Poll: Iliad 1.5 οἰωνοῖσί τε δαῖτα or οἰωνοῖσί τε πᾶσι?

[mwh]

Thanks Paul. I didn’t know it was in Ameis-Hentze-Cauer too! That’s serious. Is it in the Basle update do you know? That would be by René Nünlist I think. — Oh, come to think of it, don't they adopt West's text? But René must discuss.

As for alternatives to Pharr, well I used the OCT and the Loeb (please don’t tell me that has δαιτα too), without a teacher. Not recommended but it was good enough for me.

Tease away. You know I never take you seriously in any case.

[Paul Derouda]

The Basel edition prints West's text with a facing German translation. But I think "update" is a misnomer, as the commentary is a new text altogether with different aims, with a lot of new material but also with a lot of material left out.

[mwh]

True. I've wondered why they call AHC the Grundlage.

[jeidsath]

I did some searching within Homer, but couldn't much in the way of parallel usages to οιωνοιϲι τε παϲι. The tragic parallels seem closest. I would think that the next step in the investigation would be to look into how Aeschylus tends to allude to Homer.

[seneca2008]

I think this thread has exemplified many of the concerns which are raised in contemporary literary theory about the problem of examining meaning in texts. I think of "establishing" the text as an extension of literary study rather than as it is often presented as a separate "scientific" process. The choice to be made (if indeed we have to make a choice) will be coloured by many factors including as mwh has pointed out the practises of two millennia or so of readers.

mwh wrote

The report in Athenaeus (1.21) is untrustworthy. It will be taken from an earlier (probably much earlier) source, accusing Zenodotus “in his edition” (ἐν τῇ κατ’ αὐτὸν ἐκδόσει) of writing δαιτα in ignorance of the fact that Homer never applies the word to beasts, only to people. (Which is actually a pretty good objection.)

Is this latter point quite right? This passage appears to show δαῖτα applied to a Lion. Admittedly the context is a simile likening Achilles to a lion but it does at least cause me to question whether things are so straightforward. (I owe this point to Kirk's commentary.)

ἀλλ᾽ ὀλοῷ Ἀχιλῆϊ θεοὶ βούλεσθ᾽ ἐπαρήγειν,
ᾧ οὔτ᾽ ἂρ φρένες εἰσὶν ἐναίσιμοι οὔτε νόημα
γναμπτὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι, λέων δ᾽ ὣς ἄγρια οἶδεν,
ὅς τ᾽ ἐπεὶ ἂρ μεγάλῃ τε βίῃ καὶ ἀγήνορι θυμῷ
εἴξας εἶσ᾽ ἐπὶ μῆλα βροτῶν ἵνα δαῖτα λάβῃσιν:

Il.24.39-43

[jeidsath]

Leaf:

The anacoluthon is surprising, the two relative ὅς and ἐπεί having only one principal verb between them. We have similar but less violent cases in Θ 230 ἃς ὁπότ’ ἐν Λήμνῳ ἠγοράασθε, and in Ρ 657 (also a lion-simile), where ὅς τ’ ἐπεί is followed by one verb only. But the latter is intelligible, as a verb is supplied for ὅς after all in 664, the original construction having only been interrupted by the internal growth of the description. Here we must supply ἄγρια οἶδεν from the preceding line -- an unnatural artifice. Probably 42-5 are all interpolated. The last line undoubtedly is; 42-3 have all the appearance of an imitation of the simile in Ρ by a late hand who regarded the ἐπεί as "redundant" on the apparent analogy of the ὅτε in the familiar ὡς ὅτε -- an explanation which will also apply to Θ 230. If, as Athenaios states, Ar. held that ἐπὶ μόνων ἀνθρώποω δαῖτας λέγι ὁ ποιητής, ἐπὶ δὲ θηρίων οὐκέτι (see on Α 5), he must have obelized this couplet, though the Scholia give no hint of it; it is impossible to believe that he took βροτῶν δαῖτα together, as Lehrs would have. (See, however, Ludwich ii. 88, note.) βροτῶν is a strange expression in any case, as Nauck has remarked, and is probably another sign of an inferior hand. Schol. Α suggests εἴξῃς’ for εἴξας, ingeniously but not rightly; the lion's "yielding to his impulse" cannot be made the subject of a distinct clause as though it were quite separate from his attacking the herds, but is only in place in the subordinate participial construction.

[seneca2008]

Probably 42-5 are all interpolated.

Its a strange game that involves trying to iron out the text by invoking "interpolation". Kirk (Richardson I guess) sees no difficulty here:

"In 42-3 the words "ὅς τ᾽ ἐπεὶ" are both followed by a single verb, a type of anacoluthon similar to that found at 8.230, 17.658-64 (see comment). It is as if the "ἐπεὶ" had lost its function of introducing a clause. A T (Nicanor) propose εἴξῃ or εἴξῃσ᾽ in 43 to avoid this, but this is unnecessary."

[jeidsath]

Its a strange game that involves trying to iron out the text by invoking "interpolation".

These two lines are from an almost unknown manuscript (I'm likely the only person to have seen it) just after 24.43:

ἐννώσας "θήρα τρώγῃ" στίχος ὕστερον οἰκτρῶς
ἥμαρτε. μὴ γράφε τοῦτο. ὅδ’ Ὁυμήρος νυστάζει.

[jeidsath]

I think that I will have to conjecture the following for that last line:

ἥμαρτ’. οὐ τοῦτο γράφε. ὧδε δ’ Ὁμήρος βρίζει.

[mwh]

At this rate it's going to take us a while to get through the Iliad. Not to mention the Agamemnon.

Incidentally, it’s thanks to Athenaeus that we have this spirited and erudite epigram attacking Alexandrian scholarship. Anyone who’s struggled with σφιν and σφῳν or μιν and νιν or Homeric hapax legomena will sympathize.

φεύγετ’, Ἀριστάρχειοι, ἐπ’ εὐρέα νῶτα θαλάττης
Ἑλλάδα, τῆς ξουθῆς δειλότεροι κεμάδος,
γωνιοβόμβυκες, μονοσύλλαβοι, οἷσι μέμηλε
τὸ σφὶν καὶ σφῶιν καὶ τὸ μὶν ἠδὲ τὸ νίν.
τοῦθ’ ὑμῖν εἴη δυσπέμφελον· Ἡροδίκῳ δὲ
Ἑλλὰς ἀεὶ μίμνοι καὶ θεόπαις Βαβυλών.

Fly ye to Greece along the sea's wide back,
Pupils of Aristarchus, all more timid
Than the pale antelope, worms hid in holes,
Monosyllabic animals, who care
For σφὶν, and σφῶιν, and for μὶν, and νὶν,
This shall be your lot, grumblers—but let Greece
And sacred Babylon receive Herodicus. (transl. or rather mistransl. C.D. Yonge)

(Herodicus like Zenodotus of Mallos was closely associated with Crates of Pergamon.)

[Rhoover60]

I was a bit puzzled [but should not have been] when I noticed this difference when going through Dr. Pharr's grammar and looking at other texts online. Then I was pleased when I found this thread. I am too new to this to have a gut feeling and will not vote either way, but I seem drawn to δαῖτα.