meaning of φῶς. Solger gives a good sense, but one which is not contained in the words: Turn aside from the sleeper's eyes this light which is now poured out over them. Buttman also understands the light of day, comparing Homer's ἄλλ´ ἐπὶ νὺξ ὀλοὴ τέταται δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσι. According to him the chorus desires the Genius of sleep, as dwelling in the eye, to withstand the light and ward off its glare. To this it has already been objected that τανῦν added to a word expressing day-light would he superfluous, and that ὄμμασι would require a præposition. It may be added that the image is not sufficiently natural. For if Sleep is dwelling in the eye, it is already closed against the light: and it is not from within that the light is kept back: Sleep repels it from without with his outspread wings, or in some other like manner. So in the Iliad xiv. 359: ἐπεὶ αὐτῷ ἐγὼ μαλακὸν περὶ κῶμ´ ἐκάλυψα: and νήδυμος ἀμφιχυθείς, v. 253. Hermann retracts his original conjecture, which may be seen in Erfurdt's edition, and translates: keep before his eyes the glare which is now spread over them: that is, no glare, but darkness: and this explanation has satisfied Seidler, Wunder, and Schneider. The conception, which is the same that Wakefield and Erfurdt sought to express by writing ἀχλύν, is certainly the right one: but the sense given to the words would not suit the present case, if for no other reason, because the sight of Philoctetes overpowered by sleep could not give the chorus occasion either for jest or bitter irony: and one of these is always coupled with such a mode of expression. As to its being playful, Hermann himself (in v. 1429) in objecting to a signification defended as per acumen, observes: acumen illud non esse seriæ orationis. Beside which, the language of the chorus, instead of being witty, like the words in the Phineus of Sophocles: βλέφαρον κέκλεισταὶ γ´ ὡς καπηλείου θύραι: or those in the Philoctetes 849, ἀλλ´ ὥς τις Ἀϊδᾳ παρακείμενος ὁρᾷ, would be only affected, and in fact tame. Expressions like μελαμφαὲς ἔρεβος, ἀνήλιος λάμπα, τυφλὸν φέγγος, have a different character. It is more correct to compare them with ἐν σκότῳ ὀψοίατο, Œd. R. 1274, of a blind man. Whereas they evidently ought to be distinguished from εὔφημος βοή, Electr. 620. by which it is impossible to understand silentium: unless
