts had had time to come. The poet has preferred this order to σπάσαντος οὐδ’ ἐλθόντος (i.e. ‘or even having come’), because, εἰ ἦλθον, καὶ ἔσπασαν ἄν.

λόγοι δ’ … φύλακα . The regular form would be, λόγοις κακοῖς ἐρροθοῦμεν ἐν ἀλλήλοις, ἐλέγχοντες φύλαξ φύλακα (or ἄλλος ἄλλον), φύλαξ being the part in apposition with the whole ( ἡμεῖς). The irregularity of the form in the text is threefold. (1) For λόγοις κακοῖς ἐρροθοῦμεν we have an equiv. in sense, though not in grammar, λόγοι κακοὶ ἐρρόθουν . (2) In spite of this, ἐν ἀλλήλοισιν is retained, whereas ἐν ἡμῖν is now needed. (3) As a plur. part. would have been awkward after λόγοι, we have φύλαξ ἐλέγχων φύλακα, which thus is virtually equiv. to a gen. absol., φύλακος ἐλέγχοντος φύλακα. Remark that, even in regular examples of partitive apposition, a participle, describing what all do, is sometimes thus made singular; Xen. 7.3.47 οί ἱππεῖς οἴχονταί μοι ἄλλος ἄλλῃ διώκων (instead of διώκοντες). It is only the first of these three points that this passage has in common with others to which it has been compared. ‘, some saying this, some that,’ often appears in Greek as ‘there was a dispute,’ etc., without causing οἱ μὲν...οἱ δέ to be changed into the gen. absol. Her. 8.74 πολλὰ ἐλέγετο,...οἱ μὲν ὡς...χρέον εἴη ἀποπλέειν, Ἀθηναῖοι δέ etc. Thuc. 4.23 ὑπ’ ἀμφοτέρων...ἐπολεμεῖτο, Ἀθηναῖοι μὲν περιπλέοντες..., Πελοποννήσιοι δέ etc. Aesch. 200 στάσις τ’ ἐν ἀλλήλοισιν ὠροθύνετο, | οἱ μὲν θέλοντες...οἱ δέ etc. (This illustrates the use of ἐν ἀλλήλ. here, but is less bold, since the noun is sing.) Eur. 1462 ἦν δ’ ἔρις στρατηλάταις, | οἱ μὲν πατάξαι...οἱ δέ etc. 1131 ἦν δὲ πᾶσ’ ὁμοῦ βοή, | ὁ μὲν στενάζων... αἱ δέ etc. For ἐρρόθουν , of a confused noise of angry tongues, cp. 290. ῥόθος (onomatop.) is said of a rushing noise of waves, or of oars dashed into them, etc.: then, fig., Aesch. 406 Περσίδος

γλώσσης ῥόθος, of an unintelligible jargon.

ἐλέγχων , questioning (434, 333, 783: 1353), here, in the sense of ‘accusing.’

κἂν ἐγίγνετο : and blows would have come at last,—had not the matter been settled by the proposal mentioned at 268. (Not, ‘blows would come,’ i.e. were often exchanged, as Nauck takes it.)

τελευτῶς ', ‘at last,’ the adverbial use, found even with another partic., as Thuc. 6.53 τυραννίδα χαλεπὴν τελευτῶσαν γενομένην.

ὁ κωλύσων : cp. 297.

ἦν … οὑξειργ. , was the doer (in the belief of his comrades).

ἐναργής , manifestus facti: 535 λῃστής τ’ ἐναργής.

ἀλλ’ (ἕκαστος), evolved from οὐδείς: fr. 327 ἐμοὶ δ’ οὐδεὶς δοκεῖ | εἷναι, πένης ὤν, ἄνοσος, ἀλλ’ ἀεὶ νοσεῖν. Dem. or. 20 § 74 μηδεὶς φθόνῳ τὸ μέλλον ἀκούσῃ, ἀλλ’, ἂν ἀληθὲς ᾖ, σκοπείτω.

ἕφευγε μὴ εἰδέναι , ‘pleaded in defence that he knew nothing of it.’ For this pregnant use of φεύγειν cp. Aesch. 390, where the Argive king says to the Danaides, whose cousins threaten to seize them under Egyptian law, δεῖ τοι δὲ φεύγειν κατὰ νόμους τοὺς οἴκοθεν | ὡς οὐκ ἔχουσι κῦρος οὐδὲν ἀμφὶ σοῦ: you must plead, in accordance with Egyptian law, that they have no right over you. So defendere, 10. 5 si triumphum non cupiebas, cuius tandem rei te cupiditate arsisse defendes? (‘will you plead?’) Note that this use (like the absol. legal sense, ‘to be a defendant,’ from which it comes) was necessarily restricted to pres. and impf. Hence we must not cite, with Donaldson, Dem. or. 27 § 1 οὗτος τοὺς υὲν σαφῶς εἰδότας τὰ ἡμέτερα ἔφυγε μηδὲν διαγνῶναι περὶ αὐτῶν, εἰς δ’ ὑμᾶς τοὺς οὐδὲν τῶν ἡμετέρων ἀκριβῶς ἐπισταμένους ἐλήλυθεν (which means: ‘he has avoided any decision on the case being given by those who knew our affairs thoroughly, but has come to you,’ etc.): nor, with Paley, Xen. 1.3.19 ὑπαγόμενος θανάτου...ἀπέφυγεν, ὅτι οὐ προδοίη τὴν πόλιν ἀλλὰ σώσαι , i.e. ‘being put on trial for his life, he was acquitted, (on the plea) that he had not betrayed the city,’ etc.

μὴ (not οὐκ ) εἰδέναι , as after verbs of denying, Aristoph. 572 ἠρνοῦντο μὴ πεπτωκέναι .—Only one other version is tenable, viz., ‘shrunk from knowing it’; but this could hardly be said in the sense, ‘shrunk from confessing that he knew it.’—Others understand τοὺς ἄλλους as subject to εἰδέναι, ‘shrunk from (the others) knowing it’ (‘entzog sich dem Wissen der anderen’), which is impossible. So also is Campb.'s version, ‘always escaped, so that we could not know him,’ which would, in the first place, require ἔφυγε.

μύδρους , lumps of red-hot iron. μύδρος=a molten mass, from rt μυδ, whence μύδος, ‘moisture,’ μυδάω, etc. Cyril 359 quotes this verse, after referring to a Chaldean custom of making an oath more solemn by causing those who took it to pass between the severed portions of a victim (διὰ μέσων... διχοτομημάτων). It is probably the oldest trace in Greek of ordeals analogous to the medieval ‘judgments of God.’ The word μύδρος occurs elsewhere in connection with a solemn sanction for an oath. In Her. 1.165 the Phocaeans μύδρον σιδήρεον κατεπόντωσαν, swearing not to return till it should float. 25 ὁ δ’ Ἀριστείδης ὥρκισε μὲν τοὺς Ἕλληνας καὶ ὤμοσεν ὑπὲρ τῶν Ἀθηναίων (to observe the defensive league against Persia, 479 B.C., Grote 5. 257), μύδρους ἐμβαλὼν ἐπὶ ταῖς ἀραῖς (in sanction of the curses on traitors) εἰς τὴν θάλατταν. I conceive that in these passages, as elsewhere, μύδρος has its proper sense,

a red-hot mass of metal, and that the custom was symbolical of an older use of the μύδρος in ordeals by fire. This would explain how the Alexandrian poets of the 3rd cent. B.C. (Lycophron, Callimachus) came to use the word μύδρος, in defiance of its etymology, as simply ‘a lump’ (or even ‘a stone’). They supposed that the μύδροι had been cold masses.

πῦρ διέρπειν must here refer to a definite ordeal, by walking through a fire. The idea, at least, of such an ordeal appears in the familiar Attic phrase διὰ πυρὸς ἰέναι (‘to go through fire and water’); Plat. 4. 16 ἔγωγ’ οὖν μετὰ Κλεινίου κἂν διὰ πυρὸς ἰοίην, Aristoph. 133 διὰ τοῦ πυρὸς | ἐθέλω βαδίζειν . But it is doubtful whether the actual use of any such ordeal in the historical age can be inferred from Dem. or. 54 § 40 ἀξιοπιστότερος τοῦ κατὰ τῶν παίδων (by the lives of one's children, cp. or. 29 § 26) ὀμνύοντος καὶ διὰ τοῦ πυρός, i. e. swearing that one is ready to undergo the test by fire. It has been suggested that ἰόντος has fallen out after πυρός, which seems improbable. But the phrase may be rhetorical. Cp. Verg. 11. 787 (the Hirpi): medium freti pietate per ignem Cultores multa premimus vestigia pruna. —Becker 183 notices some other ordeals. There was a temple in Achaia, the priestess of which, before election, was proved by drinking ball's blood; if impure, she died (Paus. 7.25.13). Perjury, and some other crimes, were assayed by the accused mounting the steps of an altar for burnt sacrifice (ἐσχάρα): if he was guilty, flames appeared ( 10. 8). Incontinence was tried by the test of entering a grotto of Pan at Ephesus (Achilles Tatius 8. 6).

θεοὺς ὁρκ. , to swear by the gods; the acc. is cognate (the god being identified with the oath), like ὅρκον ὀμνύναι: Xen. 5.4.31 ταῦτα...ὄμνυμί σοι θεούς.

τὸ μήτε δρ .: for the art., cp. 236.

μήτ’ είργασμένῳ : the conjecture μηδ ' is needless, since μήτε can be understood before βουλεύσαντι: see 239 n.

πλέον : cp. 40 .

λέγει , between two past tenses: cp. 254.

τις εἷς . It is at first sight tempting to write τις, εἷς ὃς πάντας. But such emphasis on the idea of ‘one against all’ seems hardly appropriate here. And τις εἷς sometimes = εἷς τις: Thuc. 6.61 καί τινα μίαν νύκτα καὶ κατέδαρθον : Plat. 235B (οὐκέτ’ ἐκφεύξεται) τὸ μὴ οὐ τοῦ γένους εἶναι τοῦ τῶν θαυματοποιῶν τις εἷς: 145D ἔν τινι γὰρ ἑνὶ μὴ ὂν οὐκ ἂν ἔτι που δύναιτο ἔν γε ἅπασιν εἶναι.

προὔτρεψεν , impelled, here =ἠνάγκασε: cp. 358 n.

οὐ γὰρ εἴχομεν κ.τ.λ.: ‘for we did not know how to gainsay him, nor how, if we did the thing (advised by him), we could prosper.’

As ἀντιφωνεῖν means opposing his suggestion, so δρῶντες means acting on it. Others join ὅπως δρῶντες , ‘by what course of action.’ Since, however, a definite proposal was before them—viz., reference to Creon—we must then understand, ‘by what other course’ (than the proposed one). But the sense is, ‘We could not refute him, and, on the other hand, we dreaded your anger if we followed his advice.’ εἴχομεν has the same sense in both clauses. ἔχω, as=‘to know how,’ takes (1) an infin., or (2) a relat. clause with subjunct., as 42, 705 οὐκ ἔχω...ποῖ γνώμης πέσω . This is merely an indirect form of the deliberative subjunct., ποῖ γνώμης πέσω; So here, πράξαιμεν would be πράξωμεν if the principal verb were in a primary tense. The direct question would be, πῶς καλῶς πράξωμεν; Carefully distinguish ὅπως (or πῶς) ἄν with optat. after this οὐκ ἔχω, as 991 οὐ γὰρ ἔχω πῶς ἂν | στέρξαιμι , I know not how I could. The two constructions are combined again in 428 οὔτοι σ’ ἀπείργειν οὐδ’ ὅπως ἐῶ λέγειν | ἔχω .

σοί (cp. 234), rare for εἰς σέ. After ἀναφέρω τι the pers. is usu. expressed by εἴς τιvα (less oft. by ἐπί or παρά τιvα). But Lysias has the dat. in or. 12. 84 οἷς τὰς ἀπολογίας ἀνοίσει , ‘to whom he will carry back his defensive pleas’ (i.e. ‘on whom he will lay the blame,’ and so, again, in or. 7 § 17): yet ib. § 64 τὰς... ἀπολογίας εἰς ἐκεῖνον ἀναφερομένας . In Mod. Greek ἀναφορά is used of an official ‘report.’

ταῦτ’ ἐνίκα : see on 233: the impf. differs from the aor. only as ἐδόκει (‘seemed good’) from ἔδοξε (‘was resolved’).

πάλος , perh. taken by shaking lots in a helmet (cp. 396, 1285): καθαιρεῖ , reduces, i.e. ‘condemns’: Lys. or. 13 § 37 τὴν...ψῆφον...τὴν...καθαιροῦσαν , the vote of condemnation.

τἀγαθόν , iron., whereas his second errand is a true ἕρμαιον (397). —ἄκων οὐχ ἑκοῦσιν : cp. 198 (the herald detained against his will by a throng of questioners) οὐχ έκὼν ἑκοῦσι δὲ | ξύνεστιν.—οἶδ’ ὅτι, adverbial (‘doubtless’), like δῆλον ὅτι, cp. 758: so used even in the middle of a clause, as Dem. or. 9 § 1 πάντων, οἶδ’ ὅτι, φησάντων γ’ ἄν (‘when all, I know, would certainly admit,’ etc.).

ἐμοί , ethic dat., ‘for me,’ rather than dat. with βουλεύει as=‘advises’; the latter dat. is rare ( Aesch. 697 ἀστοῖς...βουλεύω σέβειν ); in 807, 1055 the dat. with βουλεύω is a dat. of interest (to plot against one). In poetry the act. can mean, not only ‘to form a plan’ ( 619), or to give counsel ( ib. 1417), but also, like the midd., to deliberate.—With μή supply ἐστί ; cp. 1253; Plat. 145C ὅρα μὴ παίζων ἔλεγεν, look whether he did not speak (i.e. I suspect that he spoke) in jest. To supply ᾖ is also possible (cp. 1180), but less fitting here.

τι , adv., ‘perchance’: 969.

θεήλατον, sent by gods ( 992 θεήλατον μάντευμα ), i.e. wrought by them (cp. 285), since there was no trace of human agency (249): not, imposed upon a human agent by a divine commission (as 255 πρᾶγμα θεήλατον ). So in 16.667 Zeus provides supernaturally for the burial of Sarpedon. Cp. p. xxxv.

ἡ ξύννοια , the art. being equiv. to a possessive pron., as 1089 f. τὴν γλῶσσαν, τὸν νοῦν. Cp. Plat. 571E εἰς σύννοιαν αὐτὸς αὑτῷ ἀφικόμενος.

πάλαι , i.e. ever since the φύλαξ spoke (249). Cp. 289.

πρὶν ὀργῆς καί με μεστῶσαι , ‘before thou hast actually filled me with anger’: καί has nothing to do with πρίν , but belongs solely to μεστῶσαι , a strong word, the stress on which makes it easier for the force of καί to pass over the enclitic με . Cp. 772 τῷ γὰρ ἂν καὶ μείζονι | λέξαιμ’ ἄν : ib. 989 ποίας δὲ καὶ γυναικὸς ἐκφοβεῖσθ’ ὕπερ ; where in each case καί goes with the verb. We must distinguish the ordinary combination πρὶν καί, ‘before even,’ which would be in place here only if Creon meant, ‘Cease, before you have so much as angered me’: cp. 396 ᾄσσεις, πρὶν ἡμᾶς κἀννεώσασθαι λόγους (before we have even renewed our talk): Aristoph. 1033 πέμπουσιν ἤδη ’πισκόπους | ἐς τὴν πόλιν, πρὶν καὶ τεθύσθαι τοῖς θεοῖς : Plat. 458B πάλαι..., πρὶν καὶ ὑμᾶς ἐλθεῖν,... επεδειξάμηv.

κἀμέ would be unmeaning: no one else is angry.

μεστῶσαι : Plat. 330E ὑποψίας...καὶ δείματος μεστός , and so often.

πότερον κ.τ.λ. Did they think him good? Or, thinking him bad, did they yet honour him?— ἔκρυπτον (sc. γῇ) = ἔθαπτον: the word is specially suitable here to the covering with dust (256). Cp. 621 κεκρυμμένος νέκυς : 838 κρυφθέντα (of Amphiaraus swallowed up by the earth). Bellermann cites an inscr. from Smyrna ( 1872, 27 p. 465) παίδων σε φίλαι χέρες, ὡς θέμις ἐστί, | κρύψαν. The impf. (‘were for burying’) refers to the motive present to the agent's mind when the act was undertaken: cp. 19 ἐξέπεμπον n.

ἀμφικίονας ναούς , temples surrounded by columns, an epith. marking their stateliness and splendour, as Eur. 1099 ἐν περιστύλοις δόμοις (of a temple), 406 περικίονας ναούς. The ναὸς περίστυλος or περίπτερος (so called because the ceiling of the colonnade projected like a wing, from the cella) had a colonnade on each of its four sides: the ναὸς ἀμφιπρόστυλος, only on two (front and back): but, though the latter would satisfy the word ἀμφικίονας, the poet doubtless meant the former.

κἀναθήματα , votive offerings, such as gold and silver vessels of all kinds; statues; bronze tripods, etc. (Cp.

Her. 1.50; Thuc. 6.46; Isae. or. 7 § 41.) The wealth of Delphi in ἀναθήματα is already proverbial in 9.404; at Thebes the Ἰσμήνιον ( 21) also seems to have been rich in them. After ἀνάθημα the gen. denotes either ὁ ἀναθείς (as more oft.), or, as here, the divine owner.

γῆν ἐκείνων (depending on πυρώσων ), i.e. the territory of Thebes (cp. on 199), since the land belongs to the θεοὶ ἐγχώριοι and πολιοῦχοι: not merely the τεμένη attached to their shrines.

νόμους διασκεδῶν , to scatter the laws abroad, i.e. to shatter the fabric of civil order: cp. Tennyson, , and the breaking up of laws. Cic. 2. 37 disturbare... legem. So διασκεδ. of breaking up a treaty ( 620), or a king's power ( ib. 1341).

διασκεδῶν would suit ἀναθήματα, but could not possibly be joined with γῆν (as if the latter meant ‘State’): hence it must be taken with νόμους only.

τοὺς κακοὺς τιμῶντας … θεούς; owing to the natural emphasis on τοὺς κακούς, the ambiguity is only grammatical. Cp. Her. 7.150 ἐπεὶ δέ σφεας παραλαμβάνειν τοὺς Ἕλληνας , oblique for ἐπεὶ δέ σφεας παρελάμβανον οἱ Ἕλληνες.

ταῦτα , the edict, depending on μόλις φέροντες (aegre ferentes): καὶ πάλαι , even from the moment when it was proclaimed; cp. 279, where πάλαι only refers back to 249.

πόλεως ἄνδρες , like γῆς τῆσδέ τις ( 236 n.).

ἐρρόθουν , muttered: 259n.

ἐμοί , against me, dat. of object, as after χαλεπαίνω, μέμφομαι, etc.

κάρα σείοντες , ‘tossing the head,’ in defiant menace (so caput quassans, Verg. 12. 894 ), instead o going quietly under the yoke. 170 E τοὺς τυράννους ἀσπάζονται,...ἀλλὰ μισοῦσι σιγῇ κάρα σείοντες (alluding to this v.). So, acc. to Suidas, s.v., Soph. used ἀναχαιτίζειν (prop. said of a horse throwing the mane back, rearing) as=ἀπειθεῖν καὶ ἀντιτείνειν, ‘to be restive.’

ὑπὸ ζυγῷ . Cp. Aesch. 1639 ζεύξω βαρείαις (ζεύγλαις).

λόφον , the back of the neck, a word used of draughtanimals (of the human nape, perh. only once, 10.573): hence, fig., Eur. fr. 175 ὅστις δὲ πρὸς τὸ πῖπτον εὐλόφως φέρει | τὸν δαίμον’, οὗτος ἧσσόν ἐστ’ ἀνόλβιος. id. Eur. 302 κάρτα τοι τοὐλεύθερον | ἐν τοῖς τοιούτοις δυσλόφως φέρει κακά, ‘impatiently.’ ( Shaksp. Pt. III. 3. 1. 16 yield not thy neck To fortune's yoke. )—Nauck writes the verse thus, νῶτον δικαίως εἶχον εὐλόφως φέρειν, because Eustathius, in alluding to it, once represents it by νῶτον εὐλόφως εἶχον (on 5.285), and twice by νῶτον εὐλόφως φέρειν (on 10.573, 10.169). But Eustath. was quoting, or rather paraphrasing, from memory, and confused our verse with Eur. fr. 175 (quoted above); also, perhaps, with Lycophron 776 εὐλόφῳ νώτῳ φέρειν. His references to Sophocles are often loose and inexact. See Appendix.

δικαίως , loyally. Donaldson had a too ingenious view that the word here meant, ‘with

equal poise’ ( 371).—ὡς = ὥστε ( 84): στέργειν , tolerare: 486(Lichas advising Deianeira with regard to Iolè) στέργε τὴν γυναῖκα, be patient of her.

τῶνδε , masc., the malcontents (for ἐκ , cp. 63 ).

τούτους, the watchers of the corpse: the pronouns joined as in 39 (n.).

εἰργάσθαι is best taken with ἐξεπίσταμαι : cp. 1092 ἐπιστάμεσθα...αὐτὸν...λακεῖν. The inf., instead of the partic., with ἐπίσταμαι, seems unknown in Attic prose, except, of course, where the sense is ‘to know how.’ Cp. 472. The inf. might, indeed, depend on παρηγμένους , as ἐπάγω (to induce) oft. takes an inf.: but (a) as a matter of fact, an infin. seems not to occur after παράγω in this sense: and (b) it may be noticed that Attic idiom often prefers the form, ‘induced by them, he did it,’ to, ‘he was induced by them to do it’: e.g. Xen. 4.8.5 πολλοὺς...λόγῳ παραχθέντες ἀπέκτειναν : Dem. or. 5 § 10 οἷς ἐπαχθέντες ὑμεῖς...προεῖσθε Φωκέας . For this participial expression of the leading idea, see n. on 1038.

νόμισμ’ , institutum. This primary and general sense of the word was almost confined to poetry ( Aesch. 269 Ἑλληνικὸν νόμισμα θυστάδος βοῆς), the special sense, ‘current coin,’ being the ordinary one. For the other sense, the usual word was νόμιμον (or νόμος). Hence in Aristoph. 247, when Socrates says, θεοὶ | ἡμῖν νόμισμ’ οὐκ ἔστι, Strepsiades rejoins, τῷ γὰρ ὄμνυτ’; ἢ | σιδαρέοισιν, ὥσπερ ἐν Βυζαντίῳ (i.e. if gods are not current with you, do you swear by iron coin?): where the schol. remarks that νόμισμα meant ποτὲ μὲν τὸ νόμιμον ἔθος, ποτὲ δὲ τὸ κόμμα τοῦ τετυπωμένου χαλκοῦ.

ἔβλαστε : cp. 611 βλαστάνει δ’ ἀπιστία.

πορθεῖ , ‘sacks’ (not merely, in a general sense, ‘ruins’): money invites attack, and often purchases betrayal: cp. Hor. 3. 16. 13 diffidit urbium Portas uir Macedo et subruit aemulos Reges muneribus.

τόδ’ (after τοῦτο : cp. 39) ἄνδρας , individual citizens, as distinguished from πόλεις. ἐξανίστ . δόμων , drives them from their cities by corrupt intrigue,—for which the στάσεις of democrat and oligarch in Greek cities gave many openings. The phrase is strikingly illustrated by the verses in which Timocreon of Rhodes, when an exile, assailed Themistocles ( Plut. 21), as τοὺς μὲν κατάγων ἀδίκως, τοὺς δ’ ἐκδιώκων, τοὺς δὲ καίνων, | ἀργυρίων ὑπόπλεως.

τόδ’ ἐκδ. καὶ παραλλάσσει , this trains and perverts good minds of men, ἵστασθαι πρὸς αἰσχρ. πράγμ., to address themselves to base deeds. παραλλάσσει=‘alters sideways’; i.e. causes to turn out of a straight course into an oblique course; hence, like παράγει, παραστρέφει, perverts. Cp. Arist. 8. 7§ 7 αἱ ψυχαὶ παρεστραμμέναι τῆς κατὰ φύσιν ἕξεως (their minds being warped from their natural condition). Since παραλλάσσει implies a bad training, it can be followed, like ἐθίζει and like words, by an infin.: it is unnecessary, then, to make ἵστασθαι , in its relation to παραλλάσσει, merely epexegetic (‘so that they set themselves’); though it might, of course, be so. Wecklein takes καὶ παραλλάσσει as parenthetic = παραλλάσσουσα: but this, too, is needless, nor is it supported by 537 (where see n.).

ἵστασθαι πρός τι means here, ‘to set oneself facing it,’ so ‘to turn to it, address oneself to it,’ just like τρέπεσθαι πρός τι: cp. Plat. 452E πρὸς ἄλλον τινὰ σκοπὸν στησάμενος ἢ τὸν τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ , ‘having set himself to some other aim,’ etc. Distinguish some other phrases with ἵστασθαι and πρός which are not really similar: Thuc. 3.11 πρὸς ὅ τι χρὴ στῆναι (a power to which they could rally): 4. 56 πρὸς τὴν ἐκείνων γνώμην ἀεὶ ἕστασαν (they had always sided with the Athenian policy): 6. 34 πρὸς τὰ λεγόμενα καὶ αἱ γνῶμαι ἵστανται (men's minds adapt their attitudes to what is said).

πανουργίας … ἔχειν : showed men how to practise villanies. For ἔχειν of the moral habit, cp. 1.368 μνηστῆρες ὑπέρβιον ὕβριν ἔχοντες : 9.305 λύσσαν ἔχων ὀλοήν . The inf. might be epexegetic, but really depends on ἔδειξεν as implying ‘taught’: cp. Eur. 195 οὐδεὶς λύπας | ηὕρετο... | ᾠδαῖς παύειν (has found out how to...). δείκνυμι of invention, as 1195 δς στυγερῶν ἔδειξεν ὅπλων | Ἕλλασι κοινὸν Ἄρη : fr. 396. 6 στρατοῦ φρυκτωρίαν | ἔδειξε, κἀνέφηνεν οὐ δεδειγμένα (Palamedes).

εἰδέναι , ‘to know,’ i.e. to be conversant with (cp. on 71) παντὸς ἔργου δυσσέβ. , impiety of (shown in) any deed,=πᾶν δυσσεβὲς ἔργον (cp. 603 λόγου τ’ ἄνοια): for πᾶς, cp. 761 n. Note παντὸς ἔργ . after πανουργίας : the familiar use of πανουργία extenuates the force to which etymology entitles it, while in πᾶν ἔργον that whole force is felt: so πᾶν ποιεῖν is stronger than πανουργεῖν, and πᾶν λέγειν than παρρησιάζεσθαι ( Plat. 39A ἐάν τις τολμᾷ πᾶν ποιεῖν καὶ λέγειν). Cp. Soph. 407 παντὸς ἂν λόγου κακοῦ | γλώσσῃ θιγόντα καὶ πανουργίας, where πάσης must be supplied, showing how πανουργία could be used without direct reference to its derivation.

ἤνυσαν : cp. 231.

χρόνῳ ποτέ , at some time or other: i.e. they will be caught sooner or later. With δοῦναι δίκην : 1041 τίσασθε, τίσασθ’ ἀλλὰ τῷ χρόνῳ ποτέ.

ἐξέπραξαν ὡς (= ὥστε, 292), as Aesch. 723 καὶ τόδ’ ἐξέπραξεν, ὥστε Βόσπορον κλῇσαι μέγαν ; The verb is here ironical; cp. Plat. 479A τὸ αὐτὸ διαπεπραγμένοι εἰσὶν ὥσπερ ἂν εἴ τις τοῖς μεγίστοις νοσήμασι συνισχόμενος διαπράξαιτο μὴ διδόναι δίκην .. τοῖς ἰατροῖς, μηδε= ἰατρεύεσθαι .

Ζεύς , in his quality of Βασιλεύς (Xen. 3.1.12), is fitly invoked by a king who vows that he will uphold the royal authority. Cp. 487.

ὅρκιος , adverbial: 1637 κατῄνεσεν τάδ’ ὅρκιος (n.). Cp. 823 ( λυγροτάταν).

τὸν αὐτόχειρα , the very man (248) whose hand strewed the dust, said with an emphasis corresponding to that with which the Guard had insisted on the absence of any clue (249). For αὐτο-, cp. 56, 172. τάφου = ταφῆς , as 490, 534, 1447: in a symbolical sense like that of θάψας (246).

μοῦνος : cp. 304 n.— ‘Death alone shall not suffice for you,’ already implies a threat of torture. To make this threat explicit, πρὶν ἂν . . δηλώσητε is added, as if merely οὐ θανεῖσθε had preceded. ‘(You shall not die,) until you have first been hung up alive, and have revealed (the authorship of) this outrage.’ They are to be suspended by the hands or arms, and flogged. Cp. 106 θανεῖν γὰρ αὐτὸν οὔ τί πω θέλω . . πρὶν ἂν δεθεὶς πρὸς κίον’ ἑρκείου στέγης . . μάστιγι πρῶτον νῶτα φοινιχθεὶς θάνῃ . 1. 4. 43 ego plectar pendens. In Plat. 872B a slave who has slain a free man is to be flogged, and then (if he does not die under the lash, ἐάνπερ βιῷ παιόμενος) put to death by other means. Other views of κρεμαστοί refer it to (1) mere suspension, as a torture, like that of Melanthius in 22.175: (2) stretching on a cross-like frame; cp. Alexis ap. Athen. 134 A ἥδιστ’ ἀναπήξαιμ’ αὐτὸν ἐπὶ ξύλου λαβών. Impalement (ἀνασταυρόω, ἀνασκολοπίζω) is certainly not meant.— ζῶντες κρεμαστοί , ‘suspended alive,’ as ζῶν is oft. joined with another partic.: Xen. 2.6.29 οὐχ ὥσπερ οἱ ἄλλοι . . ἀποτμηθέντες τὰς κεφαλάς, ὅσπερ τάχιστος θάνατος δοκεῖ εἶναι, ἀλλὰ ζῶν αἰκισθεὶς ἐνιαυτόν.

δηλώσηθ’ : as to the belief that torture was sure to wring the truth from slaves, cp. Isae. or. 8. 12 ὁπόταν δοῦλοι καὶ ἐλεύθεροι παραγένωνται, . . οὐ χρῆσθε ταῖς τῶν ἐλευθέρων μαρτυρίαις, ἀλλὰ τοὺς δούλους βασανίζοντες οὕτω ζητεῖτε εὑρεῖν τὴν ἀλήθειαν τῶν γενομένων. (Cp. , p. 358 n.)

ὕβριν , in concrete sense ( 1029).

ἵν’ … ἁρπάζητε , with grim irony, since they are to die before they can apply the lesson. So 1377 (Oed. calls down destruction upon his sons) ἵν’ ἀξιῶτον τοὺς φυτεύσαντας σέβειν, where see n. Cp. below, 716.

τὸ κέρδος , accus. (cp. 1242): ἔνθεν οἰστέον ( ἐστί).

μάθηθ’ , aor., learn once for all: but ἁρπάζητε, pres., go on stealing.

ἐξ ἅπαντος , from every source, with τὸ κερδαίνειν : Xen. 2.9.4 οὐ γὰρ ἦν οἷος ἀπὸ παντὸς κερδαίνειν : Ar. 735 ὦ ποτίσταται | κἀκ παντὸς ὑμεῖς μηχανώμεναι

πιεῖν. In 807 ἑξ ἅπαντος εὖ λέγει =speaks well on any theme (starting from anything).

τι suits a timid appeal: cp. 1414 ἱκετεύω σε πεισθῆναί τί μοι.

δέ (Boeckh), though favoured by L, could not be justified as an expostulatory ‘now.’ δώσεις : 1287 διδοὺς ἐμοὶ | λέξαι.

οὕτως , ‘without more ado,’ ὥσπερ ἔχω: 1066 οὐδὲ σοῦ φωνῆς ἔτι | γενήσομαι προσφθεγκτός, ἀλλ’ οὕτως ἄπει; 237 C νῦν μὲν οὕτως οὐκ ἔχω εἰπεῖν (‘off-hand’).

ἴω , delib. subjunct., somewhat rare in pres. ( 651).

καὶ νῦν ὡς = ὡς καὶ νῦν: for the hyperbaton of ὡς, cp. 590, 949, 1243, etc.— ἀνιαρῶς , with ι— : but Eur. , like Ar. , has ἀνι^αρός ( Eur. 230 etc.): Aesch. does not use the adj., though he has ἄνι^ος. ἀνία (ι—) is used by Soph. , but not by Aesch. or

ἐν with ὠσίν , through association with such phrases as Aesch. 605 βοᾷ δ’ ἐν ὠσὶ κέλαδος.

ἐπί with τῇ ψυχῇ denotes the seat, and, equally with ἐν, here=our ‘in’: cp. 1.55 τῷ γὰρ ἐπὶ φρεσὶ θῆκε θεά .

τί δὲ is right, not τί δαὶ (L): see Appendix.

ῥυθμίζεις , bring under ῥυθμός, i.e. reduce to a clear form, define, ὅπου (ἐστί ), with respect to its seat (i.e. whether it is in the ears or in the mind). Cp. 11. 10 ἐὰν μὴ ῥυθμίσῃ τις, unless one reduce (the opinions) to a clear form, or method. So he oft. associates ῥυθμός with σχῆμα, as 8. 3 τὸ σχηματιζόμενον καὶ ῥυθμιζόμενον, what is being reduced to form and system. For the epexegetic ὅπου cp. 103 ἧ τοὐπίτριπτον κίναδος ἐξήρου μ’ ὅπου ; ib. 890 ἄνδρα μὴ λεύσσειν ὅπου .—Cp. Shaksp. 4. 5. 244 That I may give the local wound a name, And make distinct the very breach whereout Hector's great spirit flew.

τὰς φρένας...τὰ δ’ ὦτ’ , acc. defining σε : 1301 μέθες με χεῖρα: cp. on 113.

οἴμ’ ὡς , impatient, as Aristoph. 590 οἴμ’ ὡς τεθνήξεις : elsewhere in Soph. it expresses pity or grief (1270, 354, 587).

λάλημα suits Creon's contemptuous impatience. The schol. (see crit. n.) prob. read ἄλημα (‘a knave,’ lit., ‘fine meal,’ from ἀλέω): cp. 430 παιπάλημ’ ὅλον. But if Creon used that word, he would seem to give the man credit for real subtlety: he would be taking him too seriously. Thus ἄλημα is the word applied by Ajax to his mortal foe, Odysseus ( 381, 389), who is similarly called πάνσοφον κρότημα in fr. 827: cp. 927 πανουργίας | δεινῆς τέχνημ’ ἔχθιστον (Neoptolemus). Cp. 756 δούλευμα : 85 κήδευμα (n.).

δῆλον, like ἐναργές (cp. on 263).

‘At any rate (οὖν—babbler or not) I certainly have not done this deed.’ εἰμί is supplied with ποιήσας. For οὔκουν … γε cp. 993, 907NE. αἰσχρὸς φανοῦμαι . . ΦΙ. οὔκουν ἐν οἷς γε δρᾷς· ἐν οἶς δ’ αὐδᾷς, ὀκνῶ: and so oft., as 565, 1357, 848.

‘Yes, (you have done it,) and that, too, at the cost of betraying,’ etc. The particle γε implies the contradiction, ἐποίησας: καὶ ταῦτα goes with the participle ( προδούς ): cp. 37, 614 τὴν τεκοῦσαν ὕβρισεν, | καὶ ταῦτα τηλικοῦτος . So Lat., hominem . . studiis optimis deditum, idque a puero ( Cic. 13. 16).

ἦ δεινόν . Creon has pronounced the Guard guilty on mere δόξα, without proof. The Guard says, ‘It is grievous that, when a man does harbour suspicions (ᾧ δοκεῖ γε ), those suspicions should at the same time ( καὶ ) be false.’ γε means that, in such a matter, hasty δόξα should be avoided altogether. It is always bad to assume a man guilty without proof; it is worse when the rash assumption is also erroneous. Cp. δόκησις ἀγνώς, ‘a blind suspicion’ ( 681), and ib. 608 γνώμῃ δ’ ἀδήλῳ μή με χωρὶς αἰτιῶ . Eur. 311 μηδ’ ἢν δοκῇς μέν , (ἡ δὲ δόξα σου νοσεῖ,) | φρονεῖν δόκει τι.—Nauck supposes a play on two senses of δοκεῖν, ᾧ δοκεῖ (or, as he reads, δοκῇ) having been suggested by ἔδοξε τῷ δήμῳ, etc.: ‘'Tis monstrous that he who decides should have false views.’ But, even if the absolute ᾧ δοκεῖ could be thus used, the colloquial frequency of δοκεῖ (μοι ποιεῖν τι) in Aristophanes suffices to show that ᾧ δοκεῖ could not, to an Athenian ear, have suggested ‘the ruler’ or ‘the judge’: it would have seemed to mean merely one who ‘proposes,’ not ‘disposes.’—Schütz makes δοκεῖν depend on δοκεῖ: ‘'Tis grievous when a man is resolued to believe even what is false’ (if only he wishes to believe it). A bold speech for the Guard to Creon; nor does it satisfy either γε or καί.

κόμψευε . . τὴν δόξαν , make neat sayings about it,—referring to the rhetorical form of the last verse, with its παρήχησις, δοκεῖ...δοκεῖν. Not necessarily, ‘quibble upon it,’—as if δοκεῖν had been used in two different senses,—a view of κόμψευε which has been brought to support the interpretations of v. 323 mentioned above. The verb is usually midd., often with acc., as Eur. 333 εὖ κεκόμψευσαι πονηρά (‘thou hast given subtle form to wicked pleas’): Plat. 197D πρέπει...σοφιστῇ τὰ τοιαῦτα μᾶλλον κομψεύεσθαι.

τὴν δόξαν , that δόξα of yours: cp. 96: 1110 οὐκ οἶδα τὴν σὴν

κληδόν’ (the κληδών of which you speak), not merely, ‘the word δόξα.’ If the v. l. τὸ δόξαν (see cr. n.) was intended to mean the latter, it should have been τὸ δόξα.

νυν (‘very well,’ like οὖν) is better than νῦν , which would mean ‘for the present’ (as opposed to the near future).— ταῦτα … τοὺς δρῶντας = τοὺς ταῦτα δρῶντας : cp. 384: the pron. gains emphasis by its place.

δειλά , as involving mean treachery towards king and city. Theognis 835 ἀλλ’ ἀνδρῶν τε βίῃ καὶ κέρδεα δειλὰ καὶ ὕβρις | πολλῶν ἐξ ἀγαθῶν ἐς κακότητ’ ἔβαλεν (sc. ἡμᾶς).

δεινά (L) is defended by Seyffert as=‘flagitious,’ by Whitelaw as=‘clever’ (iron.), ‘your wondrous winnings.’ In some forms of minuscule writing λ and ν could easily be confused: cp. 1130 ξυναλλάξας , where the first λ has been made from ν : and 1164, where μόνον has been restored from μολόντ’ .

ἀλλ’ prefacing the wish ( 421): εὑρεθείη sc. ὁ δρῶν (319): μάλιστ’, denoting the best thing that could happen ( 926 n.).—κἂν for καὶ is needless. We find καὶ ἐάν...καὶ ἐάν: ἐάν τε...ἐάν τε: but, as a rule, ἐάν (or ἐάν τε)...καὶ [not καὶ ἐὰν] μή: e.g. Eur. 751 κἂν τύχω κἂν μὴ τύχω : Plat. 660E ἐάν τε μέγας...ἐάν τε σμικρὸς...ἦ, καὶ (‘and’) ἐὰν πλουτῇ καὶ μή. For the conjunctive form in stating alternatives, cp. 488 n.

καὶ with νῦν, not with γάρ .

γνώμης , of reasonable forecast, cp. 1087.

First στάσιμον. 1st strophe (332—342)=1st antistrophe (343—353): 2nd strophe (354—364)=2nd antistr. (365 —375). For the metres see Metrical Analysis.

The Chorus had not thought it possible that any one should brave death to bury the corpse (220). But the deed has been done, and without leaving a trace (252). And Creon has silenced the suggestion that gods did it (278). The train of thought is continued in this ode. Its theme is man's daring,—his inventiveness, and the result to his happiness.

Man is master of sea and land; he subdues all other creatures; he has equipped his life with all resources, except a remedy against death. His skill brings him to prosperity, when he observes divine and human laws, but to ruin when he breaks them.—At that moment Antigone is led in, and the coryphaeus speaks the closing anapaests (376—383).

τοῦτο , sc. τὸ δεινόν, this wondrous power, man. The schol. quotes Theocr. 15. 83 σοφόν τοι χρῆμ’ ἄνθρωπος . Not adverbial with χωρεῖ, ‘so’ (in a way corresponding with his δεινότης), as Bellermann takes it, comparing 1005 (τοῦτ’ ἀφικόμην), where see n.— πέραν , properly, ‘to the further side of’ (trans). The point here is that man dares to cross the sea. πέρα (ultra), which Blaydes prefers, would imply wanderings (not merely over, but) beyond sea. A European visitor to New York goes πέραν πόντου: to San Francisco, πέρα. Cp. 885 and p. 279.

χειμερίῳ νότῳ with χωρεῖ, goes (driven) by it: cp. 14.253 ἐπλέομεν Βορέῃ ἀνέμῳ , and ib. 299 (of the ship) ἡ δ’ ἔθεεν Βορέῃ ἀνέμῳ. The dat. might be merely ‘with’ (dat. of circumstance), but is better taken as instrumental. Cp. 588 πνοαῖς. Some make χειμερίῳ νότῳ a temporal dat., like ὥρᾳ χειμῶνος, which it can hardly be.— Soph. is thinking of the Aegean, where the prevailing winds were from the N. or N.W. in spring and summer, while stormy south winds were associated with winter: Hesiod warns a man with a voyage before him not to await χειμῶν’ ἐπιόντα νότοιό τε δεινὰς ἀήτας, | ὅς τ’ ὤρινε θάλασσαν ὁμαρτήσας Διὸς ὄμβρῳ | πολλῷ ὀπωρινῷ, χαλεπὸν δέ τε πόντον ἔθηκεν. The epithet χειμερίῳ aptly distinguishes this wintry νότος from that gentle south breeze (now called the ‘embates’) which regularly sets in at sunset in the fair season (cp. Curt. 1. 14).

περιβρ … ὑπ’ οἴδμασιν , passing under swelling waters which open depths around: i.e. he is in the trough of a heavy sea, while on each side the waves rise above his ship, threatening to engulf it. Verg. 1. 106 his unda dehiscens Terram inter fluctus aperit. βρύχιος, ‘of the depths’ (βρυχία...ἠχὼ βροντᾶς, Aesch. 1082), is formed as if from βρύξ, of which Oppian uses acc. βρύχα (‘depth of the sea,’ 2. 588). ὑποβρύχιος=‘under water,’ and so neut. pl. adv. ὑπόβρυχα ( 5.319 etc.). περιβρύχιος occurs only here. For the ι— before βρ cp. 348, 1104, 1117. The schol.'s ἠχώδεσι means that περιβρύχιος was taken as' ‘roaring around’ (βρυ—χάομαι), where the υ would be long, against metre (cp. 347). The Homeric ἀμφὶ δὲ κῦμα | βέβρυχεν ῥόθιον ( 5.411) might suggest this view.

ὑπερτάταν , highest, as eldest, παμμήτωρ (Aesch. 90), and παμβῶτις ( 392): Plat. 40C γῆν... πρώτην καὶ πρεσβυτάτην θεῶν ὅσοι ἐντὸς οὐρανοῦ γεγόνασι .

ἀκαμάταν : this form of the fem. occurs only here, unless ἀκαμάτῃσι (and not ἀκαμάτοισι) χέρεσσιν be right in Hes. 747, but is warranted by similar epic forms in tragedy, as ἀθανάτας (gen.) Aesch. 619, Eur. 235: ἀδμήταν 1238 (and -ης in dial. 1321). For the initial α—, cp. the epic ἀθάνατος, ἀγοράασθε, etc. (and see , Appendix, note 5, p. 195): but in 164 we find ' α^κάματα.

ἀποτρύεται , prop., wears away for his own purposes (midd.), —fatigat, vexes (with constant ploughing). Earth is ‘immortal,’ and not to be exhausted; but man's patient toil subdues it to his use. Cp. 124 ἀποτρύειν ἐλπίδα , to wear it out.—Not, ‘wearies himself by tilling’ the soil.

ἰλλομένων ἀρότρων, as the ploughs go backwards and forwards,— turning at the end of one furrow, and going down the next. Cp. Nicander 478 φεῦγε δ’ ἀεὶ σκολιήν τε καὶ οὐ μίαν ἀτραπὸν ἴλλων, ‘in flying (from the snake), always make your course wind (ἴλλων) from side to side, instead of keeping it straight.’ Xen. 6. 15 κύνες ἐξίλλουσαι τὰ ἴχνη, ‘puzzling out the tracks,’ i.e. going backwards and forwards till they have found a clue. As to the spelling ἴλλω υερσυς εἴλλω, see Appendix. It is needless to write ἀρότων , ‘ploughingseasons’ ( 825), and to take ἰλλομένων as=περιτελλομένων. The picture of the ploughs at work is more vivid; and, with ἀρότων, ἔτος εἰς ἔτος would be feebly redundant.

ἔτος εἰς ἔτος , an adverbial phrase, like ‘year in, year out’: for the use of the simple acc. in temporal adverbs (like ἀωρίαν) see 1138 n.; for εἰς , 9.134 μάλα κεν βαθὺ λήϊον αἰεὶ | εἰς ὥρας ἀμῷεν (‘as each year comes round’): Theocr. 18. 15 κἠς ἔτος ἐξ ἔτεος : so εἰς νέωτα (next year), and the Gk μοδ. χρόνο σὲ (=εἰς ) χρόνο, ‘year after year.’

ἱππείῳ γένει , the ‘offspring of horses,’ meaning ‘mules’; which are ‘far better than oxen to drag the jointed plough through the deep fallow’ ( 10.352). Arist. 3.2 § 14 ὸ Σιμωνίδης, ὅτε μὲν ἐδίδου μισθὸν ὀλίγον αὐτῷ ὸ νικήσας τοῖς ὀρεῦσιν, οὐκ ἤθελε ποιεῖν ὡς δυσχεραίνων εἰς ἡμιόνους ποιεῖν· ἐπεὶ δ’ ικανὸν ἔδωκεν, ὲποίησε, χαίρετ’, ἀελλοπόδων θύγατρες ἵππων. As this story suggests, the very fact that the ordinary Attic word for ‘mule’ was ἡμίονος (adj. ὀρικός) might lead an Attic poet to prefer such a periphrasis as ἵππειον γένος. The objections to taking ἱππείῳ γένει as simply =ἵπποιςare,that (1) Greek ploughmen used oxen or mules more than horses, and (2) the achievement of taming the horse (350) is thus anticipated. Some understand both horses and mules, giving γένει a double sense—rather awkwardly, I think.

πολεύων , κατὰ σύνεσιν after τοῦτο . Cp. 11.90 ἦλθε δ’ ἐπὶ ψυχὴ Θηβαίου Τειρεσίαο, | χρύσεον σκῆπτρον ἔχων: 16. 476 μείδησεν δ’ ἱερὴ ἲς Τηλεμάχοιο, | ἐς πατέρ’ ὀφθαλμοῖσιν ἰδών: 11.690 ἐλθὼν γὰρ ἐκάκωσε βίη Ἡρακληείη . But as Soph. would write ΠΟΛΕΥΟΝ, it was the easier to read πόλευον.

Man's conquests over the animal world are here taken in two groups. First, those of which the primary aim is to kill or to capture. Here the means is netting (ἀμφιβαλὼν σπείραισι δικτυοκλώστοις), in its threefold sporting use, as applied to fowling (ὀρνίθων), hunting (θηρῶν), and fishing (πόντου φύσιν). Secondly, those conquests which aim at reducing wild animals to man's service. These are effected by μηχαναί (349),— arts of taming and training. And their result is aptly expressed by the word

κρατεῖ: here, man is not merely the slayer or captor; he becomes the master of docile toilers. The horse and the bull are types.

Thus, in this ode, the scale of achievement ever ascends: man (1) conquers inanimate nature: (2) makes animals his captives: (3) trains them to be his servants: (4) develops his own social and intellectual life.

κουφονόων is merely a general epithet, ‘light-hearted,’ ‘blithe and careless’; Theognis 580 σμικρῆς ὄρνιθος κοῦφον ἔχουσα νόον: cp. the proverbial phraseology of Athens, ἄνθρωπος ὄρνις, ἀστάθμητος, πετόμενος, | ἀτέκμαρτος, οὺδὲν οὐδέποτ’ ἐν ταὐτῷ μένων ( 169). The epithet is given to ἔρωτες below (617), and to εὐηθία in Aesch. 383.— Not, ‘quick-witted’ (and therefore harder to catch).

ἀμφιβαλὼν with σπείραισι δ.: it can precede the dat. by so much, because its meaning is already clear, and the dat. is merely a poet. amplification.

πόντου … εἰναλίαν φύσιν , a brood living in the waters of the sea, the tautology being only of the same order as in πόντος ἁλός, ἁλὸς ἐν πελάγεσσιν, πέλαγος θαλάσσης, etc.— σπείραισι δικτυοκλ., instr. dat. with ἀμφιβαλών, in the coils of woven nets: for the adj. compounded with a subst. (δίκτυον) cognate in sense to σπεῖρα, see n. on 716 εὐήρετμος πλάτα .— 528 mentions ἕρκη, νεφέλας, δίκτυα, πηκτάς as nets used by the fowler (ὀρνιθευτής). In hunting the lion, bear, boar, deer, hare, etc., various nets were used; the δίκτυον, to enclose large spaces; the ἐνόδιον, to close passages; the ἄρκυς (cassis) or tunnel-net. The chief fishing-nets were the ἀμφίβληστρον (castingnet), and the σαγήνη (drag-net, whence seine, sean).

περιφραδής . Eustath. p. 135, 25 φραδής...ὅθεν σύνθετον ὁ παρὰ Σοφοκλεῖ ἀριφραδὴς ἀνήρ. This was evidently a mere slip of memory. Neither Soph. nor Eur, uses any compound with ἀρι or ἐρι, though Aesch. has ἀρίδακρυς, ἐρίδματος, ἐρικύμων.

μηχαναῖς . μαχαναῖς in 181 and μαχανᾷ in Aesch. 133 are the only instances in which Tragedy gives a Doric form to words from this stem.— ἀγραύλου , having his αὐλή, or dwelling, in the open country, as opposed to a domesticated animal: Eur. 1187 πρέπει γ’ ὥστε θὴρ ἄγραυλος φόβῃ . For the combination with ὀρεσσιβάτα cp. Plat. 394E τὸ θηριῶδες τῆς φύσεως καὶ τὸ ἄγριον αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸ ὀρεινόν .

λασιαύχενά θ’ . The elision at the end of the verse (ἐπισυναλοιφή) is comparatively rare in lyrics, as in dialogue (1031); but cp. 595 πίπτοντ’, 864 αὐτογέννητ’.

ὀχμάζεται , he tames, ἀμφὶ λόφον ζυγῶν , putting the yoke about its neck. ὀχμάζω (prop., ‘to get a firm hold upon’) was esp. used of breaking horses: Eur. 816 (Thessalians honour a man) ὅστις ταῦρον ἀρταμεἴ (cuts to pieces) καλῶς, | ἵππους τ’ ὀχμάζει. Schol. on

Rhod. 1. 743 κυρίως ἐστὶν ὀχμάσαι τὸ ἵππον ὑπὸ χαλινὸν ἀγαγεῖν ἢ ὑπὸ ζυγόν. The midd. voice does not occur elsewhere; but this cannot be regarded as an objection, when we remember how many rare middle forms occur in the dramatists. Thus προσορωμένα in 244 is a solitary example of that verb in the midd., and if the license could be taken with so common a word, much more might it be allowed with a comparatively rare one. Blaydes writes ὀχμάζει ὑπ’ ἀμφίλοφον ζυγόν: but the Ms. ἕξεται indicates that the verb, whatever it was, was of the midd. form. ὀχμάζεται was published by G. Schöne in 1833, and by Franz in 1846: they appear to have made the conjecture independently. Donaldson (1848) printed ὁχμάζεται ἀμφὶ λόφον ζυγῶν, and seems to ascribe ζυγῶν to Franz and Schöne; though Franz, at least, proposed ἀμφὶ λόφον ζυγῷ. ζυγῶν has been revived (seemingly without knowledge of a predecessor) by H. Schütz (1886). Sophocles would write ΑΜΦΙΛΟΦΟΝΖΥΓΟΝ, and thus ζυγῶν changes no letter. Aesch. used the fut. ζυγώσω (fr. 110), and Soph. has the verbal ζυγωτῶν ( 702). To ἀμφιλόφῳ ζυγῷ it may be objected that, being clear, it was not likely to become -ον ‐όν: but, when ἀμφίλοφον had once been written, ζυγῶν (or ζυγῷ) would easily become ζυγόν. As to the schol. on ἀμφίλοφον,—ἀντὶ τοῦ, περιβαλὼν αὐτῷ ζυγὸν περὶ τὸν λόφον, ὑπάγει,—it cannot fairly be urged for ζυγῶν (or for any partic.), since it may be merely a paraphrase of ἀμφίλοφον.—Schütz's ἐφέζεται is attractive; for the acc. he cp. Aesch. 409 βρέτας...ἐφημένῳ , Eur. 1493 Εὐρώταν ἐφεζόμεναι . Add Aesch. 664 ναῦν θέλουσ’ ἐφέζετο . The sense would be, ‘seats himself behind the horse’ (in a chariot): cp. 5.46 ἵππων ἐπιβησόμενον , etc. But, though oxen were used for draught, ἐφέζεται suits ταῦρον less well. The sense, ‘tames,’ is clearly that which we require. See Appendix.

φθέγμα κ.τ.λ. The phrase, ‘man has taught himself speech,’ should not be pressed as if the poet was thinking of a theory on the origin of language. It was the Eleatic view that language came θέσει, not φύσει, and Soph, may have known that; but by his ἐδιδάξατο he meant simply, ‘developed for his own benefit, by his own effort.’ So Isocrates (or. 3 § 6) conceives primitive man as living in a brutal state, and emerging from it by the development of speech and thought,— λόγος being one of the human faculties (τῶν ἐνόντων ἐν τῇ τῶν ἀνθρώπων φύσει), and the distinctive one:—ἐγγενομένου δ’ ἡμῖν τοῦ πείθειν ἀλλήλους καὶ δηλοῦν πρὸς ἡμᾶς αὐτοὺς περὶ ὼ=ν ἂν βουληθῶμεν, οὐ μόνον τοῦ θηριωδῶς ζῆν ἀπηλλάγημεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ συνελθόντες πόλεις ᾠκίσαμεν καὶ νόμους ἐθέμεθα καὶ τέχνας εὕρομεν. Cp. Hor. 1. 3. 103 (men fought,) Donec verba, quibus voces sensusque notarent, Nominaque invenere: dehinc absistere bello, Oppida coeperunt munire et ponere leges. The Aeschylean Prometheus ( 444) claims to have made men ἔννους...καὶ φρενῶν ἐπηβόλους, but not (like Shelley's Prometheus) to have also given them language. Cp. Peile's chapter ‘On the Nature of Language’ (), p. 156: ‘In this way then we may conceive of the

beginnings of speech...Speech is the development, through imitation, of a capacity of man—the capacity of making a noise.’ This is quite compatible with ἐδιδάξατο.

ἀνεμόεν φρόνημα : cp. 15.80 ὡς δ’ ὅτ’ ἂν ἀΐξῃ νόος ἀνέρος...| ὣς κραιπνῶς μεμαυῖα διέπτατο : 7.36 τῶν νέες ὠκεῖαι ὡσεὶ πτερὸν ἠὲ νόημα : 1081 ἀελλαία ταχύρρωστος πελειάς : fr. 621 ἀελλάδες φωναί. Not ‘lofty,’ in which sense ἀνεμόεν could be said only of a high place. Cp. Shelley, ‘He gave man speech, and speech created thought, Which is the measure of the universe.’ Soph. does not imply that speech created thought; he is rather thinking of them as developed (in their riper forms) together.

ἀστυνόμους ὀργάς , ‘such dispositions as regulate cities’; i.e. those feelings which lead men to organise social life, and to uphold the social order by their loyalty. For ὀργάς, cp. 639 συντρόφοις | ὀργαῖς , the dispositions that have grown with his growth: Eur. 53 ἐπῄνεσ’ ὀργὰς ἠπίους . The relation of φθέγμα to ἀστυνόμοι ὀργαί is illustrated by Arist. 1.2 § 12, where he is showing that man, more than any other ἀγελαῖον ζῷον, is πολιτικόν: ‘Speech is intended to explain what is expedient and what is hurtful,—and so also what is just and unjust. It is characteristic of man, as compared with other animals, that he alone has a sense of good and evil, just and unjust; and it is the association of beings with this sense that make a Family and a State.’

ἐδιδάξατο here=simply αὐτὸς ἑαυτὸν ἐδίδαξε. The notion, ‘men taught each other,’ ‘learned by mutual converse,’ cannot be extracted from it. The passive διδάσκομαι as=μανθάνειν is freq., but I can find no parallel for the use of the aor. midd. here. For the ordinary use, cp. Plat. p. 93 D τὸν υἱὸν ἱππέα...ἐδιδάξατο (had his son taught to ride): so Plat. 467E (διδαξαμένους, ‘when we have had them taught’); [Plat. ] Plat. 122E, 377 B; Xen. 1.6.2, 4. 4. 5; Aristoph. 1338. Once or twice ἐδιδαξάμην is merely ἐδίδαξα with the idea of the teacher's interest superadded: Pind. 8. 59 τὸ διδάξασθαι | εἰδότι ῥᾴτερον: so Simonides fr. 145 (of himself) διδαξάμενος χορόν (unless he meant, ‘caused to be trained’). In Aristoph. 783 διδάξαιμ’ ἄν (Elmsley) should prob. be read. It is rare for any midd. form, without a reflexive pron., to denote that the subject acts on (and not for) himself: thus, ‘he kills himself’ is not ἀποκτείνεται, but ἀποκτείνει ἑαυτόν (Plat. 61E). The exceptions are chiefly words of the toilet, as λούομαι. The dative of the reflexive can be more easily understood, as Thuc. 6.40 πόλις...οὐκ...αὐθαίρετον δουλείαν ἐπιβαλεῖται , sibi imponet.

πάγων κ.τ.λ. Construe: καὶ (ἐδιδάξατο ) φεύγειν ἐναίθρεια βέλη δυσαύλων πάγων, καὶ δύσομβρα βέλη. He learned to build houses, to shelter himself from frost and rain. πάγοι δύσαυλοι=frosts which make it unpleasant to bivouack in the open: cp. Aesch. 555 δυσαυλίας.

ἐναίθρεια =under a clear (frosty) sky: cp. fr. 154 ὅταν πάγου φανέντος αἰθρίου (‘a clear frost') χεροῖν | κρύσταλλον ἁρπάσωσι . Nauck takes δυσαύλων πάγων as ‘inhospitable hills,’ citing Moschion fr. 7. 5 ( p. 633), who describes primitive man as inhabiting ὀρειγενῆ σπήλαια: but the context is against this. As corrections of the MS. αἴθρια, there is little to choose between ἐναίθρεια and ὑπαίθρεια: Aesch. 335 has ὑπαιθρίων πάγων: but after πάγων the loss of ἐν would be easier than that of ὑπ. The ι of αἰθρία could be long (as Solon 13. 22): but ι— is not elsewhere found in the derivatives; for in Cratinus Δηλιάδες fr. 5 we must read Ὑπερβορείους αἴθρια τιμῶντας στέφη (not, as Blaydes gives it, Ὑπερβορέους αἴθρι—α). The spelling ἐναίθρεια is conjectural, but in 1088 L has ἐπινικείῳ, as metre requires, for ἐπινικίῳ. Below, v. 814, ἐπινύμφειος has been conjectured: see n. there.

βέλη , the ‘shafts’ of piercing cold, or of lashing rain. Cp. Plat. 873E κεραυνός, ἤ τι παρὰ θεοῦ τοιοῦτον βέλος ἰόν (some such swift and sudden visitation): Aesch. 371 βέλεσι πυρπνόου ζάλης (sent forth from Aetna): 1.53 κῆλα θεοῖο (of the pestilence).

παντοπόρος is at once a comment on the achievements already enumerated (cp. περιφραδής in 348), and a general expression absolving the poet from further detail: ‘yes, there is nothing that he cannot provide.’ Isocr. may have had this passage in mind in or. 3 § 6 (quoted on 354), where an enumeration parallel with that of Soph. is closed by a phrase answering to παντοπόρος,—καὶ σχεδὸν ἅπαντα τὰ δῑ ἡμῶν μεμηχανημένα λόγος ἡμῖν ἐστιν ὁ συγκατασκευάσας. We must not point thus: βέλη· παντοπόρος, ἄπορος κ.τ.λ., when the sense would be weakened, and the construction perplexed (‘all-providing, and in no case without resource, he meets the future’).

οὐδὲν … τὸ μέλλον = οὐδὲν ὃ μέλλει (ἔσεσθαι), nothing that is to be (cp. the absolute τὸ μέλλον, τὰ μέλλοντα). So Plat. 197A ἔγωγε ἀνδρεῖα καλῶ οὔτε θηρία οὔτε ἄλλο οὐδὲν τὸ τὰ δεινὰ ὑπὸ ἀγνοίας μὴ φοβούμενον = οὐδὲν ὃ μὴ φοβεῖται. This negative form is as correct as (though actually rarer than) the positive πᾶν τὸ καλῶς ἔχον ( Plat. 381A) for πᾶν ὃ καλῶς ἔχει. Donaldson took τὸ μέλλον adverbially: ‘in regard to the future, he comes to nothing without resources.’ Cp. 728, μηδὲν τὸ μὴ δίκαιον, where μηδέν is subst., not adv.

μόνον and μόνου are alike admissible; μόνον means, ‘the only thing that he will not achieve is to escape death’; μόνον, ‘the only thing that he will not escape is death.’ In this general view of human achievement, μόνον seems a little the better. φεῦξιν — ἐπάξεται , procure means of escape from death. ἐπάγεσθαι, prop. ‘to bring into one's own country’; usu. said of calling in allies to help one; or of importing foreign products: Thuc. 4.64 ξυμμάχους δὲ οὐδέποτε ...ἐπαξόμεθα : id. 1. 81 ἐκ θαλάσσης ὧν δέονται ἐπάξονται. Then often fig., of calling in anything to one's aid: Plat. 823A τὸ δὲ δὴ παρὸν ἡμῖν τὰ νῦν οἷον μάρτυρα ἐπαγόμεθα· δηλοῖ μὲν ἂν ὃ βουλόμεθα : ‘we call to our help, as a witness, the example which is actually present with us; it will show what we mean.’ 492B αὐτοὶ ἑαυτοῖς δεσπότην ἐπαγάγοιντο τὸν τῶν πολλῶν ἀνθρώπων νόμον τε καὶ λόγον καὶ ψόγον (‘call in to rule them’). Menander Ὑδρία fr. 2 γέροντα δυστυχοῦντα, τῶν θ’ αὑτοῦ κακῶν | ἐπαγόμενον λήθην, ἀνέμνησας πάλιν (‘seeking to procure forgetfulness of his troubles’). The word is admirably suitable and vivid here: man looks to every side for succour against the foe that is ever in the land,—Death; but from no quarter can he find help. It is surprising that so many recent critics should have confidently condemned ἐπάξεται, and sought to replace it by conjectures (see cr. n.).

ἀμηχάνων , such as seem to baffle all treatment: 140 ἀμήχανον | ἅλγος : Simonides ap. Plat. 344C ἀμήχανος συμφορά.

φυγάς , like φεῦξιν: Eur. 799 λέκτρων...φυγάς , means of escape from the union; cp. Aristoph. 759 κἀκ τῶν ἀμηχάνων πόρους εὐμηχάνους πορίζων.

ξυμπέφρασται , here midd., as Aesch. 438 καὶ δὴ πέφρασμαι : cp. 1016 n.

The ode closes with a more direct reference to the incident which suggested its theme. The daring ingenuity shown by the unknown breaker of Creon's edict is an instance of the subtlety which leads to ruin. The implied contrast with Creon—ὑψίπολις by his care for the laws—is effective in view of the destined περιπέτεια.

σοφόν τι … ἔχων : lit., possessing, in his resourceful skill, a thing subtle beyond belief: σοφόν τι is predicate, and in apposition with τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας. Cp. Thuc. 2.89 μέγα τι τῆς διανοίας τὸ βέβαιον ἔχοντες ἀντιτολμῶσιν : ‘they are strong in the confidence of their spirit when they confront the foe.’ There is no ground for altering σοφόν into δεινόν, τοῖον, or the like.

τὸ μηχανόεν τ ., the inventive quality in his skill: for τέχνας, cp. 380 n.; for the absence of τᾶς, cp. above, 10 ( κακά). Cp. Thuc. 1.90 τὸ...βουλόμενον καὶ ϋποπτον τῆς γνώμης : 2. 61 ἐν τῷ ὑμετέρψ ἀσθενεῖ τῆς γνώμης.

τοτὲ μὲν … ἄλλοτ’ . L has τοτὲ here: cp. 739 τότ’ (i.e. τοτὲ) ἅλλος, ἅλλοθ’ α+τερος: 237 E τοτὲ μὲν ἡ ἑτέρα, ἅλλοτε δὲ ἡ ἑτέρα κρατεῖ . Cp. 1745 n. There is no reason, then, for reading ποτὲ μέν here with inferior MSS., though it is equally good (Plato has ποτὲ μὲν answered by ποτὲ δέ, by ἐνίοτε δέ, or by αὖθις δέ).

ἐπ’ with κακόν as well as ἐσθλόν: cp. 212 n. on κἀς.

γεραίρων , ‘honouring,’ is in my belief a certain correction of the MS. παρείρων. The latter=‘weaving in,’ as a thread into a texture, or a flower into a wreath: for the genuine fig. use of it, see Plat. 6. 2 μεταξὺ τοῦ ὑμᾶς λέγειν οὐδ’ ἂν τρίχα, μὴ ὅτι λόγον, ἄν τις παρείρειε: ‘while you are speaking, one could not put in a hair, much less a speech’ (so close and continuous is the texture of your speaking). Here, παρείρων has been explained as, ‘weaving the laws (etc.) into the texture of his life’; but, even if we grant that so strange a phrase would be possible with words added to express ‘the texture of his life,’ it is certainly impossible without them. Dindorf proposed παραιρῶν as=‘wresting,’ ‘violating’ (a strange sense), and pointed at δίκαν· ‘he comes to evil (though at other times to good) when he violates the laws,’ etc. ΓΕΠΑΙΠΟΝ could easily generate ΠΑΠΕΙΠΟΝ. γεραίρειν, prop. to distinguish by gifts of honour, is also a general poet. synonym for τιμᾶν: cp.

5. 67 ἐτίμων τὸν Ἄδρηστον καὶ δὴ πρὸς τὰ πάθεα αὐτοῦ τραγικοῖσι χοροῖσι ἐγέραιρον. Ar. 960 γένος Ὀλυμπίων θεῶν | μέλπε καὶ γέραιρε φωνῇ.

θεῶν τ’ ἔνορκον δίκαν , Justice, which men swear to observe, taking oaths by the gods (ὅρκοι θεῶν: 647 n.): =ὅρκοις θεῶν κεκυρωμένην.

ὑψίπολις seems best taken as =ὑψηλὴν πόλιν ἔχων: cp. Pind. 8. 22 ἁ δικαιόπολις...νᾶσος (Aegina). In Pind. 2. 8Theron, tyrant of Acragas, is called ὀρθόπολις in an active sense, as=ὀρθῶν τὴν πόλιν. In 510 ἁδύπολις = ἁνδάνων τῇ πόλει : but it is harder to suppose that ὑψίπολις could have been intended to mean, ‘standing high in his city.’ Nor would that be the fittest sense. The loyal citizen makes the prosperous city; and her prosperity is his. See on 189. In this clause the Chorus thinks especially of Creon (191 τοιοῖσδ’ ἐγὼ νόμοισι τήνδ’ αὔξω πόλιν).

ἄπολις . Where the typical citizen is a law-breaker, the city is ruined, and the evil-doer is left citiless. So Creon had described law-breaking as ἄτην...ἀστοῖς (185). The contrast with ὑψίπολις shows that the sense is not merely, ‘when a man breaks the law he becomes an exile’ ( Lys. or. 21 § 35 ἀντὶ ...πολιτῶν ἀπόλιδας ). The central thought is the power of human wit to make or mar the πόλις, according as the man is moral or immoral.

τὸ μὴ καλόν , the generic μή, such a mood as is not good.— τόλμας χάριν , by reason of (‘thanks to’) his audacity, with ξύνεστι, not with ἄπολίς ( ἐστι). In 888 δυσπότμου χάριν χλιδᾶς is not precisely similar, since it goes with κακά νιν ἕλοιτο μοῖρα. Others point at ξύνεστι, taking τόλμας χάριν with μήτ’ ἐμοί κ.τ.λ.: but μήτ’ should clearly be the first word in that sentence.

παρέστιος . Cp. 249 n., where Oed. invokes a curse on himself, should the murderer become ξυνέστιος with him: also ib. 240 n. Hor. 3. 2. 26 vetabo, qui Cereris sacrum Vulgarit arcanae, sub isdem Sit trabibus, fragilemve mecum Solvat phaselon. Schneidewin cp. also Eur. fr. 848 (the dishonourer of parents) μή μοι γένοιτο μήτε συνθύ\της ποτέ, κ.τ.λ., and Callim. 6. 117 (to Demeter) μὴ τῆνος ἐμὶν φίλος, ὅς τοι ἀπεχθής, | εἴη, μήθ’ ὁμότοιχος.

ἴσον φρονῶν , ‘may he not become like-minded with me,’ is another way of saying, ‘may I never come to share his sentiments.’ Cp. 15.50 ἶσον ἐμοὶ φρονέουσα , ‘likeminded with me’: Aristoph. 634 ἐμοὶ φρονῶν ξυνῳδά . In a narrower sense (not intended here) τὰ αὐτὰ φρονεῖν was said of agreement in politics, idem sentire de republica: Her. 1.60 τὠυτὸ φρονήσαντες , ‘having made common cause’ (the στασιῶται of Megacles and Lycurgus).

ἔρδει , L's reading, should be kept. The indic. is, of course, compatible with generality: for such an indic. after an optative, cp. Dem. or. 4. 51 νικῴη δ’ ὅ τι πᾶσιν ὑμῖν μέλλει συνοίσειν . It is also rather in favour of the indic. that the speaker is here thinking of an actual case. The optat. ἔρδοι would be abstract, ‘any one who should conceivably do these things,’ and would be equally correct: cp. on 666.

πῶς εἰδὼς κ.τ.λ.: ‘How, when I know (that she is Antigone, sc. ὅτι ἐστί), shall I maintain that she is not?’ ( οὐκ εἶναι = ὅτι οὐκ ἐστί). A simple verb of ‘saying’ regularly takes οὐ with inf. in oratio obliqua: λέγω οὐκ εἶναι = ὅτι οὐκ ἐστί. If this verb of saying is negatived, the negative with the inf. is still οὐ: πῶς λέξω οὐκ εἶναι; Here, ἀντιλογέω has the construction of a simple verb of saying: πῶς ἀντιλογήσω οὐκ εἶναι; Hermann conjectured μὴ οὐ τήνδ’ εἶναι (which is palaeographically very improbable). μὴ οὐκ εἶναι would be the normal constr. after πῶς ἀντιλογήσω, if ἀντιλογέω were viewed in its special quality as a verb of ‘denying.’ ἀρνοῦμαι μὴ εἶναι: πῶς ἀρνήσομαι μὴ οὐκ (or simply μή, 1388 n.) εἶναι; Cp. below, 443 n. It may be noted that, when ἀντιλέγω means to ‘deny,’ it is more often followed by ὡς (or ὅτι) οὐ with the finite verb; when followed by μή and inf., it more often means ‘to protest against’ a measure; Thuc. 3.41 ἀντέλεγε...μὴ ἀποκτεῖναι Μυτιληναίους : Xen. 2.2.20 αἰσχρὸν ὂν (=οὐ δεῖ) ἀντιλέγειν τὸ μὴ οὐχὶ τὸν πλεῖστα πονοῦντα...μεγίστων ἀξιοῦσθαι.

ἀντιλογήσω might be deliberative aor., but is rather fut. ind. (cp. 1419, 310).

ὦ δύστηνος : nom. for voc., 185 n.

δ. πατρός , gen. of origin: 214 n.

Οἰδιπόδα— occurs as gen. in 495, but as voc. ib. 1194.

τί ποτ’ ; Cp. 1210.

οὐ δή που : cp. 1472 οὐ δὴ κλύω που...;

ἀπιστοῦσαν = ἀπειθοῦσαν, cp. 219, 656.

ἄγουσι . It is far more probable that the final ιν of βασιλείοισιν should have dropped out in L (see cr. n.) than that Soph. should have written ἀπάγουσι. At Athens ἀπάγω and ἀπαγωγή were technical terms for a process of summary arrest by which any citizen could bring before the magistrates a person taken in a criminal act (ἐπ’ αὐτοφώρῳ). We have seen (on v. 158) that a word with a technical Attic sense was not necessarily excluded from Attic poetry. But ἀπάγω would surely jar here. Allowing for the difference between a technicality and a

colloquialism, it would be nearly as bad as, ‘Have they taken you up?’

καὶ connects ἀπιστοῦσαν with καθελόντες (not with ἐν ἀφροσύνῃ): cp. 737 n.

Second ἐπεισόδιον. Antigone, brought before Creon, avows and justifies her deed. Creon declares that she shall die. Ismene, when led in (531), associates herself with the act, but is not permitted by her sister to claim any part in it. Creon orders that both sisters shall be kept prisoners.

ἐκείνη , she whom we sought: cp. 138 ὅδ’ ἐκεῖνος ἐγώ , n.

τοὔργον ἡ ’ξειργ .: for the order, cp. 324.

ἐς δέον : cp. 1416 ἐς δέον πάρεσθ’ ὅδε | Κρέων : so ib. 78 εἰς καλόν : 1168 ἐς αὐτὸν καιρόν . L has εἰς μέσον, i.e. ‘he comes forth in public’ (so that you, and all, can speak with him). The phrase occurs elsewhere in Soph., but never with ref. to entrance on the stage: Soph. 609 ἔδειξ’ Ἀχαιοῖς ἐς μέσον (showed him publicly); 1285 τὸν κλῆρον ἐς μέσον καθείς (i.e. among the others): 514 ἴσαν ἐς μέσον (into the arena). Here, ἐς δέον is not only far the better phrase, but is confirmed by Creon's question in the next v., ποίᾳ ξύμμετρος... τύχῃ; A, and almost all the later MSS., have εἰς δέον, which may, doubtless, have been a conjecture suggested by 1416, —as is held by those who believe all our MSS. to have come from L; but it looks more like a true reading which L has somehow missed. Cp. on 831.