previous next

[252] ἀγγελίης, for the question whether this is a nom. or genitive see note on 3.206. Schol. A here is corrupt, and we do not know whether Zen. took “ἀγγελίης” as a causal gen., or, which is perhaps nore probable, read “ἀγγελίην” as in 15.640. There is no doubt that Bentley's “τιν᾽ ἀγγελίην” gives the simplest sense, if only there were support for it. “τευ ἀγγελίην” (Buttmann) is equally good — here “τευ” may be either masc. or neut., about any one or anything. The same choice is given if we read “ἀγγελίης” and take it as nom. masc.; if we make it gen. fem. we have the third possibility of making “τευ” agree with it. But no sufficient analogy for “ἀγγελίης ἐλθεῖν” = to come about a message has ever been given.

The Iliad, edited, with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices. Walter Leaf. London. Macmillan. 1900.

The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.

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: