previous next

[360] The appearance of Phoinix, late comer though he is in the Iliad, might be excused in so late an episode, if he were more than a dumb person and appeared again in the sequel. As it is, various critics have rejected the line, not without reason. Others, with more justification, have extended their condemnation to 359-61. The appointment of the ξκοπός, Phoinix or not, is useless. If we read δρόμου in 361 with MSS., and understand merely that he is to ‘keep the running in mind’ and see fair play, he evidently ought to appear in the sequel when a question of fairness is actually raised (566 ff.), but is referred, not to a “σκοπός”, but to the ordeal of an oath. If with Ar. we read “δρόμους”, and understand that he is merely to count the laps, we have the difficulty that there seems to be only one lap (see 373). Either way the lines seem indefensible. Possibly they were added by some one who concluded that there were several laps, with “δρόμους”, which was then altered to “δρόμου” by those who held this interpretation of 373 wrong.

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 Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: