previous next

[111] γινώσκων, recognizing them, explained by what follows. But Platt, J. P. xviii. 133, remarks with much force that the couplet is an extremely prosy addition and would be better away. The contracted “εἶδεν” for “ἔϝιδεν” is not an old form. It is irresolvable in Iliad only 19.292. (“ἔσϝιδ᾽” Brandreth, “ἔϝϝιδ᾽” van L., “ϝίδεν” Schulze Q. E. 378, with lengthening in the first arsis; see App. D, p. 595.)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide References (1 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (1):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: