previous next

[450] The “ϝ” is twice neglected. We might possibly adopt the variant “ὅτι” for ὅτιν̓, comparing Od. 10.44 “ἰδώμεθα ὅττι τάδ᾽ ἐστίν,” 22.73 “πάντα . . ὅττι”, and 18.128 (q.v.). These, however, differ by the important fact that in no case are the sing. and plur. joined as subject of the verb. “ὅττι τάδ᾽ ἔργα τέτυκται” would be possible, as then “ὅττι” would be part of the predicate. Hoffmann's translation, ‘what the facts are,’ which he supports by 24.354, is not likely to be accepted. Thus, if the “ϝ” is to be restored, Hoffmann's earlier conj. (adapted by Bekker) “ἴδω τίνα” deserves the preference. (For “τίς” virtually = “ὅστις” in indirect questions cf. 18.192, 24.197, 15.423 “εἰρώτα . . τίς εἴη”.) The “ϝ” of “ἴδωμι” (or “ἴδωμαι”) may easily be restored by reading “ἕπεσθε” with Bentley.

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 (7 total)
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: