# Declension class for 'ευμμελιης' **URL:** \ **Category:** Learning Greek\ **Created:** [July 19, 2025, 9:58pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788 "2025-07-19T21:58:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![kylefoley76](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/k/7feea3/32.png) [@kylefoley76](https://www.textkit.com/u/kylefoley76)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2025, 9:58pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788/1 "2025-07-19T21:58:42Z")
I’m just double checking the declension class for ευμμελιης. There’s about 50 nouns, most proper names, whose nominative singular ends in ης and whose genitive singular ends in αο. But what about the contracted form of αο which is ω? Well, I can find very few of those nouns, but I have found one: ευμμελιης. Here’s what my stats show for how ευμμελιης is terminated: ευμμελιην 18 ευμμελιης 20 ευμμελιω 13 ευμμελιαι 2 ευμμελιηι 2 Although the word ευμμελιω appears 13 times it turns out that it’s the same sentence quoted over and over again by different authors. It’s an epithet of Priam in Homer. I’m almost certain that it’s genitive but I want to double check: Aelius Herodianus, De prosodia catholica: ἐὰν γὰρ πάθωσι , πρὸ μιᾶσ τοῦ τέλουσ ἔχουσι τὴν ὀξεῖαν οἷον Ἑρμείου Ἑρμείεω καὶ κατὰ συγκοπὴν Ἑρμείω παροξυτόνωσ « Ἥρησ Ἑρμείω τε » ( Ο 214 ) , Ἀσίασ Ἀσίου καὶ Ἰωνικῶσ Ἀσίεω καὶ Ἀσίω ὡσ **εὐμμελίω** « Ἀσίω ἐν λειμῶνι » Translated as: For if they are affected [i.e. inflected], they have before the final syllable a sharp accent (oxytone), like _Ἑρμείου_ [genitive of Hermes] from _Ἑρμείας_, and in syncopated form _Ἑρμείω_, with an oxytone accent: ‘of Hera and of Hermes’ (Iliad 15.214); likewise _Ἀσίας_ [from Ἀσία] becomes _Ἀσίου_, and in Ionic _Ἀσίεω_ and _Ἀσίω_, as in _εὐμμελίω_ [‘spear-famed’], ‘Ἀσίω ἐν λειμῶνι’ [‘of Asius in the meadow’].” And here: τῆς ποτε χρυσοφόρου δειρῆς , ὡς τὸ **ἐυμμελίω** Πριάμοιο : Scholia in Euripidem -49 Scholia in Euripidem (scholia vetera) Translated as: of the once gold-adorned neck, as in ‘εὐμμελίω Πριάμοιο’ I initially thought that τὸ would make εὐμμελίω nom/acc neuter but it refers to the expression, not the word. And then the original Homeric context from the Iliad ἔσσεται ἦμαρ ὅτ᾽ ἄν ποτ᾽ ὀλώλῃ Ἴλιος ἱρὴ καὶ Πρίαμος καὶ λαὸς **ἐϋμμελίω** Πριάμοιο 6.447 There will be a day when sacred Ilios shall perish, and Priam, and the people of Priam, famed for their good spears. In conclusion the declension of ἐϋμμελίω is sn ἐϋμμελίης sg ἐϋμμελίω sd ἐϋμμελίῃ sa ἐϋμμελίην pn ἐϋμμελίαι pg ἐϋμμελίων pd ἐϋμμελίαις pa ἐϋμμελίας Let me know if I made any mistakes. ---
**Author:** ![mwh](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@mwh](https://www.textkit.com/u/mwh)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2025, 11:32pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788/2 "2025-07-19T23:32:49Z")
It’s an epic word, five syllables; nom. ἐυ(μ)μελίης, acc. ἐυ(μ)μελίην. Papyrus manuscripts double the μ, and the resulting heavy syllable is standard epic prosody. It’s first declension; -ω is the Ionic genitive. And λαὸς ἐυμμελίω Πριάμοιο doesn’t mean “the people of Priam, famed for their good spears.” ἐυμμελίω applies to Priam (singular). ---
**Author:** ![mwh](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@mwh](https://www.textkit.com/u/mwh)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2025, 12:02am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788/3 "2025-07-23T00:02:34Z")
For the -ω genitive ending ἐυμμελίω cf. Homeric βορέω alongside βορέαο. That’s not a problem. But the Euripides scholium is a puzzle. You report τῆς ποτε χρυσοφόρου δειρῆς, ὡς τὸ ἐυμμελίω Πριάμοιο. But while χρυσοφόρου δειρῆς is from Eur.Hec.152 (anapests), it’s not preceded by τῆς ποτε or anything like it, but by παρθένον ἐκ, the reference being to Hecuba’s daughter Polyxena. Still more problematic, it’s quite unclear why the Homeric phrase is adduced. There’s no evident connection between the two phrases beyond their both being genitive, which is certainly not enough justification. —Polyxena was sacrificed at Achilles’ tomb, and Priam was slaughtered by Achilles’ son Neoptolemus. But that’s not the sort of implicit mythological connection that scholia make. We expect something linguistic, but what? ---
**Author:** ![jeidsath](https://www.textkit.com/user_avatar/www.textkit.com/jeidsath/32/3_2.png) [@jeidsath](https://www.textkit.com/u/jeidsath)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2025, 12:49am UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788/4 "2025-07-23T00:49:40Z")
The scholiast finds it unlikely that Polyxena’s neck is still gold-adorned when she is a captive. He provides his explanation for this oddity. What it **ackshually** means, he tells us, is “of the at-one-time gold-adorned neck.” Similarly, Priam is an old man in the Iliad and is no longer a fighter. So Euripides is just copying Homer’s, “of the at-one-time stout spear[man], Priam.” IMO, it’s all a colossal stretch on the scholiast’s part, but his argument is quite clear. ---
**Author:** ![mwh](https://www.textkit.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/6f9a4e/32.png) [@mwh](https://www.textkit.com/u/mwh)\ **Post date:** [July 23, 2025, 12:43pm UTC](https://www.textkit.com/t/declension-class-for/30788/5 "2025-07-23T12:43:33Z")
That’s what I came up with too, but I think it’s too much of a stretch, and implausibly elliptical. And these scholia just can’t be relied on, however tempting it is to test one’s ingenuity by trying to explain them in their badly reduced state. What we really need is original ancient commentaries that preserve more of the argumentation. Cf. P.Oxy.3710 and 4452, though they present puzzles of their own.