This translation is based on Hartmut Erbse’s edition of the scholia maiora to the Iliad. In the case of D-scholia indicated but not edited by Erbse, I follow Helmut van Thiel’s edition of the D-scholia, but I prioritize the text of Venetus A, reporting major discrepancies between A and the text of the d-mss. in the footnotes. The translations of P.Hawara (Appendix A) and P.Oxy. 8.1086 (Appendix B) follow the editions of Erbse and John Lundon, respectively. Aside from the text, this translation also adopts the layout and conventions of Erbse’s edition, which I outline below.

Ariston.

<The dotted diple is placed here> because Zenodotus writes “the others” [ὦλλοι]. But the poet is sparing with articles. A

Scholia, broadly defined, are comments about a featured text that are inserted into the free spaces around it.1 In the specialized sense in which the term is used by modern scholars of ancient Greek literary texts, scholia are comments on ancient authorial texts excerpted from earlier works of scholarship and preserved in medieval manuscripts, typically inserted as marginal or interlinear notes around the text being commented upon.2 While scholiastic corpora exist for many works of ancient Greek literature,3 the scholia to the Iliad are by far the richest and most extensive collection of scholia extant, filling thousands of pages of the most comprehensive critical edition currently available, the edition on which the translation in this volume is based.4 These scholia offer a unique window into centuries of ancient and medieval scholarship on the Iliad, from the editorial activity of Alexandrian philologists and the literary exegesis of Imperial and Late Antique commentators to the grammatical and lexical work of Byzantine scholars.

D | ex. | ex.

There is a question as to why he started from “wrath,” such an ominous word. It is for these two reasons: first, to purify the relevant part of the soul of the emotion; to make the audience more attentive in view of the magnitude; and to train us to bear calamities with fortitude, as he was about to describe battles. Second, to make his praise of the Greeks more plausible. Since he was about to depict the Greeks winning, he sensibly reproaches them here, gaining credibility by not exclusively indulging in praise of them. | He began from “wrath” because this has proven to be a starting point for men of action. Furthermore, he invented a tragic beginning for tragedies. Indeed, the narration of misfortunes makes us attentive, and, like an excellent doctor, he stirs up the maladies of the soul first, and then provides the remedy later. It is characteristically Greek to provide pleasures at the end. | Note: just as with a fig, at first it is unripe, then nearly ripe, ripe, and overripe, so too first there is temper, then anger, rage, grudge, and wrath.