Ichneutae: Pearson fragments 315–316, supplementary material Alfred Chilton Pearson Alfred Chilton Pearson OCR collation, structural reconstruction, and reference alignment; working transcription prepared for Gregory Crane. Codex Working files prepared for the Perseus Multitext Viewer 2026-09-15

The 1917 source is in the public domain in the United States. No new license is assigned to third-party digital source files by this conversion.

 The Fragments of Sophocles A. C. Pearson 1917 1 233–268; appendix 269 Michigan scan, HathiTrust mdp.39015010446022

Copy text: supplied ichneutae_ocr.txt, printed pp. 234–269. Structural comparison: supplied ichneutae_pearson_scaffold.xml. The opening two verses and opening note survive only in the scaffold; their printed page is inferred as 233. These are two transcriptions of the same edition, not independent textual witnesses. No page-image proofreading has been performed.

Pearson’s fragment 314 is the main play. Pearson’s line numbers remain in n; corresp points to the supplied Hunt/Perseus reference. Short apparatus is separate from discursive commentary. OCR errors are corrected only where supported by the supplied material or unambiguous context. Unresolved readings use sic; OCR gaps differ from ancient losses. Brackets are retained as transcription signs and are not claimed to be a new diplomatic transcription. Dot runs give unspecified loss, not measured character counts. Missing numbered positions follow Pearson’s printed numbering and do not assert an exact papyrus extent.

Reference gap/aggregate pointers (especially Pearson 24–27, 379–386, and 395–430) identify a reference placeholder, not exact verse equivalence. Pearson 414 is a marginally attested reading and is not evidence that a continuous verse survives. Content and references to introductory pages outside the supplied OCR have not been reconstructed.

 Unresolved OCR or transcription detail; consult the printed page. Present only in the older scaffold; absent from supplied new OCR. Alignment to a reference gap placeholder. Alignment to a reference aggregate rather than exact line. Reading reported from a margin, not a surviving complete verse. Loss reported in the printed ancient text. Source verse shared across speakers or reference subdivisions. Source line overlaps two reference lines.

Cite the printed Pearson line or the first line of a note; source and reference numbering are distinct.

 Ancient Greek English Latin Reconstructed from the supplied OCR and scaffold; explicit line concordance and source-page provenance added. OCR-review edition, not scan-proofread.
Pearson fragment 315 (unplaced; not play line 315) ἐνήλατα ξύλα τρίγομφα διατορεῦσαι σε δεῖται

315 Pollux 10. 34 μέρη δὲ κλίνης ἐνήλατα καὶ ἐπίκλιντρον, τὸ μέν γε ἐπίκλιντρον ὑπὸ ᾿Αριστοφάνους (fr. 44, I 403 Κ.) εἰρημένον· Σοφοκλῆς δ᾽ ἐν Ἰχνευταῖς σατύροις ἔφη ‘ἐνήλατα...δεῖται.' Rutherford (New Phryn. p. 267) pronounces these words to be 'too corrupt to convey any meaning.' The conjectures hitherto recorded assume that the sense required is 'the posts must be pierced with nails. Thus Pauw (after Hemsterhuis) conjectured τριγόμφοις διατορεῦσαι δεῖ, and Valckenaer on Phoen. 1186 (1179) ἐνήλατα τρίγομφα διατορεῖν σε δεῖ, omitting ξύλα. Lobeck (Phryn. p. 178) gave as alternatives ἐνήλατα ξυλ<ουργέ > γόμφοις διατορεῖν σε δεῖ, and ἐνήλατα ξύγγομφα διατρῆσαί σε δεῖ, with the obscure comment 'spondas prius ad eum finem perforatas συγγομφῶσαι.” But none of these suggestions is satisfactory. ἐνήλατα are the four posts or bars' bedrails' which, when jointed together, form the framework of the κλίνη; they are supported by the feet, which are screwed into them. Cf. Hesych. 1 p. 193 ἑρμῖνα· πόδα κλίνης· ἀπὸ τοῦ ἐνείρεσθαι τῷ ἐνηλάτῳ. Phrynichus (CLV R.) states that κραστήρια is the correct Attic term for ἐνήλατα, but there is no material to test his authority. The meaning is placed beyond doubt by Artemid. oneirocr. 1. 74, quoted by Mau in Pauly-Wissowa III 370. The interpretation of τρίγομφα and διατορεῦσαι is doubtful; but I think it is possible to get nearer to the truth. (1) The sense usually given to τρίγομφα, ‘fastened with three nails,' is absurd. I should rather suppose that it means 'firmly-bolted,' and that τρι- has the same force as in τριγέρων, τρίδουλος, τριπάλαι, τριπανούργος, τρισάθλιος and many others. (2) διατορεῦσαι is not to bore through, but to engrave, chase; and, although it may be an error for διατορῆσαι or διατορεῖν σε, the corruption is not likely. On the other hand, the context does not suggest an allusion to τορευτική; for, although the bedstead of Odysseus was adorned with gold, silver and ivory (Hom. 4200), the verb required here must have been appropriate to ξύλα. But τορεύειν and its cognates are constantly confused with τορνεύειν etc.; and διατορνεύειν, to finish off with the lathe, is exactly what we want (Hom. Γ 391). I suggest, therefore, that we should read something like ξύλα | ἐνηλάτων τρίγομφα διατορνεύσεως | δεῖται, or perhaps simply διατορνεύσεται. In Aelian var. hist. 14. 7 perhaps διατορνευθέντες would be an improvement for διατορευθέντες (cf. ἀποτορνεύω). I find that Blaydes has suggested ἐνήλατ' οὖν τρίγομφα τορνεῦσαί σε δεῖ, besides alternatives; and Herwerden ἐνήλατα |< κλινῶν > τρίγομφα <πολλά πολλά > τορνεῦσαί σε δεῖ. R. Ellis conjectured διατόρευτ᾽ ἀποξῦσαί σε δεῖ. It should be added that Robert guesses that Hermes had concealed the lyre in his mother's bed, and that we should read δεῖ τρίγομφ᾽ ἐνήλατα | <νῦν > διατορεῦσαι (? διατορῆσαι) σ'. Even if the facts were as supposed, the method proposed for discovering the lost instrument would be a very strange one. -For Schenkl's view see on fr. 314, 309.

Pearson fragment 316 (unplaced; not play line 316) ῥικνοῦσθαι

316 Phot. lex. p. 489, 1 = Suid. s.v. ῥικνοῦσθαι· τὸ διέλκεσθαι καὶ παντοδαπῶς διαστρέφεσθαι κατ' εἶδος. λέγεται δὲ καὶ ῥικνοῦσθαι (ῥιγνοῦσθαι Phot.) τὸ καμπύλον γίγνεσθαι ἀσχημόνως καὶ κατὰ συνουσίαν καὶ ὄρχησιν κάμπτοντα τὴν ὀσφύν. Σοφοκλῆς Ἰχνευταῖς. Cf. Hesych. III p. 429 ῥικνοῦσθαι· διέλκεσθαι καὶ παντοδαπῶς διαστρέφεσθαι (διαφέρεσθαι cod.) κατ' εἶδος. p. 431 ῥιχνοῦσθαι· κινεῖσθαι ἀσχημόνως. Moeris p. 208, 25 ῥικνοῦσθαι· τὸ ἀσχημόνως κινεῖσθαι ᾿Αττικοί. There was also the compound διαρρικνοῦσθαι mentioned by Pollux 4. 99 among a list of dances and defined as τὸ τὴν ὀσφὺν φορτικῶς περιάγειν. Το the same effect Etym. M. p. 270, 5, who quotes Κράτης (1. Κρατίνος) Τροφωνίῳ (fr. 219, 179 K.): ξίφιζε καὶ σπόδιζε καὶ διαρρικνοῦ. The lemma is not a reference to fr. 314, 295.