The note in Pharr about line 301 led me to believe that a)e/kontoj e)mei=o is a genitive absolute. However there is no participle, just an adjective and a pronoun. Do we have to assume the participle, maybe e)/ontoj, or does a genitive absolute not always get a participle?
In Pharr's book, there is a koppa, a kappa, and a chi. I think the koppa is an aspirated 'k' sound while the kappa is an unaspirated 'k' sound. But what is the chi? Aspirated 'k' sound? Or is it more like the ch in 'chance'?
What's confusing me is the second part of the sentence - o(ra/w does not seem like a deponent verb, yet if the w)ra/eto is in middle/passive, what is the relationship of tou\s qnh/skontas in the accusative case with the rest of the sentence?
And now that I look at this again, since the first verb there is also non-deponent and in mid/pass, how do the two nouns relate?
In response to some questions about the caesura in the Odyssey-a group, I was able to indulge in my taste for all things metrical.
In Some Comments on the Epic Caesura I give a possible origin for the heroic hexameter which accounts for the caesura, and then analyze the first 21 lines of Iliad A with special attention on interesting things that happen around the caesura.
Just looking for sympathy: I'm reading through the Iliad and I'm on book 6: line 240: I'm going to make it through the first Loeb book even if it kills me, and then I'm going to frame the little tattered green paper cover and hang it on my wall as a trophy.
I almost always get messed up following complicated trails of pronouns; I can never seem to get the right he and him who ...