Textkit Logo

Antigone 332-383

Here you can discuss all things Ancient Greek. Use this board to ask questions about grammar, discuss learning strategies, get help with a difficult passage of Greek, and more.

Antigone 332-383

Postby Bart » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:42 am

360-361: Ἅιδα μόνον φεῦξιν οὐκ ἐπάξεται:
νόσων δ᾽ ἀμηχάνων φυγὰς ξυμπέφρασται.

Is Ἅιδα an accusative of respect or a genetive of seperation (Ἅιδα(ο)) with φεῦξιν? Both seem possible. No change in meaning either, so not really a big deal, but just checking.


365-371:
σοφόν τι τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας ὑπὲρ ἐλπίδ᾽ ἔχων
τοτὲ μὲν κακόν, ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐσθλὸν ἕρπει,
νόμους γεραίρων χθονὸς θεῶν τ᾽ ἔνορκον δίκαν,
370ὑψίπολις: ἄπολις ὅτῳ τὸ μὴ καλὸν
ξύνεστι τόλμας χάριν.

I understand what is being said here, but I'm not sure if I can completely follow the syntax.
-> Having (ἔχων ) the resourcefulness of skill/ craft (τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας ), something clever beyond hope (σοφόν τι ὑπὲρ ἐλπίδ᾽ ), he goes sometimes to what's evil sometimes to what's noble (τοτὲ μὲν κακόν, ἄλλοτ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐσθλὸν ἕρπει).

So I read σοφόν τι ὑπὲρ ἐλπίδ᾽ as in apposition to τὸ μηχανόεν τέχνας. Is that correct?


And finally I read

ἄπολις ὅτῳ τὸ μὴ καλὸν
ξύνεστι τόλμας χάριν.

as: Without city (is he) with whom the not good co-exists thanks to (his) boldness.
Bart
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:57 pm
Location: Antwerpen

Re: Antigone 332-383

Postby Hylander » Thu Mar 08, 2018 3:25 pm

Ἅιδα -- this is the "Doric" genitive in -α. 3rd declension genitive Αιδος and dative Αιδι are found in Homer and tragedy, but apparently not accusative Αιδα. Accusative of respect wouldn't seem right here to me, though I can't put my finger on exactly why.

I'm wondering about the rough breathing: the normal literary "Doric" form Αιδας has a smooth breathing, according to LSJ; the rough breathing would be Attic. But of course the breathing marks were added long after all Greek dialects had become psilotic, so how did they know? The new OCT by Lloyd-Jones and Wilson and Griffith have a rough breathing, and this is presumably the reading of the medieval ms. tradition. Did Sophocles hear a real "Doric" form here with smooth breathing, or did he simply add a Doric veneer to the Attic form with rough breathing by using the Doric genitive? It's impossible to tell. The Greek literary dialects are a can of worms.

The on-line version of LSJ omits this word, apparently because it's treated as a proper noun.

I think your understanding of the syntax is correct.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1347
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Antigone 332-383

Postby Bart » Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:30 pm

Thanks!

About Ἅιδα: I read it as a genitive at first, but Steadman suggesting instead an accusative of respect made me wonder.
Bart
Textkit Fan
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2013 3:57 pm
Location: Antwerpen

Re: Antigone 332-383

Postby mwh » Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:46 pm

360. I read ΄ᾼδα (disyllabic) not as a genitive of separation but as a plain objective genitive. He can’t flee Hades. It’s starker that way. Admittedly the difference is very slight, perhaps unreal.
An accusative, even if the form allowed (which it doesn't), would be quite wrong: much too vague, and unaccountably severed from φεῦξιν (and cf. the gen. in the next line). If that’s really what Steadman says, I’d be extremely cautious using him.

I doubt there’s justification for the rough breathing. I think it’s doubtful even in Attic, despite some epigraphic evidence of aspiration. The ἀ-ἰδ “unseen” etymology is sometimes brought into play in tragedy.

365. σοφόν τι is predicative, and carries the weight, basically as e.g. σοφον τον υιον εχει he has a smart son, his son is smart.

Edit. Those genitives in 360-361 could even (and simultaneously) be subjective: he won’t introduce Hades’ flight i.e. he won’t find a way to get Hades to flee (just as he won’t find a way to successfully flee Hades: it works both ways). In passages as dense as this it may be a mistake to narrow down the meaning.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2764
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Antigone 332-383

Postby Hylander » Thu Mar 08, 2018 11:51 pm

One further reason why Ἅιδα cannot be accusative with short -α (even if such a 3rd dec. accusative existed): -δα in 361 (strophe) must be a long/heavy syllable in order to respond with -μας of τόλμας in 371 (antistrophe).

I think you would do better with a more reliable (and much fuller) commentary. There is a good commentary by Mark Griffith in the Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics series:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0521337011?selectObb=new

It's more expensive than Steadman's commentary, but also much more informative. If you can afford it, I would recommend getting a copy. There's also an older, out-of-print commentary in the old Macmillan series by Bayfield, which is available at reasonable cost on used book websites:

https://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?sts=t&an=&tn=antigone&kn=bayfield&isbn=
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1347
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm


Return to Learning Greek