ἰχθύας, ἐκ καλάμων δὲ πλάνον κατέσειον ἐδωδάν. καί τις τῶν τραφερῶν ὠρέξατο· καὶ γὰρ ἐν ὕπνοις πᾶσα κύων ἄρτως μαντεύεται· ἰχθύα κἠγών.

43. ἐκ καλάμων. Valcken. conjectured ἐκ καλάμω, which occurred to the present editor also. Compare τὸν κάλαμον, ν. 47.

45. ἰχθύα κἠγών. “ Sic infra Eid. xxvi. ιγνύα pro γνὺν ante nostram dant omnes Edd. Monet Schaeferus ix0úa restituendum esse Bianori Ep. II. v. 2, ex Cod. Vaticano. Sed vulgata lectio bene se habet. Οσφύα pro ὀσφύν legitur apud Stratonem, sed metro non postulante ; item ὀφρύα pro ὀφούν. Ubicunque hæc forma occurrit, mihi persuasum est vitium subesse. Lego itaque hoc loco ἰχθύσι κὴ γὼν, scil. ἄρτον μαντεύομαι.” Briggs.

χὼ μὲν τὠγκίστρῳ ποτεφύετο, καὶ ῥέεν αἷμα
τὸν κάλαμον δ ̓ ὑπὸ τῶ κινήματος ἀγκύλον εἶχον.
τὼ χέρε τεινόμενος, περὶ κνώδαλον εὗρον ἀγῶνα,

48. Following the Ald., and with some MSS. authority, Reiske reads r χέρε (Ald. χεῖρε) τεινόμεναι περικλώμενον εὗρον ἀγῶνα· “ ambæ manus contentæ inveniebant certamen tortuosum s. contentiosum.' Herm. reads and explains as follows: “ Scribendum puto: τὸν κάλαμον δ ̓ ὑπὸ τῶ κινήματος ἀγκύλον εἶχον Τὼ χέρε, τεινόμενον περικλώμενον. εὗρον ἀγῶνα, Πῶς κὲν ἔλω μέγαν ἰχθὺν ἀφαυporέpoia oidάpots. Hoc dicit: Arundinem manus tenebant motu piscis curvatam, quum inflexa tenderetur.' Copula, quæ, si post εixov, ut vulgo, interpungitur, abesse non potest, recte abest post supov, quod voce magis intenta pronuntiandum est, quo significetur övτws evρov.” Briggs emends

· τῷ χέρε τεινόμενος περικείμενον εὗρον ἀγῶνα

Qua re manus extentas sentiens certamen me circumdans inveni.' τý pro v¿' ού. Vel hinge τῷ a περικείμενον gubernari, sc. τῷ καλάμῳ.”

49. ἰχθύν. Tum ix0' scripsi pro ixúv, praeeunte Wernickio ad Thryphiod. p. 290, qui verissime monet oxytona substantiva in vg et nominativum et accusativum producere." Meineke. Wuest., in support of the correption of -vv observes: "Cuius usus ex Pindaro serioribusque poetis certa aliquot exempla dedit Spitzner. Prosod. § 40, 1, not. Fr. Iacobs. in Not. Crit. ad Anth. Palat. p. 692. Pflugk. ad Eurip. Androm. 356."

Ib. Briggs, asserting that didnpos has no plur., emends

Subaudito. Id est, quomodo magnum caperem piscem, cum tamen exiguus esset hamus.'" But a plur. oídŋpa, rá, does occur, cf. Passow, and the word here does not denote the metal, but an instrument made of it, and in this sense the plur. has the analogy of kaλáμwv in v. 43, and rảyкíoтpia in v. 57.

πῶς μὲν ἔλω μέγαν ἰχθὺν ἀφαυροτέροισι σιδάροις. εἶθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τρώματος, ἠρέμα νύξα,

καὶ νύξας ἐχάλαξα, καὶ οὐ φεύγοντος ἔτεινα.

50, 51. The vulgate

Καὶ νύξῃ χαλεπῶς·

....

ἆρ' ἐμὲ νύξεις ;

50

which is rendered "num me punges? Et pungeris graviter," is derived from the Junt. Ed., and appears to be destitute of MSS. authority. Otherwise ap'èμè výžεis; ought not be displaced, as Hermann's explanation of that clause is sufficiently satisfactory, and it has, moreover, that presumption in favour of its genuineness which arises from its being by much the less obvious reading.

Herm. reads the passage thus: εἰθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τρώματος, ἆρ ̓ ἐμὲ νύξεις; Καὶ νύξας, ἐχάλαξα· καὶ οὐ φεύγοντος, ἔτεινα. and observes: "Mimicam orationem, quæ in hoc versu est, εἶθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τραύματος, ἆρ ̓ ἐμὲ νύEs; parum intellexerunt interpretes. Volebat piscator hoc dicere: hæsitabam, quid facerem; inde piscem accepti vulneris admonens, tentabam, quid facturus esset. Pro his postremis verbis admodum venuste dicit, ap' què výžɛts; i. e. certe tu me non vulnerabis, sed ego te.' Tum pergit, kaì vúžas, éxáλaža ; i. e. repente arundine læsi piscem, statimque remisi: quumque ille non fugeret, eduxi Plena oratio esset: motu arundinis pisci vulnus renovans, cogitabam, non tamen illum mihi, sed me illi metuendum esse." Eldikius proposed inоμμváσкшv - ἠρέμα νύξας, Κἤνυξ ̓ αὖ χαλεπῶς καὶ οὐ φεύγοντος ἔθεινα. Whence Briggs conjectured,

6

eum.

“ εἶθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τραύματος ἠρέμα νύξα.
καὶ νύξας ἐχάλαξα, καὶ οὐ φεύγοντ ̓ ἐνέτεινα.

'Tum admonens vulneris leniter pupugi, et cum pupugissem laxavi, et non fugientem intendi.' Qui hamo et arundine piscantium mos est." Kiessl., closely following the last critic, reads and observes: “ εἶθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τρώματος ἠρέμα νύξα, καὶ νύξας ἐχάλαξα, καὶ οὐ φεύγοντος ἔτεινα. Quatuor libri vers. priore habent vúžaç, et versu posteriore exaλağa manifesto latet in depravatis lectionibus. Locus autem sic est intelligendus: "admonens piscem de vulnere leniter pupugi." Hæc ipsa vulneris admonitio inest in eo, quod leniter piscem pungit experturus, an sauciatus aufugeret. "Quumque pupugissem relaxavi' scil. Tòv Káλaμov (pungere desii), quumque piscis non fugeret, intendi,' scil.

rod with his hands far apart, the better to resist the struggles of his game, or is to be simply rendered, "straining with both my hands," which seems the more probable interpretation.

50, 51. The reading introduced by Meineke into the text has been adopted. The sense of the passage seems to be: "Then I struck him (by jerking the hook in his mouth) to remind him of the wound, gently (lest the fish, if overpained, might, by a convulsive effort,

accomplish his freedom), and having struck him, slackened my line (expecting that the anguish of this fresh wound would make him run it out), and upon his not taking to flight, I hauled tight,” scil. τὴν ὁρμιάν, or “ drew in” τὸν ἐχε Oúv, as one or other is regarded as the object of xáλaža. Wuest. fell into some strange mistake when he wrote in his explanation of the passage, "immo manum piscatoris, qui eum attracturus erat, pupugit." Cf. V. R.

ἤνυσ' ἰδὼν τὸν ἄεθλον· ἀνείλκυσα χρύσεον ἰχθύν,
πάντοθε τῷ χρυσῷ πεπυκασμένον. εἶχε δὲ δεῖμα,
μή τι Ποσειδάωνι πέλοι πεφιλαμένος ἰχθύς,
ἢ τάχα τᾶς γλαυκᾶς κειμήλιον ̓Αμφιτρίτας.
ἠρέμα δ' αὐτὸν ἐγὼν ἐκ τὠγκίστρω ἀπέλυσα,

μή ποτε τῷ στόματος τἀγκίστρια χρυσὸν ἔχοιεν.

55

τὸν κάλαμον, et piscem denique, labore peracto, extraxi. Recedit hæc ratio nonnihil a Briggsii, non multum tamen." The present editor has adopted this reading, understanding ὁρμιάν rather as the object of ἔτεινα. Meineke too has introduced Briggs' emendation, with a slight change, into the text :

εἶθ ̓ ὑπομιμνάσκων τῶ τρώματος ἠρέμ ̓ ἔνυξα,
καὶ νύξας ἐχάλαξα, καὶ οὐ φεύγοντος ἔτεινα.

Warton proposes χέρα δ', οὐ φεύγοντος, ἔτεινα.

52. Meineke exhibits the emendation of Scaliger, ήνυσα δ ̓ ὧν.

53. "Cæterum non animadverterunt Editores Tautologiam quæ inest verbis χρύσεον ἰχθὺν χρυσῷ πεπυκασμένον. Videndum an corrigi debeat ἀνείλκυσα χερσὶ τὸν ἰχθὺν παντᾶ του χρυσῷ πεπυκασμένον, Articulus voci χρύσεον præfixus supervacaneus videtur, ad vocem ixiv pæne necessarius." Briggs. This criticism seems very unsound. The repetition objected to is the result of an imitation of nature. The article which the emendation would introduce is better away after Tòv äɛ0λov in the same line, and the 7 is unobjectionable before χρυσῷ ; and it is not prefixed to χρύσεον. Thus the sense runs : “ I achieved the struggle of my vision; I hauled up a golden fish, covered all over with the gold." The asyndeton of the verse expresses the excitement of the veteran angler as he recounts the triumphant conclusion of his efforts.

καὶ τὸν μὲν πειστῆρσι κατῆγον ἐπ ̓ ἠπείροιο,

ὤμοσα δ ̓ οὐκέτι λοιπὸν ὑπὲρ πελάγους πόδα θεῖναι,

58. καὶ τὸν μὲν πειστῆρσι. “ Eadem dat Ed. Flor. nisi quod habet πιστῆρσι. sunt itaque in Codd. reperta. Ex Aldinis lectionibus, καὶ τὸν μὲν πιστεύσασα καλά γε τὰν ἠπείρατον, quas praebet paene easdem Cod. Vat. Reiskius effecit: καὶ τὸν μὲν πίστευσα, καλόν γε τὸν ἠπειράταν· [· et illum quidem funibus alligavi, præclarum continentis futurum incolam] — haec autem Eldikius : καὐτόθ ̓ ἐπισπεύσας ἀκάτῳ γ ̓ ἄγον ἠπείρονδε. In Edit. Br. sic e coniecturis scriptus legitur versus : καὶ τῷ μὲν πίσυνος, χαλάσας τὸν ἐπήρατον ἰχθύν [* et hoc auro fretus, sublato, suscepto amabili pisce, juravi] — postea scribendum monuit ἄρας, pro χαλάσας.” Valcken. “ πιστεύσασα καλή γε τὸν ἠπήρατον C. καὶ τὸν μὲν πιστεύ σασα καλά γε τὸν ἠπήρατον 10. καὶ τὸν μὲν πιστεύσασα καλά γε τὸν ἡπείριο 11.” Gaisf. J. H. Voss conjectured καὶ τὸν μὲν πίστωσα, καλόν γε τὸν ἠπειρώZeune read πλεκτῇσι “ retibus s. sportulis," nempe ne quid ex tam pretioso pisce periret.” Kiessl. : καὶ τόν μὲν πειστῆρά γ ̓ ἀνᾶγον ἐπ' ἠπείροιο· atque hunc quidem obsequentem subduxi in continentem." Ahlwardt, apud alia, καὶ τῷ μὲν πίσυνος ἐ κατᾶγον ἐν ἠπειροιῳ. Græfe, καὶ τὸν μὲν σπεύσας ἀκάλ ̓ ἄγαγον ἠπειράταν· “ et illum quidem festinans tacite absportavi, terræ habitatorem” factum; or καὶ τὸν μὲν, σπεύσας, καλὸν ἄγαγον ἠπειράταν, “ pulcrum terræ habitatorem.” Herm. καὶ τὸν μὲν πίστευσα καὶ ἄγαγον ἀπειρώταν, which Meineke has introduced into the text.

ταν.

66

59. Brunck conjectured ὤμοσα μηκέτι.

58. The reading in the text, which is the vulgate, has been generally denounced, e. g.: "Linea et hamo captus fuerat piscis, et manu in littus adductus, ibi hamo solutus. Quid iterum necesse est eum adducere, et quidem rudentibus, qui jam in littore humi jacet? Hæc mihi adeo visa sunt absurda, ut in contextu relinquere nefas duxerim.” Brunck. And again: “Præpostera sane est vulgata lectio. Quid enim? Piscem hamo solvi, et deinde in continentem idque funibus trahi! Absit ut hæc tam insulsa nostro imputemus !” Wordsworth. Perhaps this appearance of absurdity may be removed by its being remembered that the angler was sitting upon a rock when he hooked the fish, εἶδον ἐμαυτὸν ἐν πέτρᾳ μεμαῶτα, v. 42, and there of course he freed him from the hook, &c. Now, whether this rock be imagined to have risen insularly near the shore, or to have jutted from it-and it must have

X

66

66

done either, or it would not have been selected by the fisherman for the pursuit of his craft-it is not unlikely that a prize so precious might not be regarded as secure, until it had been transferred from it to the mainland, especially as fish do occasionally make their escape after being unhooked, if the angler's position be unfavourable. Kiessl., again, objects to κατῆγον. “ Verbum κατάγειν autem de pisce ex mari extrahendo et in terram subducendo recte usurpari, nondum mihi persuasi; hinc scribendum censui áváγειν.” But by the view taken above, the verb assumes an usual signification, whether it be rendered "I brought it down," or "lowered it down to the mainland,” or be translated, with a reference to the idiom κατάγειν ναῦν, "I brought it into port," i. e. "conveyed it safely to the mainland." The former interpretation is perhaps to be preferred, and if so, the verse may be