Line 3: I translate εἰ as “if”, and ἄρα would then make it an if/then statement–in this case I render γὰρ as “indeed” per LSJ’s suggestion for pairing it with ἄρα.
I took the liberty of translating παρέχεσθαι as “furnishes” even though I recognize it is an infinitive.
“Your land”: Of the Greek rivers, the Acheloios
being the most conspicuous of the others.
Thus if Acheloios is among you all then indeed we hear the name.
For the Argos fails to perceive that it is their country.
Thus they say the Istros, flowing out into the Acheloios,
furnishes the source to it.
The passage would be controversial in claiming the Istros is the source of the Acheloios, but of course that may be a mistake in my translation: I understood αὐτῷ as applying to Acheloios.
I’m afraid you misunderstand much of this.
The Ap.Rh. ref is to bk.4 of the Argonautica.
εἰ οὖν ἄρα ὁ Ἀχελῷος παρ’ ὑμῖν ἐστιν is rephrasing Ap.Rh.4.292f. εἰ ἐτεὸν δή etc. This should be made clear.
ὁ Ἄργος is not “the Argos.” He’s the speaker in the poem! ἀγνοεῖ γὰρ ὁ Ἄργος, ὡς αὐτῶν ἐστιν τῆς χώρας. He’s “unaware that it’s not of their country.”
ἀναπιδύειν φησὶν οὖν τὸν Ἴστρον εἰς τὸν Ἀχελῷον διὰ τὸ τὰς πηγὰς αὐτῷ παρέχεσθαι. “So he says [not they say!] that the Istros issues up into the Ach. because of the fact that its streams supply it” (lit. “are furnished to it”).
The Ap.Rh, scholia (deriving from commentaries) are an exceptionally rich source of information on ancient scholarship.
Stupid mistakes on my part. Thank you for the help.
But the “its” and “it” refer to which rivers, respectively? Looking at a map the Acheloios would be far south of the Istros so I do not understand “up into”. Though I realize Apollonius’ geography was way off sometimes. Incidentally, there are records of another Acheloios that flows into the Strymonian sea and some tributaries of the Istros come close to where scholars think it (the other Acheloios) might have been.
Ancient scholars sometimes get things wrong. And scholia sometimes garble their sources. But the first task is to understand what they say. The second, to report that accurately.
I must admit I’m not sure of the import of τὸ γὰρ ὄνομα ἀκούομεν (“for we hear the name”). But the rest is clear enough.
ἀναπιδύειν (which I translated “issues up”) is the commentator’s rendering of Apollonios’ εξανίησιν at Arg.4.293 (lit. “goes up from”).
αὐτῷ must certainly refer to the Acheloos, the one and only.
You should cite the poetic text if you want this to be intelligible, and situate the notes in the context of the poem.
You should not be surprised that the commentary hooks up the Ister to the mighty Acheloos. (It doesn’t claim the Ister as its source!) After all, that is more or less what Apollonius’ own text does at the end of Argus’ speech, 4.282-293. No doubt that was much discussed.
Thank you for clarifying. Right now the original passages are linked with their catalog number in the description that comes before the scholium, but I’m considering moving all the scholia to appear with the original sources. That would sacrifice perfect chronology but would be very useful.
“Your land”: Of the Greek rivers, the Acheloios
being the most conspicuous of the others.
If indeed Acheloios is among you [i.e. “your land”]; for we hear the name.
For Argos fails to perceive that it is their country.
For he says that Istros issues up from the Acheloios,
because of the fact that its streams supply it [the Acheloios].
I’m still unclear about the author’s intention with ἀναπιδύειν and παρέχεσθαι, though I do think “supply” allows for a less concerete interpretation than furnish or produce.
It is my understanding that τὸ γὰρ ὄνομα ἀκούομεν means “we hear” in the sense of the scholium author and the readers.
The opening would better be “‘of your land’: the Acheloios is the most eminent of the other rivers of Greece.”
And οὖν is not “for” but “so.”
There are still other unsatisfactory things about your proposed revision, but I’ve given you enough help with this.
There’s no difficulty about ἀναπιδύειν and παρέχεσθαι (passive).