'EΠIΣΠENΔEIN NEKPWI, 'Agamemnon' 1393-81

Abstract

'ETTIOTTEVSEIV VEKpco would be expected to mean' to pour a libation (sponde) on a corpse'. This is a thing no Greek is recorded ever to have done—not in itself a reason why Clytemnestra should not have done it or wished to do it, if a motive could be suggested. But in the light of what is known about Greek ritual such a motive is not easily discoverable. The core of the problem is in lines 1395-6. The most widely accepted translation has been to this effect: 'and had it been a fitting act to pour a libation on a corpse, this had been justly done, aye more than justly'. It was so taken by Weir Smyth and Mazon, and as lately as 1955 by Ammendola. However, uneasiness was early feit about the absence of the article before -TTPETTOVTCOV, and Voss's irpETrövTcos, commended in Stanley's influential edition, has been preferred by many editors including Wilamowitz (text and trans. 1885), Fraenkel, and Denniston-Page, f[v is now equivalent to Ê fjv 'if it were possible fittingly to pour a libation on a corpse'. With similar effect Van Heusde, followed by Walter Headlam, kept TTpETrövTcov but took it as a part. gen. depending on ETTIOTTEVSEIV 'if it were possible to pour on a corpse a libation of fitting things'. On this viewTTPETTOVTCOV can be explained by TOCTWVSE. . .KOKCÖV 1397. The two last interpretations can be considered together. Since the hypothetical form of the sentence shows that the libation is not to be poured, the question arises, what was the difficulty about pouring fitting libations, or pouring them fittingly? Three answers seem to exhaust the possibilities. (1) The answer offered by Schütz which, so far as it goes, is logical: Clytemnestra needed rerum convenientium copia. Without the proper materials she could not offer proper libations. But Clytemnestra's palace, we have been given to understand, was nothing if not well supplied, and the materials for any normal libation must have been available; anyway the point would be trivial. (2) The sense might be that Clytemnestra could not properly offer libations to the man she had herseif killed. This was the view of Schneidewin (1883), who read