by Dindorf, who remarks that
AEschylus paid no attention to the fable respecting
Prometheus being the maker of mankind.

[4] The epithet [Greek: pantechnou], which might perhaps
be rendered "art-full," is explained by v. 110 and 254.

[5] See Jelf. Gk. Gr. Sec.720, 2d.

[6] There seems little doubt that [Greek: euoriazein] is
the right reading. Its ironical force answers to Terence's
"probe curasti."

[7] I have spelled Sire in all places with a capital
letter, as Jove is evidently meant. See my note on v. 49.

[8] This is not a mere zeugma, but is derived from the
supposition that sight was the chief of the senses, and in
a manner included the rest. (Cf. Plato Tim. p. 533, C. D.)
See the examples adduced by the commentators. Schrader on
Musaeus 5, and Boyes, Illustrations to Sept. c. Th. 98.
Shakespeare has burlesqued this idea in his exquisite
buffoonery, Midsummer Night's Dream, Act v. sc. 1.

_Pyramus._ I see a voice: now will I to the chink,
To spy an I can hear my Thisby's face.

[9] Claudian de rapt. Pros. II. 363. "Stellantes nox picta
sinus." See on Soph. Trach. 94.

[10] _I.e._, having no rest. Soph. OEd. Col. 19. [Greek:
kola kampson toud' ep' axestou petrou].

[11] The difficulties of this passage have been increased
by no one of the commentators perceiving the evident
opposition between [Greek: Theoi] and [Greek: Zeus]. As in
the formula [Greek: o Zeu kai Theoi] (cf. Plato Protag.
p. 193, E.; Aristoph. Plut. I. with Bergler's note; Julian
Caes. p. 51, 59, 76; Dionys. Hal. A. R. II. p. 80, 32-81,
20, ed. Sylb.) so, from the time of Homer downward, we
find [Greek: Zeus] constantly mentioned apart from the
other gods (cf. Il. I. 423, 494), and so also with his
epithet [Greek: pater], as in v. 4, 17, 20, etc.
(Eustath, on Il. T. I., p. 111, 30, [Greek: hoti Zeus
allachou men haplos pater elechthe]). There is evidently,
therefore, the opposition expressed in the text: "'Tis not
for the other gods (_i.e._ [Greek: tois allois theois]) to
rule, but for Jove alone." This view was approved, but not
confirmed, by Paley.

[12] See Dindorf.

[13] Paley well observes that there is no objection to
this interpretation, for if Prometheus could endure the
daily gnawing of his entrails by the vulture, the rivets
wouldn't put him to much trouble. Lucian, Sec. 6, is content
with fastening his hands to the