οὔ after εἴ

[Constantinus_Philo]

εἴ με Πλατων οὐ γράψε, δύω ἐγένοντο Πλάτωνες
Σωκρατικῶς ὀάρων ἄνθεα πάντα φέρω. Anth. Pal., IX 358
Why οὐ γράψε? kind of privative?

[Barry_Hofstetter]

I’m not sure what your question is. It simply negates (ἔ)γραψε. γράψε drops the augment in imitation of Homeric forms.

[Constantinus_Philo]

i just though that after εἴ what is usually used is μη, unless it is not an indirect question.

[Barry_Hofstetter]

i just though that after εἴ what is usually used is μη, unless it is not an indirect question.

Real users of the language don’t always conform to our expectations. However:

@LSJ

in a conditional clause μή is necessary, except,
a. in Hom., when the εἰ clause precedes the apodosis and the verb is indic., εἰ δέ μοι οὐκ ἐπέεσσʼ ἐπιπείσεται Il.15.162, cf. 178, 20.129, 24.296, Od.2.274, Id.12.382, 13.144 (9.410 is an exception).
b. when the εἰ clause is really causal, as after Verbs expressing surprise or emotion, μὴ θαυμάσῃς, εἰ πολλὰ τῶν εἰρημένων οὐ πρέπει σοι Isoc.1.44; κατοικτῖραι .., εἰ .. οὐδεὶς ἐς ἑκατοστὸν ἔτος περιέσται Hdt.7.46, cf. S.Aj.1242; so also δεινὸν γὰρ ὂν εἴη πρῆημα, εἰ Σάκας μὲν καταστρεψάμενοι δούλους ἔχομεν, Ἕλληνας δὲ οὐ τιμωρησόμεθα Hdt.7.9, cf. And.1.102, Lys.20.8 (prob.), D.8.55; οὐκ αἰσχρόν, εἰ τὸ μὲν Ἀργείων πλῆθος οὐκ ἐφοβήθη τὴν Λακεδαιμονίων ἀρχήν, ὑμεῖς δʼ ὄντες Ἀθηναῖοι βάρβαρον ἄνθρωπον .. φοβήσεσθε; Id. 15.23, cf. Hdt.5.97, Lys.22.13.
c. when οὐ belongs closely to the next word (v. A.1), or is quoted unchanged, εἰ, ὡς νῦν φήσει οὐ παρεσκευάσατο D.54.29 codd.; εἰ δʼ οὐκέτʼ ἐστι (sc. ὥσπερ λέγεις), τίνι τρόπῳ διεφθάρὴ; E.Ion347.

I suspect this is in imitation of Homer, so §a above.

[Constantinus_Philo]

yes, I agree,