Luc. Pisc. 12

Hi all
I would just like a quick check of my understanding of the below passage, particularly the part in bold.

εἶτα ἑώρων γύναιόν τι οὐχ ἁπλοϊκόν, εἰ καὶ ὅτι μάλιστα εἰς τὸ ἀφελὲς καὶ ἀκόσμητον ἑαυτὴν ἐπερρύθμιζεν, ἀλλὰ κατεφάνη μοι αὐτίκα οὐδὲ τὸ ἄνετον δοκοῦν τῆς κόμης ἀκαλλώπιστον ἐῶσα οὐδὲ τοῦ ἱματίου τὴν ἀναβολὴν ἀνεπιτηδεύτως περιστέλλουσα: πρόδηλος δὲ ἦν κοσμουμένη αὐτοῖς καὶ πρὸς εὐπρέπειαν τῷ ἀθεραπεύτῳ δοκοῦντι προσχρωμένη

I’m thinking that τὸ ἄνετον δοκοῦν stands alone as an accusative absolute (in this context perhaps “while/though seeming unkempt”) and that οὐδὲ is connected to ἐῶσα “neither did she allow her hair to be unadorned … neither”.

There’s something about accustaive absolutes (if that’s what it is) that I find difficult spotting, possibly because I don’t come across them that often.

“not even letting the seeming hanging-looseness of her hair be unbeautified." (ουδέ … ουδέ is “not even … nor.") δοκοῦν is quasi-adjectival, there’s no accusative absolute. The same use of the participle at the end of your snippet, πρὸς εὐπρέπειαν τῷ ἀθεραπεύτῳ δοκοῦντι προσχρωμένη, there too attending a neuter adjective used substantivally and predicatively (“the thing that appeared to be X”). The familiar contrast between seeming and being, schein vs. sein, of course.

Bk.3 of Ovid’s Ars Amatoria is well worth comparing, esp. 135ff.: ars casum simulet 155 (“art is to simulate chance”).

Thanks Michael for the explanation and insights, that whole passage is a lot clearer for me now.