¹ Dawe, R.D., The Collation and Investigation of Manuscripts of Aeschylus (Cambridge, 1964), 180–1Google Scholar.

² Against deletion see, for example, Zuntz, G., ‘Notes on some passages in Aeschylus’ Septem’, PCPhS 207 (1981), 81–95, at 90–2Google Scholar ≈ Zuntz, G., ‘Textkritische Anmerkungen zu Aischylos’ “Hepta”’, Hermes 111 (1983), 259–81, at 270–3Google Scholar; Judet de La Combe, P., ‘La langue de Thèbes (Les Sept contre Thèbes, 72 sqq. et l70)’, Mètis 3 (1988), 207–30, at 215–22Google Scholar; Novelli, S., Studi sul testo dei Sette contro Tebe (Amsterdam, 2005), 60–4Google Scholar.

³ Cf. Σ 170a (in Smith, O.L., Scholia Graeca in Aeschylum quae exstant omnia, Pt. 2, fasc. 2 [Berlin and New York, 2009], 88Google Scholar): ἑτεροφώνωι· τῶι μὴ βοιωτιάζοντι. ἐπειδὴ δὲ Ἕλληνες καὶ οἱ Ἀργεῖοι, οὐκ εἶπεν βαρβαροφώνωι.

⁴ Despite Zuntz (n. 2).

⁵ Lloyd-Jones, Thus H., ‘The manuscripts of Aeschylus’, CR 16 (1966), 18–21, at 20Google Scholar.

⁶ For which, cf. also Platt, A., ‘Aeschylea’, Journal of Philology 35 (1920), 86–94, at 87Google Scholar.

⁷ See Dawe (n. 1), 181.

⁸ Thus G.O. Hutchinson, Aeschylus: Septem contra Thebas (Oxford, 1985), on 72f. For ὄλβον ῥέοντα, cf. Soph. El. 361–2 σοὶ δὲ πλουσία | τράπεζα κείσθω καὶ περιρρείτω βίος.

⁹ See Dawe (n. 1), 181: ‘I believe that this represents another attempt to supply words which were wrongly thought to be missing.’

¹⁰ Quotation from Hutchinson (n. 8).

¹¹ Page, Thus D.L., Aeschyli septem quae supersunt tragoedia[e] (Oxford, 1972), 168Google Scholar; West, M.L., Aeschylus: Tragoediae (Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1990; corr. ed. 1998), 212CrossRefGoogle Scholar with app. crit. ad loc. Fraenkel, E. (Aeschylus: Agamemnon [Oxford, 1950], 2.389, on 851)Google Scholar, albeit accepting the paradosis ἐφεστίους in Ag. 851, notes that the sense ‘(provided) with the hearth’ which the adj. seems to have in that passage as well as in Sept. 73 ‘looks like an arbitrary change of meaning’, since ‘elsewhere, in Aeschylus as well as in other writers, the word either means simply “by the hearth” […] or is used, after the model of Homer […] predicatively to verbs of motion or staying’ (Fraenkel provides ample parallels for these uses, some of which are discussed immediately below in the text).

¹² Cf. Liapis, V., A Commentary on the Rhesus Attributed to Euripides (Oxford, 2012)Google Scholar, on [Eur.] Rhes. 201–3.

¹³ For the syntax, cf. Aesch. Sept. 777 κῆρ’ ἀφελόντα χώρας; Eu. 742 ἐκβάλλεθ’ … τευχέων πάλους.

¹⁴ Harberton, J.S.P. (writing as ‘A Graduate of Cambridge’), Notes and Emendations to Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides (London, 1903), 6Google Scholar suggested deleting lines 72 (from ἐκθαμνίσητε) to 76 (until ἀλκή). In a later edition of Notes and Emendations (London and Oxford, 1907)Google Scholar, which I have not seen, Harberton (now writing as ‘Unus Multorum’) limits the deletion to 74–5: see West (n. 11), 67 in app. crit. on 74–5.

¹⁵ See further Broadhead, H.D., ‘Aeschylea’, CQ 42 (1948), 1–6, at 3–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ Thus Σ 69–77, 75e (Smith [n. 3], 45, 47); Broadhead (n. 15), 2–3; see further Kühner, R. and Gerth, B., Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, ii: Satzlehre (Hannover and Leipzig, 1904), 2.20–2Google Scholar. This use of the infinitive is especially common in prayers: cf. e.g. Aesch. Sept. 253 θεοὶ πολῖται, μή με δουλείας τυχεῖν; Cho. 307 Διόθεν τῆιδε τελευτᾶν; Hom. Il. 2.412–13 Zεῦ … | μὴ … ἐπ’ ἠέλιον δῦναι; 7.179 Zεῦ πάτερ, ἢ Αἴαντα λαχεῖν ἢ Τυδέος υἱόν; Od. 17.354–5.

¹⁷ Butler, S., Aeschyli tragoediae quae supersunt, vol. 4, pt. 2 (Cambridge, 1811), 14Google Scholar. Essentially the same emendation (μὴ δῶτε) was independently adopted by Page in his OCT ([n. 11], 47).

¹⁸ Cf. Platt (n. 6), 87–8.

¹⁹ Cf. Denniston, J.D., The Greek Particles ² (Oxford, 1954), 167–8Google Scholar.

²⁰ West, M.L., Studies in Aeschylus (Stuttgart, 1990), 99–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²¹ Headlam, W., ‘Some passages of Aeschylus and others’, CR 17 (1903), 240–9, at 240Google Scholar.

²² Transl. by Sommerstein, A.H., Aeschylus I: Persians, Seven against Thebes, Suppliants, Prometheus Bound, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA and London, 2008), 389Google Scholar.

²³ See Johansen, H. Friis and Whittle, E.W., Aeschylus: The Suppliants (Copenhagen, 1980), 3.135–6, on 786Google Scholar.

²⁴ Dindorf, W., Aeschyli tragoediae superstites et deperditarum fragmenta, vol. 2: Annotationes (Oxford, 1841), 137Google Scholar.

²⁵ See van Nes, D., Die maritime Bildersprache des Aischylos (Groningen, 1963), 31–2Google Scholar.

²⁶ See George, A.R., The Babylonian Gilgamesh Epic: Introduction, Critical Edition and Cuneiform Texts (Oxford, 2003), 1.541Google Scholar.

²⁷ West (n. 20), 101–2.

²⁸ Cf. West, M.L., Greek Metre (Oxford, 1982), 109Google Scholar. For tragic examples (sparse and mostly uncertain in Aeschylus) of ⏑ — — — —, see Conomis, N.C., ‘The dochmiacs of Greek drama’, Hermes 92 (1964), 23–50, at 26–7Google Scholar.

²⁹ West (n. 20), 101, with reference to Parker, L.P.E., ‘Porson's Law extended’, CQ 16 (1966), 1–26, at 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁰ See the Thoman scholium 102g in Smith (n. 3), 64.

³¹ West (n. 20), 102.

³² Seidler, A., De versibus dochmiacis tragicorum Graecorum (Leipzig, 1811), 192Google Scholar; the accentuation was corrected into λιτάν’ by Hermann, G., Aeschyli Tragoediae (Leipzig, 1852), 1.277Google Scholar. For λιτανά, cf. Aesch. Supp. 808–9 μέλη | λιτανά, a passage for which it has been suggested that λιτανά may have been originally substantival, and μέλη a gloss: see Friis-Johansen and Whittle (n. 23), 2.158–9 (on Aesch. Supp. 808–10).

³³ See e.g. Hutchinson (n. 8), on 101f.

³⁴ Cf. West (n. 20), 102: ‘ἀμπέχω would surely cease to convey this sense [i.e. ‘clothe’] if resolved into ἀμφὶ … ἔχω’.

³⁵ West (n. 20), 102. For the text of the scholium, see Smith (n. 3), 62–3.

³⁶ West's suggestion has been partly accepted by Sommerstein (n. 22), except that the latter envisages (in app. crit. ad loc.) supplementing ἀμφὶ λιτανὰ <βαλεῖν θεοῖς> ἕξομεν.

³⁷ See Finglass, P.J., Sophocles: Electra (Cambridge, 2007)Google Scholar, ad loc. For the use of ἀνέχω with regard to ‘raising’ offerings to the gods, cf. Hom. Il. 10.460–1 καὶ τά γ’ Ἀθηναίηι ληΐτιδι δῖος Ὀδυσσεὺς | ὑψόσ’ ἀνέσχεθε χειρί; Pind. fr. 119.3 Snell/Maehler πλεῖστα μὲν δῶρ’ ἀθανάτοις ἀνέχοντες.

³⁸ For the gesture, cf. e.g. Hom. Il. 21.115–16, 22.37, and see further Sittl, C., Die Gebärden der Griechen und Römer (Leipzig, 1890), 147–8Google Scholar; Naiden, F.S., Ancient Supplication (Oxford, 2006), 43–4, 49, 51CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³⁹ Conomis (n. 28), 23.

⁴⁰ Łowiński, A., ‘Über die Parodos in Aischylos Sieben gegen Theben: ein Beitrag zur Kritik dieses Stückes’, RhM 10 (1865), 358–68, at 363Google Scholar.

⁴¹ An alternative, though less likely, possibility would be to read πέπλων καὶ στεφέων πότ’ εἰ μὴ <τὰ> νῦν. But τὰ νῦν = νῦν is unattested in Aeschylus, although there are numerous examples in Sophocles (Trach. 836, El. 422, 584, Phil. 613, 831, 1151, OC 133, 615).

⁴² Cf. Hutchinson (n. 8), on 109. For the rare dochmiac, cf. Eur. HF 1052 φόνος ὅσος ὅδ’ (Αμ.) ἆ ἆ with Conomis (n. 28), 27–8; the line is tentatively scanned as a reizianum by Bond, G.W., Euripides: Heracles (Oxford, 1981), on 1049–51Google Scholar; but see his own counter-arguments, to which add that a resolved first longum is hard to parallel in reiz.

⁴³ The question whether 108–49 are astrophic or consist of a strophe (108–28) and an antistrophe (129–49) has long been debated. For doxography, see Wecklein, N., Aeschyli fabulae (Berlin, 1885), 2.49–58Google Scholar; West (n. 20), 102; add Ferrari, F., ‘Per il testo dei “Sette contro Tebe”’, ASNP, ser. III, 13 (1983), 971–95, at 983–90Google Scholar (against responsion). I am convinced by West's ([n. 20], 103–8) argument that (a) the strophic responsion in this section is real; (b) although some emendation is indeed required to restore responsion, this is almost always ‘justified on other grounds than merely the search for responsion’; and (c) ‘even unemended, the text shows a degree of metrical correspondence between the two halves that goes far beyond coincidence’ ([n. 20], 103).

⁴⁴ Cf. esp. Soph. OC 1480 (— ⏑ ⏑ — — —) ~ 1494 (⏑ — — ⏑ —), discussed, together with a few other examples, by Diggle, J., Euripidea: Collected Essays (Oxford, 1994), 472 n. 147Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ (n. 11), 49.

⁴⁶ For the principle involved here, see Conomis (n. 28), 43–5. Conomis's principle is questioned by Stinton, T.C.W., Collected Papers on Greek Tragedy (Oxford, 1990), 334–6Google Scholar (= ‘Pause and period in the lyrics of Greek tragedy’, CQ 27 [1977], 27–66, at 46–7); it is asserted by Diggle (n. 44), 213 (= ‘Alcestis and Andromache’, IClS 6 [1981], 82–101, at 96).

⁴⁷ See Stinton (n. 46), 336 with n. 66 (= 47 with n. 66). In his metrical analysis of the lyrics of Septem, West (n. 11), 467 posits period-end at 108 = 129.

⁴⁸ See, respectively, B. Steusloff ap. Westphal, R., ‘Emendationes Aeschyleae’, Progr. Breslau = Natalicia secularia F.A. Wolffii … (Wrocław, 1859), 10Google Scholar; Headlam, W., ‘Various conjectures III’, Journal of Philology 23 (1895), 260–323, at 300Google Scholar.

⁴⁹ West (n. 20), 104.

⁵⁰ For the bare χθόν’, when the pragmatic context makes it obvious that the word refers to one's own country, cf. e.g. Soph. fr. 127 Radt ἵπποισιν ἢ κύμβαισι ναυστολεῖς χθόνα; (scil. τήνδε); OC 766 ὅτ’ ἦν μοι τέρψις ἐκπεσεῖν χθονός; OT 229 γῆς δ’ ἄπεισιν ἀβλαβής.

⁵¹ Cf. Conomis (n. 28), 24.

⁵² von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Aeschyli tragoediae (Berlin, 1914)Google Scholar, in app. crit. ad loc.

⁵³ (n. 20), 108.

⁵⁴ See Conomis (n. 28), 35; West (n. 28), 111; further, Barrett, W.S., Euripides: Hippolytos (Oxford, 1964), 434Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ See Parker (n. 29), 25–6. West's ([n. 28], 111) putative examples are refuted by Diggle (n. 44), 315 (= CR 34 [1984], 66–71, at 68).

⁵⁶ Cf. e.g. Eur. Hel. 978 σῶι συγγόνωι, where σῶι as a prepositive allows Porson's law to be respected; see Devine, A.M. and Stephens, L.D., The Prosody of Greek Speech (Oxford, 1994), 333–4Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ See Schwyzer, Ε., Griechische Grammatik (Munich, 1950), 2.63 (η 1)Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ See Kirk, G.S., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 2: Books 5–8 (Cambridge, 1990), 330, on 8.402–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁵⁹ See Mineur, W.H., Callimachus, Hymn to Delos: Introduction and Commentary (Leiden, 1984), ad locGoogle Scholar.

⁶⁰ By Groeneboom, P., Aeschylus’ Zeven tegen Thebe (Groningen, 1938), 110 n. 206Google Scholar.

⁶¹ Admittedly, ἑπτάδυμος occurs only in Aristotle (fr. 284 Rose = Strabo 15.1.22 ἑπτάδυμα = ‘septuplets’). But ἑπτάδυμοι = ἑπτά would be acceptable as a transparent (if bold) extension of δίδυμοι = δύο, a common usage; cf. Opp. Cyn. 2.181 τετράδυμοι (= τέσσαρες) ῥῖνες.

⁶² Wilamowitz (n. 52), in app. crit. on 158.

⁶³ See Pritchett, W.K., The Greek State at War (Berkeley, 1991), 5.57–8Google Scholar.

⁶⁴ In Hom. Il. 12.278–89, which offers an epic precedent for the present passage, the stones presumably come from the entire army.

⁶⁵ The year 295 b.c.e. may be a terminus post quem if the inscription is to be connected with Demetrius Poliorcetes’ siege of Messene in that year: see SEG 41 (1991), 321Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Page (n. 11), 51 in app. crit. on 158.

⁶⁷ For compound adjectives in which both the first component (here ἀκρο–) and the accompanying objective genitive (here ἐπάλξεων) depend on the second component of the adjective (here –βόλος), cf. Aesch. Sept. 729 κτεάνων χρηματοδαίτας, Ag. 437 ὁ χρυσαμοιβὸς δ’ Ἄρης σωμάτων; Eur. Or. 175 ὑπνοδότειρα τῶν πολυπόνων βροτῶν (with Willink ad loc.); see J. Diggle, ‘Notes on the Agamemnon and Persae of Aeschylus’, CR 18 (1968), 1–4, at 3. While also opting for ἀκροβόλος … λιθάς, Robert, C., ‘Die Parodos der aischyleischen Septem’, Hermes 57 (1922), 161–70Google Scholar, at 168 took the meaning to be λιθὰς ἀκροβολιζομένη, ‘a shower of stones thrown by way of a skirmish’: ‘Von den Werfenden ist das Wort auf das Geschoß übertragen.’ But see immediately below in the text on the unlikelihood of ἀκροβόλος.

⁶⁸ See e.g. Σ 158a (Smith [n. 3], 83): τῶν ἀκροβόλων, ἤτοι τῶν βαλλομένων διὰ τὸ ἐν ἄκραις τῶν τειχῶν καὶ ἄνωθεν ἵστασθαι; Wecklein, N., Äschylos: Sieben gegen Theben (Leipzig, 1902), 28 (on 145)Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ See Chandler, H.W., A Practical Introduction to Greek Accentuation ² (Oxford, 1881), 138–9 (§§460, 464)Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ See Paley, F.A., The Tragedies of Aeschylus⁴ (London, 1879), 272 (on 146)Google Scholar.

⁷¹ Butler (n. 17), 23.

⁷² Thus West (n. 20), 109 with further examples. For verbs of directed motion with the genitive, see Kühner, R. and Gerth, B., Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, vol. 2/1 (Hannover and Leipzig, 1904), 351Google Scholar.

⁷³ A similar point was made by Sidgwick, A., Aeschylus: Septem contra Thebas (Oxford, 1903), on 158(1)Google Scholar and especially by Robert, C., ‘Die Parodos der aischyleischen Septem’, Hermes 57 (1922), 161–70, at 168Google Scholar: ‘Demgegenüber kann das absolut gebrauchte ἔρχεται wohl kaum in Betracht kommen. Es bezeichnet hier nicht die Bewegung nach einem bestimmten Ziel, sondern die Bewegung überhaupt.’

⁷⁴ For examples of ῑημι in Aeschylus (only in compounds), cf. Pers. 228, 690; Cho. 661; frr. 6.2, 86.2 Radt; for the simplex with ῑ in the other tragedians, cf. Soph. Aj. 154; OC 133; Trach. 514; Eur. Phoen. 152; Hel. 1496; Or. 1304; Bacch. 139; see Nauck, A., ‘Über Cobet's behandlung des Euripides’, Philologus 11 (1856), 460–7, at 464–5Google Scholar; Veitch, W., Greek Verbs Irregular and Defective (Oxford, 1887), 331Google Scholar.

⁷⁵ Such emendations as Weil's ἐν μάχαι, στᾶσα (Aeschyli quae supersunt tragoediae, vol. 2/1: Septem contra Thebas [Giessen, 1862], 21–2) or Van den Bergh's ἐν μάχαις, ἴθι (‘Die Parodos der Sieben gegen Theben’, Zeitschrift für das Gymnasialwesen 19 [1865], 513–58, at 555) have been generated with the sole purpose of accommodating emendations in 162 (καὶ Διόθεν <ὦ> or παῖ Διός, ὅθεν). But emendations are not to be multiplied beyond what is strictly necessary.

⁷⁶ See Westphal (n. 48), 15; Van den Bergh (n. 75).

⁷⁷ It is, in principle, possible that ἐπιρρύου is addressed to Apollo as well as to Onca; but nowhere else in this parodos are the divine addressees grouped together—each one is addressed singly.

⁷⁸ Translation by Friis Johansen and Whittle (n. 23), 2.343 (on Aesch. Supp. 437).

⁷⁹ See Garvie, A.F., Aeschylus: Choephori (Oxford, 1986), ad locGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁰ For further examples and discussion, see Diggle (n. 44), 262–4 (= ‘The manuscripts and text of Medea: I. The manuscripts’, CQ 33 [1983], 339–57, at 349–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar).