Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T22:49:05.090Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Further notes on the ‘Heraclidae’ of Euripides1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2013

James Diggle
James Diggle
Affiliation:
Queens' College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

      15-16 φεύγομεν δ᾿ ἀλώμενοι
      ἄλλην ἀπ᾿ ἄλληϲ ἐξορίζοντεϲ πόλιν

The children of Heracles are roaming from city to city in search of refuge. But every city which at first admits them soon yields to the threats of their pursuer Eurystheus and sends them on their way. ‘We wander in exile,’ says Iolaus, ‘from city to city, ἐξορίζοντεϲ. But ἐξορίζειν is a transitive verb, ‘send beyond the frontier, banish’ (LSJ), and so cannot, according to its normal use, have the Heraclidae as its subject. Normal use is illustrated by 257 ϲὺ δ᾿ ἐξόριζε κἆιτ᾿ ἐκεῖθεν ἄξομεν (‘you send them beyond the frontier and we shall take them from there’). LSJ create a special intransitive meaning for the present passage (‘c. acc. loci only … pass from one [city] to another’), just as they do for ὁρίζειν in a passage which Elmsley and others have compared with ours, Med. 433 (‘pass between or through’), though the verb there has its ordinary meaning, as both Pearson (here) and Page (ad loc.) show.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society (Second Series) , Volume 28 , 1982 , pp. 57 - 63
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

2. See also his note on S. fr. 941. 11, and Kühner-Gerth I. 90–6.

3. Different in kind are the repetitions illustrated by Jackson, John, Marginalia scaenica (Oxford 1955) 220Google Scholar–2.

4. In Musgrave, 's Exercitationes in Euripidem (Leipzig 1762) 160Google Scholar.

5. De Euripideorum prologorum arte et interpolatione (Bonn 1881) 78Google Scholar n. 1.

6. Musso, O., Tragedie di Euripide I (Turin 1980)Google Scholar; see CR n.s. 32 (1982) 91Google Scholar.

7. Hermes 17 (1882) 352Google Scholar n. 1 = Kleine Schriften I (1971) 97Google Scholar n.1.

8. The writer of the hypothesis probably found this line in his text (see hyp. line 9 Murray, where Wilamowitz's λογίοιϲ for λόγοιϲ is likely to be right), but that does not mean that Euripides put it there.

9 The counter arguments of Koniaris, G. L., AJP 102 (1981) 104–6Google Scholar, leave me unmoved.

10. Cf. Schmitt, J., Freiwilliger Opfertod bei Euripides (Giessen 1921) 78–9Google Scholar. The vagueness is comparable with that of Thuc. 6.69.2 ϲφάγια…τὰ νομιζόμενα.

11. In his edition of Ion (London 1853) IXGoogle Scholar.

12. In his commentary on S. OC (Jena 1823) p. 352Google Scholar.

13. Adversaria critica in Euripidem (Halle 1901) 122Google Scholar.

14. See also Kvičala, J., Denkschr. Wien, Philos.-Hist. Cl. 29 (1879) 321–2Google Scholar.

15. Add [A.] PV 1040–1.

16. In his Notae sive lectiones … (Oxford 1762) 123Google Scholar.

17. Studio critica in poetas scenicos Graecorum (Amsterdam 1872)Google Scholar, known to me only from Bursian 1873, 85Google Scholar.

18. Hermes 17 (1882) 340Google Scholar n. 1 = Kleine Schriften I (1971) 85Google Scholar n. 1.