No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
AMФІMHTΩP
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
Extract
The adjective ⋯μøιμ⋯τωρ occurs, so far as our evidence goes, twice in Greek literature: in Aeschylus' Herakleidai (fr. 73b.4 Radt) and in Euripides' Andromache (466). And the ancient authorities are unanimous that it means, in the words of P. T. Stevens, ‘sons of the same father by different mothers, i.e. half-brothers’.
- Type
- Shorter Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1987
References
2. Their definitions are collected by Radt (TrGF iii.191).
3. The medial supplements in lines 2 and 3 are now generally accepted. For the doubtful letter in line 4 μ (Srebrny) seems highly probable; see Lloyd-Jones, H., Appendix to H. Weir Smyth, Aeschylus II(London and Cambridge, MA, 1957), 5890. The half-bracketed letters in line 4 have not survived on the papyrus but are restored on the evidence of Hesychios and other grammarians (see notes 2 and 4).Google Scholar
4. α4065 Latte. He alone specifically ascribes the word to Herakleidai
5. In accounts of these events it is regularly stated or implied that Hyllos, the eldest son of Deianeira, was also the eldest relevant son of Herakles (e.g. Eur. Hkld. 45, D.S. 4.57.2).
6. The story of Herakles, Eurytos and Iole was very old; already in the Homeric catalogue of ships (Iliad 2.730) Oichalia derives its fame from this story, being called 'the city of Oichalian Eurytos'. The story of Deianeira and the poisoned robe appears first in the Hesiodic Catalogue of Women (fr. 25.20–5 M-W). We do not know whether the two stories were linked together from the first; but no source suggests any cause for Deianeira's sending the robe other than the prospect of her being supplanted by Iole.Google Scholar
7. Cf. for this 
8. E.g. Alexis fr. 283.
9. 
10 It may not be the only Aeschylean coinage in that passage, if 
and 
are correctly restored: neither of these adjectives is otherwise attested.
11. 498, 504 bis, 511, 514.