Interpolation in Greek Tragedy, III Reeve, Michael D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1973; 14, 2; ProQuest pg. 145 Interpolation in Greek Tragedy, III Michael D. Reeve THE EARLIER parts of this trilogy! were concerned with the legiti­ macy of deletion in the textual criticism first of tragedy in general and then of Euripides' Phoenissae in particular. In this final part arguments are offered for a number of deletions that are not accepted by recent editors and commentators. One is discussed inconclusively and another partially by Page,2 three commended (two without discussion) by Jachmann;3 otherwise they are an inde­ pendent collection, drawn largely from nineteenth-century editions. The exiguous space allotted in Page's book to Sophocles4 may seem to be explained by the taste of the fourth century, when Euripides was more popular and therefore more exposed to interference. A better explanation is the influence of Jebb's edition; for older scholars had no qualms about deleting lines in Sophocles, and their reasons are often of a kind that would be approved in Euripides. Two things 1 GRBS 13 (1972) 247-65, 451-74. liD. L. Page, Actors' Interpolations in Greek Tragedy (Oxford 1934). 3 G. Jachmann, Binneninterpolation (GottNachr 1 [1936] 123--44, 185-215). '''In general, there are very few histrionic interpolations in Sophokles. Perhaps none at all in Aias, Elektra, OT; in Antigone, probably 904-20; in Trachiniai, 84 and perhaps 88-89, 362-4; in Philoktetes possibly 1365-7; in OK 769a" (p.91). It may be that in Electra "the levity of the deletor has been truly wonderful" (p.86), but 428-30 are a most unhappy illustration of it. The difficulty of giving these lines to Chrysothemis has been brought out again by H. Heubner, RhM 104 (1961) 152-56, but his arguments for giving them to Electra do noth· ing to overcome Jebb's objection that cvv KaK0 JL€T€t 1TaALV cannot be fitly uttered by Electra, and his explanation of ill' in 431 will not hold water (in the three passages he cites in n.l0, ill& marks a transition from statement to command, and 428-30 are just as much of a command as 431-38). Incidentally, n.2 of Heubner's article would drive Jachmann to distraction (cf op.cit. [supra n.3] 138+n.2, 204), and with good cause: "Gegen eine Athetese •.. hat Kaibel (zu 428) mit Recht eingewendet, dass die sprachliche Formulierung eine solche nicht rechtfertige und zudem nicht einzusehen ware, warum iiberhaupt jemand hier etwas eingefiigt haben sollte. Ebenso T. v. Wilamowitz (Dramatische Technik des Sophokles 177 Anm. 1), der daraufhinweist, dass die Verse, gcrade well sie weder mit dem Vorhergehenden noch mit Elektras Antwort in Zusammenhang zu bringen seien, un· moglich als interpoliert angesehen werden konnten." All three objections would have equal or even greater force if the lines transmitted as 428-30 were OC 607-09. The third of them must be the most perverse principle of textual criticism ever enunciated-though its author was not ashamed to confess that he could make nothing of the lines. 145 146 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m alone counsel greater caution: far less of Sophocles is preserved, and his language is far more flexible. Nevertheless, many of the deletions proposed here are certain by any standard, and until modern scholars shake themselves out of their lethargy and regain the ground won by Wunder and Nauck, there will be no presentable edition of Sophocles. (1) Ale. 15 Del. Dindorf. "Having sounded all, A and B, he found only C who was willing" is not a "characteristic Greek ellipse" (Dale) but nonsense. Conjectures that give "having sounded all his cpD\m, and his father and mother ... " exclude the father and mother unaccountably from the cpo.o£. (2) M d 791 " i:~' f''' ", , , e . cpJLw<:,a 0 o£ov £pyov £CT £pyacT£ov , _{} r """ I \ _ TOVV'T£V £v '1JJL/,V· T£Kva yap KaTaKT£VW ", " "., 'i:' 5 TaJL • ovnc ECTLV ocnc E<:, CUP'1JCETa/,· ~, , , "T' oOJLov TE 7TaV'Ta cVYX€ac .Lacovoc ;gELJLL yalac. cpLATaTWV 7Ta[8wv cp6vov .l.' ''\-'" , I 't'Evyovca Ka/, Tl\ac €PYOV aVOCLWTaTOV. OU yap y£Aac{}a£ TA'1JT6V Jg JX{}pwv, cplAaL. [ " I r - ,~" , /,TW· n JLo£ ':>'1Jv K€POOC; OVTE JLo£ 7TaTp£c N ~ ., " " , , ,/.., , .....] OVT OtKOC Ecnv OVT a7TocTp0't''1J KaKWV. • , '{}' • , , 'i: \' '1JJLapTavov TO '1JV/,K £<:, €I\LJL7Tavov ~ , , OOJLOVC 7TaTpcpovc 798-99 del. F. Leo, Hermes 15 (1880) 320 (798-810 deleverat H. Hirzel). If KaKWV (799) means the trouble likely to be caused by the murder of the children, a refuge from it has been provided earlier in the scene by Aegeus; if it means the unhappiness of Medea's present situation, an escape from it has been devised in the last 20 lines by Medea herself; if it means the calamity of murdering the children, the power to avert it lies in Medea's own hands. In any case, her arrangement with 6 Though there is no objection either to the asyndeton in this line (if. Hec. 1194) or to the isolation of Tllp.' (cf. Andr. 35, HF 966, and Denniston, CQ 30 [1936] 76, against Wilamowitz. Hermes 15 [1880] 495 n.2=Kleine Schriften I [Berlin 1935, repro 1971] 31 n.2), it may have been interpolated for the sake of making TiKI/a. more explicit (for oiJ-nc ~CT~V OCT'C ~g"'P~C£T", cf. Alc. 848, Held. 977). No such deletion, however, can safely be accepted without document­ ary support. MICHAEL D. REEVE 147 Aegeus has shown that she has neither the need nor the inclination to renounce life. "Der misskannte Zusammenhang 'zwar sundige ich, aber nicht erst jetzt: damals siindigte ich u.s. w.' hat auch die Interpo­ lation herbeigefiihrt" (Leo). (3) Med. 1220 K€tVTCU 8J V€KPO~ 7TatC T€ Ka~ yl.pwv 7TaT~p [7T€Aac. 7Tof}ELvT] 8aKpvoLcL cVjLcpopa]. 7T'OeELv1j 8aKpvoLCL cvjLcpopa has resisted all attempts at explanation or emendation. Did Euripides write something that was corrupted to it, or did an interpolator think it meant something (something of the kind that Page resigns himself to)? (4) Andr. 761 ~jLELC 8' ET' opeo£ KO-6 yEPOJJTEC. cfJc SOKELC. '\ \' " , '>" " '>' " (3' '.1. ' a/\/\ E LC "IE TOLO))O a))op a7T'O 1I.€<,.,ac JLO))O)) Tpo1TaLov a-6Tov CT~CojLaL. 7T'PEC{3VC 1TEp Wv. [ , , - , , '" ".1. .,. 7TO/\/\WV VEWV yap Kav yEpWV EV.,.,VXOC n , "'>'A""'"'' A] KPELCCW))' TL yap OEL OELII.OV OVT EVCWjLaTELV; HSuspecti," Wecklein. The sense is Hfor even if he is an old man of spirit, he is superior to a host of young men." Kirchhoff's WV for n (764) gives what is required: Hfor even an old man, if he is a man of spirit, is superior to a host of young men."6 Nevertheless, 7TPEC{3VC 7TEp tOV makes a more forceful and idiomatic end to the speech: cf phoen. 1624 ouSt! 1TEp 1Tp&CCWV KaKwc, [Eur.] Rhes. 453 Ka{1TEp VCTEpOC jLOAWV, Med. 463-64 ,\" AI''''>' I , -A.. A KaL yap 40t CV jL40 CTVY4OtC. OVK av ovvaLjL7JV COL KaKWC .,.,POV4OW 1TOT4O. Andr. 266-68 Ka£ YdP El 7Tt!PLg C' EXOL I T7JKTOC jL6>..v{380c. 19avacT~cw c' lyc1 l1Tp£v £[J 1TE1TodJac 1TaL8' 'AXLAAEWC JLOAELV. El. 362-63 Ka£ yd.p El 7T'EV7JC ECPVV. I OUTOL T6 "I' -ryf}oc 8vcYEV€e 1TapEgOjLaL. Soph. OC 958-59 7T'poe '" " '/: " I ' , I '>:"" , '>:' - , 7 oE Tac 7T'par" Etc 0jLwe KaL T7JII.LKOeO WV a))TLopav 1TELpaeop.at. 6 "Malim Ka~ ylpwv €jJifJvxoc wv," Wecklein; and indeed this K/J.V would be more at home in later Greek. The corruption of Kat to K/J.V may have led to the corruption of wv to V. 7 "Quaere: distinction here between ylpwv and 7Tplcflvc? In 761 he denies that he is ylpwv, in 763 he calls himself 7Tplcflvc: does he use ylpwv with a connotation of decrepitude which is absent from 7Tplcf3vc ? If so, can ylpwv have abandoned the connotation in 764 ?" (Barrett). It was partly doubt about the distinction that led Wecklein to accept Czwalina's deletion of 761 ("auch kann Peleus nicht in Abrede stellen, dass er ein Greis ist, wie er es 763-764 zugesteht"); but that ylpwv has a connotation of decrepitude in 761 is evident from the phrase ~7" opOot KOV ylpoV7'EC (cf also, of intellectual decrepitude, 678 ylpwv ylpwv €l and Ar. Eq. 1349 oiJ-rwc &v61)7'oC J,'ry€vr}!L1)V Kat ylpwv;), and there is no reason beyond a certain im­ plausibility in the resulting statement why it should not keep this connotation in 764 ("for even a ylpwv of spirit-sc. how much more a 7Tplcf3vc of spirit !-" etc.). 148 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, ill (5) Supp. 216 aU' ~ q,pbVT}CLC TOfJ (}€ofJ P.€'i'ov C(}lV€LV ''Y]T€'i, TO yafJpov S' lv q,p€dv K€KT'Y]P.'VOL SOKofJP.€V elva, SaLp.6vwv COcpWT€POL. ~C Kat cv cpatV'[} S€KcfSoc, OU COcpOC Y€YWC, aCTLC K6pac p.~v (}€ccfTOLC c[Jotf1ov 'vy€tC 221 1:' '" "" N", • Y'· 8'" ~ EVOLCLV wo EOWKac wc ~WVTWV €WV, 229 ' '" \ " 'A ' " EC O€ CTpaT€LaV 7TaVTac PY€LOVC aywv 231 f3t~ 7Tap€A(}c1v (}€ovC a7TwA€cac 7T(~ALV, , (}'" I V€OLC 7TapaX EtC, O£T£V€C TLP.WP.€VOL , '\' "I:' ,,, t" Xa£pOVC, 7TOI\€P.OVC T avsavovc av€v O£K'Y]C, ..I..() , '" \ ., '\ ... 'f' E£POVT€C aCTOVC, 0 P.EV 07TWC CTpaT'Y]l\a77l, • "" • • Q 'Y '" I • ~ '\ f3 I o 0 wc V,..,P£~T/ ovvap.£v EC x€£pac I\a WV, "'\ '\ '" , I '" ."., ... al\l\oc O€ KEpOOVC OVV€K , OVK a7TOCK07TWV 237 \ '\ ~() " Q\ , , I", TO 7T1\'Y] OC E£ TL ,..,l\a7TTETaL 7Tacxov TaO€. 246 " '" I , Ka7T€'T EyW co, cvp.p.axoc y€VT}cop.aL; Three interpolations have been removed from this passage: 222-28 (del. Lueders), in which Theseus so far forgets his own premises as to rebuke Adrastus for arranging a bad match; 230 (del. Wilamowitz), which competes for the attention demanded by the vital words f1lq. 7Tap€A(}c1v (}€OvC (231); and 238-45, an irrelevant piece of political analysis that deprives K/J.7TELT' in 246 of its function.s The most damag­ ing of the three is 222-28, which separates p.lv in 220 so far from S' in 229 that the structure of the argument is completely obscured; not only that, but it throws the audience off the scent altogether by sup­ plying another 8' (222). (6) Supp. 504 7j vvv q,POV€'iv /J.P.€LVOV 19avX€£ .dLbc, "() \ "" \ \' ,\,\1 'Y] EOVC OLKa£wc TOVC KaKOVC a7TOI\I\Vva£. [ ..I.. '\ ~ \ l' \ \ ..I.. \ ... , 'f'LI\€£V P.EV ovv XP'YJ TOVC CO'f'OVC 7TPWTOV T€KVa, " , 't' (}'''''i: \ €7T€LTa TOK€aC 7TaTp£oa , 'Y]v av~ €LV Xp€WV \ \ :;; i: ..I.. -. '\ \. \ 8 ' Kat p.'Y] KaT'"'1>a£. C'f'aI\€POV 'Y]y€P.WV pacvc, V€WC T€ vavT'Y]c ';;cvXOC Ka£pcp co6c' 510 \ ... I , t' ~. () I ] Ka£ TOVTO p.o£ TaVOp€£oV, 'Y] 7TPOP.'Y] La. [C 'I: I ~ Z \. , HO. E~apKEcac 'IV EVC 0 TLP.WpOVP.EVOC, • ~ "" ff3 'Y "... , "" ~Q ] vftac 0 v pL~E£V OVK EXP'Y]V TOW:VO V,..,PLV. A l' , T ~ '"A''' '" I DR. W 7TaYKaKLCT€- HE. CLy , opaCT , €X€ cTop.a , \', () ....., A \ '\ , KaL p.'Y] 7TL7TpOC €V TWV €P.WV TOVC covc I\oyovc Otic 8 Without 234-37 or 232-37 K~1T~LT' would be even easier, but since these lines consist en­ tirely of subordinate clauses, they do not sever the connexion between K~1T~''T' and 231. MICHAEL D. REEVE 149 506-10 (del. Schenkl) are irrelevant here or anywhere in the speech (post 493 Wilamowitz9), and they were unknown to the man who weakened the force of Adrastus' outburst by adding 511-12. Further­ more, 504-05 justify the outburst, but hardly 506-10. Finally, the occurrence of 8Em$c in 505 and ScxLfL6VWV in the last line of Theseus's re­ joinder (563) is not likely to be an acddent.lO (7) Supp. 841 ID 8'''~ ~ - '.1. I ?TOUEV ?TO OLOE OUX?TpE7TEtC EV'I'VXLq. 8 -".J.. ' I [ ,. .J.. ' V7]TWV E'I'VC(XV; Et?TE y WC CO'f'WTEpOC , ,- - ~']' , \,. VEOLCLV (XCTWV TWVO • E7rLCrYJfJ.WV ycxp €(. Del. Hermann, followed without reasons by Jachmann, op.cit. (supra n.3) 214. The yE is meaningless, and cocpta is not required for giving information so straightforward. For the form of what remains cf. PI. R 398 I l' 8 ' ~ • I \ I \ \ , esp. B TLVEC OVV P7JVWOELC CXPfLOVLCXL; I\EyE fLat' cv ycxp fLOVCLKOC. (8) Supp. 1169 vfLac S~ TWVSE XP~ X&pLV fLEfLV7]p.ivovc [ , y t - 'f'" 'c'­ CW~ELV, OPWVT(xC wv EKVPC(xT ES EfLov, - I 8' t - , ~ \ , \ \' ] 7rCXCLV V?TEL7rOV TOvcoE TOVC (XVTOVC I\OYOVC, ..... , \ ,~'" '" TLfL(XV 7rOI\W T7JVO , EK TEKVWV aEL TEKVOLC fLV7]fL7J1I 7r(Xp(Xyy€AAOIlT(xC cbll €KVpCa.T~ 1171 7TCXLclv ()' V7TEL7TEiv Reiske. 1170-71 are either a generalizing addition or (with Reiske's conjecture) a poor alternative to 1172-73. X&pLII is already governed by one verb, and cbll €KVPC(xTE does not bear such close repetition. (9) HF 190 , \ t \' ~ _\', _., \ aV7]p 07TI\LrYJC OOVI\OC ECTL TWV O?TI\WV [ \.. 0" l' \' 0-K(xt TOLct CVJIT(XX ~LCLII ovct fLTJ ay(X OLC ,\ '0 ~ \' - - 1\ ] (XVTOC TE V7]K~ OEtI\Lq. TTl TWV ?TEI\(XC, 8p(Xvc(Xc TE ,\6YXTJII OVK €XEL TijJ CWfL(xTL 8 ' ,- I" '\' , (xV(xTOV (XfLvvaL, fLL(x1I EXWII (XI\KTJII fLOIlOIl Since the remarks about weapons must go together, Wilamowitz transposed 191-92 after 194, while Wecklein deleted them. Wilamo­ witz may have been right, inasmuch as whoever added them intended 8 Transposition of a self-contained and dispensable passage is never preferable to dele­ tion unless some palaeographical cause can be found for the error. Cf below on HF 191-92 (no.9). 10 Cf Fraenkel, Eranos 44 (1946) 86=Kleine Beitrage I (Rome 1964) 419. Other examples occur at Ajax 524, where EVyEVJ]C answers EVyEvfj in 480, and Phoen. 525, where 'T&Ma /)' EV­ CE{1EW XPEWV answers 493 a1TOC'TEpOVILaL 1Ta'Tpl/)oc aVOCLW'Ta'Ta (not the last words of the speech, but the last words of Polynices' case). 150 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m them to follow 194, but Wecklein was right inasmuch as they were not added by Euripides. They say the same thing twice, the first time in questionable syntax,ll and they kill off the hoplite yet again when his death has already been caused by a broken spear. Even if 191-92 made acceptable sense after 194, transposition would not be a sounder remedy than deletion. Dispensable lines that form a syntactical unit will very seldom have been displaced by accident. In this passage there is nothing to cause such an accident,12 and deliber­ ate transposition would have been entirely pointless. (10) Ion 1354 10. cb p,aKapUov p,Ot cpacp,aTwv ~S' ~p,'pa. P \.Q I ", ..., I R. llafJwv vvv aVTa T'Y}V TEKOVCav EK7TOVE£. ... ~" \(J' 'A I~' E' I 0' .. 7Tacav u E7TEIl wv Ctao VpW1iTJC opOVC • I~" I ... 0 ... ~,., I YVWCTI Tao aV'TOC. TOV EOV 0 EKaTt CE "(j .1.' , l' ... , ,~,. ~ I~ I E pE.,.a T • W 7Tat. Kat Tao a7TooLowp,L COt. a KEivoc aK'AEVCTOV p,' lfJOVA-r}OTJ AafJEiv 1360 ..., 0'" ~, t 'Q 1\ 0' ., , , " cwcat • OTOV 0 EfJOVIlE OVVEK OVK EXW MYEtvt·13 ,,~ ~'O ... " • 0 1 I ~ TlOEt OE VTJTWV OVTtC av pW7TWV TaOE " f...'~' ., • ~ , ExoVTac TJp,ac. ovo tV'lv KEKpvp,p,Eva. , "",,, "C' ..... ",y Kat xatp • tCOV yap C WC TEKOVC aC7Ta."op,at. [ap~a, s' OOEV C~V p,7JT€pa '7JTEiv CE XP-rJ' 1365 7TPWTOV P,€V Et TtC LlEAcpl8wv TEKovca CE 1356 10. PR. , 1 ~ "c '(j 0 ' EC TOVCoE vaovc E~E 7JKE 7Tap EVOC. " ~." fE"" 'c f ... ~,,, E7TEtTa 0 E t TtC /lilac. E~ 7Jp,wv 0 EXEtC ., .m. IQ 0'''' ... I ] a7TaVTa 'VOtfJov • OC p,ETECXE TTJC TVX7JC 7TClcav y' E1TEA8wv 'ACLa8' Evpcf,1TTJc 8' opovc. yvcf,cTJ Ta8' 7]VPE"C KaKa Kai. 7Tkr}ctov 7TapfjcOa Kw8vvwv €/Lol, ... • .,. <:' 1<:' \ I I VVV T av OWWC /LOL 7TOI\E"/LLWV TL/LwpLav KOVK €K7TOSii>V E" t. If 380-82 were to be an illustration of 367-79 or 367-72, the appro­ priate connexion would be not yap but Kat yap or OVTWC. Cf Septem 597- 614: CPE"U TOU ~vVo:AAaCCOVTOc opvdJoc /3POTOtC S{Kawv avSpa TO ret SVCCE"/3E"CT€POLe. EV 7TaVTt7TpaYE"L S' €c()' O/LLAtac KaKijc , ,~ , \, , 600 KaKWV OVO€V. Kap7Toe ov K0p-LeT€Oe ••• ff ~'r I 609 OVTwe 0 0 p-avTte • • • 383-85 draw a reasonable moral from the present case, so long as OP-LALq, means "nach dem Verhalten im Umgang» (Wecklein) and not "by the company they keep" (Denniston). Whether they are genuine depends partly on how corrupt they are.I9 396-400 are open to objections of a different kind. XWPE"tV XPE"WV (393)20 and the we clause (394-95) suggest that the speech is at an end ;21 and the oracle implied by 399-400, which apparently promises the return of Orestes, is ignored by Electra and nowhere else mentioned either in the play or outside it.22 19 Euripides would have written PPOTWV (Keene) and something other than t/JpovqCf:O'. probably not 't/JpovTJC€O' (II. 15.104, AP 10.66, Cebes 41). For Kf:VWV 80gacjLaTwV 7fA~p£LC ef. Isoc. 8.75 lA7fl8wv Kf:VWV ()VTa jL£cTC5v, Timon fr.ll av8pW1TOt Kf:V€fjC Ol-,JCLOC ;jL1TA€OL aCKol. 10 Mr Barrett raises the important question of the exits and entrances in 357-407: what does the aiiTovpyoc do, and what do the o1Ta8ol do ? The aVTovpyoC can hardly be discussed in his presence, and yet there is no sign either that he leaves the stage at 363 or that he re­ turns at 404. The 61Ta8ol are ordered at 360 to take the gear inside, and yet they are still outside at 393-94 (awaiting an order from Orestes himself ?). Two further difficulties about 360: can the aVTovPYOC give orders to the o1Ta8ot of Orestes? can he sandwich an imperative addressed to the o1Ta8ol between two coordinate imperatives addressed to Orestes and Pylades ? The case against 360 is strong, and so is the point that the aiITovpyoc should not be discussed in his presence. Could it be that at 363 the aiITovpyOc retires to the back of the stage and busies himself with the door (ef 357 OVKOVV 1TaAa£ xpfjv To,c8' aVf:1TTox(JaL 7fOAac;), so that Orestes has time for a brief conversation with Electra (the briefer the better) before the aiITovpyoc rejoins the company round about 393 ? U Cf Ed. Fraenkel, SBMunehen 1963, Heft I, 66-67. II Wecklein was at least alive to the difficulty: "diese Worte, welche fur Elektra noch nicht verstandlich sind, spricht Orestes zu Pylades." At what point, then, does Orestes turn from Electra to Pylades ? and why should Pylades need oracular assurances about the return of Orestes? Incidentally, 0 7fapwv in 391 must surely be the aVTovpyoC. Orestes, were he present, would be a worthy host; he is not present, but the man who is, the aVrovpyoc, is no less worthy. The point would come across more clearly if 396--98 were placed between 154 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m (13) IT 1411 aU' Ep7T£. O£Cf.La Kat {3p6xovc Aa{3wv X£POLV' ,\\,.~ I I £, f.L'YJ yap Otof.La V7}V£f.LOV Y£V7}C£TaL. ,,, '\ \ ~ i:.' , OVK £CTW £1\7TLC TOLC SEVOLC cW77}p,ac. [ ' ~, " "1·\" • ~ 1TOV'TOV u avaKTWp I\LOV T £7TLCK01TE' C£f.LVOC IIocELowv. II£Ao7TtoaLC 0' JvaV'Ttoc, \ ~ 'i:. \'A I , Ka, vvv 7TapE':, £L TOV yaf.LEf.LVOVOC yovov \ \ \1 r" , _ COL KaL 1TOI\LTaLC. WC £OLKEV. £V X£POLV Aa{3£Lv T' aO£AcP~v. ~ cP6vov TOV A13AlO, , , fJ~ ~A"\' ] af.LVYJf.LoVEVTOV £q. 1TpOOOVC aI\LCK£TaL. Del. England. After the urgency and confidence of 1411-13, which in any case bring the speech to a perfect conclusion, WC €OLK£V (1417) is alone sufficient to condemn "these halting lines, with their super­ fluous and ill-timed piece of mythologizing." (14) ReI. 988 013 yap yaf.LEL T~VO' OVT£ cVyyovoc clfJEV " , "\ \ ,~, '\ \', I -1..' , -I.i:. OV'T alV\oc OVO£LC, alV\ £yw c'f' a1Tu.s0f.LaL. ,\ \" ~'fJ" \ \ \ \ I £, f.L'YJ 7TpOC OLKOVC ovvaf.L£ • alV\a 7TpOC V£KpOVC. [ ' ~ ~ , • \ fJ-\ , 'TL TaV'Ta; oaKpvoLC £C TO 'YJI\V TPE1T0f.LEVOC .\ \ .,." -\ \ ,,~ , £I\£WOC 'YJV av f.LaIV\OV 'YJ opaCT'YJpLOC. ~, .~ ~ ~ \ A \, A KT£ W • £, OOKH CO,· OVCKI\£WC yap OV KT£VHC A\ \ , I ~, ~ '() \ , f.LaIV\OV y£ f.L£V'TO' TOLC £f.L0LC 1T£' OV I\OYOLC. " ,.,. ~ , \ ~ , ,. \ \ 'R ] W 'l1C OLKaLa Ka, oaf.LapT EyW l\afJw. Del. K. Schenkl, ZostG 25 (1874) 451. Once again a perfect conclusion, this time one full of defiance, has been ruined by an interpolator. 991-992 can only bear one sense without violence to the Greek, namely "why (sc. have I been saying) this? (sc. because) if I had cried like a woman, I should have been pitiable rather than a man of action"; but to arouse pity in Theonoe was the sole purpose of his speech, and he has already explained to her why he will not resort to tears (947-53). The deletion of 991-92 leaves KT£LV'. £l OOK£L COL (993) altogether obscure: is it a gesture of defiance or submission? If of sub­ mission, why does he suddenly submit? If of defiance, what does it add to the speech but confusion? for after he has been saying "if you tell your brother and the pair of you try to kill me and take Helen, I shall kill both Helen and myself," "go ahead and kill me" would only 382 and 391. These three lines cannot stand in their present position, but they could have been moved to it, rather than written for it, by the man who added 399-400. It is not clear whether this transposition would entail the deletion of 392. MICHAEL D. REEVE 155 be intelligible accompanied by o~V and followed by a summary of his reasons why the attempt is not worth making. Only one method of rescuing the passage deserves to be considered, J. Jackson's deletion of 992 and substitution of TP€7To/L€{}a; for TP€7TO­ /L€VOC in 991. "When Menelaus, in the heat of his oratory, arrives at the chilling disyllable V€KPOVC, his voice falters a little, and, to brush away the involuntary tear, he lifts his hand ... Then comes the recollec­ tion that he is the son of Atreus ... and he rises to the typical bravado: 'kill, if kill thou wilt', followed by the typical relapse into the better part of valour: 'or preferably listen to reason'" (Marginalia Scaenica [Oxford 1955] 37). This piece of melodrama sounds plausible enough until the eye lights upon the chilling disyllable Vf:KPW in 986, which has no perceptible effect on Menelaus' resolution. (15) Phoen. 518 aA'" EL /Lev a""wc T7]VSE yfjv OLK€iv {}'AEt, fIt: ' " ~" <, {} , €!:,€CT . €KEtVOV U OVX EKWV /LE T}co/Lat. [aPXEW 7Tapov /LOt, TipSE SOVAEVCW 7TOT€;] Del. Kirchhoff. The line adds nothing to JKElvov S' OUX EKWV /L€{}~co/Lat and stands apart from the syntax of 503-19. (16) Or. 360 'A' "", ya/LE/LVOVOC /LEV yap TvXac T}7TtCTa/LT}V [ '{}' ., \~, "\] Kat avaTOV 0 up 7TpOC Ua/LapTOC WI\ETO MaMCf 7Tp0clcxwv 7Tpo/pav "Der vor 367 uberflussige Vers wird von Dindorf getilgt," Wecklein. Since TvXac can only stand for {}avaTov, the Kat is indefensible, and the intervention of WAETO makes MaMCf 7Tpodcxwv 7Tpippav ambiguous.23 (17) Or. 552 7TaTiJp /LEv JcpVT€VcEV /LE, c~ S' €TtKT€ 7Taic, \ "" \ Q A , "\ \ ' TO C7TEP/L apovpa 7Tapal\afJovc al\l\ov 7Tapa' [ " ~\ " ,,' , " ] av€v DE 7TaTpoc T€KVOV OVK €tT} 7TOT avo '\ I '1" _, , , EfloytCa/LT}v OW TctJ YEVOVC apXT}YETrJ t/La""ov a/Lvvatt Tfjc l)7TOCTaCT}C Tpocpac. Del. Nauck. "Wie ist es moglich, dass ein vernunftiger Dichter den Gedanken ausspricht • ohne Vater gibt es kein Kind', wenn er nicht etwa eine komische Wirkung beabsichtigt, die hier vorauszusetzen 23 Di Benedetto repeats Hermann's argument that the ambiguity would have been resolved in delivery. How? If by pitching 361 on a different register, that in itself is a con­ demnation of the line, because TvXac and 8a.vaTov go together in sense and syntax. 156 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, ill keinem einfallen wird ;24 wie ist es denkbar, dass er in so platter Form redet ... 1" (Euripideische Studien I [MhnAcStPetersbourg SER. VII 1.12 (1859)] 44). The language of the line is not in itself impossibly platt, but the rest of the passage is much less direct, just as its argu­ ment is much less crass. (18) Or. 557 -q C-T] 8€ (}vya77Jp-p:rrrlp' al80vp,at MYE:w- ,~ , . , ,\ ,'/'' totOl,ctV vp,E:Vaw£c£ KOVXt cW-ypocw , ) ~ \ " \1 " , '" \1 E:C avopoc 1]E:£ I\E:KTP • E:p,aVTOV, 7Jv l\E:yw ~ " 'I: ~ \ 'I: ~.., KaKWC E:KE:W7JV, E:':. E:pW, I\E:':. W 0 0p,WC. [A" () '1" \, ~ I '] tyl,c oc TJV 0 KpV7TTOC €V oop,OtC 1Toac. ... " , , ~, "() I TOVTOV KaT€KT€W , €1T' 0 € vca p,7JT€pa, " \ ~ ~ '\\\ ~ I avoaa P,€V opWV, al\l\a Tl,p,WPWV 1TaTpt. Does Tyndareus really need to know that "her clandestine husband was Aegisthus" 125 and does anything turn on his identity 1 (19) Or. 579 1TPOC (}€Wv-EV ou Ka,\ctJ P,€V €P,vr7C(}7JV (}€WV ,/.. , ~ Iy , ~ \ ~ \ \ I -y0vov Ol,Ka~wv· E:l, O€ 07J Ta p'7JT€POC ..... ,' """~" () I aywv €7T1Jvovv, T£ p, av €opac 0 KaT avwv; ,,, ... , I "E I OVK av P,€ p,l,CWV aVE:Xop€V pWVCl,V; "" \\ I , ()' 7J p'7JTpl, p,E:V 1Tap€l,Cl, cvp,p,axol, €al" ~~, " ~ \ \ ,~ , TqJ 0 ov 1Tap€£Cl" p,al\l\ov 'T}0£K7Jp,€vqJ; [ ' ,/.. , () "'1" \ CV TOt -yVT€VCaC vyaT€p, W Y€POV, KaK7JV • '\ ~ \ \ \ , () I a1TWI\ECaC p,E· ol,a TO yap K€tV7JC pacoc . (}'" , 1TaTpoc CT€P7J El,C E:YE:VOp,7JV P,7JTPOKTOVOC. I' According to Eust. 1498.58-59, Euripides 1Tf:p~f:cvplx9-q 8f:a'TptKwC for the line, aKovcac 'TO q.86p.£VOv'TO '&J/w a~ p.Tf'Tp6c, W K&8app.· EVP~1Tl8Td. E 554 is vaguer: lIiYf:'Tal'T" a?J-rov f:l1T6V'TOC 'ToVro f:lPTJKlvm 'ww 8~ p."I'Tp6c, W K&8app.· EVP~1Tl8rJ;'. The story is presumably of the same vintage as e.g. Diog.Laert. 2.33, Pluto Mor. 19E, Sen. Ep. 115.15; "Dass die Komoedie, die eine solche Tacdosigkeit des Euripides nicht ungerugt gelassen hatte, den Vers gekannt habe,lasst sich nicht erweisen" (A. Nauck, op.cit. 45). Cf Clem.Alex. Strom. 2.142.3. 26 Murray in his apparatus on 561 prints an impossible conjecture: ot Nauck (for OJ, a word too archaic for EUripides (cf Denniston on El. 924). Nauck's reason was this: "Der Artikel wiirde nur dann statthaft sein, wenn ein KpV'Tr'TOC 1T6ctc der Clytaemnestra bereits erwahnt ware und nun gesagt werden sollte, dieser sei Aegisthus gewesen. Eine derartige Erwahnung ist nicht vorangegangen; vielmehr solI ausgedriickt werden IOu.rrmp.~c'Tpa KPV1T'TOV f:1Xf: 1T6ctv" (op.cit. [on no.17] 45). Surely, however, 0 KPV1T'TOC 1T6c" is easily enough extracted from 557-59, for ratOt vp.lvatot KovXl ccIxf>POVf:C will oftener than not be clandestine. It is tempting to wonder whether the interpolation was due to a mistaken belief that the future tenses in 560 needed something to refer forward to. In that case Nauck's conjecture would have more justification, unless the name of Aegisthus was supposed to be a rude word. MICHAEL D. REEVE 157 588 • ~ '01:' , .. , , , OPCfC; OVCC€WC al\oxov ov KaT€KTaV€ '1"':\1 , \, I , I .I. "11\€fl-axoc ov yap €7T€yafl-€' 7TOC€' 7TOCLV. , ~)" tI t \ , I ] fl-€V€, 0 €V OtKO'C vy£€C €VVaT"1pwv. • ~ 'A '\ \ '" .J.. ',\ <1<:' opq,c 7TO""WV • oc fl-€cofl-'f'a ovc €Opac I R A , , ,1..,' va,wv t'POTOtCL CT0fl,a V€fl,€t ca't'€eTaTOV' TOUTeP mOOfL€VOe TTJV T€KoiJeav EKTavov. '''''' t ..... 0' , , ..., €K€£VOV"1Y€£C avocwv Kat KT€W€T€' , .... PI' ", C:K€'VOC "1fl-apT • OVK €yw. Dindorf's deletion of 588-90 is now commonly accepted (see Di Bene­ detto), but it only serves to isolate 585-87 even further. If all six lines are deleted, Orestes passes from one divine ally to another26 and leads up in all seriousness to his strongest argument. (20) Or. 682 'OplcT', Jyw TO' COY KaTa,SoiJfl-a, Kapa Kat gVfL7Tovfjeat eo,e KaKo,CL {Jov'\OfLat· [Kat XpTJ yap OVTW TWV OfLatfL6vwv KaKa gVVC:KKOfL{~C:'V, ovvafLtv ~v ot00 (}c:6c, (} ' \, \"] vnCKOVTa Ka, KT€tVOVTa TOVC c:vaVTtOVC' \ <:" .,. <:' , () \ () '"' , r '"' TO 0 av ovvae at 7Tpoe €WV XPrJ ,:>W TVXC: tv. 686 del. Hermann, "neque enim continuo interfici inimicos necesse est, quo quis aliquem ab eorum saevitia defendat"; to which Wecklein adds, "wenn Menelaos seine Bereitwilligkeit zu sterben erkHirte, wiirde er sich die folgende Ausrede abschneiden." Pedantic objections, perhaps; but to 684-85 there are two others: the previous mention of 8vvafl-tc (685) takes the force out of TO 0' ao ovvae(}a, in 687, and the use of ofLalfLovc:c for 'kinsmen' (684) is as much a singularity as the use of ofLa'fLo, for 'kinsmen' in 806.27 "Wer mit der Logik und ihrer Schere an die Rede geht, kann viel wegschneiden ... Menelaos dreht sich ja im Kreise herum und sagt eigentlich alles zweimal," Wilamowitz, Hermes 59 (1924) 261= Kleine Schriften IV 355. Unfortunately mere repetition is not the only thing wrong with the speech, and even editors who leave the text un­ changed would do a service by printing a number of diagnostic con­ jectures in the apparatus, for instance 694-95 del. Weil, RevPhil 18 (1894) 208; 696 (}vfL6e Nauck; 702-03 delebat Hartung; 706-07 del. Gow, 18 Mr Barrett points out that the transition would be even smoother if ()€ol were read for ()€al in 583. 27 See part I (GRBS 13 (1972]) 260 n.38 and cf. Bur. Supp. 1035, IT 1402, Jebb on OC 330. 158 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m CQ 10 (1916) 80-81; 714" Apyovc y' €VEK' av Hermann; 714-16 del. Din­ dorf. (21) Or. 931 cdc 8' e~A8E cVyyOVOC, "\ l: ~ J "rI ~ 'T I I EI\E~E o· .It: Y7Jv .Lvaxov KEKTTJI-"EVOt, • ~ " J~' ~ .. , v(.LtV a(.Lvvwv OVOEV 'lcCOV 7J 7TaTpt " " , , " "J..,' EKTEwa (.L7JTEp • Et yap apcEvwv ~ovoc " t' ~ , ,I..(J I ,,, , '" ECTat yvvat~tv OCLOC, OV ~ avotT ET av (J I .. l:' ~ \ , , V[JCKOVTEC, "1 yvvat~t oOVI\EVE£V XpEWV. 938 [ • ,~, ~, ,.. ~ ~ , TovvaVTLOV OE opaCET 7J opacat XpEWV' ~ , ,. ~~ \' 'J ~ , VVV (.LEV yap "1 TTpooovca I\EKTP E(.LOV TTaTpoc '(J .~,~, ~, TE V7JKEV' €I. OE 07J KaTaKTEVEtTE (.LE. ., , ~ • .1..8 ' 8' " o VO(.LOC aVEtTa£, KOV ~ avot V'[JCKWV T£C avo . ~ '\ " , ] WC T7JC yE TOI\(.L"1C ov C7Tav£c YEV7JCETat. Del. Wecklein (938 et 941 iam Schenkl mutato 942,938--41 in suspicionem vocaverat Weil). The trouble is located in 938 and KOU cp8avot (JvnCKWV TtC av in 941. "Fur 8pacET' ~ 8pa.ca£ konnte man eher TTpagET' ~ TTpa.ga£ erwarten" (Wecklein), and indeed miisste man if the implied condition is yvva£g~ 8ovAEVOVTEC ;28 if, on the other hand, the implied condition is e(.LE: KaTaKTE{vavTEc, nothing in the preceding lines has paved the way for this implication (which is why Weil read 8~ for 8l and punctuated the line as a question). As for KOU cp(Javot (JvnCKWV T£C av, the reappear­ ance of this idiom after only five lines is disquieting enough, but even more disquieting is the change of sense that it has undergone. Weck­ lein establishes with the aid of seven parallels (1551, Ale. 662, Tro. 456, IT 245, Held. 721, Ar. Pluto 485, 874) that ou cp(Javo£T' ET' av (JvnCKOVTEC. ~ yvvatgi 8ovAEVE£V xpEdJV means "ihr dlirftet nicht mehr zu fruh sterb­ en (es ist hohe Zeit fur euch zu sterben, d.i. seid nur gleich auf den Tod gefasst), wenn ihr euch nicht in die Knechtschaft der Frauen ergeben wollt," or in other words that ou cp(Javo£T' av is equivalent to an imperative; but though he remarks that the idiom is more aptly used in 936 and 1551, he does not notice that 942 requires KOU cp8avo£ 8vnCKWV T£C av to be interpreted as a future indicative, i.e. "you will be murdered before you know where you are, because they will certainly have the nerve to do it."29 It is inconceivable that one poet could have used such a distinctive phrase twice in five lines in different senses, but 28 On Spav intrans.=7rp&ccew intrans. see Fraenkel on Phoen. [376] (op.cit. [supra n.21] 22-Z4). II Some authors use the idiom in this way (LSJ cfo8&vw Iv.z.b). MICHAEL D. REEVE 159 quite conceivable that an interpolator misunderstood Euripides' use and did not realize his own was different. (22) Or 1045 E 't "J. 1\ ''t () , ,,~ I ,,, . L. W .. /-M\TaT , W 1TO E"LVOV YJotCTOV T E"XWV TijC cijc cXaE"Acpijc OvoJLa Kat tPVX~V JLlav.30 O " I '/: I " '.1. Ll Ll 1\ R. EK TOt fLE 'r'J~ EtC' Kat C afLEt'f'acuat uEI\W [r/>LA6T7]'TL XEtPWV' Ti yap ET' alooiJp.aL 7'aAaCj]- ... ") ~ '"J. - "'"J. '\ ' , , I W CTEPV CXUEI\'f'YJC, W 'f"I\OV 1TPOC1TTVYJL EP.OV. [ ,~,., I~ , , ' , I Tao aVTL 1Tawwv Kat yaJLYJMOV I\EXOVC 1TpoccP(}lyp.aT' cXJLcpt TOLC TaAamWpOtC 1T&pa.] 1050-51 del. Oeri. 1047-51 break a sequence of couplets (1022-5931 ) at the point where a reciprocal action makes parallelism most desir­ able.32 1051 has been deleted by many editors since Nauck because of its resemblance to 1026, but 1050 cannot stand on its own. In 1048 the phrase cPLAOT7]TL XEtPWV is an extraordinary mixture of mental and physica1.33 (23) Or. 1191 tE'\ , Ll , " M 1\' ~ ~ I\EV7JC uavovcYJc, YJV TL EVEI\EWC CE OPC! " ,~ ., ~ , " "J. '\ , ~ YJ TOVUE Kap.E-'1TCXV yap EV 't"I\OV TOUE-, \' , t"J. , tE ' C ' ,/.. 'i.' , , I\Ey WC 't'0VEVCEtC PJLWV7JV' ~ t'f'OC OE XPYJ ~I "~ (J' , '" UEpTJ1TpOC aVTTJ1TapUEVOV C1Tacav-r EXEtV. '" ''1' '() ~ ''1' I Kav JLEV CE CltJ~TJ JLYJ aVELV XPT1~WV KOPYJV [ 1\6 '\ tE" I ~ , .~, • " ] lr.lEVEI\EWC I\EV7JC 1TTWP. WWV EV aLJLaTL , 'e ~e '0 ' '>.'1 p.E" EC 1TE1Tac aL 1TaTp' 1Tap E"VOV oEJLac " ~, '/:. ()' \ ~,/.., YJv 0 o!>v vJLov JLYJ KpaTwv 't'poV7JJLaToc I \ \ ,/..''1' ()' '>." KTEtVTJ CE, Kat CV C'f'a~E 1Tap EVOV OEPYJV. so The couplet is corrupt (cf J. Jackson. Marginalia Scaenica [Oxford 1955] 142). 31 On 1024 see part I (GRBS 13 [1972]) 256-57. 32 Deletions that break a sequence merit the same suspicion as transmitted lines that break a sequence. Hipp. 779 (del. West, Philologus 110 [1966] 155) is not so objectionable that the sequence of couplets need be broken. 33 Mr Barrett writes: "1050-51 must go; not because of the resemblance (fortuitous?) between 1026 and 1051, but because (a) Orestes and Electra have not been bent on incest; the lines surely belong to the farewell oflovers prevented (whether by death or otherwise) from marrying, and I suppose them to have been interpolated here from such a context in another play. In our context, marriage and children are wholly irrelevant. (b) 7Tp6c1TTVyp.a indicates the inception of the embrace from which Electra breaks away with 1052 LMrT'Y)'TL X€LPWV'] 'Tl yap £'T' al8ofip.at 'T&>.ac; ~ C'TEPV' &8€Acf>ijc, ~ cf>lAov 7Tp6c7T'TVYp.' Jp.6v. (They embrace.) After the future 1"I}gm ("I can't hold myself in much longer") I should expect the giving way just to happen. not to be announced with an expression of intention (OEAW)." 160 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, III Del. Nauck. Both names appear at the beginning of the speech (1191): the repetition of both is inartistic, of Menelaus' totally unnecessary. Since Menelaus' awareness of Helen's death is the premise that Elec­ tra sets out from, the phrase "seeing Helen's corpse in blood" can hardly be meant to add anything new. (24) Ajax 312 " "" ~ " , 1\' " €1T€LT €/Lo£ TCX O€W €117]1T€LI\7]C €117] , '.J. ' -, "8 €£ /L7] ",CXVO£7]V 1TCXV TO CVVTVXOV 1TCX OC [ "', ..... , ""] KCXV7JP€T €V TCfJ 1TPCXY/LCXTOC KVpOL 1TOT€ • , , .J. '"\ ~, , /: ' KCXYW, ",LI\OL, u€LCCXCCX TOV~ €LPYCXC/L€VOV "\ /: -., ,/: ' €I\€~ CX 1TCXV OCOV1T€P €~ 'Y]1TLCTCX/L'Y]V. Del. Nauck. " ... and he asked what situation he was in" adds nothing to 312-13 and is unutterably tame by comparison: Ajax is not asking but threatening, and it is his threats that terrify Tecmessa (315).34 (25) Ajax 323 VVV 0' EV TOLq,O€ K€lJL€vOC KCXKfj TVX'D " (,,, " Q .... CXCLTOC cxV7Jp, CX1TOTOC, €V /L€COLC ,...OTOLC C£O'Y]POK/LfjCLV T}cvxoc 8CXK€L 1T€CWV, , ~ -\', ., ~, , KCX£ u7]I\OC €CTLV WC TL UPCXC€£WV KCXKOV. [ -, \\' ,~, ] TOLCXVTCX ycxp 1TWC KCXL l\€y€L KWOVP€TCXL. Del. Nauck. Ajax is 1]CVXOC (325). The wording of the line derives III part from 383 gvv TijJ O€ijJ 1Tac Kcx2 y€Aq, KclJOVP€TCXL. (26) Ajax 961 ot o· 03v y€AWVTWV KamxcxLp6vTWV KCXKOLC A -~." , Q\ , \' '0 TOLC TOVO • LCWC TOL, K€£ ,...I\E1TOVTCX /L7] 1T0 ovv, 8 ' ,,, "i: ' ' ' ''' CXVOVT CXV OL/LWS€LCXV €V Xp€LCf OopOC. ot yap KCXK02 YVW/LCXLCL Taycx{}ov X€POLV " ,,, , , Q'\ €XOVT€C OVK LCCXCL 1TPW TLC €K,...CXI\T/. 966 [ ' \ \ 'e ..., "\' €/LOL 1TLKpOC T€ V7JK€V 7] K€LVOLC YI\VKVC, ~ ..... ~, '1' \ , , e A CXVTCfJ OE TEfY1TlIOC WV ycxp 'rJpCXC 'rJ TVXEW • , 0' • - 0' ., "0 \ EKT'rJCCX CXVTCfJ, CXVCXTOV OV1TEP 'rJ €I\EV. , '" - ... "" , \ ... ... , T£ O'rJTCX TOVO €1T€YY€I\CfJ€V CXV KCXTCX; {} A'{) '" " If] €OLC T€ V7JK€V OVTOC, OV K€LVOLCW, OV. \ ... • '0'" \' A tf3 r' 1TpOC TCXVT OVCC€VC €V K€VO£C V PL,:>€TW· A " \ 'A "" , '\\" \ LCXC ycxp aVTOLC OVK€T ECTW, CXI\I\ €JLO£ \ \ " \, "" I\L1TWV CXV£CXC KCX£ yoovc OLOLX€TCXL. U Here, at least, 1TOTf cannot be called an "interpolatorisches Flickwort"; Ajax asked 1TOU 1TOT' flp.l1Tpayp,aToc;. MICHAEL D. REEVE 161 Del. Nauck (followed without reasons in GRBS 11 [1970] 286 n.8). The lines are open to five objections, two of them insurmountable and one of the two by itself decisive. (1) Since Tecmessa changes the subject in 966, the asyndeton is unjustifiable.35 (2) There is no parallel for the syntax of 966 (the two offered by Jebb both contain the verb f3ov­ AOI-'CXL). Emendations of if give either poor sense or impossible idiom (no use of n, for instance, is remotely like the one introduced by Schneidewin here). Both these objections can be evaded by supplying a suitable line before 966. (3) 969 is unmetrical. Remedies are avail­ able, but they are usually spurned. (4) 970 is just silly. «His death con­ cerns the gods, not them" (Jebb) flatly contradicts 961-65 and 971-72. Another interpretation that the Greek perhaps allows (cf. Andr. 334 T€(JJIT}Ka o~ cfj (JVYCXTpt) is "he has been killed by the gods, not them" (cf 950-53 TE. OUK ..Ei.pEt 'TTpo.pactC 1j TVXOVC' o.\ov; is wrongly ascribed to Euripides (Wilamowitz, Hermes 40 [1905] 134=Kleine Schriften IV 188; add that Euripides can hardly have used 'TTl/)'TTOT' of the future). 39 Perhaps that explains "Qu. o~ y&.p c' £xpijv" (Blaydes). MICHAEL D. REEVE 163 Del. Jahn. Logic demands not 7T(xv()' opav but 1TaVT' EloEVCtt, and though all OaLJlov€C are expected 1TCXVT' EloEVaL (657-58), not all OaL/LOVEC are €K LiLac. (31) OT 68 73 t\ ~,..,. ..... U " I T)V ° EV CK01TWV T)VPLCKOV Lacw /L0VT)V, I ,/ I: A'" ,~ ,.,. / TaVT7}V E1Tpat;a· 1TaLOa yap 11'1EVOLKEWC TE' " A R" 'no' n.pEOVT , E/LaVTOV ya/LfJPov, EC Ta v LKa " .1. m'R ~, ()' < '() ()' " E1TEJl'f'a '¥OLfJOV uW/La , wc 1TV OL OTt <;' A " ,/.. A , <;' ., " opWV T) n 'f'WVWV TT)VOE pVCaL/LT)V 1TOI\LV. [Kat /L' 7]/Lap 7fOT) tV/L/LETPOV/LEVOV Xp6vCfJ \ .... 1 I ..... \', I I\V1TEL Tt 1TpaCCEL' TOV yap ELKoroc 1TEpa " \' A ()' '] a1TECTt 1TI\ELW TOV Ka T)KOVTOC XPOVOV. ~ ~, ~ ..... , " , oTav U LKT)TaL, TYJVLKaVT EyW KaKoc /L~ opWV !XV E iYJV 1TClv()' DC' !Xv oYJ,\o i: {)E6c. Del. L. Dindorf, NJbb Abt.1, 24 (1878) 321. HWenn Oed. Tyr. 73 Oedi­ pus sagt ... , so ist weder in den Worten 7]fl-ap tVfl-fl-ETPOVfl-EVOV Xp6vCfJ ein sinn noch die construction AV1TEi: Tt 1TpacCEL durch ahnliche warter, welche eine besorgnis ausdriicken, da AV1TEi:V nur _Q" , • () A W E LV a7TaVTac TOV ac'C"J-'YJ, TOV EK t:WV cpavlVT' avayvov Kat tylvovc TOU Aatovt.44 Del. Herwerden.45 Even if it were true that Oedipus had been brought 43 The suggestion being made here is not necessarily that he took 'TOV av8pa 'TOWOV in 236 to mean the harbourer, as some scholars in the 1860s did, but that he took 236-43 to be directed at the subject rather than the object of the infinitives in 238-41. For ap.opov= Mcp.opov in 248 cf 11. 6.408 ap.p.opov; elsewhere in tragedy ap.opoc, ap.p.opoc and ap.oLpoc all mean expers. In proximity to KaKov KaKWC the meaning of EK'TPUPaL {3lov is presumably EK'TPL{3.qVaL (cf 428) rather than 'Tpl{3€LV f3lov (cf El. 602). " Can it seriously be doubted that these words are corrupt? Since the proclamation re­ ferred to is clearly 236-43 (1382 wlMv a'ITaV'Tac=241 wO€;'v • •• 'ITIfV'Tac, 1382-83 uc£{3f1 ••• avayvov=241 p.uxcp.a'Toc, 1382-83 EK O€WV cf>avtV'T' ••. =242-43 ••• O€oli • •• Egtcf>TJV€V . .. ), 'TOV uc£{3f1 K'T>'. is not Oedipus but the murderer, to whom ytvovc 'Toli Aatov does not apply. Something like xOovoc p.Llxc'Topa is required (cf 353); Herwerden's ytvovc u>'&c'Topa, which has palaeographical attractions ('Toli Aatov a mistaken gloss on ytvovc), cannot quite bear this sense (at OC 773 the reference of ytvoc 'TClmiv is fixed by the whole phrase 'lT6>'LV 'T€ ••• -n7v8€ Ka~ ytvoc 'TO 'lTav). U Where? Not in Exercitationes Criticae (The Hague 1862), where he merely offers c'Tpacp€lc for 'Tpaq,€{c (p.116); perhaps ad loco in his edition of 1866, which I have not seen. 166 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m up in splendour at Thebes, what has that to do with his self-inflicted exclusion from the temples 146 (35) T h 246 D .!: ., , ~" ,>I rae . E. '/ Ka7Tt, T(Wrn rn 7TOI\€t, TOV aCK07TOV Xp6vov (3E{3c1c tjv ~JLEPWV avr]ptOJLov; L >I .,'" "~ 'At'~ , I. OVK, a/\/\a TOV JLEV 7TI\HCTOV €V VOOtc XPOVOV I f)' fI .I. ' " '" 'f) KaT€tXE , wc ",'Y}c aVToc, OVK EI\€V €POC • , ", '0 I ~ , I t'" '.1.0 I a/\/\ €JL7TOI\'Y} €t,C' TOV I\oyov 0 ov XP'Y} '" OVOV, I ~ Z' fI I .I.'" yvvat, 7TpocEt,vat, EVC OTOV 7TpaKTwp ",avrr [K€£VOC O~ 7TpaO€tc 'OJL~&'\TJ rfj {3ap{3&pqJ , "l: I , ., , " ] €VtaVTOV €'i,E7TI\'Y}C€V, WC aVTOC I\Ey€t, >I 't' I 0 ... "t', {3' XOVTWC €o'Y}X 'Y} TOVTO TOVV€WOC I\a WV " ()' fI .... (3 " t' I wc OpKOV aVTqJ 7TpOC al\wv OLWJLOCH • • • Del. Wunder. The lines are a more explicit version of 248-51; they probably began O{JK, &,\,\~ 7TpaO€tc KT'\, which was altered to K€£VOC o~ 7TpaO€lc so that both versions could be accommodated. 248-51 are clearly the original version, for three reasons: (1) 260-61 JL€Talnov JL6vov {3POTwV requires a previous reference to a god; (2) an answer containing TbV 7T'\€£CTOV xp6vov follows better on 246-47 than one con­ taining a bald lv,avT6v; (3) an interpolator can hardly have wanted to make the passage less explicit. (36) Traeh. 332 7TpbC o~ oWJLaTa ... >It' I • I 0' r 0 " xwpwJL€V 'Y}o'Y} 7TaVTEC, wc cv 0 EI\€tc It' " , t"'l: ... 0 ... C7T€VOTJC €yw T€ TavOOV E'i,apK'Y} n w. 335 A ,... ... {3" , 'fl NG. aVTOV yE 7TPWTOV awv aJLJLE,vac , 07TWC r .. '0" ... t"" >I "] Lf"a TJc aVEV TWVO ovcnvac ay€LC €CW '" ['] , t' ' " , '0 (\ t' ~ WV T OVuEV ELC'Y}Kovcac EKJLa TJc a OE'. [ I " , ", , "] TOVTWV EXW yap 7TaVT E7TtCT7JfL7Jv €yw. D ' t'" I ~ , t" ',/.,.' {3 , E. n 0 €cn j TOV JL€ T7JVO €",tcTaCaL a"v j 340 A () "" , " , , , ~ \' , NG. CTa HC aKOVCOV' Kat, yap OVOE TOV 7Tapoc ~() I" 't" ... t' ... JLV ov JLaT7Jv 7JKovcac, OVO€ VVV OOKW. D I " t'... t' ~, "'0 " E. 7TOT€POV €KELVOVC 07JTa OEVP av tc 7Tal\W , ~ " ~ t' I "l: ~ 0 I, KaI\WJLEV,7J fLot TaLCO€ T E'i,€'7T€LV EI\€tcj A \ .... ~ I , ,~'" ,~, " NG. co, TatcOE T OVOEV Hpy€Tat, TOVTOVC u Ea. U Herwerden deleted the line "weil Tpar/J£Lc besagen wiirde, dass Odipus in Theben er­ zogen worden sei; aber die tragische Konsequenz ist eine andere als die pragmatische," K. Reinhardt, Sophokles3 (Frankfurt 1947) 273. Tragische Konsequenz would no doubt be satis­ fied by TayWV a7Tacl1c 'Acl8oc fLl1AoTp6r/Jov, if there is tragische Konsequenz in falling from a pinnacle you never occupied. MICHAEL D. REEVE 167 [336] and [T'] O. Hense, Studien zu Sophokles (Leipzig 1880) 77-79, [338] Nauck (the line is perhaps an interpolation," Blaydes, The Traehiniae of Sophocles [London 1871]). aVEu TWVO' in 336 preempts Deianira's question in 342-43.47 The impossible grammar and unusual order of 338 may also be put down to an interpolator, perhaps the same one.48 (37) Trach. 441 "Epw'TL fJ-€V vvv De'TLe aVTavLeTaTat mlKT1Je D1Twe €e XE'ipae ov KaAwe CPPOVE'i' 'f' '" , 0 A" 0 " OUToe yap apXEt Kat EWV 01Twe EI\Et [ ' A A~"" ., "A ] KafJ-OU YE' 1Twe u OU Xa'TEpae otac Y EfLOU j . " ,,' ,,...,, ~ \ ..... r,;:. ..... I weT E t 'TL TWfJ-ctJ Y CXvopt TrJOE 'T7} voecp , -l.O' ", , I\YJ'f' EV'TL fJ-EfL1TToe EtfJ-t, KapTCX fJ-atVOfLat, 1} rfjOE Tfj yuvaLKL, Tfj fJ-ETCXLTLq. TOU fJ-1J8EV aiexpou fL1J8' €fLot KaKOU 'TLVoc. Del. E. Wunder: "Faciunt enim et quae praecedunt verba, o.oToe apXEt Ka~ OEWV D1Twe O€AEL, et quae €fJ-OU pronomini addita yE particula est, ut sensus hic sit: Amor enim et dis imperat ad arbitrium et mihi adeo. Quod aliteraccipi non licet, quam sic, ut hoc dicere Deianira statuatur, difficilius esse, se vinci ab Amore quam deos ... Illud nemo dum advertit, omnino fieri non potuisse, ut Amoris in se Iolenque vim aliquam et potestatem esse Deianira diceret. Nam primum si mulier Graeca, viro nupta, succumbere se Amari deo ait, non possumus id aliter interpretari, quam sic, ut praeter maritum alius viri amore flagrare se fateatur ... Item nullo verbo indicatum a Sophocle est, Iolen amore Herculis captam fuisse; immo ita de ea loquitur, ita earn se gerentem in scenam producit, ut invitissimam in domum eius, a quo misere amabatur, abductam esse appareat." (38) T h 1146 "0' 1" , '" '" , rae. t , W TEKVOV' 1TaTYJp yap OVKET Ee'TL COt· I, \.... I "'" f I Kal\Et TO 1TCXV fLOt e1TEpfJ-a ewv ofJ-aLfLovwv, " <:' " " 'A" A , KCXI\Et OE TYJV TCXl\aLVaV I\KfL1JV1JV, ..:..Iwe I" r",~ fJ-CXTYJV CXKOL'TLV, we TEI\EVTataV EfJ-OV 1150 -l.' '0 00 -l.' ." 1'<:'" , 'f'YJIL YJV 1TV YJe E Ee'f'CXTWV oe 0 to EyW. H """ , 'O/~' '\\', I YL. a/\/\ OVTE fJ-YJTYJP EV ao ,a/\/\ E1TaK'TLq. 47 "Since no man in his senses would insert 336 with these lines there, it must have been inserted in place of them. I'm not quite sure just what it replaced: 337-44? 337-48 ? And since it must have been metrical, and since y' is no use to anybody, I wonder if it might have been p,aHuc av€v 7"(0115' oiJcnvac aYE'c €CW," Barrett . • 8 Jackson (op.cit. [supra n.30] 130) mends both by writing 'TOVTWV-EXW yap 7TaJIT'­ lmcrrlp,wv lycfJ, but at the cost of saying "I know, for I know." 168 INTERPOLATION IN GREEK TRAGEDY, m 'f1' II a 'a ." " .,'" .L LPVVUL CVjLf-'Ef-''YJICEV WCT EXEW Eopav. '''' '" \ \ \ C \ \ ·a ~, ,\ './... 7TaLOWV OE TOVC JLEV s Vl\I\af-'0VC aVTTJ TPE'YEL. \ """ \ a' a" , 'll TOVC 0 av TO .:7'YJf-''YJC acTV vaLOVTac jLauotc· 1155 ~jLE'iC 01 COL 7TapECjLEV. Ei TL XP~. 7TaTEp [7TpaTTELV. ICAV6VTEC EgV7T'YJPE~COjLEV]. H \~, l' " JI ER. cv 0 ovv alCOVE TOVPYOV. «Die hinreissend schone Herstellung dieses Passus stammt von Nauck ... Das iiberlieferte ~jLELC 0' OCOL (1155) mit seinem echten Plural ist unmoglich ... Vielmehr heisst ~jLELC 'ich', Hyllos bietet sich statt aller anderen dar, das ist einzig angemessen, und seine Worte V. 1155 in Naucks Emendation enthalten bei aller Schlichtheit eine so recht sophokleische Innigkeit, die allein schon die Richtigkeit dieser Ver­ besserung des schlechten handschriftlichen Wortlauts gewahrleistet" (Jachmann, op.at. [supra n.3] 190-91). For the expression cf 397 aM' EZ , r' ~ 1 '" 49 TL XPTJe"ELC LCTOpELV. 7TapELjL EYW. (39) Phil. 300 rp€p'. JJ T€ICVOV. VVV lCal T6 Tijc ~COV jLaOnc. , \ 'r a"'" \ • , TavT'{} 7TE/\ae"EL vaVf-'aT7]C OVOELC EICWV' , I ~ ,\,~, fI , I OV yap TLC opjLOC ECTLV OVO 07TOL 7T/\EWV EgEjL7TOA~CEL IC€POOC ~ gEvcfJCETaL. [OVIC EvOaO' Ol7TAOL TOLCL CcfJrppOCLV {1POTWV.] ".,. II " Tax OVV TLC alCwv ECXE. «Suspectus mihi videtur," Bergk; del. H. van Herwerden, Exerata­ nones Criticae (The Hague 1862) 122. The line blurs the EICWV eXlCWV dis­ tinction and has not been integrated into the syntax. (40) Phil. 382 TOLai}r' alCovcac lCagovELoLC{)E/,C lCalC" " \" ..... ,..... , 7T/\EW 7TpOC OLICOVC. TWV EjLWV T7]TWjLEVOC \ ..... I , ..... '0'" , 7TpOC TOV lCalCLCTOV lCalC lCalCwv OVCCEWC. 385 [ • • ~ ~ • \, 1\ ICOVIC aLTLwjLaL ICELVOV wc TOVC EV TE/\EL' 7T6ALC yap ECTL mxca TWV ~YOVjL€VWV 1 1 • "" , ~ a ~ cTpaToc TE cVjL7Tac OL 0 alCocjLovVTEC f-'POTWV oLoaclCaAwv A6YOLCL ytyvovTaL lCalCot.] \ , \ '\ ~. "'. 'A '''' ~ /\oyoc /\E/\EICTaL 7Tac 0 0 TpELOac CTvyWV , 'll'" \ () ~ " ./... '\ EjLOL U 0jLOLWC lCaL EOLC EL'YJ 'YL/\OC. u '1I'p&.rretv was not necessarily the interpolator's form: cf EI. 998 ~'\arrov codd., PeTsae 195 a,ac'1I'aparm codd., Andr. 939 4>vA&rmv codd. (Mr Barrett adds Phil. 1449 'lTparrftv codd., Ajax 1396 ,vp.'1I'parre codd.). MICHAEL D. REEVE 169 &KOCjWVVTEC (387) means 'insubordinate',50 and yet Odysseus is being relieved of blame precisely because he was obeying orders. The interpolator wanted a transition from 384 to 389-90, but none is necessary: 382-84 conclude the story (389 A6yoc ""AEKTat 7Tac), and the imprecation that follows is quite separate. The relevance of the im­ precation is explained by 319-26: Neoptolemus tells the story to dis­ credit the Atridae. (41) Phil. 1440 TOVTO 8' €VVOELCO', oTav 7TopBij'TE yaLav, EvcEj3ELV T