Mr Dawe on Aeschylus: Some Notes1

Abstract

The interpretation (ö) ToA(jrfjs suggested in the scholia and imported in some MSS into the text may well be ancient (p. 165), but it need not be Aeschylus: grammarians were familiär with the ambiguities of this form from Homer (cf. 2 I 605, on Tinfjs—n. gen. or adj. nom.; Hdn. Gr. 11, 108 L.). The sense is in my view inferior, and the idiomatic asyndeton of the vulgate (on which see K.-G. 11, 344) might well have disconcerted an ancient critic. As for the suprascript article, these are ' as incessant and irritating as a dripping tap', p. 165.