previous next

[554] οἵω τώ γε as it stands must be for “τώ γε, οἵω”, by a violent hyperbaton, the phrase being thus an anticipation of “τοίω τώ” in 559; or else it must mean ‘even as they, were two lions bred.’ Neither alternative is agreeable, the second perhaps being the worst, as there is no case in H. where a simile is thus introduced as a direct statement, the relation of the thing illustrated and the instance illustrating it being reversed. ““θῆρε”?” Nauck, for “τώ γε”: but then the corruption is inexplicable. The same may be said of Heyne's “οἵω τ᾽ αὖτε”, and Förstemann's “τὼ οἵω τε. οἵω αἴθωνε” conj. Düntzer, when the synizesis might explain the corruption but is itself unparalleled. Agar conj. “τώ τε” (J. P. xxiv. 276), where “τώ” is dual of “τις” on the analogy of “του, τωι”. Cf. “ὡς ὅτε τίς τε λέων17.61, and so 8.338, 17.542. But there is no analogy for “οἷός τις” in a simile; the only clear cases of it are quite different (Od. 9.348, Od. 20.377; see on 638 below). The evil is probably past remedy, “τώ γε” representing some adjective which was thrust out because it was unintelligible and forgotten. As to the dual Schol. B mentions the legend that two lion's cubs were always born at one birth, and that the lioness never had more. This is mere fiction; litters of four are common, and six are not unknown. The dual probably implies a couple, lion and lioness.

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 (5 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (5):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: