The following lines (15 sqq.) are a famous crux:
τὸ μὲν ὅτι βασιλεὺς
ἐσσὶ μεγαλᾶν πολίων
ἔϰει συγγενὴς
ὀφθαλμὸς αἰδοιότατον γέρας
τεᾷ τοῦτο μειγνύμενον φρενί.
The reading is that of all MSS., save for the necessary correction αἰδοιότατον for αἰδοιέςτατον, which will not scan. I have purposely left it without punctuation. The core of the difficulty of course is the word ὀφθαλμός Farnell, it seems to me, has made it abundantly clear that this cannot be literal, for, apart from the oddity of the epithet συγγενὴς in such a context, to take it as meaning the actual physical eye of Arkesilas (or anyone else) involves giving ἔϰει the impossible meaning ‘sees’. But the metaphorical meaning is not much easier. A person or group of persons can be the ‘eye’, that is to say the most precious part, of something, as the Emmenidai were the ‘eye of Sicily’, Ol. ii, 10, Amphiaraos the ‘eye’ of Adrastos' army, Ol. vi, 16, the eldest or only son, or even the presence of the master, the ‘eye’ of the house (Aesch., Choeph., 934, Pers., 168–9), a child the ‘eye’—we should perhaps say ‘light’—of his mother's life, Eurip. Andr., 406, and perhaps, for the interpretation is not too certain, a chosen band of Athenians the ‘eye’ of Theseus' land, Aesch., Eumen., 1025. In these instances we may I think acquiesce in Groeneboom's remark on Pers., loc. cit., that ‘eye’ is used to signify the most precious or noble part of something, its glory (dat iets het kostelijkste, het edelste, de glorie van dit of dat is).
