Euripides, Hypsipyle fr. i. i. 5Author(s): Colin AustinReviewed work(s):Source: The Classical Review, New Series, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Dec., 1966), p. 275Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/709973 .

Accessed: 23/02/2013 05:44

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserveand extend access to The Classical Review.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Sat, 23 Feb 2013 05:44:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

THE CLASSICAL REVIEW 275

Euripides does something very similar in Helen 560 :

' OC0o-0-Es ydp KaG TT ytyvdL Kew ?AovUS.

So does Sophocles in Electra 1361 (Electra to the old servant):

xatp' c rdarEp-wrarepa ydp dEaopav 80Kic.

A diligent combing of Tragedy might add to these examples. They confirm that in a line beginning

avae-Osob; ydp ...,

OEov'o should be the explanation of dvae.

University College, Oxford M. L. WEST

EURIPIDES, HYPSIPYLE Fr. I. i. 5 (Bond, p. 25)

c~. atapia ao~b.V rEcT ao[k'q, qlrL~ 7ro' v.

PAGE (G.L.P., p. 83) translates: 'How en- viable your mother, whoever she was!' So read perhaps ~Ks) for W3. Cf. Eur. Ion 308 aob (' el -rt; c aov VTrv •'KOtEKav coAp•wa,

Soph. Fr. 837P J 7rptawd•Ato / KEWVOL fporv . . ., Ar. Ach. 254 f. C ( LgaKcpLog / &'rrtg a' Jwv'aa . .. (CO

Ar, c0

R), Lys. 572 'g 6vd'rro& ( '

Dobree, 'T

R), Diphilus fr. I 14 K C '

aKdipov bpdo'vqa (cs Gaisford, W Stob. mss.), etc.

Trinity Hall, Cambridge COLIN AUSTIN

P. OXY. 2329, 3-4

-dya0n& rv'[x],- viv KGapoS dppv p' d [AolEv-] rvy 4v0av'a yap rapap4EAacLv ItOL 80Koi.

THAT is the text printed by the first editor, C. H. Roberts; but in his note on p. 79 of Part XXII of the Oxyrhynchus series, he says, 'pEX[ or (slightly less likely) e?E?['. When I inspected the manuscript in the Ashmolean in company with Dr. John Rea, we both agreed that the chi was virtually certain; only the top left-hand part of the letter is preserved, but that closely resembles the corresponding part of the two chis in 1. I. Further, the speaker of 1. 4 must surely have

said not 'I am going to neglect things here', but 'I am going to neglect things here for a while'.

Sense and palaeography would both be satisfied by the supplement pLX[p p&rwnd. Compare Samia 319f., where Moschion speaks as follows:

irpoactE vvd 4 0[ar] p. Se aae[Ta& o0;TO KCarapEELv S Gse 8qacr7aL

tAAw~ opXp T, rwVd, Set ydp JO'8, O'rav 80oK7L,

7rE[L]ai07aooU' avTWON.' Christ Church, Oxford HUGH LLOYD-JONES

IW tO KLtOJV AOo•

PROFESSOR H. LLOYD-JONES'S learned note on AtOog iroAl'r•&

(C.R. lxxix [I965], 246 f.) has made me reconsider a piece of doxo- graphy on Anaximander which seems to have given rise to rather laboured explana- tion or unnecessarily complicated (i.e. improbable) conjecture. While in Aftius

x Koerte rightly followed Wilamowitz in deleting the pov which in the papyrus follows KaraTvELwv. Sudhaus's expedient of transposing 8E'arEaL to the beginning of the line in order to keep pov, which has been adopted by Christina Dedoussi in her recent edition of the play (Athens, 1965), is ruled out by the impossibly late position pov would then have in the sentence.

(iii. i o. 2 [Plutarch] = Diels, Doxographi Graeci, p. 376) we read Ava&4.Lav3pog Alcp

Kiovt 7i ev yY 7rpoa0epi the corresponding passage in Hippolytus Haer. i. 6. 3 (Diels, Dox. Graec., p. 559) runs as follows: r 84' aXqca airhq i~ypov (libri; C. H. Kahn; yvpov ci. Roeper; edd.) arpoyy'Aov Xiovr AIOC)

The attempt of A. Barigazzi in Athenaeum xxxiv (1956), 340 f. to argue that this fragment may come from the Georgos was not worth making; neither have I much profited from the treatment by R. Stark in Rhein. Mus. c (1957), 29 f. In lines 9, io, and 24 the supplements printed by the first editor may be right, but they should not be in the text.

This content downloaded on Sat, 23 Feb 2013 05:44:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions