[551] ε:` αὐτ́ην, Zen. “ἑωυτήν” as usual; but Ar. denied the existence of the compound reflexive pronouns in H. and wrote the elements separately. The difficulty here is the hiatus; “ἓ αὐτήν” = “ἕϝ᾽ αὐτήν” from the emphatic form “ἑϜέ” (or rather “ἐϜέ”?), see note on 14.162. Two other similar cases occur, Od. 8.396 “Εὐρύαλος δὲ ἓ αὐτὸν ἀρεσσάσθω” (“οἱ αὐτὸν” G, “μιν αὐτόν” U), Od. 17.387 “τρύξοντα ἓ αὐτόν”. The error is natural at a time when the “Ϝ” had been lost and the hiatus before “ἑ” had become a convention, though a very strong one; the later poets had no means of distinguishing “ε” = “ϝε” from “ε” = “εϝ᾽”. Brandreth reads “μιν αὐτήν” from 21.245, 21.318, 24.472 (which however are not reflexive; Od. 4.244 “αὐτόν μιν” is more to the point) and is followed by Nauck and van L.; but this is unlikely. For πυκάξαξα cf. 14.289.
