Poisonous 'Growths' in "Trachiniae" Long, A A Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Winter 1967; 8, 4; ProQuest pg. 275

Poisonous 'Growths' in Trachiniae 
A. A. Long 

" , , ..I...'{) f' -,-€av yap afL'f'L P€1TTOV atfLa TWV €fLWV 

ucPaywv EVEyKTJ X€pulv, i7 fL€>.ayx6>'ovS' 
"Q .1. " ()' A ' ,,~ €fJa'f'EV WVS' pEfLfLa EpVataS' vupaS' ••. 

I N this much-debated passage (Tr. 572-4) Deianeira reports the 
instructions of the dying centaur, Nessus, who had offered her his 
mortal wound as the source of a treacherous charm to secure 

Heracles' love. Doubt has been cast on the words, fL€>.ayx6>'ovS' lovS', 

and they are not the only difficulty.1 Jebb, I believe rightly, accepts 
the received text. What I would dispute in his interpretation, and that 
of Radermacher, Campbell and Kamerbeek, is the view that {)pEfLfLa 

A€pvalaS'vopaS' is a periphrasis, meaning 'monstrous Hydra'. The 
words are clearly a reference to the Hydra's poison, which Heracles 
smeared on the tips of his arrows, but it is argued that Sophocles does 
not say so explicitly; that {)pEfLfLa is not a word for 'poison' but an 
intensification of Hydra. 

The periphrastic explanation goes back to the scholiast. It is sup­
ported by a number of "parallels." One which is frequently adduced 
is cPaufLa followed by Tavpov (Tr. 509) and vOpaS' (837). I postpone con­
sideration of the second cPaufLa, but one may remark immediately 
that what is true of cPaufLa may not be true of {)pEfLfLa. Moreover, cPaufLa 

Tavpov is not a periphrasis, if by that we mean merely a round-about 
expression which mayor may not be emphatic. The full sentence 
runs thus: 0 fLEV 1]v 1ToTafLoiJ U{)EVOS', V,plKEpW I T€Tpa6pov I cPaufLa Tavpov. 

When Sophocles writes 1ToTafLoiJ U{)EVOS' he is using a Homeric device, 
and cpaufLa Tavpov is clearly modelled on such expressions. But cpaufLa 

is in no way redundant: Achelous is a river-god, whose physical mani­
festations varied.2 Here he appears as a bull, and cpaufLa concentrates 
attention on his visible aspect.3 

1 For new and drastic emendations in line 573, see S. G. Kapsomenos. Sophok/es' 
Trachinierinnen und ihr Vorbild (Athens 1963) 9 n.3. 

2 Cf Ovid, Met. 9.1-100. 
8 See further my Language and Thought in Sophocles (London 1968) 101f. 

275 



276 POISONOUS 'GROWTHS' IN TRACHINIAE 

Oplpp,a is strictly a verbal noun expressing the result of Tpl4>€tV. It 
means <that which grows or is nurtured' and hence commonly has the 
sense 'offspring'. It is unnecessary to look beyond Sophocles for illus­
tration. He uses it with a noun in the genitive case denoting the parent 
(Ph. 243, Tr. 1099), which may be human or animal, and absolutely. 
In the latter usage Opl.p,p,a may be derogatory if it refers to a person 
(EI. 622), and it may also be applied to a monster like the Nemaean 
lion (Tr. 1093). But 'monstrous' is not an association of the word itself. 
Like the English 'creature', Oplp,p,cx can be complimentary (Ph. 243), 
abusive, or neutral (OT 1143), according to the context. The word 
itself has no emotional overtones, though it is more at home in 
tragedy than in prose. 

The fact then that Oplp,p,cx can refer to a monster is no reason for 
taking OpEp,p,a vopcxs as a periphrasis. On the contrary, Oplp,p,a followed 
by a genitive should refer to the offspring of (or thing nurtured by) 
the second noun. LS] offer three examples of the periphrastic use of 
Opl.p,p,a. One is our passage. Another is Plutarch's Opl.p,p,cx(n 7TCXAAaKWV 
(Solon 7). This is rendered <kept mistresses', but that is impossible. The 
phrase means 'children of mistresses', and it is parallel to the words 
7TatGLV OLKoTplf3wv which precede it. The third example is from plato 
(Lg. 790D), Tel V€oy€vij 7TCXtowV Opl.p,p,cxTa. This odd phrase appears to 
mean 'new-born infants', and Plato's use of it is probably influenced 
by the parallel-looking, though grammatically different, opvtOwv 
Opl.p,p,CXTCX (789B) 'offspring of birds'. 7TCXtowV defines fJplp,p,cxTcx: it tells us 
what the 'nurslings' consisted in. Jebb cites plato for his interpretation 
of fJpl.fLfLcx vopcxs, but this will hardly do. If Sophocles' phrase were 
parallel it would have to mean, 'creature, comprising the Lernaean 
Hydra'-in Jebb's translation, "Hydra, Lerna's monstrous growth." 
But it is surely not the Hydra'S relationship with Lema which 
Sophocles is stressing with the word fJPEP,p,CX but what the hydra nur­
tured. The Hydra does have a growth or nursling, namely the poison, 
and it is the poison, not the "monstrous Hydra," with which Heracles 
infects his arrows so that they become "black with bile" (p,€AcxYX6AoVS).' 

, Apollodorus 2.7.6 and Diodorus 4.36.4-5 make no explicit reference to the Hydra'S 
poison in their accounts of Nessus' instructions. The centaur's formula for the love-philtre 
is his (infected) blood plus 0 y6vo •• ')I6vo. means his semen, and this unsavoury aspect ofthe 
episode is unmentioned by Sophocles. C. Dugas, "La mort du centaure Nessos," REA 45 
(1943) 22, argues plausibly that Sophocles' account of the story is a later version. If Sophocles 
has emphasized the Hydra's poison at the expense of the y6vos motif, it is tempting to 
suppose that his use of the word 8plp.p.a has been influenced by a word like u1Tlpp.a or ."ovos 
in the different version. 



A. A. LONG 277 

This way of taking f)p~fLfLa, supported by Dobree, does not require 
his emendation, f.LEAaYXoAos lck 8p'f.Lf.La 1Jopas picks up af.Lr/>L8pE7TTOV 

cxtf.Lcx, 'the blood clotted round the wound'. For the sense of 8p'f.Lf.Lcx 

(which means TO TE8pcx-f.Lf.LEVOV) we may compare f.LLCXUf.LCX Xwpcxs, ens 
TEf)pCXf.Lf.L~VOV XBOVL (OT 97) and TPEcpOLTE T~VOE T~V vouov (Ph. 795).5 Two 
factors are involved in Nessus' instructions: his blood and the Hydra's 
poison are linked by using a word for the latter which refers back to 
the former. 

El yap Ur/>E KEvTm5pov r/>OVLq. VEr/>EAq. 
, <;', \', 

XpLEL OOI\07TOLOS cxvaYKa 
\ \ " ...... 7TI\Evpa 7TPOUTCXKEVTOS LOV, 

" , 8' " <;"'" <;" OV TEKETO avaTOS', ETEKE 0 aLOI\OS' opaKWV 
..... tlS:-'''' )'\ t/ <t\ ..... "~ 7TWS' 00 av aEI\LOV ETEpOV 'rJ Tavvv LaOL, 

~ , \ f'/~ \ 

OELVOTaT~ f.LEV vopaS' 7TpOUTETaKWS' 

r/>du f.Lan ; 

Lines 831-7 are related to the passage just discussed in language and 
subject-matter. In them the Chorus comment on the news given by 
Hyllus of Heracles' sufferings, especially lines 765-71. Much of the 
text of this chorus is clearly corrupt, but few words have caused more 
trouble than oELvoTaT~ f.LEV 1JopcxS' 7TPOUTETCXK6JS' r/>auf.LCXTL. Those who 
defend them argue that iJ8pas ¢aufLcxn, like 8pEfLfLa iJ8pcxs, mean 
'monstrous Hydra'. The only literary parallel is r/>duf.Lcx TCXVpOV, and 
that, as we have seen, emphasizes the 'appearance' of Achelous as a 
bull. But Sophocles can hardly be saying that Heracles is "glued fast 
to the Hydra's shape or appearance." The periphrasis is even less 
appropriate here than at Tr. 576. The Hydra's effects are at work but 
not its shape. Some scholars have felt the need for a word denoting 
the infected robe to which Heracles is fastened (cf 7TPOU7TTVUUETCXL I 
7TAEvpcxlmv apTLKoAAos ••• I XLT6JV a7TCXV KaT' a.p8pov 767-9). Pearson in­
geniously emends ¢duf.Lcxn to v~f.Lcxn. We are thus to suppose that 
~fLan was glossed by v¢aufLcxTL and thence corrupted into r/>aufLcxn, 

which fits the metre.6 But, as Jebb rightly remarks in his appendix on 
the passage, the scholiast must have understood what Sophocles 
wrote as denoting the Hydra'S venom, since ¢duf.LcxTL is glossed by los 
and cpdpf.LaKov. The majority of conjectures have been words for 
poison, e.g. XpLuf.Lan (Blaydes), r/>AEYfLCXTL (Heimreich), uTaYfLcxn (Wake-

S Cf. Hom. II. 11.741, ~ 'T()ua .pap/LaKa tia,? oua 7pl.pEL £vp£l.a XOwv. 
6 Cf. A. C. Pearson, "Notes on the Trachiniae," CR 39 (1925) 4. 



278 POISONOUS <GROWTHS' IN TRACHINIAE 

field). The right word, I suggest, is 8pIJ.l-J.l-an.7 Palaeographically it cor­
rupts easily into cpaawx:TL, and some scholars take the words to be 
synonymous. This is incorrect, and I hope to have proved that 8plJ.l-J.l-a 
vSpas is a poetic description of the Hydra's poison. This is "the child of 
death and the Hydra's offspring" (834). Whether we read €'TEKE or 
€'TPEcpE in this line it is clear that we need a word which denotes that 
offspring and also means poison. 8plJ.l-J.l-a does both these jobs and adds 
some confirmation to Lobeck's E'TPECPE. Sophocles' language in this 
stanza is deliberately repetitive (cf SOA07TOt6s-S0AU)J.l-u8a, 7TpOa'Ta­
KEV'TOS---'1TpOa'TE'TaKws). After the poison has been treated very em­
phatically as an "offspring" it is extraordinary that Sophocles should 
abandon this image (pointed by repetition) and refer to the Hydra's 
shape. Misinterpretation of the first 8plJ.l-J.l-a vSpas in this play may 
have prevented the easiest and most natural correction of vSpas 
cpaaJ.l-an. 

UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON 

June, 1967 

7 Blaydes in his edition of 1871 mentions 8p€p.p.a'Tt as a possibility. I discovered this after 
discussing the emendation with various colleagues. I have not been able to understand 
Blaydes' objection in his addenda that 8p€p.p.an would require the addition of lov.