5 ἄλλός τις P || κατεστεύασε P 6 ἀπετεῖ P || δὴ PM: δὲ V 7 κατὰ P: ταῦτα κατὰ MV 9 ἀντίστροφον PM: ἀντιστροφὴν V || λόγος εἰσειρόμενος P: λόγος οὑτωσὶ διειρόμενος MV 10 Δανάη] δ’ ἀν ἡ P 13 τέ μιν Schneidewinus: τε μὴν PM: τ’ ἐμῇ V || ἐφόρει ante μιν Bergkius inseruit, post πνέων Usenerus 14 τε Brunckius: δὲ PMV 15 ἤριπεν Brunckius: ἔριπεν P: ἔρειπεν MV || οὐκ Thierschius: οὐτ’ P: οὔτ’ MV
4. Bircovius points out that Hor. Carm. iii. 27. 33 ff. might be printed as continuous prose, thus: “quae simul centum tetigit potentem oppidis Creten: ‘Pater, o relictae filiae nomen, pietasque’ dixit ‘victa furore! unde quo veni? levis una mors est virginum culpae. vigilansne ploro turpe commissum, an vitiis carentem ludit imago vana, quae porta fugiens eburna somnium ducit?’” etc. The short rhymeless lines of Matthew Arnold’s Rugby Chapel might be run together in the same way, e.g. “There thou dost lie, in the gloom of the autumn evening. But ah! that word, gloom, to my mind brings thee back, in the light of thy radiant vigour, again; in the gloom of November we pass’d days not dark at thy side; seasons impair’d not the ray of thy buoyant cheerfulness clear. Such thou wast! and I stand in the autumn evening, and think of by-gone evenings with thee.” The word-arrangement from line to line is such that this passage might almost be read as prose, except for a certain rhythm and for an occasional departure from the word-order of ordinary prose.
5. Aristophanes: cp. note on [218] 19 supra.
8. Compare, for example, the last two stanzas, printed continuously, of Tennyson’s In Memoriam cxv.: “Where now the seamew pipes, or dives in yonder greening gleam, and fly the happy birds, that change their sky to build and brood, that live their lives from land to land; and in my breast spring wakens too; and my regret becomes an April violet, and buds and blossoms like the rest.”
11. ἀποδυρομένη: probably the Danaë was a θρῆνος, and in any case it illustrates, to the full, the “maestius lacrimis Simonideis” of Catullus (Carm. xxxviii. 8), or Wordsworth’s “one precious, tender-hearted scroll | Of pure Simonides.” Cp. also de Imitat. ii. 6. 2 καθ’ ὃ βελτίων εὑρίσκεται καὶ Πινδάρου, τὸ οἰκτίζεσθαι μὴ μεγαλοπρεπῶς ἀλλὰ παθητικῶς: and Quintil. x. 1. 64 “Simonides, tenuis alioqui, sermone proprio et iucunditate quadam commendari potest; praecipua tamen eius in commovenda miseratione virtus, ut quidam in hac eum parte omnibus eius operis auctoribus praeferant.”
12. Verse-translations of the Danaë will be found also in J. A. Symonds’ Studies of the Greek Poets i. 160, and in Walter Headlam’s Book of Greek Verse pp. 49-51. Headlam observes that the Danaë is a passage extracted from a longer poem, and that the best commentary on it is Lucian’s Dialogues of the Sea 12. Weir Smyth (Greek Lyric Poetry p. 321) remarks: “It must be confessed that, if we have all that Dionysius transcribed, he has proved his point [viz. that by an arrangement into διαστολαί the poetical rhythm can be so obscured that the reader will be unable to recognize strophe, antistrophe, or epode] so successfully that no one has been able to demonstrate the existence of all three parts of the triad. Wilamowitz (Isyllos 144) claims to have restored strophe (ἄνεμος ... δούρατι), epode (χαλκεογόμφῳ ... δεινὸν ἦν), and antistrophe (καὶ ἐμῶν ...); ὅτε ... δαιδαλέᾳ belonging to another triad. To accept this adjustment one must have faith in the extremely elastic ionics of the German scholar. Nietzsche, R. M. 23. 481, thought that 1-3 formed the end of the strophe, 4-12 the antistrophe (1-3 = 10-12). In v. 1 he omitted ἐν and read τ’ ἐμάνη πνείων with ἀλεγίζεις in 10, but even then the dactyls vary with spondees over frequently. By a series of reckless conjectures Hartung extricated strophe and antistrophe out of the lines, while Blass’ (Philol. 32. 140) similar conclusion is reached by conjectures only less hazardous than those of Hartung. Schneidewin and Bergk, adopting the easier course, which refuses all credence to Dionysius, found only antistrophe and epode; and so, doubtfully, Michelangeli; while Ahrens (Jahresber. des Lyceums zu Hannover, 1853), in despair, classed the fragment among the ἀπολελυμένα. Since verses 2-3 may = 11-12, I have followed Nietzsche, though with much hesitation. The last seven verses suit the character of a concluding epode.”
15. ἤριπεν = ἐξεπλάγη (same sense as Usener’s conjecture φρίττεν).
εἶπέν τ’· ὦ τέκος,
οἷον ἔχω πόνον, σὺ δ’ ἀωτεῖς·
γαλαθηνῷ δ’ ἤθεϊ κνοώσσεις
ἐν ἀτερπέι δούρατι χαλκεογόμφῳ δίχα νυκτὸς ἀλαμπεῖ
κυανέῳ τε δνόφῳ σταλείς. 5
ἅλμαν δ’ ὕπερθεν τεᾶν κομᾶν βαθεῖαν
παριόντος κύματος οὐκ ἀλέγεις
οὐδ’ ἀνέμου φθόγγον, πορφυρέᾳ
κείμενος ἐν χλανίδι πρὸς κόλπῳ καλὸν πρόσωπον.
εἰ δέ τοι δεινὸν τό γε δεινὸν ἦν, 10
καί κεν ἐμῶν ῥημάτων λεπτὸν ὑπεῖχες οὖας·
κέλομαι, εὗδε βρέφος,
εὑδέτω δὲ πόντος, εὑδέτω ἄμετρον κακόν.
μεταβουλία δέ τις φανείη,
Ζεῦ πάτερ, ἐκ σέο· 15
ὅ τι δὴ θαρσαλέον ἔπος εὔχομαι
νόσφι δίκας, σύγγνωθί μοι.