IV. A Misunderstood Passage in Aeschylus.

BY PROF. J. E. HARRY,

UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI.

THE chief purpose of this paper is to prove that the traditional interpretation of Prometheus 119 (ópâтe deσμάτηv μe δύσποτμον θεόν) is incorrect. Wecklein remarks: "The imperative has the sense of opâv Táρa." Sikes and Willson in their school edition (Macmillan, 1898) tacitly accept Wecklein's interpretation, since on moot points it is their practice to cite the work, if they approve, and to point out the divergencies, if they take issue with the German scholar. In the preface they declare that they have examined this edition "both in the original and in Allen's translation." More, in his version (which bears evidence of a careful comparison of texts and of commentaries), renders "Behold me fettered, the god ill-fated." These citations are sufficient to show that opâтe is generally understood to be an imperative, equivalent to óρâv Táρa;3 and nowhere have I been able to find a different explanation. Nevertheless, it is not to be inferred that such a conception of the passage is universal, or has even gone unchallenged down to the present day, any more than that ἐραυνᾶτε τὰς γραφάς ὅτι ὑμεῖς δοκεῖτε ἐν αὐταῖς ζωὴν αἰώνιον exew (John, V. 39) is universally regarded as meaning "Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life," simply because the Authorized Version translates it so, many (if not most) graduates of theological seminaries from the pulpit preach it so, and the Revised Version fails to state dogmatically that it is not so. The parallel is a good one, since the mistakes are identical in character. A graduate of one of the most renowned seminaries in the country recently took the passage just quoted for his text and exhorted his congregation to read their Bibles more, because this injunction

1 Allen's translation.

2 Houghton, Mifflin & Co., 1899.

8 Cf. Ag. 1354 ὁρᾶν πάρεστιν, Cho. 253 ἰδεῖν πάρεστι, 961 πάρα . . . ἰδεῖν.

65 was laid upon them by Christ himself. Yet in a book dedicated to Charles II. (written in 1675) by a member of a sect that is generally supposed to have despised learning at that time, I read these words: "Moreover, that place may be taken. in the indicative mood, Ye search the scriptures; which interpretation the Greek word will bear, and so Pasor translateth it which by the reproof following seemeth also to be the more genuine interpretation, as Cyrillus long ago hath observed." But the average student, as well as the layman, is wont to follow tradition, even if he stultifies himself by making a perfectly clear and intelligible passage pointless by his interpretation. That errors are often perpetuated simply because the writer, or teacher, will not think for himself might be shown by numerous examples. In Lysias, I. 18, μúλova appears even in the editio altera aucta et emendata of the Teubner series (Scheibe). Some of the more ancient writers may have pointed out that the verb in our Aeschylean passage is not imperative, but it is a more difficult matter to prove this for opâre than for épavvâre, since the former makes good sense as commonly interpreted, the latter nonsense.

But it is not sufficient to say that it makes good sense; the critic must ask himself the question: "Is it the Aeschylean sense?"

In the first place, it would never have occurred to me to take opâte as imperative, if my attention had not been called to the matter by the annotators and translators — from the tenor of the passage I do not expect an imperative. From the time Prometheus utters the exclamation å å till he says ὁρᾶτε δεσμώτην με δύσποτμον θεόν his mood, or rather moods, are clearly marked, both by metre and by word: tís ȧxó, tís ὀδμὰ προσέπτα μ' ἀφεγγής (surprise and anticipation) ἵκετο τερμόνιον ἐπὶ πάγον (emotional excitement) πόνων ἐμῶν θεωρός, ἢ τί δὴ θέλων (strong emotion produced by the thought of a possible sympathizing witness-observe the long vowels in which feeling is wont to dwell), and then comes the verse in question, which apprises the unknown visitor of the facts.

1 An Apology to the True Christian Divinity, written in Latin and English, by Robert Barclay (pp. 91 ff.).

In that announcement Prometheus appeals to the strangers' pity: "Whoever you are and whatever your object, ye see in me a god ill-starred in bonds." The succeeding verses are in perfect consonance with this interpretation, and the pathos and beauty of the passage are certainly enhanced by this rendition. Wecklein has totally misconceived the attitude of Prometheus toward the newcomer. The feeling of anger and indignation finds no lodgement in the sufferer's heart at this moment. Cadit ira metu. Nor does Prometheus regard his visitor as "unwelcome." His emotions are wonder and fear. He is nervous. The Oceanids observe this and, accordingly, their first words are words of comfort and encouragement. They desire to allay his fear. The sufferer is bespeaking compassion (cf. 246) of a piλía ráğıs (if haply such the stranger be). He is not indignantly summoning them to gaze upon a god ignominiously treated. The tense of the verb alone indicates that this is the feeling with which Prometheus says opâre. Not until he has been reassured by the kind words of his sympathizers does the Titan's mood change (and in this the poet's representation is psychologically correct), when in tones of mingled plaint and indignation (with the aorist) he says δέρχθητ ̓, ἐσίδεσθ' οἵῳ δέσμῳ | προσπορπατὸς τῆσδε φάραγγος | σκοπελοῖς ἐν ἀκροῖς | φρουρὰν äšnλov ỏxnow (141 ff.). Nor does he, when addressing the chorus, ever use any other tense than the aorist (273, 274). Furthermore, Prometheus employs practically the same words (πόνων ἐμῶν ἥκεις ἐπόπτης) when he speaks to his friend and sympathizer, Oceanus (298); but he does not feel that the latter has come τερμόνιον ἐπὶ πάγον to gloat over the torments of the fettered Titan. He has come, it is true, to gaze upon the sufferings of the ill-fated god (cf. Dewpós in 118), but to feel for and with him-ewphowv τúxas èμàs ἀφῖξαι καὶ συνασχαλῶν κακοῖς. Then he says δέρκου θέαμα, where both the present and the imperative are in place.

An exact parallel to the verse under discussion is found in 612, where Prometheus makes himself known to Io: TUρos βροτοῖς δοτῆρ ̓ ὁρᾷς Προμηθέα. The mood is determined by the number. If the plural had been used, it might well have

been taken as an imperative (cf. 69). Compare Aristophanes, Lys. 412 (ὁρᾶτε μέν με δεόμενον σωτηρίας). If ὁρᾶτε is imperative in Prometheus 119, it is the only example in Aeschylus, whereas the aorist is frequent: ideтe (Cho. 406, Sept. 11), ideole (Cho. 973, 980), idoû (Cho. 231, 247), idé (Suppl. 349 ἰδέ με τὰν ἱκέτιν), ιδέσθω (Suppl. 103), ἰδώμεθα (Eum. 142), μýd' ïdŋs (Suppl. 424 — naturally, by reason of the neg.). So with the optative: ido (P. V. 973, Cho. 167), ïdoito (Suppl. 209), idolobe (P.V. 895). The indicative opâte occurs frequently (P. V. 674, Ag. 1217, Cho. 1034). The singular is found occasionally of intellectual perception (P.V. 997 öpa νῦν εἴ σοι ταῦτ ̓ ἀρωγὰ φαίνεται, Eum. 255 ὅρα ὅρα μαλ ̓ αὖ . . . μὴ λάθῃ, 652 πῶς γὰρ τὸ φεύγειν τοῦδ ̓ ὑπερδικεῖς ὅρα, Cho. 924 ὅρα, φύλαξαι μητρὸς ἐγκότους κύνας). The only example of opa in Aeschylus of actual perception is Eum. 103 öpa dè πληγὰς τάσδε καρδίας ὅθεν, but that example speaks volumes for the nature of the present imperative of this verb.1

Indeed, the behavior of opâv in general, in the imperative (cf. the common idoú and pép' dw), is similar to that of many verbs in the optative, that is to say, they are used regularly with one tense (present or aorist the character of the verb determines) unless a special point is to be made by the unusual tense, and it is these shifts, this rarity of usage, that gives the beauty to those particular passages. Some verbs are never found in both tenses. When one wishes for the attainment of an action the aorist is employed. So almost always doins, but Sophocles O.C. 642 didoins. In the beginning of the Equites of Aristophanes we read Пapλayóva . . ἀπολέσειαν οἱ θεοί, and Lys. 757 κακῶς ἀπόλοιο, 887 ἐξόλοιο, but the present optative of ἀπολλύναι is never found. The same may be said of the simple verb: oλOTO (Eur. Med. 83, 659, Ion 704, Phoen. 350, [Rhes.] 720, 875, 906), őλoiole (Med. 114), ỏλéσeiav (Phoen. 152), öλolo (Rhes. 772, Soph. El. 292, Phil. 1019), but never ỏλúoтo. Similarly we find mooîev regularly, but in Euripides, Or. 130 μionoeiav, and

1 Look! in this place ran Cassius' dagger through:

See, what a rent the envious Casca made:

Through this the well-beloved Brutus stabbed.

in Antiphon, I. 13 díên кvßepvýσeiev, where we should expect κυβερνῴη. Likewise γένοιο and γένοιτο are exceedingly common, whereas yiyvoтo and yiyvolo are extremely rare. Compare Oávo Eur. Ion 763. On the other hand xaipo is regularly found in the present in the optative. So, too, in the imperative (Ar. Pax 338 χαίρετε καὶ βοᾶτε καὶ γελᾶτε).

If opâre in the one hundred and nineteenth verse of the Prometheus be imperative, it is not only the sole example in Aeschylus, but also the only instance in the whole range of classical Greek literature, with the exception of a few examples used in a special sense, like the rare optatives just mentioned.

Neither opa nor opâte occurs in Homer, but idé (ïde) is found in 443, X 233, P 179, and ideobe in Y 469. In the lyric poets opâte does not appear. The indicative is found in Solon, IX. 7. In Sophocles the indicative ópâte occurs in Electra 1228 and Trach. 1080 (where Távtes is added and ἰδού, θεᾶσθε precede. The singular δρα appears several times, but not in the sense of "behold." In O.C. 117, 587, 654, and 1167 opa is used exactly as it is in Demosthenes, Leptines, 84 (ὅρα δὴ σκόπει), synonymously with σκόπει. So often in Plato. In Electra 925 there is no direct object, and we should expect the present (ès Keivóv y' opa), while the examples in 945, 1003, Phil. 519 and 833 are all of intellectual perception. But in Ajax 351, where Sophocles has occasion to use the imperative, he employs the aorist (ideo' ' olov ἄρτι κῦμα φοινίας ὑπὸ ζάλης | ἀμφίδρομον κυκλεῖται).1

Euripides has many examples of the aorist imperative, as Hec. 808 ἰδοῦ με κἀνάθρησον οἱ ἔχω κακά, Η.Ε. 1029 ἴδεσθε, Ι.Τ. 1252 κατίδετε ἴδετε τὴν ὀλομέναν γυναῖκα, 1279 ἴδεσθε τὴν πανούργον, Οr. 147 ἴδ ̓ ἀτρεμαῖον ὡς ὑπόφορον | φέρω βοάν. The same may be said of the optative: Hec. 1292 idoμev, Cycl. 437 εἰ γὰρ τήνδ ̓ ἴδοιμεν ἡμέραν, Med. 920 ἴδοιμι δ' ὑμᾶς εὐτραφεῖς, Οr. 798 μήδ' ἴδοιμι μνῆμα. The indicative ὁρᾶτε is frequent H.F. 508 (which is parallel to the Aeschylean passage) ὁρᾶτε μ' ὅσπερ ἡ περίβλεπτος βροτοῖς | ὀνομαστὰ πράσσων, καί μ' ἀφείλεθ ̓ ἡ τύχη | ὥσπερ πτερὸν πρὸς αιθέρ' 1 Cf. Ar. Vesp. 796 ὁρᾶς ὅσον καὶ τοῦτο δῆτα κερδανείς;