[668] “ἀπὸ τούτου ἕως τοῦ “ἠδ᾽ ὅσσοι παρὰ νηυσίν”” (673) “ἀθετοῦνται στίχοι ἕξ, ὅτι οὐ προσυνίσταται ἀχλύς, ἀλλὰ συνεχῶς μάχονται. νῦν δέ φησιν “Ἕκτορα δὲ φράσσαντο βοὴν ἀγαθὸν καὶ ἑταίρους”: πρότερον δὲ οὐ καθεώρων, ὅτε ἔλεγε “τὼ δὲ μιῆς περὶ νηὸς ἔχον πόνον”” (416) “καὶ ὅτε παρεκάλει αὐτοὺς “ἀλλὰ μάχεσθ᾽ ἐπὶ νηυσὶν ἀολλέες”” (494). “πῶς δὲ ἔφυγον σκότους ὄντος; ἥ τε Ἀθηνᾶ οὐ πάρεστι διὰ τὴν τοῦ Διὸς ἀπειλήν”, The An.force of these arguments cannot be gainsaid, and only one or two scholars have made desperate efforts to save the passage by explaining “νέφος ἀχλύος” of a mental cloud, despair, and “φόως” of the light of hope. This is entirely un-Homeric. Lachmann thought that there was here a gap in the story of his ‘lay,’ the account of the bringing of this mist having been lost, as indeed is suggested by Schol. T. We probably have a piece from the same hand in 17.268-73, q. v. The only doubt is whether the athetesis should not extend to Nestor's speech, 659-67, as well. If we are right in regarding this part of O as belonging to the original “Μῆνις”, there can be no question that Nestor has been introduced later; for it is only in later additions that he has been brought back to the battlefield at all. In the “Μῆνις” he was last heard of in his hut with Machaon at the end of “Λ”.
