ENOPLIAN IN TRAGEDY

KIICHIRO ITSUMI

Introduction I discuss in this paper a group of tragic metres which Dale classified, with other metres, as ‘prosodiac - enoplian’. ‘ Before she established this classification and explained these metres from a unified point of view, their similarity had not been fully noticed. Some of them had been named enoplians, while others had been classified as dactylics, iambics, anapaests, and others. Moreover each scholar had his own definition. Different scholars used the term ‘enoplian’ for different entities.2

The word ‘enoplian’ had been used as a metrical term to indicate a certain colon from the classical age on, though its identity was ~ n c l e a r . ~ Dale widened its meaning extensively and applied the name to various cola, including the ones discussed here. Her ‘prosodiac-enoplian’ covered most of the cola that begin in double-short movement (S - u u - u u -... or - u u - u u - ...) and turn at the close to single-short movement (... - - ...), and it was defined as a branch of ‘aeolics’, because she took the sequence - u - u u - or - u u - u - u - found in these cola as the expanded ‘choriambic n ~ c l e u s ’ . ~

Dale’s classification as well as the appellation of these metres did not escape criticism. Criticism arose from three angle^:^ 1. The metres Dale collected as ‘prosodiac-enoplian’

I This paper is the one announced in a footnote of my previous article (CQ ns 34 (1984), 72) and is based upon some sections of my PhD thesis submitted to the University of St. Andrews in 1982. Each passage I treat in this paper is examined more thoroughly in the thesis, with the consideration of other colometries. Willink’s Eur. Orestes (Oxford 1986) reached me at the final stage of this paper. His definition is wider than mine and considerably different, but both will agree on principle (for instance, parallels collected for 1256/1276 and their analysis). J. A. J. M. Buijs, ‘Studies in the Lyric Metres of Greek Tragedy, “IV. Acephalous aeolic cola”’, Mnem 39, (1986), 58-73, collects some of the metres, which I discuss here, from a different perspective. I owe Mrs L. P. E. Edwards (= Parker) and Mrs E. M. Craik much gratitude. They read the first draft, improved my English, gave me useful suggestions, and saved me from errors. Mrs Edwards also scrutinised the final draft, and wrote careful comments. IR some paragraphs her suggestions are adopted verbatim. The paper was originally accepted by the editor of BICS in January 1988. During my visit to Oxford in 1989/90 Sir Kenneth Dover, Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones and Professor M. L. West kindly wrote comments. However, I leave the paper unchanged except for a few corrections of obvious mistakes. February 1993. Wilamowitz writes (GV 93, 376): “[Enoplian] hat nur drei Hebungen, aber vom und hinten steht eine Senkung” “ ... ein Dreiheber, der immer steigend beginnt und fallend aufhort, aber die Senkungen frei behandelt.” (West’s epitome (Glossary in GM) is not correct). See also p.248 below and n.14. Schroeder (Eur. Cantica3 takes enoplian as Vierhekr which may be given the scheme * -* -* -* - and -* -* -* -* (* can be u, uu, -, and nil: the schematization is mine and, strictly speaking, insufficient). Denniston (OCD2) gives the name enoplian to * -uu-uu--(* means u/-/u U ) only, and relates it to hemiepes. For White (The Verse of Greek Comedy, London, 19 12), - u u - u u - x , and for Irigoin (Recherches sur les metres de la lyrique chorale grecque, Pans, 1953). X-UU-UU-X, is enoplian, and alii alia. ’Ev6nhtov as a term in metrics first appears in Ar Nub 651. But we are not given any clearer idea than Strepsiades (and probably, the audience too) of what Socrates means by this. This is her starting point (LMGD2 157). But she also writes explicitly ‘Various lines of affinity can be traced for prosodiacs, and enoplians, affinity with dactyls, anapaests and dactylo-anapaests, with aeolo-choriambic, with dactylo-epitrite, and with dochmiac” (160). She was cautious, but inevitably over-simplification began after her (for instance, in Raven, Greek Metre). Denniston (CR 62 (1948), 120; this review should not be forgotten) or J. A. Davison (JHS 68 (1948), 159).

243

244 BICS 38 (1991-1993)

should not be classed into only one class. 2. Their relation with aeolics (= the metre of Sappho and Alcaeus) is uncertain. 3. ‘Prosodiac’ and ‘enoplian’ are not suitable names for these metres. Thus, to mention the latest, M. L. West expelled ‘prosodiac - enoplian’ totally from his book.6 I myself do not agree with her either, especially her explanation of the origin of these metres. As I argue later, they have no affinity with aeolics (glyconic and its kindred). However, it is still important to come back to her monumental LMGD.

I would like to give ‘enoplian’ the definition as follows: a group of cola/dicola that start with either x - u u - u u - x or u u - u u - u - x or u u - u u - u u - x (I call these three cola ‘basic enoplians’) and are followed by either a colon (like - u - u - - or - u u - u u - ) or a suffix (like - or - u - - ). Actually they are such forms as:

x - u u - u u - x I - u - u - - u - u u - u u - x I - u u - u u - x - u u - u u - x -

or u u - u u - u - x ~ - u - u - -

u u - u u - u - x 1 -uu-uu-

u u - u u - u - x -

or u u - u u - u u - x I - u - u - - u u - u u - u u - x -

It is essential to my definition to recognise that the last position of the three basic cola is anceps. In isolation,

could in theory be taken, by supposing brevis in longo, as u ~ u u ~ u u ~ u ~ ~ u - u - -

u -uu-uu-v~~

-u-u--

But, as I argue at p.250, setting anceps is a more appropriate and systhematic explanation of all the examples given in the two following Tables.

At first sight, it may seem arbitrary to relate, for example, u u-u u-u-uI -u u-u u- - - (Hec 1068) u u - u u - u - u I - u - - - (Tro 282) with

or uu-uu-u-u- (ion 1448 etc.). Undeniably the argument is based on analogy. But it will be noticed that analogy works in

two dimensions. Not only that every example above starts with u u - u u - u - u but that each

_ - - (Tro 286 etc.) and u-uu-uu--- (Andr 841 etc.). My definition will be useful to simplify these multifarious forms. Its logical basis will be discussed later (p.25 1).

Hereafter, the name ‘enoplian’ is used to denote the genus which covers the examples listed in the Tables as a whole, not a particular colon (cf. aeolic which covers glyconic, pherecratean etc.). Sometimes by ‘enoplians’ only the three basic cola are meant,’ and others are called ‘enoplians with suffix’ or ‘enoplian dicola’. But there will be no ambiguity.

corresponds to u - u u - u u - u I - u u - u u - - - (HF 1032 etc.) u - u u - u u - u 1 - u

6Greek Metre, Glossary (p.195). Our enoplians are scattered not only in dactylic and dactylo-epitrite but in

’ I t should be noticed that, though all the three basic cola were already called ‘enoplians’ by Wilamowitz or dochmiac.

Schroeder, I do not accept their definition of ‘enoplian’.

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 245

TABLE I

-uu-uu- A Hipp 58 Hipp 756/769 H F 1082 Tro 8331852 Pho 350 fr.79 1.1 (Tro 7991808) @Or 1811203 (El 8591873) (Rh 5321552)

B (Rh 8951906) (S Ant 3531363)

C (Rh 2261235)

. - U U - U U - X A H F 1075 Andr 1022 C Andr 1014

@Hyps 64.85

B C Alc4381448

A Andr 826 H F 1029

B Andr830

-uu-uu--

-uu-uu-u-

A H F 1032

B Tro266 C Tro257

B A Supp 525153 1 C Alc 2241236

-uu-uu---

Or 125611276

-uu-uu-u--

-v-u- - A Med 9891996 IT 40214 I7 HF 136 IA 585 fr.893.1 Tro 279 A Th 756/764

B STra6381645 # S Aj 91 11957 # (Hec 948) (Rh 23 11240)

C

A

A ( S Tra 82I1832)

A Tro 286

-u-u-u-

-u-u-v--

-u---

Phaeth 2341243 # H F 898 # H F 907

B C H F I024

C

A He1664 B C

# H F 1036

Hec 1068

Med 6471656 Hipp 155/767 Ion 107811094

fr.893.3

A PV 5481556

Tro 282

IT 39614 1 1

IA 178/199

El 699/7 13

Andr 1241133 S Tra 886

Pho 146

Rh 5271547 @Ion 1508

f r . 369.2

S fr.808

246 BICS 38 (1991-1993)

TABLE 2

Ale 5701580 S Tra 6351642 Rh 4621828 (Med 4101421) ( S Ant 5821593)

(Med 8241835) (Med 9761982

A PV 1351151 Hipp 163 S OC 1244

# Ion 1049/1062 # ( S Tereus 591.2) # S Ant 5851596 # Rh5361555 # Alc219/231 # IT400/415

S Ant 354

Andr 84 1 s oc 156411575 Alc 5941602

# Ion 6851704 # Hec647 # Hec649 # H F 1185 # H F 1186 # H F 1187 # Ion717 # Ion 1483 # Pho 121 # Hec699 # Phaeth216

A PV 5471555 S Aj 23 11255 @ Tro 8371857

@ Or 1456

IT 124511270 IT 124611 27 1 Ba 117411 I90 Med 205 Rh 2501260

Ale 4421452 Alc 4601470 Med 6481659 Hec 655 Hec 9271937 H F I080 Ion 457 Ion 1458 IT I25 111275 IT 884 Rh 900/911 Rh 9011912 S Tra 6481656 @ Rh 5301550 @ Ale 4371447

El 586 El 588 Ion 1448 Ion 1486 P haeth 276 Rh 4591825 HF 1188 @ Ion 1480 Ion 1482 Ion 1494 He1 657 He1 680 He1 68 1 Hyps 64.94 S Tra 6471655 @ Andr 8351839

@ A PV 1661184 @ Alc 5911600 S Ant 366

He1 640 Andr 2961304 Andr 2981306 Hyps 64.77 Hyps 64.8 1 @ Pho 163

* One might add two further examples (Ale 2351237, A Supp 5261532) to the group of erasm + - - in Table 2, which are counted as dicola (type B) in Table 1 ( x - u u - w - I x - u u - u u - w - - ). This is a matter of definition of ‘dicolon’. A similar case, S Ant 3541366, is excluded from Table 1 and included in Table 2, because it is preceded by two x - u u - v - . This passage is unique in another respect: the strophic responsion between - and w u at the initial position. But possibly it is dangerous to generalise from this case only and to say that erasm can correspond with u u - u u - v u - X , or that ‘link’ anceps may be resolved.

KlICHlRO ITSUMI 241

Examples8 In Table 1, examples of enoplian dicola are collected. These dicola are composed of (1) one of the three basic enoplians which are arranged horizontally in the table, and (2) a following colon, which is one of those arranged vertically. Thus, Hipp 756/769 is made up of u u - u u - u - x - u u - u u -. All the occurrences of each combination are given in every grid. Type A, B, C mean that zopliY is found after (A), before (B), one syllable later than (‘dovetailing’) (C), the final anceps of (1). Most examples are Euripidean, and only the name of the tragedy is given (including fragments). Aeschylus and Sophocles are indicated by A and S. # and @ mean that a prefix (usually x - u - ) or another colon precedes in synaphea the colon in question. When this prefixlcolon is iambic, # is given, and when it is hemiepes or dactylo-anapaestic (for instance, u - u u - u u - u u -), @ is marked (examples are discussed at p.255 below). Line numbers in parenthesis refers to examples found in a dactylo-epitrite environment.

They are analysed as combinations of (1) the basic enoplian and (2) a suffix. The borderline between cola and suffixes is drawn in the following way.

When another double-short movement comes after enoplian, it is taken as a colon and excluded from the category of suffix since a double-short movement does not return within a colon. Of sequential single-short movements, the shortest suffix is -, one long. The next length is - -, then continue - u - and - u - -, according to the increase of single-short movement. There is no actual example of the suffix - u - -, although it is conceivable theoretically. The form longer by one more element, - - u - - (ithyph), is treated in this paper as a colon and included in Table 1, though there is no essential reason to distinguish a colon from a suffix except that - u - u - - is a recognised colon in other metres.’O Its catalectic form (more exactly, doubly catalectic form, since ithyph itself is conceivable as the catalectic form of - u - u - w - ), or cr+sp, - u - - - , is also treated as a colon. I do not consider this colon as a ‘dragged’ form of - - u - . In short, the name ‘colon’ is applied to - u - - - or longer, and the name ‘suffix’, to -u-- ( e -, or trochaic metron) or shorter.

Similarly, enoplians enlarged with suffix are given in Table 2.

Analysis of Basic Enoplian

One of the basic forms of enoplian is x - u u - u u - x . Its first and last positions are described as anceps, but judging from actual examples, both positions are dominantly occupied by a short syllable. This is the most notable difference from the ‘link’ anceps before/after D-colon in dactylo-epitrite systems, especially those of Pindar. It would be almost permissible to give the notation u - w u - w w - u to this colon, admitting occasional licence to change a short into a long. The two internal double-shorts are not replaced by a long (contraction) in principle, though there are three exceptions.I‘ Following Snell, I call this form erasmonidean (erasm).I*

In cases where my colometry is considerably different from Page (Aeschylus), Dawe (Sophocles), Diggle (Euripides I, 11) and Murray (Euripides III), the text of the example in question is cited fully at the end of this paper, with notes. When a colon ends with a short syllable and the next colon is printed without indention, the editor may have supposed period-end after the first colon (brevis in Zongo). This interpretation differs from mine when I suppose synaphea, but I shall not point this out in every case. By ~ o p 4 any word-boundary is meant. This is the term Hephaestion used.

l o Which length is a colon is not easily settled. In a sense it is an arithmetical, and therefore, inessential, problem. Wilamowitz treats -u-- as equivalent to a colon in such a situation as this and calls it a trochaic metron. We have no reason to object to this, except that -u-- may be felt to be too short to be called a colon.

I I Hipp 58 (&t&Ebfi’ &&)vr&G h&ofi~), HF 136 (O~OU< O ~ O V < buoaoa) and S Tra 6381645 are exceptions. The first two are astropha. There is no example of strophical responsion between X - u u - u u - x and x---uu-x. Snell connects ’Epaopovi8q Xapihw with the homeric hexameter after penthemimeral caesura, but seems reluctant to diverge from the Wilamowitz-Schroeder line wholeheartedly. “Dass Archilochos das Hemiepes

248 BlCS 38 (1991-1993)

This name is taken from Archilochus fr. 168W ’EpaopoviGq Xapihm, ~ p f i p a 701 phoiov. Another basic enoplian is u u - u u - u - x , which I call ‘diomedean’ (diom). I derive this

name from Pindar Nem. 10.7 AIopfi&a G’kpppozov 5avea TCOZE r‘haulchq E I ~ ~ K E &OV (u u - u

will be explained at p.251 (and n.18). It invariably starts with a double-short, which is never contracted or replaced by anceps. Dale’s ‘choriambic enoplian’, - - u u - u - x and u - u u -

u - x , which is given a new name ‘hagesichorean’ by West, is a different colon by definition. Attention should also be paid to the seventh, or antepenultimate, position of ‘diomedean’. It is not anceps, and must always be occupied by a single-short. The last position is anceps (mostly short) in the same manner as that of erasm.

Both erasm and diom contain two double-shorts and end with an anceps, but the order of double- and single-shorts is different. Perhaps it will be convenient to restore the obsolete terms Hebung and Senkung so as to appreciate the similarity and the difference between diom and erasm, but without any commitment to the Hebung-theory of Wilamowitz or Schroeder: erasm has a double-short at the second and the third Senkungen while diom has it at the first and the second.

- u u - u u - x . Erasm turns into this colon, if double-short is substituted for initial anceps. And diom does the same with a double-short at the third Senkung instead of a single-short. Its last position is anceps, and it should be distinguished from u - u u - u u - - 11, the paroemiac of anapaest-systems, the last position of which is supposed to have double the length of a normal long.

Tables 1 and2show that t w o c o l a , e r a s m ( ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ) a n d d i o m ( ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ) are employed in the same manner. The third, u u - u u - X has not so many examples comparable to the other two, but its identification is sufficiently guaranteed from its usages. The similarity of the forms of these three cola (basic enoplians) can be described thus: 1. They have three true longs (Hebungen), which cannot be resolved. 2. Before and after each true long, there is a single-short/double-short/anceps (Senkungen).

* -* -* -* (* means u/ - / 3. Two neighbouring Senkungen must be double-shorts. And, to avoid misunderstanding: 4. Erasm/diom/W u - u u - u u - x cannot be in responsion strophically. They are of the same genus, but different cola.

On the first two conditions only, the ‘enoplian’ would cover too many forms including unreal ones, such as u - - u u - x . Of the omitted forms, one is worthy of attention: X - u

- u - x . This colon (‘choriambic enoplian A’ of Dale and ‘hagesichorean’ of West) is certainly used by earlier lyric poets in non-aeolic contexts; and in tragedy, either the same colon is used sometimes as aeolic sometimes as enoplian, or there are two cola of identical shape but of different genus. I shall discuss this question later.14

- u u - u u - x , ‘headless’ colon of x - u u - u u - x , one of prosodiacs in Dale’s sense (‘hemiepes pendant’), is excluded from enoplians not only because its form does not accord

wirklich als Stuck des Hexameters aufgefasst hat, scheint mir [...I hochst wahrscheinlich. Die Frage, ob Archilochos das Hemiepes richrig aufgefasst hat, ist damit naturlich nicht entscheiden.” (Griechische Metrik 3 1 n. I , italics mine. In the 4th edition, he changes his interpretation of Epodes).

l 3 Wilamowitz does not accept Senkungen to be ‘nil’ in the case of enoplian, but his Hebung-theory occasionally admits it (for instance, ‘Kurzvers’). It is Schroeder who developed Hebung-theory to extremes.

l 4 See pp.253-54 (Hagesichorean) below. There is no example of X - u - u u - x (‘choriambic enoplian B’ of Dale) which should be compared with enoplian.

X ) and E. I A 199. Why this Pindaric line parallels tragic examples u-u---u---uu-uu- X

The third type of the basic enoplian is u

-

These two conditions were already given by Wilamowitz whose enoplian may be shown as: u).I3 But a third must be added:

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 249

with the second condition above, but because, with a few exceptions, its actual usages are considerably different from those of enoplians. This colon will be examined later, t00 . l~

So far the last position of basic enoplians has been assumed to be anceps without reasoning. The final position of a pendant colon can be either (a) true long lengthened to by catalexis (for instance, ... u - - in iambic) (b) true long unlengthened (for instance, ... u u - - in acatalectic ionic, and, in my view, - - in dactylic) (c) anceps (for instance, in acatalectic trochaic - u - x ). My reasons for taking enoplian cola to belong to class (c) are as follows: 1. Most of the examples of enoplians end with a short syllable, when they have zop4 after (type A in Table 1). Moreover, a short corresponds to a short in strophic examples. The predominating number of occurrences of a short suggests that enoplians end not with a long (class (a) or (b)), but with an anceps (class (c)). One would not feel happy about assuming brevis in longo over and over again. 2. Some enoplian dicola have no zop4 between the enoplian and the following colon (type B and C in Table 1). Insofar as we assume that these dicola are of the same nature as asynartete dicola (type A), except for the shifted position of the zopfi, a period end cannot be posited after the last position of the enoplian in the cases of type A any more than in type B and C. That is, the last position is anceps. 3 . Moreover there are two examples of type A corresponding strophically to type B or C. Andr

And though strophical responsion is not absolutely certain (Diggle gives the marks str/ant here), Andr 826/830 can be assumed to have the same metre: u - u u - u u - u I - u u - u u - u - = u ~ u u ~ u u ~ ~ u ~ u u ~ u u ~ u ~

4. Elision is found after ” - u u - u u -u at Or 1276 (nv’, Triclinius) and ZA 585 ( 8 p m 8’). 5. Although the argument is circular, if the structual similarity between enoplian dicola and what I call enoplians with suffix is acknowledged, the anceps in question is not the mark of the end.

Diom was not recognized as an independent colon by Hephaestion nor, as far as I know, has it been recognised by modem scholars in Britain.16 Even German scholars who have taken u u-

u u - u - X ‘enoplian’, have ignored the relation between diom and its ‘derivatives’, and analysed each form starting with u u - u u - u - x case by case. Perhaps the reason for failure to establish this scheme is to be found in Hebung-theory, both positively and negatively. Wilamowitz and Schroeder started with the Hebung-theory when they observed ‘enoplians’. Hence, such a length as u u - u u - u - - - was difficult to explain because it appeared to have five Hebungen. At the same time their definition of ‘enoplian’ was too loose. By this theory, u u - u u - u - X was nothing more than one of the permutations and they did not pay any special attention to the frequent occurrence of u u - u - u - x in the Euripidean corpus. On the other hand, Dale, who was indebted to Maas, was eager to demolish the Hebung-theory thoroughly, so that, paradoxically, she could not pay much attention to the entity u u - u u - u - X either. She rather seems to have taken u u-u u- as a unit within a colon.

There are reasons why diom should be recognised to be comparable with erasm. 1. Parallel extension of variety of cola and suffixes is acknowledged between erasm and diom. 2. Each combination occurs several times. 3 . Similar metrical circumstances are observed (see p.253ff below).

1022 u u-u u-u-uI -u u-u u- corresponds with 1013 u u-u u-u-uT -/ u u-u u-

I 5 See pp.254-55 (‘Headless’ Erasmonidean) below. l 6 Except Willink, who calls “U-UU-U- T and compares it with x - u u - u u - , P .

250 BfCS 38 (1991-1993)

4. Pindar Nem. 10, from which I take the name ‘diomedean’, starts with u - u u - u - x . The rest of this ode is pure D/e.I7 It seems that X - ~ ~ u - u ~ - x is replaced by ~ ~ - u ~ - ~ - x as a whole. Similarly, the Paean to Hygieia of Ariphron starts with diom. These examples suggest diom is closely related with erasm (D/e) outside tragedy. 5. u u - - - X - u - is best analysed as diom + - u -. This colon (five occurences) has puzzled many because it looks anapaest + iambic ‘tripody’.

If diom were not a real entity, all the examples cited above would have to be analysed otherwise. Of the forms enlarged with suffix, some may well be segmented into anapaestic and iambic metra, such as u ~ - u u - ~ - u - or u~-uu-~-u-u--. But to analyse uw-uu -up - - or u - u - - u - - in the same fashion, it would be necessary to introduce w -

u- - or u--- as a meaningful iambic unit, not to say that such an attempt seems a retreat to Hephaestion’s mechanical segmentation into metra. Even if u - -- and u - - - are accepted under special circumstances, the anapaestic interpretation is not plausible. Anapaests are usually constructed KC& pdzpov. The frequent word-overlap between ‘anapaest’ and ‘iambic’ in our cases is against this tendency. And the anapaest may be changed into - - or - u u in anapaestic systems, while here the form is restricted to u u -. (The definition ‘iambic’ also

Or should we analyse the double-short of diom and its ‘derivatives’ as equivalent to anceps

cola as aeolic? Then the close relation with erasm with be abandoned. Certainly there are some passages where u LJ - u u - u - clearly has the function of telesilean ( x - u u - u - ): El 733/743, He1 11 14/1129, 1342/1358 etc. The relation between initial double-short and anceps may be compared with ‘tribrach’ (u u u ) in the position of ‘aeolic base’ in the glyconic although there is no certain example of strophic responsion between u u - u - -and x -

- u - . I 8 I shall argue later why enoplian should be taken as a different metre from aeolic (p.259).

Or should we accept, for example, - u - - - - LJ - - (our diom + ith) as one long, inseparable colon without any further analysis? But u u - LJ LJ - u - u - u - u - (diom + hem) cannot be accepted, because it is generally observed that double-short movement does not come back within a colon after single-short movement appears. Note Hipp 753-56/768-7 1,

- . To separate the colon LJ u - u u - u - is a natural step in comparing the two similar periods. Once these two verses are so divided, this segmentation should be applied to other forms, too.

I have treated the last anceps of enoplian as a constituent of enoplian, considering the type A (~opfi falls after the anceps) of the Table 1 as normal. But since there is a group which has zopfi before the anceps (type B), it is also possible to suppose a colon boundary before the anceps and analyse like - u - LJ u - + u - u - u --. l9 But perhaps our definition of enoplians are more meaningful. For, besides the suggested historical relationship with archilochean dicola,

implies that -- - is employable instead of - u - .I

( U U - U U - U - X = X - U W - U - X UU-UU-U-U-= X-uu_u-~_etc . )andtake these

where u u - u u - u - u I -u u - u u - is immediately followed by u u - LJ LJ - u - LJ I - u - u -

str/ant: ~~-~u-u-xe-Dlle-D-Dlle-DIle~D--ellel-ID X Dlle-e-ee xe-elll. It cannot be denied that responsion between double- and single-short@) must be accepted in some cases. For example, Callimachus understands ‘archebulean’ to start with any of single-short/long/double-short (228 Pf, KCC& o ~ ~ o v ) . The scholiast interprets this verse as anapaestic, and this interpretation agrees with Hephaestion’s definition of anapaestic. According to him, the initial position of the anapaest is not restricted to uu or -; it may be a single-short instead. Or iambic trimeter may be cited as it can start with uu-u-, too, even in tragedy (but I suspect the usage of this ‘metron’ is restricted to dialogue). We cannot be too cautious in our use of the symbol &.

l 9 As Willink does. His enoplian ends with a long position like iambic and dactylic, such as U-WU-UU- ( P ) or u u-uu-u- (7). He gives the notation, for example, T/P to UU-UU-U-U - U U - U ~ - (Or 181/202) which I divide into diom + hem.

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 25 1

there is a group of dicola which have zop4 one syllable later than the anceps (type C). This type of fusion of two cola (for example, u - u u - u 7’ - /u - u - - ) may well be called ‘dovetailing’, by comparison with the similar phenomenon in glyconics.

Moreover, there is a noticeable relation between the last anceps and the position of zopfi. If zop4 falls after the anceps (type A), this anceps is always filled with a short syllable. In fact, this is a manifestation of extended Porson’s Law.2o

-

Following Cola, Suffixes, and Prefixes

The cola and suffixes which follow enoplians can be classified into two groups: those which contain double-shorts and those which are composed of single-short movement only.

Of the first group the basic form is - u u - u w -, hemiepes, or D in Maasian notation. The combination with erasm ( x - u w - w - x I - u w - w -) is used frequently in dactylo-epitrite environments, and we may reasonably call this a type of D/e, but it appears also in dochmiac context at HF 1082 and Pho 350. Some of the examples of the combination with diom (u u-u u - - x I - w u - w u -) may be regarded as a variation of D/e in a broader sense judging from the metrical circumstances (Andr 1014/22, Tro 833/852, Efr.791). As cited above, at Hipp

. The ode I - w - u - -

containing these has no relation with D/e. At Or 1811203, the environment is dochmiac. Significantly, Euripides often uses the iambelegus ( X - w - x - u w - w - ) in dochmiac context. - - has been called ‘ibycean’ after Ibycus 286P in modern scholarship. His

usage suggests that this metre has some relation with dactyls. In tragedy this colon appears in various contexts. Some are best considered as the glyconic (00 - u w - u - ) with its aeolic base (00) replaced by - u w ) . ~ ’ In our cases where - u u - u - u - comes after erasm (2 examples; but 3 if Andr 826/830 are counted separately), and where - u - u u - - - comes after erasm/diom (5 examples in total), ‘ibycean’ seems to be - u - u - + anceps + suffix -. Its penultimate position is occupied by long frequently in contrast to glyconic. It is to be compared with U - U ~ - U U - X - (erasm + suffic -), especially with x - u - x - u - u - x - (Hec

- u - x - , too. Strophic responsion between - w - u w - - - is not found in the strict sense (except A Sept 222/229, which, however, does not follow enoplian but dochmiacs), but HF 1029 and 1032 sufficiently support the equivalence of these two forms.

All the occurences of erasm/diom + ibyc are surrounded by dochmiacs, whether in solo, in a duet, or in a choral ode of similar type. West (GM 113) explains some examples of ibycean as an expanded form of dochmiac (-u w - x - > - w u-u u- x - ). But because (1) there is no other type of expanded dochmiac, and (2) ibycean is used in the same manner as hemiepes at least in our examples, its affinity with hemiepes and enoplian is more probable.22

There are various lengths of single-short movements. As I stated above, the boundary between colon and suffix is drawn between -w--- and -u-- for convenience sake.

757/770 this dicolon comes immediately after u - w u - u - w

u - u -

647 etc.), which may be called ‘prolonged’ iambelegus, and with u u - u

- w w - w - and -

2o Cf. Parker, ‘Porson’s Law Extended’, CQ ns 16, (1966), 1-26. 21 For the examples of -uugl, see CQ, ns34, (1984), 71ff. 22 At A Sept 2221229, five of six preceding dochmiacs are -u u-u- in shape. On the other hand, at Alc 2441248, - u”-”u-u- is followed by -Wu-u-T-/uu-u-- (aeolics in Dale’s view). Dale cites this (LMGD2 164) for her theory. But neither have exact parallels more. Other examples of -uu-uu- x - are: Tro 247 ( ~ V V E ~ zh&pova Kaoo&vvGpav, Seidler’s ~VVEZE is unnecessary), Tro 270, HF 1204 (-I&, bdboq &Xiq &E,ov) - [these three are preceded by and used in Duet among dochmiacs -, Or 1381 (followed by dochmiacs), A. Cho 3151332 (followed by aeolics; for the interpretation of this ode, see n.21), S OC 239, 1245.1

” ”

252 BICS 38 (1991-1993)

In iambic contexts - - u - - (ithyph) is naturally to be interpreted as the catalectic version of -u- x - u p (lecyth). A dactylo-epitrite colon - - u - ( x ) might seem theoretically possible as a lengthened form of - -( X ), but - - - is not actually found in Pindar’s D/e. It occurs in tragic D/e, but almost exclusively at stanza end, and may be regarded as an admixture of iambic. This leaves open the question of whether the final position of -u-- and - - X - - - before period end should be treated as x or, on the analogy of ithyph as true long prolonged to -. I incline to the latter.23 -u--- is taken as the double catalectic ithyph (‘der zusammengezogene Ithyph’ by

Wilamowitz). Dale rejects this interpretation because ‘it appears in Pindar, f y t h . 9.2 and Pindar does not deal in i t h y ~ h ’ . ~ ~ But whatever its origin may be, it works in the same manner as ithyph. In iambic contexts or in the case of gl+sp, the spondee should be considered as ,,-,,- or LL not as x - ( w - ) . ~ ~ This interpretation is certainly true in our case, too.

Of the suffices, the longest, - - - , may be called a trochaic metron, but preferably e -. Then comes - w -, cretic or e. Its shorter form by one position is - - , spondee. When this suffix follows an enoplian, the last anceps of the enoplian is short in all the examples. It gives the impression that the colon ends with a bacchiac ( x - u u - w - - -, w w - w w - - u - -, U W ~ U U ~ U W ~ W ~ ~ ). The shortest suffix is a single long. I do not know what this element should be called. However it should be noticed that u-ww-~w-x-, ~ ~ - - u ~ - u - x - , and u - w - x - are identical with the first half of enoplian dicola when zopfi falls one position later than the ‘link’ anceps (for instance, - u w - x ‘7 - / u - u - - , ‘dovetailing’, type C in Table 1).

There is no certain example of strophic responsion between long and short at the penultimate position of X - U L J - L J U - U - and X - w u - u u - - - . S OC 1564/1575 is unique, but a different colometry is not impossible. And it is the same with u w - u w - u - x -, though I believe this colon can explain Andr 835/839 better than Diggle’s hypodochmiacs (see p.261). And in the Recognition Duet of Ion Euripides uses three w u - u - - - - and two w - w

- w - w - indiscriminately. It is natural to suppose that they are subsumed under the scheme of u u - w w -u - x _.

Generally speaking, all the examples listed above are used in similar metrical contexts: (i) among D/e (ii) with the freer form of D/e or enoplians (iii) among dochmiacs.

Most examples of enoplian follow zopfi. It is almost certain that they mark the beginning of a new period. But there are a few cases where another metron or colon precedes in synaphea (‘iambic’ marked # and ‘dactylo-anapaestic’ marked @I in Tables above).

- x - u - ) but there is one example of diom (HF 1036, see p.259). When an iambic metron is fused with erasm, the result looks like iambelegus ( x - u - x - u u - - ). zopfi is often found after x - u - x *26

w -

- u

Erasm is usually preceded by ‘iambic’ metron ( X - w -) and dimeter ( x -

23 It should be remembered that genuine trochaic acatalectic verses are hardly ever found. When trochaic ends a

24 LMGD* 132. She sees its origin either as syncopated cretic or as suffix formed by overrun. 25 For the analysis of compounds of glyconic (gl+sp, gl+ba), cf. CQ ns 34, (1984), 78ff. 26 Cf. Parker, ‘Porson’s Law Extended’ (see n.20 above), 9.

metrical period, it is generally catalectic.

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 253

In the ‘dactylo-anapaestic’ group, there are sub-groups: (1) u w ~ u w ~ u u ~ w u ~ 27

(3) uw-wu-ww- 29

(4) x-uu-ww- 30

(5) - u u - u w - . - ’ l

It is possible to analyse the long run of double-short sequence in all of these examples differently. For example, - u w - w u - u u - w w - u - u - w - - (Tro 8371857 and, outside tragedy, ArNub459) may be (1) - - ~ ~ - - u u - + ww-wu-u-u+ - w - - or (2) -uu-wu-

cannot be further analysed. The analysis (1) hem + diom + - u - - , seems best, to provide a consistent explanation for most verses of this type.32

( ~ ) - - w u - w w - u u - 28

U W - W U ~ U + - W - U - - o ~ ( 3 ) - w u - u u - w w - u w + -u-u-- or(4)aunitwhich

The Hagesichorean

So far I have discussed three cola as basic enoplians. But there may be a fourth. In the Sophoclean corpus there is a considerable number of examples of X - w u - u - x followed by syncopated iambics (- u - x - w - , - u - u - - . , but none is followed by a colon of the ‘dactylic’ group such as - u u -). These can be interpreted as the combination of, for instance, tel + 2 ia ( x - u u - u - 7 ’ x / - u - x - u - ). Dawe always analyses so, but many other scholars (including Dale who regarded x - u u - - x as an aeolic octosyllable with pendant ending) are tempted to compare this combination with x - u u - u u - u + - - “ - w

-. The difference of x - u w - u - x is the single-short after the double-short at the third Senkung, instead of another double.

-

Examples of dicola (A, B, C mean that zop4 is found after, before, one position after, the final anceps of x - u

) - u - x

254 BlCS 38 (1991-1993)

--uu-w-u + - w - u - -

x-uw-u-w + - u - w - w -

S Tra 960 (A) I969 ( u - u - w u - 1 u - u - w - - ) ~ ~

S OT 8851899, 887/901,j4 Tra 6331640, 9571966, E Telephus fr.149 (Austin) 7 (all A); ? OT 8691879, ? OC 104611061 (B) S OT 1096 (A) I1 108 (B), S El 486 (C) 1501 (A) - - u w - w - x +-u---

--u u-u- x + -u-u-u-u- - S Tra 9531962 (B) In these examples, too, the final anceps is dominantly short. When it is long, zop4 is not

found after the anceps (except Tra 640, but possibly 6piv with short t should be written). This tendency agrees with erasmldiom. There are two examples of strophic responsion between different positions of TOP(. If our colon x - u u - - x is accepted as a type of enoplian in the same sense as erasm or diom, these examples will be further proofs of that the final position of enoplian is anceps. On the contrary, hagesichorean is different from enoplian in that it is never followed by any colon of the dactylic group. So the argument by analogy fails.

Cratinus once substituted w - u - u - u for x - w u - u u - x ( ’Epaopovb3q B&91nn~ t 8 v 15copokicov) in an archilochean dicolon. This line seems to favour the inclusion of hagesichorean into enoplians. However, it is clearly a one-off joke which should not be used as a basis for metrical theorising.

From the metrical context of the examples above, it is impossible to decide whether the metre is aeolic or enoplian. It is the same with cola which can be analysed as x - u u - u - x

plus suffix such as x - w u - u - - - Hipp 526-81536-8 (three successive lines) or x - w - u

- u - at S Aj 3981416. Some can be guessed from metrical circumstances more probably as enoplian: for example, at A Cho 3521370, u - u w - u - - f o ~ ~ o w s u - u u - u u - - . But I prefer not to consider this problem further, since I do not discuss any single enoplian per se (u - w w - w u - - o r w u - u w - w - - o r w w - u u - u u - - ) in ’ this paper.

‘Headless’ Erasmonidean

- u - w - x , ‘headless’ form of x - u u - u u - x , is anticipated to have affinity with enoplian. Actually, three examples are undeniably similar to enoplian in shape as well as in metrical contexts (among dochmiacs, mainly).

HF 1199ff - w u-u u - u ~ -u u-w w - w ~ -u w - w

Tro 256ff Phaeth 272

- u u - u u --T -1 w u - u u - u ’I’ -1 w u - u u _ _ _ w - u -1 - w u - w w - u I - u --_ 35

The first two are comparable with E l 6 9 9 f f / 7 1 3 f f w u - u u - u u - w ~ -1 u w - w u - u I - u w - u u - - -

HF 1075ff - - u u - w w - u ~ -uu-uw-ul -pu-uw-ul -uu-- Analogy stops here. Other candidates of dicola have anceps (long, often) after ~opfi .

Remember that typical enoplian dicola have short anceps before ~ o p 4 (type A). Hemiepes, or D, is more discernible colon than - u u - u u - x . When hemiepes is followed by, say, x - u - u

- -, even whether they may be called dicola in a true sense is uncertain. And, even if they are counted as dicola, the variety of dicola starting with - w w - u u - X is strikingly poor. Most

33 The responsion between --uu-u-u and u-v-uu-u at S Tru 960/969 is difficult. It is comparable with the responsion between glyconic and wiliamowitzian (00 - u v - - ~ - / 00 - X -~u--), and from this point of view, the colon in question is aeolic. But the combination itself resembles enoplian.

- is found. The first colon could be trochaic, but the split resolution (-uu I uu-u-“) raises doubt. Many take this as a variation of X-uu-u-u that comes next. That is possible, but there is no example of resolution of a long in enoplian.

35 Text is uncertain. Without &v’ al&$’(Nauck’s emendation for meaningless nva&p), ---~u-uu-uI -u--- (erasm + ith cat.) appears.

34 At S OT 883/897, - u u LJ - w - u + - u - u -

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 255

examples will be analysed as D/e naturally. As for the metrical context, the association with dochmiacs (another criterion of enoplian) is not evident.

As for - w w - u w - x - or - u u - u u - w - - , the problem is more complex. - w u - ” w - x

- is already discussed above. Roughly speaking, this colon has affinity with enoplian, though some examples resist this interpretation. On the contrary, - u - u u - u - - is not strongly related with enoplian. First of all, this colon is an Aeschylean one. Though he hardly uses erasm/diom (except in PV) or - u - u u - x -, he employed this colon vigorously. In some passages, it appears after - w u - u u - - , and it is reasonably analysed as hemiepes (or D) plus u-- .36 But in others it follows iambo-choriambics, iambics, and u - - w u - u - - (hipp). ’’ Euripides uses it as a variation of D/e colon, or as hemiepes + ba in iambic contexts.3x Against Dale, the affinity with aeolic is not proved.

If we take ‘headless’ ones to belong to the same genus as enoplian, the characteristics of enoplian will be unnegligibly weakened. The nomination ‘headless’ erasm itself is, I think, wrong.

Historical Perspective

By giving the title Aeolic (2) to prosodiac-enoplian but setting a separate chapter between Aeolic ( I ) and Dactylo-epirr-ire, Dale seems to have sought to show her belief with some reservation in her LMGD. While she supposed the origin of her ‘prosodiac-enoplian’ to be glyconic and its kindred, she noticed that the relation of enoplians and glyconics was not so close in actual usage.

According to her concept, double-shorts found in the metres in question are to be explained as an extended form of the choriambic - u u - , like the ‘dactylic expansion’ found in, for instance, Sappho 94LP x x - u u - u u - u - gldor44LP x x - u u - u u - ~ u - ~ - g124 She applies this idea of expansion to other forms. For example, she explains x - u u - u u - u - - (our erasm + --) by reference to x -uu-u--. But, unlike gl and gld, other combinations of a shorter colon and its ‘expanded’ one are hardly used in sequence in the same Lesbian or tragic ode. And some cola used in tragedy are not found in extant Lesbian poems, while there is no unambiguous example of gld or g12d in tragedy. Moreover, it is not always possible to reduce every colon that includes two or more double-shorts to a simple form containing one double-short. Sometimes a double-short opening is equated with anceps (for instance, -u--= x - u u - u - - ), and ‘headless’ - u u - u w - ... is also posited (for instance, u - u u

-u-u-, see p.258 below). The most serious difficulty of the aeolic interpretation of enoplians lies in metrical context.

There are few odes which have glyconic (and its kindreds) and enoplians together.39 It is even possible to suppose that the ethos of the two metres is quite different. For, enoplians, at least Euripidean examples, are quite often used in dochmiac context. Dochmiac is a metre that is characteristically employed in a solo or duet of actors, as well as in some special choral odes aimed at violent emotional effect. On the other hand glyconic and its kindred metres hardly ever appear in these songs with dochmiacs.

u - u

36 A Supp 846/857,539/548, Sept 485/525, Ag 1007/1024, 1482/1506, Cho 81 1. 37 A Supp 662, Ag 1451/1471, Cho 3851399. 38 Hec 451, El 486, 1226/1232, IT 393/408, (?)Med 833/845. 39 Examples are: (Table 1) Hipp 58, 756P69, El 699/713, Ion 1078/1094, IT 396/411 (Table 2) Alc 570/580, Ion

1049/1062, 457, IT 1245/1270 (1246/1271, 1251/1275). It is noteworthy that Buijs (n.1 above), who worked independently of me, also observes that “[the type which begins with u -u u-u-] occurs as a rule in non- aeolic contexts.” (65).

256 BlCS 38 (1991-1993)

If the affinity with aeolic metre is rejected, two poets present themselves as possible forerunners of the tragic enoplian: Archilochus and Stesichorus. Modem scholarship always starts discussing enoplian with ’EpaopoviGq Xapihw. As ‘asynarteta’, the name of the chapter in Hephaestion which this dicolon represents, indicates, there is ~ o p 4 between the two cola. After explaining this dicolon first, Hephaestion makes a comparison with examples of x - u -

u - X T - - u --, which is of the same shape but has no .top4 between the two cola, cited from a parabasis(?) of Cratinus and the finale of Aristophanes Vesp. In these cases, the former half of the dicolon must without doubt end with anceps which can be filled with either a long or a short without losing the value of the syllable. It is the same as tragic enoplians.

This comic metre is considered to be a development of Archilochus’ dicolon. But there remains one question: is the last element of ’EpaopoviGq Xapihw itself anceps, too? It is possible to suppose that the former half of x - u - w u --I - - u - - is originally the latter

like other Archilochean dicola (lines of an epode) constituted of segments taken out from a dactylic hexameter or an iambic trimeter. Epodic dicola seems to be a kind of experiment to combine a dactylic segment with an iambic segment. If this supposition is right, the development from Archilochus to Cratinus means more than the shift of TOP& since it is hard to accept the last element of the hexameter is anceps.40

Moreover the idea of the ‘asynartete dicolon’ itself is dubious. It should not be forgotten that the preceding chapter to ‘asynarteta’ is about ‘the mixture of various metra’. After mechanically chopping up a ‘long line’ such as Sapphic 1 1 syll. into various metra without paying any regard to the organic structure, Hephaestion tackles here a ‘line’ which he is obliged to segment into two different ‘dimeters’ (or ‘trimeters’). The two parts are too independent even from his view. In other words, catalexis (in his sense) must be established within a ‘line’. He has no sense of the difference between period and colon in the modem sense. I suspect that ‘asynarteta’ is not a special metrical phenomenon but merely a term he uses to describe two cola of different kinds written as a single line. It is even conceivable that, though Hellenistic editions of Epodes arranged short verses in a line to make the same length as a dactylic hexameter or an iambic trimeter simply for the sake of ‘lay-out’, nevertheless Hephaestion sought a metrical explanation for the phenomenon.

On the other hand, it is obvious that there is some overlap between enoplian and dactylo- epitrite as genera. The combinations of erasm + - -, - w - - or - -, are classified as standard verses of D/e when they are used with other types of unit which can be notated by the symbols D, e, and link-anceps. But it is hard to classify all examples, even limited to the combination mentioned above, into D/e, because they are found in non-D/e contexts.

A characteristic of D/e is that the whole ode is composed of D/e only, for instance, reducible into D/e symbols totally. This homogeneity marks the D/e of Pindar. D/e in tragedy is certainly different from that of Pindar in mingling other elements (for instance, u--), and in admitting into different kind of metres within an ode. But, though to a lesser extent, homogeneity is observed in tragedy, too. On the contrary it is characteristic of enoplians, including erasm, to be combined closely with other metres.

Once D/e and enoplian are established as different but cognate genera, it will be meaningful to speculate about the origin of enoplian. Though the D/e odes of Pindar give as a whole quite a different impression from tragic enoplian, there are at the same time some odes which are

half of a hexameter (- u u - u u - 1 - _ u u - u w -_(I or - w u - u u - u I u - w u - u u _ _ 11)

-

4o Of course one may say with Dale (Collected Papers, 188), though hardly credibly, that a dactylic hexameter itself ends with an anceps, not with a true long. [I here presume that anceps is a position where a long retains the long value and a short retains the short value.]

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 257

associated with non-D/e metres. Besides Nern.10, from which I take the name ‘diomedean’, Of. 13 changes from non-D/e into D/e in the midst of ~tr/ant.~’ And some enoplian cola, or more correctly and discreetly speaking, some cola which are of the same shape as tragic enoplians, are found mingled in some non-D/e It is possible to suppose that the D/e of Pindar is an especially refined system developed from proto-D/e, and enoplian is another developed genus from it.

Bacchylides uses metres which resemble enoplian more closely than does Pindar, especially

linked with - u - u --”43 and actually, for example, ~ - u ~ - ~ ~ - ~ - ~ - ~ - - or u - u u - ~ u - u - u - u - - are found. Moreover, the positions which may be taken as anceps are occupied by short. This gives a very different impression from D/e. But at the same time not every line can be analysed as enoplian according to our definition. The length of lines varies far more than in tragedy. Bacch. 3 includes x - u - u u - u - - (str/ant 2). The next line ( x - u u

- U U - W - U ), which is almost identical, is different from tragic enoplian since it is followed by - u - x - u u - u -- in synaphea. The epode of this epinikion is composed of x - u u - u u

-- - u - u - u - and iambics, and analysable into D/e. Recently, Stesichorus has emerged as the inventor of D/e. And it is pointed out by Haslam

and West that the ‘link’, which is restricted to anceps in Pindaric D/e, may have been been biceps/anceps in Stesichorean metres. According to their observation, u u - u - u u - - is comparable with x - u u - u u - - .# This possibility is strengthened by the ‘Lille Stesichorus’ which actually gives examples of the responsion between u / - / u u at the ‘link’ position.

It is attractive to connect some of odes in the later plays of Euripides with Stesichorus (? via Bacchylides). And, by establishing the scheme * - u u - v u - x (* means u / - / u u ) one

u - u - x and x - u u - u - x . Moreover, if it may be supposed that some historical process might have led from - u u - u u - to - u u - - ,45 then * - u u - u u - could have brought forth * - u u - u - x . But the idea of responsion between u / - / u is dangerous, even if Stesichorus’ examples were attested certainly. And no example of diom or its kindred has been found so far in Stesichorean papyri. It should be treated carefully, or we shall fall into the old pitfall of Hebung-theory. As far as tragic metres are concerned, no further effort should be made to put erasm and diom under one species.

in the 19th ode. The rhythm of this dithyrambos “is typified by the group u - u u - u u - (- )

may unify x - u u - u u - x and u u - u u - u u - x , and, similarly, by * - v u - u - x u u - u

41 Periods 1-5 cannot be described by D/e symbols at all. Period 6 is intermediate between non-D/e and D/e: X - u -

~u---u---u’-’--~u--u--. Periods 7-8 and the whole of epode is analysible as D/e. 42 --uu-uu-u-: 01 10 ep 9, u U-u u-u-u-u-u--: Nem 3 str/ant 8 u U-u u-u-X-X-U-: Pyth 10

str/ant 6, u u - ~ u - - ~ - ~ - - : fsth 7 str/ant 1, ep 4, ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ u - - ~ - ~ ~ - - u ~ - ~ - - : Pyth 2 str/ant 4, ---uu

str/ant 12, --uu-u-u--: Nern 2 str/ant 2, Nern 4 str/ant 8, Isth 7 str/ant 4, --uu-u-u-uu--u-~ . Nem 3 str/ant 1 , ~ ~ - ~ ~ - - ~ - ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ~ - - ~ - : Nern 3 ep. All colometry is Turyn’s.

M. W. Haslam, ‘Stesichorean Metre’, QUCC 17, (1974), 7-57. Id. ‘The Versification of the New Stesichorus’, GRBS 19 (1978), 29-57. West, GM, 48-52.

45 There is a possibility that the unit -uu-u-, like - ~ ’ - ~ ~ - , can be repeated with ‘link’ anceps before and after for some length. Cf. Ba 72-77/88-93, Ar Pax 785-7/807-9. In these examples -u u-u-- notch + ba, since there is word-overlapping after the last long.

~ U U ~ U U ~ U ~ U ~ U ~ ~ ~ . 0 / 5 e p 1, X - U V - U - U - U - ~ U ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ X - U U - U - U - U - - : ~ ~ ~

43 P. Maas, Greek Metre (tr. by Lloyd-Jones), ch.56 (b).

258 BICS 38 (1991-1993)

Additional Note to the Notation of Enoplian

I avoid the traditional name paroemiac for & - u u - u u - - . This name is old and goes back to Hephaestion, though he himself does not approve its use. (His appellation is anapaestic

and even u - u u - u u - - ). West supposes, the paroemiac may originally have been identical with the latter half, after the caesura, of the dactylic hexameter. But we are accustomed to mean by paroemiac the anapaestic dimeter catalectic, u u - u u - u u - - II. Possibly its last position is either of double the length of a normal long or a long followed by a pause of equivalent length, because the anapaest was used for marching.4h This does not suit our colon, which, I stress here again, ends with anceps (usually

It is possible to use Maasian notation x DX and its modified form u u D X , for U - U U - U U - U and u u - u u - u u - u . Maasian notation, which was invented to describe dactylo-epitrite efficiently, is useful if we treat it carefully without giving any theoretical implications to the so-called ‘link-anceps’. As West repeats Maas’s caution recently, ‘the “link-syllable’’ is a false concept as far as the process of creation is concerned. [...I - D, - D- are cola in their own right.’48 With this caution in mind, erasm may be represented as x Dx , but its closely related colon, diom u u - u u - u - x , cannot be represented by the Maasian system.

Dale widened the usage of the Maasian system, and invented her ds- symbols. She actually notates Addsx for d i ~ m . ~ ~ But there is no ground for the hypothesis that u u - u u - of diom is - u u - u u - which has lost the initial long. And the structural similarity between erasm and diom is concealed when they are written as X ddx and Addsx . Moreover, Dale’s system is not as free from interpretation as intended. For example, to describe U U - U U - U - U - U - - , we have to choose between d d s x s- and ddsss-.

dimeter catalectic; it covers not only u u - u u - u u - - but also - - u u - u u - -

Passages to be noted

Pho 350 6hotz0, zh6’ e’ize o i 6 a p o ~ I d.r’Epq dze: n a q p I 6 o o ~ a ’ ino~, E‘ize TO 6atpOvtov I ... u ~ u u ~ u u ~ u ~ - u u - u u ~ ~ u u ~ u u ~ u u ~ u u - I U U - U U - U U - U U - ~

After the ‘link’ anceps, there is a long run of dactylic. Murray divides it into 4 da + 4 da + hem. That is of course possible. But both the combination of erasm + hem, and colon u u - u u - u u - u u - mingled with enoplian, have parallels.

46 West GM 53-54. 47 There remains another question. When the last position of

X - U U - U U - X u u ~ u u ~ u ~ X ~ ~ w u ~ u w ~ u u ~ X

is filled with a long and the following colon starts with a short or an anceps, in short, when a period-end is naturally to be assumed after this colon, the notation X - u u - x ) etc. is preferable. And, though another interpretation is of course possible, I suppose that in these cases X - u u - u u - - and

” - u - u u - - end with a long like dactylic (class b) while w - u w - w - - ends with - like iambic (class a). Then we can and should distinguish u - u w - u u - - as enoplian from u u - u - u w - - as anapaest dimeter catalectic. I count as an enoplian dicolon (Andr) 124/133 w u - u - u u - u I - u - u - - , which follows - u u - u u - I u u - u u - u CJ - - I - u - u - - (6 da + ith; repeated three times). In this case u u - u u - u - u may represent u u - w u - u w - - with brevis in longo but cannot be 2 an. But I would like to leave this question open.

- u u - - (not X - u u -

4R GM 70. For Maas’s caution, see Dale, Collected Papers, 53 n2. 49 Strictly speaking, in LMGD2 177, only Addss (‘headless’) is exemplified. It is in her posthumous Metrical

Analyses of Tragic Choruses that the symbol Fdds X extravagantly appears, in the annotations added by Webster.

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 259

H F 1075 Diggle puts qdyo z&ha5 (- - u - ) before our colon. But more probably, these two words belong to the previous period to make 5 ia. zop4 x - u - I - - u u - u u - x is against the usual Euripidean manner.

Alc 2241235

Exhh’E‘i p~ K ~ V E ~ nazip’6v.r~~ I xpoq &E K ~ K O ~ S K ~ K ~ X p4oe-I.

hu.tlipt05 EK IYavazou p - I v00 qovtov 6’ Exnonauoov “AL~CXV. p v a i ~ a papatvopivav vo- I ocl, ~azix x^9ovtov nap’ “ A L ~ ~ v .

Diggle divides into u - u u - u u - u - 1 u u - u u - u - - .

Tro 279 &paooe. KP&- I za K O ~ ~ L ~ O V Z ~ K ’ ~ V ~ X E O ~ I 6inzuxov nap~iav. Diggle divides after ~ 0 6 p t p 0 ~ . This makes 2 ia (brevis in longo) and ch+ia+ba. I prefer v - v - T u I- u u - u u - u I - u - u - - because of (1) metrical context (cf. 282

unfamiliar choriambic metron for iambic in Duet. u u - u u - u - U I - u - - - I , 286 u - u v - u u - u ) - v - - - ) (2) an

H F 1024 Diggle accepts the word order proposed by Wilamowitz. By supposing brevis in longo after Z E K ~ ~ E V O S , the word order of the MSS makes sense, though word-overlap is different from the usual one: OM& z i ~ ~ a zpiyova T E K ~ ~ E V O S

&I 6&i& huoo&Ft ouylca.r- I E L p ~ o w poipp.

v u u u u u r i \ v / u w v v ~ ( 2 i a - - v u - u u - w I - u - - - erasm cr+sp (above)

( ~ E K v ~ might be changed into T ~ K E ~ then u u u u u I u u u u u u - (cr dochm) is produced).

Or 18 11203 ~ ~ 6 x 0 ~ fiyky~z’06xi oiya 1 oiya cpuhaooopkva o‘C0WXXaid ZE K d y60Lm I 6 & K p U d T’iVVuxiOL<

Hyps 64.85

S Tra 886

H F 1036 Diggle seems to suppose brevis in longo after ‘ H p d l ~ k t ~ ~ to make ia+ba, ibyc, v - v v - u v - - . But this line is comparable with H F 898 and 907, especially with the latter ( z & p a y ~ ~ a zapz&petov &< I in’ ’Eylc~h&6cl, ~ O T E nahh&< I 65 66pous x6pxeq). 9 0 7 v - v - u - v / - ~ v - v v - v v - v ~ - u - - -

The zop4 after ‘ H ~ C ~ K ~ L O V is identical with that after zapzixpetov. Iambic dimeter (or u e u e) and the next erasmldiom are in synaphea in both cases. Just as elsewhere, here, too, diom is situated where erasm takes place.

{ E V L K ~ V nopov &p$v pe. 1 6ouhoo6va~z’ Enipaoav

&vuo&oa pova ozovoivzo< I i v Top$ m6&pou;

ipeiopa6’ ‘ H P & K ~ I O V Exp- I cpi 6 i p q Z & ~ E h d v o t ~ ixv- I qppiva d o m v O~KOV.

1 0 3 6 v - v - u - v / - ~ v u - v v - v - v ~ - v v - v v - -

Med 6471656 Possibly ai0 could be written instead of a i0v’ at the end of 647 to make a colon- end (cf. A Cho 350).

Hec 1068 As Murray or Daitz print, this line was analysed as u u - u u - I u u u - u - II - u u - - - II (anap dochm dochm), and was a locus communis to prove that an anapaestic metron could be used for a dochmiac.

aKEoat’ ~KEOCXLO, zucphov I “ A ~ L E cpdyp5 Ex.rcahh&{aG.

A PV 5481556 6htp6paviav & a m v 1 iooveipov 6 zb q m h v zo6’k~~ ivo 6’ 6%’ a p q i hoOzpa I ~ a i M x o ~ oov 6pva iouv

s oc 156411 575 VEKpbV SrhUKa K d zT6yIOV 66J lOV

KaTE6xOpa t t!V KdkXPi j ) pfiVCY.1

Ion 1483 The distribution of x - u - x and - u u - u u - - - to two actors has parallels (HF 1185ff). For the preceding line, see Ion 1480 below.

7i @oipOv a6%; - K P U R T O ~ V O V A&OS q6vaoflv.

Pho 121 llduyxahKOV &O-I7dc&p(pi &XY.xiOVt KOUCpi<OV;

The preceding part (155 ohoq ... ozpa~oO) is described as u Dle- el by Maasian symbols.

Hec 699 E K ~ ~ T Z O V fi & q p a cpot-lviou b p o ~ Ev ympabq hEup@; _ _ v - v - w - 1 w - w v - v v - - - 1 1

Diggle divides 3 ia11611 supposing brevis in longo after 6Opo~. This is, of course, possibly in isolation. But 2 ialerasmll is the metre of Phaeth 270, which cannot by analysed otherwise.

S A j 23 1/255

I am reluctant to accept u - - u u - u u - u - u - u - - as a kind of aeolic verse with ‘dactylic expansion’ of ‘choriambic nucleus’. (The preceding part seems to me ionic). But the v - - (mhaivoi5 - Cuvahy~iv), is, in any way, a problem.

Tro 837/857

For other analyses (including Diggle’s one), see p. 14 above.

€,iqxolv pOza ~ d i p o a p a s I h o v 6 1 + ~ a < pEZ& ‘COG& ZU&I& TOV do’ &7tlhtpO< I q E t .

npt&poto tik p i a v ‘Ehhby I I;lhEo’ atxph. p y i k c v , ra I ~ E ~ V & ‘pihzpa I cppook Tpoip.

BU 1 174/1190 < > V ~ O V IVIV 6-1 P&V x@a.

Med 205 irvi7qh’Bi q p a ZOV& I patv&k<. iaxav &iov noh6oTo-1 vov y6ov.

KIICHIRO ITSUMI 26 I

iaX&v codd. Gtov can be scanned as u u - . Once diom + - u - is acknowledged, there seems to be no problem.

Hec 655 d6ezat xipa 6pljm&zat [ZE] napeiav. But cf. Diggle’s apparatus.

Zon 1486 8EKlhq 6k O& PTlVOS t V K6KAq

Ion 1480

I like to suppose a lacuna at the beginning of 1481: <- - > hdptq poi and gives a whole iambic trimeter to Ion. For a similar lacuna, cf. Pho 132.

zov khaiocpuq n&pv 6Cnooet. - u u - u u - ) u u - u u - u - - -

lon 1482 xap’&q66vtov ndzpav Qoipq. Andr 8351839 K a i Gcpvnza SE6paKaptev noav.

-TOG t$Jl KazapazoS &v6pGnoq. u u - u u - u - u -

V V - V U - LJ _ - - For the preceding - u u - u u - , cf. lon 1480 above.

Or 1456 For the preceding u u - u u - u u - u u - , see above p.253.

Hyps 64.77

Like at Andr 2961304, 2981306, and Hyps 64.81, u u - u u - u u - - - may be taken as anap dim, but I have the impression (though I do not pretend to have checked thoroughly) that this type of map dim is quite rare.

i h e p dSpaKov E6paKov tv 66-1 poi5 mpavvwv

zdwov oca TE ropy&Ses dv A ~ K T ~ O ~ S zdwov Wilamowitz.