Textkit Logo

Medea

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.

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sat Nov 11, 2017 6:48 pm

Without necessarily ruling out your interpretation, she seems to have moved on from specifically sexual issues to more general concerns with καινὰ δ’ ἤθη καὶ νόμους. And, while I've seen χράομαι used of the male partner in sexual relations (wasn't this the verb used of Cyrus and the queen of Bithynia?), is it so used of the female partner? I don't know the answer to that question.

But it makes sense to read it in a less sexual way, too. Maybe, to "get along with" her bed-mate. A Greek woman's relationship with her husband will encompass more than just sex.

Perhaps E. intends it to be ambiguous or suggestive.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Nov 11, 2017 7:51 pm

If you're thinking of Cyrus and the queen of Cilicia, I think that the verb was συγγίγνεσθαι (but perhaps I'm misremembering). However, after having looked at all the references in the LSJ for χράω (C.IV.2), it does seem to always be the male parter (though sometimes with another male), and seems to mean "make sexual use of." This would sink my idea, I'm afraid.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:33 am

I took a break after the last post due to the flu going around in the family, and then re-read the play up to the point I stopped.

306-309:

σὺ δ᾽ οὖν φοβῇ με· μὴ τί πλημμελὲς πάθῃς;
οὐχ ὧδ᾽ ἔχει μοι, μὴ τρέσῇς ἡμᾶς, Κρέον,
ὥστ᾽ ἐς τυράννους ἄνδρας ἐξαμαρτάνειν

And you fear me therefore, lest you suffer an outrage?
It is not this way concerning me, Kreon. Do not fear me,
so that I do not mistake you for a despotic man.

However Page says οὐχ ὧδ᾽ ἔχει μοι...ὥστε: 'I am not in a condition to...' Does he mean that I should have understood: "I am not in a condition to mistake a man for a tyrant"?

And is Medea really the subject of ἐξαμαρτάνειν? She's not the subject of the rest of the sentence.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Thu Dec 21, 2017 1:51 pm

οὐχ ὧδ᾽ ἔχει μοι . . .
ὥστ᾽ ἐς τυράννους ἄνδρας ἐξαμαρτάνειν

ὥστ᾽ ἐς τυράννους ἄνδρας ἐξαμαρτάνειν is a "natural" result clause with infinitive (not a purpose clause). ὥστ' is correlative with ὧδ᾽.

μὴ τρέσῇς ἡμᾶς, Κρέον, is parenthetical.

"I'm not in such a state -- don't be afraid of me, Creon -- as to do wrong to/commit an offense against kings."

See Mastronarde's note for a fuller explanation.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:30 pm

324 Scholia

μὴ πρός σε: μέμφονται τῷ Εὐριπίδῃ ὅτι πεποίηκε τὴν Μήδειαν ἐξ ὧν λέγει φανερὰν γινομένην τῷ Κρέοντι, ὡς ὑπούλως ἔχει πρὸς τὴν νύμφην

νεογάμου κόρης does seem to be quite a big wink to the audience that Medea isn’t being 100% serious. Was it supposed to be humorous?
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Fri Dec 22, 2017 2:46 am

νεογάμου κόρης does seem to be quite a big wink to the audience that Medea isn’t being 100% serious.


I'm not following you here. Has M. already conceived her plan to destroy Glauce? I don't think so. She's just begging Creon to be allowed to stay in Corinth, and she invokes his knees and Glauce. And I don't think the scholiast offers much enlightenment.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Fri Dec 22, 2017 5:07 am

Having just read on, she claims, starting on line 368, that she had exactly that intention while speaking to him. But what I was comenting on was νεογάμου (and the scholia too, I think). The newly-weddedness of the girl is too distressing topic for any normal jilted lover to bring up in passing as she does. She’s overdoing it as she convinces Kreon that she only holds a grudge against Jason.

δοκεῖς γὰρ ἄν με τόνδε θωπεῦσαί ποτε,
εἰ μή τι κερδαίνουσαν ἢ τεχνωμένην;
οὐδ ̓ ἂν προσεῖπον οὐδ ̓ ἂν ἡψάμην χεροῖν.
ὃ δ ̓ ἐς τοσοῦτον μωρίας ἀφίκετο,
ὥστ ̓ ἐξὸν αὐτῷ τἄμ ̓ ἑλεῖν βουλεύματα
γῆς ἐκβαλόντι, τήνδ ̓ ἀφῆκεν ἡμέραν
μεῖναί μ ̓, ἐν ᾗ τρεῖς τῶν ἐμῶν ἐχθρῶν νεκροὺς
θήσω, πατέρα τε καὶ κόρην πόσιν τ ̓ ἐμόν.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Dec 23, 2017 3:26 am

384

κράτιστα τὴν εὐθεῖαν, ᾗ πεφύκαμεν
σοφαὶ μάλιστα, φαρμάκοις αὐτοὺς ἑλεῖν.

The straight road is best, using that which truly gives us the title of Sophae, to kill them by poison.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sun Dec 24, 2017 5:14 pm

A few suggestions.

πεφύκαμεν "to be innately", not "to have the title of".

The plurals should be translated as singulars. Tragic characters speak in the first person plural.

The antecedent of ᾗ is τὴν εὐθεῖαν.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sun Dec 24, 2017 5:57 pm

The straight road is best, in which I am by nature especially skilled, to take them by poison.

I suppose Medea could be saying that she is especially skilled at taking the direct path, but I assumed that she was anticipating the φαρμάκοις αὐτοὺς ἑλεῖν.

What I was thinking though, was that she has been called σοφή already by Kreon, describing her as especially dangerous. So I thought that this could also be read as Medea's statement about why people consider her σοφή (or also women in general, thinking about magical women in Greek folk belief and descriptions of sinister old ladies in 19th century Greek village life).

The straight road is best, by which I a σοφή am specially capable, to take them by poison.
The straight road is best, by which we σοφαί are specially capable, to take them by poison.

So my translation before was unpacking that second version.

I do think that αὐτούς is really plural and refers back to her explicit kill list, just given: πατέρα τε καὶ κόρην πόσιν τ ̓ ἐμόν.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Mon Dec 25, 2017 3:19 am

Yes, I wasn't thinking about αὐτούς, which is plural--just the plural self-references by Medea. σοφαὶ -- maybe "cunning" or "clever," to capture the slightly negative connotations of the word.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jan 13, 2018 3:53 pm

The lyric section from 410-445 was hard for me. And I've read through it a number of times, but I'm not sure about everything. Here is the section starting at 442:

Code: Select all
σοὶ δ᾽ οὔτε πατρὸς δόμοι,
  δύστανε, μεθορμίσα-
  σθαι μόχθων πάρα, τῶν τε λέκ-
  τρων ἄλλα βασίλεια κρείσ-
  σων δόμοισιν ἐπέστα.


And neither to you is a father's house, wretched one, to shelter your ship aside from labors. And another queen stronger than your marriage-bed has been set over the house.

For some reason it feels like τῶν τε λέκτρων is too far from κρείσσων for that. And the sense isn't exactly easy. Is there any way that τῶν τε λέκτρων could be absolute without a verb? "Regarding your marriage-bed, another queen stronger [than you] has been set over the house."
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Sat Jan 13, 2018 5:46 pm

Remember word order is more flexible in lyric. The fronted genitive is not at all too far from κρεισσων. Incidentally, note that the τε (an emendation of δε) responds to ουτε, untranslatably; it’s a two part sentence, with the opening σοί applying to both halves. (πάρα serves as the verb to the first half.)
The sense is that (a) she can’t go back home and (b) on the sex/marriage/domestic front she’s been replaced by another. This sums up her predicament.as outlined in the preceding verses.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sat Jan 13, 2018 6:17 pm

πάρα serves as the verb to the first half.


Joel, from your translation, I'm not sure whether you see that πάρα isn't the (postpositive) preposition but rather is equivalent to παρεισι.

LSJ:

πάρειμι (εἰμί
A.sum), inf. -εῖναι, Ep. 3pl. “παρέα_σι” Il.5.192, Od.13.247 ; Ion. subj. “παρέω” Hdt.4.98; Ep. inf. “παρέμμεναι” Od.4.640, part. “παρεών” Il.24.475 : Ep. impf. “παρέην” Od.3.267 (tm.); 2sg. παρῆας v.l. in Od.4.497 (Sch., Lex.Mess.) ; 3pl. “πάρεσαν” Il. 11.75; Att. impf. “παρῆ” A.Ch.523; in later Greek “παρήμην” Luc.VH2.25 : Ep. fut. “παρέσσομαι” Od. 13.393 :—to be by or present, “ὑμεῖς θεαί ἐστε πάρεστέ τε ἴστε τε πάντα” Il. 2.485, etc. : in tmesi, “πὰρ δ᾽ ἄρ᾽ ἔην καὶ ἀοιδός” Od. 3.267 ; πάρα used for πάρεστι and πάρεισι, Il. 20.98, 23.479, etc. : freq. in part., “ποίπνυον παρεόντε” 24.475 ; σημάντορος οὐ π. 15.325, etc. ; “ἀπεόντα νόῳ παρεόντα” Parm. 2.1, cf. Heraclit. 34.


μεθορμίσασθαι μόχθων is a unit, "sail to/find an[other] anchorage/shelter from your troubles" or something like that.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jan 13, 2018 6:35 pm

I hadn’t seen that, actually, until mwh pointed out that πάρα was a verb here. So thank you both. I thought it was a preposition, applying to μόχθων. I think that πάρα for πάρεστι has occurred once or twice in Medea at earlier points (or I remember it from Homer).

EDIT: But now I see that Mastronarde has a note saying that either is possible.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Sat Jan 13, 2018 7:41 pm

Taking πάρα as prepositional might be grammatically defensible but I don’t think it’s right, especially when we’ve already had μεθορμισασθαι used with plain genitive in the previous scene, and in much the same context:
ου μητερ’ ουκ αδελφον ουχι συγγενη
μεθορμισασθαι τησδ’ εχουσα συμφορας. (258)

(I don’t have Mastronarde’s commentary. I went through it when it first came out, or in draft before that, but not since.)
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sat Jan 13, 2018 11:13 pm

To me, σοὶ δ᾽ οὔτε πατρὸς δόμοι . . . μεθορμίσασθαι seems weak without an explicit verb. παρα for παρεισι seems more consistent with the thought: "your father's house is not available to you to seek shelter . . . "
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Sun Jan 14, 2018 2:51 am

I agree, but I think the point about the use of μεθιστασθαι a little earlier in the play carries more weight.

PS. And I see LSJ (B.I.2) cites 551 for the genitive, δευρ’ Ιωλκιας χθονος—in addition to Euripidean passages with λυπης and κακων (B.I.3)—and active passages similarly (A.II, e.g. κακων, πονων); nowhere with παρα.

EDIT: Oops, that’s μεθιστημι not μεθορμιζω. My eye must have slipped between columns. I need some sleep. But the verbs are similar enough in meaning I think to indicate the expected construction. I see LSJ quotes our phrase with the πάρα as if it were prepositional, if that’s in fact what they mean.
Last edited by mwh on Sun Jan 14, 2018 3:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:17 pm

The bit at 476-82 gave me some trouble.

ἔσωσά σ᾽, ὡς ἴσασιν Ἑλλήνων ὅσοι
ταὐτὸν συνεισέβησαν Ἀργῷον σκάφος,
πεμφθέντα ταύρων πυρπνόων ἐπιστάτην
ζεύγλαισι καὶ σπεροῦντα θανάσιμον γύην:
δράκοντά θ᾽, ὃς πάγχρυσον ἀμπέχων δέρος
σπείραις ἔσῳζε πολυπλόκοις ἄυπνος ὤν,
κτείνασ᾽ ἀνέσχον σοὶ φάος σωτήριον.

I saved you, as those Greeks who boarded that same Argo with you know, having been sent to be master over fire-breathing bulls with a yoke even in order to be sowing the deadly field. I upheld for you a saving light, having killed also the snake, who spreading his twisted coils over the golden fleece, guarded it, never sleeping.

Mastronarde mentions that ζεύγλαισι is an "adnominal dative" (I term I don't know) probably being modified by ταύρων and governed by ἐπιστάτην or (more harshly) an adnominal instrumental dative with ταύρων being governed directly by ἐπιστάτην. I assumed the second, at first, and so I've left it that way.

I think that "having been sent to be master to a yoke of fire-breathing bulls" is neater, as Mastronarde says, but I don't like that the genitive doesn't go with ἐπιστάτην, even though it could.

Why ἐπιστάτην and not ἐπιστατεῖν?

I didn't really understand καὶ σπεροῦντα and why it was a future participle.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:39 pm

Your main problem is not knowing that και means "and."
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Mon Jan 15, 2018 9:46 pm

But wasn't he sent to yoke the bulls to sow the field? And, I would have thought, this is the relationship the future participle indicates as well. So why is καί even present? It makes it seem like a separate task.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Mon Jan 15, 2018 10:04 pm

πεμφθεντα … και σπερουντα …. She’d saved him when he’d been sent to yoke the bulls and was about to sow the field. Or maybe better when he’d been sent to yoke the bulls and (then) to sow the field (επιστατην and σπερουντα in quasi-parallel).

Forgive my quip about και. I was reminded of Denniston overheard saying “και can, of course, mean ‘and’”.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Mon Jan 15, 2018 11:09 pm

That is very illuminating, thank you. The Denniston story is classic. I heard it from a friend once, but have never seen it in print.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:08 am

509-515

τοιγάρ με πολλαῖς μακαρίαν Ἑλληνίδων
ἔθηκας ἀντὶ τῶνδε· θαυμαστὸν δέ σε
ἔχω πόσιν καὶ πιστὸν ἡ τάλαιν᾽ ἐγώ,
εἰ φεύξομαί γε γαῖαν ἐκβεβλημένη,
φίλων ἔρημος, σὺν τέκνοις μόνη μόνοις—
καλόν γ᾽ ὄνειδος τῷ νεωστὶ νυμφίῳ,
πτωχοὺς ἀλᾶσθαι παῖδας ἥ τ᾽ ἔσῳσά σε.

So you made me blessed in preference to many Greek women as repayment, but wretched me I have a strange sort of faithful husband, if I will flee the land being cast out, bereft of loved ones, alone with only my children—what a fine insult for a new bridegroom, for his children to wander in poverty along with the one that saved him.

However, Mastronarde says that that μακαρίαν refers “bitterly to the portion of the wedding in which the bride was pronounced blessed by the kin and their guests (makarismos): Garland (1990) 221. Cf. 957 μακαρίαι νύμφηι.” And πολλαῖς is “in the eyes of many” or “in the judgment of many.”

I’m skeptical of this. Why the feminine πολλαῖς? I will try to find the Garland reference. I’ve left the translation as I understood it. I don’t know if “in preference to” can be signaled by just the dative, but it seemed to make sense to me.

Is ἥ in the last line attraction to the nominative? I assumed that verb in the sentence in an unexpressed εστι, but maybe I’m wrong.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:33 pm

Is ἥ in the last line attraction to the nominative? I assumed that verb in the sentence in an unexpressed εστι, but maybe I’m wrong.


See Mastronarde's note. ἥ τ᾽ ἔσῳσά σε = εμε τε ἥ ἔσῳσά σε (or something like that). A relative clause with the understood antecedent εμε. "your children and me, [the woman] who saved you."

On your first point, I don't think the naked dative yields "in preference to". "To", "in the eyes of", "in the opinion of" seems right, and I don't see a difficulty with the meaning. She was happy/blessed/fortunate to/in the eyes of many Greek women. There is an implication, I think, is that there was turmoil beneath appearances. It would be the women who identified with her in seeing her as fortunate. Not sure about this, but I think the sexes were probably separated at ancient Greek weddings: the women would attend the bride, and likely would be expected to express their collective happiness for her good fortune separately from the men. I think 509-10 reflects this separation of the sexes.

Gender is a central theme in this play, after all. Medea is casting herself in the role of a woman among women in 509-10, and she goes on to stresses her helplessness as a woman cast off by her husband along with their children. But she also emphasizes her masculine role as Jason's rescuer and his reasons to be grateful to her, and their unconventional relationship in which man and woman should treat each other as equal partners.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Tue Jan 16, 2018 6:37 pm

After sleeping on it, I recalled that I had run into this before:

Anabasis 1.9.6

καὶ τὸν πρῶτον μέντοι βοηθήσαντα πολλοῖς μακαριστὸν ἐποίησεν

The notes to 1.9.6 also reference Anabasis 1.7.4

τοῖς οἴκοι ζηλωτὸν ποιήσω

Boise has a discussion about it in his preface to the Anabasis.

Again, in the constructions τοῖς οἴκοι ζηλωτόν, 1, 7, 4; and πολλοῖς μακαριστόν, 1, 9, 6, shall the dative be called "dative of the agent," or "dative of interest in looser relations" (dative denoting "one in whose view something is true," HAD.; "The dative denoting that with respect to which a statement is made," GOOD.)? I prefer the latter, and hence I would render the first clause "an object of envy to those at home"--the exact rendering of both Kendrick and Crosby; the words used also in my larger work. In this work, I say, in the view of those at home. Yet if some one else should prefer to translate it envied by those at home, I should make no objection. The most that I could say would be, "That is not my preference;" or, "That is not exactly as I view the construction." Similar remarks might be made about the clause in 1, 9, 6. The statement of Hadley, under the genitive (558, Rem. j), "The same construction may sometimes be referred to different heads," is capable of a much wider application. This does not necessarily imply lack of discrimination or inexact scholarship: but an appreciation of the fact that the rules of syntax are somewhat flexible, and not cast-iron, like Medo-Persian laws; that the most intelligent scholars not unfrequently differ in their explanation of particular constructions. In comparing the notes of the best German scholars, this thought is forced upon me continually.


So something like "happy in the view of women", just as you say. This reminds me of Luke 1:42 too. Εὐλογημένη σὺ ἐν γυναιξίν.

However, I think that the idea that this is reference to the wedding ceremony is disproved by the Anabasis quotation (and perhaps the Luke quotation). I haven't been able to look up Garland's "Greek Way of Life," but the Bryn Mawr review makes it sound dodgy.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Tue Jan 16, 2018 7:19 pm

I don't think the marriage ceremony is necessarily relevant here, though it may be.

Medea's happiness is in the eyes of Greek women, who are expected to see a woman's happiness in terms of a marital alliance with a powerful husband.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:27 pm

582-587

γλώσσῃ γὰρ αὐχῶν τἄδικ᾽ εὖ περιστελεῖν
τολμᾷ πανουργεῖν: ἔστι δ᾽ οὐκ ἄγαν σοφός.
ὡς καὶ σύ: μή νυν εἰς ἔμ᾽ εὐσχήμων γένῃ
λέγειν τε δεινός. ἓν γὰρ ἐκτενεῖ σ᾽ ἔπος:
χρῆν σ᾽, εἴπερ ἦσθα μὴ κακός, πείσαντά με
γαμεῖν γάμον τόνδ᾽, ἀλλὰ μὴ σιγῇ φίλων.

For boasting loudly with the tongue to dress up his wickedness, he dares everything: but it is not really terribly clever. You are the same; you present a good image to me but do not make yourself appear to speak well. For one word knocks you down. You ought to have reconciled me to this marriage being conducted, and not to have stayed in silence from friends.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sat Jan 20, 2018 9:50 pm

Check the tenses and moods of the verbs.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jan 20, 2018 10:30 pm

περισελεῖν is future, from περιστέλλειν (I had thought present).
γένῃ is aorist subjunctive, which I had recognized, but didn't translate it that way.
ἐκτενεῖ is future, from ἐκτείνει, (I had thought present).

I'm not sure why future περιστελεῖν and not present.

The γένῃ must be an imperative, going with the μή. "Don't present a good appearance to me..." -- but I don't really understand λέγειν τε δεινός. It seems to be something like "by speaking cleverly," but I don't understand why that would be the construction.

And finally, "For one word will knock you down."
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby anphph » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:03 pm

λέγειν τε δεινός


δεινός infinitive is a regular way of saying "stupendous at X". In this context, with the negative imperative coming before, it means something like "Don't you be εὐσχήμων and [τε] don't give me your smart talk."

Just an example,

τὸ γὰρ μὴ αἰσχυνθῆναι ὅτι αὐτίκα ὑπ' ἐμοῦ ἐξελεγχθήσονται ἔργῳ, ἐπειδὰν μηδ' ὁπωστιοῦν φαίνωμαι δεινὸς λέγειν, τοῦτό μοι ἔδοξεν αὐτῶν ἀναισχυντότατον εἶναι, εἰ μὴ ἄρα δεινὸν καλοῦσιν οὗτοι λέγειν τὸν τἀληθῆ λέγοντα

Plato, Apology 17b1-5
Last edited by anphph on Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:27 pm, edited 2 times in total.
anphph
Textkit Enthusiast
 
Posts: 542
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2007 1:35 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:17 pm

Of course, that is obvious now. My brain must not work at airports.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:20 pm

γλώσσῃ γὰρ αὐχῶν τἄδικ᾽ εὖ περιστελεῖν -- something like "boasting that he will conceal his evil deeds well with his tongue"
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:59 pm

αυχῶν not boasting but having confidence or priding himself: Barrett on Hipp. 952-5 (a comparable passage).

Joel: Respect σοφός masculine. (He not It.)
“and” for αλλά is good. But I’m not sure you get the construction here. Lit.” you ought to have made this marriage after persuading me (i.e. gaining my approval), not [instead of that] …”.
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sun Jan 21, 2018 12:48 am

Thanks all.

I think that I felt that “instead of” had to be the sense, but wasn’t sure if that construction fit it.

600-602

οἶσθ᾽ ὡς μέτευξαι, καὶ σοφωτέρα φανῇ;
τὰ χρηστὰ μή σοι λυπρὰ φαίνεσθαι ποτέ,
μηδ᾽ εὐτυχοῦσα δυστυχὴς εἶναι δοκεῖν.

Do you know how to change your prayer and appear wiser? Ask that what is useful never appear a grief for you, nor being fortunate to appear to yourself to be wretched.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby mwh » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:04 am

Joel, I’m a bit worried about your “translations.” Even when they’re “accurate,” are you fully aware of just how much of the meaning they lose and distort? I hope you’re using them mainly as a means of conveying your understanding of how the grammar works, and are developing the ability to read the Greek on its own terms, rather than through the terribly inadequate medium of English.
(A very minor example here: εὐτυχοῦσα δυστυχής; also χρηστά ... λυπρά.)
mwh
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 2831
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:34 am

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:42 am

I only translate so that I can get corrections here, and only the hard bits that I'm not certain of. I wouldn't mind being able to translate well, as it seems to be a discipline, but I can't read or write Greek easily yet, so I would like to get there first.

On Hylander's advice, I've glanced at Kovacs every so often when I have a problem, and he is sometimes very helpful. But it's clear in any long stretch of the play, that his version is not Euripides' version.

My plan with Medea is, like other texts, to get all of Medea to the point where I can re-read it all easily, and revisit it periodically.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby Hylander » Sun Jan 21, 2018 2:49 pm

Joel, my suggestion was to use Kovacs (or some other relatively literal translation, if you think Kovacs is "not Euripides") to check yourself on the passages that you don't post here, to make sure your understanding is correct and you really see how the syntax works, not just to glance at the translation when you encounter difficulties. Short of actually taking a course where the text is gone through line by line, I think you need more guidance than you can possibly get here. This is hard work.

The Aris & Phillips series typically provides a facing page translation, along with notes. The translation is usually designed to be literal enough to take the place of notes on grammar and syntax. There is a Medea available in this series:

https://www.amazon.com/Euripides-Medea-Phillips-Classical-Texts/dp/085668788X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1516545819&sr=8-1&keywords=euripides+medea+aris+and+phillips

I don't have this and can't vouch for it, but it may be something you might consider if you don't like the Loeb.
Hylander
Textkit Zealot
 
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 1:16 pm

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:08 pm

I do like the Loeb, very much, and I find it useful. I didn't mean the above that as any slight against Kovacs. I just meant that when I read through a paragraph in the Greek, which I understand, and then read through the same in English, I notice that the feeling isn't really the same. I'm noticing this especially in Euripides, probably because it is drama. This is, as mwh says, a problem with translation in general, and can never be solved.

And I am finding everyone's help here very useful. For example, catching the future tenses in the earlier passage is something that I wouldn't have noticed until it was pointed out for me specifically. Sure, a course would be more useful in some ways. In other ways, I think that I would have to search for a long time to get the level of private tutoring that goes on here.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

Re: Medea

Postby jeidsath » Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:11 pm

ἔρωτες ὑπὲρ μὲν ἄγαν
ἐλθόντες οὐκ εὐδοξίαν οὐδ᾽ ἀρετὰν παρέδωκαν ἀνδράσιν· εἰ δ᾽ ἅλις ἔλθοι
Κύπρις, οὐκ ἄλλα θεὸς εὔχαρις οὕτως.

μήποτ᾽, ὦ δέσποιν᾽, ἐπ᾽ ἐμοὶ χρυσέων τόξων ἐφείης
ἱμέρῳ χρίσασ᾽ ἄφυκτον οἰστόν.

Loves having arrived which are more than reasonable give neither good reputation nor virtue to men, but should Kypris come in the right amount, no other god is such a favor. Never, my mistress, let loose upon me from your golden bow an inescapable arrow poisoned with longing.

In the Symposium e3, speaking about the Popular and Heavenly Aphrodite Pausanias says: "ἐπαινεῖν μὲν οὖν δεῖ πάντας θεούς," which Dover calls "a verbal gesture to avert nemesis; he does not in fact find anything to commend in Eros Pandemos." Is the bolded section here a similar desire to avoid an unalloyed criticism of a god?

στέργοι δέ με σωφροσύνα,
δώρημα κάλλιστον θεῶν· μηδέ ποτ᾽ ἀμφιλόγους ὀργὰς ἀκόρεστά τε νείκη
θυμὸν ἐκπλήξασ᾽ ἑτέροις ἐπὶ λέκτροις
προσβάλοι δεινὰ Κύπρις, ἀπτολέμους δ᾽ εὐνὰς σεβίζουσ᾽
ὀξύφρων κρίνοι λέχη γυναικῶν.

May moderation feel fondness for me, the finest gift of the gods. Never let terrible Kypris throw at me argumentative rages and insatiate quarrels having struck my heart with desire for other beds (λέκτροις), reverencing non-strife-filled beds (εὐνὰς) let her [σωφροσύνα not Κύπρις?] most wisely separate the beds (λέχη) of women.

I assume there isn't any difference between λέκτρον, εὐνή, and λέχος here?

***

I have questions about the rest of the choral part too, but I'll save them for now.
Joel Eidsath -- jeidsath@gmail.com

μὴ δ’ οὕτως ἀγαθός περ ἐὼν θεοείκελ’ Ἀχιλλεῦ
κλέπτε νόῳ, ἐπεὶ οὐ παρελεύσεαι οὐδέ με πείσεις.
User avatar
jeidsath
Administrator
 
Posts: 2548
Joined: Mon Dec 30, 2013 2:42 pm
Location: Γαλεήπολις, Οὐισκόνσιν

PreviousNext

Return to Learning Greek