James Adam, The Republic of Plato

In this difficult passage Schneider takes ἤ as ‘than,’ and προσθεῖναι as equivalent to a comparative with a verb; but no exact parallel has hitherto been adduced, and the idiom even if admissible is exceedingly harsh. Neither the suggestion of Stephanus (προσθεῖναι τῷ δικαίῳ ἄλλως ἢ) nor that of Richards (to insert πλέον after ἤ) carries conviction. It should also be remarked that the words νῦν πρὸς τούτῳ ὧδε λέγειν follow somewhat awkwardly as an explanation of προσθεῖναι τῷ δικαίῳ if ἢ ὡς is interpreted in Schneider's way. Stallbaum's ἢ ὡς—τὸν δὲ ἐχθρὸν κακῶς; νῦν πρὸς τούτῳ ὧδε λέγειν, is very unpleasing, not so much from the necessity of understanding λέγειν after ἤ (‘or to say, as we said at first’ etc.) as because it is extremely violent to separate ἤ from νῦν πρὸς τούτῳ ὧδε λέγειν. Faesius' proposal (in which he is followed by Ast, Madvig, and several editors) to eject ἤ gives the required sense (‘do you bid us add to the view of justice which etc.,’ προσθεῖναι being explained by πρὸς τούτῳ ὧδε λέγειν), but it fails to account for the presence of ἤ in the MSS. It may seem an objection to the view which I take that ἤ in a sentence of this kind would naturally introduce an alternative, whereas πρὸς τούτῳ ὧδε λέγειν only explains προσθεῖναι. This objection, such as it is, applies with still greater force to the view that ἤ is ‘than.’ Some will probably regard the whole clause from ἤ—λέγειν as a marginal commentary on προσθεῖναι; but this is much too drastic. Possibly ἤ should be replaced by καί—the corruption is said to be common (Bast Comment. Palaeogr. p. 815); but I am not convinced that ἤ does not sometimes mean ‘or in other words’ even in classical Greek.