“This is an affair to be conducted not by tears, but iron, or anything you might have which can conquer iron. Sister, I am prepared to commit every sort of crime.”
…’non est lacrimis hoc’ inquit ‘agendum
sed ferro, sed si quid habes, quod vincere ferrum
possit. in omne nefas ego me, germana, paravi…’
Should be “seu si quid habes” I think. Interesting, too, that technically the meaning could be “if you have anything which iron could conquer” as well!
On the basis of your suggestion, I thought that I may have copied the text incorrectly, but I checked Tarrant’s OCT, and he records no MSS variants with “seu.” I do, however, like the suggestion, and am surprised that I didn’t find any authority for it. I imagine that the intended effect of the anaphora “sed…sed” is meant to heighten the sense of Philomela’s rage with a certain disordered syntax and haste of expression. It may also be suggested that seu would most appropriately be used to mark a set of alternative choices, but Philomela’s suggestions may be intended as amplification: “to be done with iron, AND ALSO whatever you can suggest which is stronger than iron.” This is in some ways born out by the result: Procne kills her son “with iron,” and then adds to this the monstrous crime of feeding Tereus his own son, which – in drawing miasma upon both parents, in addition to being a horrific act – can be said to supersede mere slaughter with the sword.
I will admit had not even considered the ambiguity of the phrase “quod vincere ferrum possit.” You really read this closely – thanks for the suggestions!
A pleasure. I’ve enjoyed this site for a very long time, so I’m glad my suggestion was of some interest. After re-reading the Latin, I can certainly see some point to “sed”; it was probably reading the English translation first (a dangerous practice!) that led me to think that “seu” made more sense.