David Bain m byxéoaos neprrpiBonevos digehet SBovrogvotior naudiors (3. 34.7 f. +M); robrov of dbévtes eopasuevor évodivac norobaw dSoveogvely ti radia (4. 3. 2 £); of BE dbdvtes adtod nepiantduevor naroiv Sdovtopvodew &pudbior (4. 15.8 f. +M); tig obv Guupatvns of Sb6veeS pudlovaw d8ovrovodow nardiors nepragBEvees (4.20. 8 f. [so¥x0v of Od8vtes puddior tois SBovrogvodar naudiors reprapOévees M)); Kai SBovtoqvodir naABiorg &pydHr0t (sc. of uepyapor tav d@BaduGv) (4. 39. 7 £. 4M*); rovtov of ddéveeg Rarsiv SSovtoguoGer RepLaRtouevor dvadivas gbovran xal xGcav Sdoveadyiav nepiantdpevor iavea (4. 59 2-3), Here, however, apparently we have a transitive/causative use.* Ostensibly there is a parallel for this inthe chapter on the eagle (2.1. 10): ot BE Odévres SSovtahyiav Kai xepragBévtes nardiors avodivos S5ovtoqvotauv.? But this is just as likely to be an anacoluthon (cf. below) so that there exists no secure parallel forthe transitive use of the verb inthis work!” Instead of the indicative S8ovtogvet five manuscripts have the infinitive 6Sovtopueiv.!! This suggests the existence of a version which Compare we use of spopuiv at 2. 24. 28, repsteed as new by G. Fanayotou, ~aaipometaLesicopapia Crane” ICS 15 (190) 205-38, 324: al tpg ao savdeiout wa Revobetou eek Exeaodtiont sui nypixaorg Dacor waapey ovhy Etrsoter xa sozoqvosor(conrat 3 19.3 M,yvia nexavneva et apa enn Bo esos han doing sponvsy verwona, a4 85. § nt inesed by Kaimaka}robro wet el Aor new piv hp aaesias tpre@uey Sete). S"Ogortoqwatow IODN: Bevroputeovew WKS: 686i gboverY AGH. R hay 3 ditferemtpresecogy in which SSovroyoobow functions asa parisiple,6Sovrogyabaty epiagveesdwoBivog gw robo. A passage smal o 2110's fund at 459.2 otou of dbives navy bboroquoberkepuamonvarévedivas portato oy nay SBiveesL) eal ndouy SSoveahyiav neprantGuevosiOyea, where again I would think in term fan anacolthn, altho the conrination ith tet might be thot make hs ‘nore dificult The Lan unaualy sate fr fom the Grek here and does ot sete the sane demes fet rt denim t dere lorem deta (19.21) ary de Maly tics poor ncasatve when be wastes, "ses dens, sspendoes coy Sst ut fon Ter dem es fon sory sns dou gst ous es a ‘Ens de Mey Les lpidatres de agli td moyen dge i (ars 1903} 188). Forte ‘arma we of gea8oin the work, compare eae bala tiv epion npoextdag ag {v Bleqipov tte, cunt aa guava (228,41) eae tov Evepions ‘rou (01) an spent hs eiprorotevac pi, obxEw a, Eepatquooveat G.33 41): Boch wee.a sv Seopa Ort hei al sag 8g Besar nes ‘Bihow ed épovs tod odaros ob fodhes, bxdzpie xa oxi punooveat (8.21) "AGH this ss mpesiv aay tana is sgh apes ince, a all arse clsewhere,GHF Raven indepen vale, They evr sel elated to Aad ini of thera non-conibuton he esraton the tens unecessary tte tem slong wih . " OBoveauei is found Sve ines i the Corpus Hippocratic, twice as an aiculr init an re times april ering wh he wor for id (ondesod). OF he Gee (ie inftiveis foad in quotation from the Hippocac Apri ofan ifn, hoe ate pac andapee wih «wor for cid The oly dca oectence rom Archies fa is subject Bp (esto). ‘This content downloaded soma 4.78.44.153 on Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15105:5] UTC ‘alls subject to haps:about stor ongiermsm2 Illinois Classical Studies 20 (1995) contained a main verb which has subsequently dropped out. I would add therefore, either at the end of the sentence or directly before the infinitive, : cf. 1. 14, 29 f, 88 xeqaiy cod iz860s ExtOvpopévm a were, onspyns EvBovaréZeaBar rorei tos dagparvortévouc, 2. 24 (b) M and 4. 3. 2f, quoted above. Alternatively, read napaoxevdet rather than rotei ‘The construction will then be the same as that found in Svvyes 38 xavBévres ddonerias tprzoroteiv napaoxevdtovar (2. 3 [b] M).!2 In suggesting this I do not intend to deny the possibility that other branches of the tradition contained S5ovtopueiv used causatively. 1.2.4(M In one of the new extracts from the Cyranides edited by Anna Meschini a further medicinal quality of the fox is described: ahi BE Gooav tiv éaior ng even Eos ob ti dori pov dmoder@Bdcr todg nodahxo0s!> Kai dpOprnKode dxadAdrrer Gder@suevos. (This follows directly on 2. 2. 39-41 Kaimakis: 8¢ xxéxp0s aotod ner’ Sous Lerounévn Aevxiivas Oeparctes, abv 8¢ avian bmuracBcion dhonexias Saowvet) TIAy here cannot mean “except” or “except that.” As it stands it must be functioning as a progressive particle, a usage of ry that can be illustrated "Ct also 1.2.9 (quoted below), 2.22.18 eds BE xa dinars sezve0Qe om rapaseevigovot (WKS simply have dvOpdnovs napaaxeuitou:(rsetat Kis work omsidering emending v@pdnos to v8 pdrovc onthe assumption that wayveoBa ott has ‘ecient Ben omited nts branch ofthe tain, a crcumtane> tat may ave fo the “conection” avOponovs). 439.5 Ep gopownérn hayapag ftv a fv, rapaoxeodger (K¢M*” for hays M has Amps. te. hdBpug = fortter inthe Latin {ransaon, 19410: f omits rat nBvad and Orplea Luhiea Keryemata 7.7 (p11 Hlleox-Schamp) towvaveion 8 yoxpod tuvovts saétepar coro sapeokeuiGew {ev cewai varapnaev(.Mgowod) The sane constuction figure inthe dial ext 4°5 (a) M:ixavaBe Gryeionqpureiont yer BBoueeacayproetom wOe05 Hy05, (uspectum) stg Ehcvouévas tpigag pnxétt aig Exphacriow rapacxeudGew Tapuoxevdge isthe reading of MIs Meschn ght wo change tothe inne? assume she construc it with eave, whichis 0 he most obvious way of inrpeting the sentence, en allowing tat ieve cans sufie” here Often in later et er ean lt “leny of" rather than “sufficient or "enough to" (Gee W. Bauer, Gnecisch Dewtches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neues Testaments und der dorign schrsichen Literatur 5.x). There are only two furtber example ofthe adjective inthe Cyranides.weBpiag frbivoyr ieavéy (1.21.22), whee it retains its original meaning, and incr perhaps, tna passage in M, cavipay ein nave (2.30.2 M), whee ixavdrmst De the quale of toithd, Have we no here anther case of lack of concord ofthe Kind to which sch heelf draws anton and which she defends (, 151 on 23 [al 6M nawOeiowt Bt xai ‘iggn oomuncion atuopperi pay Tomo)? os Ege rbaba, nen by LS) nly fom yeu apd Obes 9.43.1 Cy. 2.6 8.3.1 ‘This content downloaded soma 4.78.44.153 on Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15105:5] UTC ‘alls subject to haps:about stor ongiermsDavid Bain 13 in prose from Aristotle onwards." The presence of the following 8é, which performs the same function as xii, is surprising. TIAA followed by 8 (where xAnv functions as a particle rather than as a preposition) is not signalled as a combination by the lexica or mentioned in Blomqvist's discussion of the use of the particle in later Greek.!® With the help of the CD-ROM of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae | have unearthed a single, apparent, example: ps.-Galen, De urinis ex Hipp. Gal. et aliis quibusdam 19. 615 Kuhn, obpov uév obv &potov éni tov &v byetar Kai ebeEiar Braxewévay svOpdxov dndruppsv te A dxdEavOov xai ror xéxer osnpetpov Keipevov, torodtov tit zpos olov éoupnOFin, Aelav Be Kai Aevniyy ai Sadi dxdotaaw Eyov kapik névea tov xpivov, whi BE arcs Aéyov to8 mivoévou. The two examples may be thought to protect each other, but I find that r2shv in the ps.-Galen is not as void of meaning as in the Cyranidean (jt does connote the sense “except") and I remain suspicious about the collocation in the Cyranides. ‘The most obvious solution would be to delete 5. More speculatively, one might read xdww 8é, “and again,” “and in turn.”!6 The corruption posited (the sense, however, being different) is to be found elsewhere in M, where, inthe part of the chapter on the crane corresponding to 3. 11. 3 ff, M reads Stay Yep xemives Bprapoi nédRovor (sic) yiveoBan xaradindvees t& Popes ‘gebyovotv éxi thy Atruntov xai onepuonoyoivees Stacpépovean RAiy BE 10 Eap dxoazpégovaty cig nédoas wis xpag obt01 inedytevor. The other ‘two manuscripts transmitting this passage have ndtv 5é."” Ths is found three times elsewhere in the work heading a sentence or clause, in each case in isolation introducing a statement or instruction which ‘modifies what preceded: 4 obv Bovdivn abv oivan mwonévn OBoxoijoe te veyoneva. xAiv droteBctoa: EuBpva xaraonan Kai SvooupniKods apc odpely xapasxevdter (1. 2. 9 f.); é&v obv tig mpd Spas tig ovvovatag dont éavr00 td aiboiov éx rob ywvouévou Enpiov dd tis Bordvng 10" otras owvédOnt tit yovanxt, cvdAapeiv adthy Epydécerat” RAiW mpd sob néoor 1 aidoiov, dgether zpiom todro HéAitt (I. 18, 15-17); etree Gvoavtes Koi SarHoavtes jSdaow éoBiew tH yeddover xaxvvOfivar xaiiyiverar nayig. eMAv und&v tav tig SpviBos Karaherntéov, HOvov BE t& EvB0REV adtiicg adv toig Eveépors puetéov iva ph PAGBng yévoowter xpéfeva (2.22. 21-24) "See J. Blomavist, Greek Particles in Hellenistic Prose (Lund 1969) 88 ff. I follow Blomavst in refering to ws simply asa particle (rather than a conjunction or adverb) in ‘cases where i nota preposition "3 Blomgvist (previous note) 91 finds single examples of ai dé and why wévto, but in each instance ray is adversative. *eridda 6¢ is common enough in echnical wring, bt have ben unable fo Sind an instance wer simply moves ot on to 8 New lope I kegs to Read clauses cataning Verbs of adding or moving. 1 See my discussion in the RFIC article (above, note 4) 444, “This content downloaded Som #4.78.44.153 on Thu, 12 Nov 2020 15:05:51 UTC ‘alls subject to haps:about stor ongierms