Some 'Past Optatives'

Author(s): A. O. Hulton
Source: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 8, No. 3/4 (Nov., 1958), pp. 139-141
Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/637973 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 02:22

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The Classical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 02:22:25 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SOME 'PAST OPTATIVES'
GREEKliterature embodies a number of instances of the optative in main
clauses that are acknowledged either definitely or probably to have a reference
to past time. These are mostly well known, but the object of this article is to
reconsiderthem and to attempt an explanation. They are certainly commonest
in the Homeric period, but later examples are by no means wanting.
Of the Homeric examples the clearest are those found in unfulfilled condi-
E
tions in past time: Kl VK' KEV
"A d; cI d OLTOdPvc dv pc7vALvEl'S dA E dp
p'
/
os
AI OvydrLTp poQ&7l7, II. 5. 311-12; EV6a KEPELc dq KUvT•TEVXEa
vd7).E
Havotwao j AIpe•~S~S,E~l tz of dyckdaTao 0oL/oS Ar"doAAwv, 17.po.
7o-7I; also II.
5. 388 (drdAhoLro); 2. 81 possibly
(bcGLEV, present); Od. 2. I85 ambi-
(dvLEwrS,
guous). There are also certain potential usageswhich, though possiblyreferring
to the future, are most naturally taken as past: 9al'?s KE, II. 3. 220; 15. 697;
o KdEKE 'bcs, II. 4. 429; I7. 366. These are common and stereotyped phrases;
but cf.: oQK iV ~)7TEL)''OVT7t y' EplaUELE /porS aAAho,II. 3. 223; TvUEtaqv8'
oQK ~V yvol's
L LETEl7), 5.
85; also II. 4. 223 (i'soLs); 4. 539; I3. I27;
oTo'Epo1L~
I7. 399 I2. 59 (Epalr/L); 13. 343 (OpaavKp&oSLo E~) ; 19 90 (jd4aLu);
(dvdaau'o);
Od. 5. 74 (O~ppaaro);7. 293 ( ATroLo); 9. 242 ( XMAELav); 13. 87 ( capr• LEve);
22. 12 (o'oLTo).
In post-Homeric Greek the 'past optative' still lingers, mainly in potentials;
in Herodotus we find: 6'
Av oL Kp- E, I. 2; K O Od-
.' .v
tEVOL ... E"77cav
s, I. 7o;
70dxa
o38' av •"
XPP'a KaL
TC
av
.xa
8. 136;
o7 7OTpdhEyOL,
Tapt•"
dAAAM AdvoQE.tLEv Kai cOdvCpv ELTroLEV,
Taoa 9. 71 ; sim. dETa'poQLo, 7. I80; dEv, 7. 184;
E;', 2. 98; 5. 59, 60; also a full conditional: ElaEld It Y yap v ... 'Ov4ijr , El
ij

IOA A 7. 214. Such usages in Ionic Greek are perhaps not

X~ oa •A•qrKC EL;•7,
surprising; but Attic contains: a~racu8' [al v•joL] oQK v Thuc. 1. 9
i- roAtah EL•v,
av u; Blass], Ant. 4 fi 5; EU yap av dEEL3lv
rts E-TrrLovAEo'acq, [ke1rPoEvaEVc~a
16 corrections are due to a
[jEw Emperius] Lys. 7. (the only presupposition
that the construction is at fault); calursiv, El rrapplO', sr' VEKpoQS, Eur.
Supp.764.' A similar reference is also shown, occasionally,,jycda
by the optative of
wish; with introductory particle: at ydp 4)'O"va5s9 Kacd
•-E KpaTEp•S AdoLtOrS
haaaUarToidtcvvxas-LNrov%,II. IO. 536-7;z El yp . . .'•V
dc"' &fap EK TpdkWV .
SThe Herodotean examples (though not tions 'they might possibly be Cretans'
the Homeric) are said by Kiihner-Gerth (Turner), 'these may have been Cretans'
(GriechischeGrammatik,i, ? 396 (2)) to refer to (Monro), etc., are too weak; the optative
past time from a present standpoint-'may does not in itself imply doubt: 'they would
have said', 'are likely to have been', etc.- be Cretans', 'they (certainly) would not be
and in some cases (I. 2; 2. 98; 5.59) actually many', etc.
to refer to present time. Hdt. I. 2 is regarded 2 Taken by Goodwin to refer to future,
by Goodwin as a 'future realisation' (Moods with meaning 'may it prove that they have
and Tenses, ?238); sim. Thuc. I. g. The driven' (M. T. ?93); this itself, however, is
latter, however, is taken by Forbes to mean equivalent to a past wish--or, since there is
'they would not be called "many" by the admittedly nothing unfulfilled about it, a
poet' (see also Kiuhner-Gerth, loc. cit.; this past hope: 'may they have driven' or 'I hope
again makes the optative 'present' rather they drove/have driven', and Goodwin him-
than either 'future' or 'past'); and both self, in speaking of 'laxity of usage' and com-
Goodwin and Forbes deny that these have paring this with clear cases of the Homeric
any connexion with the Homeric and other 'past optative', comes near to dispensing
Herodotean 'past optatives'. The transla- with the future interpretation altogether.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 02:22:25 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 140 A. O. HULTON

rrva, TKOL 8CpLE

rrd7TVa"Hpr?,I3. 825-6; pure optative: viv p~v C7r'
7~taTa Od. 18. 79. Later instances: EK
apdov . . .
EL•7••s,
flovycUE, ptrTE
I y•vowo, " TydpyEl'v
YEyodCS, Hdt. 7. I; s iAhoL7o 7)TLs ... 7jp•a7', Eur. Hipp. 407-8;
orov KaKc Hel. 1215. rayKcLTKs
0ho•70,o,
What is of especial importance is how these cases can be made part of a
general view of the optative. Those who hold to the tradition that the optative,
whatever its original meaning (wish or possibility), had primarily a future
reference naturally find here, whenever the context will conceivably bear it or
where some special interpretation is possible, a future, or at most a present,
meaning, and elsewhere simply an exception to the rule-hence Goodwin's
'future realisations' and Kfthner-Gerth's 'present standpoint' already noted,
and similarly Hahn's 'transference'theory.' In line with such views we might
suppose that in some cases at least the writer or speaker is projecting himself
into the past and adopting the temporal standpoint of the events he is describ-
ing; the mood, so regarded, might be called a 'vivid' or 'historic'optative. But
the most convenient supposition-one that may be held to explain all such
instances in the same way, in place of the varying explanations commonly
given, and at the same time to make them accord with a general theory-is
that the optative as such has no temporal reference at all, as indeed might be
expected, since moods, after all, are not tenses; it simply supplies the notion
of potentiality and may be fitted into any temporal context, and in this way
be given a 'temporal application'-but it takes on such temporal colouring as
it has by reflection from its surroundingsrather than possessing it in its own
right. The optative is thus essentially timeless,Zand this explains two marked
features: (i) in the earliest period it is in fact used of (i.e. applied to) anytime
-past, present, or future; (ii) it is seen to be especially suitable for those cases
where the temporal aspect is not particularly relevant and where there is no
desire to stressit (as in many of the Homeric potentials quoted), or where there
is in fact a mixture of tenses (I1. 2. 81 and Od. 2. 185, cited above, are perhaps
both 'past' and 'present', sim. 1. 3. 41; Od. I. 236; and such wishes as El ycdpu'
9
EOE'hoL•~LAEEwyAavK6)TLS A20vflr,Od. 3. 218, are possibly to be taken as apply-
ing to both present and future). Or, again, it may be used where a strictly
'general' circumstance is in fact referred to: KEY OUi7L LOS vdov lpvU-
avwp 3'
uacro, Il. 8. 143; AELa0ed y' EO'Awov ~AEQvova ... owpLaTL', Io. 556-7;
Ka•
yr0r7a7EE, 9. 77;&q'poL, Od. 9. I31, and similar potentials (Od. 5. 74; 7. 293; 9.
242 may come within this class; cf. Ii. I. 272); wishes: ELydp . . .
IJaXdoc-o,
yap
EL'7V Ii. 13. 825-6;
71TdVT/a, EL ECJWv Ws Kal cdrypwo.
7)jLa•a Ei•)V adOavacoLs
Lrdrlca,
'tacra 8. 538-9 (cf. II. 16. 722), though such usages are often taken as
'present' (many individual cases cannot, of course, be precisely classifiedas to
temporal application-nor is it always clear whether or not there is a temporal
SFor the very commonly held futuristic construction for all tenses and the indicative
interpretation of the optative see Goodwin, itself a later substitute.
M.T., pp. 385 ff. and ?? 234 f., 243, 401; 2 Goodwin and perhaps Monro occasio-
Monro, HomericGrammar,? 31x5; Thompson, nally seem to imply this (M.T., ? 442; H.G.,
GreekSyntax, p. I33. Hahn: 'the optative ? 299), but they do not make the principle
... got transferred to past unreal conditions either original or operative throughout; on the
in place of the past indicative', Subjunctive
and contrary, it conflicts with their basic theory.
Optative (American Philological Association Sim. Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik, ii. 320,
Monographs), ? 129; sim. Goodwin, M.T., 324, 328; see also Chantraine, Grammaire
p. 388 (4). But the evidence is quite con- hom/rique, ii, ??323-5.
sistent with the optative being the original

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 02:22:25 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 SOME 'PAST OPTATIVES' r4'

application). This 'timeless' interpretation applies not only to the Homeric

usage, still less to certain Homeric potential instances alone, as Goodwin
seems to imply (M.T. ? 442), but concerns the nature of the optative in
itself which it preserved throughout its existence. The use of the indicative
tenses, generally with KEor cv in the case of potentials and conditions, gradu-
ally ousted the optative from the past, and to a lesser degree from the present,
sphere (in Homer the past has already ceded much ground, though the present
remains fairly well established); and in Attic, when the optative has a specific
application at all, the tense-referenceis for this reason generally to the future.
But it is not surprising that such vestiges of its old dominion as have been
indicated remain, and these, therefore, need not be emended or otherwise
explained (besides the 'past optative' an occasional use of the 'presentoptative'
is found: 0a3' av a balrls, Ed'a(YE KVL OL VXos, Eur. Med. 568; El 84 awEpoveW
Eyvwo' . .. EV&aLLovoL'T civ av, Musgrave et al.], Bacch.I341-3;
d yA6 av dyKAEIULL
[E;a.3&LovEiLr'
Soph. Ant. 505).' But such references,
AtyoL'iv,tx El foS
qcda rather than logical, a matter of appli-
to whatever time, are always contextual
cation, not of meaning; while many optatives often taken as 'future' may still
be taken as mixed, or general (i.e. without specific temporal application),
whether in potentials: 7ECy,ZEg, -1scvYp6y vrEpcaut KaTcXoL; Soph.
Ant. 604-5; dtPv dya68sdv47p 3vvaacw
Y&OLT' KaUKaKOs,Plat. Prot. 345 b, or in
v 7T07oE
the corresponding type of conditional: oa3noAA) av cAoylaE;7',El boPonto7rv
Odva-rov c ro7o0ros; Plat. Phaed.68 b, or in wishes: EL' cvElr. . .
tzoL p.orpa,
Soph. O.T. 863; (perhaps) Loy&oaTo dcyyoS, Eur. Hec. 836; El ydp ...
ZEi E'Lo
OEL, dv EL'',Plat. Prot. 3o10d.z Common potentials (dalvv
K•a• •t•a• yv,
Av)often seem to includepresent time, or to be general and timeless,
flovAol~•v
and similarly some common wishes: Troa5ov 84 voLIoSoqu78v uoqv, Plat.
Phaedr.279 c.

The University, Shefield A. O. HULTON

Such examples as ELdETLrevov . . dEm- of a past application.It comes to very much

V cod. E], Isoc. 12. 149;
"LuLdqL77
El [der'CCud4lav
iovAd4LE a . .. E.op/Lp/LEV [ifwpPa64EV
Gilbert; cod. B], Xen. Comm.3. 5. 8, if cor-
rect readings, are probably 'future' rather
than either 'present' or 'past', and represent
a change of viewpoint. Eur. Bacch. 1343 has
only been found puzzling because it has been
thought that Ed33ayovotr' cv refers neces-
sarily to the future.
SSome of the 'past optatives' already
quoted may be of this kind. Eur. Supp. 764:
calts perhaps general (if not 'present').
Sim. Od. i8. 79: y'vowo ('would that you had
neither existence nor birth'), though a past
reference is fitting ('would that you did not
exist now, nor had ever existed'-or 'come
into existence', inceptive aorist-'before').
Moorhouse in C.R. lxii. 6i admits that the
mood may be timeless and rightly denies a
past meaning; but he ignores the possibility
the same thing here if we say that 'to have
birth' (now or in general) involves, and to
that extent includes, to have been born at
some time in the past and that Antinous may
well be allowed to be thinking of the latter
rather than of the former: 'would that you
did not exist now' (compatible with 'would
that you had perished long ago'); 'nay rather,
would that you had never been born in the
first place'. Similar considerations apply to
in II. 13. 826, and to E7tv ... yEyovwk
•EKOL
in Hdt. 7. I I where the perfect may be taken
as having a present or timeless force. Eur.
Hipp. 407: •otro, "formelhaft', Wecklein
(and cf. K.-G.o.s i, 395
? (3)) ; possiblywithout a
specific temporal reference, therefore, though
if there is one, it must be past. Hel. I215 may
be likewise taken as general, simply, or as
having a mixed reference: 'I hope he
perished or may yet perish.'

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.60 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 02:22:25 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions