No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Some years ago, Sir Kenneth Dover suggested a new interpretation of καρ⋯ξαι. Prima facie, the chorus ask the sun to proclaim where Heracles is, and this sense is supported by such passages as Il. 3.277 Ή⋯λιóς θ', ὃς π⋯ντ' ⋯ɸορᾷς, Od. 9.109 Ήελ⋯ου, ὅς π⋯ντ' ⋯ɸορᾷ (cf A. PV 91, S. OC 869), Od. 8.270–1 ἄɸαρ δ⋯ οἱ ἄγγελος ἧλθεν | Ή⋯λιος, and especially (‘a passage…which comes very close to Sophocles in spirit’) h. Cer. 69ff., where ‘Demeter visits the Sun and implores him, “you who look down on all earth and sea…tell me truly of my dear child, if you have seen her anywhere, who has gone off with her…”.’ This is the way καρ⋯ξαι in Trach. 97 has always been taken. Dover points out, however, that κηρ⋯ττειν also has a special, technical sense: to make proclamation inquiring about a missing person's whereabouts, as the town-crier used to do a century ago England and elsewhere, and the media do now. The model is not that of h. Cer. 69ff., but rather S. Aj. 845ff.: ‘Sun, when you see my native land, draw near and tell (ἄγγειλον) my aged father…of my fate.’
The examples he cites are enough to demonstrate the ‘interrogative’ use of κηρ⋯ττω, though his first example, Ar. Ach. 748 ⋯γὼν δ⋯ καρυξ⋯ Δικαιóπολιν ὅπᾳ, will not do: if sound, it means not ‘I will find out by κ⋯ρυξ where Dicaeopolis is’ (he is present in the next line), but ‘I will summon Dicaeopolis to where (the sale is)’. The normal ‘interrogative’ use is to enquire by herald (town-crier) the whereabouts of a Crminal (Andoc. 1.112, D. 25.56, Antiphon ii γ 2 with ib. δ 6) or a runaway slave (Lucian,Fug. 27).
1 Miscellanea tragica in honorem J. C. Kamerbeek (1976), 49–53. I am indebted to Sir Kenneth for detailed and generous criticism.
2 This passage, which I did not cite, reinforces my argument (JHS 96 [1976], 127–9Google Scholar) that 100ff. means ‘on land and sea’.
3 See Starkie ad loc. But in view of the special use of κηρ⋯ττειν, noticed by Dover, ‘announce, advertise’ (one's wares) for sale (cf. Antiphanes fr. 125.11, of fish; ib. 168.31), the conjecture ⋯γὼν δ⋯ καρ⋯δω· Δικαιóπολις δ⋯ πᾷ; adopted by Rennie, q.v.) is tempting. I owe this criticism of Dover's example to Dr Malcolm Davies.
4 ‘I cannot tell who the father is’ (v. 5) is doubtless a learned joke; cf. Plat, . Symp. 178bGoogle Scholar. Still, giving the parentage implies a missing free-born child, not a slave: ἔστι δ' ⋯ π⋯ις γλυκύδακρυς, κτλ. (v. 3) means ‘the boy’ in the former sense.
5 In op. cit. (n. 2) 127 I argue that παῖς has no precise syntactical parallel, but that μολ was likely to be wrongly repeated, and therefore preferred πóθι [μοι] παῖς after all. I now think παῖς is more likely to be the intruder; Σ λε⋯πει τòν παῖδα, which may well refer to τòν Άλκμ⋯νας, shows how it could have come in. There is some attraction in Schneidewin's πóθι μοι πóθι [μοι] γ⋯ς, read by Dawe (cf. 68 πο⋯…χθονóς;), but not enough to warrant the further change.
6 CQ N.S. 4 (1954), 91ff.Google Scholar
7 Dr Davies refers me to D. Korzeniewski, Rh. Mus. 105 (1962), 150, ‘who observes that it is an example of Norden's “dynamische Prädikationsart” (Agnostos Theos [1913], 221). As such, it is equivalent to δ⋯νασαι δ⋯ namque potes in hymnic contexts.’
8 Op. cit. (n. 2).
9 Dawe, R. D., Studies on the text of Sophocles, iii (1978), 79–80Google Scholar; West, M. L., BICS 26 (1979), 110Google Scholar; Lloyd-Jones, H., CR N.S. 31 (1981), 171Google Scholar. On Giangrande, G., Corolla Londiniensis, iv (1983), 61–2Google Scholar, see JHS 106 (1986, forthcoming)Google Scholar.
10 GLP 1 (1942) = SLP iii (1950), 124, 30–1Google Scholar; cf. JHS 96 (1976), 129Google Scholar.
11 Op. cit. (n. 9) n. 6. On δισσαῖσιν ⋯πε⋯ροις as a locative see further JHS 106 (1986).
12 Cf. n. 10.
13 Cf. Euripides and the Judgement of Paris, JHS Suppl. 11 (1965), 4–5Google Scholar; Griffin, J., JHS 97 (1977), 40–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar, Homer on Life and Death (1981), 165–7.
14 Cf. op. cit. (n. 6), p. 92.
15 I quote from a letter of Professor Lloyd-Jones.
16 Op. cit. (n. 2) 128 n. 35.
17 Cf. Ft. Gr. Hist. 3 Pherekydes fr. 17.
18 Cf. esp. HF73–9, with Bond's note: ib. 624–36.
19 Op. cit. (n. 2) n. 11.
20 See Studies in Honour of D. J. Conacher (1985); cf. BICS 33 (1985).
21 Even Samson's destruction of the temple, though a superhuman feat achieved by miraculous aid, conforms to his heroic but still human stature.
22 P. O. 3.44, N. 3.21, I. 4.14; Hdt. 2.33.3; Diodorus 4.18.