Pindaric Metre: The Other Half'

P I N DA R I C M E T R E : T H E ‘OT H E R H A L F ’

This page intentionally left blank

PINDARIC METRE: THE ‘OTHER HALF’ K I I C H I RO I T S U M I

1

3

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford ox2 6dp Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dar es Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York # Kiichiro Itsumi 2009 The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2009 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Data available Typeset by SPI Publisher Services, Pondicherry, India Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by CPI Antony Rowe, Chippenham, Wiltshire ISBN 978–0–19–922961–1 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2

Preface Some understanding of metre is necessary for the full appreciation of poetry. This conviction leads the study of Greek metre in two directions. One is towards research into the smaller units, i.e. verses and phrases (cola or metra), while the other involves the interpretation of the stanza-form (i.e. strophe/antistrophe and epode) as a whole. The former raises the following questions. How should a verse be organically and logically analysed into phrases? How are the phrases related to each other? Are the phrases common in the corpus, or not? How do phrases tend to be combined to make up a verse? Finally, can classes, major or minor, be established under which all the historically related phrases can be subsumed, together with material from other poets also composed in the same tradition? The other direction of metrical study raises similar questions, but in a broader perspective. How are the verses constructed in a stanza-form? To what extent is each stanza-form unique in the corpus? Are there other similar stanza-forms, and, if so, what are they? This book aims to describe the metrical features of the twenty-two Pindaric epinikia which are not composed in dactylo-epitrite (‘the other half’). Scholars currently assume, without examination in detail, that all these epinikia are composed in a single type of metre which is often called ‘aeolic’. Instead, I hope to prove that, if all the verses are analysed in a consistent manner following objectively established rules, there are in fact two types of metre, namely aeolic and freer dactyloepitrite. This is the main theme of Part I. The discussion is statistically based on observation of all 235 verses of the eighteen ‘major’ epinikia, that is those in which the stanza-form is repeated several times (from three to twelve times), so that the colometry can be established more securely than in the four ‘minor’ odes. Various metrical phrases are classified according to the two types of metre. The various combinations of phrases create such a multiplicity of verses as to enable each ode to have its own peculiarities. Nevertheless, Pindaric epinikia are not as polymetric as the odes of tragedy. The metrical styles of the stanza-forms of the ‘other half ’ are

vi

Preface

classified into three, according to the way in which the two metres, aeolic and freer dactylo-epitrite, are knitted together. Strict definitions of the three classes, based on the observations in the preceding sections, are given in the final section of Part I. The differences in the styles of these three classes are significant in the Pindaric corpus; it is indispensable for the appreciation of each epinikion to notice to which of these three classes its strophe and epode belong. The second branch of metrical studies is pursued in Part II on the basis of this classification. This Part consists of metrical commentaries on all the non-dactylo-epitrite epinikia, both the major eighteen and the minor four. The structure of the stanza-forms are each analysed and compared. Metrical parallels are given in abundance, both for the individual verses and for the stanza-form as a whole. In general, I refrain from considering non-metrical questions, but in a few passages textual problems are also discussed, for metrical study is in part an auxiliary discipline of textual criticism. In particular, metrical understanding is essential when one has to judge whether or not exact responsion may be broken in a particular metrical position. Thus in some places responsion between long syllable and short may be admitted (as anceps), or responsion between long syllable and two shorts (as resolution or biceps). In an Appendix to this Part, the metrical features of the major fragments (most of which are paeans) and their characteristics are discussed. Part III consists of miscellaneous topics common to all the epinikia. It reveals some of the tendencies of Pindaric metre, with regard, for example, to correspondence between repetitions, or the localization of particular word-forms. Also discussed here are some of the characteristics of dactylo-epitrite metre. The germ of this work originated in the visiting fellowship granted me by St Hugh’s College, Oxford, in 1989/90. Eighteen years have passed since then. During these years St Hugh’s has given me hospitality generously on every occasion I have visited Oxford. Any outsider would agree that one could not fully appreciate Oxford, the paradise for classical scholars, without attachment to a college; but what St. Hugh’s gave me is more than that. At the initial stage, I believed in a single nature of non-D/e metre (‘aeolic’), and what I was planning to make was a kind of data-book. However, the metre seemed so nebulous as to defy any classification.

Preface

vii

The major breakthrough occurred towards the end of the twentieth century, when I realized that there were two different metres and three different classes in non-D/e epinikia. In different stages of evolution of this book very many friends not only in Japan and Britain but also over the world gave me encouragement and assistance. They are too many to mention and I beg their pardon if I skip most of their names. Dr B. K. Braswell gave me many suggestions in his enviable study at Fribourg, and also sent me a photocopy of Ho¨hl’s dissertation. Professor Douglas Gerber was the first person who accepted my idea of freer dactylo-epitrite and propagated it in his paper, giving me confidence. Mrs Margaret Howatson and Dr Patrick Finglass looked through the final draft, and saved me from all kinds of errors. It is fortunate that Dr Leofranc Holford-Strevens was my copy-editor. He scrutinized the draft, and gave me acute comments. I now feel grateful especially for my two old teachers: Professor Masaaki Kubo initiated me into the world of philology when I started learning Greek poetry, and Professor Elizabeth Craik introduced me to the worldwide scholarship by assisting me to write papers in English on metrical study. I cannot fully describe my debt to Dr Laetitia Parker. My gratitude to her is immense. She gave me more than anyone would expect in tutorial sessions. She read all my drafts word by word, corrected my English, made my idea clearer by rewriting sentences, and discussed every topic. It is absolutely true that, without her, I could not have completed this book. Last but not least I thank my wife Mutsuko. Eighteen years are so long but she has incessantly supported my work and me. Kiichiro Itsumi Tokyo, April 2008

Contents Symbols Key to Terminology Text Line-Numeration

xii xv xvii xviii

PART I . I N T RO D U C T I O N 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

The ‘Other Half ’ Scope of the Investigation Rules for Consistent Analysis Two Metres in Non-Dactylo-Epitrite Stanza-Forms Aeolic Phrases A. The basic structure 1. The second position of reversed dodrans 2. Full base 3. Half-base 4. Catalexis 5. Prolongation B. Classification by ending and frequency C. The full-base group 1. The base qx 2. The base www 3. The base wq D. The half-base group 1. Position of half-base in verse 2. Half-base ww E. The first two positions of reversed dodrans 1. Reversed dodrans starting with qx 2. Reversed dodrans starting with www F. Resolution G. Acephaly

3 8 10 21 24 24 24 25 26 26 27 30 31 32 34 34 35 36 37 38 38 39 40 42

Contents 6. Freer Dactylo-Epitrite A. Basic structure and phrases B. Acephaly C. Resolution D. Link anceps 7. Ambiguities between the Two Metres 1. Reizianum /x d x 2. Aeolic half-base ww /^ D 3. Wilamowitzianum /e w d 4. Aeolic full base wq /^ e 5. Pherecratean/rdod þ1 6. Expanded aeolic 8. Composition of Verses A. General 1. Demarcation of verses 2. Identical verses 3. Verse-length 4. Pendent and blunt endings 5. Ratio of short syllables (RSS) 6. Palindromic movement within verse 7. Repetition within verse B. Aeolic verses: pure and composite 1. Contact between two aeolic phrases 2. Dovetailing 3. Verse-by-verse and phrase-by-phrase construction 4. Aeolic phrases and d 5. Aeolic phrases and e 2 6. Aeolic phrases and e 3 7. Aeolic phrases and e 8. Aeolic phrases and ^ e C. Freer D/e verses 1. Peculiarities of D and D þ 2. Verses containing two d 3. Short anceps and d (and a special group of aeolic cola) 4. Verses with no double shorts 5. Double, triple, multiple e 6. e2 and other prolonged e

ix 44 44 46 48 52 60 60 60 61 62 63 64 70 70 70 72 73 76 77 78 80 81 81 84 85 86 88 90 91 92 92 92 94 94 96 97 98

x

Contents

7. d þ short anceps þ e 8. d þ e without intervening anceps 9. e þ d without intervening anceps 9. The Three Classes of Stanza-Forms Appendix: Modern Emendations: A Test Case (Nem. 6 str. 6–7)

99 100 101 103 111

PA RT II. THE EIGHTE EN MAJORS Introduction Olympian One Olympian Two Excursus A: Bacchylides 17 Olympian Nine Olympian Ten Olympian Thirteen (Strophe/Antistrophe vv. 1–5) Excursus B: Bacchylides 3 Pythian Two Pythian Five Pythian Six Pythian Eight Pythian Ten Pythian Eleven Nemean Two Nemean Three Nemean Four Nemean Six Nemean Seven Isthmian Seven Isthmian Eight Appendices A. The Four Minors Introduction Olympian Four Olympian Five Olympian Fourteen Pythian Seven

139 141 154 168 170 182 199 204 208 220 238 244 256 267 279 281 293 300 315 326 333 347 347 347 349 355 359 367

Contents B. Longer Fragments and ‘Prolonged Ibycean’ Introduction Paean Two Paean Four Paean Six Paean Nine (strophe only) Partheneion One Partheneion Two ‘Dactylic expansion’ revisited Hephaestion’s ‘Pindaric hendecasyllable’ (fr. 94c Sn.)

xi 371 371 373 378 384 393 396 398 399 403

PA RT III. MISCELLANEA A. B. C. D.

Normal D/e epinikia Tendency Concerning Bridge and Cut The All-but-One Rule Continuous Short Syllables Addendum: Continuous Long Syllables E. Verbal Assonance F. Concentration of brevis in longo List 1. Aeolic Phrases List 2. Freer D/e Phrases List 3. Identical Verses List 4. RSS in Ascending Order List 5. Bridge and Cut

409 426 431 434 436 438 441 443 444 446 447 449

Bibliography Index

455 459

Symbols Aeolic phrases (for their relations with each other, see Part I, 5, A and B) adon adonean ar aristophanean dod dodrans gl glyconic gl þ3 hag hagesichorean hepta heptasyllable hepta þ1 hepta þ2 hepta þ2 þ3 hepta þ3 hipp hipponactean ph pherecratean rdod reversed dodrans reiz reizianum tel telesillean tel þ3 wil wilamowitzianum wil þ1 wil þ2 wil þ3 Freer dactylo-epitrite phrases d qwwq D qwwqwwq

qwwqq qwwqwqq qwwqwq ªªqwwqwq ªªqwwqwqwqq xqwwqwqq xqwqwwq xqwqwwqq xqwqwwqwq xqwqwwqwqwqq xqwqwwqwqq ªªqwwqwqq ªªqwwqq qwqwwq xqwwqq xqwwqwq xqwwqwqwqq ªªqwqwwq ªªqwqwwqq ªªqwqwwqwq ªªqwqwwqwqq

Symbols

xiii

Dþ qwwqwwqwwq e qwq e2 qwqwq 3 qwqwqwq e 4 e qwqwqwqwq 5 e qwqwqwqwqwq 6 qwqwqwqwqwqwq e sp qq ^d wwq ^D wwqwwq þ ^D wwqwwqwwq þþ ^D wwqwwqwwqwwq ^e wq Phrases created by ‘dactylic expansion’ (see Part I, 7, (6) and Part II, Appendix B) ibyc ibycean qwwqwwqwq þ ibyc qwwqwwqwwqwq þþ ibyc qwwqwwqwwqwwqwq ibyc þþþ qwwqwwqwwqwwqwwqwq ribyc reversed ibycean qwqwwqwwq þ ribyc qwqwwqwwqwwq Phrase Names: þ n ( þ 2, þ 3) following a choriambic phrase ¼ wq ( þ 2), wqq ( þ 3); e.g. hepta þ 2 is xqwqwwqwq and wil þ 3 is ªªqwqwwqwqq. It must be remembered that hepta þ 2 or wil þ3 is a single phrase. The notation of þ n is introduced in order to avoid further confusion by inventing new names or by using ambiguous names like ‘enneasyllable’. The actual examples of þ n in the eighteen majors are almost limited to þ2 and þ3, except for one phrase of þ1. However þ 1 (q), þ4 (wqwq) etc. are occasionally employed when they are useful to illustrate the structures of hypothetical phrases.

xiv

Symbols

Verse-numbering: P5s7 ¼ the seventh verse of the strophe/antistrophe of Pythian 5. O (Olympian), P (Pythian), N (Nemean), I (Isthmian); s (strophe/antistrophe), e (epode). In the Excursus and Appendices, I also use the following: Pae (Paean), Parth (Partheneion), B (Bacchylides). r ¼ the number of repetitions of a verse within the poem. So P5s7 8r means that P5 contains a total of 8 strophes and antistrophes (4 strophic pairs), so that the verse in question occurs eight times. H (8, 16, . . . ) ¼ hiatus is attested at line(s) 8, 16, . . . Similarly, B ¼ brevis in longo is attested, and HB ¼ both hiatus and brevis in longo are simultaneously attested. Brevis in longo is abbreviated simply as brevis when its meaning is manifest, especially in the combination with hiatus, like hiatus/brevis.

Key to Terminology ‘The eighteen majors’ is the name for all the non-D/e epinikia of Pindar minus O4, O5, O14, and P7 (the four minors; I explain their exclusion in Part II, Appendix A); that is: O1, O2, O9, O10, O13s1–5, P2, P5, P6, P8, P10, P11, N2, N3, N4, N6, N7, I7, I8. All the data, statistical and descriptive alike, for Part I are collected only from the eighteen majors. ‘Stanza’ is used in its ordinary sense: each strophe or antistrophe or epode is a stanza. ‘Stanza-form’ is used for the metrical scheme common to all the stanzas of a particular form. Thus, all the strophes and antistrophes of Olympian 1 have a single ‘stanza-form’, and all the epodes another. O1s ¼ the strophes and antistrophes of O1, and O1e ¼ the epodes of that poem. There is one exception: in O13, which changes metre in mid-strophe from non-D/e to D/e, I treat the strophe/antistrophe as two stanza-forms (O13s1–5 and O13s6–8). ‘Phrase’ is used as the nearest equivalent to ‘colon’ which suits Pindaric metres. See further, Part I, 3. It covers not only an aeolic ‘colon’ like glyconic but also a much shorter unit like e (qwq). ‘Single-short movement’ means a sequence of alternating short syllable and long syllable ( . . . wqwqwqw . . . ). It may start with either short or long. Every short syllable must be short in all the repetitions, even though it may theoretically fill an anceps position. ‘Double-short movement’ means a sequence of alternating double short syllables and long syllable ( . . . wwqwwqww . . . ). It may start with either double short or long, but not with a single short. Double short cannot be contracted into one long. ‘Leftwards’ and ‘rightwards’ are used mainly with extension by single-short movement. They mean that single-short movement precedes (leftwards) or follows (rightwards) the choriambic nucleus. ‘Aeolic base’: (Part I, 5, A). From the structural point of view, aeolic phrases can be analysed as one of two basic asymmmetrical hexasyllabic phrases, i.e. dodrans or reversed dodrans, preceded by aeolic base: (‘full base’, ªª), or by single anceps (‘half-base’, x), or none (‘no base’).

xvi

Key to Terminology

‘ þ n’ and ‘zero-ending’ mean the number of positions following choriambic nucleus. Thus, e.g. glyconic has plus-2 ending; Part I, 5, A (5) and B. ‘Explicit anceps’ means an anceps position where a long syllable and a short are actually found in responsion. ‘Implicit anceps’ means that the position is proved to be anceps by the structure of the verse, but is always filled by a long syllable. ‘Bridge’ means absence of word-end at a particular place in a verse; on the other hand, ‘cut’ means occurrence of word-end. ‘Bridge’ is used in a looser, unorthodox manner in this book. People have used ‘bridge’ when word-end is avoided at a particular place in a metrical pattern where all, or most, examples show the same tendency; e.g. Maas, GM (1962), §47. My usage is simply descriptive as to whether word-end occurs or not at a particular place in any given verse. ‘Example’, when it is used in contrast with repetitions, means an occurrence of verses which have a particular form. Thus, e.g. O9s3 is an example of glyconic with the base qx and P2s2 is another, and, counted with others, it is said that there are in total 11 examples of this type of glyconics. An example is repeated several times within an ode; so, glyconic in O9s3 is repeated in four strophes and in four antistrophes. Repetition is used when we count every occurrence individually; thus there are five repetitions of qw and three repetitions of qq among the eight repetitions in O9s3. The ‘All-but-One’ rule means that exact responsion is broken only once. Breach occurs by (a) anceps (short/long), (b) resolution (resolved/unresolved), (c) bridge/cut. ‘All-but-One’ is not particularly rare. See Part III, C.

Text My method is eclectic. I start with Snell–Maehler (5th edn.) and generally follow them. At the same time, I rely on Turyn for manuscript readings and the ascription of emendations to mediaeval scholars. My line-numeration is not Snell’s but Boeckh’s; see below. As for the emendations proposed by modern scholars since Erasmus Schmid, I have been helped by Gerber’s useful collection (Emendations), although I have myself read and checked important editions and papers, such as those of Hermann, Boeckh, Schneidewin, Bergk, Mommsen, Christ, and Schroeder. The section of ‘Textual Problems’ in Part II deals with only the passages in which textual and metrical questions matters are mutually entangled. I have no ambition to solve cruces. This part of my book (in Slater’s words) ‘should not be considered as an attempt on my part to improve the text of Snell, but rather as a practical help to the reader’ to trace the history of scholarship and to reach his/her own solution on the vital question whether exact responsion should be pursued at all the repetitions or, instead, the traditional text should be accepted as it is, by introducing a metrical explanation, or licence. The first occurrence of each stanza, that is, the text of the first strophe and epode in each ode, is printed in Part II, to make the colometry easier to grasp. I have not given an apparatus, since textual problems are separately discussed.

Line-Numeration Line-numeration is, in a sense, a manifestation of an author’s colometry. Every editor seeks a rational system, but must at the same time try to avoid confusion. I follow the numeration of Boeckh’s major edition. This is not only out of piety towards the scholar who first gave the correct definition of a verse, but also for a practical reason. Snell’s edition does not always reflect Boeckh’s, in spite of its marginal notation.1 In fact he follows Schroeder (BT), whose metrical theory has not found favour. When I disagree with Snell, not to say with Schroeder, about colometry and divide his verse into two, or combine two verses into one, amendment of Snell’s numbers would add further confusion, since Snell himself occasionally uses numbers such as 28b (in O1) or 7/8 (in P6). Turyn, in contrast, faithfully adheres to Boeckh; when he adopts a different colometry, this is reflected in his numeration, as 2b, which stands between 2 and 3 when Boeckh’s 2 is divided, or 2/3 when two verses are combined into one. I follow this system, but, of course, this does not mean that I follow Turyn’s colometry. There are also important editions before Snell, which any serious readers of Pindar will have to consult. The line-numbers of these editions are various, each being different from Boeckh (and, of course, from Snell). At the same time Snell’s text has established itself as the standard; I presume most readers of my book will consult Snell–Maehler. His numeration is in current use, for example, in Slater’s Lexicon. Thus 1 Snell’s edition has to be used with care. It seems at first sight that we can use it to restore the numeration of Boeckh’s editio maior; Snell appears to have followed Boeckh’s editio maior in most odes because the notation ‘Boeckhii’ is explicitly printed in its left-hand margin in O1. When we have two numerations in O2, one of which is in parentheses, it would be a natural guess that the one in parentheses was the numeration of Boeckh’s editio maior because the one not in parentheses is indicated as ‘Boeckh.2’. In fact the notation in the left-hand margin is in a mess. O2 and N6 are exceptions. Snell (actually Schroeder) without any notice diverges from Boeckh’s numeration in six non-D/e odes (O4, O9, O10, O13, P8, N3, I8). There is even a case in which Snell becomes independent of Schroeder (I8; perhaps by a simple mistake).

Line-Numeration

xix

for convenience’s sake I occasionally add Snell’s numbering when it differs from Boeckh’s, like v. 25c (¼ v. 26 Sn.)
Øı , in I8. This device is restricted to indication of a particular passage. When the scheme of each verse is cited in Part I, Snell’s numeration is omitted. Readers are kindly requested, if they are not sure, to consult the table attached to the text in the initial section of each epinikion in Part II, where Snell’s numerations are given in parentheses.

This page intentionally left blank

Part I Introduction

This page intentionally left blank

1 . TH E ‘OT H E R H A L F ’ The metre of about one-half of Pindar’s poems is easy to grasp. The main features of dactylo-epitrite ‘can be set out in half a page’.1 More space may be needed to investigate irregularities, but the basic simplicity of dactylo-epitrite is undeniable. The other half is still in obscurity. Recent commentaries keep a cautious silence. The following passage, written forty years ago in an obituary for A. M. Dale, a scholar of the greatest insight into Greek metre, still remains valid: ‘The metres of this group [¼ the ‘other half’] used to be called ‘‘logaoedic’’ (which was almost a confession of failure to understand them) and are now more commonly called ‘‘aeolic’’, because they seem to employ phrases familiar from the verse of Sappho and Alcaeus. Yet how diVerently these phrases are used in the complex organizations of Pindar and in the simple stanzas of Aeolic lyric!’2 Since then, metrical studies have, of course, advanced. M. L. West, developing the observations of Bruno Snell, introduces what I should like to call ‘dynamic analysis’. After analysing an ode (P11) in aeolic terms, he writes: ‘This kind of analysis is necessarily of an ad hoc nature (since the metrical scheme of each poem is unique), but it is far from arbitrary. What we are trying to do in analysing these musical paragraphs is to follow a train of thought. The basic ideas are drawn from the common stock of metrical Wgures, but the poets develop and embroider them in the course of composing a strophe, producing sequences which appear bewildering when we look at them in isolation and try to Wt labels to them, but which are easily derived from what has gone before. Their etymology is more important than their deWnition.’3 He invites us to pay more attention to the process of how a new verse is generated from preceding verses and how it generates following verses than to the identiWcation of each verse. Thus we should not hesitate to call e.g.


ww
ww
a ‘mutant form’ 1

H. Lloyd-Jones, ‘Pindar’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 68 (1982), 138 (¼ GELT 57), citing P. Maas, Greek Metre, trans. H. Lloyd-Jones (Oxford, 1962), 40–1. 2 R. P. Winnington-Ingram, ‘Amy Marjorie Dale 1902–1967’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 53 (1967), 428. 3 GM 63.

4

Introduction

of glyconic when the phrase is better explained as derived from that colon. To notate it as (gl) ‘does not deWne the colon, [ . . . ] but it interprets it.’4 It follows that identical phrases may be explained in diVerent ways, depending on the metrical context. Certainly this method has merits. We need not torture a verse so as to chop it up into accepted cola nor introduce multifarious, esoteric names almost for their own sake. But at the same time it does not make clear what forms are usual and what are not. It may embrace curious forms, and we are left ignorant of the extent to which they are curious. In view of the fact that metrical study is an auxiliary discipline of textual criticism, this type of analysis may be counterproductive.5 It is generally acknowledged that the text of Pindar is less corrupt than those of dramatic poetry. However, there still remain some passages in which a textual problem entangles itself with a metrical problem: the most complicated case is N6s6–7.6 Snell, whom West follows, was not the only scholar to seek a uniWed point of view for all the other half of Pindar. Dale herself proposed a new system of metrical notation to avoid the danger of dividing a verse into cola inorganically.7 ‘If we set down a period in longs and shorts and succeed in dividing these up into ‘‘anapaestþdochmiac þ 4

GM 64; (gl) is Snell’s symbol for a phrase which is not exactly glyconic but a related form. 5 I do not wish to suggest that an interpretation of this type is useless. But each verse should be explained from its relations not only with other verses within the ode in question but also with verses outside the ode in the Pindaric corpus (and the Bacchylidean, and any other Greek poetry). The two analyses are not mutually exclusive. In fact I shall occasionally ‘follow a train of thought’ (West, GM 63) in analysing each stanzaform in Part II, although my analysis is not always the same as that of Snell–West. 6 Many eVorts have been made to restore the text and the metre. The metrical forms assumed by scholars are so diverse that proposed emendations are abundant. See Appendix. 7 Dale’s paper, ‘The Metrical Units of Greek Lyric Verse’ was published in 1950–1 (CQ 44 and ns 1) before the Wrst edition of Snell’s Pindar (1953), which had in fact been completed in 1943 (see the Praefatio). Since Dale included him in her acknowledgements, I suppose that there was some interdependence between them. Willy Theiler, too, tried to introduce a uniWed scheme for various metrical phrases and invented for them new names which were free from traditional connotation (Zeitstufen). Theiler was a colleague of Paul Maas in Ko¨nigsberg, and it was by Snell that Maas was literally rescued from the Third Reich. The metrical judgement of these three (Maas, Theiler, Snell) have something in common. They, as well as Dale, stood together against the idiosyncrasy of Schroeder, who was, in a sense, a successor of Wilamowitz. Cf. T. Gelzer, MH 53 (1996), 281–305.

The ‘Other Half’

5

reizianum’’, this is worth no more as an elucidation than to call
w
ww
w
‘‘trochaicþiambic metron’’.’8 She warns us repeatedly of the pitfalls caused by inorganic dissection. Instead, she recommends describing a verse as a whole. Her newly proposed system of description free from accustomed labels, is made up of symbols like d(
ww
) or s(
w
), which are modelled on the Maasian symbols for the D/e metre, D (
ww
ww
) or e (
w
). According to her system, for example,
w
ww
w

w
is described as sdsjs.9 Recently the system has been revived by Sicking.10 The system exempts us from controversies, sometimes futile, between diVerent colometries. However, metrical studies do not end at describing a particular phrase like sds. A phrase should at least be compared with other phrases. And even comparison inevitably entails interpretation, to say nothing of further analysis from classiWcation to poetic appreciation. Dale seems to have developed the idea of the ds system from the premise that some parts of the ‘other half ’ of Pindaric metre can and should be analysed in the same manner as D/e. That means that the concept of link anceps is indispensable for the analysis of some verses. For example, N6s6a
ww
ww


ww
rw

k

is easily analysable in D/e terms: D
d e
. This analysis is much more natural than that of Snell: ^ chodim ^ glr sp. In a sense, introduction of the concept of link anceps was a revolution in the history of metrical study. Without it, the various phrases of the D/e had been given multifarious names depending on where the intervening ancipitia were attached so that the structural simplicity of the metre was obscured.11 For example, 8

Collected Papers, 46–7. The ‘mutant glyconic’ of West (


ww
ww
, see above) would be designated either
sdd or

dd according to how it is interpreted. The ds-system is not as neutral as it sounds. 10 Sicking’s method is duly criticized by West, GGA (1994), 183–97. 11 I am not sure about West’s comment: ‘It should be appreciated that this [¼ the Maasian system] is merely a convenient method of notation, not an ‘‘etymological’’ analysis. The ‘‘link-syllable’’ is a false concept as far as the process of creation is concerned. Greek poets compose with cola and need no mortar to join them’ (GM 70). Is this not an a priori argument? 9

6

Introduction

O3s1
ww
ww


w


ww
ww
j

D
e
D

was an encomiologicum catalectic (D
e)þprosodiac dimeter catalectic (
D) according to the metrical scholia, while O3e1
w
x
w


ww
ww
j

e xe
D

was a trochaic dimeter acatalectic (e x e
)þdactylic penthemimer (D), and O3s4

w

j


e


an iambic penthemimer. However, it is a pity that Dale went on applying the idea much more widely to other metres too. She even tried to notate unequivocal aeolic verses in the same manner. If she had not ventured to analyse all Pindaric verses on a single basis, she would have anticipated what I shall call freer dactylo-epitrite. At worst, Dale’s system discards any classiWcation. Thus her idea and method can be said to have paved the way for the position which West reaches by a diVerent route thirty years later, even though Dale’s ‘sds’ looks very objective, while West’s ‘(gl)’ looks very subjective, and West continues to use the appellation ‘aeolic’ while Dale abandons it. ‘Glyconic’ and ‘sds’ are not equivalent, because ‘sds’ does not allow for the phenomenon of aeolic base. It allows only for base in the form
w. The name ‘glyconic’ does not simply trace the sequence of longs and shorts. It implicitly suggests which position may be anceps, at which position a word-end tends to fall, or to which metre the colon may be related. It represents a history from Lesbian poetry, via Anacreon, to dramatic poetry (and further), and also the accumulated knowledge of ancient and modern scholars over centuries.12 If we try to observe every Pindaric verse in detail, and try to set Pindaric metre in historical perspective, classiWcation is still indispensable. A more common colon has to be distinguished from a less common. Where there is a variant, the nature of the variation must be deWned. In other words, a traditional, ‘static’ analysis does not lose

12 As to the glyconic, I am sceptical about the views of Hephaestion and other ancient scholars. It was Hermann in 1796 (De metris poetarum Graecorum et Romanorum) who rightly discarded the ‘antispast’ and gave the correct deWnition of glyconic, starting with aeolic base.

The ‘Other Half’

7

its value. We should not prematurely give up hope that a consistent, objective colometry may be available for Pindaric metres as well as for other Greek poetry. Pindaric metre is certainly complicated, but it is not so complicated that one can conclude that any and every permutation of longs and shorts makes a metrically meaningful pattern.

8

Introduction 2 . SC OP E O F TH E I N V E ST I G AT I O N

There are 44 Pindaric epinikia, counting Isthmian 3 and 4 as a single unit (14 Olympians, 12 Pythians, 11 Nemeans, 7 Isthmians).13 Of these 23 are made up of D/e. D/e odes can be separated from non-D/e ones unambiguously. There is only one exception: Olympian 13, which changes metre midway in the strophe from non-D/e to D/e. No shift of metre is found elsewhere.14 In all the other 22 odes, O13 being counted twice, the strophes and antistrophes are completely made up of D/e from beginning to end without any trace of other metres.15 And so are their epodes. Moreover, the metrical identity is kept throughout each poem. Every triadic ode whose strophe and antistrophe are in D/e has its epode in D/e. In the D/e poems, therefore, there are a total of 44 stanza-forms (on the term, see p. xv).16 So much for the D/e odes. In the course of this study, I propose to demonstrate that the non-D/e odes fall into three classes: Class I, aeolic; Class II, freer D/e; Class III, amalgamated. For the moment, however, I treat all the non-D/e odes together. There are 22 nonD/e odes (16 triadic, 5 monostrophic, including the Wrst half of the strophe/antistrophe of O13), which produces a total of 38 stanzaforms. Of these, four ‘minor odes’, Olympians 4, 5, 14, and Pythian 7, are excluded from consideration at the Wrst stage. Since my argumentation is cumulative, relying on parallels and statistics, without frequent repetitions it is diYcult to decide whether or not a verse-end is to be recognized in a particular position. Accordingly, ‘minor odes’ are unsuitable for this study, because

13 I avoid the question whether I3 and I4 are a single poem or not. Metrically, the stanza-forms of I3 and I4 are identical. 14 There is one ode in Bacchylides which is made up both of non-D/e (the strophe) and D/e (the epode): Ode 3. But there are some similarities between its two stanzaforms. See further Part II, Excursus B. 15 Some irregularities are included in O6s5, O7e3, N8s1, N10s1; see 7. 6 below. 16 Of 23 odes made up of D/e (including O13), 21 are triadic and 2 are monostrophic (P12, N9); 2
21þ2 ¼ 44.

Scope of the Investigation

9

they are too short to establish a certain division into verses.17 For the same reason, the fragments too are excluded.18 Hereafter the name ‘the eighteen majors’ will be used, meaning O1, O2, O9, O10, O13s1–5, P2, P5, P6, P8, P10, P11, N2, N3, N4, N6, N7, I7, I8. Of these P6, N2, N4, I8 are monostrophic. Incidentally, the minor odes being excluded, each stanza-form of the eighteen majors is repeated not less than three times (the minimal cases are the epode of N6 and that of I7). 17

They consist of one triad or one strophic pair only. O5 has three triads (nevertheless the strophe and the epode are very short indeed), but its authorship is questionable. The main reason for suspicion is a note inserted in the scholia (K b KÆçØ PŒ q, although K çØ is admittedly a strange word) but its peculiar metre increases suspicion. The metre of each of these four odes will be discussed later in Part II, Appendix A. 18 The longer fragments (Paeans 2, 4, 6, 9, and Partheneia 1, 2) will be analysed in Part II, Appendix B.

10

Introduction 3. RU LES FOR CONSISTENT ANALYS IS

The strict deWnition of a verse (or period) is one of the basic principles of modern metrical studies. SigniWcantly, it was from the observation of Pindaric verses by August Boeckh that the correct deWnition of verse-end was Wrst recognized. In the sung parts of dramatic poetry, tragedy and comedy alike, verse-end is not always clear. Its manifest proof, i.e. invariable coincidence of word-endþ occasional hiatus/brevis, is not necessarily present, because the same metrical scheme occurs only twice. Pindaric metre is diVerent. Thanks to many repetitions, the beginning and the end of a verse is Wrmly established in most cases. As a result, texts of Pindar have come to be laid out in ‘verses’,19 while the texts of Attic drama tend to be laid out in ‘cola’, that is to say, more or less well-deWned metrical phrases, such as glyconic, iambic dimeter, etc. I shall generally avoid the term ‘colon’ and ‘colometry’, since cola in Pindar are often very hard to demarcate, as we have already seen in D/e. Instead, I use the term ‘phrase’, even for such familiar cola as glyconic and pherecratean. It is important to note that phrases, however short or unfamiliar, cannot be combined in deWance of verse-end in order to make a familiar colon. The total number of verses in the eighteen majors is, by my count, 235. Of course, every scholar will count slightly diVerently. Judgement will diVer in cases where hiatus/brevis is absent although wordend is coincident at all the repetitions. There are also cases which involve the emendation of the text. My calculation diVers from Boeckh’s as follows: I divide thirteen of Boeckh’s verses into two, and one verse into three; and there are 10 verses newly created by combining two of Boeckh’s into one. The shortest verses I found are P5s7a, N6s1a, and N6s4b, which are composed of only three positions (for detailed discussion of the analysis of these verses, see Part II, ad locc.):

19 I follow L. P. E. Parker, who always uses ‘verse’ instead of ‘period’. The advantages are that one avoids problems created by Dale’s ‘major’ periods and ‘minor’ periods and that the term ‘verse’ is internationally comprehensible.

Rules for Consistent Analysis

11




k (P5s7a, 8r, on the notation, see above, p. xiv) w

j (N6s1a, 6r)
w
k (N6s4b, 6r) One position longer is:
wt
k (N6s6b, 6r) which is preceded by unambiguous verse-end. Incidentally, this is the same length of the shortest D/e verse:

w
k (O7s3, 10r)20 The longest verse in the eighteen majors is N2s4 (5r, 23 positions). Its structure is simple, and naturally divided into three aeolic phrases, namely, two glyconics and one pherecratean: rw
ww
w



ww
w

x
ww

k But not all the verses are segmented in such a clear, self-evident manner. There have been controversies over diVerent analyses, and controversy needs to be eliminated as far as possible so as to advance ‘static’ analysis. The Wrst step is to recognize in a consistent manner the identical phrases that are dispersed in various stanza-forms. Consistency is required not only for the analysis of the identical form, but also for similar, structurally related forms. For instance, if
x
ww
w

ww
k

(I8s6, 7r)

is divided into
x
ww
w
j
ww
k gl d then www
ww
w

w
k

(P2e5, 4r; P11e4, 4r)

should be seen as www
ww
w
j
w
k

gl e

20 Turyn, dividing N1e1 into two verses, accepts
w
([N1e1b] 4r) as an independent verse. I am inclined to unite [e1a] and [e1b]. Metrical lengthening of  at the end of [e1a] is probable. See further Part III, A.

12

Introduction

The two verses are fundamentally in the same structure: glyconicþ choriamb (d) or cretic (e).21 Every scholar would agree with this division. Remarkably, a boundary is recognized between two (true) longs: . . . w
j
ww
. . . w
j
w


Consistency is, however, broken by both Turyn and Snell when the division creates unfamiliar cola. Turyn expels all aeolic cola longer than the glyconic (blunt ending) or hipponactean (pendent). He does not set boundaries in the same manner as the cases above between two longs in these two longer verses despite the relationship of their structures: N4s1, 12r x
x
ww
w
j
ww
k N3s7, 8r
w
w
ww
w
j
w
k

He divides thus instead: x
x
ww
j w

ww
k {dim chori Maecen}22
w
w
ww
j w

w
k {glyc do} Snell diVers from Turyn, but he is inconsistent nevertheless. Snell recognizes the similarity between N3s7 and those above:
w
j w
ww
w
j
w
k {cr ^ gl cr} but on N4s1, he agrees with Turyn: x
x
ww
j w

ww
k {^ chodim (^ chodim)} Perhaps it may be said that Snell is even more inconsistent than Turyn: Turyn has a principle at least, but Snell has none. When he does not divide N3s7 in Turyn’s fashion, it does not mean that Snell is conscious of the structure: he simply dislikes dochmiac (w

w
) in Pindar. There is an obvious inclination common to Turyn and 21 In this chapter, I shall append abbreviated names of phrases to metrical schemes. These names are given simply for the sake of convenience and will be discussed in later chapters. It is more important at the moment to understand how a verse should be divided than to classify phrases. 22 Metrical notations in { } mean that the analysis is oVered by Turyn or Snell (and accepted by West), but rejected by me.

Rules for Consistent Analysis

13

Snell: both are eager to mark out a familiar colon inside a verse, and fail to recognize the fundamental structure shared by many others. We need rules based on principles. A series of rules is indispensable for reference when a verse seems to include ambiguities and more than one analysis is conceivable. Established rules will demonstrate why Turyn’s and Snell’s analyses are not always adequate. First of all, we can and should agree not to set phrase-boundary at
j w
as Turyn and Snell occasionally do (see above). Instead, boundary should always be set between true longs even if cola of unusual lengths, or of unfamiliar forms, result before and/or after the division. This principle is the Wrst step to guaranteeing objective consistency. The same principle can also be applied to double short. We should not set phrase-boundary at
j ww
. Any length of ‘dactylic run’ (or, in other words, double-short movement),
ww
ww
[ww
ww . . . ], is an indivisible unit. On the other hand, . . .
ww

ww
. . .

must have phrase-boundary . . .
ww
j
ww
. . . 23

When double short comes back after the intervention of short or anceps, or after single-short movement, it is natural to suppose that the sequence must have division somewhere between two
ww
. For example, everyone would agree, following the principle above, that there is a phrase-boundary between two true longs in the following: . . .
ww
w
j
w
ww
. . .

When an anceps intervenes, there are, in theory, two possibilities: (i) . . .
ww
j x
ww
. . . (ii) . . .
ww
x j
ww
. . .

I suppose that the majority of scholars would prefer (i) to (ii). In fact, as will be demonstrated below, (ii) makes it possible that a catalectic phrase like a pherecratean could stand in the middle of verse, which 23

There is no pure sequence . . .


ww

ww

ww
. . . in Pindar.

14

Introduction

is contrary to the modern idea of catalexis (see below). So (i) should be accepted as a matter of principle. Thus I adopt two principles for determining phrase-boundary: a boundary should be automatically and exclusively placed: (a) between true longs; (b) before anceps Xanked by two longs (
j x
). Most boundaries, perhaps as many as 90%, can be determined in this way. Based on these two principles as well as others, the following rules are established. Rule 1. By (a), two juxtaposed
ww
with no position between them belong to separate phrases. P10e3, 4r

x
w
ww
j
ww

w
k hepta d e

This means that so-called ‘choriambic expansion’ of the type found in asclepiadic cola is excluded. Snell gives the notation ^ glc w
to P8e5, 5r

ww

ww
w
w
j

assuming it to be an expanded colon of

ww
w
w
(^ gl w
). But I divide it after

ww
:

ww
j
ww
w
w
j
d d w e Rule 2. Any length of ‘dactylic run’
ww
ww
[ww
ww . . . ] is an indivisible unit:
ww
ww
and
ww
ww
ww
are taken to be of the same nature as
ww
.24 So, where Snell and West divide P11s1, 8r (admittedly an unusual verse) thus:

w
ww
j ww
ww
w


k {^ chodim ^ gl sp} I should divide thus:

w
ww
ww
ww
w
j

k
ribyc þ þ2 sp It is an old device, going back to the Alexandrian editions, to cut a dactylic sequence so as to produce a colon of a length deemed

24 No examples longer than three consecutive double shorts are found in the eighteen majors.

Rules for Consistent Analysis

15

appropriate, starting with ww.25 However, this division is unacceptably artiWcial, especially when word-end is not found at the alleged phrase-end.26 Rule 3. A position Xanked by two long positions, or by verse-opening and a long position, is, if not short, assumed to be anceps. This means that long is never to be understood as contracted double short. For example, it is highly improbable that in the latter half of O9s6/7, 8r

www
a
ww


ww

k

the sequence
ww


ww
is dactylic, with the middle long contracted. As the context shows, the verse must be analysed as wilþreiz. A similar analysis applies to N6s6a, 6r
ww
ww


ww
rw

k D x d e x27

Rule 4a. By (a), when two long positions are juxtaposed, both being within the verse, a phrase boundary is always assumed between them. N3e2, 4r I8s6, 7r P6s5, 6r


w
ww
j
w
ww

k
a
ww
w
j
ww
k
ww
w
j
w
w
ww
j

rdod ph gl d dod wil

25 I believe that the division was not based on metrical principles; it was simply a device for lay-out. There is a possible analogy here for the divisions. Cf. L. P. E. Parker, CQ, ns 51 (2001), 48, and Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line?’. 26 The case for the colon ww
ww
w
in mid-verse rests on P2s4 and N3e4, which are exceptional; see below, 8. A. 7. The descriptions and statistics in Part I are based on the following colometries for these two verses:

N3e4 P2s4

ww
ww
w
j ww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e ww
ww
ww
w
j ww
ww
w
k (teld) tel

However, examination of expanded aeolics (Part I, 7. 6) will prove diVerent colometries to be valid: N3e4 P2s4

ww
ww
j w
ww
ww
w

w
k ww
ww
ww
j w
ww
ww
w
k

^D

w ibyc e w ibyc

^Dþ

These divisions strictly follow Rule 5. 27 Theoretically, contraction of two shorts features in anapaestic as well as dactylic, but anapaestic is a well-deWned metrical type admitting both t
t
and
t
t, and is not found in Pindar. Turyn Wnds sporadic anapaests in Pindar (this analysis goes back to Wilamowitz), but following Maas and Dale we now have clearer conceptions of metrical typology.

16

Introduction

This means that divisions which produce pherecratean (and other pendent cola) within a verse, such as
w
ww

j w
ww

k (Snell’s analysis of N3e2), are avoided. Whether or not catalectic aeolic cola are permitted in synartesis (except under special conditions such as repetition of the same colon) is controversial,28 but the clausular function of catalectic cola is not in doubt. This rule sometimes creates unfamiliar phrases, as has been illustrated above. One example is: N4s1, 12r x
x
ww
w
j
ww
k heptaþ2 d

Its Wrst phrase is one position longer than the glyconic. However, it is paralleled: P11s5, 8r

u
w
ww
w
j
w
w
k heptaþ2 e2

According to the colometry of Turyn and Snell, an aeolic colon, w

ww
, turns out after the supposed division. Besides the neglect of structural similarity (see above), the colometry has another irregularity: w
as aeolic base is always preceded by word-end in tragedy.29 As for P11s5, w

w
w
, which both Turyn and Snell analyse as baþia, is not to be favoured because the baccheus is situated in mid-verse. For parallels for
w
w
, see below. Rule 4b. The above Rule 4a also applies to two longs one of which is the initial, or the Wnal, element of a phrase in single-short rhythm:

28

e.g. Eur. Ba. 105–10  120–5 is naturally arranged thus:


ww
w


ww
w

wwwwwww


ww
w


ww
w
w

ww
w

The Wrst colon and the second are in synartesis in str. and in ant. (¨BjÆØ  ˚ıæ jø). For other examples, see Parker, ‘Catalexis’, CQ, ns 26 (1976), 14–28 (esp. 20–5; ead., Songs, 9; and cf. Stinton, ‘Pause and Period’, CQ, ns 27 (1977), 39–41 ¼ Collected Papers, 325–8. 29 See Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’, 80. In Lesbian metre, iaþgl is occasionally realized as w
w
j w

ww
w
; for example, Alcaeus 70. 10 LP.

Rules for Consistent Analysis

17

P2e5, 4r www
ww
w
j
w
k gl e x e ph O13s2, 10r a
w
j
w
ww

k O1e6a, 4r

ww
w
j
w
w
k tel e2

Turyn occasionally sets a colon boundary before the Wnal jw

w
k instead of j
w
k, like the other case discussed above: N3s7, 8r
w
w
ww
j w

w
k

{glyc do}

As I shall argue later, w

w
cannot be entirely expelled from Pindar, though it is inappropriate to call it ‘dochmiac’.30 N3s7 should be analysed as
w
w
ww
w
j
w
k wilþ2 e This is more consistent with other, structurally related forms, such as: P8s5, 10r


ww
j
a
w
ww
w
k d wilþ2

Similarly, a longer phrase,
w
w
(e2), occasionally appears at verse-end (see above, P11s5 and O1e6a). Snell expels anything that looked like a dochmiac (current convention calls this phrase ‘hypodochmiac’; Turyn simply calls it dochmiac) so that he analysed, for example, P2e3, 4r w

ww
w
j www
ww

j w
w
j {gl pher ia}

The phrase
w
w
must, however, be accepted. Pherecratean in midverse entails abandoning the established notion of catalexis (see above). Rule 5. By (b), when an anceps appears between two
ww
, phraseboundary is set immediately before the anceps. Even if anceps is not explicitly realized as anceps (in other words, even if long and short syllables are not actually found in responsion at the position in question), the position is taken as anceps; cf. Rule 3. N4s5, 12r O9s6/7, 8r N4s6, 12r


a
w
ww
j a
ww
w
k wil tel www
a
ww
j

ww

k wil reiz
a
a
ww
j w
ww

k wil reiz

Rule 6. By (b), when three positions, of which the middle one is long, appear between two
ww
, if (i) either of the outer two is evidently anceps (x
w or w
x), phrase-boundary is set immediately before 30

The phrase occurs only at the beginning of verse, and is analysed as ^ eþe.

18

Introduction

the anceps; if (ii) both the outer two positions are short and it is not possible to decide which is anceps, phrase-boundary is set immediately before the second short. (i) O9s3, 8r
a
ww
w
j u
ww

k gl reiz I7s5a, 6r


ww
w
j

ww
w
j u
w
ww
j gl tel hepta gl reiz (ii) N4s4, 12r
w
ww
w
j w
ww

k

In the eighteen majors there is no example of . . .
ww
u
u
ww
. . . with two ‘explicit’ ancipitia. The sequence of positions . . . x
x . . . is theoretically possible only in the wilamowitzianum (
x
x
ww
) and heptasyllable (x
x
ww
). But in the eighteen majors actual conWrmed examples of u
u even in these cola are scarce. To assume phrase-boundary at . . .
ww
w
j u
ww
. . .

and . . .
ww
j u
w
ww
. . .

is natural, and no problem. In the case of . . .
ww
w
w
ww
. . .

the choice between two possible positions is, in a sense, a matter of taste. I prefer . . .
ww
w
j w
ww
. . .

to . . .
ww
j w
w
ww
. . .

because I assume that glyconic with its correlatives is the standard aeolic phrase.31 Thus, N4s4 (above) is analysed as glþreiz, not as
w
ww
j w
w
ww

k rdod heptaþ1 Rule 7. In spite of Rules 5 and 6, when the phrase after the anceps is very short (
ww
or
w
), anceps is treated as a link, in the manner of D/e. 31 Actually the sequence . . . ww
w
w
ww . . . is not common. There are 4 examples, collected at 8. A. 6. (b).

Rules for Consistent Analysis

19

N3e1a, 4r
ww
jwj
ww
jaj
w
j
j dwdxex P10s4, 8r w
j
ww
jaj
ww
j
w
ww
j
w
w
k ^ e d x d rdod e2 P8s7, 10r aj
w
jaj
w
w
k x e x e2

The concept of link anceps is desirable in particular when dealing with the sequence . . . x
w
x . . . in order to avoid the suggestion of ‘iambic’ or ‘trochaic’ movement. The phrase x
ww

k remains ambiguous. It may reasonably be taken as an aeolic colon, reizianum, i.e. the catalectic form of the telesillean. At the same time, it is also possible to take it as
ww
(d) preceded and followed by link anceps. Judgement depends on the metrical context. In practice, there are limitations on the use of link anceps. It is, for example, highly signiWcant that phrases with long anceps, like

ww
,

w
,

w
w
are hardly ever preceded by an aeolic phrase. See below 8. B. 4 (x d); 5 (x e); 6 (x e2). Rule 8. A prolonged sequence in single-short movement is not divided into shorter phrases. P2s1, 8r O1s6, 8r N3s5, 8r O1e3, 4r

wwwwww
w
w
wwww
k
w
wwww
w
w
jwj
ww
j
w
w
k

w
w
wwwjwj
ww
k
w
w
jwj
ww
j
w
j

e6 e5 w d e2 x e3 w d e2 w d e

It is vital to recognize that these are sequences in which no long syllable appears between longs in any repetition of the verse. Thus it makes no sense to try to decide which of the shorts is theoretically anceps. So I notate these sequences by en, so that e3, for example, represents
w
w
w
. Cf. the treatment of sequences of doubleshort movement in Rule 2.32 These are Rules.33 Before we go on, one curious fact deserves notice. From the point of view of metrical study, it is unfortunate that the traditional order of the poems sets the Olympians Wrst, since

32 Where a sequence begins with a short syllable, the notation ^ en is theoretically possible, but it seems to me more natural to notate wen–1. See below, 6. B. 33 I Wnd that my phrasing is basically identical with that of most 19th-c. scholars before Rossbach–Westphal launched a new theory. The metrical charts attached to

20

Introduction

they include clusters of very unfamiliar verses. If we were to start, say, with the Nemeans, our impression of non-D/e might be rather diVerent. For reasons of general convenience, however, I present the poems in the traditional order. the text in the editions of Boeckh, Dissen, Schneidewin, Bergk, and Mommsen, all analyse in the same manner. For example, O1s runs:

wŒŒwwlwllx wŒwwlu wr · ŒwlŒwwlwwlwwlu Œwlwlwl lx wŒwwlwu Œwlwlwu ŒwlwrwlwlwlwŒwwlŒwlwu ŒwlwlwlwŒwwlŒwl wrwr · lwlwlwu · wlºwwl wtŒ wŒrw · lwlwu Note the ictus put on the long (or resolved long). It may be said that the long with ictus indicates the beginning of a new phrase. When the phrase starts with short, ictus falls on the following long. When the phrase starts with aeolic base, the Wrst position x , and the ictus falls on the Wrst true long in this case. of anceps is indicated as (e.g.) l Then the verses in O1s are analysed in the following manner:

wl lwwlwl lwlwwlu wr lwl lwwlwwlwwlu lwlwlwl lwlwwlwu lwlwlwu lwlwrwlwlwl wlwwl lwlwu lwlwlwl wlwwl lwl wrwrlwlwlwu wr lwl rwl wl rwlwlwu The diVerence between this and my analysis based on the Rules above, which will be given in Part II, is not essential; I take wl þ lwwlwl as one phrase (glyconic), and wlwwl as link anceps þ d. Rather, I should like to stress that the fundamental idea of Pindaric colometry had been free from arbitrariness in the 19th c. until Rossbach–Westphal introduced a false theory. Wilamowitz and Schroeder rightly denied Rossbach–Westphal’s theory but their analyses introduced another confusion as Snell and Turyn show.

Two Metres in Non-D/e Stanza-Forms

21

4 . T WO ME T R E S I N N O N - DACT Y LO - E P I T R I T E STANZA-FORMS Snell and Dale, following Maas, introduced into the study of Greek metre a much clearer and stronger conception of metrical typology. Earlier, it was usual to take these poems as polymetric. Turyn, for example, chooses labels for each constituent within a single verse from such various classes of metres that, to the generation after Snell and Dale, the analysis of a stanza looks like an assorted box of chocolates.34 Dale’s ds notation (treated above, I. 1) seeks to exclude considerations of metrical typology, and is, for that reason, comparatively uninformative. Snell seeks to analyse all the non-D/e odes as aeolic.35 But here he goes too far. His uniform aeolic analyses produce phrases for which there is no analogy in aeolic as we know it from the Lesbian poets, Anacreon, and Attic drama. Even a phrase which has no double short is included in ‘aeolic’ by Snell,36 which would, incidentally, be given by West the charming designation ‘Wlleted glyconic’.37 Moreover, because the D/e poems are metrically uniform, or very nearly so, it tends to be assumed that the non-D/e poems are also uniform. This leads to the conclusion that, since some poems are clearly in aeolic metre, all must be. According to my analyses, two types of metre are used in the nonD/e poems: aeolic and what I shall call freer D/e. Out of all the 235 verses of non-D/e odes 101 verses (43%) are freer D/e (see below, 8. A. 1). Also, these two metres can be combined in the same poem. ‘Aeolic’ is a general term for the metre whose characteristics are (1) the asymmetrical units
ww
w
and its reversed form
w
ww
34 In general, Turyn follows Wilamowitz, but improves his analyses, and takes great care to be consistent in labelling each constituent of a verse. If his analyses are looked at closely ode by ode and colon by colon, he will be found more careful than on Wrst impression. 35 To be strictly correct, both Snell and West treat the metre of O2 separately from the rest. 36 e.g. x
u
w
at P8s7 and P10s6 are given the notation (^ gl). 37 West invents the phrase for the description of P11s5: ‘at the same time the iambic part w

w
w
appears as a ‘‘Wlleted’’ glyconic, with
w
taking the place of
ww
’ (GM 63).

22

Introduction

and (2) absence of ‘link anceps’ between phrases. When an aeolic phrase is preceded or followed by e or d, it is included in ‘aeolic’ in the wider sense. If necessary, diVerent appellations, i.e. ‘pure aeolic’ and ‘composite aeolic’, are used. Freer D/e is a general term for the metres which are composed essentially of (1) the symmetrical unit(s) e (
w
), d (
ww
), and/or their enlarged forms e2 (
w
w
), D (
ww
ww
), and their acephalous counterpart (^ e, ^ d, ^ D) with/without (2) ‘link anceps’ either between phrases or at the beginning/end of the verse (its diVerences from the normal D/e will be illustrated below). There are, however, some ambiguities between aeolic phrases and freer D/e (see below, I. 7). O9s1–9 is a good example of pure aeolic: O9s1 O9s2 O9s3 O9s4 O9s5 O9s6/7 O9s8 O9s9

ww
ww
w
k u
ww
w
j
u
ww
w
w

k
a
ww
w
ju
ww

k


ww
w
j

ww

k
a
ww
w
j

ww

k www
a
ww
j

ww

k
u
ww
w
k

ww

k

tel tel glþ3 gl reiz gl reiz gl reiz wil reiz gl reiz

The phrase-by-phrase construction is clear enough. Every phrase is familiar, and the combinations are natural. The similarity with the aeolics of tragedy or comedy is obvious.38 But the aeolics of Pindar deviate from the mainstream of Greek metre in that such phrase-byphrase structure is rare. Rather, common aeolic phrases are very frequently connected by shorter phrases, especially, by e (
w
), and, to a lesser extent, by d (
ww
). This characteristic is well illustrated by P6s (I cite the whole stanza): P6s1/2 P6s3 P6s4 P6s5

wj
w
jwww
ww
w
j
w
w
ww
k www
ww
wyj
w
k ww
j
w
w
ww
k
ww
w
j
w
w
ww
j

w e gl wil gl e wil dod wil ^d

38 But it must be observed that the following two verses, s10 and s11, are not given here. O9s10 is a composite type of aeolic, illustrated in the next paragraph, and O9s11 is freer D/e. Moreover, most verses of the epode of O9 are not aeolic.

Two Metres in Non-D/e Stanza-Forms P6s6 P6s7/8 P6s9

23

www
ww
w
j
wrj
k gl e
wj
w
j


w
ww

k w e wilþ1 ^ e e2 x e w
j
w
w
juj
w
k

Note that the last verse (s9) is, unlike the preceding verses, composed exclusively of shorter, ‘symmetrical’ phrases.39 Moreover, a link anceps appears in the middle of the verse. This verse is not aeolic but freer D/e. Freer D/e is exempliWed by the following two passages: N6s4a N6s4b N6s5 N6s6a N6s6b N6s7 P5s9 P5s10 P5s11

ww
ww
ww
jrw
j
j
w
k ww
j
ww
ww
j
ww
ww
j
j
ww
jrw
j
k
wtj
k
wtj
ww
jwj
w
k wj
w
j
w
j
w
k
w
j
ww
jrw
j
w
k w
j
jtw
jwj
w
k

^Dþ

ex

e ^d

D Dxdex ex edxe

xeee edee ^e x e x e

The similarity of freer D/e to the normal D/e is obvious. However, freer D/e is diVerent from the normal D/e in some respects. They will be discussed later in I. 6, but I summarize: (i) the basic phrase of double-short movement is not D (
ww
ww
) but d (
ww
); (ii) other less common phrases are extensively used; (iii) link anceps is not used so frequently as in D/e, especially within the verse, rather phrases tend to be juxtaposed without a link between them; (iv) verses in freer D/e tend to be much shorter than those in D/e. I now examine the two types of metric in greater detail. 39 The phrase w
, which I analyse as headless e, is, of course, asymmetrical itself. It is a derivative of e.

24

Introduction 5. AEOLIC PHRASES

A. The Basic Structure Aeolic cola are characterized by the presence of one or other of two ‘asymmetrical’ phrases:
ww
w
dodrans (dod )
w
ww
reversed dodrans (rdod) Both phrases have six positions, and both have a double short and a single short Xanked by longs. The diVerence lies in the order. They are mirror images of each other. From the structural point of view, these two basic phrases, the dodrans and the reversed dodrans, can be preceded by ‘aeolic base’ (hereafter called ‘full base’, ªª), or by single anceps (‘half-base’, x).40 no base half-base full base


ww
w



w
ww


dodrans (dod )

reversed dodrans (rdod)

telesillean (tel )

heptasyllable (hepta)

x
ww
w


ªª
ww
w
glyconic (gl )

x
w
ww


ªª
w
ww


wilamowitzianum (wil)

1. The second position of reversed dodrans The second position of the reversed dodrans is shown above as short. In the mainstream of Greek metre it is anceps (
x
ww
). But in Pindaric usage the position is hardly ever realized as long. Of 63 examples which contain the reversed dodrans, counting together the reversed dodrans proper and those prolonged by half or full base, none has the second position realized as long (i.e.


ww
) consistently throughout all the repetitions. In most examples (56 phrases), a long syllable never appears and a short syllable always Wlls the anceps position. Even in the other seven, short anceps is dominant, and long anceps is often (but not always) caused by proper nouns. Apparently in 40 The historical process is not taken into account here. Rather, the glyconic is the most common of all the aeolic cola in Pindaric metre as elsewhere.

Aeolic Phrases

25

Pindar, the long anceps is an occasional licence. But it must be noted that not all the long syllables can be eliminated as exceptional. There are a few examples which undoubtedly have anceps at the position, like aeolic cola in tragedy. These defy easy emendation, and attempts to emend them metri causa should be rejected. As I shall argue later, these examples are judged to belong to stanza-forms in rigidly aeolic style (Class I). For more details, see E below.

2. Full base ‘Aeolic base’ consists of two ancipitia in Lesbian poetry. Thus the notation xx is appropriate there, and a base in this form is a distinctive characteristic of aeolic metre. But in Pindaric usage, as in Attic poetry, the base is actually occupied by the following combinations of syllables:

,
w, w
, and www.41 For a base in this form, I use the symbol ªª. There are considerable diVerences in the frequency of each form of the base. Pindar predominantly employs
w. Responsion between diVerent forms is not entirely free, being admitted only between

and
w (therefore the notation
x is applicable for the scheme for particular passages),42 but the other two forms (w
and www) correspond only with themselves, except in one or two cases. So, while the notation x
can be used for tragedy and elsewhere, it is not appropriate for Pindar.43 This peculiarity of Pindar is shared without exception by all the phrases starting with the base. For the statistical detail, see C below.

41 Some editors accept the responsion between ww
and

at N6e8. If the text there is correct, we must admit not only ww
as a variation of aeolic base quite possibly unique in Greek poetry, but also the responsion between it and

. This is outrageous. There is a notorious glyconic starting with ww
: Aristoph. Ra. 1322 (
æƺº ; t Œ; TºÆ ). Bacchylides 18 uses ww

ww
w
in the environment of glyconics. I leave provisionally the transmitted text and the responsion t
, but this does not mean that I accept it. See further, Part II, ad loc. 42 But even this responsion is, in fact, restricted to Class I stanza-forms. See below, 5. C. 43 For the responsion in tragedy (with statistics), see Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’, 67–8.

26

Introduction

3. Half-base The aeolic base can be reduced to a single anceps: ‘half-base’. It can be
, w, or ww. The last form, ww, stands in the same relationship to
or w as www at full base does to

etc. Responsion is possible between
and w, but not between ww and
or w. I use the symbol x to cover all these forms (including ww) for convenience’s sake. For the statistics, see D below.

4. Catalexis The Wnal w
of the dodrans can be changed into
; this process is called catalexis. This is an a priori deWnition of catalexis, and it implies that the Wnal position of, for example, pherecratean is not anceps but triseme (equal to three morae, T).44 The following are catalectic cola:
ww

adonean (adon) x
ww

reizianum (reiz) ªª
ww

pherecratean (ph) Catalexis is naturally not applicable to the reversed dodrans.45 Some scholars posit phrases truncated yet further; for example: ªª
ww
Incidentally, this form subsumes as one of its realizations the reversed dodrans (
w
ww
). The doubly truncated phrase can be dispensed with, so far as Pindaric examples are concerned:
w
ww
and www
ww
are the reversed dodrans, while w

ww
is acephalous e (^ e)þd.46 It is not necessary to assume 44 Cf. Parker, ‘Catalexis’, 15. Ancient metricians use the term ‘catalexis’ for mechanical amputation of the last syllable of a colon. That was a product of their conception of ‘Wnal anceps’, which is now seen to be invalid. Cf. E. Rossi, RFIC 91 (1963), 52–71. 45 Thus the latter phrase of the eupolidean dicolon

ªª
x
ww
ªª
x
w
is not the catalectic form of the former; contr. West, GM 95. 46 Whether an actual phrase
w
ww
or www
ww
should be taken (i) as the base (ªª) þ
ww
, or (ii) as reversed dodrans itself (of which the Wrst position is resolved in the latter case) is, in a sense, a purely academic problem.

Aeolic Phrases

27

the existence of still shorter phrases, since x
ww
and
ww
are freer D/e phrases (x d and d ).

5. Prolongation Just as phrases may be abbreviated (catalexis), so they may be prolonged. Prolongation is possible in both dodrans and reversed dodrans; for example, ªª
ww
w

hipponactean (hipp) is a glyconic prolonged by
. Presumably the value of this
is not triseme (nor true long) but anceps (or perhaps the long similar to the Wnal long in the dactylic hexameter), comparable with that of link anceps in D/e, in Pindaric metre. Admittedly, the hipponactean could be seen as a catalectic form of ªª
ww
w
w
, but in practice this phrase is extremely rare, and is not found with a hipponactean as clausula. The same applies to the hagesichorean. Some phrases prolonged by
have no name. This type of phrase is designated by the notation þ1, e.g. wilþ1 (see the chart below). I analyse the aristophanean
ww
w

as dodrans prolonged by
(dodþ1). The aristophanean is certainly the catalectic form of
ww
w
w
in Attic poetry, but it is not found with that function in Pindar.47 Rather, one of the two examples functions as prolonged dodrans (dodþ1): O1e7 w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k

^e

e dod ar

A more important diVerence lies in the implication: if (i) is accepted, it means that w

ww
is a correlative form of
w
ww
or www
ww
and even that responsion between them is theoretically possible. There are 5 cases of w

ww
, which do not correspond with other forms, in the eighteen majors (O1e2, P2e6, P5e5, P10s2b, P10s4). Judging from the metrical context and consistency with other related ones, it is better to take the phrase as acephalous e (^ e) þ d (i.e. a freer D/e phrase); For acephale in general, see further 6, B and for the ambiguity between aeolic full base w
and ^ e, see 7, (4). Thus I prefer (ii) to (i). 47 Even in tragedy, aristophaneans are found repeated in synaphea; see Eur. Ba. 105 V. cited in n. 28 above. Stinton supposes that link anceps occasionally occurs in aeolo-choriambics (
ww
w
x in our case); at least, he admits the diYculties about this type of colon. See Stinton, ‘Pause and Period’, esp. ‘Postscript’, 64–6 (¼ Collected Papers, 358–61).

28

Introduction Beside prolongation by
(þ1) there are longer ones like

x
w
ww
w
heptaþ2 48 ªª
ww
w
w

glþ3 (phalaecian) Outside Pindaric metre, the ending w

can be taken as bacchiac. The name ‘bacchiac’ is not neutral since it inevitably implies ‘catalectic iambic’. ‘Phalaecian’ may therefore be less tendentious than glþba. But whether the last postion is created by catalexis or not is uncertain. It may be anceps like
(þ1). I use the notation þ3 without any implication. For the same reason, the ending w
(þ2) must be diVerentiated from the spondee following an aeolic colon. In fact, we cannot always distinguish between catalexis and prolongation, although such a distinction may have been made in performance, i.e. audibly by music and visibly by dance. For example, some examples of
w
ww

could in theory be rdodþ1 (prolongation), but in practice we have no way to distinguish it from pherecratean with base in the form
w (catalexis). The most delicate case is N3e2
w
ww

w
ww

k

where it is very tempting to suppose that reversed dodrans is repeated, with the second dodrans followed by anceps. Also, the pherecratean in the apparent priapean dicolon at O1s1 may not be pherecratean, but in fact rdodþ1 (for the analysis of O1s1, see further 7. 5). On the other hand, so delicate a classiWcation risks producing too many borderline cases. So hereafter I shall treat every example as pherecratean. The same is the case with rdodþ2 (¼gl) and rdodþ3 (¼hipp).49 Below I set out all the theoretically possible forms. The forms in square brackets are the ones which can or should be analysed in diVerent ways, and * is attached to forms which do not occur in the eighteen majors. 48 This aeolic enneasyllable has been regarded as anceps plus glyconic by some scholars. This interpretation entails the unlikely supposition that there is a colon in Greek metre which starts with three ancipitia. And the so-called ‘Barrett’s scheme’ (Hippolytos, Appendix I, p. 422) is refuted by Dale, LM 153 V. 49 Although the argument is circular, I am inclined to suppose that pherecratean in Class I stanza-forms (aeolic) is really pherecratean (i.e. catalectic glyconic) but only seems to be so in Class III (amalgamated), being in fact rdodþ1. So are other related phrases. I shall come back to this problem in the Wnal chapter.

Aeolic Phrases dodrans

29 reversed dodrans

prolonged by





ww
w

aristophanean (ar)

x
ww
w



hagesichorean (hag)

w


w



[
w
ww

] [rdodþ1 ¼ ph]

x
w
ww

*heptaþ1

ªª
ww
w



ªª
w
ww



hipponactean (hipp)

wilþ1

[
ww
w
w
] [dodþ2 ¼ d w e] 50 [x
ww
w
w
] [telþ2 ¼ x d w e] [
w
ww
w
w
] *[glþ2 ¼ rdod w e] 51 [
ww
w
w

] *[dodþ3 ¼ d w e
]

[
w
ww
w
] [rdodþ2 ¼ gl]

x
w
ww
w
heptaþ2

ªª
w
ww
w
wilþ2 [
w
ww
w

] [rdodþ3 ¼ hipp]

x
ww
w
w



x
w
ww
w



telþ3

heptaþ3

glþ3 (phalaecian)

wilþ3

ªª
ww
w
w

ªª
w
ww
w

Although examples are very scarce—indeed only one, P8e7, and that a forced analysis—the following phrase (a type of dodecasyllable) is taken as a single aeolic phrase: heptaþ2þ3 x
w
ww
w
w



The enneasyllabic phrase, heptaþ2, is prolonged in the same manner as the glyconic in glþ3 by w

. Its theoretical correlative wilþ2þ3 ªª
w
ww
w
w



does not in fact occur in the eighteen majors. The metrical contexts of actual examples refute the aeolic analysis of d w e and w d w e. They are collected at 8. C. 7. 51 The analysis, rdod w e, is concordant with that of
w
ww
w
w
w
which is easily accepted as glyconic þ link anceps (w) þ e. Note that the anceps is 50

always short in these cases. Examples are collected and discussed at 8. B. 5.

30

Introduction

B. ClassiWcation by Ending and Frequency All the aeolic phrases are arranged below in a diVerent synoptic chart according to the number of positions preceded by the choriamb. In the following chart the number of occurrences is given in the rightmost column: zero ending reversed dodrans heptasyllable wilamowitzianum þ1 ending adonean reizianum pherecratean *heptaþ1 wilþ1 þ2 ending dodrans telesillean glyconic heptaþ2 wilþ2 þ3 ending aristophanean hagesichorean hipponactean heptaþ3 wilþ3


w
ww
x
w
ww
ªª
w
ww

ww

x
ww

ªª
ww

x
w
ww

ªª
w
ww



23 12 15 2 9 11 052 1


ww
w
x
ww
w
ªª
ww
w
x
w
ww
w
ªª
w
ww
w


10 29 49 3 4


ww
w

x
ww
w

ªª
ww
w

x
w
ww
w

ªª
w
ww
w



2 1 2 2 2

x
ww
w
w

ªª
ww
w
w

x
w
ww
w
w

ªª
w
ww
w
w



4 3 1 0

[þ4 ending]53 þ5 ending telþ3 glþ3 heptaþ2þ3 *wilþ2þ3

52

There are two examples outside the eighteen majors: Pae6e10, e11. There is no phrase with þ4 ending because I do not analyse phrases as aeolic that could theoretically be included in such a category. Thus
ww
w
w
in the list above I analyse as d w e, although it is equal to dodþ2. 53

Aeolic Phrases

31

There are 145 phrases with zero or þ2 ending against 40 with þ1, þ3, or þ5. At the moment we should not jump to the conclusion that blunt aeolic endings are preferred to pendent, because phrases with zero ending and phrases with þ2 can stand at the middle of the verse as well as at verse-end and, consequently, have more chance of being employed. The frequency of blunt ending will be discussed at greater length later (8. A. 4).

C. The Full-Base Group The following table consists of the same material as the table above, but in a diVerent arrangement. 11 ªª
ww

49 ªª
ww
w
2 ªª
ww
w

ªª
ww
w
w

3 15 ªª
w
ww
1 ªª
w
ww

4 ªª
w
ww
w
ªª
w
ww
w

2

pherecratean glyconic hipponactean glþ3 wilamowitzianum wilþ1 wilþ2 wilþ3

The full-base group can be further divided according to the nature of the base.
w www w



x x
tx (t
)54 total gl ph hipp glþ3 wil wilþ1 wilþ2 wilþ3

12 6 2 9

12 1 1 1

8

3 1

11 3

1

1 3

2

1

1

(1)

1

1

(1)

1 1 2 32

2 15

12

1 6

19

49 11 2 3 15 1 4 2 87

The four left-hand columns after the stub indicate the number of the phrases in which exact responsion is rigidly kept throughout all the 54 The last form in parentheses, t
, is based on a certainly corrupt text (N6e8); cf. n.41 above, but is included in the calculation.

32

Introduction

repetitions. There are in total 65 instances (32þ15þ12þ6).55 The proportion of these is remarkably high (65/87 ¼ 74.7%). In other words, the anceps does not work as its name suggests. Another characteristic is the rarity of examples of

(6 in total), compared with 31 of
w and 15 of www. It should be remembered that

is the most usual form in tragedy.56 In contrast, Pindar seems usually to have avoided the ‘heavy’ full base (

).

1. The base
x Pindar’s preference for repeating the same form of full base is still more evident when one examines each repetition of the 19 examples of
x (for the terms ‘example’ and ‘repetition’, see Key).57 Two peculiar groups emerge. First, in six cases

occurs only in a limited number of repetitions, in most cases one repetition only, while the others are of the shape
w, and, moreover, all the

without exception involve proper nouns. For example, at six out of seven repetitions of glyconic in I8s5c and I8s6, aeolic base is consistently occupied by
w, the exceptions being in s5c at v. 55c (¼ v. 56 Sn.) and in s6 v. 16 (¼ v. 16a Sn.). At both v. 55c and v. 16, `YªØÆ, a proper noun and a key word of I8, occupies the base

, and consequently the scheme is given as
x
ww
w
. The same is true in the other four examples (P2e5, N4s5, N4s6, I7e5). Secondly, there are also some examples where a strong preference is observable, but where, nevertheless, there is a single deviation from the norm which

55
w (gl) P5s3, P8s2, P8e6, P11s2b, N3s4, N4s4, N6s1b, N6s2, N6e2, N7e3, I7e1, I8s4; (ph) O1s1, O1s4, O13s2, O13s5, P5e4 N3e2; (hipp) P2e8, N7s8 (wil) P5s2, P5e1, P6s1/2, P6s4, P6s5, N6s2, I8s1/2, I8s3, I8s4; (wilþ2) N3s7; (wilþ3) P10s5, N7s4. www (gl) P2e1a, P2e4, P6s1/2, P6s3, P6s6, P8s1, P11e4, N2s4, N3s3, N4s7, N7e4, N7e5; (ph) P11e2; (glþ3) N7e5; (wil) O9s6/7. w
(gl) O1s1, P2e1b, P2e2, P2e3, P5e2, P8e6, N2s1, N7s1; (wil) I8s1/2, I8s5a; (wilþ2) P2e8, P5s8

(gl) O9s4, N2s4, I7s5a; (ph) P8e3/4; (glþ3) I7s3/4; (wilþ1) P6s7/8 56 Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’, 67–8. 57
x (gl) O9s3, O9s5, O9s8, P2s2, P2e5, P8e3/4, P10e1, N2s3, I7e5, I8s5c, I8s6; (ph) P8e2, P10s1, N2s4; (glþ3) O9s2; (wil) N4s3, N4s5, N4s6; (wilþ2) P8s5. The examples of the other two forms (x
, tx) are too rare to be taken into account. For the detail of x
, see Part II, O10s6. tx (P5e9) will be illustrated later.

Aeolic Phrases

33

does not involve a proper noun. Thus, at O9s2, P10s1, and P10e1,
w is found in every repetition of the verse except one, but no proper noun is involved. This tendency is a manifestation of the ‘All-but-One’ rule (see Part III, C). At O9s5 and P8e3/4,
w being the norm,

is used more than once, in all instances but one with a proper noun. Conversely, at O9s8,

is the norm, but
w occurs once, without proper noun. So in 65 examples the aeolic base is of identical form throughout and in another 12 examples it deviates from the chosen norm only very rarely. Yet Pindar does not always show the same attachment to a single form. In seven verses for which the notation
x is appropriate, no such strong preference is observable: O9s3 (3 longs/8 repetitions), P2s2 (4/8), P8s5 (4/10), P8e2 (2/5), N2s3 (3/5), N2s4 (2/5), N4s3 (8/12). In these cases the ‘anceps’ is really employed as anceps. The situation is intriguing. A simplistic metrical rule is not appropriate. An explanation is to be sought not in a general metrical theory but in the examination of each metrical context; in other words, of the style of each stanza-form as a whole. Interestingly, the occurrence of
x is concentrated in a limited number of stanza-forms or odes: O9s (4 examples), P2e (1), P2s (1), P8s (1), P8e (2), P10s (1), P10e (1), N2s (2), N4s (3), I7e (1), I8s (2). Adding to them the examples of

(6 in total), it is reasonable to suppose that Pindar employed

, whether in responsion with
w or not, only in some limited stanza-forms. As will be argued later, the metrical context of these stanza-forms is aeolic, not freer D/e. Thus the presence of

is to be accepted as one of the criteria of Class I (aeolic) stanza-forms. Here emerges an important admonitory remark. It is dangerous to emend the text by introducing a word which has a long syllable at the second position of a glyconic (or equivalents), without consideration of the nature of the stanza-form as a whole. Thus, for example, I am dubious about the transposition of
ºÆªåŁ at N7s8 (v. 37) proposed by Boeckh and accepted by most editors.58

58 The paradosis of v. 37 does not make good metre and must be emended; but Boeckh’s transposition is not as easy a solution as has been supposed. See further Part II ad loc.

34

Introduction

2. The base www Pindar uses www frequently as full base. He is perhaps the Wrst Greek poet to introduce resolution in the aeolic base; the Lesbian poets and Anacreon did not use it, nor did Aeschylus except once.59 It becomes common in later tragedy, especially in Euripides. Theoretically, www can be taken as a resolved form of
w or w
; but as a rule www does not correspond with the other forms, even in tragedy. The sole exception in Pindar is found at the beginning of P5e9: P5e9 tw
ww
w

ww
w rw

w
k

gl d w e e

There, correspondence occurs between www oÆØ (31) and
w ZçÆæÆ (62) and håÆØ (124) and

Œıæø  (93). Perhaps the peculiarity of the style of P5 as a whole may be related to this irregularity (see Part II, ad loc.).

3. The base w
The base w
is common neither in Pindar nor in tragedy. Of 12 examples in total, four are found in P2e, and two in I8s. This scarcity is partly explained by the fact that Pindar does not use glyconic or other phrases with full base ŒÆa å (P2e1a–4 are a rare exception). Anacreon and the dramatic poets are fond of the regularity produced by repetition, but with slight variation of the base. That is not Pindar’s manner. Thus O1s1 (but see below, 7. 6) and P8e6 are exceptional: O1s1 w

ww
w

w
ww

k gl ph P8e6 w

ww
w

w
ww
w
k gl gl

In other words, since the phrase w

ww
w
and the like are not invariably employed next to an unambiguous aeolic phrase starting with full base, there are cases in which it is not easy to tell aeolic base w
from acephalous e (w
). For example, the Wrst phrase of P5e2 w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j

may be not a glyconic, but ^ eþdodrans followed by short ancepsþeþrdod, since a number of verses in P5 start with ^ e (Part II, ad loc.). Similarly, 59

Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’, 68.

Aeolic Phrases N7s1 w

ww
w

w
w
k

35

gl e2

may be ^ eþdodþe2, taking into consideration that the resemblance between the phrases
ww
w
and
w
w
is fully exploited in this stanza-form (see Part II, ad loc.). As for the wilamowitzianum, I analyse I8s5a w

w
ww

w
ww

w
ww
j

as wilþrdodþrdod. But it may be w
(^ e)þthreefold
w
ww
. But at the same time it must not be forgotten that there are some examples of w

ww
w
which are, judging from the context, most certainly glyconic: for example, N2s1, and three consecutive verses of P2e (e1b–3). It is impracticable to take all the examples of w
as ^ e. For the ambiguity, see further 7. 4.

D. The Half-Base Group reizianum telesillean hagesichorean telþ3 heptasyllable heptaþ2 heptaþ3 heptaþ2þ3 tel reiz hag telþ3 hepta heptaþ2 heptaþ3 heptaþ2þ3

x
ww

9 x
ww
w
29 x
ww
w

1 x
ww
w
w

4 x
w
ww
12 x
w
ww
w
4 x
w
ww
w

3 x
w
ww
w
w

1


w

ww

x

14 4

3 3 1

6

6 2

2 3 1

1 1

2

24

9

8

8 1 2 1 20

total 29 9 1 4 12 3 2 1 61

36

Introduction

Generally speaking, long is preferred to short in half-base: 24 examples against 9.60 Especially when an aeolic phrase makes up a verse on its own, long is dominant. P10s2 starts with short anceps, and is the sole exception, while long anceps occurs at every repetition in nine phrases (¼ verses). Besides, at explicit anceps (x, 20 examples) where both long and short are freely employed, long is dominant. Every repetition being counted, long occupies the anceps position 74 times, short 60 times. In some verses the anceps strongly tends to be either long or short: e.g. N4s3 (long is used at 11 out of 12 repetitions; ‘All-but-One’ is a manifestation of extreme cases of this tendency) or N4s1 (2 out of 10). These verses, and others of N4, indicate that it is neither a metrical rule nor the metrical context that regulates the realization of the anceps. N4 is a very simple aeolic stanza (monostrophic), and its Wrst three verses start with hepta or heptaþ2. But the ratio of long to short in each verse varies considerably: 2/10 (s1), 9/3 (s2), 11/1 (s3).61 This seems to be a matter of aesthetic preference in the individual context.

1. Position of half-base in verse Half-base is used either at the beginning of a verse (in cases where the verse starts with the phrase in question) or in the middle (in cases where the phrase is preceded by others). The dominance of long is clearer at the beginning of the verse.

60 *

*

means that half-base is used in the middle of a verse.


(tel) O1e6a, *O9e4, O10e6, P11e3, *P2s2, P2s8, P5s7b, N3s1, N7s6, N7s7, N7s8,

I7s5a, I7e2, I7e3; (reiz) *O9s4, *O9s5, *O9s6/7, O9s9; (telþ3) N2s2, N4s8; (hepta) P2e7, P8s3, P11s2a; (heptaþ2) P11s5. w (tel) O9s10, *I8s3, *I8s7; (reiz) *O1e4, *N4s4, *N4s6; (hag) *P2s8; (hepta) P10s2a; (heptaþ2) P8e1. ww (tel) O9s1, *P2s4, P10s6, N3s8, N3e4, *N3e4; (telþ3) I7s1, I7e4. x (tel) O9s2 (long at 7 repetitions out of 8), *P10e6 (1/4), *N4s5 (2/12), I7s2 (2/6), * I7s3/4 (1/6), *I7e5 (2/3); (reiz) *O9s3 (7/8), *N2s3 (2/5); (hepta) *O9e8 (2/4), P8s6 (4/10), P8e2 (3/5), P10e3 (2/4), P10e4 (3/4), N4s2 (9/12), N4s3 (11/12), *I7s5a (5/6); (heptaþ2) N4s1 (2/12); (heptaþ3) *O9e8 (3/4), P10e5 (3/4); (heptaþ2þ3) *P8e7 (3/ 5). 61 Or 10/2 (s2) and 12 /0 (s3), if the initial syllable of › åæı (v. 82) is scanned long, and if ˇPºı
fi Æ (v. 75) is read instead of ˇºı
fi Æ.

Aeolic Phrases
w ww beginning middle

18 6

3 6

6 2

37

x total 10 10

37 24

Long anceps is exclusively used in half the verses (18 out of 37). However, there are 3 verses which invariably start with short anceps in all the repetitions: O9s10 (tel), P8e1 (heptaþ2), P10s2a (hepta). At the 10 explicit ancipitia at the beginning of the verse, no strong preference is evident: long occurs in a total of 46 repetitions, short in 31. Just one verse has a high occurrence of short syllables: N4s1 (heptaþ2, 10 short out of 12). There are 6 examples of half-base in mid-verse where anceps is invariably short. All these phrases are preceded by . . .
w
w
, . . .
ww
w
or . . .
ww
, as the Wnal part of the preceding phrase, so that the whole verse makes a sequence in which single short or double short alternates with single long without intervening long or anceps: . . .
w
w
w
ww
. . . . . .
ww
w
w
ww
. . . . . .
ww
w
ww
. . .

These verses make a group of particularly Pindaric colour. The examples will be collected and discussed in I. 8.

2. Half-base ww In 8 cola, ww occupies the base. All the cola are telesillean or its prolonged form (telþ3). I do not classify O9e3, O13s1 ww
ww

k

as reizianum, nor the Wrst phrase of O1e5 ww
w
ww

w
w
k

as ‘heptasyllable’ starting with ww: O9e3, O13s1 is acephalous D and anceps, and O1e5 is ^ d w d.62

62 Some of the telesilleans, manner. See 7. 2.

ww
ww
w
, may be interpreted in a diVerent

38

Introduction

ww is never in responsion with
, let alone w. Even outside Pindar, I do not know any certain example of t
ww
w
. Whether the two double shorts in the phrase ww
ww
w
are equal, and if so, whether they are distinguishable from those of ^D ww
ww
is an interesting question.

E. The First Two Positions of Reversed Dodrans As already demonstrated above (A. 1), there is no example which has


ww
at all the repetitions. Thus reversed dodrans itself and phrases which include it are classiWed into three groups:
w
ww
,
x
ww
, www
ww
. dod hepta wil wilþ1 heptaþ2 wilþ2 heptaþ3 wilþ3 heptaþ2þ3


w


x

www

13 10 13 1 2 4 2 1

1 1 2

9

46

2

1 1 7

10

total 23 11 15 1 4 4 2 2 1 63

1. Reversed dodrans starting with
x The form
x
ww
, of course, permits initial

. Of the seven examples of
x, four (O9s6/7, N4s1, N4s2, N4s6) occur in those stanza-forms where aeolic characteristics are most evident, which I shall call Class I. This tendency is obviously related to the fact that

tends to be used at the full base in the Class I stanza-forms (see C. 1 above). But even here, the repetitions with long anceps

Aeolic Phrases

39

remain very much in the minority.63 Besides these four examples, there remain a further three. In P10s2a w
x
ww
j

hepta

long anceps is found only at v. 8 (IçŒØø). If this word can be treated as a proper noun, then the irregularity would be mitigated. The sixth example, P11s4
xtww


wr
ww
k rdod x e d

is most irregular in that not only is long anceps used in the second position, but there is resolution to the ‘left’ of aeolic nucleus in half the repetitions, and long medial anceps occurs after rdod.64 However, even here, there are some limitations: in repetitions where resolution occurs, the preceding anceps is always short. Thus there is no example of

rww
, its avoidance agrees with the general rule that long anceps does not precede resolved long; cf. 6. C (iii). The last (P8e7) is a curious verse as a whole, and, whatever analysis is chosen, its colometry will inevitably be a forced one. I oVer the following provisionally: P8e7

x
x
ww
w
w

k sp heptaþ2þ3

The anceps position of the (assumed) reversed dodrans (hepta ¼ x rdod) is Wlled with long at 3 repetitions out of 5. See Part II, ad loc.

2. Reversed dodrans starting with www Ten verses have resolution of the initial position of the reversed dodrans (www
ww
).65 There is no phrase in which resolved position is in responsion with unresolved. Of the nine examples of resolved reversed dodrans, Wve stand at the beginning of the verse. One is tempted to ask whether reversed dodrans in this form sounded identical in performance with the Wrst part of a glyconic with base in the form www. 63 O9s6/7 (3 long out of 8), N4s1 (2/12), N4s2 (3/12), N4s6 (1/12). Moreover, four of these long ancipitia are in proper nouns. 64 Resolution at aeolic nucleus is discussed below, 5. F. For the mid-long anceps see 6. D. 65 (rdod) O1e6b, P2s2, P2s7, P2e2, P2e3, P5e3, P5e6, N6s3, N7e2; (wilþ3) N7s4.

40

Introduction

www
ww
www
ww
w
We cannot answer this question since we do not know the time-value of anceps. It is, however, a reasonable hypothesis, and one which I propose to adopt, that the two phrases did sound identical. Compare the following verses, which make a spectrum: P2e4 P6s3 N7e4 P2s7 O1e6b

www
ww
w

w
k www
ww
wy
w
k www
ww
wr
w
k www
ww
rw

w
k www
ww

w
k

gl e gl e gl e rdod e e rdod e

The Wrst two (P2e4, P6s3) are unambiguously glþe. Following these two verses, I analyse N7e4 as glþe, not as rdodþe2. However, the next, P2s7, is not glyconic followed by long ancepsþe, because there is no certain case at all of gl
e.66 On the other hand, P2s7 is similar to O1e6b, where the Wrst three shorts unambiguously belong to rdod. The metrical context must be taken into consideration: reversed dodrans of the form in www
ww
occurs in a limited number of stanza-forms: O1e (1 example), P2s (2 examples), P2e (2 examples), P5e (2 examples), N6s (1 example), N7s (1 example), N7e (1 example). These are classiWed as Class II (freer D/e) or Class III (amalgamated), not as Class I (aeolic), except for P2e (an ambiguous case). On the other hand, the aeolic base in the forms

or
x is a mark of Class I. It may not have been harmonized with resolved dodrans.

F. Resolution Apart from www at full base and ww at half-base, a long position in aeolic phrase is sometimes Wlled by two short syllables. This can reasonably be regarded as resolution.67 Every long position of dodrans and reversed dodrans can be resolved. For example, the following forms of glyconic are found: 66 An aeolic phrase is, in general, not followed by a long anceps. There are only two exceptions (P10s6, P11s4). See below, 6. 3. 67 Resolution of longs in aeolic verses is rare in Attic drama; cf. Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’. It is almost restricted to later Euripides. The unique example of Aeschylus is Cho. 317: åØ i ŒÆŁ PæÆ (w
rww
w
). It worries many (e.g. Dale, BICS

Aeolic Phrases

41

Left of the choriambic nucleus N6e2
wrww
w
j resolved Right of the choriambic nucleus P8s2
w
wwrw
k resolved Final position resolved I8s5c
x
ww
wt
w

k P6s3 www
ww
wy
w
k

Resolution must be attested by responsion with unresolved position. Examples of resolved long position corresponding with unresolved are found in four verses: P11s4 N7s7 P6s3 I8s5c


atww


wr
ww
k
tww
w
rw
w
k www
ww
wy
w
k
a
ww
wt
w

k

rdod x e d tel e2 gl e gl e


In the Wrst two (P11s4, N7s7), resolution is found at the left-hand long position of the choriambic nucleus (tww
). Of these, the case of N7s7 is not surprising, since resolution involves a proper noun (v. 70 ¯PØÆ), and may be taken as a special licence. But P11s4 is extraordinary. Of its eight repetitions, four have resolution, and none of the resolutions involves a proper noun (v. 9 ŁØ, v. 41 e b, v. 52 Ia, v. 57 ŒÆººÆ).68 In the other two (P6s3, I8s5c), resolution occurs at the Wnal position of the glyconic, that is, of the dodrans (
ww
wt). At P6s3, the position is unresolved in only one repetition (v. 48 lÆ). And out of seven repetitions at I8s5c, three are resolved (v. 25c ¼ v. 26 Sn.
Øı , v. 35c ¼ v. 36 Sn. ºåø, v. 45c ¼ v. 46 Sn. K
ø). Here the situation is similar to P11s4 in that resolved positions and unresolved are freely used in responsion. There are 16 examples in which resolution is present at every repetition (i.e. responsion between resolved and unresolved is

Suppl. 21.2 (1981), 15: ‘resolution in 317 very ugly and hardly possible in Aeschylus’), but it may be accepted by referring to N6e2 and, especially, P11s4. It is noteworthy that P11 treats the myth of Clytaemestra and Orestes. Perhaps Aeschylus is inXuenced by Pindar. Further, Cho. 315 ¼ 332 (the Wrst verse of the same strophe) may betray another inXuence of Pindar.
ww
ww
w
is, most certainly, not glyconic in Aeschylus (see Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’). Rather it may be related to P11s1 (for this verse, see 7. 6 below). 68 For the avoidance of long anceps preceding the resolution, see 6. C above.

42

Introduction

absent). Of these, 10 are the initial of reversed dodrans, mentioned in section E above. The others are: the Wnal of the dodrans, N7s2, N7e3, N7e4; the left of the nucleus, N6e2 (gl); the right of the nucleus, P8s2 (gl), P11s2b (gl). In some verses it is diYcult to decide which position is resolved. The sequence . . . www
w
is typically confusing. For example, see the phrases at the end of N7e3
w
ww
www
w
k N7e4 www
ww
www
w
k

These are resolved forms of either (i) . . . w

w
or (ii) . . .
w
w
. If (i) is chosen, the verses are glyconicþcretic (e). On the other hand, if (ii) is chosen, the verses are reversed dodransþe2. I choose (i) on the analogy of P6s3 above, but there is no certainty here; see further Part II, ad loc.

G. Acephaly Besides the phrases above, there is one more phrase that is probably aeolic, judging from its context: O13s5 ww
w

w
ww

k

^ dod

ph

The Wrst half of this verse is explicable as acephalous dodrans. Acephaly is rather common, as will be demonstrated, in freer D/e, but to what extent it occurs in aeolic cola in general is not certain.69 At least there are no other examples in the eighteen majors. Acephalous dodrans (ww
w
) is familiar as a constituent of the third verse of the Attic skolion, but it is doubtful whether such an extra-generic comparison is meaningful. Rather, the proper comparandum is the Simonidean poem 542 P. Here acephalous dodrans is most certainly attested. The poem is monostrophic, with a seven-verse stanza:70

69 Note that O13s is the only stanza-form where the metre shifts from non-D/e to D/e in the middle. The alternative interpretation is: ww þ e (ww being substituted for anceps). See Part II, ad loc. Outside the eighteen majors, ^ dod occurs at Parth1s1; see Part II, Appendix B. 70 I follow Page in the reconstruction of the text, but the colometry is my own. West, GM 66 gives an analysis diVerent from both Page’s and mine.

Aeolic Phrases 1 2/3 4/5 6 7 8 9þ10

43


ww
ww
w
w

j ww


w
ww
w

w
ww
w
x
w
j ww
w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w
k ww
w

w
ww
j

w

w
ww
k w

w

j
w
ww
x
ww
w

j

Although there remain some uncertainties in the reconstruction of the strophe, it is certain that the phrase is situated at the beginning of the two verses 4/5 and 6. The basic structure of the former (4/5) is the repetition of
w
ww
w
. It is natural to extrapolate from it that ww
w
is equal to
w
ww
w
minus the initial
w
. The latter (6) is almost identical with O13s5. These two Simonidean verses and O13s5 incorporate the palindromic movement ( . . . ww
w

w
ww . . . ) found in O1s1 and elsewhere (see 8. A. 6 below). Readers accustomed to Snell’s analysis may wonder why I exclude from aeolic consideration of ‘dactylic expansion’ (e.g. ªª
ww
ww
w
). There are, however, problems of ambiguity here, which I prefer to discuss following my deWnition of freer D/e; see below, 7. 6.

44

Introduction 6. FREER DACTYLO-EPITRITE

A. Basic Structure and Phrases The essential features of freer dactylo-epitrite have been sketched in I. 4 above. Listed below are the phrases that constitute freer D/e. Some are unfamiliar in normal D/e, but many are found in normal D/e, even if only very rarely. The Wgures in the right-hand column indicate the number of occurrences. Examples are collected in List 2. d phrases
ww
d D
ww
ww
D þ
ww
ww
ww
e phrases e
w
e2
w
w
e3
w
w
w
e5
w
w
w
w
w
e6
w
w
w
w
w
w
sp



55 9 5 158 38 1471 3 1 12

Acephalous d and e phrases (verse-initial only, followed by true long) ^d ww
3 ^ D ww
ww
4 ^ D þ ww
ww
ww
1 ^e w
23

It will be clear at a glance how these phrases are related to each other. The basic ones are d (
ww
) and e (
w
). d is expanded by repetition of
ww, the maximum length being three double shorts. In normal D/e, where D is one of the two standard phrases, d is an occasional variant, apparently the abridged form of D.72 In contrast,

Including a curious colon
x
w
w
in P8s6. For this, see 6. A. It was once maintained by Schroeder and others that d was equivalent to e and long anceps, and that even strophic responsion between d (
ww
) and e þ anceps (
w

) or anceps þ e (

w
) was possible. Sandys (Loeb) and Puech (Bude´) followed them. That idea was refuted Wrst by Maas (Responsionsfreiheiten), and then by Bowra, ‘An Alleged Anomaly’, who scrutinized every possible example. 71 72

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

45

D in freer D/e should be taken as secondary, an enlarged version of d. There are considerably fewer examples of it than of d. The longest, D þ, to which Maas gave the notation Dd2, is not uncommon either in normal D/e (10 examples).73 In normal D/e, there is one example of a much longer sequences (D þþ ¼ Dd2d2 :
ww
ww
ww
ww
) at P3s4, but there is none in freer D/e.74 e is expanded like d. Expansion of e is far more extensive than that of d. The longest includes six single shorts (e6). There is no example of e4, but this is probably accidental.75 The central short position of e3 (
w
w
w
) may conceivably have been anceps in origin (
w
x
w
), and certainly some of the brevia of the longer phrases (e5 and e6) must surely have been so. It is possible that sequences of alternating short and long were derived from the familiar iambo-trochaic sequence . . . x
w
x
w
x . . . , but even if that is so, we are in no position to try to decide in Pindar which w in such a sequence is ‘truly’ anceps. It should be noted that, by deWnition, when the symbol en is used, all the intervening brevia are short throughout all the repetitions. In fact, it is the absence of long anceps which most strikingly diVerentiates the freer D/e from normal D/e. The longer sequences cannot be analysed ŒÆa æ. Both Turyn and Snell impose forced analyses on P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6

as ‘dochmiacþiaþia’ (Turyn) or ‘crþiaþiaþw
’ (Snell). O1s8 wrwrw
w
w
w
k w e5

seems to be analysed successfully as ‘iambic trimeter’. But it should not be so described: not only does the term conceal the close relation to P2s1 but it is also inappropriate for another reason. At six (vv. 19, 37, 48, 77, 95, 106) out of eight repetitions, word-end occurs at wrwrw
jw
w
w
k

73 West uses the symbol D2 for
ww
ww
ww
. I do not use it because the Wgure 2 is confusing. 74 Outside the eighteen majors, there is an example of ^ D þþ in Parth1s3. 75 In P7, which I exclude from the eighteen majors, there is an example of e4 (P7s1).

46

Introduction

Such a frequent occurrence of medial caesura is incompatible with the iambic trimeter. The process of expansion and its reversed, contraction, is most clearly visible in the following two pairs of successive verses:

wrw
w
ww
k

wrw
w
ww
ww
k O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k P2s5 P2s6


e2 w d
e2 w D e5 w d e2 e3 w d e

e2 (
w
w
) is uncommon in normal D/e, but occurs once in a verse in that metre: N8e4

w


w
w
k

It is a pity that Snell gives the verse the notation
E w
(here E is used in the Maasian sense, of course) so that the phrase often escapes notice. Incidentally, the identical verse, x e x e2, is found in the ‘other half ’ of the Pindaric corpus: P8s7 a
w
a
w
w
k x e x e2

There is a curious phrase
x
w
w
. It is similar to e3, but its second position is occupied by a long syllable at seven repetitions out of 10: P8s6 x
w
ww

x
w
w
k hepta e3(aeol)

I take this as a variation of e3. Its initial two positions are treated like aeolic base. The same phrase is used by Bacchylides in poem 18. See further Part II ad loc. A spondee is occasionally used both in normal D/e and in freer D/e. In both metres its use is restricted to the beginning or end of the verse (for a possible exception at O10s3b, see Part II, ad loc.). The spondee is most naturally understood as e of which the short position has been suppressed.

B. Acephaly Acephalous phrases are occasionally used in freer D/e as well as in normal D/e. The concept of acephaly has not been unanimously

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

47

accepted,76 but it is the most natural explanation for a certain group of verses. Since acephaly occurs at the beginning of a verse, it may be assumed that the missing position is absorbed in the ‘vacuum’ before the verse starts. I do not, therefore, call the telesillean an ‘acephalous glyconic’, because a telesillean can stand in the middle of a verse. The following verses can only be analysed when it is assumed that an initial long is lacking: N6s5 P6s4 O10s1 N6s4a

ww

ww
ww
j ww

w
w
ww
k ww
ww

w
tw
k ww
ww
ww
rw

k

^d

D wil ^D e e ^Dþ e
^d

By deWnition, every phrase of single- and double-short movement may be acephalous at the beginning of the verse. But ^ e2 (w
w
), if it occurs, is not distinguishable from short ancepsþe, and so is disregarded. So are ^ e3 and longer phrases of the same type. Examples of the d-group are not so numerous as those of ^ e : 3 of ^ d, 4 of ^ D, and 1 of ^ D þ. Though there are exceptions, examples tend to occur in Class II stanza-forms.77 Acephalous phrases are also used in normal D/e.78 As for ^ e, the most certain cases are the ones where ‘full’ e follows, so that the verse starts with w

w
, or www
w
, as in O2s2 wy
w

wr
wr
w
k

^e

eeee

There are verses which are made up only of the phrase. For example: P5s6 w

w
k

^e

e

Of 23 examples of ^ e, 11 are followed by e, 2 by e2. Examples are found concentrated in particular odes or stanza-forms: 6 in O1 (3 each in the strophe and in the epode), 6 in P5 (also 3 each), 3 in P10s,

76 For example, compare the analysis of O2 by West, GM 68–9, with that by Parker, ‘Trochee to Iamb’. Also see the forced analysis of N6s5 and P6s4 (cited below) by Turyn, Snell, or others. 77 1 each in O9, in O10s, in O10e, in O13s, P6s, and 2 in N6s. O1e5 is an exception. 78 ^ D is represented by Maas as d2d2, and ^ d as d2. At the same time d2 is used in Dd2 (¼ D þ). ^ D is used in P3e9, N8s5, ^ d in O7s1, O7s6, O7e6, O8s6, O13e6, P1e9, P9s1, P9s3, N8e3.

48

Introduction

2 in O2s. To call the phrase w

w
‘dochmiac’ is misleading, since it implies that the phrase can be in responsion with, e.g.
ww
w
.79 ^ eþe2 (in O1s10, followed by another e, and in P6s9, followed by x e) is traditionally analysed as bacchiacþiambic (w

w
w
). However, the bacchiac metron is certainly alien to Pindaric metre. Once e2 is accepted, the analysis as ^ eþe2 is reasonably concordant with the other verses. I recognize ^ e in the following cases too, for which diVerent analyses may be conceivable (the alternative would be aeolic cola starting with the base w
). w

ww

w
j w

ww
ww
k

^e ^e

d e (P2e6, P5e5, P10s2b) D (O10e2, I8s9)

In the following two verses, ^ e is followed by link anceps: N6s1 w

j P5s11 w


w
w
w
k

^ e
^e


e3

Perhaps the most perplexing case is P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wilþ3

This is unique in that ^ e is followed by an aeolic phrase.80

C. Resolution Every long position of phrases made up of single-short movement (e, e2, e3, etc.) can be resolved, and such resolution is very common. As for e, there are 33 examples of
wr (and another 4 of wr, i.e. resolved ^ e) and 27 of rw
. The total number of e is 181 (including 23 ^ e). Thus 35.4% of e (and ^ e) are resolved at one long position or 79 Support for the term ‘dochmiac’ might be sought in O1s2, where the paradosis oVers
ww
w
(v. 89 – Œ ºÆªÆ ) corresponding with www
w
in the other repetitions. But this reading is surely a false ‘correction’ by someone who thought the subject of Œ must be the mother. With Œ (Boehmer, according to Gerber) the ‘dochmiac’ disappears. The seeming dochmiac of the form u

w
at the end of Pae4s, l. 4 (cf. the analysis of West, GM 67), is, in fact, caused by neglect of the verse-end after its initial anceps (brevis in longo).

w
is an independent verse. See further, Part II, Appendix B, ad loc. 80 P10s5 may be ^ e þ e þ hagesichorean; see 7. 3.

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

49

the other (
wr and rw
), at least in one repetition. This high percentage is worth noting. O2 is noteworthy in that both of these two types of resolved form coexist repeatedly in the same verse. But similar verses are also found outside O2, for example, I8s8 rw

wr
wr
k e e e


It is occasionally diYcult to decide which long position is resolved. For example, I analyse O10s3a x
w

wr

wr

j

x e e x e sp

Another analysis looks possible: x
w

rw

rw

j x e x e x e
I reject it, however, for two reasons: (a) should it be accepted, wordend would occur very frequently after the two long mid-ancipitia; this is against Pindar’s general tendency (see section D), and (b) Pindar in general avoids long anceps preceding resolved long; see below, (iii). Responsion between resolved and unresolved is not rare.81 There are 11 cases of
www 
w
(including 2 ^ e www  w
), and 6 of www

w
. However, there does not seem to be complete freedom in the matter of responsion between resolved and unresolved positions. A strong tendency can be observed. Either resolution is dominant (as at O2s2, where resolution occurs at 9 repetitions out of 10) or it is a special licence (as at O10s1, where resolution occurs in 1 repetition out of 10). The ratio of resolved to unresolved is extreme in one direction or the other.82 This tendency is a manifestation of the All-but-One rule (see Part III, C). Longer phrases, too, are fairly frequently resolved. Since all the intervening brevia of these phrases are short, resolution creates a long 81 ^ e (wy): O1s9 (2 resolved out of 8 repetitions), O2s2 (9/10). e (
wy): O2s3 (3rd e) (9/10), O2s6/7 (2/10), O2e1 (3/5), O2e4 (1/5), P5s2 (1/8), P5s5 (7/8), N6s6b (3/6), N6s7 (5/6), I8s1/2 (2/7). e (yw
): O2s3 (5th e) (8/10), O2s5 (1/10), O10s1 (1/10), P5e7a (1/4), P5e7b (1/4), P5e9 (3/4). cf. e2 (
wyw
): O13s4 (1/10), N3e3 (2/4). 82 12 examples in total out of 19 listed above show this tendency.

50

Introduction

series of continuous short syllables. Unlike resolved e exact responsion is observed in these sequences throughout all the repetitions and produce a peculiar eVect: 7 shorts (O1s8, w e5), 6 shorts (P2s1, e 6; P5s4, ^ eþe; N7s6, e3, for emendation of the text, see ad loc.).83 About resolution in general, some tendencies are observable. (i) Resolution does not occur simultaneously at both longs of e: i.e. there is no example of rwr.84 But in expanded phrases, prolonged sequences of short syllables do occur: O1s8 wrwrw
w
w
w
k w e5 P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6

(ii) Between
wr and rw
, and between rw
and
wr, an unresolved cretic, or an anceps at least, is always present. There is just one exception for each: P5s4 wr rw
k I8s8 rw

wr


wr

^e

e


k e e e


The latter (I8s8) would be eliminated if the direction of resolution were diVerently assumed: rw

rw
rw
k e
e e This colometry, however, introduces long anceps followed by resolved long, which is not paralleled at all; see (iii) below. (iii) Resolved long is never preceded by long anceps; i.e. l x rw
is l avoided (here x means anceps position Wlled by long; i.e. long implicit anceps). In other words, when resolution occurs, the preceding position must be a real long (or occasionally, a short anceps; see (v) below). There is no exception at all. This is an important feature, but it is diYcult to explain it in a broader perspective. In tragic trimeter, resolution occurs after the penthemimeral caesura more frequently than elsewhere: 83 Continuous short syllables are found in the other type of metre too: 5 shorts (all are in glyconic; N6e2, P8s2, P11s2b). See further Part III, D. 84 Outside the eighteen majors there are two other cases; one in O4e9/10 (the four minors, see Part II, Appendix A, ad loc.) and another in Pae6s5a (see Part II, Appendix B, ad loc.).

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

51

x
w
xjrw
x
w
k (iv) In contrast, resolved long is occasionally followed by long anceps:
wr l x. There are four examples of resolved longþlong implicit anceps (marked by l x) in mid-verse, one in O2, three in O10:85 O2s3 O10s3a O10s4 O10e3



w

wr
wy l x
w
tw
k
e e e
e e x
wr

j x e e
e sp u
w

wr l ^ e e
e w

wr l x
w
k xee
dxe x
ww
y
w
k t
wr
wr l


wr
occurs at verse-end in Wve verses:86 O10e1b P6s6 P11e5 N6s6b I8s8

x
wr
k www
ww
w

wr
k w
w
w

wr
j
wt
k rw

wr
wr
k

xe
gl e
w e2 e
e
eee


(v) Short anceps precedes resolved long in three verses: P5e7b P5e9 O1s8

w tw

j we
ta
ww
w

ww
w yw

w
k gl d w e e w rwrw
w
w
w
k w e5

(vi) Short anceps follows resolved long in three verses (which all have expanded e): P11s3 N3s5 I8s3

rw
wr w
ww
k

w
w
wr w
ww
k
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
k

e2 w d
e3 w d wil e2 tel

(vii) In one verse, an expanded e is both preceded and followed by short anceps: N3e1b w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k w e3 w d w e e

85 Outside the eighteen majors there are two other cases. Both occur in Pae4s3, a verse strikingly similar to O10s3a. See Part II, Appendix B, ad loc. 86 Some scholars, including Kayser and Maas, deny the resolution at the penultimate position of a verse. The argument will be discussed below: Appendix, Addendum II.

52

Introduction

(viii) When e is followed by anceps at the verse-end, the e is resolved in many instances. Five examples of
wr
k are listed above in the Wnal paragraph in (iv), and the examples of rw

k amount to four: O10e4/5 P5e7b N6s4a N6s6a



ww

ww
rw

j
dde
w tw

k we
^Dþ e
ww
ww
ww
rw

k
ww
ww


ww
rw

k D
d e


Unresolved examples (
w

k) amount to six in total; interestingly four of them occur in O2 (s1, s6/7, e2, e5; and N3e1, I8s5c). These are characteristics of e. In contrast to e, resolution of d is an oddity, like that of choriambic nucleus of aeolic metre (5, F). There are only two examples. In both a resolved long position corresponds with unresolved at only one repetition: O10e10 N3s6

w
wwt

wr
w

ww
k w d
e e d

w
a
wwt
k
exd


In O10e10 resolution involves a proper noun (v. 110 ¼ 105 Sn. ˆÆı Ø) but not in N3s6 (v. 14 Iªæ ). Furthermore, it is very rare in any kind of metre for double short to correspond with long at the penultimate position of a verse. For example, there is no pherecratean in tragedy of the shape of ªª
wwt
. Iªæ  is highly suspect.87 See further Part II, ad loc.

D. Link Anceps Anceps can be located before, between, and after freer D/e phrases. In addition, there are some cases in which aeolic phrases are followed by short anceps and e (in most of them, d being occasionally used). Here w
w
functions as a prolongation of the ending of the preceding aeolic. This will be illustrated below. There are in total 61 ancipitia at the beginning of the verse, 45 in the middle, 28 at the

87 But outside the eighteen majors there are two examples of this type of resolution in Pae4. See Part II, Appendix B.

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

53

end.88 So anceps is comparatively uncommon at the end of a verse. This must be related to Pindar’s general preference in the eighteen majors. He prefers blunt ending to pendent ending everywhere. For the statistics of all the verses, taking also aeolic phrases into consideration, see 8. 4. Anceps may be followed by either (i) d (and D etc.) or (ii) e (and e2 etc.) when it is positioned at the beginning of the verse or in the middle. It may also be preceded by a phrase of either group, or by an aeolic phrase, in the middle or at the end of the verse. The position of anceps makes a diVerence to its realization, as does the nature of the adjacent group: (i) at the beginning followed by d group e group total
9 15 24 w 3 21 24 1 12 13 u total 13 48 61 (ii) (a) in the middle preceded by d group e group aeolic total
2 6 1 9 w 7 10 8 25 4 6 1 11 u total 13 22 10 45 (ii) (b) in the middle followed by d group e group total
2 7 9 w 14 11 25 6 5 11 u total 22 23 45

88 These Wgures do not include 3 examples of biceps in which long anceps corresponds with two shorts. In the following verses, t seems to be substituted for anceps:

O10e3 N6e6/7

t
wr
wr

ww
t
w
k t
w
w
w

j

Both verses are embroiled in textual problems, and biceps is not unambigously attested; see Part II, ad locc.

54

Introduction

(iii) at the end preceded by d group e group total
8 20 28

Note that the same ancipitia (45 in total) are repeatly counted in (ii) (a) and (ii)(b). In (iii), I treat all the ancipitia at the end of verse as realized as long even if the syllable is short.89 The number of ‘explicit’ ancipitia (¼ anceps positions in which a long syllable and a short are actually found in responsion) is in total 24 (13 at the beginning (i), 11 in the middle (ii)) and not as large as that of ‘implicit’ ones (¼ anceps positions in which either a long syllable or a short is exclusively used throughout all the repetitions, that is to say, in positions where the form of the verse requires anceps; see Rule 6). This tendency is similar to the realization of aeolic full and half-base which tends to keep the same form throughout all the repetitions of the verse (see above, 5. C–D). There are 10 examples of anceps which is long in one repetition, short in all the others (6 at the beginning of the verse, 4 in the middle).90 Conversely, there are four examples of anceps which is short in one repetition, long in all the others (2 at the beginning, 2 in the middle).91 This is one of the cases to which the All-but-One rule applies. See Part III, C. The diVerence between the d group and the e group is evident in these points: 1. At the beginning of a verse, the anceps tends to be long when it precedes d, but there is no such tendency in the e group. 2. On the other hand, the anceps tends to be short in the middle of the verse either when it precedes or follows d. But again, there is no such tendency in the e group. Point 2 may be clariWed as follows. Apart from those following an aeolic phrase, the mid-ancipitia can be classiWed into four classes according to their surroundings: 89 Some will object to calling this feature brevis in longo because, even when verseend is recognized either by hiatus or by the structure of the following verse, it is possible to take this Wnal position not as long but as anceps. There have been, and will for ever be, controversies about interpretation of the Wnal anceps. 90 At the beginning: O1s11, O10s5, O13s2, P2e5, P10e1, P10e6; in the middle: O13s4, P11e6, N3s6, N3e1a. 91 At the beginning: P11e6, I8s10; in the middle: P10s3, N2s5.

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite (i) d x d (ii) d x e (iii) e x d (iv) e x e

55

both preceded and followed by d group preceded by d group but followed by e group preceded by e group but followed by d group both preceded and followed by e group

In each of the classes (i)–(iii), there are examples of (a) invariably long, (b) invariably short, (c) responsion between long and short; in class (iv), only (a) and (c) can exist since, by deWnition,
w
w
w
is not eþancepsþe, but e3. In the following table, (a) and (b) indicate the number of examples, and (c) indicates the number of examples and, in parentheses, the number of repetitions of long/short in the verses. (i) d x d (ii) d x e (iii) e x d (iv) e x e

(a) 1 1 1 5

(b) (c) 2 3 5 1 10 3 [14]92 3

(7/1, 3/5, 4/1) (1/3) (3/5, 1/3, 1/7) (3/3, 1/9, 4/6)

Using this table, point 2 above is reformulated, going into details: 2(a). When medial anceps is preceded by d but followed by e (ii), it is mostly short. Exceptions are one verse (O10e10) and one repetition in another verse (N3e1a). 2(b). When medial anceps is preceded by e but followed by d (iii), there is one example in which it is invariably long (O10e3), while there are as many as 10 which are invariably short. Although this tendency for anceps to be short is generally kept, there are a small number of exceptions where the anceps is an ‘explicit’ one. If we look closely at actual metrical patterns of long and short syllables in the six examples of eþlong ancepsþe, the following should be noted: 3. The actual occurrence of
w


w
is remarkably rare, although there are 5 verses which can be described structurally as e
e, including ^ e
e3 (P5s11) and w e2
e (O13s3).93 In fact, the

92

The number of e3 is given for reference. Besides, the sequence
w


w
is incorporated at some of the repetitions in two verses: P6s9 (e2 x e), P8s7 (e x e2). 93

56

Introduction

long before the long anceps is often resolved.94 Needless to say, e
e is the most popular combination in normal D/e. There is a reason for 2(a) above. Short anceps is used in such verses in a characteristically Pindaric manner. Typical of this group is: O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e

The phrase w d is preceded by a long single-short movement (in this verse, e3), giving the impression that the short anceps forms part of a series. These verses amount to nine. They are all collected in 8. C. 3. As in this group of verses, short anceps, in w d and w e alike, works as if prolonging the preceding w
rightwards: N3s1

ww
w
w
ww

w
k tel w d e gl w e I7e1
w
ww
w
w
w
k

Here the short anceps follows an aeolic phrase ending with w
. Including N3s1, there are 2 examples of this type of w d and, including I7e1, 4 examples of w e. They are also collected below; in 8, B. 4. 3 and in 8. C. 7 respectively. I stated above that short mid-anceps follows an aeolic phrase. There are just two exceptions: P11s4
atww


wr
ww
k rdod
e d tel x e2 (long at 2 repetitions P10s6 ww
ww
w
a
w
w
k out of 8)

However, P11s4 may be analysed in a diVerent manner,95 and P10s6 may also be diVerently interpreted.96 Then they are not altogether exceptions; see Part II, ad locc. There emerges an important feature when the positions of wordends are examined in relation to link anceps. Pindar has a strong

94 O2s3 (ey
e), O10s3a (er
er), O10s4 (er
e). The long is never resolved after the long anceps; see above, 6. C. 3. 95 If this verse is analysed as rdod þ sp þ rdod, the irregular long anceps would be eliminated. Verse-end might be set after the spondee in mid-verse. There are other irregularities in this verse; see Part II, ad loc. 96 The Wrst phrase may not be telesillean but ‘diomedean’, a variation of D; see further 7. 2.

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

57

tendency to avoid cut after long anceps at mid-verse.97 Where short anceps occurs in responsion with long in some repetitions (i.e. anceps is explicit), long anceps is always followed by bridge. The ‘extended Porson’s Law’ seems to be applicable here.98 The examples are found in 11 verses: wD P10s3 N2s5 d ^e d P10s4 N3e1a d w d
e N3s6 xe P11e6 O9s11
d e xe P8s7 O13s4
e2 ^ e e2 P6s9 P10s6 tel total

anceps xd
xd
x d rdod e2 xe
xd
xd
xd
x e2 xe xe x e2

A B C D 7 0 1 0 4 0 1 0 3 0 3 2 1 0 2 1 1 0 5 2 1 0 2 1 3 0 2 3 4 0 3 3 1 0 8 1 3 0 2 1 2 0 2 4 30 0 31 18

A Bridge after long anceps B Cut after long anceps C Bridge after short anceps D Cut after short anceps

The metrical contexts are various. So are the phrases both before and after the anceps. The anceps is realized as long at 30 repetitions among 79 in total. Cut never occurs after these 30 long mid-ancipitia (while it does after 18 short mid-ancipitia). But at the same time one curious fact must be noted. The situation of the anceps which is realized as long in every repetition is diVerent. This anceps is found in the context of particular stanza-forms, and is usually, but not invariably, followed by bridge. There are, in total, nine irregular cuts among 74 repetitions.99 All these verses belong to what I shall call 97 By ‘cut’ I mean word-end; in contrast, when word-end is absent, I use ‘bridge’. I use these terms loosely: ‘bridge’ has usually been employed for avoidance of wordend at a particular place in a metrical pattern where all, or most, of the examples show the same tendency. My usage is simply descriptive as to whether word-end occurs or not at a particular place in an example (¼ a verse). 98 Cf. Parker, CQ, ns 16 (1966), 1–26. 99 O2s3 (10 repetitions), O10s3a (10r), O10s4 (10r), O10e3 (5r), O10e10 (5r), O13s3 (10r), P5s11 (10r), P11s4 (8r), N6s6a (6r).

58

Introduction

Class II, except for P11s. In the following illustrations, l x means implicit long anceps. x j
w
tw
k
e e e
e e O2s3

w

rw
wt l 1 case out of 10: 77 (¼ 70 Sn.) łıå , غÆ ˜Øe ›e
Ææa ˚æı j æØ· ŁÆ ÆŒ æø

O10s4 w

wr l x j
w
k ^ e e
e 1 case out of 10: 92 (¼ 88 Sn.) K
d
ºF › ºÆåg j
ØÆ

x j
ww
y
w
k t e e
d y e O10e3 t
wr
wr l 2 cases out of 5: 81 (¼ 78 Sn.) IæåÆE b
ææÆØ 
Ø j ŒÆ ı K
øıÆ å æØ 103 (¼ 99 Sn.) P æÆ
ºØ ŒÆÆæåø· j
ÆE KæÆe  æåæ ı Notably in all the three verses above, the position preceding the long anceps is resolved. Perhaps this may give a diVerent rhythm from the ordinary case. Two occurrences of cut in O10e3 would be eliminated if an alternative colometry were adopted; see Part II, ad loc. x j
wr
w

ww
k w d
e e d O10e10 w
wwt l 1 case out of 5: 88 (¼ 84 Sn.) åºØHÆ b º
a j
æe Œ ºÆ IØ Ø ºø

This verse includes many irregularities as well, and I tentatively propose a diVerent colometry; see Part II, ad loc. With that colometry the cut would be eliminated. O13s3 w
wrw
l x j
w
k w e2
e 2 cases out of 10: 3 ØØ b Łæ
Æ, j ªÆÆØ 25 (¼ 26 Sn.) ªØ åæ –
ÆÆ, j ˘F
æ,

It is uncertain whether or not it is more than a coincidence that cut occurs between a short open vowel (note verbal assonance -
Æ  –
ÆÆ) and double consonants in both lines. P5s11 w
l x j
w
w
w
k ^ e
e3 2 cases out of 10: 22 ÆØ j  ŒH Iæø, 53 IŁ ƺø j ŒÆd
ÆæøÆ
ºØ.

Freer Dactylo-Epitrite

59

The avoidance of cut after long mid-anceps is one of the two reasons why the alternative colometry is rejected at O10s3a (see above, C). Two analyses of s3a are possible according to where resolutions are supposed to occur: (A) u
w
l x rw
l x rw

j x e
e
e
x
wr

j x e e
e sp (B) u
w

wr l At Wrst (A) seems better in that the inner structure of the verse is well articulated: ancepsþe (¼ ‘iambic metron’) is regularly repeated three times. But it introduces cut between long anceps and the following resolved long (5 repetitions after the Wrst long anceps and 9 after the second). This is extraordinary. In contrast, bridge is perfectly observed throughout all the repetition according to (B). In contrast to long anceps, no preference in the matter of wordend is observed after short anceps, either ‘explicit’ or ‘implicit’. In 11 verses including ‘explicit’ anceps, short anceps occurs at a total of 49 repetitions. Both bridge and cut occur indiVerently. As for ‘implicit’ anceps, there are in total 151 repetitions in 25 verses, excluding e3 (¼ e w e). Here, too, there is no observable preference.

60

Introduction 7 . A M B I G U I T I E S B E TW E E N T H E T WO M E T R E S

There are some ambiguities between aeolic phrases and freer D/e. Five of these concern classiWcation of particular forms which can be analysed in either way. The last is more serious: despite being asymmetrical,100 some apparent aeolic phrases may, in fact, be freer D/e.

1. Reizianum /x d x The ambiguity of the sequence x
ww

has already been mentioned above (3, Rule 7). It can be analysed in two ways: (i) as reizianum, the catalectic version of telesillean and therefore a collateral form with pherecratean, and (ii) link ancepsþchoriamb (d)þlink anceps. The sequence which lacks the initial anceps is similar:
ww

. This may be (i) an aeolic colon, adonean, or (ii) choriamb (d)þlink anceps. The diVerence must have been clearly audible in ancient times if the Wnal position of aeolic cola in catalexis was given the value of ‘triseme’ (T ¼ three brevia; for further, see above on catalexis, 5. A. 4). For these phrases, the metrical context should help us towards a decision.101

2. Aeolic half-base ww/^ D A phrase starting with the movement ww
ww
. . . can be analysed in two ways: (i) aeolic half-base (ww)þ‘choriambic nucleus’ and (ii) ^ D. Thus it is possible for a reizianum of the form ww
ww

to be ^ D
; cf. the reizianum of the form x
ww

above. Unlike x
ww

, all the examples (two, in fact) of ww
ww

are classiWed as ^ D. A question arises from its longer phrase ww
ww
w
. It is, at Wrst sight, blameless telesillean. But some of the telesilleans of this form may rather be related to D. Pindar once

100

The lack of symmetry is one of the two fundamental criteria which divide aeolic phrases from freer D/e (above, I. 4). The other is absence of link anceps. 101 I classify 5 examples of x
ww

as x d
, and 9 as reizianum. The examples of
ww

are rare (2 examples). Both of them I classify as adonean. See Lists 1–2.

Ambiguities between the Two Metres

61

uses ww
ww
w
at the beginning of a normal D/e ode which is otherwise made up totally of D, e, and link anceps: N10s1 ww
ww
w
x
w


ww
ww
k

The phrase ww
ww
w
x occupies the location where we should expect x
ww
ww
x (x D x).102 The two phrases are related to each other in this fashion: x
ww
ww
x ww
ww
w
x The two double shorts of D go ahead, and the initial anceps, changed into a real short, comes behind. According to this interpretation, the apparent rtel is a derivative of D and the two shorts at the beginning really are two shorts, like those in D. Now consider, for example, the structural similarity between two verses in P10: P10s6 ww
ww
w
a
w
w
k (tel) x e2 P10s3 w
ww
ww
u
ww

k w D x d


Beside P10s6 there four other delicate cases: P2s4, N3s8, N3e4 (bis). All of them are treated as telesillean, but the question is unsolvable; see Part II, ad locc. This question will be discussed again in a wider perspective below, 7. 6. N10s1 will be cited there too.

3. Wilamowitzianum/e w d A long single-short movement is deWned as a single unit (I. 3, Rule 8) of freer D/e, like O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5 w d e2 O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e

Following this rule, it is possible to analyse the standard type of wilamowitzianum,
w
w
ww
, in the same manner (e w d).103 102 I argued for this verse, ww
ww
w
x, in tragedy, collecting the examples: BICS 38 (1991–3), 243–61, giving it the name ‘diomedean’ (248). It is extensively employed later by Euripides. 103 There are in total 9 verses which include this type of wilamowitzianum. Interestingly, their occurrences are concentrated in particular stanza-forms (e.g. 3 in P6s and 3 in I8s).

62

Introduction

Then the sequence is not aeolic but freer D/e. One of the most delicate cases is P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wilþ3

which may be better analysed as ^ eþeþhagesichorean (¼ w dod
); for ^ eþe, see further below, 8. B. 6. I categorically reject this analysis in Part I. Ambiguous cases will be examined in Part II.104

4. Aeolic full base w
/^ e w
at the beginning of a verse can be taken in two ways: the aeolic base or acephalous e (^ e). In the case of w

ww
, I take all the examples as ^ eþd (see above, 5. A. 3). As for w

ww
w
, the situation is not clear-cut. In some contexts it is certain that (i) this form is glyconic (pure aeolic); but in others it may be (ii) ^ eþdodrans (composite). I have tentatively discussed this problem above (5. C) citing N2s1 and P2e1b–e3 for the certain examples of (i), and P5e2 and N7s1 for (ii). Similarly, the wilamowitzianum in I8s5a, w

w
ww
, may be ^ eþrdod. Here is another illustration of this type of ambiguity: O1s1 w

ww
w

w
ww

k

At Wrst sight, this is an ‘innocent’ priapean dicolon. But (i) the examples of ‘priapean dicola’ are extremely rare, the other two examples being P8e3/4 (
xgl

ph), N2s4 (

gl
xph); (ii) aeolic phrases are scarce in O1; (iii) palindromic movement (for which see 8. A. 6) is conspicuous. And, although this is in general a Pindaric tendency (5. C), (iv) the exact strophic responsion at the base (w
at the glyconic,
w at the pherecratean at all the 8 repetitions) must be 104 Outside the eighteen majors I analyse the phrase in these verses as e w d: O4e9/10 rwr w
ww
w
w
w
k e w d w e2

Pae6s5

rwr w
ww
w rw
j
ww
j e w d w e d

They are similar in that (1) they start with 6 continuous shorts and (2) single-short movement extends rightward too. There is no example of totally resolved e wwwww in the eighteen majors, but resolution occurs in expanded phrases, e.g. P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6 See 6. C. 1.

Ambiguities between the Two Metres

63

taken into account.105 Moreover, (v) w
at the beginning of this verse harmonizes with other verses of this ode (s2, s9, s10, e2, e4, e7) which start with w

w
(and www
w
) : ^ eþe. (vi) Between the full þ2 ending of the glyconic and the full base of the pherecratean, bridge is not observed at as many as four repetitions. This is against the general tendency (cf. 8. B. 1). Last but not least (vii) the similarity with the preceding verse (i.e. the Wnal verse of the epode) is illuminating: O1e7 w

w
O1s1 w



ww
w

ww
w

k
ww
w

w
ww

k

^e

e dod ar

(the last colon of O1e7, aristophanean, is dodþ1 by deWnition in this book; see above 5. A. 5). O1s1 is, then, ^ eþdodþrdodþ1, i.e. w
is not the base of a glyconic, nor
w of a pherecratean. However, so delicate a classiWcation risks producing too many borderline cases. Thus, for this type of phrase, I reject (ii) and accept (i) and leave ambiguous cases as ambiguous. In the tables and parallels given in Part I above, I treat all these examples as aeolic phrases.

5. Pherecratean/rdodþ1 The apparent ‘pherecratean’ in O1s1 is a related, but diVerent matter. I have already raised the question (5. A. 5) whether
w
ww

is really pherecratean in all contexts. The example I cited there was N3e2
w
ww

w
ww

k

This verse may be analysed as two reversed dodrantes, the second followed by anceps (rdodþ1). In O1s another pherecratean is sandwiched by two lecythia (e3): The bases of the two cola (w
and
w) are in reversed order, and consequently make a strong contrast. This usage is diVerent from the standard in tragedy in two ways: Wrst,
w is often in responsion with

in tragedy (and so is w
with

though to a lesser extent). See Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’. But in O1 there is no example of

in either colon. Secondly, in tragedy, if the glyconic starts with w
, the following pherecratean usually starts with

. In short,
w does not coexist with w
. 105

64

Introduction

O1s3
w
w
w
k e3 O1s4
w
ww

k ph O1s5
w
w
w
k e3

It is a tempting suggestion that e3 and this pherecratean are the same with exchange of the Wfth and sixth positions. Whether the Wnal position of this pherecratean is triseme created by catalexis or anceps is a recurrent question (see 1 above). Again borderline cases could be produced, and I have rejected analyses like rdodþ1 in the tables and parallels given in Part I.

6. Expanded aeolic This last ambiguity does not concern the classiWcation of particular forms in particular contexts but the deWnition of diVerent metres, and, consequently, the historic perspective of the evolution of Greek metre in general: namely, the question whether there is aeolic expansion in Pindar. One might expect, after reading Snell’s Metrorum Conspectus or West’s description, that there would be extensive use of the dactylic expansion of aeolic cola in the Pindaric corpus. But the examples are disappointingly scarce. What we might imagine as a typical phrase would be, for example, gld, with which Snell’s table begins: ªª
ww
ww
w
which is absent, in fact, from the eighteen majors.106 Not only are examples of ‘expanded’ cola conspicuously few in number, but also their range of variation is surprisingly narrow.107 I count only six examples.

106 This phrase, gld, concludes a short strophe in Sappho (94 LP): gl k gl k gld k. Here, the unexpanded and expanded formsare arranged side by side. This is the most certain attestation of expansion. 107
ww
ww

is not an expanded adonean, of course, but D and anceps. And w

ww
ww
k at O10e2, I8s9 is not an expanded reversed dodrans (w

ww
) but acephalous e þ D. Certainly, there are a number of D’s which can be explained best as an expanded form of d. But the relation between d and D, and the longer form D þ, is a diVerent topic from the dactylic expansion of aeolic cola.

Ambiguities between the Two Metres

65

Of these the most plausible examples amount to only three; the notations in parentheses are given for convenience’s sake, based on the analysis taken in the following paragraphs: [1] N6e4 [2] O10e9 [3] P2s4


ww
ww
ww
w
j (dod2d)

ww
ww
w
k (teld) ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k (teld) tel

[1] N6e4 could be dodrans expanded by two dactyls, [2] O10e9 telesillean expanded by one dactyl, and so too the Wrst phrase of [3] P2s4, with ww as base. This could be one of the two cases (the other is N6s3 below) in which an aeolic colon and its expanded cognate are located side by side. There is a fourth example, though a diVerent analysis is possible: [4] N6s3

www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod (rdod2d)

The latter phrase could be reversed dodrans, like the former, but with expansion by two dactyls.108 Two further verses might be included in this category. They are of a very unusual shape (but interestingly, similar to each other even apart from expansion): [5] O9e7 [6] P11s1



w
ww
ww


k (heptad) sp

w
ww
ww
ww
w


k ((heptaþ2)2d) sp

Thus the number of aeolic verses which have dactylic expansion could be six at most.109 108 N6s3 has been analysed as gl þ D þ by many, supposing the eighth position of the glyconic to be resolved. See Part II, ad loc. 109 If an emendation metri causa might be accepted, a seventh example would be added:

O10e3

t
wr
wr

ww
y
w
k

In four repetitions out of Wve the latter part is the same as [2] O10e9



ww
ww
w
(teld)

The exact responsion is broken only at the Wfth repetition: v. 103 (¼ v. 99 Sn.) -ø·
ÆE KæÆe  æåæ ı ( is not found in the older MSS but was inserted by Moschopoulos). Here the second double short is replaced by a long. This cannot be contraction, for the double short of the choriambic nucleus of an aeolic colon is not contracted into a long in the whole of Greek poetry, unlike in dactylic movement. Admittedly, æåæ ı is a proper noun, but the licence is extraordinary nevertheless. I am tempted to think that æåæ ı was originally a marginal gloss (referring to v. 2 æåæ ı
ÆEÆ) which took the place of the true reading; e.g.
Ææe PŒºF , and perhaps asyndeton is preferable. If æåæ ı is kept, another analysis is required. Then the possibility of expanded aeolics disappears. See further Part II, ad loc.

66

Introduction

There is an interesting feature common to these six verses: the metrical context. None of them occurs among ordinary aeolic phrases. Instead, there is a stronger association with freer D/e. N6e, O10e, N6s, and O9e belong to the group of poems composed mainly of freer D/e verses (the group of stanza-forms which will constitute Class II in later chapters). P2s and P11s belong to the group in which the two metres are closely amalgamated (Class III). It is especially suggestive that Wve of the six verses have true dactylic phrases,
ww
ww
(D) or
ww
ww
ww
(D þ), in their preceding or following verses (N6e3, O10e8, P2s3, N6s4a, O9e6).110 So it seems that expanded aeolic cola are associated with freer D/e more closely than with aeolic proper. Perhaps, indeed, these examples are not, in fact, aeolic nor related to Lesbian metre at all. What we suppose to be expanded aeolic may be a modiWcation of D or D þ. The chief reason for classifying them as aeolic is the asymmetrical cadence [1, 2, 3, 6] and introduction [4, 5, 6]. But a few asymmetrical phrases are found in the normal D/e odes of Pindar in three, or possibly four, passages: [7] O6s5 [8] O7e2 [9] N10s1 [10] N8s1 [11] O13s6



w


ww
ww
w
k
w


w


ww
ww

ww
ww
w
k111 ww
ww
w
x
w


ww
ww
k
x
ww


w

j x
w
ww


w


ww
ww

w
k

[11] O13s6 could be dismissed as a special irregularity because the asymmetrical phrase is located at the turning point from non-D/e to D/e. [10] N8s1 is usually emended and does not appear in the texts of Snell or Turyn, but I believe the paradosis should be accepted.112 The

110 P11s1 is the exception. It is followed by hepta. Expansion, or more correctly speaking, contraction, is evident here. 111 Colometry is uncertain; two other colometries are possible, but an asymmetrical phrase never disappears by any means; see Part III, A, ad loc. 112 The paradosis oVers at v. 40 ÆhÆØ  Iæ ; åºøæÆE KæÆØ ‰ ‹ æ fi ¼Ø, in which sense and syntax are blameless, but the Wrst part scans
w
ww
, an unconventional phrase in D/e. The other Wve repetitions give


ww
in responsion there. Snell emends to IØ  Iæ ; åºøæÆE KæÆØ ‰ ‹ æ, ending the verse with a lacuna of

. He then takes

Ambiguities between the Two Metres

67

other three are certain, and interesting. The Wnal parts of [7] O6s5 and [8] O7e2 are equal to dodd or teld: (
)
ww
ww
w
. In [9] N10s1, the phrase ww
ww
w
x appears where we should expect x
ww
ww
x (D); cf. (2) above. Pindar may have followed the Dorian tradition. Stesichorus and Ibycus use a kind of asymmetrical phrase in the vicinity of dactylic verses, or, it may be said, in ‘prototype’ D/e. Note the epode of Ibycus 282 P:

ww
ww

k

ww
ww

k y
ww
ww

k
w
ww
ww
ww

k
ww

ww
w
k The fourth verse starts with
w
ww
ww
. Its similarity to [5] O9e7 and [6] P11s1 is obvious.113 And the Wfth ends with
ww
w
. Ibycus uses the so-called ‘ibycean’,
ww
ww
w
, alongside dactylic phrases in another ode (286 P). The ‘ibycean’ is often taken as an aeolic colon, but it must be diVerentiated from a later development of glyconic.114 Compared with Ibycus, the inXuence of Stesichorus is less conspicuous. In his S148 (Eriphyle, P. Oxy. 2618), the following verse is found (str/ant. 1):
w


w
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
k Note the similarity of the long phrase
w
ww
. . . to [5] and [6] above. And also in his Iliou Persis,


ww
as a contraction of D, which is, however, totally unparalleled. If


ww
is accepted by emendation for all the repetitions, the initial



would be interpreted as a spondee followed by d, and then Christ’s claim, ‘veterem lectionem oØØ glossa ÆhÆØ summotam esse’, would be preferable to Snell’s emendation. See Part III, A, ad loc. 113 And the Wnal spondee of [5] and [6], which adds a further curiosity, may be related to some verses of Alcman and others, collected by West, GM 52–3. 114 In his later plays Euripides occasionally uses
ww
ww
w
and
ww
x
ww
in aeolic contexts as variations of glyconic and wilamowitzianum.
ww
ww
w
is sometimes found in responsion with www
ww
w
. See Itsumi, ‘Glyconic’, 72.

68

Introduction


y
ww
y
w

k seems to be mingled (str/ant. 3) in the D/e context. But here double short is in responsion with long. In these cases the possibility of ‘link biceps’ cannot be denied.115 If we had more of Stesichorus or Ibycus, we might trace the origin of freer D/e to them, and Wnd some asymmetrical phrases in freer D/e. Then so-called expanded aeolic in Pindar might be related, not to Sappho and Alcaeus but to Stesichorus and Ibycus. Or Pindar may be connected, in these cases, with the Aeolic tradition via Ibycus. Ibycus moved to the eastern Aegean and worked in the same ambience as Anacreon. That means that he will have known aeolic verse. Pindar seems to have used expanded aeolics elsewhere more extensively. There are in total 12 verses in his Paeans that appear to be aeolics expanded by dactyls; see Part II, Appendix B. They are, in fact, ibyceans and its prolonged forms. The metrical notation inevitably associated with aeolic may not be suitable; ‘Ibycean’ (ibyc) sounds less tendentious. I therefore introduce two new terms: expanded ibycean (ibyc þ; cf. D þ) for
ww
ww
ww
w
(¼ dod2d) reversed ibycean (ribyc; cf. rdod) for
w
ww
ww


Hereafter I shall notate the six examples in the eighteen majors in the following manner, using and modifying these terms:

115 It is maintained by many that single short, long, and double short are well attested as freely in responsion at link positions (cf. West, GM 49, 52); however, I must stress that responsion between single short and double is precariously based on some papyrus readings. The responsion at the Wrst position of the iambic trimeter of tragic dialogue is, of course, another matter. And so is the beginning of the archebulean of Callimachus (228 PfeiVer). 1. Stesichorus 222(b) (the Thebaid), 215 ÆŒæıÆ. Its -ı- corresponds with a long in most repetitions and a short in one (285
ºØ). 2. Bacchylides 17 ( ˙ŁØ), (i) str. 12. v. 101 ªÆæ: r responds with w in 2 repetitions (vv. 12, 78) and with
(v. 35). (ii) str. 17. v. 40 ŒºÆØ: r responds with w in 2 repetitions (vv. 17, 106) and with
(v. 83). However, the double short in both cases, ªÆðæÞ and ŒºðÆØÞ, is easily removed; see Housman, CR 12 (1898), 138 ¼ Collected Papers, ii. 460 and Maas, ‘Freiheiten II’, 19. The transposition of ªÆæ can also remove metrical lengthening of . Snell keeps the papyrus readings and the responsion.

Ambiguities between the Two Metres [1] N6e4 [2] O10e9 [3] P2s4 [4] N6s3 [5] O9e7 [6] P11s1

69

ibyc þ


ibyc ww ibyc tel

rdod ribyc þ
ribyc sp
ribyc þ þ2 sp

It would be better to follow Rule 3 above and to divide [3] P2s4 thus: P2s4 ww
ww
ww
j w
ww
ww
w
k

^ D þwibyc

Then it might be better to analyse N3e4 in the same manner: [7] N3e4

ww
ww
j w
ww
ww
w

w
k

^ D wibyc

The discussion will be resumed in Part II, Appendix B.

e

70

Introduction 8. C OM P O SI T I O N O F V E R S E S

The characteristics of each phrase have been discussed in the previous chapters. This chapter treats verses as a whole. It is divided into three sections. In the Wrst, A, I discuss topics common to aeolic verses and freer D/e verses, like verse-lengths or palindromic movements. Especially important is RSS (ratio of short syllables to long), which will be one of the strongest criteria to classify stanza-forms in the next chapter. In the following two sections combinations of phrases are discussed; aeolic verses in section B, freer D/e verses in section C. Pindar shows his distinctive ways of making up verses of more than one phrase. This distinctiveness is evident in particular patterns of long and short syllables that are shared, in spite of various names given to the phrases, by a number of verses either completely in the same order or with slight modiWcations. All the examples are collected for each distinctive pattern, and these collections function as the parallels for each verse and will be frequently referred to in Part II.

A. General 1. Demarcation of verses Hiatus and/or brevis conWrms verse-end when word-end occurs consistently at all the repetitions. When both hiatus and brevis are absent but word-end coincides, there are two options: (1) to recognize verse-end there and to establish two independent verses, or (2) to establish a long, united verse. Recognition of verse-end depends on whether two separated verses are commoner, or in other words, appear to be more natural, than one united long verse, and moreover, whether the overall structure of a stanza-form becomes clearer by dividing the verse. There are 235 verses in the eighteen majors. Of these, 195 are marked by hiatus and/or brevis at the end and 40 verses are not. Besides, there are 17 other places in 16 verses where I do not recognize verse-end in spite of the coincidence of word-end without exception at all the repetitions.116 Nobody would divide 116 Of these 16 verses, Boeckh separated 6 verses into two while I unite into one. (And Boeckh wrongly separated another 4 verses, in spite of enclitics and/or elision.) At the other 11 places in 10 verses, Boeckh and I agree on not recognizing verse-end.

Composition of Verses

71

O2e3 rw

w
w
rw

jw
k

into two simply because of the coincident word-end before the penultimate position, but there remain borderline cases. For example, I divide N6s1a and N6s4a into two verses, although many treat them as one: N6s1a w

j N6s1b
w
ww
w
rw
k

^e x gl e

N6s4a ww
ww
ww
rw

j ^ D þ e x N6s4b
w
k e

And, on the other hand, I unite O9e1 with e2: O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
jww
w
w
w

k

w e2 w d w e2


The division of N6s into two verses makes its overall structure clearer. The united verse O9e1/2 relates better to similar verses in other stanza-forms. For further argument, see Part II ad locc. Colometry is relatively unambiguous in non-D/e, aeolic or freer D/e alike. The situation is diVerent in the normal D/e, since phrases, and consequently verses too, are homogeneous. The diYculties will be described at length in Part III, A. Brevis in longo is not always a self-evident criterion. Brevis in longo and recognition of verse-end are somehow interdependent when the supposed verse-ends are pendent.117 For example, the Wnal position of N6s4a above is occupied by both a long syllable and a short. The short syllable in that position is brevis in longo if N6s4a is separated from N6s4b. On the other hand, it would be link anceps if N6s4a were united with N6s4b. Here too we should observe other verses. As is demonstrated above (6, D), long anceps in mid-verse is hardly ever followed by word-end in the eighteen majors, and, moreover, cut never occurs after long anceps when it is in responsion with short anceps. This gives support to setting verse-end after the anceps.118

117 A good illustration is given by Stinton, ‘Pause and Period’ CQ, ns 27 (1977), 38 ¼ Collected Papers, 324. 118 Including N6s4 there are in total 7 verses which end with link anceps but without hiatus between it and the following verse. There is a possibility that the Wnal link anceps of these verses should be either mid-link anceps, when the initial position

72

Introduction

Even coincidence of word-end is not always deWnitely attested, because deWnition of a ‘word’ is not absolutely clear. There are cases where a ‘weak’ word like a preposition is located at the end of the verse, while the verse-end is manifestly guaranteed at that point by one or more other repetitions. Therefore a theoretical possibility remains, which we must be prepared to accept, that there may be verse-end even within a word-group which is normally inseparable. But, of course, this type of verse-end should be avoided as far as possible. A verse may be made up of just one phrase or of several phrases. When a verse is made up of more than one phrase, it does not necessarily mean that those phrases are of the same metrical type. Two metres, aeolic and freer D/e, can make up three types of combination: verses composed (i) of an aeolic phrase or phrases only; (ii) of a freer D/e phrase or phrases only; (iii) of both metres. I have already called (i) and (iii) ‘pure aeolic’ verses and ‘composite aeolic’ verses respectively (p. 22). (ii) is called freer D/e verse. The 235 verses of the eighteen majors are classiWed thus: (i) pure aeolic 62 verses (ii) freer D/e 101 verses119 (iii) composite aeolic 72 verses total 235 verses

2. Identical verses Of the 235 verses in the eighteen majors, 142 are unique. The variety of non-D/e verses in Pindar is certainly greater than that of D/e verses. Nevertheless, this variety should not be over-emphasized, since many unique verses are more or less closely related to others. DiVerences sometimes amount to no more than the absence of one

of the following verse is a true long, or even a true long, when the initial position of the following verse is a short or an anceps. Of the 7 verses, it is structurally implausible that O10e4/5, P5e7b, N3e1, and N6e6/7 (corrupted text) should be united with the following verses. For N6s1 and O2e5, there is a chance of combination; see Part II, ad locc. 119 This includes 6 verses which could in theory be expanded aeolic but are classiWed here as freer D/e. See 7. 6.

Composition of Verses

73

anceps or the addition of a Wnal phrase. In fact, ‘family resemblances’ between verses are easily recognizable. The remaining 93 verses (39.6%) are repeated once or more (here I ignore diVerences such as realization of link anceps, the form of aeolic base, resolution). See List 3. It will be noted that the same verse may be repeated consecutively (e.g. P2e1a, e1b, e2) or appear in a number of diVerent stanzas; glþe, which is found in seven verses and is also incorporated in another three, can legitimately be regarded as one of Pindar’s favourites.

3. Verse-length The average length of the 235 verses is 12.2 positions. This is equivalent to e.g. two dodrantes, or x eþglyconic, or x D x e. Whichever metre they may be composed in, non-D/e verses are generally short. This is a signiWcant diVerence from the verses of D/e.120 No ‘pure aeolic’ verse consists of more than three phrases. ‘Composite aeolic’ verses are shorter: there is no verse which contains three or more aeolic phrases plus e or other freer D/e phrase(s). For the sake of convenience, I hereafter mean by ‘the longer verses’ those that have 20 or more positions, although to separate 20 positions from 19 is, of course, arbitrary. The longer verses number 15. They are: (i) four pure aeolic; (ii) nine composite aeolic; (iii) two freer D/e. In the following lists, the Wgure in parentheses represents the number of positions. (i) Pure aeolic N2s4 www
ww
w



ww
w

x
ww

k gl gl ph (23) gl tel (22) I7s5a


ww
w


ww
w
x
w
ww
j hepta

120 It is less easy to set verse-end in D/e verses, for, before/after link anceps, wordend occasionally coincides at all the repetitions without hiatus/brevis, as at O3s3 x D x j e x D k or O3s4 x e x j e x e x D x e k. Moreover, even if a short syllable is located at a link anceps which can be the last position of the verse, it does not necessarily mean that brevis in longo occurs. If all these verses are divided into two or more, the number of verses is 322, and the average length is 13.3 positions. On the other hand if all these are connected, the number of verses becomes 226 and the average length rises to 18.5 positions. The problem is fully discussed in Part III, A.

74 P2s2

Introduction www
ww

x
ww
w


ww
w
k rdod

I8s5a w

w
ww

w
ww

w
ww
j

(21) gl tel wil rdod (20) rdod

Only these four verses are made up of three aeolic phrases; there is no verse with four phrases and fewer than 20 positions. (ii) Composite aeolic: divided further into four sub-groups. (a) (22) I7s3/4

w
x
ww
w



ww
w
w

k x e tel glþ3 x e hepta (21) O9e8

w
x
w
ww
x
w
ww
w

k heptaþ3 x e gl (20) P6s1/2 w
w
www
ww
w

w
w
ww
k wil

In all three, anceps and e precede two aeolic phrases. (b) wil e2 tel (20) I8s3
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
k P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k tel e2 hag (20)

e2 (
w
w
) is sandwiched between two aeolic phrases, functioning as an extensive leftward prolongation of the following aeolic phrase, which has a short half-base. (c) N7s2
ww
www w
w

ww
w

w
w
k I8s1/2 w

w
ww
w
wt
w
w
ww
k

dod w e (21) dod e2 wil w e wil (20)

w e, sandwiched between two aeolic phrases, in eVect prolongs the preceding aeolic phrase rightwards. (d ) N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k

dod w d (22) rdod e2 ^ e d x d (22) P10s4 w

ww
x
ww

w
ww

w
w
k rdod e2

These two verses are structually identical in the last 16 positions. It is highly unusual to Wnd this degree of resemblance in long Pindaric verses outside D/e.

Composition of Verses

75

(iii) freer D/e O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5 w d e2 (21) N3e1b w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k w e3 w d w e e (20)

A prolonged sequence of single-short movement precedes the short ancepsþd. The above 15 verses may also be divided into two groups another way. Verses of groups (i) and (ii) (a) feature phrases with full aeolic base in the form

,
x, or w
, and also half-base in the form
. They thus tend to include more long syllables than those of the other groups, giving a heavier impression. The other eight verses (ii) (b), (ii) (c), (ii) (d), and (iii) are similar to each other in structure. Short anceps, whether it be link before e or d, or half-base, is not easy to distinguish from true short. Thus phrase-boundary is not clear, and phrases tend to run together neatly. In three of the eight verses, e2 is employed in a particular manner, being juxtaposed with aeolic hexasyllables (
w
ww
/
ww
w
), which diVer from it only in having one double short where e2 has single short; the similarity is fully exploited. As will be discussed later, there is a diVerence between the metrical contexts of the two groups. Most of the former seven verses are used in the Class I stanza-forms (aeolic) while all the latter eight verses are in Class III (amalgamated); and there is no example of the longer verses in Class II (freer D/e), even when these verses are freer D/e in character. So much for the longer verses. Next are the shorter verses, meaning those that have six positions or fewer. There are in total 17 of these. Two are aeolic: P10e2
ww

k adon (5) O9s9

ww

k reiz (6)

These two may be analysed diVerently, i.e. as (
) d (
ww
)þanceps (the unsolved ambiguity, 7. 1). Interestingly, there are no examples where a dodrans or a reversed dodrans stands as a verse by itself. This may be purely accidental, but may be meaningful, since both are common cola and used frequently in combination.

76

Introduction Two others include d or D:

^D O10e8 ww
ww
k (6)
ww


k d sp (6) I7e6

The other 13 verses are made up of e, or its cognates, and anceps: N6s4b N6s1a P5s7a N6s6b P5s4 P5s6 P5e7a O10e1b P5e7b P5e8 O2s4 I7s5b,O10e7


w
k w

j


k
wt
k wr rw
k w

w
k w
tw
j x
wr
k w tw

j
w

w
k
w
rw
k

w
w
k

e

(3) (3) x sp (3) ex (4) ^e e (5) ^e e (5) ^e e (5) x e x (5) x e x (5) ee (6) ee (6) x e2 (6) ^e

x

Nine out of the 17 examples are found in four stanza-forms (3 each). Of these O10e, P5s, and N6s belong to Class II (freer D/e), and P5e, to Class III (amalgamated).

4. Pendent and blunt endings Pindar prefers blunt ending to pendent. Of 235 non-D/e verses, 165 verses (70.2%) end blunt and 70 verses (29.8%) pendent. When verses end with an aeolic phrase, the diVerence is not signiWcant. Out of 86 verses, 46 end blunt and 40 pendent. But there is a great diVerence when the Wnal phrase of a verse is not aeolic but freer D/e, like e or d: 119 verses end blunt, without Wnal anceps, while 30 end pendent, with anceps.121 The preference for e at the verse-end is especially remarkable: 89 verses (37.9%) end with e or its prolonged cognates (e2, e5, e6).122 In contrast, only 20 verses end with e (e2, e3) and anceps.

121 In this Wgure (119 verses), those 6 ambiguous verses (7. 6) which could be expanded aeolic but is taken as freer D/e are included. They are all blunt, anyway. 122 The 6 verses which end with a spondee are excluded.

Composition of Verses

77

Thus verses ending blunt predominate in many stanza-forms. Only six stanza-forms out of the 31 in the eighteen majors have a majority of pendent verses,123 and three of these belong to Class I. P8s (also Class I) has no blunt verse-ends at all.

5. Ratio of short syllables (RSS) When a verse includes many short syllables, it has ‘light’ movement; when ‘light’ verses are repeated, the stanza-form feels ‘light’. A short syllable is produced: (i) in a short position; (ii) when anceps is realized as short; (iii) when a long is resolved into two shorts. Thus, if a stanza-form includes (i) many short positions, (ii) short ancipitia, (iii) resolutions, the rate of occurrence of short syllables, which is hereafter abbreviated as RSS, is high. RSS is calculated in the following manner: the number of short syllables (not positions) divided by the total number of syllables (not positions). Anceps position is counted either as long or as short, according to its actual realization. Resolution is counted as two short syllables. When long and short are in responsion at a particular anceps position, and when resolved and unresolved long are in responsion at a long position, the majority prevails. RSS is calculated for all the stanza-forms. See List 4, in which not only non-D/e but D/e values are calculated. In the latter, RSS is remarkably low, mainly because of long link anceps and absence of resolution. The average of the 40 stanza-forms of D/e is 40.1% (P4, the longest epinikion, is typical: P4s 40.8%, P4e 40.0%). The highest is 46.9% (O7e) and the lowest 34.3% (N5s). In contrast RSS of the eighteen majors is higher. Even the lowest (O9e) is 42.1%. The highest is as high as 61.8% (N7e). The average of the eighteen majors is 50.9%. It is about 10% higher than that of the 40 D/e stanza-forms.

123 N2s (4 pendent verses/5 in total), O9s (7/10), O2e (4/6), O13s (3/5), P8e (3/6), P11e (3/6).

78

Introduction

RSS helps our vague impression to become visible statistically. This will serve as one of the powerful criteria for classifying stanzaforms. In general, RSS is high in most cases of Class III (amalgamated) and in some of Class II (freer D/e), but low in Class I (aeolic). The minimum and maximum values in each class are: Class I 42.4% (P8e)–53.6% (P6s); Class II 42.1% (O9e)–58.0% (N6s); Class III 50.0% (O1e)–61.8% (N7e).

6. Palindromic movement within verse By ‘palindromic movement’ is meant a sequence composed of two phrases which repeat each other in reversed, as for example, O1s1 w

ww
w

w
ww

k ¥

¥

gl ph

Many more verses are partially palindromic. The following verses include: (a) . . .
ww
w

w
ww
. . . P2e1a www
ww
w

w
ww
j w

ww
w

w
ww
k P2e1b w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k P2e8 w

ww
w

w
ww
w
k P8e6

ww
w

w
ww
w

k N7s8 ww
w

w
ww

k cf. O13s5 ¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

gl rdod gl rdod wilþ2 hipp gl gl tel hipp ^ dod ph

There are some other types of palindromic movements, such as: (b) . . .
ww
w
w
ww
. . .
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dod w d rdod e2 N3s1

ww
w
w
ww

w
k tel w d e N4s4
w
ww
w
w
ww

k gl reiz ^ e e dod reiz O1e4 w

w

ww
w
w
ww

k ¥

¥

N3e3

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

(c) . . .
ww
x
ww
. . . and . . .
ww
w
ww
. . . ¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

N2s5
ww
x
ww
N4s5
x
w
ww
x
ww
P10s3 w
ww
ww
x
ww
P10s4 w

ww
x
ww



k dxdx w
k wil tel
k wDxdx
w
ww

w
w
k ^ e d x d rdod e2

¥

Composition of Verses ¥

¥

¥


ww
w
ww
x
w

j ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k ¥

N3e1a N3e4

¥ ¥


x
x
ww
w
ww

k ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k ¥ ¥

N4s6 P2s4

79 dwdxex tel tel e (or ^ D w ibyc e) wil reiz teld tel (or ^ D þ w ibyc)

(d) . . .
w
w
ww
w
w
. . . O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k w e2 w d w e2 x ¥

¥

(e) . . . (
) w

w
ww
w

w (
) . . . w
w

w
w w
w

w
k w

w
w w
w

w
ww
w

k ¥

¥

¥

¥

N3s4 P2e8

w e gl e wilþ2 hipp

(f) . . .
ww
w
x
w
ww
. . . I7s5a


ww
w


ww
w
x
w
ww
j gl tel hepta ¥

¥

The following types include resolution, yielding the sequence
www
: (g) . . .
ww
www
ww
. . . ¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

N6s3 www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod ribyc þ P5e3
w
ww
www
ww
j rdod rdod
ww
www
ww

w
j d rdod e P5e6 ¥

(h) . . .
w
www
w
. . . ¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

N7s7
tww
w
www
w
k tel e2 O2e2
w
w
www
w

w

k e3 e e x O2s8

w
www
w
w
ww
k x e e2 w d ¥

(i) . . .
www
www
. . . ¥

¥

¥

¥

¥

^e e e e e O2s2 wy
w

wr
wr
w
k O10e3 t
wr
wr

ww
y
w
k x e e
dxe rw

wr
wr
k eee
I8s8

¥

Perhaps the palindrome was not only audible but visible, if the dance steps went, as it were, in reversed.

80

Introduction

7. Repetition within verse It has already been mentioned that the combination of glþph is remarkably rare within a verse (3 examples). Not only glþph but repetition of identical or similar cola is rare. For example, glþgl is found in only 3 verses (including glþglþ3). Even when the identical colon is repeated, the aeolic base is often changed. For example, N2s4 www
ww
w



ww
w

x
ww

k gl gl ph

the Wrst glyconic of N2s4 starts with www while the second with

, and for the Wnal pherecratean,
w is used at 3 repetitions out of 5. There are even verses in which two aeolic cola have w
and
w respectively, like O1s1 (w
glþ
wph) or P8e6 (w
glþ
wgl). This combination is very rare in tragedy. The following Wve verses therefore merit special mention in that hexasyllables of identical form, sometimes even with identical base, are repeated within the verse. Most examples belong to Class III stanza-forms (amalgamated): N7e5 N3e4 O9e8 I8s5a I8s5b

www
ww
w
www
ww
w
w

k ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k

w
x
w
ww
x
w
ww
w

k w

w
ww

w
ww

w
ww
j
w
ww

w
ww
j

gl glþ3 tel tel e xe hepta heptaþ3 wil rdod rdod rdod rdod

Whether they are freer D/e or expanded aeolic (7. 6), repetitive structure is evident in the following two: P2s4 ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k (teld) tel N6s3 www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod (rdod2d)

In the following three verses, not whole phrases but parts of phrases are repeated: O1e7 N3e2 P2e8

w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k ^ e e dod ar
w
ww

w
ww

k rdod ph w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k wilþ2 hipp

These are all there are, and the rarity is striking. Contiguous repetition is fundamental to Greek poetic rhythm, but Pindar deviates from it to a great extent.

Composition of Verses

81

B. Aeolic Verses: Pure and Composite 1. Contact between two aeolic phrases There is no verse which has more than three aeolic phrases (above, A. 3). Within that limit, the number of aeolic phrases within a verse varies. ‘Pure’ and ‘composite’ aeolic verses are classiWed thus according to the number of phrases: 3 aeolic phrases 2 aeolic phrases 1 aeolic phrase

pure aeolic composite aeolic 4 0 29 13 29 59

An interesting tendency can be observed in the matter of word-end when two aeolic phrases are directly juxtaposed. In some of the contact points, by which is meant the point of junction between two phrases, either word-end coincides with the contact point (cut) or a word extends into the following phrase (bridge). Bridge is strictly observed throughout all the repetitions in some kinds of verse, while not in others. First we count the number of contact points. Each of the four verses made up of three aeolic phrases (collected above A. 3) has two contact points. There is one contact point each in the 29 pure aeolic verses made up of two phrases. The 13 composite aeolic verses made up of two aeolic phrases are classiWed into two groups: those in which the two aeolic phrases are juxtaposed (7 verses) and those in which one or more freer D/e phrases are sandwiched between them (6 verses). The former have one contact point while the latter have none. And I add one contact point of heptaþaeolicized e3 at P8s6, which, however, is one of the freer D/e phrases, but its Wrst two positions are identical with aeolic base. In total there are 45 contact points of two aeolic phrases. They can be classiWed according to the ending of the Wrst phrase and to the beginning of the second phrase. Theoretically six diVerent types of contact are possible:124 124 By deWnition,þ1 ending and other pendent cola do not appear in mid-verse. Also, by deWnition, the full aeolic base in mid-verse is not of the shape w
.

82 (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)

Introduction from zero ending to full base from zero ending to half-base from zero ending to no base from þ2 ending to full base from þ2 ending to half-base from þ2 ending to no base

example rdodþgl wilþtel rdodþrdod glþwil glþtel glþrdod

total instances 5 4 4 15 11 6

Combinations of phrases are various.125 A particularly strange feature of the aeolics of Pindar is, as has been pointed out, the shortage of examples of the combinations of glþgl or glþph within a verse. There is an organic relationship between these cola, as is clear from the usage of Anacreon and the Attic dramatists. There is a strong tendency to avoid coincidence of word-end and phrase-end between aeolic phrases, especially where the second phrase starts with full base: (i) . . .
ww

x
ww
. . . or . . .
ww

x
w
ww
. . . (iv) . . .
ww
w

x
ww
. . . or . . .
ww
w

x
w
ww
. . .

In these cases, bridge is strictly observed in most examples. In contact points between þ2 ending and full base (iv), cut is totally absent at nine out of the 15 cases,126 and so it is at four out of the Wve cases where zero ending meets full base (i).127 This tendency cannot be accidental. For example, glyconic is followed by wilamowitzianum (iv) in 3 verses (I8s4, 7r; N6s2, 6r; P6s1/2, 6r). The repetitions amount in total to 19; bridge is observed at them all without exception. To give another example: at N4s3, word-end never coincides with the contact points between heptasyllable and wilamowitzianum

125 (i) hepta þ ph (P8e2), hepta þ wil (N4s3), hepta þ e3 (aeolicized) (P8s6), rdod þ gl (P2s2), rdod þ ph (N3e2); (ii) wil þ reiz (O9s6/7, N4s6), wil þ tel (N4s5), hepta þ heptaþ3 (O9e8); (iii) rdod þ rdod (P5e3, I8s5a, I8s5b), wil þ rdod (I8s5a); (iv) gl þ gl (P8e6, N2s4), gl þ ph (O1s1, P8e3/4, N2s4), gl þ glþ3 (N7e5), gl þ wil (P6s1/2, N6s2, I8s4), dod þ wil (P6s5),^ dod þ ph (O13s5), tel þ hipp (N7s8), tel þ glþ3 (O9s2, I7s3/4), wilþ2 þ hipp (P2e8); (v) gl þ reiz (O9s3, O9s4, O9s5, N2s3, N4s4), gl þ tel (P2s2, I7s5a, I7e5), dod þ reiz (O1e4), tel þ tel (N3e4), tel þ hepta (I7s5a); (vi) gl þ rdod (P2e1a, P2e1b, P2e2, P2e3), dod þ ar (O1e7), tel þ adon (I7e2). 126 127 See List 5. 1. See List 5. 2.

Composition of Verses

83

(i) in any of the 12 repetitions. Such a Wrm preference must be deliberate. Here, however, as so often in metre, there is no single rule. The situation is more complicated. Besides the majority, there are a few verses where cut/bridge is chosen freely. For example, there are three instances of glyconicþpherecratean contact (N2s4, 5r; P8e3/4, 5r; O1s1, 8r). At the Wrst two (N2s4, P8e3/4), cut is totally avoided at all the 10 repetitions. So far the situation is the same as the glyconicþwilamowitzianum contact above. But O1s1 is quite diVerent: there is cut at half the eight repetitions. Four repetitions are too many to be considered as mere exceptions to an assumed rule. We are impelled to judge that in this matter there is no such rigid rule as, for example, Porson’s Law in the iambic trimeter. Rather, we should admit that there is no rule which applies to all the verses of a given form, even if a strong preference is observable in more than half the cases. How the situation should be grasped, or described, will be discussed in a wider scope taking bridge in general into consideration in Part III, B. The situation is diVerent in the cases where half-base is concerned: (ii) . . .
ww
x
ww
. . . or . . .
ww
x
w
ww
. . . (v) . . .
ww
w
x
ww
. . . or . . .
ww
w
x
w
ww
. . .

In these cases bridge may be expected to occur, if it occurs at all, at two positions: (a) between two aeolic phrases, i.e. before the half-base; (b) after the half-base if it is realized as long: (a) . . .
ww
 x
ww
. . . or . . .
ww
w
 x
ww
. . . (b) . . .
ww


ww
. . . or . . .
ww
w


ww
. . .

(b) is based on the supposition that the half-base should be collateral to the link anceps in freer D/e phrases; see 6, D above. However, examination proves that there is no strong tendency towards bridge before the half-base (a) in either case (ii) or (v) although there are some conspicuous exceptions.128 For example, bridge occurs at 11 repetitions out of 12 in N4s6 (ii) and all eight repetitions in P2s2 (v). But at the same time there are verses in which cut is dominant like O9s6/7 (bridge at 128

See List 5. 3, 4.

84

Introduction

1 repetition out of 8). No strong tendency is not observed in case (v) after the long half-base (b) either. On the other hand bridge is observed, or in other words, cut is totally avoided, in case (ii), though there are only three examples.129 See further Part III, B. Examples are scarce too, in cases (iii) and (vi). (iii) . . .
ww

ww
. . . or (vi) . . .
ww
w

ww
. . . or

. . .
ww

w
ww
. . . . . .
ww
w

w
ww
. . .

No tendency is observable in these cases.130

2. Dovetailing131 Dovetailing is a particular way of avoiding word-end at the contact point of two phrases, such that, when two cola are joined by bridge, word-end is regularly located after the Wrst position of the second R phrase. it is most noticeable in the combinations gl R Outside Pindar, R gl, gl ph, chþia chþia. The following are examples of dovetailing between two aeolic cola (each found in all 6 repetitions of its respective ode): R P6s1/2 w
w
www
ww
w
x e gl wil R
/ w
w
ww
k I7s3/4

w
w
ww
w

/

ww
w
w

k x e tel glþ3

As the line-numbering of these two shows, Boeckh and his followers divided them into two, following the cuts. Withthis division, dovetailing, of course, disappears. But compare the following verses (the number of instances and the total of repetitions are added in parentheses): R N2s4 www
ww
w

/

ww
w

w
ww

k gl gl ph (4/5) R hepta wil N4s3

w
ww

/ u
w
ww
k (11/12)

Obviously, Pindar is conscious of dovetailing in particular cases. The metrical contexts of all the four verses are similar. Standard aeolic phrases come before and after the contact point. These stanzaforms will later be classiWed as Class I. In these verses, it is preferable to recognize dovetailing, even when there is coincidence of word-end 129 131

130 See List 5. 3 (b). See List 5. 5, 6. For this term see Maas, GM (1962), §59. Also cf. West, GM, Glossary-Index.

Composition of Verses

85

elsewhere. There are also verses in which the second phrase starts with ‘half-base’. For example: R P2s2 www
ww

u
ww
w

/
ww
w
k rdodgltel(7/8) However, Pindar diVers from the tragic poets. The tragic poets tend to employ dovetailing in almost every case where word-end does not coincide with phrase-end. In other words, a word which does not end with the phrase overlaps the contact point by just one position. In contrast, Pindar is not so rigid. Even in cases where bridge is observed in all the repetitions without exception, word-end occurs at various positions. For example, in I8s4, one of the three verses which include glþwil, dovetailing occurs at three out of seven repetitions. In the other four, a word overlaps by two positions:
w
ww
w

wj
w
ww
k In N6s2 (glþwil), dovetailing occurs at two repetitions out of six, while at three repetitions word-end occurs after two positions as in the scheme above, and at one repetition it occurs after three positions. On the other hand dovetailing is rigidly observed in all the repetitions in P6s1/2 (glþwil, above).

3. Verse-by-verse and phrase-by-phrase construction Some songs in tragedy and comedy are constructed almost entirely by repetition of the same phrase (ŒÆa ŒHº). The phrase is repeated at length, and it is not clear how these phrases should be grouped into verses. For example, in his later plays Euripides often introduces a song in aeolic metre in which the glyconic or the wilamowitzianum is repeated again and again with little modiWcation no less than ten times in a manner that is almost mesmeric. In Pindar, verses can, of course, be deWned and it can be observed that he hardly ever repeats the same verse. Within a verse, repetition of the identical phrase is rare as is demonstrated above (A. 7). Even in O2, the verses, however homogeneous, vary considerably in length.132 132 But this does not mean that there is no structural principle. The structure is more delicate and Xexible than simple repetition. The seven verses of O2s are articulated into two halves, s8 being taken as a coda. And there are other devices. At the introduction of these verses, extra positions are located and the extra decrease in number one by one, and increase in reversed. See further Part II, ad loc.

86

Introduction

Verse-by-verse construction is rare, and when it occurs, its context is distinctively aeolic (Class I). An example is O9s3–5 (glþreiz; similar too are s6/7–9) or P2e1a–3 (glþrdod, with a Wnal e2). Even repetition with modiWcation is rare. The following case is noteworthy: N4s4
w
ww
w
w
ww

k gl reiz N4s5
a
w
ww
a
ww
w
k wil tel N4s6
a
a
ww
w
ww

k wil reiz

N4s (monostrophic) is distinctively aeolic. It is conceivable that Pindar regarded the repetition as one of the characteristics of purely aeolic metre.

4. Aeolic phrases and d In composite aeolic verses, one or two aeolic phrases are preceded or followed by freer D/e phrases like e or d. Rarely, the freer D/e phrase is sandwiched between two aeolic phrases. These freer D/e phrases are short. e is used extremely often; e2 and d are markedly rarer. In this section and the following, the characteristics of these freer D/e phrases are illustrated; Wrst d and ^ d, then e, e2, e3, and ^ e (in this order). Interestingly, D is never used in the same verse as an aeolic phrase; that is, D does not occur in ‘composite’ aeolics. There are in total 55 examples of d and three of ^ d in the eighteen majors. The majority of them (42 d; 2 ^ d) are used in freer D/e verses, and will be discussed later (section C in this chapter). The examples in composite aeolic verses (13 d; 1 ^ d) tend to be used in the following ways. (a) In seven out of 13 examples of (i), d immediately precedes an aeolic phrase: P5e6
ww

ww
P8s5 x
ww
P10e1

ww
I7e7 ww
P6s4 N3e3 . . . w
ww
P10s4 . . . w
ww


rw
ww

w
j
x
w
ww
w
k
x
ww
w
k
w
ww
k
w
w
ww
k
w
ww
. . .
w
ww
. . .

d rdod e d wilþ2 x d gl x d rdod ^ d wil see (c) below see (d) below

Composition of Verses

87

An anceps occurs before d in four verses, and in one acephalous d is used instead of d, but nonetheless these seven resemble each other closely in structure. The aeolic phrases after d start either with ‘full base’ or ‘no base’ (is there any diVerence between full base and the initial two positions of rdod? cf. 5, E). There is no example that starts with half-base. Bridge is in general observed between d and the aeolic: at 32 repetitions out of 39 (82.1%).133 See further Part III, B. (b) In another four verses, d follows immediately upon an aeolic phrase: P10e3 I8s6 P5e9 N4s1

x
w
ww

x
ww
w
ta
ww
w
x
x
ww
w



ww

w
k
ww
k
ww
w rw

w
k
ww
k

hepta d e gl d gl d x e e heptaþ2 d

Here too the structural similarity is evident. In contrast with e and e2, the examples of aeolic phrase followed by d at the verse-end are surprisingly few (22 e, 12 e2, see the next sections). Bridge is more frequent than cut between the aeolic phrase and d, but it does not seem to be absolutely required.134 Note that cut occurs at four repetitions out of 12 in N4s1. (c) In two verses, d is preceded by short anceps and further, by an aeolic verse with þ2 ending (w
). One of these (N3e3) is listed in (a) above: N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dod w d rdod e2 N3s1

ww
w
w
ww

w
k tel w d e

As a whole, the palindromic movement (
ww
w
w
ww
) is striking. Both examples occur in N3.135 An aeolic phrase is never followed by long ancepsþd.

133

134 See List 5. 7. See List 5. 8. The segment . . .
ww
w
w
ww
is also to be found in two other verses, but I prefer a diVerent analysis: 135

N4s4 O1e4


w
ww
w
w
ww

k gl reiz w

w

ww
w
w
ww

k ^ e e dod reiz

See on individual verses, Part II below. Among freer D/e verses, a similar sequence (d x d, often d w d:
ww
w
ww
) are found in 4 verses (see above on palindromes).

88

Introduction

(d) The other two examples are irregular: P11s4
atww


wr
ww
k

rdod
e d

Aeolic phrase (rdod) and d are separated by intervening long anceps (which is highly irregular too) and e. For this extraordinary verse, see Part II, ad loc. P10s4 w

ww
a
ww

w
ww

w
w
k

dx d rdod e2

^e

This verse includes two d’s. It may be better to suppose that a reversed dodrans intrudes into a fundamentally freer D/e structure.

5. Aeolic phrases and e As d may precede and follow an aeolic phrase, so may e, which in fact is employed far more extensively. The following table includes only e, x e and e x; longer e sequences (e2, e3, etc.) and ^ e are excluded. Also excluded are the examples in ‘composite’ aeolic verse in which an aeolic phrase and e are separated by other intervening phrases. Thus only examples in which e precedes or follows an aeolic phrase without any intervention, except for anceps, are counted. preWx e xe suYx e ex

full base 1 10

half-base no base total 0 4 5 3 4 17

þ2 ending zero ending 15 5 2 0

total 20 2

The above table shows that the common combinations are: x
w
þaeolic phrase, and aeolic phraseþ
w
. If the cases are limited to those at the beginning and end of verses, the tendency is stronger: initial e precedes x e precedes

full base 0 9

half-base 0 3

no base 0 2

total 0 14

Composition of Verses Wnal e follows e x follows

þ2 ending 15 2

zero ending 5 0

89

total 20 2

For further description, I give glyconics as an example. There are 49 glyconics in the eighteen majors. Of these 13 are immediately preceded at the beginning and/or followed at the end of the verse by e: x eþglþe (3 examples), x eþgl (1), glþe (7), glþe x (2). There are in total 10 verses of glþe at the end of verse. This Wgure is remarkably high. Glyconic followed by cretic may not be totally unparalleled outside Pindar, but the examples are scarce. As for eþgl, Sappho (86 L.–P.) uses creticþgl, but Pindar does not. Oddly enough, the anceps of x e is indispensable at the beginning of the verse in the Pindaric cases. Perhaps this may be by sheer chance, and I should not be surprised if counterexamples are one day found in papyri. However, it must not be denied that there are some tendencies or preferences in the non-D/e odes. These verses resemble each other and their relationship is evident. Another tendency is clearly observable. In the matter of word-end, bridge is strongly preferred to cut between þ2 ending aeolic phrases and following e (15 verses) and e x (2 verses).136 Even extreme cases are found. At 3 verses cut is completely avoided at all the 8 repetitions. The proportion of bridge is, in total for all the repetitions, 77/ 89 (¼ 86.5%; 15 verses of e) or 86/102 (¼ 84.3%; including e x). After zero ending aeolic phrases, the tendency is less evident, 19/25 (¼ 76.0%), perhaps because of the shortage of examples (5 verses).137 As for the beginning of verse, bridge between x e and following aeolic phrases with full base occurs 52 repetitions out of 64 (¼ 81.3%).138 However, there are a few verses which run counter to the general tendency; for example, at N7e3 (glþe), cut is found in 2 repetitions out of 5. In these bridge/cut is freely chosen. The situation is similar to that between two aeolic phrases (B. 1): although a strong preference is dominant, no metrical rule is oVered which regulates all the verses of the identical form. A similar tendency is observable between d (D, D þ) and e (e2, e3) (C. 6), and perhaps also between 2 e’s (C. 9). Bridge/cut will be discussed in a wider perspective in Part III, B. 136

See List 5. 9.

137

See List 5. 10.

138

See List 5. 11.

90

Introduction

To turn to link anceps, there is a group of verses in which x e follows an aeolic phrase with þ2 ending (4 verses) or with zero ending (2 verses). In these verses, with only one exception, the anceps is short. It is as if the ending of the aeolic phrase were prolonged further by w
w
: N7s2


ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k dod w

I7s2 x
ww
w
w
w

w
k I7e1
w
ww
w
w
w
k P5e2 w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j I8s1/2 w

w
ww
w
wy
w
w
ww
k

e dod e2 tel w e e gl w e gl w e rdod wil w e wil

P11s4, whose irregularities are repeatedly mentioned above, is the exception:
xtww


wr
ww
k rdod
e d At all the repetitions in P5e2 (4r) and I7s2 (6r) word-end occurs either before or after the short link anceps.

6. Aeolic phrases and e2 e2 is used basically in the same manner as e in ‘composite’ aeolic verses. It follows an aeolic phrase with þ2 ending (9 verses) or zeroending (3 verses) at the end of the verse. In the former case, bridge is commonly observed (54/61 ¼ 88.5%).139 The exceptions are concentrated in N7s2 (see Part II, ad loc.); if this verse is excluded, the percentage of the observance rises to 92.5% (¼ 49/53). In the latter case, cut is rather common.140 It is interesting that of these 12 verses only two, P8e1 and P2e3, appear in stanza-forms composed mainly of aeolic verses (Class I), the rest in forms that make extensive use of both aeolic metre and freer D/e (Class III). The seven examples of e2 following gl, tel, and heptaþ2 are found in verses made up only of the aeolic phrase and e2. The other Wve, which follow dod or rdod, occur in a longer verse (for three of them, N7s2, N3e3, P10s4, see A. 3). In

139

See List 5. 12.

140

See List 5. 13.

Composition of Verses

91

these, the similarity between aeolic hexasyllable (dodrans or reversed dodrans) and e2 is fully exploited. There is no example of e2 x following an aeolic colon at the end of the verse. As for x e2, there are two examples: P10s6 ww
ww
w
x
w
w
k tel x e2 N3s8 ww
ww
w
w
w
w

k tel w e2


Interestingly, the anceps in P10s6 is really anceps (long in 2 repetitions, short in 6; the transmitted text requires emendation; see Part II, ad loc.). e2 and x e2 never precede an aeolic phrase at the beginning of the verse, except for one verse which starts with x e2 and ends with rdod: I8s10

w
w
rw

w
ww
k x e2 e rdod

In the following two, which are also counted amongst the ‘longer verses’ above, e2 in eVect prolongs the following aeolic phrase leftwards: I8s3
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
k P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k

wil e2 tel tel e2 hag

7. Aeolic phrases and e3 Four examples of e3 out of 14 are combined with an aeolic phrase. In N7s, there are two verses in which an aeolic colon is followed by e3: N7s6

ww
w
rwrw
w
k tel e3 N7s3
ww
w

w
w
w
dod e3

There is also one example of e3 preceding an aeolic colon: I8s7
w
wrw
w
ww
w

w
k e3 tel e

In fact, e3 is treated like e2. The curious phrase
x
w
w
in P8s6 (on which see 6. A) also follows an aeolic phrase: P8s6 x
w
ww

x
w
w
k hepta e3(aeol)

Longer phrases than e3 are not used with aeolics.

92

Introduction

8. Aeolic phrases and ^ e By deWnition, an acephalous phrase can only stand at the beginning of a verse. The following phrase is always, with one possible exception, freer D/e.141 The possible exception is: P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wilþ3

This exception can be removed by analysing: ^ eþeþhagesichorean (¼ w dod
); see further Part II, ad loc. ^ eþe can precede an aeolic colon. There are three examples: O1e7 w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k O1e4 w

w

ww
w
w
ww

k P5e1 w

wr
w
w
ww
k

^e

e dod ar e dod reiz ^ e e wil ^e

C. Freer D/e Verses In freer D/e verses, d (and D etc.) and e (and e2 etc.) are combined with or without link anceps. There are various kinds of combination, but some tendencies are observable. A verse shares some common characteristics with other verses; in other words, it has parallels. In this section and the following ones, examples of peculiar combinations are collected.

1. Peculiarities of D and D þ D (
ww
ww
) and D þ (
ww
ww
ww
) are prolonged versions of d, but diVer from d in two points. First, two D phrases (including D, D þ, ^ D, and ^ D þ) are never found within the same verse. Here, there is a contrast with normal D/e, in which the repetition of D within the same verse is quite common. Secondly, D or D þ is never associated with any type of aeolic phrases. In other words, ‘composite aeolic’ verses do not have any D in them. Aeolic and D are incompatible, indeed. 141 If w
in the aeolic base of some cola, for example, O1s1 (w
gl þ ph), were analysed as ^ e, the number of the occurrence of ^ e þ aeolic colon would be considerably increased.

Composition of Verses

93

There are in total 19 examples of D, D þ, and their acephalous forms. That means the number of verses which include D etc. is 19 (no verse includes two or more); they are concentrated in eight odes, in particular seven cases in N6 and four in O10 (their stanza-forms will be classiWed as Class II: freer D/e). On the other hand, there are stanza-forms (O1s, P2s, P10s, I8s; all Class III) in which D or D þ occurs only once. The occurrence is distinct from the surroundings. Especially in O1s2 (D þ) and P2s3 (D þ), the contrast with the other verses is striking; see Part II, ad locc. Verses are in general short. Three examples out of four of ^ D and two out of four of x D þ are independent verses by themselves: ^D O10e8 ww
ww
k ^D
O9e3, O13s1 ww
ww

k O9e6, N6e9

ww
ww
ww
k x D þ

D and D þ phrases may be preceded or followed by d (6 verses). Three examples out of nine of D are preceded by d (or ^ d) and one out of Wve of D þ is followed by d without link anceps: N6s5 N6e1 N6e5 N6e3

ww

ww


ww




ww
ww
j
ww
ww

ww
ww
j
ww
ww
ww


rw
j
ww
j

^d

D dDe xdD x Dþ d

It is interesting that all these are found in N6. In two other verses, D is followed by x d: P10s3 w
ww
ww
x
ww

k xDxd
ww
ww


ww
rw

k D x d e
N6s6a

From this point of view, N6 is the most similar to D/e of all the non D/e odes. e precedes or follows D etc. in 10 verses, two of which also include d. Two e’s are possible, but three are not. Spondee is used in one verse (O10s3b), and so is e2. There is no verse in which e both precedes and follows. This is characteristically diVerent from the normal D/e verses; for example, e x D x e is very common in them. D preceded by e I8s9 O10e2

w

ww
ww
k w

ww
ww
k

^e ^e

D D

94

Introduction

O1s2 wr
w

ww
ww
ww

k ^ e e D þ
O10s3b rw


ww
ww
k e sp D

wrw
w
ww
ww
k x e2 x D P2s6 D followed by e

ww
ww
ww

w
k x Dþ e P2s3 ^Dþ e
ww
ww
ww
rw

j N6s4a O10s1 ww
ww

w
tw
j ^ D e e
ww

ww
ww
rw
j dDe N6e1
ww
ww


ww
rw

k Dxde
N6s6a

Between D etc. and e at the end of verse, bridge is the general tendency. This will be discussed with the examples of dþe. See further below, 8. C. 8.

2. Verses containing two d As is stated above, D is not repeated within a verse, but D and d may be included in the same verse. As for double d, there are two verses which contain two d’s without intervening anceps and four with anceps: O10e4/5
P8e5
O1e5 N3e1a N2s5 P10s4 w



ww

ww
rw

j
ww

ww
w
w
j ww
w
ww

w
w
k
ww
w
ww
x
w

j
ww
x
ww

k
ww
x
ww

w
ww

w
w
k


dde

ddwe ^ d w d e2 dwdxe
dxd
^e d x d rdod e2

The last (P10s4) includes rdod and is not a freer D/e verse but composite aeolic. Another two verses have one or more e phrases between two d’s: O9s11

ww

w
x
ww

k x d e x d
O10e10 w
wwt

wr
w

ww
k xdxeed

3. Short anceps and d (and a special group of aeolic cola) There is a group of verses containing w d, which is peculiar to Pindaric metre. 9 verses are made up in the same manner. In the following chart they are arranged according to the length of the phrase preceding w d:

Composition of Verses

95

O1e3
w
w
w rw
wr w P11s3

w
rw
w
w O2s8 w
w
w
w O9e1/2


ww

w
k e2 w d e
ww
k e2 w d
ww
k x e e2 w d
ww
w
w
w

k x e2 w d x e2
P2s5

wrw
w
ww
k x e2 w d
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e O1s7

w
w
wr w
ww
k x e3 w d N3s5 w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k x e3 w d N3e1b xee e5 w d e2 O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k

Every verse starts with a single-short sequence. The short anceps of w d is arranged in such a way that it carries on the preceding singleshort movement. In other words, the short anceps itself appears to be a part of the movement. The double short contained in d seems as if it were a temporal substitute for a single short. In two verses (O9e1/2, N3e1b) the single short movement continues beyond the double short. At Wrst sight, an analysis which separates w d from the preceding sequence may seem arbitrary. But it is necessary to divide the sequence; otherwise we are obliged to recognise an aeolic colon of gigantic size (cf. I. 3, Rule 8). On the other hand, similarity with the following four examples of w d and with another (P2s6), in which w D is used instead of w d, suggests that this colometry is the least inappropriate if we wish to be consistent:142 O1e5 N3e1a N3e3 N3s1 P2s6

ww
w
ww

w
w
k
ww
w
ww
x
w

j

^ d w d e2 dwd xe

ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dod w d rdod e2

ww
w
w
ww

w
k tel w d e

wrw
w
ww
ww
k x e2 w d

Moreover, there are another three composite aeolic verses which are constructed in the same fashion as single-short movementþw d. In

142 N3e3 and N3s1 have already cited as examples of aeolic cola followed by w d, and O1e5 and N3e1a, as examples of 2 d’s within a verse.

96

Introduction

these, instead of w d, an aeolic colon starting with short anceps, such as a telesillean of the form w
ww
w
, follows single-short movement: I8s7
w
wrw
w
ww
w

w
k e3 tel e I8s3
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
k wil e2 tel tel e2 hag P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k

More important than analysis is the general structure. Long anceps is never used in verses of these types, except at the beginning of the verse. In all the repetitions, the anceps preceding d is short, and so are the ancipitia assumed to be present in e3 or e5. So short anceps cannot be distinguished from true short. As a result, the verses have a distinctively light movement, unlike normal D/e. This impression is enhanced by the length of the verse. Some of the verses are the ‘longer verses’, collected above (A. 3). In general, they are very long, longer than other non-D/e verses. The metrical contexts of all the verses are interesting too. They are localized in particular stanzaforms: O1, P2, N3, I8, which will be classiWed in Class III.

4. Verses with no double shorts There are in total 45 verses which lack any double short, whether it be the choriambic nucleus of an aeolic colon, a choriamb (d), or a hemiepes (D). Twelve examples out of 45 occur in O2, but also a further 33 verses in the other odes.143 It would evidently be forced to classify all the non-D/e odes other than O2 into one group and to interpret them as aeolic. In these verses e is the commonest phrase. It is mixed with ^ e, or e2, or the longer phrases. Link anceps is occasionally present: at the beginning of a verse 23 times; at the middle eight times; at the end 11 times.144 Nevertheless, its rarity is striking. In contrast to the normal

143 O1s3, O1s5, O1s8, O1s9, O1s10, O1s11, O10s3a, O10s4, O10s5, O10e1b, O10e7, O13s3, O13s4, P2s1, P5s1, P5s4, P5s6, P5s7a, P5s9, P5s11, P5e7a, P5e7b, P5e8, P6s9, P8s7, P11e5, N3s2, N6e6/7, N6s1a, N6s4b, N6s6b, I7s5b, I8s8. 144 The number of mid-verse examples (11 examples) would increase if we included as anceps the central position of e3 (6 examples) and some positions of e5 (2 examples) and e6 (1 example).

Composition of Verses

97

D/e, e (and e2, e3, . . . ) and e are in general juxtaposed without link. It is especially remarkable that long anceps between two e’s is avoided to a considerable extent. There are only six mid-ancipitia in total which are exclusively long.145 At another three ancipitia, long and short are in responsion.146 As for word-end, cut is fairly strictly avoided after the anceps (6 D).

5. Double, triple, multiple e Double e and triple e are very common: P5e8
w

w
k ee P5s9 w
w

w

w
k x e e e

There are 20 examples of double e in O2, but also a further 18 examples in other odes.147 Except for the verses of O2, eþeþe is found in P5s9 and I8s8, and eþe in O1s9, O1e1, O10s1, O10s3a, O10s5, O10e3, O10e10, P2s7, P5s1, P5s10, P5e8, P5e9, N3e1b, I7s2. The examples tend to be concentrated in certain odes; six in P5, Wve examples in O10. Except for I7s, all the stanza-forms belong to Class II (freer D/e) or Class III (amalgamated). Resolution is frequent. The examples in which either or both of two e’s placed side by side contains resolution amount to 28 out of 38. Either long of e may be resolved. For Pindar’s tendencies in respect of resolution, see 6. C. As has been demonstrated above (B. 5), at the end of verse e is commoner than e x while at the beginning of verse x e is commoner than e, when e is preceded or followed by an aeolic phrase. This tendency is observed in the cases of double e too, and is to be considered as a manifestation of link anceps being more frequent at the beginning of verse than at the end (6. D). At the beginning of a verse, x eþe occurs in 12 verses, and x eþe2 in two verses, while eþe

145 (e
e) O2s3, O10s3a, O10s4, (e2
e) O13s3, P11e5, (^ e
e) P5s11. As has already been remarked in 6. D (link anceps), the long is resolved either before or after the long anceps so that three successive long syllables (
w


w
) tend to be avoided. 146 (e2
e) O13s4, P6s9, (e
e2) P8s7. 147 In a verse made up three or more successive e, each e þ e is counted separately; thus P5s9 above is counted twice.

98

Introduction

occurs only in three verses, and eþe2 in one verse. At the end of a verse, eþe occurs in 17 verses, ^ eþe in three verses, and e5 þe in one verse while eþe x occurs only in four verses and e2 þe x in one verse. As for word-end between two e’s, bridge is fairly common. Cut is generally avoided, both at the end of a verse (bridge is observed at 127 repetitions out of 156 in 21 verses; 81.4%)148 and at the beginning (bridge is observed at 90 repetitions out of 110 in 14 verses; 81.8%).149 In other words, a single word of the shape
w
is rare at verse-end, and so is a single word, or word group, of the shape x
w
at the beginning.

6. e2 and other prolonged e A prolonged single-short movement followed by w d in the group of verses above is the most distinctive use of the prolonged e (e3, e5), cf. section 3 above. But there are other examples. e5 and e6 make up a verse either by themselves or with e: O1s8 w rwrw
w
w
w
k x e5 N3s2
w
w
wrw
w
rw
k e5 e e6 P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k

In all three verses, frequent resolution is prominent: two out of six longs are resolved at O1s8 and three out of seven at P2s1. Moreover, there are seven short syllables in succession in O1s8 and six in P2s1 (for continuous shorts, see Part III, D). Resolution always occurs throughout all the repetitions. Certainly the short syllables have a striking eVect. These three verses too are used in the Class III stanza-forms, like those ending with w d in the section 3. There are no verses of the form e5 x or e6 x. A preference for blunt ending over pendent is evident here too. There are 14 examples of e3. Some of these are listed in the section 3: three followed by w d (O1s7, N3s5, N3e1b) and one followed telesillean with short half-base (I8s7). Another four examples (including

148

See List 5. 14.

149

See List 5. 15.

Composition of Verses

99

I8s7) either precede or follow an aeolic phrase. They are listed at B. 8 above. The others are: O2e2 O1s3, s5 O1e2 P5s11 N6e6/7


w
w
wr
w

w

k e3 e e

w
w
w
k e3 ^ e d e3 w

ww

wrw
w
j ^ e x e3 w


w
w
w
k x e3
t
w
w
w

j

There are 38 examples of e2 in 37 verses. Of these examples, 17 are in composite aeolic verses. The other 21 examples are in freer D/e verse with e or other phrases; e2 is occasionally substituted for e, for example: O1s6 O2s6/7 P2e3


w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5 w d e2 ^ e e e e2 e
w

wr
wt
w
w

w

k w

ww
w
www
ww

w
w
j gl rdod e2

In O10e7 and I7s5b, x e2 (

w
w
) is a single verse by itself. As in these, anceps usually stands before e2 at the beginning of the verse (10 examples, as against 2 without anceps; cf. frequent x e/rare e, B. 5). If e2 were not recognized as a phrase, it would be diYcult to analyse these simple verses: O1s11 P8s7 O13s3

x
wr
w
w
k x e e2 x
w
x
w
w
k x e x e2 w
wrw


w
k x e2 x e

7. dþshort ancepsþe d w e is usually analysed as chþia and is treated as a single colon, e.g. in tragedy. But the metrical context in Pindar is against this treatment. d w e is much less frequent in Pindar, and is included only in 4 verses. P5e9 N3e1b N6s7 P8e5


ww
w rw

w
k ta
ww
w
wrw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k
wy
ww
w
w
k

ww

ww
w
w
j

gl d w e e we3w d w e e edwe xddwe

No verses have long anceps before e, and verses in which d and e are connected by ‘explicit’ anceps are very rare. There is only one example:

100

Introduction

N3e1a
ww
w
ww
x
w

j

dwdxe


This verse (N3e1a) is irregular in that an anceps (‘link’) is situated after e at the end of the verse. There is one verse which has d w e2
: O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k x e2 w d w e2


This verse (O9e1/2) is included in the group discussed above (3), short anceps and d, but is unique in that it has long single-short movement both before and after the central
ww
. There is no verse that ends with d w e
. In the chart of aeolic phrases (5. A. 5) I mentioned a theoretical possibility that d w e was the dodrans prolonged by w
(dodþ2) and w d w e was telesillean prolonged by w
(telþ2). But the metrical contexts of the examples above refute this interpretation.

8. dþe without intervening anceps In contrast with d w e, there are as many as 16 verses in which d is directly followed by e (and e2, e3) without intervening anceps (
ww

w
). The related phrase without link anceps, Dþe, is fairly common in the normal D/e odes. In the eighteen majors, the phrase dþe often ends the verse. Pindar frequently uses e after an aeolic colon for that purpose (see B. 5). Apparently the same eVect is sought here too. There are nine verses which have dþe at the end of verse, and 1, dþeþe : P2e6 P5e5 P10s2b N7e1 P10e3 O1e3 O1s7 N3s1 P5s10

w
w
w
w
w
x
w
ww

w
w
w
w
w
w
w

ww
w
w
w



ww

w
j
ww
www
j
ww

w
j
ww
rw
k
ww

w
k
ww

w
k
ww

w
k
ww

w
k
ww
rw

w
k

^e

de de ^e d e wede hepta d e e2 w d e e3 w d e tel w d e edee ^e

Note that the Wrst long of e is resolved so as to produce a characteristic sequence (
ww
www
) in three examples (P5e5, N7e1,

Composition of Verses

101

P5s10). This sequence is included in Dþe (N6e1) and in ^ D þ þe x (N6s4a); cf. 1 above. The examples of dþe x are fewer. This is the same as the rarity of e x after aeolic phrases: O10e4/5

ww

ww
rw

j x d d e
N6s6a
ww
ww


ww
rw

k D x d e


Again the Wrst long of e is resolved in these two. dþe2, and dþe3 are used in: O1s6


w
wrw
w
w
w

O1e5 N7s5 O1e2

ww
w w w



ww

w
w
k
ww

ww

ww


e5 w d e2 (cf. 3 above) ^ d w d e2
w
w
k
w
wrw
k w d e3
wrw
w
j ^ e d e3

Bridge is the general tendency between d (D, D þ; cf. 1 above) and e at the end of verse, though there are conspicuous exceptions. The examples of d (D, D þ) and e amount to 10. The majority of them strictly observe the bridge.150 Notably, cut is totally absent from all the repetitions in as many as 6 examples. However, the situation is complicated in the same manner as that between two aeolics (see B,1 above). In three examples (O1s7, N3s1, P10s2b) cut occurs in half or more of the repetitions. Obviously there is no single ‘rule’ that should regulate all the examples. See further Part III, B.

9. eþd without intervening anceps In contrast with dþe, the phrase in reversed order, eþd (
w

ww
), is less common (7 examples): P5s5
wy
wy N6s7
w
P5s10 O10e10 w
wwt

wr
w


150


ww
k
ww
w
w
k
ww
rw

w
k
ww
j

See List 5. 16.

ed edxe edee xdxe ed

102 O10e1a N7e1 P11s4

Introduction w
wr
ww
j w
w

ww
rw
k
atww


wr
ww
k

xed xede rdod x ed

Mirroring the sequence
ww
rw
, the last long of e is resolved rather frequently (4 examples) so as to produce
www
ww
. Note that x eþd, which is a common phrase in drama (iaþch), is rare.

The Three Classes of Stanza-Forms

103

9. THE THREE CLASSES OF STANZA-FORMS We have discussed each phrase and combination of phrases up to this chapter. Now it is time to discuss the metre of the stanzaform as a whole. This is a diVerent topic from the metre of each verse contained in a stanza. To comprehend a single stanza-form, it would be suYcient to analyse its verses individually and describe, or label, the cola or phrases. However, the combination of various phrases gives each stanza-form a kind of unity as well as its particular character. Strictly speaking, every single stanza-form is individual. Nevertheless, similarities can be distinguished between some stanza-forms. ClassiWcation is both required and possible. Moreover, parallels between diVerent stanza-forms are required, in order to establish an appropriate colometry for ambiguous verses. Although there are some borderline cases, the 31 stanza-forms of the eighteen majors can be classiWed stylistically into three groups, according to the way in which two metres, i.e. aeolic and freer D/e, are mixed. Stanza-forms which are made up mainly of aeolic phrases belong to the Wrst group (Class I). The second group consists chieXy of freer D/e (Class II). In the third group, the two metres are tightly amalgamated (Class III). ClassiWcation does not depend exclusively on the distribution of the two metres. That is only one of the criteria. As has occasionally been pointed out in the preceding chapters, there are other characteristics peculiar to each group. For example, the aeolic cola of Class I are diVerent from those of Class III in that they feature two longs at the aeolic base. The criteria listed below are useful, and classiWcation is acceptable when all the criteria are met.

Proportion of freer D/e to aeolic By deWnition, the stanza-forms of aeolic style (Class I) contain none or few verses made up only of freer D/e phrases. Indeed, all the stanza-forms that I classify in Class I contain no freer D/e verse or, at most, one. But the opposite is not true; a stanza-form without a freer D/e verse or with just one does not automatically belong to

104

Introduction

Class I. Taking other criteria into consideration, I classify three stanza-forms (N7s, N7e, P11s) as Class III, although they contain only one freer D/e verse. In contrast to Class I, the stanza-forms of freer D/e style (Class II) cannot be judged by the number of occurrences of freer D/e verses, for aeolic verses are ubiquitous. The proportion of freer D/e verses is more signiWcant. More than half the verses are freer D/e in all the stanza-forms that I classify as Class II. The opposite is true in this case but one; O1s belongs to Class III though nine verses out of 11 are freer D/e.

Ratio of short syllables (RSS) Cf. 8. A. 5. The method by which RSS is calculated has been explained above. The frequency of short syllables is a useful index. In general, RSS is high in Class III, and quite high in some of Class II, but low in Class I.

Length of verses Cf. 8. A. 4. The length of each verse is, of course, not consistent within a stanza. Admittedly, there is a great diVerence between three positions and 22, but the average length of all the verses of a stanza is nonetheless useful. It is high in most Class III stanzas, and in some Class I stanzas. In contrast, it is low in Class II. Fifteen verses have been deWned as ‘longer verses’. These are classiWed into two groups: distinctively aeolic verses (7 verses) and amalgamated verses (8 verses). The former tend to be used in Class I, and the latter, in Class III. There are also 15 ‘shorter verses’. Of these, two are aeolic, but the remaining 13 are made up of d, D, or eþanceps. It is, therefore, not surprising that verses in Class II are, on average, relatively short.

Verse-by-verse construction Cf. 8. A. 2. In Class I, there are some cases in which the identical colon is repeated for 3 or more verses in cluster.

The Three Classes of Stanza-Forms

105

Repetition of identical phrase within verse Cf. 8. B. 3. In 10 verses, aeolic phrases, dodrans or reversed dodrans are repeated within a verse with/without base. Most of them belong to Class III.

Dovetailing Cf. 8. B. 2. Dovetailing is a special method of linking two (or more) aeolic cola by single-syllable overlap. It is peculiar to Class I.

Aeolic base of two longs Cf. 5. B. 1. Aeolic base is a useful criterion. ‘Full aeolic base’ is rarely occupied by

(6 examples in total). Even when

corresponds with
w (i.e.
x, 20 examples),

is exceptional in about half the verses concerned; the exception often results from a proper noun. In the majority of stanzas,

is avoided. This is the general picture; but there are some exceptions in which

is freely used, most of them belonging to Class I.

Reversed dodrans with long second position Cf. 5. E. 1. In Pindar reversed dodrans is
w
ww
, but occasionally
x
ww
occurs. The latter form is found, with few exceptions, only in Class I.

Reversed dodrans with tribrach opening Cf. 5. E. 2. There are 10 reversed dodrantes of the form (www
ww
). Most of them occur in Class II or Class III.

Aeolic phrases and e2 Cf. 8. B. 6. In contrast to e, e2 is hardly ever used after an aeolic colon in Class I. The similarity of e2 with aeolic hexasyllable (dodrans and reversed dodrans) is fully exploited in some Class III stanzaforms.

106

Introduction

Dactylic runs Cf. 7. 6, 8. C. 1. D and D þ are rather rare phrases. Within the verse, they are incompatible with aeolics. Nevertheless, the six verses which look like ‘expanded aeolics’, but which are better analysed as special D/e, are located next to verses containing D or D þ. The aYliation is certain. Attention should be paid to the fact that an asymmetrical phrase is occasionally mixed in with the genuine D/e. To sum up, dactylic runs, whether contained in D or D þ or in ‘expanded aeolics’, are absent from Class I.

Long link anceps Cf. 6. D. In freer D/e, link anceps is not so frequent as in normal D/e. Two longs tend to be juxtaposed without anceps in between. However, there are some verses which contain anceps in mid-verse. When the link anceps is long in a verse, the stanza-form belongs to Class II.

Short link anceps and choriamb after long sequences of single-short movement Cf. 8. C. 3. 6. e5 and e6 are signals of Class III. e3 is used more generally, but is absent from Class I. There is a group of verses which are made up of single-short movement followed by w d. These are peculiar to Class III.

Double, triple, multiple e Cf. 8. B. 5. Successive e without anceps in between is a common phrase, but is hardly ever used in conjunction with aeolic phrases, i.e. it is absent in Class I.

Acephalous phrases Cf. 6. B. Though there are a few exception, ^ d, ^ D, ^ D þ, and ^ e are concentrated in some stanza-forms in Class II. These criteria are arranged in the following synopsis:

The Three Classes of Stanza-Forms #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21

no freer D/e verse or one at most fewer aeolic verses higher RSS lower RSS longer verses shorter verses verse-by-verse construction construction in repetitive aeolic phrases dovetailing aeolic base of two longs rdod with long in second position rdod with tribrach opening aeolic phraseþe2 parataxis of hexasyllabic aeolics and e2 dactylic run dactylic movement with asymmetry long link anceps in mid-verse short link anceps and d e3, e5, e6 multiple e acephalous phrases

107

Class I Class II Class III p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p

In the following sections, a sketch of the ‘ideal type’ of each Class is oVered Wrst; a short historical survey then follows. Class I: Aeolic Examples: O9s, P2e, P6s, P8s, P8e, P10e, N2s, N4s, I7s, I7e. Most certain cases: O9s, N2s, N4s, I7s, I7e. Ambiguous cases: P2e (? Class III), P10e (? Class III) Most of the verses, if not all, are made up of aeolic phrases with/ without preWx or suYx. They are made up of one or two, or, exceptionally three phrases which make the verse very long (#5). Freer D/e phrases are used as preWx and suYx, but verses made up wholly of freer D/e are rare (#1). Aeolic phrases of the identical or very similar type are repeated within a verse (#8), and two at a time are sporadically connected by dovetailing (#9). The identical aeolic phrase is also repeated for several verses in the same structure, and verse-by-verse construction is clear (#7). ‘Full aeolic base’ (ªª) may take any of the forms:

,
w, w
, www; two longs (

) and

108

Introduction

long and ‘explicit’ anceps (
x, i.e. long and short are in correspondence in the second position) are peculiar to this class (#10). And the second position of reversed dodrans is long occasionally at some repetitions (#11). Partly because of these long ancipitia, RSS tends to be low (#4). It is reasonable to suppose that Pindar’s Class I belongs basically to the aeolic tradition. The aeolic phrases of Pindar in Class I are the same in detail as those of Sappho and Alcaeus on the one hand and tragedy on the other, although the diVerences cannot be ignored. It is not clear how far the diVerences are to be attributed to the genre and how far to Pindar’s own artistic preferences. The judgement must follow a fresh examination of other poets (Bacchylides, the three tragic poets). Class II: Freer D/e or choriambo-cretic Examples: O2s, O2e, O9e, O10s, O10e, O13s1–5, P5s, N6s, N6e. Most certain cases: O9e, O10s, O10e, O13s1–5, P5s, N6s, N6e. More than half the verses are composed of the phrases e, d, and their prolonged forms. Aeolic phrases are mixed in but are uncommon (#1). Verses tend in general to be short (#6). Occasionally, there are very short verses, made up of fewer than 6 positions. Freer D/e phrases are combined with each other with or without link anceps. Link anceps, especially long, in mid-verse is rare outside normal D/e, but is occasionally found here in Class II (#17). The use of ‘dactylic run’ (D, D þ, and also ones with asymmetrical opening or cadence) is a distinct feature, though some stanzas of Class III have them too (#15, #16). Phrase e is sometimes repeated two or three times without an intervening link (#19). It may be heavily resolved. At the beginning of the verse acephalous phrases, mainly ^ e, but also others, are found (#21). RSS varies according to stanza-forms, and is not a valid criterion for the identiWcation of this class. O2 is peculiar in that it contains no double short except s8, nor any aeolic phrase. However, verses made up exclusively of e and e2 are not restricted to O2 but are found in other stanza-forms. Stesichorus is reasonably assumed to be the forerunner of the normal D/e of Pindar. Freer D/e is another development from this prototype, and the inXuence of Ibycus is noticeable in dactylic runs with asymmetrical cadence/opening. In view of uncertainties of

The Three Classes of Stanza-Forms

109

dating, it cannot be decided which of the two, the normal D/e or freer D/e, is the earlier development in Pindar’s career. In normal D/e, Pindar seems to have assigned himself rigid rules. In the other area he chose to resort to rarer phrases, for example, d or the sequence of two (or more) e’s without link anceps. Moreover, he introduced aeolic phrases in this looser D/e environment (whether or not these aeolic phrases are to be identiWed with those in Class I; see below on Class III). Class III: amalgamated style Examples: O1s, O1e, P2s, P5e, P10s, P11s, P11e, N3s, N3e, N7s, N7e, I8s. Most certain cases: O1s, O1e, P2s, N3s, N3e, N7s, N7e. Aeolic metre and freer D/e are neatly amalgamated; in other words, verses can be divided into phrases as in freer D/e, but at the same time a number of asymmetrical phrases of aeolic type are incorporated (#1, #2). As is demonstrated in the synopsis above, there are many criteria common to Class II and Class III. The diVerence between these two classes is, however, fundamental: one is the length of verse (#5, #6), another is whether aeolic verses are frequent or not (#2), and the third is absence of long mid-anceps (#17). RSS is very high (#3), especially in the stanza-forms which contain long sequences of single-short movement with many resolutions (#19). The single-short movement is often followed by w d (#18). Verses of this type are in general very long and so are verses of another group, in which paratactic use of aeolic hexasyllable with e2 is a distinct feature (#14). Some stanza-forms are magniWcent both in scale and in their complicated style. Class III is the most characteristically Pindaric and the consummation of his art. It cannot be by accident that not only the elaborate, grand-scale odes like O1 or P2 but also those most problematic in their content belong to this class: I am thinking of N7 or I8.151 At the Wnal stage of this Part, I must ask the reader to be tolerant if I raise again a residual question (cf. I. 7). I cannot help suspecting 151 Oustside the eighteen majors two beautiful poems belong to Class III: O14 and Paean 4. The metres of these two are very sophisticated, comparable with O1 or P2, or perhaps more. See each section of the Appendices to Part II.

110

Introduction

that the dodrans and the reversed dodrans, as used in Class III (and in Class II, but not in Class I), are not really aeolic. Rather, Pindar may have introduced these phrases (
ww
w
and
w
ww
) in a much freer context and employed them like the symmetrical components d or e2. They are even followed by anceps (for example,
w
ww

¼ rdodþanceps) or preceded by ^ e (for example, w

ww
w
¼ ^ eþdod). He may have gone further, and conXated these two asymmetrical phrases so as to invent a new phrase
w
ww
w
, which happens to be equal to one possible form of the glyconic, but is not in fact glyconic. The Simonidean phrase which is repeated in 542 P (cited above in 5. G) is most probably this non-glyconic type. If this hypothesis is right and Pindar (and/or Simonides?) invented a diVerent metre, what seems to be glyconic or pherecratean in Classes II and III is to be distinguished from the aeolic glyconic or pherecratean in Class I, which starts with the aeolic base. However, it is dangerous to push this argument too hard. Starting from the rules in Ch. 3, we have now established two metres and three styles in the other half of Pindar. It remains to assign individual odes to them.

APPENDIX

Modern Emendations: A Test Case (Nem. 6 Str. 6–7) When there is a break in responsion between corresponding strophes, the text is possibly corrupt. The exceptions are anceps and resolution, but recognition of anceps or resolution itself occasionally raises a question. Numerous emendations have been proposed to recover exact responsion since the Byzantine period (notably by Moschopoulos and Triclinius), but the nineteenth century was the heyday of textual criticism, especially in Germany. In this chapter I cursorily trace the history of emendationes metri causa. N6s6–7 is chosen as a test case to illustrate the inclinations of prominent critics, from Hermann and Boeckh to Turyn and Snell. Other passages will be each discussed in Part II. The end of the strophe (s6–7) of Nemean 6 is heavily corrupt.1 Of its six repetitions, str. 3 is the most contentious: proposed conjectures cover almost a whole page’s worth of Gerber’s Emendations (112–13). But the other Wve repetitions are not exempt from suspicion either. They do not metrically correspond with each other although the meaning is, in general, unambiguous. Like all the other Pindaric passages where textual matters are entangled with metrical ones, an attempt at emendation often involves a full-scale rewriting of more than one corresponding passage. The emendations hitherto proposed are so huge in number that, before we examine them each by each, some preliminary guidance would be helpful for grasping the scope of the question. First, it is convenient to arrange the six corresponding lines horizontally. Instead of the manuscript readings I start from Snell’s text for practical reasons. Not only is Snell’s text easily available, but it also prints N6s6–7 with the fewest emendations among modern editions. In fact, Snell is certainly wrong in assuming free responsion at the beginning of s7 (his 8th verse), but, thanks 1 One must remember that the Nemeans (and the Isthmians too) are not well preserved in the MSS. The tradition is thin: Nemean 6 depends on only two, apart from twelve verses in V; of these B is superior and has a scholarly text while D is careless and unreliable. In contrast, the Olympians are preserved in a number of MSS, including. A, which is the sole manuscript of the ‘recensio Ambrosiana’. The situation of the Pythians is not so good, but far better than for the Nemeans and the Isthmians.

112

Introduction

to this alleged free responsion, his text generally keeps the manuscript readings as they are (except str. 3, which must be rewritten in any case). s6a str. 1 (6) ant. 1 (13) str. 2 (28) ant. 2 (35) str. 3 (50) ant. 3 (57)


ww
ww


ww
rw

k ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ  PŒ f¼g I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ

s6b str. 1 (6b) ant. 1 (13b) str. 2 (28b) ant. 2 (35b) str. 3 (50b) ant. 3 (57b)


wt
k ¼
Æ F fg
çÆÆØ sæ K
ø Æx Æ
ÆæÆ EŒ åغ ¼ªªº Æ,

s7 str. 1 (7) ant. 1 (14) str. 2 (29) ant. 2 (36) str. 3 (51) ant. 3 (58)

–Ø ªÆæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , PŒºÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± 
 åÆÆd ŒÆÆÆd Iç ±æ ø,

 K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø


w


w


wr
(K
ø scanned trisyllabically)
w


wr

wr

at
ww
w
w
k

At the beginning of s7 (his 8th verse) Snell admits responsion between these forms:


w

ww
. . . (str. 1; the Wrst syllable of ªÆæÆł is scanned as long)
www
ww
. . . (str. 2, ant. 3; also str. 3, emendatio metri causa)

ww
ww
. . . (ant. 1, ant. 2). The Wrst and the second are unproblematic. However, the responsion between these two and the third is highly improbable. Snell postulates ‘acephalous choriambic dimeter’, whose three positions are ancipitia (ªªª
ww
),2 but the existence of three or more successive ancipitia must be denied in Greek metre.3 Either
www or

ww (or, theoretically, neither) should be retained, and the other must be emended. As I describe below, the majority

2 Snell, Griechische Metrik4 37. As is illustrated below, Snell’s text is identical with Schroeder’s (BT2). 3 Itsumi, ‘Choriambic Dimeter’.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

113

of critics before 1900 took

ww as the norm. This means as many as four repetitions must be emended, namely, str. 1, str. 2, str. 3, and ant. 3. Conversely, the idea that
www was the norm was Wrst proposed by Hermann in his ‘Notae’ of 1817 and, after a long interval, was revived by Maas,4 Schroeder (ed. maior2, BT3), and Turyn. If the responsion between
www and
w
is allowed, the number of responsions that must be emended is fewer: ant. 1, ant. 2, and str. 3. I discuss this Wrst. Turyn, who considers
www as the norm, adopts two conjectures by Hermann: PŒ ¼æ at ant. 1 and åæı
ºŒ ı at ant. 2 (Hermann himself emends the text more extensively; moreover, his ideas greatly changed at least three times during his life; see below). I leave the emendation of str. 3 aside for a moment. PŒ ¼æ is a minor change but åæı
ºŒ ı for åæıƺƌ ı is not, and seems less plausible. Pindar seems to have understood åæıź ŒÆ , a Homeric epithet for Artemis (see M. W. Edwards on Il. 20. 70–1), as ‘with golden distaV’ (for the sense, see R. Janko on Il. 16. 183). It is a favourite of Pindar (O6. 104 epithet for Amphitrite; N5. 35 epithet for Nereids; fr. 29 epithet for Melia; and Threnos 3. 1(¼ fr. 128c) epithet for Leto, as in our passage). åæı
ºŒÆ is not used anywhere by Pindar, though it is the epithet for Leto in h.Ap. 205.5 As noted above, other critics considered

ww as the norm. This idea has its origin with Boeckh (1811), but actually the emendations which Boeckh introduced were Wrst proposed by none other than Hermann in 1809 (‘De dialecto’). Boeckh emends metri causa the initial part of three repetitions thus (I leave str. 3 aside again): str. 1

str. 2 ant. 3

¥ Æ Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. (The Wrst syllable of ªæÆł is scanned short, contra Snell and Turyn ¼ Hermann, ‘Notae’) PŒºEÆ:
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø

 ª K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

Textually these emendations are not cogent. ¥ Æ Ø (str. 1) and

 ª (ant. 3) are hardly improvements. As for PŒºEÆ (str. 2), Pindar does not use this Homeric form. He uses other forms for sg. acc.: PŒºÆ 5 times (O6. 76, P8.65 (¼ 62 Sn), P9. 58 (¼ 56), N5.15, N6. 48 (¼ 46), and PŒºA once (P12. 24 em. E. Schmid; PŒºÆ codd.). Nevertheless these three emendations became indispensable for the text of N6s6–7 and established themselves as, so to speak, a three-piece set. They had been adopted for a century by many, 4 5

According to Schroeder’s report, ed. maior2, 521. Scholia register åæıź ŒÆ (Drachamann iii. 109; åæÅź ŒÆ D).

114

Introduction

including Mommsen and Christ. It may be said that this three-piece set was less oVensive than åæı
ºŒ ı. An Entweder-Oder arose: either (unnecessarily) to expel åæıƺƌ ı or (unnecessarily) to introduce the three-piece set. To avoid this dilemma, Bergk ingeniously invented a quite diVerent metrical scheme with further sophisticated emendations (see below), and Schroeder, instead of resorting to emendation, accepted some of the manuscript readings as metrical licences, by introducing a theory which supports these anomalous responsions. So far I have left aside the emendations of str. 3. The paradosis Wts metrically neither
www nor

ww at the beginning of s7: [end of s6a] . . . Ææf  çØ [s6b] EŒ 
 [s7]

`åغðºÞ åÆÆd ŒÆa Iç ±æ ø,

Moreover it raises a question about the construction of EŒ . Is it in apposition to åغðºÞ (thus Hermann, who is followed, among others, by Turyn and Snell)? Or should a transitive verb be introduced, e.g. E EŒ (Boeckh)? Note the scholia, which paraphrase thus: ÆæEÆ b ŒÆd K
ÆåŁB Æåc Øa çغØŒÆ ÆPE K
Ø › åغºf E `NŁłØ, åÆÆd ŒºÆ e Æ ÆPe KŒ H ±æ ø ŒÆºŁ. This reading includes the verb K
Ø but not 
. Thus the whole sentence of str. 3 is another big issue. The third problem is the colometry, namely, the separation of s6b from s6a. Some have felt that the length of s6b, a sequence of four positions, was too short to be an independent verse. Thus they have tried to combine it with either the preceding verse (s6a) or the following one (s7). But hiatus hinders the combination in both cases: between s6b and s6a, EÆ; j sæ (str. 2); and between s6b and s7,
çÆÆØ j PŒ (ant. 1; the paradosis is elided
çÆ , which is unmetrical). Moreover, the metrical form of s6b itself is questionable even if s6b is accepted as one verse. The responsion between r
and

at verse-end is highly unusual. The penultimate position is Wlled by a resolved long at str. 2 (K
ø scanned trisyllabically ww
) and at ant. 3 (and also at str. 3 in Snell’s text above; str. 3 is an emendation). Thus, to restore the exact responsion at all the repetitions, Boeckh, for example, introduces the unresolved form to ant. 3 by changing ¼ªªº Æ into ¼ªªº A and by changing the word-order in str. 2: (MSS) (Boeckh)

K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, j sæ K
ø K
d F K
ø, t E , ¼ª , sæ

In str. 3 the verse is occupied by E EΠ; a large-scale emendation (see above).

Appendix: Modern Emendations

115

Finally, some words or word-forms caused suspicion: for example, a ή (str. 1) or
ÆæØåø (str. 2). And, though there is no metrical diVerence, there is a choice between K
Aº (plupf.) and 
ƺ (aorist). These are essentials for a rough sketch of the scope of the varieties of emendations.6 Now we shall trace the history in chronological order. It is generally acknowledged that the Wrst modern text of Pindar is Boeckh’s editio maior (1811). But before its publication, Hermann had already published a dissertation, ‘De dialecto Pindari observationes’, in 1809, in which he proposed emendations for N6s6–7: Nec praetereundum Œ
 Ol. VIII 50 [¼ 38] correpta prima, pro Œ

. [ . . . ]. ne quem moveat, ut ŒÆa scribendum putet Nem. VI. 87 [53 ¼ 51 Sn.]. in quo carmine pene omnium stropharum Wnis corruptus est, moneo ibi sic legendum videri: Ææf  çØ EŒ 
Æ , ŒÆa åغf åÆÆd z Iç ±æ ø, [ . . . ]. ¯
Æ , ab sensu commendatum, ob metrum necessarium est, quum in vulgato 
 , etiamsi vocalis sequatur, non possit brevem syllabam apostrophus ante anacrusin excipere. . . . Sed ne cui in reliquis strophis metrum diYcultates obiiciat, de his quoque dicendum puto. Ac v. 12. scribendum videtur ¥ Æ Ø : v. 25. F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ , [ . . . ] PŒºBÆ, forma ab Homero accepta, apud quem est IŒºÅE Iliad. XII. 318. denique v. 99 ¼ªªº Æ (seu ¼ªªº A)

 ª K
d YŒØ. (Hermann, ‘De dialecto’, Opuscula, i. 260–1.)

This is the Wrst occasion on which what above I call the three-piece set was published. The corresponding lines are each adjusted to

ww. Also note that Hermann implicitly accepts the manuscript word-order in str. 2. It must be remembered that he follows the old division into lines preserved in Heyne’s numeration. Boeckh, in the ‘Notae criticae’ incorporated in his editio maior of 1811, argues at length against the metrical ideas in Hermann’s ‘Commentatio de metris Pindari’ (which was published in 1799, ten years before ‘De dialecto’; see Addendum I below). For our concerns, this part of Boeckh’s argument is not important. More important is his declaration that s6 should not be divided but is a long verse, and that its Wnal part (i.e. what is later separated as s6b) must not include resolution, which Hermann accepts (
wta) at the penultimate position (see above). He gives a new colometry and emends the text considerably (underlined) but, in fact, he accepts the three-piece set, already proposed by Hermann. s6 s7


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a t
ww
ww
w
w


6 ƒ Ø Łd (ant. 2 v. 36 ¼ 35 Sn.) is an emendation of Triclinius for unmetrical ƒÆøŁd (MSS). For this, see the Wnal paragraph of this Appendix.

116

Introduction

str. 1 ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 ¥ Æ Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. ant. 1
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , str. 2 u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F K
ø, t E , ¼ª , sæ PŒºEÆ:
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø ant. 2 åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± str. 3  PŒ I
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ EŒ 
Æ 7 åغ åÆ Ø ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, ant. 3 Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ , ¼ªªº A,

 ª K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø.

Hermann’s ‘De dialecto’ was reprinted in 1817 in Heyne’s three-volume edition, and with it, he published another piece, ‘Notae ad Pindarum’, in which he criticized Boeckh in turn and oVered diVerent solutions for several passages. But at N6s6–7 he drastically changed his mind from ‘De dialecto’. His description in ‘Notae’ is a kind of running commentary, but I reconstruct his whole text, supplementing unmentioned words and metrical scheme: s6b s7 str. 1


wru
wr
ww
w
w


¼
 , P –Ø ¼æ ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. ant. 1 F 
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ . str. 2 sæ K
ø PŒºÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, ant. 2 Æ¥ ÆØ
æÆ åæı
ºŒ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± str. 3 EŒ åغ 
 åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø ant. 3 ¼ªªº Æ,

 K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø,

Underlined are the words or word-order which Hermann was the Wrst to introduce. His approach is certainly drastic, but some of his emendations have survived and are adopted in the modern editions: ¼æ (ant. 1), åæı
ºŒ ı (ant. 2) are, as described above, printed by Turyn. Besides these, both Turyn and Snell follow Hermann in changing word-order:

`åغ 
 (str. 3). It must be remembered that 
 can be in this 7

Boeckh occasionally admits an elided vowel at the end of verse, contrary to our notion of verse-end.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

117

position because the second position of s7 is short. Boeckh’s ª is proved to be unnecessary (ant. 3). But instead, ¼æ is introduced (str. 1; ªæÆł is scanned w
w). Hermann restores exact responsion in s6b, perhaps in answer to Boeckh’s critical comment. Interestingly, his exact responsion includes resolution at all the repetitions (
wru), contrary to Boeckh’s (
w
w). The case of Æx Æ is changed into Æ¥ ÆØ (ant. 2).
çÆÆØ (< çÅ) (ant. 1) is as bold as åæı
ºŒ ı. From the point of view of modern metrical scholarship, a diYculty is found in P (str. 1) at the verse-end, which contradicts modern principles. One might combine s6b with s7 in these texts. Then P would not be a problem, but correption of
çÆÆØ PŒ in a non-dactylic context would produce a further problem. Challenged by Hermann, Boeckh published a corrected edition (his editio minor) in 1825. In that he changed str. 3 considerably: s6
ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a s7 u
ww
ww
w
w
str. 3  PΠI
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ E EŒ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa `åغf Iç ±æ ø,

The other emendations were left unchanged and the same as in his editio maior. The emendation of str. 3 above was, in fact, proposed by Dissen (1830) on vv. 52 V.: ‘Quod nunc in textu vides, Boeckhius ex mea coniectura reposuit, quum Scholiastes E videatur habuisse).’ Textually Dissen (1830) is the same as Boeckh, ed. minor. In 1840 Kayser published his Lectiones Pindaricae, which included a good many conjectures. He explicitly maintained that EŒ is in apposition to åغ , against Boeckh: ‘fortasse nullo mutato verborum ordo tantum alius inferendus est: Ææf  
 çØ EŒ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa åغf Iç ±æ ø. [ . . . ] Dissenius in his (i.e. scholia) ipsius poetae manum agnoscebat, recipiens inde E EŒ quod nobis secus videtur’ (Lectiones Pindaricae, 77–8). His metrical analysis of this text would be explained, unsuccessfully, in his article of 1844 discussed below. In 1843 two important editions were published. One was Schneidewin’s; although its title was ‘Pindari carmina . . . ex recensione Boeckhii commentario perpetuo illustravit Ludolphus Dissenius, editio altera auctior et emendatior’, the text is essentially Schneidewin’s, and he furthermore adds his own ample exegeses in the apparatus. Schneidewin divides Boeckh’s s6 into two verses (our s6a and s6b), which he gives the following schemes: s6a s6b s7


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
wta a
ww
ww
w
wu

118

Introduction

str. 1 ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼Ø
 ¥ Æ Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. str. 2 u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø Kߌº · I
Øåø ªaæ Iæø str. 3  PŒ I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ ºŒ åغ 
ÆØ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø,

The other three repetitions are identical with Boeckh (edd. mai. et min.). I
Øåø found followers. For example, half a century later, the manuscript reading
ÆæØåø was denounced as ‘unmo¨glich’ by Wilamowitz (‘denn
ÆæåŁÆØ kann man von den Toten nicht sagen’, GV 487), and LSJ still has a vestige of this when it claims that
ÆæØåø in this passage as lectio dubia. ºŒ instead of EŒ was supported by Hermann in his third publication (‘Nem. sextum’, 1844). In reconstructing the text of N6s6–7, Schneidewin owes a lot to Ahrens, who suggested the readings in str. 2 and str. 3 (though Schneidewin did not follow him in str. 1). However, it was Schneidewin’s own merit to divide Boeckh’s verse into two, keeping the modern notion of the verse-end. He further introduced in the apparatus two conjectures by Ahrens as well as his own. One of them was adopted later by Christ.8 Schneidewin app. crit. str. 3 
ÆØ åÆAÇ ŒÆa Iç ±æ ø, Ahrens ibid. str. 1 Ær Æ  ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. ant. 3

 Ø K
YŒØ F ªÆæø

The other edition to be published in 1843 was Bergk’s Poetae Lyrici Graeci (Bergk1) which included Pindar’s epinikia. Bergk would introduce bold conjectures in his later editions, but he was modest in this Wrst edition. The text of s6–7 is basically the same as Boeckh’s editio minor, except for ¼Ø instead of ¼ (str. 1), proposed by Schneidewin. In the next year (1844) Kayser reviewed both Bergk and Schneidewin for Jahrbu¨cher der Literatur. He makes several good comments and provides his emendations as well. His metrical observation is keen. According to 8 Schneidewin contributes to the Pindaric text more than we see in the apparatus of Snell or Turyn. He elucidates problems and passes sound judgements on the proposals of his predecessors, especially Hermann. I presume his edition was enormously helpful to later critics, e.g. Mommsen or Christ.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

119

Schneidewin’s edition, the penultimate position is resolved at three repetitions in N6s6b. Kayser remarks that resolution is unacceptable at this position: ‘In der AuXo¨sung der trocha¨ischen Dipodie scheint sich Pindar zur Regel gemacht zu haben, den Tribrachys oder Anapa¨st am Schlusse eines Verses nicht zuzulassen’ (JL 106). He proposes the following emendations so as to eliminate the resolution: str. 2 ant. 3

sæ oø (Wrst proposed by Kayser) instead of sæ K
ø ¼ªªº A (already proposed by Boeckh) instead of ¼ªªº Æ

For str. 3, he introduces his former suggestion slightly modiWed (åÆAÇ ŒÆa instead of åÆÆd ŒÆÆa ): Ææf  
 çØ EŒ åÆAÇ ŒÆa åغ Iç ±æ ø.

Unlike the two emendations above, this text does not Wt Schneidewin’s colometry, unless Kayser accepted a verse-end within a word: s6a ends with Ææf  
- and s6b is occupied by - çØ EŒ (
w
w). Thus Kayser must have assumed that s6a and s6b were one united verse (like Boeckh). However, when s6a and s6b are united, hiatus occurs at str. 2 between EÆ and sæ (Boeckh changed the word-order). It is not clear how Kayser viewed the matter: he might have accepted the hiatus by some unknown reasoning. At any rate, he was apparently the Wrst to suspect the resolution at the penultimate position of a verse. This suspicion would be revived after seventy years by Paul Maas (see Addendum II); and, the change of word-order, Ææf  
 çØ EŒ , would be accepted, along with Boeckh’s emendations and colometry, by Christ. In the same year (1844) Hermann again published a newly revised text, which is proved to be his last (‘Nem. sextum’). As in the other two publications on Pindar of his later years, namely ‘Emend. P.’ (1834)—which, despite its title, includes emendations on the Pythians only—and ‘Quinque Ol.’ (1847), Hermann in this article makes many acute observations as well as bold conjectures. He is especially keen to restore exact responsion: ‘Accedit quod quaedam a grammaticis metri maxime caussa videntur mutata esse: quo proclivior etiam recentioribus criticis via ad errorem est, plus sibi licentiae sumpsisse Pindarum putantibus, quam per severitatem lyricae poesis concessum erat.’ s6b is totally regularized and united with s7: s6a s6bþs7 str. 1 ant. 1


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
wr

wr
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼Ø
 i çı ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F ‹
çÆ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ ,

120 str. 2 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3

Introduction u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F; ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æ¥ ÆØ
æÆ åæı
ºŒ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ±  PŒ I
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ ºŒ åغ 
; åÆAÇ ŒÆÆd Iç ±æ ø, Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ ¼ªªº Æ

 K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

The metrical scheme is not diVerent from that in ‘Notae’ except that the last position of s6b is Wxed as long without hiatus. In other words, Hermann expelled
w

from, and introduced
wr
, to the corresponding part of s6b at every repetition, and also adjusted the beginning of s7 to the scheme
wr. Some of his conjectures are undeniably bold, however. Of them, str. 1 L çı ªæÆł (instead of –Ø ªæÆł) is a completely new proposal. Str. 3 åÆAÇ ŒÆÆd (instead of åÆÆd ŒÆÆa =ŒÆa ) follows the åÆAÇ ŒÆa of Schneidewin (app.crit.) or Kayser (JL). Note that the monosyllabic word – now moves one position forwards (str. 1). It occupies the position which had been occupied by P in ‘Notae’ (
 is scanned as double short as before). Also note that he revokes his rejection of the unusual form ŒÆa in ‘De dialecto’ cited above. At ant. 1, F ‹
çÆ , has some manuscript support (F 
çÆ ;  has been excluded).9 ºŒ is from Schneidewin–Ahrens; PŒºÆ, Æ¥ ÆØ; åæı
ºŒ ı are from ‘Notae’. It should be noted that Hermann, here too, totally rejected Boeckh’s threepiece set (¥ Æ Ø =PŒºEÆ=

 ª ).10 Also in 1844, Rauchenstein published a pamphlet (Commentationum Pindaricarum particula prima) containing some good proposals. In N6s6– 7, he proposed an emendation of str. 3, which he would later withdraw: s6 s7 str. 3


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a u
ww
ww
w
w
 PΠI
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ ŁBŒ EŒ ŒÆa åÆÆd pæ åغf Iç ±æ ø,

or ŒÆa åÆ Ø Þ åغf Iç ±æ ø,

Bergk, in his second edition (Bergk2) of 1853, establishes exact responsion in a quite diVerent manner from both Hermann and Boeckh. He ingeniously succeeds in expelling Hermann’s çı and åæı
ºŒ ı as well as the 9

For this emendation, see Addendum II below. Hermann’s contribution to the text of Pindar is enormous. But we should admit that he was too keen to seek exact responsion, especially in his later years. 10

Appendix: Modern Emendations

121

three-piece set of Boeckh. Whether his text is closer to the truth is, however, another matter.11 s6a s6bþs7 str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
ww
a
ww
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼

æe –Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F ª
çÆ PŒ :::::::::::: ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºEÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ ::::::::::::::::::::: åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± ::::::::  PŒ I
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ ºŒ `

åغº , s åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ , ¼ªªº K A (sic),

 K
YŒØ F ªÆæø

His text starts with accepting ÆxÆ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı (ant. 2) as the standard. But, unlike the previous editions, he scanned
 ÆæÆ . Following  this,
 (str. 1) and K
ø (str. 2) too were scanned as w
. Thus what had been scanned in all the previous editions as
w
a and
wr
became
ww
. ª (ant. 1) occupies the position of , which is written in the manuscripts but is meaningless, and had been deleted by many. Elided
çÆ which had been recovered by Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’) was introduced. K- (ant. 3) is newly inserted. Thus all the s6b-parts became
ww
. The most ingenious parts of Bergk’s new text are KA and åغº (not åغ ). These words enable Bergk to keep the traditional åæıƺƌ ı as Boeckh does, but at the same time they dispense with

 ª K
d. Compare: Boeckh, ed. min. ¼ªªº A,

 ª K
d YŒØ ¼ªªº KjA,

 K
YŒØ Bergk2 In this Bergk’s new scheme, -A occupies the position which
- occupies in Boeckh’s. Also compare: Schneidewin ºŒ åغf 
ÆØ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Bergk2 ºŒ åغjº , s åÆÆd ŒÆÆa 11 Bergk’s sense, both metrical and stylistical, is very keen, perhaps next to Hermann’s. Like him, he does not hesitate to think radically and to propose an original colometry which involves rewriting the majority of the repetitions. Bergk is also similar to Hermann in discarding his previous emendations for the sake of a new idea in later editions. It is important for us to note in which edition an emendation is proposed.

122

Introduction

`åغº covers not only the latter half of s6b but the beginning of s7. Instead, the main verb 
 (or a replacement such as Schneidewin’s 
ÆØ) is expelled. From this time onwards, philology gradually declines into an intellectual game. The grammar may become more correct, the meaning more precise, and the metre more exact; but we may wonder whether Pindar actually wrote like that. As an illustration, I give Hartung’s text (1856):12 s6a s6b s7 str. 1

ant. 1

str. 2

ant. 2

str. 3

ant. 3


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
ww

wr
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb ıåÆ  ¼Ø
 –Ø KªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F Kç Å PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F ¼ª EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıŒÆØ
b ˚ƺºÆ ±  PŒ I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ E åÆÆd EŒ åغ ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ IªªºÆ

 K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

Apparently Hartung’s main concern was to recover
ww
at s6 in all the repetitions, so scanning sæ K
ø as well as ¼Ø
 and ÆxÆ
æÆ . This idea may have come from Bergk’s second edition, but his conjecture is too bold to be considered as likely. In an article of 1858, ‘Zu Pindars Nemeen’, Rauchenstein approved of Hartung’s idea that, at str. 1, two interrogative pronouns, instead of one, were necessary. He tried to be less radical. His metrical scheme is the same as Boeckh’s. 12

Hartung proposes many bold conjectures in all the odes. He occasionally has a good idea; for example, the division of P10s2 into two verses with some emendations, P10e3–4 (v. 15–16), or P5 v. 118 ›EÆ. But his text also includes many implausible rationalizations. Most of his emendations seem to me to be Ximsy. In Part II, I often ignore his proposals, unlike those of other big names.

Appendix: Modern Emendations s6 s7 str. 1 str. 3

123


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a a
ww
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb ŒØ  ¼Ø
  ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.  PŒ I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ
ÆE ºŒ , åÆÆd ŒÆÆa åغf Iç ±æ ø,

Tycho Mommsen had worked for long years on Pindar’s manuscripts. It was he who Wrst used two important vetusti, A and B. His edition was Wnally published in 1864. Mommsen was more prudent than his contemporaries, and his judgement was sober. Perhaps we do not Wnd his name as frequently as Bergk’s, but it should not be forgotten that he scrutinized the emendations which had already been proposed by his predecessors.13 In N6s6–7, his text is basically the same as Boeckh’s editio minor (note the adoption of the three-piece set), except for str. 3, which is his own conjecture: s6 s7 str. 1


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a

ww
ww
w
w


ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 ¥ Æ Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. ::::::: ant. 1
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , str. 2 u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, K
ø t :::::::::::::::::::::::::: E , ¼ª , sæ PŒºEÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, ::::::::::: ant. 2 åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± str. 3  PŒ I
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ EŒ 
Æ ŒÆa åغ K
Ø Iç ±æ ø, ant. 3 Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ , ¼ªªº A,

 ª K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

Two years later (1866) Mommsen published his editio minor. In the same year Bergk published the third edition of PLG. As in the second edition, s6b is not combined with s6a but with s7. But its form is radically changed, and is diVerent from all the other editions: s6a s6bþs7 str. 1 ant. 1


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
wy

ww
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
   ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ, ŒıƪÆ ,

13 Together with his major edition Mommsen published Annotationes criticae supplementum ad Pindari Olympias. It is a pity his adnotationes did not cover the other epinikia.

124 str. 2

ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3

Introduction u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºA· Nåø ªaæ Iæø, (nisi malis PŒº I
Øåø) åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e øPF Æ¥ Æ åæıƺƌ Æ
b ˚ƺºÆ ± ::::::::::::  PŒ I
 Æ K
Aº· Ææf  çØ EŒ åغf E , åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, :::::::: Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ , ¼ªªº Æ,

 K
YŒ Ø F ªÆæø :::::::::

The most important change is the beginning of s7: the total length of the second verse (s6bþs7) becomes one position shorter. Compare Bergk3 with some of previous editions and Snell: Boeckh (ed. minor) Schneidewin Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’) Bergk2 Mommsen Snell Bergk3


w
a k u
ww
ww
w
w

wta k u
ww
ww
w
w

www

www
ww
w
w

ww
u
ww
ww
w
w

w
a k

ww
ww
w
w

wt
k
at
ww
w
w

wt

ww
ww
w
w


¥ Æ Ø (str. 1), one of the three-piece set (–Ø BD) in Boeckh and others, is changed into   . The idea of two interrogative pronouns comes from Hartung. Later the paradosis –Ø would be recovered in Bergk4, but in this edition, Bergk believes the fourth position must not be anceps but long.
çÆÆØ is elided (ant. 1); the elision is actually found in the paradosis.
æÆ is deleted while ÆxÆ is changed into Æ¥ Æ (ant. 2) with ÆÆ into øPı. One position is expelled from ½
ÆæNåø (str. 2) and K
½d YŒØ (ant. 3). Presumably Bergk was eager to seek a diVerent way from both Hermann and Boeckh. He rejected both Boeckh’s three-piece set and Hermann’s åæı
ºŒ ı. This aim may be admirable. However, it is implausible that I
e øPF Æ¥ Æ (ant. 2) is right. In his fourth edition (1878), Bergk slightly modiWes the metrical scheme and introduces the manuscript reading –Ø at str. 1: s6bþs7


wy u
ww
ww
ww
w
w


The others are the same as the third edition, except for åæıƺƌ ı (in the third edition, åæıƺƌ Æ ). Bergk3–4 would later be adopted in principle by Wilamowitz. In 1869, three years after Mommsen’s editio minor and Bergk3, the Bibliotheca Teubneriana published an edition of Pindar edited by Wilhelm Christ. Christ later published his editio maior in 1896 with ample commentary.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

125

Successively his editio minor (BT) was revised in the following year (1897). Although it lacks the commentary, in text and apparatus it is basically the same as the editio maior. Both his editio maior and BT are excellent. His text would not have achieved much without thorough examination of his predecessors; the report of previous conjectures is very accurate.14 As for N6s6–7, his text is basically the same as Boeckh– Dissen, except str. 3, where he follows Kayser (Lectiones Pindaricae): s6 s7 str. 1


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
u u
ww
ww
w
w


ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 ¥ Æ Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ. ::::::::::: ant. 1
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , str. 2 u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: K
ø, t E , ¼ª sæ PŒºEÆ·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø ant. 2 åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± str. 3  PŒ I
ÅÆ 
ƺ· Ææf  ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 
 çØ EŒ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa åغf Iç ±æ ø, ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ant. 3 Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ ¼ªªº ::::: A::,

 ª K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

Christ was a metrician too. He wrote a book on metre (Metrik der Griechen und Ro¨mer, Leipzig, 1874). Like Rossbach–Westphal he introduces ‘logaoedic’ with ‘cyclic dactyl’ etc. His presentation of metrical scheme is drastically changed from the ones from Boeckh to Mommsen.15 As for our passage, one thing is certain. He does not like free responsion in Pindar. He even tries to minimize actual occurrences of ancipitia. Note his conjecture in the apparatus for str. 3: fort. ŒÆa åغf åÆÆd Ærł , where the initial syllable is long like the other repetitions. Abhorrence of free responsion is noticeable also in Rossbach–Westphal, the most celebrated book on metre for decades. I just cite the scheme from the second edition of Griechische Metrik (1868), without any comment, because their theories, based on analogy to modern Western music, have already proved unncessary and futile. It is uncertain on which text West14 Christ usually abstains from printing his own conjectures in the main text in an exemplary manner. At the same time, in the apparatus we Wnd many good proposals which are based on deep consideration with keen sense. They are, and will for ever be, a challenge for future generations. 15 Until Christ, the segmentation of verses had been basically the same as my Rules. cf. the illustration above at pp. 19–20 n. 33. Here in the Appendix, I omit ictus (Œ) from their metrical schemes and reproduce their analyses in the current fashion.

126

Introduction

phal’s analysis is based. The line numbering is his; thus 7, 8, 9 correspond to our s6a, s6b, s7. 2 Bd. II, 4. die logao¨dischen Metra. §61. Logao¨dische Strophen des Pindarischen Stils. S 825 Nem. 6 str. Tetrapodisch-dipodisch 7
ww
ww


ww
www ^ 8
w
a ^ ^ 9 w
ww
ww
w
w



a

It is fair to note that, although it is less artiWcial, Christ’s idea of metre is not far from Westphal’s. The trend started changing at the end of the nineteenth century. 1897 was a dramatic year in classical scholarship. The papyrus of Bacchylides was published, and some apparent anomalies of responsion helped new theories of metre to be launched. Sixteen years later, Maas described the situation as follows: Bis vor etwa 16 Jahren wiesen die modernen Pindartexte keine anderen Freiheiten der antistrophischen Responsion auf als Vertauschung von La¨nge und Doppelku¨lze in einigen Hebungen . . . und Vertauschung von La¨nge und Ku¨rze in einigen Senkungen. ¨ berlieferung entha¨lt oder zu enthalten scheint, Die u¨brigen Inkongruenzen, die die U waren seit dem 13. Jahrhundert allma¨hlich sa¨mtlich beseitigt worden, sei es durch ¨ berlieferung, sei es durch Annahme einer Korruptel. Nach den selben Deutung der U Prinzipien wurden 1897 die neuen Lieder des Bakchylides in der Erstausgabe behandelt, wenn auch fu¨r manche Einzelheit keine befriedigende Lo¨sung gegeben werden konnte. (‘Freiheiten’, 1.)

Schroeder’s editio maior was published in the last year of the nineteenth century (1900); the publisher printed it as the Wfth edition of Bergk’s PLG. Schroeder introduced into Pindar’s poetry a new metrical theory, which resembles Wilamowitz’s idea, but later develops it to the extreme.16 In general, he tends to seek an example of irregular responsion in manuscript readings, and to use it as proof of some more wide-ranging metrical theory, even if it is not fully paralleled. Here in N6s6–7, he introduces two free responsions: s6a s6b s7


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a
ww
(sæ K
ø)

ww
ww
w
w


16 To be correct, such metrical theory as Dreiheber/Vierheber or strophic analysis based on the number of Hebungen is still absent from his editio maior. What he introduced here is free responsion between e.g.
ww
and
w

in D/e.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

127

w
ww
w

ww
w

str. 1

ant. 1

str. 2

ant. 2

str. 3

ant. 3

(Kߌº I-) (–Ø ªæÆ-ł) ( `åغ åÆ-) ŒÆ
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ17 ¼
 –Ø ªæÆł æÆ
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø Kߌº I
Øåø ªaæ Iæø, åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ±  PŒ I
ÅÆ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ EŒ 
º åغ åÆÆd ŒÆÆÆd Iç ±æ ø, Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ ¼ªªº A,

  K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

We need to go back to the chronological order. In 1890, ten years before the publication of Schroeder, Bury had written a commentary on the Nemeans. Bury honestly admitted his ignorance of metre and wrote: ‘in regard to Pindaric metres, I have adopted with hesitation the conclusions of M. Schmidt. As I have not made a thorough study of Greek metric, I do not feel competent to pronounce on a subject which demands the concentrated powers of specialists’ (Preface, vi). In N6s6–7 he reads: s6 s7 str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2


ww
ww


ww
rw
w
wty
ww
ww
w
w
18 ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 ¼Æ  ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
ç Æ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , :::::::::: u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºA· Nåø ªaæ Iæø :::::::::::::::::::::::::::

17 In apparatus: ‘ . . . a ŒÆ exspectandum esse sensit Hartung, quod reposui cum Wilamowitzio (Eur. Her2 II 232, v, 1106), Hartung ipse . . . ’; for Hartung’s text, see above. If ‘bei Tag oder Nacht’ (Wilamowitz) should be rendered from KçÆæÆ . . . a ŒÆ, not by ŒÆ , hiatus would occur (as in str. 2) so that s6b must be divided from s6a. 18 The metrical chart on p. 102 is misprinted; cf. on v. 50, p. 111.

128 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3

Introduction åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ±  PŒ I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ EŒ åغ çA åÆAÇ ŒÆa Iç ±æ ø, ::::::::::::::::::::: Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ , ¼ªªº Æ,

 K
YŒØ F ªÆæø

In s7, these free responsions are admitted: str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3

¼
 ¼Æ F
çÆ PŒ ¼- sæ K
ø PÆx Æ
æÆ åæıÆEŒ åغ çA¼ªªº Æ,
-



w
ww

w
ww

wr


wr


wr


wr



If Hermann had been alive, what would he have said about such extraordinary metrical licence? However, it became a trend in the twentieth century to defend abnormal responsion in manuscripts by introducing new metrical theories. In 1908, Schroeder introduces new metrical schemes in his editio minor (BT), based on the same text as his editio maior in N6s6–7. Here the ‘choriambic dimeter’ is explicitly launched for the Wrst time in a edition of Pindar: N6s6 N6s6b N6s7


ww
r


ww
rw
a
wy
ªªªª
ww
w
w


ªªªª represents any combinations of four syllables of either long or short:
w

(–Ø ªæÆ- ),

ww (PŒ ¼æ ), w
ww (Kߌº
Æ-),

ww (åæıƺƌ -), ww
w ( `åغ åÆ-),
www (

 K
Ø). In 1914, Schroeder amended his text in the second edition of his editio minor (BT2), after accepting the advice of Maas (cf. Praefatio: ‘In plagulis corrigendis amice et sollerter me adiuvit Paulus Maas non sine magno (velut N vi str 9, . . . ) poetae ipsius commodo’. A new metrical scheme is also introduced for s7 (his str 9), which would be reproduced without any change later by Snell: s7 str. 1

ant. 1


at
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 –Ø ªÆæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ ,

Appendix: Modern Emendations

129

str. 2

u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø Kߌº ::::::::
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, ant. 2 åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± str. 3  PŒ I
ÅÆ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ EŒ åغ 
 åÆÆd ŒÆÆÆd Iç ±æ ø, ant. 3 Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ ¼ªªº Æ,

 K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø

‘Choriambic dimeter’ survives. It is unfortunate that, in our passages, Snell’s text as well as his metre follow this edition of Schroeder. Maas criticized the free responsion: ‘ich habe . . . , wa¨hrend ich fu¨r Schroe¨ berzeugung von der der die Korrektur des Pindarstextes von 1914 las, die U Unzula¨ssigkeit der ganzen Gattung von Anomalien gewonnen’ (‘Freiheiten’, 2). But it took a long time for his ideas to be vindicated. The anomalies in the D/e poems were wiped out comparatively early (however, as late as 1930, Bowra still criticized the free responsions in D/e: ‘An Alleged Anomaly’), but those in the non-D/e poems survived.19 It is uncertain to what extent the metrical theories of Schroeder or Wilamowitz were correctly understood by nonspecialists. Apparently Sandys and Puech were under their inXuence. I cite below in detail only the last part of s6 (the s6b-part) and the beginning of s7 of Sandys (Loeb, published in 1915).


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
wta
ar
ww
w
w


s6 s7

The metrical scheme of Sandys is basically the same as that of Schroeder, BT2 (1914). Textually Sandys diVers from Schroeder in two words (underlined). str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2 ant. 2

19

¼
 F
çÆÆØ sæ K
ø Æx Æ
æÆ

¥ Æ Ø -ª PŒ ¼æ PŒºÆ·
Æåæıƺƌ -


w


w


wr

w





ww

ww
www

ww

These are some of examples of ‘licentiae antistrophicae’ which Schroeder introduces in his text by keeping the paradosis: O9s10

ww
aw
(reading ª at v. 76), O10s
aw
y
w
(reading ˚ıŒÆ at v. 15), N7s7a
taw
w
(reading åæı at v. 80).

130

Introduction

str. 3 ant. 3

EΠ`

åغ ¼ªªº Æ,

ƺ åÆ

 K
d


wr

www
wr

www

The scheme of Puech (Bude´, published in 1923) is much freer. s6a s6b s7


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
w
a uaau
ww
w
w


This is the metrical scheme Puech himself gives.20 Like the case of Sandys, I cite s6b and the beginning of s7. str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3

¼
 F
çÆÆØ sæ K
ø Æx Æ
æÆ EŒ 
 ¼ªªº A,

¥ Æ Ø ªÆæPŒ ¼æ PŒºA·
Æåæıƺƌ `

åغ åÆ

 K
d


w
w
w
w
wr

w


w
w
w





w


ww
w
w

ww ww
w
www

Puech’s own comment on s7 well explains his position: La premie`re dipodie de ce dernier coˆlon ne peut eˆtre ramene´e, quoi qu’on fasse, au meˆme type. Je n’ai admis aucune correction pour les vers de la 1re antistrophe, de la 2e strophe, de la 2e antistrophe et de la 3e, qui ne paraissent suspects ni par le sens ni par l’expression; j’en ai admis une, qui est facile, au vers de la strophe 1; une autre qui est plus douteuse, au vers de la strophe 3. On obtient ainsi partout quatre syllabes, mais qui prennent les formes

w
,
w
w,

ww, ww
w,
www. C’est un exemple unique chez Pindare. Vu l’extreˆme diYculte´ d’une solution satisfaisante, je crois utile de renvoyer le lecteur au dernier ouvrage de Wilamowitz, Griechische Verskunst, Berlin, 1921, ou` il en trouvera, p.487, une autre assez diVe´rente.

Wilamowitz’s text and the metrical form given in GV are based on the fourth edition of Bergk (‘Bergk hat Recht gegen Boeckh und Schroeder’). The characteristics of Bergk4 are: (1) the total length of the second verse (s6bþs7) becomes one position shorter; (2) nevertheless, the paradosis is for the most part preserved. Wilamowitz follows Bergk in elided
çÆ (ant. 1); Nåø (emendation, str. 2); K
YŒØ (ant. 3) :‘Fu¨r die Bestimmung des Versmaßes scheidet eine so verdorbene Stelle aus. Dann stehen vier gegen eine, und es ist unerlaubt, die vier zu a¨ndern’. The text in str. 3 is

20 The indentation seems to imply that s6b and s7 form one verse, but two juxtaposed ancipitia defy this interpretation. Hiatus occurs at ant. 1, but Puech may suppose epic correption occurs. Apparently he is not good at metre.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

131

slightly diVerent, but basically the same as Bergk. The weak point of Bergk’s text lies in ant. 2 as I have already pointed out above. Aber auch die widerstrebende Stelle la¨ßt sich nicht zwingen; es wa¨re doch bare Willku¨r, anzunehmen, daß åæıƺƌ ı ein anderes Epitheton wie åæıŁæı verdra¨ngt ha¨tte. Wir ko¨nnen nur konstatieren, daß vor dem Hemiepes viermal
wtw, einmal
ww

steht, fu¨r unsere Kenntnis unerho¨rt. Also geho¨rt wieder die Alogos vor diesen Vers.

The ‘Alogos’ in s6b is, however, not paralleled at all. Wilamowitz’s text reads: s6a s6b s7 str. 1

ant. 1

str. 2

ant. 2

str. 3

ant. 3


ww
ww


ww
rw
a
wta 
ww


ww
ww
w
w
ή
æ KçÆæÆ PŒ N Pb a ŒÆ ¼
 –Ø ªæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.
ÆE KƪØ , n ÆÆ Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ F
çÆ PŒ ¼æ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , u I
e ı ƒ · hŁı K
d F, ¼ª, EÆ, sæ K
ø PŒºA· Nåø ªaæ Iæø, ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: åEæÆ ƒ Ø Łd —ıŁHØ Œæ Å I
e ÆÆ Æx Æ
æÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ±  PŒ I
 Æ 
ƺ· Ææf  çØ EŒ åغ tæ åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, Łı: ŒØ  Kªg fiø Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ ¼ªªº Æ,

 K
YŒØ F ªÆæø

Schroeder published the second edition of his editio maior in 1923. Although the publisher called it pt. 1 vol. 1 of the six edition of PLG, revisions are not printed in the main text butare collected inan appendix, where they easily escape notice. It is evident that Schroeder owes much to Wilamowitz and Maas. In N6s7 he regularizes all the repetitions as
wy
ww
w
w
and notates ^ iat ch ia: –Ø ª-æÆł (str. 1), PŒ ¼æ (ant. 1), PŒºÆ·
Æ-æØåø (str. 2), 
 åÆ-Æd (str. 3),

 K
d (ant. 3). Most noticeable is åæı
ºŒ -ı (ant. 2), without mentioning Hermann’s name.21 21 Instead, Schroeder mentions Maas (‘in idem inciderat P Maas’, 521). Later in his third edition of BT (1930), he prints åæı
ºŒ ı in the text, and notates simply ‘Maas’ in the apparatus.

132

Introduction

Bowra (OCT published in 1935) is in confusion. His text is fundamentally the same as Schroeder’s (ed. maior2 ¼ BT3) on N6s6–7 and adopts åæı
ºŒ ı (rightly citing Hermann) with others (see above), but at ant. 1 he sticks to PŒ ¼æ . Perhaps this is a simple mistake. Now we are back at the point where we started: Turyn. Were he compared with his predecessors in the main stream for the last hundred years, Turyn might seem too conservative. But at N6s6–7, he virtually follows Schroeder (ed. maior2 ¼ BT3). Remember that Snell follows Schroeder’s previous edition, BT2. I follow Turyn. A word on ƒ Ø Łd (ant. 2 v. 36 ¼ 35 Sn.). This is an emendation by Triclinius, one of his best. All the critics mentioned above accept it in place of the paradosis, ƒÆøŁd , which Ho¨hl, however, defends: Gerade die Seltenheit des Wortes spricht fu¨r seinen Gebrauch durch Pindar. [ . . . ], es ¨ nderung von ƒÆøŁd in einerseits wo¨hl mo¨glich wa¨re, einer Erkla¨rung fu¨r die A ƒ Ø Łd mit ziemlicher Sicherheit anzugeben, wa¨hrend es anderseits unmo¨glich ¨ nderung von ƒ Ø Łd in ƒÆøŁd einzusehen. [ . . . ] ist, einen Grund fu¨r die A Es erscheint kaum glaublich, daß die angeblich authentische Leseart ƒ Ø Łd , welche metrisch einwandfrei ist, spurlos untergegangen sei und einer fu¨r den damaligen Standpunkt fehlerhaften Glosse oder Interpolation Platz gemacht habe. (Responsionsfreiheiten bei Pindar, 64.)

However, we know the text tends to be easily corrupted for various reasons, carelessly or even consciously. On the other hand metrical irregularities (in our case, contraction of double short in D which occurs at this repetition only) were never introduced by the poet. Ho¨hl’s case is extreme, but such an argument will never cease. We should trust more the regularity of metre as well as grammar than the manuscripts (including papyri) which are not always trustworthy.

Addendum I: Hermann, ‘De metris pars ii’ (1799), 319 Hermann had already analysed the metre of N6, as well as all the other epinikia, before writing the ‘Notae’ (see above) incorporated in the third volume of Heyne’s edition (Leipzig, 1817). The earlier analysis was also a part of the third volume of an earlier edition by Heyne, that published in Go¨ttingen in 1798–9 (its third volume was published in 1799).22 This included a two-part ‘Commentatio de metris Pindari’ (Gerber’s Herm. 1). Parts I and II were later revised and published respectively as ‘De metris

22 I have had diYculty in tracing the bibliographical history of Heyne’s editions. The Wrst edition was published in Go¨ttingen in 1773, and was reprinted, with revision and/or additional material, several times by diVerent publishers. I have consulted the copy in the Bodleian Library: 88 S 103–108 Linc.

Appendix: Modern Emendations

133

Pindari’ (Gerber’s Herm. 5a) and ‘Notae ad Pindarum’ (Herm. 6), in Heyne’s 1817 edition.23 In part II Hermann oVers an analysis of the above verses in N6s, useless in itself, but interesting as a historical document for tracing his own development, which is, in a sense, to trace the origin of metrical study in modern times. Hermann does not yet introduce radical emendations, but accepts free responsions (as Schroeder would, though these two scholars’ theories are completely diVerent). Acccording to Hermann in 1799, the metre of N6–7 is ionic a maiore, which he would later expel from Pindaric metre. 9 s6bþs7a


w
a > = r
> ;

s7b str. 1 ant. 1 str. 2 ant. 2 str. 3 ant. 3


ww
w
w


8 > < > :

¼
Æ –Ø ªÆæÆł æÆØ
d  ŁÆ. F
çÆÆØ PŒ ¼Øæ Içd
ºfi Æ ŒıƪÆ , sæ K
ø PŒºA·
ÆæØåø ªaæ Iæø, Æx Æ
ÆæÆ åæıƺƌ ı
b ˚ƺºÆ ± EŒ 
 åغº åÆÆd ŒÆÆa Iç ±æ ø, ¼ªªº Æ,

 hª i K
d YŒØ F ªÆæø



ww
w
a ww



w
w
w


w
w
w
w24
wr

w
w
w



ww
w
w r

w
wr


ww

Hermann writes: ‘Decimus strophae versus [our s6bþs7a] Ionicus a maiore est, . . . in Ionico ubique trochaei sunt.’ In the Wrst metron, ‘anapaestus in Ionico pro trochaeo, ut saepe’ (str. 2; ant. 3). Trochee is used also in the second metron in str. 1, ant. 1 (note ¼Øæ which is the reading of the ‘vulgata’ (¼ Triclinius) and D; B, which preserves ¼æ , was as yet unknown), str. 2 (the emendation of PŒºÆ into PŒºA). In str. 3 ‘anapaestus in principio alterius Ionici pro trochaeo’. ‘Purus Ionicus’ occurs only in ant. 2 (note that åæıƺƌ ı is kept) and in ant. 3 (note the inserted ª ). This notion about ionic a maiore is not a peculiarity of Hermann, but has its origin in Hephaestion, from whose authority the young Hermann was not free;25 ionic a maiore is treated at length in De metris poetarum Gr. et Rom. (1796) too.

23

The copy I have consulted is in the Bodleian Library: 88 M 39–41 BS. He writes: ‘dipthongi emollit eius correptio’. 25 Hermann does not totally discard ionic a maiore in Elementa doctrinae metricae (1817). The examples he gives are what we now call Sotadean. 24

134

Introduction Addendum II: Maas, ‘Nachlese’ (1916)

After publishing the Wrst part of ‘Die neuen Responsionsfreiheiten’ in 1913, Maas wrote a short paper, ‘Nachlese zu Pindar’ (reprinted as no. 6 of his Kleine Schriften), in which he discussed several passages including N6s6–7. Here he unites s6b with the following verse (s7). What prevents uniting these verses is the hiatus between F fg
çÆÆØ and PŒ ¼æ (ant. 1). Maas emends F fg
çÆÆØ into F ‹
çÆ , getting rid of the hiatus. F ‹
çÆ had already been proposed by Hermann in ‘Nem. sextum’ (see above), although Maas does not seem to have noticed it. The meaningless  in the manuscripts, which all scholars delete, now becomes explicable. For F ‹ Maas cites two Aeschylean passages as parallels (see below): Aeschylus ‘hat F ‹ im Sinn von versta¨rktem F’. His main reason for the uniWcation of s6b with s7 is metrical: the resolution at the penultimate position in s6b is, according to him, totally unparalleled.26 Moreover, if we adopt the following metrical scheme for s6bþs7, none of the manuscript readings, except for the transposition of 
 åغ , needs to be emended:


wtu
ay
ww
w
w
k I am not sure how he interprets it but am rather sceptical about its possibility. Especially, the two ancipitia divided only by one long are improbable. However, even if we reject this scheme and follow Turyn, who adopts the emendations proposed by Hermann (‘Notae’ 1817), such as åæı
ºŒ ı in place of åæıźƌ ı, Maas’s rejection of the resolution at the penultimate position must be seriouly taken into consideration. Two questions, (1) metrical and (2) grammatical, arise; and I judge Maas’s proposal to be untenable. 1(a). There are four verses whose penultimate positions are resolved, according to my analyses, in freer D/e verses in the eighteen majors. In Part I, I prefer (i) the analyses which result in resolution at the penultimate position, to (ii) the alternatives which eliminate this resolution, in all the four verses. Presumably Maas will have preferred (ii) by assuming a diVerent direction of resolution. The reason why I prefer (i) is that long anceps is never followed by resolved long in the eighteen majors: see Part I, 6, C (ii). Besides, there are other reason to prefer (i) in some individual cases.

26 This observation was, as far as I know, Wrst published by Kayser in 1844 (see above).

Appendix: Modern Emendations

135

O10e1b (i) (ii)

x
wr
k x e


rw
k sp e

According to (i) the Wrst position can be Wlled by a short syllable. Thus emendation of
æø at 57b (¼ 55 Sn.) into
æø proves to be unnecessary. If resolution were supposed to occur in the direction illustrated in (ii), the initial position must be not anceps but true long; so the emendation above becomes necessary. P6s6 (i) (ii)

www
ww
w

wr
k gl e
www
ww
w

rw
k gl
e

Long link anceps is hardly ever found after an aeolic phrase: see Part I, 8. B. 5. There is no example of gl
e in the eighteen majors. In contrast glþe
is found in I8s5c (and besides, there are many examples of glþe). P11e5 (i) (ii)

w
w
w

wr
j w e2 e
w
w
w

rw
j w e2
e

(ii) introduces cut after long implicit link anceps at two repetitions; but in this position we usually encounter bridge (see Part I, 6, D); cut irregularly occurs at nine out of 74 repetitions. I8s8 (i) (ii)

rw

wr
wr
k e e e
rw

rw
rw
k e
e e

According to (i), this verse would be unique in that two resolved e, whose directions of resolution are diVerent, are juxtaposed. Usually, an unresolved cretic, or an anceps, is found between rw
and
wr; cf. Part I, 6, C (ii). (ii) would eliminate this irregularity, but, as is described above, it would introduce long anceps followed by resolved long, which is totally unparalleled. (i) is preferable. 1(b). There is one case in the eighteen majors, and there are three cases in Pae6, of correspondence between resolved and unresolved at the penultimate position. N3s6



w
a
ww t
k
e x d


Resolution occurs only at v. 14: Iªæ . The reading is suspect; see Part II, ad loc.

136 Pae6s4

Introduction w
w

ww
wt
j w e ar

Resolution occurs at v. 149 ±: ºfiø. Pae6s6


ww

w
wwt
j d ph

Resolution occurs at v. 131 Iæ½ . Pae6e6

w
[ ]
w
wwt
k

[ ] ph

Interestingly, the same word causes the resolution as in Pae6s6: v. 176 Iæ . Whether it is an aeolic phrase or freer D/e, the sequence
wwt
k is diVerent from
wt
k. My intuition accepts the latter, but rejects the former (there is no example of pherecratean with resolved penultimate position in tragedy). In any case, N6b does not belong to the former group. In sum, I judge that resolution at the penultimate position is certainly rare, but may occasionally occur. Thus it is not wise to introduce emendation just for this reason. 2. What Maas means by ‘im Sinn von versta¨rktem F’ is, I think, equal to the description of Ku¨hner–Gerth ii. 446 (§566): ‘Die Dichtersprache gebraucht zuweilen st. des einfachen F mit gro¨sserem Nachdrucke F ‹, d. i. F KØ, ‹.’ Ku¨hner cites the same Aeschylean passages as Maas: A. Sept. 705 and Suppl. 630. In these two passages F ‹ stands at the beginning of a sentence (or, you may say, a defective sentence), while in N6 v. 13b it does not. It comes in the middle of a relative clause. Although Maas does not cite it, Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’) refers to S. Aj. 802 for introducing F ‹
çÆ in place of F fg
çÆÆØ. In his edition of Sophocles’ Ajax, Hermann cites those two Aeschylean passages as parallels, among others which are not necessarily so. However, the sentence constuction of S. Aj. 801–2 is diVerent from the others. F must go with  . Moreover, all these three passages in tragedy are emended, or at least, suspected, by recent editors. My judgement is that F ‹ may be accepted at the two Aeschylean passages, although they are both suspect with good reasons. S. Aj.802 is diVerent from these two, and is not a parallel. Hermann’s and Maas’s emendation, which depends on them, ought to be rejected.

Part II The Eighteen Majors

This page intentionally left blank

I N T RO DU C T IO N Each of the eighteen majors is metrically analysed in Part II; for the four minors see, the Appendix. Each analysis is organized as follows: (1) metrical scheme; (2) lines with hiatus/brevis in longo at the end; (3) sample text; (4) general remarks about the ode; (5) analyses of strophe and epode; (6) textual problems; (7) individual verses. In the metrical scheme, if verse-end is guaranteed by hiatus/brevis, the mark k is placed at the end of the verse. If not, the mark j is used. This mark is also found in the middle of a verse, where it means that word-end coincides at all the repetitions. Structure of some stanzaforms is easy to grasp when they are divided into sections. In these cases, (§1, 2, etc.) are attached to metrical scheme. Occasionally, especially in stanza-forms of Class III, an alternative analysis is given in parentheses with (?). This relates to the interpretation in the Wnal chapter of Part I. Lines where hiatus or brevis occurs are listed with ‘H’ and ‘B’ respectively; lines in which both occur are listed in both places. The Wrst repetitions of the two stanza-forms, namely str. 1 and ep. 1, are given with verse- and line-numbers (and Snell’s line-numbers in parenthesis if they are diVerent from Boeckh’s). The mark ƒ in the text denotes a phrase-boundary. Every boundary is marked, except for some next to link anceps. The mark is omitted after link anceps (e.g. between w and e) and also before the anceps at the verse-end (e.g. between e and xk), so as to avoid clutter. Textual problems are discussed only when they have a bearing on metrical analysis. Unless it involves a change of metrical scheme, an emendation, however important it may be, is omitted. So too are passages where at least one of the old codices reports the right reading.1 In contrast, all emendations metri causa since Byzantine 1

I use the term ‘paradosis’ loosely to mean the reading of all or some of the MSS that Turyn gives roman capital letters as symbols. Those of the Moschopoulean and Triclinian traditions are not included. In theory, there are chances that some of this ‘paradosis’ might not be the reading derived from the ancient world, let alone from Pindar himself, but conjectures of Byzantine (or Italian?) scholars, especially when the MSS were copied at a later date. To what extent Byzantine scholars were able to make good conjectures without MSS now lost will remain a diYcult question. It is related to the assessment of the MSS belonging to so-called ‘contaminated’ traditions.

140

The Eighteen Majors

times are listed.2 I have done my best to check the ascriptions to modern scholars since Hermann and Boeckh by consulting the original publications, but occasionally I rely on Gerber’s Emendations (reliance is indicated). As for Byzantine scholars, my ascriptions follow Turyn’s apparatus, because I have not examined any manuscripts (I have also consulted Mommsen and Christ). I occasionally describe a diVerent approach, which sometimes involves rewriting texts to a considerable extent. This may seem dispensable, but it is still worthwhile to follow the process of how good conjectures, now printed in Snell or Turyn, were made with the help of many others which are dismissed (and I must say that Snell’s apparatus is not always correct). Reconsideration of Hermann’s and (to a lesser extent) Bergk’s proposals is, and will be, stimulating to serious critics. If breaches of exact responsion occur, I discuss whether it is normal or not verse by verse in the last part. I also collect here the metrical parallels for each verse. Readers are asked to be tolerant towards repetitions; description of each epinikion is self-contained so that a reader may refer to it as a metrical commentary to an ode. 2 The list will help us also to survey quickly how scholars understood the metre in historical perspective, although this survey needs more examinations. The history of scholarship on metre is an interesting topic but is outside the scope of this book.

Olympian One

141

OLYMPIAN ONE Four triads, Class III (§1) O1s1

w

ww
w

w
ww

k

gl ph (? ^ e dod rdod
) ^e e D þ


O1s2 wr
w

ww
ww
ww

k (§2)
w
w
w
k e3 O1s3 O1s4
w
ww

k ph (? rdod
)
w
w
w
k e3 O1s5 (§3)
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5wd e2 O1s6 O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3wd e w rwrw
w
w
w
k we5 O1s8 (§4) ^e e e wt
w
rw
k O1s9 ^ e e2e O1s10 w

w
w
rw
k xe e2 O1s11 a
wr
w
w
k O1e1 O1e2 O1e3 O1e4

w
wr
w

ww
w

w
w
k w

ww

jwrjw
w
j
w
w
w
ww

w
k w

w

ww
w
w
ww

k

O1e5 O1e6a O1e6b O1e7

ww
w
ww

w
w
k

ww
w

w
w
k rw
ww

w
k w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k

we e dod e2 ^ e d e3 e2wd e ^e

e dod reiz (? ^ e e dodwd
) ^ dwd e2 tel e2 (?
dod e2) rdod e (? ^ e d e) ^ e e dod ar (? ^ e e dod dod
)

s1 B 88, 91; s2 H 2, 42, 71; B 31; s3 H 43, 101; B 32, 72; s4 H 15, 91; B 62; s5 H 5, 34; B 45; s6 H 35; B 46; s7 H 36; B 7, 76; s8 H 95, 106; B 19, 37; s9 H 96; B 20, 38, 78; s10 H 108; B 68, 97; s11 B 51; e1 H 52, B 23; e3 H 54, 112; e4 H 26, B 84; e5 H 85; B 27, 56, 114; e6a HB 86; e6b B 86b; e7 H 58

If s1 is analysed as suggested in parentheses (cf. Part I, 7. 4), the alternative analyses should be adopted for s4 e4 e6a e7. See below.

142

The Eighteen Majors

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6

1 2 3 4 5 6

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

s7 s8 s9 s10 s11

7 8 9 10 11

(7) (8) (9) (10) (11)

@æØ b oøæ, › b ƒåæıe ÆNŁ
Fæ – ؃Æ
Ææ
Ø ƒ ıŒd ª æ åÆ
ºı· N  ¼ŁºÆ ªÆæ ºÆØ, çº qæ, ÅŒ pºı Œ
Ø ¼ºº ŁÆº
æ K ±æfi Æ çƃe ¼æ Kæ ƒÆ Ø ÆNŁæ , Å ˇºı
Æ IªHƒÆ çææ ÆPƒ : ‹Ł ›
ºçÆ o IçØ ººÆØ çH ƒ ŃØ, ŒºÆE ˚æı ƒ
ÆE K IçÆa ƒ ƒŒı  ŒÆØæÆ ! " ƒæø Æ,

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6a e6b e7

23 24 25 26 27 28a 28b 29

(23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28a) (28b) (29)

#ıæÆŒØ ƒ ƒ

å æƒÆ ÆغBÆ· º ƒ
Ø  ƒ Œº K Pƒ æØ ¸ıƒF —º
 I
ØŒfi Æ· F ªÆŁc ƒ Kæ Æ ˆÆ؃ å —؃ , K
 ƒØ ŒÆŁÆæF ºŃ º ˚ºøŁ, KºçÆƒØ çÆØ tƒ ŒŒÆ q ŁÆÆÆ
ºº , ŒÆ ƒ
 Ø ŒÆd æH ç Ø $
bæ e IºÆƒŁB ºª Æ؃ƺØ ƒ łØ
ØŒºØ ƒ KÆ
ÆHØ FŁØ.

From the Alexandrian age onwards Olympian 1 has been the most celebrated of all the epinikia, and deservedly stands at the head of the collection. But one will Wnd oneself baZed at once if one tackles the analysis of Pindaric metre by starting with O1, for the metre of the poem is far from typical. There are a good many unusual verses that refuse traditional analysis (or analyses). Nevertheless, since its very Wrst verse appears at Wrst sight to be an unambiguously aeolic phrase, the priapean dicolon (glyconic þ pherecratean), people are often enticed into the search for an aeolic scheme for all the rest. But even that is uncertain (see Part I, 7. 4–5). Aeolic features are not so clearly present as might at Wrst be thought. The enigmatic phrase `NºÅØ º
fi A (v. 102) does not necessarily refer to the metre. It is certainly technical but may possibly indicate the harmonia.3 We need to observe the style of O1 from a diVerent angle. To understand the overall structure of the metre of O1, it is essential 3 For `NºÅœØ º
fi A, P2 v. 69 e ˚ÆæØ  K `NºØ åæÆE and N3. 76 (¼ 79 Sn.) IØ `NºØ K
ÆEØ ÆPºH should be taken into account together. Gerber (Olympian One, ad loc.) considers that ‘a reference to metre seems to

Olympian One

143

to compare it with other poems, especially P2, which belong to Class III. There are some signiWcant similarities between O1 and P2 (details will be extensively discussed in Part II, P2). The metre apart, both are ranked as two of the most magniWcent epinikia. Both celebrate victories of Hieron around the same time (O1 in 476 bc; P2 c.470 bc). In fact, these two odes are distinct even from the other Class III stanza-forms. The maturity of Pindar’s metrical technique can be observed in them (P1, another magniWcent poem, is composed in normal D/e, but includes some unusual phrases). Single-short movement is strikingly predominant. Such long phrases as e2, e3, and e5 recur throughout. In contrast to the dominance of single-short sequence, a long dactylic run (Dþ
) features in the earlier part (s2). Its length is equivalent to what is traditionally called a dactylic tetrameter. This too is distinctive. There is no other dactylic phrase in the ode. Even outside O1, the dactylic tetrameter is unique in Pindar; it is unparalleled in non-D/e odes although there are a few examples of Dþ , notably P2s3 (see List 2). RSS is fairly high: the Wgures for the strophe and the epode are 53.7% and 50.0% respectively.

be the likeliest explanation’ (i.e. likelier than dialect or musical mode) and ‘suspects that Pindar could have so designated virtually all the odes not composed of D/e’ because ‘it is doubtful whether Pindar would have used the general term º
as an equivalent of the technical term ±æÆ’. Parker, Songs, 161 suggests some special appropriateness of the word ‘aeolic’ for equestrian songs; cf. O1 v. 101 ƒ

fiø fiø P2. 69 e ˚ÆæØ. On the other hand Lloyd-Jones writes (‘Modern Interpretation of Pindar’, JHS 93 (1973), 123 ¼ GELT 132) ‘the term ‘‘Aeolic’’ . . . will refer not to the metre, but the music’. West thinks O1, P2, and N3 are apparently in the Aeolian mode (Music, 347) with a note (n. 87): ‘ ‘‘Aeolian’’ could mean merely Boeotian, i.e. from Pindar, but close phraseological parallels with other passages favour the modal interpretation’. I agree with him. A particular name of harmony (mode) is mentioned at N4. 45 ¸ıfi Æ f ±æfi Æ. O14. 17 ¸ıfiH (?¸ıfiø) . . . K æ
fiø is certainly the same one. The metre of N4 is not D/e, nor is that of O14. I do not know from when glyconic or pherecratean started being called ‘aeolic’ under a strict classiWcation. Horace’s usage of ‘Aeolium carmen’ seems to imply it, but it may have been a rough generalization. At least in Hephaestion’s classiWcation it is to the special type of ‘dactylic’ metre that the adjective `NºØŒ refers, while glyconic and pherecratean are never called ‘aeolic’. They belong to a diVerent group (antispastic). According to West (Music, 147 n. 51), the use of the term ‘aeolic’ with this denotation (¼ the coexistence of single and paired short notes) is modern.

144

The Eighteen Majors

Strophe The strophe/antistrophe can be divided into four sections: §1: s1–s2; §2: s3–s5; §3: s6–s8; and §4: s9–s11. §1 and §3 are composed of longer verses (15.8 positions on average) and §2 and §4 of shorter verses (8.0 positions on average, of half of the other). For the two verses of §1, see above. §2 looks simple at Wrst sight; a pherecratean between two lekythia (e3). But this apparent simplicity is deceptive. While outside Pindar lekythion is very common, in the eighteen majors lekythion making up a verse without additional phrases is found only here.4 A trickier aspect is its juxtaposition with pherecratean starting with
w. Pherecratean and e3 are equal in length. Both have seven positions. Even their structures are similar. The Wfth and the sixth syllables being exchanged, e3 turns into a pherecratean with base in the form of
w:
w
w
w
k
w
ww

k One is tempted to guess that the Wrst two syllables of this pherecratean are not two ancipitia but real long þ real short, equal to those of e3. Cf. Part I, 7. 5. §3 consists mostly of long single-short sequences, with, in the Wrst two verses, wd as the ‘core’. The way in which the verses relate to each other becomes clear if they are arranged thus: s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k
w
w
w
w
ww

w
j s7 s8 w rwrw
w
w
w
k

The Wrst two longs of s8 are resolved to produce a sequence of seven short syllables, the longest run of shorts in all the eighteen majors (see Part III, D). From s8 on, double short is totally missing. §4 starts with ^ e, which resolved as w r has appeared already in s2 but is hereafter repeated again and again, both in the strophe and the epode. s9 is

4

There are 9 verses made up of e3 þ other phrases. See Part I, 8. C. 6.

Olympian One

145

enlarged in s10, the central e being changed into e2. The two verses are identical in structure: even the resolution occurs at the same position. The basic structure is maintained in the next (s11), too. Here initial ^ e is replaced by anceps þ e and the Wnal e is dropped: s9 wt
w
rw
k w

w
w
rw
k s10 s11 a
wr
w
w
k

Epode The structure of the epode is clearer if the verses are arranged thus (resolution being eliminated): e1 w
w
w
e2 e3 w
e4 (or w

w
e5 e6a e6b w
e7


w

w
w

w

ww
w
ww

w



ww
w

ww
w
ww

ww
w
w
ww
w
ww


ww
w

w
ww

ww
w



w
w
k
w
w
w
j
w
k w
ww

k
k)
w
w
k
w
w
k
w
k
ww
w

k

Every verse has a double-short phrase at its core: dodrans (
ww
w
) in 4 verses, d (
ww
) in 3, and reversed dodrans (
w
ww
) in 1. Before and after the core come single-short phrases. Typical ones are, before the core, w
(e2, e4, e7) and
w
(e1, e4, e7), and, after the core,
w
(e3, e6b)
w
w
(e1, e5, e6a) and
w
w
w
(e2). There are some variations. In e1, the initial w
is prolonged (or doubled). In e3, which is reminiscent of s6 and s7, w is placed between
w
w
and d. A long anceps is placed before the core in e6a too. e5 has an unusual start. In e4 and e7 the core is repeated, once (e4) tracing backwards (palindromic), once (e7) in the normal order. Alternatively, e4 could be arranged as in the parenthesis. This arrangement would be better in that it explains the short anceps of the reizianum as equivalent to those of e3 and e5, and also the relation between e3 and e4 would be clearer. The objection is that its similarity with e1 and e7 would be concealed.

146

The Eighteen Majors

A diVerent analysis is applicable to e6b too. The initial long of the reversed dodrans is resolved at all the repetitions. If www
ww
is not analysed as rdod but as ^ e þ d, then the core of e6b is not rdod but d as in e2 etc., and the similarity between e6b and e2 is more signiWcant: e6b w

ww

w
k e2 w

ww

w
w
w
j

Note that ^ e at the verse opening is a key phrase of this ode. The connection between the two stanza-forms is organic. From the strophe to the epode (s11 ! e1), s11 a
wr
w
w
k xe e2 e1 w
wr
w

ww
w

w
w
k we e dod e2

e1 is developed from s11 by adding another e and dodrans between e and e2. Even the position of resolution at the Wrst e is the same. For the development from the epode to the strophe (e7 ! s1) see Part I, 7. 5: e7 w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k ^ e e dod ar
ww
w

w
ww

k ? ^ e dod rdod
s1 w


As stated in Part I, this relation is one of the reasons why s1 may not be gl þ ph. Even if s1 is analysed as gl þ ph, the similarity of the two verses cannot be denied.

Textual problems 23 (e1). The paradosis #ıæÆŒıø =#ıæÆŒø is unmetrical; #ıæÆŒØ Byz. 26 (e4). The paradosis KEº is unmetrical; º Moschopoulos. 48 (s8). The paradosis K
is unmetrical. Boeckh adopts Iç (Byz.), but Mommsen’s N is better. He is followed by later editors. 52 (e1). The paradosis ¼
æ is unmetrical; ¼
æÆ (Byz.). 57 (e6a). The paradosis is   ƒ, which is unmetrical. Hermann’s – ƒ (‘Notae’) is adopted by many editors (Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen, Christ, et al.) so that the penultimate syllable of the telesillean may be short. Both Turyn and Snell follows a suggestion of Fennell and print – Ø, to avoid two dative pronouns (cf. 58 ÆPfiH). Corruption may lie deeper. Bowra adopts M. Schmidt’s x .

Olympian One

147

64 (s6). The paradosis ŁÆ ÆPe must be emended for metrical reasons. The required scheme is
w. Hermann (‘Notae’) and Boeckh accept ŁÆ (Byz.) with deletion of ÆPe. If this curious form ŁÆ is not a conjecture of the Byzantine scholars, it is conceivable that, as Christ says, ‘forma verbi ex falsa analogia verbi Æ Wcta est’; note that he adopts Æ (Byz.) at O9. 57 (¼ 53 Sn.), instead of the unmetrical Æ. Schneidewin, Bergk2–4 (‘quamvis dubitanter’), and Gildersleeve adopt ŁÆ the reading of PQ (MSS eliminated by Turyn) and the Aldine editor, accompanied by ÆPe. This grammatically correct form is rejected by many because it introduces resolution at a position which is not resolved at all the other repetitions. It is certainly reasonable to hesitate before breaking exact responsion by an emendation; but All-but-One may be applied. When ÆPe is gone, the object of the verb is missing. Christ, following Bergk and M. Schmidt, restores the accusative by emending x Ø (v. 63) into x Ø. But ŁÆ seems to be too ungrammatical (as is Æ, which must be qÆ). Thus Bowra and Turyn adopt ŁBŒÆ (Rauchenstein), while Snell adopts Ł Ø (Mommsen), keeping x Ø at v. 63. Schneidewin seeks a diVerent verb from ŁÅØ. His suggestion is ŒÆ (the parallels are cited from Aeschylus). There is another fault in this verse. It lacks a short syllable either before or after ºÆŁ. hØi (Byz.) has been adopted since Boeckh, except by Mommsen and Christ (ººÆŁ) and Turyn (hŒi). 65 (s7). The paradosis has ƒ in the expected second position from the beginning of the sentence. This ‘grammatical’ word-order is unmetrical. Triclinius transposes. 71 (s11). The seclusion of the unmetrical  was Wrst proposed by Bergk2 in the apparatus. Before that, ¼ªåØ  (Byz) was current. 80 (s11). The initial position of s11 is anceps. This analysis is based on the recognition of the phrase e2 (xe e2). Some critics thought the position had to be short, and it is in fact short except for ÆBæÆ here. Kayser (Lectiones), referring to Philostratus, Imagines, 1. 30, suggested KæHÆ . Bergk2 proposed an ingenious emendation: ÆBæÆ ð< ÆÆØ, cf. Hom. Il. 9. 394  ÆØ), which was adopted by Christ. 89 (s2). The paradosis gives L Œ, which makes
ww
w
responding with www
w
. This is, of course, possible in dochmiacs, but dochmiacs are alien to Pindaric metre (see Part I, 6. B); either

148

The Eighteen Majors

Œ (with asyndeton) or Œ  (or ) must be accepted. The subject of Œ is not here the mother, but the father (Gerber, Olympian One, ad loc.). 104 (s6). Snell obelizes the unmetrical –Æ. Wilamowitz (GV 237 n. 1, 415) changes –Æ into ±A on the assumption that in the ‘choriambic dimeter’ (on his deWnition)
ww

ww
(v. 104) can be in responsion with
w
w
ww
(the other repetitions). This emendation is accepted by Schroeder, but their deWnition of the ‘choriambic dimeter’ is invalid (cf. Itsumi, ‘Choriambic Dimeter’) and so ±A must be rejected. It is certain that s6 is a long sequence of single-short movement followed by wd, and, consequently, the positions which –Æ falsely occupies must be
w. Triclinius’ ¼ºº ŒÆd is not acceptable either; before him Moschopoulos had given ¼ºº j, but this would be semantically inappropriate (and IçæÆ . . .  . . . j is a strange combination). I am not sure whether Hermann’s Iººa ŒÆd (which is accepted by Bergk4, Christ, and Turyn) is gramatically plausible (no parallel for IçæÆ . . .  . . . Iººa ŒÆ in Denniston).5 Further possibilities include ¼ ŒÆd (Mommsen; followed by Gildersleeve), KÆ (or sÆ) ŒÆd (Maas, followed by Bowra), z ŒÆd (Von der Mu¨hll). None of them is especially persuasive. 113 (e4). At the beginning, a syllable is missing. Since it must be short (^ e), IººØØ (Blumenthal) or hIç i ¼ººØØ (Schroeder) should be immediately rejected; either hKi or hK
i seems the inevitable choice. Mommsen (Annotatio, 13–14) proposes a diVerent solution by changing the metre: if v. 113 starts with ¼ººØØ without any preposition, the metre would be

w

ww
w
w
ww

k
e dod reiz This is possible, and two correponding lines would be easily adjusted to it:
ø (84) and Æ (55) in place of ±
ø and KÆ: —ØA (26) might be the intrusion of a marginal gloss for ªÆŁc ˆÆØ å which expelled an epithet of ˚ºøŁ in original, for example,
æçæø.

5

Those who adopt Iººa ŒÆd cite P4 v. 79 (IçæÆ . . .  . . . ).

Olympian One

149

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 7. 4 (ambiguities), 8. A. 6 (palindrome), 8. A. 7 (contact between gl þ ph). In v. 1, the rhythm w

w . . . is intensiWed by articulation or word localizations: `æØ b oøæ, w

w j w
› b åæıe ÆNŁ
Fæ w

w j
ww

k

Compare and contrast v. 99: IŁºø ª Œ: w

j ww
e  ÆNd
Ææ æ Kº w

j w
ww

k

But such localization is not signiWcant in the other six corresponding verses. Against the general tendency (Part I, 8. B. 1), word-end occurs four times between glyconic and pherecratean at four repetitions, though not at the other four including the two above. s2. See Part I, 6. B (^ e), 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse). There are Wve examples of D þ , but among them, O1s2 is unique in that D þ is followed by anceps, and moreover, in that it is immediately preceded by e. In the eighteen majors, even the ordinary D (
ww
ww
) does not follow e with or without anceps (although it can precede it). In the normal D/e, there are at least two examples of D þ following e, but with link anceps between: N1e3
w


ww
ww
ww


w


w
k P4s6
w


w


ww
ww
ww
k

There is word-end either between e and D þ (3 times) or, more often, after the Wrst long of D þ , a kind of ‘dovetailing’ (6 times; both at v. 89, j£j). s3, s5. See Part I, 8. C. 6 (e3). For the verse-end after adverbial ŒÆ (s3 v. 14), cf. I8 v. 23b (‹ ŒÆ). s6. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (iii) (longer verse); 8. C. 3 (enwd), 8. C. 6 (en as a substitution for e). Pindar favours long sequences of single-short movement followed by wd, and this verse is the longest (6 times
w). Another peculiarity is that the verse does not end at wd, but is followed by e2. At the junction, two true longs are juxtaposed without link, like the other two similar verses in O1, s7 (the next), and e3, which have e after the sequence. But this is rare outside O1. There is only one example:

150

The Eighteen Majors

N3s2
w
w
wrw
w
rw
k e5e

The third long of O1s6 is resolved. The resolution is never split between words in this verse although Pindar does not in general care about split resolutions. Word-end occurs frequently at these two positions:
w
wr j w
w j
w
w
ww

w
w
k There is a clear preference for absence of word-end between d and e2 (6 out of 8 verses). See Part I, 8. C. 8. and Part III, B. s7. The preceding verse, s6, is organically shortened (see the chart above). Reduction of length is a common development; but there is no other example in single-short movement. (x) e3wd itself is a fairly common length (N3s5, N3e1b). Observe too the similarity to I8s7: O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3wd e I8s7
w
wrw
w
ww
w

w
k e3tel e

Word-end is avoided at these positions throughout all eight repetitions:
w
w
w
w
w w

w
k The reason for the avoidance does not seem to be metrical; it is rather the result of a similar phraseology, or ‘verbal assonance’ as I should like to call it. We can identify verbal assonance in the following two verses, for example: 36 IÆ
ææø çŁªÆØ  47 ÆPŒÆ çŁæH ªØø

Note the resemblance of sound of IÆ=ÆPŒÆ, and
ææø= çŁæH at the same positions. Frequent word-end (4 out of 8) between d and Wnal e is against the general tendency, but there are parallels; P10s2b (5/8), N3s1 (5/8); see Part I, 8. C. 8. s8. See Part I, 6. A (inappropiateness of the term ‘iambic trimeter’), 6. C. 3 (short anceps preceding resolved long), 8. C. 6 (e6 and e5). This verse is a variation of the long single-short movement used in s6 and s7. In these and other such verses the single-short movement usually turns into wd, but there are two other exceptions (P2s1, N3s2: Part I, 8. C. 6). The similarity between O1s8 and P2s1 is especially noticeable. Both start with a cluster of short syllables.

Olympian One

151

O1s8 has an additional short (O1s8 has 7 consecutive shorts, while P2s1 has 6; in other words O1s8 starts in ascending movement while P2s1, in descending). For continuous shorts, see Part III, D. The seven short syllables are often chieXy occupied by a long word or word-group: 8 ‹Ł ›
ºçÆ , 19  $
e ªºıŒı ÆØ , 37 ›
 KŒ º, 66 a e Æå
, 77 Kb  K
d Æåı ø. Perhaps these short syllables imitate boiling, bubbling water: 48 oÆ ‹Ø 
ıæd. Attic correption is admitted three times: 19 $
 ªºıŒı ÆØ , 66 Æå
, 106 K
Øæ
 . And compare the diVerent treatment of short open syllables in $
 ªºıŒı- (19) with 109 
Ø ªÆºıŒıæÆ. Furthermore, although the metrical location is slightly diVerent, correspondence of Æå
 with 77 Æåı ø and 95 Æåıa is interesting. s9. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ e), 8. C. 5 (double e). The phrase w

w
(^ e þ e) is very common at the beginning of a verse (11 examples), but there is no exactly identical verse, ^ e þ e þ e. Resolution at the second position (wr
w
) occurs twice (20 ‹
Ææ , 38 K æÆ). The responsion between resolved and unresolved is fairly free: it is not restricted to one irregular case nor to proper nouns. At v. 96, IŒÆ is scanned as w
. The last e is resolved at all the repetitions. There is one parallel for the phrase
w
rw
k at the end of a verse, namely O2s4. s10. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ e2). The preceding verse is expanded. Instead of
w
(e) of s9,
w
w
(e2) is used at s10. Both e (s9) and e2 (s10) are preceded by ^ e and followed by an e whose initial long is resolved. Like IŒÆ of s9, å in º åÆØ (v. 68) does not make position. The sequence ^ e þ e2 is found also at P6s9 w

w
w
x
w
k

^ e e2xe

and the sequence e2 þ e at O2e3 rw

w
w
rw

w
k e e2e e

Note the resolution in the e after the e2, which occurs at the same position as in our verse. And e2 þ re is structurally the same as e þ re in the preceding verse. s11. See Part I, 8. B. 6 (aeolic þ e2). As is shown by the chart in the opening section, ^ e þ e2 in s10 develops into xe þ e2. Although it has no exact parallels, the structure of this verse is well explained as a

152

The Eighteen Majors

variation of xe þ e, which is a very common sequence. The initial anceps is basically short. Long anceps is used only at v. 80 (ÆBæÆ ), under the All-but-One rule (Part III, C). Bridge is observed between xe and e2 at all the repetitions; cf. Part I, 8. C. 6 e1. See Part I, 8. B. 6 (aeolic þ e2), 8. C. 5 (double e). The juxtaposition of dodrans (or reverse dodrans) and e2 in a long verse is a mark of Class III. Note the general similarity between O1e1 and N7s2: N7s2
ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k w
wr
w

ww
w

w
w
k O1e1

The other phrase-combinations phrases of O1e1 are also common. xe þ e is used at the beginning of ten verses, of which O2s5 and O2e5 are resolved at the same position; e þ dod is found in six verses. Of these, three are in O1e; the others are O1s2, P8s4, N7s2. e2. See Part I, 5. A. 4 (analysis not as ªª
ww
but as ^ e þ d); 8. B. 4 (d þ e3); 8. C. 6 (e3). There are no exact parallels, but cf. P2e6, P5e5, P10s2b (^ e þ d þ e), and N7s5 (wd e3). All four repetitions follow the same pattern of word-end: w

ww

jwrjw
w
j. Turyn divides the verse into two, but his two verses (pherecratean and xe2 respectively) do not harmonize with the rest of this stanzaform. More probably O1e2 is an indivisible unit, as demonstrated in the chart above. e3. See Part I, 8. C. 3 (enwd). The structure of e3 is identical with s7, but the length of the single-short movement is shorter by one
w. They are diVerent in the preference for bridge. Word-end does not occur before the Wnal e in e3, while in s7 it is found at Wve repetitions out of eight. e4. See Part I, 8. A. 6. (b) (palindrome), 8. B. 8 (^ e þ e þ aeolic). e5. See Part I, 6. B (^ d), 8. B. 4 (d þ e2), 8. C. 2 (double d), 8. C. 3 (wd). The Wrst half seems strange, but is paralleled by a verse in the four minors: O4s1 ww
w
ww

ww
ww
j

In the normal D/e odes,

Olympian One P9s3 ww
w
ww
ww

k

^d

153

w D


(accepting Œºı  instead of ŒºØ  at v. 37 as Snell does) is the closest parallel. And, although the link anceps is always realized as long, P1e8 ww


ww
jrw

w
j

^d
d

ee

is also similar. e6a. Boeckh combines this verse with the next and makes one long verse. He eliminates hiatus and brevis at the end of v. 86 by following ‘recentiores’ (Kç łÆ t j 
Ø.). This reading is actually a Byzantine emendation. The two ‘halves’, e6a and e6b, are metrically easily explained. There is another verse (P11e3) which is made up of telesillean þ e2, and a similar combination, dodrans þ e2, is used at e1 above. Mommsen was the Wrst to divide e6, and is followed by later editors. e6b. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans). N7e2 is the identical verse. Including this, there are in total nine examples of rwrdod. As is discussed above, the resolved position can be diVerently analysed: wr
ww
(^ e þ d). ^ e þ d is found at e2 above. e7. See Part I, 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse), 8. B. 8 (^ e þ e þ aeolic). As illustrated above, this verse is similar to e4 and s1. The aristophanean is a surprisingly rare phrase in the eighteen majors: besides O1e7, there is only one example, P11e1 which consists entirely of an aristophanean. By deWnition, aristophanean is dod þ 1 in this book; see Part I, 5. B. For the repetition of dodrans with prolongation by a long (or a long anceps), cf. N3e2
w
ww

w
ww

k

in which reverse dodrans seems to be repeated with an added Wnal position.

154

The Eighteen Majors OLYMPIAN TWO

Five triads. Class II (§1) O2s1 O2s2 O2s3 (§2) O2s4 O2s5 O2s6/7 (coda) O2s8 O2e1 O2e2 O2e3 O2e4 O2e5 O2e6

w
w

w

k we e
^e e e e e w y
w

wr
wr
w
k

w

wr
wy

w
tw
k
e e e
e e
w
rw
k

wr
w
rw
tw
k w

wr
wt
w
w

w

k

^e



w
rw
w
w
ww
k


e e 2wd



w

wy
w
k
w
w
wr
w

w

k rw

w
w
rw

jw
k

w

wt
wr

j u
wr
w

w

j w
w
w

k


e e e e 3e e


ee


e e e e

e e e 2e


e e 2e e


e e e sp xe e e
we 2


s1 H 9, 23, 67; B 75, 97; s2 B 2, 10, 32, 54, 68, 90, 98 (!! see below), s3 H 69, 91, 99, s4 H 34, B 78, s5 H 35, 57,6 s6/7 H 37, 51, 73, 81; B 7, 103, s8 B 38, 52, 74, e1 B 61, 83, 75, e2 H 40; B 62, e3 H 41, e4 H 64, 86; B 20, e6 H 66, B 22, 44.

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6/7 s8

1 2 3 4 5 6/7 8

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

ÆØçæƒتª oØ, Æ Łƒ,  lƒæøÆ, Æ ƒ ¼æÆ ŒºÆƒ ; XØ —Æ ƒb ˜Ø · ˇƒºı
Ø Æ ƒ Æ !˙ ƒæÆŒºÅ IŒæŁØƒÆ
ºı· ¨ æøÆ b ƒæA; æÆ ƒ ŒÆ ؃ŒÆçæı ªªøƒÅ, Zƒ

Ø ŒÆ؃ ø, æØ ƒ Œæ ªÆ , Pøø ƒ
Ææø ¼øƒ OæŁ
ºØ·

e1 e2 e3 e4

17 18 19 20

(15) (16) (17) (18)

ºØ
fiH ªØ: ƒ H b

ƒæƪø K Œfi Æ  ŒÆd
Ææa ƒŒÆ I
ƒÅ P ¼ %æ ›
ƒø
Æcæ Æ؃ Ł 惪ø º · º ŁÆ b
ƒfiø f PƒÆØ ªƒØ ¼.

6 If the emendation
ÆæƺØ ıçæA is accepted (see below), hiatus does not occur at the end of v. 57.

Olympian Two e5 e6

21 22

155

(19) KºH ªaæ $
e ƒåÆæ ø ƒ
BÆ Łfi ŒØ (20)
ƺªŒ ÆÆŁ,

str. 2 23–30 ¼ (21)–(27) ant. 2 31–8 ¼ (28)–(34) str. 3 45–52 ¼ (41)–(47) ant. 3 53–60 ¼ (48)–(54) str. 4 67–74 ¼ (61)–(67) ant. 4 75–82 ¼ (68)–(74) str. 5 89–96 ¼ (81)–(87) ant. 5 97–104 ¼ (88)–(94)

ep. 2 39–44 ¼ (35)–(40) ep. 3 61–6 ¼ (55)–(60) ep. 4 83–8 ¼ (75)–(80) ep. 5 105–10 ¼ (95)–(100)

The rhythm of Olympian 2 ‘is essentially cretic, with sporadic ancipitia, usually at the beginning or end of verses, but occasionally within the verse’ (Parker, ‘Trochee to Iamb, Iamb to Trochee’). Besides these, acephalous ‘cretic’ (^ e) and prolonged ‘cretic’ (e 2) are admitted. The metre of O2 is indeed exceptionally homogeneous. Among its 13 verses double short is found only once, in s8. Nevertheless this ode can be considered in perspective to be an extreme case of freer D/e composition in which e is intensively and almost exclusively employed. O2 has aYnities with others of the eighteen majors: notably, there are in total 33 verses in the other stanza-forms (Part I, 8. C. 4) that, like like those in O2, have no double short at all. Some similar verses, and sometimes even identical ones, are found here and there. Even s8, which has a double short at the end and seems curious within the context of this ode, can be paralleled. It is associated with a group of verses which are usually found in Class III stanza-forms and which are made up of single-short movement turning to d (Part I, 8. C. 3). There are a number of phrases made up of three short syllables in sequence. Two of the three must be a resolved long, but it is hard, and occasionally impossible, to decide which two are resolved: either
wr
or
rw
. Besides, one or two of the three longs of e 2 (
w
w
) can be resolved. Consistent realization of anceps positions, either long or short, throughout all the repetitions makes the decision more confusing. See, for example, the notes below on e2, e3, and e4. However, a strong tendency in the matter of resolution is observable (cf. Part I, 6. C). First, when a long is resolved, the resolution is usually repeated at the same position in every repetition. Thus, out of 39 e’s (including 2 examples of ^ e, and counting e 3 as 2 e’s) and four e 2’s, 12 e’s and one e 2 are always resolved at the same position throughout all the repetitions (7
wr, 5 rw
, and 1 rw
w
). On the other hand, 20 e’s and three e 2’s are totally

156

The Eighteen Majors

unresolved. In total, 36 phrases (32 e’s and 4 e 2’s) out of 43, whether resolved or unresolved, are consistently repeated 10 times in the strophe/antistrophe and Wve times in the epode in the identical form. Secondly, even in the remaining seven cases where resolved and unresolved are found in responsion, preference for one or other is manifest. The poet does not seem to have a completely free choice of resolution at each repetition. The following chart shows the relative frequencies of ‘regular’ and ‘irregular’ forms in each passage. Thus s2 begins nine times with wr, only once with w
: regular/irregular s2 s3 (3rd) s3 (5th)

wr/w

wr/
w
rw
/
w


totals 9/1 9/1 8/2

s5 (4th) s6/7


w
/rw

w
/
wr

9/1 8/2

e1


wr/
w


3/2

e4


w
/
wr

4/1

line 68 11 3 25 57 28 102 17 39 108

¼ Sn. 62 10 23 52 26 93 15 35 98

irregular form YÆØ æØ ! ˙jæƌƺÅ
jØ Ææ
ÆæƺØ ÆıjŁØæÆ #jºÆ ŒÆj ª Kjø H b

jæƪø j– 
Æjæœ jł  IæØjŁe

Emendation changes the statistics. If, for example, we read ıçæA instead of IçæıA at v. 57 (see below on textual problems),
w
emerges against the majority (rw
): s5 (3rd) rw
/
w


9/1

57

52

ıçæA

Then the number of totally unresolved cretics will be 19 instead of 20, while those in responsion with resolved will be eight instead of seven. But, if we accept ıçæA, it is better to change the word-order as well, giving
ÆæƺØ ıçæA, so that the position of the resolved long at third and fourth e is perfectly consistent with all the other repetitions (in that case totally unresolved cretics will number 21). There is also another possibility of an emendation: s3 (3rd), v. 11 (¼10 Sn.), æØ , h›i. This increases the number of totally resolved cretics. So does s2, v. 68 (¼ 62 Sn.), YÆ  K ±æÆØ . For these, see further below, on textual problems. Resolution does not occur simultaneously at both longs of a cretic: i.e. there is no example of rwr (for the general summary, see Part I,

Olympian Two

157

6. C). Nor is there any example of in the eighteen majors
wr rw
, nor more than one of rw

wr (I8s8). Between
wr and rw
, an unresolved cretic, or an anceps at least, is always inserted. Frequent resolutions raise RSS: 53.0% (O2s) and 47.3% (O2e). Supposing that the whole ode were composed only of unresolved cretics and no ancipitia were included, RSS would be 33.3%, because two-thirds of the syllables would be long. Eight verses start with anceps. Realization of the anceps is rigidly regularized as either long or short; Wve of these ancipitia (s3, s5, s8, e1, e4) are consistently long, two are short (s1, e6). For ŒØa in v. 71 (¼ 65 Sn.), s5, see below. Only at e5 are long and short syllables in responsion (2 longs vs. 3 shorts). Some editors unnecessarily regularize it at all the repetitions; see the textual discussion on v. 107. With Wnal anceps six verses end pendent. Pendent ending is rather uncommon in the strophe (2 out of 6). Intermediate anceps between 2 e’s is very rare. I count only one in the whole O2 (or 2, if the middle short of e 3 at e2 is included): O2s3

w

wr
wt ‘
’
w
t w
k
e e e
e e

For the possibility of another mid-anceps in e3, see below. Bridge is observed at some contact points of 2 e’s. It is generally recognized that Pindar observes it in xe þ e at the beginning of the verse and in e þ e at the end; see Part I, 8. C. 5. But there is no rule that can be applied to all contact points. Let us examine the strophe, in which there are 15 contact points. There is only one contact point where bridge is observed throughout all 10 repetitions. At another four it is observed in nine. By contrast, there are points where it is ignored in more than half the repetitions: between the third and the fourth e in s3, in as many as seven repetitions, and between the second and the third e, in six repetitions. There is no relation between the presence of bridge and the resolution of e.

Strophe Hiatus/brevis unambiguously indicates every verse-end.7 The length of verses varies widely. But the structure of the stanza is articulated 7 Merkelbach, ZPE 12 (1973), 45–55 grasps the essence of the metre of O2. Instead of the traditional concepts of the (iambic, trochaic, etc.) metron, he introduces the idea of e, e2, e3 (though his notations are diVerent from mine) and, above all, link

158

The Eighteen Majors

into two halves (§§1, 2), s8 being taken as a coda. Both halves are of the same construction articulated by the contrast between a shorter verse and two longer ones. Each starts with a shorter verse (s1 and s4), which is made up only of two e’s, and two longer verses follow, of which in each case the Wrst is shorter than the second. The numbers of positions are 8–14–17 in §1; 6–13–17 in §2. Each of the latter longer verses (s3 and s6/7) includes an irregularity: there is a midverse anceps in s3, the only one in this ode, and a prolonged e (e 2) in s6/7. The almost complete absence of mid-verse anceps and e 2 makes the rhythm easy to catch—perhaps even a triXe monotonous, in contrast with the epode. There are also devices that make the structure of s2–s6/7 symmetrical, or circular. At the introduction of these verses, extra positions are located that decrease in number from two (w
) through one (
) to none, and then increase in reverse: ^e

(s2) :
(s3) : none (s4) :
(s5) : ^ e (s6/7).

As for the cadence, the outer two verses (s1, s6/7) end pendent, the inner four blunt. The last eight positions of s6/7 are exactly the same as s1: O2s6/7 w

wr
w t
w
w

w

k w
w

w

k O2s1

Thus it is possible, and may be sensible, to describe the Wrst phrase of s1 as ^ e 2, instead of we as indeed Dale (Collected Papers, 78) analyses it. The last verse, s8, is the coda of the stanza-form. Though it starts in the usual manner with anceps þ e (

w
) like s3, the movement changes and surprisingly ends with a double short.

anceps. But it is a pity that he unites two verses without regard to the explicit verseend; for example, s1 and s2 are, as a whole, described as w 7 e (according to his own notation, w 7 p). Certainly the Wnal long of s1 and the initial w
of s2 could make another e, and this fact might illuminate the structure of these verses. But it should not be ignored that there is verse-end between them. To ignore verse-end means suicide for modern metrical scholarship.

Olympian Two

159

Epode In contrast with the strophe, the colometry of the epode is less deWnitely settled. In three verses (e2, e3, e4) diVerent analyses are possible, depending on which positions are taken to be resolved, and on the presence and location of mid-verse anceps and e 2 (see below). Pindar departs from the monotony of the strophe and deliberately makes the rhythm hard to grasp. As demonstrated above, he tends to regularize both the resolution of e and the realization of anceps, but this tendency becomes less rigid in some verses of the epode; see e1 (resolution) and e5 (anceps). The Wnal two verses (e5 and e6) should perhaps be combined into one: e5 þ e6

u
wr
w

w

jw
w
w

k xe e e e 3


This is certainly long, but not exceptionally so. The number of positions of this united verse amounts to eighteen—one more than the longest verses in the strophe, s3 and s6. The last phrase, e 3 (¼ ewe), is employed in e2 too. On the other hand, e 3 never follows e in the eighteen majors.8 Moreover, if we separate e6, the transition from the epode to the strophe is smoother: O2e6 w
w
w

k we 2
O2s1 w
w

w

k we e


Hence, although I am strongly tempted by the united verse, I follow the editions and divide e5 and e6.

Textual problems 6 (s6/7). By changing  of the paradosis into ø, Hermann (‘Notae’) restores perfect sense. The long
Ø in Z

Ø ŒÆØ should be explained by a Homeric analogy, for example,  
Ø (¼  Ø þ Ø): Chantraine, Gram. hom. i. 217. 11 (¼10 Sn.; s3). Hermann (‘Notae’) proposes æØ , h›i, which produces the same form as the other repetitions. But he may not have emended the text simply to tidy up the responsion. Neither in the strophe nor in the epode is there any sequence of three long 8

B17s6 (xe e e3) is very similar; see excursus below.

160

The Eighteen Majors

syllables within a verse. æØ ,
ºF  is the sole exception. Cf. Maas, ‘Freiheiten II’, 7. Similarly, Bergk4 writes K
Zº. 34 (¼ 31 Sn.; s4) The paradosis
æÆ is unmetrical. Most critics accept
EæÆ (Moschopoulos), which is a term unattested elsewhere (cf. LSJ
EæÆæ). Mommsen changes word order: æH ª
æÆ Pj ŒŒæØÆØ Ø ŁÆ ı. It is preferable not to set verse-end after P, but it may be accepted. 42 (¼ 38 Sn.; e4). The paradosis º œ is unmetrical; ºfi A Hermann. æØ is unmetrical, too. æØ is recorded in some of the scholia, and Byz. 46 (¼ 42 Sn.; s2). The paradosis
çðÞ ƒ is unmetrical; 
ç ƒ Triclinius. This emendation is plausible, but
ç might still be right. The corresponding part is www in all the other repetitions except 68 (¼ 62 Sn.): YÆØ (w
). But this line is corrupt and some critics try to expel YÆØ (see below). If www were introduced instead of YÆØ in 68 and
ç were retained in 46, the metre of s2 might be yw
w

wr
wr
w
k e2e e e Schroeder’s
ç (=Ø) (w
) cannot be accepted since digamma does not in Pindar lengthen a preceding short syllable ending in a consonant: Braswell, Pythian Four 184d. 57 (¼ 52 Sn.; s5). The paradosis ıçæÆ is unmetrical. I follow Bowra (CQ 1936), Slater, et al. in reading IçæÆ
ÆæƺØ (IçæıA Mommsen, Turyn). The choice between IçæÆ (IçæıA) and ıçæA is hard. Içæ½· is attested in a papyrus (P.Oxy. 2092). ıçæA (W. Dindorf; ‘anxiety’ cf. ıçæH Moschopoulos according to Willcock, Triclinius according to Christ), is certainly germane in this sentence, but IçæıA (‘foolishness’ ¼ ‘to remain as a fool equal to his fellow citizens’) seems me to be more likely as a Pindaric gnome.9 Metrically both are possible. As 9 Bowra, ‘The Metre of Pindar’ cites P8. 73–4 for the illustration of ‘Pindar’s notion that to fail in the games . . . implies stupidity’: N ª æ Ø Kºa

ÆÆØ c f ÆŒæfiH
fiø,
ººE çe ŒE
 Içæø . . . (‘. . . for if someone has gained success without long labour, he seems to many to be a wise man among fools’; tr. Race). But I am not sure that this sentence at once supports IçæÆ
ÆæƺØ . . . ‘(winning) releases from stupidity’. Or, though this meaning is not attested, does IçæÆ perhaps mean ‘deprived of PçæÆ ’ i.e. ‘the status of being deprived of celebration after the victory’? At N7 v. 3, PçæÆ (‘night’) is wrongly written as PçæÆ in D.

Olympian Two

161

demonstrated above, and also taking into account of the All-but-One rule (Part III, C), one occurrence of an ‘irregular’ form against the others is not unusual. Thus it should not be regularized simply because of its rarity. It is, in a sense, reasonable that Schroeder (ıçæA
ÆæƺØ), despite accepting Wilhelm Dindorf ’s emendation, keeps the word-order of the paradosis (ıçæÆ of the paradosis is neither gramatical nor metrically possible). Schroeder is followed by Snell. Nevertheless, if we prefer ıçæA to IçæıA, then
ÆæƺØ ıçæA is better. This slight change removes two successive ‘irregular’ responsions. Pindar seems to have accepted ‘irregularities’ but, at the same time, to have been willing to remove them as easily as possible. 68 (¼ 62 Sn.; s2). The paradosis YÆØ  K ±æÆØ is unmetrical. Both Turyn and Snell follow Mommsen, and delete K without the change of the preceding YÆØ b ŒØ. The responsion between YÆØ w
here and wr in the other repetitions is not strange; see above, and in a wider perspective, Part III, C (All-but-One). Other proposals are: Y b Œ: . . . YÆ  K ±. (Triclinius, Heyne); Y K b Œ: . . . YÆ  K ±. (Schwickert, Christ); Y b Œ: . . . Y K ±. (Boeckh), YÆØ b Œ: . . . Y K ±. (Bergk4), alii alia. Note that these all seek exact responsion. The emendations depend on our interpretation of the situation of the sun in Hades. Boeckh thinks the sun always shines during both night and day. Bergk supposes perpetual equinox (i.e. spring), and Mommsen interpretes YÆØ as ŒÆd &E E ÇHØ (when the sun rises in the upper world, it sinks in the underworld). 71 (¼ 65 Sn.; s5). Most scholars, including Snell, adopt ŒØa (Moschopoulos). ŒØ is attested at O3. 48, where a long syllable (ŒØ) is necessary. Here in O2 v. 71, the position is anceps. The paradosis is Œa. Mommsen keeps it, by scanning Æ as one long syllable. He is followed by Turyn. ŒØa is preferable even metrically, since anceps tends to be regularized in this poem. 84–5 (¼ 76–7 Sn.; e2–3). The word-order in the paradosis is in complete confusion if the subject is taken to be Kronos, as the majority of scholars since Didymus (ap. Drachmann i. 95) have supposed. The paradosis is: 84 n
Æcæ åØ ªA E ÆPfiH
ææ 85
Ø ›
ø ! 'Æ o
Æ KåÆ
ÆE Łæ.

162

The Eighteen Majors

Remarkably, the metre is not so bad as some think, though a diVerent articulation becomes necessary (for this analysis of these two verses, see below): O2e2
w
w
yw
w

w

k e 2e 2e
O2e3 rw

w
wtwy

w
k e e 3
e

The confusion arises conspicuously from two words: ªA and
ÆE ; hence Byz. introduced (1) ˚æ in place of ªA , (2) deleted
ÆE , and supplemented the missing syllables by prolonging o
Æ into $
æÆ. Boeckh and Schneidewin follow this path. Pauw’s emendation ªÆ for ªA was restored by e.g. Christ and Schroeder, which is now conWrmed by a papyrus (Snell’s — 2 ¼ P. Oxy. 2092) and adopted by both Turyn and Snell. It is a pity, however, that the next verse (
Ø . . . Łæ), ‘which in the papyrus would have occupied two lines, has dropped out. Whether the omission was noticed or not cannot be determined, the margin on both sides being defective’ (Hunt, The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, XVII 129). Reading (2) of Byz., deletion of
ÆE and emendation to $
æÆ, is adopted by most critics, including Turyn and Snell. Two questions arise: (i) why did
ÆE wrongly intrude? (ii) were Byz. capable of emending the text so brilliantly? Perhaps they had access to a good manuscript which is now lost. If the subject is not Kronos but Zeus, as Aristarchus seems to have interpreted, and moreover, the etymological meaning (‘ruler’) of
Ø , governing the genitive
ø, could have survived till Pindar’s time, the paradosis in 85 might be acceptable.10 Then the metre cannot be rejected at once but introduces two irregularities; see below. 107 (¼ 97 Sn.; e3). All the manuscipts report ŒæçØ  Ł, which is one syllable too long. Editors emend ŒæçØ into Œæıç, following Aristarchus, although the whole sentence has been variously construed with some emendations. 109 (¼ 99 Sn., e5). Snell’s report is careless. The paradosis is ŒIŒE ; ŒÆd ŒE is Mommsen’s emendation. The older editions before Mommsen adopted KŒE . However, connective ŒÆd is necessary for 10
ÆE ›
ø ! 'Æ $
æÆ KåÆ Łæ (M. H. Rocha-Pereira according to Gerber’s Emendations) would be easiest if Zeus were the subject.
ÆE › introduces
w where www occurs at the other repetitions. This is, of course, possible.

Olympian Two

163

(

the sentence ŒÆd . . . ŁÅŒ to be included into the K
d clause. Metrically, the long syllable does not pose a problem. The initial position of e5 is unambiguously anceps. Snell marks Kº H (21 ¼ 19 Sn.) to indicate that its initial is short. But this is unnecessary.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 8. C, (5) (double e). The verse is short, its structure simple; but the exact parallel (we e x) is not found elsewhere. The closest verses are: P5s1 w
w

w
k we e P5s9 w
w

w

w
k we e e

Including these two and O2s1, there are in total 15 verses that start with short anceps and e (w
w
).11 Six of them are found in P5. As demonstrated above, we here may be ^ e 2. It is impossible to select from the other 14 examples those that may be acephalous e 2. Interestingly, when e is followed by anceps at the verse-end, the e is resolved outside O2; see Part I, 6. C. (viii). There are only two examples of unresolved (
w

k) I8s5c
a
ww
wt
w

k N3e1
ww
w
ww
x
w

j

gl e
dwdxe


s2. See 8. A. 6 (i) (palindrome). This verse starts with an acephalous e which is followed by a full e. This combination (w

w
) is fairly common (11 in total); see 6. B. The full e is repeated four times without intervening link anceps, unparalleled except O2s5. The second e and the third are resolved at the same position (
wr). They create a palindromic sequence
www
www
. There are two other parallels. Brevis in longo occurs frequently, at seven verses out of 10. Interestingly, all seven end with a short vowel þ  ðŒºÆ , Æ, ¼çŁØ, Iºç, I
æ,
æ,  ºº (an eighth would be added if Iæ œ (v. 46 ¼ v. 42 Sn.) were not followed by a consonant). Perhaps this fact is another example of verbal assonance. 11 O1e1, O2s1, P5s1, P5s2, P5s3, P5s9, P5e4, P5e7b, P6s1/2, P6s7/8, P8s4, N3s4, N7s4, N7e1.

164

The Eighteen Majors

s3. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er
e), 6. D (long mid-anceps). Five seems to be the maximum for full e in one verse. There is no such verse in the eighteen majors. Between the third and the fourth e, a link anceps occurs which is realized as long at all the repetitions. Long midanceps is rare not only in O2 (cf. s2 and s5, in which four e’s are juxtaposed) but in Pindar. The position before the anceps is resolved at nine repetitions out of 10 (except v. 11 ¼ v. 10 Sn.; see above). The sequence er
e (
wr

w
) occurs also in O10s4 w

wr

w
k

^e

exe

Bridge is observed between long anceps and the following e in most of the repetitions. There is only one exception: v. 77 (¼ 70 Sn.) ˚æıj æØ (see parallels in 6, D). Note the words of the shape ww
at the verse-end: 33 ŒŒæØÆØ, 77 ÆŒ æø, 99 K
 Ø. This is naturally common in s8, which ends with d, but is supposed to be rare in the verses made up of single-short movement. Verbal assonance is observed: 33 "E  åŁÆØ  55 "ŁE  ŒØÆ  69 Kºd ŒÆØ. s4. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Outside this ode there is a single verse (P5e8) made up only of two e’s. Five repetitions end with words of the shape ww
: 4
ºı, 34 ŁÆ ı, 48
ºı (again), 92 çÆææÆ , 100 ÆÆØ . Verbal assonance may occur between these, especially 92  Kd çÆææÆ  100 Œæ ªÆØ ÆÆØ . s5. This verse is one position shorter than s2. Without its initial short, s2 would be structurally equal to s5. However, their diVerent resolved positions give them such a completely diVerent impression: O2s2 wt
w

wr
wr
w
k

wr
w
rw
tw
k O2s5

^e

eeee


e e e e

Verbal assonance: 5 ¨ æøÆ   49 Ø  57
Øæ. s6/7. See 8. C. 6 (en as a substitution for e). This verse starts with acephalous e (^ e) like s2, and ends with anceps like s1. In the middle 3 e’s and 1 prolonged e are connected without mid-anceps. s6/7 as a whole structurally resembles the preceding s5 (and s2 too): O2s5

wr
w
rw
tw
k O2s6/7 w

wr
wt
w
w

w

k

Olympian Two

165

At nine out of ten repetitions, word-end regularly occurs unambiguously in the following manner: w

w r
w t
w
jw

w

k The exceptional case is v. 29 (¼ v. 26 Sn.): çغE j  Ø. Boeckh occasionally neglects postpositives at the beginning of a verse. Our verse is one of the examples. He wrongly divides this into two. Perhaps he may have wished to expel an unfamiliar phrase,
w
w
(e 2). In fact, it is fairly common for this to be adjacent to e. The combination e þ e 2 is incorporated, outside O2, in O1s11 a
wr
w
w
k xe e 2

and e 2 þ e in O1s10 w

w
w
rw
k

^e

e 2e

For the ending . . .
w

k, see s1 above. s8. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (h) (palindrome); 8. C. 3 (enwd). A double short exceptionally occurs at the end. But this verse is not extraordinary in the eighteen majors; it is associated with a group of verses, usually found in Class III stanzas, which are made of up of singleshort movement ending with d. These sequences vary in length. That found here (e 2wd) is attested in: O1e3 P11s3 O2s8


w
w
w
ww

w
k e 2wd e rw
wr w
ww
k e 2 wd

w
rw
w
w
ww
k
e e 2wd

O2s8 is diVerent from the others in that it has a short phrase (anceps þ e) which precedes the sequence. At the same time this phrase and the initial part of the following e 2 are partially equal to some of the preceding verses:

w
(s3),
w
rw
(s4, s5),
wr
w
(s5). Resolution of the Wrst long of e 2 is also found in P11s3, and in N7s7
yww
w
rw
w
k tel e 2

Other colometries are theoretically possible:

w
wr
w
w
ww
k
e 2e w d

w
rw
w
w
ww
k
e e hepta

166

The Eighteen Majors

However, these analyses fail to bring out the similarity with the sequences mentioned above. Verbal assonance: 8 Pøø 
Ææø  52 KªŒøø  ºø,  38 PŁıØA   104 PæªÆ  16 hçæø ¼æıðæÆÞ. e1. The structure of long anceps þ 3 e’s is identical with the Wrst half of s3. But words are localized in a completely diVerent manner. In s3, the following cuts are frequent (612 and 7 out of 10 repetitions respectively):

w

jwrj
wy . . . while in e1 word-division is absent from all Wve repetitions at both boundaries. This verse includes a rare case where a resolved long and an unresolved are in responsion rather freely (resolution at 3 repetitions against 2). Interestingly, two repetitions which lack resolution have words that could be scanned as if resolution might have been considered for these verses too till some relatively late stage of the composition: 17 b

æƪø 39 
Ææœ. These words must be scanned in this context w

w
but could be ww
w
, and if another w were supplemented, the total verse would be equal to the other three. Conversely, if w were taken away from the other three (61 -º , KıÆ 83 -Ø ! 'ÆÆ Łı 105 - K
Æ Œæ ), the verse would be

w

ww
w
at all the repetitions. This is exactly what the Byzantines did; their text has: 61 K ı (instead of KıÆ), 83 OæŁÆE (instead of OæŁÆEØ), 105 Æ (instead of K
Æ). Boeckh, Dissen, and Schneidewin followed them. Bergk2 is the Wrst major edition to adopt the currently favoured metre (but he actually follows Mommsen’s suggestion: ‘creticum numerum restituendum esse vidit Mommsen’). e2. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (h) (palindrome), 8. C. 6. (e 3). This verse includes e 3 uniquely in O2 (in other words, it uniquely has a short link anceps between 2 e’s throughout all the repetitions). The alternative analysis

12

7, if OçŁÆº ; ÆNg j  (11) is included.

Olympian Two

167


w
w
rw
w

w

k e 2 e 2 e
is less likely since there is no verse elsewhere in the eighteen majors that includes two juxtaposed e 2’s. The reading of the paradosis requires this analysis (see above), but the emendation is indispensable; ªA should be changed into ªÆ . e3. This verse too could theoretically be analysed in a diVerent way: rw

w
w
wr

w
k e e 3
e It may be better, however, to avoid e 3 in the middle of the verse. e 3 always occurs either at the beginning or at the end of a verse without exception. The long mid-anceps is rare, but not a problem (cf. s3 above). Note that bridge is observed between it and the following long at all the Wve repetitions. If the paradosis were accepted (see above), this verse would be rw

w
wtwy

w
k e e 3
e The responsion between resolved and unresolved at two diVerent positions of e 3 is highly irregular, since there is no example of responsion in the eighteen majors between
wr and rw
at e. Moreover, the paradosis introduces cut (KåÆ j) after the long anceps. Verbal assonance: 19 %æ ›
ø  63 ‹Ø ŁÆø  85
Ø ›
ø. e4. See Part I, 6. D (long mid-anceps). This verse is very similar to O10s3a u
w

wr

wr

j xe e
e sp and the colometry of O2e4 should be taken into consideration. O10s3a should not be analysed as u
w

rw

rw

j xe
e
e
because (i) this analysis entails too many cuts after the second long anceps (see Part I, 6. D, and Part II ad loc.) (ii) it also entails long ancipitia preceding resolution (see Part 1, 6. C. 3). In fact, a long mid-anceps is, in general, very rare. As for O2e4, although it does not entail the cut after long mid-anceps, the colometry

168

The Eighteen Majors



w

wt
wr

k
e e e sp is preferable to

w

wt
rw

k
e e
e
The latter analysis would introduce a long anceps followed by resolution. This is totally unparalleled. The analysis apart, it is important to notice that the ending wr

k is similar to
w

k, which is repeated in O2 (s1, s6/7, e2, e5). e5. There is no manifest indication of verse-end. When e5 is united with e6, a long verse will result; see Epode above. e6. There is no other verse made up of xe 2
, but two verses consist of xe 2 (O10e7, I7s5b). Verbal assonance: 22
ƺªŒ ÆÆŁ  44
ƺÆçÆ º.

Excursus A: Bacchylides 17 The metre of Bacchylides fr. 17 ( ˙ ŁØ) is similar to that of O2. The similarity is more evident, and easier to grasp, when both are analysed according to the same rules. The text of ˙ ŁØ still remains uncertain even after the challenge of R. Fu¨hrer. There are a great many disagreements between scholars about the extension of Responsionsfreiheiten. If one could say that Maas’s position is to the extreme left of the spectrum, then that of Fu¨hrer would be to the extreme right (there is no political implication; Fu¨hrer’s arguments cannot be said to be conservative in the usual sense: he is as radical as Maas) and Snell would be located somewhere in the middle. Fu¨hrer’s text is very sensitive to what I would like to call ‘verbal assonance’ (see Part III, E) between the corresponding repetitions as they stand on the papyrus. Consequently, he is very faithful to the word-order on the papyrus and does not hesitate to widen the limitation of acceptance of irregular responsions. This is not the place to argue the text in detail. I simply propose the analysis of the Wrst strophe using my method of notation, to show how the metre of B17 resembles that of O2. The verses which include similar phrases are given in the right column. In the Wrst strophe of B17 there is no signiWcant disagreement on the text. The metrical scheme is

Excursus A: Bacchylides 17

169

unambiguously Wxed. What intrigues us is the responsion between this strophe (str. 1) and the other three repetitions, namely, ant. 1, str. 2, ant. 3. B17s1 B17s2 B17s3 B17s4 B17s5 B17s6 B17s7 B17s8 B17s9 B17s10 B17s11 B17s12 B17s13

e e 2e e 2k we e 2 j e e
k
e
e e e ej we e spk xe e e 3j dwewDwe 2j we e 3e 3e ek e e e 3k
e 4e e
k xe e 2k e e 3ej e e 2ek ^e

O2s6/7 O2s1 O2s1, O2e5 O2s3 O2e4 O2e5 þ O2e6 O2s8

(^ e e e e 2e
) (we e
), O2e6 (we 2
) (xe e e
) (
e e e
e e) (
e e e sp) (xe e e e 3
) (
e e 2wd )

O2e3

(e e 2e e)

O2e5

(xe e e
)

O2e3

(e e 2e e)

The following characteristics are observable: 1. The basic metre is the same as O2: e; also its prolonged phrases (e 2, e 3, e 4) are used together here and there. 2. Link anceps is rare. e and other phrases are directly connected. 3. d and D are used in only one verse (B17s7). Thus the metre of this ode too can be described a special case of freer D/e. 4. There are a considerable number of similar verses shared between B17s and O2. But verses are, in general, longer, and short anceps (incorporated in e 3 or e 4 ) is more frequent in B17s than O2.

170

The Eighteen Majors O LYM P I A N N I NE

Four triads. Class I (strophe/antistrophe); Class II (epode) (§1) O9s1 O9s2 (§2) O9s3 O9s4 O9s5 O9s6/7 O9s8 O9s9 (§3) O9s10 O9s11 O9e1/2 O9e3 O9e4 O9e5 O9e6 O9e7 O9e8

ww
ww
w
k u
ww
w

u
ww
w
w

k

tel tel gl þ 3


a
ww
w
u
ww

k


ww
w


ww

k
a
ww
w


ww

k www
a
ww


ww

k
u
ww
w
k

ww

k

gl reiz gl reiz gl reiz wil reiz gl reiz

w
ww
w

w
k

ww

w
a
ww

k

tel e

w
w
w
w
jww
w
w
w

k ww
ww

k



ww
w


k
ww




j

ww
ww
jww
k

we 2wdwe 2
^ D
sp tel sp d sp sp
D þ



w
u
w
ww
u
w
ww
w

k

(¼ heptad) sp
e hepta hepta þ 3



w
ww
ww


j


d exd
(?
d e reiz)


ribyc þ

s1 H 72; s2 H 13, 73; B 32; s3 B 93; s4 B 15; s5 B 46, 65; s6/7 H 7; s8 H 19, 98; B 19, 68, 79, 109; s9 H 110; B 20, 39, 50, 69; s10 H 70, 100; B 51, 81, 111; s11 H 112; B 22; e1/2 B 22; e3 B 115; e4 H 26; B 116; e6 H 28, 58; B 88, 118; e8 B 30

For the analysis and the notation of e7 (
ribyc þ ), see Part I, 7. 6 and Appendix B. s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6/7

1 2 3 4 5 6/7

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

(e b æåغåı º çøA ˇºı
fi Æ, ƒ ŒÆººØŒ › æØ
ƺ ŒåºÆ ¼æŒ ˚ ÆæØ
Ææ ZåƒŁ ±ªFÆØ Œø ÇØ çºØ ¯ çÆæƒfiø f ÆæØ · Iººa F ŒÆƺø ƒ ØA I
e ø ˜Æ  çØØŒæ
Æ ƒ   K
ØÆØ

Olympian Nine

171

s8 s9 s10 s11

8 9 10 11

(7) (8) (9) (10)

IŒÆæø æØ @ºØ ØE ºØ, e 
 ¸ıe lƒæø —ºł K æÆ Œ ºƒºØ ƒ ! "

ÆÆ ·

e1/2

23/4

e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8

25 26 27 28 29 30

(21) (22) (23) (24) (25) (26) (27) (28)

Kªg  Ø çºÆ ƒ
ºØ ƺæÆE ƒ K
Øçƺªø IØÆE , ŒÆ Ø Iª æ ¥

ı ŁAƒ ŒÆd Æe $

æı ƒ
Æfi A IªªºÆ ƒ
łø ƒ ÆÆ, N  ØØ ØæØfiø
ƺ fi Æ KÆæ %Ææø ÆØ ƒ ŒA
: ŒEÆØ ªaæ þƒ
ÆÆ a æ
 · IªÆŁd ƒb ŒÆd çd ŒÆa Æ ¼æ

str. 2 31–41 ¼ (29)–(38) ant. 2 42–52 ¼ (39)–(48) ep. 2 53/4–60 ¼ (49)–(56) str. 3 61–71 ¼ (57)–(66) ant. 3 72–82 ¼ (67)–(76) ep. 3 83/4–90 ¼ (77)–(84) str. 4 91–101 ¼ (85)–(94) ant. 4 102–12 ¼ (95)–(104) ep. 4 113/4–120 ¼ (105)–(112)

The two stanza-forms (i.e. the strophe/antistrophe and the epode) of Olympian 9 belong unambiguously to diVerent classes. This is highly unusual. Even in a few exceptional poems (P2, P5, P10) where the classiWcation changes from strophe to epode, the diVerence between the stanza-forms is subtle. Some similarities are undeniably visible. O9 is, however, a one-oV. The strophe is very simple aeolic. Its structure is one of the simplest in Pindaric aeolic. It thus belongs to Class I without any doubt. In contrast, the epode includes few asymmetrical phrases. There are verses which have features in common with those of Class II odes, but many unfamiliar, sometimes perplexing, phrases are included. It is possible to speculate that the metrical contrast may be a device to reXect the contrast between the simple structure of Archilochean songs and the far more elaborate songs of Pindar himself; str. 1 starts with e b æåغåı º while ep. 1 starts with Kªg  Ø çºÆ
ºØ ƺæÆE K
Øçº ªø IØÆE . For the assumption that the central part of the epode may be related to the metre of Stesichorus or Ibycus, see Part I, 7. 6. RSS is low both in the strophe (43.8%) and in the epode (42.1%, the lowest of all the non-D/e stanza-forms).

172

The Eighteen Majors

Strophe In the central part (§2), the identical or nearly identical verses are repeated Wve times from s3 to s9. The Wrst three (s3, s4, s5) are completely identical: glyconic is followed by reizianum. Instead of the glyconic, the fourth (s6/7) introduces its variation, wilamowitzianum. At s8 and s9 the sequence gl þ reiz returns, but this time as separate verses. Such a straightforward structure is unusual in the aeolics of Pindar. He occasionally repeats the same or similar verses as at P2e1–3 or N4s4–6, but never at such length. Our case has aYnities with the short stanzas of Anacreon (though gl þ reiz is not his choice), or some simple odes of dramatic poetry (Euripides or Aristophanes). Another unusual feature is the variety of forms of the aeolic base of glyconics. In his usual practice, Pindar maintains the same form throughout all the repetitions, and, even when a diVerent form is used in responsion, it is restricted to one, or two at most, repetitions (Part I, 5. C. 1). Generally he prefers
w (and even www) to

, contrary to the tendency of Anacreon or the dramatic poets. In this ode, however, the ratios of
w to

in the four glyconics from s3 to s8 are 5/3, 0/8, 5/3, 1/7 respectively. 0/8 means perfect regularization and 1/7 accords with the ‘All-But One’ rule, but the predominance overall of

is signiWcant. Returning to the beginning of the strophe (§1), the Wrst two verses are also simple aeolic. The ancipitia in s2 are generally long. In §3 the penultimate verse (s10) starts with a simple aeolic colon, but notably the anceps is always short. And it uses e as suYx. Here, the Pindaric Xavour is prominent for the Wrst time. The last verse (s11) is situated, as it were, at the midpoint between aeolic and freer D/e.

Epode In contrast with the strophe, the epode is very unusual. Except for the Wrst and last verses, which are adjacent to the strophe, single-short movement is totally absent. These two verses (e1/2, e8) resemble each other, although the analysis above conceals the resemblance: e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k

w
u
w
ww
u
w
ww
w

k e8

Olympian Nine

173

The diVerence lies in two ‘explicit’ ancipitia (and the initial anceps) as well as the ‘inserted’ ww
in e8. The central Wve verses are made up mostly, though not completely, of spondees and ‘dactyls’. Spondee occurs at the beginning and end of e4, duplicated in e5 after d, and also placed at the end of e7. Snell, in the metrical scheme printed at the head of his text, moved the second spondee in e5 at the beginning of the next ‘line’, though the line is indented (the lay-out of the text is diVerent). Whatever he may have intended, verse-end should not be supposed between the two spondees; see v. 57 (¼ 53 Sn.) Œø  j qÆ (Æ Snell) and further, textual problems ad loc.13 Spondee is not a common phrase in the eighteen majors (12 in total), but, signiWcantly, about half of the examples are concentrated in this epode. (The others are found at O2e4, O10s3a, O10s3b, P5s7, P8e7, P11s1, I7e6; some of them will be cited below as parallels.) Spondee is occasionally found at versebeginning and verse-end in normal D/e. For example, (before e) P1s3


w


w
k sp e
e (after e) P9s2
w


w


k e
e sp (after D) P1s2
w


ww

w


ww
ww


k e
d e


D sp

Most certainly the Wnal two longs in e4 and e7 are comparable with those in P9s2 or P1s2, and the initial ones in e4 with those in P1s3. Another peculiarity is ‘dactylic movement’, which is not very common either, even in freer D/e, except for N6. It occurs in three verses: e3 (^ D), e6 (
D þ ), e7 (

wD ¼
ribyc ¼ heptad). The arrangement of e4–e7 is symmetrical and, so to speak, chiastic: 0 B B B B @




O9e4



ww
w


k O9e5
ww




j O9e6

ww
ww
ww
k O9e7

w
ww
ww


j

sp tel sp d sp sp


D þ
ribyc þ ( ¼ heptad) sp

13 The discrepancy between the layout of the text and the metrical scheme in Snell’s edition may be explained thus: Snell carelessly follows Schroeder’s metrical scheme while, in the main body of the text, changing the layout. According to the idiosyncratic theory of Schroeder, the initial short syllable of Æ does not matter. He deletes  before it.

174

The Eighteen Majors

The inner two verses, e5 and e6, are similar. The similarity would be strengthened if the spondee at e5 were supposed to be equivalent to a ‘dactyl’. The structure of the outer two, e4 and e7, are also similar. The central part of both is a sequence which combines double short (s) and a single short, the order being reversed. A spondee follows it. As is demonstrated in Part I, 7. 6, asymmetrical cadence and introduction in the vicinity of dactylic verses occur in the ‘prototype’ D/e of Stesichorus and Ibycus. The Wnal spondee may be related to Alcman and others. For the initial spondee, Stesichorus S222(b) (the so-called Lille Thebaid) ep. 6 can be cited:


w

k In Wve ‘dactylic’ verses (e3–7), word-end between two shorts tends to be avoided. Localization of words like BØ ¼Ø Ł

(
wjw
wjw
) is absent. There are in total nine paired shorts, (
)ww
, in each of these verses and they are repeated four times. Word-end occurs between the two shorts only in one out of nine pairs in each repetition; thus there are in total four irregular cases. Moreover, each of these four irregular cases occurs in a diVerent verse (e4: ep. 1 v. 26 Æe $

æı e5: ep. 2 v. 57 ¼º ºE; e6: ep. 3 v. 88 ºÆ b ŒÆd; e7: ep. 4 v. 119 تıØ, ›æH . As a result the rhythm of these verses feels very square, for instance e6 v. 28 N  ØØ ØæØfiø
ƺ fi Æ

wwj
ww
jww
j.

Textual problems 18–20 (s6/7–9). All modern editors follow Bergk2 and adopt his ingenious emendation (‘felicissimo ingenii acumine’, Schroeder, ed. maior): Ł ººØ  IæÆEØ  , ˚ÆƺÆ,
æÆ ºçF  ÞŁæ:

Bergk, in fact, owes much to Boeckh. His colometry is fundamentally the same as Boeckh’s division. It was Boeckh who Wrst rejected the vulgate text and established verse-ends: IæÆEØk and
æÆk. Synartesis is impossible because verse-end is attested at each (s7, s8,

Olympian Nine

175

s9) by hiatus/brevis in one or more other repetitions. It must be remembered that A, which preserves   ˚Æƺfi Æ,
æÆ had not been discovered yet; thus Boeckh conjectured A’s reading without knowledge of it (it was discovered by Mommsen). He also expels r  (sic in all MSS except A; see below) and scans ºçF disyllabically against the usual trisyllabic scansion; cf. not. crit., p. 397. Bergk’s merit lies in the introduction of the invocation to Castalia in s8 by deducing  from r. Hermann (‘Notae’) insists on retaining the (unmetrical) vulgate: Ł ººØ  IæÆE , Y  ˚Æƺfi Æ
Ææ ºçØF  ÞŁæ·

He writes: ‘si hi versus . . . asynarteti sunt, nihil opus est mutationibus, quas Boeckhius durissimas et minime elegantes fecit.’ It is one of the cases in which Hermann makes use of ‘asynarteta’ as a weapon to reject the deWnition of verse-end established by Boeckh. As late as in 1847 (‘Quinque Ol.’), he did not abandon the idea of asynarteta but united s8 with s9:  , ˚Æƺfi Æ
Ææ º-jçØF  ÞŁæ·

His deWnition of asynarteta is: ‘[versus] qui sicut placeret poetae nunc cohaerentibus numeris decurrerent, nunc ex duobus constarent non continuatis numeris’ (Opusc. viii, 115). I record Hermann’s text here, not because it should be adopted nor because his metrical theory on asynarteta is right, but because it shows how diYcult it had been to recognize verse-end as the primary necessity of modern metrical studies.14 For
æÆ at the verse-end, o
æ (O1 v. 57; preverbal) is a remote parallel. As for disyllabic ºçF, there is an example outside Pindar: Ba. 6.v. 3. Kayser introduces Œæ Æ ˚ÆƺÆ
æÆ

because ‘Quum spondeus in omnibus ceteris strophis octavum versum inchoet, non credibile est, in hac sola trochaeum a poeta fuisse admissum.’ But this is not strange (All-but-One). 14

For asynarteta, see Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line?’.

176

The Eighteen Majors

57 (¼ 53 Sn.; e5). Snell retains the paradosis Æ. The Wrst position is long at two other repetitions in e5. The fourth, 87 (¼ 81 Sn.), is indeterminate: çæfiø. Turyn introduces qÆ. For qÆ, see Braswell, Nemean Nine, on v. 17 and Gerber, Olympian Nine, ad loc. Boeckh, Mommsen, Christ, et al. adopt Æ (Byz.). Schroeder retains Æ and sets verse-end after the Wrst spondee. Supposing asyndeton, he deletes  before Æ. Thus the two positions for Æ stand at the beginning of the next verse. The Wrst syllable of Æ is accepted as anceps. He introduces anceps also at the beginning of the following verse, e6 (for 
Ø 89 (¼ 83 Sn.), see below). Presumably he Wnds some kind of parallelism between e5 and e6. Bowra exactly follows Schroeder; his colometry is the same as Schroeder’s, and he chooses Æ and 
Ø. But how he analyses the metre is uncertain. Wilamowitz (‘Wil.3’ in Gerber’s Emendations) supposes w
to be required at all the repetitions and, retaining Æ and çæfiø as they are, emends two repetitions: 27 (¼ 25 Sn.) Œºı  (for ÆÆ), and 117 (¼ 109 Sn.) ZæŁØ IFÆØ ŁÆæø (for ZæŁØ þæıÆØ ŁÆæø). Snell’s metrical analysis (‘chotrim’) must be rejected, together with Schroeder’s theory. Dale retains Æ in a diVerent metrical analysis (‘the proper Pindaric form Æ need not be emended to the dubious Æ or qÆ’, Collected Papers, 73), maintaining that the seventh position is, as well as the Wfth and others in the preceding verse (e5), is a drag:
ww


u
d
s(
s) Her conception of ‘drag’ is unorthodox, and she resorts to it too frequently. 60 (¼ 56 Sn.; e8). The paradosis ŒFæÆ is unmetrical; ŒæA Triclinius. 82 (¼ 76 Sn.; s11). ª in the paradosis is unmetrical. Snell obelizes it. Various emendations have been proposed. The easiest is either ªF (Mingarelli, followed by Mommsen and Christ) or changing the word-order with insertion of ª : ¨Ø ª Pºfiø ª (Hermann, ‘Notae’, followed by Boeckh and Schneidewin). More sophisticated are ª r Ø (Bothe), ª ZÇ (Bergk, LPG 2), ºÆ (Hermann,‘Quinque Ol.’), keeping the word-order of the manuscripts. Turyn, on the same lines, writes ª æ . Schroeder retains the paradosis by defending the

Olympian Nine

177

awkward responsion
uw
. This idea of responsion itself is rejected by Maas, but he classiWes the passage amongst ‘nicht evident geheilte, weil auf verschiedene Weise heilbare Stellen’ (‘Freiheiten’, 11, Beleg 75). He cites ŒFæ (Mommsen, in apparatus) as a sample of the emendations. See further Gerber, Olympian Nine, ad loc. 89 (¼ 83 Sn.; e6). The majority of manuscripts have 
Ø. Moreover, A has unmetrical ÆN after it. Most editors adopt 
Ø, except Bergk1 (but 
Ø Bergk2–4), Schroeder, and Bowra. These adopt 
Ø (HN). Two questions arise: (i) whether Pindar used the aorist-stem starting with 
-, and (ii) whether the present tense is preferable to the aorist. There is no metrical problem, because the position is anceps. 
Ø produces exact responsion, but Pindar may not have been worried about breaking it (All-butOne). Braswell, Glotta, 58 (1980), 205 V. refutes Schroeder, who banned all non-indicative forms of 
-, and supports 
Ø in our passage: ‘in the non-indicative moods early Greek uses either the present or the aorist’. And the unmetrical gloss ÆN: ‘It was obviously added by someone who felt that the notion of duration was not adequately expressed by the aorist optative that he found in his text.’ ÆNd (A, see above, Csl) is expelled by most, but there may be a chance for it to be retained. Mommsen suspects
æfi Æ and establishes the text: 
Ø ÆN: fi Æ . . . Instead of
æÆ, Æ may be used in similar contexts (P10. 64, and N7. 65, where Mommsen introduces it in place of
æÆ to heal a metrical irregularity). In the same line, the manuscripts unmetrically read XºıŁ, which must be qºŁ (Byz.). 106 (¼ 99 Sn.; s5). The paradosis KƺÆ is unmetrical; NƺÆ Byz. 120 (¼ 112 Sn.; e8). `N Ø  K ÆØ "ºØ Æ ðˇNºØ ÆÞ ØŒH (MSS) seems grammatically impossible even if we disregard the metre. ‹ was introduced by Byzantine scholars who thought the preceding  (acc.) and ØŒH (nom.) were incongruous. ‹ had been accepted by older scholars (E. Schmidt, Boeckh, Hermann (‘Notae’), Schneidewin), with various emendations. But since  is present, ‘sententia eadem manet, sive pronomen ‹ addideris sive non addideris’ (Christ). Perhaps it may be helpful to put a colon after the preceding verse, IºŒ  (Hermann, Mommsen), rather than a

178

The Eighteen Majors

comma (Christ, Snell). It was Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’) who Wrst deleted ‹ ; his conjecture `r Æ,   is now generally accepted.

Individual verses s1. There is no strictly identical verse. However, the telesillean starting with double short is quite common (6 in total, and 2 others suYxed by w

). Also common is the telesillean that makes a verse by itself, not combined with any other components (4 in total): O10e6, P5s7b, I7e3 (all of these start with long anceps). s2. The half base of the telesillean is always long except for v. 62 (¼ v. 58 Sn.) (Ł ªÆæ ), and the full base of the gl þ 3 is
w, except for v. 73 (¼ v. 68 Sn.) (

, ¨ÅA, ƒ ). Both follow Pindar’s general tendency. Bridge between the two cola is observed in general, but breached at v. 2 and v. 103 (¼ v. 96 Sn.). There are two other verses in which a telesillean precedes another aeolic colon starting with full base: I7s3/4 (xe þ tel þ gl þ 3) and N7s8 (tel þ hipp). The examples of gl þ 3 amount to three (others are: I7s3/4 (above) and N7e5 (gl þ gl þ 3). s3–9. See Part I, 5. E. 1 (rdod starting with
x) and for s9, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). For the repetition of the same structure, and for the general tendency of realization of anceps, see above. The combination of gl/wil þ reiz is found in N2s3 (gl þ reiz), N4s4 (gl þ reiz), N4s6 (wil þ reiz). All are found in Class I odes. No tendencies are observable about bridge either before or after the anceps (¼ half-base) in s3, s4, and s5. The most interesting case is s6/7. Except for one repetition, v. 47/8 (¼ v. 44 Sn.), where elision of  is involved, word-end always falls at the end of the wilamowitzianum (thus Boeckh separates s6 from s7 to make two verses). In other words, s6/7 is virtually two verses, like the following s8 þ s9, in most repetitions. Verbal assonance: 75
ÆE – æÆØ  94
ÆE  K Ł ÆØ ; 18 Ł ººØ  IæÆEØ  108
ººd b ØÆŒÆE . s10. The anceps of the telesillean is always short. This is against Pindar’s general tendency: usually long is preferred to short at the half-base, especially in the cases at verse-beginning; see Part I, 5. D. 1. The suYx of e is typically Pindaric: there are in total 15 examples of e following an aeolic with þ 2 ending; see Part I, 8. B. 5. Bridge between the telesillean and e is always observed in our verse,

Olympian Nine

179

s11. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps), 8. C. 2 (double d). The Wrst eight positions (anceps þ d þ e) do not constitute an aeolic colon; accordingly, it seems natural to describe the latter half of this verse as anceps þ d þ anceps. It is, in fact, equal to the reizianum of the preceding verses. The arrangement of the last two-thirds (9 positions) of s11 is completely identical with that of s3–6/7; moreover, the verse is exactly as long (14 positions). The diVerence lies in the Wrst Wve positions: s11

ww

w
u
ww

k
u
ww
w
u
ww

k s3

The unsettled question emerges whether every reizianum is the catalectic version of the telesillean, so that the Wnal long of the reizianum was given the value of three shorts, i.e. longer than an anceps. If so, the diVerence between reizianum and anceps þ d þ anceps must have been audible. The sequence of anceps þ d þ e is paralleled: N7s5 w
ww

w
wrw
k wd e 3

Alternatively, the last nine positions in s11 might be analysed as an aeolic colon (ªª
x
ww

). But that is less plausible. There are few examples of this colon (P6s7/8), and even if it is accepted, the anceps at the fourth position is against the general tendency of Pindaric reversed dodrans. The position is predominantly realized as short, whereas in our case it is long at as many as three repetitions (41 ŒÆıåAŁÆØ, 71 ºÆ , 101 Œ ººØ ). e1/2. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (d) (palindrome); 8 C. 3 (enwd). Word-end coincides after the eighth position throughout all the repetitions. Many editors (but not Turyn) divide this verse into two at this point. But in that case, the second verse (e2) is diYcult to analyse. Instead, the whole of e1/2 should be taken as a variation of a long sequence of single-short movement turning to d. Rightward extension by singleshort movement is not paralleled by so many verses as leftward extension, but there is one example: N3e1b w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k we 3wdwe e

This verse is longer on the left side and shorter on the right than our verse (but e is attached without link), but its basic structure is similar. Outside the eighteen majors two verses are very similar to ours:

180

The Eighteen Majors

O14s2 w
w
w
ww
w
w

j O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k O4s5/6 w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k

we wdwe
w e 2 wd we 2
w e wd w e 2


The uniWcation of e1 þ e2 is now supported by Barrett, who avoids a short vowel at the end of v. 83 (¼77 Snell). e3. There are in total four verses that start with acephalous D. Among them, O13s1 ww
ww

k

^D




is identical with ours. Others are: O10e8 (^ D) and O10s1 (^ D e e). e4. The Wrst three long syllables of our verse are here analysed as spondee þ initial anceps of telesillean. For the spondee, see above, epode. Instead one may posit the anceps þ true long þ anceps of the aeolic enneasyllable: x
x
ww
w


k I reject this analysis, which requires the supposition that the second position of the reverse dodrans (
x
ww
), in our case the third position or the second anceps, is realized as long at all the repetitions. This is most unlikely (see Part I, 5. A. 1); in Pindar the position is mostly short. e5. There is a possible parallel for this unusual verse, though spondee is not duplicated there: I7e6
ww


k d sp15

e6. There are four examples of
D þ ; among them, N6e9

ww
ww
ww
k

is completely identical. Others are N6e3 (
D þ d) and P2s3 (
D þ e). e7. This strange verse must be compared with another strange verse, P11s1: O9e7

w
ww
ww


j P11s1

w
ww
ww
ww
w


k

15 The verse may be united with e7 by adopting Barrett’s emendation; see ad loc. Then the Wnal spondee will disappear.

Olympian Nine

181

The identical structure is astonishing. Both include what I call ‘reverse ibycean’ or its cognate (ribyc þ þ 2) at the core. Link anceps stands at the beginning of the verse, and a spondee at the end. e8. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (ii) (a) (longer verse), 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). The colometry is clearly indicated by two ancipitia. Long and short appear 2/2 and 3/1 respectively. Duplicated heptasyllable is absent elsewhere. Heptasyllable preceded by e is paralleled: P2s8

ww
w

w
x
w
ww
w

k tel e hepta þ 3

182

The Eighteen Majors O LY M P IA N T E N

Five triads. Class II (§1) O10s1 O10s2 O10s3a O10s3b (§2) O10s4 O10s5 O10s6 (§3) O10e1a O10e1b O10e2 O10e3 O10e4/5 (§4) O10e6 O10e7 O10e8 O10e9 (coda) O10e10

ww
ww

w
t w
k u
w

ww
w
k u
w

wr

wr

j rw



ww
ww
k w

wr

w
k a
w

w
k a

ww
w
k

^D

ee

xe dod xe e
e sp e sp D ^ e e
e xe e

gl

w
wr
ww
j u
wr
k w

ww
ww
k t
wr
wr

ww
y
w
k

we d xe




ww

ww
rwj

j


d d e




ww
w
k

w
w
k ww
ww
k

ww
ww
w
k

tel

w
wwjt

wr
w

ww
k

wd
e e d

^e

D

xe e
dxe (here x means a biceps)


e 2 ^D


ibyc (¼ teld)

s1 H 1, 73; B 7, 23, 29, 89, 95; s2 H 68; B 2, 8, 24, 46, 90, 97; s3b H 31b; B 91b; s4 H 4, 26, 92; B 4, 10, 26, 32, 48, 54, 76, 92; s5 B 55, 71; s6 B 6, 28, 72, 78, 100; e1b B 57b; e2 H 102; B 36, 58, 80, 102; e3 H 59, 103; B 15, 37, 59; e6 B 18, 62, 84; e7 B 63, 85, 107; e8 H 86, B 108; e9 H 65, 109; B all (!); e10 B 44

The analysis above, on which Part I is based, presents quite a few diYculties in e3 and e10. An alternative, experimental analysis, which tries to eliminate these diYculties, will be given in a separate section at the end. For the analysis and the notation of e9 (
ibyc), see Part I, 7. 6 ‘expanded aeolic’, and also Appendix B, ‘Dactylic expansion revisited’.

Olympian Ten

183

s1 s2 s3a s3b s4 s5 s6

1 2 3a 3b 4 5 6

(1) (2) (3) (3) (4) (5) (6)

e1a e1b e2 e3 e4/5 e6 e7 e8 e9 e10

13a 13b 14 15 16/7 18 19 20 21 22

(13) Ø ªaæ `惌ØÆ
ºØ ¸ŒæH ˘çıæø, (14) ºØ ƒ çØØ ˚ƺºØ
Æ (15) ŒÆd å ºŒ @ƒæÅ : æ
 b ƒ ˚ŒÆØÆ  åÆ ƒ ŒÆd $
æØ (16) ! ˙ æƌƺÆ·
ƒŒÆ  K ˇºıƒ
Ø Ø ØŒH (17) "ºfi Æ çæø å æØ (18) <ªÅÆ , ‰ (19) åغE — 挺 . (20) Ł ÆØ  Œ ç Iæfi A
 (21)
ºæØ ›æƒ ÆØ Œº Iƒcæ ŁF ƒ f
ƺ ÆØ .

str. 2 str. 3 str. 4 str. 5

23–8 ¼ (22)–(27) 45–50 ¼ (43)–(48) 67–72 ¼ (64)–(69) 89–94 ¼ (85)–(90)

(e ˇºı
؃ŒÆ I ªƒø Ø æåæ ı ƒ
ÆEÆ,
ŁØ çÆæ KA ªªæÆ
ƒÆØ· ªºıŒf ªaæ ƒ ÆPfiH º Oƒçºø K
غºÆŁ · ƒ t E , ƒ Iººa f ŒÆd Łıª Åæ `

º ƒŁØÆ ˜Ø , ƒ OæŁfi A åæ KæŒ ƒ łø KØ
a IºØ.

ant. 2 ant. 3 ant. 4 ant. 5

29–34 ¼ (28)–(33) 52–6 ¼ (49)–(54) 73–8 ¼ (70)–(75) 95–100 ¼ (91)–(96)

ep. 2 35–44 ¼ (34)–(42) ep. 3 57–66 ¼ (55)–(63) ep. 4 79–88 ¼ (76)–(84) ep. 5 101–10 ¼ (97)–(105)

The rhythm of Olympian 10 is basically freer D/e, like P5 or N6 (Class II). It includes four asymmetric phrases (s2, s6, e6, e9), but the essential phrases are e and, to a lesser extent, d. They are occasionally linked by anceps; mid-verse long anceps is one of the main characteristics of Class II stanza-forms, and is comparatively frequent in O10. There are in total four examples (s3a, s4, e3, e10). ‘Dactylic’ movement is also conspicuous, being present in six verses (s1, s3b, e2, e3, e8, e9). One of them, e9, can be analysed as an expanded aeolic as well, teld, and likewise the end of e3. Expanded aeolics (see Part I, 7. 6) are, in spite of the appellation, peculiarities not of Class I stanzas (¼ aeolic), but of Class II (¼ freer D/e), like O9e7, N6s4, or N6e3. Thus I analyse e9 as link anceps þ ibycean, ibycean being associated with D. The long of e is frequently resolved. Especially the form
wr returning at every repetition is remarkable (3 examples in strophe, 6 in epode).16 Resolution of either long of e and the presence In the eighteen majors
wr occurs 33 times and rw
27 times: the numerical diVerence is statistically insigniWcant; see Part I, 6, C. But in O10, the latter is scarce. 16

184

The Eighteen Majors

of adjacent link anceps make colometry ambiguous here and there, especially in s3a, s3b, s4, e1b. Two irregularities are perplexing. One is the biceps, used twice in e3. The other is the spondee in the middle of verse at s3b. Moreover, the glyconic in s6 is abnormal in the strophic responsion of aeolic base, and the long of d is resolved at e10. The transmitted text is certainly corrupt in some passages which also contain metrical problems. The metre of this ode is perhaps the most diYcult to analyse of all the Pindaric epinikia. It is interesting that brevis in longo occurs with an extraordinary frequency at no less than half of the verse-ends: in the strophe (10 repetitions in total), Wve at s1, six at s2, eight at s4, Wve at s6; and in the epode (5 repetitions in total), four at e2, three each at e3, e6, and e7, Wve at e9. For other examples of concentrated brevis in longo, see Part III, F. This means that, if the ends of the other repetitions are modiWed, the verse in question can be united with the following verse and the united verse will take on quite a diVerent form. For example, if we conWne ourselves to the Wve repetitions of the verses (ant. 1, ant. 2, str. 3, ant. 3, ant. 4), s4 and s5 could be run together to make w

wr

wwjw
w

w
k

^e

e
e e e

Could it be that Pindar was wavering till some relatively late stage of the composition of the ode between two ways of dividing the verses? SigniWcantly, all the verses except one (s3b) start with an anceps or a short position, and most end blunt (there are 3 exceptions: s3a, e1b, e4/5). As is usual in Class II odes, many verses are short. The average number of positions is 10.3 in the strophe and 9.5 in the epode. The strophe is considerably shorter than the epode: 72 positions in the strophe to 98 in the epode. The ratio (s/e) is 0.73 (¼ 72/98), the lowest of all the eighteen majors, and even taking the normal D/e odes into consideration, it is still the lowest.

Strophe The main part of the strophe is composed of e. It resembles O2, though e is not repeated within the verse as frequently as in O2. There are two ‘dactylic’ phrases (s1, s3b), which frame the Wrst half of the strophe (§1) (e.g. 1 e ˇºı
ØŒÆ and 3b Iººa f ŒÆd Łıª Åæ). §1 both starts and Wnishes with ww
ww
. Also, two dodrantes at

Olympian Ten

185

verse-end have an important function in articulating the structure (e.g. 8 ðŒÆÆÞåı ÆŁf åÆæ and 12  K å æØ). One of them is a dodrans in itself (s2) and the other forms part of a glyconic (s6), but the similarity is obvious: s2 u
w

ww
w
k xe dod a

ww
w
k gl s6

The initial part of s2 (x
w
) is repeated in s3a and s5. And there is one more structural correspondence: s3a u
w

wr

wr

j xe e
e sp ^ e e
e w

wr

w
k s4

Note the resolution and mid-long-anceps at the same position. The responsion a
at s6 is highly irregular. The correspondence between w
and

in aeolic base is common, of course, in Lesbian poems and in drama. But this verse is the only example in the eighteen majors that testiWes to the correspondence, not only in glyconic but also in all the other aeolic cola starting with full base; cf. Part I, 5. C. Long syllable occurs at two repetitions (v. 50 ¼ v. 48 Sn. Ø ÆØ , v. 94 ¼ v. 90 Sn. Łfi ŒØ). At all the other eight repetitions, the position is regularly realized as short. It is very strange that such an unusual practice occurs in a Class II stanza-form where glyconic is not otherwise present. Even in Class I (aeolic) where typical aeolic characteristics such as responsion between
w and

or dovetailing are retained, this responsion is totally avoided. As far as Gerber’s Emendations reports, only Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’) seems to have doubted the paradosis. His proposal is Iª ººø for Ø ÆØ , and ŁÆØ or ºØ
Ø for Łfi ŒØ. But these are too ingenious to be accepted. Glyconics can start with x
anyway. Perhaps Pindar introduced a one-oV licence in this ode, like that in e3 below, and tried to substitute

for w
at the beginning of a verse, as if to give a Wrst ‘foot’ of x
w
. Then our verse is literally a shorter version of s2: s2 u
w

ww
w
k xe dod
ww
w
k x
dod s6 a


And if this supposition were accepted, then the metrically suspect word øH at v. 26 (¼ v. 25 Sn.; s4), which must be rejected

186

The Eighteen Majors

according to current metrical theory, could be left unemended for the same reason: s4 a

wr

w
k x
e
e

Here the regular w
(^ e) is replaced by

. For the emendation of øH, see further on textual problems. Perhaps this type of licence may be paralleled outside the eighteen majors. In Paean 9, x
at the beginning of two verses may not be aeolic base; see Appendix B.

Epode I tentatively divide the epode into two halves. The structure of the Wrst half (§3) is easily grasped when the phrases are arranged horizontally (irregular responsion between long and double short at three positions is ignored): w u w

e4/5


e1a e1b e2 e3

cf. e10


wr
ww
j
wr
k

ww
ww
k
wr
wr
ww
ww
w
k
ww

ww
rw

j

w
ww


wr
w

ww
k

An anceps stands in the left-hand column.
wr is located in the centre. The phrase is occasionally modiWed: it is cut short into
in e2, and doubled in the Wrst third of e3. Finally in the right-hand column
ww
is situated. In e2, this is expanded to D. These phrases are inverted in e4/5: the d phrase precedes the e (
ww
rw

). Moving on to e10, we Wnd the same structure repeated. The initial anceps of e1b is short at one repetition (57b ¼ 55 Sn.) although it is regularized by all the critics; see textual problems below. The main part of §4 consists of three short verses. The Wrst two are similar. The double short in e6 is replaced by a single short in e7. There is no single short in e8. åغE — 挺 (v. 20 ¼ 19 Sn.) is an

Olympian Ten

187

impressive phrasing. The whole of e8 is the same as the beginning of s1, which frames the Wrst half of the strophe (§1, see above). e8 is incorporated in the next verse too: e9

ww
ww
w
k

At the same time e9 is an expanded form of e6, and has already occurred in e3 (except at one repetition; see the Wnal section). The Wnal verse, e10, has characteristics common to §3. See the chart above.

Textual problems 8 (s2). The paradosis ŒÆÆØåØ is metrically wrong; ŒÆÆåı Boeckh. 9b (s3b). ŁÆH should be emended both for semantic and metrical reasons. Without ŁÆH, s3b starts with www
(e) at all the repetitions. Many are suspicious of ŁÆH, but not Schroeder, Turyn, or Verdenius. It is not the K
Øça of people in general (ŁÆH) but of Hagesidamos, or his father Archestratos, which Œ , ‘interest’, can absolve (see Erbse, and Barrett, Collected Papers, 54–72). Very many emendations are proposed for ŁÆH. They are words of the shape w

starting with a vowel, which makes exact responsion with all the other repetitions. Hermann’s O øæ (‘Notae’) (cf. ¨˝`(*˝=ˇ˝`(*') was adopted by Boeckh and Schneidewin. It is still kept in LSJ (v. O øæ) and in the apparatus of many editions. Like O øæ, most critics look for a word which qualiWes Œ : e.g. O
Æø (Mommsen) or ›Ææø (Christ). Erbse’s I ø qualiWes ºFÆØ, but it is, in a broader sense, on the same line. On the other hand some propose a verb which is attached to the following sentence, like Schneidewin’s (Gerber’s Schn. 8, monente Wiesler) ›æA t. This was adopted by Bowra. Fennell reWned it to ›æ ø (the subject is Hagesidamos), which he later withdrew in his ‘new edition’, but Barrett revives (Collected Papers, 61). However, the metrical problem does not seem to have been thoroughly examined. I myself believe that the text is corrupt, but there is some chance of ŁÆH being right. If it were accepted, s3b would be analysed as

188

The Eighteen Majors

wy



ww
ww
k

^ e
sp

D

and Œ ŁÆHw


respond with wr

in the other nine repetitions. The lack of exact responsion at only one of the repetitions is a common feature in Pindar (‘All-but-One’; Part III, C). ^ e with resolution at the beginning of the verse is paralleled: O2s2 wy
w

wr
wr
w
k

^e

eeee

(here resolution occurs at 9 repetitions out of 10; the same frequency as our case.) Unlike O2s2, ^ e in O103b is followed by three longs. Most possibly the Wrst of them is anceps (resolved long followed by anceps is paralleled by O2s3 and O10s4). The next two must be a spondee (sp þ D cannot be D þ ; double short in D and D þ are not be contracted). This analysis is not a very welcome one, but, even if ŁÆH is expelled, the spondee remains. At two repetitions of O10s3b word-end occurs after the anceps; i.e. bridge is ignored between the long anceps and the following long. This is a counterargument against the analysis above, but not an absolute one (for long anceps and bridge, see below). Alternatively, s3b may be ^ e sp
D. This analysis hardly diVers from the one above. Or should s3a and s3b be united, as most editors have believed since Boeckh? Turyn is an exception (and perhaps Snell too, because his metrical analysis seems to require two independent verses; if so, he should not have indented the text there). Then another
wr
is created instead of ^ e: u
w

wr

wr

wy



ww
ww
k xe e
e
e
sp D This is very long (25 positions), but not excessively so. There is a verse of 23 positions in the eighteen majors (N2s1), and a verse of 27 positions is found (N5s1) in the D/e odes. I prefer the separation because the other verses of this stanza are short and because the shortness of verses is one of the characteristics of Class II. But this, of course, is not compelling. 21 (¼ v. 20 Sn.; e8). The paradosis ŒÆd is unmetrical; Œ Byz., Npc.

Olympian Ten

189

26 (¼ v. 25 Sn.; s4). Except here, every repetition starts with w
, acephalous e, which is common before full e. Snell obelizes øfiH and records two conjectures in the apparatus, ºg (Theiler) and ŒÆg (Erbse). Christ in his apparatus proposes an ingenious emendation,
ø (‘cum øH metrico vitio laboret et arae nihil ad certamen attineant, øH ex
ø corruptum esse duco, ut quae infra sex genera certaminum, cursu lucta pugilatu quadrigis iaculo disco, referentur, iam hoc loco signiWcentur.’). Bowra and Turyn adopt it. If Christ’s
ø is rejected, øH, which in fact gives good sense, cannot be accepted metrically, unless we accept an over-ingenious interpretation (see on the strophe). øH  æØŁ KŒÆ is the reading of A; the other manuscripts are more unmetrical, reading øe ðøfiHÞ ! ˙ æÆŒºÅ KŒÆ (or KŒ:! ˙æ.). The older editions (Heyne, Boeckh, Schneidewin) accept Triclinius’ reading Å ! ˙æÆŒº KŒÆ. Hermann too (‘Quinque Ol.’) takes it with  æØ in place of KÆæ at v. 25 (¼ 23 Sn.). Mommsen, Bergk4, Christ (in the main text), and Schroeder (BT) keep øH ðøfiHÞ, but without persuasive metrical explanation. 36 (¼35 Sn.; e2). The paradosis Z
ØŁ is unmetrical. Z
ØŁ is the reading of Byz. and Npc. 57b (¼55 Sn.; e1b). The older manuscripts read
æø:
æø (Byz.) regularizes the quantity of the Wrst position, which is long in the other four repetitions. It is adopted by almost all editors. Snell analyses the Wve positions of e1b-part as sp þ cr. If this analysis is adopted,
æø would be indispensable. However, the regularization is unnecessary because, according to my analysis, the position in question is anceps. Cf. Mommsen (annotatio p. 139): ‘Possit dividi [ep. 1] ut etiam
æø vs. 55 teneas. Omnino haec numerorum deWnitio suavior (si recte sentio) quam vel Bo¨ckhiana . . .’. This verse is one of the cases where recognition of link anceps is vitally important, otherwise spondee or dochmiac would be introduced. For the resolution of the penultimate position, see Part I, Appendix, addendum II. 59 (¼57 Sn.; e3). For IŒæŁØÆ, see the Wnal section. 67 (¼ 64 Sn.; s1). The paradosis is unmetrical (PŁ). PŁf  (Thiersch) is generally accepted. Critics since Schneidewin and Bergk2 construe it with æåø. Dissen and Mommsen are the exceptions who adopt the Hermann’s emendation Æı (Hermann (‘Notae’): PŁf
).

190

The Eighteen Majors

73 (¼ 70 Sn.; s1). The paradosis gives the meaningless A IºØæðæÞŁıð Þ· #A › ºØæŁı is the emendation of Boeckh based on the scholia; the last two words are scanned
rw
with crasis of › - (some accordingly write ‰ºØæŁı). 74 (¼ 71 Sn.; s2). Asyndeton is introduced by Moschopoulos, who deletes the unmetrical b. 90 (¼ 86 Sn.; s1). The pardosis u is unmetrical; z Boeckh. 95 (¼ 91 Sn.; s2). The unmetrical b is deleted by Byz. 103 (¼ 99 Sn.; e4).  is inserted by Moschopoulos. For

`æåæ ı, see the Wnal section. 109–10 (¼ 104–5 Sn.; e9–10). Boeckh introduces –
 instead of –
 and establishes the verse-end at e9. Then brevis in longo occurs at the end of e9 in all the repetitions. 110 (¼105 Sn.; e10). The paradosis Ł Æ ¼ºÆºŒ is one syllable too long and metrically wrong.
 ¼ºÆºŒ (Hermann, ‘Notae’) is adopted by Boeckh, Schneidewin, Schroeder. Mommsen proposes æ ¼ºÆºŒ, and is followed by Christ and Turyn. Maas (‘Nachlese’) retains Ł Æ by changing ¼ºÆºŒ into pºŒ, which Bowra and Snell accept. The presence of Ł Æ in exactly the same metrical position in v. 44 (¼ 42 Sn.) is an argument for reading it here as well, but, in view of Pindar’s usual practice, not so strong an argument as to warrant introducing the unusual verbal form pºŒ or pº (see Part III, E). Verdenius accepts the correspondence between ‘cretic’ and ‘iambic’, citing Wilamowitz’s authority. But the responsion based on the assumption of triseme is not paralleled by unambiguously certain examples, at least in Pindar.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 6. B (acephaly), 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse), 8. C. 5 (double e), 8. C. 8 (D þ e). It is rare for dactylic sequences to be followed by e. Of four examples of acephalous D (^ D), O10s1 is unique. N6s4 is most similar though its dactyls are extended: N6s4 ww
ww
ww
rw

j

^D

þ

e


In the normal D/e odes, there are two examples of ^ D followed by e, though a link anceps is inserted between them:

Olympian Ten

191

P3e9 ww
ww


w


w
k N8s4 ww
ww


w

ww
ww

k

The Wrst long of the second e is resolved at one repetition (v. 73 ¼ v. 70 Sn.) out of 10. It is caused by a proper noun which is the emendation of Boeckh based on the scholia (see above, Textual Problems). s2. The initial anceps is not regularized; long at seven repetitions and short at three. There is a verse which is of the same structure: P8s4 w
w

ww
w
k we dod

Verbal assonance: 2
ŁØ çÆæ  8 ÆŁf åÆæ , 30 IŒŁ  74 ¼ŒØ. s3a. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er
e), 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse), 8. C. 5 (double e). Although hiatus/brevis is absent, the coincidence of word-end throughout all the repetitions suggests the division into two verses, s3a and s3b. For the possibility of a united verse, see above, Textual Problems. The extraordinary internal spondee remains whichever verse-division is adopted. Another analysis of s3a is conceivable, according to where resolutions are supposed to occur: u
w
l x rw
l x rw

j xe
e
e
But this colometry introduces two irregularities and must be rejected. In the eighteen majors (i) resolution is never preceded by a long anceps (see Part I, 6. C. 3) (ii) cut tends to be avoided after long anceps (Part I, 6. D); it would occur at Wve repetitions after the Wrst long anceps and at nine repetitions after the second, according this colometry. In contrast, bridge is observed throughout all the repetition according to the other colometry. Moreover s3a harmonizes with another verse in this stanza: s4 (see above). O2e4 is structurally similar, and another colometry seems possible (see ad loc.):

w

wt
wr

k
e e e sp Outside the eighteen majors, there is a verse which is strikingly similar to ours: Pae4s3

w

wr

wr

jwr

k
e e
e
e sp

192

The Eighteen Majors

The verbal unit of wr

j at verse-end is distinct. In nine out of 10 repetitions, word-end occurs at u
w

wr

jwr

j. The exception is v. 9 OEj-Æ K
Øça. Moreover, at four repetitions, the same verbal unit is repeated: u
w

jwr

jwr

j. (v. 3 KA ªªæÆ
ÆØ·jªºıŒf ªaæ ÆPfiHj º Oçºø). Although the analysis is diVerent, rw

j is used at the end of e4/5 too; for its diVerence from wr

, see below on e4/5. Verbal assonance: 3 KA ªªæÆ
ÆØ  9 ‹ø b ºFÆØ  97 Icæ ¥ ŒÅÆØ s3b. The metre picks up the same pattern as the Wnal word-group of s3a: jrw

j (see above). The two longa between rw
and D are diYcult to analyse. This is the only case of a spondee in mid-verse. Analyses apart, the similarity between O10s3b and O1s2 is undeniable: O1s2 www
w

ww
ww
ww

k ^ e e D þ
O10s3b www



ww
ww
k e sp D

s4. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er
e), 6. D (long mid-anceps). The second long of the full e is resolved. The sequence w

wr is also found in O2s6/7 and P5e1. The latter half is analysed as long anceps þ another e. The combination er
e is rare, but not unparalleled: O2s3

w

wr
wy

w
tw
k x e e e x e e

Bridge is observed between long anceps and the following e in most of the repetitions. There is only one exception: v. 92 (¼ 88 Sn.) ºÆåg j
ØÆ. This cut could be eliminated if another colometry were adopted: wr
rw

w
k

^ e
e

e

But this must be rejected. First, there is no example of a long anceps followed by resolution. And acephalous e is rarely followed by anceps (the examples are P5s11, N6s1a). s5. See Part I, 8. C. 5 (double e). Anceps þ e þ e is a very common phrase, and there is another example where the phrase makes a verse by itself:

Olympian Ten

193

P5s1 w
w

w
k x e e

The anceps at O10s5 is short, except for one: v. 71 (¼ v. 68 Sn.) ((æıŁÆ). s6. For the correspondence between w
and

at aeolic base, see above, strophe. Verbal assonance: 34 ðlÞ @ºØ ¼ 50
æ ºçF. e1a. See Part I, 8. C. 9 (e þ d). e1b. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er þ anceps at verse-end). As stated above (Textual problems, 57b), the initial position is not long but anceps. The alternative analysis (

rw
), based on a diVerent direction of resolution and on an emendation (
æø), is unnecessary and should be rejected. Hiatus/brevis is absent at the end of e1a; metrical tendency supports the division neverthless, because (1) if the two verses were combined, d would be followed by long anceps þ e, which is extremely rare (
ww
w
w
is common,
ww


w
irregular17), and (2) there are some examples of short verses composed only of e and link anceps, like N6s6b
w t
k e


Verbal assonance: 79
a   101 ðıÞçÆ
 e2. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ d, ^ e þ D); 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse). This strange form must be acephalous e and D. The same verse is used at I8s9. The nearest parallel is N6s5 ww

ww
ww
j

^d

D

e3. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er
e); 8. A. 6 (i) (palindrome); 8. C. 5 (double e). Irregular responsion between ww and
, which occurs twice, makes the analysis of the verse diYcult. The Wrst case comes at the beginning; N6e6/7 may be cited as a parallel (but see ad loc.). Double short appears only at v. 59 (¼ v. 57 Sn.) IŒæŁØÆ while long

17 One of the three cases of d
e is found at only one repetition (v. 57 (¼ 59 Sn.) ÞØ
ÆEØ) out of four in

N3e1a


ww
w
ww
a
w

j d w d x e


The others are e3 of this ode (v. 102 ¼ 99 Sn.: `æåæ ı) and e10; see the Wnal section.

194

The Eighteen Majors

syllables Wll the position at all the other repetitions. The position is most probably anceps from the structural point of view, since the following phrase is e. Contrary to the general tendency, double short is replaced by long only in ep. 5 in the latter half of the verse ( `æåæ ı). This responsion may be explicable as a licence for a proper noun, and perhaps the irregularity may be mitigated by the fact that the regular form has been repeated four times before this irregularity occurs. However, it would be an extravagant licence. There is no evidence in all Greek poetry that the ‘choriambic nucleus’ of an aeolic colon is ever contracted, nor the double short of D. This cannot, then, be contraction. Inevitably, the double short in question should be taken as biceps like that at the beginning of the verse.18 Then the phrase is anceps þ d þ biceps þ e. However, there are still further oddities; see the Wnal section. e4/5. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (d þ ex), 8. C. 2 (double d). As the linenumbering suggests, Boeckh divided this verse into two: e4

ww

e5 ww
r



But this yields verse-end after
ή  at v. 16, and must be rejected. In this verse, however, there is another place where word-end coincides perfectly: e4/5

ww

ww
rwj

j

If the verse ends there, supposing brevis in longo at all the repetitions (this is not implausible since brevis occurs with high frequency in this ode; see examples cited above), and the two Wnal longs are shifted to the beginning of the next verse, the following colometry, which Turyn adopts, emerges: [e4/5]

ww

ww
ww
k
d D

j

ww
w
k sp tel [e6]

The new e4/5 sits well in the chart above (Epode), without introducing the inverted e4/5. On the other hand, the new e6 is not good because 18 Dale (Collected Papers 75) accepts contraction in general, although ‘ascertainable contraction is extremely rare’. ‘The only possible case is in a proper noun [ . . . ]. The contraction in `æåæ ı is clearly genuine.’

Olympian Ten

195

of the uncommon combination of sp þ tel. Certainly O9e4 (sp þ tel þ sp) can be cited as a parallel, but its environment is too peculiar to be comparable. Turyn’s colometry will be better rejected.19 Under the accepted colometry, parallels for e4/5 can be cited: for xd þ d, P8e5; for d þ re (
ww
rw
), P5s10, P5e5, N6s6a, N7e1. As stated above, the sequence of . . .
www

j is found at the end of verse at s3a too, but the direction of resolution is diVerent. The analysis there is
wr

j (er þ sp) and is applied to O2s4 as well, while rw

j (re
) must be applied here and to N6s4a, N6s6a, because the preceding
is not anceps but unambiguously belongs to the preceding phrase (d or ^ D þ ). Word end does not function for the decision because, unlike tragic poets, Pindar does not avoid ‘split resolution’ but puts frequently word end between two shorts. Verbal assonance: 17 K ˇºı
Ø Ø ØŒH  61 f ˇºı
Ø Ø
æfi Æ. e6. Telesillean with long anceps at half-base makes a verse by itself. There are examples in P5s7b and I7e3 too. e7. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Anceps þ e 2 is a common phrase, and makes a verse by itself in I7s5b too. e8. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Acephalous D is used already in s1. There are two verses made up of only ^ D
(O9e3, O13s1), but in consisting of ^ D without Wnal anceps our verse is unique. e9. Hiatus attested at v. 65 (¼ v. 62 Sn.) and v. 109 (¼ v. 104 Sn.) guarantees the verse-end, so that brevis must be accepted even though all Wve verses end with a short syllable. This verse is related to the telesillean of e6 as well as to the dactylic movement of the previous verse (e8). Verbal assonance: 21 (Iæ)fi A
  65 –æÆØ  109 –
; 87 ŒæÆıe IæÆæÆ  109 ŒŒæÆ, –
. e10. See Part I, 8. C. 2 (double d), 8. C. 5 (double e), 8. C. 9 (e þ d). At v. 110 (¼ 105 Sn.) double short (ˆÆı Ø) corresponds with long. Resolution of the latter long of the d is highly irregular. There are other oddities too; see the next section.

19 Barrett (Collected Papers, 190) gives another ground for rejecting Turyn’s colometry: it introduces frequent occurrences of a short vowel at verse-end (SVE).

196

The Eighteen Majors

Alternative Colometry for e3 and e10 This is the colometry on which the discussion in Part I is based: e3 t
wr
wr l x
ww
y
w
k te e
dye x
wr
w

ww
k wd
e e d e10 w
wwjt l x means implicit long anceps) (here l This analysis of these two verses includes several irregularities. Of these the Wrst three are unmistakable: (i) the initial biceps in e3: at v. 59 (¼57 Sn.) double short (IŒæŁØÆ) corresponds with long in the other four repetitions; (ii) the second biceps in e3: at v. 103 (¼ 99 Sn.) double short is replaced by long ( `æåæ ı). (iii) the resolution of the second long of d in e10: at v. 110 (¼ v. 105 Sn.) its place is occupied by double short (ˆÆı Ø). The others are not self-evident; they concern long anceps: (iv) d
e (d followed by long anceps þ e) in e10. (v) d
e at the Wfth repetition in e3, with `

æåæ ı retained. (vi) cut between long anceps and the following true long at two repetitions in e3; v. 81 (¼ 78 Sn.) 
Ø j ŒÆ ı and v. 103 (¼ 99 Sn.) ŒÆÆæåø· j
ÆE . (vii) cut between long anceps and the following true long at one repetition in e10: v. 88 (¼ 85 Sn.) º
a j
æe . For (iv) and (v): examples of d
e are extremely rare; cf. on e1b above. For (vi) and (vii): Pindar tends to keep bridge after long anceps. Where short anceps occurs in responsion with long in some repetitions, there long anceps is always followed by bridge. Where anceps is always long (‘implicit’), there are in total nine exceptions among 74 repetitions of which one-third are constituted by the three cases in O10e3 and e10. The alternative colometry removes (i), (iii), (iv), (vi), (vii). Instead, uu
should be accepted, see below. For (ii) and (v), emendation of `æåæ ı is desirable. e3 t
rw
rw

ww
ww
w
k t
e e ibyc we e10a w
w
k t
e e d e10b t

wr
w

ww
k

Olympian Ten

197

At all the repetitions in e10 there is coincidence of word-division after the fourth syllable. In other words, if we suppose brevis in longo there, we can divide e10 into two verses. Then (iii) the irregular resolution of d and (iv) the mid-anceps are eliminated together with (vii), the irregular cut, and instead t
emerges. When, interpretation apart, this t
is acknowledged as a phrase and the direction of the resolution of e is changed in e3, the long mid-anceps is eliminated (vi). Note the similarity between e10b and e3: these verses both start with spondee, which is replaced by r
in one repetition each, and have two e’s after it. The Wnal phrase is d or its prolonged form (ibycean). The curious phrase t
may be paralleled; the outrageous phrase at N6e8 (t

ww
w
), which cannot be glyconic, becomes explicable once t
is accepted. Perhaps it should be, on the following grounds: (1) the long of e may be resolved, and responsion between resolved and unresolved e is no problem; (2) spondee may be interpreted as a variation of e; (3) therefore t
may be an e whose middle short has dropped out. This is contrary to current metrical theory, indeed, but Pindar may have experimented as with u
in the strophe (above). Without `æåæ ı, the latter half of e3 would be ibycean and is repeated in e9 with the preceding anceps. æåæ ı may be an intrusion of a marginal explanatory gloss, referring to æåæ ı
ÆEÆ at v. 2. The original text may have been, for example,
Ææe PŒºF . Note that  is not the reading of the paradosis; it was inserted by Moschopoulos (perhaps for metrical reasons). The asyndeton can be classiWed into the group of Hummel, Syntax §461 (‘asynde`te, implication illocutoire et performativite´’); cf. ÆYÅÆ (full-stop is rather desirable after ŒÆÆæåø). The irregularities of these verses have been explained in various ways and various improvements have been sought. In the nineteenth century (Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen, Christ), IŒæŁØÆ at v. 59 (¼57 Sn.) seems to have been mistakenly scanned as
rw. These critics give a diVerent metrical scheme to e3:
twr
wr

ww
y
w
k Bergk2 knows the syllable ŁØ is long and scans IŒæŁØ- as
w
. At the same time he maintains that
w
may be in responsion with

(‘quod si cui insolens videatur, meminerit solutionem, quam

198

The Eighteen Majors

statuunt,
t vel t
magis etiam oVensioni esse’). Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’) tries to expel not only this irregular resolution caused by IŒæŁØÆ but also the synaloepha of Æ in
ºıŒÆ (37 ¼ 36 Sn.). He unites e3 with e4 (note that brevis in longo occurs in quite a few verses at the end of e3) and separates e4 from e5: [e3/4]

wr
wr
wr w
ww
y

ww

j

This colometry is not necessarily good. Moreover it requires too many emendations to be accepted (I forbear to cite them). To expel oddities, Hermann proposes a diVerent colometry for e10 as well. He takes the last position of e9 as short (note brevis in longo at all Wve repetitions) and unites e9 with the Wrst half of e10. A new verse starts with the eighth position of e10: [e9]

ww
ww
wr
ww


j [e10] wr
w

ww
k

But not only brevis but hiatus occurs at the end of e9 at ep. 3 (65 ¼ 62 Sn.) and at ep. 5 (109 ¼ 104 Sn.). To avoid hiatus, Hermann (1) introduces B’s –æÆØ instead of –æÆØ, and (2) changes wordorder with large-scale emendations: uæfi Æ  ŒŒæÆ, – ˆÆ ı Ø IÆÅ. Besides, verse-end falls between
æe and Œ ºÆ at ep. 4 (88 ¼ 84 Sn.) according to this colometry.20 20 A diVerent colometry is also proposed by Bergk2. He sets a division after the fourth position of e10:



ww
ww
wr
w
k [e9] [e10] u

wr
w

ww
k Brevis in longo is posited at the end of the new [e9] in all the repetitions. His text of ep. 5 is: . . . –
 IÆØÆ k ˆÆı œ ¼ºÆºŒ . . .

Olympian Thirteen

199

OLYMPIAN TH IRTEEN (STROPHE/ANTISTROPHE V V. 1 – 5) Five triads. Class II O13s1 O13s2

ww
ww

k a
w

w
ww

k

O13s3 O13s4 O13s5

w
wrw


w
k

wtw
a
w
k ww
w

w
ww

k

^ D


xe ph (? xe rdod
) we2
e
e2xe

ph (? re rdod
)

^ dod

s1 B 75; s2 B 10, 46, 54; s3 H 11, B 69; s4 B 56, 70; s5 B 5, 13, 49, 57, 93

O13s6 u
w
ww


w


ww
ww

w
k xrdod
e
D e xD
D
O13s7 u
ww
ww


ww
ww

k O13s8
w

w


ww
k e e
d O13e1 O13e2 O13e3 O13e4 O13e5 O13e5b O13e6a O13e6b



ww
ww

ww
ww


w

k
w


ww
ww
j
w
u
ww

w

k tw


w


w
k
w


w


ww
ww
k ww

w

tw
k
w


w
j
w

tw

k

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6

1 2 3 4 5 6

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)

s7 s8

7 8

(7) (8)

e1

17

(17)

e2 e3

18 19

(18) (19)


D D
e
e
D exd e
e
e
e e
e
D ^ d e
e e
e e
e


(æغı
ØŒÆ K
ÆØø ƒ r Œ læ IE , ØØ b ŁæÆ
ƒÆ, ªÆÆØ a OºÆ ˚æ؃Ł, "Łı
æŁıæ —؃A , IªÆºÆŒıæ· K fi A ªaæ ¯PÆ ÆØ ŒÆتÆ Æ ,  Łæ
ºø Içƺ , ˜ŒÆ ŒÆd ›Ææç ¯Næ Æ,  Ø Iæ Ø
ºı, åæÆØ
ÆE Pºı ¨Ø · ! Ð *æÆØ
ºı ŁØ IæåÆEÆ çÆŁ : –
Æ  $æ æª. Æd ˜Øøı
Ł KçÆ f ź fi Æ å æØ ØŁıæ fiø;

200 e4 e5 e5b e6a e6b str. 2 str. 3 str. 4 str. 5

The Eighteen Majors 20 21a 21b 22a 22b

(20) (21) (22) (23) (23)

23–30 ¼ (24)–(31) 45–52 ¼ (47)–(54) 67–74 ¼ (70)–(77) 89–96 ¼ (93)–(100)

 ªaæ ƒ

Ø K Ø æÆ, j ŁH ÆEØ NøH ÆغÆ ı K
ŁÅŒ ; K b E ±
Æ , K  @æÅ IŁE ø PºÆØ ÆNåÆEØ IæH. ant. 2 ant. 3 ant. 4 ant. 5

31–8 ¼ (32)–(39) 53–60 ¼ (55)–(62) 75–82 ¼ (78)–(85) 97–104 ¼ (101)–(108)

ep. 2 ep. 3 ep. 4 ep. 5

39–44 ¼ (40)–(46) 61–6 ¼ (63)–(69) 83–8 ¼ (86)–(92) 105–110 ¼ (109)–(115)

In Olympian 13, the metre changes midway through the strophe/ antistrophe from so-called ‘aeolic’ to the normal D/e. This is unique among all the Pindaric epinikia. Comparable is Bacchylides 3, of which the strophe is non-D/e but the epode is D/e. But there are signiWcant diVerences; see further the excursus below. The changing-point of O13 is between s5 and s6. This analysis is accepted unanimously by every scholar, whatever deWnition he may give to ‘aeolic’. The D/e section does, however, begin with an asymmetrical phrase (heptasyllable, or rather, anceps þ rdod x
w
ww
). The reversed dodrans is closely associated with the two pherecrateans in s2and s5; on which see below. The epode conforms metrically to the latter half of the strophe and is made up purely of D/e. The metrical change after s6 is evident not simply because the verses can be described using the Maasian symbols. Other characteristics of D/e are also present. Verses become much longer than before. Link ancipitia are abundantly employed and mostly realized as long. Semantic break too occurs between s5 and s6 in eight out of 10 repetitions; the exceptions are: str. 3 (49 ¼ 51 Sn., but there ends a participial clause), ant. 3 (57 ¼ 59 Sn.), a case of enjambment. Nevertheless, it must be recognized that the ‘aeolic Xavour’ is already not very strong even in the non-D/e part (s1–s5). Asymmetrical phrases, the most distinctive feature of ‘aeolic’, are rather scarce. Only three such phrases are interspersed among Wve verses: one in s2 and two in s5. The other three verses are to be analysed as freer D/e, not a very diVerent metre from the normal D/e. One of the aeolic phrases (s5) is unique in Pindar. It is an acephalous dodrans (see Part I, 5. C); for another interpretation, see below on s5. The other two are pherecrateans. Pherecratean is not a very common phrase in Pindar. It can even be imagined that here in this context the

Olympian Thirteen

201

pherecratean is used as a kind of variation of D/e phrases, like the initial phrase of the D/e part at s6. It is possible to analyse the pherecratean with base in the form
w as the reversed dodrans þ link anceps (cf. Part I, 7. 5), while the initial of s6 as link anceps þ rdod:
w
ww

u
w
ww
The juxtaposition of pherecratean and heptasyllable is found in another stanza-form. P10s1 is a pherecratean, and s2 is a heptasyllable. The association of the D/e part with the non-D/e part is clear. Some of the verses in the normal D/e part have similarities with freer D/e, and even with aeolic. The most irregular is the asymmetrical phrase at s6 mentioned above. In addition, some other phrases are introduced which are fairly rare in the other typical D/e odes: choriamb, d, is used twice (s8 and e3), and acephalous d, once (e5b). Moreover all these three verses share another peculiarity: link anceps is often omitted. Thus these verses would be easily accommodated even if they were transferred into freer D/e surroundings:
w

w


ww
k ee
d O13e3
w
u
ww

w

k e x d e
^d e
e O13e5b ww

w

tw
k O13s8

The transition is smooth from strophe to antistrophe and from epode to strophe. The last verse of the strophe (s8), mentioned above, is akin to freer D/e, and so is the last of the epode (e6b): O13e6b
w

tw

k e
e


In short, it is certain that the metre of O13 changes between s5 and s6, but the diVerence between the two metres is not fundamental. RSS is 49.0% in s1–s5, and 42.0% in s6–s8 in the strophe, and 37.2% in the epode.

Strophe (s1–s5) The non-D/e part has a simple, transparent structure. Of its Wve verses, s3 and s4 are identical except for the realization of anceps and the admission of resolution in e 2. They are sandwiched between

202

The Eighteen Majors

s2 and s5 which are also very similar to each other. The diVerence lies in the initial position: O13s2 a
w

w
ww

k xe ph O13s5 ww
w

w
ww

k ^ dod ph

For ^ dod, see on the individual verse s5 below. The very Wrst line is occupied by one, essential word ((æغı
ØŒÆ). Its metre, ^ D
, is common to the normal D/e, but the brevity of this verse is typically pertinent to non-D/e.

Textual problems (s1–s5 only) 78 (¼ v. 81 Sn.; s4). Both Turyn and Snell follow Mommsen and accept the paradosis IÆæfiÅ. Not only Mommsen’s predecessors (Hermann, ‘De dialecto’, Boeckh, Schneidewin, Bergk2) but some amongst his successors (Christ and Bowra) reject this form. Their choice is IıæfiÅ (Callierges; for this Homeric form, see LSJ Iıæø). Both IÆæfiÅ and IıæfiÅ introduce resolution at the position, which is long at all the other repetitions. Exact responsion is unnecessary but IæfiÅ (Triclinius) is supported by Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’). 79 (¼ v. 82 Sn.; s5). The paradosis ƒ

fi Æ is unmetrical; ƒ

fi Æ Moschopoulos. 101 (¼ v. 105 Sn.; s5). The deletion of the unmetrical › is possibly based on the judgement of Byz. (deleted in N too).

Individual verses s1. The same verse appears in O9e3 and, without the link anceps at the Wnal position, twice in O10. Verbal assonance: 1 (æغı
ØŒÆ  97 a  ˇºı
 fi Æ ÆPH; 23 Pæf I ø  89 PŁf IŒø. s2. Anceps þ e (‘iamb’) often precedes an aeolic colon with full base (in total 9 examples). The anceps of O13s2 is generally short. Long is found only at v. 68 (¼ v. 71 Sn.) (Œ ƒ). Two positions are ambiguous (10 + ,æØ; 46 æ), but probably short (‘All-but-One’). Bridge between e and the pherecratean is irregularly neglected. Word-end occurs after e as many as at Wve repetitions (vv. 2, 10, 24, 54, 68; and one more at 76 (Kı
fiø  ). See Part I, 8. B. 6.

Olympian Thirteen

203

s3. See Part I, 6. D (long mid-anceps); 8. C. 6 (e 2), Anceps þ e 2, x
w
w
, is a well-paralleled phrase. Here it is followed by anceps þ e. There is one verse made up of the same combination: P11e5 w
w
w

rw
k

And one more with the order of the phrases inverted: P8s7 x
w
x
w
w
k

Two ancipitia are realized regularly without any exception throughout all the 10 repetitions: short (the Wrst, before e 2) and long (the second, before e). Cut after the long anceps, which is highly irregular in the eighteen majors, occurs at two repetitions: 3 Łæ
Æ, j ªÆØ, 25 –
ÆÆ, j ˘F
æ (Part I, 6. D). Is it a simple coincidence that the anceps position is Wlled in both repetitions by a short vowel followed by double consonant (note the verbal assonance underlined)? In addition, the resolution of the second long of e 2 is regularized. The form
wrw
is quite common; in total there are six examples; see Part I, 6. C. Of these P2s5 is very similar even in the structure of the following verse in that anceps stands before and after it: P2s5

wrw
w
ww
k

xe 2xd

Verbal assonance: 55 K
IçæÆ ÆåA  99   K Æ  i s4. This verse is identical in structure with s3, but diVers in two features. First, the regularization of anceps is reverse: the Wrst (before e2) is always long and the second (before e) is basically short. The sole exception is v. 78 (¼ v. 81 Sn.) ˆÆØÆåfiø. However, ˆÆØÆåfiø too may be scanned as short; cf. M. L. West on Hes. Th. 15. Secondly, the resolution of e2 is found at only one repetition, v. 78 (¼ v. 81 Sn.) IÆæfiÅ, see textual problems ad loc. s5. See Part I, 5. G (acephaly and the Simonidean parallels), 8. A. 6 (a) (palindrome). The verse starts with ^ dod. This is the sole example of acephalous aeolic in the eighteen majors.21 Acephalous dodrans is

21

Outside the eighteen majors, there is one: Parth1s1 ww
w


ww
w
ww
j ^ dod
dwd

204

The Eighteen Majors

most certainly attested in the Simonidean poem (542 P) cited in Part I. That poem includes two verses which start with acephalous dodrans, and one of them (v. 6) is very similar to O13s5. Interestingly, the next verse (v. 7) is similar to O13s2. The relation between v. 6 and v. 7 of Simonides 542 P is the inverse of that between O13s2 and s5: ^ dod in v. 6 and s5 is replaced by xe in v. 7 and s2. Acephaly is a common feature of O13: we Wnd ^ D in s1 and ^ d in e5b. Thus the head of dodrans may be dropped. Another, but less probable, interpretation is that this phrase starts with biceps, instead of anceps, at the initial position, which is followed by e. Structural similarity of s5 with s2 may support this interpretation. The biceps may be comparable with that of Stesichorus. Pindar seems to have resorted to this licence in O10e3. But the usage of biceps in lyric poetry is more limited than is usually supposed. The initial of dramatic iambic trimeter is another matter. In short, acephaly is preferable to biceps. Verbal assonance: 5 IªºÆŒıæ  93 -Æ K
Œıæ  27 Æ sæ  71 ¼ yæ.

Excursus B: Bacchylides 3 From a metrical point of view, O13 is comparable with B3. Like O13 the metre of B3 changes from non-D/e to normal D/e. It is true that the strophe of B3 is non-D/e while the epode is D/e. The relation between the two stanza-forms is, however, not so clear-cut, nor are their structures so simple. B3s1 a
w
a yw
w

k w

k B3s2 a
ww
ww
w
w
w
a
ww
w

k B3s3 a
ww
ww



B3e1 u
ww
ww

w
u
w

B3e2 tw
u
w
u B3e3


w
u
w
k
wt

w
k
w

w
u
w
k

Before analysing each stanza-form, it must be recognized that both strophe and epode are very short. This brevity is alien to the eighteen majors of Pindar. Comparable is O5, whose brevity is one of the reasons why its authenticity is questioned. Each stanza-form consists of only three verses though they are repeated as many as seven times.

Excursus B: Bacchylides 3

205

The third verse is longer than the other two, both in the strophe and in the epode, especially in the former. It is like those of the Sapphic stanza or the Alcaic stanza (West’s ‘aaA’ pattern; their traditional four-line layout does not represent their structures).22 It is inappropriate to call the metre of the strophe as a whole aeolic; at least s1 is not aeolic, having no double short in it. For this reason s1 is similar to e2 and e3. Another similarity between the strophe and the epode is dactylic sequence. The Wrst half of e1 is identical with the Wrst eight positions of s2 and s3. This phrase is anceps þ D, and this D is the only D in the epode. The epode is usually analysed as normal D/e and the analysis is not wrong, but after this D all the rest is exclusively made up of e (and link anceps). I shall come back to this topic later. s1 is usually analysed as ‘iambic trimeter catalectic’ (ia þ ia þ ba), as if it were the same verse as in drama. Such an analysis in Pindaric metre should be rejected (see Part I, 5. A. 5). The ‘bacchiac’, whose last position is possibly triseme created by catalexis, is alien to Pindar. Admittedly, Bacchylides is not Pindar. It is, nevertheless, reasonable to think that the last position of the apparent bacchiac in s1 is not triseme but anceps. The reason is as follows. The ending of s1 is identical with that of s2: . . .
w

k. It is natural to take both Wnal positions to be of the same value. On the other hand, s2 is repeated in the Wrst half of s3. Here in s3 the position corresponding with the Wnal of s2 is realized as short, but its position is deWnitely anceps, for its ‘left’ short is really short and so is its ‘right’. Then, if the Wnal position of s2 is anceps, so is that of s1. The situation is similar to the Sapphic stanza:
w
x
ww
w

k
w
x
ww
w

k
w
x
ww
w
x
ww

k Here too the Wnal position of the Wrst verse and that of the second are most probably anceps, like the corresponding position in the third verse. Pindar once uses a seeming iambic trimeter catalectic. It is not found in the eighteen majors but in the four minors: 22

Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line?’

206

The Eighteen Majors

P7s1

w
wrwrw

k
e 4


But B3s1 is diVerent from P7s1, in that its Wfth position is not invariably short; it is therefore preferable to describe it as x e x e2
. It resembles rather P8s7 a
w
a
w
w
k x e x e2

With the additional Wnal anceps attached, B3s1 is one position longer than P8s7. In the next two verses, B3s2 and s3, the
w
ayw
of s1 is replaced by
ww
ww
. In other words, the two verses include socalled ‘expanded aeolic’. It has been argued that these ‘expanded aeolic’ phrases are, in fact, freer D/e (Part I, 7. 6). This is true in B3 too. Conventionally, I use the notation ibyc(ean) (¼ dodd) for
ww
ww
w
(dodd makes it easier to recognize the structure at a glance). Then the verses are analysed thus: B3s2 xibyc
k B3s3 xibyc w e x dod
k

The phrase
ww
ww
w
(ibyc ¼ dodd) and its shorter form
ww
w
(dod) are used as if they were variations of D. The relation of ibyc to dod is the same as that of D þ to D. Like D or D þ they are preceded and followed by link anceps. And e intervenes between them in s3 too. The strophe of B3 is, as a whole, freer D/e. As described above, the epode is totally made up of e except for the D at the beginning. In this sense, it is similar to O2. At the same time, there is a diVerence from freer D/e, which Maasian symbols clarify: e1 x D
e x ek
e
ek e2 e x e x e e x ek e3 e x e

Link anceps is regularly used except between the third e and the fourth in e3. This is certainly the usual manner of normal D/e. Conversely, link anceps is rare in freer D/e. But there is still a diVerence. The number of e in e2 (four) and e3 (Wve) is not typical even in normal D/e. Of all the verses in Pindar’s normal D/e odes (in total 321), only seven verses are made up of four e’s without D, and only one verse of Wve e’s without D (O12e7, 1r); see Part III,

Excursus B: Bacchylides 3

207

A. Incidentally, his maximum number of e’s without D is 6 (N10s6). Although link is often absent and this absence is a crucial diVerence, some of the verses of O2 includes as many e’s as B3: O2s3

w

wr
wy

w
tw
k
e e e
e e
e e e e O2s5

wr
w
rw
t w
k

208

The Eighteen Majors P Y T H I A N T WO

Four triads. Strophe/antistrophe Class III: Epode Class I (?Class III) (§1) P2s1 P2s2 (§2) P2s3 P2s4 [or

rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6 www
ww

u
ww
w


ww
w
k rdod gl tel

ww
ww
ww

w
k ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k


D þ e wwibyc tel (¼ teldtel) þ ^ D wibyc (see below)]

(§3) P2s5 P2s6 (§4) P2s7 P2s8



wrw
w
ww
k

wrw
w
ww
ww
k


e 2wd
e 2wD

www
ww
rw

w
k

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k

rdod e e tel e 2hag

P2e1a www
ww
w

w
ww
j P2e1b w

ww
w

w
ww
k P2e2 w

ww
w
www
ww
k P2e3 w

ww
w
www
ww

w
w
j P2e4 www
ww
w

w
k P2e5 a
w

a
ww
w

w
k P2e6 w

ww

w
j P2e7

w
ww
k P2e8 w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k

gl rdod gl rdod gl rdod gl rdod e 2 gl e xe gl e ^e d e hepta wil þ 2 hipp

s1H 9; s2 H 2, 82; B 10, 26, 34, 58, 74; s3 H 59, 75; s4 H 84, B 4, 12, 28, 76; s5 BH 61; s6 H 78; s7 BH 31; s8 B 40; e1b H 65b, B 89b; e2 B 66; e4 B 44; e5 B 93; e7 H 95; e8 H 24

For the analysis and the notation of s4 (wibyc þ ), see Part I, 7. 6 (‘expanded aeolic’), and also Appendix B. s1 s2

1 2

(1) (2)

s3 s4 s5 s6

3 4 5 6

(3) (4) (5) (6)

ªÆº
ºØ t #ıæ ŒÆØ, ÆŁı
ºı  @æ , IƒæH ¥

ø  ØÆæåÆæƒA ÆØØÆØ æç, hØ  A ºØ
ÆæA I
e ¨ÅƒA çæø º æåÆØ IªªºÆ ƒæÆæÆ KººåŁ , P æÆ ! " æø ƒ K fi v ŒæÆø źÆıªØ IŃ ˇæıªÆ ç Ø ,

Pythian Two

209


ÆÆ  æƒØ , v ƒ PŒ ¼æ ŒÆ IªÆÆEØ K ƒ åæd
،غƃı K Æ
ºı .

s7 s8

7 8

(7) (8)

e1a e1b e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8

17a 17b 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

(17) ƒæÆ Œº çÆæƒÆ · ¼ªØ b å æØ çºø
 Ø Id 惪ø O
ØÇÆ· (18) b  , t ˜ØØ
ÆE, ƒ ˘çıæÆ
æe ø (19) ¸Œæd
ÆæŁ I
Ø, ƒ
ºø ŒÆ ø ƒ K IÆå ø (20) Øa a ÆØ æÆŒE ƒ Içƺ · (21) ŁH  KçƃÆE " Æ çÆd ÆFƒÆ ÆæE (22) ºªØ ƒ K
æƒØ ÆæåfiH (23)
Æfi A ŒıºØ· (24) e PæªÆ IªÆÆE I؃ÆE K
Øåı ŁÆØ.

Like other odes dedicated to Sicilian tyrants and placed early in the collections, Pythian 2 is very long. Not only is the triad repeated as many as four times, but also both the strophe and the epode are long in themselves. The number of positions amounts to 124 in the strophe and 122 in the epode, making them respectively the third and the fourth longest among the eighteen majors. The style of the strophe is majestic, and unambiguously classiWed as Class III. There are many peculiarities in each verse (for the details, see below). The epode does not lack majesty either, but its structure is based on regular repetition of identical aeolic phrases, and feels diVerent from the strophe. The epode is located somewhere between Class III and Class I (aeolics). I classify it tentatively as Class I. But its similarity to the strophe is undeniable; see the section below. Frequent resolution makes RSS high, especially in the strophe: 58.3% (the second highest). In the epode it is 52.4%. This Wgure is not exceedingly high among all the stanza-forms, but deWnitely high for Class I. A number of verses of P2s and P2e8 (the Wnal of the epode) conspicuously resemble those in Paean 6; see Appendix B.

Strophe The strophe has the most magniWcent structure of all the non D/e stanza-forms. The only comparable one is the strophe of Olympian 1. It is remarkable that P2s and O1s share two impressive but rare types of verse. Both stanza-forms include (i) a verse composed solely of a long sequence in single-short movement (P2s1/O1s8), and (ii) a verse/verses including a long sequence in double-short movement

210

The Eighteen Majors

(P2s3, P2s4/O1s2). Moreover, (iii) a verse made up of multiple aeolic phrases (P2s2/O1s1) deserves notice. There is a strong tonal contrast by nature between (i) and (ii), and the contrast is more signiWcant in P2s than in O1s because (i) and (ii) occur nearer together. P2s starts with an extraordinarily long single-short movement (the longest of the eighteen majors), which is diversiWed by resolution. The six continuous short syllables at the opening are especially striking. The eVect is enhanced by a single word which occupies the very beginning of the odes (ªÆº
ºØ ). Resolutions, which give bright, dazzling eVects, are also to be found as well here and there in other verses: s2 and s7 start with tribrach; s5 and s6 (the latter is an enlarged version of the former) have resolution at the same position. As for (ii), two long dactylic sequences are incorporated in P2s: s3 (hØ  A ºØ
ÆæA I
e ¨ÅA) and s4 (º æåÆØ IªªºÆ). As in the Wve dactylic verses of O9e (see ad loc.), wordend between two shorts within these sequences is, in general, avoided. As a result the rhythm feels square. We may imagine that a kind of solemnity was given by this movement. The former is analysed as anceps þ D þ , which is used in O1s8 too, but fairly uncommon. The latter is analysed as ^ D þ (or a part of teld), a very unusual phrase (see on individual verses below, s7). A verse made up of three aeolic phrases (iii) is rare in the eighteen majors, and P2s2 is one out of only four examples (the Wrst verse of O1 is also aeolic, and this combination of two aeolic phrases is rare in Pindar: the priapean dicolon). The three phrases in P2s2 are designed to be diVerent from each other: no base (rdod)/full base (gl)/half base (tel); reversed dodrans (rdod)/straightforward dodrans (gl, tel). In O1s1 there remains a possibility that the pherecratean and the glyconic should be diVerently interpreted (see Part I, 7. 4), but in P2s2 the glyconic is unmistakably identiWed by the free responsion at the aeolic base (see below). A long single-short sequence followed by d is a characteristic of Class III stanzas. Here in P2 an additional technique is signiWcant: expansion of d (s5) into D (s6). Interestingly, a similar compression is applied to the transition from O1s6 to s7, but in reverse: O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5 w d e2 O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e

Pythian Two

211

In general, the structure of the strophe of P2 is more complicated than that of the strophe of O1, which is divided into four clearly discernible sections. P2s is divided into four as well, but the relation between each section is more subtle. Each section is made up of two verses. In §1 (s1–2) there are two motifs which will be developed later. The two verses are completely diVerent. s1 is e 6. It is as a whole symmetrical, although frequent resolutions occur in it. By contrast, s2 is made of three aeolic phrases whose essence is asymmetry. When we move to §2 (s3–4), we notice at once that the main feature is an important type of metre which is diVerent from both s1 and s2 and which has been absent up to now. This is double-short movement, and most of the second part is based on it. The two verses in §3 (s5– 6) resemble each other, to a greater degree than those in §2. s5 itself is a typical verse of the Class III stanza-forms in which single-short movement ends with a double short. s6 is almost the repetition of s5. But the diVerence between the two is signiWcant. By the expansion of the Wnal phrase (d ! D), s6 has a resemblance to the dactylics in §2 (s3–4). At the same time, the initial part of s5 and s6 has a similarity with s1: s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k w
ww
k s5

wrw


Thus various metres merge and develop. Then comes the Wnal section (s7–8). The two verses of §4 are basically a recapitulation of s2, as well as an enlargement. The initial phrase of s7 is identical with that of s2. This phrase appears at Wrst sight to be repeated once more in the same form, but, by changing a short into a long ( . . . ww
! . . .
w
), it turns into two e’s. The Wnal e is not new; it is a reminiscence of s3. Again, s8 starts with an aeolic phrase, which is identical with the third (¼ Wnal) phrase of s2, a telesillean. Then follows a single-short movement, which resembles s5 and s6, but without resolution. If it ended without prolongation beyond
ww
, the latter half of s8 would be identical to s5:

ww
w ‘

w
w
w
ww
’ w

k But the sequence has an appendage w

, so that the whole sequence shares a common feature with aeolic phrases. For example, a glyconic, the second phrase of s2, can be detected in it:

212

The Eighteen Majors



ww
w

w
w ‘
w
ww
w
’
k The appendage w

makes s8 end pendent. s8 is the only verse in the strophe that has pendent ending. Compare the last verse of the epode (e8). Interestingly, O1e7, the last verse of O1, ends with w

. Pindar may have intended a special eVect and reserved it to round oV a stanza. These aeolic phrases, hagesichorean (O2s8), hipponactean (O2e8), aristophanean (O1e7), all of which have w

at the end, are highly unusual.

Epode The epode is composed of aeolic phrases, and its composition is one of the most straightforward in all the Pindaric non D/e stanza-forms. The generative procedure from the preceding verse to the next is evident in each case. In short, the basic principle is repetition accompanied by a slight variation. The Wrst three verses (e1a, e1b, e2) are the same in structure (gl þ rdod). e3 starts in the same way, but is extended by suYxed e 2. The glyconic is repeated again at e4, but in this verse the reversed dodrans is dropped, and e 2 is shortened to e. Then the new combination, glyconic þ e, is repeated in the next verse, e5, but with preceding anceps þ e. The next verse, e6, is an abbreviated version of e5: the initial xe is shortened into ^ e, and the glyconic, into d. At the same time, the combination ^ e þ d is equal to three-quarters of the glyconic starting with w
, which is used repeatedly for three successive verses from e1b to e3. The Wnal e is the same as in e4 and e5. The next verse, e7, is composed only of a heptasyllable. This can be analysed as anceps þ reversed dodrans, which is repeated four times successively from e1a to e3 (for verseby-verse construction, see Part I, 8. A. 2). When the heptasyllable is prolonged both forwards and backwards, a decasyllabic aeolic phrase (wil þ 2) results. This is the Wrst half of the Wnal verse, e8. Its aeolic base w
has been much used already. The decasyllable incorporates a glyconic, and the glyconic is repeated once more in the latter half of the verse with one additional position (hipponactean), which makes the last verse the only pendent verse in the epode. One of the peculiarities of the aeolic base of this epode is frequent w
. It comes at the opening of Wve verses out of nine (including e6,

Pythian Two

213

where it is analysed as ^ e). The opposite form,
w, which is the commonest in the Pindaric odes, is never used. When w
is absent, a neutral base, www, is used (e1a, e4). wwwgl echoes wwwrdod in two verses of the strophe (s2, s7). At the same time, wwwrdod is used after a glyconic (e2, e3). The initials of glyconics and reversed dodrantes make a contrast: www cannot stand at opening of both of glyconic and reversed dodrans within the same verse. In other words, it is restricted to one or the other. The aeolic base of the glyconic in the middle of e5 is designated as
x. It is in fact
w;

is a licence for a proper noun (21 "Æ). There are two verses (e5, e7) which do not start with w
, but a true long is avoided at the beginning in these two, as in all the other verses. They start with anceps.

Textual problems 7 (s7). The paradosis A is unmetrical; v Hermann, ‘Notae’. 12 (s4). The paradosis ¥

Ø is unmetrical; ¥

Ø Heyne. 16 (s8).The paradosis gives åæıåÆÆ , which makes the verse

ww
w

w
x
w
ww
w

k tel e hepta þ 3 This analysis is not impossible (cf. O9e8, in which e precedes a heptasyllable whose half-base is x), and Liberman accepts the anceps. But a better and well-paralleled scheme is obtained by a slight change; so åæıåÆEÆ (Moschopulos). For the similarity of s8 to s5, see above, strophe. See also below on s8. 28 (s4). The paradosis K (and K
) is unmetrical; N Triclinius. 30 (s6). º, like åæıåÆEÆ above, is as one of the best emendations of Moschopoulos (for an evaluation of whom cf. Gu¨nther, Ein neuer metrischer Traktat). å is metrically impossible. 31 (s7).  at the verse-end is deleted by Hermann (‘Notae’). 41b (e1b). The paradosis IÆ produces resolution at the Wnal position of the glyconic. It is not impossible, but IÆ (Moschopoulos) is deWnitely preferable. 65 (e1a). The paradosis Iæ Ø is unmetrical; ¼æØ Hermann, ‘Notae’. Gentili’s Iæ Ø is impossible. Even if
w
ww
were analysed as ªª
ww
(cf. Part I, 5. A. 4), it would not respond with w

ww
. Full base is not free in Pindar. There is no example of responsion between
w and w
.

214

The Eighteen Majors

66 (e2): The paradosis
d
Æ ºª is one short syllable too short. Following Boeckh’s
d 
Æ ºª, Bergk proposed 
d
Æ ºª, based on scholia. 72 (e8). The paradosis ªØ  (most MSS; ªØ  B) is unmetrical; ªØ Triclinius. 76 (s4): Æ of ØƺØA is treated as long, as in the dactylic hexameter. Christ cites Theognis 324 Ø
ƺfiÅ. 79 (s7). The paradosis K ºØ is unmetrical; N ºØ Byz.,   ºØ Schroeder. 82 (s2): The paradosis gives unmetrical ¼ªÆ. Both Turyn and Snell adopt Heyne’s proposal ¼Æ. Boeckh’s Iªa (accusative of Iª ) is, according to Schneidewin, approved by Hermann, and adopted by Mommsen, Christ, et al. LSJ records it (‘3. curve, bending . . . hence . . . in the sense of crooked arts, deceit’). Bergk2 proposes ¼ªæÆ (i.e. rete), alii alia. Gentili, by deviating from the consensus on metre among modern scholarship, keeps ¼ªÆ. According to his colometry, a pherecratean which ends with a short syllable can be followed by a glyconic which starts with an iamb (
u
ww
w u

ww
w
)! 89 (e1). b  ÆsŁ is one syllable too long.  was deleted by Triclinius.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 8. C. 6 (e 6 and e 5). The verse consisting only of e 6 is unique; there are no other examples. Comparable is the single-short movement of O1s6, which is of the same length but ends in d. As stated above, the consecutive six short syllables in the initial positions of an ode are striking. However, if we search for parallels, not just at the beginning of an ode but at that of any verse, two other verses are found to start with several shorts: O1s8 (7 shorts), P5s4 (6 shorts); cf. Part III, D. In P2s1, there is another resolution near the verse-end. The ending of
wrw
k has parallels: N3s3 (analysable as e 2), N7s5 (analysable as a part of e 3). s2. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans); 8, A. 3 (i) (longer verse). This verse has characteristics of typical aeolic phrases: (i) multiple phrases; (ii) ‘dovetailing’; (iii) Xexibility of aeolic base. It is composed of three aeolic phrases, rdod þ gl þ tel, comprising in total 21 positions. Comparable is

Pythian Two

215

N2s4 www
ww
w



ww
w

u
ww

k gl gl ph

which is of 22 positions in length and has some structural similarities (note the tribrach opening). Word-end tends to be avoided at junctions both between the reversed dodrans and the glyconic (except for v. 26 , j ÆŒæe) and between the glyconic and the telesillean (avoided without exception). Instead, overlap by one position (‘dovetailing’) is a general tendency from the glyconic to the telesillean. Dovetailing happens at seven repetitions out of eight (the exception is v. 50 ŁÆºÆjÆE). Reversed dodrans starting with www at verse-beginning is common (5 examples in total). Thus in the other examples the resolved long of s2 is not in responsion with unresolved, and the initial anceps of the telesillean is regularly long. In contrast, the aeolic base of the glyconic retains Xexibility:

and
w are used equally (4 times each).23 This glyconic provides strong counterevidence against the hypothesis that the phrase
w
ww
w
in Class III can be diVerentiated from the glyconic as an aeolic phrase. s3. See Part I, 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse), 8. C. 8 (D þ e). The nearest parallel is: N6e3



ww
ww
ww

ww
j
D þd

The diVerence lies in the Wnal phrase. In our verse e is used instead of d. There are in total Wve examples of D þ , in four of which a long anceps precedes D þ as here. Phrase D, which is more frequently used than D þ , is combined with e without link anceps in freer D/e (N6e1) and more rarely in the normal D/e. Our verse is its prolonged variant and is not strange. Avoidance of word-end is strictly observed at the joint of D þ and e; see Part I, 8. C. 1. s4. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (b) (palindrome), 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). This verse is one of the six expanded aeolics discussed at length in Part I, 7. 6. The following colometry is adopted in the main body of Part I, the latter half of P2s4 being counted as one of examples of the telesillean whose half-base is ww:

23

Or 5 long /3 short, . . . -æA: åæc being scanned as


.

216

The Eighteen Majors

(1) ww
ww
ww
w
jww
ww
w
k teldtel (¼ wwibyc tel )

However, if the argument that ‘expanded aeolics’ are not aeolics but, in fact, a kind of freer D/e should be convincing, a diVerent colometry, which strictly follows Rule 5 (Part I, 3), would be admissible and possibly ought to be accepted: (2) ww
ww
ww
jw
ww
ww
w
k

^D

þ

wibyc

No strong tendency can be observed concerning word-boundary in the eight repetitions. Leaving analysis and appellations aside, the similarity to N3e4 is striking: N3e4 ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e or ^ D w ibyc e

The Wrst half is expanded by another ‘dactyl’ in our verse. Also similar is N6s3 www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j

rdod ribyc þ

Outside the eighteen majors, teld (or wwibyc) is used as a verse by itself: Pae4s1

ww
ww
ww
w
j

Short anceps between two d is paralleled: O1e5 ww
w
ww

w
w
k N3e1a
ww
w
ww
a
w

j

^ dwd e2

dwdxe


s5. See Part I, 8. C. 3 (enwd). This verse is a shorter form of those sequences of single-short movement that turn into d. The sequence in O1s7 is one position longer, and, although it does not turn into d, O13s4 is the nearest parallel at the same time: O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k

wrw
w
ww
k P2s5 O13s4

wrw
a
w
k

e 3 wd e
e 2 wd
e 2xe

s6. See Part I, 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse). 8. C. 3 (wd). The d in the preceding verse is expanded into D; one of the clearest cases of ‘internal expansion’ according to West’s classiWcation of the generative procedures (64–5). Our verse is unique in that D appears as the

Pythian Two

217

second unit after link anceps; there is no other example of this feature. s7. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans); 8. C. 5 (double e). The alternative analysis of this verse, glyconic þ long anceps þ e, should certainly be rejected. A glyconic whose last position is resolved is attested four times elsewhere, but in all these cases the glyconic is followed not by an anceps but by a true long. In fact there is no example of glyconic (or dodrans) followed by long anceps. Double e after an aeolic phrase is not paralleled either, but these two verses are related: P5s10
w

ww
rw

w
k e d e e ^D e e O10s1 ww
ww

w
tw
k

Note especially P5s10, in which the same position (the Wrst long of e after d) is resolved as our verse. s8. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (ii) (b) (longer verse); 8. C. 3 (e 2w half-base). A telesillean precedes the single-short movement. The nearest parallel is I8s3: I8s3
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
k wil e 2tel P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k tel e 2hag

Both P2s8 and I8s3 start with an aeolic phrase which is followed by e 2. They are almost identical in structure and the number of positions is the same. As we have seen above, without the appendage w

the latter part of P2s8 would be e 2wd. There are in total three verses in which an aeolic phrase is used instead of d after a long single-short movement (the third is I8s7). Hagesichorean is very rare in any context. There is no other example in the eighteen majors.24 e1a–3. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans); 8. A. 6 (a) (palindrome); 8. C. 6 (en as a substitute for e). There is no hiatus or brevis in longo after e1a and after e3, but the repeated structure guarantees the division. The sequence incorporated in these verses, dodrans þ reversed dodrans,
ww
w

w
ww
There will be another if P10s5 is analysed not as ^ e þ wil þ 3 but as ^ e þ e þ hag; see ad loc. 24

218

The Eighteen Majors

makes a type of palindrome. Bridge between glyconic and reversed dodrans is observed when reversed dodrans starts with
w (e1, e1b), but is not observed when it begins with www (e2, e3). Interestingly, there are no other examples in the eighteen majors of the combination of aeolic with þ 2 ending (like glyconic) and reversed dodrans. The e 2 at verse-end in e3 following an aeolic phrase is common (12 in total), including three examples of rdod þ e 2 (the others are N3e3, P10s4). Bridge between rdod and e 2 is not the rule, being observed at only two repetitions (43, 67). e4. Glyconic þ e is a very common phrase (10 in total). Though bridge between glyconic and e is a general tendency (see Part I, 8. B. 6), cut is admitted once at v. 68 (±ºe j

ÆØ). e5. See Part I, 5. C. 1 (proper noun involving aeolic full base of the shape
x). Anceps þ e (‘iambic metron’) often precedes glyconic and other aeolic cola starting with full base (9 examples in total; see Part I, 8. B. 5). There are two other verses with the identical structure: N3s4 w
w

w
ww
w

w
k xe gl e P5s3 w
wr
w
ww
w
rw
k xe gl e

The aeolic full base of the glyconic is mostly
w, as stated above. e6. See Part I, 5. A. 4 (analysis not as ªª
ww
but as ^ e þ d); 6. B (^ e þ d, ^ e þ D); 8. C. 8 (d þ e). There are two other verses (P5e5, P10s2b) of the identical structure: ^ e þ d þ e (and one of ^ e þ d þ e 3: O1e2). e7. A verse made up only of hepta is not rare; there are in total Wve examples. e8. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (a, e) (palindrome); 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). There are four examples of wil þ 2, of which two, P5s8 and P2e8, have w
as aeolic base, and it is possible to analyse them as ^ e þ gl (see below; in P5s8, wil þ 2 makes a verse by itself). In our verse, bridge is strictly observed between wil þ 2 and the following hipponactean without exception. Hipponactean is a rare phrase in Pindar: there are only two examples, including our verse (the other is N7s8). Both are located at the end of their stanzas. Alternatively our verse is analysable as w

w
ww
wil w

w
ww
w

k wil þ 3

Pythian Two

219

This analysis has its merit in its recognition of the repetitive structure. However, I reject it because (1) to cut at
ww
jw
is against the rules established in Part I, and, more importantly, (2) the analysis w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k

^e

gl gl x

becomes more meaningful once
w
ww
w
is recognized as a non-aeolic unit in some stanza-forms (see the Wnal section of Part I).

220

The Eighteen Majors P Y T H IA N F I V E

Four triads. Class II (strophe/antistrophe); Class III (epode) (§1) P5s1 P5s2 P5s3 (§2) P5s4 P5s5 P5s6 P5s7a (§3) P5s7b P5s8 (§4) P5s9 P5s10 P5s11 P5e1 P5e2

w
w

w
k w
wt
w
w
ww
k w
wr
w
ww
w
rw
k

we e we wil we gl e

wr rw
k
wy
ww
k w

w
k


k

^e



ww
w
k w

w
ww
w
k

tel wil þ 2 (? ^ e gl)

w
w

w

w
k
w

ww
rw

w
j w


w
w
w
k

we e e

w

wr
w
w
ww
k w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j

^e

e ed ^e e
sp

edee ^e
e 3

e wil gl (? ^ e dod) we rdod P5e3
w
ww
rw
ww
j rdod rdod we ph (? dod
) P5e4 w
w

w
ww

j ^e d e P5e5 w

ww
rw
j P5e6
ww
rw
ww

w
j d rdod e ^e e P5e7a w
tw
j we
P5e7b w tw

j P5e8
w

w
k ee P5e9 ta
ww
w

ww
w yw

w
k gl dwe e s1 H 74, 94; B 94; s2 H 44, 75; s3 H 34, 65; s4 H 97; B 77; s5 H 78; s6 B 37; s7 H 49, 80; B 7, 18, 38, 49, 80, 111; s7b H 69b; B 7b, 69b, 100b, 111b; s8 H 8, 70, 112; B 19, 81, 112; s9 H 20, 51; B9, 20, 51, 71, 102, 113; s10 ? H 72 see below; s11 B 42, 73, 84, 115; e1 H 54; e8 H 61, B 30; e9 H 62

s1 s2 s3 s4

1 2 3 4

(1) (2) (3) (4)

! ˇ
ºF PƒæıŁ , ‹Æ Ø Iæƒfi A ŒŒæÆ ŒÆŁÆæfi A æ Ø Iƒcæ
ı
ÆæÆ ÆPƒe I ªfiÅ
ºç؃º 
Æ.

Pythian Five s5 s6 s7a s7b s8 s9 s10 s11

5 6 7a 7b 8 9 10 11

221

t Łæ ƒ 挺Æ,   ƒØ ŒºıA ÆNH IŒÆæA ÆŁø ¼
 (8) f Pfi Æ ÆÆØ (9) ŒÆØ åæıƒÆæ ı ƒ ˚ æ : (10) PÆ ƒ n a å؃æØ Zƒæ   (11) ŒÆÆ؃ŁØ  ŒÆØæÆ Æ. (5) (6) (7)

e1 23 (23) 
ºƒºØ ¼ƒŁıæÆ· H  c ºÆŁø, e2 24 (24) ˚ıæ fi Æ ªºıŒf Içd ŒAƒ
 çÆæƒÆ IØ, e3 25 (25)
Æd b Łe ÆYƒØ $
æØŁ, e4 26 (26) çغE b ˚ æƒæø å Ææø· e5 27 (27) n P ƒ a ¯
ØƃŁ ¼ªø e6 28 (28) OłØı ƒ ŁıªÆæÆ — ÆæçÆØ ƒ ´ÆØA e7a 29a (29a) I烌 ı e7b 29b (29b) ŁØŒæø· e8 30 (30) Iºº Iæ؃Ł æÆ e9 31 (31) oÆØ ˚ÆƺÆ øƒŁd ªæÆ Iƒçƺ ÆEƒØ ŒÆØ ,

Pythian 5 celebrates the same victory as Pythian 4. In contrast with P4, however, which is a long D/e ode and by far the longest of the Pindaric epinikia, the metre of P5 lacks grandeur and, indeed, creates a light tone. The eVect is caused by (i) frequent ‘cretics’ (e) and avoidance of ‘dactyls’, (ii) frequent resolutions, (iii) short verses. Freer D/e is the basic metre of this ode. More correctly, e is dominant while d appears sporadically (in total only Wve: at s5, s10; e5, e6, e9). There are a considerable number of verses which are made up only of e and anceps (s1, s4, s6, s9, s11; e7a, e7b, e8). Indeed, there are several parallels for these verses in O2, which is made up almost completely of e. There is no dactylic sequence at all. Aeolic phrases are intermixed both in the strophe and in the epode: four phrases in four verses in the strophe (s2, s3, s7b, s8) and eight phrases in six verses in the epode (e1, e2, e3, e4, e6, e9). The occasional intrusion of aeolic phrases is not rare in the odes of Class II (freer D/e), and the strophe can be classiWed with certainty as belonging to Class II. But as for the epode, I am tempted to suggest Class III (amalgamated), because of the noticeable presence of the reversed dodrans (4 times) and its variant, pherecratean (see below). Nevertheless, the similarity of the two stanza-forms is undeniable.

222

The Eighteen Majors

There are some common features, for example, a heavy use of acephalous e (w
). RSS is 51.8% (the strophe) and 52.6% (the epode). ClassiWcation is not always self-evident. This epode is a borderline case. The aeolic base (full base) of three aeolic phrases (s8, e2, e5) located at the beginning of the verse is Wlled with w
. This is equal to ^ e, which frequently appears in this ode (5 times in total). The two are not always easy to distinguish. The ambiguity of w
sometimes makes the colometry uncertain. Compare these two verses, which both have 10 positions (the diVerence lies in the ‘central’ 3 positions, marked by [ ]): P5s8 w

[w
w]w
w
k wil þ 2 P5s11 w

[
w
]w
w
k ^ e
e w e

Thus it is not impossible to analyse the Wrst, s8, as ^ e and glyconic (Part I, 7. 4; for wil þ 2, see below). Another ambiguity is found in wilamowitziana starting with
w (Part I, 7. 3). That forming the latter half of P5e1 w

wr
w
w
ww
k

^e

e wil

can also be analysed as e þ short anceps þ d. This ambiguity is exploited in s2 in a sophisticated manner (see below). Moreover, resolution adds further ambiguity. For example, the sequence
ww
www
ww
which occurs twice in e3 and e6, can be analysed in two ways, depending on how www is treated. There is yet another diYculty. No clear indications of verse-end are found in eight successive verses from e2 to e8. Hiatus/brevis are totally absent. For the arguments for placing verse-end in these verses, see below on each verse. Verses are in general short, especially in the strophe (here, verseend is clearly guaranteed in most cases). Half of the 12 verses are made up of fewer than eight positions: s1 (7), s4 (5), s5 (7), s6 (5), s7a (3), s7b (7); cf. three verses in the epode: e7a (5), e7b (5), e8 (6). The average length is 8.8, the shortest of all the Pindaric odes. In the epode the verses are longer (11.6). Pindar generally prefers blunt ending to pendent (see Part I, 8. A. 4), but the preference is extreme in this ode. Except for e4 and e7b,

Pythian Five

223

all the verses end blunt; 14 with
w
(or rw
), Wve with
ww
(s7a is exceptional, see below).

Strophe The strophe is divided metrically into four sections. In §1 (s1–3) verses are gradually augmented. In spite of diVerent terminology, the Wrst seven positions of s2 are identical with s1, if we ignore the resolution at the fourth position that appears at only one of the repetitions (see below). The same sequence is repeated again in the next (s3), but wilamowitzianum in s2 is replaced by glyconic, the reversed phrase of the same length, and the verse is prolonged furtherly by suYx e. Both the wilamowitzianum and the glyconic start with
w and end with w
. The diVerence between them lies in the order of single and double short:
w
w
ww
k
w
ww
w
k §2 (s4–7a) consists of four very short verses. Despite the brevity, the rhythm of the Wrst (s4), is striking because of the six successive short syllables (cf. Part III, F). After a slightly longer verse (s5), the same phrase returns, but this time without any resolution (s6). The Wnal verse of this section, s7a, is again striking. It is made up of just three longs (for the separation of s7a from s7b, see below on the textual problem in v. 100). Aeolic phrases do not appear in §2 but return in §3 (s7b–8). First comes a telesillean (s7b). The next verse, s8, ends with the same six positions (
ww
w
), but they are preceded by w

w, instead of just
. So s8 starts in the same manner as s6, the key phrase of §2 (w

w
): s6 w

w
k

ww
w
k s7b s8 w

w
ww
w
k

s8 is, in a sense, a combination of s6 and s7b. The key phrase of §2 is augmented into we þ e in the Wrst verse of the last section (s9). This is the return of the initial verse of the

224

The Eighteen Majors

strophe (s1) with an additional e. e is dominant in the next verse (s10), but a double short, d, is introduced. Thus, the Wrst half of s10 (e þ d) is identical with s5. The last verse (s11) starts with ^ e again, but unlike the other examples a long anceps intervenes before a sequence in single-short movement (e 3 ¼ e w e).

Epode The epode contains here and there several phrases reminiscent of the strophe. At the same time, aeolic phrases, which are rare in the strophe, appear more frequently. In particular, reversed dodrans is repeatedly used and distinctive. Another diVerence between the epode and the strophe is verse length. Verses tend to be longer in the epode. Transition from one verse to another is gradual and smooth. The contrast between one verse and the next is not so strong as in the strophe, which are divided into 4 sections. It is not possible to divide the epode into sections in this way. e1 (^ e þ e þ wil) as a whole is very similar to s2, which, however, starts with we instead of ^ e þ e. ^ e þ e already appears in s4 and s6 (the key phrase of §2). The latter half of e1, wilamowitzianum, is the same as s2. The next verse, e2 (gl þ we þ rdod), again starts with w
. In e2 this phrase is the aeolic base, but is nevertheless identical with ^ e in the preceding verse. This glyconic is one of those that may be better analysed as ^ e þ dod. Note the twofold structure of e2: e2

w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j

The Wrst half ends with dodrans, the latter with reversed dodrans, which is incorporated in the wilamowitzianum of e1. For the neat relationship between the localization of words in e1 and that in e2, see individual verses, e2 below. Reversed dodrans has not been used in the strophe, but occurs at the end of e2 for the Wrst time and is repeated as many as twice in e3. The resolution of the initial position of the second dodrans makes a characteristically impressive palindromic phrase,
ww
www
ww
. This phrase is, in fact, reminiscent of
ww
www
which has already been incorporated in s10 (as d þ re), and also of
www
ww
, in s5 (as er þ d).

Pythian Five

225

In the next verse, e4, reversed dodrans is enlarged into the pherecratean (we þ ph). Preceding it, we is used in the same way in s2 (we þ wil) and s3 (we þ gl þ e). Pherecratean is, theoretically, aeolic full base þ catalectic form of dodrans, but this pherecratean in e4 should rather be analysed as rdod þ anceps (Part I, 7. 5). Note the similarity between the latter half of e2 and e4: e2 w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j w
w

w
ww

j e4

comes back again in e5. The sequence ^ e þ d þ e is contained in s10 (e þ d þ e þ e), and even the resolved position is the same in these two verses. At the same time, names apart, the phrase e5 is similar to e3 in structure:

^e

s10
w

ww
www

w
j e3
w
ww
www
ww
j w

ww
www
j e5

This similarity is carried over into the next verse: e6


ww
rw
ww

w
j

The characteristic movement of e3,
ww
www
ww
, returns again in e6. The next verse, e7a, is ^ e þ e, identical with s4 and s6 (and with the beginning of s8 and e1). e7b also is made up of just Wve positions (we
). Several verses start with this movement (s1, s2, s3, s8, e4). In e8, two e’s are juxtaposed. The combination e þ e is very frequent in the strophe (s1, s9, s10). The Wnal verse, e9, contains glyconic, the aeolic phrase used occasionally both in the strophe and in the epode. For the unusual responsion in base, see below.

Textual problems 2 (s2). Resolution of the fourth position is found, among eight repetitions, only at v. 2 (‹Æ Ø Iæfi A). Hermann (‘Emend. P.’, 145), with his usual keen sense, doubts the resolution and proposes Oæªfi A: a rational but radical solution. But it is in the Pindaric manner to use a diVerent form only once in corresponding repetitions (Allbut-One; see Part III, C). Thus we need not doubt the innocent word

226

The Eighteen Majors

Iæfi A, though I cannot be so conWdent that Iæfi A ŒÆŁÆæfi A is a keyphrase as some commentaries maintain. 5 (s5). E. Schmid corrects the unmetrical paradosis ŁØæ into Łæ . The position is resolved at all the repetitions except v. 36 (see ad loc. below). Even if consonantal treatment of  of ŁØæ , or omission of  (ŁØæ ), were posible (cf. Snell in apparatus; Liberman p. 258 n. 6), Łæ would be more probable. 12 (s1). The paradosis  Ø= Ø is unmetrical;  Ø Moschopoulos. 17 (s6). I must confess that I am unable to understand vv. 17–19 (åØ ıªªc OçŁÆºe . . . çæ). The diYculties arise, above all, from the Wrst three words both in the meaning and in the logical construction of the sentence(s). Christ seems to me to be the nearest to a solution: ‘immo OçŁÆºe est ipsius Arcesilai, qui vultu gravitatem et maiestatem regiae dignitatis prae se ferebat, quam innatam (ıªª ) et a maioribus acceptam habebat.’ However, his text is metrically untenable: åØ ıªª  = OçŁÆºe ÆNØÆ ªæÆ : according to modern scholarship,  should not be introduced at the verse-end by emendation. Verse-end is certainly attested by brevis at v. 37. Recently Liberman has taken OçŁÆºe as Arcesilaus. His solution is: åØ ıªª , = ZçŁÆº, = ÆNØÆ ªæÆ . . . Since there are good grounds for dividing s7 into two verses (see v. 100 below), ZçŁÆº as one independent verse can be accepted. Another direction of emendation and interpretation has been proposed by Hermann (‘Emend. P.’ 145–6), who changes åØ into K
, keeping, of course, ıªª : ‘te ius servantem magna sequitur felicitas, partim quod rex es magnarum urbium: nam gentile lumen est haec maxime venerabilis dignitas tuae sociata sapientiae; partim beatus es, quod vicisti nunc in ludis Pythiis.’ Lloyd-Jones, in Philanthropia kai Eusebeia: Festschrift fu¨r Albrecht Dihle (Go¨ttingen, 1993), 304 n. 5 ¼ The Further Academic Papers of Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones (Oxford, 2005), 113 n. 5, suggests that OçŁÆºe means ‘a source of light’. 18b (s7b). The paradosis ÆNØÆ is unmetrical; ÆNØÆ E. Schmid. Gentili keeps the paradosis and explains the apparent anceps as the last position of a syncopated trochaic (¼ palimbaccheus/molossus), followed by an iambic. However, his metrical explanation is hardly acceptable. The juxtaposition of two ancipitia is improbable; if anything, the positions of both would be regularized,

Pythian Five

227

either long or short. Above all, palimbaccheus and molossus, and their responsion, are admissible only in a purely trochaic context, which is totally alien to Pindar. 23 (s1). E. Schmid corrects the unmetrical word-order of the paradosis   into  c. 36 (s5). The paradosis ÆØ ºÆ is unmetrical; Æƺ (Pauw) is accepted by Hermann (‘Notae’) and Boeckh. Since resolution occurs regularly at all the other repetitions except for the preceding Œø (‘All-but-One’), Hermann introduces exact responsion (‘Emend. P.’): ‘certo aestimari posse arbitror, Pindarum ŒØÆ Æƺ ¼ªø scripsisse, ut åæØÆæA pro substantivo esset.’ Gentili keeps ÆØ ºÆ . According to his theory, or ‘nella dottrina metrica antica e nella prassi poetica’, responsion between cretic and trochaic (here in this case, epitrite of trochaic form) is possible. But responsion of
w

with
wr is outrageous. 42 (s11). Snell, following Schroeder (Pythien, 58), supposes that the initial  of æ
 is prolonged (‘¼ making a preceding short vowel to make position’), so that the Wnal  of the preceding ŒÆŁÆ is metrically long. The paradosis is also accepted by Fu¨hrer, who thoroughly examines the possible cases of irregular responsion afresh. The prosodical licence of lengthening the Wnal short syllable followed by a single consonant is applied to a few isolated cases in D/e; but in non-D/e, it is extremely rare. P11s1 (38) is perhaps the only case in the eighteen majors (see ad loc.).25 Our case is diVerent from that and the examples in D/e in three points: (i) The consonant which can ‘make a position’ is usually  (especially the combination of ), and ocasionally . There is no other case involving . (ii) There is a word-division between the vowel  and the nasal  in our case while word-end comes after  in most cases. This is a diVerence, though all the words in a verse are metrically continuous, so that ŒÆŁÆ
 . may be compared with ÆŒæa 
 ÞłÆØ (P1 25 Snell does not recognize brevis in longo but posits prosodic lengthening at the end of P11. 8. He thinks that the Wnal  of ı followed by a vowel (ZçæÆ) is given a syllable-closing pronunciation. But colometry is good enough even if verse-end is established there; see P11s3.

228

The Eighteen Majors

v. 45). Snell correctly classiWes these in the same sub-category in his ‘metrical conspectus’. But P5 v. 42 is still unique. All the other similar cases involve Þ. There are no other examples in which the nasal (, ) or  stands at the beginning of a word, and ŒÆŁÆ is not a ‘light’ word like a preposition. (iii) The metrical context is diVerent. Our case occurs neither (i) at the end of double-short movement (Fu¨hrer’s Class I (a), in which he posits prosodical lengthening) nor (ii) in the sequence
ww
taking the place of
w

(Fu¨hrer’s Class II, in which he posits metrical freedom). On the other hand there are some similarities. P5s11 is the Wnal verse of the strophe: Fu¨hrer observes that this type of freedom of responsion tends to occur there, and that the normal rhythm has already been repeated twice. If the metrical licence were accepted, it would mean that more Xexibility should be introduced in our case than others. Fu¨hrer himself admits: ‘Diese Annahme wu¨rde eine besondere, die Sprache gewaltsam in seinen Bann ziehende Festigkeit der Rhythmus gegen das Ende der Strophe hin inplizieren’. The older critics did not accept the licence but tried either to emend the text (e.g. Boeckh) or to explain the irregurality metrically (Hermann). The manuscripts are divided between two readings, ŒÆŁÆ and ŒÆŁÆ e. Boeckh proposes Œ ŁÆ, e æ
, çı. He paraphrases çı thus: ‘natum, quum lignum natura Wguram humani corporis haberet, nec nisi expolitum esset arte’ (Dissen, 1830, Comm. 231). Hermann, who, in general, does not hesitate to introduce emendationes metri causa, nevertheless accepts ŒÆŁÆ . in ‘Notae’ and tries to give metrical justiWcation to the responsion between short and long at this position: ‘nihil in ŒÆŁÆ de metro laborandum. Neque opus ut aut Œ ŁÆ ŁfiH quod in diss. de dial. P.p.6 conieci, aut Œ ŁÆ, e æ
, çı scribatur, quod edidit Boeckhius, commate per typothetae errorem, ut puto, post æ
 posito. Versus es asynartetus ex antispasto et iambico ischiorrhogico, quo genere saepe usi tragici.’ His metrical explanation is invalid. Later (‘Emend. P.’) he changes his mind and accepts e æ
 çı without the comma (‘Librorum scripturam, ŒÆŁÆ : ç., ego quidem non propter metri legem, sed propter diligentiam, qua in hoc metro syllabas

Pythian Five

229

aequavit Pindarus, repudiatam velim.’) Several emendations are proposed. Boeckh’s, adopted by Schneidewin and Christ, requires an unattested adjective çı , meaning either ÆPçı or ‘of the tree’: cf. Christ’s paraphrase: ‘arboream statuam ex uno trunco factam, non ex pluribus partibus compositam’. Thus Kayser writes: ‘et propter constructionem ‹
ŒÆŁÆ, e :ç. et propter insolitam ea notione adjectivi verbalis genus non accipio. ‘But his proposal Œ ŁÆ, F æ
ı çıF is not acceptable. Nor is Mommsen’s in his ed. maior (withdrawn in his ed. minor): ‘Œ ŁÆ, F æ
 çı, i.e. huius (ipsius saltus Parnassii) plantam singularem.’ Turyn adopts the emendation of Pauw (ŒÆŁÆ, e æ
 çı). But this is even less plausible. Contrary to his predecessors, Wilamowitz (GV 307) retains the paradosis just with an orthographical change (ŒÆŁÆ ıæ
 çı) but introduces a metrical licence instead: w

w

w
w
 w


w
w
w
. ‘Responsion ist streng; aber nach den Erfahrungen mit Bakchylides werden wir uns nicht entsetzen, wenn in den letzten [iambischen] Trimeter einmal das zweite Metron statt kretisch bakcheisch ist.’ What Wilamowitz means by Bacchylides is either 18. 7 (our ‘aeolicized’ e 3; cf P8s6) or 17 in which free responsion seems to occur between iambic and cretic and between iambic and bacchiac (the responsions are still controversial). But the responsion between cretic and bacchiac is, even in Bacchylides, unparalleled. Unless an overall emendation is adopted (like e æı 
, van Herwerden post Hartung, according to Gerber, Emendations; Hartung’s own proposal is ŒÆŁÆ º æı), it seems inevitable to adopt Boeckh’s (above). 49 (s7). See below, v. 100. 52 (e10). The paradosis IªÆŁH (most MSS)/IªÆıH (V) is unmetrical; Moschopoulos’ IªºÆH is a good emendation and is gen erally accepted. Mommsen proposes $ªÆŁø. 53 (e11). The paradosis
ÆæÆ is unmetrical;
ÆæøÆ Moschopoulos. 57 (e4). The paradosis ØØ is possible because the initial position of e4 is anceps. But the start of most verses is predominantly short. Exact responsion is easily recovered by ØØ (Moschopoulos).

230

The Eighteen Majors

58 (e5). The paradosis çFª is unmetrical; çª Moschopoulos. 69 (s7). See below, v. 100. 72 (s10). The MSS’ ªÆæ cannot be accepted. Both Snell and Turyn take ªÆæØ (Wilamowitz; ‘Apollo proclaims’), but ªÆæØ (Hermann (Opuscula VIII, 93–8), followed by Bergk2–4 (ªÆæ) and Christ, and recently by Race; ‘it is mine to proclaim’) seems to me to be better. Metrically both are good (ªÆæØ makes hiatus). Mommsen, following scholia, introduces ªÆæÆØ by uniting s10 with s11:
w

ww
rw

wtw


w
w
w
This is not impossible, but is inferior even metrically. 80 (s7). See below, v. 100. 100 (s7). Snell’s text is metrically untenable. He gives the following metrical scheme and analyses it as sp þ gl:

a

ww
w
k This interpretation is hard to accept. First, responsion between w
and

at the aeolic base is extremely rare; there is only one example (O10s6; see Part I, 5. C. 1). And an aeolic phrase with the base w
usually, perhaps always, comes at the beginning of the verse. Secondly, there is no other example of spondee preceding an aeolic phrase. Two metrical schemes are conceivable: (i) s7

w

ww
w
k
e dod
sp (ii) s7a


k tel s7b

ww
w
k

The metre of (i),
e dod, is common; there are two parallels: O10s2 and P8s4. It requires that the third position be short. This is short in four lines (vv. 7, 18, 38, 59), and in another three (vv. 49, 69, 80), some minor, orthographical emendations make it short; see below. Substantial change, however, is inevitable in v. 100. Even if ÞÆŁØA (gen. pl.) is rejected and ÞÆŁEÆ (acc. sg.) is adopted, the following Œø is impossible. The word must start with a vowel. Then, ÞÆŁEÆ (acc. sg.) oø would be a most plausible conjecture (see below). Alternatively, if (ii) is chosen, the third position does not need to be short. ÞÆŁØA (gen. pl.) is possible. So is Œø.

Pythian Five

231

I adopt (ii), following Hermann (‘Emend. P.’), and divide between s7a and s7b. Hermann is followed by Schneidewin, Bergk, Schroeder (ed. maior), Turyn, and Liberman; but the last two read ÞÆŁEÆ (acc. sg.). They all accept Œø. Boeckh combines s7a and s7b into one verse, keeping Œø. But his text is hard to accept. He introduces ª ºÆ  Iæa . . . ÞÆŁEÆ (nom. sg.) Œø with full-stop after $
e åÆØ. Mommsen revives the old emendation oø (and adopts ÞÆŁEÆ acc. sg.). Christ and Bowra follow him. oø (Beck according to Mommsen and Christ; but ed. Oxon. 1697 had already adopted it, according to Bowra and Gerber’s Emendations) would be a good conjecture: ‘songs can be poured, ŒHØ cannnot.’ (Barrett, Collected Papers, 191). However, the metaphor is not necessarily bold, and the genitive plural (ÞÆŁØA) follows Pindar’s tendency more than the accusative singular. For ªÆºÆ  IæÆ . . . ÞÆŁØÆ, ‘variis accentibus codd.; scholia utroque modo tum genitivos plur. tum accusativos sing. interpretantur’ (Turyn). Metrically, (ii) is certainly uncommon, but acceptable. s7a is anceps þ spondee. It ends with a short vowel (Barrett’s SVE) at two repetitions, but avoidance of SVE is not an absolute rule. The brevity of the verse composed of only three positions is not a diYculty: there are two other comparable verses (see Part I, 8. A. 3). Rather, the analysis has its own merit. As is explained above in the general introduction to this strophe, three longs provide a strong contrast to six shorts within the same block (s4). As Turyn points out, there is strong semantic pause at three of the repetitions (Hermann has already laid stress on this point). This argument is not decisive because of frequent discord between semantic and metrical pause. At vv. 49, 69, 80, some emendations are unavoidable whichever colometry may be chosen. DiVerences between Hermann (ii) and Boeckh–Mommsen (i) are more or less orthographical and are not decisive on their own: 49 ÆEÆ· =Æ œ · (codd. - œÆ or - œ) 69 ÆE· fiH ŒÆd =Æ œ· fiH ŒÆd (codd. Æ Ø· fiH ŒÆd)26 80 ˚ÆæE, =˚Ææ œ , (codd. ŒÆæE )

26 Bergk2–4 establishes the trisyllabic verse, s7a, like Hermann (ii), but introduces ÆfiB and ÆfiB.

232

The Eighteen Majors

At 100, Ł should be deleted. 118 (e3). The paradosis ºØ
e t ˚æÆØ is two positions too short. Both Turyn and Snell, following Christ or Bowra, adopt ºØ
e ›EÆ, ˚æÆØ (Hartung; who proposes ıåE at v. 120 too). Schroeder (Pythien, 51) writes: ‘nach Hartungs glu¨cklicher Deutung des u¨berlieferten t’. I am not sure of this emendation. ›EÆ has the following competitors: 
ØÆ (Hermann, ‘Notae’), Z
ØŁ (Boeckh), ›
EÆ (Mommsen), ºØ
e ›H ,  ŒÆæ ˚æÆØ (Bergk2), ºØ
e ›H ,  ŒÆæ ˚æÆØ (Bergk4). Liberman proposes ¼æØÆ in the apparatus.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 8. C. 5 (double e). It is one of Pindar’s favourite techniques to Wll the whole of the Wrst verse with a gnomic manifesto. Here ›
ºF PæıŁ makes up one verse. The combination of anceps þ e þ e is a common one, but it usually occupies the initial part of a longer sequence. Verses of two e’s’ length are rare. There is only one exact parallel, O10s5. s2. As observed above on the strophe, the Wrst seven positions are completely identical with the preceding verse (s1); after the seventh, ours is ampliWed by anceps þ d. Thus s2 may be analysed as we ewd. At the same time, however, the similarity of s2 with the following verse, s3, is not negligible. In s3, the wilamowitzianum of s2 is replaced by a glyconic (and expanded by e). The sequence
w
w
ww
is highly ambiguous between wilamowitzianum and e wd in this verse, where metrical context is not necessarily decisive (Part I, 7. 3). Compare our verse with these: P5e1 w

wr
w
w
ww
k P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k P6s4 ww

w
w
ww
k

^e

e wil wil þ 3 ^ d wil

^e

Bridge from e to wilamowitzianum is generally observed, except v. 33 (
ÆæŒø j Œ ); cf. Part I, 8. B. 5.. s3. The verse starts with the same phrase (we) as s2, but here the fourth position is resolved throughout all the instances. Both xe as preWx and e as suYx of glyconic are common (Part I, 8. B. 5). Bridge

Pythian Five

233

from gl to e is strictly observed in all eight repetitions while cut occurs between xe and gl at no fewer than four. Excluding the initial position, the verse is palindromic on a gigantic scale. Even resolutions are located symmetrically at either side. There is no exact parallel but one very similar verse: N3s4 w
w

w
ww
w

w
k we gl e

s4. See Part I, 6, C. 2 (er þ re); 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Two analyses are possible: (i) e2 (rwrw
) or (ii) ^ e þ e (wr rw
). Neither has parallels; see Part I, 6. C. I prefer (ii), because ^ e is frequently employed in the ode and because ^ e þ e is used again in s6. Six successive short syllables are impressive. See Part III, F. Wordend is almost regularly located at wwwwjww
j, except one: v. 35 (›
Æ åæØÆæA). Verbal assonance: 4
ºçغ  77
ºŁı, and 46 ÆŒ æØ  97 Æغ . s5. See Part I, 8. C. 9 (e þ d). There are Wve examples of e þ d at the verse-end, but it is usually part of a longer phrase. The nearest is O10e1 w
www
ww
j we d

Contrary to the resolution at s2 (once in 8 repetitions), here resolution occurs almost regularly at all the repetitions but one at v. 36 (Œø); see textual problems. s6. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). ^ e þ e is a very common phrase (10 examples in total), but there is no verse which is solely made up of it excepting the two verses of this ode (s4 is the other). s7a. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). There are two possibilities for the analysis of the three longs. I prefer anceps þ spondee to its reversed (spondee þ anceps), because anceps at the beginning of a verse is more frequent than that at the verse-end. s7b. There are in total four verses made up of only one telesillean (the others are I7e3, O9s1, O10e6). s8. There are in total four examples of wil þ 2 (of which N3s7 is the most certain case; the other two are P2e8 and P8s5). P2e8 starts with the identical form of our verse: P2e8 w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k wil þ 2 hipp

234

The Eighteen Majors

s9. See Part I, 8. C. 5 (triple e). The triple e combined continuously without link has many parallels. Besides seven verses in O2, there are two others, O1s9, I8s8. The exact parallel, xe þ e þ e at the beginning of a verse, is found three times in O2, at s3, s5, e1. Resolution is frequent in these parallels while in our verse none of the three e is ever resolved. Word-end between two e’s is generally avoided, except at v. 9 (åæıÆæ ı j ˚ æ : ). s10. See Part I, 8. C. 5 (double e), 8. C. 8 (d þ e), 8. C. 9 (e þ d). Although d and e are combined with each other rather freely, there is no exact parallel to e þ d þ e þ e. The resolved e, rw
, located after d (or D) is common (7 examples in total). As in s9, word-end between two e’s at verse-end is generally avoided, except at 72 (e  Ke j ªÆæØ). s11. See Part I, 8. C. 6 (e 3). In the ‘lyric iambic’ in tragedy, this verse would be easily identiWed as bacchiac þ lecythion. But in Pindar the initial w

is rare; N6s1, which is made up only of w

, is the sole parallel. Certainly w

is not bacchiac (¼ syncopated iambic). I take the third syllable to be long anceps. Word-end after w

occurs only at 22 (ÆØ), 53 (IŁ ƺø), and in a looser sense, 115 (
çÆÆ Ł ). e 3 (‘lecythion’) is a common phrase. But it is not preceded by anceps, let alone by ‘bacchiac’. The sequence w


w is not diYcult to use at the middle of verse in D/e, the third position being long link anceps; but for whatever reason it is extremely rare in the eighteen majors. Besides our verse, there is only one example: O13s3 (included in the phrase we 2
e). e1. See Part I, 8. B. 8 (^ e þ e þ aeolic). The sequence of ^ e þ er (w

wr) is employed in O2s6/7 and also O10s4. The following wilamowitzianum includes reversed dodrans, which will be repeated in the following verses. But it is analysable as ewd too. As in the latter half of s2, ambiguity remains. e2. See Part I, 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ we). This verse is one of the four examples in which w
w
(we) functions as a prolongation of the ending of the preceding glyconic and the like ( . . . w
). As is described above under the epode, e2 is in a sense an ampliWed version of e1. The start and the ending of the two verses are composed of an identical sequence of longs and shorts. The similarity is strengthened by localization of the words or word-groups of the same shape. The clearest case is found in the fourth epode:

Pythian Five

235

116 ‹ÆØ  Nd 117 ºÆŒ.

K
Øåøæø ŒÆºH Ø, Ł  ƒ e F 
æçÆæø ºE ÆØ,

116 w

wj 117 w

wj

r
w
j w
w
jw
wj

j

w
jww
j w
jww
j

Hiatus/brevis does not occur at the end of the verse in any repetition. But it is reasonable to assume verse-end because sentences are round oV there in all the four repetitions, and because otherwise the length of the verse would be extreme. Bridge is strictly observed at the two borders between e and dod/ rdod (i.e. between ^ e and dod, and between we and rdod). e3. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans); 8. A. 6 (g) (palindrome). The latter half of the preceding verse, reversed dodrans, is repeated twice. A longer series, of Wve rdod, is found in I8s5a–b; but whereas the Wrst position of all Wve is of the same form, the second rdod in our verse is resolved. Resolution of the initial position of rdod is common itself: there are in total nine examples (Part I, 5. E. 2), of which four, including our verse, have the resolved rdod in question in the middle of verse (the others stand at the beginning of the verse). Interestingly, they are found in P2e and P5e only, and their structural similarities seem suggestive: P2e2 w

ww
w
www
ww
k gl rdod P2e3 w

ww
w
www
ww

w
w
j gl rdod e2 P5e3
w
ww
www
ww
j rdod rdod
ww
www
ww

w
j d rdod e P5e6

In the two examples of P2, the preceding phrase is not (
w)
ww
but ‘obverse’ dodrans:
ww
w
. But they are based on the same construction. Because (
w)
ww
stands before www
ww
, a long palindromic movement is created. This movement is found only in N6s3 and the two P5e verses. e4. Manifest indications of verse-end are lacking at the end of the pherecratean. Then, if e4 is combined with the following verse, e5, the pherecratean changes into rdod which is repeatedly used in the preceding verses and e5 becomes identical with s10, but for the Wnal e: w
w

w
ww

w

ww
rw
j we rdod e d e

236

The Eighteen Majors

This colometry is not bad in itself, but a strong sense-break at two repetitions, v. 26 and v. 88, suggest that the separation of e5 from e4 would be better. Pherecratean is not a common phrase in Pindar, nor there is any other example in this ode, although a verse of identical composition with ours is used in O13s2 (in this verse too, the pherecratean is peculiar). The illustration above in Epode show how the pherecratean in our verse may be analysed as reversed dodrans þ long anceps. e5. See Part I, 5. A. 4 (analysis not as ªª
ww
but as ^ e þ d); 6. B ^ ( e þ d, ^ e þ D); 8, C, (8) (d þ e). Acephalous e standing before d is not rare. There are two verses identical with ours, P2e6 and P10s2b. Moreover, O1e2 (^ e þ d þ e 3) and O10e2, I8s9 (^ e þ D) can be paralleled. e6. See Part I, 5. E. 2 (resolution of reversed dodrans), 8. A. 6 (g) (palindrome), d þ aeolic: 8. B. 4. e7a–b. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (short anceps preceding resoloved long); 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). These two verses are combined into one in most editions. The result is analysed as w
tw
wtw

j

^e

e 3


This analysis is not impossible, but there is no parallel in the eighteen majors for e 3 preceded by ^ e. Instead, the divided verses are paralleled, and moreover are susceptible to an organic explanation (see above). Note that e7a, ^ e þ e, is identical with s6 (and s4). e7b is we
, which is an independent verse in O10e1b (x
wr
k) too. Outside the eighteen majors there is a good parallel for the division: P7s7 wr
w
k P7s8 u rw

k

^e

e

xe


P7s7 þ s8 is the same as P5e7a þ e7b, and at the same time the verseend of P7s7 is guaranteed by brevis (v. 7). There are two resolutions, each in one repetition: v. 29 IçŒ (Hermann’s regularization (‘Emend. P.’), IçEŒÆØ, is not only unnecessary but untenable) and v. 91
Ø Æ. e8. See Part I, 8, A, (3) (shorter verse), 8. C. 5 (double e). There is a parallel (O2s4) for the verse made up of only two e’s. e9. See Part I, 6, C, 3 (short anceps preceding resolved long), 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d); 8. C. 5 (double e), 8. C. 7 (dwe). This is the sole example

Pythian Five

237

of irregular responsion at the full base between wwwoÆØ (31) 
wZçÆæÆ (62) and håÆ (124) 

Œıæøa (93). Not only the responsion between

 www, which is manifestly irregular, but also that between
w  www, which seems less irregular, are in fact, unparalleled. Mommsen proposed an emendation: $ªæfi A for oÆØ. Pindar does not admit irregular responsion in typically aeolic stanza-forms (Class I), where only responsion between the identical forms and


w are found. Perhaps because O5e (and O5s too) is not a Class I stanza-form, Pindar may have been able to introduce this irregularity. It is suggestive that another irregular responsion is found not in a Class I stanza-form but in a Class II: O10s6 a

ww
w
k

gl

238

The Eighteen Majors PYTHIAN SIX

Six strophes (monostrophic). Class I P6s1/2 P6s3 P6s4 P6s5 P6s6 P6s7/8 P6s9

w
w
www
ww
w

jw
w
ww
k www
ww
wt
w
k ww

w
w
ww
k
ww
w

w
w
ww
j www
ww
w

wr
k w
w

j

w
ww

k w

w
w
u
w
k

we gl wil gl e ^ d wil dod wil gl e
we wil þ 1 ^ e e2xe

s1/2 H 46/7; s3 B 30, 39; s4 H 40; s6 H 6; s7/8 H 7/8; s9 B 27

s1/2 1/2 (1/2) ŒÆ · q ƒªaæ ºØŒ
Ø çÆæƒÆ ¼æıæÆ j %Ææø s3 3 (3) IÆ
ºÇ, Oçƺe KƒæØÆæı s4 4 (4) åŁe K ƒ Ø
æØåØ· s5 5 (5) —ıŁØØŒ Ł ƒOºØØ ¯ ÆØ s6 6 (6)
Æfi Æ  Œæ ªÆØ ŒÆd ƒa ˛Œæ Ø s7/8 7/8 (7/8) E oƒø ŁÅÆıæe K
ºıåæfiø s9 9 (9) 
ºƒºøfi Æ ƒåØÆØ 
fi Æ·

As is usual with monostrophic odes, the structure of Pythian 6 is simple and clear. The basic metre is aeolic. Glyconics and wilamowitziana return, and some additional minor phrases produce slight modiWcations. The simplicity of the ode is enhanced by repetition of identical forms. Aeolic base in all three glyconics takes tribrach form. And three wilamowitziana are of the standard type
w
w
ww
. As the line-numbers indicate, Boeckh divides two verses, s1/2 and s7/8, into two. Turyn follows him. But Snell does not divide them. He is probably right in the former case, and arguably right in the latter (see below). Two phrases are fused into one verse while word-end is regularly placed one position after the colon-end (dovetailing; see Part I, 8. B. 2). Though the ode is simple as a whole, it includes some rare phrases: ^ d (s4), e
at the end of a verse (s6), and wil þ 1 (s7/8). And the last verse (s9) is irregular in this context, in that it is not aeolic; double short movement is totally absent. RSS is rather high (53.6%), the highest of the Class I stanzas.

Pythian Six

239

Textual problems 4 (s4). The paradosis Æe is unmetrical. Many, including Snell and Turyn, adopt  œ (see Hermann, ‘Merkwu¨rdige Art von Logik’, in Opuscula, vi. 286–9), but the phrase Zçƺ . . . K  œ arouses suspicion in a series of critics from Dissen to Liberman. If K Æe is an intruding gloss as Mommsen suspects, there are many possibilities as to the word which was expelled; cf. Liberman, 273–4. 18 (s8). The paradosis I
ƪªººØ is unmetrical; I
ƪªºE Byz. 21 (s3). The paradosis   is unmetrical;  E. Schmid. 28 (s1). The paradosis Kª is not impossible, but ª (Triclinius) is easy to accept. 31 (s4). The paradosis IÆ is unmetrical; IÆÆØ (Boeckh; IÆÆ Triclinius). 32 (s5). The paradosis æ is unmetrical; ˝æØ Byz. 46 (s1). The paradosis IªÆºÆÆ Ø –
ÆÆ is too long; either Ø or –
ÆÆ must be deleted. Bergk2 deletes Ø; he is followed by Christ and later editors. Before Bergk, critics used to follow Byz. and delete ¼
ÆÆ. This is grammatically easier, but is less probable for the same reason. 48 (s3). lÆ destroys exact responsion. This is not a problem in general (‘All-but-One’); responsion between resolved and unresolved long at the end of glyconic occurs at I8s5c (resolved at three repetitions out of seven; cited below). However, introducing a tribrach like all the other repetitions has a special merit in our case. If lÆ were replaced, the metre might not be gl þ e but rdod þ e 2;27 cf. P5e3
w
ww
rw
ww
j rdod rdod P2s7 www
ww
rw

w
k rdod e e

Kayser was the Wrst explicitly to reject lÆ on the basis of metrical classiWcation (JL 106): ‘Aber einen so tribrachisch ausgehenden Glykoneus hat erst Euripides sich erlaubt, Pindars fester Bau kann sich mit solchen, gleichsam in der Luft schwebenden Formen nicht vertragen.’. 27

N7e3 N7e4

The rhythm is ambiguous in N7e3 and e4:


w
ww
wr
w
k gl e (? rdod e2) www
ww
wr
w
k gl e (? rdod e2)

see ad. loc.

240

The Eighteen Majors

Hermann, ‘Emend. P.’ supposes –
ÆÆ (46, above) to be redundant and writes: ‘videtur id ex adscripta vera lectione ÆP Æ ortum esse’. Citing P2. 28 ÆP Æ $
æ çÆ, he proposes ÆP Æ in the place of lÆ. Kayser. Lectiones, 56 makes a comment on it: ‘nimirum ÆP Æ quidem $
æ çÆ dici potuit, h ¼ØŒ hŁ $
æ
º non potuit, quia nec injustitia nec superbia caret unquam.’ His proposal is 
Æ. But what poses a problem for ÆP Æ is not the two adjectives but, as Schneidewin remarks, the verb æ
Ø. Kayser answers Schneidewin (JL 107): ‘Aber das Particip [¼ æ
ø] geho¨rt zuna¨chst zu
ºF und das vorgeschlagene Substantiv [¼ 
Æ] ist nur Apposition dazu.’ Mommsen modiWes Hermann’s proposal in a diVerent manner: $
æ çÆ IŒa (in apparatus). For the single h, see Hummel, Syntax §389. Hartung construes diVerently: ¼ØŒ hŁ $
æ
º goes with
ºF (without a comma after ¼ªØ), and the object of æ
ø becomes çÆ. Then he recovers the exact responsion by introducing IªÆfiH, which go with fiø. 50 (s5). The paradosis OæªÆE
ÆØ n ƒ

Æ , is metrically wrong, and needs a verb in the relative clause. ‘Locus antiquitus corruptus . . . sed etiamnunc credo OæªÆE
ÆØ esse parepigraphen adscriptam ad v. 51  ºÆ IØ fiø’ (Bergk4). Following Christ’s Oæªfi A n ƒ

ØA Kø, Bowra introduces ¼æåØ n ƒ

ØA Kø, the most natural emendation, which is accepted by Snell. Turyn adopts a palaeographically less radical ›æfi A n ƒ

Æ  (Rauchenstein). Wilamowitz’s þ
ÆÆ n requires responsion between www and
w at the aeolic base. That is improbable in Pindar. 51 (s6). The paradosis
ææåÆØ does not make sense, nor is it metrical;
æåÆØ E. Schmid.

Individual verses s1/2. See Part I, 8, A. 3 (ii) (a) (longer verse), 8. B. 1 (two aeolics in contact). There are many examples (9 in total) of an ‘iambic metron’ (anceps þ e) preceding an aeolic phrase starting with full aeolic base. In these the base is mostly
w or
x. On the other hand, when the aeolic base is occupied by a tribrach as in our verse, it usually stands at the beginning of verse (13 examples) and is not preceded by any phrase. Besides our verse there is none in which a tribrach follows e (there is one example of tribrach in mid-verse: N7e5, where two

Pythian Six

241

aeolic verses, both of which start with tribrach, are repeated). Bridge is observed in our verse at the junction of xe and glyconic at all six repetitions; cf. Part I, 8. B. 5. There are two other examples of a glyconic followed by a wilamowitzianum within a verse (I8s4, N6s2). And later in this ode (s5), a dodrans (¼ glyconic without base) is combined with a wilamowitzianum. Between the glyconics and the wilamowitziana, word-end is strictly avoided; cf. Part I, 8. B. 1. s3. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase). Glyconic suYxed by e is Pindar’s favourite (10 examples), but in this verse there is a small diVerence from the majority: resolution at the eighth position of the glyconic. The resolution occurs regularly at almost every repetition. The only exception is v. 48 (lÆ); see above on textual problems. Bridge between glyconic and e is observed at all the repetitions but one (v. 12 jK ıå ). Perhaps it is most interesting that word-division is found to be coincident before the sixth (4 out of 6 repetitions), after the seventh position (4 out of 6) of the glyconic, or in both places, while it is avoided between the sixth and seventh: www
ww :
w : t
w
k Verbal assonance: 3 ð-eÞ KæØÆæı  30 KÆææ. s4. See Part I, 6. B (acephaly). There are four examples of acephalous d, but this case is unique in that an aeolic phrase follows it. Even examples of full (not acephalous) d preceding an aeolic phrase are scarce: only P8s5
ww

x
w
ww
w
k d wil þ 2

can be cited for a parallel in a broader sense. There is one verse where acephalous e, instead of d, precedes wil þ 3: P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wil þ 3

s5. Verse-end is not manifested by hiatus/brevis, but the overall structure may probably guarantee it. No exact parallel for dod þ wil is found elsewhere, but there are three examples of gl þ wil (one of them occurs in this ode, see s1/2 above). As in these cases, bridge is observed here in s5 too. Verbal assonance: 32 ¥

 –æ K
Æ  50 ƒ

ØA Kø.

242

The Eighteen Majors

s6. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (eww þ anceps at verse-end), 8. B. 4 (d þ aeolic), 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ e x). The glyconic is followed by
www
This phrase must be either e þ anceps (
wr
) or anceps þ e (
rw
). The former analysis is preferable, because long anceps is never followed by resolved long in the eighteen majors: see Part I, 6. C. ii. Besides, there is no example of gl
e (
w
ww
w


w
). By contrast, gl e
is found, and the example supports the former interpretation: I8s5c
x
ww
wt
w

k gl e


Nevertheless, e þ anceps is signiWcantly scarce after any type of aeolic phrase. The examples are limited to I8s5c and our verse, contrary to plenty of examples of
w
following glyconic and its kindred. Word-end never falls between gl and e. At four repetitions (vv. 6, 33, 42, 51) word-end occurs at www
ww
w

jwr
and at the other two (vv. 15, 24) at www
ww
w

wjr
Interestingly the short syllable before the word-end in both these lines is . Moreover, an identical tendency for word-localization is found in I8s5c too; see ad loc. Parallels for resolution at the penultimate position of a verse end are collected and discussed in: Part I, Appendix, Addendum II. s7/8. It is not easy to decide whether two verses in Boeckh’s edition should be fused into one, because the phrases created by either colometry are not supported by parallels. But one combined verse (i) with dovetailing would be preferable to two separate verses (ii): (i) With fusion, a rare verse, wil þ 1, appears. This enneasyllabic phrase is itself unique. Moreover, there is no other example of wilamowitzianum and the like (wil þ 2, wil þ 3) starting with the aeolic base of two long syllables. On the other hand, the structure of the verse is well explained. A verse starting we and followed by an aeolic phrase has been used in this ode, s1/2. (ii) w
w

j

w
ww

k

Pythian Six

243

With separation, a short phrase, xe x, must be recognized as an independent verse. This is possible (cf. O10e1b u
wr
k x e x), but this type of short verse is rare in the aeolic context (Class I). And the ensuing octosyllabic aeolic phrase, whatever name is given to it, is never used in the eighteen majors and very rare outside the Pindaric corpus too. s9. See 6, B (^ e þ e 2), 6, D (bridge after long anceps). Uniquely in this ode, this verse is not aeolic. In dramatic poetry it would be analysed as iambic: bacchiac þ two iambics. But consistency with other Pindaric examples suggests the analysis as acephalous e þ e 2 þ link anceps þ e. The nearest parallel is O1s10 w

w
w
rw
k

^e

e 2e

Similar too are: P11e5 w
w
w

rw
k we 2
e O13s3 w
wrw


w
k we 2
e O13s4

wrw
a
w
k
e 2 x e

The fact that double short is, exceptionally, absent from the Wnal verse in a stanza form which otherwise would be made up totally of aeolic phrases can be paralleled by P8s7 u
w
u
w
w
k x e x e2

though P8 is triadic. The anceps between e 2 and e is realized as long at three repetitions (or 4, if the Wrst syllable of 27

æø is counted long) and short at three.

244

The Eighteen Majors P YT H I A N E I G H T

Five triads. Class I www
ww
w
k
w
wwrw
k

w
ww
k w
w

ww
w
k
ww

a
w
ww
w
k a
w
ww

u
w
w
k a
w
a
w
w
k P8e1 w
w
ww
w

w
w
k P8e2 u
w
ww

a
ww

k P8e3/4
a
ww
w

j

ww

k

ww

ww
w
jw
j P8e5 w

ww
w

w
ww
w
k P8e6

u
u
ww
w
w

k P8e7

P8s1 P8s2 P8s3 P8s4 P8s5 P8s6 P8s7

gl gl hepta we dod d wil þ 2 hepta e3(aeol) xexe2 hepta þ 2 e2 hepta ph gl ph
d dwe gl gl sp hepta þ 2 þ 3

s1 H 29; s2 H 44, 51; s3 H 52, 94; s4 H 46, 88; B 53, 74; s5 B 33; s6 H 97; B 27, 69; s7 H 56, 91; B 98; e1 B 57, 99; e2 H 79; B 16, 58; e3/4 B 38/9; e5 HB none; e6 B 20; e7 H 21, 42

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

e1 e2 e3/4 e5 e6 e7

15 16 17/18 19 20 21

(15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20)

str. 2 22–8 ¼ (21)–(27) str. 3 43–9 ¼ (41)–(47) str. 4 64–70 ¼ (61)–(67) str. 5 85–91 ¼ (81)–(87)

/غçæ ! ˙ıåÆ, ˜ŒÆ t ªØ
ºØ ŁªÆæ, ıºA  ŒÆd
ºø åØÆ ŒºÆƒ~ Æ $
æ Æ —ıŁØ؃Œ Øa æØØ Œı. f ªaæ e ƺŁÆŒe æƒÆØ  ŒÆd
ÆŁE ›H K
ÆÆØ ƒ ŒÆØæfiH f IÆæŒE· Æ b ŒÆd ª ºÆıå ƒçƺ K åæfiø. (ıçg ˚ºØ ŒÆªƒŒæÆ h Ø ¼ºı, Pb a Æغf ˆØª ƒø· AŁ b ŒæÆıfiH Ø  
ºƒºø · n PƒE fiø ˛ æŒØ Œ ˚æƒæÆŁ KçÆø ıƒe ƒ
fi Æ —ÆæÆØ ˜øæØE  Œfiø. ant. 2 29–35 ¼ (28)–(34) ep. 2 ant. 3 50–6 ¼ (48)–(54) ep. 3 ant. 4 71–7 ¼ (68)–(74) ep. 4 ant. 5 92–8 ¼ (88)–(94) ep. 5

36–42 ¼ (35)–(40) 57–63 ¼ (55)–(60) 78–84 ¼ (75)–(80) 99–105 ¼ (95)–(100)

Pythian Eight

245

The basic metre of Pythian 8 is aeolic. Overall, it is homogeneous. It starts with three short verses which all consist of a single, unambiguously aeolic phrase. They are very simple, like some others. Moreover, even the intermingled combinations are simple, and familiar in Anacreon or dramatic poetry, like gl þ ph (e3/4) and gl þ gl (e6). The ode is classiWed as Class I without doubt. However, on closer inspection, the apparent simplicity proves deceptive. The ode as a whole is not so simple. The lengths of the aeolic phrase in this ode are diverse. Each of the Wrst three phrases (¼ verses) is of normal length, seven or eight positions. But after them comes a phrase of 10 positions (s5) and another of 9 positions (e1). Furthermore, there is one of 12 positions (e7), though the colometry of the verse is not certain. As for shorter ones, there is a six-position phrase (s4). Some would like to include among the aeolics

ww
in e5, which counts Wve positions. Moreover, it is not impossible to take
ww
at s5 as the minimum length for an aeolic phrase. But I reject these classiWcations. Rather,

ww
and
ww
should be classiWed as d-phrases. Like d-phrases, e-phrases are also used; w
w
as a preWx (s4), and
w
w
as a suYx (e1). There is one phrase which I classify as ‘freer’ D/e:
ww
w
w
(e5), but which could also be included in aeolic (Part I, 5. A. 5). In contrast, double short is absent from s7, and the verse cannot possibly be aeolic. At s7 and e1, the paradosis includes some ancipitia that cannot easily be analysed either as link or as aeolic base: s7 u
w
u
‘‘a’’
w
k e1 w
w
ww
‘‘a’’

‘‘a’’
w
k

The irregular long occurs at one repetition out of ten or Wve each. Dale (Collected Papers, 71) accepts long syllables at all these positions, and calls the result ‘drag’. But this is a confusing extension of the term ‘drag’, which should be limited to the exceptional prolongation of the penultimate position of glyconic and other blunt aeolic cola (which, mostly, occur in tragedy). In fact, in the above verses the licences are prosodic, not metrical. At e1, ØÆFÆ (v. 57 ¼ 55 Sn.) should undeniably be scanned as w
w. Similarly, the initial syllable of ˚ ı (v. 49 ¼ 47 Sn., w
) and the middle syllable of Nåø

246

The Eighteen Majors

(v. 36 ¼ 35 Sn.,
w
) scan short; cf. West, GM 12, 17.28 If these scansions are adopted, the positions shown as (‘‘a’’) prove to be short in all repetitions. There still remain two cases which seem to be purely metrical irregularities: s6 u
w
ww

u
w
w
k hepta e 3(aeolicized) e7

u
u
ww
w
w

k sp hepta þ 2 þ 3

The analyses given are tentative; see ad locc. below. RSS is very low in the epode (42.4%, the second lowest of all the non-D/e stanza-forms). In the strophe, RSS is neither high nor low (52.1%), but the average number of positions is distinctively small (10.1 pos.).

Strophe There are seven verses in the strophe. All are short: even the longest has no more than 14 positions. Although the metre is not straightforwardly aeolic, each verse is closely related to those preceding and following it. s2 is identical with s1: both are glyconics. At the same time s2 can be taken as a wilamowitzianum, supposing a diVerent combination of two shorts to be a resolved long (
w
wrww
k). When the initial syllable of the wilamowitzianum is removed, it turns into a heptasyllable: s3. In s4 the reversed dodrans included in the heptasyllable is changed into the ‘obverse’ one, and the half base of s3 (
) is augmented into w
w
. The dodrans appears to be repeated again at the beginning of s5, but its last two positions are cut oV (
ww
w
!
ww
). Then a new, longer phrase starts within the same verse. This phrase is a decasyllable and starts like a wilamowitzianum but is carried on further and includes a dodrans at the end. The next verse, s6, starts with a heptasyllable (i.e. half base þ reversed dodrans). Interestingly, s6 contains a sequence of positions incorp28 West comments that shortening is not found with ; ª, ‘[e]xcept in late poetry where the prosody is otherwise faulty. [ . . . ] ˚ ı is a doubtful example’ (GM 17). If this prosodical licence is too great, we should admit an irregular phrase which is similar to e 2 but its second position may be anceps: ‘aeolicized’ e 2 (
x
w
) like e 3. See futher below (s7).

Pythian Eight

247

orated in s5 in the same manner, and both s5 and s6 have the same number of positions (14). Their relation becomes clear when they are arranged thus: s5
ww

a
w
ww
w
k
w
k s6 a
w
ww

u
w

The latter half of s6 (
x
w
w
) is a curious phrase which I tentatively call ‘aeolicized e3’ (see below). This phrase anticipates the following verse, s7. If one omits the choriamb, s7 can be seen as, in a sense, a curtailed version of s6: s6 a
w
ww

u
w
w
k
a
w
w
k s7 a
w

There is no pendent ending in the strophe. All seven verses have blunt ending.

Epode There are six verses in the epode. Half have pendent ending, which is totally absent from the strophe. Another diVerence from the strophe lies in the length of the verses: all those in the epode are long, none less than 13 positions. As in the strophe, a close structural relationship is observable between successive pairs of adjacent verses. e1 starts with an unfamiliar phrase (hepta þ 2), but the verse as a whole has clear aYnities with s6: s6 w
w
ww

u
w
w
k e1 w
w
ww
w

w
w
k

The diVerence between e1 and s6 is so slight that one would be tempted to take the latter half of e1 (w

w
w
) as an independent phrase equal to the ‘aeolicized e 3’. But it is not wise to set phrase boundary at
jw
against the General Rules (especially, Rule 4a, Part I, 3). Besides the similarity with s6, e1 is also similar to s7. The phrase e 2 (
w
w
) repeats the close of the preceding verse: s7. The next verse, e2, starts with a real heptasyllable, like s6, but it is followed by a pherecratean. In other words, inversion of long and short occurs twice from e1 to e2:

248

The Eighteen Majors

e1 w
w
ww
w

w
w
k e2 u
w
ww

a
ww

k

The next verse, e3/4, consists of two phrases and has almost the identical structure with e2. A pherecratean is used again as the latter half, while a glyconic is substituted for the heptasyllable. From e3/4 to e5, we can observe a greater evolution. Snell introduces so-called ‘choriambic expansion’ as an explanation: e3/4
a
ww
w



ww

k e5

ww

ww
w
w
j

He gives e5 the notation ^ glcw
; I give it
d dwe. A diVerent colometry is just worth considering. Consistent wordend makes it possible to move the Wnal w
of e5 to the beginning of e6: [e5]

ww

ww
w
j [e6] w
w

ww
w

w
ww
w
k


d dod we dod gl

The Wrst half of [e6] is then identicalwith s4. However, the division I have chosen (that of Snell and others) is more compatible with the sense, keeping together PE fiø (19)ºª çæØ (40)KºıŁæfiø ºfiø (103). The Wnal verse, e7, is hard to analyse, in that it includes the sequence x
x, which is very rare in Pindar. A glyconic (a key phrase in this ode) can be distinguished, and the whole verse is certainly a prolonged aeolic phrase of some kind. Barrett’s deWnition of aeolic (Hippolytos, 422) would suit it, although his scheme is not always appropriate for describing aeolic cola.

Textual problems 4 (s4). ŒºÆ~ Æ is rightly scanned by Moschopoulos. 16 (e2). ŒÆªŒæÆ is restored by E. Schmid. 21 (¼20 Sn.; e7). The paradosis
ÆæÆfi Æ is unmetrical; —ÆæÆØ Boeckh. 33 (¼32 Sn.; s5). Schroeder regularizes the aorist of ŒÇø and emends ŒfiÅ into ŒfiÅ. Metrically, this is unnecessary. The position is the kind of anceps in which a short and a long freely correspond.

Pythian Eight

249

45 (¼ 43 Sn.; s3). The paradosis z  r
 is unmetrical; z r
 Triclinius. 62 (¼ 59 Sn.; e6). The paradosis $
ÆÆ introduces resolution of the choriambic nucleus. It is extremely rare; $
Æ E. Schmid. Also unmetrical is ªÆÆ ; ªA is Triclinius’ correction. 80 (¼ 77 Sn.; e3). The paradosis ¼ºº  ¼ºº is unmetrical; ¼ºº ¼ºº Byz. 82 (¼ 78 Sn.; e5). The paradosis ŒÆÆÆØ K cannot be right. Byz. deletes K, and scholia reads ŒÆÆÆØ in the sense of ŒÆÆ ÆØ
ØE. Some critics (including Mommsen, Schroeder, and Snell) follow it, but this reading is hardly convincing. There is no parallel of ŒÆÆÆØ ¼ ŒÆÆØ ÇØ. Bergk2 was the Wrst to punctuate at the end of the preceding verse (åØæH·). A new sentence starts with an imperative addressed to Aristomenes, ŒÆ ÆØ . The subject is changed from Æø by asyndeton: ‘ne nimis concupiscas in certamen descendere, multas iam partas habes victorias’. Thus he retains K but expels a superXuous syllable from the paradosis ŒÆÆÆØ. Christ and Turyn follow him. Liberman follows Bergk4: $
åØæH: æfiø ŒÆÆÆØ· fKg ª æØ . . . ; ŒÆÆÆØ as imperatival. 84 (¼ 80 Sn., e7). The paradosis ŒÆØØ is unmetrical; ŒÆØ Byz. 91 (¼ 87 Sn., s7). The paradosis ÆœªØ is unmetrical; ƪØ Boeckh. 100 (¼ 96 Sn.; e2). The paradosis ¼Łæø
Ø is certainly inferior to ¼Łæø
 not only stylistically but also metrically; correption in non-dactylic movement is unusual.

Individual verses s1. A glyconic with tribrach opening is common (12 examples). Also common is a glyconic which stands for a verse (8 examples). These two features are shared by N4s7 too. Verbal assonance: 8 f  ›
Æ  64 f  , + ¯ŒÆÆðºÞ; 50 › b ŒÆg  92 › b ŒÆº. s2. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase). There is one parallel for the glyconic with a resolved sixth position: P11s2b
w
wwrw

w
k

gl e

250

The Eighteen Majors

Word-end regularly falls either before or after the third short of the successive Wve shorts; thus
w
wwjrw
k (5 repetitions) or
w
wwwjww
k (the other 5 repetitions). Verbal assonance: 2 t ªØ
ºØ ¼ 23 ± ØŒÆØ
ºØ ; 9 ŒÆæfi Æ Œ Kº fi Å  86 ø Ø ŒÆŒa çæø; 65 ØÆø  86 ŒÆŒa çæø. s3. A verse made up of a single heptasyllable is not rare; there are three other examples: P2e7, P11s2, N4s2. s4. The initial anceps is always short. There is a parallel for anceps þ e preceding a dodrans: O10s2 u
w

ww
w
k x e dod

though its anceps is long at seven repetitions out of 10. Bridge is quite strictly observed between the e and the dodrans: word-end does not occur at that point except in v. 95 (¼v. 91 Sn.) $

æØ j. Verbal assonance: 4 åØÆ  25 ŁØªEÆ. s5. See Part I, 8, B. 4 (d þ aeolic). This verse is one of the two cases where the unfamiliar decasyllable, wil þ 2, is most certainly used (the other is N3s7; and there are two other examples). The anceps is realized both as long (4 repetitions) and short (6 repetitions). Such a free responsion is typical of the ‘full base’ used in aeolic phrases of the Class I stanza-forms. Seven verses start with d, but an aeolic phrase following the d is not common. There is another example: P5e6
ww
www
ww

w
j

d dod e

but a diVerent colometry is possible: dod d e. As in s4 bridge is observed: between d and wil þ 2 word-end is avoided except in v. 47 (¼v. 45 Sn.) KŒ
Ææø j
ÆØd. Dovetailing is frequent (8 repetitions), even followed by strong sentence pause at four repetitions: 12 oÆæØ K ¼ºfiø,  26 (¼ v. 25 Sn.) Æ I
IæåA .  54 (¼52 Sn.) IÆ
æ Ø.  75 (¼ 72 Sn.) ¼çŁ ÆNø.29 29

The exceptions are:

47 KŒ
Ææø
ÆØjd ºBÆ: ŁÆÆØ Æç 68 þ
ÆÆ , YŒØ jb
æŁ ±æ
ƺÆ Ø This is one of the two reasons why Hermann (‘Emend. P.’) suspects 47 (‘turpissimum vero est vitium in tertia stropha’; but 68 does not seem to be ‘ugly’ all the same, since

Pythian Eight

251

s6. Juxtaposition of two true longa Wrmly indicates the phrase boundary illustrated in the chart above. There is always bridge between the two phrases, which indeed are even fused by dovetailing: word-end occurs after the initial position of the second phrase at seven repetitions, at six of which the second position is realized as long. Thus the phrasing

w
w
at verse-end is very frequent: 13 Œæ b çºÆ, 27 (¼ 26 Sn.) ŁæłÆØÆ ŒÆd ŁÆE , 48 (¼ 46 Sn.) ºŒA K
I
 , 55 (¼ 53 Sn.) ıƒF, åfi Æ ŁH, 69 (¼ 66 Sn.) $ÆE K
ªÆª , 76 (¼ 73 Sn.) c f ÆŒæfiH
ø. At 34 (¼ 33 Sn.), the syllable after the cut is short: Æ ŒÆºH. Interestingly, the same phraseology is observable in the other three repetitions, where dovetailing does not occur, being cancelled by enclitics: 6  ŒÆd
ÆŁE ›H , 90 (¼ 86 Sn.)  KåŁæH I
æØ, 97 (¼ 93 Sn.) b ŒÆd
Ø åÆÆ. This is suggestive. The enigmatic phrase
x
w
w
should be explained not only from the metrical but also from the phraseological, or even grammatical, point of view. It may be said that Pindar sought the following colometry until some stage of the creation: a
w
ww

k octosyllable (¼hepta þ 1) u
w
w
k x e2 The Wrst phrase is a prolonged heptasyllable; its half-base is realized freely, as long in four repetitions and short in six. The second phrase is puzzling. Its second position is beyond doubt anceps: long in seven repetitions and short in three.

he, like Boeckh, always admits word-division before ). The other reason is the inconsistency of the anceps. It is realized as long (four repetitions) and short (Wve repetitions), and undecided (68). But in three of the Wve repetitions at which the anceps is short, the value can be changed orthographically; ŒfiÅ (33),  (54), and ˛ÆæŒ (75) become ŒfiÅ; F (Byz.), and ˛ÆæŒ (Byz.) respectively. At 47 the anceps might be lengthened too (
ÆØ), but that would worsen the worddivision. Hermann supposes that the verse should be regularized at all the repetitions:


ww

j

w
ww
w
k This is his emendation of 47: KŒ
Ææø;
ÆE; j d ºBÆ. But  is not emphatic; it should not stand at the beginning of the verse. At 96, where the short is not easily changed to long, Hermann proposes æÅæÆ for æØÆ. His colometry is certainly invalid.

252

The Eighteen Majors

There are a few examples of the phrase
x
w
w
outside the Pindaric corpus. Bacchylides uses it once as if it were a variation of glyconic (18. 7), and the second colon of the eupolidean dicolon (Aristoph. Nub. 518–62) is of the same form, whatever its origin may be: ªª
x
ww
ªª
w
w
Perhaps this is a kind of experimental phrase made either from a lecythion with modiWcation of the Wrst two positions to make an aeolic base or from a wilamowitzianum with the change of
ww
into
w
;30 but in Pindar’s case a third explanation is possible. e2 of this ode is similar to s6, but instead of the ‘aeolicized e 3’, a heptasyllable is followed by a pherecratean with the base
x. The pherecratean is made up of seven positions; if the penultimate and the antepenultimate are exchanged, the ‘aeolicized e 3’ appears:
x
ww


x
w
w
There is another example in which Pindar may exploit the similarity of lecythion and pherecratean: O1s3–5, but there the initial two positions are always
w. s7. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps), 8. C. 6 (e 2). There is no double short in this verse. This type of verse may be used at the end of stanza-forms made up of otherwise totally aeolic phrases. The last verse of P6 (^ e þ e 2 x e) is comparable. There is no other example of x e x e2, but the reversed combination x e2 x e is used three times: O13s3, O13s4, P11e5. Both ancipitia are freely realized, each being long in four repetitions and short in six. When the second anceps is long, word-end is totally avoided after it; this avoidance is characteristic of Pindar (cf. Part III, B). At the end, the phrasing formation

w
w
is repeated as in the preceding verse, though less frequently: 7 ŒÆØæfiH f IÆæŒE, 28 (¼ 27 Sn.) læøÆ K  åÆØ , 56 (¼ 54 Sn.) ºÆfiH f IƺÆE, 98 (¼ 94 Sn.) ªfi Æ Ø. I introduce irregular scansion (˚ ı w
) into the latter half of v. 49 (¼ 47 Sn.) to regularize the metre:

‘‘w’’
w
(
e2). The position marked by ‘‘w’’ is short at all the other nine repetitions. This 30

See Itsumi, ‘Choriambic Demeter’.

Pythian Eight

253

position would be anceps, if metrical licence were preferable to prosodical one. There is a parallel to the phrase
x
w
outside the eighteen majors: Pae2s2

u
a
w
j x e 2(aeol )

Here long is attested at one repetition out of the three which are established: —ØA 
ÆE (2). Note that irregularity is caused by a proper noun, like ˚ ı. For the interpretation of ‘aeolicized’ e 2, see ad loc.31 e1. The enneasyllabic aeolic, hepta þ 2, is well established here. As in s5, which includes the decasyllable wil þ 2, phrase boundary is indicated unambiguously by two adjacent longa. Including our verse, there are three examples of hepta þ 2. Of the other two (N4s1, P11s5), P11s5 is exactly identical: P11s5 x
w
ww
w

w
w
k

hepta þ 2 e 2

As for e 2, there are in total nine examples following an aeolic phrase with þ 2 ending. Bridge is observed between the two phrases in four repetitions; 36 (¼ 35 Sn.) NåÆø j Ææƺç is the sole exception. I scan Nåø irregularly as
w
(see above). The normal scansion would create drag in the penultimate position of a blunt aeolic phrase. Then the licences would be metrical, not prosodic. Verbal assonance: 15 Æ  78 (75 Sn.) . e2. Pherecratean is not a very popular phrase in the Pindaric corpus, and it is not surprising that there is no other example of the combination with a heptasyllable. Bridge over phrase boundary is observed at all the repetitions. The initial anceps of the heptasyllable is long in three repetitions and short in two (including ˇºı
fi Æ at v. 37 ¼ v. 36 Sn.; if it is changed into ˇPºı
fi Æ, short appears only at v. 79 ¼ v. 76 Sn. a  PŒ). The aeolic base of pherecratean is

(2 repetitions) and
w (3 repetitions).

31

Some editors accept
x
w
at P10s6 (long at vv.30 and 60); see ad loc.

254

The Eighteen Majors

e3/4. Word-end is totally avoided at the end of the glyconic; instead there is dovetailing in all repetitions. In the strictly aeolic stanza-forms (Class I) fusion of two phrases is preferred to separation, and the colometry is better explained in the wider context, as is described above. e5. See Part I, 8 C. 2 (double d); 8. C. 7 (dwe). Verse-end is not manifestly indicated by hiatus/brevis. For a diVerent colometry, see above on the epode. e6. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (a) (palindrome). The combination of two glyconics, which is very frequent in dramatic poetry, is surprisingly rare in the eighteen majors. Furthermore, contrary to usual practice in dramatic aeolics, where aeolic bases in two successive phrases are not reversible, the Wrst is w
and the second
w. This reversing is comparable with the combination of w
gl þ
wph at O1s1. This anomaly would be avoided if the alternative colometry were adopted. Word-end occurs at the phrase boundary at three repetitions. Interestingly, a monosyllabic word construed semantically with its neighbour is used before or after the boundary at all three: 41 (¼ 40 Sn.) ˇœŒÆº j
ÆE , 62 (¼ 59 Sn.) ªA j Oçƺe, 104 (¼ 99 Sn.) ŒØÇ j ˜. e7. There are a number of verses in which a prolonged sequence of alternating long and short is prolonged leftwards of the choriamb; see Part I, 8. C. 3. But P8e7 is unique in that anceps, not short, takes turns with long. SpeciWcally, two verses, 63 and 105 (¼ 60, 100 Sn.), are of the shape

w
w
ww
w
w

k and the other three, 21, 42, 84 (¼ 20, 40, 80 Sn.) are

j

j

ww
w
w

k Note the regular coincidence of word-ends: 21 ıƒe j
fi Æ j,42 ıƒf j ¨ ÆØ j,84 ŒÆØ j æØÆE j.32

32 PfeijVer’s notation, which follows Sicking, is misleading. Not all the Wrst Wve positions are ancipitia.

Pythian Eight

255

There is no other example of the sequence . . .

x
x
. . . . Two ancipitia cannot be a part of e or its cognates. Aeolic base, whether it be full or half, preceding a reversed dodrans is the only possible explanation. Thus, although it is artiWcial, I analyse this as a spondee þ a long aeolic phrase, hepta þ 2 þ 3. An enneasyllabic phrase, hepta þ 2, has been used in e1. In e7, this phrase is prolonged further by w

. See Part I, 5. A. 5; For rdod starting with
x, see 5. E. 1.33 33 Both Hermann (‘Emend. P.’) and Bergk4 try to regularize the metre, but in diVerent directions. Hermann changes two short ancipitia at vv. 63 and 105 into longs and produces two spondees, while Bergk supposes the third position to be short and changes long into short at three repetitions (vv. 21, 42, 84):

Hermann Bergk







ww
w
w



w
u
ww
w
w



Bergk’s scheme is better. It is common one and easy to analyse:
e tel þ 3. However, his emendations are improbable; v.21 with scansion of
Æ as w
, v.42 ¨ ÆØ ıƒf with scansion of ıƒf as w
, v.84 ØŒfi A ; æd v , (v ¼ ø ). Hermann regularizes not only the two positions but the word-division at the beginning of all the repetitions: 63 105

 Ø , j åæÅH j  Iç –łÆ ıªªØØ åÆØ . —źE j  KŁºfiH, j ŒÆd f (ºÆHØ   åغºE.

These are implausible.

256

The Eighteen Majors PYTHIAN TEN

Four triads. Strophe/antistrophe Class III; epode Class I (? Class III). P10s1 P10s2a P10s2b P10s3 P10s4 P10s5 P10s6


a
ww

k w
a
ww
j w

ww

w
k w
ww
ww
u
ww

k w

jww
a
ww

w
ww

w
w
k w

w
w
ww
w

k ww
ww
w
a
w
w
k

ph hepta ^e d e wD x d
^ e d x d rdod e2 ^ e wil þ 3 tel x e2

P10e1 P10e2 P10e3 P10e4 P10e5 P10e6

a
ww

a
ww
w
k
ww

k u
w
ww

ww

jw
k u
w
ww

w
k u
w
ww
w

k a
w
a
ww
w

w
k

x d gl

adon (¼ d
) hepta d e hepta e hepta þ 3 x e tel e

s1 B 43; s2b B 2; s3 H 21, 27, 45; B 9; s4 H 4, 10; s5 H 41, B 5, 59; s6 B 6, 12, 42; e1 H 49; e2 B 68; e3 BH 69; e4 B 34; e5 B 17; e6 B 54

s1 s2a s2b s3 s4

1 2a 2b 3 4

(1) (2) (3) (4)

s5 s6

5 6

(5) (6)

ˇºÆ ¸ÆŒÆø,  ŒÆØæÆ ¨ƺÆ.
Ææe ƒ IçæÆØ ƒ K   ÆغØ. IæØ åı ª ! ˙ ƒæÆŒº   Œƒ
ø
Ææa ŒÆ؃æ; Iºº  —ıƒŁ  ŒÆd e —ºØƒÆE I
Ø ºƒÆ 
ÆE , ! "

Œºfi Æ Łº IªÆªE K
ØŒøÆ ƒ IæH Œºıa Z
Æ.

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6

13 14 15 16 17 18

(13) (14) (15) (16) (17) (18)

ˇºı
؃ŒÆ d K
ºÆŒØ @æ ‹
ƺØ · ŁÅŒ ŒÆd ÆŁıºƒø $
e ˚æƒæÆ
æA Iªg ŒæÆÅ
Æ ƒ /ÆæØŒÆ. 
Ø EæÆ ŒÆd $æÆØØ K ±æÆØ ƒ Iª æÆ
ºF IƒŁE çØ·

Pythian 10 is the earliest epinikion in Pindar’s career. But this does not mean that its metre is simple. Metre does not develop from simple to complex along with Pindar’s age. Perhaps the young Pindar was keen to employ his polymetrical technique colourfully, but, if so, his intention was not carried out. Its realization is rather crude. The harmony which maturity would bring to him had not yet been achieved.

Pythian Ten

257

The colometry of this ode is not diYcult in itself. Phrase-boundary is unambiguously settled in most verses with the help of juxtaposed longs or of anceps sandwiched between two longs. But the interpretation of the ode, especially in the strophe, is not easy. What makes the interpretation particularly diYcult is the variety of diVerent metres. A variety of phrases, some of which are hardly ever used outside P10 in the eighteen majors, are mixed together in one stanza-form, as if in a ragbag. Compare P10 with simple but sophisticated structure of, for example, N3 or N7 (Class III). The structural relation of the phrases in P10 to each other is not evident, especially if we keep the paradosis at v. 38. Separating s2 into two as above does something to clarify the way in which the verses develop throughout the stanza (see below). I place the strophe in Class III. Some of the characteristics of the later Class III stanza-forms are already recognizable. There is a long verse (s4) in which the similarity of an aeolic hexasyllable (
w
ww
) to e 2 (
w
w
) is exploited. Acephalous e (w
) is used rather as if it were the full base of aeolic phrases (s2b, s4, s5). Link anceps is used between phrases (s3, s4, s6). But it is undeniable that the two metres, i.e. aeolic and freer D/e, are not well amalgamated. At one extreme, there are aeolic phrases in which the ancipitia are not completely regularized so that they retain a strong aeolic Xavour (s1 and s2). Moreover, after an interval a long aeolic phrase returns (s5). It is preceded by ^ e, and the combination is totally unparalleled. At the other, there is a dactylic verse, whose construction is more suitable to normal D/e odes (s3). As for the epode, I tentatively propose Class I, because the heptasyllable is repeated in verse after verse (e3–5) in a cluster and because RSS is comparatively low: 45.5% (in the strophe, 50.0%). Other aeolic phrases too are found here and there, and the base of the glyconic is not regularized. But the epode is undeniably similar to the strophe. This ode has one peculiarity common to the strophe and the epode: resolutions are completely absent.

Strophe Although at s2a þ 2b the paradosis gives one continuous long verse with no break in the middle, I prefer to divide it into two verses, s2a

258

The Eighteen Majors

and s2b, by adopting a slight emendation at v. 38, Hartung’s çæØ · ±
Æfi A for çæØØ·
Æfi A (MSS) so as to clarify the whole structure better. This produces word-end at the same point throughout all the repetitions (for the unmetrical paradosis in v. 15, see below, textual problems). Sentences break clearly between s2a and s2b at vv. 2 and 44. With the verse-division as I give it, the strophe begins with a pair of similar, but contrasting verses. Both are aeolic phrases of seven positions, but the Wnal position of the Wrst verse becomes, as it were, the Wrst position of the second: s1
a
ww

k ph hepta s2a w
a
ww
j

The relation of the two verses would be closer if the Wnal position of this pherecratean were not triseme derived from catalexis but anceps. See Part I, 7. 6. This verse-division is particularly eVective in the Wrst stanza, where metrical similarity and contrast coincide with semantic similarity and contrast: ˇºÆ ¸ÆŒÆø and  ŒÆØæÆ ¨ƺÆ; cf. vv. 7, 19, 37, 61 too. From s2a to s5 all the verses start with w
, though analysis diVers according to the context of each verse. The initial short at s2b, s4, and s5 is real short while it must be short anceps at s2a and s3. But the similarity is fully exploited: transitional change is ingenious. s2a s2b s3 s4 s5

w x
a
ww
w

ww
. . . w x
ww
ww
. . . w

ww
. . . w

w
. . .

The second anceps in s2a is dropped from s2b and d emerges as not merely part of an aeolic phrase. This d is expanded into D in the next verse (s3). But there is no general similarity in these two verses as a whole. The next verse (s4) shares the characteristics of the preceding two verses. It starts in the same manner as s2b, and at the same time it has a common sequence with s3 in the middle: s3 w
ww
ww
u
ww

k s4 w

ww
u
ww
(
w
ww

w
w
)k

Pythian Ten

259

but its second half, here in parentheses, is not related to any other verse. The next verse, s5, starts with ^ e in a similar manner to some of the others, but goes on to be totally independent. In s6, the doubleshort movement of s3 comes back again. We can discern a structural similarity in a broader sense between these two verses: s3 w
ww
ww
u
ww

k s6 ww
ww
w
a
w
w
k

Here ww
ww
w
x functions like x
ww
ww
x (x D x). This phrase is extensively used later in tragedy, especially by Euripides (see Itsumi, ‘Enoplian in Tragedy’); Pindar uses it even in one of the normal D/e odes (N10s1). See Part I, 7. 2, 6 and Part III, A.

Epode In the centre of the epode, hepta is repeated three times (e3–5). In each case, a short phrase follows and relations between the verses are easy to grasp. The other three verses too are composite aeolic phrases. However, they are not closely associated with the central three, nor with each other. There are as many as seven ancipitia which are not regularized as short or long throughout.

Textual problems 8 (s2). Most editors adopt Boeckh’s æÆfiH  IçØŒØø (MSS IçØŒıø). This leaves the third position (anceps) to be irregular. In the Pindaric examples, the position of reversed dodrans is basically short; cf. the examples at Part I, 5. E. 1. Here it is short in general, except v. 8. Pindar may have not succeeded in pruning away long anceps totally, like the ancipitia in s1 (v. 25) or e1 (v. 49). Hermann (‘Emend. P.’) introduces short: æÆfiH
æØŒØø Ł . This is accepted by Schneidewin, and may be right. 11 (s5): The paradosis E is unmetrical; E Triclinius. 15–16 (e3–4). Snell’s apparatus is too simple. The unmetrical word-order in the manuscripts (ŁÅŒ ŒÆd ÆŁıºøÆ Iªg $
e ˚ææÆ
æÆ) had already been corrected by Triclinius. He reduced one syllable by elision and changed the word-order: ŁÅŒ ŒÆd ÆŁıºø $
e ˚ææÆ Iªg
æÆ. Boeckh accepted this, except

260

The Eighteen Majors

ŁÅŒ, and suggested besides in his ‘notae criticae’ changing ŁÅŒ ŒÆd into ŁBŒ b ŒÆd for metrical regularization. Hartung Wrst realized that the transmitted ÆŁıºø should not be accusative but nominative (but nominative is preserved in D, according to Christ’s report). His text is: ŁBŒ b ŒÆd ÆŁıºø $
e ˚ææÆ
æÆ Iªg. Christ supported it (! ÆŁıºø non ÆŁıºø scribendum fuit, quoniam ut planities cirrhaea, in qua certamina Webant, pratosa recte dicitur, ita rupes supra illum campum pratosa dici non potuit; construe ÆŁıºø Iªg $
e ˚ææÆ
æÆ ŁBŒ /æØŒÆ ŒæÆÅ
Æ: ). Christ, however, makes a further change. His main text is ŁBŒ b ŒÆd ÆŁıºø $
e ˚ææÆ Iªg
æÆ, while in the apparatus he writes, ‘fortasse ÆŁıºø $
e ˚ææÆ
æA Iªg’. This is what Turyn means by ‘Hartungio praeeunte Christ’. However, both Turyn and Snell prefer ŁÅŒ ŒÆd (MSS) to ŁBŒ b ŒÆd. From the metrical point of view, both are possible, so they are right. The Wrst syllable is the initial position of the heptasyllable, and the position is actually realized both as short (69) and long (33, 51). The same is true in the next verse (e4); both the word-order of Triclinius (Iªg k
æÆ ) and that of Hartung–Christ (apparatus) (
æÆ (or
æA) k Iªg) are possible, although in e4 the position is always long at all the other three repetitions. 17 (e5). Moschopoulos (according to Christ’s report) changed 
Ø (MSS) into 
Ø. The reason for the change seems to have been simply metrical because the corresponding syllable is long at all the other repetitions. 
Ø is accepted by Boeckh, Schneidewin, and Christ. Schroeder wrongly banned all non-indicative forms of 
ŁÆØ; but Braswell, Glotta, 58 (1980), 210, is right: ‘If we adopt 
Ø at O9 83 [¼ 89 Sn.], it would be consistent to adopt it here as well, although few recent editors have done so.’ 29 (s5). The paradosis is one syllable too short and the optative requires ¼: Œ is supplemented by Hermann. i (Boeckh, etc.) goes back to Moschopulos. Ng  å oæØ Bergk4. 30 (s6). ŁÆıÆa (E. Schmid) is necessary instead of ŁÆıÆa; cf. Braswell, Pythian Four, 241c. The nineteenth-century editors (Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen, Christ, etc.) all adopt it. ŁÆıÆa may have been introduced from epic usage.34 See further, below on v. 60. 34 LSJ (ŁÆıÆ ) cites P10. 30 and O1. 28 as examples of this as a poetic equivalent for ŁÆıÆ . However, the latter, ŁÆÆÆ
ºº , is the plural of the noun ŁÆFÆ.

Pythian Ten

261

38 (s2a–b). For çæØ · ±
Æfi A (Hartung), see above, Strophe. 58 (s4). The paradosis   (most MSS)/  ŒÆd (B) is unmetrical; K ŒÆd Triclinius. According to Gentili, pherecratean ends with anceps and it can be followed by another anceps (in our case, the short anceps of iambic:
w
ww
u w
w
); he therefore retains  . This is another manifestation of his ultra-conservatism on both textual tradition and metrical theory (cf. P2, v. 82, s2). 60 (s6). The paradosis is corrupt and one position too short: æØ æø æø ŒÆØ çæÆ . Triclinius supplements rather mechanically: æø ŒØ ha i çæÆ . Gentili adopts this. Boeckh’s æø $
ŒØ restores exact responsion. Schneidewin and Mommsen follow him. Hermann’s æø $
ί introduces an unusual sequence x
x
w
(see below). I do not understand why Christ adopts this, while giving the metrical scheme as x
w
w
. Snell and Turyn, following Bowra, accept æø ŒÆØÆ (Mair). This, like Hermann’s conjecture, leave two positions as ancipitia: ww
ww
w
x
x
w
k The Wrst anceps is short in six repetitions, long in two, 6 IæH, 24 ºfi Æ), which creates no problem. It is a link, although an aeolic phrase þ long mid-anceps is very rare (Part I, 6. D); of the two examples, the other is P11s4. The second anceps is more diYcult, since it produces the phrase
x
w
(instead of the normal e 2
w
w
).35 In fact, the position in question is short except in vv. 30 (above) and 60. Short could be read throughout by reading æø ŒØÆ (or æø $
ŒØ) in 60, and ŁÆıÆa for ŁÆıÆa in 30. Then the phrase x
x
w
becomes x
w
w
(x e 2) in all the repetitions. This is what Boeckh and others have already done, and Liberman restores after a long interval. The aorist ŒØ- is attested at in P11 v. 23b (s2b) and P8 v. 33 (¼ 32 Sn.) (s5). Schroeder does not admit the stem -ŒØ- but -ŒØ- and changes all the examples into -ŒØ-. He is wrong. I agree with Liberman (in apparatus on P8 v. 32): ‘Pindare . . . utilise -ŒØ- ou -ŒØ- (voyelle bre`ve, syllabe longue) selon la commodite´ me´trique’.

35 There is an example of the phrase outside the eighteen majors in Pae2s2. It may be that P8s7 includes this; see ad locc.

262

The Eighteen Majors

69 (e3). The paradosis Iºç  K
ÆØ  Kº is one short syllable too short. Editors emend the text variously; e.g. Iºç b K
. (Boeckh), ŒIºç b K
. (Hermann, ‘Emend. P.’, Schneidewin), Iºç K
  ÆN  (Bergk2–4), Iºç 
ÆØ  (Mommsen), Iºç  ª ÆN   (Christ), alii alia. Turyn prints his own conjecture and is followed by Gentili: Iºç Ø K
. This seems metrically improbable because of the epic correption in non-dactylic movement. Recently Liberman has revived Housman’s Iºç   K
ÆØ  (ap. Sandys). Wilamowitz (Pindaros), citing fr. 43 (fiH
ÆæØ  K
ÆØ ÆØ ), changes accusative into dative (IºçE  . . . KºE ), which Snell accepts.

Individual verses s1. The verse consists only of a pherecratean, a relatively unfamiliar phrase in the Pindaric odes, which nevertheless make up an entire verse twice elsewhere: O1s4, P11e2. The aeolic base is of the shape
w at seven out of eight repetitions. Only at v. 25 does

(ŒÆd Çø) appear (‘All-but-One’). The long anceps is irregular except for Class I (aeolic) stanza-forms, but Çø is certain. s2a. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ d, ^ e þ D). A verse made up of only a heptasyllable is not rare (5 examples in total). The third position (anceps) is irregular at s2a as well as s1. In the Pindaric examples, the position of reversed dodrans is basically short. Here it is short in general, but long syllable is used at v. 8 (IçØŒØø). Cf. the examples at Part I, 5. E. 1. If IçØŒØø is not an ordinary noun (‘neighbours’) but a proper noun (‘the Amphictionic oYcials’, pace Braswell, Pythian Four, 66e), the irregularity may be mitigated as a special licence. Otherwise, Pindar may not have succeeded in totally pruning away long anceps, like the ancipitia in s1 or e1. For Hermann’s regularization, see above, textual problems. When s2a and s2b are combined, an enneasyllabic aeolic phrase (hepta þ 2) appears: w
a
ww
w

ww

w
k hepta þ 2 d e This alternative colometry is possible, but less likely. Hepta þ 2 is not a problem in itself. It is certainly an established phrase in the eighteen

Pythian Ten

263

majors (3 examples in total). The diYculty of the combined verse lies in that it is less organically related to its surroundings. The emendation is slight, and the separation of two verses is preferable. s2b. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ d, not ªª
ww
); 8, C, (8) (d þ e). The combination, ^ e þ d þ e, is fairly common. There are two other verses which are the same: P2e6, P5e5. And O1e2 can be cited as another parallel: w

ww

wwww
w
j

^e

d e3

P2e6 is especially interesting because it is followed without interruption by heptasyllable, in the reversed order to P10s2a and s2b: P2e6 w

ww

w
j ^ e d e hepta P2e7

w
ww
k

s3. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps), Part I, 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome); 8. C. 1, 2 (D and d). This verse is divided into two similar halves: w
ww
ww
u
ww

k Obviously, D in the Wrst half functions as an expansion of d in the second. This ‘diptych’ structure is surprisingly rare in the eighteen majors. Some similar verses may be cited, but the resemblance is not very close: N6e5

ww

ww
ww
j x d D d w d
N2s5
ww
w
ww

k

The nearest parallel is found outside the eighteen majors. In one of the normal D/e odes, there is a very similar verse: I3/4e1

ww
ww


ww
k
D
d

As is typically observed in
D
D, the ‘diptych’ construction is common in D/e. But Pindar avoids it in non-D/e. Or rather, what Pindar avoids is D itself. Except in N6, D is very rare (see List 2). Apart from our verse, the examples of D preceded or follwed by d are conWned to N6. Anceps þ D is much rarer, two in total; the other is found at P2s6, which is the expansion of anceps þ d in the preceding verse. There is no other example of x D at verse-beginning, although

264

The Eighteen Majors

seven verses start with x d and four with x D þ . The anceps is regularly short, which is diVerent from the normal practice in ordinary D/e. The other anceps, which is placed between D and d, is long except in one instance (v. 27 h
 IÆe ). Bridge is regularly observed between the anceps and the following d. s4. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ d, not ªª
ww
), 6. D (bridge after long anceps), 8. A. 3 (ii) (d) (longer verse), 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome), 8. C. 2 (double d). Symmetrical and asymmetrical phrases of Wve or six positions are connected together neatly. A long verse made up of them is one of the most distinctive characteristics of Class III, and certainly becomes Pindar’s favourite later. Even this being admitted, the similarity of P10s4 with N3e3 is astonishing: P10s4 w

ww
u
ww

w
ww

w
w
k ^ e dxd rdod e 2 N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wrw
k dodwd rdod e 2

Three-quarters of these two long verses are completely identical for as long as 16 positions. There is a diVerence only in the initial quarter: ^ e þ d in P10s4 contra dodrans in N3e3 (and both of these have 6 positions; ^ e þ d is equal to dod when ^ e and d are inversely placed). And there is another parallel: P2e3 w

ww
w
rw
ww

w
w
j

gl rdod e 2

Not only its latter two-thirds are identical (rdod þ e 2), but the initial phrase starts with w
(should this phrase be analysed not as glyconic but ^ e þ dod?). The link anceps after the Wrst d is not regularized. It is short at Wve repetitions and long at three, 10  IŁæ
ø, 22 PÆø, 58 ŁÆÅe. Word formation is often localized. Bridge is, in general, observed between in two true longs: between ^ e and d at all eight repetitions, between d and rdod except for 28 IªÆºÆÆØ j), between rdod and e 2 with two exceptions, 22 Icæj and 64 Kaj (and further, 46 ŒÆdj, 58 Kj). Two coincidences of word-division are remarkable: after the initial w

j in all repetitions, 58 ŒÆØ included) and in the rdod,
wj
ww
except 28 ±
jŁÆ (interestingly, the single short position is Wlled by  in 3 instances). s5. The phrase
w
w
ww
is often ambiguous between wilamowitzianum and ewd (Part I, 7. 3). To be consistent, I analyse it as wilamowitzianum in every verse. Thus s5 is ^ e and wil þ 3. But

Pythian Ten

265

ambiguity is more prominent in this verse than elsewhere. There are in total 23 examples of ^ e, and none of them is followed by an aeolic phrase (Part I, 6, B). All the others are followed by freer D/e phrases like e, d, or D. The analysis w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

e hag

is attractive. If ^ e þ e is accepted, the remaining part will be hagesichorean (for ^ e þ e þ aeolic, see Part I, 8. B. 5). Hagesichorean is unusual, but appears once in a similar context: P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k

tel e2hag

Both P10s5 (if this colometry is accepted) and P2s8 end with a hagesichorean, which is preceded by e (P10s5) or its expanded form, e2 (P2s8). In a sense, the colometry of P2s8 above is a compromise so as to analyse a long single-short movement þ a double short, which is quite normal so far, but here further prolonged by w

. Whichever analysis is accepted for P10s5, it is certain that this verse is unusual. The initial w
cannot be aeolic base: there is no example in Pindar or elsewhere of such an aeolic decasyllable as ªª
x
x
ww
. s6. 6, D (aeolic phrase þ long mid-anceps). See above, Strophe, and Textual problems. Anceps þ e2 is rare, but compare: N3s8 ww
ww
w
w
w
w

k tel w e2 x P8s7 x
w
x
w
w
k x e x e2

Notably, the Wrst phrase of N3s8 is telesillean starting with ww in the same manner as our verse; but the anceps is always short. The pivotal position of the link anceps in our verse is discernible in bridge and cut after it. When the anceps is short (6 repetitions), word-end may fall after it (4 repetitions), but, when the anceps is long (2 repetitions), word-end never so falls; bridge between the anceps and the following long is obligatory. See Part III, B. Verbal assonance: 60 æØ æø  66 çغø çغ . e1. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (d þ aeolic). Anceps þ d is common at the verse-beginning, but it rarely precedes an aeolic phrase. There is only one parallel: I7e7

ww

w
ww
k

x d rdod

266

The Eighteen Majors

Moreover, there is no other example of glyconic preceded by d at any position of the verse. Both in P10e1 and in I7e7, bridge between xd and the aeolic base is strictly observed. The initial anceps is realized as short except for v. 67
ØæHØ. In the base of the glyconic,

appears only at v. 49 º ø P. e2. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). I take this phrase as the minimal length of aeolics, but whether it is really adonean (as a short aeolic phrase) or, alternatively, d þ anceps (as a freer D/e phrase) is not easy to decide. There is one identical verse, I7e2, where the metrical context more plausibly suggests adonean. Here the context does not help; d is used in the preceding and the following verses, and aeolic phrases are used extensively in others. e3–5. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d); 8. C. 8. (d þ e). Three successive verses start with the identical phrase, a heptasyllable. Comparable is N4s1–3 (hepta þ 2 d k hepta k hepta wil k). The transition is easy to understand: excision of d (from e3 to e4) and change of e to bacchiac (from e4 to e5). Surprisingly, however, neither of these simple transitional processes recurs in the eighteen majors, though each verse on its own is well paralleled. The initial anceps of the heptasyllable is not regularized in any verse: short is used in respectively one, two, and two repetitions out of four. In e3 bridge is strictly observed, both before and after d. e6. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps). There are two other examples in which anceps þ e (iamb) precedes an aeolic phrase starting with half base:
e hepta hepta þ 3 I7s3/4

w
x
ww
w



ww
w
w

k
e tel gl þ 3

O9e8



w
x
w
ww
x
w
ww
w

k

The initial anceps is short except for v. 36 åÆæØ and so is the second except for v. 72 ŒÆÆd.

Pythian Eleven

267

PYTHIAN ELEVEN Four triads. Class III P11s1



w
ww
ww
ww
w


k
ribyc þ þ 2

P11s2a P11s2b P11s3 P11s4 [? P11s5



w
ww
j
w
wwrw

w
k rw
wr w
ww
k
atww


wr
ww
k
atww


rw
ww
k

w
ww
w

w
w
k
ww
w

j www
ww

k

ww
wj

w
w
k www
ww
w

jw
k w
w
w

wr
j u
w
a
ww

k

P11e1 P11e2 P11e3 P11e4 P11e5 P11e6

(¼ (hepta þ 2)2d ) sp hepta gl e e2wd rdod
e d rdod sp rdod] hepta þ 2 e2

ar ph tel e2 gl e we2e
xexd


s1 H 54;36 B 1,37 6, 49; s2b H 39b; B 18b, 23b, 55b; s3 B 8;38 s4 H 52, 57; s5 H 10, B 26, 42;e2 H 27; B 59; e3 B 29; e4 H 46

For the alternative analysis of s4 in square brackets, see the last section. For the analysis and the notation of s1 (
ribyc þ ), see Part I, 7. 6 (‘expanded aeolic’), and also Appendix B. s1 s2a s2b s3 s4 s5

1 2a 2b 3 4 5

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

˚ Æı ŒæÆØ, #ºÆ b ˇºı
Ø ø Iªı؃AØ ,

"g b ¸ıŒŁÆ
ØA ›Ł ºÆ ˝ÅƒæÅø, Y f ! ˙ æÆŒº ƒ Iæتfiø Ææd
aæ ºÆ ƒ åæıH K ¼ıƒ æØ
ø ŁÅÆıæ, n
æƺº KƒÆ ¸Æ ,

e1 e2 e3

11 12 13

(11) (12) (13)


Æ
ºØØ ¨ ÆØ å æØ IªH  ˚ææÆ , K fiH ¨æÆıfi A ƒÆ Æ

36

The text is uncertain at the beginning of the following verse (v. 55). It is unnecessary to change IªıØAØ to IªıØAØ (Christ in his apparatus, adoted by Snell); cf. Barrett, Collected Papers, 187. 38 Snell does not recognize brevis in longo at the end of v. 8; see below, strophe. 37

268 e4 e5 e6

The Eighteen Majors 14 15 16

(14) (15) (16)

æ 
Ø çÆ
ÆæfiƒÆ ƺ, K IçÆÆE IæƒæÆØØ —ıº Æ ØŒH ı ƒ ¸ Œø ˇæÆ.

Pythian 11 creates a confusing impression. It is, in a sense, a metrical potpourri. Aeolic verses, made up in a typical Pindaric manner, are juxtaposed with typical freer D/e verses; for example, s2b with s3, or e3– 4 with e5–6. A reversed dodrans has a strange resolution of the choriambic nucleus, complicated by free responsion at the second position (s4). Moreover this aeolic phrase is followed by long anceps and freer D/e phrases (e þ d). Most extraordinary, and hard to analyse, is the Wrst verse. I classify this ode as Class III, not so much because it has characteristics common to Class III stanzas, but because it includes everything. Besides P10, P11 is most crudely structured. Resolution is frequent, but it is not always easy to identify the resolved positions; see s4 below. RSS is 53.3% in the strophe, and 50.0% in the epode. Verses are in general short. The average number of positions is 12.0 in the strophe, and 9.5 (the second shortest in the eighteen majors) in the epode. The stanza-forms themselves are short. The epode is the shortest (57 positions) of all the non-D/e stanzas.

Strophe As stated above, there are a number of peculiarities. Nevertheless, a rationale is discernible in the strophe through the scheme below, in which resolution is eliminated. A diVerent analysis is given by Snell and eloquently explained by West, GM 62–3; but it seems to me strained. For Snell’s somewhat idiosyncratic line-division see below:
ww
ww s1

s2a s2b
w
w s3 s4
s5 [or s4

#


w
ww
w

w
ww
j
w
ww
w

w
ww
k
a
ww

w
ww
w

a
ww

w
ww
k ]



k
w
k

w

ww
k
w
w
k



Pythian Eleven

269

This chart is based on the assumption that, when the Wnal w
is cut oV from glyconic, the phrase can be felt as equivalent to reversed dodrans:
w
ww
[w
] ¼
w
ww
This applies only to one form of glyconic, but that is the only form used in this stanza. The basic phrase of the stanza is found in the former half of s5. I call it hepta þ 2, but, in this chart, it may well be analysed as anceps þ reversed dodrans þ w
. This phrase is repeated, with modiWcations, from beginning to end. In s1, its central part is expanded by two dactyls. Elsewhere, either the Wnal w
(s2a; hepta) or the initial anceps (s2b; gl) or both (s4; rdod) is missing. In s3 the phrase is augmented by single-short movement. After the basic phrase comes e (s2b) or the like: spondee (s1) or e2 (s5). The latter half of s4 is irregular. Snell combines into one long verse not only s2a þ s2b but s3 þ s4.39 The former is, in a sense, a matter of taste but the latter involves a theoretical problem. He does not recognize brevis in longo at the end of v. 8. He thinks that the Wnal  of ı followed by a vowel (ZçæÆ) is given a syllable-closing pronunciation. Thus, according to him, the syllable  is long by position, like all the other seven repetitions, and, consequently, s3 þ s4 is one verse. However, it is much more natural to admit brevis (¼ verse end) and to separate s3 from s4. Metrical lengthening is very rare and should not be lightly introduced. It may possibly occur at v. 38 in this epinikion: æ
 K: . . . But this is the only case in the eighteen majors (or in all the nonD/e epinikia); see below, Textual problems. For the further discussion accompanied with the assessment of Fu¨hrer’s argument, see P5, Textual problems, v. 42.

Epode The structural principle of the epode is obscure. Even verse-end is not guaranteed at the end of e1 or e5 (here Snell’s mark k is wrong) 39 Note that the verse number allotted in his metrical chart and the line number in his main text are inconsistent. v. 5 in the Wrst strophe is the fourth verse in his metrical analysis.

270

The Eighteen Majors

and, moreover, there are two other instances of coincidence of wordend within a verse: e3 and e4. In the colometry, however, echoes of some parts of the strophe are discernible. Two verses are almost identical with verses in the strophe: e3 ffi s5 e4 ffi s2b



ww
w


w
ww
w
www
ww
w

w
wwwww



w
w
k
w
w
k
w
k
w
k

tel e2 hepta þ 2 e2 gl e gl e

Inside the epode, too, there are some echoes. e1 and e2 are enlarged into e3 and e4 respectively: e1
ww
w
e3

ww
w
e2 www
ww
www
ww
e4


j ar
w
w
k tel e2
k ph w

w
k gl e

Here the pherecratean of e2 is analysed as rdod þ anceps, like some examples in the Class III strophes. The similarity between it and e1 is clear, for the aristophanean is dod þ anceps. If e1 and e2 were combined into one verse, as by Snell, the colometry would be diVerent:
ww
w

wr
ww

k dod e d
Then the sequence, eww þ d, would be identical with that of the latter half of s4: s4
atww


wr
ww
k rdod
e d

This might be a merit, but on the other hand this colometry destroys the inner structure analysed above. The separation of e1 from e2 is preferable. None of the aeolic phrases is used in the last two verses (e5 and e6). They are distantly related to s4.

Textual problems 2b (s2b). The paradosis Åæø is unmetrical; ˝ÅæÅø Byz. 4 (s4). The paradosis N is unmetrical; K Triclinius, but cf. Individual verses, s4.

Pythian Eleven

271

6 (s1). The paradosis Æø=ÆE is unmetrical; Æø (Hermann, ‘Notae’) is semantically better as well. 10 (s5). The paradosis ŒºÆB introduces an undesirable hiatus; so, ŒºÆ  (Heyne). 18 (s2a). The paradosis åæH may be right. The initial anceps of the heptasyllable is occasionally short; for example, P10e4 (short at one repetition, v. 16 Iªg, out of four. But åØæH (E. Schmid) is a very easy correction and the form Pindar usually uses. It should be adopted. 23b (s2b) ŒØ must be retained. (The paradosis is ŒØ; ŒØ is a Byzantine conjecture, according to P. Finglass.) Schroeder regularizes the aorist stem of this verb and introduces ŒØ; ed. maior, Prolegomena II, 62 (p. 32). The second position of glyconic is theoretically anceps, but in Class III strophes it is very rarely long. Moreover, Œfi Å is attested in the manuscripts at P8 v. 33. Regularization is unnecessary. 25 (s4). e c is unmetrical; e b Pauw. Gentili keeps the paradosis by analysing the latter half of s4, our
e d, as ‘dimeter polyschematistos’. According to him, both ŒEÆØ; e c ÆØ IºåØ (25,

w

ww
, with ÆØ scanned as one syllable) and - Iººa åæfiø f @æØ (36,


w
ww
, see below) can be in responsion with the other repetitions:

wr
ww
. The Wrst half of wilamowitzianum (¼ choriambic dimeter, polyschematist), however, has not such a freedom; see Itsumi, ‘Choriambic Dimeter’. 34b (s2b). The word-order of the paradosis,  ªæÆ, is unmetrical. Byz. transposed. 36 (s4). åæfiø is Triclinius’ emendation (but G has it too, according to P. Finglass), possibly for a metrical reason. It is adopted by many. åæfiø f @æØ is comparable with O9 v. 82 (¼ 76 Sn.) Pºfiø Ø K @æØ. Most manuscripts have åæfiø. It may be kept, see the Wnal section. 37 (s5).
ç  (Moschopoulos) improves the metre, because the consistently long anceps certainly accords with the Pindaric manner. It is stylistically better too than the paradosis 
ç. 38 (s1). This is perhaps the only case in the eighteen majors (or in all the non-D/e epinikia) in which prosodical lengthening of the Wnal syllable by consonant (æ
 K . . .) may occur. P5s11 (v. 42 ŒÆŁÆ
 æ
) is quite diVerent and under suspicion (see ad loc.; Fu¨hrer’s argument is summarized there). Our case is more

272

The Eighteen Majors

plausible. Even Maas, who categorically denies a freer metrical responsion (so-called ‘anaclasis’), rejects any textual emendations for our case: (e.g. IıØ
æı æØı (Hermann; accepted by Schroeder and Turyn), ‘Die zur Beseitigung der drei gela¨ngten Endsilben [the others are Ba. 5. 187, 10. 113] vorgeschlagenen Emendationen verschlechtern alle den Text’, ‘Freiheiten’, 18). When both textual emendation and metrical explanation are rejected, prosodical licence remains as the sole explanation. Snell follows him (see ‘Metrorum conspecutus’ D). Fu¨hrer, after thorough re-examination, conWrms the prosodical lengthening for our case. This passage shares these characteristics in common with some of the most certain examples in D/e odes: (i) The lengthening in question occurs in . (ii) The syllable in question is placed at the end of double-short movement. The inXuence of epic is certain. (iii) Normal rhythm has already been repeated several times (Wve, in our case) before this irregularity occurs. At the same time the following peculiarities should be noticed: (i) Prosodical lengthening is extremely rare in Pindar even in D/e. (ii) Whatever analysis is given, the verse P11s1 itself is metrically very unusual. (iii) In its six repetitions the metrical irregularity is made more prominent by four-syllable words (KØ ŁÅ in our case; see s1 below) located at the end of the verse. 41 (s4). The paradosis ØŁfiH ıŁı
ÆæåØ is one syllable too short. Christ’s ØŁE is adopted by Snell and Turyn. For other possibilities, see the Wnal section. 43 (e1). —ıŁŒfiø is Triclinius’ emendation (—ıŁØŒfiø MSS). 46 (e4). K is Triclinius’ supplement. 53 (e6). f is deleted by Triclinius. Christ adopts Bergk2–3’s  Ø instead of ÆŒææfiø (BV; ÆŒæ fiø rell.) and keeps . In his 4th edition Bergk retracts the emendation (‘praepositio novissimo versus loco incommoda’). 54–8 (ant. 4) are ‘a monstrous textual crux’ (David Young, Three Odes, 2). There are considerable diVerences between editors even about what these sentences mean. The biggest issue is whether to

Pythian Eleven

273

delete ¼fi Æ (55) or not. But, in a sense paradoxically, the metrical scheme is not aVected, for every editor tries to give a text which metrically corresponds to the established scheme. I resign myself to leaving the question unsolved.

Individual verses s1. This verse is peculiar in two respects: the dactylic expansion and the Wnal spondee. But the two verses in O9e suggest it is not as strange as it looks: O9e4



ww
w


k O9e7

w
ww
ww


j

sp tel sp
ribyc þ (¼heptad) sp

P11s11 starts in the same manner as O9e7 and ends like O9e4. It is almost symmetrical, or palindromic, with the expanded nucleus situated at its centre:

w
ww
ww
ww
w


k There is no dactylic movement elsewhere in the stanza. This is a diVerence not only from the other Wve examples of expanded aeolics in the eighteen majors (Part I, 7, 6) but also from the examples in the Paeans (Part II, Appendix B). The eVect of the Wnal spondee is enhanced by long words located there: 1 IªıØAØ , 17 ˚ºıÆØ æÆ , 22 K
¯Pæ
fiø, 33
ıæøŁÆ (or
ıæøŁø), 38 KØ ŁÅ, 54 IÆØ. Perhaps ˚ºıÆØ æÆ, an indispensable word in this ode, may have prompted the poet to introduce a spondee at the end of the verse: words of the shape w


can indeed be located in other positions of other metres indeed; for example, over two aeolic cola from þ 2 ending to full aeolic base, and above all, in normal D/e, by locating its penultimate syllable on link anceps, but the spondee is essential to locating the word in question at verse-end. s2a. A verse made up of a single heptasyllable is not rare (N4s2, P2e7, P8s3, P10s2). s2b. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase). There is one parallel for the glyconic with sixth position resolved: P8s2
w
wwrw
k gl

274

The Eighteen Majors

No example is found in Pindar of the responsion between resolved and unresolved at this position. The Wve successive shorts are occupied by one word at v. 2b ›Ł ºÆ and v. 23b Ææı
ºÆ and by a metrical word at 7b (ŒÆ) ı K
; 55b   ; for the other examples of successive shorts, see Part III, D. Including these, six repetitions out of eight have word-end after the successive shorts. gl þ e is a familiar combination; cf. Part I, 8, B, 5. Bridge is observed here at all the repetitions. s3. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (resolved long followed by short anceps), 8. C. 3 (enwd). Continuous shorts created by resolution occupy the central part again in this verse. P11s3 is one of the verses made up of a long single-short movement followed by wd; see the complete list at Part I, 8. C. 3. O1e3 has a sequence of the same length, and P2s5 is very similar in construction. P11s3 rw
wr w
ww
k e2 w d
w
w
w
ww

w
k e2 w d e O1e3 x e2wd P2s5

wrw
w
ww
k

Resolved e2 is quite common, but the form rw
wr has no parallel. But the sequence w
wrw
ww
is also incorporated in the following verses (marked by ‘ ’): N3e1b w rw
‘w
wr w
ww
’ w
w

w
k
w
w
ww

‘w
wr w
ww
’ w
k I8s3

we3wdwe e wil e2tel

In P11s3 at seven repetitions out of eight, word-end falls at
wrjw
ww
in this sequence (the exception is v. 40; ‰ ‹ ¼ŒÆj). The identical division occurs at all seven repetitions in I8s3, but never in N3e1b. Alternatively, P11s3 can be analysed as e wrdod (or e þ hepta). This analysis harmonizes with other verses as illustrated under Strophe. It is especially recommended if s4 is analysed in the alternative manner set out below. However, the similarity with O1e3 etc. is lost. s4. See Part I, 5. E. 1 (rdod starting with
x), 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase), 6. D (aeolic phrase þ long mid-anceps); 8. C. 9 (e þ d). As many as three idiosyncrasies are packed into this verse: (1) responsion between long and short at the second position of the reversed dodrans; (2) resolution at the ‘left’ of its nucleus; (3) long link anceps between rdod and e.

Pythian Eleven

275

(1) and (2) are related. Eight repetitions are classiWed into three groups:
wr (4 repetitions) 9 ZçÆæÆ ŁØ, 41 EÆ, e b, 52 H ªaæ Ia ð
ºØÞ, 57 ŒÆººÆ;
w
(2 repetitions) 4 Ææd
aæ ðºÆÞ, 25 ıåØ;


(2 repetitions) 20 ˚Æ æÆ, 36 —ÆæÆF. The last two cases are proper nouns. Thus, long syllable at the second position is acceptable as a special licence for proper nouns. In contrast the resolution of the nucleus is extraordinary, being is almost unparalleled in the eighteen majors. There are three other examples, N6e2, P8s2, P11s2b. In these, resolution occurs at all the repetitions; in P11s4, on the other hand, it occurs only at half the repetitions, and in the other half does not.40 Thus, strictly speaking, what is peculiar in our verse concerning (2) above is free responsion between resolved and unresolved at the left of the nucleus. The resolution is followed by the two original shorts of the nucleus. As a result, there are Wve successive shorts in these four repetitions, the same number as in s2b. Presumably Pindar sought a certain eVect by the use of runs of shorts in three consecutive verses: s2b
w
rwr

w
k s3 rw
wrw
ww
k
wrww
. . . . . . . . . k s4

gl e e2wd rdod . . . . . . .

but then why did he not resolve the position in more of the repetitions of s4?41 As for the link anceps (3), short anceps is the rule after the ‘nucleus’ or d. The combination of long anceps þ e itself is not rare when it is preceded by e or e2. However it is highly unusual that it should be preceded by
ww
. The exceptions, besides our verse, are two: O10e10 w
wwt

www
w

ww
k w d
e e d (this verse has many irregularities, see ad loc.)
ww
w
ww
a
w

j d w d x e
N3e1a (long anceps occurs once out of four repetitions) 40 The number of occurrences of resolution may be changed by slight emendations: 52 Ia may be i (
ºØ) (Hermann, ‘Notae’), which reduces the number. 4
aæ may be
Ææa, which increases it. 41 Hermann (‘Emend. P.’) adjusts all the other repetitions to
wr and restores exact responsion: besides 4
Ææa, 20 NŒæÆÆ (for ˚Æ æÆ), 25 KåØÆ
æƪ ŒØÅÆŁ · n ÆØ IºåØ , 36 ˜ºçe $
e
Æ (for —ÆæÆF
Æ). Certainly, nobody could believe in these rewritings. The old Hermann reveals vehement intolerance of any irregular metrical responsion, especially in ‘Emend. P.’ At the same time we should not forget that there are still good emendations in this article.

276

The Eighteen Majors

Strictly speaking, these are not parallels. In our verse, the phrase preceding long anceps is not d but an aeolic phrase (rdod). Bridge is observed between the anceps and the following long throughout all the repetitions both in our verse and in O10e10. To eliminate this irregular long anceps, an alternative colometry is conceivable. See the Wnal section. s5. The enneasyllable, hepta þ 2, is employed in two other verses (N4s1, P8e1). In P8e1 it is followed by e 2, as in our verse. Bridge is strictly observed between hepta þ 2 and e 2 (there is one breach in P8e1; Part I, 8, B, 6). e1. Aristophanean is a rare verse in Pindar. There is only one example elsewhere: O1e7 w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k

^e

e dod ar

e2. Pherecratean is less rare, and in three examples out of 11 stands alone and makes up a verse (O1s4, P1s1, and P11e2). But the pherecratean starting with www has no parallel. e3. Bridge is always observed between telesillean and e 2; cf. Part I, 8. B. 6. There are in all three verses composed of tel þ e 2, and two of gl þ e 2. e4. As in the previous verse, bridge is observed before the suYx. Glyconic starting with www is common, and so is gl þ e. e5. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er þ anceps at verse-end) Two analyses are possible, depending on which position is resolved: (i) w
w
w

rw
j w e 2
e (ii) w
w
w

wr
j w e 2 e


(ii) is preferable to (i) because (i) introduces cut after long link anceps (31 læø j æÆ , 47 Iªø j
ºıç ø). Cf. the analyses of O10s3a: (i) u
w

rw

rw

j x e
e
e
(ii) u
w

wr

wr

j x e e
e sp

Here too (i) is to be rejected for the same reason, see Part I. 6. C. Parallels for the resolution at the penultimate position of a verse end are collected and discussed in Part I, Appendix, Addendum II.

Pythian Eleven

277

The combination of e2 þ e has parallels: O1s10, O2s6/7, O2e3, I8s10. The anceps at the beginning of verse is always short; thus we2 may be ^ e3. e6. There is one identical verse in the other odes, and one similar one: N3s6

w
x
wwy
k xexdx O9s11

ww

w
x
ww

k x d e x d x

Alternative Colometry for s4 Leaving the irregularities in the Wrst half aside, the long anceps in the other half can be eliminated by another colometry: s4
wtww


rw
ww
k rdod sp rdod

The second rdod is the same as in the latter half of the preceding verse: s3 www
w rw
r
k

Reversed dodrans is a key phrase of this ode, and its recurrence matches better than
e d (see the introductory chart above, Strophe). Moreover, it saves åæfiø (36), without emending it unnecessarily into åæfiø, because
w
ww
can correspond with rw
ww
(the Wnal Æ of Iººa making position before åæ), although there are no examples of this responsion in the eighteen majors. This analysis is what Hartung oVers. But instead, this analysis introduces a spondee in the middle of the verse. This is highly unusual, and the colometry feels artiWcial. There may be a parallel for the spondee in mid-verse, but the analysis of this verse is uncertain; see ad loc.: O10s3b ww w



ww
ww
k e sp D

Spondee is used in s1 indeed, but at the verse-end. Rather, if it were possible, it would better to set verse-end after the spondee in s4 too. Then s4 would be divided: [s4a]
wtww


k [s4b] yw
ww
k

rdod sp rdod

278

The Eighteen Majors

There are some textual problems in the manuscripts here and there. Word-end is certainly attested after the spondee at Wve repetitions out of eight: 4 åæıø j, 20 åƺŒfiH j, 25 ŒEÆØ j (sentence-end), 52 $æŒø j, 57 lacuna? (the following j ªºıŒı fi Æ gurantees the word-division there). According to the text of Snell and Turyn (and others), there are three repetitions in which word-boundary does not coincide with the end of [s4a]. In fact, it does coincide at two repetitions in the paradosis. At 36, the paradosis åæfiø is blameless. åæfiø is Triclinius’ emendation, and most editors adopt it. If asyndeton were acceptable, delete Iººa instead. Then —ÆæÆF
Æ ÆÆ· k hKi åæfiø f @æØ would be a simple solution, both brevis and hiatus being supposed at the end of [s4a]. K introduces a long in the place of double short at the initial of the rdod. Admittedly, this corresponsion is unparalleled in the eighteen majors, but it may be related to the irregular resolution in [s4a]. At 41, ØŁEj is Christ’s emendation. The paradosis is ØŁfiH, and it covers the spondee. However, the text is one position too short. Before Christ, editors supplemented the latter half: ØŁfiH j ıhiŁı
ÆæåØ (Boeckh) or ØŁfiH j
Ææå ıŁı (Hermann). The repetition where word-end does not occur after the spondee is 9. I tentatively suggest the followings: ZçÆæÆ ¨Ø ƒæfi A —ıŁE (or ƒæa —ıŁ) ŒÆd hei OæŁŒÆ.42 42 Bergk2 too retains the paradosis at 36 and 41, åæfiø and ØŁfiH, but at the same time emends the text in all the other repetitions: 4 N deleted (K Triclinius), 9 —ıŁ (—ıŁH paradosis), 20 f deleted (omitted in. V), 25 b deleted. 52 {a} Æ  Ø  ( paradosis, deleted by Triclinius). The metre he oVers is:


wtww


ww
ww
k rdod
D This colometry is not good, however: D is never combined with an aeolic phrase in the eighteen majors.

Nemean Two

279

NEMEAN TWO Five strophes (monostrophic). Class I N2s1 N2s2 N2s3 N2s4 N2s5

w

ww
w
k

ww
w
w

k
u
ww
w
u
ww

j www
ww
w



ww
w

u
ww

k
ww
u
ww

k

gl tel þ 3 gl reiz gl gl ph dxd


s1 B 16; s2 H 2, 22; B 7; s4 H 4, 24; B 19; s5 H 5, 15; B 10

s1 s2 s3 s4

1 2 3 4

(1) (2) (3) (4)

+ ˇŁ
æ ŒÆd !ˇÅæÆØ ÞÆ
H K
ø a
ºº IØ ¼æåÆØ, ˜Øe KŒ
æ؃ı, ŒÆd ‹ I æ ŒÆƺa ƒæH Iªƒø ØŒÆçæÆ ŒƒÆØ
æH, ˝Æı s5 5 (5) K
ºı߃ fiø ˜Øe ¼ºØ.

Nemean 2 is one of the simplest of all the Pindaric epinikia. It is monostrophic, and composed of the smallest number of verses among the eighteen majors. Its metre is aeolic in a plain structure. Particularly noteworthy is s4, in which three aeolic phrases, two glyconics and a pherecratean, are connected with total avoidance of word-end at junction. The construction resembles that of a tragic verse, and is typical of Class I (aeolic). Another characteristic of Class I is the long anceps in the second position of full aeolic base (s3, s4). Except for s1, all the verses end pendent. This is fairly unusual in the eighteen majors. RSS is comparatively low (45.5%).

Textual problems 19 (s4). The paradosis
aæ introduces the improbable responsion
w in the base;
Ææa (Triclinius) is necessary. 24 (s4). PŒºœ (Callierges) is rightly scanned thus. The paradosis is PŒºE.

Individual verses s1. Some Pindaric glyconics which start with base w
could be taken as acephalous e þ dodrans (e.g. O1s1, P5e2, N7s1 cf. ad locc.). But

280

The Eighteen Majors

N2s1 is most certainly glyconic because of the aeolic context and the absence of e elsewhere in this ode. s2. In the eighteen majors there are in total six examples of tel þ 3, half of which are concentrated in I7. This phrase usually, as here, makes a verse by itself. s3. Neither hiatus nor brevis is present, but the pendent ending and the aeolic base of the following verse conWrm verse-end. As is occasionally found in typical aeolic phrases, ancipitia are realized as long or short indiscriminately at each repetition without any predominant tendency. The aeolic base of the glyconic is

three times,
w twice (cf. Part I, 5. C), and the ratio of the initial anceps of the reizianum is three long to two short (cf. Part I, 5. D). Word-end is strictly avoided between glyconic and reizianum in all Wve repetitions, in three of which dovetailing is observed. s4. See Part I, 5. C. 1 (the base), 8. A. 3 (i) (longer verse), 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). Combinations of gl þ gl or gl þ ph are most common with Anacreon and in Attic drama, but surprisingly scarce in the Pindaric corpus. The second glyconic starts with the full base

at all the repetitions. The rarity of this type of base is another peculiarity of Pindar. Bridge is observed at all ten junctions between two phrases (Part I, 8. B. 1). Between the two glyconics dovetailing is found at four repetitions out of Wve, and between the glyconic and the pherecratean at three. s5. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps), 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome); 8. C. 2 (double d). The latter half of this verse may be either reizianum, as in s3, or anceps þ d þ anceps. Whichever analysis is accepted, there is no exact parallel for the verse as a whole. Reizianum is employed at s3 after glyconic. If we accept the parallelism and the latter half of s5 is analysed as reizianum, the former half of s5 may be regarded as the shortest phrase among aeolic cola. I prefer to take it as d, consequently the latter is d and anicipitia. Thus a residual ambiguity (Part I. 7. 1) creeps into this simple stanza-form. There is a parallel for the double d: N3e1a
ww
w
ww
a
w

j

d w d x e


On the other hand there is no example of d (or xd) preceding the half base of an aeolic phrase in the eighteen majors. The anceps between two d’s is long except in v. 20 (˚æØŁø). There are in total seven verses which start with d. Of these, only our verse and N3e1 have d followed by anceps.

Nemean Three

281

NE MEA N TH RE E Four triads. Class III

ww
w
w
ww

w
k
w
w
wrw
w
rw
k www
ww
w

wrw
k w
w

w
ww
w

w
k

w
w
wr w
ww
k

w
a
wwt
k
w
w
ww
w

w
k ww
ww
w
w
w
w

k

N3s1 N3s2 N3s3 N3s4 N3s5 N3s6 N3s7 N3s8

telwd e e 5e gl e2 we gl e
e3wd
e x d
wil þ 2 e telwe2
(? ^ Dwe3
)

dwdxe
we3wdwe e rdod ph (? rdod rdod þ 1)
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dodwd rdod e2 ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e (? ^ Dwibyc e)

N3e1a
ww
w
ww
a
w

j N3e1b w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k N3e2
w
ww

w
ww

k N3e3 N3e4

s1 H 9, B 9, 29, 69; s2 H 2, 22; B 2, 22, 62; s3 H 51; s4 H 64; s5 H 13; s6 H 6, 26; B 34, 46; s7 B 55; s8 H 68; e1b H 17b; e2 H 18, 38; e3 H 19; e4 B 20

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

e1a e1b e2 e3

17a 17b 18 19

(17) (18) (19) (20)

e4

20

*
ÆØÆ EÆ, Aƒæ ±æÆ, ƒ ºÆØ, a
ºıÆ K ƒæÅfi Æ ƒ ˝ Ø ¥ Œ ˜øæÆ A `YƒªØÆ· oÆØ ª æ  K
ƒø
fiø ºØªÆæø ƒ Œ Œø ÆÆØ, Ł Z
ƒÆ ÆØØ. ØłfiB b
æAƒª ¼ºº b ¼ººı, IŁºØŒÆ b  ºØ I؃a çغE, ç ø IæA  ƒØø Æ O
Æ·


ƺŒæÆı ƒ ºfiø· ŒÆÆøƒø b
ºÆªA ¼Œ $ªØÅæe K ÆŁı
ƒfiø ˝fi Æ ƒ e ŒÆºº؃Œ çæØ. N  Kg ŒÆºe æƒø  KØŒÆ æçfi A  ƒ IæÆØ $
æƒ ÆØ K
Æ ƒ
ÆE æØç   , PŒØ
Ææø (21) I Æ –ºÆ ŒØø ƒ o
æ ! ˙ æÆŒº
æA ƒ PÆæ ,

282 str. 2. str. 3. str. 4.

The Eighteen Majors 21–8 ¼ (22)–(29) 41–8 ¼ (43)–(50) 61–8 ¼ (64)–(71)

ant. 2. ant. 3. ant. 4.

29–36 ¼ (30)–(37) 49–56 ¼ (51)–(58) 69–76 ¼ (72)–(79)

ep. 2. ep. 3. ep. 4.

37–40 ¼ (38)–(42) 57–60 ¼ (59)–(63) 77–80 ¼ (80)–(84)

The style of Nemean 3, of strophe/antistrophe and epode alike, is a representative sample of Class III. Abundant short syllables are conspicuous. Frequent resolutions apart, anceps is very often realized as short. RSS is high: 53.1% (strophe) and 54.4% (epode). Short anceps and true short are diYcult to identify in some cases. Three verses (s2, s5, e1b) start with a long sequence of single-short movement (e 5, e 3, e 3 respectively), and one (s8) ends with it (equivalent to e 4, for its analysis, see below). Also remarkable are two palindromic sequences, which are quite uncommon, especially the former:
ww
w
w
ww
(s1, e3)
ww
w
ww
(e1a) There are many lengths of aeolic phrase in this ode (the indicative phrase, IØ `NºØ K
ÆEØ ÆPºH (76 ¼ 79 Sn.), is discussed with O1 v. 102; see ad loc.). Anceps in the aeolic phrases is predominantly short, except at the beginning of the verse. When a phrase starts with full aeolic base, the two positions are never Wlled with

, so that long syllables (sporadically resolved into two shorts) and short syllables take regular turns, contrasting with the double shorts of the choriambic nucleus. And the phrase
ww
, which can be analysed as d of freer D/e, appears here and there. It is always preceded or followed by short anceps; that is, it is never Xanked by two long syllables. Thus the movement runs very lightly from beginning to end. The eVect of lightness is enhanced by the frequent attachment of suYx e. In Pindar it is common for an aeolic phrase to be followed by e, and, to a lesser extent, by e 2; see Part I, 8. B. 5–6. But in this ode the extensive use of these is greater than usual. Two-thirds of all the verses (8/13) end with them. And three of them are resolved, regularly or partly, at some repetitions. Dactylic movement is totally absent. But there are three examples of telesillean starting with two shorts, which produces two consecutive double shorts. SigniWcantly, the last verse of both strophe/antistrophe and epode starts with this type of telesillean. The identical Wnale gives unity to the two stanzas. These telesilleans may be a

Nemean Three

283

derivative of D in the normal D/e; see Part I, 7. 6. Consequently, s8 and e4 can be interpreted as a variation of freer D/e: s8 ww
ww
w
w
w
w

k e4 ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k

(A diVerent colometry is conceivable for these verses, which is indicated in parenthesis in the chart above; see on e4 in individual verses.) Verses are in general long. The average number of positions is 13.4 (strophe) and 17.2 (epode). The latter is the biggest in the eighteen majors.

Strophe Every verse in the strophe has as its main body a sequence in which long syllables and short syllables regularly alternate. At some places a double short, which is either choriambic nucleus of an aeolic phrase or d of freer D/e, replaces a single short. The sequences are long. Occasionally anceps or short phrases are attached before or after. This structure is more evident in the strophe than in the epode, and will be easily visible in the following chart in which resolution is eliminated and the irregular long anceps at v. 46 (¼ 48 Sn.) in s6 is ignored: s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8





ww
w
w
ww

w
w
w
w
w

w
ww
w
w
w

w
ww
w


w
w
w
w
ww


w
w
ww

w
w
ww
w
ww
ww
w
w
w
w



w
k
w
k
w
w
k
w
k

k


k
w
k
k

Three verses (s1, s5, s6) start with long anceps. Two verses (s6, s8) end with it. Some short phrases precede or follow the main body: w
w
at the beginning of s4,
w
at the end of four verses (s1, s2, s4, s7) and
w
w
at the end of s3. Except for these, there is no place where two long syllables are juxtaposed, whether the position is a real long or a long anceps. All the central sequences are quite long,

284

The Eighteen Majors

and regularly constructed. Even the shortest has four longs (s3, s4, s6). The longest has six (s2, s5, s8). Two verses have two double shorts (s1, s8), one has none (s2), but the others do not lack one. Double short tends to be located towards the end: before the Wnal long (s5, s6, and one of s1) or before the second Wnal (s3, s4, s7). Each of the verses has its own characteristics but at the same time they resemble each other.

Epode Unlike the strophe, the Wve verses of the epode are not constructed in a uniform manner. Only e1b is of exactly the same type as those of the strophe, and has a long sequence of regularly alternating longs and shorts as its core, which is followed by e. Others have similar sequences only in part. Two juxtaposed longs are found to a greater extent. For example, e3 starts in a very similar manner to s1, but its latter half is diVerent. A reversed dodrans, which is itself followed by e2, follows the sequence. Thus there are two collisions of two longs in this verse, and the long verse is chopped up into shorter phrases. Reversed dodrans is repeated in e2 as well (if it is assumed that the
w
ww
in the pherecratean is equivalent to it). Repetition is certainly an important motif of the epode. e4 has the same telesillean as the initial phrase of s8, but it is here repeated twice, instead of a single-short sequence. In spite of these diVerences, the fundamental similarity of the epode with the strophe is undeniable, as has been described in the opening section. For example, the palindrome of e1a is a modiWcation of that of s1, which is exactly repeated in e3, while the Wnal part of e1a is similar to the preceding verse, s8, and so on.

Textual problems 2 (s2). The paradosis
ºıÆ is unmetrical;
ºıÆ Moschopoulos. 14 (s6). The penultimate position is resolved only at v. 14: Iªæ . The metrical context of our verse strongly suggests that a
wwt
k should not be analysed as a reizianum but as xd
. The resolution of the second long of d is an oddity (see Part I, 6. C). There are only two examples. In the other (O10e10 v. 110 ¼ v. 105 Sn. ˆÆı Ø) a

Nemean Three

285

proper noun is involved and the phrase is not located at verse-end.43 Even if our case were a reizianum, the resolution would be totally unparalleled. In tragedy or comedy, when the right of the choriambic nucleus is resolved, it must be followed by w
(Part I, 5. F).44 PfeijVer 619 does not grasp the essence of the metrical problem. What is irregular is not ‘a non-responding resolution of the longum of a double short element’ nor ‘four short syllables in a row’, but that the resolved long is (i) the second long of the ‘choriamb’, whether it is d or choriambic nucleus, and (ii) the penultimate position of a verse. The sequence
wwt
k is diVerent from
wt
k. I accept the latter (see Part I, Appendix, Addendum II), but it does not guarantee the former. Iªæ  is highly suspect. Kayser, JL 108 introduces æÆ. Rauchenstein, ‘Zu Pindars Nemeen’, 250 searched in a diVerent direction. His emendation is ›æ  or IºŒ  (cf. Hom. Il. 16. 157, on the legendary (
ƺÆçÆ) IºŒ  of the Myrmidones). Iªæ  may have been a gloss which displaced the original word; hence Stadtmu¨ller and Mair conjectured YæÆ, which is adopted by Bowra. For a defence of Iªæ , see PfeijVer 619–24. 18 (¼ 19 Sn.; e2). The paradosis J is unmetrical; Kg Heyne. 19 (¼ 20 Sn.; e3). To obtain the exact responsion (
wrw
) throughout all the repetitions, Hermann (‘Notae’) emends the text: ‘Vulgaris error
æø. Scribe
ææø. Scholia
æÆØæø explicant.’ His emendation is adopted by Christ. At 39, too, he scans diVerently and writes h
 I挜, instead of IÆæŒE; cf.
º ªœ (22) at the end of s2. He may be right.

43 Even this example may be eliminated by establishing a diVerent colometry; see ad loc. Then the irregularity of our case is enhanced. 44 Outside the eighteen majors, there are in total three examples of resolution of the penultimate position of aeolic phrases in Pae. 6. Two of them are found in pherecrateans ( . . .
wwt
k): s6 (ph): 131 Iæ½  ( 91 `
½ºº½ø),

e10 (ph): 176 Iæ ( 54 ½EÆØ, 115 r ½Œ). It is noteworthy that the same word, Iæ , is used at both. Perhaps Pindar may have been conscious of the

extraordinary nature of the resolution, but nevertheless had no other means to expel it. Maas supposed diVerently (‘Freiheiten’, 11, Belege 78–9): Iæ may have been a substitute for another word of the form

. The third example is the resolution of the penultimate position of aristophanean ( . . .
ww
w

k): s4: 149fi ±ºfiø ( 88 I½æø, 128 IØA). See Appendix B.

286

The Eighteen Majors

23 (¼ 24 Sn.; s3): The paradosis $
æå is unmetrical; $
æåı Moschopoulos. 33 (¼ 34 Sn.; s5). The paradosis F is unmetrical;  Byz. 41 (¼ 43 Sn.; s1). The paradosis Iåغºf is unmetrical; åغf G. Morel. 43 (¼ 45 Sn.; e3), The paradosis r  is unmetrical; Y E. Schmid, YÆ  Moschopoulos. Also IØØ must be IØ (Byz.). 44 (¼ 46 Sn.; s4). The paradosis K  åfi Æ is unmetrical;  åfi Æ Triclinius. 53 (¼ 55 Sn.; s5). The paradosis ÆºÆŁÆŒåØæÆ is unmetrical; ƺƌåØæÆ Byz. 56 (¼ 58 Sn.; s8). The paradosis is a syllable too short; E. Schmid. 69 (¼ 72 Sn.; s1). The paradosis is K  Iæ Ø; f g Hermann. Turyn’s comment, ‘metro non cogente’, is wrong; the position must be short. 72 (¼ 75 Sn.; s4). <›> Triclinius.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (b) (palindrome), 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d); 8. C. 3. wd, 8. C. 8 (d þ e). The verse is a palindrome, except for the last two positions. There are four verses which include this type of palindrome. For the decision of where to set phrase-end between two double shorts, see on Part I, 3, Rule 6, which leads us to prefer (a) to (b): (a)

ww
w
w
ww

w
k telwd e (b)

ww
w
w
ww

w
k
d hepta e

There are in total three verses which include the sequence x
ww

w
(xd þ e). Contrary to Pindar’s general tendency to maintain bridge over the Wnal e (Part I, 8. C. 8), word-end falls before it at Wve repetitions (or six, if 49 Ł æŒø is included). The e is in general occupied by one word (1 ºÆØ, 21 Kå Æ , 29 Œæ , 41 K Ø , 49 æŒø, 61 ÆPŁ). s2. See Part I, 8. C. 6 (e 6 and e 5). The verse starts with a very long sequence in single-short movement. The length of the sequence is

Nemean Three

287

eleven positions (e 5). Of the other examples, O1s8 (xe 5) and P2s1 (e 6 ) are comparable. Like these two and unlike the majority, the sequence at N3s2 does not run into double short at the end. And, peculiarly, it is followed directly by e. At the junction of e 5 and e, two longs are juxtaposed without brevis/anceps in between, but the transition is smooth because the initial long of the e is resolved. This sequence of e
re at the verse-end is found also at O1s9, O1s10, O2s4. Word-end does not occur before the resolved e except at v. 2 (ƒæÅfi Æ j ˝ Ø). Rather, word break tends to be . . . j
rw
k (six repetitions out of eight). It is conspicuous that two repetitions end with a tetrasyllabic word of which the last syllable is not only short (brevis in longo) but open (2 ˝ Ø, 22
º ªœ). These two make hiatus. Short open end is found at another repetition (42 ŁÆØ ) too. Though the end is closed, a short vowel is distinctively used at four other verse ends (10 ŁªÆæ, 30 ºÆå , 62 ƺ, 70 å). That is, seven out of eight repetitions have a short syllable. Compare the similar ending of N7s5. There is another resolution at the fourth long of e 5. Here too words of three or more consecutive short syllables are used (2 K ƒæÅfi Æ, 10
ºıçºÆ, 22  Æ b, 30
çæ, 42 ª ºÆ, 50 ºª). There is a strong sense break either before or after the third short syllable:
w
w
: w : rw
w
rw
k The pattern of bridge and cut is interesting; the Wrst three continuous instances, i.e. 2, 10, 22, have cut regularly before that position while, the rest, as if Pindar changed his mind after the third repetition, have cut after the position throughout all the Wve repetitions. Moreover, in three instances out of the Wve there is a similar grammatical construction: a Wnite verb of the shape w
w Wlls the positions from the second short to the third short: (30  ı, 42 ¼Łıæ, 50 Œæ Œ). This may be regarded as an example of verbal assonance in a wider sense (Part III, E). s3. The Wnal e 2 is a common feature. In the eighteen majors there are in total nine verses in which e 2, following an aeolic phrase with þ 2 ending ( . . .
ww
w
), comes at the verse-end (Part I, 8. B. 6). Bridge between the aeolic phrase and e 2 is generally observed, and in

288

The Eighteen Majors

our verse too, but there is an exception: 63 K
ØåæØ j å æÆ. Resolution of e2 is not very common. The form
wrw
occurs in six examples (Part I, 6. A). It is worth noting that a verse that ends with this form is found only in N3 (here and e3). In the other verses it stands at the beginning, preceded by link anceps. s4. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (e) (palindrome). Except for the initial position, this verse is again palindromic. This type of palindromic sequence (e þ gl þ e) is without parallel. The metrical structure of P2e5 x
w

x
ww
w

w
k

is identical with that of N3s4, except that the aeolic base is not restricted to the form
w. Anceps þ e (¼ ‘iambic metron’) often precedes an aeolic phrase. Combined with glyconic, it is found in three other examples (P2e5, P5s3, P6s1/2). Here the anceps is always short. Bridge is generally observed between e and glyconic, and between glyconic and e. In our verse there are exceptions, one each: 24 ›
fi A j

Ø, and 4 ºØªÆæø j Œ . s5. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (resolved long followed by short anceps); 8. C. 3 (enwd). The single-short rhythm of s2 reappears. But here, unlike the previous case, the sequence starts with anceps and turns to double short at the end in the usual manner. There is another diVerence from s2 at the beginning; s5 starts with anceps. The position where cut appears in most repetitions is also diVerent. Here a strong sense break is found after the second short in six instances. Compare: s2
w
w
: w : rw
w
rw
k s5

w
w :
w rw
ww
k

At s2, three or four consecutive short syllables are often allotted to one word (see above). Here this is rather rare (13 ıæØ , 45 ÆÆ b, 53 ƺƌåØæÆ). s6. See Part I, 6. D (bridge after long anceps). Like s5 this verse also starts with xe. The initial anceps is always long. Then comes xdx, or reizianum (for the ambiguity of this sequence see Part I, 7. 1). The link anceps (or the half-base of reizianum) is irregularly long at v. 46 (¼ v. 42 Sn.) IŁÆÆ. For the resolved choriamb (d) at v. 14, see under Textual problems above.

Nemean Three

289

s7. This verse is one of the four examples in which an aeolic decasyllable (wil þ 2) occurs. The phrase is used unambiguously at P8s5
ww

x
w
ww
w
k d wil þ 2

(the others are P2e8 and P5s8). Long and short syllables appear alternately, similarly with e3 or e5 of the preceding verses, at the Wrst Wve positions. Bridge is regularly observed between wil þ 2 and e, except at 55 ª  ƒ j çæÆ (and, with elision, at 85 æ j Iç
Ø). s8. Telesillean with two short initial syllables is fairly common (eight examples in total, including tel þ 3). Although the length is diVerent, these three are comparable: I7s1 ww
ww
w
w

k ww
ww
w
w

k I7e4 P10s6 ww
ww
w
x
w
w
k

Here single-short rhythm is considerably prolonged. Counting the penultimate short position of the telesillean together, there are four shorts. Such a long sequence of single-short movement usually precedes a double short, but rarely follows it. The only comparable verse is O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k

we2wdwe2


The structural similarity with P10s6 (above) suggests that the telesillean may be interpreted as the phrase ww
ww
w
x which functions like x
ww
ww
x (xD x) and is extensively employed later by Euripides (Itsumi, ‘Enoplian in Tragedy’). For another possible colometry, see e4 below. e1a. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (resolved long preceded and followed by short anceps); 6. D (bridge after long anceps); 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome); 8. C. 2 (double d); 8. C. 3 (wd); 8. C. 8 (dwe). Verse-end is not marked by hiatus or brevis in longo, but the verse formations of e1a and e1b, and the length of e1b, establish the division with certainty. The verse e1a is analysable into d, e, and link anceps (dwdxe
). In the normal D/e, D x D x e x is a typical combination, but in the eighteen majors, such a verse with frequent use of link ancipitia is highly exceptional, even if the diVerence between D and d is ignored. Our verse is only partially paralleled. For the former, d xd (x),

290

The Eighteen Majors

parallels are collected at Part I, 8. C. 2. In these the combination xd x is found in two cases (N2s5, P10s3), but the phrase comes at verseend. In our instance, xd x is followed by e x. Surprisingly, d xe x is unparalleled. Even xe x is not common in freer D/e: xe x is usually preceded by e. d xe (our phrase minus the last anceps) has a few parallels, but the middle anceps is usually realized as short at all the repetitions (
ww
w
w
), like that one in the next verse, N3e1b. In our verse, the long anceps occurs only at v. 57 (¼ v. 59 Sn.) ÞØ
ÆEØ. If it were realized as short at all the repetitions, the phrase would be w
ww
w
w

and analysed as tel þ 3, which is a common phrase, used, for example, in the preceding verse (s8). e1b. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (iii) (longer verses); 8. C. 3 (enwd); 8. C. 8 (dwe); 8. C. 5 (double e). This verse is another example of a sequence mostly in single-short movement. The verse starts in the same manner as s5, and even the location of resolution is the same: s5 e1b



w
w
wr w
ww
k
e3 w d w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k we3 w d w e e

However, it is further prolonged after d. The movement frames the central d. The prolongation of two w
has no precedent in the strophe. Word-end is found regularly after the choriamb (17b ˝fi Æ, 37b Iæ Æ , 77b ÆÆØ ) except for 57b (but even here word-end is found; ¸ıŒø j). Although the single-short movement is fundamental, it is not necessarily felt as a ‘galloping’ rhythm. The reason lies in that words which would even suit dactyls or anapaests are used rather frequently, thanks to split resolution; for example, 57b $
e (æÆ æŒı
 IºÆºa ¸ıŒø jwwww
jw
wwjww
jww
j 77b źŁ ÆÆØ j
wwjww
ww
j

e2. See 8, A. 7 (repetition within a verse). The pherecratean is longer than the preceding reversed dodrans by the Wnal long. Both phrases start with
w. It is as if reversed dodrans were repeated

Nemean Three

291

twice, and prolonged by a long (or long anceps). For the interpretation of this apparent repetition in general, see Part I, 5. A. 5, and 7. 5. Word-end is totally avoided at the junction of the two phrases. There is no other example of this type of repetition, but the last two phrases in the following verse are comparable: O1e7 w

w

ww
w

ww
w

k

^e

e dod ar

in which dodrans seems to be repeated with an added Wnal position (this combination too is unique). e3. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (ii) (d) (longer verse), 8. A. 6 (b) (palindrome), 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d), 8. C. 3 (wd). Verses of this type are characteristic of Class III. The verse should be compared especially with the following: N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dodwd rdod e2 N7s2
ww
wt w
w

ww
w

w
w
k dodwe dod e2 P10s4 w

ww
x
ww

w
ww

w
w
k ^ e dxd rdod e2

Note the juxtaposition of dod/rdod and e2. The second long of the Wnal e2 is resolved only in the last two repetitions (59 ŒæÆ O
ø, 79 º Æ Œ). In the Wrst two repetitions the position is not resolved, but it is interesting that both involve the combination of light plosive and liquid making position: 19 PŒØ
Ææø 39 h
 IÆæŒE, as though, at Wrst reading, they might be expected to scan
www
, like
wrw
in the other two repetitions (Attic correption is less common in Pindar, but not rare). Perhaps Pindar may not have intended to admit the responsion between
wrw
and
w
w
and have tried to regularize all the repetitions in either
www
or
wrw
, but changed his mind at some later stage. Instead, it may be better to suspect the text, because the responsion between resolved form and unresolved is unparalleled (the sole exception is O13s4, v. 78 (¼ v. 81 Sn.) IÆæfiÅ; but this is not beyond suspicion). Hermann may be right to restore exact responsion by changing only
æø into
ææø; see Textual problems above. Remarkably, bridge between these two phrases is completely absent at all the repetitions (including 59 c j ŒæÆ O
ø). Bridge before the Wnal e2 is occasionally absent, especially when the phrase preceding e2 is an aeolic phrase with zero-ending, but this case is extreme; see Part I, 8. B. 6.

292

The Eighteen Majors

e4. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome); 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). In Part I, the following colometry is adopted for the statistics: ww
ww
w
jww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e This colometry helpfully speciWes the repetition of the ‘telesillean’. On the other hand, it is one of the two examples in which the rules of colometry (Part I, 3) lose consistency and require exceptions; according to them, phrase boundary should be set before the short (which is regarded as anceps), not between a long and double short. In all the other verses the consistent division is: ww
ww
jw
ww
ww
w

w
k The other exception is P2s4, which is structurally similar to N3e4: P2s4 ww
ww
ww
jw
ww
ww
w
k

This can, or should, be analysed as ^ D þ w ibycean if the argument that expanded aeolics are not aeolics but, in fact, a kind of freer D/e is accepted. And, if P2s4 is ^ D þ wibyc, it is reasonable to analyse N3e4 as ^ Dwibyc, too (and e, of course). Then, should N3s8 not be telwe2
but ^ Dwe3
? This analysis would hide the similarities with the other telesilleans cited above (on s8). I must admit that there is a dilemma, and I have no clear-cut solution at the moment.45 Between the two ‘telesilleans’, bridge is observed at three repetitions out of four. However, elision or postpositive is involved in all cases: 20 ŒØø=o
æ, 40 ıæØA  =IæA, 80 ¯
ØÆıæŁ  =¼
. 45

The fundamental problem is our ignorance of the time value of two shorts in the place of half-base of telesillean: ww
ww
w
. Is the initial ww equivalent to ww in the nucleus when this telesillean is used in unambiguously aeolic context? We should remember too that, as far as I know, there is no example in Greek metre of responsion between ww
ww
w
and

ww
w
.

Nemean Four

293

NEMEAN FOUR Twelve strophes (monostrophic). Class I N4s1 N4s2 N4s3 N4s4 N4s5 N4s6 N4s7 N4s8

a
a
ww
w

ww
k u
a
ww
k

w
ww

u
w
ww
k
w
ww
w
w
ww

k
a
w
ww
a
ww
w
k
a
a
ww
w
ww

k www
ww
w
k

ww
w
w

k

hepta þ 2 d hepta hepta wil gl reiz wil tel wil reiz gl tel þ 3

s1 B 33; s2 H 10, 34, 90; B 82; s3 H 3, 27, 43, 91; B 35, 59, 75; s4 H 28, 92; B 36; s5 H 69; B 21, 45; s6 H 6, 46, 86; B 70; s7 B 23, 47

s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

@æØ PçæÆ
ø ƒ ŒŒÆæØø NÆæ · ƃ b çÆ ØA ŁªÆÆæ I؃Æd ŁºÆ Ø ±
ÆØ. Pb Łæe oøæ  ƒª ƺŁÆŒa åØ ªıEÆ,  PºªÆ ƒ çæتªØ ı æ . ÞBÆ  Kæª ø åæ؃æ ØØ, ‹ Ø Œ f %Ææø åfi Æ ªºHÆ çÆæe KºØ ÆŁÆ .

Nemean 4, the longest of the monostrophic poems, is constructed very simply. All the verses can be analysed without ambiguities. The metre is completely aeolic. Repeated use of wilamowitzianum (3 times) and its acephalous form, heptasyllable (twice), is a peculiarity of this ode. The following features of this ode show that it is purely aeolic, Class I. 1. At some anceps positions long and short syllables occur quite freely. Long syllables sporadically appear even at the second position of reversed dodrans, against Pindar’s usual practice. 2. Resolution is very rare (only in base at s7). 3. Acatalectic and catalectic verses appear in sequence to make an evident contrast at s5 and s6. 4. Dovetailing occurs at 11 repetitions out of 12 in s3. 5. e is never used as a suYx.

294

The Eighteen Majors

6. Verse-by-verse structure is evident: identical or similar cola are repeatedly employed. To illustrate the last point: s1–3 all begin with hepta, or its related colon hepta þ 2. In s3, heptasyllable is followed by wilamowitzianum (
hepta). s4 begins with glyconic, the reverse form of wilamowitzianum. From s4 to s5, and from s5 to s6, these modiWcations are clear: s4 ! s5: gl ! wil (inversion); reiz ! tel (acatalectic) s5 ! s6: wil ! wil (repetition); tel ! reiz (catalectic)

The next (s7) is glyconic again (inversion), which is followed by tel þ 3; s7 and s8 are divided by verse-end, manifested by brevis in longo at two verses (but see below, s7). Compare the construction of O9s3–9: gl/wil þ reiz is repeated four times; then broken into two verses: gl k (s8) and reiz (s9). It is important to notice that colometry and word-patterns are related, of course, but at the same time are independent of each other. In this poem word-end often coincides at particular positions in most, but not all, of the twelve repetitions. This makes a dominant word-pattern; eventually a particular, conspicuous rhythm emerges superimposed on the colometry. For example, the Wrst seven positions of s1 are repeated in the following verse (s2). The repeated rhythm is highlighted by the presence of word-end after the seventh position in nine out of 12 repetitions of s1 (including 41 Kd  j): x
x
ww
jw

ww
k The very Wrst verse of the ode is typical (@æØ PçæÆ j
ø ŒŒæØø) in that a syntactical break is found there. Similarly, in s3 (hepta þ wil), word-end almost always falls after the Wrst position of the second phrase (wil), e.g. ØA ŁªÆÆæ j IØÆd ŁºÆ Ø ±
ÆØ:

w
ww

j

w
ww
k There is only one exception (v. 51). Moreover, the word-pattern is reversed in the following verse with a minor change (Pb Łæe oøæ j  ª ƺŁÆŒa åØ) in three repetitions in the following verse (s4):
w
ww
jw
w
ww

k

Nemean Four

295

In eight other repetitions another neat construction can be discerned: the verse is given a twofold structure too, but slightly diVerent from the above. The structure is clearest at v. 44 (str. 6): KçÆØ, ªºıŒEÆ, ŒÆd  ÆPŒÆ, çæت,


w
ww
w
w
ww



The pivotal nature of the seventh position can be felt at almost all the other repetitions:
w
ww
: w :
w
ww

k Only one (v. 68) has word-end neither after nor before it. The ninth position in the following verse (s5) is again of a pivotal nature; six verses have word-end after it, and three before:
w
w
ww
: x :
ww
w
k

Textual problems 3 (s3). The paradosis ŁıªÆæ is unmetrical; ŁªÆæ E. Schmid. 9 (s1). The paradosis ˜Ød is unmetrical; ˜d Boeckh. 12 (s3). The paradosis h
ıæª is unmetrical; M0
ıæª E. Schmid. 20 (s4). The paradosis oŒ is unmetrical; oŒ Triclinius. 23 (s7). The paradosis Ø is unmetrical; Ø Triclinius. 25 (s1). The paradosis (æøÆ is unmetrical; (æÆ G. Morel. So is the paradosis ŒÆææe ; ŒæÆÆØe E. Schmid. Hermann’s › ŒæÆæe is implausible, since it involves resolved d. 37 (s5). The paradosis ø is unmetrical; so  (Triclinius). 54 (s6). E. Schmid regularizes the initial anceps of reizianum by changing ºÆæÆ into ºÆæÆ. The anceps is short at all the other repetitions. ºÆæÆ gives the right sense (‘a handmaiden’; ºÅ scholia), Iolkos being personiWed. Here in this verse, regularization is preferable to ‘All-But-One’. 55 (s7). The paradosis åØæd is unmetrical; åæd Triclinius. 62 (s6). The paradosis ŁæÆıÆåA is unmetrical; most editors adopts Hermann’s emendation (‘Notae’) ŁæÆıÆå ø. 63–4 (s7–8). The verse-division in the paradosis is ZıåÆ Oı Æ IŒ   Ø ø å ÆØ Oø

296

The Eighteen Majors

The older editors accept it, but  at the beginning of a verse is highly improbable. Ahlwardt’s emendation of  into ŒÆd is accepted by e.g. Schroeder and Snell, although it would make the word-order less ‘grammatical’—or it may be for that reason that the manuscripts introduce . Carey (p.147) cites k  in our case as well as k ª at I8. 10, as parallels to k  a at N7 v. 25, and acknowledges an occasional licence that a postpositive can stand at verse-beginning. Certainly ª at I8. 10 is diYcult to emend (see ad loc.), but this is not strong enough reason to support the others. And  at N7. 25 need not be recognized as a postpositive. k  in our case is better emended. Turyn adopts Ahlwardt’s ŒÆd, and further transposes IŒ  and å ÆØ . Turyn registers Wilamowitz’s name in his apparatus for this change, but it had been already proposed by Kayser (JL). Wilamowitz, Pindaros, 175 n. 3 suggests it as a possibility but rejects it. 68 (s4). The paradosis K ª is unmetrical; Kªªb Ritterhausen. 90 (s2). The paradosis › e IÆØ,
ÆE is metrically wrong. Boeckh’s emendation e ¼Ø
,
ÆE is a solution and is adopted by most scholars including Snell (his apparatus is wrong). Boeckh basically follows Hermann, ‘De metris’: › e ¼Ø
,
ÆE. This is metrically inferior, and the usage of › is not in Pindar’s manner. The change of the tense of the verb from future to aorist was Wrst proposed by Pauw. The assumed situation is: Euphanes, the grandfather of Timasarchos and, most probably, the father of Kallikles, whom he celebrated, is now dead. Some scholars, including Bury and Farnell, maintain that the change of the tense is unlikely to have occurred in transmission. Among these, Mommsen is the least radical, and is followed by Turyn and Race (Loeb): IÆØ,
ÆE, ›  . This requires correption (
ÆE, ›) in non-dactylic movement. Moreover, ÆØ belongs to a monosyllabic word with circumXex accent. The correption is highly suspect; I Wnd no examples in Pindar (for O4 v 7 ¼ 6 Sn. ˚ Ææı
ÆE, n , see ad loc. in Appendix A). 91 (s3). The paradosis ¼ Ø åÅ is wrong; Both Snell and Turyn adopt IØåfiÅ (Mingarelli). Hermann’s ¼ Ø YfiÅ (‘Notae’) is followed by the older editions: ‘ "fiÅ scholiastes iam legisse videtur, ita scribens; ŒÆ ªaæ, çÅd, YÆØ ÆFÆ $
æåØ KåÆÆ, –
æ ÆPe r .’ 95 (s7). The paradosis ƺŁÆŒa is unmetrical; ƺƌa E. Schmid.

Nemean Four

297

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 5. E. 1 (rdod starting with
x), 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d). The analysis of aeolic enneasyllable (hepta þ 2) followed by d is guaranteed by the similarity with P8e1 and P11s5, in which hepta þ 2 is followed by e 2: x
w
ww
w

w
w
k The use of d with a longer type of aeolic colon resembles (in reverse order) P8s5
ww

u
w
ww
w
k d wil þ 2

Short syllables are dominant at both the two ancipitia of the enneasyllable (hepta þ 2). Long syllables are used only twice at each anceps. Proper nouns are involved (17 ˚ºøÆı, 49 ¯Pfiø) at the second anceps (thus, proper nouns apart, rdod is not
x
ww
here either), but not (49 K  , 81  ºÆ) at the Wrst. In the eighteen majors there are four verses in total that are composed of an aeolic phrase ending with w
( þ 2 ending) and d (Part I, 8. B. 4). In these examples word-end tends to be avoided at the junction (bridge), but N4s1 is an exception: word-end occurs at four repetitions out of 12. Interestingly,
ww
is occupied by one word in all four (1 ŒŒÆæØø, 9 ŒÆd ˝fi Æ, 65 ˝Åæø, 81 ºıŒæÆ). s2. See Part I, 5. E. 1 (rdod starting with
x). At the second anceps short syllable is dominant as usual in reversed dodrantes, but there are three exceptional cases: 10 (ØÆ æåı (proper noun), 66 hŒıŒº, 90 ¼Ø (emendation; see above, Textual problems). Long and short syllables seem to be used rather freely at the Wrst anceps (long/short ¼ 9/3 or 8/4 (depending on 82 › åæı-). s3. Heptasyllable is repeated once more, but this time followed by wilamowitzianum. Except for v. 51 (Ij
æfiø), there is dovetailing in 11 out of 12 repetitions after the Wrst position of the wilamowitzianum. Bergk2–4 divides the verse into two by regularizing v. 51; ‘nec obstat v. 51 /Łfi Æ· ˝
º b k I
æfiø ØÆ
æıfi Æ, si ØÆ in unam syllabam coalescere statuis’.46 But the regularization is unnecessary; this is a typical case of All-but-One. 46 There is another reason for Bergk to divide s3. He scans disyllabically the two sequential vowels of Åfi Æ (35) and ˝fi Æ (75) and suggests that r
w
ww
is possible for s3b, as when in Euripides resolution at the initial of the heptasyllable is

298

The Eighteen Majors

At the aeolic base of the wilamowitzianum, responsion between

(8 times) and
w (4 times) are freely interchanged. But the other ancipitia tend to be of Wxed value: the half base of the heptasyllable is always long—reading ˇıºı
Æ at 75 (E. Schmid); for

ˇº-= ˇıº-, see Braswell, Pythian Four, 214(d)—whereas the anceps in the reversed dodrans incorporated in the heptasyllable and that in the wilamowitzianum are always short. s4. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (b) (palindrome). For the palindrome . . .
ww
w
w
ww
. . . and the rule of setting colon-end before its second breve, see N3s1. Following the rule, this verse is analysed as glyconic and reizianum. This analysis explains particularly well the relationship between s4 and s5–6 (see above). s5. See Part I, 5. C. 1 (proper noun involving aeolic full base of the shape
x), 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome). The aeolic base of the wilamowitzianum here is in general
w, but at three repetitions

is used for proper nouns only (21 ˚ÆEØ, 53 ˜øÆŁ, 69 ˆÆæø; at v. 29 læ  should be read; see Braswell, Pythian Four, 58(a). The anceps of the telesillean is short 10 times out of 12. Long syllable appears at two repetitions (one of them with proper noun): 5 çæتªØ 13 (ØŒÆæØ , and perhaps at two further verses (61

æø, 77
æÆ). s6. See Part I, 5. C. 1 (proper noun involving aeolic full base of the shape
x), 5. E. 1 (rdod starting with
x), 8. A. 6 (c) (palindrome). As in s5, the aeolic base of the wilamowitzianum is generally
w; only for proper nouns (22 `NªÆ , 46 ˇNfi Æ) is

permitted. And the second anceps is short, except in one proper noun (70 ¯Pæ
Æ). The initial anceps of the reizianum is always short.

accepted. The accepted colometry requires ˝fi Æ to be irregularly scanned as w
, instead of (ww
), which is normal in all the other examples (the example at N6 v. 20 is diYcult to decide, see ad loc.). Certainly this would be a bonus. But, as Hermann (‘Notae’) points out, —ıŁfi Æ is disyllabically scanned at I6. 55. As for ÅÆ, there is no problem in supposing synizesis. Metrically Bergk’s colometry is not good. The resolution of the half-base of hepta is not paralleled in Pindar. One may cite: O1e5

ww
w
ww

w
w
k ^ dwd e2

But the metrical context suggests a diVerent analysis, Above all, the responsion between double short and single short is extraordinary. Bergk’s proposed division should be rejected.

Nemean Four

299

s7. Glyconic with base www is common in the eighteen majors, commoner than that with

. Verse-end between s7 and s8 is weak; I æ (47) and K
 (31) at the verse-end are unparalleled. If s7 were united with s8, the united verse would be very similar to s4, s5, and s6. Attestation of verse-end depends on brevis in longo at 23 and 47, but these cases could only be eliminated if it were possible to assume prosodical licence there: syllable-lengthening before  at 23/4 ŒÆÆæÆŒ
 j ! ˙ æƌƺ and before æ at 47/8 I
æ j `YÆ . However, examples of prosodical lengthening are very few, fewer than some might assume, at least in Pindar. The only probable case in the eighteen majors is P11. 38. P5, v. 42 is most certainly not an example, and should be emended. See ad locc.47 s8. The aeolic decasyllable (tel þ 3) are used at N2s2, I7s1, I7e4 too. All of them stand as independent verses by themselves. 47

Bergk2 eliminates verse-end by another means; by intoducing two conjectures: ŒÆÆÆæÆE (with KºŁ in the preceding verse changed into qºŁ) and ¼æŁ .

300

The Eighteen Majors NEMEAN SIX

Three triads. Class II (§1) N6s1a N6s1b N6s2 (§2) N6s3 N6s4a N6s4b (§3) N6s5 N6s6a N6s6b (coda) N6s7

w

j
w
ww
w
rw
k
w
ww
w

w
w
ww
k

^ e
gl e gl wil

www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j ww
ww
ww
rw

k
w
k

rdod ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d) ^ D þ e
e

^d D ww

ww
ww
j
ww
ww


ww
rw

k D
d e

wt
k e



wy
ww
w
w
k
ww

ww
ww
rw
j N6e1
wrww
w
j N6e2 N6e3

ww
ww
ww

ww
j
ww
ww
ww
w
j N6e4

ww

ww
ww
j N6e5 N6e6/7 y
w
w
w

j N6e8 y

ww
w
k

ww
ww
ww
k N6e9

e dwe dDe gl
D þ d ibyc þ (¼ dod2d)
d D ye3
ygl
D þ

s1b H 54b; s2 H 25, 32, 48, 55; s4a B 11;5 s4b B 50; s6a H 29; B 6, 29, 59; s6b H 13b; B 6b; e8 B 22; e9 HB 23

For the analysis and the notation of s3 (ribyc þ ) and e4 (ibyc þ ), see Part I, 7. 6 ‘expanded aeolic’, and also Appendix B. s1a s1b s2 s3 s4a s4b

1a 1b 2 3 4a 4b

(1) (2) (3) (4)

1 ¯ IæH, £ ŁH ª · KŒ ØA ƒ b
 Ææe IçæØ· Ø惪Ø b
AÆ ŒŒÆæØÆ ÆØ , ‰ e b Pƒ, › b å ºŒ Içƺb ÆNb  Ø PæÆ : Iºº Ø
æƒçæ 
Æ j ªÆ

Nemean Six s5 s6a s6b s7

5 6a 6b 7

(5) (6) (6b) (7)

 XƒØ çØ IŁÆ Ø , ŒÆ
æ KçÆæÆ ƒ PŒ N Pƒb a ŒÆ ¼
Æ –Ø ªÆƒæÆł æÆE
d  ŁÆ.

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6/7 e8 e9

15 16 17 18 19 20/1 22 23

(15) (16) (17) (18) (19) (20) (21) (22)

YåÆØ K ƒ —æÆØ Æ e ƒ
Æ ø
ÆÆæ
æ ›ÆØØ . ŒE ªaæ ˇºı
ØØŒ Kg ƒ `NÆŒÆØ æÆ
æH < ØŒ > I
`

ºçF, ŒÆd
 ŒØ "ƒŁE çÆø  , ˝fi Æ b æE , 
Æı º ŁÆ #øŒÆºÆ , n $
æÆ <ªÅØ åØ $ø ª.

301

str. 2. 24–30 ¼ (23)–(29) ant. 2. 31–7 ¼ (30)–(36) ep. 2. 38–46 ¼ (37)–(44) str. 3. 47–53 ¼ (45)–(51) ant. 3. 54–60 ¼ (52)–(58) ep. 3. 61–9 ¼ (59)–(66)

Nemean 6 is a representative sample of a small-scale Pindaric epinikion in language, use of motifs, structure, and its praise for the victor and his family. But metrically, it includes most unusual phrases both in strophe/antistrophe and epode. Even the verse-end is not always Wxed; see s1a, s4a. Metrical problems are entangled with textual problems. The transmitted text is undoubtedly corrupt here and there. The Wnal part of the strophe (s6–7) is especially diYcult, and inevitably, involves wider emendations. Using this part as a model case, I try to trace emendations proposed by critics historically in detail (Part I, Appendix). The Wnal part of the epode is also diYcult. For this, see below Textual problems. The dactylic phrase
ww
ww
(D) and its prolonged form
ww
ww
ww
(D þ ) are used extensively in N6. Both are often preceded or followed by
ww
(d). The combination of D or D þ and d is peculiar to this ode. Outside N6 only one example (P10s3) is found in the eighteen majors (Part I, 8. C. 1–2), another in O4 outside them. ‘Dactylic movement’ occurs in the ‘expanded aeolic’ too. Two out of the six ‘expanded aeolics’ in the eighteen majors are used in this ode (e4, s3). These ‘dactylic’ movements may possibly raise RSS: 58.0% (the strophe) and 55.9% (the epode). The usual type of glyconic and some other aeolics are mixed, but most verses are best analysed as freer D/e, and both stanza-forms are classiWed unambiguously into Class II.

302

The Eighteen Majors

Strophe The strophe is metrically divided into three blocks, all of which consist of three verses each (s1a–2, s3–4b, s5–6b), and a coda (s7). After an impressive short verse (+ ¯ IæH), simple aeolic phrases are repeatedly employed in the Wrst block. In the Wrst verse of the next block (s3), double-short movement appears in an expanded aeolic phrase: ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d). It is a transitional point from aeolic to freer D/e. The second and the third blocks resemble each other in the overall structure. Their Wrst verses (s3 and s5) end with dactylic runs. The next, s4a and s6a, start with dactylic movement again, and their Wnal parts are exactly the same: . . .
ww
rw

k

This peculiar sequence is paralleled only by O10e4/5 (cited below, ad s4a). d þ e is common in the eighteen majors, but d þ e x is not (8, C, 8). Then comes a very short verse in both blocks: s4b and s6b. The coda, s7, is certainly corrupt textually in the Wrst three positions, and the metrical analysis remains uncertain. But its other part oVers no problem. The Wnal sequence of w
w
connects with the beginning of the following antistrophe. When an epode follows, there is a stronger sense of pause ( . . . w
k
w . . . ). There is one long anceps in mid-verse as a link (for its rarity, see Part I, 6. D). This shows strong aYnity with the normal D/e. Four verses end with pendent anceps (s1b, s4, s6a, s6b).

Epode As in the strophe, ‘dactylic’ phrases are much used in the epode. The phrase d þ D is twice repeated (e1, e5), and its reversed form with expansion, D þ þ d, appears too (e3). Phrases with three dactyls, D þ (e3, e9) and ibyc þ (¼ dod2d) (e4), are also signiWcant. These are not common in the eighteen majors. With them two glyconics (e2, e8), if they are really so, and a single-short verse starting with biceps (an oddity) are mixed (e6/7). Hiatus/brevis is absent till e6/7, but the coincidence of word-ends accompanied by rather frequent sense pauses, and lengths of verse support the divisions accepted since Boeckh.

Nemean Six

303

Textual problems Besides s6–7 (Part I, Appendix), there are quite a few verses in which textual and metrical problems are so closely intertwined that even their metrical scheme is uncertain. The repetitions in e4 are discussed together Wrst, and those in e6–8 too, before other individual problems are introduced. e4 (vv. 18, 41 ¼ 40 Sn., 64 ¼ 62 Sn.): ep. 1 ep. 2 ep. 3

æÆ
æH I
ºçF, Æıæçfiø æØÅæØ ˚æÆ
ÆE,   KçØ ŒÆd —ºıØÆ (
ÆE  D)

(

Apparently there is a lacuna in ep. 1. The other two repetitions are metrically the same if synizesis of ˚æ- is accepted at ep. 2. (i.e. ˚æÆ
w
):
ww
ww
ww
w
j Based on this scheme, Bergk2 supplies ، after
æH at ep. 1 (18). Both Snell and Turyn adopt it. Henry, following Barrett, supposes the lacuna to come at the end of the verse after I
`ºçF: ‘words more often drop out at the end of manuscript cola’. Barrett supplements ¼ªÆª. Correption (F ¼-) is acceptable in quasi-dactylic movement. Before Bergk, scholars thought diVerently. A Wnite verb is not necessarily required. Even metrically there are other possibilities. Without assuming the synizesis of ˚æÆ the metre at ep. 2 becomes longer by one short position than Bergk’s proposal:
ww
ww
rw
w
This scansion had been accepted by critics before Bergk, and, after him, by Mommsen. The supplement of Boeckh (ed. minor), KºÆÆ (18) is based on this metre though the resolution does not occur at the position next to D :
ww
ww

w
w
(Æ  Ø ˚æ). Kayser’s proposal KªŒ is also based on this scheme (Bergk’s ØŒ is a development of Kayser’s). Exact responsion including resolution is introduced by Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’), Kßææı, and

304

The Eighteen Majors

by Mommsen, K
d æ
 (in the main text) and I
æ
g (proposed in apparatus). Kßææı requires correption (-ı I
) in a nondactylic context and is doubtful. To make ep. 3 correspond with ep. 2, either a short syllable should be added or a short should be replaced by a long. Boeckh writes:
ÆE,   KçØ ŒÆd —ıºıØÆ. Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’), after proposing Mb —ºıØÆ, prints in the main text:
ÆE,  ‹ KçØ ŒÆd b, —ºıØÆ. He is basically followed by Mommsen:
ÆE,   KçØ ŒÆd b, —ºıØÆ. The metrical form of Boeckh, Hermann, et al. must be analysed as D þ e 2, which is totally unparalleled in the eighteen majors. Even taking account of the scarcity of ‘expanded’ aeolics into consideration, Bergk’s scheme (and/or Barrett’s supplement) is better; and it requires only one lacuna without any further emendations. e6–8 (vv. 20–22, 43–5 ¼ 42–4 Sn., 66–8 ¼ 64–6 Sn.): ep. 1 ep. 2 ep. 3

˝fi Æ b æ , 
Æı º ŁÆ #øŒºÆ , n $
æÆ  Æ  
Ł ± º ØŒ Æ æł ÆŒØ ºçEØ Œ  å Ø –ºÆ Y Y
ØØ ºÅÆ

The Wrst metrical question is whether e6 and e7 should be divided or not. Unless Hermann’s æE for æ (‘Nem. sextum’) is adopted at ep. 1, the syllable in question is brevis in longo, and e6 must be separated from e7. On the other hand,
Ł at 44 is enclitic, and supports combination into one verse. In Part I, e6 and e7 are combined and are treated as a single verse, with the adoption of Hermann’s æE . Neither separation nor combination creates metrically irregular verses, except for the double short at the beginning. The initial position of e6 is diYcult.  Æ at ep. 2 starts with double short, ºçEØ at ep. 3 with long. Either scansion is possible for the remaining repetition ˝fi Æ (ep. 1): ww
or w
(for synizesis of fi Æ cf. N4. 75). Unless  Æ is emended and something like
Æ (Hermann) is introduced to make the position in question a simple anceps, the responsion between double short (ep. 1, ep. 2) and long (ep. 3) should be accepted as a rare example of link biceps. This type of correspondence at link position occurs only at O10e3. Both O10e3 and N6s6 have, or are supposed to have, the link anceps at the beginning of the verse. Perhaps we had better accept the licence of the

Nemean Six

305

responsion between long and double short only at the initial position of the verse, as in the tragic trimeter.48 At e8, the paradosis gives worse responsion than at e6/7. Neither Turyn nor Snell provides a good text from a metrical point of view. E. Schmid’s æç IŒØ (45 ¼ 43 Sn.) for æł ÆŒØ (the paradosis: æł IŒØ is a correction of Triclinius’, according to the reports of Mommsen and Christ) was accepted by the old editions (e.g. Boeckh and Schneidewin). The supposed metre is t

ww
w
Hermann’s Xæç ÆŒØ (‘Nem. sextum’) is a further step to preserve ÆŒØ . In consequence, he also introduces ØŒH in place of ØŒ Æ (the paradosis) to expel one syllable and to adjust the length to other repetitions. Some, including Snell, suppose a diVerent metre so as to keep ØŒ Æ , but I leave this aside for the moment. The corresponding lines in Hermann’s text are: ep. 1 ep. 2 ep. 3

#øŒºÆ , n $
æÆ ØŒH Xæç ÆŒØ Y Y
ØØ ºÅÆ




ww
w



ww
w
r

ww
w


Turyn follows Hermann. Mommsen rejects ØŒH , but his emendation is Xat (ØŒ Æ å, ÆŒØ ). The verse could be analysed as glyconic with base in the form r
at ep. 3. But it is highly questionable whether there is a glyconic of the form r

ww
w
, and still more questionable, even if it is admitted, whether r
can respond with

.49 Thus Bergk dubitanter proposes NŒ ÇØØ for Y Y
ØØ to restore exact responsion 48 There seems to be another biceps in the middle of O10e3, but I strongly believe that emendation is necessary there; see ad loc. There is no other certain example. For I8s2, some editions accept the responsion but I reject it; see ad loc. 49 If, however, the phrase t
were accepted as a possible resolution not of glyconic but of a freer D/e phrase, two other irregularities would be eliminated in O10: namely link biceps in e3 and resolution of d in e10; see ‘Alternative Colometry for e3 and e10’ at the end of the section for Olympian 10. It might be explained that the phrase t
is a variation of e. The responsion between rw
and
w
is common, and

(‘spondee’) is easily analysed as e with suppression of the central w. Then t
might be tw
minus the central w. I am not sure of Henry’s analysis: (tia^ ) tia. The initial anceps of iambic may not be resolved outside ‘spoken parts’ of drama.

306

The Eighteen Majors

throughout all the repetition. Bergk is followed by Christ. Maas is more radical. He changes the potential optative Π. . . Y
ØØ (ep. 3) into indicative ŒÆd . . . r  çÆØ (‘Freiheiten’ 19). Bowra accepts Postgate’s N ÇØØ, which must be rejected even metrically unless the Wrst syllable (Ø) is long: w
is hardly ever in responsion with

in Pindar. Wilamowitz (Herakles, on v. 681) supposes a diVerent metrical scheme instead of glyconic. Based on ØŒ Æ Xæç ÆŒØ (certainly good Greek, see above), the scheme is



ww
w
. It is one position longer than Hermann’s. To add another mora to the other repetitions, #øŒºÆ (ep. 1) and Y Y
ØØ (ep. 3) are changed into #ÆŒÆºÆ and r  < Œ > Y
ØØ (with Œ in the preceding verse changed into ŒÆd) respectively. Snell follows Wilamowitz unreservedly while Schroeder does so with minor changes (Y in place of r). The problem of this sort of solution lies in the metrical form itself. The phrase x
x
ww
w
, an aeolic enneasyllable (hepta þ 2), occurs three times (P8e1, P11s5, N4s1) but its third position is in general realized as short. The three continuous long syllables preceding dodrans are unparalleled.50 Errors and emendations in the other verses: 23 (¼ 22 Sn.; e9). The paradosis ıƒH Kª is unmetrical; $ø W. Schultze, ª Triclinius. The older editions write ıƒø and scan

. 26 (¼ 25 Sn.; s3).
ºø is supplemented from the scholia by E. Schmid. 28 (¼ 27 Sn.; s5). The unmetrical word-order in the paradosis, ¼Æ Œ
F, is corrected by Mingarelli: Œ
F ¼Æ (epic correption in dactylic movement). This word-order is now supported in a papyrus (— 41 Snell–Maehler). 31 (¼ 30 Sn.; s1). ºªØØ is, pace Gerber, unmetrical; ºªØ Hermann. So is KŒØÆ; KŒØÆ Triclinius. 36 (¼ 35 Sn.; s6). ƒ Ø Ł is one of Triclinius’ best emendations. The paradosis is ƒÆøŁd (a rare verb). Ho¨hl is certainly wrong to defend it. See Part I, Appendix. 52 (¼ 50 Sn.; s6). The unmetrical and ungrammatical ¼ is omitted by Triclinius. 50

Schroeder’s scheme a


ww
w
is more improbable.

Nemean Six

307

55 (¼ 53 Sn.; s4a). ÆFÆ (Pauw) certainly gives better sense than the manuscript reading ÆÆ. Metrically too it is better, although it is not impossible to accept, like Turyn, the responsion of

with
w and to keep ÆÆ. 57 (¼ 55 Sn.; s4a). The paradosis Id is unmetrical; so ÆNd. 60 (¼ 58 Sn.; e2). Snell’s apparatus is at its least informative. Before Turyn proposed the text that Snell accepts, there was a long and complicated history. The paradosis is ºŒØÆ  ª K
æŒ ŒºØfi A ªfi A. The nominative ºŒØÆ ðÞ is metrically wrong. The required metre is
wrw. First, ºŒØÆ (genitive) ‹ was introduced (E. Schmid, Hermann; this was further elaborated by Boeckh, who made ŒºØa ª the subject). Then Bergk suggested ºŒØÆ (Aeolic nominative), which had been already printed by Ahlwaldt (so reported by Mommsen, and by Gerber, Emendations). At the same time Bergk writes in the apparatus: ‘quae (¼ nominativi forma aeolica) si cui displicet, poterit is ºŒØÆ,  ª (vel ‹  ) K
æŒÆ . The Aeolic nominative was accepted by Mommsen, but was suspected by Christ (‘nescio tamen an ad metricam licentiam nominis proprii confugere praestet’). On the other hand the form was championed as a vocative by Maas (‘Freiheiten’, 15), who introduced  (¼ ) ª instead of  ª , and K
ÆæŒÆØ (inWnitive), which was Wrst proposed by Schroeder (below). Bowra prints ºŒØÆ, f  K
æŒÆ (which has been already proposed by Maas: ‘ist nicht unmo¨glich, aber schwa¨cher’). Finally, Turyn establishes ºŒØÆ,  ª K
ÆæŒÆØ. Meanwhile Hartung proposed: . . . f IŁºØØ ƒæE j ºŒØÆ K
æŒ . . . . Metrically, this introduces an unusual responsion:
ww
w
w
in place of
wwwww
w
. The required metre is not dwe (or ‘ch þ ia’) but glyconic, because resolution is rare in d (see below, e2). The same is true of Schroeder’s reading (ed. maior): ºŒØÆ K
ÆæŒÆØ.

Individual verses s1. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Word-end falls after the initial three positions without fail at all the repetitions, but lacks hiatus or brevis in longo there. Whether these three make an independent verse is diYcult to decide. Most editors, including Turyn and Snell, do not acknowledge independence; Schroeder and Bowra are exceptions. In

308

The Eighteen Majors

Pindar there is no exact parallel ‘bacchiac’ at the initial position of a verse (whether these three syllables should appropriately be called ‘bacchiac’ is a diVerent matter; I use the name for the sake of convenience at the moment). Both O10s4 and P5s11 start with w

followed by a true long (in O10s4, the true long is resolved). Neither has word-end consistently after the ‘bacchiac’. At the same time, the coincidence of word-end at all the repetitions does not necessarily mean the verse-end, of course. For example, at P10s4 w

jww
u
ww

w
ww

w
w
k

^e

d x d rdod e 2

word-end occurs after the initial w

at all eight repetitions, but phrase-end (let alone verse-end) here is improbable. However, the possibility that the ‘bacchiac’ in our case is a verse by itself is strong. Its shortness does not matter; there is a certain example of a verse composed of four positions in Pindar (O7s3 in D/e). And it is worth noticing that one or two other short verses are found in our strophe: s6b most certainly, and (very probably) s4b too. Generally, every verse tends to be short in Class II odes. Perhaps the strongest case for verse-end is the impressive, paratactic structure of the very Wrst verse of the ode ð1 ¯ IæH, j £ ŁH ª ·Þ: K
 ƒ j (24) does not weaken the case; cf. N4. 79 N  Ø j and even N4. 31 K
 j. Unless s1 and s1b are separated, the combination of bacchiac þ glyconic is highly exceptional. Glyconic is undoubtedly preceded on occasion by other phrases within a verse. But there is no example for the preceding phrase ending pendent; all the examples end with a true long. For the last position of our phrase there are two possible interpretations; and whichever of the two is accepted, it is questionable whether the three syllables are attached to those following. (i) Suppose the three syllables are a true bacchiac. Then the last syllable is most probably three brevia long, longer than true long as a result of syncopation. There are cases in which bacchiac is followed by cretic or iamb in lyric iambic, but hardly ever followed by noniambic phrases. In general, bacchiac comes at verse-end and its catalectic eVect is usually accepted. (ii) Alternatively, suppose that three syllables are acephalous e plus link anceps. If so, the link preceding glyconic within a verse will be unique (see above). To sum up: an independent verse of w

j seems more plausible, and the phrase is ^ e
, not bacchiac.

Nemean Six

309

s1b.e following glyconic is very common (12 examples). Resolution at the same position has a parallel: P5s3 w
wr
w
ww
w
rw
k we gl e

Our verse illustrates Pindar’s tendency to avoid word-end at the junction; it has no repetition with cut at the position. See Part I, 8. B. 5. s2. This is one of the three examples of a glyconic followed by a wilamowitzianum. Word-end never occurs at the junction in any repetition of these three verses. Cf. Part I, 8. B. 1. s3. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (g) (palindrome); 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). Although there is no certain indication (hiatus/brevis), verse-end is almost certain because, if this verse is combined with the next, an unusually long dactylic run results (but see below), and because there is a sense-break here three times (vv. 10, 49, 56 ¼ 10, 47, 54 Sn.); note especially the anaphoric sentences at 10–11 ŒÆ b t . . . ŒÆ  Æs ). The diYculty lies in colometry. Two analyses are possible, but both are unparalleled: (i) www
ww
wr
ww
ww
ww
j gl D þ (ii) www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d)

cf. P5e3, which is ambiguous like our verse: (i)
w
ww
wr
ww
j gl d (ii)
w
ww
www
ww
j rdod rdod

I reject (i) and adopt (ii), against Snell (and West, GM 65). If (i) were correct, the eighth position of glyconic would be resolved; if (ii), the initial position of what I call reversed (and of course expanded) ibycean (
w
ww
ww
ww
) is resolved, like that of the second reversed dodrans in P5e3 (see further ad loc.). As to (i): although a glyconic with two resolutions at either end has parallels in P6s3 (and its eighth positions, resolved and unresolved, are in responsion) and N7e4 (Part I, 5. F), and the combination gl þ d also has a parallel in I8s6 (8. B. 4), D þ following gl is unique. The phrase D þ makes a verse by itself or combined with e or d. (It is the same with its shorter, much more usual form, D.) If analysis (i) were accepted, our verse would be the only example in which an aeolic phrase and a dactylic phrase (D or D þ ) were united in the same verse; this is the strongest argument against it. Repeated word-end is not helpful:

310

The Eighteen Majors

there are three coincident cuts in Wve out of six repetitions, but neither of them shows phrase-division, positively or negatively: www
wwj
wjww
ww
ww
jww
j And bridge is perfectly observed both before and after the second ‘tribrach’. That is, whichever of (i) and (ii) is adopted, two phrases are closely knitted together. In (ii), for the so-called ‘dactylic expansion’ of the choriambic nucleus of an aeolic phrase see Part I, 7. 6. Examples are surprisingly rare. There is no certain example of rdodd (
w
ww
ww
) or of rdod2d (
w
ww
ww
ww
) in the eighteen majors. However, in N6 there is a plausible case of dod2d (e4), though it is not paralleled. As I have argued in Part I, what we suppose to be expanded aeolic may be a modiWcation of D or D þ . Like the other examples in the eighteen majors, a ‘true’ dactylic phrase (s4) follows our verses too. This is a good reason for preferring (ii). For resolution of reversed dodrans, see Part I, 5. E. 2. In (ii) we see an ‘expansive diptych’ structure, i.e. the repetition of similar phrases of which either the former or the latter is longer than the other. The Wrst reversed dodrans is ‘expanded’ by two ‘dactyls’, with the second keeping resolution at the initial. Pindar occasionally, but less often than is expected, uses ‘expansive diptych’ structure, e.g. N7e5 www
ww
w
www
ww
w
w

k gl gl þ 3 (teld) tel P2s4 ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k

s4a. See Part I, 6. B (acephaly); 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse); 8. C. 8 (D þ e). The double-short movement of the preceding verse is ampliWed. There is no hiatus or brevis at the end of the preceding verse (s3), and s4a is ‘headless’, starting with ww
ww
. . . Theoretically it may be conceivable to make one composite verse, which includes a very long dactylic run. But such a length is improbable. There is one example of a similar combination of two verses among the normal D/e odes. In N8, the Wnal phrase of s3 is D, and s4a starts with ^ D, but hiatus occurs between them at vv. 20 and 37: they are manifestly independent verses. For the acephalous dactylic, there is no other example of the length of N6s4a: three double shorts. Shorter lengths (^ D and ^ D
) are found at four passages: O10s1, O10e8 (^ D); O9e3, O13s1(^ D
). Of these,

Nemean Six O10s1 ww
ww

w
rw
k

^D

311

ee

is similar to our verse in that acephalous dactylic is followed by two e’s. s4b. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Most editors do not separate s4b from s4a. The sole dissident is Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’), who, however, combines s4b with s5. When s4a and s4b are combined into one verse, the Wnal position of s4a is considered as link anceps, . . . rw
xj
w
k, realized as long at all the repetitions except for v. 11 (ÆæłÆ: j qºŁ Ø). Word-end occurs at the end of s4a in every repetition. Full sentence-end is found in two repetitions (11 ÆæłÆ., 27 ±
Æ .), and a syntactical division occurs here at v. 4 (
æçæ 
Æ j j ªÆ). Metrically, the combined verse contains an irregularity. Contrary to the ordinary D/e, the phrase, e x e whose anceps is exclusively long or long/short in responsion, is unusual in freer D/e (whereas e 3,
w
w
w
, is fairly frequent). The examples are limited to the verses which have no double short at all but are totally composed of e, as in O2. Even in the verses where medial long link anceps appears, word-end after it is generally avoided (Part I, 6. D). In other words, bridge is observed as a rule between long link anceps and the following long. By giving independence to s4b, the overall similarity becomes transparent between two blocks: s3–s4a–s4b and s5–s6a–s6b. See the analysis in the opening section above. Except for the brevity of
w
k, there is no objection to its separation as an independent verse. Such a short verse is not strange (Part I, 8. A. 3). In the normal D/e odes, there is a verse of similar shape, just one position longer: O7s3

w
k (3 øæ ÆØ); (H9, B22, 66).

A similar but not identical phrase is used as an independent verse at s6b of our ode too (but some scholars do not accept its very brevity and have tried to expel it).51

51 Hermann adds ª after źŁ (50b ¼ 48 Sn.) so as to expel the brevis in longo and to connect s4b with s5. But apart from the meaningless ª , his colometry, though eliminating Œ at the beginning of v. 35 (¼ v. 34 Sn.), is not good in itself:


w
ww

ww
ww
j It is a combination of an aeolic phrase þ D within a verse; which is unparalleled (see above on s4).

312

The Eighteen Majors

s5. See Part I, 6. B (acephaly). Acephalous d has a parallel in freer D/e. There is no other case of ^ d þ D; but ^ e þ D (O10e2, I8s9) is structurally comparable. Among the normal D/e odes, the same phrase (^ d þ D) is found at O7e6: ww

ww
ww


w
k s6a. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (d þ ex); 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse). Unless we follow Boeckh and transpose FÆ (see Part I, Appendix), verse-end is Wrmly established by hiatus (breve at 29 and 59 is not helpful, because the last position is anceps). This verse ends with an anceps (pendent ending); there is also a long anceps between D and d. Our verse is akin to the normal D/e Cf. N11e4:
ww
ww


ww

w
j D
d e In contrast to D/e odes, the combination Dxd (let alone DxD, one of the most popular phrase in D/e) is rare in non-D/e odes. Among the eighteen majors, the nearest parallel is O10e4/5

ww

ww
rw

j
d d e


But in this verse link anceps is not placed after the Wrst d. There is cut in our verse between D and the intermediate link anceps at all the repetitions, except for v. 52 (¼ 50 Sn.) (PŒ I
j Æ ). Without this, our verse would be divided into two. Verbal assonance: 13 Ł
ø ˜ØŁ Ær Æ  59 Ł
ø ı ¼åŁ . s6b. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (er þ anceps at verse-end); 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Most scholars recognize verse-end at the end of s6b, whether s6b is separated from s6a or not. The exceptions are: Kayser (JL), Hermann (‘Nem. sextum’), Bergk2, Bergk3–4 (diVerent metre from 2nd edn.), and Maas (‘Nachlese’); see Part I, Appendix. The brevity of this verse is not a problem; see s4b above. Although the diVerences are many in the surrounding verses, the texts of Snell and Turyn are the same in s6b. However, there remains an oddity, which is not fully considered in the Appendix. The third position of e is resolved at three repetitions: v. 29b (¼ 28b Sn.) sæ K
ø (K
ø being scanned trisyllabically), v. 52b (¼ 50b Sn.) EŒ åغ (emendation metri causa), v. 59b (¼ 57b Sn.) ¼ªªº Æ. There are

Nemean Six

313

also three unresolved repetitions: v. 6b ¼
Æ , v. 13b F fg
çÆÆØ (emendation), v. 36b (¼ 35b Sn.) Æx Æ
ÆæÆ . It is Pindar’s normal practice, when resolved and unresolved are in responsion, for one form to be dominant. Fifty–Wfty is unusual. Kayser (as early as 1844) and Maas reject resolution at the penultimate position of the verse. Although resolution is certainly avoided, there are some cases. For discussion, see Addendum II to Appendix. s7. See Part I, 8. C. 7 (dwe), 8. C. 9 (e þ d). Snell’s text cannot be accepted. It would be the best solution, by emending åæıƺƌ ı (37 ¼ 36 Sn.), to introduce a short syllable into the second position. Hermann’s åæı
ºŒ ı is, so far, virtually the sole proposal along this line (Part I, Appendix). If åæıƺƌ ı were still preferred along with emendations in other repetitions, the verse would be analysed as

ww
ww
w
w

Dwe e1. See Part I, 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse); 8. C. 2 (d þ d), 8. C. 8 (D þ e). There is no exact parallel for this verse, but its construction is easily analysed from analogous verses. Supposing that D is an expanded form of d, the verse can be taken as a variation of d þ d þ e without any intervening link anceps. There are seven verses in which d is situated in the initial position. For d þ d there are two (but both are preceded by anceps). e2. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase). Three analyses are theoretically conceivable for this verse, but (ii) and (iii) are without parallels and must be rejected. (i)
wrww
w
j (ii)
wwr w
w
j

glyconic with the third position resolved ‘choriamb’ (d) with the second long resolved þ short anceps þ e (iii)
rwr
w
j long anceps þ totally resolved ‘cretic’ (e) þ another ‘cretic’ (i) Two other examples of glyconic contain Wve successive shorts. From their metrical context they are certainly glyconic, but the resolved position is not the third but the sixth. P11s2b
w
wwrw

w
k gl e
w
wwrw
k gl P8s2

314

The Eighteen Majors

(ii) There are two cases in which one or other of the two longs of a ‘choriamb’ is resolved: N3s6 (14 Iªæ ), O10e10 (110 ˆÆı Ø). Responsion guarantees the resolution here. But the resolution is irregular; the position is not resolved at most repetitions. For another reason, I suspect N3s6 (14 Iªæ ), and there is a possiblity of a diVerent colometry for O10e10; see ad locc. (iii) Anceps þ two e’s is a common phrase in Pindar. As for the resolution, N7s6

ww
w
rwrw
w
k

tel e 3

is a remote parallel, but a totally resolved cretic is never found in the eighteen majors (including O2). e3. D þ , the doubly expanded d, is used in
D þ (four verses) and þ D
(one verse). The nearest one to our verse is P2s3

ww
ww
ww

w
k
D þ e

There is no example of D þ þ d or D þ d in the eighteen majors. In D/e odes, there is one case of D þ d ( . . .
ww
ww

ww
. . . ): I1s6
w


ww
ww

ww

w


w
k e
D d e
e

e5. The order of the longer phrase (D, D þ ) and the shorter phrase (d) of e3 and s6 is reversed, in a similar manner to e1 or s5. The combination d þ D is found once in the normal D/e odes: N5e4

w


ww

ww
ww
u
w
j
e
d Dxe

e9. This verse, anceps þ D þ , has an exact parallel at O9e6.

Nemean Seven

315

NEMEAN SEVEN Five triads. Class III N7s1 N7s2 N7s3 N7s4 N7s5 N7s6 N7s7 N7s8

w

ww
w

w
w
k gl e 2 (? ^ e dod e 2)
ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k dodwe dod e 2
ww
w

w
w
w
k dod e 3 w
w

wrw
ww
w

k we wil þ 3 (? we ewdod
) w
ww

w
wrw
k wd e 3

ww
w
rwrw
w
k tel e 3
tww
w
rw
w
k tel e 2

ww
w

w
ww
w

k tel hipp

N7e1 w
w

ww
rw
k N7e2 www
ww

jw
k N7e3
w
ww
wr
w
k N7e4 www
ww
wr
w
k N7e5 www
ww
w
www
ww
w
w

k

we d e rdod e gl e (? rdod e 2) gl e (? rdod e 2) gl gl þ3

s1 H 43, 85; s2 H 23, 31, 44, 86; B 2; s3 H 74, B 53; s4 B 54; s5 H 5, 13, 68, 89; B 5, 55, 76, 97; s6 H 14, 48, 56; s7 H 49; B 15, 57; s8 B37, 92; e1 B 17; e2 H 81; B 18, 102; e3 H 103; B 19, 61; e4 H 83; e5 H 84; B 21, 63

s1 s2

1 2

(1) (2)

s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8

3 4 5 6 7 8

(3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

¯ ºŁıØÆ,
æÆæ ؃æA ÆŁıçÆæø,
ÆE ªÆºŁ , ƒ ¼Œı, + ˙ƒæÆ , ªØæÆ ŒÆƒø· ¼ı Ł P ç  , P ºÆ؃Æ æÆŒ PçæÆ a Iºƒça Kº å IªÆºÆªıØ + ˙Æ. IÆ
Æ ƒ På –
Æ K
d YÆ· YæªØ b
fiø ÇıªŁ ƒ æ æÆ: f b  ŒÆd
ÆE › ¨Ææøƒ Iæfi A ŒæØŁ h IÆØ ƒ øªÅ a
ÆŁÆºØ .

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5

17 18 19 20 21

(17) (18) (19) (20) (21)

çd b ºƒºÆ æØÆEƒ ¼ ÆŁ, P $
e ŒæƒØ º · IçÆe
Øåæ  ŁÆ ƒı
æÆ –Æ ÆØ: Kªg b
º ƒ º
ÆØ ºª ˇı j
ŁÆ ƒ Øa e ±ı
B ªŁ ! ˇÅæ·

Nemean 7 is fairly typical of Class III. In its many verses, both in the strophe and in the epode, aeolic phrases and freer D/e phrases are

316

The Eighteen Majors

closely combined. RSS is 53.3% in the strophe, and, in the epode, 61.8%, the highest of all the Pindaric odes. Sequences of three or more short syllables are very frequent (s2, s4, s5, s6, s7, e1, e2, e3, e4, e5). Note four continuous shorts in s2, s4, s5 and six shorts in s6 (cf. Part III, D). Some of these make colometry ambiguous, for it is not always easy to identify the resolved position. The sequence www
w
is typically confusing. For example, see the phrase at the end of N7e3
w
ww
www
w
k N7e4 www
ww
www
w
k

It is a resolved form of either (i) w

w
or (ii)
w
w
. If (i) is accepted as in the analysis above, the verses are glyconic þ e. The combination is without doubt a favourite with Pindar, and glyconic with its eighth position resolved can be paralleled. Thus (i) is consistent with other examples. On the other hand, with (ii), the alternative analysis in parenthesis, the verses are reversed dodrans þ e 2. Reversed dodrans,
w
ww
, and e 2,
w
w
, are structually similar to each other: the former is equivalent to the latter, with
ww
taking the place of
w
. Pindar occasionally exploits such a similarity in this poem (e.g. s2) and elsewhere; see the analysis of the overall structure of the strophe below. The phrase is used in a similarly ambiguous manner at N7s7. In the freer D/e parts of this ode, metre is almost restricted to single-short movement. It is signiWcant that e 3 (
w
w
w
), which is a rather unfamiliar phrase (14 examples; Part I, 8. B. 7, 8. C. 6), less frequent than e þ e, is repeatedly used (but much longer ones, like e 5 or e 6, characteristic of Class III, are absent). It is a plausible guess that Pindar employed this especially in this ode (and O1 too, although its use is diVerent there). d is occasionally employed, but double-short movement is completely missing.

Strophe As is noted above, resolution sometimes obscures colometry, especially at s2, s4, and s7. But a consistent overall structure for the strophe can be clearly grasped. Let us suppose that repeated dodrans (
ww
w
) and single-short movement (
w
w
,
w
w
w
) are the basic

Nemean Seven

317

units of N7, and adjust resolved positions to these schemes. Obviously, the similarity between
ww
w
(dod) and
w
w
(e2) is fully exploited. In the following chart, resolution is totally eliminated: s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8


ww
w
w
w


w
w
w

w
w w



w


ww
w

ww
w

ww
w

ww
w

ww

ww
w

ww
w

ww
w

ww
w



w
w

w
w

w
w
w


w
w
w

w
w
w

w
w



Dodrans and e 2 juxtaposed without intervening link is the base for all the verses. It occurs by itself at s7, except for a preceding anceps. Dodrans is followed by e 2 and its prolonged form
w
w
w
, e 3, but never vice versa. Only single e can stand before dodrans. At s1 a short phrase (w
) precedes dod þ e 2. This latter combination is almost exactly repeated twice at s2, though, the initial long of e 2 being suppressed (w
w
), the Wrst half of this verse is one position shorter than the latter. The combination of dodrans and e3 is also used by itself (s3) and in a longer form (s6). Some additional changes occur: at s5, wd (or ‘headless’ reversed dodrans, w
ww
) is used instead of dodrans; at s8, dodrans is repeated in the form of hipponactean, which starts like e 2 and incorporates dodrans (or one could say that hipponactean appears instead of e 3); and at s4, e 2 is missing. Note that s4 and s8 end in the same manner ( þ 3 ending); except for these two verses, the others end blunt. Also note that the initial anceps of s4 and s5 is short anceps, that of s6, s7, and s8 long.

Epode The structure of the epode is simple and its analysis is easy: e1 w
w

ww
www
ww
e2
w
ww
www e3 www
ww
www e4 www
ww
w
e5

rw
k
w
k
w
k
w
k

www
ww
w
w

k

318

The Eighteen Majors

Four verses out of Wve end with ‘cretic’ (e). The frequent resolutions are remarkable, and create ambiguities. Seven longs are resolved out of 33. If e3 and e4 are divided into two similar halves (rdod þ e 2), as is alternatively proposed in the opening section above, e4, for example, will be arranged in the same manner as e2: e4 www
ww
rw
w
k

The tribrach in e2 is also ambiguous. It is most naturally taken as a part of reversed dodrans (examples collected and discussed in Part I, 5. E. 2), but it may be ^ e, an abridged form of we of the preceding verse (see further, below). The Wnal verse, e5, is the only verse that ends blunt. Its structure is very close to that of the Wnal verse of the strophe (s8).

Textual problems 12 (s4). ƺ· Æd (MSS) is one syllable too short. Both Kƺ· Æd and Kƺ· ƃ are possible as further improvements of E. Schmid’s Kƺ· Æd. 16 (s8). Deletion of Ø (Hermann, ‘Notae’) is indispensable. 19–20 (e3–4). The paradosis gives ŁÆ ı
Ææ k AÆ  ÆØ:
Ææ at verse-end can be paralleled and is not problematic (examples cited from the eighteen majors): O1e6, v. 57 o
æ k ŒæÆ (but strictly, here o
æ is not a preposition but adverb) and O9s8, v. 19  , ˚ÆƺÆ,
æÆ k `ºçF  ÞŁæ (but strictly, here
æÆ refers back to   ðÞŁæÞ, as well as forwards). The paradosis has caused suspicion on other grounds. Its main diYculties lie in the curious expression ŁÆ ı AÆ itself, and in the lack of a word which means ‘similarly’ or the like (paraphrased in the scholia by ›ø ). The paradosis also has another  after Içe which is metrically unacceptable. Furthermore I suspect that
Ææa AÆ ŁÆØ does not mean ‘to die’ but ‘to visit a tomb (of a dead person)’. The meaning of the text itself apart, the paradosis is suspect metrically. With AÆ ÆØ the base of the glyconic in v. 20 is
w while the other four corresponding instances have www. This correspondence is found only at P5e9 (see ad loc. and Part I, 5. C on aeolic base in general). Pindar does not generally admit responsion between diVerent forms of base, except between
w and

, mainly in

Nemean Seven

319

Class I poems. Schneidewin accepts Wieseler’s emendation, ŁÆ ı
æÆ k –Æ ÆØ, which is superior to other proposals and accepted by many (e.g. Mommsen, Christ). That also removes synizesis of ÆØ. Snell nevertheless returns to the paradosis. He is now fully refuted by Barrett (Collected Papers, 188). 22 (s1): Insertion of  (Hermann, ‘Notae’) is necessary. 33–4 (s4–5). Snell’s text adopts several emendations; ÆŁH participle (ÆŁø MSS),
Ææa (ª æ MSS), º 1st pers. sg. (º MSS). He puts a full stop before ÆŁH. Boeckh’s text is: ŁÆŒø ÆŁH, d
Ææa : O: P: º åŁ : d is rel. pron., and º is of course 3 p. Boeckh is followed by Mommsen and Turyn. ŁÆŒø ÆŁH is suspect. Hermann (‘Notae’) writes: ‘Locus hic antiquo vitio laborat, ÆŁø. Tum scholiastes pro ªaæ habuit
Ææa, idque recte et metro exigente. [ . . . ] ´ÆŁ est is, qui ad clamorem accurrit. Inde ÅŁE auxilio venire clamantibus: unde recentior forma ÅŁ : ÆŁØ simpliciter de viris fortibus dictum esse, valde dubito. ºª autem ŁÆŒø ÆŁ , ut Olymp.I, 177. K
Œıæ $æg ›e ºªø. Similiter Ol.XIII 137

ˇºØªÆØŁÆØ  Æ K
Œıæ "ŁE 21.’ Dissen follows Hermann (‘ŁÆŒÆ ÆŁı recte dici Graeci mortuos viros fortes, heroes, dubitat Hermannus, cui plane assentior. At ÆŁ, h.e. K
Œıæ, sensu aptissimum, immo prope necessarium mihi videor ob consilium loci’) and so does Schneidewin. Christ expels ÆŁø. His emendation is fi Æ Ł  . . . ºg: (‘mortem occumbere omnes homines, sed honore ornari quorum famam mortuorum deus augeat, exemplo Neoptolemi poeta illustrat, qui mortuus antistes pomparum Delphicarum a diis constitutus sit’). I am not sure who was the Wrst to introduce the participle ÆŁH and the Wrst person º together. The participle is ascribed to Farnell by Snell (Gerber’s Emendations seems to support this), but the main verb there is º. 35 (s6). I take Christ’s proposal ˝
º ( is scanned ww). Most editors accept the paradosis ˝
º by scanning it as
www, with crasis of . This irregularly makes the initial position of e 3 unresolved here but resolved at all the other repetitions. This responsion may seem accepteble as an attestation of the All-but-One Rule (see Part III, C), but when long sequences of short syllables occur in expanded e phrases, like O1s8 (we 5) or P2s1 (e 6), exact

320

The Eighteen Majors

responsion is never breached throughout all the repetitions. At v. 103 (e3), ˝
º is scanned as w
www. 37 (s8). The paradosis oVers: #Œæı b –Ææ:
¥ ƒŒ  N ¯çæÆ
ºÆªåŁ .

ww
w

w
ww



j

The problem here is that, while drag is well attested in aeolic phrases in dramatic poetry which end blunt, there is no parallel for a pendent phrase (here hipponactean) ending


instead of w

. Modern editors (Turyn, Snell, Bowra) generally accept Boeckh’s transposition: #Œæı b –Ææ,
ºÆªƒåŁ  N ¯çæÆ ¥Œ.

ww
w



ww
w

j tel hipp

This, however, produces base in the form

, whereas in all the other repetitions the base of the hipponactean takes the form
w. Moreover, elsewhere in this poem correspondence in aeolic base is exact, as is characteristic of Class III stanza-forms. Hermann (‘Notae’) sought to preserve the MS order by reading
ºÆ , an unattested form. Bergk2 in the apparatus, proposed ‘
º Å vel
ºÆBÆØ’.
º Æ had been proposed by Ahlwaldt. Mommsen introduced
ºÆAÆØ in the main text. I regard
ºÆAÆØ as preferable to transposition. Note that the subject of ¥Œ is implicit in the manuscripts. Barrett supposes
ºÆA , to avoid SVE; see Collected Papers, 189. 41 (e4). (æÆŁ (E. Schmid) is necessary for (æøÆŁ. 43 (s1). Transposition of
æØa and  æıŁ (E. Schmid) is necessary. 46 (s4). &æøÆØ had been scanned
ww
. Schroeder introduced &æÆØ . 59–60 (e1–2). The paradosis gives IæÆfiø Ø: Iæfiø Ø (Hermann, ‘Notae’) recovers both sense and metre. 61 (e3). For the prosodic licence of NØ· Œ-, see West, GM 17. Boeckh writes ŒØ, and Bergk2–4, in the apparatus, ‘haud dubie vitiosum, . . . ŒºÆØ postea Kæ . . .’. 65 (s2). The paradosis oVers

"Æ $
bæ ±ºe NŒø· ŒÆd
æfi Æ

ØŁ ,   ÆÆØ

Nemean Seven

321

Scanning Nο disyllabically (Turyn and Snell), this produces
ww
wwww



ww
w

w
w
k At v. 86, the MSS read
æ
æHÆ b, where, metre apart, b is completely inappropriate. Turyn (
æ
æH ) and Snell (
æ
æ  ) produce the same scansion as v. 65. Thus in these two verses Turyn and Snell introduce long where there is short in all the other eight repetitions. Both posit phrase-division before the anceps thus produced:
ww
wrw
u

ww
w

w
w
k52 It is, however, doubtful whether a glyconic of the form w

ww
w
is found except at the beginning of a verse. And responsion between w
and

at base is highly exceptional. An alternative would be to analyse
ww
rww
u

ww
w

w
w
k d dod dod e 2 but the Wrst dodrans, with resolved Wrst long and drag, is most peculiar. The position in question is not anceps but a real short. It is much simpler to eliminate both longs by following Hermann (‘Notae’) in deleting ŒÆd at 65 (‘ŒÆd is not connective but aYrmative, thus there is asyndeton, anyway’ Carey ad loc.), scanning NŒø trisyllabically, and in reading the epic form  (Jurenka, ‘Novae lectiones Pindaricae’, 28) at 86. So Bowra. Instead of deleting ŒÆd at 65, Mommsen proposes ŒÆd fi Æ (cf. his change of
æfi Æ into fi Æ at O9 v. 89 ¼ 83 Sn.). He is followed by Christ (‘et apud peregrinos et inter cives incedo . . .’). 66 (s3). $
æƺ (E. Schmid) is necessary for $
æ ººø. 77 (s6). IÆ º (Triclinius) is necessary for IÆ ºº. 78 (s7). For the irregular scansion åæıe, see Maas, ‘Freiheiten’, Beleg 57. 81 (e2). The word-order of the paradosis (oø Łæ Ø) does not make correct responsion. Emendation is easy by transposition; of two proposals, Łæ oø Ø (E. Schmid, Hermann (‘Notae’), Snell) is better than Ø oø Łæ (Turyn) because it does not require correption in non-dactylic movement. 52 Strictly speaking, their metrical analyses are diVerent. Turyn’s analysis (notation) is glyc glyc do, while Snell’s is 2 cho hipp ia.

322

The Eighteen Majors

83 (e4). &æfi Æ (Benedictus) is necessary for ŁÆæA or ŁæA. 86 (s2). See above on v. 65. 98 (s6). The paradosis çØ is unmetrical. çØØ (Triclinius) is an easy correction. Snell accepts Maas’s f ƒ. 104 (e4). æ ŒØ (E. Schmid) is necessary for æ ŒØ .

Individual verses s1. There are eight examples of the phrase w

ww
w
k. Some of these, like N2s1, are beyond doubt glyconic with aeolic base w
. Our verse is one of the most probable cases of ^ e þ dodrans. On this ambiguity in general, see further, Part I. 7. 4. e2 is common after an aeolic phrase with þ 2 ending: excluding the examples in N7, there are six verses in which the combination occurs. Bridge between the two phrases is generally observed (Part I, 8. B. 6); this is the case in our verse too, word-end occurring only at v. 51 ›e ƒ ŒıæÆ out of ten repetitions. s2. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase), 8. A. 3 (ii) (c) (longer verse), 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ we), Part III, B. The analysis of s2 is complicated by textual problems at v. 65 and v. 86. See above. Unlike s4 or s5, the sequences of four short syllables are not occupied by one long word (except v. 65 $
bæ ±ºe ) but divided into two. At six repetitions out of ten the division is between the second short and the third so that the introductory movement of this verse may sound dactylic; the typical case is v. 44 Iººa e æØ j I
øŒ:
ww
wwjww
wj; the others are vv. 10, 23, 31, 52, 73. At the other three repetitions, the rhythm is
ww
wwwjw
, e.g. v. 2
ÆE ªÆºŁ . Contrary to the general tendency (Part I, 8. B. 6), bridge between the Wnal e2 and the preceding dodrans is frequently ignored: 10, 73, 94. Besides there are two repetitions in which a sentence ends there, but with an elided vowel: 65, 86. s3. See Part I, 8 B. 7 (aeolic þ e 3). Of 14 examples of e 3 (including a strange form at P8s6; see below) in the eighteen majors, the totally unresolved form
w
w
w
occurs only seven times, including N7s3. The others include resolution somewhere, like s5 and s6. Unlike e or e 2 it is surprisingly rare for e 3 to follow an aeolic phrase (and there is no example of exe doing so). There are only three occurrences, including P8s6. The other two are found in N7.

Nemean Seven

323

Word-end is avoided between dodrans and e 3 except at v. 66 æŒÆØ ƒ ºÆ
æ; and elision is found at v. 53 a æ
 ƒ ¼Ł . s4. For the ambiguity of the phrase
w
w
ww
between wilamowitzianum and ewd, see Part I, 7. 3. ClassiWcation is rendered too delicate by the many uncertain borderline cases. Thus, without considering each passage in its metrical context case by case, I have classiWed all the examples as wilamowitzianum, giving preference to consistency. In N7s4, the phrase in question is prolonged by w

, yielding wil þ 3. But it is one of those for which the alternative is highly probable: we ewar (aristophanean is dod
by deWnition). The chart given in under Strophe is based on this analysis. When the phrase is accepted as wil þ 3, we have a sequence we þ wil þ 3 similar to those in P5s2 (we þ wil ) and P6s7/8 (we þ wil þ 1). As an example of wilamowitzianum(and its cognates with þ n) our verse is the only case that starts with
wr. In other words, the Wrst long of reversed dodrans following the base is resolved. This is not rare in reversed dodrantes which lack base (9 examples, Part 5, E. 1). s4 is one of the four verses of N7 which includes a sequence of four or more short syllables in mid-verse (Part III, D). Characteristically, all four shorts often belong to the same word: 4 Kº å, 12 Kƺ (emendation), 33
Ææa ªÆ, 54 ØÆçæ, 88 Iœ. s5. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (d þ e 3). Note the relatively frequent occurrence of brevis in longo (4 times). Moreover it is striking that a word or word-group of four short syllables is used there: 5 K
d YÆ, 55  IÆ, 76 ŒÆÆŁ, 97 ŁÆa Ø. The ending of N3s2 is very similar. Compare the use of tetrasyllabic words at s4. This verse begins with short anceps þ d. Anceps þ d is quite a common phrase at the beginning of a verse (8 examples in total). However, in all the other instances it is long, except O10e10 (wd
e e d) and P10e1 (xd þ gl) of which three repetitions out of four have it short. Between wd and the following e 3, bridge is observed in eight repetitions out of 10. There is word-end with elision at v. 5 (IÆ
Æ ƒ  På) and full word-end at v. 97 (IÆåÆØA ƒ ı ø). e 3 is rare after d, as it is after aeolic phrases (see s3 above), in other stanzas: there is only one parallel: O1e2 w

ww

wrw
w
j

^e

d e3

324

The Eighteen Majors

s6. See Part I, 8. B. 7 (aeolic þ e 3). Telesillean is followed by e 3. Unlike s3 and s5, bridge before e 3 is occasionally neglected (full word-end is found at three repetitions; vv. 35, 48, 69; elision at v. 6). Both the Wrst and the second longs of e 3 are resolved, so that there are six consecutive shorts (cf. Part III, D). Note the following words or word-groups (cf. s4, s5): 6 æ æÆ, 27 åغ ¼æ, 35 ˝
º (see under Textual problems), 48 æÆ 
Æ, 56 Iº, 69 ł ªØ ZÆæ, 77 IÆ º, 90 n K ÆÆ , 98 K
ŁÆ . s7. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase), 8. A. 6 (h) (palindrome), 8. B. 7 (aeolic þ e 3). The resolution at the second position occurs only at v. 70 (n.pr. ¯PØÆ). As indicated in the opening section, the colometry of s7 can be taken in two ways, according to how we connect two shorts in resolution, and I take (ii) as more probable (see the chart arranged horizontally): (i)
tww
w
wr
w
k
d
e e tel e2 (ii)
tww
w
rw
w
k

The combination of tel þ e 2 is used at O1e6 and P11e3. s8. See Part I, 8. A. 6 (a) (palindrome). Hipponactean is rare; Besides our verse, there is only one (P2e8). Both are located at the end of a stanza-form. Emendation at v. 37 is necessary; see textual problems. e1. See 8. C. 8 (d þ e); 8. C. 9 (e þ d). we þ d, (in drama, ia þ ch), is surprisingly rare; it is found in only one other verse, O10e1. On the contrary, the phrase d þ e is incorporated in many verses. The resolved form
ww
rw
is quite frequent. In N7e1, word-end at . . .
wjww
k in three repetitions is conspicuous, perhaps more conspicuous than ordinary cases because of verbal assonance (17 æØÆE ¼, 38 Kƺı Oºª, 101 ¼æØ Z
ØŁ). e2. For the ambiguity of the initial www, see above. There is another verse which is identical: O1e6b rw
ww

w
k

rdod e

And the combination rdod þ e is incorporated in these: P5e6
ww
rw
ww

w
j d rdod e P2s7 rw
ww
rw

w
k rdod e e

Nemean Seven

325

Alternatively, there are three examples of ^ e þ d þ e (P10s2b, P2e6, P5e5); the initial ^ e is not resolved in these. Word-end is strictly avoided between reversed dodrans and e at N7e2. e3, e4. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase). As discussed in the opening section, and as presented in the chart of Epode above, two colometries are possible, depending on how the second www is taken. I analyse gl þ e, giving preference to consistency with verses in other odes. The eighth position of glyconic is surely resolved; responsion between unresolved and resolved at P6s3 and I8s5c attest it. e5. See Part I, 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). The aeolic hendecasyllable (gl þ 3) is found elsewhere only at O9s2 x
ww
w

x
ww
w
w

k tel gl þ 3 I7s3/4

w
w
ww
w



ww
w
w

k
e tel gl þ 3

Repetition in sequence of the glyconic with base www has no parallel, but the pair of telesilleans or reversed dodrantes in the following verses is comparable: N3e4 ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e rdod ribyc þ N6s3 www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j

Word-end clearly occurs after the Wrst glyconic at three repetitions (vv. 21, 42, 63). At one of the other two, bridge is not strongly marked: 84 `NÆŒ ƒ Ø.

326

The Eighteen Majors ISTHMIAN SEVEN

Three triads. Class I I7s1 I7s2 I7s3/4 I7s5a I7s5b

ww
ww
w
w

k a
ww
w
w
w

w
k

w
a
ww
w

j

ww
w
w

k


ww
w


ww
w
u
w
ww
j

w
w
k

tel þ 3 telwe e
e tel gl þ 3 gl tel hepta
e 2

I7e1 I7e2 I7e3 I7e4 I7e5 I7e6 I7e7


w
ww
w
w
w
k

ww
w

ww

k

ww
w
j ww
ww
w
w

k
a
ww
w
u
ww
w
k
ww


k

ww

w
ww
k

glwe tel adon tel tel þ 3 gl tel d sp
d rdod

s1 H 35; s2 B 2, 36, 41; s3/4 H 25; B 8, 37;s5b B 39b; e1 H 28, B 11; e2 H 29; e4 H 48; e5 HB 32; e6 H 33; B 16, 33, 50;53 e7 H 17

s1 s2 s3/4

1 2 3/4

s5a

5a

s5b

5b

e1 e2 e3 e4 e5 e6 e7

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)

(Ø H
æ , t  ŒÆØæÆ ¨ Æ, ŒÆºH K
Øåøæø ƒ  ºØÆ Łıƒe  hçæÆÆ ; qƒæÆ åƺŒŒæı
æƒÆæ ˜Æ æ ±Œ PæıåÆÆ ¼ØºÆ ˜Øı, j ƒ åæıfiH ŒØ ƒ çÆ ÆÆ e çæÆ ŁH,

(11) (12) (13) (14) (15) (16) (17)

ıæø  æø K @惪 ¥

Ø; j ˜øæ I
ØŒÆ ƒ oŒ OæŁfiH ÆÆ K
d çıæfiH ¸ÆŒÆØø, º  ŒÆºÆ `NªEÆØ Ł ŒªØ, ƒ ÆÆØ —ıŁØ ; Iººa
ƺÆØa ª æ oØ å æØ , Iƒ  b æ,

Most of the verses of Isthmian 7 are unequivocally aeolic. Both the strophe and the epode can be reasonably attributed to Class I (aeolic

53

See on Textual problems.

Isthmian Seven

327

odes). The ancipitia, both those of half-base in the telesillean group and those of full base in the glyconic group, are realized as long in several examples. RSS is comparatively low, 44.0% (strophe) and 46.0% (epode). Typical features of aeolic metre are identiWable at s3/4, s5a, and e5. At s5a, three phrases, gl, tel, and hepta, are set out in that order (22 positions). Verses composed of three aeolic phrases are found in another typical Class I stanza-form, N2s4. Phrase-boundary tends not to agree with word-end, though there are exceptions (1/6 and 3/6). All the ancipitia of full and half-bases in s5a are long except one. The combination of gl þ tel is repeated at e5. In s3/4, dovetailing is found between tel and gl þ 3. Other verses are fairly short. In some of them an aeolic phrase is expanded by an apparent ‘bacchiac’ (s1, s4, e4). Such expansion is a common feature of tragic aeolics, but less common in the eighteen majors. There are in total seven examples of the phrase expanded by þ 5 ending (tel þ 3, gl þ 3, hepta þ 2 þ 3) in the eighteen majors, and its concentration in I7 is noteworthy.

Strophe Of the aeolic phrases, telesillean appears most frequently. In fact every verse includes it except for the last (s5b). In the Wrst two verses (s1, s2) telesillean is expanded to the right; in the next (s3) it is expanded to the left and followed by a hendecasyllable (gl þ 3). The ending of this verse ( þ 5, w
w

) is common to s1. The number of positions in s3/4 amounts to 22, of which, the Wnal position being taken as anceps, 10 are true long. Interestingly, both Wgures are exactly equal to those of s5a. The two verses are related in the following manner: s3/4

w
a
ww
w



ww
w
w

k u
w
ww
j s5a


ww
w


ww
w


Note the locations of

gl and hepta. Unlike the others, the last verse (s5b) has no double short. Though the scale is smaller, it is comparable with the last verse of the strophe of P6 (^ e þ e 2 þ xe) or that of P8 (xexe 2), for these stanza-forms are, except for the last, made up exclusively of aeolic verses.

328

The Eighteen Majors

Epode The key phrase of the strophe, telesillean, is heavily used in the epode too. It stands as a verse by itself in e3. And e4, tel þ 3, is identical with s1. In e5 two thirds of s5 is repeated (gl þ tel). The expansion of glyconic by w
w
(we) in e1 is quite similar to s2 (telwe e). However, there are some diVerences. In e2 telesillean is followed by adonean, which, alternatively, may be d þ anceps. d is also used in the last two verses (e6, e7).

Textual problems 8 (s3). The word-order in the paradosis, ØæÆ
ıŒØÆE , is unmetrical, and is corrected by Pauw (
ıŒÆE (ØæÆ). 11 (e1), The paradosis N is unmetrical; K E. Schmid. 23 (s1). The paradosis  N
ºŒ ØØ does not respond. Bergk2–4 restores responsion with b N
ºŒØØ (he also introduces
ÆEÆ N
ºŒ at O6. 30 for the unmetrical
ÆE N
ºŒÆ). The older editions adopted  NæåØØ (E. Schmid). 28 (e1). The paradosis Iø must be emended. Since Iø seems an intrusion from the preceding verse (27 IÆØ), there are many possibilities for emendation: IØø (Hermann, ‘Notae’), Ia çæø (Thiersch, Christ, Willcock), I

ƺg (Mommsen), IçØƺg (Mair, Turyn), alii alia. Snell obelizes ºتe Iø. 33 (e6). Brevis occurs at every repetition. This is certainly unusual (the other example is O10e9; cf. Part III, F). It is impossible to combine this verse with the following. Verse-end is attested by hiatus (it occurs only at v. 33). Also unusual is the verse-form which I analyse as d þ spondee (see below). Some editors try to expel the hiatus at 33. For example, Christ, in his apparatus, proposes ºıŒÆŁ instead of PÆŁ at the beginning of 34. The newly combined verse would be
ww

w

ww

w
ww
k d e d rdod This is acceptable although there is no example of d þ e þ d in the eighteen majors. Bergk4 introduces a quite diVerent metre. Starting with the suspicion about çØ æÆ  (‘Amphiaraum non decuit componere cum Meleagro et Hectore, qui patriam fortiter defendentes

Isthmian Seven

329

occubuerunt’; the so-called ‘Amphiaraus diYculty’; see David Young, Isth. Seven, 21 nn.72, 74), he intoduces I çØ æØ  (sc. temple of Amphiaraus). The metre so produced is: x
ww

k reiz Reizianum harmonizes with the Class I context. But the two corresponding lines must also be emended, though the emendations are very slight: 16 Iºº ±
ƺÆØa ªaæ, 50 ÆEØ ±ººÆØ fØg. Bergk is followed by Bury (with a further change: Iç çØ æØ). I am now persuaded by Barrett, who brilliantly solves the Amphiaraus diYculty (Collected Papers, 197–9). His supposition is Iç ƒæe Eå . He unites e6 with e7 (see above on Christ’s conjecture). As stated above, the combination of d þ e þ d þ rdod is unparalleled, but is explicable enough to be accommodated in Class I context.54 36 (s2). The unmetrical K
is deleted by Callierges. 43 (e3). The paradosis ¼œ is improved by Benedictus: ¼œ .

Individual verses s1. Telesillean and tel þ 3 with the initial anceps (half-base) replaced by two shorts are quite frequent (8 in total; Part I, 5. D. 2). Verbal assonance: 18 ‹ Ø  40 ‹Ø. s2. See Part I, 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ we); 8. C. 5 (double e). Telesillean comes again, but the initial anceps is literally anceps in this verse (short 4 times, long twice). Contrary to the frequent occurrence of ‘cretic’ (e) after telesillean or glyconic, ‘iambic’ (we) is rare (4 examples). The last two positions of telesillean þ ‘iambic metron’ produce the sequence of w
three times. At all six repetitions, word-end occurs either before or after the Wrst short link anceps. Between we and e, bridge is observed at Wve repetitions among six, with the exception of v. 36 Kå ÆØ ƒ Kº
Ø. s3/4. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (longer verse). Since Boeckh, this verse has been divided into two at the point where word-end occurs in all the repetitions: I7s3

w
w
ww
w

j
e hag 54 I retain the analysis and the statistics in Part I unchanged so as to avoid confusion at the Wnal stage.

330

The Eighteen Majors

I7s4

ww
w
w

k

tel þ 3

But apart from coincidence of word-end, there is no manifest indication of verse-end. It is more probable that s3 and s4 make one verse, and that the coincidence of word-end is a manifestation of dovetailing; see above. Here Pindar seems to share a common tendency with the tragedians. The current colometry makes s3 a hagesichorean, which is hardly ever used in the Pindaric corpus (only one certain example, in P2s8). At Wrst sight, anaphora at vv. 8–9 may be thought to support the old division into s3 and s4: 8 j Içd
ıŒÆE (ØæÆ ıºÆE ; 9 j Iç "ºÆ ƒ

ÅØ;

But that is not necessarily so. Compare the following verse: 10 j #
ÆæH IŒÆƺªƒåA; j ‹ ŒÆææA ƒ @æÆ K IºÆºA

Here the second j occupies not the Wrst but the second position of the second phrase by dovetailing. Lines 8/9 and 10 are in anaphora on a larger scale. Note also the second X clause at v. 5, which starts in mid-verse (s5). Note too the similarity of the meaning of the two sentences at the same metrical position (verbal assonance in a wider sense): 25 fiz
 b @æÅ Ø  42 Łfi Œ ªaæ ›H –
Æ . s5a. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (longer verse), 8. A. 6 (f) (palindrome). Though manifest indications are absent, verse-end is almost certain after the third phrase; otherwise the verse would be extraordinarily long (28 positions). Besides this verse and e5, there is one example of glyconic followed by telesillean, P2s2; there bridge is strictly observed between glyconic and telesillean but almost totally neglected after the long anceps (the half-base). 5. Here, in I7s5a, the tendency is not quite so strong. Between glyconic and telesillean, bridge is observed at nearly all the repetitions (one exception, v. 39 IÆØ ƒ åÆÆ; but v. 22 ŁØ  ƒ Œ
ƪƺ ). After the long anceps, word-end occurs at two repetitions (vv. 10, 44). The half-base of the heptasyllable is short only at v. 27 (å ºÆÇÆ Æ¥Æ ). Heptasyllable following telesillean or other phrases ending with w
is totally unparalleled.

Isthmian Seven

331

s5b. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). Anceps þ e 2 can stand for a verse by itself. There is one certain case, O10e7; it is interesting that this too is preceded by a telesillean. Anceps þ e 2 may be associated with telesillean, the key phrase of this poem. If its Wrst single short is changed into double short, the phrase
e 2 becomes telesillean. e1. See Part I, 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ we). It is as if the ending of the glyconic were prolonged further by w
w
( þ 4 ending, so to speak). The examples are rare. The other is P5e2. The ending is articulated in all three repetitions: v. 11 K @æª ¥

Ø, v. 28 KÆfiø æÆfiH, v. 45 K PæÆF ÆŁ ; note the verbal assonance in a looser form. At v. 45, the Wrst syllable of ÆŁ is scanned as short, as at P2e2, v. 90, and P6s9, v. 45. e2. This verse is unique in that
ww

follows an aeolic phrase. I analyse the phrase as another aeolic phrase, adonean, in this context. Adonean is the catalectic version of
ww
w
, dodrans, which is incorporated in the preceding telesillean. As a catalectic phrase,
ww

by deWnition does not stand before other phrases within a verse. Even when we take this into account, the phrase is surprisingly rare. There is only one parallel at most (P10e2), and that may not be adonean but d þ anceps. e3. Although hiatus/brevis is lacking, verse-end is certain. The following verse e4 is a well-identiWed form, the same as s1. Telesillean makes a verse by itself in O10e6 (half-base
), P5s7b (
), I8s3b (w), and O9s1 (
). e4. The half-base of the telesillean is changed from long to double short, the inverse relation to s1–2. e5. See Part I, 5. C. 1 (proper noun involving aeolic full base of the shape
x). The full base of the glyconic is

only at v. 15 `NªEÆØ, a proper noun; it responds with ÆNø and ¼Ø  , t; a verbal assonance? In contrast to s5 and P2s2, bridge is neglected between glyconic and telesillean in two repetitions out of three, and perfectly observed after the long anceps. —ıŁØ (15) and ¸Æ (49) occupy the same metrical position. e6. See Part I, 8. A. 3 (shorter verse). All repetitions end with a short syllable, but hiatus at v. 33 proves verse-end, unless we adopt Barrett’s emendation (above, under textual problems). This unusual verse may be analysed theoretically

332

The Eighteen Majors

(i) dodrans (
ww
w
) dragged; (ii) hemiepes or D, with the second biceps contracted; (iii) d and spondee. In Part I, I reject (i) and (ii) because there is no certain example of either drag or contraction. Spondee takes the place of ‘cretic’ (e) in D/e and freer D/e. The closest parallel is: O9e5
ww




k d sp sp

e7. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (d þ aeolic). There are in total seven verses which start with anceps þ d, but no exactly identical verses are found. The nearest parallel is P10e1 x
ww

x
ww
w
k

xd gl

and the two phrases anceps þ d and reversed dodrans are included in the same order in the following verses: P10s4 w

ww
x
ww

w
ww

w
w
k N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

w
w
k

dxd rdod e2 dodwd rdod e2

^e

Here in I7e7, the relation between the two phrases is comparable with that between telesillean and glyconic.

ww
is telesillean minus w
and
w
ww
is glyconic minus w
. Bridge is observed after
d, as in P10e1 (at all 4 repetitions), P10s4 (with one exception out of 8 repetitions). Note the verbal assonance 34 PÆŁ 51 PÆŁÆ (and 17 oØ).

Isthmian Eight

333

ISTHMIAN EIGHT Seven strophes (monostrophic). Class III (§1) I8s1/2 I8s3 I8s4 (§2) I8s5a I8s5b I8s5c I8s6 I8s7 (§3) I8s8 I8s9 I8s10

w

w
ww
w
wy
w
w
ww
k
w
w
ww

w
wrj w
ww
w
k
w
ww
w

w
w
ww
k

wilwe wil wil e 2tel gl wil

w

w
ww

w
ww

w
ww
j
w
ww

w
ww
j
a
ww
wt
w

k
a
ww
w

ww
k
w
wrw
w
ww
w

w
k

wil rdod rdod rdod rdod gl e
gl d e 3tel e

rw

wr
wr
k w

ww
ww
k

w
w
rw

w
ww
k

e e e
D
e 2e rdod ^e

s1/2 B 22, 32; s3 H 43, 53; s4 H 4, 14, 24; B 64;s5c H 15c, 35c; B 15c, 35c, 45c, 65c; s6 B 56; s7 H27, 67; s8 H 18; B 8, 18, 28, 38,55 48, 58; s9 H 39, 69; B 29, 49; s10 B 10, 20, 30, 40

s1/2 1/2 (1) s3 3 (2) (3) s4 4 (4) s5a 5a (5) s5b 5b (5a) s5c 5c (6) s6 6 (6a) s7 7 (7) s8 8 (8) s9 9 (9) s10 10 (10)

˚º æfiø Ø ±ºØŒfi Æ ƒ  ºÆæ hƒ, t Ø, ŒÆ ø
ÆÆæe IªÆºÆe (º æƒåı
Ææa
ÆæŁıæƒ Ng IªØæø ŒH, "ŁØ   ƒŒÆ ¼
ØÆ, ŒÆd ˝fi Æ IŁÆºø ‹Ø ŒÆæ  KƒFæ· H ŒÆd Kª, ƒ ŒÆ
æ IåÆ Łı, ÆNÆØ ƒ åæıÆ ŒÆºÆØ  ºıŁ EÆ: KŒ ª ºø b
ƒŁø   K OæçÆfi Æ
øƒ ç ø,   Œ Æ Łæ
ıƒ·
Æı Ø  I
æ Œƒø ŒÆŒH ªºıŒ Ø ƃøŁÆ ƒ ŒÆd a
: K
؃c e $
bæ ŒçƺA ªy (Æ ºı ºŁ ƒ
Ææ Ø ƃæł ¼Ø Ł ,

Isthmian 8 is a monostrophic ode with seven repetitions. In spite of the large number of repetitions, verse boundary cannot always be

55

Word-order is corrected; see below, Textual problems.

334

The Eighteen Majors

settled with certainty. See s1/2 and s3 below. Although I8 is monostrophic, its stanza is extremely long. The total number of positions is by far the biggest (163 positions). Compare N2, the shortest monostrophic ode (65 positions). It is even bigger than the total of the strophe and the epode of P11 (129 positions) or of others (I7, P10, P8, O2 (only the eighteen majors being taken into consideration); but it is smaller than the total of any whole triad; a triad of P11 amounts to 201 positions). Its structure is not so simple as those of the other monostrophic odes (P6, N2, N4). They are all simple aeolic (Class I) whereas I8 is not. O14, one of the four minors, is very similar to I8: it too is monostrophic, belongs to Class III, and is 157 positions long. Certainly there are various aeolic phrases in I8. Among them, reversed dodrans
w
ww
is the key phrase. Especially conspicuous is its frequent repetition, no less than Wve times, from s5a to s5b (the Wrst is incorporated in a wilamowitzianum). Its longer cognates, glyconic (three times) and wilamowitzianum (four times), are used frequently too. But I8 is diVerent from the stanza-forms of Class I. In these aeolic phrases tend to be constructed colon by colon, while in I8 they are not. At s5c and s6, the base of glyconic is represented as
a, which may sound characteristic of Class I but is in fact a special licence to admit a proper noun, `YªØÆ, the key word of I8 (Part I, 5. C). On the other hand, there are similarities to N3 or N7 (Class III): preponderance of short anceps, long runs of single-short movement (s3, s7), and freer D/e, which appears in the Wnal part of the ode (s8– 10) and includes even D. RSS is 52.7%. This is not signiWcantly high, but higher than that of O1e, one of the typical Class III stanzas. The structure of I8 is indeed complicated, but less complicated than the variety of names given to each phrase suggest. The process of generation from the preceding verse to the next is fully comprehensible. The stanza can be divided into three sections: §1 s1–s4; §2 s5a–7; §3 s8–10. In §1, what I conventionally called e 2 þ tel (s3) may be analysed as e wgl; the analysis is less important than the fact that s3 as a whole is of equal length and structure to the preceding verse, s1/2: s1/2 w

w
ww
w
wy
w
w
ww
k
w
w
ww

w
w rw
ww
w
k s3

Isthmian Eight

335

Both verses start with wilamowitzianum, and end with it or its cognate, glyconic. A tetrasyllabic single-short phrase is sandwiched between them. The direction of each single-short movement corresponds to the beginning of the verse (the aeolic base): ‘iambic’ (w
) in s1/2, ‘trochaic’ (
w) in s3. Two longs are juxtaposed without an intervening short at either border: that after the iambic phrase in s1/ 2, that before the trochaic in s3. In other words, it is as if the iambic phrase were attached to that preceding to make up a dodecasyllabic aeolic colon, while the trochaic phrase were attached to that following to make up an aeolic of the same size. These two verses have a further aYnity: the last phrase of s1/2 is the same as the Wrst of s3. In the next verse (s4), the sandwiched phrase, the trochaic, drops out, and the wilamowitzianum and the glyconic are interchanged. §2 starts at s5a in the same manner as s1/2, after which comes its principal part, reversed dodrans, which is repeated four times. Glyconic is found again in s5c, where it is followed by e þ anceps (interestingly, the anceps is never Wlled with a syllable long by nature; it is as if this phrase were equal to the Wrst four positions of glyconic). The same phrase is repeated in the following verse (s6), but the suYx, e þ anceps, is changed into d. The diVerence between the two suYxes is in the penultimate position alone: long in the former; short in the latter. The main part of s7 appears unusual at Wrst sight, but is in fact a longer form of the latter half of s3: s3 (end) s7


w
wr w
ww
w
k
w
wr w
w
ww
w

w
k

e is attached to it, and this phrase is repeated in the next verse (§3, s8) with abundant resolution. Aeolic phrases are absent from §3 except at the end of the stanza (s10). The key phrase, reversed dodrans, returns and provides a transition to the beginning of the stanza like a sort of metrical ring-composition. The dactylic phrase D appears for the Wrst time in the middle of this section (s9), but the underlying structure of the verse is not so diVerent from s8: s8 rw

wr
wr
k w

ww
ww
k s9

The Wnal verse starts again with single-short movement.

336

The Eighteen Majors

Textual problems 10 (s10). Emendation is necessary to avoid ª (B, Scholia; D) at the initial position. Carey tries to acknowledge an occasional licence, whereby a postpositive can stand at verse beginning. But his parallels are weak; see Part II, N4, Textual paroblems, 63–4. Bowra and Turyn accept a mechanical transposition (Bergk1): ºŁ ª (Æ ºı. This is inelegant: ‘stone’ does not need to be emphasized. It is not good metrically either. At all the other repetitions the initial position is Wlled with a long syllable. The position is anceps, and a short syllable is, of course, acceptable, but in all the other eight examples of xe 2 at verse beginning Pindar tends to keep the same length in responsion. We should thus avoid introducing a breach of the tendency. Mommsen introduces ŒÆd (Æ ºı ºŁ; but emphatic ŒÆd is meaningless. Bergk4 admits the responsion between double short and long here: – (Æ ºı ºŁ. It is highly exceptional in Pindar. Privitera follows Bergk, and analyses – (Æ ºı as ‘iambic’. But the ‘resolution’ of the initial anceps is permitted only in the spoken part of drama. Snell obelizes the text. 11–12 (s1–2). I am not conWdent of understanding this notoriously diYcult sentence. I provisionally read Iºº Kd EÆ b
ÆæØå ŒÆææa 
Æı æØÆ, construing
ÆæØå with EÆ (so Hermann and others, including Boeckh and Christ et al., who print Iºº Ø). The paradosis gives
ÆæØåø. Some take
ÆæØåø as neuter (‘the events passing by’; Mommsen (with å æÆ instead of EÆ!), Schroeder, Snell). Bowra and Turyn adopt Boehmer’s Kb with ŒÆææA . . . æØA. For the discussion of its metre, see below on individual verses, s1/2. 13 (s3). The unmetrical paradosis ÆNd is emended by E. Schmid to give Id. Between it and åæBÆ a lacuna is discernible. A papyrus (P. Oxy. 2439) provides º
Ø, which is adopted by Snell. 15 (s15a). The paradosis Øı is unmetrical; ı Triclinius. 18 (s8) The paradosis – ÆغBœ is unmetrical;  – Æغœ Triclinius. 21–2 (¼ 21 Sn.; s1/2). The paradosis KªŒg ŒØA is unmetrical according to my analysis (which follows Hermann and Maas). See below on s1/2. 24 (s4). The paradosis K
æÆØ is unmetrical; K
æÆØ Triclinius.

Isthmian Eight

337

25b (¼ 25a Sn.; s5b). The paradosis Æ  is unmetrical;  Triclinius. 29 (s9). The paradosis ÆØ is unmetrical;  Triclinius. So is å; å E. Schmid. 31 (s1). The paradosis XŒıÆ is metrically wrong. The ‘choriamb’ in the wilamowitzianum may not be replaced by three longs. Carey, citing Radt, Paian, 93, tries to defend the paradosis, but the examples given by Radt are not necessarily appropriate. K
ŒıÆ (Triclinius) is adopted by both Turyn and Snell, KıBŒÆ (Bergk4) by Christ. 33 (¼ 32 Sn.; s3). The paradosis çææ ª ¼ÆŒÆ
Ææe ŒE needs another short. Various words have been proposed for insertion after ª: for example, ¼æ (E. Schmidt), ƒ (Boeckh, but correption before digamma in this pronoun is improbable), ª (Bury; followed by Turyn). Bergk4 proposes çææ Œ ª and çææ ª i and prefers the former; Christ adopts the latter. But is the potential optative suitable for a destined event? Schroeder (BT), following Ahlwardt and followed by Bowra and Snell in turn, is more drastic: çææ
Ææ ¼ÆŒÆ ª ŒE. Mommsen’s çææ Œ ¼ÆŒÆ
Ææe ª is on a similar line. Cf. Barrett, Collected Papers, 185 n. 195, who supposes çææ ª  KÆ
Ææ . 35 (s5a). The paradosis åØæd is unmetrical; åæd Triclinius. So is Ø; Snell adopts Triclinius’ ˘Å, Turyn Hermann’s ˜  (‘Notae’). Bergk4 proposes ˜d ÆÆÇÆ. 37 (s7). The paradosis ¼æœ åEæÆ is unmetrical; Hermann (‘Notae’) transposes: åEæÆ @æ, and Boeckh inserted  . 38–9 (s8–9). The paradosis
źE Ł Øæ O
ÆØ ª ı ÆNÆŒÆ ªæÆ does not correspond with the metrical scheme. Hermann (‘Notae’) transposes ªæÆ to follow —źœ and introduces the forms Łæ, O
ÆØ, `NÆŒfi Æ. He is followed by editors. 40 (s10). The paradosis çÆd is unmetrical. ç Ø (Bothe) is generally accepted. 41 (s1). PŁf should just be changed to PŁf. See below on s1/2. 43 (¼ 42 Sn.; s3). The paradosis Åæø is unmetrical; ˝Åæ Boeckh. 45b (¼ 45a Sn.; s5b). The paradosis K
ØÆ is unmetrical; K
ØÆ Triclinius.

338

The Eighteen Majors

46 (¼ 46a Sn.; s6). The paradosis ıƺªØ is unmetrical;  IºªØ Hermann (‘Notae’). 47 (s7). At Wrst sight ¼ÆŒÆ (Bergk2–4, adopted by Turyn; i.e. Zeus and Poseidon), which introduces long corresponding with the third short, is metrically blameless, notwithstanding the absence of long anceps at the position elsewhere. However, though it is analysed as the half-base of telesillean, the position is always realized as short in such a long single-short sequence in leftward extension from d. Thus similarity with a number of examples, including I8s3, is broken. From this point of view, the paradosis ¼ÆŒÆ (implicitly Zeus only; so Snell) or ¼ÆŒ (Triclinius, Bowra) is preferable. Ææa ØÆ is the correction of E. Schmid. The paradosis is  IØÆ. 48 (s8). The paradosis Iåغø =Iåغº is unmetrical; åغ E. Schmid. 52 (¼ 51 Sn.; s1/2). The paradosis æøÆ is unmetrical; (æœÆ E. Schmid. 55b (¼ 55a Sn.; s5b). The paradosis Iåغº is unmetrical; åغ E. Schmid. 56 (¼ 56a Sn.; s6). The paradosis IØÆd ºØ
 produces an improbable hiatus which preserves long ÆØ; so, rather mechanically, IØÆd ª ºØ
, Hermann (‘De dialecto’). Snell introduces hK
iºØ
, which is improbable because of the correption in nondactylic movement. In his apparatus Snell registers Œ ºØ
 with the name of Maas, but it is in fact Schroeder’s (ed. maior 2). 58 (s8). The paradoses Æ and åıÆ are unmetrical;   Heyne, åÆ E. Schmid. 59 (s9). The paradosis ¼æÆ is unmetrical; pæÆ Boeckh. 60 (s10). The paradosis K ºª ª is nonsensical and unmetrical; Kº ª Callierges. 62 (s1/2). The paradosis ªæÆæÆØ is unmetrical; ªæÆæ Bothe. 63 (s3). The paradosis I
 is nonsensical and unmetrical; ¼ 
 Hermann (‘Notae’). 65 (s5). The paradosis IçŒ åØæd is nonsensical and unmetrical; IçŒfiø åæd Triclinius. 65b (¼ 65a Sn.; s5b). The paradosis e . . . ªa is wrong in both sense and metre; e . . . ªa Triclinius.

Isthmian Eight

339

68 (s8). The word-order of the paradosis ( Æ
æd Œ) does not correspond with the metrical scheme. Hermann’s transposition with correction ( Æ Œ
æd, ‘de metris’) is accepted by Snell, Bergk3–4’s 
æd Œ Æ by Turyn. 70 (s10). The paradosis $
e åÆ
ø is nonsensical and unmetrical. Editors accept Triclinius’ $
e åØfi A, with some hesitation.

Individual verses s1/2. See 8. A. 3 (ii) (c) (longer verse), 8. B. 5 (aeolic þ we). It is diYcult to decide whether to divide this verse into two (Boeckh, Turyn) or not (Hermann, Snell). The metrical problem involves a textual problem. It is also complicated by the interpretation of the perplexing passage at vv. 11/12. Emendations (and preservation of the paradosis) can be classiWed into three from a metrical point of view;56 my analysis above is based on (iii). (i) Division into two verses: w

w
ww
w

k t
w
w
ww
k (ii) Combination into one verse, leaving an unparalleled responsion at mid-verse: (ii) (a) w

w
ww
w
at
w
w
ww
k or (ii) (b) w

w
ww
w
at
w
w
ww
k (iii) Combination into one verse, with emendation metri causa at mid-verse: 56 Or four, since Mommsen acknowledges two verses in the same manner as (i), but at the same time establishes verse-end within a word: Kƒd. He calls it asynarteton. The idea of ‘asynarteton’ is, for some scholars even after Boeckh, a last resort to make compatible both verse-end and carrying-over of a word. It survives as late as Christ’s editio maior (1896), although it should be noted that Christ does not admit verse-end inside a word: ‘Versus primum et secundum, cum et numeris et sententiis (cf. vv. 11.12; 21.22; 31.32) cohaereant, in unum versum Hermannus Bergkius Mommsenius coniunxerunt, quorum auctoritati quominus obtemperarem, syllaba media ancipiti versuum 21. 41 prohibitus sum. Divisi igitur versus, ita tamen, ut ex duobus versibus unum asynartetum versum eYci putarem.’ According to our diWnition of verse, anceps iuxta anceps is a mark of division of verses. For asynarteta, see Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line?’. Privitera adopts the same text (colometry) as Mommsen’s, and analyses the Wrst half as ‘Pindaric hendacasyllable’. For this, see Appendix B.

340

The Eighteen Majors

w

w
ww
w
wt
w
w
ww
k (i) is accepted by Boeckh, Christ, Schroeder (ed. maior 1), Bowra, Turyn. Boeckh divides into two verses, rather naı¨vely. His text includes irregularities in both verses: Iºº k Ø (v. 11; prepositive at verse-end followed by postpositive at verse-beginning), and  k (v. 31; elision at verse-end). Iººa at verse-end seems to be paralleled by O9e3 v. 55 (¼ 51 Sn.), but we must still ask whether that passage is really parallel (see below), and  can be expelled to produce asyndeton. The most serious problem is Ø in the initial position. Thus, Bowra and Turyn, following Boehmer, change Ø into K (two shorts must be accepted anyway for v. 51 ! ¯ ºÆ, but see below). Certainly, K could stand at the beginning, and sense seems to be no problem when æØA (genitive) is introduced. But Iºº Kd=Kb is a transitional idiom, as Carey points out. The division Iºº k Kb is inelegant, even if grammatically acceptable. And at O9e3, v. 55 (¼ 51 Sn.), Iººa is not construed with the next word but with the whole sentence (Iººa k ˘Åe åÆØ I
øØ KÆçÆ k ¼º ºE.) When the verse is divided, the Wrst verse is metrically perfect: w

w
ww
w

k wil þ 3 The second is less easy to accept: t
w
w
ww
k te w d Double short corresponding with long in (supposedly) anceps position can be compared with O10e3, but this verse is highly unusual metrically (see ad loc.): t
wr
wr

ww
t
w
k te e
dte Another, N6e6/7, is a crux textually as well as metrically (see ad loc.). Turyn gives six parallels, but they are not comparable. At I8s2 the double short is found in the paradosis only at v. 52 ! ¯ ºÆ, which may be a licence for a proper noun. Introducing double short by emendation (Kb) is another matter. Thus, the emendation entailed by (i) is the least probable. (ii) (a) is adopted by Wilamowitz (GV 237), Schroeder (BT1), and Snell. Following the metrical theory of Wilamowitz and Schroeder, Snell calls the latter half of the united verse ‘choriambic trimeter’:

Isthmian Eight (2a) w

w
ww
w
ut
w
w
ww
k

341 chodim chotrim

According to their theory, free responsion at the ‘Wrst metron’ of ‘choriambic trimeter’ between w
w
 w


 w
wr is admitted. But the idea is groundless (see Itsumi, ‘Choriambic Dimeter’). So (ii) (a) must be rejected. Carey, too, rejects the division into two; but he does not seem to accept (ii)(a). Presumably he takes ut as aeolic base, judging from his citation of P5e9: tu
ww
w

ww
w tw

w
k gl dwe e (ii) (b) w

w
ww
w
ut
w
w
ww
k is worth serious consideration. The former half is no problem. There are four examples of this type of decasyllable (wil þ2; ªª
w
ww
w
). Of them, P5s8 and P2e8 start with w
and are identical with our case. However, the latter part of (ii) (b) is questionable. We must ask (1) whether the colon, which can be described as another type of decasyllable, ªª
x
x
ww
, has any parallels; (2) even if that is admitted, whether Pindar really admitted the responsion between w


 www at aeolic base; (3) even if the responsion is admitted, whether the form may occur in the middle of a verse, not at the beginning. 1. There is no certain example of this type of decasyllable. Two sequences seem to be applicable to the scheme: O1e3
w
w
w
ww

w
k P10s5 w

w
w
ww
w

k

But they can be better analysed in a diVerent manner. There is no reason to pick out O1e3 and adapt it to this particular scheme, separating it from the group of verses which have sequences in single-short movement of various lengths turning to d (Part I, 8, C). As for P10s5, the initial two positions should be taken as acephalous cretic (^ e), judging from the metrical context. 2. In Pindar’s usage, responsion at aeolic base is restricted to identical forms and


w (Part I, 5. A. 2). There are only two exceptions to that dominant tendency, O10s6 and P5e9 (see ad locc.) Both occur unambiguously at the beginning of the verse.

342

The Eighteen Majors

3. Aeolic base w
comes as a rule at the beginning of a verse. Admittedly, that is a matter of deWnition, because I consistently set a boundary between two true longs (Rule 4a). If, for example, I8s6 were divided as
x
ww
jw

ww
k the result would be diVerent. However, I have not so far found any case that decisively refutes this rule of division. In short, the colometry (ii) (b) is hardly plausible. Hermann, Bergk4, and Maas are the champions of (iii). Metrically, their proposals are perfect: an ‘iambic metron’ (or short anceps þ e) is sandwiched between two wilamowitziana: w

w
ww
w
wt
w
w
ww
k This structure is related well to that of the following verse (s3), as is described in the opening section. The sandwiched ‘iambic metron’ is paralleled by P5e2 w

ww
w
w
w

w
ww
j N7s2
ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k

glwe rdod dodwe dod e2 (emended; see note ad loc.)

In order to adjust to this colometry, which demands short, instead of anceps, at the third position of the ‘iambic metron’, two verses of I8 must be emended. One is simple; at v. 41, PŁf should be changed to
PŁf. The other is not so easy. At vv. 21–2, Hermann changes KªŒg ŒØA into ªŒ ŒØfi A . But the active voice of ŒØ ø does not have the meaning ‘to have sexual intercourse with’. Bergk proposes çæø KŒØA (and in his apparatus ¼ªø KŒØA).57 But those do not explain the intrusion of the less common form KªŒ. Maas’s proposal is ªŒ, `YªØÆ (vocative). He may be right to suppose that ŒØA was originally a paraphrase of another word and intruded into the text (although the scholiast actually read the word ŒØA in his text and noted that it was used euphemistically). My tentative proposal is ªŒ ºŒæ: ºŒæ is found at Hom. 57 Bergk3–4 introduces a bold emendation in vv. 11–12, though this does not aVect the metre: Iºº K P EÆ b
ÆæØå ŒÆææA 
Æı æØA:

Isthmian Eight

343

Od. Ł 292, ł 254. Barrett, Collected Papers, 191–3 adjusted Maas’s emendation, proposing ŒÆ , `YªØÆ.58 s3. See Part I, 6. C. 3 (resolved long followed by short anceps), 8, A. 3. (ii) (b) (longer verse), 8. C. 3 (e 2 þ w as half-base). Turyn divides s3 into two at the point where word-end occurs at all seven repetitions:
w
w
ww

w
ww
kB w
ww
w
k He is followed by Snell. The Wnal syllable of the former half is short throughout, so brevis in longo must be assumed at every repetition. That is exceptional, though a high degree of coincidence of brevis in longo is not particularly unusual; for example, at I8s8, six repetitions among seven have it (cf. Part III, F). As for colometry, the divided verses are plain. The former one (s3a) is wil þ rdod. The latter (s3b) is telesillean. It is metrically much better to unite them, however. The structure of the stanza is well suited by the united verse, as is demonstrated in the opening section. The long phrase following the initial wilamowitzianum may look strange at Wrst sight (hence Turyn’s division):
w
wr
ww
w
But this is a variation of sequences occasionally found in Class III stanzas. They start with long single-short movement and usually turn to double short. Here the double short is followed by w
(called e 2 þ telesillean, but in fact, equal to e 2wdw
). e 2 þ telesillean can be compared with e 2 þ hagesichorean (e 2wdw

), in P2s8

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k

tel e 2 hag

And, as has already been remarked, I8s7 has a longer sequence of the identical structure (e 3 þ tel ¼ e 3wdw
). As for e 2wd, there are two parallels: P11s3, O1e3. s4. This verse is one of the three examples of gl þ wil. Bridge is observed at all the repetitions, and dovetailing occurs at three repetitions out of seven.

58 Two metrical notations in Barrett’s book are wrong, one in the main text (192) and one in a footnote (n. 212).

344

The Eighteen Majors

s5a–c. See Part I, 5. F (resolution of aeolic phrase), 8. A. 3 (i) (longer verse), 8. A. 7 (repetition within a verse). The recurrence of the identical phrase
w
ww
is noteworthy. The phrase itself is repeated four times, and also forms part of the preceding wilamowitzianum and the following glyconic. Its second position is always short, except once (v. 55c `YªØÆ, in glyconic). The whole of s5 can be described as w
þ 6

w
ww
þ wt
w

From the viewpoint of colometry, there is not much diVerence whether or not the whole is divided into three? The main reason for the division is its gigantic length (44 positions in total). A stronger impression peculiar to these verses is produced by the coincidence of word-end at the end of the metrical unit
w
ww
. Besides the end of s5a and s5b, where word-end is found regularly at all the repetitions, word-end also occurs at six repetitions out of seven at the end of the Wrst reversed dodrans in s5a; only v. 65 is an exception (I烌fi Æ). And in s5b, two reversed dodrantes are divided by word-end at four repetitions; there is elision at a third. The eighth position of the glyconic at s5c is resolved at three repetitions: 25c
Øı, 35c ºåø, 45c K
ø (whereas at 5c, -ø of
Łø is scanned as one long). Responsion between resolved and unresolved at the same position also occurs at P6s3. At s5c an apparent trochaic metron (e þ anceps) comes after the glyconic. Various types of aeolic colon are frequently followed by e, but rarely by e þ anceps (Part I, 8. B. 5); besides our verse there is just one example: P6s6 www
ww
w

wr
k gl e


I8s5c displays a special relationship with s8, in which the Wnal e is followed by anceps. Word-end falls after the Wrst position of e at four repetitions, and in the other instances the boundary shifts one position later (i.e. after the short of e) always with postpositive (25c  45c ; 65c Ø ). Interestingly, the identical tendency of word-localization is found in P6s6 too. Brevis in longo occurs at four repetitions (hiatus too occurs at two), and in the other three repetitions there is a short vowel in a syllable lengthened ‘by position’, as if the four syllables of e
had

Isthmian Eight

345

been intended to work as the four initial syllables of a glyconic (
w
w) till a certain stage of creation. Also noteworthy is the coincidence of word-end after the penultimate position of glyconic (6 repetitions):
u
ww
wjt
jw

k s6. See Part I, 8. B. 4 (aeolic þ d). Aeolic base of glyconic is
w, except for one

(v. 16), to admit `Nªfi Æ, exactly as in the preceding verse (s5c). Unlike gl e but like gl e
(s5a), gl þ d is rare. s7. See Part I, 8. B. 7 (aeolic þ e 3), 8. C. 3 (e 3 þ w half-base). For the similarity to s3, see above. Moreover, with change of the telesillean (¼ wdw
) to wd, O1s7 can be oVered as a parallel:
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e s8. See Part I, 6. C. 2 (re þ er), 6. C. 3 (er þ anceps at verseend), 8. A. 6 (h) (palindrome); 8. C. 5 (triple e). Another colometry is conceivable, but should be rejected: rw
l x rw
rw
k e
e e Long anceps is never followed by resolved long in the eighteen majors; see Part I, 6, C. Parallels of the resolution at the penultimate position of a verse end are collected and discussed in Part I, Appendix, Addendum II. A verse made up of three e’s, each of which is resolved, is familiar from O2, e.g.: O2s5 x
wr
w
rw
rw
k

xeeee

But in O2 and in other stanzas, there is no example of the sequence rw

wr, juxtaposition of two e’s resolved in diVerent positions (Part I, 6, C). At verse-end a word (or word-group) of four short syllables is employed at almost every repetition: 8 a
, 18 Æغœ, 28 Œ æ , 38 Łæ, 48 åغ , 68 Œ
æ (Hermann’s transposition). That causes frequent brevis in longo (six out of seven). Even the sole exception (v. 68) could be eliminated by changing e (v. 69) into n. s9. See Part I, 6. B (^ e þ d, ^ e þ D); 8. C. 1 (e and D within a verse). The same verse is used at O10e2.

346

The Eighteen Majors

s10. A verse starting with anceps þ e 2 is quite common. The closest parallel is: P11e5 w
w
w

rw
k w e 2
e

The combination of e 2 and
e is also paralleled: ^ e e 2e O1s10 w

w
w
rw
k O2e3 rw

w
w
rw

w
k e e 2e e

As described above, the Wnal phrase
w
ww
provides a transition to the beginning of the stanza. At the same time, it reminds us of the Wnal verse of O2s, which is unique in having double short in that ode.

APPENDIX A

The Four Minors I have excluded from the analysis in Part I these four non-D/e odes: O4, O5, O14, and P7. Their shortness is the main reason for the exclusion. O4 and P7 are each composed of only one triad. O14 is even shorter; it consists of just one strophic pair. Thus O4s, P7s, and O14s have just two repetitions, and O4e and P7e are never repeated. O5 is diVerent. It is composed of three triads, but the verses are unusually few. Its authenticity has been questioned not only on the basis of the scholia but for a metrical reason (see below). When a stanza-form is not repeated many times, coincidence of word-end seems less striking. When word-end coincides here and there, the colometry of these stanza-forms tends to be uncertain, for it is theoretically possible that every coincidence of word-end should be verse-end. For example, four coincidences are found in O4s1 þ s1b:

ww
w
wwj

ww
ww
j
w
wj

k (The Wnal one is unambiguously verse-end. It is attested by hiatus in both vv.1b and 11b). Boeckh established one long, undivided verse as above. I prefer to divide his long verse into two after the second coincidence, for this division makes the metrical articulation clearer (see below). But admittedly this argument is not conclusive. It would be possible to divide the verse further, as Bergk4 does, after the Wrst coincidence, by the assumption of brevis in longo: ww
w
w
k. This division does not make for good metre, and can be dismissed, but the possibility of brevis at all the repetitions should not in itself be summarily rejected. Thus Turyn divides P7s2

w
wwj

w
u
w
ww
j

after the fourth position and makes a short verse: w
w
k. I prefer to reject this too, but the possibility remains. In astropha like O4e and P7e, colometry is desperately uncertain. Every word-end is in theory a candidate for a verse-end. The observations of the eighteen majors are of course helpful in some cases for the decision of verse-ends. For example, O4s2a and s2b, which make up one long verse in Boeckh’s edition,

348

Appendix A. The Four Minors

ww
ww

ww

jw
ww
w

k should be divided into two because there is no verse in the eighteen majors in which both a dactylic movement and an aeolic phrase appear together. Parallels also help. O4s5 and the following s6 should not be treated as two independent verses, but be united into a single verse:

w
w
w
wwj
w
w
w

k For this O9e1/2 is a good parallel:

w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k w e2 w d w e2
It is itself paralleled by other verses; see Part I, 8. C. 3. The following analyses of the four minors are necessarily tentative. I try to cite parallels from the eighteen majors so as to place them in the perspective of the whole of Pindaric metre.

Olympian Four

349

Olympian Four One triad. Class II (§1)

O4s1a O4s1b O4s2a O4s2b O4s3 O4s4 O4s5/6 (§2) O4s7 O4s8a O4s8b O4s9 O4s10

ww
w
wwj

ww
ww
j
w
wj

k ww
ww

ww

j w
ww
w

k

ww

ww

j





j w
wj
w
ww
j w
w
wj

k

^ d wd e2




w

w

w
j
w
ww
rw
ww
j

w
w
k u
ww

j a
jww
w
w
w

k


e e e rdod rdod
e2 xd
xdwe2


O4e1/2 O4e3 O4e4 O4e5 O4e6 O4e7 O4e8 O4e9/10



ww
w
w
ww
w

j w
w
w
w
j

ww
ww

w
k w
w
ww

w
wrw
j
ww
ww

k

ww
ww
j w

w
w
w
w
ww
j rwr w
ww
w
w
w
k

tel hag we3
D e hepta e3 D
D ^ e e3wd ewdwe2

D

d
hag
d d
sp sp sp wewdwe2
^D

s1b H 1b, 11b; s2b B 2b; s5/6 H 5/6; s8b H8, B18; s10 B20

s1a s1b s2a s2b s3 s4 s5/6 s7 s8a s8b s9 s10

1a 1b 2a 2b 3 4 5/6 7 8a 8b 9 10

e1/2 e3

21/2 23

(8) (9)

¯ºÆcæ ƒ $
æÆ æƒA IŒÆÆ
 ˘F· Æd ªaæ ! *æÆØ $
e
،غçæƒتª IØA ºØÆ  
łÆ $łÅº ø ƒ  æıæ IŁÆºø: ø ƒ s
æƃø ÆÆ ÆPƒŒ IªªºÆ ƒ
d ªÆºıŒEÆ Kº : Iººa ˚ Ææı ƒ
Æ
E , n `YƒÆÆ åØ r
 IƒÆ ŒÆªŒç ºÆ (ıçH OÆæı,

ˇºı
ØŒÆ ÆØ %Ææø ƒŁ ŒÆØ  ŒH,

(19–20) (21)

–
æ ˚ºıØ
ÆEƒÆ ¸ÆØ ø ªıÆØŒH ºı K IØÆ .

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

350 e4 e5 e6 e7 e8 e9/10

Appendix A. The Four Minors 24 25 26 27 28 29/30

(22) (23) (24) (25) (25–6) (27)

åƺŒØØ  K Ø ؃ŒH æ Ø
 ! , łØ
ıºƒfi Æ a çÆ N: ‘y Kªg ÆåıAØ: åEæ b ŒÆd qæ Y. çƒÆØ b ŒÆd Ø K Iƒæ Ø
ºØÆ ŁÆ ŒØ
Ææa e ƒ ±ºØŒÆ ƒ KØŒÆ åÆæ.’

Although some aeolic phrases are mixed in here and there, the basic metre of Olympian 4 is freer D/e, both in strophe and epode. It is remarkably similar to N6. As there, double-short phrases are extensively employed. There are 10 d’s and 5 D’s; D is a somewhat infrequent phrase in the eighteen majors; for its use, see Part I, 8. C. 1. In three verses (s1, s2, s3) two d’s (or D) are juxtaposed without intervening anceps ( . . .
ww

ww
. . . ). This type of juxtaposition is rare in the eighteen majors: 4 examples of d þ D and D þ þ d (all concentrated in N6; Part I, 8. C. 1), and 2 examples of d þ d (8, C. 2). RSS is rather high: 45.4% in the strophe, 53.8% in the epode.

Strophe The strophe is divided into two sections. Each section is articulated by long single-short sequences following the core d: s5/6 s10

w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k a
ww
w
w
w

k

The relation of the Wrst 6 verses of §1 is easily grasped from this chart: s1a s2a s3

ww
w
ww

ww
ww
j s1b
w
w

k ww
ww

ww

j s2b w
ww
w

k

ww

ww

j





j s4

Double-short movement occurs in alternate verses. These three verses (s1a, s2a, s3), each of which has two d (or D) in the centre, are gradually shortened. The other three verses (s1b, s2b, s4) resemble each other. s1b and s4 each consist of six positions, but in s1b two of them are short, while in s4 all are long. The last Wve positions of s1b are the same as those of s2b (and s5/6). It must be remembered that the verse-ending . . .
w

k is remarkably rare in the eighteen majors; see below, Individual verses. So far, all the phrases employed are symmetrical except for the hagesichorean in s2b. An asymmetrical phrase, the reversed dodrans, appears in s8a of §2 and is repeated twice (for s7, which is analysed as heptasyllable ¼ anceps þ rdod in Snell and Turyn, see Textual problems). All the other verses, however, are symmetrical. There are similarities with the verses of §1: s8b (
e2) is the inverted form of s1b (e2
), and s9 (
d
) is, in a way,

Olympian Four

351

included in s2 and s3. The Wnal verse (s10) is, as described above, a shorter version of the Wnal of §1 (s5/6). At the same time it includes s8b and s9: s9 s8b s10

a
ww

j

w
w
k a
ww
w
w
w

k

Epode Most verses are freer D/e. Four (e3, e4, e6, e7) can be described in the normal D/e manner. D is more frequent than d, unlike in the eighteen majors. Also, long single-short movements are conspicuous (e3, e5, e8, e9). The Wnal verse, e9/10, is very similar to the central verse of the strophe, s5/6: s5/6 e9/10

w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k wewdwe2
rwr w
ww
w
w
w
k ewdwe2

The similarity between s2b and e1/2 is also noteworthy. The rare phrase hagesichorean (w
ww
w

) is repeated.

Textual problems 9 (¼ 8 Sn.; s9). Most editors accept ˇPºı
ØŒÆ (Byz.) to regularize the initial position. The initial position is anceps, and the paradosis ( ˇº.) goes well. However, the statistics may favour the regularization; see below, s9. 10 (¼ 9 Sn.; s10). Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen, and Bergk2–4 all adopt Œı (Byz.), instead of ÆØ, to get exact responsion. They also move Œı and the corresponding word, ºª, to the preceding verse (s9 in the chart above): [s9]

ww

w
j
d e [s10] ww
w
w
w

k

Christ Wrst restores ÆØ and establishes the colometry which I adopt. He is followed by later editors, including Turyn and Snell. 17 (¼ 16 Sn.; s7). All modern editors since Boeckh accept the paradosis ÆØ . Their colometry is

w
ww

w
(hepta þ e). That supposes correption in the corresponding line in the strophe: v.7 (¼ 6 Sn.)
ÆØ! , n . Correption in non-dactylic movement is, in general, disfavoured. Our case is especially suspect because it involves
ÆE. Rather we should scan
ÆE, n as
w, and introduce ØÆØ (scholia, ‘recc.’) as Heyne’s text and Hermann’s colometry in ‘Notae’.

352

Appendix A. The Four Minors

Individual verses s1a. The Wrst half, ^ dwd is paralleled: O1e5

ww
w
ww

w
w
k

^d

wd e 2

As for the latter, D, N6s5

ww

ww
ww
j

^d

D

is similar. s1b. The phrase e2
is, in appearance, identical with the ithyphallic in drama. Interestingly, there is no example of e2
in the eighteen majors, whereas the reverse form
e2 is attested; see below on s8b. Outside the eighteen majors it is repeated in as many as Wve verses of O5. See ad loc. s2a. There is no exact parallel except for N6s5, cited above ad s1, which is structurally close (d and D are interchanged). ^ D is used in O10s1 and O10e8. s2b. Hagesichorean is a rare phrase in the eighteen majors (and so are other phrases with þ3 endings; i.e. aristophanean and hipponactean). There is only one secure example: P2s8. However, s2b is similar to s10, in spite of their diVerent names: s2b s10

w
ww
w

k a
ww
w
w
w

k

s3. d þ d are incorporated in O10e4/5 and P8e5. s4. Three consecutive spondees are unparalleled. The nearest case is O9e5


ww




j d sp sp

s5/6. The closest parallel is O9e1/2, as seen in the general introduction to this Appendix. s7. See Textual problems. The triple e combined continuously without link has many parallels. See note on P5s9. s8a. The same verse is used with resolution at the same position at P5e3


w
ww
rw
ww
j rdod rdod

s8b. The same verse is found at O10e7 and I7s5b. s9. At v. 9, the choice between ˇPºı
ØŒÆ (Byz.) and ˇºı
ØŒÆ (the paradosis) is not easy (and there must have been no diVerence in the alphabet of Pindar’s age). The position is anceps, but in the eighteen majors exact responsion is a strong tendency when d is preceded by anceps at the beginning of a verse. There is only one exception (P10e01). And the anceps is long more often (5 examples in the eighteen majors) than short (2 examples). See Part I, 6. C. The same pattern appears in O9s9

ww

k

Olympian Four

353

although this should certainly be analysed as reizianum from the metrical context. s10. Although single-short movement extends leftwards from wd in nine verses (Part I, 8. C. 3), extension rightwards is rare. e1/2. The palindromic sequence of
ww
w
w
ww
is incorporated in four verses of the eighteen majors; see Part I, 8. A. 6 (b). Of these, N3s1

ww
w
w
ww

w
k tel

wde

is the most similar. For the hagesichorean, see s2b above. The uniWcation of e1 þ e2 is now supported by Barrett, who avoids SVE at the end of e1. e3. This verse is equivalent to the iambic dimeter. Surprisingly, there is no example in the eighteen majors. e4. D þ e without intervening anceps is rare at the end of a verse. It is paralleled in the eighteen majors by N6e1 P2s3


ww

ww
ww
www
j d D e

ww
ww
ww

w
k
D þ e

It is rare even in the normal D/e odes (5 examples). e5. Two verses may be cited as remote parallels: P10e4 x
w
ww

w
k hepta e P8s6 x
w
ww

x
w
w
k hepta e3(aeol)

e6–7. Brevis in longo must be assumed at the syntactical break. Both D
and
D by themselves are familiar verses in normal D/e, but in the eighteen majors there is no exact parallel. e6 ends with a short vowel (SVE). To avoid it, Barrett, Collected Papers, 185 proposes a diVerent colometry: y Kªg ÆåıAØ· åEƒæ b ŒÆd qæ Y: çƒÆØ b ŒÆd Ø
ww
ww
w

ww
ww
w

w
w
j ibyc (¼ dodd) ibyc e2

Ibycean suits this Class II ode. But two ibyceans without diaeresis are not paralleled in the eighteen majors nor in Ibycus 286 P. This is highly unusual, I presume, in any other Greek poems and should not be adopted even for the sake of avoidance of SVE. e8. e3wd is common, but the initial ^ e is rather strange in this context. The nearest case is: P10s5

w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wil þ 3

The parallels for e3wd are: O1s7 N3s5


w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3wd e

w
w
wr w
ww
k
e3wd

354

Appendix A. The Four Minors

e9/10. If the rule is strictly observed, the Wrst half should not be notated as ewd but as wilamowitzianum. There is no example of e resolved totally in the eighteen majors. Outside the eighteen majors, there is one verse whose Wrst half is the same: Pae6s5a

rwr w
ww
w rw
j e w d w e

Olympian Five

355

Olympian Five Three triads. Class II (?) O5s1


ww

ww
w

w
j O5s2


ww
ww
ww

w
w

k O5s3 ww
ww
w

w

w
w

k

sp d (? rdod) dod e sp D þ (? rdod2d) e2
tel e e2


sp D þ (? rdod2d) we2
O5e2


jww
ww
ww

w

w

w
w

k sp D þ (? rdod2d) e e e2
O5e1


ww
ww
ww
w
w
w

k

s2 H 2, B 13, 18; s3 HB 3; e1 H 23

For the diVerent colometry of e2 adopted e.g. by Turyn, see the Wnal paragraph. s1 s2 s3

1 (1) ! ,łÅƒºA IæA ƒ ŒÆd ç ø ¼øƒ ªºıŒ 2 (2) H ˇPƒºı
 fi Æ, *ŒÆF ŁªÆæ, ƒ ŒÆæfi Æ ªºÆE 3 (3) IŒÆÆ
  I
ƒÆ Œı ƒ 2ÆØ  HæÆ·

e1 7 (7) ¥

Ø ƒ &ØØ  Æ
ıŒfi Æ ƒ: d b ŒF ±Ææ e2 8 (8) ØŒ ƒÆ IŁÅŒ, ŒÆd n
Ææ @ŒÆƒæø KŒ ƒæı ŒÆdƒ a ØŒ ÆæÆ.

The Scholia record the suggestion that Olympian 5 may be a spurious work (K b KÆçØ PŒ q), though its meaning is not necessarily clear (K çØ is a strange word).1 Besides, there are so many metrical features uncommon in the other Pindaric epinikia that its authenticity is questioned by many; cf. Boeckh i. 372: ‘Metrum plane est eximium, quamquam a ceteris Pindari carminibus mirum quantum distans’. First of all, both the strophe and the epode of O5 are extremely short. Though each individual verse is long and the triad is repeated as many as three times, the number of verses is only 3 (strophe) and 2 (epode), extremely few and far from the average of the eighteen majors. Parallels are rather found outside the Pindaric epinikia: Partheneion 1, 2 (see Appendix B) and Bacchylides 3 (see Excursus to O13). Secondly, the structures of the two stanza-forms are unusually simple and clear. All the verses both in strophe and in epode are almost identical. Three of them (s2, e1, e2) start with sp þ D þ , and the other two also start in a similar fashion. All end with e2
(apparently ithyphallic) except s1. Even the ending of s1, e, can be explained as a variation. e is repeatedly inserted in 1

A stimulating explanation is now given by Barrett, Collected Papers, 47.

356

Appendix A. The Four Minors

e2. Such simplicity and clarity is totally absent from the non-D/e odes of Pindar, except for partheneia. Thirdly, both these key phrases, namely sp þ D þ and e2
, are unfamiliar in the eighteen majors. The former could be analysed in two other ways: (1) ‘expanded aeolic’ (¼ rdod2d); (2) dactylic with its Wrst dactyl replaced by spondee. Neither is likely. 1. Interpretation apart, the expanded aeolic is rare (six in total) in the eighteen majors (Part I, 7. 6). A seeming rdod2d is once used, but it starts quite diVerently: N6s3

rw
ww
rw
ww
ww
ww
j rdod ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d)

More peculiar than expansion is the initial pair of longs, which, together with the following
ww
, could be seen as making up a reversed dodrans. In the eighteen majors the second position of the reversed dodrans is short, at least in some, if not in all repetitions:


ww
at all the repetitions is unparalleled (see Part I, 5. A. 1). Another explanation might be that the Wrst two positions are aeolic base; s1 does not include ‘expansion’ but


ww
is followed by
ww
w
. The combination of these two is equal to the asclepiad of Lesbian metre, and has been taken thus by many scholars. But this cannot be so either, because (i) there is no certain example of ªª
ww
, the doubly truncated glyconic (Part I, 5. A. 4) (ii) the asclepiad is never used in the eighteen majors. The interpretation of s2 as beginning with rdod2d should be rejected. 2. The whole of


ww
ww
ww
cannot be dactylic either. ‘Contraction’ of two shorts of a dactyl is totally unparalleled in freer D/e as well as in the normal D/e. It would be an Aeschylean-type verse if it were dactylic. If this phrase is analysed in the same manner as those in other Pindaric verses, its initial two longs must be an independent spondee. Spondee is used three times in the normal D/e odes. It comes at the beginning of the verse in P1s3 (but it is followed not by a D-type colon but by e
e). Since the two longs of s2, e1, and e2 are spondees, it is rational to take rdod in s1 as sp þ d. Its reversed form, d þ sp, is used in I7e6 (and d þ sp þ sp, in O9e5).2 In the Paeans of Pindar there are some examples of spondee preceding dactylic sequences; for example, Pae4s5




ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j sp ibyc þþ

These are discussed in Appendix B. Like sp þ D þ , e2
(apparently ithyphallic) is not familiar either, in the eighteen majors. The ithyphallic is a very common colon outside Pindar, but contrary to expectation, there is no example at all in his poems, although 2

If we adopt Barrett’s correction, the colometry of I7e6 will be diVerent; see ad loc.

Olympian Five

357

we2
(apparently equal to iambic þ bacchiac) at e1 is paralleled (O2e6, N3s8, O9e1/2). At the same time, however, it should be pointed out that there are some similarities to the eighteen majors. The appendage e following a dodrans (s1) is very common, and can, indeed, be regarded as one of the characteristics of Pindaric metre. The combination of dod þ e is also included in s3 in the form of tel þ e. The double e’s in e2 are paralleled; see Part I, 8. C. 5. The Wnal verse of the strophe, s3, starts with the telesillean with half-base in the form ww, which is common (6 examples, including tel þ 3). The following verse is especially similar: N3e4

ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w

w
k tel tel e

This type of telesillean may also be compared with ww
ww
w
x, the phrase which is used in one of the normal D/e odes: N10s1; see Part I, 7. 2. It is related to xD. It is interesting that the combination of e þ e2
(cretic þ ithyphallic) is used, outside epinikia, in the three verses of Parth1 (s3, e1, e2). They are similar to the verses in O5, and, especially, the similarity between Parth1s3 and O5s3 is striking: Parth1s3 O5e2

ww
ww
ww
ww



ww
ww
ww



w

w
w

k ^ D þþ e e2

w

w

w
w

k sp D þ e e e2


As far as we believe in the reconstruction of Partheneion 1 and its ascription to Pindar, we should not deny the authorship of O5 outright, at least on metrical grounds. Turyn, following Schroeder, divides e2 into two verses: e2a e2b




ww
w
k gl
ww

w

w

w
w

k d e e e2


This colometry assumes verse-end at these word-boundaries: v.8 ŒÆ ƒ ‹, v.16 ŒŒÆºı· ƒ s, v.24 ŒÆ ƒ PºªÆ. According to these divisions, we encounter hiatus (vv.8, 24) and brevis (v. 16). ŒÆ at the verse-end is not itself a problem. It is paralleled. But here in this metrical context, i.e. the dactylic movement, epic correption is acceptable.3 If ŒÆ is scanned as a short syllable, the dactylic movement is carried on further, and metrical 3 Barrett, Collected Papers, 51 writes: ‘Pindar invariably observes the digamma in the pronoun ƒ, , and its adjective ‹ . [ . . . ] It looks to me as if we have got correption of ŒÆd before ‹; and if we have, the ode is not by Pindar.’ Incidentally, the examples of the adjective are scarce.

358

Appendix A. The Four Minors

consistency is acquired. The combination of e2a and e2b as one verse is preferable.

Textual problems 16b (e2). The paradosis gives an improbable hiatus: s b å . Both Snell and Turyn adopt Boeckh’s emendation: s b ıå . Hermann suggests M0  å , and is followed by Dissen, Mommsen, and Christ. 18 (s2). Christ keeps the paradosis, ÞÆ "ÆE and scans -Æ " - as ww (‘ " ÆE ¼æ, non Cretense, sed Olympicum’). Schroeder, Snell, and Turyn follow his scansion. Hiatus should be acknowledged as a licence for a proper noun in ‘dactylic’ movement. Boeckh and others write Þ

"ÆE by scanning the initial "- as a long vowel. However, this scansion requires responsion between a long and double short, and should certainly be rejected.

Olympian Fourteen

359

Olympian Fourteen Two strophes (monostrophic). Class III hepta (?
rdod) O14s1

w
ww
j O14s2 w
w
w
ww
w
w

j wewdwe
O14s3
ww
w
w
ww

k dod reiz (? dodwd
) O14s4 www
ww
w
w
ww
w
w
j glwdwe O14s5
ww
w

w

w
w
k dod e e2 O14s6
ww
w

ww
k dod d O14s7
ww
ww
w
ww

k Dwd
O14s8
w
ww

ww
w
j rdod dod O14s9
ww
ww

w
w
w

ww
k D e3d O14s10

w
w

w

jww
w
k
e2e dod O14s11
yjw


jw
j
e
e O14s12
ww
w
w
ww
w
wj

k dod tel þ 3 (? dodwdwe
) s3 HB 15; s5 H17; s6 B18; s7 B 19;4 s9 H9; s10 B 10 s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8 s9 s10 s11 s12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)

˚ÆçØø $ ø ºÆåEÆ Æ¥ ƒ Æ ŒÆºƒº
øº ÆæÆ, t ºØ
ÆæA IƒØØ ÆºØÆØ % æØ ¯æåF,
ƺÆ؃ªø ØıA ƒ K
Œ
Ø, ŒºF , K
d håÆØ· ƒ f ªaæ $ƒE  æ
a ŒÆ a ªÆºıŒ ¼ÆØ ƒ
Æ æE , N ç , N ŒÆº , Y ƒØ IªÆºÆe I æ. Pb ªaæ Łd ƒA %Ææø ¼æ ŒØæÆØ åæf ƒ h ÆEÆ · Iººa
ƒø ÆÆØ æªø K PæÆfiH, ƒ åæıƒ ŁÆØ
æÆ —ŁØ 
ºƒºøÆ ŁÆæı , ÆNÆ ƒØ
ÆÆæe ˇºı
Ø Ø .

The stanza is repeated, like strophe and antistrophe in tragedy. This structure escaped the notice of the metrical scholiast and Byzantine scholars. They treated the whole as one long astrophon. There had been some attempts to search for strophic responsion, but in Heyne’s edition published in 1798–9, Hermann took the Wrst step worthy of consideration to recover it (‘De metris Pindari’, 259). His analysis was republished in almost the same form in his ‘Notae’. There are a number of textual uncertainties which conceal the strophic responsion (see below, Textual problems), but responsion between the two strophes is undeniably established. The total number of positions in each strophe amounts to 158. This Wgure is very high; higher than in most of the stanza-forms of the eighteen majors, except for I8s (169),

360

Appendix A. The Four Minors

which is also monostrophic. RSS is 48.7%. Resolution is conspicuously rare; it occurs only in s4 and s11. Olympian 14 is a short poem, but its metre is sophisticated. The stanza-form is unambiguously classiWed in Class III. Perhaps it represents the most developed stage of Class III metre, comparable to O1 or P2. Asymmetrical phrases,
ww
w
(dod) and
w
ww
(rdod), are used as if they were variations of symmetrical phrases like
ww
ww
(D),
ww
(d) and
w
w
(e2). The similarity of dodrans to e2 is exploited in N7s, but its resemblance to D on such a scale is unparalleled. Aeolic phrases appear to be multifarious at Wrst sight, but are in fact rather simple, and the development from verse to verse is clear. The whole structure is well articulated in the chart below: (single-short/anceps) (dodrans/D/e2 ) (single-) (dodrans/D/e2) s1

w
ww
s2 w
w
w
ww
w
s3
ww
w
w
ww
s4 www
ww
w
w
ww
w
s5
ww
w

w

w
w
k s6
ww
w

ww
k s7
ww
ww
w
ww
s8
w
ww

ww
w
j s9
ww
ww

w
w
w

ww
j s10

w
w

w

ww
w
k s11

w


w
s12
ww
w
w
ww
w


w

j
k w
j
k

w

j

Dodrans is the principal phrase, used as many as ten times. Its place is taken twice by D (s7, s9), four times by d (s3, s6, s7, s9), and twice by e2 (s5, s10). Reversed dodrans too is used twice (s1, s8). With the exception of s1, s2, and s11, each verse comprises two parts, each of which contains one of the above phrases; it is noteworthy that dodrans and D never occur in the same verse. The pairings are two dodrantes (e.g. s4), dodrans and d (e.g. s6), dodrans and e2 (e.g. s5), and D and d (e.g. s7). This accords with the general observation that there is no verse in which both dactylic movement and an aeolic phrase appear together. The principal phrase may be immediately preceded by a single-short one: e before the dodrans in s5 and s10, e3 before d in s9. In s11, single-short movement (
e
e) alone makes a verse without the dodrans. Dodrans is prolonged by single-short movement leftwards (s2, s4) and rightwards (s2, s4, s12). D and d are connected by short link anceps (s7), which also stands before or after dodrans (s3, s4, s12). Long anceps is rare, especially in mid-verse. The sole example is found in s11, where one word (
ººøÆ 11, Pı 22) occupies the consecutive three long

Olympian Fourteen

361

syllables. There are no other words of this shape, so that the whole poem gives a peculiar impression of lightness. Another outstanding feature of this ode is its variety of palindromes. Seven out of twelve verses contain palindromic movement. These are the examples, with their parallels, if any: s2
w
w
ww
w
w
s3
ww
w
w
ww
s4 www
ww
w
w
ww
w
s7
ww
w
ww
s8
w
ww

ww
w
s9
ww

w
w
w

ww
j s12
ww
w
w
ww


(1) (2) none (3) (4) none ¼ s3 (2)

(1) O9e1/2, O4s5/6 (2) O1e4, N3s1, N3e3, N4s4 (3) P2s4, N3e1, N3e4, N4s6 (4) none, but its reversed form,
ww
w



w
ww
, is found in 7 verses.

Textual problems 2 (s2). The third position of s2 must be short. Boeckh’s emendation, ºÆåEÆ for ºÆåEÆØ, is still worth considering (‘verisimiliter’ Christ); it expels hiatus between ºÆåEÆØ and Æ¥. Snell, following Mommsen, accepts the paradosis and supposes correption: ºÆåEÆØ Æ¥; but correption in single-short movement is improbable. Turyn too keeps the paradosis ºÆåEÆØ, but adopts Æ (Bergk2) to avoids hiatus. Then the position in question becomes anceps, and s2 cannot be analysed as a separate verse from s1. Metrically, separation is more attractive (the united verse of Turyn will be discussed below). s2 is well paralleled by O9e1/2 and O4s5/6. All three belong to the group of long sequences of single-short movement turning to d (9 verses in total in the eighteen majors, see Part I. 8. C. 3). O14s2 w
w
w
ww
w
w

j O9e1/2 w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k O4s5/6 w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k

wewdwe
we2wdwe2
wewdwe2


When s2 is united with s1, as in Turyn’s colometry, the phrase boundary must be established before the anceps:



w
ww
w
u
w
ww
w
w

j hepta þ 2 hepta þ 2 þ 3 This analysis is acceptable, but not altogether a good one. The former phrase (hepta þ 2) is well paralleled but the latter is not (cf. P8e7, which is quite unique and its analysis is uncertain). Rather, the diYculty lies in the

362

Appendix A. The Four Minors

combination of the phrases. There is no example in the eighteen majors of an aeolic phrase of þ 2 ending followed by another aeolic starting with x
w. 5, 17 (s5). Strophe and antistrophe do not respond: μF , K
d håÆØ· f ªaæ $E  æ
a ðÞ ŒÆ  æ
a (most MSS);  æ
  (C) ŒFçÆ ØHÆ· ¸ıfiø ªaæ `
Øå K æ
fiø 5
ww
w

w

w
w(w)
17
ww
w
w
w

ww
w


The text has been variously emended both in the strophe and the antistrophe, according to various metrical schemes; my analysis above is based on (vi). (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) (v) (vi)


ww
w

w

ww
w
w


ww
w
w
w

ww
w
w

ww
w
w

k u
ww
w

w



ww
w
k dod e dod
ww
w
k dwe tel
ww
w
k dodwe dod
ww
w
k dwe dod
ww
w
k dwe
j tel
w
w
k dod e e2

(i) Hermann (‘Notae’), Bergk2, Christ, Turyn, Snell ŒºF , K
d håÆØ· f ªaæ hØ  hi æ
a ŒÆ ŒFçÆ ØHÆ·¸ıfiH ªaæ 
Øå K æ
fiø

(ii) Boeckh μF , K
d håÆØ· f hØ ªaæ  hi æ
a ŒÆ ŒFçÆ ØHÆ· ¸ıfiø  
Øå K æ
fiø

(iii) Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’) ŒºF , K
d PåŁÆ· f ªaæ hØ  hi æ
a ŒÆ ŒFçÆ ØHÆ· ¸ıfiø ªaæ `
Øå K æ
fiø

(iv) Mommsen μF , K
d håÆØ· f fªaæg hØ  hi æ
a ŒÆ ŒFçÆ ØHÆ· ¸ıfiH fªaæg `
Øå K æ
fiø

(v) Bergk4 μF , K
d håÆØ· f fªaæg hØ j  æ
  ŒÆ ªºıŒÆ j IƺºÆØ . . . ŒFçÆ ØHÆ· ¸ıfiø ªaæ j 
Øå K æ
fiø j fKg ºÆØ  I4 If ± ØØÆ is adopted. Turyn reports ± ØıÆ. Boeckh prints ØıÆ, which is now given strong support by Barrett, Collected Papers, 187.

Olympian Fourteen

363

(vi) Schroeder, Bowra μF , K
d håÆØ· f ªaæ hØ  æ
a ŒÆ ŒFçÆ ØHÆ: ¸ıfiH ªaæ 
Øå fKg æ
fiø

Metrically, (ii) and (iv) are less likely. The long anceps of the telesillean does not suit Class III (ii); and the correption of fiH before ` is implausible (iv). At Wrst sight (v) is too drastic to accept. But, although this colometry is totally diVerent from the others, the textual changes are not many, except IƺºÆØ in the following verse. The  after æ
a is the reading of C. Even IƺºÆØ should not be dismissed at once, for exact responsion is lost in the following verse too (see below; Bergk does not adopt Kayser’s ¼ÆØ for ªÆØ at v. 6). However, deletion of ªaæ (iv)–(v) may not be syntactically preferable. The choice would be either (i) or (vi). Although there are no strict metrical parallels to (i) or (vi), both are possible combinations of phrases. I adopt (vi); see further individual verses. 6, 18 (s6). Turyn retains the paradosis with the following analysis: a ªºıŒÆ ªÆØ
Æ æE , K ºÆØ  Iø º;

wwr
w

ww
k
ww
w

ww
k

However, the resolution of the ‘choriamb’ (or choriambic nucleus of dodrans if phrase boundary is changed) is rare; emendation is necessary. Hermann transposes . Boeckh, Mommsen, et al. follow him: a ªÆºıŒÆ ªÆØ
Æ æE ,
K hi ºÆØ f g Iø º,

wr
w

ww
k e e d

I prefer Kayser’s emendation a ªºıŒ ¼ÆØ ð K ºÆØ  I-), like Christ, Schroeder, Snell. This gives


ww
w

ww
k dod d 5 8, 20 (s8). Again, exact responsion is lost:6 Pb ªaæ Łd ƒA %Ææø ¼æ F ŒÆØ: ºÆƒØåÆ F 


w
w


ww
w

w
ww

ww
w


Neither the metrical form in the strophe nor that in the antistrophe is exactly paralleled in the eighteen majors. From the metrical point of view, the latter is slightly preferable (rdod þ dod). This combination of two aeolic 5

According to Bergk4 (see above, s5, (v)), s6 becomes ^ dod d ^ dod is found in O13s5. 6 Schroeder (BT) accepts the irregular resposion. According to his theory, both
w
w

and
w
ww
belong to the same metre.

ww
w

ww
k

364

Appendix A. The Four Minors

phrases harmonizes well with the other verses; see the horizontally arranged chart above. The diYculty of the former (e2 þ tel) lies in the fact that e2 rarely stands at the beginning of a verse in the eighteen majors. Also rare is the long half-base in combinations like xe þ tel. Various emendations have been proposed to recover the exact responsion. Some scholars emend v. 20: thus Boeckh introduces ºÆØåÆ. Responsion is seemingly recovered, and Mommsen adopts it. But resolution before half-base,
w
wr a
ww
w
, is hardly acceptable; instead, Maas (‘Nachlese’) proposes غÆØåÆ, which is accepted by Turyn.7 Emendation should be rather looked for in v. 8, but a convincing proposal has not yet been made. Snell, following Wilamowitz (GV), scans Łd monosyllabically and supposes responsion
w
y
. Contraction of the choriambic nucleus is the least probable option, and should be rejected. Kayser proposes ±ªA instead of A. Christ follows him. Exact responsion is restored (
w
ww
), but correption in an aeolic phrase (Łd ±ªA ww

) is doubtful. Bergk4, having found a rare word in Hesychius (Łæ ¼ ÆØ ,  , PÆŁ ), reads Pb ªaæ ŁæA Ł  .8 9 (9). See below, on v. 21. 11 (s11). See below, on v. 21. 13 (s1). t is Boeckh’s supplement (om. MSS). 15 (s3). K
ί F (MSS) is one syllable too short. Bergk2 changes the adjective into a verb: K
ƌE F. Both Snell and Turyn adopt this. Hermann retains the adjective. After two proposals, K
Œ ªı (‘De metris’; adopted by Boeckh) and K
ŒØ ÆF (‘Notae’), his Wnal one is K
ŒØ e F (‘Quinque Ol.’), which is adopted by Mommsen. 21 (s9). Snell accepts the paradosis. It requires responsion between two shorts and a long in D, which is improbable. ºıŁ (Ahrens, followed by Christ) seems to be a simple correction, but this conjugated form of XºıŁ is not otherwise attested. YŁØ (Byz., adopted by Turyn), too, is simple, and may be right instead of hiatus. The dactylic rhythm might admit it.9 On the

7 Bergk2 introduces E in place of F and changes the word-order: Pb Łd ªaæ in the corresponding v. 8. This makes
ww
y
, which is improbable. 8 Hermann (‘Quinque Ol.’) is drastic: he not only emends v. 8 but changes the colometry by moving F ŒÆØ to the preceding verse: Pb A j ¼æŁ %Ææø Łd
w

kw

ww
w
F ŒÆØ: j ºÆØåÆ F 
w

kw

ww
w
The second phrase, ^ e þ dod, does not suit the context well; there is no example of ^ e in this song. 9 Turyn supposes the digamma before åE. I am incapable of judging whether his citation from epigraphic material is right.

Olympian Fourteen

365

other hand Boeckh emends the strophe (v. 9), introducing ŒØæÆØØ, and retains ºŁ here (the hiatus remains). The metre then becomes
ww

w
(d þ e). That is possible, and Mommsen accepts it. 23 (s11). The paradosis PØ is unmetrical, so Pı (Boeckh), or PØ (Bergk). The responsion between —ŁØ in v. 11 and Œº
Ø (FEN) in v. 23 involves resolution, which is possible. To produce the exact responsion, Ahrens accepts Œº
ØØ (the other MSS) and introduces —ıŁfiH in the strophe (v. 11):



ww


w
j
d
e This may be right, because resolution is in general avoided in this ode. He is followed by Christ.

Individual verses s4. The sequence wdwe is unusual; it should perhaps be reanalysed as tel þ 2 (¼ wdod þ w
), as is demonstrated in the table above by which I analyse the structure as a whole. There is only one parallel for wdwe, in which it is preceded further by we3: N3e1b

w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k w e3 w d w e e

s5. ŒÆ at verse-end is paralleled. There is no example of dod þ e, but its correlative, tel þ e, is one of Pindar’s favourites. e þ e2 is used in three verses in O2. The three phrases, dod, e, e2 are all included in O1e1, but in a diVerent order: O1e1

w
wr
w

ww
w

w
w
k w e e dod e2

The text of Turyn and Snell (see above, Textual problems) yields a peculiar colometry since e is never used between two aeolic cola in the eighteen majors. s6. d is not a common suYx of aeolic phrases; there are only two parallels (I8s6, P5e9). s7. There is no exact parallel, but the following verses are similar: N6s6 N2s5 N3e1


ww
ww


ww
rw

k D
d e

ww
x
ww

k d x d

ww
w
ww
x
w

j d w d x e


s9. Three D/e phrases are connected without link anceps. One expects to Wnd parallels in normal D/e, but connection without link is fairly rare. There are six examples of D followed by e
e (not by e3): P3s6, P4e7, P9s7, N1s7, N8e1, I3e6, and three of d preceded by e (not by e3): O7e7, N1e4, I5e4.

366

Appendix A. The Four Minors

s10. There is one verse of similar structure in the eighteen majors: I8s1 x
w
w
rw

w
ww
k x e2 e rdod s11. This verse is equal to the iambic dimeter, of which, however, there is no example in the eighteen majors (there are many in the D/e odes, of course).

Pythian Seven

367

Pythian Seven 1 triad. Class II (strophe/antistrophe); Class II (or Class III; epode)

w
wrwrjw

k w
wwj

w
u
w
jww
j

w

j

wjw

k w
wr
ww

j

jww
w
k wr
w
k u rw

k P7e1
w
wwj

w
ww
j P7e2 w


w
j

wjw
w
j P7e3a rw
ww
j P7e3b rw
wj
ww
j P7s1 P7s2 P7s3 P7s4 P7s5 P7s6 P7s7 P7s8



w
w
ww


w

ww
j

P7e4 P7e5 P7e6

w
ww

k


e4
wd e hepta
e

d
we d
tel ^e e xe
rdod rdod ^ e
e tel rdod ewd
ewd
e d wd


s1 H 9; s3/4 H 4; B 12; s5/6 H 6; s7 B 7 s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 s6 s7 s8

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

e1 e2 e3a e3b e4 e5 e6

17 18 19a 19b 20 21 22

(1) (2–3) (3/4) (5/6) (7) (8) (17) (?) (?) (?) (20) (21)

˚ ººØ ƃ ªÆº
ºØ `ŁAÆØ
æØ `ºƒŒÆØA ƒ PæıŁE ªfi A ŒæÅ
E IØA ¥

ØØ ƺŁÆØ. K
d Æ
ƒæÆ, Æ r Œ Æø Oı ÆØ K
Øçƃæ ! ¯ ºº Ø
ıŁŁÆØ; t ª Œº , $ƒÆ  ŒÆd
æªø. fi Æ ƒ P
æƪfi Æ ƒ åÆæø Ø· e  ¼åÆıÆØ, çŁ IØ a ŒÆºa 惪Æ: çÆ ª   oø Œ Iƒæd
ÆæÆ Ł ººØÆ PƒÆØÆ a ŒÆd a çæŁÆØ.

Strophe The colometry of the strophe is uncertain. Coincidence of word-end is frequent. There are also some textual uncertainties. Notably, Snell’s colometry (taken from Wilamowitz, GV) is unique, and diVers from all its

368

Appendix A. The Four Minors

predecessors. The colometry above is Boeckh’s. It follows, more or less, semantic divisions, and is adopted by most editors either without change (Schneidewin, Mommsen, Christ, Schroeder) or with a minor change (Bowra unites s3 with s4, and Turyn divides s2 into two after the fourth position). The exceptions are Snell, as has been mentioned, and Bergk2–4, who deletes the two initial longs of s6 and unites s6 with s5 (see below, Textual problems, on v. 6). Snell is no less radical. He not only changes the metre at the junction between s2 and s3 (see below, Textual problems, v. 2) but unites s3 with s4, and s5 with s6. If s3 is united with s4 (Bowra and Snell), and s5 with s6 (Snell), two aeolic phrases starting with heavy full base (

) emerge (with dovetailing): P7s3/4 P7s5/6



w

j

ww

k
e ph w
wr
ww

j

ww
w
k we d gl

This aeolic base is, however, peculiar to Class I (aeolic), but there are no other Class I features elsewhere in this stanza-form. When separated from each other, the four verses, s3–6, become short, but their shortness can be accepted. It is paralleled by s7 and s8, between which verse-end is demonstrated by brevis in longo at v. 7. This stanza-form is, as a whole, similar to P5s and belongs to Class II (freer D/e). As in P5s, e is dominant while d appears sporadically. Asymmetrical phrases are occasionally mixed in: the heptasyllable, which may be analysed as link þ rdod, at s2, and telesillean, link þ dod, at s6. It is remarkable that all the verses start with anceps or acephalous e. None starts with a true long.

Epode The colometry of the epode is more uncertain. I start from the hypothesis that it is not very diVerent from the strophe (and P5). My colometry is basically the same as Christ’s and Schroeder’s. Before Christ (Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen) e3b was divided into two, its Wrst half (rw
w, a ŒÆºa æªÆ) united with the preceding verse, and its second half (
ww
, çÆ ª  ), with the following verse. The analysis above is considerably diVerent from those of Turyn and Snell. Following Wilamowitz, they expel Œ (MSS) at v. 20 (e4) and read Œ . They then analyse: P7e3b P7e4 P7e5

www
w
ww
j wil


w
ww
j wil

w

ww
j wil (Turyn), ia þ ch (Snell)

Snell’s nomenclature is right here. With my analysis, the two wilamowitziana disappear. It is common in Class II or Class III (for example, P5e or I8s) that reversed dodrans is repeatedly used amongst e’s.

Pythian Seven

369

Textual problems 2 (beginning of 3 Sn.; s2). Snell scans ªfi A as a disyllable and moves it to the begining of the following verse. In his corresponding verse 10–11 Snell takes oV a syllable to make responsion, by establishing  ƒ  (V) where most editors adopt  ª , Moschopoulos’ emendation of the other MSS’   . According to Snell’s colometry (but not his notations), the verses may be analysed thus: [s2] [s3]

w
wwj

w
u
w
j wd e x e w
j

w

j

wjw

k ^ e
e ph

[s3] is similar to e3a. The disyllabic scansion of ªfi A and the expulsion of  are already suggested by Mommsen in his apparatus, though his colometry is diVerent: s2

w
wwj

w
u
w
jw
j wd e x e2

4 (s4). ¥

Ø (MSS) is unmetrical; ¥

ØØ Triclinius. 5 (s6). Æ (=)EŒ (Boeckh) is accepted by many. The paradosis is  rŒ (unmetrical) or Æ  r Œ. 6 (s6). Æø is dubious. Scholiasts try laboriously to explain it. Proposed emendations are various: ÆNø (Kayser, followed by Christ, and recently, Liberman), ºÆH (or ŁÆH, Schneidewin), ÆNA (i.e. ªÆØ ø; Mommsen). If a word starting with a vowel like ÆNø is selected, brevis in longo occurs at the end of the preceding verse. Combining s6 with s5 is more unlikely in this case because Pindar hardly ever uses u
at the opening of glyconic. Bergk2 deletes it, and the corresponding EŒÆØ (14) too, as a gloss. 6 (s6). The paradosis (Oı ÆØ=Oı ø=Oı Çø) is one syllable too short. Boeckh, Schneidewin, Mommsen, Christ et al. adopt Oı ÆØ (Triclinius). Oı ÆØ is Boeckh’s suggestion in not. crit. It is adopted by Schroeder, Turyn, and Snell. 9 (s1). The paradosis (
ºØ › ºª =
ºØ › ºª =
º Ø ºª ) is unmetrical. Many adopt
ºØ ºª (Byz.), except Turyn (
º › ºª ).

Individual verses s1. In the iambic context, this verse would be a catelectic trimeter (ia þ ia þ ba); but the bacchiac as the catalectic form of the iambic metron is alien to Pindaric metre. Except in the initial and the Wnal position, all the intervening brevia are short. Thus, like e5 and e6 in the eighteen majors,

370

Appendix A. The Four Minors

this verse should be taken as one of the long sequences of single-short movement (en), preceded and followed by ancipitia, even though e4 is not paralleled in the eighteen majors. Frequent resolution is a characteristic common to the examples of long en (O1s8, N3s2, P2s1). Our verse includes seven successive shorts, as many as O1s8. It is localized by ªÆº
ºØ ŁAÆØ (and
ºØ ºª ›غE), which reminds us of the beginning of P2s1: ªÆº
ºØ t #ıæ ŒÆØ. s2. The combination of xd e is frequent: N7s5 O9s11

w
ww

w
wrw
k wd e3

ww

w
x
ww

k
d e x d


For e þ hepta O9e8

w
u
w
ww
u
w
ww
w

k


e hepta hepta þ 3

is a remote parallel. s3. There are two verses made up only of xe
: O10e1b and P5e7b. s4. No example is found of xd
as an independent verse (O9s9 may be one, though I analyse it as reizianum). s5. Very similar is O10e1

w
wr
ww
j we d

s6. A single telesillean is found as an independent verse in Class II stanzaforms (O10e6, P5s7b). s7–8. Exactly the same combination of short verses at P5e7 P5e7b

w
tw
j ^ e e w tw

j we


e1. There are two other verses made up of two rdod: I8s5b, P5e3. e2. Acephalous e is hardly ever followed by long anceps. The unique parallel in the eighteen majors is P5s11

w


w
w
w
k

^e


e3 (see ad loc.)

It may be better to divide after P
æƪfi Æ to make the telesillean an independent verse like s6. e3b–4. x e w d
is paralleled at N3s6, P11e6.

APPENDIX B

Longer Fragments and ‘Prolonged Ibycean’ It is much more diYcult to establish colometry in the fragments of Pindar than in the small-scale epinikia, to say nothing of the eighteen majors. Of the two main sources of fragments, citations by ancient authors are not necessarily reliable in detail. They often change the word-order. Even the omission of a particle could change a metrical scheme. Moreover, verses are hardly ever repeated, for it is rare that two or more stanzas are cited. On the other hand, the fragments recovered from papyri have diYculties pertinent to papyri. First of all, one must be a papyrologist to read the letters correctly. Furthermore, the restoration of strophic responsion from scattered letters on more than one scattered column of a papyrus is itself sometimes dependent on a supposed metrical scheme. The ‘colometry’ laid out in papyri is often mysterious. Whether it deserves to be treated as a real colometry should be seriously examined. Even when strophic responsion is conWrmed, the number of repetitions is generally small. That means it is not easy to aYrm verse-end by hiatus/brevis. For the identiWcation of hiatus/brevis, both the Wnal letter and the initial letter of the following line must be preserved in the papyrus. We are not always so lucky. But, in spite of these diYculties, some fragmentary odes of Pindar can be used for metrical studies. West chooses Paean 4 as a good specimen to show generic development of verses in an ‘aeolic’ ode (GM 67). Recently, Rutherford has remarked that ‘such sequences as gl@da [¼ gld] and gl@2da [¼ gl2d] are rare in the Epinikia. They are, on the other hand, characteristic of the
ÆØ  genre’ (p. 449). It is interesting and even desirable to investigate how the major fragments are found to be related to the epinikia when the rules on which my analysis is based (I. 3) are applied to them. Some of the fragments are evidently D/e, and are consequently excluded from further consideration here. Of the non-D/e poems, these six are long enough to be analysed in detail: four paeans (Pae2 ¼ D2 Rutherford, Pae4 ¼ D4, Pae6 ¼ D6, Pae9 ¼ A1) and two partheneia (Parth 1, 2). It must be stressed that my observation is limited to metrical analysis. For the reading

372

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

of papyri, I follow the report of the previous editions, especially Grenfell– Hunt, Lobel, Snell–Maehler, Radt, and Rutherford.1 In general I do not specify how the ‘colometry’ of the papyrus diVers from modern analyses. How papyri lay out verses and whether they correctly analyse metrical units are interesting questions about scholarship in antiquity, but outside the scope of this book.2 In the Paeans, especially in Paean 4 and Paean 9, there are a number of verses which seem to be created by so-called ‘dactylic expansion’ of aeolic phrases. The analysis of these is a big issue, and a special section is devoted to them after the sections for each poem. At the end of this Appendix, I discuss fr. 94c Snell. This is not a papyrus fragment but a citation by Hephaestion. The name he gives to the metrical form in question is interesting: ‘the Pindaric hendecasyllable’. I investigate two questions: one is what Hephaestion understood by the Pindaric hendecasyllable; the other is what the Pindaric hendecasyllable really is.

1 Snell’s layout is a compromise between the reproduction of the layout in the papyrus and his own metrical analysis. He keeps the line-division of the papyrus to print the text, but makes indentation where he judges the verse does not end. Nevertheless, in his metrical chart he freely moves syllables to clarify his analysis. Consequently, the line division in his chart does not accord with the line division of the text. For example, the second verse is divided into two lines of 7 syll. (ph) þ 7 syll. (ia þ ba) in his metrical chart, while in the text it is divided into two of diVerent lengths (6 þ 8). 2 Cf. Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line?’

Paean Two

373

Paean Two Three triads. Strophe: out of the six repetitions, some parts of str.1, str.2, str.3 and ant.3 are preserved: s1a 2r;3 s1b 3–4r; s2 3r; s3–4 2–4r; s5 2–3r; s6 1–3r; s7 1–2r. Epode: survives better than the strophe: e1 1–3r; e2 3r; e3/4 2– 3r; e5–e9 3r. Strophe: Class I. Epode: Class III

Pae2e1


w
ww
j u
w
w

j u
a
w
j rw
ww
w

u
ww

k

ww

a
ww

w
k
w
ww
rw
ww

j

ww
w

w
ww

j

ww

w
ww
w

j

ww

ww
w rw
w

k

Pae2e2 Pae2e3/4 Pae2e5 Pae2e6 Pae2e7 Pae2e8 Pae2e9


ww

w
ww

w
k d rdod e




ww

ww
ww
ww
w
j sp sp d ibyc þ w rw
w

w
ww
rw

j we2 rdod e
rw
ww

a
ww

w
k rdod rdod e

w
ww
w

k hepta þ 3
w
ww
w


ww

k gl reiz w
ww

w
ww

w
ww

k wd rdod ph

Pae2s1a Pae2s1b Pae2s2 Pae2s3 Pae2s4 Pae2s5 Pae2s6 Pae2s7

rdod xe2
xe2(aeol) gl ph
d rdod e rdod ph tel ph
d hipp


d d we2
(or
d dodwe
)

The colometry of the papyrus is obviously wrong in two verses (s4, e2). It ignores the mark of verse-end (hiatus/brevis), and makes a continuous line beyond the mark. s4. Colon-end is placed after the double short of the reversed dodrans, and its last long and the following e are united with s5, at all the corresponding repetitions. The vertical stroke ƒ here indicates line-boundary, not phrase-division: 41/42 ]ƒ [ 51/52 . . . ƺƃŒÆؽıØÆؽŒÆØ . . . 77/78 . . . ºƒª
ÆæŁıÅ . . . 3 r means the number of repetitions which suvive in the papyrus. Needless to say, where the number is small, the analysis is uncertain. The number is uneven within a verse because (i) surviving parts are diVerent according to repetitions, (ii) the colometry of the papyrus is diVerent from mine.

374

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

The colometry of the papyrus ignores brevis in longo at 78 (
ÆæŁ P-), rendering the division impossible. e2. Colon-end is placed between the reversed dodrans and the following e, and the e is united with e3, at all the corresponding repetitions: 25/26 . . . Æ
º½ ƒÆŒÆØıŒÆæ
 . . . 61/62 . . .
æÆƽ ƒ
ÆØøÆØåÆÆ . . . 97/98 . . . ÆçØ
Ææƒ ØÆØ
æÆØ . . .

Hiatus at 26 (ŒÆd P-) makes the division impossible. The structure of the strophe is fairly simple. Except for s2, aeolic phrases are repeated. Responsions between long and short both at aeolic ‘full base’ (s3) and at the second position of reversed dodrans (s4, e6) are characteristics of Class I. So is dovetailing (s3). Occasionally
d (s4, s7) and e (s4) are combined with aeolic phrases. Parallels are many in the eighteen majors. s1b and s2 are irregular; see below. The epode is more complicated. Reversed dodrans is frequent and freely combined with d and e (e2, e5, e6, e9). Particularly unusual is e3/4, which is the only verse that includes double-short movement.

Individual verses s1a–b Editors including Snell–Maehler do not divide s1 into two halves. However, word-end is regularly attested after the reversed dodrans (s1a). The anceps at the beginning of s1b is long at two repetitions (1 @Åæ, 37 IºŒÆd) and short at one (73 åe). In the eighteen majors aeolic phrases are hardly ever followed by long link anceps þ a freer D/e phrase. There are only two exceptions: P11s4


atww


wr
ww
k rdod
e d

in which the anceps is always long, but would be eliminated with an alternative colometry, rdod þ sp þ rdod (see ad loc.); P10s6

ww
ww
w
a
w
w
k tel x e2

in which the anceps is long at two repetitions out of six. Thus it is better to separate s1a (rdod) from s1b. xe2
(‘ia þ ba’ in drama) is not very common in Pindar, and when it occurs, the anceps is always short in the eighteen majors (3 examples). we2
either functions as a prolongation of single-short movement (N3s8, O9e1/2) or stands as an independent verse (O2e6). There is no example that follows an aeolic phrase with zero ending like rdod.

Paean Two

375

Furthermore it is possible to unite s1b with the following verse, s2. The Wnal part of s1b is preserved in four repetitions. There is no hiatus/brevis to prevent two lines being united. s2. Two ancipitia, which make this verse unique and diYcult to analyse, are attested beyond doubt by the reading of the papyrus. The restoration of 2, —ØA 
ÆE w


w
, is certainly right while the whole of 74 ÆØE f Ø,

w
w
, survives in the papyrus. The third (38) ołØ ¥ ÆÆØ,

w
w
, is a restoration from the scholia, and is accepted by many. Note that one of the two ancipitia, either the former or the latter, is short, while the other is long, at all the three repetitions. Perhaps the phrase x
x
w
may be a variation of an aeolic phrase, x
x
ww
, in the same manner as the latter half of the eupolidean dicolon (ªª
x
w
) is equal to its Wrst half (ªª
x
ww
) with ‘cretic’ taking the place of ‘choriamb’. In the eighteen majors, there is a verse which seems to be related somehow: P8s6

a
w
ww

u
w
w
k hepta e3(aeol)

Our verse and P8s7 may support each other: P8s7

u
w
u
‘‘w’’
w
k

I introduce unusual scansion (˚ ı w
) into the latter half of v. 49 ¼ 47 Sn. to regularize the metre: e2. The position marked by ‘‘w’’ would be anceps if metrical irregularity were preferable to prosodical irregularity, and aeolicized e2 would occur. The other examples that Snell’s metrorum conspectus collects under the head ‘anceps in ‘‘dactylo’’ glyconei’ (pt. 2, 174) are not really parallels. s3. Glyconic þ pherecratean is not a usual combination in the eighteen majors. There are two examples: O1s1 and P8e3/4. In Pae2s3 the combination shows typical characteristics of the pure aeolic, or Class I: (i) dovetailing occurs at three repetitions out of four (vv. 3, 39, 75), (ii) the full base of the pherecratean is

(vv. 3/4, 75/76) corresponding with
w (50/51). s4. The second position of the reversed dodrans is, like that in the pherecratean in s3, ‘explicitly’ realized as anceps: long at one repetition (52 Ł ººØ), short at three (5, 41, 77).
d followed by full aeolic base is paralleled in the eighteen majors: I7e7 P10e1



ww

w
ww
k
d rdod a
ww

a
ww
w
k xd gl

There are Wve examples in the eighteen majors of e following an aeolic phrase with zero-ending, see Part I, 8. B. 5.

376

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

s5. There are examples, one in the eighteen majors (P5e3), and another in the four minors (O4s8a), that are perfectly identical. Even the position of resolution is the same:


w
ww
rw
ww
j rdod rdod s6. Exact parallels for the combination, tel þ ph, are not found in the eighteen majors, but there are two places in which telesillean is followed by an aeolic with full base: N7s8 (tel þ hipp), O9s2 (tel þ gl þ 3). Against the general tendency in the eighteen majors, bridge is not observed. Word-end occurs at the joint of two phrases in the two repetitions that survive in the papyrus (55, 80). s7. For
d þ aeolic phrase with full base, see s4 above. Hipponactean is a rare phrase in the eighteen majors. There are only two examples: N7s8 P2e8



ww
w

w
ww
w

k w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k

tel hipp wil þ 2 hipp

It is interesting that all three, including our verse, are situated at the end of a stanza. e1. The nearest parallel is P8e5



ww

ww
w
w
j
d d w e

For the other examples of d þ d, see Part I, 8. C. 2. It is least probable that wwww
is d (‘choriamb’), for the resolution of d is extremely rare. Rather, the sequence
ww
wrw
w
is, as a whole, either d w e2 or dod w e. I adopt the former analysis for two reasons: (i) P8e5 (above) is quite similar; (ii) we2 resolved at the same position is used in e5. But the alternative is not impossible; compare N7s2


ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k dod w e dod e2

e2. Without the suYx e, this verse is equal to I7e7



ww

w
ww
k
d rdod

e3/4. In the papyrus this verse is divided into two lines after the Wrst positions of ibyc þ . This division is accepted by many. But the sequence . . .
ww

ww
. . . is well attested, e.g.: N6e1


ww

ww
ww
rw
j d D e

For ibyc þ , see ‘Dactylic expansion revisited’ in this Appendix. The Wrst half, two spondees and choriamb, would, as a whole, be analysed as a

Paean Two

377

wilamowtizianum in drama. However, this form of wilamowitzianum is totally alien to the eighteen majors. Rather, O9e5


ww




j d sp sp

is a possible parallel. e5. There are in total nine examples of xe2 in the eighteen majors, but none of them is followed by reversed dodrans. Nor are there any examples of the combination of rdod þ e
. However, the sequence . . .
ww
rw

at the end of the verse Wnds parallels: O10e4/5 N6s6



ww

ww
rw

j d d e

ww
ww


ww
rw

k D
d e


e6. Five reversed dodrantes are repeated in I8s5 and the following, but a closer parallel is found in the Wrst two phrases of P2s2

www
ww

u
ww
w


ww
w
k rdod gl tel

The anceps of the second dodrans is long at 67 (PƪæÆØØ) and short at 31 (
ºÆªEÆ· N). At 103 the text is missing. e7. There are two examples of hepta þ 3 (O9e8, P10e5). e8. In O9, three successive verses are made up of gl þ reiz. e9.
d rdod is used in I7e7 (see above, on e2). For rdod ph, see N3e2


w
ww

w
ww

k rdod ph

Like this (N3e2), the pherecratean in our verse may be better analysed as rdod þ anceps (Part I, 7. 5). Moreover, it is possible that the initial wd should be acephalous reversed dodrans (^ rdod); but the metre of ritual cries (Nc N, —ÆØ ) is far from certain.

378

Appendix B. Longer Fragments Paean Four

Two triads. Strophe/antistrophe: s1–3 2–3r; s3b–8 2–4r. Ant. 2 is the only stanza that preserves the whole text. Str. 2 too is in good condition but some metrically crucial parts are absent. Str. 1 and ant.1 are only partially preserved but they compensate metrically the missing part of Str. 2. Epode: totally 1r. Only ep. 1 survives in the papyrus. The Wrst two lines of ep. 2 are the rearrangement of the citation of Plutarch according to the metrical scheme of ep. 1. Thus they are not helpful for metrical study. Class II. (§1) Pae4s1 Pae4s2 Pae4s3a (§2) Pae4s3b Pae4s4 Pae4s5 (§3) Pae4s6 Pae4s7 Pae4s8

ww
ww
wwj
w
j wwibyc (¼ teld)

w

ww
w
k
e dod

w

wr

wr

jwr

k
e e
e
e sp

w
k w
w



ww
ww
w
k


ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j


e we sp ibyc sp ibyc þþ


ww
j d ^ e D sp w

ww
ww


k ^ e ibyc þþ w

ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k Pae4e1a

ww
ww
j
D
d e rdod Pae4e1b

ww

w
rw
ww
j
e
e2tel Pae4e2

w


w
w


ww
w
k Pae4e3/4

ww

ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k
d ibyc þþþ Pae4e5 w
w
w

ww
ww
w
k we2ibyc e e e2e sp Pae4e6/7
wr
w

w
w

wr

j
e tel Pae4e8

wr

ww
w
k we d
Pae4e9 w
w

ww

j Telesilleans at e2 and e8 should be analysed in this context as link anceps þ dodrans. Ibycean is, by deWnition, expanded dodrans (dodd).

Strophe The colometry above diVers considerably from those of the papyrus and of modern editors.

Paean Four

379

(i) s3a–b. The third and the fourth lines on the papyrus are thus represented (the wide spaces are given here for a practical reason, to highlight coincidences of word-end within the line): Third str.1 ant.1 str.2 ant.2 Fourth str.1 ant.1 str.2 ant.2

] ÆP:  · ] % æØØ· ˚ æŁÆØæÆØ· ƽÆø b [ ] K e ÆŁf ( æÆæ Ka Æ-

3 13 34 44 4 14 35 45

½Æ b Œa Kø· æÆ ºØ


½ ªıÆØŒH KºÆåø ºª½ ¼ Æ Œ    ŒÆd ‹º r Œ

ÆÆØ æ åŁ ¯Pƽı PæŒÆ·

The third line cannot be a verse in the modern sense:4 a word is divided at the end of the line: ˚ æŁÆØ- (ant.1) and Æ- (ant. 2). On the other hand, there are two coincidences of word-end inside the fourth line: 3. 4.



w

rw

rw

jrw
uj

w
k

Snell unites these two lines into one verse:



w

rw

rw

rw
x

w
k Following him, West analyses it as 4 iambics þ dochmius. Instead of the dochmius, however, Snell simply leaves the metrical symbols as they are, x

w
, without giving them any name, apparently because of his total avoidance of dochmiac metre in Pindar. These Wve positions remain perplexing. The diYculty lies in the initial anceps, long at two repetitions (4, 14) and short at the other two (35, 45), which is, nevertheless, followed by (possibly) another anceps (always long). It should be separated from the following four positions (

w
), contra Snell and West. Notably, wordend is observed after it in all four repetitions: that is, there is verse-end. The short syllable in this position is in fact brevis in longo.

4 Apparently Bowra makes a mistake. His reconstruction of the third line does not make good metre.  ÆP:  : (str. 1, 3 according to his line-numbering) is one syllable too long, and ˚ æŁÆØ½Æ (ant. 1, 12) is two syllables too long to correspond with Ka (ant. 2, 40).

380

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

s3a

w

wr

wr

wr

k
e e
e
e sp s3b

w
k
e

The similarity of s3a to u
w

wr

wr

j

O10s3

xe e
e sp

longer than O10s3 by another
wr
. Note too that the verses preceding these two are the same (
e dod). There are parallels for the shortness of s3b. Apart from the examples in the eighteen majors, O7s3 in a normal D/e ode is remarkable; the same form (
e) is used as an independent verse. is striking.5 Pae4s2 is

(ii) s5 (end)–s8. These are the seventh, eighth, ninth, and tenth lines on the papyrus. Again, wide spaces indicate coincidence of word-end: Seventh str.1 7 ant.1 17 str.2 38 ant.2 48

æ  ªÆ ¼ººŁØ

&ıåÆ : Ø· —ÆØç½ Æ : ŒºAæ åø;

˚fiø ŁH <f> ıƒºÆ

Eighth str.1 8 ant.1 18 str.2 39 ant.2 49

½EØ· : æÆ  e r Ø ½ 
 Y-

Ninth str.1 9 ant.1 19 str.2 40 ant.2 50


 çØ· Å Œ.

æÅ· æø Ø
º Æ, çæ , Œı
æØ-

Tenth str.1 ant.1 str.2 ant.2

10  ººÆØ 20  . NåŁØ 41 ˜Øe ¯Æ  Æ潌ı
. 51 , Æ b e —æØ œ.

5 O10s3 should be analysed as above, not as xe
e
e
, because the latter analysis introduces cut between long anceps and the following resolved long against Pindar’s tendency; see further, Part II ad loc.

Paean Four

381

7. ww
w
j
ww
jw
8.
ww
ww
9.
wjw

ww
10. ww
ww
ww
w
k Snell rightly separates the Wve initial positions of the 7th line on the papyrus, æ  (str.2) and ªÆ ¼ººŁØ (ant.2), from the following parts, and unites them with the preceding line (s5).6 I follow him. After that, however, my colometry diVers from Snell’s. Snell makes a very long, single verse (his 6th):


ww
jw

ww
ww

wjw

ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k However, it is better to divide this long verse into three verses at the two points where coincidence of word-end occurs. The initial choriambic, which is written in the middle of the seventh line on the papyrus, makes an independent verse (s6). Note that syntactical division occurs after these four positions at two repetitions (17, 48). Furthermore, the ninth line should be divided after -
 çØ: k (40) and -Å Œ.k (50) (s7). Thus the choriamb located in Snell’s chart with indentation at the beginning of the second line of his 6th verse becomes

kw
, with brevis in longo supposed after the second position (but çØ followed by æø is not necessarily brevis). Again, syntactical division occurs there. The separation of s6 from s7 is necessary. If s6 were united with s7, the united verse would include an aeolic phrase (dodrans) and D in one verse:


ww
w

ww
ww


k There is no parallel at all for this in the eighteen majors. The overall structure of the strophe is quite easy to grasp. It is divided into three blocks composed of three verses each. Transition between the verses in §1 is smooth. The last six positions of s1 and s2 are identical (
ww
w
), and so are the Wrst six positions of s2 and s3. The structures of the next two blocks (§2, §3) are similar to each other. Both start with a short verse made up of four positions. All the other verses in both blocks include dactylic movement of diVerent lengths. Of the two verses in each block, the number of dactyls is smaller in the former. The shorter ones are similar to each other: when the penultimate position of the ibycean in s4 is replaced by long, the D sp of s7 appears. The dactylic movements of the longer ones (s5, s8), are 6 It must be remembered that Snell reproduces the layout of the papyrus. His own analysis, which is diVerent from the papyrus, can be deduced from the metrical chart. He gives the notation (gld) ¼ 5 da at the Wfth verse, which is meaningful when the initial Wve syllables of the sixth verse are added.

382

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

completely identical. Spondee is found here and there (s4, s5, s7). For its interpretation, see below. (iii) The other verses of the strophe s1. Exactly the same phrase is used in the Wrst half of P2s4

ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k wwibyc tel (¼ teldtel),

or rather, ^ D þ wibyc

And, although the beginning is diVerent, O10e9



ww
ww
w
k
ibyc (¼ teld)

is the same in that the verse is made up only of this phrase. s2. There are two verses of the same combination: O10s2 P8s4

u
w

ww
w
k xe dod w
w

ww
w
k we dod

s4. The Wrst four positions are we and cause no problem. What I describe as spondee in the following part is taken by many as aeolic base. Thus, what I analyse as sp þ ibyc is, according to them, gld. The restoration of the text and the metrical theory are interdependent at the crucial point. Only one line is completely preserved in the papyrus (the underlined letters make the spondee): ant.2 46


ØÆ
ºı
ØæH ÆŒ æø  K
ØåæØ

The latter half of this part,
ww
ww
w
k, is preserved in the other three repetitions too. The Wrst half, w
w


, is missing in two repetitions (5, 15). In the other (36), one of the two syllables which I suppose to be spondee is missing. Grenfell–Hunt supplement the defect with a short syllable: str.2

36 K
Æ ±: ½ºŒø ÆØø n Iƽ

Housman’s supplement, which Snell accepts in his edition, restores the same metre as in 46: f: g K
ÆÆ: ½˚ ÆæÅH ÆØø n Iƽ

The reason why I prefer a spondee to aeolic base will be discussed in a separate section (‘Dactylic expansion revisited’). s5. The initial spondee is attested in two repetitions. In the other two the corresponding part is missing. The long ‘dactylic’ sequence (ibyc þþ ) is not paralleled in the eighteen majors.

Paean Four

383

s7. For ^ e preceding D, these verses must be compared: I8s9 O10e2

w

ww
ww
k w

ww
ww
k

^e ^e

D D

Epode The metre is far from certain. I give here a tentative analysis. It is diVerent from that of Snell and West in the following cases: e3 and e4 are united; so are e6 and most of e7;
ÆæÆ (29, e7) is scanned not as www but as
ww; @æªØ (29) is transposed from e7 to e8.

384

Appendix B. Longer Fragments Paean Six

The metrical scheme is the most certainly attested of all the Paeans in the non-D/e metre. Three triads. Strophe/antistrophe: each verse is repeated Wve times at most (ant. 1 is totally missing; str. 2 and ant. 3 are partially preserved), three times at least. Epode: e1–5 1r; e6–7 1–2r; e8–10b 2–3r; e11–14 3r. Class III. (§1) Pae6s1 Pae6s2 Pae6s3 Pae6s4 Pae6s5a Pae6s5b Pae6s6 Pae6s7 (§2) Pae6s8a Pae6s8b Pae6s8c Pae6s8d Pae6s9 Pae6s10 Pae6s11 Pae6s12

ww
w
w
w
w
ww
w

j


w
ww

w
w
w

k


ww
w

w
k w
w

ww
wt
j rwr w
ww
w rw
j
ww
j
ww

w
wwt
j w
w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k

^ dwe2hag rdod e3


dod e we ar ewdwe d d ph hepta þ 2 hipp


wrw
j
ww
ww


ww
ww
k ww

ww
wwj
ww


j ww
ww
rw

w
k ww
w
jw
w

wj
ww
k w rw
w
w
w
wrw
j
w
jw
ww
k
ww
w

k

e2 D
D ^ d D þ sp ^D e e ^ d w e2rdod w e6 wil (?e w d) ar

Pae6e1 Pae6e2 Pae6e3 Pae6e4 Pae6e5 Pae6e6 Pae6e7 Pae6e8 Pae6e9/10a Pae6e10b Pae6e11


ww
w
w
w
k

w
ww
w

j rw
ww
w
ww

j


ww
j
ww

w
ww

j w
[ ]
w
wwt
k

w
ww
w

k
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j w
w
ww
jw

w
w
k
ww
w
w
w
ww

j
ww
w

y
ww
w
w
ww

j

Pae6e12 Pae6e13a Pae6e13b


w
ww
w
j
wwrw

w
ww

k w
w
w
ww

w
w
ww
k

dodwe hepta þ3 rdod reiz sp d d ph [] ph hepta þ3 ibyc þ þ þ hepta þ 2 e2 dod hepta þ1 dod D (?) hepta þ1 gl rdod ph

we w d e w d

Paean Six

385

The colometry of the papyrus is wrong at two or, possibly three, verses; unambiguously wrong at s8d, and, unless we admit a licence, at s8b. At these two it ignores the mark of verse-end, hiatus, and makes a continuous line. There is one more error at e10a, as long as we accept the reading of Vitelli– Radt. s8b. In the 13th line in the papyrus the last half of s8b (D) is united with the initial part of s8c (^ d ) in spite of hiatus at 95:


ww
ww
ww
str.1 13
ØŁŒÆÆçÆø ant.2 95 Æ
æØıłØŒø½::ºÆØ str.3 135
ı
½. . .

æŁıæøÆŁıŒº

The corresponding parts in str. 2 (74) and in ant. 3 (156) are not preserved. The supplement 95 $łØŒfiø ½! ¯ ºfi Æ is beyond doubt. This means that the papyrus ignores hiatus. Snell accepts this hiatus in mid-verse, apparently as a special licence for a proper noun in dactylic movement. This is possible, but unnecessary. The united verse, s8b þ s8c, would be of unparalleled length in Pindar; cf. Radt 95. There are in total six examples of D k ^ d ( . . .
ww
ww
kww
. . . ) in the normal D/e; see Part III, A, under Uncommon phrases. s8d. The 16th line in the papyrus runs over the verse-end and includes the Wrst half of s9 (ww
w
): str.1 16 ŁÆØƺçøŒÆæÆØåŁçƺ ant.2 98
ıæ
ØƺŒØŒı½ ƽ str.3 138 æŒæıłÆŒ½ Ø
ØåøæØ

The corresponding part in line 78 is not preserved. Hiatus is observed at 138 Œ½fi Æ K
Ø-. e10a. According to Radt, there is a position in the middle of a line on the papyri (both — 4 and — 5) which is, in fact, the Wnal position of the verse. Although the preceding position is short, long and short syllables nevertheless respond in this position. This is the Wnal position of e9/10a (Radt’s 9th verse). Snell diVers from Radt. He reads short syllable throughout all the three repetitions. This is Snell’s text: 53 114 175

. . . I åƽ $æ: . . . XÆæ øe K½
. . . ıæƽ çº: ª O
H  : -

The underlined syllables occupy the position in question. Both by keeping this short and by supposing that word-end does not occur after it (note O
H), he unites the latter half of e9/10a with e10b to make one verse. Radt conWrms the reading of the editio princeps (Vitelli), which is:

386 175

Appendix B. Longer Fragments . . . ıæƽ. . . :ªØ H ª : -

Rutherford follows Radt, while Maehler (1989) follows Snell. From the metrical point of view, Radt’s division is easier to explain; see below. For the reading of the papyri, I follow Radt. My colometry too is essentially the same as his (cf. his argument in detail, 93 V.), except in two places: the separations of s5b from s5a, and of s8b from s8a. Snell’s colometry is considerably diVerent. He does not accept s8c (Radt’s 9th verse) as an independent verse, nor s8d (Radt’s 10th verse), but makes a gigantic verse by uniting s8a/8b/8c/8d into one. The metre of Paean Six is striking at Wrst sight (‘Das Metrum ist wieder ‘‘a¨olisch’’, aber die ao¨lischen Grundformen sind hier viel freier variiert als im zweiten Paian’, Radt 93). But its peculiarity should not be exaggerated. As is demonstrated below, the metre as a whole unambiguously belongs to Class III. Each verse is well explained by the parallels collected from the epinikia (the eighteen majors). The similarity with P2 is especially striking. There are at least seven pairs of verses which are almost identical, common to both Pae6s and P2s (with one being P2e). It is possible that Pindar may have modelled one upon the other. Pae6s1 P2s8 Pae6s5a P2s1 Pae6s7 P2e8 Pae6s8b P2s4 Pae6s8c P2s3 Pae6s8d P2s7 Pae6s10 P2s1

ww
w
w
w
w
ww
w

j ^ dwe2 hag

ww
w

w
w
w
ww
w

k tel e2 hag rwrw
w w
wrw
j ewdwe rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6 w
w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k hepta þ 2 hipp w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k wil þ 2 hipp
ww
ww


ww
ww
k D
D þ ^ D wibyc ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k þ ^ d D sp ww

ww
ww
ww


j

ww
ww
ww

w
k
D þ e ^D e e ww
ww
www

w
k www
ww
www

w
k rdod e e w rw
w
w
w
wrw
j we 6 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6

Other parallels are frequently cited from O1, N3, and, outside the eighteen majors, from O14. At the same time some characteristics of Class II are mixed in: O10, N6, and, O4 outside the eighteen majors. Resolution is frequent. Continuous shorts are remarkable: 6 shorts (s5), and 4 shorts (s5, s8, and twice in s10). Amazingly, the penultimate position of aeolic phrases with pendent ending is occasionally resolved: s4: 149  ±ºfi : ø ( 88 I½æø, 128 IØA), s6: 131 Iæ½  ( 91 
½ºº½ø), e10b:

Paean Six

387

176 Iæ ( 54 ½EÆØ, 115 r ½Œ). These may support the unusual resolution of w
wwt
k, caused by Iªæ  at N3s6. Partly because of frequent resolutions, RSS is very high. Palindromic movement on a grand scale is prominent. Most examples are unparalleled in the eighteen majors. s1 s5a s7 s8b s10 e2 e3 e7 e10b e11

ww
w
w
w
w
ww wwww
ww
wwww
w
ww
w

w
ww
w

ww
ww


ww
ww
wwww
w
w
w
wwww

w
ww
w


ww
w
ww


w
ww
w


ww
w
w
w
ww

ww
w
w
ww


(1) none (2) (3) none (4) (5) ¼ e2 none (6)

(1) None, but a shorter form,
w
w
w
w
, is found at O9e1/2. (2) Cf. P2e8 w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k; and
ww
w

w
ww
in a further six verses. (3) None, but
ww
x
ww
in four verses, and
ww
w
ww
in another four. (4) None, but it includes glyconic. (5) Cf. (2) above. (6) O1e4, N3s1, N3e3, N4s4.

Strophe Most verses of the Wrst half (§1) include aeolic phrases. Particularly noteworthy are those which have þ 3 ending ( . . .
ww
w

); hagesichorean (s1), aristophanean (s4), hipponactean (s7). They articulate the structure of §1. The þ 3 ending is quite rare in the eighteen majors, and these phrases are unfamiliar. An aeolic phrase with pendent ending is used in s6 too (pherecratean). This pherecratean is possibly one of the cases which may well be analysed as rdod þ anceps (cf. Part I, 7. 5). Lengthy single-short movements are included in s1, s2, and s4. This movement culminates in §2, s10. Aeolic phrases are nearly absent from the latter half of the strophe (§2). Double-short movement becomes a key. D and its related phrases are remarkably repeated (s8b, s8c, s8d). After s8d some resemblances to §1 are pursued. s9 is a variation of s1, and, as mentioned above, single-short movement, which appears here and there, is extended and attains its maximum length in s10. Finally, an aeolic phrase of þ 3 ending (aristophanean)

388

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

comes back. It echoes one of the themes of §1, and at the same time introduces the beginning of the following stanza, whether strophe or epode.

Epode Because restoration of the metrical scheme of the Wrst half (e1–7) relies on essentially only one repetition (ep. 2), some uncertainties inevitably remain. But the similarities with the strophe are evident; see below on each verse. About half of the verses end pendent. Repetition of þ 1 ending, like that of pherecratean, should be noted.

Individual verses s1. For the similarity to P2s8, see above. Two-thirds of the latter part of the verse is completely identical. The long single-short movement whose initial short is replaced by double short has no parallel. Nearest to a parallel are: O1e5 O4s1

ww
w
ww

w
w
k ww
w
ww

ww
ww
j

^d ^d

w d e2 wdD

They have only one single short between two doubles. Instead, our verse has four singles. s2. There is no exact parallel. Of the verses which start with reversed dodrans, the following are partially similar: I8s5b N3e2 O1e6b, N7e2


w
ww

w
ww
j rdod rdod
w
ww

w
ww

k rdod ph www
ww

w
k rdod e

There is one example of e3
(the preceding position, a double short, is suspect but the sequence itself is certain): N6e6/7

r
w
w
w

j ? xe3


A long single-short movement ends pendent in these verses too: O2e6 N3s8 O9e1/2

w
w
w

k we2
ww
ww
w
w
w
w

k telwe2
w
w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k we2wdwe2


s3. Two other verses include the same sequence as ours: N7s3 P6s5


ww
w

w
w
w
k dod e3
ww
w

w
w
ww
j dod wil

Paean Six

389

s4. These two end blunt, but are quite similar:

u
w

ww
w
k xe dod w
w

ww
w
k we dod

O10s2 P8s4

Aristophanean (¼ dodrans þ anceps, by deWnition) is rare in the eighteen majors. It is used at P11e1 (by itself) and O1e7 (end of verse). s5a. See above for the similarity to P2s1, which would become identical with Pae6s5 if the central
w
w
were changed into
ww
. Outside the eighteen majors, there is one verse whose Wrst half is the same: O4e9/10

rwr w
ww
w
w
w
k e w d w e2

ewd may be analysed as a wilamowitzianum which starts with six shorts. This is not rare in tragedy, especially in Euripides. But it is unparalleled in the eighteen majors. I prefer to analyse the whole verse (as well as O4e9/10) as a long single-short movement with d at its core (the examples are collected in Part I, 8. C. 3). There is no example of totally resolved e (rwr) in the eighteen majors. But in expanded phrases, long sequences of short syllables do occur, as in P2s1 above. Although resolution gives a diVerent impression, the sequence ewdwe is incorporated in N3e1b

w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k w e3 w d w e e

s5b. I separate d (
ww
) from the preceding verse because none of the examples similar to s5 have another d after rightward extension. Word-end coincides before and after d, and moreover, d is occupied by one word at all three repetitions that can be read in the papyri (8 ˚ÆƺÆ ; 90 ˜ÆæÆÆ; 130 Æı
æÆØ). There is no verse in the eighteen majors that is made up only of d. Thus it is possible to combine this d with the following s6; this is preferable to doing so with s5. s6. The parallel for initial d is P5e6


ww
rw
ww

w
j d rdod e

Furthermore N3e2


w
ww

w
ww

k rdod ph

is very similar, except for the initial
w. s7. For the similarity to P2e8, see above. The diVerence lies only in the initial position. s8a. It is uncertain whether
wrw
should be separated from the following D. There are no verses made up only of e2, but two examples

390

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

of
e2, O10e7 and I7s5b. Nor is there any example of e2 followed by D. Resolution of the third position of e2 occurs at N3s3. s8b. Note the essential feature of P2s4 and its similarity to Pae4s8b, see above. Both D’s are prolonged to ^ D and ibyc, and the names given to them conceal the similarity. There are no other verses that include two D in the eighteen majors. N6s6


ww
ww


ww
rw

k D
d e


is a remote parallel. Of course, in the normal D/e, D
D is familiar. s8c. For the similarity to P2s3, see above. The Wnal spondee of Pae4s9 is replaced by e in P2s3. The Wnal spondee following D þ can be compared with I7e6 O9e7


ww


k d sp

w
ww
ww


j
ribyc (¼ heptad) sp

As for the initial ^ d followed by D þ , N6s5

ww

ww
ww
j

^d

D

is similar though the length is diVerent. s8d. For the similarity to P2s7, see above. Even the resolved position is the same. Nomenclature apart, the diVerence lies only the absence of the initial short. Identical too except for the diVerence in resolved positions is O10s1

ww
ww

w
tw
k

^D

ee

s9. For ^ dwe2, see s1 above. Although there are three examples of rdod þ there are none of e2 þ rdod. s10. See above for the similarity to P2s1, which lacks the initial w. On the other hand,

e2,

O1s8

w rwrw
w
w
w
k we5

is one w
shorter but similar in that it starts with w. s11. The wilamowitzianum of this shape is frequently used, but perhaps this phrase is better analysed in context as e w d. Whichever it may be, there is no other verse made up only of this phrase. s12. P11e1 too is made up only of aristophanean. e1. There are two examples of gl w e (I7e1, P5e2) and one of telwe (I7s2), i.e. the sequence of threefold w
after the choriamb. e2. This ten-syllable phrase, hepta þ 3, is used twice (P10e5, O9e8). Of these P10e5 is made up only of this.

Paean Six

391

e3. Reizianum and xd
are ambiguous (Part I, 7. 3). There are Wve examples of wil þ reiz (O9s6/7, N4s6). Resolution of the Wrst position of reversed dodrans is frequent (5 examples). e4. Since the second position of reversed dodrans is regularly short, this phrase is to be taken as sp d. There is no parallel, but in the reverse order see I7e6


ww


k

e5. There is no exact parallel but I7e7 P10e1



ww

w
ww
k
d rdod w
ww

w
ww
w
k xd gl

are similar enough. e6. The reading and restoration of v. 109 proposed by Grenfell–Hunt and accepted by all later editors, åe ½b ( æı, is rejected by Radt: ‘so scheint es mir fast sicher, dass hier ÆæØı Ææªı oder ] Ææı stand’. Corresponding lines are absent. e7. See above, e2. e8. This line is a prolonged version of so-called ibycean (
ww
ww
w
); see below, ‘Dactylic expansion revisited’. A shorter one is used in N6e4


ww
ww
ww
w
j ibyc þ (¼ dod2d)

In our verse there are Wve dactyls. This is by far the longest. In the eighteen majors D þ is the longest. D þ þ is used once in normal D/e. e9/10a. These two verses are identical: P8e1 P11s5

w
w
ww
w

w
w
k hepta þ 2 e2

w
ww
w

w
w
k hepta þ 2 e2

e10b. Although the analysis is diVerent, the sequence


ww
w
w
ww
(i.e. 2 single shorts sandwiched between doubles) is to be found in: N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k N3s1

ww
w
w
ww

w
k N4s4
w
ww
w
w
ww

k O1e4 w

w

ww
w
w
ww

k

dodwd rdod e2 telwd e gl reiz ^ e e dod reiz (?^ e e dod w d
)

¥

¥

Our verse is longer by one more
w (three single shorts between doubles); cf. s1 (four single shorts between doubles). e11. Radt scans 117 - ı: I çØ
ºØ as
ww
ww
. This scansion seems blameless, and is certainly more plausible than the crasis (scanning ı·

392

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

I as one longum) proposed by Turyn; but it creates two metrical irregularities. One is noticed by Radt himself: responsion between
ww
ww
and


ww
(56
ÆÆæd ƽfi Æ; the initial part of the other verse, 178, is missing: :Ø
ºØ
ÆæÆ). The double short of D is never replaced by a long, in contrast to true dactyls.7 Snell’s analysis, ^ gld, should certainly be rejected. His metrical note in the ‘Metrorum conspectus’ is groundless.8 The other metrical irregularity is that D is connected with reversed dodrans within a verse. In the eighteen majors, unlike e or d, D is never used in the same verse with an aeolic phrase. I leave the question open. e12. Glyconic quite often makes a verse by itself. e13. Resolution of the choriambic nucleus of an aeolic phrase is rare, but there are examples (Part I, 5. F). The following verses are comparable: P8s2 P11s2b N6e2


w
wwrw
k gl
w
wwrw

w
k gl e
wrww
w
j gl

For the combination of rdod þ ph, see the verses cited above on s2. e14. The sequence x e x d occurs in P11e6 N3s6

u
w
w
ww

k xe x d


w
w
wwt
k
e x d


and a closer case is O4s5/6

w
w
w
ww
w
w
w

k we wd we2


It is most likely that the latter half should not be analysed as wilamowitzianum but e wd in this case. 7 Radt gives four parallels: O10. 99, O14. 8, 21, N6. 64. Of these, only the Wrst is textually certain (see ad locc.). But it should be interpreted as link biceps. Moreover it involves a proper noun. I myself doubt the transmitted text. 8 ‘Longum pro duobus brevibus semel a Pindaro in aeolicis ponitur: pae. 6, 56 . . .’ (ii. 173).

Paean Nine

393

Paean Nine (strophe only) Two triads at least. s1–2 2r; s3 3r; s4–9 4r; s10 2–3r. It is fortunate that Dionysius of Halicarnassus cites in total 19 lines (¼ the whole of 10 lines of str.1, 8 lines of ant. 1 and 1 line of ep. 1). Moreover, it is a happy coincidence that some letters of these lines are conWrmed in the papyrus (fr. 126, col. ii). A practically complete column follows this small fragment and gives most of another strophic pair (¼ 6 lines of str.2 and 9 lines of ant. 2). Consequently, we have in total four repetitions in the central Wve or six lines. The epode is missing except for one line cited by Dionysius; I exclude it from consideration. Class II Pae9s1 Pae9s2 Pae9s3/4 Pae9s4/5 Pae9s6 Pae9s7 Pae9s8 Pae9s9 Pae9s10

u

ww
ww
ww
w
k x
ibyc þ [¼gl2d]

w
w

ww
w
k
e2dod w
w

ww
ww
ww
ww


w
k we D þ þ
e
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
k d ribyc þ u

ww
ww
w
k x
ibyc [¼ gld]
ww
ww
ww
w
k ibyc þ ww
ww
w
k tel


wr
w

k sp e e


ww


w
k
d
e

At s3/4–s4/5, Snell follows Grenfell–Hunt and keeps the ‘colometry’ (or layout) of the papyrus which establishes three verses. At Wrst sight this ‘colometry’ appears to be in harmony with other verses: Pae9s3 w
w

ww
ww
ww
w
k we dod2d Pae9s4


ww
ww
w
k sp dodd (or gld) wD þ Pae9s5 w
ww
ww
ww
k But, in fact, it assumes brevis in longo at all the repetitions of both s3 and s4 and sets verse-end after the last syllable, which is always short: s3 3r; (str.1) 3 I åÆ j Nå, (ant. 1) 13 Ø j j, (ant. 2) 44 —ŁØ ½ j fiH s4 4r; (str.1) 4 › j K
Œ, (ant. 1) 14 Ł j $
æçÆ, (str.2) 34 ÆØfiø Ø j ºåØ, (ant. 2) 44
½ºØ j IŒæŒÆ. Consequently, it conceals the fact that the preceding long double-short movement is carried on. It is theoretically not impossible for brevis in longo to occur at every repetition, but it is highly unusual for it to be repeated in two successive verses. Moreover, there is another diYculty in this colometry. The Wfth syllable of s4 is, in fact, not short at all the repetitions on the papyrus. It is long in ant. 2. 44: Pae9s4


wa
ww
w
k fiH ˚ ı æÆe ŒÆd ˘ Łı
½ºØ

394

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

Thus, instead of the blameless ŒÆd, an emendation metri causa, ¼ (Wilamowitz, GV 490), is introduced to expel the long syllable. Housman diagnoses the error of the ‘colometry’ and writes in such a punctilious manner that no addition is needed (CR 22 (1908), 12 ¼ Collected Papers, 769): It will be observed that this, the fourth line of the two strophes and antistrophes, always ends with a short syllable, which is never lengthened by position nor followed by hiatus; and that the end of the third line, wherever extant, obeys the same restriction. The fourth line therefore is apparently in synaphea with what precedes and follows, and is merely a scribe’s line, not a verse [my italics]. The division of the verse lies . . . where it is revealed by the syllaba anceps. I follow him and rearrange the three lines on the papyrus into two verses. Rutherford does the same, although his analysis is diVerent. Snell supplements ÆØ at the end of 33 (str. 2), the following word being KŒæ ŁÅ. This creates hiatus according to my colometry.

Individual verses s1. The initial anceps is realized as long in str.1 and as short in ant. 2. The other two corresponding lines are missing. For the analysis, see below, ‘Prolonged ibycean’. s2. There are in total nine verses in the eighteen majors which start with
e2, but none is followed by an aeolic phrase. A remote parallel is I8s10



w
w
rw

w
ww
k
e2e rdod

s3/4. Although the verse as a whole can be described in D/e symbols, no parallels are found in D/e odes or the eighteen majors, even if D þ þ were equated with D (i.e. we D
e). The following are all those verses in which xe precedes double short: In D/e N1e4



w

ww
j
e d

In the eighteen majors

O10e01 N07e01 O10s2 P8s4

w w u w


wr
w

w

w



ww
j
ww
rw
k
ww
w
k
ww
w
k

we d we d e xe dod we dod

There is no verse in the D/e odes, nor in the eighteen majors, that starts with

xe D. Even e þ D at verse-beginning is rare. It occurs only once in D/e:

Paean Nine

395


w

ww
ww
k

O8e7

As for parallels for the latter half of s3/4,
e is never preceded by dactylic movement and is hardly ever preceded by other phrases in the eighteen majors, while there are in total six verses in the normal D/e odes that end with D x e. s4/5. The sequence
ww
www
ww
is included in the following verses: N6s3 P5e3 P5e6

www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d)
w
ww
rw
ww
j rdod rdod
ww
rw
ww

w
j d rdod e

¥

N6s3 is similar to our verse in that expansion occurs in the latter half. But in the paeans there are no other examples of reversed ibycean of any lengths. s6. The initial anceps is once (ant. 1) realized as long (j
 ı) while in the other three it is short. For its interpretation, see below. s7. If s7 could be united with the following s8, the united verse would be very similar to P2s4

ww
ww
ww
w
ww
ww
w
k wwibyc þ [¼ teld] tel)

But brevis in longo in ant. 1, 17 Łæ ƒ oÆØ prevents this. s8. Verse-end is conWrmed by the hiatus at 8. Thus brevis in longo must be supposed to occur at all of the four repetitions. Telesillean starting with double short is common in the eighteen majors. s9. The spondee preceding e is unparalleled in the eighteen majors. However, in the normal D/e odes, there is a close parallel: P1s3




w


w
k sp e
e

s10. There is no parallel for this simple verse in the eighteen majors, nor in the D/e odes, except O06e03


ww


ww


w


w
k d
d
e
e

which includes the same sequence as our verse.

396

Appendix B. Longer Fragments Partheneion One

A pair of strophe/antistrophe and, if we rely on Snell–Maehler, almost the whole of an epode survive. This song may not be a partheneion because a masculine participle is used for the singer (çغø 11). ^ dod
Parth1s1 ww
w


ww
w
ww
j dwd ibyc þ 1


ww
ww
w

k Parth1s3 ww
ww
ww
ww

w

w
w

k Parth1s2

þþ e e2


^D

Parth1e1

ww
ww

w

w

w

w
w

k Parth1e2



ww
ww
ww

w

w

w
w



D e e e e2

k
D þ e e e2


The stanza-forms of Partheneion 1 are short. The strophe/antistrophe is made up of only three verses. The identical metre and paragraphoi at the beginning of ll. 6 and 11 conWrm that these parts make up a strophic pair. Therefore the lines starting at l. 16 with another paragraphos belong to the epode, and so does the part preceding the strophe. Snell–Maehler assume that ll. 4 and 20 are in responsion so that the epode is as short as the strophe. The scheme above is based on this assumption. The shortness is similar to Partheneion 2 and, interestingly, to O5, which is made of three verses (strophe) and two (epode) too. All the verses, in strophe and epode alike, are unfamiliar in the eighteen majors. On the other hand, s3, e1, and e2 are decidedly similar to some verses in O5, whose authenticity has been questioned on metrical grounds too. This feature is intriguing. s1. There are two peculiarities: (i) ^ dod at the beginning; (ii) the following long link anceps. There is the unique example of ^ dod in O13s5, but its metrical context is diVerent: O13s5

ww
w

w
ww

k

^ dod

ph

Moreover, an aeolic phrase of þ 2 ending is never followed by long anceps in the eighteen majors. Even e is rarely followed by
d; the exception is O10e3 (but the long preceding the anceps is resolved, unlike our verse). d w d is uncommon too; an exact parallel is found only in N3e1, but there is one example of ^ dwd and two of dxd; see Part I, 8. C. 2. s2. This is equal to ‘the alcaic decasyllable’. It is used nowhere in the all the non-D/e epinikia, nor in the paeans. The nearest parallel is

Partheneion One O10e9

397



ww
ww
w
k
ibyc

Our verse is the only case of ‘expanded aeolic’ ending with w

; see Part I, 7. 6 and ‘dactylic expansion revisited’ below. In Simonides 542 P, which I cite in Part I, 5. G to illustrate ^ dod, there is another similar verse: 1


ww
ww
w
w

j ibyc þ 3

This may be analysed as D w e
, however. s3, e1, e2. These three verses are structurally similar: double-short movement þ e or some e’s þ e2
with total absence of link anceps between phrases. This structure is shared by some verses in O5. e2
, which would be analysed as ithyphallic outside Pindar, is unfamiliar, except for O5; see above ad loc. There are in the eighteen majors four verses in which D or its cognates are followed by e without an intervening link: P2s3 N6s4a O10s1 N6e1



ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww

ww

ww
ww



w
k rw

j
w
tw
j rw
j

xD þ e ^ D þ e
^D e e dDe

But the most similar verse is O5e2


ww
ww
ww

w

w

w
w

k sp D þ e e e2


In O2, e’s are frequently juxtaposed without link anceps, but there are no double-short movements there. There are in total four examples of
D þ (O9e6, P2s3, N6e3, N6e9), but þþ ^D is totally unparalleled.

398

Appendix B. Longer Fragments Partheneion Two

Seven triads at least. Strophe: s1 5–9r; s2 7–10r; s3 6r. Epode: e1 2–3r; e2 2–3r. Class I

ua
ww
w
u
w

u
ww
w
u
w
k

ww
w

u
ww
w
k

ww

k Parth2e1


ww
w

u
ww
w


ww

k Parth2e2
u
ww
w


ww

k Parth2s1 Parth2s2 Parth2s3

gl x e gl x e tel gl reiz gl gl reiz gl reiz

Accustomed to the non-D/e metre of the epinikia and Paeans, one may be surprised that Pindar wrote Partheneion 2 in such a simple metre, as if it were a short song of Aristophanes. Whether this simplicity is related to the genre of Partheneia, in other words to the Chorus made up of girls, is not easy to answer. Like the anceps in Class I stanza-forms, the anceps in this song is often long, aeolic base or link alike (perhaps xe of this song should be iamb; then ‘link’ is not a suitable word). The base of glyconic is freely variable; in s1 (1st):

(4r),
w (4r), w
(1r, 61 KBŒ); in s1 (2nd):

(7r),
w (2r); in s2:

(6r),
w (4r); in e1 (1st):

(3r, all); in e1 (2nd)

(1r),
w (2r); in e2

(2r),
w (2r). s1 is made up of two identical halves. Word-end coincides exactly after the Wrst half except in (36) ªjŒØÆØ, and perhaps also in (91) [ . . . ]jÅæÆ[ (¼  + ˙æÆ). If a special licence is admitted in that the adverbial preWx of a verb (K) is treated like a preposition, since a preposition occasionally stands at verse-end, s1 can be divided into two equal verses.

‘Dactylic expansion’ revisited

399

‘Dactylic Expansion’ Revisited In Part I, 7. 6, I demonstrate that verses which seem to be created by the socalled dactylic expansion of aeolic phrases are, in fact, related to freer D/e. I argue here that this is conWrmed by the observation of the verses in the fragments. Expanded verses are used particularly in Paean 4 and Paean 9 but are rare in Paean 2 and Paean 6 (only one each). Rutherford’s comment that they are characteristic of the
ÆØ  genre is slightly exaggerated. These are the examples collected from the four Paeans. First I set them out according to my analysis. (I) Ibycean (for its deWnition, see below) [1] Pae4s4 [2] Pae4e5 [3] Pae9s6 [4] Pae4s1

w
w



ww
ww
w
k w
w
w

ww
ww
w
k u

ww
ww
w
k ww
ww
ww
w
j

we sp ibyc we2 ibyc x
ibyc (¼ ? gld) ribyc (¼ teld)9

(II) Ibycean (and reversed ibycean) expanded by one ‘dactyl’ [5] Pae2e3/4




ww

ww
ww
ww
w
j sp sp d ibyc þ [6] Pae9s7
ww
ww
ww
w
k ibyc þ [7] Pae9s1 u

ww
ww
ww
w
k x
ibyc þ (¼ ? gl2d) d ribyc þ [8] Pae9s4/5
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
k

(III) Ibycean expanded by two ‘dactyls’ [9] Pae4s5 [10] Pae4s8




ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j sp ibyc þþ w

ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k ^ e ibyc þþ

(IV) Ibycean expanded by three ‘dactyls’ [11] Pae4e3/4 [12] Pae6e8



ww

ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k
d ibyc þþþ
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j ibyc þþþ

Seeming ‘aeolic base’ I analyse the two positions preceding ‘dactylic movement’, for example,

of [1] Pae4s4, as spondee, and w
of [10] Pae4s8, as acephalous e. This analysis is diVerent from the usual interpretation. Instead of spondee or acephalous e, Snell, West, Rutherford and others take them as aeolic base. I

9 The notation ^ ibyc þ may be given instead. [4] is the acephalous form of [6] below.

400

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

now pick out the examples that appear to start with full base and rearrange them according to the shape of seeming aeolic base. The designation in square brackets is that produced by taking the two positions as base. (a)

[1] Pae4s4 [9] Pae4s5 (b) w
[2] Pae4e5 [10] Pae4s8

w
w



ww
ww
w
k xe [gld]


ww
ww
ww
ww
w
j [gl3d] w
w
w

ww
ww
w
k xe [gld] w

ww
ww
ww
ww
w
k [gl3d]

(c) x
[3] Pae9s6 x

ww
ww
w
k [gld] The initial anceps is long at one repetition and short at three. [7] Pae9s1 x

ww
ww
ww
w
k [gl2d] The initial anceps is long and short at one repetition each.

It is noteworthy that there is no example whose full base is of the shape (d)
w or (e)
x. (d) is most frequently used in the aeolic phrases of the eighteen majors, while (b) w
is rare (Part I, 5. C). If (a) and (b) were aeolic full base, (d) or (e) would be expected to occur at least once.10 The phrases follow (a) spondee and (b) acephalous e are not only asymmetrical (i.e. ibycean-type, ending with . . .
w
) but also symmetrical (i.e. D). The latter is attested in Pae4s7, which is not ‘expanded aeolic’: Pae4s7

w

ww
ww


k

^e

D sp

This supports my analysis of the two examples of (b). It is interesting that there are two verses similar to this in the eighteen majors: O10e2, I8s9

w

ww
ww
k

^e

D

And three verses out of Wve in O5 always start with spondee, for example: O5s2




ww
ww
ww

w
w

k sp D þ (? rdod2d) e2


However, the two examples of (c) x
raise a diYcult question. If x
is not aeolic base, how should [3] Pae9s6 and [7] Pae9s1 be analysed as a whole? It may after all be better to give them the notation gld and gl2d. But the comparison with the eighteen majors is still illuminating. The aeolic base x
occurs only once in the eighteen majors, at O10s6

a

ww
w
k gl

10 The metre of the second book of Sappho is gl2d: xx
ww
ww
ww
w
. The aeolic base of the 27 verses of fr. 44 is Wlled with

(19 exx.),
w (5 exx.), w
(3 exx.).

‘Dactylic expansion’ revisited

401

The initial anceps is long in two repetitions and short in eight. O10s (and O10e too) includes very few aeolic phrases and certainly belongs to Class II (freer D/e). Moreover, in this stanza-form there is another verse, O10s4, which may well start with x
. At v. 26 (¼ 25 Sn.), most editors (except Mommsen and Schroeder) adopt Christ’s
ø metri causa, which gives initial w
in all repetitions. But øH (the reading of some MSS) makes good sense, and would produce one initial

: O10s4

a

wr

w
k x
e
e

Perhaps Pindar may have introduced a licence that

at verse-beginning may stand instead of the normal w
, especially in some stanza-forms. Note that x
is Wlled with w
more frequently than

, in O10s and Pae9s alike. This suggests that w
is the norm. The two Pae9s verses in group (c) above may be variants of group (b), with ^ e being occasionally replaced by spondee.

The metrical context The metrical context indicates that the examples of ‘expanded aeolic’ in the eighteen majors are not really aeolic but freer D/e. Such verses do not occur among ordinary aeolic cola in the Paeans either. Instead, D and its related phrases tend to be used with them. For example, Pae4s7

w

ww
ww


k

^e

D sp

which precedes [10] Pae4s8, or Pae9s3/4

w
w

ww
ww
ww
ww


w
k we D þþ
e

which precedes [8] Pae9s4/5. Most of the ‘expanded aeolic’ verses are found in Paean 4 and Paean 9, both of which belong unambiguously to Class II (freer D/e). On the other hand, the strophe of Paean 2, which is the most aeolic of all the stanza-forms of the Paeans, does not include any ‘expanded aeolic’. Paean 6, which resembles Class III stanza-forms in its peculiarities, includes only one.11

Ibycean All twelve examples listed above under (I)–(IV), except [8], end with the movement . . . ww
ww
w
. They are apparently similar to the verse

11

There are many D in Pae6: ^ D (s10), DxD (s8b), D þ (s9).

402

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

which has been traditionally called ‘ibycean’ by some (
ww
ww
w
). I adopt this name because it is the least tendentious. I also introduce the expression ‘expanded’ to ‘ibyceans’. This does not imply historical development, but remains as a structural explanation. Thus the examples above can be called, more or less, expanded ‘ibycean’. The designation, ibyc þ , is used to represent (6)
ww
ww
ww
w
(Pae9s7, N6e4) for convenience’ sake. The mark þ is used as in D þ (
ww
ww
ww
).12 As is demonstrated in Part I, the ‘ibycean’ used by Ibycus himself is not an aeolic colon. It is likely that Pindar succeeded Ibycus in further developing such cola. ‘Ibycean’ itself could be described as dodd. Snell (and West) would use dod2d for ibyc þ (in fact, Snell’s notation for N6e4 is gld). Certainly symbols such as gld or gl2c are very helpful for the understanding of some Lesbian metres. However, since ibycean-type phrases are not aeolic but freer D/e, it would be misleading to use Snell’s symbols while at the same time rejecting his interpretation. D þ w
would be a solution. However, such a notation is misleading in another sense, suggesting a verse made up of D þ and suYx w
. Another notation for ibyc þ would be 4da w
. That inevitably reminds us of the idea of ‘lyric dactyls’ accepted by some scholars, including Snell himself and Korzeniewski (and at one time Eduard Fraenkel). Old ghosts like ‘aeolic dactyls’ or ‘logaoedic’ are not welcome.
w
ww
ww
is ‘reversed ibycean’ (ribyc) in the same manner as
w
ww
is ‘reversed dodrans’. It is used in the Paeans only at [8] Pae9s4/ 5, but is paralleled by N6s3

www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j

which can be designated rdod þ ribyc þ . Outside Pindar, a verse of Stesichorus (S148 ¼ Eriphyle, P. Oxy.2618, str/ant. 1) is e
ribyc þþþþ :


w


w
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
k and one of Ibycus (282 P, 4th verse) is ribyc þ
:


w
ww
ww
ww

k The unusual phrase
w
ww
ww
ww
w
in P11s1 can be taken as a conXation of ibycean and reversed ibycean (also expanded). The name, or the notation, which I give to the phrase is ribyc þ þ 2, in the same manner as hepta þ 2: x
w
ww
w
.

12 The alternative would be ibycd; but to designate [12] Pae6e8 (
ww
ww
ww
ww
ww
w
) ibyc þþþ is slightly less misleading than ibyc3d, just as D þ is

preferable to West’s D2 (see Part I, n. 73).

Hephaestion’s ‘Pindaric Hendecasyllable’ (fr. 94c Sn.)

403

Hephaestion’s ‘Pindaric Hendecasyllable’ (fr. 94c Sn.) In §14 (
æd B ŒÆ IØ
ŁØÆ ø ) of the Enchiridion (p. 44 Consbr.), Hephaestion cites these two lines: ! ˇ ıƪÆ  ŒÆºE åæFÆØ. ¼ªØ t Œºıa Łæ
Æ ¸ÆE

w

w
ww
w

The metre is called by an interesting name: ‘Pindaric hendecasyllable’. Some of the letters in the Wrst citation have now been identiWed in a papyrus (P. Oxy. 2438; see below), and Snell plausibly ascribes both lines to a Partheneion (94c). We are accustomed to analyse the metrical form above as wil þ 3 (or wil þ ba), based on the supposition that its Wrst two syllables (w
) are the aeolic base and that the fourth (w) is anceps:

ªª
x
ww
w

. If this analysis were rightly applied to the two Pindaric lines, the appellation ‘Pindaric hendecasyllable’ would become nothing other than a Hephaestionic name given to wil þ 3. But there remains a possibility that what Hephaestion means by the Pindaric hendecasyllable might be restricted only to the verse that starts with w
(and the fourth position not anceps but regularly short; but I leave aside this topic). Note that the two citations both start with w
. Furthermore, another possibility must be taken into account; unlike wil þ 3, the two positions may not be ancipitia. Instead, they may be Wxed as w
. It should be remembered that, although the Sapphic hendecasyllable appears to be equal to one of the possible permutations of wil þ 3, its Wrst two positions are not ancipitia but must be
w unconditionally:


w
x
ww
w

Needless to say, the Sapphic hendecasyllable and wil þ3 are diVerent metres, and should be separately treated because their metrical contexts are diVerent. At least it is impractical and confusing to treat the Sapphic hendecasyllable as one of the possible permutations of wil þ3. The same may be true with the Pindaric hendecasyllable; it should be asked whether it is really related to wil þ3. Hephaestion’s manner of citation is interesting and may be suggestive. The Pindaric hendecasyllable comes immediately after the Sapphic hendecasyllable as if the Pindaric were a variation of the Sapphic. Compare these two hendecasyllable lines: Sapphic hendecasyllable Pindaric hendecasyllable


w
x
ww
w

w

w
ww
w



404

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

Hephaestion classiWes both hendecasyllable lines under the name of ‘epichoriambic trimeter catalectic’. The Sapphic is trochaic syzygy þ choriamb þ iamb þ IØ çæ. And, according to him, when the trochaic syzygy is replaced by antispastic, the Sapphic hendecasyllable becomes the Pindaric. It is not important whether his analysis is right or not. What concerns us is the nature of the Pindaric hendecasyllable itself. First it must be asked what Hephaestion means by ‘antispastic’. Strictly, by the ‘antispastic’ is meant only the ‘metron’ w

w. But Hephaestion uses it in a looser manner in the chapter on ‘antispastic’: e IØ
ÆØŒe c b
æÅ ıÇıªÆ åØ æ
Å ŒÆa e
ææ
Æ N a ÆæÆ F Øıºº ı å ÆÆ; . . . (§10, p. 31 Consbr.). That is, the following are all permitted to stand at the beginning of the antispastic metre:


w,
w
w, w

w, ww
w. If this interpretation were applied to the Pindaric hendecasyllable too, what Hephaestion calls the Pindaric hendecasyllable would be equal to wil þ 3. However it seems to me more likely that here in the description of the Pindaric hendecasyllable the ‘antispastic’ means only the exact antispast, namely, w

w. There are several reasons. First, as is already pointed out above, the actual citations both start with w
. Secondly, if the Wrst two positions of his Pindaric hendecasyllable were capable of any combination of ªª, it would also cover the Sapphic hendecasyllable as one of its possibilities. Hephaestion does not say so, though admittedly he is not always logical. Thirdly, ‘polyschematist’ (i.e. wilamowitzianum) is fully treated in a diVerent chapter (§16). It would be natural, and more logical, for the Pindaric hendecasyllable to be treated there if it were virtually wil þ 3. Thus I presume what Hephaestion regards as the Pindaric hendecasyllable is no more wil þ 3 than the Sapphic hendecasyllable is. Short syllable is compulsory for the Wrst position of the Pindaric as well as the second position of the Sapphic. And possibly also the fourth position of the Pindaric is short. But it must be stressed that this deWnition of the Pindaric hendecasyllable is merely what Hephaestion (or some of his predecessors in the Hellenistic period) conceived. Hephaestion does not always correctly understand the metre of archaic poetry.13 For Pindar himself, it probably was diVerent. We should ask why, or in which historical process, the metre in question was named the Pindaric hendecasyllable. It is easily observable that most of the citations by Hephaestion come from poems, or parts of poems, which are made up of the identical verses ŒÆa å. Otherwise they are cited from short strophes like the Sapphic stanza. At the same time it is unlikely that the Pindaric hendecasyllables were 13

Cf. Itsumi, ‘What’s in a Line’.

Hephaestion’s ‘Pindaric Hendecasyllable’ (fr. 94c Sn.)

405

arranged ŒÆa å by Pindar himself. As far as we know none of his poems was made up of verses ŒÆa å. Perhaps a Hellenistic poet may have ‘excavated’ this verse from the Pindaric corpus and used it ŒÆa å. The title
æH $æ of this verse is, rightly or wrongly, ascribed to Pindar by Hephaestion, but the propagator may have been another. We go back to the two lines cited by Hephaestion and speculate as to their context. They are from the same poem without doubt, but syntactically the second does not immediately follow the Wrst. There seems to have been an intermediate line, or lines, of a diVerent metre, because, if this (or these) were also the hendecasyllable, it would have been more natural for it (or them) to be cited instead of the second citation. At the same time, if there is more than one intermediate line, they must not have been numerous, or else the hendecasyllable would not have been conspicuous or comprehensible enough to cite the two lines above as a suitable example of the same metre. It is fortunate that we have now P. Oxy. 2438. This papyrus is a part of a version of the Vita Pindarica. In its 30th line we read eleven letters of the Wrst of the two lines Hephaestion cites: 28  ŁıªÆæÆ  : ½ : —æø½½ åÅ: Œ½Æd : ¯hÅ29 Ø z Å ½Ø K BØ TØBØ w & Iæ½å · › Ø: 30 ÆªÆ  ŒÆºE å½æFÆØ 
: : ºº : ø½ :

It is in Hephaestion’s manner to cite the Wrst lines of a poem. The description in 29 (K BØ TØBØ w# & Iæ½å : ) supports the restoration of 30. In other words, the two lines cited by Hephaestion come from the poem that the Vita mentions. Snell is certainly right to classify this poem among the Partheneia (fr. 94c). Even if we were sceptical about the credibility of ancient Vitae in general, a Partheneion would be the most appropriate genre for the two female proper names, Protomache and Eumetis. They are cited as Pindar’s two daughters not only in P. Oxy. 2438 but also in the Vita Ambrosiana. From the metrical point of view, it is suggestive that the two verses belong to a partheneion. The metre of Partheneion 2 is surprisingly simple (see above). It accords with the manner of Hephaestion too, for he is interested only in simple metres. Except for the hendecasyllable, his citations from Pindar are ‘verses’ made up of dactylo-epitrite. It is time to speculate as to the exact nature of the Pindaric hendecasyllable. In the eighteen majors there are a number of verses which start regularly with w
. It is sometimes diYcult to identify these two positions: either aeolic base or ^ e (Part I, 7. 4). Many of these cases are followed by dodrans (w

ww
w
. . . ) and not immediately relevant to our

406

Appendix B. Longer Fragments

problem. But there are four which are followed by reversed dodrans, i.e. parallels to the Pindaric hendecasyllable: I8s1/2 I8s5 P5s8 P2e8

w

w
ww
w
wr
w
w
ww
k wilwe wil w

w
ww

w
ww

w
ww
j wil (?^ e rdod) rdod rdod w

w
ww
w
k wil þ 2 (?^ e gl) w

w
ww
w

w
ww
w

k wil þ 2 hipp

cf. P10s5

w

w
w
ww
w

k

^e

wil þ 3

I am inclined to believe the following: the verse which Hephaestion calls the Pindaric hendecasyllable was repeatedly used in the Partheneion 94c Snell. The poem’s structure was very simple, and the verse was conspicuous. The metrical nature of the verse was ambiguous like the examples above; it may have been either wil þ 3 or ^ e hipp (or gl x), for its Wrst two positions were w
in all repetitions. Their nature may have been discernible in the original performance, but it was not so in late antiquity. Hephaestion noticed its similarity to the Sapphic hendecasyllable.

Part III Miscellanea

This page intentionally left blank

A. NORMAL D/E EPINIKIA

Determination of verse-ends There are 23 epinikia which are composed of D/e (counting I3 and I4 as a single ode, and O13s6–8 þ O13e as an entity diVerent from O13s1–5). The verses in these epinikia amount to a maximum of 321. Half (159 verses; 49.5%) are unambiguously identiWed as individual verses; not united with the preceding or the following verse because both the verse-beginning and the verse-end are marked by hiatus/brevis in longo.1 The Wrm indication, hiatus/brevis, is absent from the other verses either at the verse-beginning or at the verseend, or both, although word-end is coincident at both ends throughout all the repetitions. Thus these verses may be united with the preceding and/or the following verse. This situation may be said to be basically the same as for the non-D/e verses. In some of the non-D/e verses too verse-end is not deWnitely attested, but the number of these verses is less, and colometry is easier to Wx; parallels helps us to decide whether it is common or not for a particular combination of phrases to make a single verse. In contrast, the D/e verses are much more homogeneous, and more ambiguities remain. For example, there is coincidence of word-end among all the repetitions in O3e4, but hiatus/brevis is absent. Thus it is possible to unite it with the following, O3e5, into one verse as Snell does:2 O3e4/5
ww
ww
j

w
x
ww
ww
k

D
e x D

But at the same time it is also possible to establish two independent verses: O3e4
ww
ww
j D O3e5

w
x
ww
ww
k
e x D 1

The statistics would be diVerent if verses were counted based on Snell’s edition. Snell occasionally (32 cases in total) unites two verses of the 321 into one. Between these two, of course, hiatus/brevis is not attested. According to his colometry, 179 verses out of 289 are certainly Wxed (61.9%). 2 This combined verse was given a single number, e4, by Snell, following Schroeder. Snell’s line-numbering is diVerent from Boeckh’s in this ode. Snell’s e5 is Boeckh’s (and Turyn’s) e6. The situation is the same as in the non-D/e odes. Cf. ‘Line-Numeration’ (p. xviii).

410

Miscellanea

The parallels are not helpful. Both colometries, the combined and the separated alike, can be paralleled. For the former, there are seven verses whose form is exactly identical; e.g. O7s5
ww
ww


w


ww
ww
k D
e
D

Unlike O3e4/5, this cannot be divided into two because in six repetitions out of ten word-end does not fall coincidentally after the Wrst D. And for the separated colometry, two pairs of verses are found to be parallels; e.g.: N1s3
ww
ww
k D N1s4

w


ww
ww
k
e
D

(the other is I1s4 þ s5). At the end of N1s3, hiatus occurs in two repetitions, and brevis in one, out of eight; thus the D cannot be united with the following
e
D. In O3e4, perhaps on the assumption that a verse made of a single D is too short to be an independent verse, Snell unites it with the following. But this is groundless. There are in total four manifest examples of a verse made up of a single D (and, in addition to O3e4, another seven that I take as independent verses but whose independence is not unambiguously certain). Metrical context is not a good criterion either. Returning to O3, there is another verse of the identical form in the strophe with O3e4/5: O3s1
ww
ww


w


ww
ww
j

D
e
D

But this does not necessarily mean that O3e4 and e5 must be one verse. Pindar may have used identical verses in the strophe and in the epode, but at the same time it can also be maintained that he may have slightly modiWed the verse in the strophe by dividing it into two in the epode. Both explanations are possible. We may wonder whether sense-breaks help us to decide whether or not to divide verses. In fact they do not. Syntactically there is no stronger or weaker pause after the initial D in e4 than at the end of e5. The same is true of the preceding verse(s), O3e3a þ 3b, which is similar in structure and has cut throughout all the repetitions at the same position, though the sequence is reversed after the break. Here too we Wnd no stronger or weaker pause after the initial D : O3e3a þ 3b


ww
ww
j

ww
ww


w
k D
D
e

Normal D/e epinikia

411

Thus the question remains open. The example we have just been examining is O3e4 and e5, verses in the epode. One may imagine that, if a verse were in the strophe and were repeated more, hiatus/brevis would eventually occur. But the number of repetitions does not always help. For example, hiatus/ brevis is missing at the end of O3s1 at all the 6 repetitions. Thus O3s1 and the following, O3s2, could be one gigantic verse:
ww
ww


w


ww
ww
j

ww
ww


w
k D
e
D
D
e

None of the editors adopts this interpretation (nor do I), presumably because the combined verse sounds too long. But this is not a decisive argument. Its length, 31 positions, is not, in fact, extraordinary. There is an example of a similar length (30 positions) and a similar structure, and unambiguously a single verse: P1s6
ww
ww

w


ww
ww


ww
ww

w

k De
D
De


There is a more delicate case in the strophe: O3s4a þ 4b (24 positions):

w

j
w


w


ww
ww


w
k


e
e
e
D
e

Word-end is coincident after the Wfth position (
e
) at six repetitions. Even a sentence ends (‘full-stop’) in two of them. Thus Turyn posits the verse-end there, rightly, I think, against Boeckh, Bowra, and Snell. They must have thought that Wve positions are not enough to form a verse. But this is a groundless assumption. We should admit that there is no objective rule as to whether two verses should be united or separated in these cases. Thus consistency is required at least at the initial stage of metrical study. What I do is to divide every verse wherever possible. This means that where wordend coincides in all repetitions (i) before or after link anceps or (ii) between two metrical phrases like D or e where link anceps is absent, verse-end is posited even if manifest indication (hiatus/brevis) is lacking. Thus, to cite the examples discussed above, I separate not only O3s1 from O3s2 (where nobody would object), but also O3e3 from O3e3b and O3e4 from O3e5 (where some, like Turyn and

412

Miscellanea

Snell, would object), and moreover I divide O3s4 into two at the border after
e
. Consequently 34 of Boeckh’s verses are divided into two (Snell basically follows Boeckh except two cases). There are some reservations. Even if word-end coincides before or after the link, I cannot recognize unconditionally a short sequence like j
w
j or j

w
j as an independent verse. Inconsistency would be removed if the minimal length of verse were made smaller. There is one verse made of four positions (see below). But I hesitate to separate all cases like j
ej or je
j from a sequence and call them ‘a verse’. I take j
e
j as a verse of the minimal length without manifest indication. P1s6, cited above for its 30 positions, is the longest verse; the shortest is O7s3

w
k
e

Some editors, including Bowra and Turyn, accept a shorter verse than this: N1e1b
w
k e

Its length is not a problem, and we need not change word-order, as Hermann and Bergk do, to expel the seeming brevis between [e1a] and [e1b]. It occurs at two repetitions: 51 . . . æÆ = IŁæØ and v. 69 . . . åæ = hKi åæfiø. Rather we should accept prosodical licence of lengthening the Wnal short syllable (-
) here. According to Fu¨hrer, this prosodical lengthening tend to occur (i) in -, (ii) at the end of double-short movement, (iii) after normal rhythm has already been several times repeated before this irregularity occurs.3 Our case fulWls all three conditions. Thus, as far as the D/e of the Pindaric epinikia are concerned, the range of length of a verse which is unambiguously certain is between four and 30. The actual variety of lengths is much wider than might be expected. One thing remains to be said about the determination of a verse. One of the two manifest indications of verse-end, brevis in longo, does not work when pendent verse-end is possible. For example, 3 See Part II, P5, ‘Textual problems’, on v. 42, and P11, on v. 38. Cf. Braswell, Pythian Four 184(d), West GM 16. On the other hand, Dale prefers to accept the division (Collected Papers, 75).

Normal D/e epinikia

413

the last position of I1s1 is once Wlled by a short syllable (v. 35

¯æåE 
ÆÆæfiÆ ¼æıæÆ; ð– Ø . . .Þ). If I1s1 is independent of the following verse, the Wnal syllable of v. 35 is brevis. But if we assume that the position is a link anceps, s1 and s2 could be one long verse, though I reject this uniWcation for the reason discussed above. Incidentally, when s1 is acknowledged to be independent, two ways of notation are still conceivable. I do not notate I1s1
ww
ww


w
x j I1s2
ww
ww
x
w
k

but I1s1
ww
ww


w

k I1s2
ww
ww
x
w
k

Scholars have joked about the huge format of Boeckh’s editio maior and said that, without it, it would have been impossible to print a verse on one line. But if a verse were divided wherever wordends are coincident as is my practice, more verses could be printed on a line, even in the format of OCT or BT, with fewer indentations than Bowra or Snell–Maehler.

Verse-length When a verse is established by dividing wherever possible, the average number of positions in a verse is 13.3. But the average and the divergence from it is not very useful for judging whether a particular verse is common or not. There is too great a diVerence between the longer and the shorter ones to make the average meaningful: as mentioned above, the longest (P1s6) has 30 positions while the shortest (O7s3) has only four. Moreover, because the standard phrases of D/e are D (7 positions) and e (3 positions), we may easily anticipate that verses of certain numbers of positions, like 12 (one D, one e, and two links), will occur very frequently. It is more promising to count double shorts and single shorts in each verse. Then the peculiarity of P1s6 emerges. This is the only verse that has three D (i.e. 6 doubles) in it. The other verses have two D at most. Even the verses which have two D are not many (see the chart below, where rows are arranged by pairs of double shorts).

414

Miscellanea

Since each D contains two such pairs, it is natural that verses with odd numbers of them (1, 3, 5) should be rare. D þ , which contains three pairs, and d, which contains one pair, are not such common phrases as D (see below). There are in total 74 verses which have no D (nor d, D þ ) and 156 verses which have one D, and so on. The columns are arranged according to the number(s) of single shorts. There are in total 52 verses which have no e, 97 verses with one e, and so on. Thus, all the D/e verses are classiWed and counted according to the number of D and e. For example, there are in total 62 verses which have two pairs of double short (one D in most cases) and one e. Ancipitia are totally ignored, and some rare phrases (see below) are simpliWed. ! single # double 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Total

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Total

0 1 28 5 18 0 0 52

5 6 62 9 14 1 0 97

36 12 46 7 8 0 1 110

24 2 14 5 1 0 0 46

7 0 4 0 0 0 0 11

1 1 2 0 0 0 0 4

1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

74 22 156 26 41 1 1 321

Some interesting tendencies may be observed. (i) Verses with four single shorts (4 e’s or equivalents; to some of which Maas would give the symbol, e.g. E
E
) are decidedly rare (11 in total), let alone those with Wve or six. They are much rarer than those which have four double shorts (2 D’s or equivalents; 41 verses in total). The extraordinary verse with six e’s (the highest Wgure) and no D is N10s6. (ii) More than one-third of the verses (126 ¼ 52 þ 74) completely lack either double or single short. That means there is a fairly large number of D/e verses in which D and e are not united. (iii) We expect that, because of the rarity of D þ and d, verses with odd numbers of double-short pairs (1, 3, 5) will be uncommon. But we might not have expected there to be some equally uncommon combinations with even numbers of pairs. Verses of two doubles and three shorts (for example, P3s2, e
D
e
ek) are not numerous;

Normal D/e epinikia

415

there are 14, ignoring permutations of phrases and ancipitia. Nor are the verses of four doubles and one short (for example, O3s1, D
e
Dk), also 14 in total. We might easily have conceived these to be typical, and expected them to be used much more frequently. (iv) Pindar occasionally creates very lengthy verses like P1s6 (6 doubles and 2 singles). They are exceptional, despite being completely made up of the two commonest phrases (D and e): N1s7 N5s1 O12e7 N10s6

e
D e
e
e
ek
e x e e
e
D
ek e
e
e e
e
k e
e
e e x e
ek

Each Wgure in the chart above conceals the variety inside. For example, there are 46 verses of two doubles and two singles. This is undeniably a high frequency. These 46 verses are classiWed into as many as 13 diVerent types, some of which are very common while others are not: e x D x e 12 e x D x e x Dxexe 4 D exe exexD 6 exexDx d e exd 1 x e x ibyc

1 exD e 2 xexDxe 3 2 xDxexe 5 xD exe 2 5 xexexD 1 dxdxexe 1 1

In short, D/e verses are certainly homogeneous but at the same time multifarious.

Link anceps Like non-D/e verses, the D/e verses end blunt more often than pendent. 321 verses are classiWed, according to their ending, as follows: . . .
ww
k (or j) 103 113 . . .
w
k (or j) . . .
ww

k (or j) 42 60 . . .
w

k (or j) others 3

In other words, two-thirds (68%) of the D/e verses end without link anceps. Similarly, verses start without link anceps more frequently than with it:

416

Miscellanea

k (orj)
ww
. . . k (orj)
w
. . . k (orj) x
ww
. . . k (orj) x
w
. . . acephalous others

80 157 32 36 12 4

Consequently, it is rare that a verse both starts and ends with anceps. Out of 42 verses above that end with . . .
w

, only seven start with anceps, including Wve short verses made up just of x D x . And, out of 60 verses that end with . . .
w

, only 12 start with anceps, including four short verses made up of x e x . Similarly, out of 32 starting with x
ww
. . . nine end with anceps (of which 5 are x D x ) and out of 36 starting with x
w
. . . 10 end with anceps (of which 4 are x e x ). On the other hand, link anceps is common inside a verse and is normally posited between two phrases, e and D alike. There are 512 places where two phrases are located next to each other either with or without intervening link anceps. Out of these 512 places, 459 have a link (89.6%). When we count only the typical cases (i.e. the combinations of D and e), the following Wgures emerge. Note the contrast between the Wgures in the left and the right columns: With intervening link DxD 26 81 Dxe 111 exD 185 exe subtotal 403

Without intervening link DD 1 De 14 eD 3 ee 15 33

It is evident that link anceps is a necessity in most cases. However, there is one exceptional case that is not given in the table above. When d (not D) is followed by e, anceps is often absent (d e 8 times in contrast to d x e twice). d e is the same length as e
e, and their diVerence lies in the third position (
w‘w’

w
:
w‘
’

w
). This fact gave rise to the illusion that these two combinations could be in strophic responsion. Maas Wnally showed that to be false.4 It is interesting that, contrary to d e, the 4

Bowra also argues against Wilamowitz and Schroeder in ‘An Alleged Anomaly’.

Normal D/e epinikia

417

reversed combination, e d, is rare (e d 3 times in contrast to e x d 20 times). There are in total 50 places where two phrases are connected without intervening link anceps. Of these, 33 combinations are cited in the chart above; and there are eight examples of d e and three of e d. The other cases are: d D 1; ^ d D 1; D d 1; ^ d e 2; D þ e 1. These places (‘missing links’) are distributed unevenly in 43 stanzas. There is no missing link in 12 stanza-forms while in two stanzaforms there are four. The number of stanza-forms are arranged below according to the number of missing links inside: Missing links 0 1 2 3 4

Stanza-forms 12 18 9 2 2

(O7e, O13e) (N8e, P1s)

It is no accident that the stanza-forms which include three or four ‘missing links’ show unusual features in other respects too. Various types of irregularities tend to be concentrated in particular stanzaforms. O7e includes an extremely curious verse (O7e3, discussed below); O13e belongs to the unique ode whose metre changes from non-D/e to D/e (and O13s6–8 has two ‘missing links’ in its D/e part which has only three verses); N8e includes an unusual phrase, e2 (N8e4; and N8s is peculiar too); P1s is very complicated in its construction (for example, two spondees in s2 and s3). Some verses even include two ‘missing links’ (these are counted twice in the chart above). They are the following Wve verses: P1s6 N10e6 N11s5 I1s6 I6e8

De
D
De
eeD
e
e dee
d e
Dde
e e
Dee
e

r

Resolution of e One of the two long positions of e may be resolved: rw
or
wr. The other phrases may not be resolved. The exception is a very strange

418

Miscellanea

phrase included in O7e3 which I tentatively notate as ribyc (discussed below). In 12 verses resolution of e recurs throughout the repetitions (and also in O7e3).5 Besides there are 14 cases among 13 verses (there are two resolutions in O3s5) in which resolution occurs at only one repetition (11 cases)6 or some of the repetitions (3 cases);7 in other words, resolved and unresolved positions are in correspondence. When resolution of e occurs in all repetitions, it is almost exclusively restricted (9 out of 12 cases) to the beginning of the verse, which thus starts with three shorts, e.g.: P1e7 rw


w

j

There are only three exceptions: I2e6
wr

w

k

This is the sole example in which the latter long of e is resolved. And in these two verses resolution occurs in mid-verse: P1e3
w


w


w
rw
k O7e5
ww
ww
w rw


ww
ww
k

O7e5 is highly unusual in that it includes four successive shorts (the anceps preceding the resolution is always short). When resolution occurs at only one or some of the repetitions, no strong tendencies can be observed. Both tw
and
wt are found (8 and 6 verses respectively). Resolution at the beginning of the verse occurs in six verses out of eight examples of tw
.

Uncommon phrases Apart from D and e, the following phrases are used in the D/e stanzas. D þ (
ww
ww
ww
): 11 examples This is an expanded form of D. Its usage is basically identical with that of D. It stands at the beginning of a verse without preceding link anceps (4 examples, P4s4, N1s6, I5e8, N1e2; the last one makes a 5 6 7

O7e5, O11e3, P1e3, P1e7, P1e8b, N1e1, N10e6, I2e6, I5s2, I5s6/7, I5e6, I6s6. O3s5 (bis), O13e4, O13e5b, O13e6b, P1e5, P4e7, P9e10, N5s4, I3e6b, I6s3b. P4s8 (23 resolved/3 unresolved), N5s6a (2/4), I6s6 (4/2).

Normal D/e epinikia

419

verse by itself) or with anceps (1 example, P4e5). The other six examples are preceded by e
(2 examples, N1e3, N5e6) or e
e
(4 examples, O6e2, P4s6, I3s5, I6s3). There are no verses in which D þ and D are used together. When D þ is followed by one or more phrases, anceps and e are commonest:
e or
e
or
e
e. The following are exceptional cases: e
without link in between (I3s5) and
d (O6e2). There are two examples that regularly have word-end after
ww
ww
in all repetitions: I5e8
ww
ww
jww


w
j D þ
e Dþ N1e2
ww
ww
jww
j

It is possible to divide D þ there into two verses, e.g. Dj^ d
e (I5e8). Indeed, there are six other pairs of verses in which D is followed by ^ d, but is manifestly separated from it by hiatus/brevis (see ^ d below). N1e2a is followed by e2b
e
e without hiatus/brevis, and is similar to I5e8 in structure. D þþ (
ww
ww
ww
ww
): 1 example (P3s4) This appears to be the longest of the ‘dactylic expansions’ in the Pindaric epinikia (among non D/e odes, D þ is the maximum). P3s4a is made up of D þþ alone, but there is no manifest indication of verse-end between it and the following verse: P3s4a P3s4b


ww
ww
ww
ww
j

w


w


ww
k

At v. 50, sense-break is very weak: (j ŁæØfiH
ıæd
æŁØ Æ j j åØHØ, . . .). Since X at verse-end is certainly unique, but not impossible since there are some cases of ŒÆj, the uniWcation of s4a þ s4b is not compulsory. d (
ww
): 35 examples This is a rather common phrase and its usage is various. There are 22 examples at verse-end, in all but one of which there is no following anceps. Only O7e7 ends with d
. Four verses start with d (there is no verse starting with
d). Two verses are peculiar in that they have two d:

420 O6e3 N11s5

Miscellanea
ww


ww


w


w
k d x d x e x e
ww

w

w


ww
k d e exd

^ D (ww
ww
): 2 examples (P3e9, N8s4) Acephalous phrases are used in the ‘other half ’ too (2 examples of ^ D in the eighteen majors). In the D/e stanzas, ^ D is rarer than ^ d, contrary to the relative frequency of D and d. In both examples, ^ D is followed by
e (and this in turn by D
in N8s4, by
e in P3e9). The verse preceding N8s4 (¼ N8s3) ends with D. If it were not for hiatus after v. 20 (Æ fiø j K ºªå) and v.37 (æØ j I
æÆ) a prolonged sequence of double shorts ( . . .
ww
ww
jww
ww
. . . ) would result. ^d

(ww
): 9 examples This may be followed by D, d, or e, with or without link, in a total of nine verses, of which six (marked by #) it stands verse-initially immediately after verse-Wnal D ( . . .
ww
ww
kww
. . . ):


D
D
d
e e

P9s1, P9s3 #O7e6 #P1e8 O7s1, #O7s6, #O8s6 #O13e5b, #N8e3

With the sequence D k^ d we may compare D þ , which has regular word-end after D; these examples are especially interesting, with their suggestion that Pindar had intended to make a longer verse including D þ at Wrst, but changed his mind. For example, if brevis in longo were not established at the end of the preceding P1e7b (only at v. 59b
Ææ : k ¼ª ; in the other four repetitions the Wnal position is Wlled with a long syllable), a longer verse, P1e7b þ e8 (e
e
D þ
d) would emerge. ^e

(w
): 1 example (O6s6) This unique case will be discussed below along with the preceding verse O6s5, which ends with an ibycean.

e2 (
w
w
): 1 example N8e4

w


w
w
k
e
e2

Normal D/e epinikia

421

The occurrence of this phrase in a D/e stanza may be an intrusion from the ‘other half ’, in which it is quite common. sp (

) 3 examples This phrase is employed at either the beginning or the end of the verse. It should possibly be taken to be a substitute for e. P1s3


w


w
k sp e
e P9s2
w


w


k e
e sp P1s2
w


ww

w


ww
ww


k e
d e
D sp

D/e is, by deWnition, totally made up of symmetrical phrases. Nevertheless, there are in total six verses which include asymmetrical phrases. They were collected in Part I, 7. 6, where I argued that socalled ‘expanded aeolics’ in the eighteen majors are not aeolic but freer D/e. hepta: 1 example x
w
ww


w


ww
ww

w
k hepta
e
D This asymmetrical phrase is used as a transition from non-D/e to D/e (see Part II, ad loc.). The initial anceps is link anceps as well as the half-base of hepta; the following
w
ww
is, in a structural sense, a substitute for D. O13s6

diomedean (ww
ww
w
x ) For the name ‘diomedean’ see Itsumi, ‘Enoplian in Tragedy’; cf. N10s7 ˜Ø Æ  ¼æ ÆŁ
 ˆ ƺÆıŒH
Ø ŁÅŒ Ł. The sequence is one meaningful unit. N10s1 ww
ww
w
x
w


ww
ww
k diom e
D

The Wrst single short is always short while the second is short only at two repetitions out of 10 (vv. 1, 73); it is link anceps. Pindar does not use the phrase ww
ww
w
( x ) elsewhere in the D/e odes, but examples and kindred phrases are common in Euripides. Its usage suggests that ww
ww
w
x occurs in places where x
ww
ww
x is expected. For example, E. Hipp. 755–8  767–70: ww
ww
w
w
w
w

ww
ww
w
w
ww
ww


422

Miscellanea

Snell’s notation of N10s1, ww
ww e u e
D, is inorganic and must be rejected. Both ww
ww
w
x in N10s1 and
x
ww
in N8s1 (below) stand at the very beginning of an ode. This does not seem accidental. Perhaps Pindar may have intended a surprise by starting a D/e ode in this way.
ibyc : 1 example O6s5

w


ww
ww
w
k
e
ibyc

Verse-end is guaranteed by hiatus (27, 56), brevis (34, 78) or both (71). The following verse is also curious: O6s6 w


w


w


ww
ww

k

^e
e
e
D


Snell proposes that ‘pause’ intrudes into e (
kw
), which consists of the Wnal position of s5 and the initial two of s6. But this idea demolishes the fundamental notion of a verse and should be rejected. It is better to accept that the phrase
ww
ww
w
is used in place of D or D e after link anceps. rdod N8s1
x
ww


w

j rdod
e
40 ÆhÆØ  Iæ ; åºøæÆE KæÆØ =‰ ‹ æ fi ¼Ø,

This is the transmitted text of s1 and s1b. The metre is:
w
ww


w

j
ww
ww

k The second position is always long at all the other repetitions. Thus Snell deletes ÆhÆØ and transfers fi ¼Ø from the end to the beginning of the line and changes it into the trisyllabic form IØ, with a lacuna after æ. The intended metre is


ww


w

j
ww
ww

k throughout all the repetitions. Its Wrst phrase is interpreted as D with contracted initial double short. But the contraction is highly unusual. Unlike true dactyls, D is never contracted in any verse of the D/e odes. Perhaps it may be compared with the second hemiepes (D) of the pentameter in the elegiac couplet. As for the sense, ÆhÆØ  Iæ and æ fi ¼Ø are natural and blameless. We do not need the bold metaphor IØ  Iæ for the sake of the unparalleled metre. Rather it is

Normal D/e epinikia

423

better to accept the transmitted text and the asymmetrical phrase
x
ww
as an intrusion from the other half. N8 as a whole is unconventional. Our verse apart, e4 includes e2, which is fairly common in the other half but totally unparalleled in the D/e odes (see above). Of the less uncommon phrases, ^ D (s4), ^ d e (e3),
d e (e6) are used. And link anceps is often short, especially in e6, where it is always short throughout all the Wve repetitions. ribyc There is one apparent example: O7e3
ww
www
ww
ww


ww
ww
k d ribyc
D This must be examined along with the preceding verse: O7e2
w


w


ww
ww

ja wwjb O7e3
ww
wwjc w
ww
ww


ww
ww
k Verse-end is needed somewhere (or nowhere), but colometry is most uncertain. Word-end coincides at three places throughout all the Wve repetitions (marked a, b, c). If we posit verse-end at either b or c, we must acknowledge brevis in longo in all Wve repetitions.8 This is possible and not unparalleled, but sounds artiWcial. 14 33 52 71 90 b 15 34 53 72 91

$ø
ÆE çÆæÆ ºØ  çÆ, r
 ¸æÆÆ I
IŒA PŁf K IçØŁ ºÆ æªÆ b ÇøEØ æ
 Ł ›EÆ ŒºıŁØ
Fæ
ø Iæåe ¥

ø. ŁÆ ! 'fiø
b ØåŁd ŒÆd
 IH ήd
d ø: K
d o ÆæØ KåŁæa c PŁı åÆ ZçæÆ ŁÆ
b  Ææå q b Œº ÆŁ. 
a çÆÆ PŁı
æE;  çÆ

a

b ! ', , çæ. Œ ›

c 15 34 8


ºæØ ¼æÆ
Ææ ºçØfiH çÆø  ŁH Æغf › ªÆ åæıÆØ Øç Ø
ºØ,

There is a diVerence between brevis at (b) and at (c). At (b) the Wnal syllable ends with a consonant like ! ' in all Wve repetitions. In contrast, at (c), it ends with a short vowel like ZçæÆ in four repetitions out of Wve (v. 34 æå should be æå). Barrett Wnds that ending with a short vowel (which he calls SVE) is rare in Pindar; he prefers (b) to (c).

424 53 72 91

Miscellanea ÆØ b ŒÆd çÆ Çø ¼º ºŁØ.  Æ K
d
Æææø IæH
ÆæÆÆı Æd –  ƒ
Ææø OæŁÆd çæ K IªÆŁH

Strong sense-pause is observed after b in three repetitions (14, 33, 52) and, if we do not divide between verses at a, adjective and noun are united in two (33, 90). On the other hand, by dividing at a, a key word, ! ' (14), and perhaps some others too, are emphasized at the verse-beginning. The division at c coincides with sentence-end in one repetition (53) but breaks a syntactical unit in others more or less sharply. ZçæÆ (15) before verse-end is especially awkward, but there are some examples where a conjunction is separated from the following clause. In short, division at b is syntactically the least unnatural. From the metrical point of view, there are eight possibilities. Of these permutations three are illogical, i.e. a þ b, a þ b þ c, none; Wve remain: 1. a
w


w


ww
ww

j ww
ww
www
ww
ww


ww
ww
k

e
e
D
^ D ribyc
D (or tel D
D)

2. b (the colometry I adopt, and perhaps Snell9)
w


w


ww
ww

w
kB
ww
www
ww
ww


ww
ww
k

e
e
De d ribyc
D (or dod D
D)

3. c (Turyn’s text)
w


w


ww
ww

ww
ww
w
kB e
e
D ibyc w
ww
ww


ww
ww
k wD
D 4. a þ c
w


w


ww
ww

j ww
ww
w
kB w
ww
ww


ww
ww
k 9

e
e
D
tel wD
D

Snell starts a new verse after division (b) without indentation and numbers it 3. But in his metrical chart, brevis in longo is not acknowledged, but two shorts ww are left as they are.

Normal D/e epinikia

425

5. b þ c
w


w


ww
ww

w
k e
e
D e
ww
w
kB dod w
ww
ww


ww
ww
k wD
D When division c is ignored, tribrach emerges (1, 2). This is very strange in the D/e metre. Moreover, the tribrach is preceded and followed by double-short movement. This is highly unusual even in the other half. There are only three parallels, two of them in P5e: P5e3 P5e6 N6s3


w
ww
www
ww
j rdod rdod
ww
www
ww

w
j d rdod e www
ww
www
ww
ww
ww
j rdod ribyc þ (¼ rdod2d)

The analysis of the supposed tribrach in O7e is ambiguous. If we suppose it to be equal to
w, as in the two verses of P5e cited above, www
ww
ww
is a single phrase analysed as ribyc. If it is equal to w
, the alternative colometry, which is in parenthesis in the chart above, may be possible. The single merit of colometry 1 is that it dispenses with brevis in longo throughout all repetitions. The ‘tribrach’ is eliminated when the verse is divided at c. Whichever colometry may be accepted among the relevant three (3, 4, 5), a colon ending with
ww
w
emerges. This is unusual in the D/e stanzas, but not without parallel. Certainly, O6s5



w


ww
ww
w
k
e
ibyc

ends with it. But the division creates another oddity: the verse following c starts with a link anceps that short in every repetition, before D. This is unparalleled. In conclusion: no colometry is obviously preferable to the others. I adopt colometry 2 so as not to break the sentence units.

426

Miscellanea

B. TENDENCY CONCERNING BRIDGE AND CUT Pindar tends to avoid word-end regularly at certain junctions between metrical phrases. For example, as illustrated in Part I, 8, B, 1, word-end is quite often absent between two aeolic phrases of which the Wrst ends þ 2 ( . . . w
) and the second starts with full base (
x . . . ): . . .
ww
w

x
ww
. . .

I group together the metrical patterns of this case (the regular absence of word-end between two true longs) and call them Type A. The same tendency is observed at certain places after link anceps (Type B). For example, as illustrated in Part I, 6. D, word-end never occurs after long link anceps when this anceps is explicit (i.e. the position is Wlled by long at some repetitions but by short at others). In other words, if cut occurs after explicit anceps, this anceps must be short:  
w
. . . or . . .
w
x  
ww
. . . or . . .
ww
x  
w
. . .
w
x  . . . or . . .
ww
x 
ww
. . . (Note that x represents a long syllable which Wlls explicit anceps. It does not represent long implicit anceps although the same chart would be applicable to it.) There are diVerences in regularity. Of the cases grouped in Type B, in that illustrated above (i.e. word-end after explicitly long link anceps), ‘bridge’ never occurs. There are 11 verses with explicit anceps in mid-verse, found in a total of 79 repetitions, out of which long anceps occurs at 30, and is never followed by word-end; cut occurs in 18 repetitions after anceps but only where this is short. However, the situation of the anceps which is realized as long in every repetition (long implicit anceps) is diVerent. The anceps is usually, but not invariably, followed by bridge. There are six verses with long implicit medial anceps, amounting to 74 repetitions, in 65 (87.8%) of which word-end is absent (in other words bridge is observed) after these ancipitia, however, cut exceptionally occurs in nine repetitions.10 As for the representative case of Type A illustrated above, word-end 10

These cases are examined individually in Part I, 6. D.

Tendency Concerning Bridge and Cut

427

between two aeolic phrases ( þ 2 ending followed by full base), wordend is absent (i.e. bridge is observed) at the junction in 80 repetitions out of 96 (83.3%) among 15 verses. There are 16 exceptions, and they do not occur evenly among the 15 verses but are concentrated in six (cf. List 5. 1). In other words, word-end is avoided without exception at the junctions in as many as nine verses. This Wgure, nine verses out of 15, enhances our sense of regularity, which cannot be ignored, even if there is a counter-example, one verse in which cut occurs at four repetitions out of eight (O1s1). As stated in the Key to Terminology, I use the terms ‘bridge’ and ‘cut’ in a looser manner than normal; my usage is simply descriptive, with the object of collecting data for a further investigation. I examine whether word-end occurs regularly in a particular place and count up the frequencies. I avoid the question why bridge occurs so regularly there; important as it is, it is not my project to look for a rule, or rules, and to explain its or their existence in Greek metre. We may use the word ‘rule’ for the limited cases where there are no exceptions at all, like the bridge after long explicit anceps. But perhaps we should not. First, the number of examples is small in the eighteen majors. Contrast with ‘Porson’s Law’, which is deduced from c.30,000 stichic trimeters in tragedy. Secondly, the same tendency is not always observed in similar cases; cf. the diVerence between bridge after long explicit and implicit link anceps. Thus, I use the word ‘tendency’ instead of ‘rule’. For a (strong) tendency to be observed concerning bridge in Pindar (strictly, in the eighteen majors) the following three conditions must be fulWlled: (i) Examples of the same metrical pattern are not scarce. (ii) Bridge occurs at the same point in a high proportions in these examples. (iii) There are some examples inwhich cut neveroccurs in any repetition. (i) Suppose bridge were to occur at all the repetitions, or at most repetitions (e.g. 7 out of 8), in a verse, but at the same time, the metrical pattern were not found elsewhere except for this one verse. Then we should not think this bridge represented a general tendency in Pindar. Taking into account the variety of verses in the eighteen majors, examples of the same pattern are not expected to be very

428

Miscellanea

frequent. I should tentatively suggest that there must be at least three examples to allow us to assume the existence of a tendency. (ii) How high must the proportion be so to make us feel that bridge is regularly observed, even if there are a few exceptions? The answer is necessarily subjective; but I suggest 75% as an answer if all repetitions among all verses of the same pattern are added up. We may not regard that 3 out of 4 as a high proportion in a verse by itself. But if the frequencies of bridge in each of four verses are, say, 3/4, 6/7, 8/12, 4/4, making a total of 21/27 (77.8%), we shall say that bridge is a tendency in this metrical pattern. These Wgures are taken from an actual case: the junction between an aeolic phrase and d. . . .
ww
w

ww
or . . .
ww

ww


(iii) Even if the examples number more than three as under (i) and the proportion is more than 75% as under (ii), we should hesitate to acknowledge a tendency if there were one or more exceptions (i.e. cut) at one or a few repetitions in every verse. Remember the junction between two aeolic phrases discussed above: there are nine verses in which cut never occurs at the junction. Thus, I should suggest that there must be at least one verse in which cut never occurs at the junction. In fact, there is no case that fulWls conditions (i) and (ii) but fails (iii). Based on these three criteria, I judge a tendency towards bridge to occur in 11 patterns of Type A (bridge between two true longs) and in three patterns of Type B (bridge after long anceps). They are all collected below with reference to List 5 where the verses include the pattern in question are given with the frequency of bridge and cut. Then come three Wgures in square brackets. They represent (i)–(iii) above: the number of the examples in total, the frequency of bridge, and the number of verses in which cut never occurs.

Type A (bridge between two true longs) (a) between two aeolic phrases: þ2 ending þ full base (List 5. 1) [15, 83.3%, 9]

Tendency Concerning Bridge and Cut

429

Illustrated at the start of this section. þ0 ending þ full base (List 5. 2) [5, 97.4%, 4] e.g. . . .
w
ww

x
ww
w
. . . or . . .
w
ww

x
w
ww
...

(b) between d and an aeolic phrase: d þ aeolic (full base or no base) (List 5. 7) [7, 82.1%, 2] e.g.
ww

x
ww
w
. . . or
ww

w
ww
. . .

aeolic ( þ 2 or þ 0 ending) þ d (List 5. 8) [4, 77.8%, 1] e.g. . . .
ww
w

ww
or . . .
ww

ww


(c) after x e followed by long at the verse-beginning: x e þ aeolic (full base) (List 5. 11) [9, 81.3%, 4] e.g. k x
w

x
ww
. . .

x e þ e/e2 (List 5. 15) [14, 81.8%, 2] k x
w

w
. . .

(d) before e at verse-end: aeolic ( þ 2 ending) þ e (List 5. 9) [15, 86.5%, 6] . . .
ww
w

w
k

aeolic ( þ 0 ending) þ e (List 5. 10) [5, 76.0%, 2] . . .
w
ww

w
k

aeolic ( þ 2 ending) þ e2 (List 5. 12) [9, 88.5%, 4] . . .
ww
w

w
w
k

freer D/e phrase (e/e2/en) þ e (List 5. 14) [21, 81.4%, 5] . . . [
w]
w

w
k

freer D/e phrase (d/D/D þ ) þ e (List 5. 16) [10, 73.2%, 6] . . . [
ww]
ww

w
k

430

Miscellanea

Type B (bridge after long anceps) after explicit link anceps [11, 100%, 11] after implicit link anceps [9, 87.8%, 3] These two are illustrated above. after long half-base preceded by þ 0 ending of an aeolic phrase (List 5. 3) [3, 100%, 3] e.g. . . .
w
ww
x
ww
w
. . . or . . .
w
ww
x
w
ww
. . .

The All-but-One Rule

431

C . TH E AL L- B U T- O N E RUL E Suppose a verse which includes an anceps position is repeated, say, eight times. If this position is Wlled with a long syllable at all eight repetitions, we shall judge the anceps to be regularized and accept the regularization without any anxiety as it is. The next step is to ask whether there is a metrical rule behind it. Or if this position is Wlled with a long syllable at, say, three repetitions and with a short at the other Wve repetitions, we shall again easily accept the situation, thinking that the anceps is literally treated as an anceps. But in contrast if the anceps is Wlled with a long (or short) at only one repetition out of eight, we may feel uneasy: why is the anceps of this particular verse Wlled with the one diVerent syllable against the general tendency? Is this particular word including the long (or short) anceps especially important, like a proper noun? Or, perhaps, is there corruption in the transmitted text? We not only feel uneasy about an irregularity caused by an apparently insigniWcant word but also tend to suppose that the poet shared the same anxiety. He should not have left the irregularity. Thus, for example, Hermann in most cases proposes emendations to regularize the responsion where exact responsion is breached by only one repetition.11 However, as is demonstrated below, it fairly often happens that Pindar does breaks exact responsion by introducing a diVerent pattern at only one repetition. In these cases the word in question is not necessarily a key word; of course, the judgement whether a word is important or not is to some extent subjective, even apart from the consideration that every word in a poem is indispensable and deliberately selected by the poet. Anceps is not the only agent that breaks exact responsion between verses. Breach also occurs by resolution. Anceps and resolution concern a position of a verse and the syllables Wlling it. Apart from positions, a regular pattern is also observed where word-end coincides, or is avoided, after a particular position (bridge or cut). 11 Mommsen’s comment on non-regularized anceps in P10 is interesting: ‘Ancipitis syllabae per totum carmen iuvenilis quaedam indulgentia et inconstantia regnat.’ It betrays his feeling that anceps must be regularized in good poems and that unregularized anceps shows immaturity. But, in fact, this is groundless.

432

Miscellanea

In section B above, I pick out 14 patterns where bridge tends to occur. These three topics, anceps, resolution, and bridge in those 14 patterns, may be considered together; for each I count the number of verses in which responsion is not exact, with the frequency of the irregular cases. I limit calculation to verses repeated Wve or more times because, the greater the number of repetitions, the more uneasy we feel about the ‘irregular’ case. In other words, we do not call a case irregular if it is diVerent from just two or three others. The stanzas which are repeated Wve or more times are listed below according to number of repetitions (*means that the stanza in question is monostrophic). 5 6 7 8 10 12

O2e P6* I8* O1s O10s N4*

P8e I7s

N2*

O9s O13s

P2s P8s

P10s

P11s

N3s

Table 1 represents the sum of all verses in which exact responsion is broken. They are subdivided according to the number of repetitions of each verse. Thus, for example, among the verses repeated eight times, 17 have an anceps position which is not perfectly regularized as either long or short. Based on the same structure as Table 1, Table 2 represents the number of verses in which exact responsion is broken at only one repetition (All-but-One). Thus, in nine of the 17 verses repeated eight times with an unregularized anceps a long (or short) syllable appears at only one repetition against the general tendency of the other seven (proper nouns are included).

The All-but-One Rule

433

Table 1. Verses with inexact responsion Locus of variation

Anceps Resolution Bridge Total

No. of repetitions 5

6

7

8

10

12

Total

10 2 8 20

4 3 5 12

3 2 3 8

17 4 23 44

9 9 15 33

10 0 0 10

53 20 54 127

Table 2. Verses with single inexact responsion (All-but-One) Locus of variation

Anceps Resolution Bridge Total

No. of repetitions 5

6

7

8

10

12

Total

0 1 3 4

2 2 4 8

3 0 1 4

9 2 10 21

3 7 5 15

2 0 0 2

19 12 23 54

The ratio of All-but-One (Table 2/Table 1) is calculated in Table 3. Table 3. Percentage of All-but-One Locus of variation

Anceps Resolution Bridge Total

No. of repetitions 5

6

7

8

10

12

Total

0 50 38 20

50 67 80 67

100 0 33 50

53 50 43 48

33 78 33 45

20 0 0 20

36 60 43 43

The conclusion follows that All-but-One is not particularly rare.

434

Miscellanea D. CONTINUOUS SHORT S YLLABLES

Pindar occasionally introduces a long sequence of continuous short syllables in mid-verse. These sequences are usually 4 shorts long (24 examples), but there are much longer ones: 5 shorts (4 exx.), 6 shorts (3 exx.), and even 7 shorts (1 ex.). These Wgures include examples in which continuous shorts (i.e. resolution(s)) do not occur in every repetitions (8 exx.). In drama, long sequences of shorts are often found in dochmiac contexts and this usage culminates in the later plays of Euripides, but dochmiacs are alien to Pindar. His typical cases occur in a long single short movement such as e3, e5, e6. There are two verses which contain two sequences each: N3e1b, P2s1. It is striking that the examples are concentrated in particular stanzaforms: P2s (4 exx.); P11s (3 exx.); N3s þ e (4 þ 3 exx.); N7s (5 exx.). All of these belong to Class III. In the following list, all the examples are arranged according to the number of continuous shorts and their metrical contexts. # before a verse number means that resolution occurs only once, and * means that resolution does not occur at all the repetitions. (a) Four shorts in single short movement (i) included in e2: O13s3 w
wrw


w
k w e2
e
e2 x e #O13s4

wtw
x
w
k

wrw
w
ww
k
e2 w d P2s5

wrw
w
ww
ww
k
e2 w D P2s6 www
ww
w

wrw
k gl e2 N3s3 *N3e3
ww
w
w
ww

w
ww

wtw
k dod w d rdod e2 (in 2 repetitions out of 4)

(ii) included in e3: I8s7
w
wrw
w
ww
w

w
k e3 tel e w d e3 N7s5 w
ww

w
wrw
k ^ e d e3 O1e2 w

ww

wrw
w
j

Continuous Short Syllables

435

(iii) included in e5 or e6: N3s2
w
w
wrw
w
rw
k e5 e O1s6
w
wrw
w
w
w
ww

w
w
k e5 w d e2 P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k e6

(iv) the Wnal part of en þ the following short anceps: P11s3 I8s3 N3e1b N3s5

rw
wr w
ww
k
w
w
ww

w
wr w
ww
w
w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
k

w
w
wr w
ww


e2 w d wil e2 tel w e3 w d w e e
e3 w d

(v) the preceding short anceps þ en: *P5e9

#P5e7b N3e1b

t x
ww
w

ww
w tw

w
k

gl d w e e (in 3 repetitions out of 4) w tw

j we
w rw
w
wr w
ww
w
w

w
w e3 w d w e e

(b) Four shorts in d: #O10e10 w
wwt

wr
w

ww
k

w
x
wwt
k #N3s6

wd
eed
exd


(c) Four shorts in aeolic phrase ( þ short anceps): N7s2
ww
wr w
w

ww
w

w
w
k dod w e dod e2 #N7s7
tww
w
rw
w
k tel e2 N7s4 w
w

wrw
ww
w

k w e wil þ 3

This case is included in (a)(iv) if the whole verse is analysed as x e e hag. (d) Five shorts (all are in aeolic phrases): N6e2 P8s2 P11s2b *P11s4


wrww
w
j
w
wwrw
k
w
wwrw

w
k
wtww


wr
ww
k

gl gl gl e rdod
e d (in 4 repetitions out of 8)

436

Miscellanea

(e) Six shorts:12 P5s4 wr rw
k N7s6

ww
w
rwrw
w
k P2s1 rwrw
w
w
wrw
k

^e e tel e3 e6

(f ) Seven shorts:13 O1s8 w rwrw
w
w
w
k w e5

The successive short syllables are not always occupied by a single word. Split resolution is frequent. Occasionally a long word is used like ªÆº
ºØ at v. 1 of P2s1. Impressive usage is cumulatively found in N3 (s2) and N7 (s4, s5, s6); see Part II, ad locc. The type ¼Ł ¼çغ is not in Pindar’s repertory.

Addendum: Continuous Long Syllables There are not many sequences of continuous longs is in the eighteen majors (and possibly not in Pindar’s other poems either; see below). The longest sequence is found in some of the repetitions in P8e7:

u
u
ww
w
w

k

At three out of its Wve repetitions, both ancipitia are realized as long so that six long syllables occur in succession. Of the sequences which occur in every repetition (i.e. the sequences which consist of only longs without anceps), that in O9e5 is the longest: Wve long syllables in succession:
ww




j d sp sp Others are shorter. There are in total six verses in which four long syllables occur in succession, and nine others in which we Wnd a sequence

x
(there is no example of
x

). 12

Outside the eighteen majors, there are two cases:

O4e9/10 Pae6s5

rwr w
ww
w
w
w
k e w d w e2 rwr w
ww
w rw

ww
j e w d w e d

13

Outside the eighteen majors, there is one case:

P7s1



w
wrwrw

k
e4


Continuous Long Syllables

437

In the epic hexameter, successive longs are not rare (e.g.
ººa  NçŁı łıåa ). Some dramatic anapaests contain only long syllables. By contrast, the normal D/e may include three successive longs at most, the Wnal of D (or e) þ long anceps þ the initial of D (or e). Pindar seems to have been much freer in non D/e metre. But there are few examples of continuous longs as mentioned above. Outside the eighteen majors there is a sequence of six (pure) long syllables: O4s4





j

And Wve continuous longs are used in Pae2e3/4






ww

ww
ww
ww
w
j sp sp d ibyc þ

In Pindar, four or more long syllables never belong to one word.  s
æÆø (v.4, O4s4) is the nearest case. Perhaps such conjugated forms as ıºıø or ıºıÆØ may have been avoided. Thus, P11s1 is impressive where a single word repeatedly occupies w


at verse-end (see Part II, ad loc.).

438

Miscellanea E . V E R B A L A S S O NA N C E

Verbal assonance is the repetition of identical words, or words of similar sound, at the same position in the same verse. Identical repetition is conspicuous and easy to Wnd. For example, I æ occurs three times at the end in this verse: P2s5 13 29 37



wrw
w
ww
k
e2 w d ¼ººØ  Ø Kº ¼ºº I æ tæ.  åÆ b
ÆŁg KØŒ I æ łF ªºıŒf Ł
ø ¼œÆæØ I æ

In the next example, the word
ÆE is the same and the subsequent phrase is similar: O9s4


ww
w


ww

k gl reiz 75 `NªÆ  Ø: F
ÆE – æÆØ 94 @æªØ  åŁ ŒF IæH,
ÆE  K Ł ÆØ ,

In addition to the resemblance of sound, the grammatical form of æÆØ and Ł ÆØ is identical. Resemblances of sound are in general, however, subtler and more delicate. For example, in this verse, O1s7
w
w
w
w
ww

w
k e3 w d e 36 ıƒb (Æ ºı, b  IÆ
Æææø çŁªÆØ, 47 
 ŒÆæıçfi A Ø ÆPŒÆ çŁæH ªØø,

not only do the sounds of IÆ=ÆPŒÆ and
ææø=çŁæH resemble each other, but their metrical positions are also the same. But grammatically, IÆ=ÆPŒÆ are completely diVerent. O2s8

w
rw
w
w
ww
k
e e2 w d Pøø 
Ææø ¼ø OæŁ
ºØ. 8 52 KªŒøø  ºø ºıæA  ıªåÆ.

The resemblance of sound is less signiWcant, but undeniable. Then how should we assess three other repetitions of this verse that start with P- like Pøø (8)? 16 38 104

hçæø ¼æıæÆ Ø
ÆÆæÆ çØ ŒØ PŁıØA  Æ ŒÆd
ø K ¼æÆ Æ. PæªÆ
æÆ
Ø IçŁæ  åæÆ

Verbal Assonance

439

Their similarity does not go beyond P- (except that  in 38 is in the same position as in 8 and 52). Certainly it is better not to widen the deWnition of verbal assonance too much. Semantic similarity is sometimes observable too: P5s4 46 97

wr rw
k

^e e ÆŒ æØ , n åØ Æغ ƒæ

In this verse, verbal assonance is evident between
ºçغ (4) and
ºŁı (77). The initial four brevia are occupied by one word at six repetitions out of eight. I7s3/4

w
a
ww
w



ww
w
w

k
e tel gl þ 3 25/6 å ºŒÆ
Ø fiz
 b @æÅ Ø, Øa  IªÆŁEØ IŒØÆØ. 42/3 ÆNHÆ. Łfi Œ ªaæ ›H –
Æ . Æø  ¼œ . a ÆŒÆæa  Y Ø

The underlined sentences are placed at the same position in the verse and have related meaning. But this is not a case of verbal assonance. Apart from the deWnition of ‘verbal assonance’, a word or wordgroup with phonetic/grammatical/semantic similarities at the same metrical position may be related to the creative process of the poet. At the Wrst stage of creation, texts and music (metre) must have simultaneously occurred to the poet’s mind, but gradually music (metre) must have been Wxed before the texts at every repetition were composed. I surmise that the process of creation will have been as follows. Having composed a Wrst pattern-stanza, the poet devised following stanzas to Wt the same melody, with, nevertheless, the possibility of modifying the pattern-stanza here and there. We can imagine that verbal assonance sometimes played a part in creating the new text. Rudolf Fu¨hrer once made use of verbal assonance in an extreme degree to prove the metrical responsion of seemingly non-responding texts in the word-order of the papyrus of Ba.17. I admire his determination, but am not fully convinced to the point of accepting all the metrical irregularities required. At least I am sceptical about whether the same process can be extended to Pindar. Certainly verbal association must have worked at some stage, but in the process of improvement and reWnement of the poem, it disappeared, leaving

440

Miscellanea

only small traces. At least, Pindar did not lay stress on the similarities of corresponding repetitions; the examples cited above are in the minority. The majority of corresponding texts are very various, phonetically, grammatically and semantically. Thus, for example, Maas (‘Nachlese’) proposed Ł Æ pºŒ at O10. 110 (¼ 103 Sn.) in preference to æ ¼ºÆºŒ (the paradosis Ł Æ ¼ºÆºŒ is metrically wrong) and Snell accepts it. The presence of Ł Æ in exactly the same metrical position in v. 44 (¼ 42 Sn.) is an argument for reading Ł Æ here as well, but, in view of Pindar’s usual practice, not a very strong argument.

Concentration of brevis in longo

441

F. CONCENTRATION OF B R EV I S I N LO N G O Brevis in longo occurs occasionally with a remarakble frequency at a particular verse-end. For example, eight repetitions out of 10 end with brevis in O10s4. As illustrated above ad loc. in Part II, ‘this means that, if the ends of the other repetitions are modiWed, the verse in question can be united with the following verse and that the united verse will take on quite a diVerent form’. There are even verses in which all the repetitions end with brevis. The verse could be united with the following if verse-end were not guaranteed by hiatus (O10e9, I7e6).14 There are in total 24 verses in which a half or more of the repetitions end with brevis. Of these 24 verses, nine are concentrated in O10 (4 in O10s, 5 in O10e). In the table below these verses are arranged according to the ratio of the number of breves in longo against the total repetitions. When the ratio is the same, the verse repeated more times comes Wrst. verse

repetitions

brevis

ratio

O10e9 I7e6 I8s8 O10s4 O10e2 P5s7 P5s9 O1e5 O2s2 P2s2 O10s2 O2e1 O10e3 O10e6 O10e7 I8s5c I8s10

5 3 7 10 5 8 8 4 10 8 10 5 5 5 5 7 7

5 3 6 8 4 6 6 3 7 5 6 3 3 3 3 4 4

1.00 1.00 0.86 0.80 0.80 0.75 0.75 0.75 0.70 0.63 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.57 0.57

14 At v. 33 in I7e6, Barrett convincingly emends the text and unites e6 with e7 by expulsion of brevis (Iç ƒæe Eå in place of `çØ æÆ ). See Part II, ad loc.

442 O10s1 O10s6 O13s5 O9s8 O9s9 N6s6 I7s2

Miscellanea 10 10 10 8 8 6 6

5 5 5 4 4 3 3

0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50

List 1. Aeolic Phrases

443

List 1. Aeolic Phrases ^ dod

1

O13s5 adon P10e2 I7e2

2

ar O1e7 P11e1

2

dod 10 O1e1, 4, 7 O10s2 P6s5 P8s4 N3e3 N7s (2
), 3 gl 49 O1s1 O9s3, 4, 5, 8 O10s6 P2s2; e1a, 1b, 2, 3, 4, 5 P5s3; e2, 9 P6s1/2, 3, 6 P8s1, 2 P8e3/4, 6 (2
) P10e1 P11s2b; e4 N2s1, 3, s4 (2
) N3s3, 4 N4s4, 7 N6s1b, 2; e2, 8 N7s1; e3, e4, e5 I7s5a; e1, e5 I8s4, 5c, 6

gl þ 3 O9s2 N7e5 I7s3/4

3

hag P2s8

1

hepta 12 O9e8 P2e7 P8s3, 6; e2 P10s2a; e3, 4 P11s2a N4s2, 3 I7s5a hepta þ 2 P8e1 P11s5 N4s1 hepta þ 2 þ 3 P8e7

3

1

hepta þ 3 O9e8 P10e5

2

hipp P2e8 N7s8

2

ph O1s1, 4 O13s2, 5 P5e4 P8e2, 3/4 P10s1 P11e2 N2s4 N3e2

11

rdod 23 O1e6b P2s2, 7; e1a, 1b, e2, e3 P5e2, 3 (2
), P5e6 P10s4 P11s4 N3e2, 3 N6s3 N7e2 I7e7 I8s5a (2
), 5b (2
), 10 reiz O1e4 O9s3, 4, 5, 6/7, 9

9

N2s3 N4s4, 6 tel 29 O1e6a O9s1, 2, 10; e4, e6 P2s2, 4, 8 P5s7b P10s6; e6 P11e3 N3s1, 8; e4 (2
) N4s5 N7s6, 7, 8 I7s2, 3/4, 5a; e2, 3, 5 I8s3, 7 tel þ 3 N2s2

4

N4s8 I7s1; e4 wil 15 O9s6/7 P5s2; e1 P6s1/2, 4, 5 N4s3, 5, 6 N6s2 I8s1/2 (2
), 3, 4, 5a wil þ 1 P6s7/8

1

wil þ 2 P2e8 P5s8 P8s5 N3s7

4

wil þ 3 P10s5 N7s4

2

444

Miscellanea

List 2. Freer D/e Phrases Each group is subdivided into subgroups in parentheses according to whether the phrase in question is preceded or not by link anceps. Thus, for example, three of Wve e’s in O2s3 are classiWed as (e) and two as ( x e): O2s3

w
j
wrj
wyj

w
j tw
k
e e e
e e The Wnal anceps is an exception, being attached to the preceding phrase; the two e’s in O2s1 are classiWed into ( x e) and (e x ): O2s1 w
w
j
w

k w e e
( x e x ) denotes e both preceded by link anceps and followed by link anceps þ verse-end, as in: O10e1b u
wr
k

^d

3

O1e5 P6s4 N6s5 d 55 (d 26) O1e2 O9e5 O10e1a, 4/5, 10 P2e6 P5s5, 10; e5, e6, e9 P8s5; e5 P10s2b, s4; e3 P11s4 N2s5 N3e1a N4s1 N6s7; e1, 3 N7e1

x e


I7e6 I8s6

N2s5 N3s6

(xd 24) O1s6, 7; e3, 5 O2s8 O9s11; e1/2, 3, 4/5 O10e10 P2s5 P8e5 P10s4; e1 P11s3 N3s1, 5; e1a, 1b, e3 N6s6a; e5 N7s5 I7e7

^D

(xdx O9s11 P10s3 P11e6

5)

(^ D O10s1; e8 (^ D x O9e3 O13s1

O1s2 4 2)

( x Dþ O9e6 P2s3 N6e3, 9

2)

^e

D 9 (D 7) O10s3b; e2 N6s5, 6a; e1, 5 I8s9 (xD P2s6 P10s3 ^D þ N6s4a Dþ (D þ x

2)

1 5 1)

4)

23 (^ e 22) O1s2, 9, 10; e2, 4, 7 O2s2, 6/7; O10s4; e2 P2e6 P5s4, 6, 11; e1, 5, 7a P6s9 P10s2b, 4, 5 I8s9 (^ e x 1) N6s1a

List 2. Freer D/e Phrases e 158 (e 92) O1s2, 7, 9(2 x ), 10, e1, 3, 4, 6b, 7 O2s2(4 x ), 3 (3 x ), 4 (2 x ), 5 (3 x ), 6/7 (2 x ); e1 (2 x ), 2, 3 (3 x ), 4 (2 x ), 5 O9s10, 11 O10s1(2 x ), 3a, 3b, 4, 5; e3, 10 P2s3, 7(2 x ); e4, 5, 6 P5s1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9 (2 x ), 10 (3 x ); e1, 5, 6, 7a, e8 (2 x ), 9 P6s3 P10s2b; e3, 4, 6 P11s2b; e4 N3s1, 2, 4, 7; e1b, e4 N6s1b, 4b, s7; e1 N7e1, 2, 3, 4 I7s2 I8s7 I8s8(2 x ), 10 12) (e x O2s1, 6/7; e2, 5 O10e4/5 P6s6 P11e5 N6s4a, 6a, 6b

445

(xex O10e1b P5e7b N3e1a

3)

( x e2 11) O9e1/2 O10e7 O13s3, s4 P2s5, 6 P8s7 P10s6 P11e5 I7s5b I8s10 3) ( x e2 x O2e6 O9e1/2 N3s8 13 e3 9) (e3 O1s3, 5, 7; e2 O2e2 N7s3, 5, 6 I8s7 3) ( x e3 P5s11 N3s5 N3e1b

e2

38

( x e3 x N6e6/7 e3(aeol) P8s6

I8s5c, 8 51) (xe O1s11; e1 O2s1, 3(2 x ), 5, 8; e1, 4, 5 O9e8 O10s2, 3a (2 x ), 4, 5; e1a, 3(2 x ), 10 O13s2, 3, 4 P2e5 P5s1, 2, 3, 9; e2, 4, 9 P6s1/2, 7/8, 9 P8s4, 7; e5 P10e6 P11s4; e6 N3s4, 6; e1b N6s7 N7s2, 4; e1 I7s2, 3/4; e1 I8s1/2

(e2 24) O1s6, 10, 11; e1, 3, 5, 6a O2s6/7, 8; e3 P2s8; e3 P6s9 P8e1 P10s4 P11s3, 5; e3 N3s3; e3 N7s1, 2, 7 I8s3

e5

1) 1 3

(e5 O1s6 N3s2

2)

( x e5 O1s8

1)

e6 P2s1

1

sp 12 (sp 11) O2e4 O9e4(2 x ), 5 (2 x ), 7 O10s3a, 3b P8e7 P11s1 I7e6 ( x sp P5s7a

1)

446

Miscellanea

List 3. Identical Verses Pure aeolic gl gl ph gl rdod gl reiz gl wil hepta ph rdod rdod tel tel þ 3 wil

8 2 3 5 2 5 3 2 4 4 2

Composite aeolic gl e2 2 gl e 7 gl e x 2 hepta þ 2 e2 2 rod e 2 3 tel e2 x e dod 2 x e gl e 3 x e ph 2

O9s8 O10s6 P8s1,2 N2s1 N4s7 N6e2,8 O1s1 P8e3/4 P2e1a,1b,2 O9s3,4,5 N2s3 N4s4 N6s2 I8s4 P2e7 P8s3 P10s2a P11s2a N4s2 O1s4 P10s1 P11e2 P5e3 I8s5b O9s1 O10e6 P5s7b I7e3 N2s2 N4s8 I7s,e4 O9s6/7 N4s6 N3s3 N7s1 P2e4 P6s3 P11s2b P11e4 N6s1b N7e3,4 P6s6 I8s5c P8e1 P11s5 O1e6b N7e2 O1e6 P11e3 N7s7 O1s2 P8s4 N3s4 P2e5 P5s3 O13s2 P5e4

Freer D/e ^D ^e

x

D ^e d e ^e e ee e3 x Dþ x Exe x E x ee x eee x exd x x e x

2 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2

O9e3 O13s1 O1e2 I8s9 P2e6 P5e5 P10s2b P5s4,6,e7 O2s4 P5e8 O1s3,5 O9e6 N6e9 O13s3,4 P11e5 O1e7 I7s5b O1s5 P5s1 O2e1 P5s9 P11e6 N3s6 O1e1b P5e7b

List 4. RSS in Ascending Order List 4. RSS in Ascending Order The Eighteen Majors stanza-form RSS O9e 42.0% P8e 42.4% O9s 43.8% I7s 44.0% N2s 45.5% P10e 45.5% I7e 45.9% O2e 47.3% O10s 48.7% O13s1–5 49.0% N4s 49.5% O1e 50.0% P10s 50.0% P11e 50.0% P5s 51.8% P8s 52.1% P2e 52.4% O10e 52.4% P5e 52.6% I8s 52.7% O2s 53.0% N3s 53.1% P11s 53.2% N7s 53.3% P6s 53.6% O1s 53.7% N3e 54.4% N6e 55.9% N6s 58.0% P2s 58.3% N7e 61.8%

Class II I I I I I I II II II I III III III II I I II III III II III III III I III III II II III III

The Four Minors O5s 44.0% O5e 44.2%

II II

D/e stanza-form N5s I3/4e I2s O13e I1e N8s I3/4s N9s N1s O3s I6s O6s P1s N5e P4e I6e N8e N11s O3e P3e P4s I2e P9e O7s N1e O13s6–8 P3s N10s O8s P1e P12s N10e O6e I1s P9s

RSS 34.3% 35.6% 36.5% 37.2% 37.6% 37.9% 38.2% 38.5% 38.9% 39.1% 39.2% 39.4% 39.4% 39.8% 40.0% 40.0% 40.2% 40.3% 40.5% 40.8% 40.8% 40.8% 41.0% 41.6% 41.9% 42.0% 42.2% 42.5% 42.5% 42.6% 42.7% 43.2% 43.3% 43.4% 43.7%

447

448 O4s O14s P7e P7s O4e

Miscellanea 45.4% 48.1% 48.4% 50.0% 53.7%

II III II II II

I5e N11e I5s O8e O7e

43.7% 44.2% 44.4% 44.8% 46.9%

List 5. Bridge and Cut

449

List 5. Bridge and Cut Examples in which cut is totally absent come Wrst; the rest are arranged according to verse-number, with some exceptions in 9, 14, 15, 16. In 3(b) and 4(b), only long ancipitia are counted; therefore the Wgures for total repetitions are diVerent from those in 3(a) and 4(a). * means that the anceps is Wlled by long at all the repetitions (i.e. ‘implicit’ anceps); in those cases these Wgures are equal. 1. Between two aeolic phrases: þ2 ending and full base P2e8 P6s1/2 P6s5 P8e3/4 N2s4 N2s4 N6s2 I7s3/4 I8s4

wil þ 2 þ hipp gl þ wil dod þ wil gl þ ph gl þ gl gl þ ph gl þ wil tel þ gl þ 3 gl þ wil

O1s1 O9s2 O13s5 P8e6 N7s8 N7e5

gl þ ph tel þ gl þ 3 ^ dod þ ph gl þ gl tel þ hipp gl þ gl þ 3

bridge 4 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 7

cut 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

4 6 8 3 7 2

4 2 2 2 3 3

total 4 6 6 5 5 5 6 6 7 8 8 10 5 10 5

2. Between two aeolic phrases: þ0 ending and full base P8s6 P8e2 N3e2 N4s3

hepta þ e3 (aeol) hepta þ ph rdod þ ph hepta þ wil

P2s2

rdod þ gl

10 5 4 12

0 0 0 0

10 5 4 12

7

1

8

450

Miscellanea

3. Between two aeolic phrases: þ0 ending and half-base (a) before the half-base O9s6/7 wil þ reiz 1 O9e8 hepta þ hepta þ 3 1 N4s5 wil þ tel 6 N4s6 wil þ reiz 11

7 3 6 1

(b) after the half-base if it is realized as long *O9s6/7 wil þ reiz 8 0 O9e8 hepta þ hepta þ 3 3 0 N4s5 wil þ tel 2 0

8 4 12 12 8 3 2

4. Between two aeolic phrases: þ2 ending and half-base (a) before the half-base O1e4 dod þ reiz P2s2 gl þ tel N2s3 gl þ reiz O9s3 O9s4 O9s5 N4s4 I7e5 I7s5a I7s5a

gl þ reiz gl þ reiz gl þ reiz gl þ reiz gl þ tel gl þ tel tel þ hepta

4 8 5

0 0 0

4 8 5

5 6 5 9 1 5 3

3 2 3 3 2 1 3

8 8 8 12 3 6 6

(b) after the half-base if it is realized as long I7s5a tel þ hepta 5 0 I7e5 gl þ tel 2 0 O9s3 *O9s4 *O9s5 *P2s2 N2s3 *I7s5a

gl þ reiz gl þ reiz gl þ reiz gl þ tel gl þ reiz gl þ tel

5 5 6 1 0 4

2 3 2 7 2 2

5 2 7 8 8 8 2 6

5. Between two aeolic phrases: þ0 ending and no base I8s5a

wil þ rdod

7

0

7

P5e3 I8s5a I8s5b

rdod þ rdod rdod þ rdod rdod þ rdod

3 1 3

1 6 4

4 7 7

List 5. Bridge and Cut 6. Between two aeolic phrases: þ2 ending and no base P2e1a P2e1b

gl þ rdod gl þ rdod

4 4

0 0

4 4

O1e7 P2e2 P2e3 I7e2

dod þ ar gl þ rdod gl þ rdod tel þ adon

2 1 3 1

2 3 1 2

4 4 4 3

4 3 2 5 9 7 2

0 0 2 1 1 1 2

4 3 4 6 10 8 4

7. Between d and aeolic P10e1 I7e7 P5e6 P6s4 P8s5 P10s4 N3e3

d þ gl d þ rdod d þ rdod ^ d þ wil d þ wil þ 2 d þ rdod d þ rdod

8. Between aeolic and d P10e3

hepta þ d

4

0

4

P5e9 N4s1 I8s6

gl þ d hepta þ 2 þ d gl þ d

3 8 6

1 4 1

4 12 7

9. Between aeolic ( þ2 ending) and e at the end of verse O9s10 P2e5 P5s3 P11s2b P11e4 N6s1b P6s6

tel þ e gl þ e gl þ e gl þ e gl þ e gl þ e gl þ e x

8 4 8 8 4 6 6

0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 4 8 8 4 6 6

P2e4 P6s3 P10e6 N3s4 N3e4 N7e3 N7e4

gl þ e gl þ e tel þ e gl þ e tel þ e gl þ e gl þ e

3 5 3 7 2 3 4

1 1 1 1 2 2 1

4 6 4 8 4 5 5

451

452 I8s7 I8s5c

Miscellanea tel þ e gl þ e x

5 6

2 1

7 7

10. Between aeolic (zero ending) and e at the end of verse O1e6b N7e2

rdod þ e rdod þ e

4 5

0 0

4 5

P2s7 P5e6 P10e4

rdod þ e rdod þ e hepta þ e

6 3 1

2 1 3

8 4 4

11. Between x e þ aeolic (full base) at the beginning of verse P2e5 P6s1/2 P5e4 N7s4 N3s4 P5s3 O13s2 P5s2 P6s7/8

x x x x x x x x x

e þ
x gl e þ wwwgl e þ
wph e þ
wwil þ 3

4 6 4 10

0 0 0 0

4 6 4 10

e þ
wgl e þ
wgl e þ
wph e þ
wwil e þ

wil þ 1

7 4 5 7 5

1 4 5 1 1

8 8 10 8 6

12. Between aeolic ( þ2 ending) and e2 at the end of verse O1e1 O1e6a P11e3 P11s5

dod þ e2 tel þ e2 tel þ e2 hepta þ 2 þ e2

4 4 4 8

0 0 0 0

4 4 4 8

N3s3 N7s1 N7s2 N7s7 P8e1

gl þ e2 gl þ e2 dod þ e2 tel þ e2 hepta þ 2 þ e2

7 9 5 9 4

1 1 3 1 1

8 10 8 10 5

13. Between aeolic (zero ending) and e2 at the end of verse P2e3 P10s4 N3e3

rdod þ e2 rdod þ e2 rdod þ e2

2 6 1

2 2 3

4 8 4

List 5. Bridge and Cut 14. Between two e’s at the end of verse O2e1 O2e3 P5e8 P5e9 P5e7a

eþe eþe eþe eþe ^e þ e

5 5 4 4 4

0 0 0 0 0

5 5 4 4 4

O1s9 O2s2 O2s3 O2s4 O2s5 O10s1 O10s5 P2s7 P5s1 P5s9 P5s10 N3e1b I7s2 P5s4 P5s6 N3s2

eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe ^e þ e ^e þ e e5 þ e

5 7 9 7 8 8 9 6 6 7 7 3 5 7 4 7

3 3 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 4 1

8 10 10 10 10 10 10 8 8 8 8 4 6 8 8 8

15. Between two e’s at the beginning of verse P5s9 O1s11 O1e1 O2s1 O2s3 O2s5 O2e1 O2e4 O2e5 O10s3a O10s5 O10e3 P5s1 O2s8

x x x x x x x x x x x x x x

eþe e þ e2

10 8

0 0

10 8

eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe eþe e þ e2

2 7 9 8 4 4 3 9 9 4 6 7

2 3 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 3

4 10 10 10 5 5 5 10 10 5 8 10

453

454

Miscellanea

16. Between d (D, D þ ) and e O1e3 P2e6 P5e5 P10e3 N6e1 P2s3

dþe dþe dþe dþe Dþe Dþ þ e

4 4 4 4 3 8

0 0 0 0 0 0

4 4 4 4 3 8

O1s7 P10s2b N3s1 N7e1

dþe dþe dþe dþe

4 3 3 4

4 5 5 1

8 8 8 5

Bibliography Barrett, W. S., Euripides: Hippolytos (Oxford, 1964). —— Collected Papers ¼ Greek Lyric, Tragedy, and Textual Criticism: Collected Papers, assembled and edited by M. L. West (Oxford, 2007). Bergk1–4 ¼ Th. Bergk, Poetae Lyrici Graeci (Leipzig, 1843; 2nd edn. 1853; 3rd edn., vol. i, 1866; 4th edn., vol. i, 1878). Boeckh, A., ed. maior ¼ Pindari opera (Leipzig, 1811–21). —— ed. minor ¼ Pindari carmina (Leipzig, 1825). Bowra, C. M., ‘An Alleged Anomaly in Pindar’s Metric’, CQ 24 (1930), 174–82. —— ‘The Metre of Pindar, Olympian II’, CQ 30 (1936), 94–9. —— OCT ¼ Pindari carmina (Oxford, 1935). Braswell, B. K., Pythian Four ¼ A Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar (Berlin and New York, 1988). —— Nemean One ¼ A Commentary on Pindar Nemean One (Fribourg, 1992). —— Nemean Nine ¼ A Commentary on Pindar Nemean Nine (Berlin and New York, 1998). Burton, R. W. B., Pindar’s Pythian Odes (Oxford, 1962). Bury, J. B., The Nemean Odes of Pindar (London, 1890). —— The Isthmian Odes of Pindar (London, 1892). Carey, C., A Commentary on Five Odes of Pindar: Pythian 2, Pythian 9, Nemean 1, Nemean 7, Isthmian 8 (New York, 1981). Chantraine, P., Gram. hom. ¼ Grammaire home´rique (Paris, 1958). Christ, W., BT ¼ Pindari carmina (Leipzig, 1869, 18972). —— ed. maior ¼ Pindari carmina (Leipzig, 1896). Dale, A. M., Collected Papers (Cambridge, 1969). —— ‘The Metrical Units of Greek Lyric Verse’, CQ 46 (1950), 138–48, ns 1 (1951), 20–30, 119–29. —— LM ¼ The Lyric Metres of Greek Drama, 2nd edn. (Cambridge, 1968). Dissen, L., Pindari carmina . . . ex rec. Boeckhii commentario . . . illustravit L. Dissenius (Gotha and Erfurt, 1830). Erbse, H., ‘Beitra¨ge zum Pindartext’, Hermes, 88 (1960), 23–33. Fennell, C. A. M., Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian Odes, new edn. (Cambridge, 1893). —— Pindar: The Nemean and Isthmian Odes, new edn. (Cambridge, 1899).

456

Bibliography

Fu¨hrer, R., Beitra¨ge zur Metrik und Textkritik der griechischen Lyriker: II a. Text und Kolometrie von Bakchylides’ (c.17) II b. Zum Problem der Responsionsfreiheiten bei Pindar und Bakchylides (NAWG 1976/5; Go¨ttingen, 1976). Gentili, B., Pindaro, le Pitiche (Milan, 1995). Gerber, D. E., Emendations ¼ Emendations in Pindar 1513–1972 (Amsterdam, 1976). —— Olympian One ¼ Pindar’s Olympian One: A Commentary (Toronto, 1982). —— ‘Pindar, Nemean Six: A Commentary’, HSPh 99 (1999), 33–91. —— Olympian Nine ¼ A Commentary on Pindar Olympian Nine (Hermes Einzelschriften, 87; Stuttgart, 2002). Gildersleeve, B. L., Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian Odes (New York, 1890). Gu¨nther, H.-Chr., Ein neuer metrischer Traktat und das Studium der pindarischen Metrik in der Philologie der Pala¨ologenzeit (Mnemosyne Suppl. 180; Leiden, 1998). Hartung, J. A., Pindar’s Werke (Leipzig, 1855–6). Haslam, M. W., ‘Stesichorean Metre’. QUCC 17 (1974), 7–57. Henry, W. B., ‘Contracted Biceps in Pindar’, ZPE 143 (2003), 11–16. —— Pindar’s Nemeans: A Selection (Munich and Leipzig, 2005). Hermann, G., ‘De dialecto’ ¼ ‘De dialecto Pindari observationes’, Programm Leipzig, 1809 ( ¼ Opuscula, i. 245–68), repr. in Heyne 1817, iii. 250–75. —— ‘De metris Pindari’, in Heyne, 1798–9, iii/1. 177–356. —— De metris poetarum Graecorum et Romanorum (Leipzig, 1796). —— Elementa doctrinae metricae (Leipzig, 1816). —— ‘Emend. P.’ ¼ ‘Emendationes Pindaricae’, Programm Leipzig, 1834 ( ¼ Opuscula, vii. 129–73). —— ‘Nem. sextum’ ¼ ‘Pindari Nemeorum carmen sextum’, Programm Leipzig, 1844 ( ¼ Opuscula, viii. 68–75). —— ‘Notae’ ¼ ‘Notae ad Pindarum’, in Heyne 1817, iii. 235–51. —— Opuscula, 8 vols. (Leipzig, 1827–77). —— ‘Quinque’ ¼ ‘Emendationes quinque carminum Olympiorum Pindari’, Programm Leipzig, 1848 ( ¼ Opuscula, viii. 110–28). Heyne, C. G., 1798–9 ¼ Pindari carmina, 3 vols. (Go¨ttingen, 1798–9). —— 1817 ¼ Pindari carmina, new edn., 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1817). Ho¨hl, H., Responsionsfreiheiten bei Pindar (diss. Cologne, 1950). Housman, A. E., ‘Bacchylides Ode XVII’, CR 12 (1898), 134–40. —— Classical Papers ¼ The Classical Papers of A. E. Housman (Cambridge, 1972). Hummel, P., La Syntaxe de Pindare (Leuven and Paris, 1993).

Bibliography

457

Irigoin, J., Histoire du texte de Pindare (Paris, 1952). Itsumi, K., ‘Choriambic Dimeter’ ¼ ‘The ‘‘Choriambic Dimeter’’ of Euripides’, CQ, ns 32 (1982), 59–74. —— ‘Enoplian in Tragedy’, BICS 38 (1991–3), 243–61. —— ‘Glyconic’ ¼ ‘The Glyconic in Tragedy’, CQ, ns 34 (1984), 66–82. —— ‘What’s in a Line? Papyrus Formats and Hephaestionic Formulae’, in Hesperos: Studies in Ancient Greek Poetry Presented to M. L. West on his Seventieth Birthday, ed. P. J. Finglass, C. Collard, and N. J. Richardson (Oxford 2007), 306–25. Jurenka, H., ‘Novae lectiones Pindaricae’, WS 14 (1893), 1–34. Kayser, C. L., JL ¼ review of Bergk1 and Schneidewin, Jahrbu¨cher der Literatur, 105 (1844), 97–120. —— Lectiones ¼ Lectiones Pindaricae (Heidelberg, 1840). Liberman, G., Pindare, Pythiques (Paris, 2004). Lloyd-Jones, H., GELT ¼ Greek Epic, Lyric, and Tragedy: The Academic Papers of Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones (Oxford, 1990). Maas, P., ‘Freiheiten’ ¼ ‘Die neuen Responsionsfreiheiten bei Bakchylides und Pindar’, JPhV 39 (1913), 289–320 (also publ. separately, Berlin, 1914). —— ‘Freiheiten II’ ¼ ‘Die neuen Responsionsfreiheiten bei Bakchylides und Pindar, zweites Stu¨ck’, JPhV 47 (1921), 13–31 (also publ. separately, Berlin, 1921). —— GM ¼ Griechische Metrik (Leipzig, 1923; 2nd edn. 1929). —— GM (1962) ¼ Greek Metre, trans. H. Lloyd-Jones (Oxford, 1962). —— Kleine Schriften (Munich, 1973). —— ‘Nachlese’ ¼ ‘Nachlese zu Pindar’, JPhV 42 (1916), 102–4 ( ¼ Kleine Schriften, no. 6). Merkelbach, R. ‘Pa¨onische Strophen bei Pindar und Bakchylides’, ZPE 12 (1973), 45–55. Parker, L. P. E., ‘Catalexis’, CQ, ns 26 (1976), 14–28. —— Songs ¼ The Songs of Aristophanes (Oxford, 1997). —— ‘Trochee to Iamb, Iamb to Trochee’, in ‘Owls to Athens’, Essays on Classical Subjects Presented to Sir Kenneth Dover, ed. E. M. Craik (Oxford, 1990). PfeijVer, I. L., Three Aeginetan Odes of Pindar. A Commentary on Nemean V, Nemean III, and Pythian VIII (Mnemosyne Suppl. 197; Leiden, 1999). Privitera, G. Aurelio, Pindaro: le Istmiche (1982). Race, W. H., Pindar, 2 vols. (Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge, MA, 1997). Radt, S. L., Pindars zweiter und sechster Paian (Amsterdam, 1958). Rauchenstein, R., Commentationum Pindaricarum particula prima (Aarau, 1844). —— Commentationum Pindaricarum particula altera (Aarau, 1845).

458

Bibliography

Rauchenstein, R., ‘Zu Pindars Nemeen’, Philologus, 13 (1858), 245–63, 421–42. Rossi, L. E., ‘Anceps, vocale, sillaba, elemento’, RFIC 91 (1963), 52–71. Rutherford, I., Pindar’s Paeans: A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey of the Genre (Oxford, 2001). Schneidewin, F. G., rev. edn. of Dissen (Gotha, 1843). Schroeder, O., BT1–3 ¼ Pindari carmina (Leipzig, 1900; 2nd edn. 1913; 3rd edn. 1930). —— ed. maior1–2 ¼ Pindari carmina (Leipzig, 1900; 2nd edn. 1923). —— Pythien ¼ Pindars Pythien (Leipzig and Berlin, 1922). Sicking, C. M. J., Griechische Verslehre (Munich, 1993). Slater, W. J., Lexicon to Pindar (Berlin, 1969). Snell, B., Griechische Metrik (Go¨ttingen, 19623, 19824). —— Pindarus, 5th edn. (Leipzig, 1971). Stinton, T. C. W., Collected Papers ¼ Collected Papers on Greek Tragedy (Oxford, 1990). —— ‘Pause and Period in the Lyrics of Greek Tragedy’, CQ, ns 27 (1977), 22–66 ¼ Collected Papers, 310–61. Stockert, W., KlangWguren und Wortresponsionen bei Pindar (diss. Vienna, 1969). Theiler, W., ‘Die Gliederung der griechischen Chorliedstrophe’, MH 12 (1955), 181–200. —— Die zwei Zeitstufen in Pindars Stil und Vers (Schriften der Ko¨nigsberger Gelehrten Gesellschaft, Geisteswiss. Kl., 17/4; Halle, 1941). Thummer, E., Pindar: Die isthmischen Gedichte (Heidelberg, 1968). Turyn, A., Pindari carmina (Oxford, 1952). Verdenius, W. J., Commentaries on Pindar, Vol. 1: Olympian Odes 3, 7, 12, 14 (Mnemosyne Suppl. 98; Leiden, 1987). —— Commentaries on Pindar. Vol. 2. Olympian Odes 1, 10, 11 (Mnemosyne Suppl. 101; Leiden, 1988). West, M. L., GM ¼ Greek Metre (Oxford, 1982). —— Music ¼ Ancient Greek Music (Oxford, 1992). Wilamowitz, GV ¼ U. von Wilamowitz-MoellendorV, Griechische Verskunst (Berlin, 1921). —— Pindaros (Berlin, 1922). Willcock, M. M., Pindar: Victory Odes (Cambridge, 1995). Young, D. C., Pindar Isthmian 7, Myth and Exempla (Leiden, 1971). —— Three Odes of Pindar. A Literary Study of Pythian 11, Pythian 3, and Olympian 7 (Mnemosyne Suppl. 91; Leiden, 1968).

General Index The items which are indicated in Table of Contents and Key to Terminology are omitted. For the occurrences of each phrase (glyconic etc.), see List 1 and 2. Aeschylus 34, 147; see also tragedy inXuence of Pindar (?) (Cho. 317 and 315 ¼ 332) 40 n. 67 possibility of F ‹ at Sept. 705 and Suppl. 630 134, 136 Alcaeus 3, 68, 108; see also Lesbian ia þ gl in 70 LP 16 n. 29 Anacreon 6, 21, 34, 68, 82, 172, 245 Aristophanes 172, 252, 398 glyconic starting at wwq (Ra. 1322) 5 n. 41 bacchiac 28, 48, 205, 229, 234, 243, 266, 308, 327, 357, 369 Bacchylides 8 n. 14, 108, 126, 229, 355 3 204–7 17 68 n. 115, 168–9 18 5 n. 41, 46, 252 biceps 53 n. 88, 68, 182, 184, 194, 196, 204, 302, 304, 305 n. 48, 305 n. 49, 332, 392 n. 7 brevis in longo: or Wnal anceps 4 n. 89 not always a self-evident criterion 71, 73 n. 120, 347, 412 collected examples: contact between two aeolic phrases 82 n. 125 e resolved 49 n. 81 full base, exact responsion 32 n. 55 full base, qx 32 n. 57 half base 36 n. 60 rdod starting with www 9 n. 65 correption, epic 117, 130 n. 20, 249, 262, 296, 303, 304, 306, 321, 337, 338, 351, 357, 361, 363, 364

dochmiac, seeming 4, 12, 17, 45, 48, 147, 189, 379, 434 eupolidean dicolon 26 n. 45, 252, 375 Euripides see also tragedy 34, 40 n. 67, 61 n. 102, 67 n. 114, 85, 172, 239, 259, 289, 297 n. 46, 389, 421, 434 catalectic cola in synartesis (Ba. 105–10 ¼ 120–5) 16 n. 28 Hepahestion 6 n. 12, 133, 142 n. 3, 372, 403–6 Ibycus 67–8, 108, 171, 174, 353, 402 lengthening of on at the end of verse, metrical 11 n. 20, 68 n. 115, 227–8, 269, 272, 299, 412 Lesbian (poets) 6, 16 n. 29, 21, 25, 34, 66, 185, 356, 402; see also Sappho and Alcaeus proper noun 24, 32–3, 39, 39 n. 63, 41, 52, 65 n. 109, 105, 151, 191, 194, 213, 218, 253, 262, 275, 285, 297, 298, 331, 334, 340, 358, 385, 392 n. 7, 431, 433 Sappho 3, 64 n. 106, 68, 89, 108, 400 n. 10; see also Lesbian Simonides 110 acephalous dodrans (542P) 2–3, 204 ibyc þ 3 (542P) 397 Stesichorus 7–8, 108, 171, 174, 204, 402 222b (responsion between single short and double) 68 n. 115

460

General Index

SVE (ending with a short vowel; named by Barrett) 195 n. 19, 231, 320, 353, 423 n. 8 tragic poets (tragedy) 10, 16, 22, 25, 27 n. 47, 32, 34, 50, 52, 61 n. 102,

63 n. 105, 68 n. 115, 80, 85, 99, 108, 136, 195, 228, 234, 245, 259, 279, 285, 305, 327, 330, 359, 389, 427 truncated phrase, doubly 26, 356

Index Locorum References are limited to (1) the Pindaric verses in the‘other half ’ and (2) loci in Part I. O1s1 O1s2 O1s3 O1s4 O1s5 O1s6 O1s7 O1s8 O1s9 O1s10 O1s11 O1e1 O1e2 O1e3 O1e4 O1e5 O1e6a O1e6b O1e7 O2s2 O2s3 O2s4 O2s5 O2s6/7 O2s8 O2e1 O2e2 O2e3 O2e4 O2e5 O4e9/10 O9s1–9 O9s1 O9s2

28, 32 n. 55, 34, 43, 62–3, 78, 80, 82 n. 125, 83, 92 n. 141 48 n. 79, 93, 94 64, 96 n. 143, 99 32 n. 55, 64 64, 96 n. 143, 99 19, 46, 61, 75, 95, 99, 101 46, 56, 61, 95, 98, 100, 101 45, 50, 51, 96 n. 143, 98 49 n. 81, 96 n. 143, 97 48, 96 n. 143 54 n. 90, 96 n. 143, 99 97 26 n. 46, 99, 101 19, 95, 100 36 n. 60, 78, 82 n. 125, 87 n. 135, 92 37, 47 n. 77, 94, 95, 101 17, 36 n. 60 39 n. 65, 40 27, 63, 80, 82 n. 125, 92 47, 49, 49 n. 81, 79 51, 49 n. 81, 56 n. 94, 57 n. 99, 58, 97 n. 145 76 49 n. 81 49 n. 81, 99 79, 95 49 n. 81 79, 99 71 49 n. 81 71 n. 118 50 n. 83 22 36 n. 60 32 n. 57, 33, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125

O9s3 O9s4 O9s5 O9s6/7 O9s8 O9s9 O9s10 O9s11 O9e1/2 O9e3 O9e4 O9e6 O9e7 O9e8 O10s1 O10s3a O10s3b O10s4 O10s5 O10s6 O10e1a O10e1b O10e2 O10e3 O10e4/5 O10e6 O10e7 O10e8 O10e9 O10e10 O13s1 O13s2

18, 32 n. 57, 33, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125, 86 86 32 n. 55, 33, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125, 86 15, 17, 32 n. 55, 36 n. 60, 38, 39 n. 63, 82 n. 125, 83 32 n. 57, 33 36 n. 60, 75 22 n. 38, 36 n. 60, 37 22 n. 38, 57, 94 71, 79, 95, 100 37, 93 36 n. 60 66, 93 65, 67, 69 36 n. 60, 74, 80, 82 n. 125 47, 49, 49 n. 81, 94, 97 49, 51, 51 n. 85, 56 n. 94, 57 n. 99, 59, 96 n. 143, 97, 97 n. 145 46, 93, 94 51, 56 n. 94, 57 n. 99, 58, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 145 54 n. 90, 96 n. 143, 97 32 n. 57 102 51, 76, 96 n. 143 48, 64 n. 107, 93 49, 53 n. 88, 55, 57 n. 99, 58, 65 n. 109, 79, 97 52, 71 n. 118, 94, 101 36 n. 60 76, 96 n. 143, 99 66, 76, 93 65, 69 52, 55, 57 n. 99, 58, 94, 97, 101 37, 93 17, 32 n. 55, 54 n. 90

462 O13s3 O13s4 O13s5 P2s1 P2s2 P2s3 P2s4 P2s5 P2s6 P2s7 P2s8 P2e1a–4 P2e1a P2e1b P2e2 P2e3 P2e4 P2e5 P2e6 P2e7 P2e8 P5s1 P5s2 P5s3 P5s4 P5s5 P5s6 P5s7a P5s7b P5s8 P5s9–11 P5s9 P5s10 P5s11 P5e1 P5e2 P5e3 P5e4 P5e5 P5e6

Index Locorum 55, 57 n. 99, 58, 99, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 145 49 n. 81, 54 n. 90, 57, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 146 32 n. 55, 42–3, 78, 82 n. 125 19, 45, 50, 62 n. 104, 96 n. 143, 98 32 n. 57, 33, 36 n. 60, 39 n. 65, 74, 82 n. 125, 83, 85 66, 93, 94 15 n. 26, 36 n. 60, 61, 65, 69, 79, 80 46, 95 46, 94, 95 39 n. 65, 40, 97 36 n. 60, 74, 91, 96 32, 86 32 n. 55, 70, 78, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55, 62, 78, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55, 39 n. 65, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55, 39 n. 65, 82 n. 125, 90, 99 17, 32 n. 55, 40 11, 17, 32, 32 n. 57, 54 n. 90 26 n. 46, 48, 100 36 n. 60 32 n. 55, 78, 79, 80, 82 n. 125 96 n. 143, 97 32 n. 55, 49 n. 81 32 n. 55 50, 76, 96 n. 143 49 n. 81, 101 47, 76, 96 n. 143 11, 76, 96 n. 143 36 n. 60 32 n. 55 23 96 n. 143, 97 97, 101 48, 55, 57 n. 99, 58, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 145, 99 32 n. 55, 92 32 n. 55, 34, 62, 90 39 n. 65, 79, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55 26 n. 46, 48, 100 39 n. 65, 79, 86

P5e7a P5e7b P5e8 P5e9 P6s1–9 P6s1/2 P6s3 P6s4 P6s5 P6s6 P6s7/8 P6s9 P7s1 P8s1 P8s2 P8s3 P8s5 P8s6 P8s7 P8e1 P8e2 P8e3/4 P8e5 P8e6 P8e7 P10s1 P10s2a P10s2b P10s3 P10s4 P10s5 P10s6 P10e1 P10e2 P10e3 P10e4 P10e5 P10e6 P11s1

49 n. 81, 76, 96 n. 143 49 n. 81, 51, 71 n. 118, 76, 96 n. 143 76, 96 n. 143, 97 34, 49 n. 81, 51, 87, 97, 99 22–3 74, 82, 84, 85 32 n. 55, 40, 41, 42 32 n. 55, 47, 86 15, 32 n. 55, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55, 51 32 n. 55 48, 55 n. 93, 57, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 146 45 n. 75 32 n. 55 32 n. 55, 41, 42, 50 n. 83 36 n. 60 17, 32 n. 57, 33, 86 36 n. 60, 44 n. 71, 46, 81, 82 n. 125, 91 19, 21 n. 36, 46, 55 n. 93, 57, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 146, 99 36 n. 60, 37, 90 32 n. 57, 33, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125 32 n. 55, 32 n. 57, 33, 62, 82 n. 125, 83 14, 94, 99 32 n. 55, 34, 78, 80, 82 n. 125 29, 36 n. 60, 39 32 n. 57, 33 36 n. 60, 37, 39 26 n. 46, 48, 100, 101 54 n. 91, 57, 61, 78, 93 19, 26 n. 46, 57, 74, 78, 86, 88, 91, 94 32 n. 55, 48, 62, 92 21 n. 36, 36 n. 60, 40 n. 66, 56, 57, 61, 91 32 n. 57, 33, 54 n. 90, 86 75 14, 36 n. 60, 87, 100 36 n. 60 36 n. 60 36 n. 60, 54 n. 90 14, 40 n. 67, 65, 66 n. 110, 69

Index Locorum P11s2a P11s2b P11s3 P11s4 P11s5 P11e2 P11e3 P11e4 P11e5 P11e6 N2s1 N2s2 N2s3 N2s4 N2s5 N3s1 N3s2 N3s3 N3s4 N3s5 N3s6 N3s7 N3s8 N3e1a N3e1b N3e2 N3e3 N3e4 N4s1 N4s2 N4s3 N4s4–6 N4s4 N4s5 N4s6

36 n. 60 32 n. 55, 42, 50 n. 83 51, 95 39, 40 n. 66, 40 n. 67, 41, 56, 57 n. 99, 87, 90, 102 16, 21 n. 37, 36 n. 60 32 n. 55 36 n. 60 11, 32 n. 55 51, 96 n. 143, 97 n. 145 54 n. 90, 54 n. 91, 57

N4s7 N4s8 N6s1a N6s1b N6s2 N6s3 N6s4a-s7 N6s4a N6s4b N6s5 N6s6a

32 n. 55, 35, 62 36 n. 60 32 n. 57, 33, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125 11, 32 n. 55, 32 n. 57, 33, 62, 73, 80, 82 n. 125, 83, 84 54 n. 91, 57, 78, 94 36 n. 60, 56, 78, 87, 95, 100, 101 96 n. 143, 98 32 n. 55 32 n. 55, 79 19, 51, 95, 98 52, 54 n. 90, 57 12, 17, 32 n. 55 36 n. 60, 61, 91 19, 55, 57, 79, 94, 95, 100 51, 75, 95, 97, 98, 99 15–6, 28, 32 n. 55, 63, 80, 82 n. 125 49 n. 81, 74, 78, 86, 87, 90, 95, 95 n. 142 15 n. 26, 36 n. 60, 61, 69, 79, 80, 82 n. 125 12, 16, 36, 36 n. 60, 37, 38, 39 n. 63, 87 36 n. 60, 38, 39 n. 63 32 n. 57, 33, 36, 36 n. 60, 82, 82 n. 125, 84 86 18, 32 n. 55, 36 n. 60, 78, 82 n. 125, 87 n. 135 17, 32, 32 n. 57, 36 n. 60, 78, 82 n. 125 17, 32, 32 n. 57, 36 n. 60, 39 n. 63, 38, 78, 82 n. 125, 83

N6s6b N6s7 N6e1 N6e2 N6e3 N6e4 N6e5 N6e6/7 N6e8 N6e9 N7s1 N7s2 N7s3 N7s4 N7s5 N7s6 N7s7 N7s8 N7e1 N7e2 N7e3 N7e4 N7e5 I7s1 I7s2 I7s3/4 I7s5a I7s5b I7e1 I7e2

463 32 n. 55 36 n. 60 11, 71, 76, 96 n. 143 32 n. 55, 71 32 n. 55, 82, 82 n. 125, 85 39 n. 65, 65, 69, 79, 80 23 47, 52, 66, 71, 94, 101 11, 71, 76, 96 n. 143 45, 47 n. 76, 93 5, 15, 52, 57 n. 99, 93, 94, 101 11, 49 n. 81, 51, 76, 96 n. 143 49 n. 81, 99, 101 93, 94, 101 32 n. 55, 40 n. 67, 41, 42, 50 n. 83 66, 93 65, 69 93 53 n. 88, 71 n. 118, 96 n. 143, 99 25 n. 41, 31 n. 54 93 32 n. 55, 35, 62 42, 74, 90, 90 91 32 n. 55, 39 n. 65 101 36 n. 60, 50, 91 36 n. 60, 41, 79 32 n. 55, 33, 36 n. 60, 79, 82 n. 125 100, 102 39 n. 65 32 n. 55, 42, 89 32 n. 55, 40, 42 32 n. 55, 80, 82 n. 125 36 n. 60 36 n. 60, 90, 97 32 n. 55, 36 n. 60, 74, 82 n. 125, 84 18, 32 n. 55, 36 n. 60, 73, 79, 82 n. 125 76, 96 n. 143, 99 32 n. 55, 56, 90 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125

464 I7e3 I7e4 I7e5 I7e6 I7e7 I8s1/2 I8s3 I8s4 I8s5a

Index Locorum 36 n. 60 36 n. 60 32, 32 n. 57, 36 n. 60, 82 n. 125 76 86

I8s5b I8s5c I8s6 I8s7

32 n. 55, 49 n. 81, 74, 90 32 n. 55, 36 n. 60, 51, 74, 91, 96 32 n. 55, 82, 82 n. 125, 85 32 n. 55, 35, 62, 73, 80, 82 n. 125

I8s9 I8s10

80, 82 n. 125 32, 32 n. 57, 41, 52 11, 15, 32, 32 n. 57, 87 36 n. 60, 91, 96, 98, 99 49, 50, 51, 79, 96 n. 143, 97 48, 64 n. 107, 93 54 n. 91, 91

Pae6s5a Pae6e10 Pae6e11

50 n. 84 30 n. 52 30 n. 52

I8s8