[863] εἴ μοι ξυνείη μοῖρα φέροντι is equivalent to εἴθε διατελοῖμι φέρων, the part. implying that the speaker is already mindful of ἁγνεία, and prays that he may continue to be so: whereas εἴ μοι ξυνείη μοῖρα φέρειν would have been equivalent to εἴθε μοι γένοιτο φέρειν, an aspiration towards ἁγνεία as not yet attained. Though μοῖρα is not expressly personified （cp. Pind. P. 3.84 “τὶν δὲ μοῖρ᾽ εὐδαιμονίας ἕπεται）,” the conception of it is so far personal that ξυνείη（ “be with”） is tinged with the associations of ξυνειδείη （ “be witness to”）, and thus softens any boldness in the use of the participle; a use which, in principle, is identical with the use after such verbs as διατελῶ, τυγχάνω, λανθάνω. φέροντι (= φερομένῳ, see on 590） ... ἁγνείαν, winning purity, regarded as a precious κτῆμα （Soph. Ant. 150）: cp. 1190 πλέον τᾶς εὐδαιμονίας φέρει: Soph. El. 968 “εὐσέβειαν ... οἴσει” （will win the praise of piety）: Eur. Orest. 158 “ὕπνου ... φερομένῳ χαράν.” —Others take φέροντι as = “bearing about with me” （or “within me”）. Cp. Soph. Ant. 1090 “τὸν νοῦν τ᾽ ἀμείνω τῶν φρενῶν ἢ νῦν φέρει” （where it = τρέφειν in 1089）: Soph. Trach. 108 “εὔμναστον δεῖμα φέρουσαν” （where Casaubon τρέφουσαν, as Blaydes τρέφοντι here）. This may be right: but the use here, at least, would be bold; and I still incline to the former view.
[864] εὔσεπτον active, “reverent,” only here: so 890 τῶν ἀσέπτων, also act., “irreverent deeds,” as in Eur. Hel. 542 “Πρωτέως ἀσέπτου παιδός,” impious, unholy: see on 515.
[865] ὧν νόμοι πρόκεινται ὑψίπ. “for which （enjoining which） laws have been set forth, moving on high,” —having their sphere and range in the world of eternal truths: ὑψίποδες being equiv. to ὑψηλοὶ καὶ ὑψοῦ πατοῦντες: see on οἰόζωνον 846, and contrast χθονοστιβῆ 301. The metaphor in νόμοι was less trite for a Greek of the age of Sophocles than for us: cp. Plat. Laws 793a “τὰ καλούμενα ὑπὸ τῶν πολλῶν ἄγραφα νόμιμα—οὔτε νόμους δεῖ προσαγορεύειν αὐτὰ οὔτε ἄρρητα ἐᾶν.”
πρόκεινται （ Thuc. 3.45 “ἐν οὖν ταῖς πόλεσι πολλῶν θανάτου ζημία πρόκειται”） strengthens the metaphor: Xen. Mem. 4.4.21 “δίκην γέ τοι διδόασιν οἱ παραβαίνοντες τοὺς ὑπὸ τῶν θεῶν κειμένους νόμους, ἣν οὐδενὶ τρόπῳ δυνατὸν ἀνθρώπῳ διαφυγεῖν, ὥσπερ τοὺς ὑπ᾽ ἀνθρώπων κειμένους νόμους ἔνιοι διαφεύγουσι τὸ δίκην διδόναι”: where Socrates speaks of the ἄγραφοι νόμοι which are ἐν πάσῃ χώρᾳ κατὰ ταὐτὰ νομιζόμενοι, —as to revere the gods and honour parents. Aristot. Rh. 1.13.2: ‘I consider law （νόμον） as particular （ἴδιον） or universal （κοινόν）, the particular law being that which each community defines in respect to itself, —a law partly written, partly unwritten [as consisting in local custom]; the universal law being that of nature （τὸν κατὰ φύσιν）. For there is a certain natural and universal right and wrong which all men divine （（μαντεύονται）, even if they have no intercourse or covenant with each other; as the Antigone of Sophocles is found saying that, notwithstanding the interdict, it is right to bury Polyneices’ （Soph. Ant. 454, where she appeals to the ἄγραπτα κἀσφαλῆ θεῶν νόμιμα）. Cp. Cope's Introd. to Aristot. Rh. p. 239.[866] οὐρανίαν δι᾽ αἰθέρα τεκνωθέντες called into a life that permeates the heavenly ether （the highest heaven）: the metaphor of τεκνωθέντες being qualified by its meaning in this particular application to νόμοι, viz. that they are revealed as operative; which allows the poet to indicate the sphere throughout which they operate by δι᾽ αἰθέρα, instead of the verbally appropriate ἐν αἰθέρι: much as if he had said δι᾽ αἰθέρα ἐνεργοὶ ἀναφανέντες. So, again, when he calls Olympus, not Zeus, their πατήρ, the metaphor is halffused with the direct notion of “source.” Cp. Aristot. Rh. 1.13.2 quoted on 865, which continues （illustrating τὸ φύσει δίκαιον）: καὶ ὡς Ἐμπεδοκλῆς λέγει περὶ τοῦ μὴ κτείνειν τὸ ἔμψυχον: τοῦτο γὰρ οὐ τισὶ μὲν δίκαιον τισὶ δ᾽ οὐ δίκαιον, Ἀλλὰ τὸ μὲν πάντων νόμιμον διά τ᾽ εὐρυμέδοντος ι αἰθέρος ἠνεκέως τέταται διά τ᾽ ἀπλέτου αὖ γῆς （so Scaliger rightly amended αὐγῆς: Emped. 438）: where the special reference of Empedocles is to a principle of life common to gods, men, and irrational animals （“πνεῦμα τὸ διὰ παντὸς τοῦ κόσμου διῆκον ψυχῆς τρόπον,” Sext. Emp. Adv. Math. 9.127: cp. Cope ad loc.）.
αἰθέρα Hom. Il. 16.364 “ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἀπ᾽ Οὐλύμπου νέφος ἔρχεται οὐρανὸν εἴσω ι αἰθέρος ἐκ δίης”: where, Olympus being the mountain, the οὐρανός is above the αἰθήρ, since ἐξ αἰθέρος could not = e)c ai)/qpas, after clear weather: and so Hom. Il. 2.458 “δι᾽ αἰθέρος οὐρανὸν ἵκει”: Hom. Il. 19.351 “οὐρανοῦ ἐκκατέπαλτο δι᾽ αἰθέρος”: cp. Soph. Ant. 420. Here οὐρανίαν αἰθέρα =the highest heaven.[867] Ὄλυμπος not the mountain, as in the Iliad, but, as in the Odyssey （Hom. Od. 6.42）, the bright supernal abode of the gods: and so = the sky itself: Soph. OC 1654 “γῆν τε προσκυνοῦνθ᾽ ὁμοῦ ι καὶ τὸν θεῶν Ὄλυμπον.”
[870] ἔτικτεν “was their parent,” sometimes used instead of ἔτεκε where the stress is not so much on the fact of the birth as on the parentage, 1099, Soph. OC 982, fr 501: Pind. P. 9.15 “ὅν ποτε” = Ναΐς ... ἔτικτεν. （It would be prosaic to render, “brought forth successively,”—developed.）οὐδὲ μή ποτε κατακοιμάσῃ. I formerly gave οὐδὲ μάν ποτε κατακοιμάσει, —regarding L's μήν as more significant than its κατακοιμάσηι. But I now think that the probabilities are stronger for μήν having come from μή. In point of fitness, the readings are here equal. οὐ μή expresses conviction: Plat. Phaedo 105d “οὐκοῦν ἡ ψυχὴ τὸ ἐναντίον ᾧ αὐτὴ ἐπιφέρει ἀεὶ οὐ μή ποτε δέξηται, ὡς ἐκ τῶν πρόσθεν ὡμολόγηται;”
[871] μέγας ἐν τούτοις θεός the divine virtue inherent in them is strong and unfailing. θεός without art., as 880: Soph. OC 1694 “τὸ φέρον ἐκ θεοῦ.” For this use of the word, to express an indwelling power, cp. Eur. fr. inc. 1007 ὁ νοῦς γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐστιν ἐν ἑκάστῳ θεός.
[873] ὕβρις The tone of Oedipus towards Creon （esp. 618-672） suggests the strain of warning rebuke. Aeschylus, with more elaborate imagery, makes ὕβρις the daughter of δυσσεβία and the parent of a νέα ὕβρις which in turn begets κόρος and θράσος （Aesch. Ag. 764）.
τύραννον here not “a prince,” —nor even, in the normal Greek sense, an unconstitutionally absolute ruler （bad or good）, —but, in our sense, “a tyrant”: cp. Plat. Stat. 301c “ὅταν μήτε κατὰ νόμους μήτε κατὰ ἔθη πράττῃ τις εἶς ἄρχων, προσποιῆται δὲ ὥσπερ ὁ ἐπιστήμων ὡς ἄρα παρὰ τὰ γεγραμμένα τό γε βέλτιστον ποιητέον, ᾖ δέ τις ἐπιθυμία καὶ ἄγνοια τούτου τοῦ μιμήματος ἡγουμένη, μῶν οὐ τότε τὸν τοιοῦτον ἕκαστον τύραννον κλητέον;” Plat. Rep. 573b “ἆρ᾽ οὖν ... καὶ τὸ πάλαι διὰ τὸ τοιοῦτον τύραννος ὁ Ἔρως λέγεται;”[532] εἰ ... ὑπερπλησθῇ: Plat. Rep. 573c “τυραννικὸς δὲ ... ἀνὴρ ἀκριβῶς γίγνεται, ὅταν ἢ φύσει ἢ ἐπιτηδεύμασιν ἢ ἀμφοτέροις μεθυστικός τε καὶ ἐρωτικὸς καὶ μελαγχολικὸς γένηται.” For εἰ with subj., see on 198.
ἃ μή the generic μή （such wealth as is not meet）: cp. 397 n.[876] The reading of all the MSS., ἀκροτάταν εἰσαναβᾶσ᾽, is accounted for by Wolff's emendation, which I have now received, ἀκρότατα γεῖσ᾽ ἀναβᾶσ᾽. The change of γ into ν was very easy for cursive minuscule; while on the other hand the presence of ἀνάγκαν in the next verse is not enough to explain the change of an original ἀκρότατον into the unmetrical ἀκροτάταν.
γεῖσα the coping of a wall: cp. Eur. Phoen. 1180 （of Capaneus） ἤδη δ᾽ ὑπερβαίνοντα γεῖσα τειχέων ι βάλλει κεραυνῷ Ζεύς νιν （as Soph. Ant. 131, of the same, βαλβίδων ι ἐπ᾽ ἄκρων ἤδη ι νίκην ὁρμῶντ᾽ ἀλαλάξαι）. So here the ὕβρις is hurled down, Capaneus-like, at the crowning moment of wicked triumph. In Eur. Supp. 728 there is a similar image of insolent ambition hurled down, as from the topmost round of a scaling-ladder: ὑβριστὴν λαόν, ὃς πράσσων καλῶς ι εἰς ἄκρα βῆναι κλιμάκων ἐνήλατα ι ζητῶν ἀπώλεσ᾽ ὄλβον.[877] With the MS. ἀπότομον ὤρουσεν εἰς ἀνάγκαν, there is a defect of \v\ \v\ or\h\. Reading ἀκρότατον in 876, Arndt supplies αἶπος before ἀπότομον, as I formerly supplied ἄκρον in the same place: E. L. Lushington thought of ὄρος to follow ἀπότομον: Campbell reads ἐξώρουσεν. But none of these remedies, nor any other of a like kind, is satisfactory, or very probable. I now agree with Wecklein in preferring Schnelle's ἀποτμοτάταν for ἀπότομον. This is metrically exact （= 867 δι᾽ αἰθέρα τεκν-）, and removes the necessity for any conjectural supplement. （The superlative of ἄποτμος occurs Hom. Od. 2.219.）
ὤρουσεν gnomic aor. （cp. Soph. OC 1215 “κατέθεντο）.” ἀνάγκαν a constraining doom from the gods: Eur. Phoen. 1000 “εἰς ἀνάγκην δαιμόνων ἀφιγμένοι.” Cp. Plat. Laws 716a “ὁ δέ τις ἐξαρθεὶς ὑπὸ μεγαλαυχίας ἢ χρήμασιν ἐπαιρόμενος ἢ τιμαῖς ἢ καὶ σώματος εὐμορφίᾳ, ἅμα νεότητι καὶ ἀνοίᾳ φλέγεται τὴν ψυχὴν μεθ᾽ ὕβρεως ... μετὰ δὲ χρόνον οὐ πολὺν ὑποσχὼν τιμωρίαν τῇ δίκῃ ἑαυτόν τε καὶ οἷκον καὶ πόλιν ἄρδην ἀνάστατον ἐποίησε.”[878] χρησίμῳ ... χρῆται: where it does not use the foot to any purpose: i.e. the leap is to headlong destruction; it is not one in which the feet can anywhere find a safe landing-place. For the paronomasia cp. Pind. P. 2.78 “κερδοῖ δὲ τί μάλα τοῦτο κερδαλέον τελέθει;” “but for the creature named of gain,” （the fox） “what so gainful is there here?”
[879] τὸ καλῶς δ᾽ ἔχον but I ask that the god never do away with, abolish, that struggle which is advantageous for the city,—i.e. the contest in which citizen vies with citizen who shall most serve the State. The words imply a recognition of the προθυμία which Oed. had so long shown in the service of Thebes: cp. 48, 93, 247.
[880] πάλαισμα cp. Isoc. Letter 7.7 “τοῖς καλῶς τὰς πόλεις τὰς αὑτῶν διοικοῦσιν ἁμιλλητέον καὶ πειρατέον διενεγκεῖν αὐτῶν.” Plut. Mor. 820c “ὥσπερ οὐκ ἀργυρίτην οὐδὲ δωρίτην ἀγῶνα πολιτείας ἀγωνιζομένοις” （the emulous service of the State）, ἀλλὰ ἱερὸν ὡς ἀληθῶς καὶ στεφανίτην （like the contests in the great games）.
[882] προστάταν defender, champion: not in the semi-technical sense of ‘patron,’ as in 411.
ὑπέροπτα adverbial neut. of ὑπέροπτος [not ὑπερόπτα, epic nom. for ὑπερόπτης, like ἱππότα]: cp. Soph. OC 1695 “οὔτοι κατάμεμπτ᾽ ἔβητον,” ye have fared not amiss. Hom. Il. 17.75 “ἀκίχητα διώκων ι ἵππους”: Eur. Supp. 770 “ἄκραντ᾽ ὀδύρει”: Eur. Phoen. 1739 “ἄπειμι ... ἀπαρθένευτ᾽ ἀλωμένα”: Eur. Ion 255 “ἀνερεύνητα δυσθυμεῖ” （hast griefs which I may not explore）. χερσὶν in contrast with λόγῳ, merely = ἔργοις, not ‘deeds of violence ’: cp. Eur. Phoen. 312 “πῶς ... ι καὶ χερσὶ καὶ λόγοισι ... ι περιχορεύουσα τέρψιν ... λάβω,” find joy in deed and word of circling dance, i.e. in linking of the hands and in song: cp. 864.[885] Δίκας ἀφόβητος not fearing Justice: cp. 969 ἄψαυστος ἔγχους, not touching a spear. The act. sense is preferable only because class. Greek says φοβηθεὶς τὴν δίκην, not φοβηθεὶς ὑπὸ τῆς δίκης: the form of the adj. would warrant a pass. sense: cp. Soph. Trach. 685 “ἀκτῖνος ... ἄθικτον.” With ἄφοβος （Soph. Aj. 366） ἀφόβητος cp. ἀταρβής （Soph. Trach. 23） ἀτάρβητος （Soph. Aj. 197）.
[886] ἕδη images of gods, whether sitting or standing; but always with the added notion that they are placed in a temple or holy place as objects of worship. Timaeus p. 93 ἕδος: τὸ ἄγαλμα καὶ ὁ τόπος ἐν ᾧ ἵδρυται: where τόπος prob. denotes the small shrine in which an image might stand. Dion. Hal. 1.47 uses ἕδη to render penates. Liddell and Scott s.v. cite the following as places in which ἕδος ‘may be a temple ’: but in all of them it must mean image. Isoc. 15.2 “Φειδίαν τὸν τὸ τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς ἕδος ἐργασάμενον,” i.e. the chryselephantine Athena Parthenos; cp. Plut. Per. 13 “ὁ δὲ Φειδίας εἰργάζετο μὲν τῆς θεοῦτὸ χρυσοῦν ἕδος:” Xen. Hell. 1.4.12 “Πλυντήρια ἦγεν ἡ πόλις, τοῦ ἕδους κατακεκαλυμμένου τῆς Ἀθηνᾶς”: i.e. the ἀρχαῖον βρέτας of Athena Polias in the Erechtheum was veiled in sign of mourning （the death of Aglauros being commemorated at the festival of the Plunteria）. Paus. 8.46.2 “φαίνεται δὲ οὐκ ἄρξας ὁ Αὔγουστος ἀναθήματα καὶ ἕδη θεῶν ἀπάγεσθαι παρὰ τῶν κρατηθέντων” （i.e. carry off to Italy）: where ἀναθήματα are dedicated objects generally, ἕδη images worshipped in temples. Is Sophocles glancing here at the mutilators of the Hermae in 415 B.C., and especially at Alcibiades? We can hardly say more than this:—（i） There is no positive probability as to the date of the play which can be set against such a view. （2） The language suits it, -nay, might well suggest it; nor does it matter that the Ἑρμαῖ, though ἀναθήματα （Andoc. 1.34）, were not properly ἕδη. （3） It cannot be assumed that the dramatic art of Sophocles would exclude such a reference. Direct contemporary allusion is, indeed, uncongenial to it. But a light touch like this—especially in a choral ode—might fitly strike a chord of contemporary feeling in unison with the emotion stirred by the drama itself. I do not see how to affirm or to deny that such a suggestion was meant here. （Cp. Soph. OC 1537 n.）
[888] δυσπότμου miserably perverse: Soph. Ant. 1025 “οὐκέτ᾽ ἔστ᾽ ... ι ἄβουλος οὔτ᾽ ἄνολβος.”
ἔρξεται keep himself from: Soph. OC 836 “εἴργου,” “stand back”: Hdt. 7.197 “ὡς κατὰ τὸ ἄλσος ἐγένετο, αὐτός τε ἔργετο αὐτοῦ καὶ τῇ στρατιῇ πάσῃ παρήγγειλε.” Plat. Laws 838a “ὡς εὖ τε καὶ ἀκριβῶς εἴργονται τῆς τῶν καλῶν ξυνουσίας.” As to the form, Herodotus has ἔργω or ἐέργω: in Attic the MSS. give Aesch. Eum. 566 “κατεργαθοῦ”: Soph. Aj. 593 “ξυνέρξετε”: Thuc. 5.2 “περιέρξαντες” （so the best MSS., and Classen）: Plat. Gorg. 461d “καθέρξῃς” （so Stallb. and Herm., with MSS.）: Plat. Rep. 461b “ξυνέρξαντος”: Plat. Stat. 285b “ἕρξας.” So far as the MSS. warrant a conclusion, Attic seems to have admitted ἐρ- instead of εἰρ- in the forms with ξ. The smooth breathing is right here, even if we admit a normal distinction between εἴργω “to shut out” and εἵργω “to shut in.”[891] θίξεται This conjecture of Blaydes seems to me certain. The form occurs Eur. Hipp. 1086 “κλαίων τις αὐτῶν ἆρ᾽ ἐμοῦ γε θίξεται”: Eur. Her. 652 “εἰ δὲ τῶνδε προσθίξει χερί.” Hesych. has θίξεσθαι. L has έξεται with no breathing. Soph. could not conceivably have used such a phrase as ἔχεσθαι τῶν ἀθίκτων, to cling to things which should not even be touched. He himself shows the proper use of ἔχεσθαι in fr. 327 τοῦ γε κερδαίνειν ὅμως ι ἀπρὶξ ἔχονται, ”still they cling tooth and nail to gain “: fr. 26 τὰ μὲν ι δίκαι᾽ ἐπαίνει τοῦ δὲ κερδαίνειν ἔχου. Some explain ἕξεται as ”abstain “: Hom. Od. 4.422 “σχέσθαι τε βίης λῦσαί τε γέροντα”: Hdt. 6.85 “ἔσχοντο τῆς ἀγωγῆς.” To this there are two objections, both insuperable: （1） the disjunctive ἤ, —with which the sense ought to be, ”unless he gain etc. ... or else abstain “: （2） ματᾴζων, which could not be added to ἕξεται as if this were παύσεται.—ματᾴζων, acting with rash folly: Hdt. 2.162 “ἀπεματάϊσε,” behaved in an unseemly manner: Aesch. Ag. 995 “σπλάγχνα δ᾽ οὔτι ματᾴζει,” my heart does not vainly forebode. The reason for writing ματᾴζων, not ματάζων, is that the form ματαΐζω is well attested （Her., Josephus, Hesych., Herodian）: while there is no similar evidence for ματάζω, though the latter form might have existed, being related to a stem ματα （μάτη） as δικαζ-ω to δικα （δίκη）.
[892] τίς ἔτι ποτ᾽ ... ἀμύνειν; Amid such things （if such deeds prevail）, who shall any longer vaunt that he wards off from his life the shafts of the gods? The pres. ἀμύνειν, not fut. ἀμυ^νεῖν, because the shafts are imagined as already assailing him. ἐν τοῖσδ᾽:1319: Soph. Ant. 38 “εἰ τάδ᾽ ἐν τούτοις.”
[893] θεῶν βέλη The MSS. have θυμῶι, θυμοῦ or θυμῶ: in A over θυμῶι βέλη is written τὴν θείαν δίκην. This points to the true sense, though it does not necessarily presuppose the true reading. The phrase θυμοῦ βέλη, “arrows of anger,” could mean, ”taunts hurled by an angry man “; but, alone, could not mean, “the arrows of the divine wrath.” The readings of the MSS. might have arisen either through the ν of θεῶν being written, as it often is, in a form resembling μ, and ω having then been transposed （so that θυμῶ would have arisen before θυμῶι）; or from a gloss θυμοῦ on ψυχᾶς. For βέλη cp. Plat. Laws 873e “πλὴν ὅσα κεραυνὸς ἤ τι παρὰ θεοῦ τοιοῦτον βέλος ἰόν.”
[894] εὔξεται This conject. of Musgrave （which Blaydes adopts） involves only the change of one letter from ἔρξεται: and nothing would have been more likely than a change of εὔξεται into ἔρξεται if the scribe's eye or thought had wandered to ἔρξεται in 890, especially since the latter is not obviously unsuited to the general sense. But ἔρξεται here is impossible. For （1） we cannot render: ”will keep off the shafts from himself, so as to ward them from his life “: this would be intolerable. Nor （2）, with Elmsley: ”who will abstain from warding off the shafts of the soul （the stings of conscience, ψυχᾶς βέλη） from his mind （θυμοῦ）̣ “ i.e. who will not become reckless? This most assuredly is not Greek. εὔξεται, on the other hand, gives just the right sense: ”If justice and religion are trampled under foot, can any man dare to boast that he will escape the divine wrath? “
[896] χορεύειν The words πονεῖν ἢ τοῖς θεοῖς added in a few MSS. （including L） have plainly arisen from a contracted writing of πανηγυρίζειν τοῖς θεοῖς which occurs in a few others. This gloss correctly represents the general notion of χορεύειν, as referring to the χοροί connected with the cult of Dionysus, Apollo and other gods. The χορός was an element so essential and characteristic that, in a Greek mouth, the question τί δεῖ με χορεύειν; would import, “why maintain the solemn rites of public worship?” Cp. Polybius 4. 20 （speaking of the youth of Arcadia） μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα τοὺς Φιλοξένου καὶ Τιμοθέου νόμους μανθάνοντες （learning the music of those masters） πολλῇ φιλοτιμίᾳ χορεύουσι κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν τοῖς Διονυσιακοῖς αὐληταῖς ἐν τοῖς θεάτροις, οἱ μὲν παῖδες τοὺς παιδικοὺς ἀγῶνας, οἱ δὲ νεανίσκοι τοὺς τῶν ἀνδρῶν λεγομένους. Eur. Ba. 181 “δεῖ ... Διόνυσον ... ὄσον καθ᾽ ἡμᾶς δυνατὸν αὔξεσθαι μέγαν: ι ποῖ δεῖ χορεύειν, ποῖ καθιστάναι πόδα, ι καὶ κρᾶτα σεῖσαι πολιόν; ἐξηγοῦ σύ μοι ι γέρων γέροντι, Τειρεσία.” The Theban elders need not, then, be regarded as momentarily forgetting their dramatic part. Cp. 1095 χορεύεσθαι.
[897] ἄθικτον cp. the story of the Persian attack on Delphi in 480 B.C. being repulsed by the god, who would not suffer his priests to remove the treasures, “φὰς αὐτὸς ἱκανὸς εἶναι τῶν ἑωυτοῦ προκατῆσθαι,” Hdt. 8.36.
ὀμφαλόν see on 480.[899] τὸν Ἀβαῖσι ναόν The site of Abae, not far N. of the modern village of Exarcho, was on a hill in the northwest of Phocis, between Lake Copais and Elateia, and near the frontier of the Opuntian Locrians. Hdt. 8.33 “ἔνθα ἦν ἱερὸν Ἀπόλλωνος πλούσιον, θησαυροῖσί τε καὶ ἀναθήμασι πολλοῖσι κατεσκευασμένον: ἦν δὲ καὶ τότε καὶ νῦν ἐστὶ χρηστήριον αὐτόθι: καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἱερὸν συλήσαντες ἐνέπρησαν” （the Persians in 480 B.C.）. Hadrian built a small temple beside the ancient “ἱερόν,” Paus. 10.35.3.
[900] τὰν Ὀλυμπίαν called by Pindar δέσποιν᾽ ἀλαθείας （Pind. O. 8.2）, because divination by burnt offerings （μαντικὴ δι᾽ ἐμπύρων） was there practised on the altar of Zeus by the Iamidae, hereditary μάντεις （Hdt. 9.33）: Pind. O. 6.70 “Ζηνὸς ἐπ᾽ ἀκροτάτῳ βωμῷ ... χρηστήριον θέσθαι κέλευσεν” （Apollo）: ι ἐξ οὗ πολύκλειτον καθ᾽ Ἕλλανας γένος Ἰαμιδᾶν.
[901] εἰ μὴ τάδε ἁρμόσει if these things （the prophecy that Laius should be slain by his son, and its fulfilment） do not come right （fit each other）, χειρόδεικτα πᾶσιν βροτοῖς, so as to be signal examples for all men. Cp. Soph. Ant. 1318 “τάδ᾽ οὐκ ἐπ᾽ ἄλλον βροτῶν ι ἐμᾶς ἁρμόσει ποτ᾽ ἐξ αἰτίας,” can never be adjusted to another, —be rightly charged on him. Prof. Campbell cites Plat. Soph. 262c “πρὶν ἄν τις τοῖς ὀνόμασι τὰ ῥήματα κεράσῃ. τότε δ᾽ ἥρμοσέ τε, κ.τ.λ.,” where I should suppose ἥρμοσε to be transitive: ἥρμοσέ τις τοῖς ὀνόμασι τὰ ῥήματα: if so, it is not parallel. χειρόδ. only here.
[903] ἀκούεις audis, alluding chiefly to the title “Ζεὺς βασιλεύς,” Xen. Anab. 3.1.12; under which, after the victory at Leuctra in 371 B.C., he was honoured with a special festival at Lebadeia in Boeotia, Dio. Sic. 15.53.
[904] The subject to λάθοι is not definitely τάδε（902）, but rather a motion to be inferred from the whole preceding sentence, — “the vindication of thy word.” Elms. cp. Eur. Med. 332 “Ζεῦ, μὴ λάθοι σε τῶνδ᾽ ὃς αἴτιος κακῶν.”
[906] After φθίνοντα γὰρ Λαΐου we require a metrical equivalent for θεῶν βέλη in 893. The παλαιά in the marg. of L and in the text of other MSS. favours παλαίφατα, proposed by Linwood and Arndt, which suits φθίνοντα: cp. 561. Schneidewin conj. Πυθόχρηστα Λαΐου. Λαΐου, object. gen.: cp. Thuc. 1.140 “τὸ τῶν Μεγαρέων ψήφισμα” （about them）.
[908] ἐξαιροῦσιν are putting out of account. This bold use comes, I think, not from the sense of destroying （ Xen. Hell. 2.2.19 “μὴ σπένδεσθαι Ἀθηναίοις ἀλλ᾽ ἐξαιρεῖν）,” but from that of setting aside, excluding from consideration: Plat. Soph. 249b “τούτῳ τῷ λόγῳ ταὐτὸν τοῦτο ἐκ τῶν ὄντων ἐξαιρήσομεν,” “by this reasoning we shall strike this same thing out of the list of things which exist.” Cp. Plat. Theaet. 162d “θεοὺς ... οὓς ἐγὼ ἔκ τε τοῦ λέγειν καὶ τοῦ γράφειν περὶ αὐτῶν, ὡς εἰσὶν ἢ ὡς οὐκ εἰσίν, ἐξαιρῶ.” The absence of a gen. like λόγου for ἐξαιρουσιν is softened by φθίνοντα, which suggests ”fading from men's thoughts. “
[909] τιμαῖς ... ἐμφανής manifest in honours （modal dat.）: i.e. his divinity is not asserted by the rendering of such worship as is due to him. Aesch. PB 171 （of Zeus） σκῆπτρον τιμάς τ᾽ ἀποσυλᾶται.
[910] τὰ θεῖα “religion,” both faith and observance: cp. Soph. OC 1537.
