Mother Jocasta asks son Polyneikes after a long absence what she wants to learn first about his life. What does he say about exile? Is it such a bad thing? Here is Francesco Filelfo's interpretation of this (and here is more context for Filelfo's project), the dialogue in Filelfo's Latin text of this part of his excerpt from Euripides. This is followed by the last two lines of the section from Euripides, with barest translation.
Joc. Tandem rogo te scire quod primum velim: quid exilium ais, nate? Num magnum malum?
Pol. Quammaximum, maiusque re quam oris sono.
Joc. Quonam modo? Quae est exulibus acerbitas?
Pol. Quo durius nihil est, oportet exulem demittat ipse se, nec audeat loqui.
Joc. Servile puto nequire quod sentis loqui.
Pol. Ineptiasque principum ferat, est opus.
Joc. Et hoc grave est, aliorum ut ullus particeps amentiae fiat.
Pol. Lucrique gratia servire cogitur.
Joc. Sed, ut dici solet, spes exules pascunt.
Pol. At hae pulchris quidem luminibus aspiciunt, nimis at amant moras.
αἱ δ᾽ ἐλπίδες βόσκουσι φυγάδας, ὡς λόγος.
But hopes nourish exiles, so it's said.
καλοῖς βλέπουσαί γ᾽ ὄμμασιν, μέλλουσι δέ.
In the text from Filelfo, Jocasta says, "ut dici solet", - as it is said, - [that] "spes exules pascunt"- hope nourishes exiles.
And Polyneikes replies, 'looking on these things of beauty, with eyes, but loving too much delays'.
Here the idea has been stretched a bit. As prior in that section, Filelfo closely follows the Greek of Euripides, but this last line in Filelfo introduces the subtly different idea that instead, hope inclines us to a more ambiguous future, 'loving delays' rather than more certain, expected, or intended outcomes.
That is not found in Euripides' Greek. First, because hope, 'spes' in Latin, is a feminine noun, the next line in Polyneikes reply, in Filelfo, makes 'these things' - "hae pulchris" - in reference to hope's products also feminine. These 'things of hope' which 'see with eyes, lights', may also simply be with looks or glances. They may also be the exiles themselves that see.
These things for Euripides, indeed, what see the beautiful things, are the eyes, and as intended. This line has an aphoristic quality, like an idea that is plain for anyone. For Filelfo however, hopes long after delays, not more directly, 'as they play out' or, 'as intended' in Euripides. But, the Greeks had a more permanent sense of fate, the 'will of the gods' that goes along well with the notion of 'what was intended'.
The equation seems the same in both at first. The hope nourishes exiles who sees beauty with eyes that see. But in Euripides that's as it should be, and with Filelfo, the delays are too much. The difference in sense, seems to be between hopes as intended - 'μέλλουσι δέ', and, hopes delayed - how Filelfo has Jocasta answer in a question about the god's vanity with 'longa'.
This subtle difference continues in comparing Filelfo with Euripides through this tight, back-and-forth dialogue between mother and son. But the expected, intended certainy which lies in the greek expression rather than the latin, as Filelfo altered it (for his character of Palla Strozzi and) for his fifteenth-century Italian audience, also leads to more further, and different, constructions. My wooden barest translations barely scratch the surface. Can you do better?
Joc. Neque longa vanas indicat dies eas?
οὐδ᾽ ὁ χρόνος αὐτὰς διεσάφησ᾽ οὔσας κενάς;
Doesn't time show these godly things as being empty?
ἔχουσιν Ἀφροδίτην τιν᾽ ἡδεῖαν κακῶν.
They do keep at enjoying any delight badly.
Joc. Verum unde quaerebus cibum ante nuptias?
πόθεν δ᾽ ἐβόσκου, πρὶν γάμοις εὑρεῖν βίον;
And how did you prosper before you found life with marriage?
Pol. Modum diurnum habui, modo carui miser.
ποτὲ μὲν ἐπ᾽ ἦμαρ εἶχον, εἶτ᾽ οὐκ εἶχον ἄν.
I kept a daily practice, and also if I might not keep it.
Joc. At patris amici et hospites nil proderant?
φίλοι δὲ πατρὸς καὶ ξένοι σ᾽ οὐκ ὠφέλουν;
But friends and guests of your father, didn't they help you?
Pol. Utere secundia. Nullum amicum miser habet.
εὖ πρᾶσσε: τὰ φίλων δ᾽ οὐδέν, ἤν τι δυστυχῇς.
Good on occasion: but not the things from friends, that was an unlucky thing.
Joc. Nec magnitudo sustulit generis boni?
οὐδ᾽ ηὑγένειά σ᾽ ἦρεν εἰς ὕψος μέγαν;
κακὸν τὸ μὴ ἔχειν: τὸ γένος οὐκ ἔβοσκέ με.
Joc. Patria, ut videtur, est homini amicissimum?
ἡ πατρίς, ὡς ἔοικε, φίλτατον βροτοῖς.
Pol. Amicum ut est patria, loqui nequeam quidem.
οὐδ᾽ ὀνομάσαι δύναι᾽ ἂν ὡς ἐστὶν φίλον.
__________________________________________
from Filelfo, Francesco: On Exile, Edited by Jeroen de Keyser and translated by W. Scott Blanchard, for The I Tatti Renaissance Library (ITRI); by The President and Fellows of Harvard College, USA 2013
and at the Tufts University site
