κρόκου βαφὰς εις πέδον χέουσα; “dropping her saffron veil,” says Sym.; perhaps rightly, but I see no ground for certainty. The application of κρόκου βαφὰς to the drops of blood seems a modern idea, which has proceeded from some critic who had not poetry enough to understand the application of χέουσα to anything but a liquid. Except in peculiar circumstances, the word κρόκος, as Con. justly observes (see [note 73] below), cannot be applied to the blood; and, in the present passage, it is plain the final work of the knife is left purposely undescribed.

[ Note 27 (p. 49). ]

“The virgin strain they heard.”

I cannot sufficiently express my astonishment that Humb., Droy., and Fr., as if it were a point of Germanism, have all conspired to wrench the ἐτίμα out of its natural connection in this beautiful passage, and to apply the whole concluding clause to the self-devotion of Iphigenia at the altar, rather than to her dutiful obedience at the festal scene just described. The fine poetical feeling of Sym. protested against this piece of tastelessness. “These commentators,” says he, “seem to have been ignorant of the poet’s intention, who raises interest, pity, and honor to the height, by presenting Iphigenia at the altar, and unveiling herself preparatory to her barbarous execution, on which point of the picture he dwells, contrasting her present situation with her former happiness, her cheerfulness, her songs, and the festivities in her father’s house.” It is strange that the Germans do not see that ἔυποτμον ἀιῶνα is the most unfortunate of all terms to apply to the condition of Agamemnon, as a sacrificer; while it is most pertinent to his previous fortunes, before his evil destiny began to be revealed in the sacrifice of his beloved daughter.

[ Note 28 (p. 50). ]

“. . . What boots

To forecast woe, which, on no wavering wing.”

It is both mortifying and consoling to think that all the learning which has been expended on this corrupt passage from Δίκα down to ἀυγαῖς, brings out nothing more than what already lies in the old Scholiast. As to the details of the text, I wish I could say, with the same confidence as Con., that Well. and Her.’s σύνορθρον ἀυγαῖς is a bit more certain than Fr.’s σύναρθρον ἀταις, which, however, I am inclined to prefer, from its agreeing better with the general sombre hue of the ode.

[ Note 29 (p. 50). ]

“Ever swift