Page images
PDF
EPUB

πολλὰ μὲν ἐν κονίᾳ χέρσῳ, τὰ δὲ γείτονι πόντῳ φά

σομαι.

[ocr errors]

43. Cf. Ο. XII. 6, πόλλ' ἄνω. τὰ δ ̓ αὖ κάτω. Render, And his honours won at other times, many mid the dry land's dust, others again on the neighbouring sea, will I proclaim.' The idea to be supplied with the neut. plur. pron. must surely be suggested by κλéos ἀνθῆσαι (υ. 39), δέδορκεν τοῦτο φέγ yos (vv. 41, 42). Dissen understands πραχθέντα οι πραχθῆναι and compares Aristoph. Ran. 281, as οὗτος ὁ τόπος ἐστίν, οὗ τὰ θηρία τὰ δείν ̓ ἔφασκ ̓ ἐκεῖνος, where an infinitive verb is obviously suppressed, or at least a participle. But I venture to say páσouai can take an accusative like κεῖνα κεῖνος ἂν εἴποι ἔργα, Ο1. νιιι. 62, μήδ' ἀγῶνα φέρτερον αὐτ δάσομεν, ΟΙ. I. 7, τὰ δ' αὐτὸς * ἄν τι* τύχῃ, ἔλπεταί τις ἕκαστος ἐξοχώ τατα φάσθαι, Nem. IV. 91.

Kovia.] L. and S. gives this as an adj. under κóvios, a subs. under Xépoos. I prefer the latter view.

γείτονι πόντῳ.] The sea of Cumae. For the battle cf. Pyth. I. 71-75.

pároua.] Pindar also uses the middle forms φάτο, φάσθαι, which may in all five instances be well rendered in the second and more definite sense of pnui, to affirm, declare, &c.' (Don.). He uses paμévw, Isth. v. 49, of the utterance of a wish. This pároμaι then has a different shade of meaning from pάow, and has no proper connection with the following theory which Don. propounds in this place. Pindar uses a middle form for the future of active verbs signifying "to utter a sound;" as audáσομαι ἐνόρκιον λόγον, “I will solemnly swear," Ol. II. 92: keλadŋσόμεθα βροντάν, “we will sing of the thunder," Ol. XI. 79: кwμáo oμaι, "I will raise the comus-song," P.

[ocr errors]

IX. 89: and here pároμaι, "I will affirm." In all these cases of future assertions he uses the middle form of this tense, for the reason which I have given in the passages above referred to-namely, because when we speak of something which will make an impression upon our senses or feelings, or, in general, befall us, as future, we consider ourselves as merely the object of these outward impressions or accidents; but when we speak of their present effect we consider ourselves as an agent or inchoative in respect to them. If, however, we use the future in a deliberate or prohibitory sense, the idea of agency is not lost; and thus we find that Pindar not merely writes avdáσoμaι, "I will speak" (Ol. II. 92), but also uǹ avdάooμev, “let us not speak" (Ol. 1. 7); and not only кwμáσoμaι, "I will raise the comussong (P. IX. 89), but also κwμάσoμev, "let us sing the comus-song (supra, v. 1). Similarly, although Bonooμal is the regular Attic future of Boáw, we have in Aeschyl. Pers. 640: παντάλαν' ἄχη διαβοάσω ; “am I to go on proclaiming my woes?" Now avdáσouai, Ol. 11. 92, is distinctly reflexive, as the utterance of an oath binds the utterer. Keλaδήσομεθα is neutralized by κελαSnow, Ol. x. [xI.] 14. Don. should refer κωμάσομαι to his κωμάζομαι, Isth. III. 90. This mid. is used causatively, 'I cause to be celebrated in (or 'by') a kômos,' only used in the first person sing. in reference to the poet. Cf. also Nem. II. 12, 27, vI. 26. Perhaps кeλad., Ol. xi. 79, is causative. Thus there is no instance in Pindar to which Dr Donaldson's ingenious explanation of middle futures to active verbs will fairly apply.

[ocr errors]

ἐκ πόνων δ ̓, οἳ σὺν νεότατι γένωνται σύν τε δίκα, τελέθει πρὸς γῆρας αἰῶν ἁμέρα.

45 ἴστω λαχὼν πρὸς δαιμόνων θαυμαστὸν ὄλβον.

105

Στρ. ύ.

εἰ γὰρ ἅμα κτεάνοις πολλοῖς ἐπίδοξον ἄρηται IIO κῦδος, οὐκέτ ̓ ἔστι πόρσω θνατὸν ἔτι σκοπιᾶς ἄλλας ἐφάψασθαι ποδοῖν.

ἡσυχία δὲ φιλεῖ μὲν συμπόσιον· νεοθαλὴς δ' αὔξε

[blocks in formation]

ἀργυρέαισι δὲ νωμάτω φιάλαισι βιατὰν ἀμπέλου παῖδ ̓, ἅς ποθ ̓ ἵπποι κτησάμεναι Χρομίῳ πέμψαν θεμιπλέκτοις ἅμα

[blocks in formation]

οἳ γένωνται.] See Goodwin, § 63. νεότατι.] The classical youth includes our middle age. Pindar speaks, Pyth. II. 63, of Hiero's νεότας in connection with the battle of Himera (B.C. 480) and yet of his βουλαὶ πρεσβύτεραι, though the date of the ode is B. c. 477.

ἁμέρα.] For αἰών fem. cf. Pyth. IV. 186.

45. ἴστω λαχών.] Cf. Ol. ν. 8, Nem. xi. 15, Isth. 1. 68, vi. 27.

46. For sentiment cf. Pyth. 1. 99, Nem. I. 32, Isth. I. 50.

47. For metaphor cf. Ol. 1. 115, Nem. I. 25, VIII. 36, Isth. IV. 23. For ἔτι cf. Eur. Med. 1077.

6

48. αὔξεται.] Cf. Pyth. x. 10. Render, a victor's honour (the status of a νικηφόρος) putteth forth fresh blossoms by aid of soothing minstrelsy.' For metaphor cf. Nem. VIII. 40.

50. ἐγκιρνάτω μιν.] For constr.

125

ef. ἐγχεῖν κρητῆρα, Soph. Frag. 149, • To mix into the cup = to pour in and mix. Cf. Isth. iv. 25.

προφάταν.] The bowl is the interpreter of the κŵμоs because it adds vigour to the performers and stimulates the faculties of the audience, raising both nearer to the level of the poet's inspired genius. It would appear that another ode was to be sung at or after the feast. The Schol. indicates a variant προηγητήν, which does not scan.

51. Cf. Nem. x. 43. Silver cups were also prizes at Marathôn, cf. Ο1. Ιx. 90. Probably the wreath was universally given as a symbol of victory in games.

52. ἀμπέλου παῖδ'.] ‘The masterful child of the vine.' Conversely (Aesch. Persae, 616), ἀκήρατόν τε μητρὸς ἀγρίας ἄπο | ποτόν, παλαιᾶς ἀμπέλου γάνος τόδε. In the Schol. the quotation from Nem. v. 6, ματέρ' οἰνάνθας οπώραν is misplaced and put under v. 48. It appears

Λατοΐδα στεφάνοις ἐκ τᾶς ἱερᾶς Σικυῶνος. Ζεῦ πάτερ, εὔχομαι ταύταν ἀρετὴν κελαδῆσαι σὺν Χαρίτεσσιν, ὑπὲρ πολλῶν τε τιμαλφεῖν λόγοις 130

55 νίκαν, ἀκοντίζων σκοποῖ ̓ ἄγχιστα Μοισᾶν.

that Chromios did not himself attend these games.

θεμιπλέκτοις.] prefer the interpretation of one Schol. νομίμως καὶ καθηκόντως πεπλεγμένους, ‘twined with due ceremonial' to 'fairlytwined,' 'twined in justice to him,' i.e. 'fairly won.' For crowns won by horses cf. Ol. 11. 50, vi. 26, Pyth. III. 73, 74. But the plural is used for the victor's crown for a single victory, e. g. Isth. III. 11.

53. iepas.] The Schol. refers this epithet to the partition of the victims between gods and men at Mêkônê close to Sikyôn. Cf. Hes. Theog. 535, but the fact of Pythian games being held there is perhaps sufficient ground for the attribute.

54. euxouai.] 'I pray.' Paley 'I flatter myself.'

[ocr errors]

ápeтáv.] Glory (in games);' cf. Isth. I. 41, IV. 17.

σὺν Χαρίτεσσιν.] For the association of the Graces with Epinikian poetry and with Pythia cf. Pyth.

VI. 2, Nem. x. 1. For -σai our cf. Isth. III. 17.

ὑπὲρ πολλῶν, κ.τ.λ.] ‘And that more than many (bards) I may make victory of great account by my verses. Notice the aorist κελαδήσal referring the poet's celebration of the particular achievement, the present τιμαλφεῖν referring to his general habit. For inf. cf. Goodw. § 23, 2 note 2. A Schol. gives an unhappy v. ι. πολλᾶν...νικᾶν which Christ gives as his own emendation. For vnèρ πоλλŵv cf. Isth. II. 36.

55. ἀκοντίζων.] For the hurling of the javelin, one of the contests of the quinquertium, cf. Ol. xiii. 93, Pyth. 1. 44. For the metaphor cf. Ol. 1. 112.

σκοποί.] Mss. give σκοποῦ, but cf. Pyth. xI. 41 (where I find Christ had anticipated my suggestion of μισθοῖο), ΟΙ. ΧΙΙΙ. 35, πατρὸς δὲ Θεσσάλοι ̓ ἐπ ̓ Αλφέου ῥεέθροισιν αἴγλα ποδῶν ἀνάκειται, Isth. I. 16.

[ NEMEA X. ]

ON TWO VICTORIES OF THEIAEOS OF ARGOS IN THE WRESTLING MATCH (IN THE HEKATOMBAEA AT ARGOS).

INTRODUCTION.

THIS fine ode is proved by vv. 22, 23 and the thrice-repeated mention of Hêra to be composed for an anniversary of the Hekatombaea at Argos, in which Theiaeos son of Ulias of Argos had won the wrestling match twice. He had also won thrice at Nemea, thrice at the Isthmos, once at Pythô, but not yet at Olympia. Dissen argues from Amphitryôn being called an Argive that the date falls after the destruction of Mykênae by the Argives, Kleônaeans and Tegeaeans B. C. 468; he also fixes the later limit, B.C. 458, by the consideration that Argos joined in an invasion of Boeôtia in that year, after which Pindar would hardly compose an ode for an Argive.

It is probable from vv. 29-36 that an Olympian contest was at hand, that is that the date was either B.C. 464 or 460, as Mykênae was probably not taken till late in the year and the poet would hardly be likely to transfer the myths of Mykênae to Argos immediately after the destruction of the former. For such transference in the Tragedians cf. Aesch. Ag. 24, Porson on Eur. Heracl. 188 (Elmsley and Barnes). The confusion was made easy by the larger meaning of Argos = Argolis (see on v. 42).

As one of the victor's ancestors claimed intimate connexion, as their host, with the Dioskuroi (vv. 49, 50), and as these deities were patrons of athletic games, and as the poet has given the most beautiful episode of their legend, we need not suppose that the myth

has reference to the victor any more than is the case with the allusion at the end of Pyth. XI. Perhaps from the relation of the favour with which Zeus entertained Polydeukês' entreaty, Theiaeos might deduce encouragement as to the result of his own prayer v. 30; but I think Mezger refines a little too much in suggesting that the implication is that the Dioskuroi will intercede without stint for the mortal Theiaeos, even as Polydeukês gave up half his life as a god in intercession for his mortal brother Kastôr. The poet may possibly imply that as a friend of the Dioskuroi he has a second claim on the favour of Zeus, who is introduced in three important passages, vv. 11 ff., 29 ff., 75—end. The myth may incidentally contain a veiled allusion to the struggle between Sparta and the Helôts in Messênia which began B.C. 664 and lasted beyond B.C. 460. Leopold Schmidt considers that the myth inculcates the trustworthiness and good faith of the breed of gods (vv. 54; 78, 79); but the trustiness of the latter passage is that of a mortal comrade, and there is little analogy between Polydeukês' self-sacrifice for his brother and his good faith as a divine patron.

I think that either παῦροι δ ̓ ἐν πόνῳ πιστοὶ βροτῶν refers back rather to the general sense than the particular application of ev TOTÒν yévos, and is in fact almost a false echo, or else that the recurrence of TOTо- is a mere coincidence. It should be observed that Polydeukês distinctly avows a selfish grief at the loss of his brother, which is most pathetic and appropriate in a presentment of deep affection, but which would tend to mar an illustration of disinterested good faith. Mezger points out that vv. 37 f. form the middle point of the ode, referring the victories of the family to the Graces, who are invoked v. 1, and the Tyndaridae, who form the subject of the close of the ode.

Polydeukês is vividly presented as the ideal exemplar of brotherly love, and it is hard to believe that the poet wished a beautiful picture to be blurred by any occult references to Theiaeos. Dissen sees that the exaltation of Polydeukês' brotherly love is the point of the myth, but gratuitously proceeds to infer that Theiaeos' unselfish brotherly love is indirectly celebrated. The poet implies, v. 54, that he is just; but beyond that no indication of his character can be traced.

The rhythm is Dôrian with a few Lydian measures.

« PreviousContinue »