35 μακρὰ δισκήσαις ἀκοντίσσαιμι τοσοῦθ ̓, ὅσον ὀργὴν Ξεινοκράτης ὑπὲρ ἀνθρώπων γλυκεῖαν ἔσχεν. αἰδοῖος μὲν ἦν ἀστοῖς ὁμιλεῖν, Αντ. γ'. ἱπποτροφίας τε νομίζων ἐν Πανελλάνων νόμῳ 55 καὶ θεῶν δαῖτας προσέπτυκτο πάσας· οὐδέ ποτε ξενίαν 40 οὖρος ἐμπνεύσαις ὑπέστειλ ̓ ἱστίον ἀμφὶ τράπεζαν· 60 35. Dissen thinks that the hurling of the discus only is meant, Quare ἀκοντίσσαιμι im proprie dictum;' Donaldson on the contrary says that ‘δισκήσαις is used in the primitive sense of δίσκος from δικεῖν. The latter view is manifestly the best ; δισκήσαις = ῥίψαις, Pyth. Ι. 45, where, and Nem. VII. 71, the same metaphor is found, cf. also Ol. 1. 112, supra, v. 3. The poet means 'may my praises be adequate to Xenokrates' superiority.' ὀργάν.] Cf. Pyth. I. 89, εὐανθεῖ ἐν ὀργῇ παρμένων. 36. ὑπέρ.] Cf. Nem. ix. 54. γλυκείαν.] Cf. Pyth. νι. 52, γλυκεῖα δὲ φρὴν | καὶ συμπόταισιν ὁμι λεῖν—μελισσᾶν ἀμείβεται τρητὸν πόvov-of Thrasybulos himself. Dissen quotes Solon, Frag. 13 [4], (δότε) εἶναι δὲ γλυκὺν ὧδε φίλοις ἐχθροῖσι δὲ πικρόν, | τοῖς μὲν αἰδοῖον, τοῖσι δὲ δεινὸν ἰδεῖν. For the inf. cf. Madv. § 150 a, Ol. vII. 26. 37. αἰδοῖος.] 'Loved and revered.' According to Mezger it is the correlative of ἀναιδής, ὑβριστής. For such correlation cf. Johann. Damasc. quoted by Bergk at the end of Phocylides, Αἰδώς τοι ξυνετοίσιν ἐπὶ βλεφάροισι κάθηται, | ὕβρις δ ̓ ἀξυνέτοισι· σοφὸς δέ κε τοῦτο δαείη. Solon however gives us the passive sense of αἰδοῖos in opposing it to δεινός. Now to his associates a bully is δεινός, is hated and dreaded, while a truly gracious, courteous character inspires affec tion and respect. We must render ὁμιλεῖν, ' in their converse with him.' Cf. Pyth. vi. 53, where the same kind of infinitive is rendered differently but similarly explained. 38. ἱπποτροφίας] The plural is probably distributive, 'divers kinds of horse-breeding.' τε.] For re after μὲν cf. O1. ιν. 15, Nem. II. 9, VIII. 30. The formula couples two ideas without adversative force, but draws special attention to the first; it may be rendered, 'Indeed...and besides.' νομίζων.] ‘Practising. Cf. Aesch. Choëph. 989 [P.], ξένων ἀπαιόλημα κἀργυροστερῆ | βίον νομίζων. ἐν.] According to.' Cf. Pyth. I. 62, IV. 59, Nem. x. 28, Dem. § 496 end. Πανελλάνων νόμῳ.] Cf. Eur. Suppl. 526, τον Πανελλήνων νόμον | σώζων, Isth. III. 47. In the manner of all Greeks who assemble for the great games. 39. δαΐτας.] Mss. and Edd. princ. διαίτας. For the idea cf. Ol. III. Introd. προσέπτυκτο.] • Used to cherish ;' lit.had folded to his bosom.' οὐδέ ποτε.] Nor did the wafting wind which blew around his hospitable table ever induce him to furl his sail.' Cf. on Pyth. I. 91, where this explanation was, I believe, first given, my note being in print when Mr Wratislaw commented on the passage before the Cambridge Philological Society; similarly Mezger. ἀλλ ̓ ἐπέρα ποτὶ μὲν Φᾶσιν θερείαις, ἐν δὲ χειμῶνι πλέων Νείλου πρὸς ἀκτάν. Ἐπ. γ'. μή νυν, ὅτι φθονεραὶ θνατῶν φρένας ἀμφικρέμανται ἐλπίδες, μήτ ̓ ἀρετάν ποτε σιγάτω πατρῴαν, 45 μηδὲ τούσδ ̓ ὕμνους· ἐπεί τοι οὐκ ἐλινύσοντας αὐτοὺς εἰργασάμαν. ταῦτα, Νικάσιππ ̓, ἀπόνειμον, ὅταν ξεῖνον ἐμὸν ἠθαῖον ἔλθῃς. 41. Cf. Eur. Androm. 650, ἣν χρῆν σ ̓ ἐλαύνειν τήνδ ̓ ὑπὲρ Νείλου ῥοὰς | ὑπέρ τε Φᾶσιν.. The Phasis, the Nile, and the Pillars of Herakles were the extreme limits of Hellenic (ordinary) navigation. The last had been used metaphorically in praise of Théron, Ol. III. 44, and could hardly be used again for Xenokrates. Note the chiasmus. θερείαις,] Sc. ὥραις. 43. ὅτι, κ.τ.λ.] Because envious expectations beset men's minds.' Cf. Ol. VII. 24, 25, ἀμφὶ δ ̓ ἀνθρώπων φρασὶν ἀμπλακίαι | ἀναρίθμητοι κρέμανται. Dissen says the metaphor is from nets. The poet means that the democratic party were anxious for the Emmenidae to fall into oblivion. See Introduction. 65 44. σιγάτω.] The address to Nikasippos begins at v. 43, so that Thrasybulos is the subject. 45. μηδέ.] Cf. οὔτε...οὐδέ, Pyth. VIII. 75, neither...nor indeed.' ὕμνους.] This ode and probably the skolion, of which Athenaeos has preserved a fragment, Frag. 101 [89]. 46. Cf. Nem. v. 1. 47. Νικάσιππ'.] The transmitter of the odes to Sicily; cf. Ol. VI. 85, 86, O. and P. pp. XXVIII, ΧΧΙΧ. ἀπόνειμον.] • Impart. The Schol. wrongly interprets by ἀνάγνωθι, quoting the 'Αχαίων σύλλογος of Sophokles, σὺ δ ̓ ἐν θρόνοισι γραμμάτων πτυχὰς ἔχων | ἀπόνειμον. 48. ἠθαῖον.] Doric for ἠθεῖον. See L. and S. ISTHMIA III. [III. IV.] ON THE VICTORY OF MELISSOS OF THEBES IN THE PANKRATION. INTRODUCTION. IN the MSS. and in editions earlier than Böckh's the third Isthmian ode consisted of only one strophic system, ending at v. 19 (30), the rest being the fourth Isthmian. The identity of subject and rhythm, the connexion of thought in the two portions, the obvious incompleteness of the first portion and the abrupt and unique character of the supposed beginning of the old fourth Isthmian amply justify Hermann in proposing, and Böckh in adopting, the union of the five systems into one ode; but I think that originally there were six systems, of which the second has been lost (see note on v. 19). Melissos, one of the noble and wealthy Kleônymidae of Thebes, probably gained this victory in the spring of B.C. 478, in the year after the Battle of Plataea (vv. 34-36). The mention of Hêrakles' conquest of Antaeos and his clearance of the sea possibly glances at the Hellênic victory over the Bápßapot. The ode was probably recited at a meeting of the clan in a temple or before an altar. The rhythm is Dorian. vv. ANALYSIS. 1-3. One who enjoys good fortune in a moderate spirit is praiseworthy. 4-6. Zeus, the source of good capacities, makes the prosperity of the devout more lasting. 7, 8. The man of prowess must receive a meed of praise and song. 9-12. Melissos has gained two prizes, this at Isthmos and one at Nemea. 12-17. His merits are hereditary, as his noble and wealthy ancestors competed eagerly in chariot-races. F. II. 10 19-23. By favour of the god Melissos' victory gives the poet ample opportunity for praise of his prosperous family. But the breeze of mortal destiny varies and shifts. Praises of the prosperous Kleônymidae : 23, 24. 25-33. 36, 37. But now the winter of their sorrow gives way to the spring of success. 37-42. Poseidon, their neighbour, and the patron of the Isthmian games, has roused from slumber their ancient fame. Their former achievements. 43-47. 48. For they were averse to the obscurity of the unenterprising. 49-53. But in contests the issue is doubtful. Craft gets the better of sterling worth. 53, 54. Such was the case with Aias whom the Greeks drove to suicide. 55-57. But Homer made him famous everywhere for ever. 58-60. For good poetry is immortal, and universal as light. 61-63. May the Muses grant me to kindle such a beacon-flame for Melissos: 63-69. Who is brave and cunning, though of insignificant physique ; 70-73. As was Herakles compared with Antaeos; 73–78. Hêrakles, who after a glorious career dwells with the gods in bliss. 79-86. In his honour the Thebans celebrate yearly funeral sacrifices and games to his eight sons. 87-end. At which games Melissos, thanks to his trainer Orseas, won three victories. Mezger sums up the fundamental ideas of the poem as follows. "Melissos and his clan should be highly praised because they are fortunate both in wealth and in victory, and yet keep their pride within bounds. For though they like all mortals are not exempt from vicissitude and have to endure much sorrow, yet still in the victory of Melissos and the consequent reawakening of the fame and the poetic praises of the clan a fresh spring has brought back what the winter had taken." He tells us that Perthes rightly says that the myth of Aias refers to the unsuccessful efforts of the Kleônymidae to win victories, while Melissos in his success resembles Hêrakles. No doubt the uncertainty of human affairs is one of the main strands in the thread of song, but another conspicuous strand is the power of song to reward merit (vv. 7, 8; 19-21; 27-29; 39, 40; 44, 45, 55—63; 90). One difficulty with respect to the interpretation of the ode is that vv. 37–45 quite ignore the victory of Melissos in the chariot race at Nemea and (which is less important) the three victories mentioned at the end of the ode. This difficulty is solved by the assumption that this Isthmian victory was the first success which had been specially celebrated by a poet. If he won at the Nemea just before the battle of Plataea the disturbed state of affairs at Thebes would quite account for there not having been an ode. Another difficulty is the suggested disparagement of réxva (v. 53), though the victor is represented vv. 65, 66 to have won by réxva. But in the latter passage the word used is not réxva but μñtis, and so in v. 53 we must take réxva to be coloured by xeɩpóvwv and to be used in a bad sense as in Pyth. 11. 32. Thus the poet makes a general insinuation that the clan had been deprived of their full share of honours in the great games by dishonest or dishonourable means. It is however possible that the success of Melissos was unpopular, and that though crowned he was not honoured (vv. 3, 55, 77). So that as far as honour went he himself was like Aias. V. 66 is decidedly apologetic. The word réxva would cover nice objections lodged against his manner of conducting the struggle. A third strand is the ascription of worth, fame and happiness to the gods (vv. 4-6; 19, 23; 33; 37—41; 61; 76—78). We may accept the poet's own criticism of this ode. He calls it, ν. 39, τόνδε θαυμαστὸν ὕμνον. Στρ. α'. Εἴ τις ἀνδρῶν εὐτυχήσαις ἢ σὺν εὐδόξοις ἀέθλοις 1. avv.] The construction with this preposition is half-way between that of Pyth. 1. 38, σùv (merely in connection with') evφώνοις θαλίαις ὀνυμαστάν, and of Nem. x. 48, 'by means of.' Of course the preposition is to be taken with εὐτυχήσαις. For εὐτυ xéw, in connection with games, cf. Nem. I. 10. evdóçois.] 'Glorious' rather than 'glorifying,' cf. Pyth. vi. 16, þá. |