Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T22:17:38.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Notes on Euripides' Herakles1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Martin Cropp
Affiliation:
University of Calgary

Extract

Professor M. L. West has challenged the accepted reading (Reiske) and proposed (Philologus 117 (1973), 145). This makes for a disappointing antithesis, and Paley seems to have been right in pointing out that would be surprising as an object to tragic diction, at least, seems to use only pronouns, adjectives, or nouns which stand as internal accusatives etc.; fr. adesp.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1979

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

page 59 note 1 I am grateful to Mr. Bond for drawing this point to my attention, with the suggestion that my might best be combined with the alterations suggested by Badham and Pearson. For verbs of restraining without objects specified, cf. also Theognis 140 (rightly explained by Van Groningen with as subject of ); Thuc. 3.45.3 Examples can be multiplied (cf., e.g., Iliad 15.618, 17.747, Theognis 816, S.O.T. 129, E. Suppl. 18, LSJ s.v. 5 and 6).

This is not, of course, to say that there is anything wrong about (‘felt compunction’’) in itself; cf. I.T. 949, and infinitives frequently following , as they do at A. Ag. 1203 (cf. ibid. 948).

1 There is an obvious possibility that or at least is an intrusive repetition from in the previous line. But the repetition is not in itself unexpected: cf. Hkld. 670–1, Ion 952–3, 1326–7.