Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
  1. Home
  2. Browse subjects
  3. Classical Studies
  4. Classical languages
  5. Content listing

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

3730 results in Classical languages

Page 135 of 187

  • INTRODUCTION

  • Edited by Richard Claverhouse Jebb
  • Book:
    Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments
    Published online:
    05 October 2010
    Print publication:
    11 February 2010, pp ix-l
    First published in:
    1892

  • Summary

    Divergent views of the Trachiniae. Difficulty of judging it rightly.

    § 1. It has been the fortune of the Trachiniae to provoke a singular diversity of judgments. Dissen and Bergk refer the play to a period when the powers of Sophocles were not yet fully matured. Bernhardy regards it as a mediocre production of declining age. Schlegel, in his Lectures on Dramatic Literature, goes further still; he pronounces the piece unworthy of its reputed author, and wishes that the responsibility for it could be transferred from Sophocles to some feebler contemporary,—his son, for instance, the ‘frigid’ Iophon. Yet there has never been a lack of more favourable estimates. In the very year when Schlegel was lecturing at Vienna (1808), Boeckh pointed out the strong family likeness between this and the other six plays; A. Jacob made a direct reply to Schlegel's censures; and Godfrey Hermann said that, whatever faults the work might have, at any rate both the spirit and the diction were unmistakably those of Sophocles. During the last half century, with the growth of a better aesthetic criticism in relation to all things Hellenic, a sense of the great beauties in the Trachiniae has decidedly prevailed over the tendency to exaggerate its defects; indeed, the praise bestowed upon it, in these latter days, has sometimes perhaps been a little too indiscriminate.

  • ANCIENT ARGUMENTS TO THE PLAY; DRAMATIS PERSONAE; STRUCTURE

  • Edited by Richard Claverhouse Jebb
  • Book:
    Sophocles: The Plays and Fragments
    Published online:
    05 October 2010
    Print publication:
    11 February 2010, pp 1-5
    First published in:
    1890

  • Summary

    ΦΙ∧ΟΚΤΗΤΟϒ ϒΠΟΘΕ∑Ι∑.

    Χρύσης ʾΑθηνᾶς βωμὸν ἐπικεχωσμένον,

    ἐφʾ οὗπερ ʾΑχαιοῖς χρησθὲν ἦν θῦσαι, μόνος

    Ποίαντος ᾒδει παῖς ποθʾ ʿHgr;ρακλεῖ ξυνών.

    ζητῶν δὲ τοῦτον νανβάτῃ δεῖξαι στόλῳ,

    πληγεὶς ὑπʾ ἔχεως, ἐλίπετʾ ἐν ∧ήμνῳ νοσῶν.

    ῞Ελενος δʾ ʾΑχαῖος εἶφʾ ἁλώσεσθʾ ῞Ιλιον

    τοῖς ʾΗρακλέους τόξοισι παιδί τʾ ʾΑχιλλέως.

    τὰ τόξʾ ὑπῆρχε παρὰ Φιλοκτήτῃ μόνῳʾ.

    πεμφθεὶς δʾ ʾΟδυσσεὺς ἀμφοτέρους συνήγαγεν.

    This metrical Argument, with the heading Φιλοκτήτου υ, stands in L (p. 79 b) immediately after the ἆθλοι ʿΗρακλέους, twelve hexameters which are placed at the end of the Trachiniae. Then comes the prose Argument, with the heading ἄλλως, followed by τὰ τοῦ δράματος πρόσωπα. The metrical Argument was first printed in the ed. of Sophocles by Turnebus (Paris, 1553), who found it in the Paris 15th century ms., T (cod. 2711). It is absent from the earlier editions (those of Aldus, Junta, and Camerarius), since the mss. on which they were chiefly based did not contain it. (Cp. O. C. p. liv.)—The workmanship of these iambics is decidedly worse (and presumably much later) than that of the metrical Argument to the Oedipus Tyrannus. In v. 2 an anapaest holds the second, and in v. 9, the fourth place; while in v. 6 ἁλώσεσθʾ ῞Ιλιον combines an impossible elision with an impossible spondee. In v. 5 ἐλίπετʾ has the sense of ἐλείφθη, a Homeric use of the aor. midd. which is unknown to later classical Greek.

Page 135 of 187