¹ I am indebted throughout to Professor H. Lloyd-Jones, and in the Trachiniae passages to Mrs P. E. Easterling and Mr M. D. Reeve, for valuable advice and criticism. Part II of this article will appear in the 1977 Journal.

² See ‘Pause and Period in the lyrics of Greek tragedy,’ C.Q. 27, 1977.

³ Wilamowitz (ed.) took μόχθων to be the Furies' exertions. This is in itself unlikely and does not help with the main difficulty.

⁴ So also Mazon, Weir-Smyth.

⁵ Cf. Dornseiff, F., Pindars Stil, 1921, 86Google Scholar.

⁶ Stanford, W. B., Aeschylus in his Style, 1942, 55Google Scholar.

⁷ This use of polar opposites to denote the range of possibilities in between is akin to the type in S. Ant. 1109 i.e. ‘everyone’, examined by Wilamowitz on H.F. 1106.

⁸ For as opposed to others' troubles as opposed to one's own, cf. Hdt. 7.152, 2 E. fr. 322 N².

⁹ Wieseler, F., Coniectanea in Aeschyli Eumenides, 1839, 108Google Scholar, also read which he thought was implied by the scholion and would account for the alternative explanation He renders ‘accessio, incrementum’, derives from and paraphrases: ‘audient … initium et successionem laborum’. I find this very hard.

Hermann read effugium. But if this goes with (as in his text), the sense ‘will ask about’ is again required; if with (as he suggests in his note: finem effugiumque laborum … frustra pro solatio adhibens), the sense effugium does not quite fit.

¹⁰ Dale, A. M., The Lyric Metres of Greek Drama ², 1968, 73Google Scholar (= LMGD).

¹¹ Such usages as κατ' ὄμμα, ἐν ὄμμασιν are irrelevant, as can be seen from e.g. Pers. 81 κυάνεον δ' ὄμμασι λεύσσων ϕονίου δέργμα δράκοντος, E. Or. 1020–1 ὥς σ' ἰδοũσ' ἐν ὄμμασιν | πανυστάτην πρόσοψιν. In Pho. 293 γονυπετείς ἓδρας προσπίτνω σ', ἄναξ, cited with our passage in K.-G. i 321, προσπίτνω governs ἕδρας in the first place, cf. Hel. 947. Forberg, E. (Abhandlung über πόδα βαίνειν und ähnliche Strukturen im Griechischen, Coburg, 1850, 9Google Scholar) explained ὄμμα here on the analogy of πόδα βαίνω and other expressions with πόδα which has no verbal force either; but this peculiar idiom with πόδα is quite common, and its extension unwarranted.

¹² The omission of δέδια, not οὐ δέδια, in H does not seem significant; see Dawe, R. D., The Collation and Investigation of Manuscripts of Aeschylus, 1964, 139Google Scholar.

¹³ Denniston, J. D., The Greek Particles ², 1954, 191Google Scholar (= GP).

¹⁴ Possible instances can be scanned in other ways, e.g. Cho. 152–3 giving if is long in but it is probably short, so that the rhythm is trochaic (so Wilamowitz, Schroeder, Kraus); E. Bacch. 578 possibly but better interpreted as trochees (so Wilamowitz, , Griechische Verskunst, 1921, 580Google Scholar [= GV]).

¹⁵ E. Bacch. 1170 is best taken as 2 ia.; so Dodds, Schroeder.

¹⁶ οὐ ϕόβος (Dawe) still leaves biceps followed by syncopated long.

¹⁷ Hermann suggested έμοὸ δέ γ' ὅτε, a most unlikely combination of particles, cf. GP 155.

¹⁸ 8 metra is the longest period found in Pindar (Mass, P., Greek Metre [tr. Lloyd-Jones], 1962, para. 65Google Scholar [= GM]), which gives a reasonable guide for tragedy.

¹⁹ See C.Q. 27, 1977.

²⁰ Cf. the opening stanza, and Pindar ll.cc.; though the opposition mortals/gods is certainly meant here, despite the Oceanids' status, as it is in N. 10, 72. Wilamowitz is right to insist (in his edition) that they are thought of as girls not goddesses, but wrong to infer that θεών need signify irrelevant gradations of divine rank.

²¹ Longo, O., Commento linguistico alle Trachinie di Sofocle, 1968Google Scholar.

²² There are a few apparent instances of brevis in longo in mid-verse in Pindar (see Snell³, ii, 173). Hiatus at interjections and in correptio Attica are of course irrelevant.

²³ For further definition and illustration of these terms see Maas, GM para. 135.

²⁴ There is some inevitable circularity in the argument here. Fraenkel, arguing from the displacement of ἂν from its normal position as second in the sentence in e.g. ἀλλ' οὐκ ἂν, has suggested that some conjunctions function as ‘Kurzkola’ and stand outside the sentence they introduce (‘Kolon und Satz, II’, NGG Phil.-Hist. 1933, 341 n. = Kl. Beitr. i 117 n 1, 120 n.5; ‘Nachträge zu “Kolon und Satz, II”’, Kl. Beitr. 135); but this is not meant, in its context, to imply that there is any kind of sense-pause after such ‘Kurzkola’. A less artificial approach, perhaps, is that of Moorhouse, A. C. (Studies in the Greek Negative, 1959, 85Google Scholar), who says of such combinations as ἂλλὰ μὴ, where μὴ is displaced from its normal position of first in the sentence, that since ἂλλὰ must always come first, μὴ comes as early as possible and can therefore be regarded as having its normal position.

²⁵ Listed in Snell, l.c. n. 1, Maas, l.c. n. 2.

²⁶ ‘A preposition placed between adjective and substantive loses something of its prepositional character’, Maas, l.c.

²⁷ Not οὐδ' ἁ | χρυσάνιος, with Elmsley's Θεαῑς for θείαις in 680, which gives successive ancipitia.

²⁸ For this and the following type of hyperbaton, see K.-G. ii 579, Anm. 4.

²⁹ I owe this point to Mr R. Mayne.

³⁰ Ad loc. and on O.T. 1216 (his 1192).

³¹ I owe these examples to Mrs P. E. Easterling.

³² C.Q. ² 4, 1954, 91 ff. Professor Lloyd-Jones does not accept the following criticism of his interpretation, though he endorses the arguments in n. 33.

³³ Janni, P., in a survey of some uses of κλίνομαι in Homer and later poetry (Quaderni Urbinati 3, 1967, 7–25Google Scholar), claims that κλιθείς here can mean ‘situated’. He shows that there are various models underlying the uses of κλίνομαι, and that the senses ‘leaning on’, ‘resting on’, ‘lying on’ which underlie the relevant examples of κεκλιμένοσ are sometimes so watered down that it means no more than κείμενος, situated in or on; e.g. Od. 4.608 αἳ θ' ἀλὸ κεκλίαται (of islands, cf. Od. 9.25 εὸν ἁλὸ κεῑται), Theogn. 1216 κεκλιμένη πεδίῳ (of a city), Il. 10.472 χθονὸ κέκλιτο (of weapons). Il. 5.709 λίμνῃ κεκλιμένος and P. O. 1, 92 Ἀλϕεοῦ πόρῳ κλιθείς ‘situated near’ (of persons), which come closest to κλιθείς here as it is usually understood, are extensions of the ‘weak’ use, as Jebb saw. (In Il. 15.740 πόντῳ κεκλιμένοι, of the Greeks fighting on the shore, the military use of κλίνομαι ‘give way’ may be operative, cf. Il. 16.68). But Janni does not meet the main difficulty: that the sense ‘resting on’, ‘leaning on’ underlying these personal uses cannot, however much it is watered down, apply in Trach. 101, because δισσαῑσιν ἀπείροις denotes the area within which Heracles is to be found, not a particular place near which he is situated; and the analogy of islands αἳ θ' ἀλὸ κεκλίαται cannot be invoked to justify some such paraphrase as ἐν χέρσῳ κείμενος because Heracles, like Mr King's Regulus, was not a feature of the landscape. The same holds if with marginal change we read δισσαῳς ἐν ἀπείροις. Nor does it help to take ἐν ἀπείροίς with ναίει, since κλιθείς will then have a positive sense ‘laid’ or ‘having reclined’, which suits Phaedra (E. Hipp. 114) but not Heracles. In other words, the fact that κεκλιμένος sometimes means κείμενος is irrelevant to Trach. 101, because κεῑμαι is not normally used of persons except in special circumstances, e.g. if they are ill or dead. Lloyd-Jones's interpretation alone gives κλιθείς its proper force. Otherwise we must assume that Sophocles has completely misunderstood and misapplied the Homeric usage.

³⁴ Campbell, A. Y., PCPS 183, 1954–1955, 12Google Scholar.

³⁵ So the exchange with Atlas is not mentioned as a feat of strength (its inclusion at E. H.F. 403–7 does not clash with Heracles' human stature in that play, because the ode is a set-piece encomium, with the canonical labours). The Gigantomachy is mentioned (1059), but then giants were often thought of simply as rather large warriors, as the vases show (cf. Vian, F., La guerre des géants, 1952, 16, 51–6Google Scholar; West on Hes. Th. 50); monsters like Enceladus were dealt with by gods. Heracles is not to be thought of as a god in the Trachiniae, least of all in this ode, where his safety depends on divine help.

³⁶ I do not mean that the question ‘is he in the east or west?’ is impossible, particularly after the reference to the sun's rising and setting at the beginning of the stanza, but merely that ‘where is he, on land or sea?’ is typical in such a context. With Heracles, there is a special point, as his labours involve both; cf. e.g. Trach. 1012, E. H.F. 225 f., P. I. 4.40.

³⁷ Greek Literary Papyri, i, ed. Page (Loeb), D. L., 1942Google Scholar = Select Literary Papyri, iii, 1950 = Pap. Oxy. 2078.

³⁸ Rightly, I think, though the sense is not certainly attested elsewhere. The meaning of E. Cycl. 291 is unclear. Seaford, R. A. S. suggests (C.Q. 25, 1975, 204Google Scholar) that the which Heracles visited are caves: he is looking for a way down to Hell. In E. H.F. 400 f., could mean ‘depths’ (Wilamowitz, Parmentier), but might again mean ‘farthest recesses’, cf. P. N. 3, 23–5.

³⁹ In Theognis 855–6, 945–6 is used metaphorically of a ship off course (= ‘deviate’), which might suggest ‘having turned aside’ for here, cf. (intr.) at Xen., Anab. 11.2Google Scholar, 16, Theocr. 1.130. But the simple verb could hardly mean this without some more precise complement, as at O.C. 193

⁴⁰ Anthony Macro, in a note on the passage (AJP 94, 1973, 1–3) cites examples of genitives with neuter plural adjectives used substantially without the article, e.g. Ant. 1209–10, but I doubt if these are enough to establish the singular use.

⁴¹ Macro (l.c.) anticipates these objections (a) by distinguishing between the senses of and ‘Aristotle defines the function of as the maintenance of the “being” of a living creature, whereas the increasing of the bulk of whatever has “being” is the function of (growth-promotion)’. But and are in general complementary rather than contrasted; they are both aspects of alere. Certainly h. Cer. 233–5 which he quotes, does not support his contention. (b) He follows Schütz, H. (Sophokleische Studien, 1890, 400 f.Google Scholar) in explaining by the negative idea implicit in the metaphor: ‘the higher the surge raises him, the greater the depth of the abyss on the other side; the more labours he performs with success, the further would he fall—if he were to fall. Yet, so far, one of the gods has kept him from falling into the abyss of death’. But for to have its proper adversative force, the negative implication would have to be explicit.

⁴² Stud. Urb. 39, 1965, 125 ff.

⁴³ Mrs Easterling writes: ‘I take the logic of the stanza to be: just as the waves of the sea “pass by” and “come on”, to use Jebb's translation, sc. just like the regular up-and-down movement of the sea (as in A. Sept. 758–60), so Heracles' fortunes are now up, now down—his πόνοι follow a similar up-and-down pattern—but up to now he has been under divine protection. Something like “this perpetual sea of troubles is his daily bread” would remove the comparability (or so it seems to me) of βάντ' ἐπιόντα τ', a rhythmic pattern which is important in the whole Parados.’ But βάντ' ἐπιόντα τε surely refers not to the ‘regular up-and-down movement of the sea’, and so to the rising and falling fortunes of the swimmer, but to the perpetual succession of waves. The notion of ‘up-and-down’ in this stanza depends entirely on αὔξει, which I argue may be corrupt; though of course the cyclic alternation of good and bad fortune is the central theme in the antistrophe and epode.

⁴⁴ ‘I shall oppose you, though with all deference’ does give some contrast, if not the right one, and the slight zeugma of is easy enough. The conjecture is bad because never has the sense required.

⁴⁵ I owe the substance of this point to Mr C. J. Tuplin.

⁴⁶ So even with ἒσται: D. 4.29, the only case cited by K.-G. i (41, Anm. 2), is not a clear case.

⁴⁷ Op. cit. (n. 21), ad. loc.

⁴⁸ Cf. e.g. D. 18.125 ‘while pretending to be mine’ (GP 370).

⁴⁹ Mrs Easterling also suggests that has an emphatic rather than a contrasting effect, and compares 229 she understands with and renders: ‘loaded him often with abuse, evilly spoken and evilly intended’. She argues further that there should be no contrast between words and actions in Eurytus’ repeated behaviour towards Heracles. ‘The emphasis, surely, is on the ever more offensive nature of his insults: he claims that Heracles is an inferior archer, he taunts him with being a slave, and finally to crown all he throws him out once and for all—not “often”.’

could no doubt be understood as she takes it. But the distinction emphasised by in 229 (‘as my news is good, so I have a warm welcome’) is irrelevant in 263–4: there is no point in distinguishing between Eurytus' evil speech and his evil intentions, if they are both aspects of his insults. (Lloyd-Jones, compares Ant. 603Google Scholar but the effect of the conjunction is to emphasise not that speech and intention are distinct, but that folly in both, for the family of Oedipus, is retribution for past wrong.) I do not take the point about the repeated behaviour of Eurytus: Lichas gives two examples of insulting words, one of insulting actions—in fact, the culmination of them.

⁵⁰ Philol. 90, 1935, 341 ff., esp. 342–3; Rh. Mus. 84) 1935, 207; ‘Binneninterpolationen’, NGG 1 (1936) 123–44, 185–215.

⁵¹ rather than the normal form of the verb with this sense in trimeters, since Sophocles in this play avoids interlinear hiatus without pause (Harrison, E., CR 55, 1941, 22–3Google Scholar). Another part., or aorist part, or finite verb would also do, and since the syllabic augment can probably be omitted here; there are many possibilities, ( would be neat, cf. in O.T. 560 = ‘deed of violence’, Sept. 1022 = ‘work of the hands’, both apparently from but the abusio cannot be assumed here, and without it the contrast is insufficient: cf. Plat. Soph. 219c )

⁵² Cf. Taillardat, Les Images d'Aristophane, para. 369.

⁵³ It is found with participles and verbal adjectives, at least some of which may be regarded as having substantival force (see Schulze, W., Ph. W. 16, 1896, 1332–3Google Scholar [= Kl. Schr., 1966, 648–9]; Ed. Schwyzer, , ‘Syntaktische Archaismen des Attischen’, Abh. Berl. Akad. 1940, nr. 7, pp. 8–9Google Scholar [cf. ib. 1942, nr. 10, p. 14 and Gr. Gr. ii 6⁵]), though not all can be so explained (see Koster, W. J., Mnemosyne ser. iv 5, 1952, 89 ffGoogle Scholar.). The simple genitive with is gen. of comparison. It might be argued that the same held for i.e. + gen. = ‘to be crushingly defeated by’; but there is no analogy for such an extension, and the phrase would even so be very difficult.

⁵⁴ C.Q. 39, 1925, 3.

⁵⁵ Nor can γε emphasise κακὴ, as Mazon implies by his rendering: ‘si son sort est cruel, il lui donne au moins le droit à quelque indulgence’. Such displacement, with γε following two closely connected words of which the first is more emphatic, is very rare (GP 150; the only tragic example Denniston considers sound, E. Hel. 837 ταὐτῷ ξίϕει γε, is clearly much easier).

⁵⁶ Emendationes in Sophoclis Trachinias, 1841, 192–4.

⁵⁷ Reeve, M. D., ‘Interpolation in Greek Tragedy, III’, GRBS 14, 1973, 167Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ Cf. h. Ven. 34–5, S. Ant. 787, frr. 684, 941.15, E. Hipp. 443 ff., Ar. Nub. 1079–82, Men. Hero, fr. 2 (Sandbach), A.P. 5.64, 4–5 (Asclepiades), Theocr. 3.46–8, Mosch. 2.76, Ovid. Met. 5.369–70.

⁵⁹ Jebb makes a psychological error when he says in his note: ‘Such a belief would mitigate, rather than increase, the wife's pain’. This might seem reasonable, but it is not the way the human heart works.

⁶⁰ Cf. the judicious remarks of P. E. Easterling on the kind of psychological realism to be looked for in Greek Tragedy (Greece and Rome 20, 1973, 6–7).

⁶¹ Longo understands (1) and (2) at the same time, this being a case of the ‘syntactical ambiguity’ he often finds in Sophocles. There is ambiguity in Sophocles, but not of this particular kind.

⁶² Longo also considers taking in apposition to but thinks that must then mean ‘advance unchecked’, making a genitive of space traversed, which is ‘duro’: I should say impossible.

⁶³ Punctuate after ἄναξ, followed by asyndeton. (This arrangement occurred independently to several members of the Heracles seminar given in Oxford by Mr G. W. Bond and Professor H. Lloyd-Jones in 1972.)

⁶⁴ This objection was pointed out to me by Mr L. D. J. Henderson.

⁶⁵ See Norden, , Agnostos Theos, 172Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ For this ‘predicative’ use of θεός, see Wilamowitz, , Der Glaube d. Hellenen, 1931–2, i 17Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ As El. 925, possibly A. Eum. 701; Pers. 610; possibly Trach. 575; cf. Hesych. (see Paley, , J. Phil. 5, 1874, 89Google Scholar; but in P. P. 5, 106, which he cites, is adj.).

⁶⁸ As Reinhardt and others interpret the scene, cf. Reinhardt, K., Sophokles,³ 1947, 55–6, 254–8Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ It is possible that here means ‘shredded’ or ‘tapped’ (i.e. lot by incision), cf. Fraenkel on A. Ag. 17 But the metaphor has much more point if it refers to surgery (cf. Tucker's note and see p. 57 n. 3 below, on Trach. 1121).

⁷⁰ Op. cit. (n. 56), 196–7.

⁷¹ In Trach. 1190 is performa tory; but that is different, as it does not endorse a prayer already uttered.

can mean glorior as well as imprecor, as at A. Ag. 1262 (see Fraenkel), 1394; so here might mean, as Lloyd-Jones suggests to me, ‘and if it is right, I exult in it’, viz. her punishment. But the sense imprecor is favoured here both by the context, where an imprecation is actually uttered, and by the qualification: it is particularly in the utterance that the speaker must insure himself against impiety, cf. S. El. 126–7 P. P. 3, 1–2 (it does not matter whether or not Pindar is actually uttering the wish for Cheiron's return), Od. 22.412 (Odysseus restrains Eurycleia from uttering an exultant cry).

⁷² Philol. 4, 1849, 574. Wakefield has the reading so pointed in his test; in his note he attributes it to Brunck, and prefers δὴ.

⁷³ This punctuation seems not to have been considered by Wakefield or Musgrave, as is implied in Blaydes' note.

⁷⁴ If is intrusive, there are many possibilities. Wunder suggested ‘since you provoked this strife’ (between mother and son), Il. 11.529 (op. cit. 58).

⁷⁵ περονὴ can also mean fibula (safety-pin or brooch), as in Od. 19.226–7 (Od. 18.293 is problematic; in Il. 10.131, Il. 14.180 a pin is probably meant; see Bielefeld, E., Heft ‘Schmuck’ in Archaeologia Homerica, 1968Google Scholar); but περονὶς here is almost certainly a pin. Fibulae are not found in mainland Greece in the classical period, except in outlying parts such as Illyria, and hardly ever appear on vases (Blinkenberg, C., Fibules grecques et orientales, 1926, 32–33Google Scholar, notes only two examples, both of the mid-sixth century); whereas pins, and later also buttons or discs, are shown regularly on vases as fasteners of peploi.

⁷⁶ Cl. Pfeiffer on Callim. fr. 620^a.

⁷⁷ Sub-Mycenean and Geometric pins are sometimes very long (30 cm or more) and were worn point downwards. Pins tend to become smaller; in the sub-Geometric period the longer pins average 13 cm; the smaller, from 5 cm to 10 cm, are not all likely to have been used to fasten peploi, as they would not be long enough to pass through the folds and hold them. Virtually no pins have been found which can be identified, by some divergence from the archaic type, as originating in the classical period. We must therefore assume that in classical times pins, when they were used, were of the archaic type: for peploi, that is, around 13 cm long. This agrees well enough with the size of pins shown on vases. (Herodotus comments on the very large pins used in Argos and Aegina [5.88]). Pins were inconvenient, and evidently went out of general use during the fifth century: ‘It is hard to understand how long it took for the pin, an inheritance from the Bronze Age, to be gradually superseded by other, cleverer types of fasterners’ (Jacobsthal, op. cit. 114; cf. 90, 110–11).

⁷⁸ The François vase is cited in illustration of Trach. 924–5 by Studniczka, F., Beiträge zur Geschichte der altgriechischen Tracht, 1886, 98–9Google Scholar.

⁷⁹ This point was made to me by Mr J. Boardman, to whose advice I am indebted in this note.

⁸⁰ Jacobsthal (93) quotes the passages together, and remarks on Trach. 924–5: ‘thus the peploi in the Kerameikos graves were fastened’. But the position of pins in graves can rarely show how they were fastened, and as he later points out (109), ‘pins in tombs are found where they were placed at or after the prothesis: vases show how people wore them when alive’.

⁸¹ CR 67, 1947, 7–8.

⁸² ϒCS 22, 1972, 267 ff.

⁸³ For the reading see Barrett ad loc.

⁸⁴ There are of course many verbs in Greek which are normally transitive but have an intransitive, reflexive or absolute use (see K.-G. i 91–5). These are characteristically verbs expressing motion or change, as in other languages (verto, muto; turn, move; changer, sortir; ziehen), and are far more often compound than simple. This seems to be very rare with denominative verbs. Out of the many listed in K.-G. l.c., I note only κυκλεῑν, which is probably absol. rather than intr. (sc. πόδα, cf. ἑλίσσω), and ἐναυλίζειν (Phil. 33, E. Hyps., Hippocr.), perhaps by analogy with καταλύειν (cf. κατακοιμāν in Hdt. 8.134). εὰνāν intr. might conceivably be justified by analogy with this last, or with λωϕāν (commoner intr.), or (κατ' ἀντίϕρασιν, as it were) with ἀνακινεῑν if intr. at Trach. 1250 (probably trans. there as Jebb takes it, though the intr. use is found with παρα-, ὑποκινεῑν). The usage is not particularly Sophoclean (Campbell lists a few examples in his ‘Essay on Language’, ed. vol. i p. 99); it is fairly common in Herodotus, εὐνάσαι might therefore be intransitive, but the evidence tends to show that it is not.

⁸⁵ Not always easeful: cf. Hipp. 560 of Althaea; Hec. 473 of Zeus and the Titans (Giants).

⁸⁶ See Schwinge, E. R., Die Stellung der Trachinierinnen im Werk des Sophokles, 1962, 21–4Google Scholar.

⁸⁷ here might account for the unmetrical in 1042. For the responsion 1006 cf. Phil. 395 510 where the scansion need not be doubted (cf. Conomis, N., ‘The dochmiacs of Greek drama’, Hermes 92, 1964, 38Google Scholar). is also possible, though I know no actual instance of the responsion in hypodochmiacs occurs in syncopated trochees at E. IA 235/46). is in this context most naturally interpreted as dochmiac. But this gives brevis in longo without sense-pause in both places, which would be remarkable. (Conomis states [op. cit. 45] that brevis in longo and hiatus do not occur without sense-pause in the dochmiacs of tragedy. This does not hold for Aeschylus and Euripides, in whom this feature is no more rare in dochmiacs than in other metres, but it does seem to hold for Sophocles; see now C.Q. n.s. 26, 1976). Slight pause might perhaps be given by the exclamatory force of in the strophe, though this is doubtful; certainly not with lengthening before mute and liquid in 1024, since this would imply synaphea (it is required, most improbably, by Seidler's arrangement of the scene if Erfurdt's is read in 1042). It seems better to interpret (with Coxon) as dactyls. An isolated pair of dactyls among dochmiacs is, however, anomalous; they should be regarded as forming a compound with the following i.e. a long form of prosodiac, cf. the shorter ibycean at Andr. 826 itself part of a longer enoplian compound; the longer dactylic movement of Med. 135 and the corresponding enoplian at Ion 1466 followed by dochmiacs (on this type of colon and its incidence in dochmiacs, see LMGD 167; the ending is typical, ib. 159). Dale remarks on S. Phil. 827 where the metre is ambiguous, that the verse is uncharacteristic of Sophocles (op. cit. 117–9), but it is presumably in place in the type of scene in which most of the Euripidean examples occur. (On Phil. 677 see Part II of this article.)

⁸⁸ As a devotee of Onians, R. B.' Origins of European Thought (q.v. p. 149 f.Google Scholar), I had thought of cf. A. Ag. 76–8 in a similar contrast between youth and old age; but the phrase is too bizarre to convince even myself.

⁸⁹ The most convincing restoration is that of Lloyd-Jones, (ϒCS 22, 1972, 269–70Google Scholar):

His ex gratia supplement (or governing ‘putting an end to the pains of life’ fits exactly with the interpretation of offered here.

If it is right to see a close correspondence between this whole passage and E. Hipp. 1371 ff. (see p. 144 top) above), Hipp. 1385–6 (for the text see Barrett) might be thought to support Musgrave's interpretation of Trach. 1021–2. But it would correspond equally well with Trach. 1015–8, as restored by Lloyd-Jones.

⁹⁰ It is possible that the metaphor there refers to the tapping of roots or the shredding of herbs, as does at P. P. 4.221 or at E. Alc. 971 (cf. Fraenkel's note); but it has more point if it anticipates 846 in the sense ‘cure by incision’, i.e. surgery, as Page takes it, and so does in Cho. 539, Suppl. 268 (see n. 69 above on Trach. 554).

⁹¹ Jachmann, G., ‘Binneninterpolationen’, NGG 1, 1936, 190–1Google Scholar.

⁹² Op. cit. (n. 57), 167–8.

⁹³ I owe this point to Mr Reeve, who tells me that Mr W. S. Barrett made it to him. I have not found any examples of this usage. E. Suppl. 594 would be analogous, but has other usages not shared by