MOUSEION - Memorial University of Newfoundland

68 GIANCARLO GIARDINA
I have some perplexity about pectore taken with Jessi as a sort of ablative of
limitation. Here an instrumental ablative of the cause would be better. like uulnerewith
fessi in Liv. 1.25.11. But I have no acceptable suggestion.
Agamemnon
236 We find here ignauus iste ductor et fortis pater. in which one of the two adjectives
excludes the other. If we assume that Aegisthus is ironical about Agamemnon
(fortis being the word indicating his irony). the explicitly derogatory ignauus
cannot stand. Conversely. if Aegisthus is speaking in earnest and openly
depreciates Agamemnon. ignauus holds good but fortis must be emended (a
likely emendation would be turpis). It is better to keep to the ironical view of
Aegisthus' words. In place of the impossible ignauus we must put a sarcastic
adjective such as insignis(cf. Liv. 9.17.12 Manlius Torquatus aut Valerius Coruus.
insignes ante milites quam duces).
457 The whole line is et dubia parent montis Idaei iuga. In the previous line other
signs of the ongoing sunset are given (jam litus omne tegitur et campi latent).
Fitch prints parent. translating "and the peaks of Mt Ida [are] only dimly seen."
He also registers in his scanty apparatus Poggio Bracciolini's conjecture pereunt
(adopted by Tarrant in his edition of Agamemnon [Cambridge 1976]. with some
comments on its merits). As for Fitch's translation of the transmitted parent. it
says the very opposite of what the word means (d. OLD S.v. 5 "To be visible. be
seen," and the passages quoted there). My suggestion. in order to improve the line
while preserving parent. is instead to emend the positive conjunction at the beginning
of the line (et) to the corresponding negative nee nee dubia parent montis
Idaei iuga. "nor are the peaks of Mount Ida to be seen" (being hardly visible).
461 The paradosis is in astra iam lux prona. iam praeceps dies. This cannot
stand (see the comments of Tarrant ad loc). and astra needs to be emended. Damste
(not a wonderful emender. by the way) tried alta. "the deep sea" (trans. Fitch).
which has been adopted by Tarrant and Fitch. Now I will deal with the presumed
loci similes for this strange equivalence alta =ima indicated by Tarrant: Verg. A.
2.203ff. ecce autem gemini ... tranquilla per alta / ... angues / incumbunt pelago
pariterque ad litora tendunt refers to the quiet waves of the sea through which
the serpents make their way towards Troy: in Ov. Ars3.390 ille Paraetonias mersit
in alta rates. Phoebus sinks Cleopatra's ships into the deep: in Ov. Fast. 6498 et
secum celso mittit in alta iugo. Ina casts herself into the deep together with her
son. These three presumed loci similes are totally different from the passage of
Agamemnon in that their contexts clearly show that the events take place near.
or in. the sea: the sea-snakes. the sinking of a fleet. the suicide of a woman jumping
into the sea. At Ag. 46 I. however. nothing indicates the proximity of the sun to
the deep sea. and the isolated word alta cannot be a sufficient indication by itself.
I would rather read freta: d. Ov. Met. II.257f. pronus erat Titan indinatoque
tenebat / Hesperium temone fretum. Luc. 3.40 Titan iam pronus in undas.
735-36 The transmitted text (retained by Fitch) is quem petit dextra uirum /
Lacaena cultu. ferrum Amazonium gerens?Was any cultus peculiarly characteristic
of Laconian women? And should we consider the abrupt cultu a sort of ablative
of limitation? Should we understand something like "She was a Laconian
with regard to her cultus. for-as far as her face was concerned-she rather was
like an Athenian"? The word cultu is untenable and must be corrected to. for example.
coniunx (d. uirum).