[170] μορφὴν … στέφει. Two doubts may arise about this construction: whether μορφήν is accusativus objecti, or a quasi-cognate accusative; and whether ἔπεσι is a remoter object or an instrumental. On the first point we are led to the conclusion that “μορφήν” is the quasi-cognate accusative, ‘puts a crown of grace upon;’ as if στέφει were equivalent to “περιτίθησι”. For, inf. 175, “χάρις ἀμφιπεριστέφεται” is the same construction converted into the passive; such too is the ordinary construction with “στέφειν” as in Il.18. 205“ἀμφὶ δέ οἱ κεφαλῇ νέφος ἔστεφε δῖα θεάων”, and with similar words, e. g. inf. 569 “ὄρος πόλει ἀμφικαλύψειν”. As to the second point, it might seem doubtful if “στέφει” can govern a dative of the remote object, as Nitzsch gives it, ‘puts grace upon his words,’ and the alternative might suggest itself, ‘puts grace upon him by means of his words;’ yet this rendering if applied to 175 would be forced in the extreme; besides which, there is in “ἔπεα” per se no idea of grace or eloquence, and again, an unexpressed dativus commodi (“οἱ”） would be awkward. Therefore we must prefer to make “ἔπεσι” a dative of remoter object, but at the same time to regard “στέφει” as standing for “περιστέφει”, an abbreviation which would be softened by “ἀμφιπεριστέφεται” following. Cp. Od.10. 410“ὡς δ᾽ ὅτ᾽ ἂν ἄγραυλοι πόριες . . ἀμφιθέουσι μητέρας: ὣς ἐμὲ κεῖνοι . . δακρυόεντες ἔχυντο”, where “ἔχυντο” governs “ἐμέ” in virtue of “ἀμφιθέουσι” preceding. So again “εἰπεῖν” governs the accusative of a person addiessed, as equivalent to “προσειπεῖν”, though no “προσειπεῖν” be near, e. g. Il.17. 651“καὶ τότ᾽ ἄρ᾽ Αἴας εἶπε βοὴν ἀγαθὸν Μενέλαον”. Compare for the sense of our passage Od.11. 367“σοὶ δ᾽ ἔπι μὲν μορφὴ ἐπέων”.
οἱ δὲ … ἀγρομένοισιν. This is one of those sentences in which the clauses are divided and counterchanged: see on Od. 4.192; so that “οἱ δέ τ᾽ .. λεύσσουσιν” forms one clause with “αἰδοῖ μειλιχίῃ”, and “ὁ δ᾽ ἀσφαλέως ἀγορεύει” joins on with “μετὰ δὲ πρέπει ἀγρομένοισιν”. This interpretation, in which Nitzsch agrees, is satisfactorily borne out by the parallel passage in Hes. Theog.81“ὅντινα τιμήσωσι Διὸς κοῦραι μεγάλοιο . . ὁ δ᾽ ἀσφαλέως ἀγορεύων” “αἶψά τε καὶ μέγα νεῖκος ἐπισταμένως κατέπαυσε.. ἐρχόμενον δ᾽ ἀνὰ ἄστυ θεὸν ὣς ἱλάσκονται”“αἰδοῖ μειλιχίῃ, μετὰ δὲ πρέπει ἀγρομένοισιν”. It is also required by the natural meaning of αἰδοῖ μειλιχίῃ, which is, ‘with submissive reverence;’ for αἰδώς does not take the meaning of dignity; the nearest approach to which is found in h. Hom. Cer. 214 “ἐπί τοι πρέπει ὄμμασιν αἰδὼς”
“καὶ χάρις, ὡς εἴ πέρ τε θεμιστοπόλων βασιλήων”. The other way is to remove the comma after “ἀγορεύει” and to translate “αἰδοῖ μειλιχίῃ” ‘with winning modesty.’
