Production Note
Cornell University Library pro-
duced this volume to replace the
irreparably deteriorated original.
It was scanned using Xerox soft-
ware and equipment at 600 dots
per inch resolution and com-
pressed prior to storage using
CCITT Group 4 compression. The
digital data were used to create
Cornell's replacement volume on
paper that meets the ANSI Stand-
ard Z39.48-1984. The production
of this volume was supported in
part by the Commission on Pres-
ervation and Access and the Xerox
Corporation. Digital file copy-
right by Cornell University
Library 1991.ITINAAPOY ETTIN t KOI NEME0NIKAI5.
THE NEMEAN ODES
OF
PINDAR*9-
■NTTINAAPOY ^ETTINIKOI NEME0NIKAI2.
THE NEMEAN ODES
PINDAR
EDITED, WITH
INTRODUCTIONS AND COMMENTARY,
J. B. BURY, M.A.,
FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, DUBLIN.
Uonbon:
MACMILLAN AND CO.
AND NEW YORK.
1890
{The Right of Translation is reserved.}■1 .s
/cornellN
Un! VERS STY
\LISftARV/
(£ambrit!ffe:
PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A., AND SONS,
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.PREFACE.
F all the great Greek poets Pindar has received least
attention from English scholars. The only complete
commentary that has appeared since Donaldson’s is that of
Dr Fennell. The Nemean and Isthmian Odes came off even
less well than the Olympian and Pythian, which were separately
edited by Cookesley and in America by Mr Gildersleeve (whose
work however was published in England). When we compare
this list with the number of editions of Homer and the Greek
dramatists which appear from year to year, it may seem needless
to apologise for a new commentary on the works of Pindar;
and certainly an editor of the Nemean Odes may feel secure
against the charge of crambe repetita.
The methods of interpretation and the plan of exposition
adopted in the present volume are in many respects new ;
otherwise indeed this edition, after Dr Fennell’s sound work,
which so opportunely supplied a want, would have no reason
for existing. The reader will find in the general Introduction
a statement of my principles of interpretation, and he will see
how much I owe to a new idea put forward by F. Mezger in
Pindars Siegeslieder, 1880. To the other well-known German
scholars who have edited or dealt with Pindar (Boeckh, Dissen,
Mommsen, Bergk, &c.) I gratefully acknowledge my obligations,
and their names will be found in every page of my commentary.
Rumpel’s Lexicon Pindaricum and E. Abel’s edition of the
Scholia vetera on the Nemean and Isthmian Odes have been
specially useful. Dr Fennell’s Nemean and Isthmian Odes has
been always by me.
In the revision of the proof-sheets I have received mostVI
PREFACE.
valuable help from my friend Mr R. Y. Tyrrell, to whom I
would here express my best thanks. Some of his suggestions
are specially mentioned in the notes.
I have also to acknowledge the kindness of Dr J. P. Postgate
in offering to place at my disposal his manuscript notes on the
Nemean Odes. Unfortunately I was unable to take full advan-
tage of his offer, as the greater part of my Commentary was
already finally printed; but I have mentioned a few of his
suggestions in a list of Addenda, to which I would invite
attention. (See too Appendix A, note io.)
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.
As six of the hymns included in this volume celebrate
Aeginetans, I should like to have added an essay on the
contemporary history of Aegina, but the introductory matter
touching the art of Pindar claimed so much room that such an
addition would have made the book too big. If however I
realise my hope of editing the Isthmian Odes, there will be
an opportunity of dealing with Aegina then. The two hymns
to Chromius likewise suggest a section on a greater island than
Aegina; but that will be more in place when we reach the
presence of the Syracusan 4 Basileus ’ himself. And besides
when I come to the Olympian and Pythian Odes, if I should
ever get so far, we shall have the advantage of new light on
the island of the Sikels and Pindar's Sikeliot friends from the
first instalment of the expected work of Mr Freeman.
The Appendix on the Origin of the Great Games, in which I
have had some useful help from Mr Mahaffy, propounds a new
view as to the establishment of the Olympian games. I have
stated there as strongly as possible the case which I plead, but
of course I am fully conscious that it is only guesswork.ERRATA AND ADDENDA.
P. i, footnote r. After the words * Journal of Hellenic Studies' read ‘vol. ii.’
for ‘vol. i.’
P. 2, footnote (continued from page r), for ‘as Aetna was founded in 475’ read
‘as Aetna was founded in 476 B.c.’, and in next line for ‘472 B.c.’ read ‘473 B.C.’
P. 20, add to note on 1. 46 :
Dr Postgate, however, quotes Aeschylus, Agamemnon, 894, rou gwetidovros
Xpbvov ‘the time that shared my sleep’ as an instance of time being said to do what
takes place during its lapse.
P. 44, 13th line from foot,
for----------(17),
read	(17).
P. 49, add to note on 1. 22 :
The difficult expression rjpos 0«os has never been satisfactorily explained. Dr
Postgate conjectures ijp(p 0e6s, and this certainly deserves consideration.
P. 50, to note on 1. 24 add a reference (pointed out to me by Dr Postgate)
to Plato, Critias, p. 108.
P. 53, 1. 41 of text, for arpeKii read arpe/ceZ.
P* 591 to note on 1. 72 add the following words: rpirov is the reading of the
MSS. of Triclinius. BB have rplraros and the other ancient mss. rplrarov, contrary
to the metre.
P. 6r, in note on 1. 80 after the words ‘associated with the city of Agrigentum’
add:
The scholiast says that Pindar is alluding to Bacchylides.
P. 89, in note on 1. 2, for x^^...6Vre...eWxa(ra^ read xa^^*/--*oVre...wxa(rat.
P. 91, add to note on 1. 20 :
Dr Postgate compares Oed. Tyr. 1301 rls 6 injorjoas fid^ova ba.ip.03v rCbv ficucla-
Ttav; and suggests that we may infer from this that a maximum and a minimum leap
were marked.
P. 92, add to note on 1. 26 :
Dr Postgate believes that wcdaaai here means to kill, comparing (pvrevt foi B6.va.rov
IV. 59 and Thren. fr. 6, wtyve 5Z rpeis Kal 5Ik avdpas, rerpdrtp S’ avrbs tteddBrj.Vlll
ERRATA AND ADDENDA.
P. 109, in note on 1. 38 after the words ‘the significance of y4<pvp' aicdfiavTos has
been explained in the Introduction ’, add :
I feel doubts however whether Dr Fennell and Mr Paley are right in taking aicd-
fiavros as a collateral form of aicd/xas. Dr Fennell translates ‘the impregnable cause-
way through the sea’, and Paley ‘the hard rocky causeway’. But I can find no analogy
for a nom. sing. djcdfiavTOi (which would imply a *Kap.aiv(a)i and, though I am sorry
to abandon the conception of the indefatigable bi'idge (see p. 100), I must admit that it
is safer to follow Boeckh in taking aKafiavros with ttovtov (mavis indefessi).
P. 130, add as a note on 1. 14 :
For evl <rin> rpoirip, ‘in one way only ’, Dr Postgate compares the use of cum in
Latin, as e.g. in Lucretius v. 364 solido cum corpore mundi naturast.
P. 133, to note on 1. 30 add :
Dr Postgate however thinks the meaning is ‘Death comes unexpected even on
the best prepared’ and compares Horace, C. II. 13, 13. It cannot be denied that
this explanation suits the position of Kal better than that which I have adopted.
P. 135, in note on 1. 48, add after the word yaarpis:
Compare also kclkwv peKTrjpa Kal i)(3piv avlpa, Hesiod, yE. Kal ’H. 191 (a reference
for which I am indebted to Dr Postgate).
P. 144, after the words (crying for nothing) in 1. 19 of note on 1. 102 add:
Dr Postgate, who takes the same view of the construction as Dr Fennell, would
illustrate naif/vkaKas (‘vainly babbling’, practically = ‘vainly babbled’) by xf/ebarav
\6yop in Nem. v. 29.
P. 152, add as a note on kclvov ye 1. 10 :
Dr Postgate has pointed out to me that the force of ye may be brought out by
rendering ‘a prince like him’ (cf. vn. 75).
P. 158, add to note on 1. 51 :
For the repetition of the article (rdv) although the strife of Adrastus and the
strife of the Cadmeans were one and the same, Dr Postgate well compares the
repetition of inter in Horace, Ep. 1. 2, 11 Nestor componere lites inter Peliden festinat
et inter Atriden, the effect here being to bring out the fact that Adrastus and
the Thebans were on different sides.TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAGE
Preface.......................................................v
Introduction : i. The Interpretation of Pindar .... xi
2.	The Construction of the Pindaric Ode .	.	. xxxiii
3.	The Text.......................................lii
Text and Notes................................................1
Appendix A (Notes 1—10)..........................................227
Appendix B, The Graces in Pindar.................................241
Appendix C, Pindar’s visit to Sicily.............................245
Appendix D, Origin of the Great Games............................248
Index: I. Greek..................................................265
II. English...............................................270INTRODUCTION.
i. The Interpretation of Pindar.
Those who desire to study the Greek mind as revealed in literary
art will probably find that there are more secrets to be learned in Pindar
than in any other writer. For of all Greek poets he is the most Greek;
or, rather, in his poems those distinctive qualities of the Greek temper
which are alien to modern sentiments and ideas are more clearly
reflected than for instance in the tragedians. The Greek tragedies deal
with forms of human emotion which are universal; as we read them, the
stress of common humanity tends to eliminate the differences between
the modern and the ancient spirit; and hence we even find it difficult
to avoid the importation of modern emotions into our reading of
Sophocles and Euripides. Whereas there is no temptation to falsify
Pindar in this way, or, as we might say, to modernise him. He is the
poet of ‘the delightful things in Hellas’, ra Tepirvd lv 'EAAaSi, and his
works reflect the authentic quality of the Hellenic spirit. This is
the secret of his charm, and to this, too, is due the fact that he is less
generally read than other Greek poets. For the complicated structure
of his Odes,—demanding from the reader a close searching attention, to
apprehend the unity of the whole and grasp the punctual meaning of
every part,—cannot be regarded as a completely independent cause of
unpopularity; inasmuch as this elaborate art is likewise a revelation
of the Hellenic spirit, here carrying the desire of artistic perfection to
the extreme limit of achievement.
For recognising that with nature their power was small, the Greeks
determined that .over art at least their control should be complete, and
they left little to chance. The saying of the poet Agathon that art and
chance loved each other,
T*XV71 r^XVV «TT€p£c KCLl TV\7J T€^VT]V7INTROD UCTION.
xii
had certainly no application to the work of Pindar. He elaborated his
poems to such a point that every phrase was calculated, and no word
was admitted which did not ‘tell’ in the total effect. In one place
indeed he speaks as if he wandered from matter to matter at random
Mike a bee’ (wrc /xeAtcro-a1) flitting from flower to flower; but that
is only a graceful reserve or cipom'a—an expression of the artistic
hiding of art. Nor is the contrast between genius and the mere know-
ledge of rules and Texyrj), on which he often dwells, in any sense
inconsistent with the self-consciousness of his own art. His idea of <l>vrj
was not of some blindly acting force, moving outside rules, successful
by sheer strength; nor did he condemn in	an excessive care for
order or diction. By rigi/rj, rather, he meant the mere mechanical,
slavish application of formulae, where the divine gift of insight is
absent; by fay, the power which can wield art more artfully and
effectually than ever, because it works freely. His hymns wonderfully
unite an appearance of the absence of restraint with the most scrupulous
precision of language. The poetry seems to flow with the impulse of a
torrent or some free natural force, unable to confine itself; and yet
when we look more closely we find that every sentence is measured,
every word weighed, every metaphor charged with subtle meanings that
play beneath the surface. To be fettered and yet free is the ideal of
art, or, in Pindaric phrase, the 4 aim of the Muses ’ (Moicrav ctkottos) ;
and perhaps no literary artist has ever realised that ideal as perfectly as
the poet of Thebes.
For appreciating Pindar a susceptibility to the effects of words is
eminently necessary; for each of his is, as it were, a gem with a virtue
of its own, which the poet had fully appreciated before he set it in its
place. To show what in editorial waywardness may result from a lack
of this susceptibility, I may choose (one of many instances) the last
measure of the Sixth Olympian Ode. This poem written in honour
of Agesias of Syracuse, closes with an invocation of Poseidon, who ;s
besought thus:
ifx&v 8’ vfivdiv ae£ evrepires avOos,
Cause the delectable flower of my hymns to grow. As the chief feature of
the Ode is the story of Iamus, laid after birth in a bed of pansies (ta)
and thence deriving his name, the last word avOos is calculated to
suggest the aesthetic virtue of the whole hymn, reminding us, even
at the end, of that flowery ‘woodborn wonder’, to which the victor
Agesias is compared. And ae£av is the appropriate verb for a flower.
1 Pyth. x. 54.INTROD UCTION
xiii
Poseidon is implored to tend the growth of Agesias even as he had
watched over Iamus. Yet Bergk is led by the indications of some
mss. to adopt in his text
ifjuov vjulvo)V Se 8c£* cvrc/37rcs avOos1.
We shall meet many instances of this kind in the Nemean Odes.
But what one may lose through mere inattentiveness of the ear to words
and their intentions, most readers have perhaps at some time or other
experienced in the case of really careful poetry written in their own
language. In this stanza for example of Tennyson’s In Memoriam—
And up thy vault with roaring sound
Climb thy thick noon, disastrous day ;
Touch thy dull goal of joyless gray,
And hide thy shame beneath the ground,
—the felicity of the word disastrous in the context might easily pass
unnoticed.
And words have the habit of investing themselves, through asso-
ciations, with a certain atmosphere, sometimes palpable, sometimes
very subtle,—these associations being often the secret of the whole
aesthetic effect, and withal of so volatile a nature as to elude inquiry.
In the poetry of an ancient, in the poetry even of a foreign language,
much is missed by the impossibility of feeling instinctively such associa-
tions ; but in some words at least, used by Pindar, we may detect special
significances. <£eyyos, for example, seems to have been charged with a
mystic import, designating most probably, in the mysteries, a divine
Light; it was an afiporov €7ros, a ‘mystic word’2. And thus Pindar’s
phrase of the Graces, KaOapov <j>£yyos Xapirwv, will suggest (as cf>aos
could not) a wonderful light,—as it were, ‘ the light of ineffable faces ’.
But the delicate potencies in words tend to vanish, when you try to
define them, for in definition there is mostly a certain violence or
rudeness. Of modern poets Rossetti was a master in handling the
subtle suggestiveness of words. In one of his sonnets in the House of
Life, for instance, these lines close the octave :
Such fire as Love’s soul-winnowing hands distil
Even from his inmost ark of light and dew.
To this curiously happy effect it is clear that the choice of the word
ark and its accompaniment by ‘light and dew’ most largely contribute ;
and yet if we let the mind force into full consciousness the associations
1 Another objection to this reading is 2 See below, note on Nem. ix. 42
that in an Olympian Ode Poseidon could (p. 180).
not be the receiver of the poet’s offering.XIV
INTRO D UCTION
which have determined the virtue of that word, the happy effect is
spoiled by an emerging incongruity. For when you pass into imagi-
native literature, no coquettes are so capricious as words, so easily
spoiled in more than one sense, their humours requiring the patient
study of a lover.
Nor is the mere sound of a word insignificant. In poetry of all
ages effects frequently depend on similar sounds which represent quite
different meanings, as in Pindars SXXouri 8’ aAticcs akkoi, in Homer’s
toSiva)v 68vvrj<TL, dOvpfiara Ov/j,<3, or in Rossetti’s
By what spell they are sped.
This is carried further, the poet, as it were, drawing attention to it,
when Viola says in Twelfth Night
And what should I do in Illyria?
My brother he is in Elysium.
The effect of these lines depends on the assonance of the names.
Now to the Greeks similarity in sound meant far more than to modern
ears, for they (except a few rationalists) regarded language as a divine
invention and of this view it was a corollary that behind a likeness in
sound lay some hidden likeness in fact. And this theory, in combi-
nation with a belief in omens, suggested especially significances in
proper names; ovofia opvus, a name is a bird. References to such
significances, common to all Greek poets, are a notable feature in
Pindar, occurring in almost every hymn \ And this was recognised by
Greek critics. In a note which probably comes from Didymus we read
the words : etcoOe 8c o IliVSapos rats opuawpiais iirava7rav€(r0au e$€i 18tip
(Schol. on Nem. n. 11). There is a good example in the Second Pythian
Ode. Rhadamanthys is there introduced for the sake of his name,
interpreted as ‘easily learning’, and contrasted with the ape who also
‘learns in a way’:—
fiaOiav kolXos toi 7tl0(x)v, 7rapa irauriv alel
Kakos* o 8c *Pa8a/xav0vs ev TreTTpayev, on <j>p€vuiv
cAa^c Kapirov dp,<op,rjTOV.
Unless we recognise this intention, we shall have to think that
Pindar, introducing Rhadamanthys without a motive, had forgotten his
cunning.
It is obvious that in many cases, where it would have been improper
to mention names, unmistakable allusions could easily be made by
1 Instances will be found in most of paronomasia from Homer, Aeschylus &c.
the Odes in this volume. It is needless The derivations of Iamus and Aias in
to cite here the familiar instances of Pindar are well known.INTROD UCTION.
xv
various kinds of ‘ paronomasia ’. Latin poets, as everyone knows, used
to introduce real personages under fictitious designations, metrically
equivalent to the original names. Pindar combined this device with
etymological allusion. In the Seventh Nemean Ode the strange
coinage fuu/rvAaica? can, in my opinion, have been invented for no other
purpose than to designate Pindar’s younger rival Bacchylides. fxaif/-
v\&Ka<s is metrically equivalent to BaKxvXtSrjs and has the same number
of letters	And no enemy of Bacchylides who wished to refine
on the significance of his name, could have more cunningly combined
a plausible derivation and an invidious suggestion. Connecting the
first syllable fiak%- with the evil influence of wine on ‘rhyme and
reason’, he parodies it by pdifs ‘wildly, rhymelessly’; and he sees in the
second part of the name a relation of the words which mean ‘bark’
(v\a<t>, etc.)1. Philologists, much nearer to our own day than Pindar,
would not have hesitated at such an etymology.
There is in the Eighth Pythian, if my view of the passage is right,
an interesting instance of an etymological allusion.
That Ode, written in honour of an Aeginetan, soon after the
conquest of Aegina by Athens (b.c. 457), though containing no direct
reference to the Athenians, dwells on the uncertainty of prosperity;
in a short time, we read, ‘men’s pleasance waxeth; but in the same wise
too it falleth to the ground’. There is a clear prophecy of a reversal of
fortune for the Aeginetans at the expense of the Athenians. Some
words however contain a more pointed allusion. The victor who had
won his laurel wreath in wrestling had thrown four competitors; and of
these defeated men it is said that they did not return home to be
welcomed by the smiles of their mothers,—
Kara Xavpas xopwv durdopoi
7nd(T(TOVTL crvjJLcfxipa SeSay/xeVot,
‘ they cower, aloof from dances, in lanes ’. The expression is strange;
but it wins significance if we suppose that one at least of the wrestlers
was an Athenian and that Xavpas alludes to the silver mines of
Laurium—Kavpiov being really a diminutive of Xavpa The suggestion,
then, covertly expressed, is this: an Aeginetan has vanquished an
Athenian in wrestling; well, let the Athenian skulk in those mines, the
source of the strength of his countrymen. The commercial Aeginetans
must certainly have been jealous of the riches which their neighbours
1 If Pindar had been defending his connexion, suggested in the Odyssey, be-
etymology he might have supported the tween 2/ctfXXa and cr/n5Xa£.
connexion of -vXibrjs with -i/Xaxas by the
B.
bXVI
INTRODUCTION.
dragged out of the earth at Laurium; but this jealousy was still more
bitter, if, as has been plausibly suggested1 * * *, Laurium originally belonged
to Aegina herself and was wrested from her by Athens, ‘the fountain
of silver7 being really the fountain of discord between the two cities
throughout the early part of the 5 th century.
We should not expect to find one so punctual as Pindar in the
use of words errant in the matter of metaphors. For in this as in
other respects Greek literature was marked by temperance; in Greek
writers there is not that oriental exuberance of metaphorical language,
which, at first attractive through its very strangeness to the western
mind, soon offends the dry understanding. This shyness in regard
to metaphor produced the habit of qualification; as when a chorus
of maidens, in the Iphigenia among the Tauri> comparing them-
selves collectively to a bird, add am-epos, ‘ a bird—but wingless \ The
oestrus which drove Io is called by Aeschylus ap8is airvpos, ‘ a goad—
but unforged’; Orestes and Pylades in the Orestes are ‘Bacchants—
but wandless7 aOvp<roi; discord in the same play, is ‘fire, but not of
Hephaestus ’. In Pindar we shall find that his metaphors, when they do
not arise naturally out of the metaphorical usage of a word in common
speech, are due to some motive which renders them appropriate. In
the expression
k\vtcu,(tl 8ac8a\(x)(rcp,€V vp.vwv TrTv\<u^
the comparison of strains of music to the folds of a dress enveloping
the object arises smoothly out of a metaphor latent in the verb ScuSa-
Aovv. The remarkable image of a hymn as
AvSiav pLLTpav KavagaSa TT€Troua\p.£vav
has its justification in the use of the p.urpa to bind together the leaves of
the victor’s crown, and Kavaxa8a is the qualification of the image; ‘ a
headband—but of sounds’. This temperance in direct metaphorical
language is combined with a sharp sensibility to the metaphors latent
in words, leading to a choice of harmonious phrases. Thus <rvv 0co>
<|>vT€v0€l$ o\/3os (in the Eighth Nemean) followed by Kivvpav 2ppio-€
7rXovT(o suggests a tree weighed down by its fruit, but does not force the
image on the vision. In another passage (Nemean n. 7) tvOyTropuros,
implying the image of a wind, seems	at first sight to stand alone. But
1 By Mr Mahaffy (Rambles and Studies	(3) the allusion in the Persae of Aeschy-
in Greece, p. 163). This hypothesis ex-	lus, which indicates that the mines had
plains (1) the power of Aegina, (2) the	only recently come into prominence at
existence of an Aeginetan metric system, Athens.INTROD UCTION
xvii
looking closer, we discover that the substantive which it qualifies, aldv9
is really conceived as a breeze, for Pindar associated it with arjfu.
And thus, though Pindar has won a repute of audacity for bold and
mixed metaphors, we shall find on examination that his language is
always scrupulously weighed, and charged with intention, his metaphors,
as all else, bearing a definite relation to the whole effect. He does not
mix images incongruously, though sometimes they follow in rapid succes-
sion ; but he is rather inclined to push a single metaphor further than
may be superficially obvious. The famous instance of mixed images in
the Sixth Olympian Ode is clearly due to an error in the text. The
lines are these :
KCtvos, <3 7tcu ^(txrrpaTOv,
(tvv j3apvy8ov7T(o Trarpl Kpacvei aeOcv evTv^iav.
8o£av €^(0 TLV €7Tl yXcocrara aKOvas Atyupas,
a pH iOeXovra irpocrikKei KaXkipoouri ttvocus,
pLaT€p ipLa 2rvpL<f>a\U cvav&qq Menaira.
The idea of a whetstone on the tongue, to sharpen it, interposed
between the god of the sea and the waters of Metopa, with which the
phrase /caAAipo'ottu wools is accordant, is merely grotesque, and has
absolutely no motive. Even in a modern writer, as eccentric as
Browning, it would seem unusually harsh; for Pindar, I believe, it
would have been impossible. A little consideration will show what
word originally held the place usurped by okovos. From l^o> iw yAoxrora
it is evident that the writer had in his mind the proverbial /3ovs brl
yAoxrcrci signifying 4 silence ’; and as his meaning clearly is 41 cannot be
silent touching Metopa ’, we must infer that for the ox of muteness he
substituted a singing creature, a bird. And to be really suitable to the
context, to harmonize with the presence of the sea and the rivers, the
voice of a seabird was required. 4 On my tongue I have (not an ox
but) a certain fancy of a vocal seabird, which draweth me on full willing
with a fair stream of treat hM soundsl And this, I believe, was what
Pindar wrote:
So£av €\o) tlv €7rt yA<o(rcra ’A/ojoVos Aiyupas1.
The seabird that he chose was a kingfisher. And the idea is more than
a mere metaphor; for the seabird, as it were, flies seaward and draws
the minstrel after it to the ‘deep thundering’ ocean from the waters of
1 AKYONOC was read olkvovos or a/toi'os,	7°	7“P	’^d^aro vavrCklas; (as
and ‘ corrected ’ to atcovas. For the	Bergk rightly reads, only he spells dpxv
occurrence of such prodelision (as I pre- ’k5{£clto), and 250 c3 ’piccalXa; 01. XIII.
fer to consider it) in Pindar, cf. Pyth. IV. 99	1 pQortpwdev.
b 2INTRO D UCTION
xviii
Metopa and the Stymphalian lake, in Arcadia,—thus symbolizing the
passage from Stymphalus to Syracuse, from home to home (oikoQw
otKaSe). Nor is the imagery mixed; for not the bird, but the imagina-
tion thereof, is said to be ini yAoWa1.
1 This metaphor has been defended by
two eminent scholars. Professor Jebb,
in his admirable study on Pindar {Jour-
nal of Hellenic Studies, vol. hi., p. 171),
writes thus : ‘ The thought which in-
spires a strain is compared to the whet-
stone which sharpens the knife,—and here,
again, note the mixture of metaphors :
[Greek quoted]: “ I have a thought upon
my lips that lends keen motive to my
song; it woos my willing soul with the
spirit of fair-flowing strains ”... With re-
gard to this metaphor, as to many others
in Greek lyrics which are apt to strike us
as harsh or even grotesque, there is a
general principle which ought, I think,
to be clearly perceived. Most Indo-
European nouns expressed some one
obvious and characteristic quality of the
object which they denoted: e.g. pads is
“the swimmer”, 8pvs the thing which is
cleft, &c. Similarly a/covy is the sharpener,
Kparrip is the mixer &c. A Greek who
called a thought an aKoprj was thus using
a less startling image than we should use
in calling it a whetstone; to call the
teacher of a chorus a Kparfip was not the
same thing as it would be for us to call
him a howl. And such phrases are less
audacious in proportion as they are old,
i.e. near to the time when the language
was still freshly conscious of the primary
sense in such words as aicovT) ’.
I find it difficult to elicit Professor
Jebb’s ingenious translation ‘a thought
upon my lips that lends keen motive to
my song’ from 86£ap rip’ olkopas \iyvpas.
His rendering would rather demand Hojjav
tip , aKOPap \tyvpdp. And his defence
of the metaphors applies with greater
force to Kparrip than to akop-t], inasmuch
as the Greeks had the verb Kepdppvuu to
remind them of the original meaning of
Kparrip, whereas they had no word (like
Latin acuere) to associate with clkopti
except aKOpdw itself. Such words as clkti,
aKUK'ii, Akujp, akIs would, alone, hardly
suggest the idea of sharpening, and, with
all deference to Professor Jebb’s opinion,
I doubt very much whether in Pindar’s
day or many generations before Pindar
the Greek language ‘was still freshly
conscious of the primary sense ’ in &k6pij.
kpar-ftp, I submit, is on a different footing.
Mr Tyrrell (ClassicalRevierv, May 1888,
p. 139) has defended the suspected phrase
on different grounds. ‘ On the one hand
it is wellnigh impossible to set bounds to
the “soaring craft” as Pindar called it.
What may not a great poet say at that
golden moment
‘ ‘ When a great thought strikes along
the brain
And flushes all the cheek”?
Yet on the other, it must be owned that
confusion of metaphor has its limits,
and is sometimes quite intolerable. Our
feeling about the expression seems to
depend upon our feeling about the poet’s
mind at the moment when he clothed
his thought in words. The expression
is majestic only if we feel that the poet
was in a “ fine frenzy ” ’. In this con-
nexion he refers to Pindar’s
‘ Methinks a whetstone shrilleth on
my lips,
It draws me on full fain
On current of sweet airs*.
But there must, I think, be certain objec-
tive limits to legitimate mingling of meta-
phor, apart from the subjective state of
the poet. Take the familiar instance
from Hamlet, quoted by Mr Tyrrell in
this connexion,—
Or to take arms against a sea of
troubles.INTR OD UCTION.
xix
When this formidable example of metaphorical aberration is removed,
those who read Pindar attentively will, I think, acknowledge that
tenacity of one image is more characteristic of his poetry than a blend-
ing of several.
But though he does not confuse metaphors, he sometimes uses what
we may call double metaphors, by playing on two meanings of a word.
There is a remarkable example of this in Isthmian vi. 18;
dfJLvdfioves Se fiporoi
6 tl fxrj aortas awrov anpov
kXvtclls €7rco)i/ poais ££iKr]T(u tyyiv.
The meaning of these lines turns on the double sense of acoros
(i) gloss, or perfection, (2) breeze or breath (arjpu, acorcco), for which I
must refer to note on Netn. 11. 9 and Appendix A, note 3. Thus there
are two distinct metaphors, (1) from driving in a car (t>vykv) to a height
(dtcpov) : men remember not whatsoever reaches not the crowning height of
Art, drawn in a rushing car of verses; (2) from a ship wafted by a
breeze : whatever exploit, ungirded by sounding streams of poetry, fails to
win a favouring wind of Wisdom, passeth out of men's minds. The
language is chosen with the greatest skill, almost every word suggesting
a second meaning. £uyeV, properly belonging to the first metaphor,
is not inappropriate in the second, for ^evyvvpu was a technical word for
undergirding a ship. k^Ur^Tai may suggest bc/x-cvos ov/009, while awrov
Here the metaphor * sea of troubles ’ is
natural and familiar; ‘ to take arms
against ’ or fight against troubles is also a
familiar image : and therefore the con-
nexion of the two metaphorical phrases
does not strike us as incongruous. But
if both metaphors had been unusual, the
incongruity would be unjustifiable. This
applies to the passage in the Antigone
v where, according to the generally ac-
cepted correction of the reading of the
MSS., kovis (with other things) is said to
mow down a light which had been set
above a plant. Here the incongruity of
the unfamiliar metaphors is aggravated
by the fact that the thing a) which
seems to offer itself to the scythe of the
Erinys is not mown, while the thing
which could not possibly be mown suffers
that operation. A slight change restores
the passage and gives its proper object to
d/x$. The same reasoning applies to the
passage under consideration. Four in-
congruous pictures rise before us; yX&craa,
aKOva,	%\k€lv, raWipoot irvoai. The
ykCxrva is not a natural resting-place for
the whet ter; an a Kova cannot be said to
* draw on ’; and with Ka\\ip6oi ttvoolI it
certainly is not accordant. And the
strangeness of the image makes these
discords jar. My reading, while it in-
volves but a very slight change, harmo-
nises the words into one striking idea.
I should add that the comparison of a
trainer to a Naxian whetstone, that
sharpens athletes, in Isthm. v. 72 (an
image thoroughly in place there) cannot
be fairly adduced to support a/covas in
Olympian vi.XX
INTRODUCTION.
aKpov of a prosperous breeze is justified by the Homeric adjective
aKp-dTys.
The idea of building up the Ode of Victory on a myth, worked out
so as to contain an application usually to the victor himself, sometimes
to his country, was adopted by Pindar1. Direct praises, blended with
ethical commonplaces, must, when continued through a whole composi-
tion, become monotonous and fulsome2, a poet's genius notwithstanding.
But the myth gave a sphere both for the higher work of the imagination
and for craft in elaborating a parallel or an allegory; while the apparent
passing away from the subject of the victor, for a while, was a relief
from the necessity of reiterating a sort of Aios KoptvOos. This new
method of Pindar was thus a happy discovery, and we may regard it as
the chief secret of his poetical charm ; for certainly the interest of each
poem turns mainly on the myth and its relation to the rest.
And here too lies the chief difficulty. Only recently a clue has been
found by a German scholar, whose discovery certainly marks a new
period in the study of Pindar. Just ten years ago F. Mezger published
his Pindars Siegeslieder, in which he pointed out that it was a practice
of the poet to repeat some particular word in the same verse and foot of
different strophes or epodes, and that he indicated thereby some
connexion in thought between two separated parts of the Ode. Thus
Pindar has himself supplied us with indications for following the ways
of his thought; he has ‘set words’3 for us like sign-posts. And he
hinted too that his songs require a key, when he called Aeneas—the
bearer of the Sixth Olympian Ode to Agesias, and charged with its
interpretation—a scytale of the Muses (fjvKopuav a-KvrdXa Moio-av)4.
I need not illustrate the principle of Mezger here, for each of the
Odes in this volume is an example, as is shown in the special Intro-
ductions. But I must observe that Mezger has not carried his own
principle far enough; and this has precluded him in many cases from
grasping the full meaning of a poem. For Pindar does not confine his
‘responsions’ to verses metrically corresponding—and Mezger has to
some extent recognized this—but indicates the train of his thoughts by
1	He tells us this himself in the Fourth
Nemean (q. v.), as Mezger has shown.
The idea he is said to have derived from
the instruction of Corinna.
2	Cp. also E. Lubbert, Pindar's Leben
und Dichtung, p. 8 : ‘ Ein ausfiihrliches
directes Lob des Siegers wiirde nach
hellenischen Begriffen eine Herausfor-
derung an die Nemesis gewesen sein’.
3	eirktuv deaei, Olymp. III. 8. Mezger
has closely connected this discovery with
Westphal’s untenable theory of the struc-
ture of the Pindaric Ode; but the con-
nexion is not essential.
4	I (not Mezger) am responsible for
this interpretation.INTRODUCTION.
xxi
verbal echoes anywhere, independently of the metre. These echoes
become formal and emphatic ‘ responsions ’, where in conformity with
Mezger’s rule the metre is confederate; but when the metre does not
assist, they are not less important guides for us in detecting the parallel
ranges and answering groups constructed by this wonderful art. The
last words of the Sixth Olympian Ode, already quoted, furnish an
instance in point. Poseidon is invoked for Agesias :
8icnrora ttovto/lcSov, evOvv Se irXoov KapLaraiv
€Ktos iovTa 81801, xpv<ra\aKOLTOio ttoctls
*AfufyiTpiras, ifJLUJv 8’ vfiviov	cvrcpirh av6os.
In the myth which occupies the centre of the hymn, Poseidon had been
invoked by Iamus, who is the mythical counterpart of the victor
Agesias; and this is recalled by the ringing of ‘ gold ’ and an echo of
‘ delight ’. For the appeal of Iamus to Poseidon was introduced by
the words
Tcpirvas 8’ €7T€t xpva-oo’TecfHxvoi0 Xafiev
Kapirov *H/?as.
And, further, there is another cross-echo, here punctually answering;
for evrcpTres dv0os, at the end of the fifth epode, recalls cvavOtjs McrtoVa, the
last words of the fourth epode.
And sometimes the echo is combined with a play on words. In the
First Isthmian Ode, for instance, we read of the ‘ omen of Asopodorus ’
yapvdofxaL—ayaKXea rav *Ao‘t07ro8(6pov warpos alcrav (1. 34),
and we wonder what it may be. Reading further we learn of the
things which this Asopodorus (the father of the victor) had suffered;
how he had been banished from Thebes and afterwards restored; and
then the third strophe ends thus :
o Trovrjcrais 8e vow teal TrpopidOeLav tfxpei.
When we reach the end of the fourth antistrophos, our ears are struck
by a reverberation, which clears up our difficulty:
7} p.av ttoXXolkl Kal to tr&rwirapivov ev$vp.iav	¥p“ (k 63)*
The repetition of <f>ip€ 1 here at the end of the same verse, takes us back
to the man of ‘forethought’; and then we apprehend that to <r€<rmrapAvov
explains the omen of ’A-crawro-Scopos—the guerdon of silence.
The objections, which will doubtless be made to the principles on
which my interpretation of Pindar is based, I can well imagine. It will
be said that my view imputes to the poet an artificiality which is
unworthy of a great genius and inconsistent with true poetical inspira-XXII
INTROD UCTION.
tion. If it be replied that no a priori considerations can alter a simple
fact, the objectors will say that the echoes and ‘responsions’ are
undesigned coincidences, discerned only by the vain fancy of an over
subtle commentator. This second argument is the only one with which
I am necessarily concerned. If it can be shown that the echoes are not
the creatures of a modern fancy, seeing in Pindar more than he ever
dreamed of, then we must simply accept the fact and harmonize it with
our aesthetic theories as we may see fit.
There are two considerations which, in my judgment, peremptorily
exclude the supposition that the echoes and responsions, pointed out in
this volume, were merely accidental, (i) If only one hymn of Pindar
were extant, it might be maintained that echoes of language, noticed by
an editor, were a freak of chance and formed no part of the poet’s
design. But seeing that forty-five (or at least forty-three) poems of
Pindar1 have been preserved, and that in every one of these there are
distinct responsions and echoes in which a direct bearing on the
connexion of thought may be perceived (more or less easily), it
cannot be judiciously or even plausibly maintained that chance worked
so systematically. The eleven odes in this volume are quite sufficient
to establish the principle; but, if additional proof is needed, it will be
shown in the succeeding instalments of this edition of Pindar, how
amply the Olympian, Pythian and Isthmian Odes reinforce the evidence
of the Nemeans, that rkyy^ not tvxv, arranged the answering echoes.
(2) If it be found that the echo-systems guide the student of Pindar
to an adequate interpretation of the Odes, and enable him to discern the
significance of the myths and the general connexions of thought,—then,
regarding such results, it can only be said that, if this be chance, ‘ yet
there’s method in it ’.
Now the explanations offered by Boeckh, Dissen and their successors,
who possessed no directing clue, were certainly, and indeed confessedly,
far from satisfactory. Their analysis was often true as far as it went,
but it generally left serious difficulties unexplained. When Mezger
discovered the law of verbal responsions, he found himself able to
solve problems which had eluded his predecessors; and it is a feature
of his commentary that the artistic unity of each hymn is exhibited and
analysed more thoroughly than in previous works on Pindar. But even
Mezger frequently failed, and left many knots untied, because he had
not recognised that his ‘ responsions ’ were only part of a more general
system of echoes and signals.
1 Forty-five, assuming Olymp. v. to be consist of eight (not seven) Odes,
genuine, and the Isthmian collection toINTRODUCTION
XXlll
As an example of the inadequacy of hitherto proposed interpreta-
tions, I may point to the First Nemean. The chief question, which
occurs to the student of any ode, is: what is the application of the
myth? but in the case of the First Nemean this question forces itself on
the attention with more than usual emphasis. What can the story of
Heracles throttling the snakes have to do with Chromius of Syracuse ?
There might be little difficulty in agreeing that the general description
of the labours of Heracles (11. 63—68) is appropriate to the man who
had fought at Helorus and led an unusually active life; but of all the
exploits of Heracles why should that of his infancy be selected for a hymn
celebrating a victory won in the chariot-race by a Sicilian noble ? The
answer of Dissen was, that, as Tiresias augured the future powers of
Heracles from his achievement in the cradle, so Chromius had showed
in his early youth at the Helorus what manner of man he was to be. It
is clear that this answer is inadequate; nor indeed is it tenable. It is
not tenable, because there is no reference or allusion to the battle of the
Helorus throughout the Ode, and in the tale of the conflict with the
snakes there is. nothing to suggest it. It is inadequate, because no
account is taken of the elaborate detail in which the exploit of Heracles
is worked out. If Pindar merely meant what Dissen says, these details
are superfluous and must be considered an obvious blemish in the poem.
We have to believe that nearly half the ode is devoted to a description
of accessories, which have nothing to do with the main idea and only
draw the attention away from it. The selection of this event in the life
of Heracles for comparison with the bravery of Chromius in battle does
not, at the best, strike one as happy. But granting that Pindar might
have likened the adventure with the snakes and the fighting at the
Helorus as the opening incidents in two brilliant careers, he would
assuredly have accentuated the point of likeness and passed over the
details in which the dissimilarity was glaring. But this is just what he
has not done. He has worked out an elaborate picture of the battle of
the snakes, while he has not even alluded to the special exploit of
Chromius supposed to be signified thereby.
On this question no new light was thrown in the various explanations
offered by von Leutsch, Rauchenstein and L. Schmidt. All these
interpretations left the remark of Schneider, that the poet ‘verlor sich in
eine Episode die gar kein Verhaltniss zum Ganzen hat und dem
Gedichte die fabelhafte Gestalt eines Hippocentaurus gibt1as true as
ever. But Mezger, by the help of his discovery, advanced nearer a
solution. He holds that the myth is intended to illustrate the truth
1 Quoted by Mezger.XXIV
INTROD UCTION.
that all men have to contend with troubles and to show how they can
overcome them. The trouble of Chromius was the malice and calumny
of enemies, but by his native faculty he triumphed over them, even as
Heracles proved himself superior to all the trials which beset him even
from his cradle. The responsion of hrrav (1. 19) with «rra (1. 55)
suggests that Amphitryon contemplating the triumph of Heracles over
the snakes is compared to the poet contemplating the triumph of
Chromius over his calumniators; and thus indicates what the intended
parallel is.
This analysis is an important advance on all previous attempts, but
it does not completely solve the difficulty. A general reference to
detractors will hardly account for the elaborate picture of the slaying of
the snakes. Moreover we find that the verses which describe the
success of Chromius against his foes respond, not to anything in the
episode of the SpaKovrcs, but to the lines in which Tiresias foretells
that Heracles will distinguish himself by killing robbers and fighting
with the Giants (dvriov 1. 25, for example, signals to dvTid£<jxnv, which
Mezger did not observe). Thus as far as the general comparison is
concerned, the episode under discussion might be spared; for the
Giants and the Qfjpe*; aihpohUai of 1. 63 amply suffice as prototypes of
iniquitous foes and calumniators. We may infer that the combat with
the snakes is introduced for the sake of some particular reference.
This special instance of the victories of Heracles over Orjp€$ or kv<o8aA.a
(1. 50) must have been selected in order to suggest some special victory
of Chromius over ‘ beasts ’ who annoyed him. Here we have no clue,
except so far as the language of the myth itself may reveal us some-
thing ; for Pindar preferred to veil his special allusions in a fable which
was perfectly lucid for Chromius and his friends. There is at least one
inference which may be drawn with tolerable confidence. The enemies
of Chromius specially alluded to were two,—neither more nor less.
The accentuation of the dual number (Sio-o-aun Soiov's) can hardly be
regarded as undesigned,—if it be once admitted that the myth had any
application to contemporary fact. As the allusion to Chromius, which
I suppose to be intended in 1. 46, rests on a slight change in the reading
of the mss., I will not dwell on it here. The responsion —
cora was appreciated by Mezger, but he did not notice a further
responsion, Oip.€v—Oivav (11. 5, 59), which sustains the parallel between
Heracles and the victor. But enough has been said for the present
purpose; the other points bearing on the question will be set forth in
the Introduction to the Ode under discussion.
It may be shown that another distinct difficulty in the same poemINTRODUCTION
xxv
yields to investigation, when Pindar’s method of verbal signals is duly
apprehended. The meaning of the opening lines is a puzzle as old as
Didymus. Why is the river Alpheus introduced? Some say (according
to the scholiast) that the stables of Hieron and Chromius were in
Ortygia; for this reason Ortygia was mentioned; and Ortygia suggested
Alpheus, though Alpheus has no connexion with the subject. Modern
commentators throw no further light on the question.
It has been noticed by Mezger that in the last verses of this hymn
there is an echo of the beginning (o-c/xvov,—o-c/xvoV, 11. i and 72). There
is another echo which he did not observe: Oakos, 1. 2—Oakepav, 1. 71.
Now the Ode closes with the prophecy of the apotheosis of Heracles and
his marriage with Hebe. It is clear, therefore, that if these echoes have
any signification, they must imply some bright augury for the future of
Chromius; and there must he some allusion to such an augury in the
first lines of the Ode. The solution is now obvious; and indeed the
query of the scholiast might have put us on the right path. These are
the words in which he states the difficulty:
tprjT hr at 8 c, tl 8rjTTOTC t<5 ’AAc^eiu) 7rpocrSiaAey€Tai kcu rrj ’OpTVyia, rrjs
viktjs ovk ovVrjs ,OXv|A'TriaKrjs, akka Nc/xcaicfjs.
That is, 'Akfaov would have been pertinent in an Olympian Ode. But it
is now easy to see that the mention of Alpheus is not only quite in place,
but wonderfully happy, although the Ode is not an Olympian. By this
allusion the prospect of an Olympian wreath in the future is held out to
the Nemean victor. Such a victory would be his crowning triumph, as
the entry into the houses of the Gods was the crown of the career of
Heracles.
This interpretation is strikingly confirmed by the reference to
Olympian wreaths won by Sicilians in 1. 171; and it should be observed
that the words
*0\vfJL7nd8o)v cfrvkkois ikaiav xpvcrcois
in the 3rd line of the 1st epode are metrically identical with
w — Oakcpav	olkoltlv kcll yafiov
in the 3rd line of the last epode. The meed foretold for Heracles
responds to the meed foretold for Chromius.
If these reasons are cogent—and it seems to me that they cannot be
eluded,—students of Pindar must henceforward avail themselves of the
1 Timaeus actually inferred from this	focus wkaprjdcis 6 Tifiaios ’OXv/jlttikoi' top
line that the Ode was not a Nemean but	cwlplkop (firjOri clpox (ed. Abel p. 27).
an Olympian, Schol. on 1. 17: iPT€v0epXXVI
INTROD UCTION
signals which the poet himself has placed to guide us. It may be
urged against Mezger, it may be urged against me, that it is difficult to
believe that Pindar alone of the Greek poets adopted such a system of
connecting the trains of his thought. But in the first place, of the lyric
poets complete compositions have not been preserved except Pindar’s
Epinicians; so that it is impossible to say what they did or did not.
And in the second place it may be pointed out that the artifice of
| verbal signals was not unknown to Aeschylus. Pindar’s elaborate
systems of echoes may be illustrated by a familiar choral ode in the
Agamemnon.
The second stasimon in that play (11. 367—474), whose theme is
suggested by the fall of Troy, falls into four parts. The first part
(367—398) deals generally with the impossibility of hiding injustice, and
asserts that the gods regard it. In the second part, this doctrine is
applied to Paris; the flight of Helen is briefly described; and the Sopuov
Trpo<j>rjTcu lament the case of Menelaus (399—426). In the third part
the poet passes to the woes brought upon Greece by the Trojan war and
the feelings of discontent which prevailed against the Atridae (427—
455). In the fourth part gloomy presentiments are expressed in the
form of general moral remarks on the results of excessive prosperity and
indifference to human life.—Now it is to be observed that although the
import of the first section is apparently and professedly a comment on
the crime of Paris (otos k<u Ila/ots iXOuv 1. 399), yet the poet dismisses
this crime in a line or two and hurries on to Menelaus, as though he
were the real theme of the Ode. It is quite clear that the preliminary
moral reflexions are intended to apply to the Atridae as much as to
Paris, and indeed they have a close resemblance to the moral reflexions
at the close, which refer undisguisedly to the house of Atreus. The
irony of the situation is that a very similar cause to that which overthrew
the house of Priam is now about to bring low the house of the victors.
It was an irony which gained by being covertly suggested rather than
overtly expressed. And thus Aeschylus, while he directly identifies
Paris with the avrjp who ‘kicked the altar of Justice ’, does not state in
so many words that Agamemnon or Menelaus might be considered
examples of the same type. But he has conveyed this meaning
indirectly by a number of artful echoes. (1) Phrases in the first part
are taken up in the second—in the passage where the So/xwv irpo^ijrai
describe Menelaus after the departure of Helen. (2) The grief of
Menelaus, as painted in that passage, for his lost wife is contrasted with
the grief of the Greeks at home for their kinsfolk who fell in the war, by
means of answering words. The details are as follows :IN TROD UCTION
xxvii
(i)	(a) The elders state at the beginning of the Ode that they
intend to ‘ search out the traces ’ of the great stroke which Zeus has
dealt to Troy (A109 7r\aydv). Their words are
7rdp tern tovto y i^L)(vev(rai.
The metaphor does not recur, and we forget that we are so to speak
on a scent, until a strange phrase let fall by the 8o/xw 7rpo^rat reminds
us that we are seeking traces. (ttl/3ol faXavopes (prints or traces of a
wife's embrace) is one of the most noticeable expressions in the whole
hymn; and it was chosen, I believe, to suggest that the o-tl/3oi, conceived
as arousing the regrets of Menelaus and determining him to the fatal
expedition, were in a deeper sense ‘traces’ in the course of the tragedy,
—the At09 7rXaya, which is here traced out.
The elders begin their investigation by asserting that the gods do
not disregard those
371 octols dOferwv \dpis
7rttT(H#\
The man who kicks the altar of justice has no defence against
punishment.
ov yap t(TTtv €7ra\fis
382	7tXovtov 7rpo9 Kopov avSpl
XaKTLcravri /xcyav Ai/azs
f3(DfJLOV €19 d<f>av€Lav.
It is clear that the Ai*a9 /?<d/xo9 is the dOUrfav under another
aspect. Now by using the same metre and by introducing a responsion,
the poet suggests that the son of Atreus is an example of such an avrjp.
At the end of strophe 2 we find
€VpLOp<l><t)V 8e KoXo(T(T(OV
417	at x<*pis av8p£.
o/x/xaTwv 8* cv axr)viai<;
eppet 7rad ’A^poStVa.
Here is an avrjp who also scorns a certain x^Pts- both cases the
cause of this scorn is assigned ; and the two causes are parallel. The
typical wicked ‘man7 is constrained by importunate Persuasion:
385 fiidrai 8’ a TaXatva ttciOw.
The man in the special case is the victim of persuasive dreams, which
will not allow him to forget the treacherous wife:
420 0V€Lp6(j}aVT0L 8c TTClOrjpOVCS1
Trdp€i<TL 8ofcu.
1 Mr Housman’s correction of wevdij/JLoves.XXV111
INTROD UCTION.
In both cases the vanity of hope is dwelt on. The fancy of the
typical scorner that he may escape is vain; the fancy of Menelaus in
his dream that he may clasp Helen is vain.
387 olkos Sc 7rav (idTCUov.
421—Sofai <f)€pov(Tai \apiv paraCav.
pa/rav yap—
fiefiaKev oxf/is.
But the parallel is carried further still. It has often struck me, and
it may have struck others, that (in the first antistrophos of this Ode) it
was somewhat strange to introduce the figure of a boy chasing a bird in
the middle of another totally different metaphor taken from ill-mixed
bronze.
We are now in a position to explain the motive of this. The boy
chasing the bird is there for the purpose of the covert parallel. The
unjust man attempting to hide, and Menelaus seeking to embrace the
dream forms, are like men chasing winged things:
394 Stajk€l irals iroTavov opvtv,
426 irrepots 07raSots virvov KeXcvOois.
Another point which strikes the reader in the first strophe is the
expression dOUraiv x*PLq (already mentioned)—surely a somewhat
strange one. It is highly probable that this phrase was echoed in
words regarding Menelaus, and although a corruption in the mss. had
long concealed the echo, the ingenuity of Mr Housman has brought it
to light. In 1. 420 we have, if this restoration is correct
—fj>€povcraL \apiv fiaraiav.
/xarav yap eur av cs Oi/yds Sokov op a1
—fitpaKtv Oij/LS K.T.X.
Menelaus seeks to touch the charming visions; but they cannot be
touched. The case of the transgressor was somewhat different; but the
word aOiKTos is ambiguous. The transgressor laid an impious touch on
the charm of things which must not be touched. And this is more than
a mere sport with words. The charm of the dream forms (it is
implied) is the cause of the transgression of the Atridae. The
apparitions of Helen in sleep are a poetical symbol for the brooding
and longing regret of Menelaus, ultimately driving him to undertake the
fatal expedition. Thus the dream forms, from this aspect, are literally
1 Though I have printed Mr Housman’s	read dopy. It would be quite in the
op$ (provisionally accepted by Mr Verrall),	manner of Aeschylus to picture Menelaus
I question it. I should be inclined to	leaping up in his bed to clasp the vision.INTROD UCTION
XXIX
the aOiKTa, whose xaPts or spell, thrown over the man, tempts and
compels him to transgression. He should have seen that Helen was
clOlktos, like the dreams, and that it was vain (paratos too has a double
sense) to seek to touch her.
(b) But there are some passages in the first part of this Ode to
which a more distant echo answers, (i) The declaration in 1. 370
that the theory which imputes to the gods disregard of transgressors is
impious, is repeated in 1. 461, with a definition however of the
particular form of transgression meant: m itoXvkt6v(dv yap ovk diroo-Ko-
7rot 0€oi.	(2) Again to 8’ vttcpkotws kXvclv €v fiapv 1. 469 repeats, in a
special form, what was said about excessive prosperity in 377 sqq.
<fi\c6vT(j)v Btopdroiv vir£p(f>ev virkp to (diXrMTTov. What was before ap-
plied to the house of Priam is now repeated of the house of Atreus.
(3) In both passages, with this denunciation of the ‘excess’ is closely
connected a reference to moderate prosperity. 379 corco 8* dmjpavTov
(sc. to fiiXrKTTOv), war airapKeiv eu 7rpa7ri8o)v Xa^ovTa, 471 Kpivia 8*
a<f>0ovov oXj3ov * prjr €irjv 7TToXurop0rj<; pijr ovv avros aXovs vtt aXXwv fiiov
Kar&oipu1. (4) When the curse comes on the transgressor, there is no
defence or aid: 381 ov yap Icrnv $ira\|is k.t.A., 466 £v 8’ aio-roLs tcXcOovtos
ovtls dXicd. (5) In both cases similar expressions are used for the
destruction which awaits the transgressor, 384 cfc d<£dv€iav, 465 £v 8*
dto-Tots. (6) The remarkable metaphor from the rubbing of bad
bronze in the first antistrophos is echoed in the last antistrophos.
390 KaKov 8e xoAkoi) rpowov
rp{p<u tc icat irpoo-poXats
pcXapirayrjs iriXti
StKaao^ets—
7roXct 7rpd<rrpippa Oels a</>€pTOV,
This metaphor is not repeated, but another metaphor to the same
intent is so expressed as to echo some of the words:
461 KeXawal 8* ’Epivues XP°Vi?
TV\rjpov ovt av€v 8i#cas 7raXtvtv\€l
Tpi|3£ J3Lov TiOeia apavpov.
It has not been definitely made out, what is the metaphor of
7raA,ivTvxct Tpi/3a, but rpifta echoes rpifiti) and TTpoarpippa, both in sense
and language, while the words apavpov and KeXaivat (of those who make
dpjavpov) recall piXapiray^. The Erinyes are said to make the man
dim, and this idea is carried on in words which follow
pdXXerai yap ocrcrois AvbOev Kepavvos.
1 Of the last two words one is probably, both possibly, corrupt.XXX
INTROD UCTION
The lightning of Zeus is hurled upon their eyes. This /3o\ij of Zeus
is an element in the fatal progress of their doom, and was to the
transgressors of 1. 461 what 7rpocr/3o\ats was to the Si/caitoflcis of 1. 393;
fiaWcTaL echoes Trpocrf3o\aLs.
(2) Another parallel is instituted between the grief of Menelaus
for the loss of Helen, caused by the crime of Paris, and the grief of the
Greeks at home for the loss of their fighting kinsfolk who fell at Troy
through the crime of the Atridae. The parallel is worked out by
echoing in the second description remarkable words which had been
used in the first. As the length of this digression has already exceeded
bounds, I will not enter into the details of comparison between these
companion pictures. But one striking echo may be pointed out. The
charm of the fair statues of Helen disappears as it were in the hatred of
Menelaus for their blank gaze:
416 eufxofxjxov Sc Ko\o(T(T(j)V
2)(0€Tai xapis avSpt.
Even so the fair bodies of the Greek warriors are lost in a land
which hates them :
453 OrjKa^ TAtaSos yas
€V|J.Op<f>Ol KCLT€)(OV(TLV * 4\-
0pd S’ C^OVTa? €KpV\j/€V.
It appears then that the artifice of suggesting meanings by echoes
was not confined to Pindar, although he practised it more systematically
and more constantly than any other poet of whose work we have
materials to judge. There is no reason to suppose that he originated
the idea, but he may have been the first to develope it into a system.
If we had the works of the early Greek lyric poets, we should doubtless
be able to trace the evolution of this remarkable feature of Pindar’s
poetry. It might be conjectured that the ‘responsion ’ is simply a
subtle modification of the ‘refrain*, a feature of the most primitive
poetry. The refrain is reduced to a catchword; and as poetry becomes
more subtle and elaborate the catchwords and catch-phrases are varied,
multiplied, refined; the iteration becomes more than a mere iteration,
and of itself adds an idea. Such a development is intelligible, but we
have not the data for tracing it.
Before leaving the subject, it is worth pointing out that Pindar
sometimes takes a physical substance, bronze or gold, and rings signifi-
cant changes throughout a poem. In the Tenth Nemean and in the
Sixth Isthmian xa^K°s> in some form, occurs in each metrical system.
In the Third Pythian, in the Fifth Nemean, in the Sixth and SeventhINTRODUCTION
XXXI
Olympians, the parts of the argument are connected by golden links.
Silver has a special significance in the Ninth Olympian. Other sorts of
words are effectively repeated in the same way; for example, fdvos and
its cognates in the Seventh Nemean. ‘Works* are the keynote of the
Eighth Olympian, and accordingly in the first epode we find cpyw, in the
second epyao-tcus, in the third and in the fourth epya. Now it is worth
noticing that Sophocles adopts the same artifice. In the first choral
ode of the Oedipus Rex (beginning <3 Aios dSveirh ^arC) a remarkable
effect is won by this device. The bright abode of the Pythian Apollo is
almost physically borne in upon us by the gold ringing through the hymn,
(i) ras 7roA,uxpv<rov IIv0c3j/os 1. 151, (2) <3 xPv<r^as t€kvov €A/7ti8os 1. 157?
(3) \pv<ria Ovyarep Alos 1. 187, (4) \pv(roorTp6(f)cov air dyKvXav 1. 203,
(5) xp'xro/JLiTpav tc KLKXnjo-KO) (Dionysus) 1. 209. We observe also the
presence of Aglaia; (1) dyXad% 1. 152, (2) alyXas 1. 207, (3) dyXa&Tn
1. 213. By such a recurrence of physical symbols Sophocles has deter-
mined the bright, hopeful atmosphere of this appeal to gracious deities.
Thus Pindar, like most great poets, was highly artificial. But he
hid his art so effectually that we are only now beginning to
apprehend how thoroughly self-conscious his poetry really was. His
utterances seem spontaneous; his sentences flow without constraint;
and yet every word was weighed. It is not within my scope to enter
here upon an aesthetic disquisition, but I may point out one significant
fact. It may appear to many modern minds that the dominant note
of the Odes of Victory is ‘ unregenerate * indeed; Pindar might be de-
scribed as the poet of the ‘pride of life \ He consorted continually with
the great of the earth, he moved among the strong and the beautiful,
where none was ‘ sick or sorry ’, he derived his inspiration from success,
being himself too intellectually successful in realising his desire of per-
fection. Kingdom and victory, nobility and wealth, strength and
comely limbs, dyXala and tixfypoo-vvr}, inherit his palaces of music. The
impression left on the mind, after reading the Odes of Victory, is that
‘lo, the kings of the earth are gathered and gone by together*. Now it
is a significant fact (for the Philosophy of History or the Philosophy of
Aesthetic) that this Pride of Life, in its untroubled phase, found expres-
sion in a spiritual art, which was flawless in the minutest details of order
and diction, and yet moved in lofty places. It is thus suggested that
where there has been no rending of the soul, art can be scrupulously
accurate and achieve finite greatness; ‘avec Part chretien nous eprouvons
le trouble et le dechiremenf \ Euripides, in the Helena, describes the
1 E. Scherer, Ettides critiques de littci'ature, vol. 1. p. 57.
B.
Cxxxii
INTRODUCTION.
life of Ganymede in the Olympian abode as /caXXryaA^vos, and no
single word perhaps describes more properly the art in which the
Greek spirit revealed its rhythm. The calmness of the atmosphere,
in which that art lived, was untroubled, for ‘the wind which bloweth
where it listeth ’ had not yet been loosed.
‘Un rhythme secret ’ M. Cherbuliez writes of the Greeks ‘r^glait
leurs mouvements les plus vifs, et il se faisait, au fond de ces cceurs si
bien gouvernes, com me le doux bruit d’une fete, dont une divinity,
couronnee de fleurs, etait la supreme ordonnatrice \ A divinity crowned
with flowers is a happy image for the spirit which presided over * the
delightful things in Hellas ’ and illuminated Pindar’s imagination. By
the shores of the midland sea, not yet ‘ dolorous;, were raised, under
a really benignant breath, palaces of music, shining afar, and statues
of ivory and gold. Haggard forlorn faces, wizened forms did not
haunt the soul, nor were there any yearnings to heavenward, Grace,
which maketh the ways of men soft1, being arbitress then with undivided
right and ‘ crowned with flowers ’ in those bright pagan borders. The
spirit of man, bland but without effeminacy, dwelling, as it were, in a
strong and beautiful body, had no thought of the faintness of old age,
no foreboding of a day when it should leave the broken shell, naked,
stark, pallid—as the Roman Emperor conceived the soul sundered from
the body,—and be swept along dreary ways into wild places and
‘devious coverts of dismay’, which are known, at least partly, to those
who live now, the experienced of the children of men. Pindar may
well interest us as the most characteristic poet of that fortunate spirit.
1 x^PLS anep airavra revx^i ra fidXtxcL
Ovarois (First Olympian, 1. 30), which
means that men owe all their aesthetic
pleasures to Charis; in other language,
Charis is the divinity of art and of the
fairest things of nature. For Charis in
Pindar see Appendix B.—Cf. Lubbert,
op. cit. p. 16: ‘Die Olympischen Gotter
werden durch menschliches Leid und
Elend, welches in das Bild der einigen
Schonheit der Welt nicht passen wird,
beleidigt; der Anblick von Leichen
verunreinigt sie’.2. The Construction of the Pindaric Ode.
The question how the metrical divisions are related to the divisions
of argument in Pindar’s Odes, seems at first sight to present considerable
difficulties. Does each ode, when we regard its matter, fall into divisions
which do not coincide with the terminations of the strophic systems, or
are the two sets of divisions coincident ? With this question I propose
to deal. Before dealing with it, however, I must clear the ground by
considering the ingenious but, as I hope to show, groundless theory of
Westphal and Mezger concerning the construction of the Pindaric
hymn.
Westphal has sought to prove, that the hymn of Pindar is built on
the same lines as the nome of Terpander1, and can be analysed into the
parts of which the Terpandrian nome is said to have consisted2. Each
hymn falls into three major divisions, (i) the apxa, (2) the op,<£aAo's and
(3) the <rcf>payL<s. The transition from the apxa to the dp,<£aAos is
called the KaraTpoira, that from the dp,<£aA.os to the (rc^payig is the /xcra-
KOLTaTpoird. In some hymns a irpooipaov goes before the apxa, and
sometimes, though rarely, there is an hrapxd or transition from the
7rpooipuov to the dpx a3. In some hymns too there is an e£o&ov or finale,
succeeding the o-^payis.
Of these parts, the dp,<£a\ds, as its name betokens, is the centre and
kernel of the composition, and it contains the chief thought (Hauptge-
danke) of the poem. Thus the nome of Terpander and, according to
Mezger, the ode of Pindar resembled in structure the pediment of a
1	Prolegomena zu Aeschylos’ Tragd-
dien, 1869. The theory, as worked out
by Mezger, was briefly criticised by Mr
Mahaffy in the Preface to his History of
Greek Literature, vol. 1. 2nd ed. 1883;
and afterwards by Professor Gildersleeve
in the Introduction to his edition of the
Olympian and Pythian Odes.
2	Pollux, iv. 66.
3	For example in the Thirteenth Olym-
pian Ode, which has also an i^odiou,
according to Mezger’s analysis.XXXIV
INTRODUCTION
temple. There is a central group, with antiphonic groups on either side
which might be represented thus :
om4>aAoc
KCLTOLTpOTTCL	fJL€TaKaT(lTp07rd
&PX<£	c<f>pA|-tc
eTrapxaj
irpooCfALOv J	€|o8iov
Mezger claims to have shown that these divisions underlie all Pindar’s
odes, except six, of which the compass is too short to admit of such
elaboration, and the Eleventh 4 Nemean ’ which is not an ode of victory;
but even in these a triplicity, which suggests apxs opfaXos and cr<f>payi<;,
can be traced.
This idea sounds extremely plausible, but will not stand examina-
tion. It must however be distinctly understood that his discovery of
the verbal responsions in Pindar is really quite independent of West-
phal’s attempt to detect the Terpandrian nome lurking in the Odes of
Victory. We can reject Westphal’s Terpandrian divisions, while we accept
the new light thrown by Mezger on the eVcW Oto-is; just as we might
accept Fick’s theory of the original language of the Odyssey, though
we reject the special analysis of Kirchhoff on which Fick has worked.
The considerations, which, in my judgment, are fatal to Westphal’s
theory as worked out by Mezger, may be stated as follows:
i. It implies that Pindar constructed his strophic system and his
trains of thought quite independently; it implies that the matter and
form of each poem were totally unconnected1. For when the odes are
analysed on the principle of the Terpandrian nome we find that the
strophes are sometimes cut up, sometimes not, at haphazard, by the
divisions of Mezger. Now this independence of matter and form is, a
priori, highly unlikely; it is certainly not consonant with the spirit of
Greek art. It devolved upon Westphal and Mezger to show cause for
such a strange proceeding, and they have not done so. We know very
little about Terpander’s nome, but it certainly seems extremely probable
that the corresponding parts corresponded in metre. As the apxa
answered to the o-^paycs, we may conjecture that apya and ar^payls were
similar in metre. The KaraTpoira was taken up by the pLeraKaraTpoird, as
the nomenclature indicates; is it not probable that they were metrically
the same? No such metrical correspondence can be found in Pindar;
1 This obvious objection has of course Mr Gildersleeve’s Pindar, Introductory
been noticed by every critic who has Essay, p. lii.
dealt with the question. See, for example,INTRODUCTION.
XXXV
and thus Mezger’s theory implies that the Terpandrian divisions were
transferred into a new metrical system for which they were not intended,
without any attempt to compass a harmony between the old and the
new. That such a consummate artist as Pindar would have been
satisfied with this patchwork it is impossible to believe.
2. Waiving the question of the metre, we find that Mezger’s
analysis of the Odes does not always conform to the structure of the
Terpandrian nome. They do not all resemble a pediment, of which the
6p,<f>aXo<; forms the central group. For of some hymns the apx<*- occupies
the larger portion; in some the cr<f>payU begins before the middle. Thus
the 6pb(f>aX6s is sometimes in the first half of the hymn and sometimes in
the second1; it is not always in the middle. Such flagrant inequalities
in proportion, as well as the absence of correspondence in metre, throw
discredit on the theory.
3.	If then neither fixed relations of metre nor fixed length are
marks of the Terpandrian divisions in Pindar, it remains that they should
be at least distinguished by some definite character in point of matter.
Here certainly the champions of the nome seem to have something to
urge for their cause. It is pointed out as the mark of the opL^aXos that
it contains the myth. But even this mark is not certain, and Mezger
has to confess that there are six odes2 in which the 6p.<l>aX6s does not
contain the myth. Allowing the exceptions to pass, we ask whether,
after all, this observation proves anything. Supposing that there had
never been any such thing as a Terpandrian nome, should not we expect
to find, as a general rule, the illustrative legend placed somewhere in
the middle of the poem? The natural conditions of such a work
evidently demand that the poet should begin with his proper theme,
that he should pass from it to the mythical tale which illustrates it, and
that he should then return to his theme again. In certain cases some
artistic effect may be gained by not returning again, as in the First and
Tenth Nemean Odes. Now if Pindar’s hymns conform to this obvious
law of art, how can such a conformity prove any relationship to
Terpander’s nomes? And the same argument applies to the KaraTpowd
and p.€Ta.KaTarpoTrd. As a matter of course, there are transitions in
Pindar’s Odes. There must be a transition to the myth; and the poet,
as a rule, passes back again to the personal theme of the poem. But
1 This doubtless is what Wilamowitz- welche Pindar auf das kreuz des terpan-
Moellendorff means when he says (Euripi- drischen nomos schlagen ’.
des, HerakleSy B. 1. p. 329 note) : ‘Dies 2 Pythian 1. and ix., Nemean 1. and X.,
gedicht (Nem. 1.) und N. 10 diirfte man Isthmian 11. and vi.
zun'achst von den herrn erklart wiinschen, •XXXVI
INTRODUCTION
there is no sufficient reason for identifying these transitions with the
catatropa and metacatatropa of the nome. It is true that there is
constantly a connexion in idea between these parts, in the analysis of
Mezger. But this does not amount to a proof, and, if it did, it would
prove too much, for in every hymn there are parallelisms of idea in
many places. Mezger also points out that in certain cases, where the
KaraTpo7ra and p.€TaKaraTpoira happen to correspond partially in metre,
there are verbal responsions. But this observation likewise proves too
much; for verbal responsions occur in all the parts, indifferently, and
are not peculiar to these two divisions.
It appears then that Mezger has produced no sufficient reason for
identifying the divisions into which he has broken up the Odes of
Pindar with the divisions of the Terpandrian nome, recorded by Pollux.
It appears also that in point of form there is much to be said against
this theory; for it involves divisions which are neither symmetrical in
length nor confederate with the metre.
4. If Pindar really did adopt the structure of the Terpandrian nome
as his rcOpo5, it is very strange that he makes no allusion to it. For
such an allusion would have been quite in his manner. It seems
almost certain that he would have sometimes hinted at those charac-
teristic names, the seal and the navel. As no such an allusion is to be
found in the Odes, there is, to my mind, a presumption that these
names were not the keywords of his TeOpios.
We may then set aside as groundless the doctrine that Pindar built
his odes by the canon of the Terpandrian nome. We must also set aside
the misleading comparison of a Pindaric Ode to the pediment of a
temple. If there had been any real analogy between the Theban and
the Corinthian eagles, Pindar would not have failed to remark it1. He
would have eagerly grasped the opportunity of likening his hymns to
pediments, just as he likens them occasionally to statues and often to
palaces.
Of one fact at least as to the construction of Pindar’s hymns we are
assured. We know that those hymns, which were to be sung by a
chorus in procession, consist of a number of repetitions of a strophe;
hence they are called monostrophic. We know that the stasima, which
1 In 01. XIII. 21 Pindar mentions the comparison between the aeros and his
pediment (aerSs) as an invention of the own odes. It seems to me that too much
Corinthians, along with the curb and the	is made of this passage in the admirable
dithyramb, (rls...0eG}v vaounv oiw&v /3a<rt- essay on ‘Pindar’s Odes of Victory’ in
8L8vpov iirtByK ;) but he suggests no the Quarterly Review (Jan. 1886) p. 171.INTRODUCTION
XXXVll
were sung by a standing chorus, consist of a number of repetitions of a
system. By system I mean the metrical group which consists of strophe,
antistrophos and epode. These are the obvious elementary facts about
the form of Pindar’s Odes. The problem is to determine how the
matter is related to the form. It would be inconsistent with the first
principles of all Greek literary art to suppose that no such relation
existed. It would be absurd to imagine that Pindar constructed his
odes on two discordant systems without any attempt to harmonise
them, or that he adopted a form which had no relation to the matter.
This problem chiefly concerns the stasima. The monostrophic hymns,
which are comparatively few in number, present little difficulty.
If all the hymns were like the Eleventh ‘Nemean’, the problem
would be easily solved. That composition consists of three systems,
and each system is an unity in itself. The divisions of matter and form
in this case absolutely coincide. The whole poem is an unity; but it is
built up of three subordinate unities of equal length. This hymn
however is exceptional; it is not the Pindaric type. In the first place,
all the odes are not formally threefold. Of the extant odes, nine
(including ‘Nemean’ xi.) consist of three systems, eleven consist of
four systems, and eleven consist of five systems. In the long Fourth
Pythian there are thirteen repetitions of the metrical unit. Thus odes
consisting of three systems are in the minority. In the second place
we cannot in the other odes distinguish subordinate unities punctually
coinciding with the metrical unities, as in the Eleventh ‘Nemean’.
In most cases the train of thought and the grammar run on from one
system into another.
The inference which we are entitled to draw is clear. The Eleventh
‘Nemean’ represents an older type, against which Pindar’s other odes
are a reaction. It is a misfortune that no complete ode remains from
the workshop of Stesichorus, who had the glory of inventing the system
of strophe, antistrophos and epode. But we may consider it probable
that the Eleventh ‘Nemean’ represents the Stesichorean type. I have
little doubt that in the hymn of Stesichorus each system was a
subordinate unity, shut up in itself. My contention is supported by
the circumstance that the Eleventh ‘Nemean’ is just the work which we
might expect to represent an older form. For it is the only one of
Pindar’s extant odes which is not an ode of victory. It was composed
for the eisiteria of a prytanis of Tenedos, and in a hymn for such an
occasion Pindar was more likely to be conservative.
We are now much nearer to a solution of our problem. In
proposing that problem we have a certain standard in our minds. Ourxxxviii
INTRODUCTION.
standard is a hymn in which the divisions of matter and the divisions of
form should punctually coincide; and as we see at the first glance that
Pindar does not conform to such a standard, we ask, why? Had he
some other canon? But now we have advanced to another point of
view, and we have at least reason for suspecting that Pindar was
purposely avoiding the very standard, which we might have expected
him to adopt.
The type of the Eleventh ‘Nemean’ is directly opposed to the
divisions which Mezger has sought to establish in the epinician hymns.
In the former case there is absolute coincidence in the partitions of
matter and form; in the latter case there is no coincidence at all; or, if
there is occasionally, it is purely accidental. Now a careful examination
of all the odes shows that Pindar followed neither of these plans. The
principle assumed by Mezger would indeed never have occurred to him;
for it is thoroughly inartistic. But the other principle was doubtless the
established canon of the Stesichorean hymn, and Pindar must have had
a definite design in abandoning it.
It is not difficult to see Pindar’s motive here. The sheer divisions
between the parts of the hymn produce a stiff and unpleasing effect.
The full stops interrupt the flow; and the unity of the whole is to some
extent sacrificed to the integrity of the parts. The want of transitions
is felt. We can appreciate this stiffness of effect in the Eleventh
‘ Nemean and we can understand how much was gained by abandoning
that type, when we compare with it one of the epinicians.
What Pindar had to do then was to break down the wall of partition
between the metrical systems. While he preserved the general corre-
spondence between divisions of thought and divisions of metre, it was
his aim to make the whole ode as far as possible continuous. Wherever
the sense is obviously continuous, it makes little difference whether the
systems are syntactically connected or not. Such is the case, for
example, in the narration of a story. It is when a new system introduces
a new division of the composition that Pindar is careful to avoid a
break or a full stop. He tries, as it were, to disguise the division by an
intentional overlapping. Sometimes indeed, though rarely, we find an
absolute break,—a survival of the old method; but in such cases some
special effect is aimed at. In many cases* the continuity -is formally
preserved by a relative pronoun or a relative adverb, at the beginning of
the new system. But most often there is an overlapping; the last words
of an epode belong to the following strophe or the first words of a
strophe belong to the foregoing epode. Occasionally the overlapping is
considerable, but in these cases there was generally a special motive.INTROD UCTION
XXXIX
There is some reason for conjecturing that in his later years Pindar
handled his transitions with much greater freedom than in his early
period.
The comparison which Pindar institutes between his odes and works
of architecture1 throws light on his procedure. He likens his works not
to pediments but to palaces. Holding to this metaphor, we may regard
the metrical systems as the rooms of the palace; the first for example
being the ttpoOvpov, as 1 the mason’ himself suggests in the opening lines
of the Sixth Olympian. According to the old type, the systems were like
unconnected compartments, each shut into itself. Pindar’s improvement
was to open the doors of connexion; in his odes, each chamber com-
municates with that which follows, so that the Muse can sweep on
unhindered from ingress to egress.
In order to establish this it will be necessary to consider briefly each
ode separately. For our present purpose we may divide the odes,
according to the number of systems, into four classes: Odes (i) of 3
systems, (2) of 4 systems, (3) of 5 systems; (4) the Fourth Pythian,
consisting of 13 systems. It is worthy of observation that there are no
odes of two systems2.
I. All the odes of three systems are tripartite in matter as well
as in metre. The mythical part is generally in the centre, but not
always.
(1)	I begin with the Sixth Nemean because it contains a survival
of the want of continuity which characterised the old type. The third
system begins abruptly, without any attempt at a transition; and this
is certainly unlike the usual procedure of Pindar. The connexion
between the first and second systems is smoothed by the relative cVct.
In this hymn the myth is in the third part.
(2)	In the Eighth Nemean (a) the first line of strophe 2 (beginning
with o<T7T€p) is closely connected with the last line of epode 1. The
second division of the ode properly begins in the second line of the
strophe, (b) The other transition is smoothed by tolovtov at the
beginning of the 3rd system, referring to the last words of the 2nd
epode. The myth is in the centre.
(3)	The second transition (from the second to the third system)
in the Fifth Nemean is very skilfully managed. The myth, which
1 Furtwangler (in die Siegesgesdnge des 2 Thus Bergk’s conjecture that the
Pindaros) has worked out curiously a	3rd ‘Isthmian’ (acc. to his numbering)
parallel between the Pindaric Ode and originally consisted of two triads, of which
the Greek temple.	one has been lost, was not happy.xl
INTRODUCTION.
occupies the second division of the hymn, leads, quite naturally, up to
Poseidon, and in Poseidon’s company we pass from legend to the
Isthmus and athletic victories won there. The third strophe begins
yafxfipov IlocrctSaova ircurtu?, os AlyaOev k.t.A.
This is one of Pindar’s most strikingly successful transitions.
On the other hand the first and second systems of this hymn are
not connected; but the want of connexion is intentional. Pindar
notifies this by calling a halt, as it were, at the end of the first epode:
orao'op.ar ov rot a7ra<ra k.t.A..
and the second strophe begins abruptly a new subject, with the
usual Sc
(4)	The Third Olympian affords another example of a very
successful transition, (a) The myth of Heracles visiting the Hyper-
boreans and obtaining there the olive tree to plant at Olympia occupies
the central system. It is thus introduced
.........epode i
.. .yAavKoxpoa koct/jlov cA,ata?, rdv 7totc
*l<Trpov a7ro CTKiapav irayav ev€iKcv ’Ap,<£iTpva)viaSas
fivdfjia tujv OvXvjJLTTLa koXAkttov d£6\a)v,
strophe 2
Sa/xov tY7rep/3opea)v irticrais k.t.A.
We thus pass to a new part, without a break in the continuity, (b)
The conclusion of the legend extends a short way into the third
system; but only such a part of it as closely bears on the Olympian
festival to which the poet then returns.
(5)	The Second Isthmian is marked by the absence of the mythical
element. In both the transitions there is an overlapping, (a) The
Isthmian victory of Xenocrates leads us from the first system to the
second, in which past victories at other festivals are recorded. (b)
The first two lines of the third "system are connected not with what
follows but with what precedes.
(6)	In the Fifth Isthmian (Bergk’s numbering) the myth is in the
centre, (a) The last sentence of epode 1 overflows into strophe
2—t61v8 cs evvojjiov 7t6X.lv, and in this position these words become
very emphatic, (b) The third system is connected with the second
by the relative tol<tlv, referring to heroes mentioned in epode 2.
(7)	The legend of Telamon occupies the middle system of the
Sixth Isthmian (Bergk’s numbering), (a) It is introduced thus :INTROD UCTION
xli
ovS* € err tv ovto) /3dp/3apo<; ovre 7raXiyyXa>crcros 7roXis
ans ov n^X€0S...KX€05...
strophe 2
ov8* arts Atavros TcXa/xcoviaSa
ical Trarpos* rov k.t.X.
(^) The legend runs on into the 3rd strophe, occupying no less than
five lines. This excessive overlapping requires an explanation; and the
explanation clearly is that the poet wished to make the words of the
prophet, contained in these lines, particularly emphatic, and to point
their application to the matter in hand.
(8) In the Seventh Isthmian (Bergk’s numbering) the mythical
matter is in the first part, (a) The transition from the first to the
second system is divided between them both:
.. .dfjLvdjJLOves Se fiporoi,
strophe 2
o,ri p,rj <jo<f>Las k.t.X.
(b) The second and third system also overlap :
a7T€7rv€i>(ras aXt/aav
strophe 3
7rpo/xa^a)V av o/xiXov, IvO* k.t.X.
at which point Pindar leaves Strepsiades p.drpm.
In regard, then, to the odes of three systems we see that each
consists of three parts, coincident in form and matter. Eight such
epinician odes are extant, and in these eight there are consequently
16 cases of transition from system to system. In only two of the
16 cases is there an absolute break; and one of these two breaks is
designed.
II. Odes of four systems are of three kinds, bipartite, tripartite,
and quadripartite. They are bipartite when there is a close connexion
between systems 1 and 2, and between systems 3 and 4. They are
tripartite when systems 2 and 3 form an unity. They are quadripartite
when each system stands by itself. Of the eleven odes of this structure,
three are bipartite (Nemean 1., Pythian v., and Isthmian iv.), five
tripartite (Pythian x., Nemean 111., Olympians 1., vm., ix.) and three
quadripartite (Isthmian 1., Pythian 11. and xi.).
(1) The First Nemean is bipartite, the myth occupying the second
half. The introduction to the myth begins in the second epode, where
the birth of Heracles is related; but the main tale of the battle withxlii
INTRODUCTION.
the serpents does not begin till the third strophe. Pindar signifies this
by the resumption of ws,
epode 2
« » \
, CDS C7TCI...
strophe 3
(Js ov \aOwv K.T.X.
The second <os is as much as to say: ‘ the last two lines of the epode
were an anticipation; we are now really entering on the second part of
the hymn’.
In the two subordinate transitions there is no loss of continuity.
iiripav (last line of epode 1) and co-rav 8’ (first line of strophe 2) have
the same subject. The fourth system continues the tale of Heracles.
(2)	The Fifth Pythian falls into two parts, and the myth occupies
part of the second. The transition is made by the relative o at the
beginning of strophe 3. The subordinate transitions are cases of
overlapping1.
(3)	The Fourth Isthmian (according to Bergk’s numbering) is
bipartite; the first part is concerned rather with the family of the victor
Melissus, the second part with himself. The transition is managed
cleverly. Ajax at the end of the 2nd epode suggests Homer who
honoured him, and thus leads to the power of poetry. The two
subordinate transitions in this ode are marked by grammatical con-
tinuity.
(4)	The Tenth Pythian, Pindar’s earliest extant hymn, is tripartite,
the myth coming in the central division, (a) The first words of strophe
2 and the last of epode 1 form one idea,
hroLTO fxolpa kcu vorepaio'iv
iv deepens ayavopa ttXovtov avOetv
strophe 2
twv 8* iv 'EAAaSt Tepirvwv
.....i7nKvp<rauv.
The central part consists of general reflexions and the Hyperborean
myth. (^) There is a break between systems 3 and 4, but Pindar
prepares for a new subject by the last words of epode 3,
iyKwpLiwv yap acoro? vp,vu)v
iw aWor aXXov wrc /xeXtcrcra Ovvei \6yov.
1 It might be thought that the return connected with Cyrene that such a divi-
from the myth to Arcesilaus in the end	sion was unnecessary, and Pindar clearly
of the 4th strophe ought to mark a new	intended to emphasize the intimate con-
division. But the myth is so intimately nexion formally.INTRODUCTION.
xliii
(5)	The mythical narratives in Nemea7i 111. fill the second and
third systems, and thus it is tripartite, (a) The transition is skilful.
The proverbial pillars of Heracles introduce the myth of Heracles in the
western sea.
OVK€TL--
klov(x)v virep *Hpa/cA.eos irepav evpapes,
strophe 2
TJpiliS 0€O$ as K.T.X.
(b) The first line of strophe 4 belongs in sense to the preceding
epode:
TrjXavyls apap€ <f>eyyos Aia/a§av avtoOcv.
But at the same time it lights us forward as well as backward.
In the subordinate division between systems 2 and 3 there is a
break.
(6)	The First Olympian is tripartite, (a) The first and. second
systems overlap. Preparations for the myth begin in epode 1.	(b)
The myth runs over into the fourth strophe, but so as to bring us back
to the Alpheus.
(7)	The Eighth Olympian is also tripartite, (a) The transition
from system 1 to system 2 is thus managed:
dcrK€LTai ©G/Ais
strophe 2
dv0plO7T(DV.
(b) The third part is begun at the end of the 3rd epode
vvv p\v avrw yepag ’AAki/acSwv k.t.X.
(8)	The Ninth Olympian falls into three parts, (a) The myth is
thus introduced:
epode 1
dyaOol Se koX <ro<l>ol Kara Satpov avSpes
strophe 2
iyevovr. c7rcl k. t.A.
(b) Part 3 begins in the penultimate line of the 3rd epode
7rpo^€Vla S’ ap€Ta r* rjXOov k.t.X.
(9)	The First Isthmian naturally resolves itself into four parts,
corresponding to the four systems, (a) The myth, which is placed in
the second system, begins in the last line of the 1st epode:
KCtvot yap rjpwuiv k.t.X.xliv
INTRODUCTION.
(b)	The theme of the third system is introduced in the last lines of the
2nd epode, and there is grammatical continuity:
yapycrofiat—rav 'AaonroScopov 7rarpos alaav
strophe 3
*0pxop>€vot6 T€ irarptoav apovpav, k.t.X.
(c)	Between the 3rd and 4th systems there is a break, strophe 4
beginning thus :
afXpLl 8’ £01K€ Kpovov O’€LO‘L\0oV vlov K.T.X.
But the abruptness is much lessened by the circumstance that he is
proceeding to carry out what he said in the 2nd epode:
cyoj 8c IlocraSacovt t 9Icr0p.<p re.. .7repLO,TeXXoJv aoiSav,
eyw is taken up by a/x/u, and IloaecSdtJvt by crei(TixOov vlov.
(10) The Second Pythian consists of four parts, (a) The myth
of Ixion is introduced in epode 1. (b) There is a sharp break between
systems 2 and 3, but there was a special intention here. Pindar wished
to emphasize Oeos, the opposition of BeoL and fipoTot being an important
element in the ode. The 3rd strophe begins
Oeds array eiri FeXiTiheo-ori TCKfiap avvercu,
Oeos, o Kal k.t.X.
Thus the word is emphasized in two ways, by its abrupt introduction
and by its repetition, {c) The fourth part begins in the last line of
epode 3, and there is grammatical continuity.
(n) The Eleventh Pythian is peculiar. It falls into four parts,
but Pindar suggests that it was very nearly becoming a poem of three
parts, (a) The relative tov &yj connects the second system, which is
occupied with the myth of Orestes, and the first, (b) The myth runs
on into the third system, so that we expect it to occupy two systems.
But at the beginning of the 3rd antistrophos Pindar pulls himself up
with these remarkable words
rj p\ <3 cfriXoL, kolt apLevo-liropov TpLoSov iSwdOrjv,
opOav KeXtvOov iwv Toirpiv' rj pie Tt? avc/xos e£co 7rXoov
efiaXcv ok or cIkoltov elvaXiav;
This is a sort of apology for not concluding the myth at the end of the
second epode. Of course the apology is ironical; iSivaOrjv and
irXoov are also ironical; for it was with a design that Pindar let the myth
overflow. Nevertheless his words indicate that he was doing an
unusual thing. The result is that the third division of the hymn
consists partly of matter that might seem to belong to the secondINTRODUCTION.
xlv
division, partly of matter that might seem appropriate to the fourth
division and partly of an explanation of the irregularity, (c) The
fourth part begins with
6c66cv ipcufirjv kolX&v
n the second line of strophe 4.
In the eleven Odes, which have four systems, we have met two
cases of an abrupt transition (in the First Isthmian and the Second
Pythian), and in both these cases we have seen that there are reasons
which mitigate or explain the abruptness.
III. Eleven of the remaining Pindaric odes have five metrical
systems, and these systems are combined in various ways, (a) The
favourite type is that in which systems 2, 3 and 4 are closely connected;
thus—
i = 2 + 3+4 = 5.
To this type belong Olympians 11., vi., vn., x. and Nemean vn. {b)
Another symmetrical form is
14-2 = 3 = 4 + 5.
The First and Eighth Pythians are thus constructed. (c) The Third
and Ninth Pythians are bipartite, a continuous narration running
through the first three systems:
i + 2 + 3 = 4 + 5.
(d) The Thirteenth Olympian and (e) the Tenth Nemean have each
four parts, but not distributed exactly in the same way:
(d)	1 = 2 = 3+ 4 = 5
(e)	i = 2=3 = 4 + S-
We may consider the Odes in this order.
(1)	In the Second Olympian (a) the last sentence of epode 1 runs
into strophe 2 and (b) the myth is concluded in the beginning of
strophe 5.
(2)	In the Sixth Olympian {a) there is a pause between the first
and second systems. Strophe 2 begins thus :
*0 $ivns, aXXa £d)£ov tjSt] fioi (rOevos tffjuovwv.
The abruptness is happy, for it gives the effect of making haste to reach
Olympia, (b) The transition from system 4 to system 5 is veiled by
grammatical continuity.
(3)	The transitions in the Seventh Olympian are managed byxlvi
INTROD UCTION.
relatives; (a) tolo-lv connects system 2 with system 1 and (b) toOl
connects system 5 with system 4.
(4)	In the Tenth Olympian, (a) a general remark in the last two
lines of epode 1, followed by a general reflexion in the first two lines of
strophe 2, forms the transition to the myth, (b) The third part begins
in the last line of the 4th epode.
(5)	The three central systems of the Seventh Nemean belong
closely together, although the mythical part ends in the third strophe.
By this means Pindar has indicated that the myths are intimately
connected with the words which he addresses to Thearion in the 3rd
epode and with what he says to Sogenes in the 4th strophe and anti-
strophos. (a) The transition to the myths is a criticism of Homer
which begins in the last lines of epode 1.	(b) The third part of the
ode begins at the end of the 4th epode—Aeyovtl yap A iaKov k.t.X.
(6) Of the First Pythian (a) the second part, which occupies the
third system, begins in the second line of strophe 3: av8pa 8’ cyw
k€lvov k.t.X. (b) The fourth system is connected with the third by the
relative to>.
(7)	In the Eighth Pythian (a) the transition from the second to the
third system is skilful:
epode 2
Xoyov t/yeptis
TOV OV7T€p WOT 'OlkXcOS WaiS €V €WTaWvXoi$ l8toV
Gthjfiais vlovs alvt$aro wapp.ivovras at^/xa,
strophe 3
owot dir *Apyeos rjXvOov k.t.X.
It will be observed that while the narration is continuous we do not
know that we are to have the myth until the third strophe begins, (b)
Between the third and fourth systems there is an apparent break.
Strophe 4 begins with an address to Apollo :
tv 8’, €Karafi6X€, 7tolv8okov
vaov cv/cXca hiavipunv
IIv^wvos iv yvaXois k.t.X.
But as Delphi is directly suggested in the last lines of epode 3,
(v7ravTacrcv Iovtl yds op.<f>aXov wap' aotStpov
p.avTCvpLaT(ov t i<j>a\J/aTo (rvyyovouji Te^vais)
the passage to the last part of the hymn is not really abrupt. In fact
this case might be quoted to illustrate Pindar’s care in smoothing
transitions.INTRO D UCT/ON
xlvii
(8)	The myth occupies the first three systems of the Third Pythian.
The 3rd epode leads gradually up to the Alrvaios £cvos,
os 5vpaKocraaurL vifiei /?a<riA.€vs—Strophe 4.
(9)	Between the two parts of the Ninth Pythian there is, super-
ficially, a sharper division than usual. The myth ends in the middle of
epode 3, the rest of which is occupied by a declaration of the victory
achieved by Telesicrates:
Kal vvv iv HvOdivi vlv [Kvpavai/] ayaBid KapvaaSa
mos zvOaXei crwcpxfc ru\a,
evOa viKacrais dvi<f>dvc Kvpai/av a vlv €vcf)pu)v 8c£cTai
KaWiyvvaua Trdrpa
8o£av IpitpTdv ayayoVr’ dwo AcA.<£(5v.
strophe 4
ap€Tdl 8* aici pLcydXdt TroXvpivdoi *
fidta 8* iv pidKpoun ttolklW^lv
dKOd (TOPOLS' o 84 KCLtpOS OpLOltoS
7ravros cxct KOpvcfadv.
The last lines of the epode in the strictest sense belong to the first part
of the hymn. The myth is both preceded and followed by notifications
of Telesicrates’ victory; and these lines express in a new way the idea
which the first lines of the hymn had already stated. Thus we come to
a full stop at the word Aand if the hymn had ended here we
might have thought it a complete composition, dperdl 8’ atct /^cyaXat
seems to begin anew, and although we apprehend on reflexion that the
general expression is suggested by the particular apcra of Telesicrates, just
mentioned, still it cannot be denied that there is as rough a break here
between the systems, as either of the breaks in the Eleventh Nemean.
It may be that by this break Pindar wished to introduce with solemn
emphasis his thoughts about Opportunity; for this idea is the feature of
the ode, called by Mezger ‘ Das Hohelied von icatpos \
(10)	In the Thirteenth Olympian (a) there is a sufficient break
between systems 1 and 2 to invest the prayer to Zeus with a due
solemnity. The first system eulogizes Corinth and strophe 2 begins
VTTdT €VpVdVd(T(rO)V
'OXvpmidS...
Kdl rov8e \dov dfiXdfirj vipuav k.t.X.
There is no stiffness in a transition like this.
B.
(b) There is sufficient
dxlviii
INTROD UCTION
connexion of thought between the end of epode 2 and the first lines of
strophe 3 to obviate the unpleasant effect of a complete break.
0)5 fxdv oraches
ovk av elBetrjv \eyew 7rovTiav	apiOpov.
strophe 3
€7T€Tai 8’ €V € KOI O'TO)
perpov* vorjcrai Sc icaipos apterro?.
(c) There is a greater break between systems 4 and 5.
epode 4
Stao'0)7rao'op.at ot popov eyw,
TOI/ S’ CV OuA.Vp.7TO) ^KXTVat ZrjVOS dp)(OLlCU StKOVTOU.
strophe 5
4|ji S’ Cvflul' (XKOVTCiiV
Icvra p6p/3ov irapoi crKonrov ov \prj k.t.X.
Here the emphatic repetition of the first personal pronoun helps to
bridge across a passage to the new system. '
(n) In the Tenth Nemean (a) the first line of strophe 2 refers
directly to the theme of system 1.	(b) There is a slight break between
systems 2 and 3, but the subject of the verb (cpoAcv) in the last line of
epode 2 is directly addressed in the first line of strophe 3.	(c) The
third epode leads up to the myth. The direct continuity is superficially
broken by the interposed reflexion (koX pav 0€<3v mo-rov ycVos) at the end
of epode 3.
From this analysis it appears that in the eleven odes consisting of
five metrical systems, there is only one case of an abrupt division,
without an apparent motive, namely in the Ninth Pythian.
IV. The Fourth Pythian stands by itself as the only surviving
specimen of an ode exceeding in length the measure of five systems.
It falls naturally into three parts, the myth extending from strophe 4 to
epode 11. Thus:
i + 2 + 3 = 4+ ...+ 11 = 12 +13.
(a) The first transition is on this wise :
a7ro 8’ auToy cycu Motcrato't 8wo'w
teal to 7rayxpvcrov va/cos Kpiov * pcTa yap
k€lvo 7r\ev(rdvTU)v Miwav, 0eoVop7roi o'^to'tv Tipat <£uTcv0cr.
strophe 4
tU yap ap)(r] VScfaTO vaimAta?; k.t,A.INTRODUCTION.
xlix
(b) We are prepared for the end of the myth and the approach of
the third part by the first words of the nth epode (fxaKpd p.01 vcio-Oai kolt
dfia^LTov k.tX). The end of the legend, rapidly told, runs over into the
12 th strophe, where it loses itself in the early history of Cyrene.
The result of this investigation is that the avoidance of abrupt
transitions is a distinct feature of Pindar’s art, and that this feature tends
to disguise the agreement which really exists between the metre-groups
and the subject-groups (if I may be permitted to use these expressions)
of his odes. There are a few cases in which the clefts of metre are
not bridged over by a close connexion of grammar or sense; but they
are few, and mostly designed to produce a special effect. There are
only two cases where no cause for the abruptness is apparent, in (i) the
Sixth Nemean and (2) the Ninth Pythian; and even of these the
second possibly admits of explanation.
The strange expression which Pindar uses of his own improvements
in art, veocruyaXov evpovn rpo7rov (01. hi. 4), may allude partly to his
smooth transitions. In any case it is a metaphor from the craft of the
mason or the carpenter, not from the craft of the sculptor; for words in
the context show that the construction of the hymn is compared to the
building of a house.
(Ohjptovos 'OXvpLTnoviKav vpvov op0co<rai$, aKa/xavT07rdSa>i'
t7T7ro)v aa)Tov. Motcra S’ ovti0 ttoi Trapcara p.01 vcocrfyaXov cvpovn Tpoirov
€TT€t... (rT€(j)OLVOl
7rpdcrcrovTL /xe tovto 0€o8paTov \peos,
cfroppLiyya re 7roua\6yapvv kou fioav avXwv €7T€o>v tc 0&riv (laying of words)
.....(Tvppu^ai 7rp€7rovTO)s.
The adjective o-tyaAo'ets is used in Homer of wcpwia as well as of
seats (Qpovos), reins, linen garments &c.; and vcocrtyaXos suggests the
high polish, obtained by new methods, of the chambers of Pindar’s
palaces.
In conclusion I must briefly notice the monostrophic Odes, intended
to be sung in procession. They are built on the same principles as the
stasima. The strophe takes the place of the system. Thus the Twelfth
Pythian, consisting of 4 strophes, is constructed in the same way as the
Tenth Pythian which consists of 4 systems. The 2nd and 3rd strophes
containing the myth hang closely together. A relative pronoun
connects the 2nd strophe with the 1st, while there is grammatical
continuity between the 3rd and 4th. The Eighth Isthmian (to Clean-
d 21
INTROD UCTION.
dros of Aegina), consisting of seven strophes, is similarly constructed
(t~+2 = 3 + 4+ S + 6 = 7), and the transitions are equally smooth. The
formula of the Second Nemean (5 strophes) is 1 + 2 = 3 =4 + 5; the
central strophe being mythical. The Fourth Nemean has twelve
strophes, of which the central six contain the mythical element; (a) the
first transition is skilful and (b) the return from myth-land is formally
announced in the end of the 9th strophe. The transitions in the
Sixth Pythian (1 + 2 = 3 + 4 + 5 = 6) are also smooth. The Ninth
Nemean falls into two parts, a mythical and a non-mythical, which
meet in the 6th or central strophe. But this poem suggests more than
anything else a series of scenes, passing into each other, on a running
frieze, like that of the Parthenon cella. And this comparison illus-
trates the feature of Pindar's art, which it has been the object of this
essay to illustrate and emphasize. The metrical systems of the older
Odes, typified by the Eleventh Nemean, might be compared to a series
of metopes, kept apart by the intervening triglyphs; whereas the
Pindaric hymn resembled rather a continuous frieze, without blanks.
But it should be remembered that the truest analogy for the Pindaric
Ode, and that sanctioned by the artist himself, is the analogy of a house
or palace1.
As to the construction of the strophe itself, it is not my intention to
say much. I determined to exclude from this edition the abstruse and
repulsive subject of ‘ colometry ’, for I could not find that it contributed
to the comprehension of Pindar’s meaning or that it gave much assist-
ance towards the enjoyment of his rhythms. But I have taken
advantage of Dr M. Schmidt’s studies on the Strophenbau of the
Pindaric Ode (which indeed involve the rejection of colometry) and
I have incorporated his results in the metrical analysis of each hymn.
It seemed quite unnecessary to give any account of the new methods
of treating Greek metres, of which J. H. H. Schmidt has been the chief
exponent. The mysteries of irrational syllables, cyclic dactyls, synco-
pation, fjLaKpaX TpLtrqpLOL &c. have been familiar to English students
1 It is unnecessary to introduce into
this discussion the four short Odes of one
system (Olymp. iv., x., xii. and Pyth.
vii.) or the Fourteenth Olympian which
consists of two strophes. I have omitted
the Fifth Olympian from my list of hymns
of three systems, as I have been unable
to satisfy myself that it is the work of
Pindar. As for the Third ‘ Isthmian
see my paper in Hermathena, vol. xvi.,
1890.INTRODUCTION.
li
since the publication of Professor Jebb’s Oedipus Rex. The subject
has also been treated, in special reference to Pindar, in Mr Gilder-
sleeve’s edition of the Olympian and Pythian Odes.
The symmetrical arrangements of ^eylOrj, or groups of feet, which
M. Schmidt has discovered in the strophes and epodes, seem to me
superior to the analyses of J. H. H. Schmidt and Westphal. Occasionally
these constructions compass or conduce to an aesthetic effect; as for
example in the first epode of the Eleventh Nemean
(A)	avSpa 8* eyto p,a.Kapi£<*> fxkv tta/rep’ ’ApKccnXav,
Kal to Oarjrov Sep,as arpepiiav re £vyyovov.
(A') et Se ns o\/3ov t^cov fxop<f>a 7repa/x€vo-€T(u aXXa)v,
tv T atOXoLVLV dpi(TT€V(tiV €7Te8et^€I/ pLOLV‘
(B)	Ovard p.€pLvd<rO(ti irtpiGrreWtov pcXiy
Kal reXevrav d.7rdvT0)v yav imecro-opLevos.
Here the structure is epodic. Upon the two parts A and A' (corre-
sponding in the number and character of their feet), which describe the
advantages of the man who is deemed happy, supervenes an epode (B),
metrically dissimilar, with the suggestion of death supervening on the
fair things of life. Thus the metrical structure deepens the effect of
the words,—they have almost the sound of a knell. That the effect
might have been deepened still more by the accompanying music, we
can well imagine.3. The Text.
The most important mss. for the text of the Nemean and Isthmian
Odes are the Vatican B (of the 12th century) and the Medicean D (B).
Unfortunately the Ambrosian (A), which has preserved some important
variants, contains only the first twelve Olympian hymns. All the mss. 1
of Pindar are derived from a single archetype; and there are con-
siderations which show that this archetype was of late date. The
principles adopted by its author in arranging the verses set at defiance
the metrical doctrines of the Alexandrine grammarians, and betray
complete ignorance of the studies of Aristophanes in the field of lyric
poetry. Hence Christ deduces that this lost ms. was written long after
the days of Alexandrine learning.
It is a matter of importance for the purposes of textual criticism to
reach some conclusion as to the comparative values of the fountain
of our mss. and the Pindaric scholia. It is generally confessed that
some German scholars have gone to unwarranted extremes in eliciting
emendations from the scholia; but even judicious editors have, in
my opinion, given them undue weight. These scholia are founded
on a Pindaric commentary composed by Didymus, who lived about the
Christian aera; but citations from the grammarian Herodian prove
that they were compiled at a time subsequent to the middle of the
1 Of less importance are B (Augusta-
nus C) and g (Augustanus E2). Besides
these, mss. contain Nem. I., 11., in. and
IV. 11. 1—68 : namely V (Parisinus A),
X Estensis B, X (Estensis A), these two
also containing Nem. VI. 34—44; also
X (Par. D), Y (Venetus D). Moreover
Z (Vindobon. D1) has Nem. 1.—in., T
(Vat. C) and U (Vindob. A) have Nem. 1.,
II. and Z (Aug. D2) has Nem. 1. 1—40.
The Byzantine mss. of Moschopulos
and Triclinius are spoiled by the bad
‘emendations’ of these students of the
15th century, and have little value; some-
times however they have a reading which
deviates from the old mss. and rests per-
haps on some lost scholium. Thus in
01. VI. 83, a ix ideXovra irpo<r£XK€i is
found in the libri Truliniani, while the
best mss. have irpoo-ipwci. (Two MSS.
have 7rpo<y£\Koi, and the scholium on 142
has the explanation: 7rpo<rdyet, wapotyvei
icai axnov fxe OeXovra, while in that on 144
we find 2X/cerat p.e t\ MerwTr^.)INTRODUCTION.
liii
second century a.d. It is likely enough that they are considerably
earlier than the archetype of our mss. ; but there is no definite proof
of this. I certainly cannot attribute much value to the argument of
Christ, based on Pythian xi. 42. In this passage all the mss. except
one have
Motcra, to S’ eredy, €t pucrOto avvi6cv irapk^iv
42 cj>(ovav virapyvpov aXXor aXXa XPV TapaaorifJLtv k.t.X.
(P, a Heidelberg ms., has to $e tcov). The metre in 1. 42 requires the
omission of xPV (and the restoration of aXXa or dXXa for aXXa), and this
correction is confirmed by the scholion : avrl tov rapacrcre Kal p,*Ta<f>€p€'
XeL7T€L to o<^>€tA.€i5. Thus the scholiast used a text, which had not been
corrupted by the insertion of and Christ infers that our archetype
is more recent than the scholia. Possibly; but, on the other hand,
it may be shown that our mss. are sometimes free from corruptions
which beset the text of the scholiast. There is a remarkable example
in Olympian vi. 97, which has hitherto escaped notice. The mss.
have
aSvXoyoL Sc viv
XvpaL pLoXirai tc yivwcr/covTi.
On this the scholiast has the following comment: Xlyovrai a 1 <£71-0 twv
opyavoiv irvoaL* o Se Xoyos* at Sc Tj^vXoyoL avrov 7rvoat t<2v opydvo)v Kal
wSal yva)pi£ov(nv.
It is perfectly clear that this is not an explanation of Xvpai, which
required no explanation. Bergk recognised this, but he was wrong
in his conclusion that the scholiast read 7rvoat, and he was not judicious
in expelling Xvpau from the text in favour of irvoai It is manifestly an
instance of the confusion of A and A. The scholiast found in his text
AY PA I and naturally interpreted it by 7rvoat, whereas our archetype
preserved the genuine reading AY PA I. This is a case in which the
mss. have the best of it.
In most cases however there is little or nothing to choose between
the mss. and the scholia. The archetype and the text of the scholiast
seem to have been very much alike; indeed, we might conjecture that
both were derived from a common original, exhibiting all the most
serious corruptions which disfigure our mss. I am unable, for example,
to ascribe any value to the note preserved in the Medicean on Nemean
x. 74, a note on which Mommsen bases an emendation. (See note on
that passage.)
Although the text of Pindar, compared with that of his contemporaryliv
INTRODUCTION.
Aeschylus, has been well preserved, there are many passages which
obviously demand correction. In dealing with such passages my first
principle has been that no conjecture is of the slightest critical value
unless it explains the origin of the corruption, which it claims to heal.
And a mere vague resemblance in the ductus litterarum of two words is
not enough to show that one could have taken the place of the other.
If we adhere strictly to this principle, there is some chance of setting
textual criticism on a scientific basis; but far the larger number of the
‘emendations’ proposed every day in philological journals and new
editions are condemned at once, when tried by this standard.
In the Nemean Odes we find instances of most of the well-known
causes of corruption. For example, in vn. 68 there is an instance of a
false division of words; av ipei has taken the place of avepel. Similarity
of adjacent syllables has led to errors in many places. Thus in iv. 91
av ns Uny became av tls rj, and was afterwards emended to av rts tvxV-
But perhaps the most fertile source of corruption is the occurrence of
strange words and unusual forms. That frit, restored by Mr Ellis in
the Mostellaria, should have suffered corruption may be regarded as
inevitable. Such a word as ropy os, occurring in a tragedian, was a trap
for the ignorance of a late scribe. The forms irov, irav, which Bergk
has brilliantly restored in some passages of Pindar1, could not fail to
become tov and rav. Sometimes rare words were explained by a
marginal gloss, and in these cases the gloss often insinuated itself into
the text. Thus in Nem. vi. 52 and Nem. x. 60 a/ca was ousted by its
explanation alxpa at the expense of the metre. In Pytft. v. 31 we read
vSan (Kao-raXias) where the metre rather demands2 — or — w (whence
vypa and Kpava. have been proposed). It seems probable that vSan was
a gloss on v8ei, a form found in Hesiod, which Pindar may well have
used. In many cases the change of a letter transformed a rare into a
familiar word, and of such ‘ emendations ’ on the part of copyists there
are, if I am right, three instances in the First Nemean (1. 45 xpovos for
Xpo/xos, 1. 48 fiikos for ttcAos, 1. 66 Swo-civ for 7r<oo-€iv). It is often
impossible to know whether a corruption is due to the usurpation of
a gloss or to a deliberate alteration; as in Nem. vn. 37, where,
according to my view, TrXaycVrcs became ir\ayydivT^s.
In the case of Pindar, we are in a better position to deal with
corruptions in the text than in the case of most ancient authors; for he
often assists us himself in restoring the genuine reading. I refer to the
systems of verbal echoes and responsions which render us so much
1 See Nem. vii. 25.
2 The tribrach however is quite possibly rightINTRODUCTION
lv
help in following his trains of thought. I may first direct attention to
an instance in which a responsion confirms the reading of our mss. as
against a reading found in Plutarch. In Nem. iv. 4,
ovSe Oeppov v8o)p toctov ye paXOaKa T€v\€i.
Plutarch (de tranquillitate, 6) read reyfei. But in the corresponding
line of the nth strophe we find rev^u in the same metrical position,
epypoiTUiv fiacriXevcriv laohatpova
Instances in which this principle has guided me in restorations of the
text will be found in Nem. iv. 68 (c£i;<£avav), vi. 50 (<£dvc), vm. 40,
x. 41, &c.
There is a remarkable case in the Tenth Pythian which will serve to
illustrate the principle. We read there of the Hyperboreans (31 sqq.):
Trap ols Trore IIc/so’ci;? iSataaro Xayeras
Swpar eoreXOojy,
kXcitcLs ovwv eKaropfias €7rtrdo,o'ats Sew,
petpvTas* (Sv OaXiais epireSov
€v<f>apiais T€ paXidT ’ATroXXwy
Xpipei yeXa O' opdov vfipiv opGCav KywSdXajy.
Moicra. 8* ovk airohapel
TpOTTOlS €7TL (T0CT€pOtO'l * TTaVTa 81 X°P0L '"’apGfrwV
Xvpdv re j3oal Kava\ai t avXujy Soyeoyrai *
Sacfiva r€ xPvo*^ xdpas dvaSrjcravTes uXarrivatpifTiv cv<|>pdvw$.
The difficulty in this passage is rpoVots which yields no meaning (as
Bergk says, plane alienum vocabulum). Now when we turn to the last
system of the hymn, we find a parallel worked out between the festival
of the Hyperboreans in honour of Apollo, and the festival which
celebrated the success of the victor Hippocles at Apollo’s Pythian
games. In the first place there is a play on the name Hippocles : the
3rd line of the 4th strophe
tov TiriroicXcav crt koi paXXov <rvv aocSacs
echoes the 3rd line of the 2nd epode
icXcirds ovwv €Kar6p/3as.
The glory of asses was a feature at the mythical feast; the glory of
horses is an omen, at least, at the victor’s feast. In both celebrations
the presence of maidens is a feature : cf. 1. 59
veoucrtv T€ irapG^vouri p4Xrjpa.lvi
INTRODUCTION.
In 1. 64 the poet proceeds thus :
TriiroiOa £evia irpocravi'i ®ojpa#cos ocnrep ip,dv ttol7TVvwv \dptv
to8* e&viev app,a IlieptSwv Ttrpdopov
<j>i\eu)V (fnXiovr, ayoiv ayovra TTpo^povcos.
67 TT€ip(jJVTL 8e Kal xpvcrds iv /3acrdv(0 irpiirzi
kcu voos op0os.
There are four echoes here of the revels in the far north. Ihcpfow
corresponds to Molo-a, irpo<l>p6vm recalls cvcfrpovcos, xpvo-o<; echoes xpvo-ca,
and op6os explains the point of opOlav. The golden laurel, with which
the Hyperboreans bound their hair and with which the victor has
recently bound his, is an emblem, compared to the most precious of the
metals; and the victor’s horse-name, suggesting the opOla vfipis #cv<»8aAa>v,
is an omen of vo'os opOos.
It is now an easy matter to restore the genuine word which was
replaced by rpoVois. This cluster of four verbal responsions was
originally a cluster of five. I have no doubt that Pindar wrote
TTpO'ITOlS €7t\ (T<f>€T€pOL<TL
and echoed it in iv fiao-avu irp&rcc (1. 67). 7rpo7ros is formed from irpeirm
as TpoVos from rpi7rco; the ablaut (to use the technical expression) has
been preserved in Oeoirpowos, B^oirpoiri^ and in the gloss anpoTrov *
aTpowov, a7rpe7r€9 in Hesychius. We may render at their solemnities
or at their rites, irpiire iv1 means ‘to be due’; 7rp€Tr6vTm = rite; so
that TTpoiroi would mean ritus, ‘rites’. I need not add that a strange
word like 7rpo7roi5 was doomed to be corrupted; and the most natural
corruption was rpoVot?.
This restoration in the Tenth Pythian suggests a discussion of a
general question, connected with the art or science of textual criticism,
which has assumed considerable importance within the last ten years.
Some scholars do not hesitate to introduce into Greek texts words
which are not to be found in the dictionary. Others condemn such a
procedure as unjustifiable without qualification. It may occur to an
impartial observer, who wishes to preserve the due mean between
excessive caution and rashness, that there is probably some reason on
both sides. The question, certainly, deserves to be fully argued out.
Our texts of the Greek poets, as they stand, present us with a
considerable number of rare words and a7raf elprjpiiva. No one could
1 irpiireiv implies the idea of solemnity;	TTpi-rrovaa, in robes of solemn black
cf. Agamemnon, $0 10s b <f>pvKrbsayyiWiov (cp. Shakespeare’s ‘customary suit of
Trplirei, as the beacon solemnly or duly solemn black’).
announces; Choephori n <f>apeaLv fxeXay-INTRODUCTION.
lvii
fairly object to an editor making use of one of these to correct a
corrupt passage.
Let us go a step further. In the great body of lyric poetry and in
the numerous tragedies which have perished, many words occurred
which do not happen to occur in the extant remains of the contemporary
literature. But all these words are not lost. Some have been preserved
by the Alexandrine writers, especially by Lycophron ; others by the
compilers of glossaries, like Hesychius. Lycophron is a great store-
house of strange words, which he culled from older literature—from the
dramatists, and from the lyric poets. We meet in the Alexandra many
a word, which is found isolated in one passage in tragedy. A student
of the Greek tragedies is thoroughly justified in regarding Lycophron’s
vocabulary as available for. purposes of emendation.
The use of the lexicons of Hesychius, Suidas, &c., takes us a step
further still. These compilers preserve many words of whose existence
we should otherwise be ignorant. Suppose a corrupt passage in which
one of these words would restore perfect sense and satisfy the conditions
of the critical problem, would it be reasonable to reject the restoration
because it so happens that the word does not occur in our extant
literature? There are many who would not scruple to restore in
Euripides a word which our mss. have only once preserved in tragedy,
and yet would hesitate to admit a word vouched for by Callimachus
or Lycophron. There are others who would swallow Lycophron
but strain at Hesychius. The reason for this distinction is that the
Alexandrine writers are nearer in time to the older classical writers;
whereas the glossaries are late and it cannot be proved, in the large
majority of instances, that any given gloss actually occurred in an early
Greek poet. The distinction is certainly valid, but it would be a false
inference that would lead us to discard the assistance of the glossaries.
It is a question of a degree of probability. Let us suppose two corrupt
passages. Let us suppose that in one of these the demands of the sense
are perfectly satisfied by the restoration of a word whose existence is
vouched for by Hesychius; and that the other can be perfectly healed,
as far as the meaning is concerned, by the restoration of a word whose
literary use is proved by its occurring in Callimachus or Lycophron.
If we were told nothing more of the two cases, we should be justified
in saying that the second restoration had a higher degree of probability
than the first. But if we learned then that critical considerations
founded on the indications of the mss. pointed with much more cogency
to the Hesychian word than similar considerations, in the second case,
pointed to the Alexandrine word, we should be compelled to acknow-lviii
INTROD UCTION
ledge that the comparative probabilities were equalised or perhaps that
the first emendation was even more convincing than the second.
The next step is the restoration of a word, which is of irreproachable
form, but does not happen to have been preserved in our extant
literature, as transmitted to us through a period of twenty centuries.
Many scholars demur to such conjectures without any reservation,
and consider them in all cases unjustifiable. But these objectors will
nevertheless admit that numerous words were used by Greek men of
letters (especially by poets), which have not been preserved. Even as
it is, there are many aira£ etprjfjLeva, that is, rare words; and it would be
absurd to suppose that there were not many others. They will also
have to admit that some of these words may have been used in passages
which have become corrupted in the course of transmission. And this
possibility forces itself seriously upon the attention, when we consider
that unusual words were the words, of all others, most exposed to
corruption, whether through conscious correction, unconscious mis-
copying, or the intrusion of a gloss.
Now it is important to draw a distinction between two kinds of
strange words, (i) words whose existence at some time or other is
presupposed by actually existent forms; (2) words whose existence is
not thus presupposed, but which, being formed on correct analogy, may
have been in use. It is clear that these two classes do not stand on
the same level. Let us take them in order.
(1) Suppose two passages, a and A which require correction. In
a a strange word is introduced which harmonises with the context
admirably and is palaeographically a sound emendation. This strange
word is found in Hesychius. In b a strange word is also introduced, equally
sound from a critical point of view, and equally suitable in meaning.
This word is not found in Hesychius or elsewhere, but not only is it of
unimpeachable formation but its existence is presupposed by cognate
words in actual use. It is clear that ceteris paribus the emendation of a
is more probable than the emendation of A We know that both words
existed; but the occurrence of the first in the glossary of Hesychius
certifies us that it was a word which probably was used in literature,
whereas it might be urged that the second may have fallen out of use at
such an ancient date that it was unknown in the age of the earliest
Greek literature. Nevertheless it is obvious that cases are conceivable
in which the immediate data would point so strongly to the restoration
of a word of this kind that there could be little doubt as to its
correctness. Perhaps an illustration from English literature will put
this in a clearer light. Let us suppose that Tennyson's Locksley Hall isINTRODUCTION
lix
transmitted to distant posterity in two mss. In one of these (A) the
following line occurs:
In the spring a livelier rainbow changes on the burnish’d dove,
while in the other (B) there is an obvious corruption,
In the spring a livelier is changes on the burnish’d dove.
It is clear that the first reading, though it scans and is intelligible, does
not account for the corruption in the second. Let us suppose that the
critic has at his disposal only a comparatively small part of the entire
body of English literature; and let us further suppose that in that extant
part the word iridescent happens to occur, but not iris. Iridescent conse-
quently is recognised in his English lexicon; and he has sufficient
philological knowledge to know that iris is presupposed by iridescent
Would he not, then, be amply justified in reading
In the spring a livelier iris changes on the burnish’d dove—?
The variants are thus completely accounted for. Rainbow was merely
a gloss on iris; while the corruption in B arose from the omission of
one of two similar syllables
e
liveliriris.
But we cannot expect many cases so clear as this. In most cases of
this kind we must admit that the emendation would gain in probability
if the word had more than an etymological certification. In other
words, such emendations must be for the most part labelled ‘ possible ’
and await accident to verify or condemn them. But at the same time
they are thoroughly justifiable, and may often pass into the region of
high probability, b becoming as probable as a under favourable circum-
stances.
As an example of a word, certified by etymology, I may refer to a
passage in the Choephori\ 61 sqq.
powrj 8* ImcrKOTrei Slkclv
ra^eia rots fiev iv <£aa
rd 8* iv fJL€TCLL)(JJLLli) (7KOTOV
64 fiivu xpovi£ovT* dix7} fipv*1
rovs 8* a/eparos e^ei vvf.
axv and fipiei cannot stand together in 1. 64 for the metre demands
words equivalent in quantity to
fJL€V€L XpOVl£ovrd /3pt€L
It seems clear that dxrj is a gloss on ret 8’ and that fipvti is a corruption
of a substantive in the dative case agreeing with /*€Taix/Ai<j>. I believelx
INTRODUCTION
that the word whose place has been usurped was ppv\^	is
presupposed by fipvxtos, vwo/3pvxt09> as surely as x^v is presupposed by
xQovios, imxOovios. In fact, viroftpvxLos is simply v-n-o fipvxt affected with
an adjectival termination. The picture is a twilit sea between the coasts
of darkness and light. The slight change of fipvxt to ftpvti was
facilitated by the actual occurrence of fipvei a few lines below.
This conjecture can only lay claim to possibility. But if there had
chanced to be an explanatory gloss, aXl, or fivo-aw, or something of the
kind, then it might fairly be regarded as highly probable.
(2) The case is different when etymology does not demand the
assumption of a lost word, but only acquiesces in a legitimate formation.
Here it must be admitted that the word may not have existed, and if
the only sign of its existence is an inference from a corrupt passage, the
emendation which assumes it must be regarded as extremely doubtful,
though no one can deny that it is possible.
But it is conceivable that other considerations might intervene which
might raise this possibility into a probability; and such considerations
would of course apply to (1) as well as to (2). There might be a
confirmation of a strange word as cogent as a gloss in Suidas if not more
cogent. I may illustrate this from a passage in the First Nemean. In
1. 48 we read
€K 8* ap drXarov Scost
irXai;* yvvaiKas,
where the mss. vary between 8eos and £UX09. In the note on this
passage I have shown that neither of these variants can be right and I
have ventured to restore ir^Xos, a word of unexceptionable formation,
whose existence is recognised by Hesychius. I need hardly say that it
was the conditions of the problem, not a knowledge of the Hesychian
gloss, that suggested this emendation. Now if I had not found this
word in Hesychius or anywhere else, I should not have been able to
consider the correction highly probable; I should only have been
entitled to regard it as possible. The circumstance that Theocritus uses
the word ttcAo)pia in his description of the battle with the snakes might
be adduced to bring the conjecture a degree nearer probability. But let
us suppose, now, that in some other strophe of the ode we found a
series of verbal echoes, answering to the passage under consideration,
in accordance with Pindar’s method, and let us suppose that among
these echoes the word TreXwp or ireXwpLov occurred; in that case we
should have a confirmation of the conjecture iriXos, rendering it not
only quite as probable as if the word were found in Hesychius (as ex
hypothesi it is not), but even more probable. An Hesychian glossINTRODUCTION
lxi
proves the existence of a word, but not its use in a particular passage;
in the hypothetical case the use of tj-cXos in the particular passage is
indicated.—These are the principles on which I would defend the
emendation 7rpo7rot9 in the Tenth Pythian.
I have attempted to deal with this vexed question as generally as
possible, but it is obvious that general conclusions will require modifica-
tion in any particular instance. Special groups of hypothetical words,
such as strange compounds (like Mr Tucker’s \ivoo-ivel in the Supplices
of Aeschylus) or strange parts of verbs in ordinary use, demand special
consideration; and it is clear that different minds will always estimate
differently the amount of evidence required to render probable a
conjecture of the kind here discussed.ET7INIK0I NEME0NIKAI2
NEMEAN I.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY WON AT NEMEA
BY THE HORSES OF CHROMIUS OF SYRACUSE.
INTRODUCTION.
The ideal of successful labour on a grand scale is continually kept before
us in the poems of Pindar. The mythical type of this ideal was the son of
a god—Heracles, the deliverer of the Greek world, who, having lived laborious
days and gratified the lusts of the flesh, was in the end elevated to heaven,
to crown a splendid life by a marriage with immortal Youth. Pindar cer-
tainly clave unto Heracles. He often praises the qualities of his patrons by
suggesting points of comparison with the hero of the twelve, and other,
labours, whose Theban birth supplied a special ground of interest to a Theban
poet; and the legend that this son of Zeus instituted the Olympic games1
rendered frequent mention of him in odes of victory a matter of course.
For such a comparison with Heracles was selected a Sicilian noble, a
friend of king Hiero and conspicuous at the Syracusan court. On the
occasion of a victory won in a chariot race at Nemea, Chromius2 employed
1 The tale of the early institution of
these games by Heracles and by Iphitus
was invented when in comparatively later
days the Olympic festival had won a
Panhellenic repute. In Homeric days the
Olympic games, if they existed, must have
been insignificant and local. The games
described in the 23rd Book of the Iliad are
quite unlike the Olympic, as Mr Mahaffy
V B-
observed in his paper on the Olympic
register in the fournal of Hellenic Studies,
vol. I.
2 He belonged to the tribe of the
Hylleis. He is also celebrated in the
Ninth ‘Nemean’, which Boeckh and
Dissen are certainly right in assigning to
a later date than the present Ode. As
the epithet veoKriorav is applied to Aetna
I2
NEMEAN /.
Pindar to write an epinician hymn, and invited the poet to his house at
Syracuse, where an unusually rich hospitality was dispensed. Chromius had
been always a fighter. He had played a prominent part in the vicissitudes
which attended the rise and continuance of Gelon’s power; he had fought
bravely in battles by land and sea1. He was certainly one of those who
had laboured on a distinguished scale, and might without absurdity be
likened, in the exaggerating language of art, to Heracles.
But the incident in the life of Heracles, which Pindar has chosen to
portray at length, in this Nemean Ode,—the infant throttling the serpents,
—seems a somewhat strange parable to speak to a Nemean victor, and it
puzzled the curiosity of ancient readers. To attempt to resolve this enigma,
we must analyse the hymn2.
At Syracuse, in the place where the fountain of Ortygia reminds the
visitor of that ‘lovely’ nymph and of her lover the river Alpheus and of
Olympia overseas, the hymn first sets our thoughts, as in a divine retreat;
and then proceeds to comply with the usual formalities of an epinician song.
The god, at whose games the victory was won, the kind and the place of the
contest, the name of the victor, are indicated in the lofty, somewhat indirect
language, which Pindar wields with a peculiar grace and never discards.
This is the foundation of the building, secured with divine names3.
Then reflecting that great contests are a grateful theme for poets, Pindar
goes on to praise the victor’s country, and tells how long ago Zeus promised
to Persephone that he would exalt the cities of Sicily, and how he fulfilled
this promise, and blessed the island with a nation of horsemen and warriors,
and granted them the boast of winning not a few Olympic crowns.
It is evident that this shower of grace (ay\aia), which is flung over Sicily,
is intended for Chromius, one of her typical children, a wooer of brazen war,
and one whose horses had won a conspicuous, though not an Olympic,
victory. And the reference to the ‘golden leaves of Olympic olives’
supplies us with a clue to the meaning of the whole hymn. As long as
those golden leaves had never shone on his brow, Chromius had not won
the highest attainable glory in his brilliant world, he was not quite the ideal
Sicilian lord. Well, Pindar holds out to him the prospect of this glory,
in the Ninth ‘Nemean’, and as Aetna was
lYfG) ? founded in 475, we can hardly assign a
) later date to Nemean 1. than 472 B.c.,
in which year Nemean games were cele-
f brated. As Pindar probably went to
7^-^ ? Sicily in 473, an earlier date is also
excluded.
1	Especially at Helorus; see Nemean
IX. and Introduction to that Ode.
2	Mezger, applying the nomenclature of
the Terpandric nomos, divides as follows:
1—7 apx&; 8—12 KaraTpoTra; 13—20
6fi<pa\6s; 31—33 neraKaTaTpowa', 33—72
<r(f>payls.
The <r<ppayls has such a disproportion-
ate length that one is forced to suspect
the whole arrangement. An bpxf>akbs,
extending from 1. 13 to 1. 20 in a poem
of 72 lines, is not an 6/A<f>a\bs in any
legitimate sense.
3 Zeus is named Aetnean (1. 6), as in
Ol. vi. 96; but this does not give the
least support to the extraordinary notion
of Welcker that the poem is a glorifi-
cation of Aetna, that newly-founded city
being compared to the infant Heracles.INTROD UCTION
3
not directly, but, as we shall see hereafter, covertly. And this motive too,
prompted the artist at the outset to place our thoughts in a spot where the
reputed waters of the Alpheus should remind us of Olympia.
We enter the hospitable home of Chromius, filled with strangers; and the
poet stands at the door of the great hall, ‘ singing a beautiful strain’—
tarav S’ cV* avXelais 6 vpais
avBpos (f)i\o£*ivov KaXa ptXnbpevos.
The house in Ortygia is accustomed to the faces of strangers; and this
note of Chromius’ liberality surprises the poet into remarking that envy has
been thwarted or crushed, and that arts or artifices have been foiled by the
straightforwardness of nature. Chromius has good friends to support him
against detractors, friends ready to whelm the smoke as with water; for
smoke, insinuating and noxious, seemed to the Greeks a fitting symbol
of envy.
The connexion of ideas in this strophe, and the significance for Chromius
of the persons mentioned—Pindar himself, the strangers (dXXofiatjw), and the
detractors—is not made clear to us (though doubtless Chromius and his
friends readily apprehended it) until we read the passage in the light of a
later portion of the hymn1. The last line of the strophe contrasts the arts
of his enemies with the ‘ plainness and clearness ’ of Chromius, who opposes
the virtue of nature, </>vd, to the tricks of art. ‘ Arts vary; but it is meet,
walking in straight paths, to oppose them by the quality of naturel
The opposition of art and genius is a favourite theme; Pindar was no
friend of rhetoric reduced to rules. And in the present passage, too, he is
thinking of his own rivals, as well as of the adversaries of Chromius; and he
reveals this thought in the following antistrophos;
26	wpao-o-fi yap epya) pcv aOevos
27 j3ov\aiai Se <f>prjv icnrbptvov irpoibeiv
28 crvyytves 01s eVrercu.
In these words (see note on 1. 26) Chromius (1. 26) and Pindar (27, 28) are
designated, as endowed with two forms of <j)va, respectively, practical and
intellectual; and it is noteworthy that the intellectual faculty is specialised as
the power of foreseeing future events. We shall learn hereafter the signifi-
cance of these words2.
The circumstance that Chromius conducted his house at Syracuse with
lavish expenditure, not hoarding his wealth, but using it with unwithdrawing
hand for the joyance of life and the solace of his friends, seems to have given
occasion to illwishers to say unkind things about him. At least Pindar here
makes an emphatic apology for the uses to which ‘ the son of Agesidamus ’
put the gifts of fortune, and justifies the indulgence of oneself and one’s
friends in the pleasant things of life by a reflection on the vicissitudes
incident to mortal frailty ; ‘ for to all alike come the hopes and fears which
beset toiling men ’.
1 See below, p. 5.	2 See below, p. 6.
I—24
NEMEAN /.
‘Toiling men/ 7ro\v7r6va>v av8pa>vy—that is the key-note, here sounding
loudly at the beginning of the epode. It closes the first part of the hymn
which treats directly of Chromius, and introduces the second, somewhat
longer, half, in which the tale of Heracles, the great toiler of legend, is told1.
The lines which introduce the myth have two indications that it is directly
applicable to Chromius.
iy© 5* HpaxXeos dvrix°PaL irpoefrpovm
iv Kopv (pa is dpcrav peyaXais ap^aiov orpvvcav \6yov,
‘ In the world of great towering excellencies, I am fain to cleave fast to
Heracles, stirring an ancient story] how &c. Two words here, Kopv^ais and
orpvvo)i/, are echoes, recalling the ‘towering’ cities wherewith Zeus promised
to enrich Sicily,
(1. 15 Kopv^als noXloov d<f>vcais),
and the ‘ stirring ’ of Pindar to sing the praises of Chromius,
(1. 7 appa S’ orpvvei Xpopiov k.t.X.).
The birth of Heracles is described in significant words; he came forth
into a marvellous brilliant lights Oarjrav Is aiyXav, this son of Zeus. These
words remind us that Chromius was born in a land already brilliant, the
gift of Zeus to Persephone, whereof it was said before
(T7T€ip4 wv ayXalav nva va<ra> (1. 13).
The mission of the serpents by Here, their coming through an open gate
to the bower of Alcmene, their approach to the children, and the strangling
in the hands of Heracles, are set forth in a series of brief and vivid pictures.
Then we see the women stricken with horror, and the mother leaping from
her bed to protect her infants. Presently arrive Cadmean nobles in bronze
armour, and Amphitryon himself, brandishing a naked sword, in deep
distress, as the messengers had brought tidings that the serpents had slain
the children. He stands at the door of his wife’s chamber, in ‘a notable
passion of wonder/ seeing the proof of the miraculous strength of his
reputed son and the tale of the messengers reversed. Then he sends for the
seer Tiresias, who prophesies the future prowess and the apotheosis of the
wonderful child.
As to the import of this story2, Pindar supplies us with clues, and
1	In the scholia on 1. 33 various ancient
theories as to the application of the myth
are mentioned. Of these I need only
call attention to that of Didymus, who
supposes that as Heracles’ first achieve-
ment was an emblem of future exploits,
so this Nemean victory of Chromius is
designated by Pindar as the first of a
long series to come—irpopavni'erai Bn
teal tQv Xolttojv <TTe<f>aviov rev^erai.
2	This is a suitable place to state
Mezger’s view of the Ode. ‘ Der Myth us
von Herakles soil also zeigen, dass alle
Menschen mit Mfihen zu kampfen haben
...und wie man fiber diese Herr wird.
Die Ausfiihrung schliesst sich eng an den
Gedankengang des 6p<pa\os an.’ In the
6pxf>a\6i there are three ideas: (1) the
promise of Zeus to give Sicily a victorious
people; (2) repulse of calumniators; (3)
fjLapvcujdai (pvq.. To these correspond in
the <r<ppayl$ three pictures, in chiasticINTRODUCTION.	5
especially sets two unmistakable sign-posts, shewing the connexion between
the first and second parts of the ode.
The fifth line of the fourth strophe
ayyikotp pfjaip 6e(rap
responds to the fifth line of the first strophe
vfipos opparai Be pep.
This means that even as the immortals established the prowess of Heracles by
reversing the tale of the messengers, so the hymn of victory establishes the
prowess of Chromius by reversing (we may read between the lines) the
dark prophecies of ill wishers.
Again the first line of the fourth strophe,
ecrra be Oapfiei bvac^opto,
responds to the first line of the second strophe,
etrrav b* in avXeiats Bvpais,
indicating that the part played by Pindar in the drama in Sicily corresponds
to the part played by Amphitryon in the drama at Thebes1. Pindar was
moved with concern for his friend Chromius, and with delight at his
achievements, as Amphitryon was moved for his ‘son’ Heracles. And
this gives a clue to the meaning of the second strophe, which puzzled us.
Amphitryon, yet ignorant of the event, is sorely distressed:
to yap olKelop me£ei navB' op&s*
evOvs b* anrjpcap Kpabia Kabos ap(j)y aXXorpiop.
Now we see the position of the strangers aXXoban&p, in the hall of
Chromius. As strangers, they are external and indifferent to the weal or woe
of Chromius, and thus are contrasted with Pindar himself, who, like
Amphitryon, feels the fortunes of his friend as something oIkcwp or pertaining
to himself.
That the dragons represent enemies who attempted to injure Chromius
and were worsted by him, there can be no doubt; else the myth would have
no point. And the emphatic prominence given to the dual number of the
beasts in 1. 44
buraa'icri boiovs av\eP(OP
renders it probable that the foes crushed by Chromius were also a pair.
Assuming the correctness of the reading which I have printed in the text,
with some confidence, in 1. 46
dyxopivois be % pop. os,
order; (a) the infant Heracles, answering
to 0, cf. vv. 25 and 43; (&) Amphi-
tryon, beholding his expectations re-
versed, cf. v. 19 &rrcu' and v. 55 fora;
this corresponds to (2); and (c) Tiresias
prophesying the future victories and re-
wards of Heracles (cf. v. 14 with v. 61);
this answers to the promise of Zeus.
1 This responsion was noticed by Mez-
ger, see last note.6
NEMEAN L
we have a special note of the application of the story to the personal history
of the victor.
That rivals of Pindar took part in disparaging Chromius is perhaps
indicated by the words irakiyy\a>(r(rov prjaiv dyycXav 6i<rav. The rare
adjective 7rdklyy\co(T<rov may be an allusion to certain pedantic words or
yX<5(ro-ai which those rivals affected; just as	in 1. 25 may be an
allusion to their studied rules of art. And perhaps we should not be far
astray in interpreting the two snakes as Simonides and his nephew
Bacchylides. There is reason to suppose that about the year 474 some
intrigue was carried on against Pindar by these two poets, and it may well
have been that Chromius, zealously espousing the interests of his friend,
foiled their schemes1.
But Pindar is more to Chromius even than Amphitryon was to Heracles ;
he is a true prophet as well as a friend, and thus it becomes necessary
to supplement Amphitryon by the ‘true prophet5 Tiresias. And now we
understand the reference to the prophetic gift in II. 27, 28.
The utterance of Tiresias enables us to see still further. He foretells
that Heracles is destined to slay many workers of iniquity both on the dry
land and on the ‘ monstrous deep 5, and declares that he will give a draught
of death for drink to those who walk in the ways of crooked envy ; he
foretells moreover the battle with the giants on the plain of Phlegra. The
language in this prophecy is clearly meant to be an answering echo to
the words in which Chromius5 victory over the envious was described.
‘ The man who walketh with crooked envy5 (64, 65)
(tvv ir\ayt(p—Kopa arrcixovra
characterises those cunning detractors, who are opposed2 * * (1. 25) to ‘the man
who walketh in straight paths 5,
tv cvdeiais 68ois orflxovra.
And as smoke is quenched by water, so the envious are borne down by
a draught of death. And again as the Gods ‘affront5 the Giants, so
the good friends of Chromius ‘affront5 his disparagers—this echo being
metrically punctual:
25, avriov—beginning the last line of second strophe
68, avTiafafnv—beginning the last line of fourth antistrophos.
1 Prof. Jebb in his essay on Pindar
(Journal of Hellenic Studiesy in. p. 163)
suggests such an allusion in the First
Pythian (474 B.C.). Referring to 1. 45
fkiropai—d/xevoaad’ dvrtovs, and 1. 85
Kpiooitiv yap oUrippov <p0ovos he writes:
‘The tone of this and other passages is
(to my mind) not that of a jealous man,
but of one who is maintaining an atti-
tude of defence against calumny; and it
is difficult to resist the impression that,
at this time, Pindar had been the object
of some hostile intrigue at Hiero5s court,
which he associated with the desire of
Simonides to advance the fortunes of a
young kinsman more distinguished by
diligence than by originality ’.
2 So Mezger, p. 106, but he does not
notice the responsion dvrlov—&vTiafa<nv.INTRODUCTION
7
Moreover the reference to Heracles’ victories on ‘the dryland’ and ‘on the
sea’ might remind Chromius of his own land and sea battles, not indeed
expressly referred to in this hymn, but mentioned in another ode written
by Pindar in his honour, the Ninth ‘ Nemean’: 1. 43,
7roXXa fjitv iv kqvlo. xipacd, ra yhrovi novrco.
But the vision of Tiresias looks forward still further to the apotheosis of
the hero and his marriage with Hebe; and the hymn ends with this vision of
a state which we call bliss, and the Greeks called darjros oXftos. ‘ Moreover
he declared that Heracles should win a meed passing rich for his great
labours, even an everlasting rest and unbroke7i peace, in a fortunate habita-
tion; and that having received Hebe, ever fair, for a bedmate, and having
held high nuptial feast, he would be well content with a holy abode in
the home of Zeus.’
Here, and again, as we shall see, in the Tenth ‘Nemean’, Pindar makes
the marriage of Heracles and Hebe the type of supreme happiness ; and in
both cases the supreme happiness typified is that which an Olympic victory
confers. For this is the meaning of the prophecy1. As Tiresias foretells
the winning of an Olympian bride by Heracles, so Pindar foretells the
winning of an Olympic wreath by Chromius. Of this signification there are
proofs. We find in 1. 70 (second line of fourth epode)
acrvxLw Kaparcov peyaXcov noivav,
corresponding to
iv nopv(f)ais dperav peyaXcus,
in 1. 34 (second line of second epode)2. In Pindar’s view, the Kopvcfrdi pcydXai
for men like Chromius were victories at Olympia ; and this is suggested
by the occurrence of Kopv<f)cus in the lines on Sicily, whose people had often
felt the touch of ‘ the golden Olympic olive leaves ’.
An artful reminiscence of the first lines of the ode establishes the truth of
this interpretation. The note of rest, lightly struck in the suggested picture
of Alpheus in the arms of the ‘lovely’ nymph Ortygia,
dpnv€vpa at pvov *AX(f>€Ov
Kkuvav 2vpaico(r<rav SaXos 'Oprvyia,
1 Mezger refers it to ‘ die schliessliche
Aufnahme auf die Inseln der Seligen’.
Leopold Schmidt thinks that a reference
to a possible marriage of Chromius is
intended, which might seem to be con-
firmed by the circumstance that the gift
of Sicily to Persephone, mentioned in an
earlier part of the ode, was supposed to
be et’s dvaKaXvTTTrjpLa. Dissen finds the
foretold ‘rest’ in a placida vita: ‘Fruitur
Chromius ut Hercules post labores ex-
antlatos placida vita ludicrorum certa-
minum summis coronis ornatus I
submit that my interpretation alone
explains satisfactorily the connexion of
the opening and the closing lines of the
ode.
2 Mezger notices this (p.'in). He
also observes that the hymn, beginning
with apwvevpa crepvov closes with vepvbv
dopov.8
NEMEAN I,
is reiterated in the full, sounding description of the rest of Heracles in
heaven, in the arms of the ‘lovely ’ Hebe—
oXftiois ev dcofjiaari) 8e£dfi€vov OaXepav "Hfiav aKotrip kcu ydfLov
daurai/ra, nap At Kpoviba crepvov aiinjaeiv crradpov.
Thus the rest of Heracles, recalling the repose of Alpheus, bears our thoughts
to Olympia, where Chromius hoped to win a wreath of olive leaves, the
highest honour in the Greek world of those days, and which Pindar often
compares to gold. It is suggested that Chromius too, like Heracles, may
perhaps set up an ‘everlasting rest’.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
VV. I — 5.	--V/— vy-vy —
VV. 6—7*	“ww-wv; — vy
— vy--— vy vy — w vy — A | “ vy vy — vy vy — — |
— vy---wMy-v o — A “ v--------vy— A (21)
----—	—-----vy — A • ~ vy — “ — u u — vy ^y — • j
— vy----vy-----vy-----vy — A (2l)
Thus the strophe falls into two peyedrj of equal length, each of which is
made up of three smaller peyedij, in mesodic symmetry : thus,
	9—3—9=21	
	00 1 Vyi 1 00 II to	
	Epode.	
V. I.	A. CO vy	vy		 vy vy — vy vy — * — vy — A	(9)
V. 2.	B. G. — vyvy — vyvy — vyvy — — — vy — — — vy — •	(8))
	f£. ^		(2)
v. 3.	(a'. — vy vy — vy vy — vy vy — — — vy —	vy		(8)1
V. 4.	A'. — vy — • — vy vy — • — vy — • — • — vy — A	(9)

y •
This is an example of the tripartite mesodos. Like the epode itself, the
mesode of the epode is divided mesodically.
As I accept the reading of the mss. iv crx^pn L 69, I have to deviate
slightly from the arrangement of M. Schmidt (which practically coincides
with that of Rossbach-Westphal and J. H. Schmidt) by making AA' consist
of 9 instead of 8 feet.
The rhythm of this ode is ‘ dactylo-epitritic ’; the mood was Dorian.NEMEONIKAI A'.
XPOMIQi AITNAIfi*
innois.
y,AfjL7rv€Vfjui aefivov ’A\<j>€ovy	<rrp. a.
tcXeivav Xvpafcocradv Oakos 'Oprvyla,
I. afiirveu|Aa crcpvov *AX<|>€ov] The
choice of apwvevpa is a Pindaric felicity.
The word expresses the mythical identity
of the fountain Arethusa with a ‘spout’
of the river Alpheus, and at the same
time conveys the poetical application that
Alpheus 4 rested ’ in Ortygia after the toil
of his journey under seas. avbirvevpa.,
which is not the same as avairvorj, must
mean, according to the analogy of words of
like formation, ‘that which is exhaled, ex-
halation, breath respired’; the fountain
in Ortygia, with which Ortygia is almost
identified, is literally the breath exhaled
by Alpheus. We may translate Breath
of the holy rest of A Ipheus. Perhaps <sepvov
suggested the adjective in Milton’s
Divine Alpheus, who by secret sluice
Stole under seas to meet his Arethuse.
The legend which connected Alpheus
and Arethusa may be a younger form of
the legend which connected Alpheus and
Artemis. See Roscher’s Lexikon der
griechischen und romischen Mythologies
article Alpheios by H. W. Stoll.
The huntress nymph Arethusa was
loved by the hunter Alpheus, and to
avoid his wooing she fled to Ortygia
and became a spring. Alpheus, through
a sort of sympathetic charm, was trans-
formed into a river, which flowed beneath
the sea and united its waters with the
spring. Pausanias v. 7, 2. A somewhat
different form is given to the myth
in Ovid, Metam. v. 752 sqq., where
Artemis is introduced as protecting her
nymph Arethusa. Under the legendary
connexion of Ortygia with Elis lies the
fact that Eleans from the neighbourhood
of Olympia took part in the colonization
of Syracuse and brought with them the
cult of Artemis Potamia, who was so
widely worshipped in the Peloponnesus
(in the neighbourhood of the river Al-
pheus under the special name of Artemis
’AXtpeiala, ’A\<f>elov<ra or ’A\<f>€uovta).
2. OaXos] There were five parts of
Syracuse (Ortygia, Achradina, Neapolis,
Epipolae, and Tyche) and OaXos expresses
the fact that Ortygia is one of them. But it
expresses much more, and is not synony-
mous with tpvos, just as it is not synony-
mous with plfa. The notion of bloom
is uppermost, and 4 branch ’ is conse-
quently an inadequate rendering; trans-
late fair branch of glorious Syracuse. In
the last lines of the ode Pindar will come
back to the note which he strikes in the
opening verses, peace and beauty after
labour; even as <repvov <sra.0p.bv (1. 72)
recalls apwevpa. oepvov, so OaXephv "HjSaj/
(1. 71) fair Hebe recalls OaXos 'Oprvyia
(1. 2). It is worth noticing that when
the poet speaks of Libya (Pyth. ix. 8) as
plfav a.irdpov rplrav he adds the epithet
OaWousav.IO
NEMEONIKAI A'.
Sefiviov 'AprepuSos,
Aakov KaaiyvrjTa, tredev ahveirrj^
t>fjLvo\? opp^curai Bepuev	5
alvov aeWoiroBcou pueyav ittttcov, Zrjvos AlrvaLov X**PLV
apfia 8’ orpvvei Xpo/xlov Ne/iea O' epypbaaiv vucafyopow iyiccbpuov
%€vf;(U /acXo?.
3.	8l|tvu>v ’ApWfuSos] Couch of Ar-
temis. In the second Pythian Ode (1. 7)
Pindar uses the words 7rora/das %8os ’Ap-
rlpudos, habitation of Artemis queen of
rivers, of Ortygia. Here he chooses 8i/x-
vtop bed, to harmonize with the note of
rest struck in the first line. Ortygia is a
resting-place for Alpheus, for Artemis,—
and for Chromius. It is usual to com-
pare 12 615 where the nymphs are said to
have their beds, evva/, in Sipylus.
The worship of Artemis as a goddess
of rivers, lakes, springs and marshes (iro-
TCL/ila, \i/JLvaia, i\da) was widely spread
in the Peloponnese, especially in Arcadia;
she was a ‘ Naturgottin von ahnlichem,
nur allgemeinerem Wesen als die Nym-
phen der Berge, Fliisse und Bache *
(Article Artemis, in Roscher’s Lexikon,
p. 560). In Elis she was brought into
relation with the river god Alpheus and
called after his name. * At Letrinoi
where the Alpheios flows into the sea
Artemis Alpheiaia had a temple, and the
inhabitants related as cause of its building
that Alpheios inflamed with love for
Artemis, and unable to attain to his
wishes by persuasion or entreaties, re-
solved to resort to violence ; but Artemis
smeared the faces of herself and her
nymphs with mud at Letrinoi (where she
celebrated with them a nocturnal feast)
so that Alpheios retired unable to re-
cognise her’ (see Pausanias vi. 22, 5).
‘According to another legend Alpheios
pursued Artemis to the island of Ortygia,
where she had a temple as Alpheiaia.’
(II. W. Stoll, article Alpheios, in Ros-
cher’s Lexikon, p. 257.)
4.	AaXov Kcuriyvijra] Sister of Delos,
not literally, but spiritually, as sharing
with Delos the favour of Artemis.
<r^0€v] From thee, the second syllable
-dev having its full ablative force, op-
p.a<r0ai could hardly be constructed with
the simple genitive.
dSucmjs] Used of persons; e.g. i)8v-
Itteiai Mowai, Hes. TJi. 965; Niarwp
ijdveTr^St A 248 ; advenr} "0wpov, Pind.
Nem. VIII. 21 ; and of things personified,
as here; e.g. Olymp. x. 93 advew^s re
\bpa, Sophocles 0. T. 151 adveiris <pdn
(of the oracle of Apollo), adveirrjs vp.vos
is the hymn that speaketh sweetly (with
the special sense of speaking in verse ;
far) = verses).
5,	6. 0l|i€V k.t.X.] To render high
praise to the storm-swift steeds, and to
pleasure Aetnean Zeus. Both Zeus of
Aetna (the city afterwards governed by
Chromius) and the victorious steeds are
honoured by the hymn. xdpLV> a grateful
service, is in apposition with dtvov and is
not to be confounded with its quasi-
prepositional use in Pyth. ill. 95 (Aios
xdptv, by grace of Zeus) and other places.
Olpev means to set or establish; but
see below note on 1. 59. . Aetnean Zeus
is mentioned in Olymp. vi. 96.
7. But the car of Chromius and Netnea
impel me to harness a song of praise for
deeds of victory. The exploits of Chromius
are the car to which the song, as a steed,
is yoked. In Pyth. x. 65 r&5’
&p/JLa Hiepldtop rerpaopov, the metaphor is
different; the ode is compared to the car
of the Muses. It is a characteristic usage
of Pindar to apply to the work of the
poet expressions appropriate to the ex-
ploits which he is celebrating. 'ipyna<ru>NEMEAN /.
II
apxai	fiefSkiivTai 6e&v	dvr. a.
tceivov avv dvSpds Scufioviat,9 dperal9.
(B ty/iaac) is stronger than 2/ryo«, and is,
as Dissen remarks, ‘sollemne apud Pinda-
rum de certaminum labore viica<f>6pots
has a literal signification; Victory rides
in the chariot.
8. apxal 8i f&pXi|VT<u Octttv] The
difficulty, which has always been found
in these words, is due to the blending of
a metaphor with a somewhat uncommon
construction. Pindar often conceived his
hymns as works of visible art, plastic or
architectural, statues or temples; thus in
Pyth. vii. 4 he speaks of laying the
corner-stone of songs, Kpqwid* aoi8av (3a-
\£<t6at, and in the opening lines of Olymp.
vi. he works out the metaphor of a
palace with some elaboration. Here he
only suggests the metaphor by the use of
pipXyvTai. Why, it may be asked, did
he abstain from writing Kprjirls (3£p\y)-
rai (as in Pyth. vii. 4 and IV. 138) and
choose the weaker word apxai? The
answer to this question involves the ex-
planation of apxai BeCov. apxopai is the
technical word for the opening invocation
of a hymn, and is regularly used with the
genitive. Thus in I 97
£v aoi pJkv	a£o 5’ ap^opai,
and in Nem. v. 25 (of the’Muses) Aids
apx6p£vcu. Somewhat boldly (not how-
ever more boldly than Attic prose writers
use <{>6{3os and such words with an ac-
cusative) Pindar has here transferred to
apx*i the construction of apxopat, and
apX0* (3£(3\7)vtoi Bedov is equivalent to
apxofievos Bedov (3dXkopuu KprjTrida aoidas.
Translate, First hymning the gods, and
withal the heroic excellences of that man
(Chromius), I have laid a foundation for
my song. It is impossible to give the
sense and at the same time preserve the
conciseness of the original, as we have
no word that conveys to an English ear
all that dpxv or apxofia 1 in connexion
with a hymn suggested to a Greek ear.
In translating Matthew Arnold’s lines
‘ First hymn they the Father
Of all things ;—and then
The rest of immortals,
The action of men’
dpxopai would be the word to use.
It should also be remembered that in
the Terpandric nomos the word apxa
had a special sense; it was the first chief
division of the composition, as distin-
guished from the dp^aXos and oippayts.
The gods with whose mention Pindar
has ‘begun’, in the first strophe are
Aetnean Zeus, Artemis and the river
deity Alpheus. He has united with their
names the victory of Chromius, and this
union of ‘the action of mefi’ with the
praise of the immortals might seem to
require an explanation. Such an ex-
planation is contained in the epithet
Saipovfais, heroic, half divine; the 8al-
poves being an intermediate class between
gods and men, as is clearly stated for
example in the Apology of Plato.
Other explanations of this passage
have been put forward, and even emen-
dations have been proposed. Dissen
translates ‘initia autem horum factorum
jacta sunt a diis una cum viri illius sin-
gularibus virtutibus ’, interpreting apxal
Bedov as ‘(initia) divina, a diis profecta’.
We may confidently hold that the words
could not admit this meaning. Mr Fen-
nell’s view almost coincides with mine in
sense, but not exactly; he takes “the
genitive Bedov as ‘ Kara ovveaiv ’, dpx&i
{3£(3\tivtcu being regarded as equivalent
to ‘ I have begun ’ Dawes read Be<p,
and Mingarelli proposed (3£(3\tivt' £k
Bedov, both of which give an inferior sense
to the reading of the mss. and are from
a critical point of view highly improbable,
as no reason for the assumed corruption
is apparent.
The note of a scholiast is worth quoting12
NEMEONIKAI A'.
can 8’ iv evTVyjia	IO
7ravho1;La$ aKpoV fieyaXcov 8’ aeOXtov
MoZtra fi€fiva<T0ai (f>t\€c.
tnrelpe vvv aryXatav nva vaatp, Tav '0\vp,irov Bearrora^
Zei)? eSco/cev Qepfrefyova, Karevevaev re Fot xalrcus, apiGTevoiaav
evicdpTrov 'xdovo9
in support of the explanation which I
have adopted and which is practically
that of von Leutsch and Mezger :
apx*l ed rod iyKUpdov. tovto 8£ \lyet
did, to avd Oeov Trjs ’Aprepudos KaTrjpxOai
wore apxds ra irpoolpua ttjs tpdrjs avrov
\£yeiv. £6os 82 IItvddptp deoh avdwTeiv ra
OWUMTOVV TOtS dvdptbvots £ KITOV otipiCV Cl.
I think however that 6e£>v may include
Zeus, if not Alpheus, as well as Artemis.
io—12. In success is the attainment
unto perfect glory; and great contests the
Muse delighteth to remember. Here ev-
Tvxla refers primarily to victory in games;
but as it generally bears a wider meaning
and as d£0\(ov may bear a wider meaning,
we need not, in translation, limit the
words of Pindar to athletic contests;
they would be true, for example, of
the labours of Heracles, ttavdo^la is a
Pindaric formation and may be compared
to Travdaiaia, TravdrfpUa ; as travdaioia is a
banquet at which nothing fails, iravdoi-la
is glory to which nothing is wanting (not
world-wide glory). A similar coinage of
Pindar is irayyKuxrala (Olymp. II. 87).
a.Kpov vavdo^ias is the eminence of perfect
praise, which is won by success celebrated
in song.
13. <nrcipl vvv] mss. tyeipe vvv, Beck
and Hermann restored aireipl vvv, which
is palaeographically almost identical.
Compare ereipe with cneipe. It is
clear that cnveipe was read by the scholiast
who wrote £ kit e pure Tolvvvt iS Move a, Kal
<tteipe XapnrpoTtpra, Tiva Trj vijecp rrj St-
KeXlq,.
The usual interpretation that Pindar
calls upon the Muse to scatter (spargere)
praises, or shed lustre on the island may
be right. One might translate perhaps
Fling then some thing of beauty over the
island—remembering of course that vdetp
is the dative of the interested person.
The idea of spreading ‘broad rumour’
may be implied in (nreipe, but it certainly
is not prominent. Editors always com-
pare tiv S’ adveirijs re \bpa y\vKbs r*
auXos dvcnraacrei x^PLV {01. X. 94), but the
reading there is very uncertain, as the
MSS. vary between dvandureei, avavTd<r<rei
and dvairkdetrei. A better parallel is Nem.
VIII. 39 popupdv S’ iwunrelptov ahiTpois.
A new suggestion as to the meaning
of oireipe will be found in the Additional
Note on p. 27; but see also note on 1. 18
below.
d-yXatav Tivd] The indefinite pronoun
is frequently used to express the writer’s
consciousness that his words are unusual
or metaphorical,—that he is taking a
liberty with language. Brightness is
the idea dominant in dy\aia, which re-
minds us a little of Fame’s ‘glist’ring
foil’ in Lycidas. ‘Song’ or ‘praise’ or
laus illustris is an inadequate translation.
14. $cp<rc^ovq.] Zeus gave Acragas
(Agrigentum) as an ‘unveiling gift’ {els
rd avaKcikvTTT'tipia) to Persephone, and
hence that city is called by Pindar in
the Twelfth Pythian Ode (1. 2) $€p<re-
<povas £dos. The donation was afterwards
extended to the whole island. Pherse-
phona, with double aspirate, is doubtless
the original form of the name of the
maiden of Enna, and attempts to deter-
mine the etymology should start with it.
Observe that 0i is digammated in
Pindar, cp. below 1. 16.
KaT^vcwfr ri Fot xa^Tais] And shookNEMEAN I	13
SitccXiav irUipav opOooaetv /eopixfiats iroXmv atfyveaW iir. a. 15
do7ra(T€ Se h^povLcov iroXkfiov fiva<jTr)pd F01 yaXKGV'rkos
Xaov i7T7rai'Xjnov 0afid Brj teal ’OXvfiiridScov <f>vXXoi? iXaiav
Xpvaiot,?
fivyBkvTa. iroXXwv iirkfiav tcaipov ov yfrevSec ftaXwv.
his locks in token tmto her that he would
exalt Sicily to be the richest soil on
the fruitful earth, with cities supreme
in wealth. Compare A, 524 K€<j>a\rj
Karavebcropai.
J dpwrrcvourav.. .irfoipav] wUipavdefines
the quality in which Sicily excels. x^ov^
depends on the comparative idea implied
in dpicrrebct.
15.	Kopv^ais ttoXCcdv a<f>V€ats] KOpV-
<f>ats and dfpveais stand to each other in
the same relation as dpumbourav and
wieipau; cities unmatched in wealth. This
use of Kopvtpii, head, occurs below 1. 34 and
in Olymp. I. 13 bphrwv Kopvcpas dperav airo
iraadv : it may be illustrated by our word
‘chief’ (chef, caput). In Olymp. xm.
hi, the poet speaks of the cities made
beautiful with wealth at the base of high-
peaked Aetna, red O' \nd Atrvas v\f/i\6<pov
kolWIttXovtoi iroXies. But perhaps Kopv<f>cus
(especially taken in connexion with 6p-
Odxreiv) may be intended to suggest also
the lofty situation of the Sicilian cities;
so Mezger ‘die Stadte Siciliens lagen
grosstentheils auf steilen Anhohen’.
16.	KpovCwv] In Homer KpovTw,
Kpovtovos but KpovTwvos, Kpoviwva; in
Pindar Kpovlwv and KpovXwv, see Nem.
IX. 19 and 28; cp. Tyrtaeus, Ei)vopia
2, 1 (Bergk’s numbering) aiWin ydp Kpo-
vicw Ka\\i<TT€<pdvov TrSais "Hprjs.
iroXlpov pvcumrjpa] Enamoured of
war, war-wooing. In the Twelfth Py-
thian (1. 24) the Many-headed Mood
(to\vkI^>o\os vbpoi) invented by Athene
is called a glorious lover of games, ebtcXea
\a<xr<rb<av pvaoTrjp’ ay&vwv, and in the
Second Isthmian (1. 5) we read of ’A<f>po-
Siras ebOpbvov pvaareipav adUrrav bicdopav.
It is certain that pvaarrjp and pvdcreipa
are the same word as parijar^p a suitor,
whether pvdopat, pvrjaTijp and purjarebto
be originally connected with ptpvrjaKto,
pv-qprj &c. or not. We can hardly
hesitate to assume however that the
Greek, whether rightly or wrongly, men-
tally associated /mjorijp with pvripwv,
especially in such a phrase as iroKtpov
fwaarrip, and we might attempt to re-
produce this association by rendering a
people that turns to thoughts of bronze-clad
war. Such a rendering will be still more
appropriate in the passage quoted from
the Second Isthmian: the sweet summer
season which turns to thoughts of Love.
XoXkcvtIos] A Pindaric adjective, oc-
curring also in Nem. xi. 35. Another
Pindaric epithet aiSapoxdpprjs is applied
in the Second Pythian to the steeds and
warriors of Sicily.
17.	fonraixpov] of horsemen, lit. fight-
ing on horseback. The cavalry of Sicily
were famous, hnraixpos is also, as far
as we know, a word framed by Pindar.
Oapa 81) Kal...pix&vra] w&° full of ten
too felt the touch of the golden leaves of
Olympian olives, that is whose children
often won victories at Olympia. Some
MSS. have 0* apa, but Oapa is the best
attested reading and is indubitably right.
The old idea that 0apd might mean ‘ to-
gether’ as well as ‘often’ and was in fact
a collateral form of apa, was exploded
by Dr Ingram, Hermathena, vol. 11. p.
217—227. Sri here has its regular em-
phasizing force. For this use of pxxBkvra.
(characteristically Pindaric) compare
Nem. IV. 21 Kadpeioi viv avdeai plyvvov,
crowned him with flowers.
18.	ttoXXwv £irlf3av Kcupov ov ijrcvSci
PaXwv] These words have caused con-H
NEMEONIKAI A'.
earav S’ iir avXeiai? Ovpcus	arp. /3\
av&pos (f>iXo^€Lvov KaXa peXiropevo^^	20
evda pot appoStov
siderable difficulty to editors, who are
divided as to the construction of Kaipbv,
some (notabljrMr Fennell) taking it with
paXuv, while others, including Dissen and
Mezger, regard it as the object of irripav.
Dissen translates multarum rerum tetigi
commode oblatam copiam non loquutus
mendacia; Mezger ‘ich habe Gelegenheit
zu vielem Lobe gefunden, ohne dass ich
doch mit einem Liigenworte geschleudert
hatte’; Mr Fennell on the other hand ‘I
have entered upon a copious theme, having
aimed at moderation with a statement of
simple truth’ (inadvertently rendering
Kaipov pdXutv as if it were Kaipov paXiav).
If it were not for the difficulties which
have been discovered and discussed by
•the commentators, the sentence would
appear clear and simple enough. We
should instinctively take Kaipov with tto\-
Xujv and therefore with iiripav, especially
bearing in mind such passages as Cov
tyarai Kaipov didobs (.Pyth. I. 57), and
ioiKora Kaipov 6Xpov (.Nem. Vli. 58);
iTrifirjvai Kaipov to alight on an occasion
would seem a natural expression (for
iiripalvio, alight on, with accusative see
Liddell & Scott); and we should take ov
rf/ebdei paX&v, casting no falsehoods, with-
out introducing the idea that Pindar
imagines himself shooting at a mark.
This is the interpretation adopted by
Dissen . and Mezger, and it is the only
one that gives pertinent sense.
Translate: I have found meet matter
for many praises without flinging one
false word,
Pindar has touched on various dis-
tinctions of Sicily; she was a gift of
Zeus to Persephone, her soil is fertile,
her cities are wealthy, her children are
warriors, and Olympian victors. There
is thus much matter for praise, and, he
adds, all the praise is true.
I confess that the words ov xf/ebdei
fiakuv cast doubt on the somewhat bold
explanation of o-Treipe (1. 13) offered in
the Note on p. 27. On the whole I am
disposed to think that Pindar bids his
Muse fling gleaming words in praise of
Sicily, and then, when she has glorified
the island, assures his hearers that the
praises which she has flung are not mere
glittering falsehoods.
19.	foray 8* eir* avXctais Ovpais] /
stood at the door of the courtyard; that
is, I approached the vestibule; compare
Isthmian VII. 2 irapa irpodvpov iibv ave-
yeipirio kuj/mov, also Pyth. III. 78 Kovpai
Trap* i/xov irpodvpov nlXirovrai. So Dissen
‘ accessi ad aulicas fores, ad vestibulum
ChromiV, and Mezger ‘ich trat an das
Hofthor ’. Harpocration sub voce explains
avXeia dvpa as 17 cbro r rjs odov TrpwTTj 06pa
rrjs oiKias (Dissen). dvpai, a door is like
tc6Xai, a gate.
20.	icaXd peXiropcvos] In Pythian
III. 78, Marpi tclv Kovpai trap’ ipov irpodv-
pov fiIXirovrai 0ap.a aefivav Oeov, we have
fiiXTrofiax with an accusative of the burden
of the song, like the active pdXTru). And
so here it is better to take KaXa as a direct
accusative than as an adverb,—celebrating
a fair theme in choral song. The genitive
dvdpos (piXo^dvov (that is, Chromius) de-
pends on 06pais.
Bergk conjectures, but wisely does not
read, KXia. (1) KaXa gives excellent
sense; (2) were KXda the true reading,
it was too familiar a word to suffer
corruption.
21.	dppdStov Sciirvov] Properly ban-
quet due, and so equivalent to generous
banquet, compare the Homeric /xevoeiKta
datra. This use of appuidtos is illustrated by
£elvi ap/JLofpvra, generous entertainment,
in Pythian iv. 129 (‘epulas convenientes
non parcas’ Dissen).NEMEAN 1.
15
Sebrvov K€Koapr)T(U, 8 a pa S’ aXKohairwv
ovtc aireiparob Sopot
tvTi' \e\oyxe Be pep(f>opevoL<; iaXovs vScop nairv& <f)ep€iv
Mezger gives us the alternative of‘ein
geziemendes * or ‘ ein fertiges Mahl ’, with-
out deciding which is preferable. He
suggests the latter rendering (which to
me seems impossible) because a scholiast
writes irpoxeipos nat appoSios in elucida-
tion of iroi/xov alvov in Olymp. VI. 18.
But the fact that iroifios is (rightly) para-
phrased in that passage by * at hand and
due* does not prove that dpfwdtos, due,
fitting, could be equivalent to ‘fertig’.
22.	Oapa 8* aXXoSainov] and ofteti
are his halls visited by outlanders. In
another ode, the Ninth Nemean, composed
in honour of Chromius, the poet refers to
his hospitality by mentioning that the
door was too narrow to admit the multi-
tude of guests, i-elvwv vevUavrai 0bpai
a- 2).
Bergk, in order to connect this sentence
more closely with the following words in
lines 24, 25, has proposed 0d/xa 5* ix&odo-
7ruv (0dp.a paroxyton for dp.a; but see
above, note on l. 17). Hartung proposed
KeKoo’fJL’qrcu 0’ oi/xa d\
23.	OVK diT€tpaTOi] Litotes. For airel-
pdros compare 01. XI. 18 p.q8' airdparov
kclXQv ; in active sense, unadventurous,
Isth. ill. 48 (iv. 30). (In Olymp. vi. 54,
the MSS. vary between a Tretpart# and
airetparry, the words being
KltcpVTTTo yap ffxotvy Parly r iv direipdrip,
where the metre requires that the pen-
ultimate syllable of the verse should be
short. Boeckh and Dissen take airelpdros
as equivalent to dveLpaoros, untried, and
so of a thicket, dense; compare Oav/xaros,
0av/j.a<rr6s. Bergk reads direiplTip.)
24.	XAoyx€ 8^ pivots k.t.X.]
But he hath won good friends to quell as
with water the smoke of envious cavillers.
The following considerations are, it
seems to me, decisive in favour of the
meaning elicited by Hermann and Mat-
thiae, whose interpretations differ only in
a minor detail. (1) The impersonal con-
struction of XAoyxe which underlies other
explanations is at least doubtful; the
personal construction is regular and occurs
in Pindar 01. 1. 53 aicipdeia XiXoyx^v
0a/uva Kaicayopos (though there the verb
is used in a somewhat different sense).
(2) Here especially the context seems to
require the personal construction, as
affording a closer and more natural con-
nexion with the preceding sentences. The
generous host has won by his hospitality
good friends. (3) A remark of Plutarch
(Frag, xxiii. 2) that ‘envy is compared
by some to smoke’ (rov <f>0ovov Zvioi r<£
Kairv<p eiKagovoiv), whether he had this
passage in mind or not, strongly confirms
the opinion that Kairvlp here, occurring in
close connexion with fxe/iKpofxlvots, means
the smoke of envy. This passage was
adduced by Hermann in support of his
explanation. (4) The collocation /ue/*0o-
fiivois iaXovs vdcop Kawv<p strongly suggests
that the i<r\ol are pitched against the
fien<f>ofi€voi as vdwp against Kairvos; whence
we infer (a) that iaXovs is not governed
by fie/Mpoficvoi, (b) that Kairvos represents
the quality or work of the detractors, not
of the good.
The general sense then is: Chromius
has won for himself noble friends, who
defend him against cavillers and quench
their envy. In this sense Hermann and
Matthiae interpreted the passage, but
their analyses of the sentence are some-
what different. Hermann, followed by
Dissen, takes it thus: Nactus est (hospitii
liberalitate) viros probos adversus obtrecta-
tores, ad aquam fumo obviam ferendam.
Matthiae (Seebode’s Archiv fiir Philo-
logie, v. ii., fasc. 4, p. 681, quoted by
Dissen) takes fiefupo/iivois, not with X^-
\oyxcv icrXots, but with dvrlov tfdpciv, the16
NEMEONIKAI A'.
avriov. ri^vat 8' erepoov erepcu*
tTTei'XpvTa pudpvaaOac <f)va.
XPV
8'
€V
evdeiais oSoi9
25
order being XAotxc*' ecrXobs, p.ep.<f>op.bvois
08<ap avriov <f>ipeiv (uawep) Kairvip. Dissen
objects to Matthiae’s view, on the ground
that the natural order of the words is
neglected and that it is intolerable to
have to supply the comparative conjunc-
tion w<rirep. I am disposed to agree with
Bergk that Matthiae comes nearer the
truth than Hermann. That p.ep.<l>op.4vois
alone with XbXoyx^v could mean against
cavillers, I cannot believe; the so-called
dativus incommodi is sufficiently elastic,
but it would not at its tensest meet a case
like this. We have only to suppose the
first three words standing in a clause by
themselves, and we see that Hermann is
wrong and that the case of p.epL<f>op.lvois
is really determined by the subsequent
words wriov <f>dpeiv. So far Matthiae is
right, but he need not have introduced
wtnrep: Pindar is using a metaphor rather
than a simile. Without metaphor he might
have written XbXoyxcv ioXovs, fjLe/Kpo/xlvujv
<pdov(p avnafav. In the metaphor, 08(op
avriov <f>tpeiv takes the place of avriafciv
and K(nrv<p of <f>Bov(p; and the poet gains
an elegant verbal antithesis by writing,
instead of the genitive p.ep<f>op.4v(ovy the
dative p.ep.fpop.tvois, a strict dativus incoin-
modi (‘their smoke for cavillers’).
A totally different interpretation, which
is at first sight attractive, has been sug-
gested by von Leutsch and is accepted
by Mezger. Observing that water poured
on smoke increases it these scholars con-
clude that 08cop Kairv(p <f>tpeiv avriov was a
Greek proverb corresponding to our
‘pouring oil on the fire’, and translate
thus: ‘ It is the lot of those who detract
from the noble to carry water to quench
smoke’, that is to increase the glory which
they would fain disparage. Strabo, ix.
443, QerraXiav Xaxciv AevKaXivvi is quoted
to support \t\oyxc with the dative, but
Herwerden both suspects the reading in
Strabo, and rightly takes avrjp as the
subject of XeXoyxe (Pindaricay p. 24).
Considerations already adduced tell a-
gainst Mezger’s view, and the only argu-
ment in its favour falls to the ground
through the simple reflection that though
a small quantity of water poured on a
smoking fire causes the vapour to spread
about, a sufficiently large quantity will
extinguish it.
But Mezger may be judged almost out
of his own mouth, and here we come to
another argument which supports the
explanation adopted by the present editor.
According to the Pindaric usage, which
Mezger has the credit of having discovered,
avriov in 1. 25 corresponds to dvrid^oxnv
in 1. 68, both words occupying the same
position in the same verse of strophe
and antistrophos 8' respectively. By this
device Pindar indicates a connexion in
thought between the two passages, and
the connexion is patent. The good men
oppose the cavillers as the gods and
Heracles oppose the giants. This cir-
cumstance confirms the view that the
iaXol are the subject of avriov (pepeiv.
The next note will develop Pindar’s
meaning further.
25. T^xvai 8* cWpa>v /c.r.X.] Arts are
divers; but it is meet that a man should
walk in straight paths, and use in strife
his native vigour. For might of limb
worketh {manifests itself) by action ; and
wit—in those to whom it is given by nature
to foresee the future—by counsels.
The opposition of born talent, <f>va, to
art and acquired learning is a favourite
theme of Pindar. He touches on it in
the Second Olympian Ode, where he
attacks Korax and Teisias; 1. 86 <ro<f>b$ 6
ttoXXA dd<bs <pvqi’ /xadovres 8b X&fipoi way-
yXbnralqLy /cbpaices ws, aicpavra yapverov Aios
irpos opvL\a Belov, Wise is he who hath
much knowledge through native wit; butNEMEAN I.
17
out. /8'.
7rpaatrei yap epyq> fiev aOevos,
ftovXalcn Se <f>prjv iacropuevov irpolbelv,
it is through study that they twain clamor-
ously titter their lean notes, idly, like
crows against the divine bird of Zeus.
(Mr Verrall showed, from the dual yapv-
erop combined with the Pindaric paro-
nomasia Kbpaices, that Korax and Teisias
the Sicilian rhetors are alluded to. For
Xdppoi, loud, see note on Nem. vm. 46.)
Again in Olymp. ix. 1. 100, we read,
to Se <pv§ Kpdnarop airav iroXXol 8e
SiSa/crais
dv$p(Jjiro)v aperats kXIos
wpovaap dpiadat.
In the Second Pythian 1. 72 the ac-
complishments of the ape, which amuse
children, are contrasted with natural
ability;
Hadbv kcl\6s rot iridtov irapd rraialp
aid
KaXbs. 6 de '’PaSa/mpdvs ev irltrpayep
on <f>pepQp
t\ax€ KapTTOP dfld)/JL7)T0P, K.T.X.
where the purpose of introducing Rha-
damanthus, as I have pointed out
(Hermathena, vol. VI. p. 185), is the
suggestion that his name means pq.8l(o$
fiapddpwp.
Pindar himself provides us with a
means of elucidating to some extent the
present passage by the hint (contained in
aPTiop—dPTcdfaoip) that we are to take
part of the fourth antistrophos in con-
nexion with it. And it requires no in-
genuity to see that <nV rrXaylcp K&p(p orel-
Xopra (1. 64) him who walketh with
crooked envy is opposed to (‘ findet seinen
Gegensatz in’ Mezger) arelxopra ip ev-
ddais 0801s him who walketh in straight
paths ; and the icbpos of 1. 65 corresponds
to the Kairvbs of 1. 24. Thus the thought
is: the true and noble man, when he is
assailed by envious cavillers, who, because
they are envious, use crooked wiles (r^%-
pai), will not deviate from the straight
path but will oppose their adventitious
arts by his own inborn strength. So it
was that Heracles subdued those who
walked with crooked envy, and aided the
gods to overcome the envious giants.
In the first instance the poet is aiming
these shafts at enemies of Chromius; but
it would be quite in the manner of Pindar
to intend a side-blow at his own rivals ;
and this is suggested by riyyai 8’ iriptop
'irepai, see above, Introduction, p. 6. It
is possible that Pindar’s rivals, or literary
foes, may have been actually among the
detractors of Chromius.
26.	irpdwnrci] operates by, manifests
itself in. Zpyop is the adipos externalised,
and irpdaaei means the process. For
irpd<T<rcj = ago, ‘function’ Mr Fennell
compares TpaoobPTWP pLeXiwp in frag. 131,
I.	4 (ed. Bergk).
This verse refers to Chromius, whose
deeds prove his native strength.
27. PovXauri 8\	k.t.X.] These
words, I believe (with Welcker), refer to
the poet himself, not, as is generally
assumed, to Chromius. In this ode Pindar
is a prophet foretelling, under the cover
of myth, a glorious career for Chromius
and a fair close thereto. As Heracles
in the myth corresponds to Chromius,
Tiresias, who prophesies the greatness
and final apotheosis of Heracles, corre-
sponds to Pindar. And in the passage now
under consideration Pindar indicates this
by the words those to whom it is given to
foresee the future. For &rercu in this
sense—not quite the same as heart, but
suggesting continuity in time—compare
Isthm. in. 4 jieydXat. 5’ dperal tarots
’iiropraL.
The general connexion of thought in
II.	24—28 may be summed thus. We
must oppose envy and artifice by straight-
forwardness and native faculty, <pva. In
you, Chromius, this <f>va is adipos, in me
<pfdip, whereby I can foresee what is to be,
and can meet the cavillers by prophesying
your glorious future.
B.
2i8
NEMEONIKAI A'.
crvyyeves oh 67rerai.
*Ayrj<TiBdfiov nraiy creo S’ dpucfn rpoirco
twv re /cal t&v xprfaies.	30
oi5/c epauat 7roXvv iv fieyapcp ttXovtov /caTa/cpi>y}rai<z e^eiv,
a\V iovrcov ev re iraOelv /cal a/covorai	i^apKecov. /coival
yap epxovr ikTriSe?
29, 33. But in the compass of thy
character, O son of Agesidamus,
powers of using {fortunes) various gifts.
For	(somewhat like German bet)
compare Olymp. XIII. 37 deXfif/ d/*0’ evl,
i« the compass of one sun's race ; Pyth. v.
119 dvvatnv.. .iir 2py our iv afi(f>L re fiovXais
&X€lui puissance for the achievement of
deeds and in the scope of his counsels;
Nem. VI. 14 ovk apropos dp<j>l ttd\q,, i#
yfo/df of wrestling.
Ta Kal Ta] this and that, is a favourite
expression of Pindar and always means
divers things; according to the context,
the divers things may all be good, or some
may be good and others—Odrepa. Ob-
serve the following passages. Olymp. 11.
53 0 pdv xXouros aperais SedaidaXplvos
tpipei rcov re Kal rCov Kaipbv, wealth surely,
if tricked out with fair qualities (of its
possessor), giveth occasion (means) for
divers achievements. Pyth. v. 55 6 Bar-
rel/ 5’ &rerai xaXaids oX/Jos Hpjrav rd
Kal rd vipcov, irvpyos aareos, But the
ancient fortune of BcUtus' house abideth,
notwithstanding, allotting various bless-
ings, a tower of defence to the city.
(For frrerai compare above, note on
1. 27.) Pyth. VII. 20 <j>avrl ye pdv
ovreo Kev avdpl irappovlpav OdXXo 1-
<rav ebdatpovlav rd Kal rd <f>4pe<rdai,
Surely they say {ye italicises tpavrl) that
Happiness, when she thus abideth with a
man always in the fairness of her youth,
winneth divers things ; that is good and
bad, the bad being <f>06vo$, mentioned in
the previous line. [Dissen takes <p4peodai
here as equivalent to <p4peiv [<ajferre, and
so Mezger ‘ mit sich bringe ’); wrongly;
evdaipovLa does not bring <p06vos in her
train, but wins it (piperat in its regular
middle sense).] Isthm. iv. 52 Zeus rd
re Kal rd vkpei, Zeus distributes various
lots (good and bad).
With these passages in view I cannot
hesitate to disagree with the majority of
commentators, who made tGjv Kal rcov
refer to the epyov and (3ov\al mentioned
in the preceding verses. ‘In utraque
virtute uterisDissen; ‘Rath und That’,
Mezger ; and even Welcker, who rightly
refers fiovXats to Pindar, explains ‘tu
alteram habes, a04vos, alteram experiris,
jSouXds*. But it is quite gratuitous to
assign to rd Kal rd here a definite sense
which the expression bears nowhere else;
and especially in the light of the verses
quoted above from the Second Olympian
ode. Chromius’ character is such that he
can use well the various gifts of fortune,
wealth among the rest. The two follow-
ing lines, I think, make this explanation
certain.
31.	ovk Ipapai, k.t.\.] / love not to
keep great store of treasure hidden in the
palace, but of my abundance to make good
cheer and win a good name, contenting my
friends. From this defence of Chromius*
lavish hospitality, we may with some
probability conclude that one of the
charges brought against him by the cavil-
lers was prodigality. Observe that iradeiv
and axovoai are aorists: eft ird&x€LV would
mean to indulge in continual high living.
cv is carried on to ok over ai.
32.	covtwv] Such expressions as to
give of your abundance or xaPL£°lJ^vrl
irapeovrwv are familiar; iovrcov eu iradeiv
is the same construction in a passive
form. Dissen compares Theognis 1. 1009
rcov abrov Kredvcov eb 7ra<rx^fJL€V- The
genitive is akin to the partitive gen.; ifNEMEAN I
19
ttoXvttovoov avSpwv. iyoo S’ fH pa/eXeos dvre'XppLai 7Tpo<f>po-
v(o$f	inr. ft',
iv Kopv<f>ah aperav fieyaXai? ap^aiov orpvvcov Xoyov,
ft5?, inrel (nrXay'xy&v into puarepos avr'uca darjTav 69 aXyXav
nrah A los	35
toSiva <f)€vy(ov 8i8vp,<p crvv Kaaiyvr)T<p poXev,—
g$9 ov Xa0d)v 'Xpvaodpovov	<rrp. 7'.
f/Hpav KpoKcorov anrapyavov iy/car eft a'
grammarians seek a name for it, they
might call it the genitive of Capital.
Koival yap x.r.X.] For to all alike
come the hopes and fears of toiling men ;
none are exempted from the changes and
chances of mortal life; therefore* make
use of the wealth while it is still called
to-day. Koival, common (as in Hamlet,
‘ay, madam, it is common’); compare
Nem. VII. 30 kolvov ydp epx^rai kv/i’
’Alda, to all alike comes the wave of
Death!s river. iXirldes, hopes and fears,
iXiris being neutral, either hope or fear;
translated into objective language it
means changes and chances. ttoXvttovwv,
toiling and stiffening; compare raXaol
(Sporol, comfortless mortals, Aristoph.
Birds, 687, and 6i£vpoi>s pporots, N 569.
33—38.	8* /c.r.X.j But I hold
fain and fast by Heracles for matchless
deeds of mighty prowess, and stir a time-
honoured tale,—how no sooner had the son
of Zeus with his twin brother issuedfrom his
mother’s womb forthright into the won-
derful dazzling lights fresh from the birth-
pang, than his swathing in the saffron
bands was known to Hera on her golden
throne.
drpbvu) is used like klvCo,—as if the tale
lay quiet and Pindar disturbed its rest.
35.	<nrXdyxva,v viro] from beneath the
heart. A passage in the Sixth Olympian,
telling of the birth of Iamus, is very
nearly verbally identical 1 rjXdev d’ biro
<nrXdyxv(ov vrr’ thdlvos r £parasvIa/*o$
£s (pdos avrlKa (1. 43). Here abrUa is
taken by Dissen with iwel (quum primum,
the very moment that); but Mr Fennell
rightly observes that it ‘ indicates the
normal process of the delivery as in the
Sixth Olympian. The point of abrlxa
is that the passage from the womb into
the light is not graduated, but sudden,
and this idea is further developed in the
words darjTav atyXav. Qarqrdv for dyrp-dv,
wondrous to look upon, suggests the first
surprise of light dawning on a newborn
infant’s eyes; and atyXav is felicitously
chosen to express the dazzle after the
darkness of the womb.
36.	Kao-iymfnp] Iphicles, son of Am-
phitruo.
37.	«$] So Boeckh for mss. t\
Some scholars have wished to change
iird in 1. 35, for it is clear that iirei and
us r cannot stand together. [Hermann,
for example, read us apa, Rauchenstein
us ttot€, but these and other attempts
to emend us £wel set all principles of
textual criticism at defiance.] The omis-
sion of r is a simple and certain remedy;
a scribe observing ws following u>s in the
same sentence and unconnected by a
copula would be tempted to insert a re
or a Kal. The second ws is (as Mezger
says) a repetition or resumption of the
first t&s. The object of this resumption is
to begin the tale proper in the new
strophe.
38.	KpoicwTov] saffron-dyed; KpoKurbs
is generally used as a substantive. The
colour was worn by kings and heroes ; in
2—220
NEMEONIKAI A'.
dWa 6e&v /3a<ri\ea
(TTrepxOeLaa dvfiw ire/jure Spa/covra9 acjyap,	4°
rol p,€V olx0€l<rdv 7Tv\dv
€9 OaXdpuov p*yxpv evpvv eftav, ri/cvoLcnv co/eeia? yvadovs
dp,<j)€\Cf;a(r0cu pLepLa&res' 6 8* opOov puev avreivev /capa, 7reiparo
8e rrpooTov pLayas,
8i<r<Tai<Ti Soiovs av^evcov	avr. y.
pudpyfrai9 cuf>vKroi<; xepalv eal9 o<f)ia$'	45
dyxopiivois 8e xpopuo?
the Fourth Pythian, Jason flings off a
saffron-coloured garment, KpoKbev et/m
(1. 232).
£yKarlf3a] was placed and swathed in,
stronger than h£(Za just as iyKara8l(o is
stronger than lv84(o. Verbs compounded
with iy Kara- (such as iyicaTaXeLwa), iy-
KaTa^eijyvvfUi iyKararldrifu, iyicardiceipLcu,
&c.) connote a firm insertion or a strict
inclosure; here iyKar(ipa) suggests the
swathing.
39. aXXd 0€wv pao-CXca] But the
queen of the gods, in hot wraths straight-
way sent serpents. I follow Heyne
and Bergk in reading jQaaCKea for MSS.
fiaolXeia; compare lipea for lipeia and
see Bergk’s note. Boeokh’s (SaaiXia would
mean palace (paoiXela). oiripxo^aL is
used of hasty and violent anger; as a
medical term oirepxvbs connotes the
violence of a fever or sickness. The
scholiast explains by vwep&ovoa.
42. 0aXd(AOv] d&Xafios and 0d\afwi
have the special sense of a woman’s
chamber or bower, fiirxbv Odkdfxov =
chamber far withdrawn, inner.
Wkvowtiv coicctas /c.r.X.] There can
hardly be any doubt that afi<f>€\i£ao$cu
refers to the coiling of the serpents round
the bodies of the children; cf. X 95
iXioob/xepos irepl xeLV of a serpent. The
proper meaning of eXloow is to coil, and
the middle in active sense is quite right
here as its object is part of the subject’s
body. The use of yvddovs, where we
might expect a word denoting the whole
body, is bold and graphic; in the swift
process of coiling, the jaws of the snakes
and the darting tongues are the most
prominent feature,—they seem all jaws.
<bicelas refers to the rapid motion of the
head. Ravening, although as a transla-
tion, it would be inexact, is the subjec-
tive aspect of djKdas and is expressed by
pL€p.au)Tes. We may translate, Yearning
to wind round the children their coils and
darting jaws.
Dissen’s note is ‘ dicit avidas maxillas
celeriter se moventium, appropinquan-
tium bestiarum, ad partem corporis revo-
cato epitheto, quod proprie toti corpori
serpentium competit ’.
43. opOov avreivev] opdov avcLTeiveiv =
raise in an erect posture. This in itself
was the mark of a prodigious infant.
irpwTov] for the first time. It was his
first battle.
8uro-aiori Soiovs x.r.X.] by seizing in the
sure grasp of his hands twain the two
serpents by their necks. a<f>bKroi$ Bergk
unnecessarily changes to d^i/xrws. Notice
the stress laid by Pindar on the dual
number of the serpents by 81000101 doiovs
in the emphatic position at the beginning
of the antistrophos (see next note).
46. (ryxopivois 8^ \popos] As they
were throttled, the breath of life left their
unutterable limbs in a gurgling hiss.
Xpbvos is the reading of the mss., which
editors have (vainly I think) endeavouredNEMEAN L
21
yjrvxa? direTrvevaev fie\i<ov dffrarcov.
J M tf >	»	>	Av
etc o ap arXarop ireXo?
to explain. ‘Constrictis tempus vitam
exstinxit’, Dissen; ‘indem sie gewiirgt
wurden, blies die Zeit ihre Seelen aus
den unsagbaren Gliedern = die lange Zeit
des Wiirgens raubte ihnen den Athem ’,
Mezger; ‘the time made them breathe
forth the life from their dread frames
Fennell. Von Leutsch says insolens sane
dicendi genus sed necessarium, and Mr
Fennell admits that ‘ it is quite possible
that there is some corruption but it is
impossible to establish a correction ’.
Hartung has adopted ayxb^voi 5£ XP&V
\pvxas air^iryevaav, a reading which may,
primo conspectu, be rejected as uncritical;
Bergk suggests 5’ drpofxos, which, we may
safely say, would never have become
corrupted to 5£ XP°V0S'
The obvious objections to xp°v°s are
decisive. xpoVos by itself can only mean
a long time, and thus gives a sense discor-
dant with the spirit of the narrative. As
Bergk says, celeriter facinus patravit
infans, his mighty grasp throttled them
at once, and so it is represented in
Theocritus’ account of the prodigy, xxiv.
55. But even if we waive this, dirkirvevae
cannot admit an external agent (like
Xpovos) as its subject.
I have no hesitation in restoring XP°-
fxos, the conjecture of Schmidt. From a
critical point of view it is a perfect emen-
dation; for that the unfamiliar xpofi0*
would have almost inevitably been ‘ cor-
rected ’ to the familiar and nearly identical
Xpdvos will be admitted by any one who
has dealt at all with questions of textual
criticism. It is moreover a fine addition
to a realistic picture; we hear the hissing
death-rattle, in which, literally, the breath
leaves the serpent’s body. (Cp. Nem. x.
74, where Polydeukes finds the dying
Castor &adimTL (pplaaovra irvoas.) The
strangling grasp produces the xpoP'0* in
the throat, and the xp^os, as it were,
‘expires’ their souls. As x/^M05 is merely
the audible sign of the departing breath
and is not external to the organisms, the
phrase xp^05 dirivyevtre is not exposed
to the objection which applies to XP^V0S
dirlirpevo-e. For xpoyuos see Hesychius.
But there is a further consideration
that removes remaining doubts on the
subject of xp°P“>S' The idea of the ode
is a comparison between the fulfilled
career of Heracles and the unfulfilled
career of Chromius, and it would be
characteristic of Pindar’s art to remind
the hearer or reader of this by indirect
allusion in the course of the narrative.
A favourite mode of such allusion was
paronom/sia, and here the strange word
XpofMos (which arrests the attention all
the more because it is strange) im-
mediately suggests Xpopuos. This also
explains the form of the phrase xp'opo*
dirlTTvevaev; the circumstance that xpdp-os
is the subject and as it were the agent
makes the allusion to some exploit of
Chromius more precise. What this ex-
ploit was, to which Pindar compares the
slaying of the serpents, we have no
means of knowing; but the emphatic
prominence given to the number of the
serpents by diatraiai doiovs (see last note)
suggests that two special enemies of
Chromius are alluded to. See above,
Introduction.
Herwerden (Pindarica, p. 25) suggests
Xdvos (equivalent to <rro/«i) for xpovos.
47.	dcjwrwv] This use of fie-
\£wv is a reminiscence of Homeric phrases
like Ovfibs i^TTctTo £k /xeXlcvv (Dissen).
For dcparuv, vast, huge, compare Hero-
dotus VII. 190 dipara xpv/JLaTai vast sums
of money (like German ‘kolossal’).
48.	Ik 8* dp* drXarov rr(Kos <irXa|€
yuvcuKas] The better mss. have arXcLrov
510s, while Vi, X, Y, Z and the libri of
Moschopulos have pb\os. Many editors,22
NEMEONIKAI A'.
7r\a£e yvvai/cas, oaai rv^ov 'AXicfir)va<; dpr\yourai Xe^er
/cal yap avrdy irotraflv direirKo^ opovaata anro arpoopwasy op,cS9
apwvev ifipiv tcvcoSdXwv.	5°
including Dissen and Fennell, adopt piXos
on the intelligible ground that dios can
be explained as an interpretation of the
difficult piXos, whereas piXos cannot be
accounted for if dios were the word
written by Pindar. This argument is
conclusive against deos. They explain
piXos as a pang of fear (repentinus animi
motus), and support it by Homer’s <bs $’
6t hv (bdLvovaav $xy P&Xos 6^v ywatfca,
A 269 (compare also Homeric ax« Pepo-
XrjfjLhos). But this use of piXos for
the sharp physical pain of a woman in
travail—almost a piXos of Artemis—does
not in any way justify or explain the
absolute use of piXos for fear. To me it
seems incredible that Pindar would have
used the word in this sense without some
further definition of its meaning. I hold
therefore, with Bergk, Hartung and
others, that both piXos and Slos are
corrections, but their suggestions are
certainly untenable. Neither Bergk’s
airXaTov xptos (which assumes a double
corruption), nor Hartung’s (3X&(3os nor
even Rauchenstein’s ratpos stood in any
peril of being changed; and even if rdtpos
might have been surmounted with the
gloss dlos, it could never have produced
piXos. In the reading piXos we have a
valuable clue for discovering the lost
original. piXos gives such poor sense
that no scribe would have thought of
introducing it into the text unless it were
very similar in letters to the actual word
he found, that word being itself so un-
familiar that it puzzled him completely.
In fact the only circumstance that could
have determined anyone to read piXos was
its likeness to an unintelligible original.
This argument appears to me conclusive,
and I have no hesitation in restoring
7rtXos, a neuter noun related to irlXwp,
as vdos (Hesiodic t/5ei) is related to vdwp.
It may be that Hesychius had this very
passage before him when he noted the
gloss
7re\os' fieya, repdanov.
(His gloss on w4X<op is pdya, vireptpvis.)
This rare word was not understood; and
while one scribe, who clung to the letter,
altered it to the nearest word that sug-
gested anything like sense (ptXos), another
who had a keener eye for the meaning
boldly read 81 os. While wiXwp was con-
fined in use to living organisms, irlXos (as
is indicated by Hesychius* Tepdanov and
as the form of the word suggests) might
be used of a strange or prodigious event;
hence Pindar uses it here. We may
render; but the terrible prodigy struck
with dismay the women who were helping
Alcmena at her bedside.
50. ko.1 yap avra x.r.X.] All the
MSS. read woaalv (U iroalv). Dissen’s
note is ‘non temere adjecta voce iroo--
alv, sed oppositionis causa; consternatae
feminae, ipsa vero etiam accurrit’; in
other words iroaalv is added to 6pob<rai<ja,
in order to emphasize the motion of
Alcmena; cf. iro<r<ri rpl%(av Olymp. X. 65,
where the footrace is opposed to the
wrestling match. Cf. also Olymp. xm.
72 avd 5* hraXf 6p0(p iro8l. As Mr
Fennell says, we may translate ‘to her
feet ’, though the dative is certainly instru-
mental. Bergk reads Trcuolv (to be taken
with afivvev) which Mezger accepts.
Translate: For she too leaped to her feet
where she lay, robeless, and was fain to help
in repelling the felon monsters.
Stephanus’ ofuos for the MSS. bp.Q>s is
arbitrary and Mezger is right in rejecting
it. The choice of vppis to designate
the attack of the beasts is notable,
and indicates that Pindar is thinking
of some triumph of Chromius won over
human Kvd>8aXa. a7re7r\oj, it is perhapsNEMEAN I
23
rayy Se KaSfieiojv ayol yaX/ceocs avv ottXols eSpapov dOpo-
01'	eV. 7'.
iv yepl 8' 'Ap,<j>irpv(DV /coXeov yvpuvov Tivaaacov <f>aayavov
Xk€t\ oj-elats dviaicri rvire/?, to 7dp obcelov irik^ei irdvd’ o/xcS?'
evdv<$ 8’ dirrjpLcov fcpaSla tcaSo9 dp<f> dXXorptov.
e<7Ta 8e Odpftei 8va<f>opcp	<rrp. S'.	55
T€p7rvS re puydek. €i8e yap itcvopuov
Xrjpa re teal 8vvap.iv
vlov* iraXLyyXcoaaov 8e foe ddavaroi
unnecessary to observe, does not mean
naked, but & xirwWy, or /xovox'^wp.
51.	\oXk€Ois <rvv o-irXois] Here
Pindar (in the 3rd epode) represents the
countrymen of Heracles as wearing
bronze arms, just as he represented the
countrymen of Chromius (in the first
epode 1. 16) as a people tto\£[xov puraoTTjpa
X^Kevrios. Hints like this serve the
purpose of keeping the parallel in the
reader’s mind.
e'Spapov] in arsis, as below 1. 69 XP^V >
01. VI. 103 TroPTdfieddp, Pyth. III. 6
yviapicdos. Note the quantity of affpooi.
52.	4v X€P^J cf* Pyth. 11. 8 £p x€P*1
ebdjaaooe ir<h\ovs. Moschopulos is our
authority for <pdoyapop which is omitted
by the mss.
53.	6£c£ais avCauri tu-ttcCs] A remi-
niscence of T 125 top 5’ a%os o£t) Tvxj/e.
In Pindar the 1 of aviapos is short, cf.
01. xil. 11 apiapais; that of apla is short
here (as in Sappho and Theognis), but
long (as always in Homer) in Pyth. IV.
I54\
to yap oIkciov irav0* opws] For
each alike is whelmed by his own trouble
(the grief that comes home to him), but
distress for a stranger's sorrow soon
passeth away fro?n the heart. ttlI^o), keep
under, whelm, compare Eurip. Hippol.
637 md^ei ray ad <p to dvorvxds.
54.	cvOvs 8* dmjpoiv] The heart feels
concern, but straightway—loses it; the
feeling is only a passing impression {rasch
wieder voriibergehender Eindruck, Mez-
ger).
dp<f>l KaSos] cf. Isthm. VI. 9 (Ovpop
etffppapas) dfi<pl To\aop UnrofiTiTip.
55. if ora & 0app€t k.t.X.] He stood
oppressed with wonder and delight; for
he saw the strange spirit and power of his
son, and the immortals had rendered the
tidings of the ?nessengers perverse.
For the responsion of &rra to £<ttclp at
the beginning of the 2nd strophe, see
Introdtiction p. 5.
ptX&fe] touched with. The mental
state of Amphitryon was OdpLpos wonder,
and this wonder was at once painful and
pleasurable. Dissen quotes 6(kt<p cruy/ce-
KpafJLfrrjp, Soph. Aj. 896, and SetXcUg
ovyKiKpaficu dbg,, and translates ajfectus;
but I doubt whether the use of ovyKepw-
pv/u can throw much light on the use of
pUypvfii. At the same time I have no
doubt that he is right in taking it simply
as affected, and not as in a state of
mingled &C. Compare u 203 dip8pas
fJuoylp.epaL kokot^tl ical akyeOL; Isthm.
III. 5 ebXoylats clotcop fJLefuxOaL; the
general use of the word is to bring into
contact with.
58. vlov] Intended by its position in
the verse to correspond to ’Ayirfoiddfiov
rrai in the corresponding line of the
second antistrophos, and thereby indi-
cate that Chromius like Heracles is
endowed with £kpo[j.iop Xrjpu1 teal dbpapLip.
iraXCyyXwo'O'ov] This word may be24
NEMEONIKAI A'.
dyyeXwv prjacv Qkaav.
yeiTova Srj Kakeaev Ato? vyJriaTov TTpofydrav e^oxpv,	60
opdopuavriv Teipeo-iav' 6 Se Fol </>pd%€ teal nravrl arparm, iroLai^
6p,Ckr}<rei rvxais,
termed a vox Pindarica. It occurs only
here and in Isthmian v. 24 ov87 %<ttip
ovtcj fiapfiapos otfre TraXlyyXuxroos ttoXis,
arts oi) ILrjKios atei kXIos. Commentators
have been in the habit of assigning
different meanings to the word in these
two passages; (1) here in contrarium
verterant; schol. ivavTi6<pr)p.ov, (2) Isthni.
V. 24, speaking a foreign language; schol.
aXXoKoros. As to the general sense they
are of course right, but it is important to
observe that 7raXLyyXw<r<ros itself has the
same connotation in both passages, the
apparent difference being due to the con-
text. waXlyyX(0<T<ros means using wrong
words, that is, words which do not agree
with a certain standard. In the passage
under consideration, the standard is the
truth or the fact; as it turned out, the
speech of the messengers used words
which did not agree with the fact. In
the other passage, the standard is the
Greek language. See App. A, note 1.
Fot for Amphitryon.
59.	0&rav] rendered. 61/xev occupies
a similar metrical position in 1. 5; and
Pindar intended to intimate that his hymn
renders praise to Chromius even as the
gods gave glory to Heracles by rendering
the tale of the messengers false. When
we take this in connexion with the word
iraXlyyXoxroop, it would seem that Pindar
hints at slanders circulated by Chromius’
enemies, and that among these there may
have been literary men, who affected the
use of yXQ<r<rai, strange dialectic words.
See Introduction, p. 6.
60.	yeCTOva] Pausanias (ix. 16) men-
tions that there was a so-called o’uopooko-
wefov Teipeelov in the region of the Electra
Gate of Thebes, and the same writer
(IX. 11) also mentions that Amphitryon
dwelled by the Electra Gate. This
explains yetrova. Near the same gate
too was the Ismenion (aXa$la pLavriw
6Qkov, Pyth. xi. 6), of which Tiresias
was probably the pAvtls (Dissen).
81) Ka\€<r€v] This reading is due to
Bergk. The reading of the best mss. is
5’ iKaXeo-av; that of B2 DV and the Mos-
chopuleans 5’ lKKa\€<rav is clearly a cor-
rection for the sake of the metre and
probably has no independent authority.
Most editors read with Triclinius 5’ e/c/ca-
Xecrev. It is just possible that the plural
form of the mss. may be right and that
Pindar may have represented the same
persons who had brought the news to
Amphitryon as having called forth Ti-
resias.
Aios vi|/£o-tov k.t.X.] The eminent in-
terpreter of Zeus most high, the true seer,
Tiresias.
61.	opOopxivris] Formed by Pindar as
the opposite of xl/evdo/iaPTis. Compare
<reywo/xaPTis, a coinage of Sophocles,
O. T. 556.
6 SI Fot K.T.X.] 6 is Tiresias, ol is
Amphitryon : but the subject of o/uX^iret
is Heracles.
Translate: And he declared to him and
all his host, what fortunes shall attend
the boy, and how many uncouth prowlers
he shall have slain on the dry land,
and how many on the sea.
tuxcus refers to the destiny of Heracles
after all his labours have been accom-
plished, as described in the last lines of
the ode, and ktclpAp is aorist in reference
to o/wX^iret. Mr Fennell explains ktclpup
as ‘the participle of the gnomic aorist
referring to sundry points of the time
covered by the principle verb ’, and
equates 8<r<rovs ktclpAp with Kal ToXXobs
KT€P€t.NEMEAN I.
25
avt. S'.
oa(rov$ fiev iv ^ipcro) /cravoov,
oaaov? Se ttovto) dfjpas aihpohitcas'
teal rev a avv irXaylcp
avSpeSv icopq) (nei'xpvra rov ixdporarov	65
( <j>acre viv Trcoaeiv p,opov.
teal yap orav deol iv irehito <f>\eypa<? Yiyavrecraiv p*ayav
63. aiSpoS^Kas] The best comment
on this word is the Homeric line quoted
by Dissen (1 215), dv8pa otfre 8Uas ed
el86ra otfre dlfuaras. For 0r}pas the same
editor compares Archilochus, frag. 88
(ed. Bergk) <rol 8b drjpiuv tippis re /cat SIktj
pdXei, but Pindar doubtless chose the
word to suggest that the exploit of the
infant in slaying the KrwdaXa was typical
of his future achievements.
64—66. Kal Tiva /c.r.X.] And he said
that he would give many a one who
walked with crooked envy a draught of
direst doom to drink.
With the reading of the mss. Sweets
this sentence has no construction. Most
of the changes which have been proposed,
beginning with Boeckh’s fx6p(p, seem un-
critical. The most ignorant scribe was
so familiar with the fact that 8L8ufju takes
a dative, that his tendency would have
been to substitute a dative for an accusa-
tive rather than to do the reverse. If
Pindar wrote fi6p(p, or (as Kayser would
have it) iravexQ pordrip fi6p(p, no reason
can be assigned for the corruption.
There can be no doubt, I think, that
the error lies in 8u)aetv and in 5t6ce«'
only. In fact even if the mss. gave fwptp,
I should feel confident that Pindar did
not use such a weak expression as 8i8opcu
fiopip. The words in Olymp. 11. 82 K6kvop
re dav&Tip iropev do not support it; iropev
(connected as it is with 7mrpiv(rKU), irlirpuj-
fjLai) is a very different word from
I may illustrate what I mean by a similar
case in English; to give death would be
an intolerably bald expression for to slay,
(except there were some special reason
for representing death as a gift) and it
could not be supported by such a phrase
as to deal death. Another difference
between the present passage and the
verse in the Second Olympian is that 0d-
raros may be personified, fidpos hardly.
I conclude therefore that Sdxreiv has
taken the place of some unfamiliar word
which it closely resembled, and I restore
irdxreiv, Aeolic for wiaeiv, future of iriwla-
K(o, just as irw, 7rw0t are Aeolic for 7rt0i,
drink! (Alcaeus, 54 A. B. ap. Bergk,
P. L. G.9 xcupe Kal ttw rdvSe. 8evpo <r6fi-
7rw0i), irdjvcj for tcIvqj. Pindar uses the
future 7Haw in the 5th Isthmian, 1. 74,
but this circumstance would not be an
objection to his using iruxno here. In
that passage nlcrto takes the double ac-
cusative : 7riaoj (Tf/>e AipKas ayvbv tiScop.
This description of Heracles’ punish-
ment of the envious corresponds to the
lines in the second strophe concerning
the envious foes of Chromius who are
thwarted by him and his friends, as has
been pointed out in the Introduction and
in the notes on 11. 24 and 25. It may
be added that vSoop (plpetv there may
perhaps be taken up by Tibaeiv here.
Bucketfuls of water quenched the Kairvos
of the cavillers; Heracles quenches the
Kopos of the crooked walkers by a draught
of death.
66.	viv] See Olymp. vi. 62; Pyth.
iv. 36.
67.	Kal yap x.r.X.] Aye, he told that
when the gods on the plain of Phlegra
stand against the giants in battle, their
foes shall have their bright tresses mingled
with Earth's dust under the potency of
that herds whizzing bolts. Heracles is
represented as a knight-errant against26	NEMEONIKAI A'.
avrid^waiv, fiekewv vnto pLiralai kclvov	yaia 7T€(f)vp-
aeadaL Kopav
eveirev' avTov fiav iv elpava tov airavra ypovov iv a-yeptp iir. S'.
avvyLav Kaparoov peyaktov iroivdv \ayovr igaiperov	7°
KopoSy and his championship of the gods
against the giants is one instance; hence
Kal ydp. fi&xCLV dvriafaaiv is equivalent
to n&xav d.vrlov fmx^<T0ai, to engage in a
battle against. Dissen compares rroWovs
ayQvas i£iu)v, Soph. Track. 159, but the
Pindaric expression is hardly so bold.
Pindar uses inravria^uj in Pyth. VIII. 11.
Professor Jebb in his essay on Pindar
{Journal of Hellenic Studies, ill. 179)
notes that “the Gigantomachia adorned
the pediment of the Megarian ‘Treasury*
at Olympia ”, as an instance of “ how
Pindar and the sculptors were working in
the same field”.
$\£ypas] on the isthmus of Pallene.
68. piirauri] pnrai is used by Pindar
of winds and waters Pyth. ix. 48, KVfxd-
rtav pirrds avlpuov re Pyth. IV. 195; 800*
ay\aa x^oiv Kovrov re pnrai <f>lpov0iv fr.
220, 3; of a lyre’s waves of melody, reals
pnrcuai (addressed to xPvcr^t ^bpiuyl-)
Kara0xofi€vos Pyth. I. 10. In poetical
value it answers very nearly to our
influence, pnrai aarpuv (Sophocles, Plec-
tra, 106) are the influences of the stars,
suggesting at the same time the visible
signs of the influence—the twinklings.
And so in Pindar fr. 166 avdpoddjULavra 5’
iirei &7)pes daev pnrav fieXiadlos otvov,
pnra connotes the influence of the wine,
visible as it were in its sparkling. If we
had to render in Greek Shakspere’s
‘skyey influences’ or Milton’s
‘ With store of ladies, whose bright eyes
Rain influence ’
pnrai would be a suitable word to use.
(fxuSCpav yatq. ‘irafwpo'ccrOai ic6pav] I
believe that Mezger’s novel interpretation
of these words ‘ The earth shall have her
bright hair soiled * (es wei-de der Erde das
glanzende Haar besudelt sein) is highly
improbable, for, if Pindar had meant to
say that, he would have almost inevitably
written yalas.. .The familiar use of (pupa
with the dative as in daicpvai ei/mar’ £<f>v-
pov (12 162) renders a ‘ dativus commodi ’
intolerably ambiguous. Moreover <paL5t-
laos, which, as far as we know, was al-
ways applied to the bodies of gods or
heroes, would hardly have been used to
describe the plants and grass of the
Earth, even though the foliage were
conceived as her hair. It may be said
that (pvpeiv yalq. is a strange expression
for <pbp€Lv Kovei (Eur. Hec. 496 kovci
<j>bpov0a Kapa), but the choice of yalq. is
determined here by the context; the
Giants are the sons of the Earth and
when they fall their locks mingle with
their mother’s dust.
<|>aiSt|xav] This Homeric word is used
of the bright visage of a god assuming
human form in Pyth. IV. 28 <paf.8lp.av
TTpO0O\pLV.
‘7r€<j>vpcr€<r0cu] A perfect future which
occurs only here.
69.	tov airavra \povov] arras is not
equivalent to iras. Both words connote
all the parts conceived as one; but iras
emphasises all the parts, arras makes the
unity prominent. Cp. Nem. iv. 83; VII.
56; VIII. 20; V. 16.
Xpovov 4v o*X€pw] The second syllable
of xf*>vov is treated as long; compare
28papLov above in 1. 51. ev 0X€P<? ex-
presses a line without a break; each
moment of happy rest holds to another
(£xercu)- Compare Nem. xi. 39; and
Isthm. V. 22 eKaropnredof. Iv 0X€P<P (con-
tinuous) KlXevdoi.
70.	peyaXwv] This word takes us
back, as Mezger has pointed out, to 1. 34
where the poet introduces the story ofNEMEAN I.
27
6\/3loi<z iv 8(D/ia<ri} Se^apevov OaXepav r/il/3av a/coinv teal 7dpov
Saicravra,, 7rap Al Kpoviha erepvov alvrjaeiv araffpov.
Heracles. fxeyaXais and pLeydXup occur
each in the second line of an epode and
in the same foot. (‘Dass aber der Dichter
diese so wortreich gepriesene selige Ruhe
in Causalzusammenhang mit der Be-
wahrung der angebornen Tuchtigkeit in
Miihe und Noth gesetzt wissen will, diirfte
daraus vorgehen, dass er an den betreffen-
den Puncten v. 34 und 70 pdyds zweimal
in die gleiche Stelle der Epode setzt ’,
Mezger, p. m.) For the significance of
the artifice here see Introduction to this
ode.
iroivdv] meed or recompense. Compare
Pyth. I. 59 K€\ad7)<rcu woipclp (meed of
praise) TedptwTidv.
71.	OoXcpav] This word expresses
the eternal youth and fairness of the
immortals, an idea which is personified
in the Grace Thaleia. Compare note on
line 2.
•ydjJiov SaC<ravTa] a Homeric phrase;
see T 299.
72.	A£] The mss. give Ait. I follow
Heyne and Bergk in writing it as a
monosyllable, to suit its metrical value.
alvrjo-civ] For the meaning I may refer
to the Introduction to this ode, p. 7.
crra0|x6v] The best mss. have do hop,
others have ya/iov. It seems clear that
neither reading can be right; ydfwp was
introduced from the preceding line, and
dofiov is hardly more than a repetition of
diofiaoi. The choice lies between two
readings:	Pauw’s po/xop and Bergk’s
<Trad/iov. For po/aop it may be urged that
a scholiast seems to have read popiop (rfy
8iavlfi€<ruf tt]v irapd Oeots indiptceip); but
Bergk’s proposal is strongly supported
by Istkm. vi. 45
deoirorav idlXovr’ is ovpavov <TTa0/J.oiJS
iXdeiv /*e0’ bp.(Lyvpiv BeXX^potpovrav
Zrjvos,
and Olymp. XI. 92 8rav...ehiAt8a oradfwv
dvi}p iKrjTai. Moreover ocfxvbv OTdBpjov
is a felicitous suggestion of dfiirvevfia
defipbv, the opening words of the ode.
ADDITIONAL NOTE. Nemean i. 13.
I am not sure that the usual interpre-
tation of (nreipe in this passage is true.
* Scatter ’ is a secondary sense of the verb,
derived from the meaning * sow ’; it is not
the primary meaning from which ‘ sow ’ is
derived. The original meaning, I believe,
was ‘ to set in a certain order, range ’; but
in order to establish this, I must ask the
reader to consider for a moment the
Latin sero ‘ I sow ’. It is generally sup-
posed that this present form belongs to
the same family as seviy satum% semen,
and etymologists attempt to explain it as
a reduplicated present. If such, the re-
duplication must be internal or ‘ broken ’;
for if it were regular, the word would
necessarily be *siso, *siro, and *siro could
not become sero, all the more as there
already existed a sero of different meaning.
A ‘broken reduplication’ in the present
tense is an extremely doubtful assump-
tion. I submit that sero ‘ I sow, plant ’
is the same word as sero ‘ I twine’ (etpui),
the original meaning being arrange, set
in a row; seed is sown along furrows, as
cords or flowers or leaves are plaited in
a chain. Now when we compare aweipd,
a coil or twisted cable, and mrdpTOp, a
rope, with enreipu, <rirapr6$, the idea
suggests itself strongly that here too we28
NEMEONIKAI A'.
have the same development of meanings;
and the two cases mutually confirm each
other. The original signification of crwelpw
I suppose to have been ‘ to arrange or
draw in a line \ and like sero it might be
developed in the sense of sowing or in
the sense of twining. It is perhaps
hardly necessary to remark that Latin
spira does not invalidate the connexion
of (Tireipa with tnrelpu, as spira is clearly
borrowed.
If these etymological considerations
are correct, is it not possible that in
<Tweipe, in this passage, we have the link
between oirdpu sow and <nreipa coil? If
so, we might render, Twine a bright
wreath of song for the island &c. Com-
pare Nem. VII. 77 dpeiv OTetpdvovs iXa-
<pp6v k.t.X., a passage indeed which
once suggested to me that the true
reading here might be efpe.NEMEAN II.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY IN THE PANCRATION
AT NEMEA WON BY TIMODEMUS OF AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
The second Nemean Ode1, composed to be sung in a procession,
celebrated a victory in the pancration, won by Timodemus, the son of
Timonous, an Athenian. The Timodemids were a family belonging to the
deme of Acharnae ; but Timonous lived in Salamis, the island associated
with Telamon and Ajax, and there Timodemus was reared.
Athletic prowess was hereditary in this family, and there were many
victories to boast of, including four Pythian, eight Isthmian, and seven
Nemean crowns, besides successes passing number at the Athenian festival
of Olympian Zeus. These victories might be taken as an indication that
Timodemus, who had now gained his first great distinction in the really
trying strain of the pancration contest, would win a Pythian and an Isthmian
to set beside his Nemean wreath, thus walking in the way of his fore-fathers
(7Tarpiav Kaff odd*/). Pindar suggests this hereditary obligation, as we may call
it, by making his prophecy of the future career of Timodemus respond, in
part, to his commemoration of the past achievements of the Timodemids.
Thus :
1. 9, Bafia fieu TcrSfuaboDV bpdrreadai kclWkttov acarov iv ILvdiourl re vikciv
1. 19, irapa pev vyfnpibovri Uapvavco Te(r<rapas e£ a46\<ov viicas €Kopi£ap.
And the very name of the family, borne also by the victor himself, might be
regarded as an omen of honourable distinction ; this omen moreover, rt/id,
being discoverable in the father’s name, Timonous, as well as in Timodemus.
1 There is no indication of the date.
Boeckh’s connexion of this ode with frag.
75 (a dithyramb) is a mere guess; and
even if the connexion had some foundation
we could hardly take iravbaiboCKov r €vk\4’
dyopdv of 1. 5 as a proof that both poems
were composed soon after the battle of
Plataea, when the Athenians restored
their city.30
NEMEAN II.
This thought,—that Timodemus’ success is what might be looked for from a
Timodemid and a son of Timonous,—is expressed indirectly by a mythical
parallel.
It is meet that the Mountaineer (Orion) should rise at no long distance
from the Mountain Maids, the Peleiads.
e<m S’ eoucos
opeiav ye IlfAeiadoop
firj TrjXoOev *Qapi<ov9 dveivQai.
The fitness of the proximity of the constellations depends on the mountain-
name of Orion and the mountain-associations—whereof indeed little
information has survived—of the Pleiads, here conceived as Dove-maidens.
Prior commentators had perceived the play upon words, but Mezger first
apprehended its significance in the context of the Ode. Timodemus follows
as naturally in the wake of the Timodemids, as the mountain-hunter follows
the mountain Doves. But a question still occurs, and Mezger has not
answered it. There was surely some special fitness in this comparison,
some motive for it; why is Timodemus compared to Orion, or rather,
should we ask, to a star ?
The solution of this question lies, I think, in the circumstance that
Timodemids had already won seven victories at Nemea: eirra 8 ev Nepea.
This number suggested to Pindar the conceit of the seven Pleiads, followed
by Orion, a kindred constellation, to symbolize the group of seven Nemean
victories, followed by the kindred achievement of Timodemus; and this
conceit has been worked out with the utmost adroitness.
It must be observed that there is a double force in the word aveitrSai1 (for
dvave'itrdai), which, besides its usual meaning to rise9 of a heavenly body, could
signify to return. Thus it might suggest the return of Timodemus from the
scene of his victory, as well as the ascent of Orion ; and this is confirmed by
<rvv evK\ei voara, in 1. 24, i/ooroy being connected in Pindar's mind with
veloSai.
And moreover the Pleiads, who were daughters of Atlas, might seem not
unsuitable emblems of a flock of pancratiasts, men of ‘ Atlantean shoulders9;
inasmuch as endurance was the prime virtue of such athletes, and endurance
was the proverbial quality of Atlas, supposed to be signified by his name.
Remembering that Alcyone was one of the seven daughters, we find an
allusion of this kind in the words
eo Tipo&rjpe, (re S' d\<d
TTaynpariov rXdOvpos de£ei.
It should be observed that ae£ei pleads for such an allusion; for the subject
of the verb in this sense of increasing or glorifying, should be not a
quality, but a person. The expression is explained, if we apprehend
a suggestion that Alcyone, daughter of Atlas,—Might, daughter of Endu-
rance, in abstract language—exerts a ‘stellar virtue' on Timodemus, or, at
least, that her faculty consents with his.
1 See note on 1. 12.INTRODUCTION.
31
An education in Salamis too might be interpreted as a fortunate augury
for a pancratiast. Boxing and wrestling are the games which partake of the
nature of war, and ‘ Salamis, certainly, is able to rear a warrior such as
Ajax for example, whose weighty strength was felt by Hector at Troy.
‘ Praise Zeus and withal the glorious return of Timodemusl These
words at the end of the hymn, which begins and ends with Zeus, are a brief
abstract of its theme,—the distinguished nostos or Coming Home of the victor
from Nemea, where he was brought into a certain connexion with the
highest of the gods. He came home to Salamis; but he also rose to a new
home in a firmament named of honour, to move among a starry train.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
VV. I—3.
«!✓ — —	— W — A j “ * —	— \j----| —	— SJ'U — • — A (16)
vv. 4, 5.
UUv ——  — \J\J — \j— •“ — — \J \J — ' — A | -UU — — 'w'v-/ ——	(16)
Thus each strophe falls into two parts of an equal number of beats, provided
we recognise that the end of the fourth line is a tetrapody, not a tripody—
thus :
-KTCil Trpto | TOV N€fM€ | at • | OV A |
and that, in the same way, the last two syllables of the 3rd and corresponding
lines are equivalent to two feet. The rhythm is logaoedic.NEMEONIKAI B'.
TIMOAHMfli A0HNAICh
IIArKPATIASTHi.
''Odevirep /cal 'OfirjplSai	arp. d.
pairr&v iirecov t air odd aocSol
ap'XpvTai, Aao9 i/c irpooip,Lov' /cal 08' avrjp
/carafioXav iepcov dycovcov vt/ea<f)opia<? BeSe/crai irpcorov NepeaLov
1. o0€V*rr€p k.t.X] Even as Homerid
minstrels most often begin their linked
verses with a prelude in honour of Zeus;
so likewise hath this man laid the first
foundation for a tale of achievements in
the sacred games, by receiving a crown in
the song fam'd grove of Nemean Zeus.
In this strophe, without any detriment
to the lucidity of his thought, Pindar has
gracefully mixed two constructions. The
Homerids mostly begin their epopees by
hymning Zeus; with Zeus, similarly, this
young man begins his career of victory.
This comparison might have been ex-
pressed either 8dev—(Aids being the ante-
cedent of odev) apxovTcu, Aids iv aXaei Kai
08’ dvijp k.t.X. or Cixnrep—apxoprai Aids Ik
ttpooifxiov, (o\jt(x)) Kal 081 dvijp k.t.X. Pin-
dar begins with odev and then goes on as
if he had written ucrirep, this change
being necessitated by the words Aids ck
irpooifiLov, which supply odev with an
antecedent inapplicable to the second
clause.
Mr Tyrrell may be right in suggesting
that *0firjpldai here simply means poets
(successors of the Poet) and not specially
the Homerid school of Chios. For
pairrCov iwiwv cf. Hesiod (frag. 227)
iv ArjXip Tore wpQrov iyw Kai "Oyu^pos
doidol
/liXirofAev iv veapofc v/avols pdrf/avres
aoidrjv
$oi(3ov ’AttoXXwvcl XPV<T^°P01/ ov riKe
2.	TCwroXX*] Schol. iirel ovk del diro
Aids ijpxovTo, dXXa Kai aicb MovcQv.
3.	apxovTai] compare note on Nem.
1. 8, above.
avrjp] note the quantity, as in avipes.
4.	KarafSoXav] See above Nem. 1.
1. 8, note. The scholiast compares Calli-
machus fr. 196, ’Apo-iv6r)s, w £e?ve, yd/xov
KarapdXXofP aeideiv. It may be that
KarafioXd was a technical term for the
proem of an ode or nome.
Upwv] mss. lepav. I am not sure that
editors have been right in restoring lepQv,
though it was the reading of the scholiast;
the cause of the corruption is not ex-NEMEAN II.
33
iv 7TO\vVfA,V7]TG) A*09 a\(T€l.	5
0(j)€L\€C S’ €Tl, TTCLTpiaP	<TTp. )S'.
ehrep kcl0* oSov viv evOviropbird?
alcov rah pLeyaXcus SeSco/ce tcoapbov ’AOavcus,
6 a pud fiev ’IadpuaScov SpeireaOai fcdWiarov acorov iv YlvdioiaL
re vucav
plained. I am almost inclined to read
lepdv (with KarapoXdv). Timodemus*
victory is compared to a proem in honour
of Zeus, and thus its religious side is
rendered prominent, it is iepd.
VLKCu|>op£as] a career of success.
Sc'Scktcu irp<5rov] has begun by winning.
Compare Pyth. I. 80 vpvov rbv edi^avr1
dp<f> apery, and ibid, too ardepavov
tov did€ktcu, Olymp. II. 48 ’OXoporlq, pev
yap airros yipas ZdeKro, vi. 27 areepd-
vovs di^avro. Commentators generally
take dideKTcu here in the sense of
winning a victory as we say, but all the
examples cited from Pindar fail to prove
this use. dixo/*cu can only be employed
of receiving the rewards of victory (whether
crowns or poems), and so here the idea
of Kara^oXav vtKa<popias is (not the first of
a series of victories, but) the first of a
series of victory-odes. The meaning of
KarapoXd, and the choice of the adjective
TroXvvp.v'bTtp in 1. 5, confirm this view.
5.	iro\vvp,vijTa>] A Pindaric word
equivalent to 7roXtiv/xvos, theme of many
hymns.
6.	o<j>€C\€i 8* Iti x.r.X.] It needs must
be that the son of Timonoos shall cull yet
the bloom and breath, most fair, of Isth-
mian glories and Pythian victories, since
time wafting him straight along the way
which his fathers went hath given him as an
ornament to great Athens. It is meet that
the rising of the Mountain hunter should
not be far from the Mountain Peleiads.
ocfttCXci] Impersonal; it is due. Schol.
*AplaTapxos ovk eirl tov avdpbs rb ’OcpeiXei
ctXX’ £irl tov TrpdyfiaTbs (pTjcriv, ws av ns
€17T01 * 6<f>€lX6fL€VOV 5’ ^TL loTLV.
B.
iraTptav] That is, of the Timodemi-
dae.
8.	aitov] ai<hv is not synonymous with
fjioipa and it is a mistake to render it fate
(fatum Dissen), although the ideas are
intimately connected. It is the time of
life. The Greeks connected it with ay/a,
and here this connexion is prominent, for
evdvtto/bards implies a breeze. The cogency
(o^elXei) depends partly on this etymo-
logy. See Appendix A, note 2. Compare
Isthm. hi. 18
aidiv be KvXivdopivais a/xlpais aXX’ aXXor’
iijaXXa^ev,
the wind of time causeth divers changes
to the rolling days (of life’s sea).
9.	T<r0p.id8a>v] agrees with vlkolv.
8p€7T€cr0cu awTov] awroy, a favourite
word of Pindar, which he uses in many
ways; but in all the passages, where it
occurs, it preserves its proper force, some-
what obscured by the hackneyed trans-
lation ‘flower’. aurros means the fine
nap of a cloth, which might be described
as bloom; and this explains the usurpa-
tion of the floral metaphor. The follow-
ing passages will elucidate the force of
dwros, but I must also refer to Appendix
A, notes 2 and 3. Isth. I. 51 evayo-
prjdels (the victor) icipbos vx/ziarov d^Kerai,
TroXiardv Kal	yXuatras aorrov, the
fine praise breathed from the tongues of
citizens and strangers.
Isth. VI. 18 dfivdfJLOves be fiporoL
8 tl fx^ <ro<plas aoiTov aKpov
kXvtous eirtiav poais i^Kyprai
?vy tv,
whatsoever unlinked with sounding
streams of verses attains not to the height
3NEMEONIKAI B'.
34
TLfJLOVOOV Troth'. €<TTl S’ €OlKO?
ope Lav ye He\eiahcov
of exquisite poetry, passetk out of the
minds of men.
Here and in some other cases exquisite
is perhaps the fittest rendering of this gloss
of perfection. For example in Isth. vn. 18
Xpd) 5’—kiylvq. XaplTUP autop irpopipeip,
it is meet that Art (the Graces) should pay
Aegina an exquisite tribute. Again in
Pyth. X. 51 iy/cupilup ydp {Lottos vp.pup
in a\\or’ aWop utc pd\i<r<ra dbpei \byop
(here flower would be ludicrously incon-
gruous), the fine art of hymns of praise
darteth like a bee, from tale to tale (but
see App. A, note 2). And in 01. 1. 14,
ayXat^erai de ical fxovfrucas ip aurip, we
may render he courts grace too in exqui-
site kinds of music.
If we had to translate into Greek
Shakspere’s “culling the principal of all
the deer” (Henry VI.> Part 11. Act 3,
sc. 1, 1. 4), or ‘ the flower of the flock ’,
acjros would be the very word; cf. pavrap
&utos Pyth. iv. 188, and see Nem. vm.
9.	Or again awros would be suitable
for rendering Tennyson’s “the roof and
crown of things ”: compare 01. II. 8
where Theron is called evupbpiup naTipup
clutop, the qualities of his ancestor, as it
were, achieving their ultimate and crown-
ing bloom in him. The phrase ‘ plumage of
fire ’, by which Flaubert suggests an ideal
prose style, might be done into Greek by
irvpbs awros. Pindar calls the finest
bloom which the flower of life reveals
fwas awros (Isth. IV. 12 ; cf. Pyth. IV.
131 dparrup lepbp ebfipas clutop). Now we
are in a position to see the exact meaning
of such phrases as vpvop aKap.aPT0v68up
clutop ittttup (01. III. 4), x€lP&v clutop
irripucop (01. Vhi. 75), the highest excel-
lence which feet (or hands) can realise
(cf. 01. v. 1). &ojtop <rT€<papu)p in Isth. v. 4
might be rendered crown of crowns. In
the present passage Spirreadai determines
IO
arp. y.
the meaning bloom. But see App. A,
note 2.
10.	Tijiovoou iratS*] A misapprehen-
sion of the impersonal construction of
dcpeLXei led to the insertion of a full stop
after plkcLp (1. 9) and the connexion of
Ttfiopbov rraibl with the following sentence
(with the reading opeiap re).
11.	opeidv] The home of the Pleiad
sisters, daughters of Atlas and Pleione,
was Mt Cyllene in Arcadia. Fleeing
from the pursuit of Orion they were
changed into doves and finally became a
constellation.
The ancient interpreters found con-
siderable difficulty in explaining opeiap,
as will be seen from the following extracts
from the scholia.
rj tup opeiup iiretdi} 6 vArXas 6 tup
IlXetdSwt' irarijp opiupvpia Ztrx*1' °Py * ^ on
opoi eial tov apd)T0v * 7) XiT&repop tup opup
/cal tup rbrrup ip ots eioip ol aoTipes.
61 be ovtu * Ka6b IIeXeid5as abras ehre
eal opeias * al ydp nepiOTepal tpeial elaip *
etude de 6 Hipdapos rats 6p.upvp.lais iirapa-
nabeoda 1 £dei 18 Up.
ipioi 8i, 81a to ini Trjs obpas tov Tavpov
Ketadai, Kara vcpeaip tov v XiyecrOai K.r.X.
1} diro Trjs KvXX^prjs ip 77 iTpd<t>r)(rap.
Crates wrote Oepeiap IleXeidSw?, but (as
a scholiast observes) they rise in winter as
well as in summer. From one of the
scholia we learn that Simonides called
the Pleiad Maia obpeia; two lines are
given, one imperfectly,
MatdSos obpelas iXucopXecfrdpov
KvXXijprjs ip 6peer al deup Krjpv/ca Tif
'E ppirjp.
(Tzetzes read eXiKo^Xecpdpoio yipedXop, in
his note on Lycophron, 219.)
The names of the Pleiads are given in
the following lines, whose authorship is
uncertain (some ascribing them to He-
siod, fr. 10 b, ed. Flach) :NEMEAN II
35
fir) rrjXoOev 'ClapLcav aveurOai.
/cal fiav a 'ZaAafik ye Opeyfrai (fxSra pa^arav
Svvarov. iv Tpota fie v f/E Krcop A Lavrov utcovaev' eo T ijioSrjfie,
<76 S’ aXfcd
TrjvyiTT) r’ epbeaaa Kal ’HX^xrpi; Kvav<a-
TTLS
AXkv&pt} T€ Kal ’A<TT€p6m) dir} re KeXcu-
vb
Maid re Kal Mepdiry, t&s yelvaro <paidi-
julos vArXas.
The name TrjvylTT] combined with the
fact that they were the daughters of
Atlas seems enough to explain the epithet
opetav.
ye] The particle shows that the stress
of the argument rests on opetav; because
they are mountain nymphs, opetal, the
hunter of the mountain 'Qaplwv moves
near them. For this force of ye compare
Eurip. Bacchae, 926 -J) tt)P ’Ayatir)* earct-
vai, fiTjrpds 7’ ifjLrjs (seeing that she is my
mother). So in Isth. V. 4 Pauw’s resto-
ration tIv y* for tip is certainly right.
12.	dvet<r6ai] This is the reading of
B, B, D; and in a scholium on Nem. 1. 3,
where the line is quoted, B, Brfs w
have 1baplojp dpetadai. The other mss.
have ’QapLopa peiadai, which is explained
in the scholium by 7ropetieadai. Editors
before Bergk adopted vetadai, but Bergk
showed that apeladai is for dpap€i<r0aif
oriri; compare k 192 ovd’ 8tty} tyXios
<f)a€<rip.(3poTos da' viro ycdap ovd’ 8tt7j
appeirai. It is obvious that it is much
more likely that the difficult &pd<r0ai
should have become pei<r0ai than that the
easier pewdai should have been altered to
aP€t<T0ai, and therefore I cannot hesitate
to accept the reading of B, B, D. It has
been pointed out in the Introduction that
the verb has a secondary import, in regard
to Timodemus, who is compared to Orion.
13.	Kal jidv a SaXapfe yc] Aye and
Salaniis is potent to rear a fighting man.
I have attempted, by rendering is potent
instead of is able, to arrest the attention
in somewhat the same way as Pindar does
by dvpards for feminine dvpani.
14. "Ektg>p AWtos dKOVorcv] At
Troy Hector heard Ajax like a rushing
wind. Atas, like alivp in 1. 8, is conceived
as a wind (apepuop araXaPTOS alXXrj).
Schol. w<r0ero rrj trdpq.;, (vs KaVOfMrjpos [A
532]• toI de TrXrjyrjs atopres, &pt'i tov
alo06fiepoi. 8olk€ de 6 TUpdapos rb Trap’
Atapros pj]0h 7rpd$ "EXX^pas vTropeporjKipai
elprjcr0ai Trpos "E/cropa * <p7]ol yap [H 198]
eirel ovd’ ifie prjidd y’ ovtivs
ZXiropLai ep "EaXapupi yep£o0ai re rpa-
<pbp.ep re.
el fir) apa tis tt) Trdpq, p,epa07]Klpat
VTTO<JTT)<S€Tai TOP "E/CTOpa, (VS €TTlT7]dd(VS 7)
SaXa/us <?x€L irpos ttjp tIvp i)p<v(vp ytpeaip.
Editors have failed in their attempts to
explain aKovaep. The meaning supposed
to be required is expressed in the scholium
ya0€To Trj irelpq ‘learned by experience’,
but such a sense cannot possibly be elicited
from aKovaep, which would rather mean
the reverse (‘knew by hearing only’).
The Homeric TrXTjyrjs atopres proves no-
thing for aKobo), nor will it avail to adduce
vTraKOvtfjLep abyats aeXlov, Olymp. Hi. 24,
to show that (xkoihv could mean to feel the
might of. Nor will the word bear the
interpretation which Mezger proposes as
an alternative : he hearkened to him, that
is, listened for his battle-cry, in order to
bring succour to the point of danger.
But when we apprehend that Atas by
virtue of his name is conceived as a blast
(ayfu), we see that aKovtre bears its ordi-
nary meaning heard (of a sound). Pindar
chose the word in order to bring out the
play on Atas. His object was to suggest
a connexion between the Timodemids
and Aeacids.
Though I believe the text to be sound,
I suggest as possible
"EKT(Vp AtaPTOS €KOVC€P •
eKovaep being an aorist from koF- (koIw)
like eXovoa from XoF- (XoiJw). The form
3—236	NEMEONIKAI B'.
7rayfcpariov rkaOvpo9 aefjet.
IS
*Aydpvac oe 7raXai(f>aTOT)	arp. 8 .
€vavope<z’ o<r<ra S’ a^<£’ ae0koi$,
Tipo8rjpi8ai i^oxcoraroL ir pokey optcll.
irapa pep vyfripeSoprc Tiapva<r&
iteopigap'
akka Kopivducov viro </>cdtgov
ip icrkov Ueko7ro<; irrvxafc
oactco <TT€<f)dvoi<; epuxdev rjBry
eirra S’ eV Ne/xea, Ta S’
Ato9 dywvv. top, c5 TTokirai,
PO<TT(p ’
Teaaapa*; e£ ae0\G>i> w/ea9
20
CTp. €.
paaaop* apiOpov,
kcopal-are TipoSrfpq) avp evtckei
£k67i<t€ occurs in Callimachus frag. 53.
That /cow was used not only in the sense
of vow but also in the sense of aloOavopicu
is proved by glosses of Hesychius: /cow*
aicrdavo/Acu, Koei‘ alcr0av€Tcu, €ko/jl€v’ tdo-
fiev, evpofiev, rj<r06pL€0a. (Compare k(o)wv
ddws, £kool0tj‘ eir€vo7}07j, £<pwpa07], and
€Koa/j.€s' yKoboapev, €Trv06fJL€0a.) Bergk
reads eiraio-’ and points out that it was
probably the reading of the scholiast.
Hecker proposed lyeboaP.
15.	TXd0v(Jios] Staunch Might in the
pancration maketh thee great, O Tiniode
mus. rXa0v/jlos expresses the endurance
necessary for the feats of the pancration.
I have explained in the Introduction the
probable significance of this sentence.
A comparison of the passages in which
ad;w, atf£w, abi-dvw occur in Pindar shows
that dX/ca at dl^ei would be an awkward
expression, if dX/ca did not imply some
personal influence. I therefore conclude
that dX/ca alludes to Alcyone, the Pleiad,
and that T\d0vp.os, as it were WXdbvpos,
suggests "ArXas.
16.	*Axapvai] Long of yore is A char-
nae famous for brave men. Pindar uses
the adjective evdvwp of places; in the
Homeric poems it is applied to wine and
to arms. In 01. 1. 24 we read of the
colony of Lydian Pelops blessed vrith a
fine race of men (ev evavopi IIIXotos
diroiKlq); in 01. Vi. 80 Arcadia is called
ebavopa ; in Nem. x. 36 the Argives are
evavopa Xa6v.
17.	8<r<ra] But in all that apper-
tained unto games the Timodemids are
preferredfor highest excellence.
18.	TrpoXtyovrai] Compare N 689
’A0r)valwv wpoXcXeypLcvoi, quoted by the
scholiast. Brae caeteris nominantur,
Dissen ; wpoKiKpivTai, schol.
19.	vi|h|a&ovti] By the lordly height
of Parnassus. The adjective is gene-
rally applied to Zeus, as by Hesiod,
Theog. 529.
20.	KopivOfov] The judges of the
Isthmian games.
21.	4v...im/xai$] In dells of Pel-
ops. Compare Isthm. ill. 11 cv fiao-
eraiaiv T<r0/uou, ib. VII. 63 "loOfuov av
v&ttos. Bergk’s proposal 7rtfXats is un-
fortunate. tttvxcus is a touch of local
colouring, like v\f/ifx£5ovTi IIapvaortp.
23. eirrct] And with seven crowns at
Nemea.
Td 8* oticoi] But their achievements
at home, at the games of Zeus, are
beyond the compass of number. Him
(Zeus), O citizens, Timodeinus biddeth youNEMEAN II.
37
25
dSvfieXei S' e^dpj^ere <J>a>vd.
hymn, and withal his own glorious home-
coming\ Begin the sweet vocal music.
o?koi] at Athens. The festival of Zeus,
at which the Timodemids won so many
victories, was the Athenian Olympia (so
schol., Boeckh, Dissen &c.). Mezger
thinks that these games must have been
Diasia at either .Salamis or Acharnae, of
which we have no record. Reference to
the Olympia he thinks is impossible,
“weil es sich dann nicht erklaren liesse,
warum sich die Timodemiden von den
iibrigen athenischen Festspielen fern
gehalten haben sollten ”. But Pindar’s
silence does not prove that Timodemids
did not win prizes at other less important
Athenian games. Observe too that rh S’
of/coi in 23 responds to peydXais ’kdavais
in 8.
24. tov] There can be no question
that the mss. reading is right and that t6v
is Zeus. The honour of Zeus and the
praise of Timodemus’ victory are to be
the joint subject of the hymn. As in
Nemean I. 8, 9, we have Oeuv kcIvov crvv
av8pos dperais, so here we have Tbv...obv
€vk\Il vborip. TipLo8ljfjL(p is the dative of
the person interested. For Kupafa with
accusative, compare Nem. x. 34. The (r
form of the aorist occurs in Nem. xi. 28
KWfji.do’cus, IX. 1 Kup.doop.ev. So Pindar
uses also kopilous and Kopurov, ivappogcu
and appooav, &c. He has IdoKTjoev (Pytk.
VI. 40) as well as £5o£a.
Bergk punctuates at apiOpov, and joins
A 16s dyuvi with the following words,
referring it to the recent victory at
Nemea; instead of tov he reads t68\ that
is, rbde iyK(bpuov.
25. dSvf&cXct] Compare Isthm. Vi.
20 Kibpaf €7T€LT€v advpeXei ovv vpv(p. For
e%dpx€T€ compare 2 51 QItis 8’ i^vpx€
76010, Hesiod, Scut. Her. 205, &typx°v
aoidijs.NEMEAN III.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY IN THE PANCRATION
WON AT NEMEA BY ARISTOCLIDES OF AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
The modern theory of the hereditary transmission of qualities, which in
this century is being worked out in so many directions, would have found a
warm advocate in Pindar. For it is clear that this doctrine might be
perverted by an upholder of aristocracies and monarchies in support of his
political prejudices. And Pindar in his sympathies was thoroughly aristo-
cratic, belonging himself to a distinguished family and associated in friend-
ship with men of high position and with families of ancient name. He
believed in the derivation of excellences, physical and moral, from the
ancient heroes, to whom such families traced their descent ; and he
disdained the doctrine that excellences might be acquired. People of low
position are outside his world; and those whose natural faculties do not
reach a certain high level, he regards as doomed, in spite of all teaching,
to abide for ever ‘in the dark’. The world of men is divided, for him, into
eagles and daws.
This principle dominated his mind, when he composed a hymn on a
victory in the pancration at Nemea1, won by an Aeginetan, Aristoclides, son
of Aristophanes, whose remarkable achievements—at Megara and Epidaurus
as well as at Nemea—in that trying contest beseemed the comeliness of his
strong limbs. His name Aristoclides, too, might strike his friends as a fair
augury, to Pindar at least suggesting that the man was under the special
patronage of Clio, the Muse whose name is of glory ; and, with this thought,
he associates her intimately with his hymn. Aristoclides had already
reached the years of later manhood, and might seem to his contemp oraries
one of those few men who at every age realise an appropriate excellence.
The hymn opens with a picture of young men standing in Aegina on the
banks of the Asopus stream, on the anniversary of the Nemean festival,
ready to lift up their voices and waiting only for the arrival of the Muse;
for it appears that Pindar had been tardy in executing the commission of
Aristoclides2. Victory thirsts for a draught of song ; and in the latter end
of the ode we shall see how Pindar describes the ingredients of the potion,
1 As to the date of this ode we only independence,
know that it must have been composed 2 Compare fxaio/mcmi, 1. 5, and 6\f/£ wep
before 457 B.C., when Aegina lost her 1. 80.INTRODUCTION.
39
‘with many murmurs mix’d’, which he offers to the lips of the victor. But
here, with a characteristic change of metaphor (suggested by an etymology),
he proceeds1: ‘song, a most propitious minister of crowns and brave deeds,
—whereof do thou, O Muse, minister abundance, drawing from the store of
my craft
This is the prelude; and now, under the auspices of Zeus, the hymn
begins; a hymn in praise of one who is fair like a statue, and touched
with the grace of art,—really recalling, perhaps, as he stood in the agora of
Aegina, a statue of Onatas. And the exploits of Aristoclides are like unto
his comely form, equally worthy of the time-honoured agora, associated
with the Myrmidons of Achilles. For through the favour of Clio, whose
virtue as it were passed into his name, Aristoclides behaved with dauntless
hardihood at Nemea, and the blows which wounded him are salved by the
hymn of triumph. And thus in marine metaphor,—addressed to the ears
of the seafaring Aeginetans,—‘the son of Aristophanes’ has embarked in
pinnaces of splendid prowess; but with the Greek instinct to moderation,
the poet straightway marks the limit of the triumphant voyage by the
pillars of Heracles, figuring probably the goal of an Olympic victory.
Here the first system of the Ode ends, and the next two systems are
occupied with the mythical tales which Pindar has chosen to illustrate his
theme. In the fourth and last system we return to Aristoclides and
Aegina.
Having named the pillars of Heracles, the poet is moved to speak of the
voyage of discovery made by that hero in the far west, where he reached the
end of possible navigations, and reached it alone.
And here, having fully expressed what he would say, Pindar feigns to
check himself, and to recall his imagination from its wanderings far at sea;
for there are examples, awaiting it, at Aegina itself, Aeacid heroes, who can
as punctually illustrate the truth which he wishes to convey. To speak
of older men, for instance, Peleus—he who cut the supereminent spear —
captured Iolcus alone,
povos av€v (TTpar Las,
and by hard wrestling captured Thetis. There was Telamon too, who, with
Iolaus, slew Laomedon, and went against the Amazons, the fear that killeth
never dulling the edge of his spirit.
And the lesson that is conveyed by these examples,—Heracles, Peleus
and Telamon—is now, at the end of the second metrical system, clearly
stated2:
‘A man who hath the birthright of nobility prevaileth greatlyj but he
whose knowledge is a lesson learned is a man in darkness, whose thought is
1 See note on 1. 9. Mezger divides the
hymn thus:
apx<i (1—25); Kararpoira (26—32);
6fuf>a\6s (32—64); peTcucaTaTpoTra (65—
67); <r<ppayis (68—84).
This practically corresponds to my
triple division.
2 In these words Mezger finds the
Grundgedanke of the hymn; p. 391. The
mark, he says, of taught excellence is povs
dreX^s (v. 42), that of innate excellence
is tIXos iv weipq. (v. 70).40
NEMEAN III.
as a veering gale, and who never cometh to port with unerring course, but
with ineffectual mind tasteth a thousand excellences.’
avyyevtl di ns cvdo£ia piya ftptdet'
os 8e 8i8cuct €%€i \j/€(j)Tjvos aprfp aXXor aWa npicop ovnor arptKei
Kareva no8i, pvptav 8* aperav areXei vo<p ycverai.
In these lines ‘the dark man’ who never comes to port is contrasted with
Heracles, in echoing words : for of Heracles it was said
1. 25. oira nopmpop Kariftaipe vocrrov riXos.
It is meant moreover that Aristoclides is worthy of comparison with each
of these mythical ensamples; and this meaning is conveyed by Pindar’s
system of echoes. The superiorities of the victor, noted in 1. 20,
avo plats vneprarais ini ft a,
are echoed in the superlative beasts subdued by Heracles, proving his own
superlative qualities,
dapaae 8e Sfjpas—vnepoxovs (1. 24),
and again in the superlative spear which Peleus cut on Mount Pelion (1. 33)
vnipdXXov alxp>av rap.dv.
The comparison between Aristoclides and Telamon is exhibited by the
application of nepivBevrjs to the pancration in 1. 16, echoed in evpvo-Bepyjs1
as the epithet of Telamon in 1. 36.
We now come to the third system, in which the life of Achilles is sketched,
both in childhood and in manhood. We see him, a child of six years, in the
cave of Chiron, dealing death to lions and boars with a small javelin and
dragging the bodies, too heavy for him yet, to the feet of the Centaur; and
again we see him by virtue of his fleet feet overtaking and slaying stags without
aid of hounds or snares, and in the background Artemis and Pallas Athene
standing, amazed.
He was nourished in all things fitting his condition by Chiron, that
trainer of divine young men, who had brought up Jason and Asclepius, and
who compassed the marriage of Peleus with the nymph of the bright
well-head. And this training prepared him for fighting with the Lycians and
Dardanians at Troy, where his great achievement was to slay Memnon, the
son of Morning, and cousin of the inspired Helenus.
Pindar leaves us in no doubt that he is comparing Aristoclides to Achilles.
Chiron, who is a master in the healing art, bears, it is suggested, the same
relation to Achilles, as the poet, who heals by his song, bears to Aristoclides.
‘Chiron of deep thoughts’
ftadvprjra Xeipcav
is said to have taught Asclepius the art of dispensing remedies with gentle
hands2,
(pappaKoou3 8i8a^€ /LtaXaKoxeipa vopov.
1 Both these adjectives are unusual. logy of Xeipwp.
3 paXcucoxeipa suggests the etymo- 3 <papp.-a.Kov: (j>{peip clkos; see note.INTRO D UCTION
41
Now these words are intended to recall the curious description of the
pancratiast’s victory (11. 15, &c.)
ayopav—ovk— iplave—fiaXaxQds—
Kaparcobecov be irXayap
aKos vyirjpbp ep ye fiadvireba Nepea to koXXIpikop (jyepeip1.
The deep soil of Nemea, ‘the dispenser’, provides a remedy, like the deep
mind of Chiron, but Chiron himself rather corresponds to the poet2 as is
indicated by advprjra, which recalls patios apas ano of 1. 9.
Other intentions of Pindar in this story of Achilles will be elucidated by
the fourth system, to which we may now pass. By the ‘far shining star’
of the Aeacidae, fixed at Troy by their achievements there, especially by this
victory of Achilles over Memnon, we are lit back, as it were, to the young
men singing at Aegina and the proper theme of the hymn.
The fourth system is parallel to the first :
1. IO. apX6 ^ ovpapco—Kpcovn—
vppop.
1.	5* veaviai <reOep orra paiopepoi.
1. 12. (uppop—), xaPL€vra ^
ttovov x a) p a ? ayaXpa.
1. 7. aedXopiKia be paXiar aoibav
(piXei.
1. 3. ixeo Acopiba pda op Riyivav.
1. 13. x^Pai aXpa.
1. 65. Zev—dya>p top vpuos eftaXep.
1. 66. 07Tt Pe<DP.
1. 66. vppos—emx^pf’OP x^PP*1
KeXabecov.
1. 67. fioabe piKa(f>6p(p avp'ApioTo-
icXelba npenei.
1. 68. off raphe paaop.
1. 69. dyXaaiai pepippcus.
Moreover the thirst of 1. 6 is assuaged in the honeyed draught of
11. 76 sqq., peXi in 77 echoing peXiyapveop in 1. 4> and 7Top9 aoibtpop echoing
aoibau of 1. 7. All these echoes mark, as it were audibly, a train of thought
returning to the places from which it set out.
Aristoclides is said to have wedded the island of Aegina to Renown, and
the Theorion or sacred college of Apollo to a society of bright Ambitions.
The remarkable words are :
off raphe pcut op evfcXe'i 7Tpo(redrjK€ Aoyo>
69 Kai aeppop ayXaaicri pepipvcus
Uvd’iov Qeapiop3.
Now dyXaaiai pe pippins responds to dyXaoKpapop, the epithet of Thetis,
in the corresponding line of the 2nd antistrophos; of Chiron it is said,
56 pvpcfoevcre b* avris ayXao Kpavov
Nrjpeos dvyarpa.
Aristoclides is said to marry Aegina to evKXerjs Aoyor, and the college of
Theori to a company of ayXaal Mepipvai, just as Chiron married Thetis
ayXaoKpapos to Peleus. What is the meaning of this ? How is it that the
1 (pipeip too is echoed in yopop <pipra-	2 This comparison was noticed by Lud-
top (as it were, most winning) in 1. 57. wig.
See Appendix A, note 3.	3 See note on this passage.42
NEMEAN III
victor, who has already been compared both to Peleus and to Achilles, is
now compared to Chiron ? The puzzle is solved in the following lines.
Pindar proceeds to set forth that each of the three ages of man, child-
hood, early manhood, and elder age, has a proper excellence of its own ; and
besides these there is another excellence, not confined to a particular time of
life, namely wisdom. Thus there are four excellences or ‘virtues’ in mortal
life. The childhood of Achilles exhibited the first, and his manhood the
second. Of advanced age Peleus was the example, as is pointed out by
a responsion1,
1. 32.	7TaXaialcn d* iv dpcrals.
1. 73* TrakairepoKTi...
............Te<r<rapas dp eras.
It has already been observed that Aristoclides is compared to all these
heroes; the implication being that he inherited the apera appropriate to each
age. For his perfection, it only remains that he should have the fourth
excellence, wisdom. Now it is manifest that this excellence would be well
illustrated by PaBvprjTa Xdpav ; and therefore, by comparing Aristoclides to
Chiron, Pindar would imply that he possessed wisdom. This is the solution
of the problem.
But in regard to these virtues it must be observed that the fourth, which
bids man do wisely that which he does, may be possessed at any age.
And Pindar takes care to indicate that all the heroes, whom he has celebrated
in the hymn, were endowed with this faculty of thought. Of Heracles it is
said
Kal yav (frpadacrae (1. 26).
The wisdom of Peleus is alluded to by the responsion already mentioned.
Telamon is praised because
ovSi vlv iTore (fioftos dvdpoSapcus €7ravtrev a<pav <f>p€v<Z)v.
And of Achilles it is related that in his childhood Chiron nourished him
iv appivouri ndcri Bvpov av£<ov2,
and of his resolve to slay Memnon the curious expression is used
iv <f>pa<ri ira£aiTo.
The words of 1.75 <f>povc iv 8y iviirci to ira.pKtip.evov elucidate all these phrases3.
Finally the poet turns to Aristoclides4, and solemnly offers him, to assuage
1	This responsion is noticed by Mezger.
2	On the significance of this passage I
must refer the reader to Appendix A,
note 3, where he will find a discussion
of other details, connected with the
argument of the hymn.
3	I may observe that Dissen found
the Grundgedanke of the poem in the
passage on the four virtues. “Fons
explicationis est in eo loco, ubi de aetati-
bus vitae dicitur.” He thinks that the
three victories mentioned in the last line
of the hymn were gained respectively in
youth, manhood and advanced age. I
have already mentioned that Mezger
places the Grundgedanke in the passage
about innate and acquired excellence.
The truth is that both thoughts have
been worked out in the poem, the aperd
of Aristoclides being the link between them.
4	Mezger sees in xa*Pe (!• 76) “eine
Zuruckweisung auf yiyaSt v. 33, womit
der My thus begonnen wurde ”, Aristo-
clides is to be glad like Peleus.INTR OD UCTION
43
the thirst mentioned at the beginning of the hymn, a draught of song, with
honey and white milk for ingredients,—as the Muses accepted only wineless
libations—and crowned with foam, presented ‘in the breathings of Aeolian
flutes’, as cups. The hymn concludes with a pointed comparison of
Aristoclides to the Aeacids, and especially to Achilles. Just as the eagle,
aUros, is the emblem of the Aeacids, AiW&u, so Clio’s favour is indicated in
the name Aristoclides. The eagle is described seizing a hare in these words
tFXafttv aly/ra, rrjXodt ptrapaiopevos, ba<poivov aypav iroo-lv.
The choice of language shows that Achilles is primarily intended1; 8a<f)oivov
aypav recalls
Xtovrecaiv ayporipois tirpaaratv <f)ovov (46)
and tto(tlv recalls iroaa-X yap KpartcrKt (1. 52) the traditional quality of
Achilles.
And Aristoclides too, if not an eagle, has a quality etymologically
resembling the eagle’s power of ‘grasping’ prey (eXafiev); for he has
atQXofyopov Xfj pa, which suggests Xfjppa2. And he too, like the Aeacids, has
a star
(1. 84, dibopKcv (j)aos. 1. 64, apapt (faeyyos3).
And the prey of Aristoclides is indicated ; for }UTap.ai.6p.€vo$) used of the
eagle, echoes aiBtv ona patopevoi said of the young men in the first strophe.
It was upon the song of victory that he swooped.
The whole composition is a hymn of the perfect man, who has realised
duly the excellences appropriate to the three periods of life,—childhood,
manhood, and later manhood. Old age is not mentioned, for the Greeks
regarded it as hardly a part of life in the true sense of the word. The
perfect man will also realise a fourth quality, not confined to any age,—
<jipovtlv to irapKtiptvov. These virtues are illustrated by (i) Achilles as a
child, (2) the same hero as a man, and Heracles, (3) Peleus and Telamon,
(4) Chiron.
The perfect man, who always attains his end by his own faculty, without
extraneous aid, is also the man of light, opposed to the ineffectual man, who is
called a ‘dark’ one. And there is a certain atmosphere of light, consciously,
about the whole poem ; we feel that we are in the bright Greek world, which
extends to the pillars of Heracles, dividing it from darkness. ciyaXpa (1. 13),
ayXaoKpavov (1. 56), ayXaalo-i. (1. 69), are notes suggesting the gracious presence
of Aglaia; rrjXavyts apapt (fityyos (1. 64), dibopiccv <j)aos (1. 84), biafyaivtTai
(1. 71), even the name of the victor’s father’Ap«rro</>a^y, determine the bright
atmosphere, of which Clio is the presiding deity.
And as in all Pindar’s works there are many striking phrases and
suggested pictures in this poem—for instance, the young men waiting
at the river, the balm of Nemea, Heracles alone in the far west sounding
1	In these lines there is a secondary 1. 83, and to Appendix A, note 3.
allusion to the poet himself. See note.	3 This comparison is noticed by
2	In support of this explanation I must Mezger.
refer to the note on the significant p£v in44
NEMEAN III.
the shallows, the child Achilles with his short spear at the entrance of
Chiron’s cave, the lowflying daws, the draught of song ministered in the
breathings of Aeolian flutes, the constellations of glory.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
A.
A — ^	Gj v-> — v-' — • CO — A (15)
-- • ~ W- A (^5)
B.
V. CJ.	— . — \j — OD \J —	“ A	(7)
VV. 6, 7*	—--- —	--(12)
V. 8. “ vw - ^	w — w — • — A	(7)
Here the strophe falls into two unequal parts of which the second has
a mesodic structure (compare the strophes of the Tenth Nemean Ode).
Observe that the first two syllables of the 8th line belong rhythmically to
the 7th.
It is worthy of remark that t*eo, in 1. 3> seems to have led Schmidt into the
mistake of making the second piyedos begin with — ww.
Epode.
A.
w ^ — c — ---- w-u-wuDw—A (17)
v------	--(17)
VV. I, 2.
“U v — vy —
vv. 3, 4.
—	-O' ^-
VV. I, 2.
— — u w — vy — vy — v — • — w
w. 3, 4.
B.
2/, 5. — v/ v/ — vy —	— . — v^-“A	(8)
A structure of this kind is called by Hephaestion an inabiKov. The
€7rG>8i»cd, writes Schmidt, “sind so gebaut, dass den zwei gleichen p.*yi6r) ein
drittes entweder nachfolgt, oder vorangeht, oder als Centrum eingewebt wird ”.
He proceeds “die erste Art ist hochst wahrscheinlich die alteste, da es nahe
genug lag, die einzelnen Systeme, ebenso wie die umfangreichere irepiKoirj,
auch wieder gleichsam in zwei Stollen und einen Abgesang zu theilen
It is clear that the strophes of the present ode might be also included
under the head of epodics.
The rhythm of this hymn is logaoedic, and the mood was Aeolian, as we
learn from 1. 79.NEMEONIKAI F.
API2TOKAEIAH* AITINHTHi
nArKPATIASTHt.
7TOTVia Molaa, parep aperepa, \iaaopcu,	crrp. a.
rap TroXv^evap iv Upoprjvia NepeaSi
ifceo AwpiSa vaaov Atycvav. vhan yap
pkvovr €7r ' A a a)7TLay peXiyapviop re/cropes
1.	<5 irorvia Mot<ra] O Muse august,
mother of us, come, I beseech thee, on
the holy moon of Nemea to the Dorian
island of Aegina which harbours many
strangers. The Muse invoked is Clio,
mentioned by name in line 83. Poets
are her spiritual children. The scholiast
suggests the relation of Odysseus to
Athene, SP 783:
l^ljTrjp 10s ’OSvorrji iraplo-TaTCU Tjtf hra-
riyet.
2.	iro\v£lvav] Pindar sometimes
adopts a feminine termination in the case
of compound adjectives; as adavdra
Pyth. III. 100, aKivlfrav 01. IX. 33, irap-
fxovlpav Pyth. VII. 20, and cp. Nem. v. 9.
The MSS. have icokv&lvav, but the resto-
ration of iro\vi;4vav (with Moschopulos)
is necessary for the metre.
The kindness of the Aeginetans to
strangers was famous. In the 8th Olym-
pian, 1. 26, the island is called tcolvto-
dcLToifftv £4vois kIovol daifiovlav, a divine
pillar for strangers of all lands, and in
the 5th Nemean, 1. 8,	%4vwp
dpovpav.
kv Upop/qvCq. NcpcdSi] The anniversary
of the Nemean festival, iepofirjpia is, as
Hesychius explains it, simply iopraaipos
i]pdpa festal day, and does not imply that
the moon was new or at the full.
3.	vSari. yap x.r.X.J For by the waters
of Asopus are waiting young men, smiths
of honeyed hymns, eagerly seeking for thy
voice.
Although there is no evidence beyond
this passage, it would seem that there was
a stream named Asopus near the city
Aegina (as well as the Asopus in Boeotia
and the Asopus near Phlius). In legend
Asopus was the father of the nymphs
Thebe and Aegina.
4.	jUvovt*] That is, plvovn =piivovai.
fitXiyapvtov t&tovcs kwjuov] Here the
singers (xopcvral) are called artificers of
the hymns. In another place (Pyth.
III. 113) the metaphor is used of the
poet:
kt)£ iirlcw /ceXadevvQv, tIktovcs ota
<ro<t>ol
dpp,o<Tav, yivilurKopep,
from the sounding verses wrought by skilful
joiners. The writer of the essay on
Pindar's Odes of Victory in the Quarterly
Review of Jan. 1886 observes in regard
to this phrase (p. 171); “Even the ex-
pression 4poet-builders’, though it does
not seem unnatural to us who are familiar46
NEMEONIKAI r.
fccoficov veavlcUy creOev oira ficuofievoi.	5
Scyfrj) Se irpayo? aXXo fiev dXXov '
aeBXovucla Se /ioXlctt aoihav (friXei,
cr€<j>dva)v aperav re SeguoraTav oirahov.
t«9 d<f>0oviav oira^e p,r}Tio<$ ap,a$ airo'	avr. a.
apX€ S’, ovpavov iroXvvecfteXa Kpeovn Ovyarep,	IO
with Milton’s ‘build the lofty rhyme’,
must have been a significant expression
when it was used by Pindar; since we
find it parodied by Aristophanes and
Cratinus See Aristophanes, Equites 530
tIktopcs €vta\dpup tippwp and Cratinus,
Ew. 3. It is to be observed that pe\l-
yapvs is not used as an epithet of persons
but only of utterance. Pindar uses it
always of hymns; 01. XI. 4 and Pyth.
ill. 64 /uL€\iydpv€s tifipoi; in Homer it
qualifies 61J/, p 187.
5.	|Mu6|icvoi] Pindar has chosen this
word to allude to the circumstance that
the hymn was delayed beyond its due
time. palopat, I seek, is used by Pindar
(1) without a case, 01. 1. 46, (2) with
accusative, as here and Pyth. xi. 51
Sward paibpevos, (3) with infinitive, 01.
VIII. 5 pcuopivuv XajSeh'. But there is
ultimately little difference between the
three cases; in (1) an accusative is under-
stood, and in (3) the infinitive is gram-
matically the object.
6.	8«M&] Divers are the thirsts of
divers exploits; but victory in the games
is chiefly fain of song, ministress most
auspicious of crowns and valiant deeds.
Dissen translates 81^/rj desiderat, but it
is a mistake to render the original, which
is far stronger than woPei or imPvpei, by
a weaker equivalent. Compare Pyth. ix.
103 £p£ S’ wv tis doiddp blxf/av dreidpepop
irpdoaei xp£°s aSrts eyeipat. The rare
word Trpayos differs from tpyop only in
dignity and solemnity, tpyop is a deed;
wpayos is an exploit.
7.	dcOXovucCa] This word occurs only
here.
8.	o*T€<|>ava>v aperav re] In sense this
is a hendiadys, but there is no reason to
translate it as such. Joined with onadSp
the adjective Se^icordrap is felicitous; it
suggests that song, the companion, walks
on the right of victory. aeOXopucla and
aoidd are abstractions; oTrabbv suggests a
concrete picture, and de^icordrap helps to
define it.
9.	Tas d<|>0ov£av] Thereof minister
an ungrudging measure from the store of
my craft. Tas = dot8as; the request is
addressed to the Muse. In the preceding
verse Song was called the companion of
victory; in this verse song is regarded
rather as a measurable thing than as a
person, and the Muse is asked to send
abundance thereof to accompany the vic-
tory of Aristoclides. With consummate
skill the poet connects the second meta-
phor with the first by choosing the word
oirdfa, which literally meant send along
with (as an oirabos), as in £ 31 o ap’ rjyepbp1
£<r0\8p owaocrop, but acquired the more
general sense of bestow. With p-frios dp.as
airo compare Nem. iv. 8. In Homer
d/xo's means our but in Pindar my; see
Isth. v. 45, Pyth. IV. 27 and in. 41.
10.	<fy>X€ 8* ovpavov k.t.X.] Begin a
true hymn in honour of the king of
the cloudy welkin, his daughter thou;
and I will impart it to their blending
voices and commit it to the lyre.
Dissen’s explanation of 1.10 is certainly
correct, praei vero caeli regi praeclarum
hymnum, filia (=filia Jovis). Bergk
introduces into the text of his fourth
edition Ovpapot, wd\vpe<f>£\q. KplopTi dv-
yarep, Urania, daughter of the kingNEMEAN III.
4 7
hcKifxov vfjuvov* iyco $€ tceivcov re viv oapoi?
\vpa t€ KOLvaaopcu. yapUvra S’ e%ei ttovov
'Xwpas ayaXpa, Mvppihoves iva irpirepoi
tp/crjaav, cov iraXai^arov ayopav
enwrapped in clouds, but the Muse ad-
dressed is Clio, not Urania, and all the
mss. have ttoXvvetpiXa (genitive). The
scholium 6 p.kv ’Aplarapxos Ovpavou
Ovyartpa tt)v MoOtrav dedeKTCu shows, as
Mommsen pointed out, that Aristarchus
read Ovpavtp nToXvvefaXq. Kpiovn Ovyarep,
which would support Bergk’s construc-
tion.
n. SoKipov] ein echtes Lied, Mezger;
approved. Compare Aeschylus, Persae,
547
K&yib dt jxbpov tCov oixop.iv(av
cupoj boKlfxm iroXvirevdij.
86ki/jlq$ would be the word for translating
patent into Greek.
<$apois] Used of choral song (cf. iralSuv
6dpoi<ri, Pyth. I. 98). viv (restored by
Mommsen for juuv) is tipivov.
12.	Koivdo-opcu] For the sense com-
pare Pyth. VIII. 29 avadip-ev (commit)
irSLaav pLaicpayopiav Xvpq. re Kal (pdiypLari
/ia\$aand Horace, Odes iv. 9. 11 vi-
vuntque commissi calores Aeoliae fidibus
puellae. The poet acts as a Trpo<pr)T7}s or
interpreter of the Muse to the musicians.
In Pyth. iv. 115 Pindar uses the active
aorist of kolv6oj in the same construction,
vvktl KOLvdaavres o86v, to Night (and to
none other) having imparted the secret of
their journey.
Xapfcvra 8* g£ci ttovov] Its gracious
work will be a bright jewel to deck the
land where in former days dwelled the
Myrmidons. H/uluos is the nominative to
2£et, and if any change were necessary
I should prefer Rauchenstein’s 2£ei$ (sc.
Mo?<ra) to Mr Fennell’s 2£ecu (sc. Mot<ra),
of which, as of other ‘ causal Middles ’,
I confess that I feel rather shy. But it
seems unnecessary to deviate from the
mss. ; the semi-personification of the
Hymn is thoroughly Pindaric (compare
Nem.\. 5). The interpretation of Dissen
is as untenable as those of Boeckh and
Matthiae. (1) Boeckh making x^Pas
ayaXfxa mean the chorus took it for the
subject of : “pulcrum elegantemque
laborem habebit chorus”. (2) Matthiae
also took x^Pas diya\jj.a for the subject
but explained it as the ode. (3) Dissen
and Hermann understood Zeus as the
subject of and took xaPL€VTa as pre-
dicate : “lubens autemaccipiet hoc carmen
Iuppiter utpote ornamentum terrae ”.
Xapi'ets irbvos is a work inspired by
the Graces, and the closely following
&yaXp.a suggests Aglaia. (See Appendix
B.) irdvos does not mean toil here, rather
work of the hands, as though the song
in honour of Aegina were a statue, and
this comparison is further hinted at in
the word AyaXfia, which is specially used
of images (in Nem. x. 67 it means the
headstone of a tomb).
13.	MvpfuSovcs] In a fragment of
Hesiod it is related that Zeus supplied
Aeacus with a people by transforming
ants, /jLbp/jiTjKes, into men, who were thence
called Mvppu86v€$. They were the oldest
inhabitants of Aegina.
14.	ayopav] In conformity with the
metre of the corresponding lines of the
other strophes we expect here a word of
spondaic instead of anapaestic scansion.
(Hence Rauchenstein has proposed &Xk&v
and Kayser 2$pav.) But in the fourth
lines of the epodes of this ode we also
find a variation between - and hence
it seems gratuitous to suppose that there
is a corruption, especially as the word
gives most excellent sense. Aristoclides
brought no soil of shame on the Place
of Assembly called after the Myrmidons;
and in the fourth strophe (1. 69) it is said
that he glorified the Theorion, which was48
N EMEONIKAI T.
ovk iXeyykeacriv ’Apiaro/cXciSa? reap	15
i/iiave kclt alaav iv irepiaOevel /Aa\a%0eW
iray/epariov aroXco* tcap,aTCD$ecov Se irXayav	iir. a.
a* 09 vyirjpdv iv ftaOvireSicp Nefiea to /caXXivi/cov fyepei.
probably situated close to the agora (cf.
Mezger, p. 386). It is clear, I think,
that dyopd means here, primarily, the
place of assembly (not conventum as
Dissen takes it), suggesting of course the
fame and traditions of the Myrmidons
inseparably associated with the place.
15.	ovk IXcYxlcoHriv x.r.X.] Translate:
whose time-honoured agora A ristoe tides,
by virtue of thee, O Clio, stained not with
soils of shame through soft succumbing in
the stalwart array of the pancration.
That Aristoclides is possessed of the
valour that wins renown (kXIos) his very
name (*Aptaro-KXeldas) is a sign, and for
the same reason he is the favourite of
Clio (KXetci, who sings ra ic\la avdpojv).
This idea is expressed by redv xar’ alaav,
wider thy auspices—a stronger phrase
than aoG x&Plv' For dtcra means omen
(compare the adjective ataios), and here
suggests that the name Aristoclides is
ominous. In a passage in the Ninth
Olympian Ode (1. 42) the word, I think,
has a similar significance:
tv* aiohofipbvTa Aids aterq.
Hbppa AevKaXiwv re IIapvaaov Kara-
fidvre
86[mov idevro wp&rov k.t.X.
where under the auspices of Deus (Zeus),
who wieldeth the forked flame, Pyrrha
(suggesting 7rvp) and Deu-calion &c. Here
aXaq. calls attention to an omen latent
in the names Deucalion and Pyrrha.—
With oGk i\eyxlc<T<riv ifiiave Dissen com-
pares Solon (frag. 32, Bergk) pudvas Kai
Karaioxfoas k\Ios. Compare xj/evdeai xa-
rafudvais (Pyth. iv. 100) and Oed^vrjTov
ob KareXiyx^is (Pyth. VIII. 36). For redv
Bergk reads edv after a scholium.
16.	,ir€pur0€vci] This Pindaric adjec-
tive occurs only here and in frag. 131, 1. 2,
where it is used of Death: Kai aCafia fikv
wavriov iirerai Oavarip wepicrdevei, and the
body of each followeth stalwart Death. It
conveys the idea of the immense strength
required for the pancration. aroXip sug-
gests a comparison with real warfare, as
Dissen has noticed, comparing Pyth. xi.
50 TLvOoi re yvfivbv iiri aradiov Karafiavres
ijXey^av 'EXXavlda arparidv dnc&ran.
Mezger translates Allkampfsgang (cf.
Waffengang).
17.	KapaTwS&ov $€ irXayav] But he
hath a healthful balm for weary blows and
bruises, even the hymn of victory which
the deep dale of Nemea doled to him. The
thought that victory and the songs which
celebrate victory are a physic for pain
often recurs in Pindar; compare e.g. the
opening lines of the Fourth Nemean, and
Nemean vm. 49. For Kafianhbrjs cf.
Hesiod, Op. et D. 582 Oipeos Kafiarubeos
upy, and Pindar, frag. 218 Kafiariodees
fiipifivai.
18.	4v paOvTreSto) Ncjiiq.] Most mss.
have iv (HaOviredlip, two (X and Z prima
manu) have iv fiadvicibw, the Moscho-
puleans have iv ye fSadviribip. I think
Bergk is rash in adopting the latter.
fiadviribios (with law-lying plain) is an
isolated compound of irediov, and Pindar
coined it in order to arrest the attention
and emphasize his covert meaning. Ne-
mea is a dispenser (vifiu) of balm and
her vale is deep, even as the mind of
Chiron the healer is deep (see below
1. 53 fiadufirfra and 1. 55 vofiov).
rb KaXXCviKOv <f>4pa] he has won the
song of triumph ; he is greeted in song as
u KaXXlviKe, conquering hero. In Olymp.
ix. 2 we have KaXXivtKos 6 rpiirXoos xe-
xXadios (the hymn swelling with thrice-
resounding shout of triumph), where il/ivosNEMEAN III.
49
el S’ iwv icaXbs epBcov t ioucora fiop(f)d
dvopecus virepraTcu9 iire^a irals ’Api<TTO<f>dv€v<;, ov/cen irpoaco 20
dfidrav d\a kiovcov virep 'HpaicXeos irepav evpapes,
rjpco? 0ed$ a? eOrjKe vavTikias ecyaTas	arp. /3'.
is understood; cf. Pyth. v. 106 rb KaXXl-
vikov p.bXos. (pbpetv is used for winning as
well as (pbpeadai; see Isthm. Vi. 21. But
here <kos <pbpet is intended to suggest an
etymology of 0apn-a/cop, see below 1. 55.
The present tense implies that the conse-
quences of the victory are not yet over.
Bergk, after a scholium, reads <f>bpeiv (To
win at Nernea is balm). But a view of
the whole context supports the MSS.
reading; it seems most natural that after
the negative assertion o8k bpdave, the
particle 8b should introduce a corre-
sponding positive assertion.
19. ci 8* &ov k.t.X.] But if the son of
Aristophanes, being comely and doing
deeds like unto his comeliness, embarked
in the loftiest achievements of manhood?s
excellence, then it is not an easy thing to
traverse further the pathless sea beyond
the pillars of Heracles which the hero-god
set as witnesses of the li??iits of his famed
seafaring. For the association of beauty
with beautiful deeds compare Olymp. IX.
94 wpaios bCov Kal KuXbs k6.XXuttcl re pbt;ais,
Isthm. VI. 22 aQbvn r’ bKwayXos ISeiv re
fiopipacis, ayei r’ dperav ovk afoxtov 0uas,
Olymp. VIII. 19 rjv 8’ baopav KaXbs bpytp
r’ oi) /card etSos iXbyxw. It is not neces-
sary to interpret avopbais laudes with
Dissen; it simply means manly deeds,
which imply manly qualities, iwbfia in-
troduces the metaphor of the seafarer;
compare iwipalveiv vaval Thucyd. VII. 70.
In Nem. XI. 44 peyaXavoplais epfiaivopev,
we embark in great deeds of valour, a
similar metaphor is used of the poet.
Aristoclides’ noble qualities are the ship
in which he sails and reaches the pillars
of Heracles; the fact that he reaches
them, though not expressly stated, is
B.
implied in the next clause, and is
assured by the excellence of the ship
(vwepraTais).
20. ovk^ti TTpoo-to k.t.X.] The pillars
of Heracles were a prominent feature in
Pindar’s view of the world. In Olymp.
III. 43 it is said of Theron that by his
deeds of prowess he toucheth without
leaving home (dwTerai oiKodev) the pillars
of Heracles, t6 wopaw 8’ ban <ro<f>6is
aftarov /cd<ro'0ois, but that which is beyond
may not be traced by wise or witless;
compare Isthm. ill. 30 dvopbais S’ baxd-
raunv oikoOcv araXaunv awtovO’ 'Hpa-
xXefais, almost verbally the same. In
both these cases the force of oUodev is to
qualify a somewhat strong metaphor.
See also Nem. iv. 69 TaSdpwv rb wpbs
£b<t>ov ov weparbv. In the present case
the poet makes the metaphor an intro-
duction to a short statement of the
services of Heracles the Deliverer.
The declension of 'Hp&KXbrjs in Pindar
is -&>s, -ei and -771, -ba -ees. The ante-
penult is long in 12 passages, short in 10,
and twice doubtful.
22. vcnmXCas kXvt<xs] Pindar uses
vavnXia in the plural, also of Heracles’
sea-voyaging, in Isthm. ill. 75:
6s OtfXiyiwbvS’ bfia yaias re wdcras
Kal paBvKpi\fxvov woXtds aXbs b&vp&v
dbvap
vavnXlaial re wopdphv apepdoais,
who went to Olympus, having discovered
the beetling ledge of the whole earth and of
the white sea, and having tamed the deep
by his seafaring (wopdp.6s is the sea from
the aspect of navigators). The reading of
the best mss. kXvtGLs is certainly right
(al. KXvrds); vavnXlas kXvras balances
eo’x^as id ova s.
4NEMEONIKAI r.
50
/laprvpa9 fcXvras' Sdfiacre Be 0r}pa<z ev ireXayel
V7T€poxovs, IBia t ipevvaae revayecov
pod?, Sira 'Trbpmifiov /carefiaive voarov reXo?,	25
/cal yav <f>paBaaae. 0Vju,e, rlva tt/>o? dXXoBairav
23.	8d(j.a<r€ 84 k.t.X.] He subdued
monstrous beasts on the ocean and by him-
self searched out the streams and the
shallows, as far as where he was landing
at the goal that speedeth homeward, and
he made land known. All the MSS.
have rceXdyei, except B which has ireXd-
yeai. I follow Bergk in reading ireXdyeX
(there is a similar error, drpeKei for
drpeKii, in 1. 41 below). Von Leutsch
suggests that these words may be a
reminiscence of words of Stesichorus,
who first narrated the fable.
24.	The mss. have inrepdxos l8Lq.(a)
t ipebvaae. The scholia mention another
reading did r’ ipevvaae, whence Boeckh
deduced did r’ i^epebvaae. With Momm-
sen and Mezger I believe we should
retain idlq, on his own account, without
the aid of others; this was a significant
characteristic of Heracles’ achievements,
and that Pindar wished to insist on it in
this ode is clear from the emphatic
prominence given to the fact that Peleus
was single-handed when he captured
Iolcos, pMvos &vev arpanas, 1. 34. M.
Schmidt proposed andlas ( = fiaKpas) and
Bergk aidvas (caliginosa, cf. irrjXds aCdvos
in Hesychius).
TCvay&Dv] The schol.: dlvypoi Kal wapa-
ncordpuoi 6<ppbes rjroi TrapaTerafJilvri Kal
inre/)^xovo'a "YV o&oa, is hardly correct.
Tevayyj are, as Dissen says, ‘ irrjXibdr]
weXdyrf, vada\ and Mr Fennell aptly
quotes Pliny’s remark about the straits of
Gades, frequentes taeniae candicantis vadi
carinas tentant (Hist. Nat. ill. 1).
Heracles discovered the channels (pods)
intersecting the tracts of shallow water.
With ipevvaae (Lat. scrutari) compare
fi 259 iropovs aXds i^epedvwv.
25.	owqi tf.r.X.] This clause defines the
place up to which Heracles explored the
shallows. He was landing (note the im-
perfect, which is relative to epebvaae not
to Pindar) at the goal which causeth
return—beyond which none sail—that is
the Straits of Gades. The meaning of
the passage has been obscured by not
attending to the tense of Karapaivio and
by taking voarov as meaning Heracles’
own return. As no causal adjective is
formed from v oar os, voarov Tcopnripiov is
used instead. Mezger compares wopnrifios
<f>lXu)v, Eur. Med. 848. Dissen wrongly
takes voarov with riXos (meta reditus).
Karafialveiv = devenire ad portum, com-
pare Nem. IV. 38.
26.	4>paSa<ro-€] Coordinate with ipev-
vaae, not with Karipaive. This verb,
formed from <f>pada, is perhaps a coinage
of the Pindaric mint. It is generally
rendered ‘ made the land known ’ (terram
indicavit, machte kund das Land), almost
equivalent to i<f>paae. But just as yvio-
plfa means to discover (as well as to make
known), so (ppadafa may mean to discover
by (ppad-j, that is, by conjecture or divina-
tion; he discovered the land which he
had divined. For (ppadij compare OL
XII. 9 ru>v di fieXXovriov rerb<f>X(ovrai
(f>padal, Aeschylus Eum. 245 firiwrrjpos
a<f>dlyKTov (ppadats.
6v|ii, tCvo, k.t.X.] Soul, to what pro-
montory of outlanders dost thou make
my skip’s course to veer ? The expression
reminds us of Dante’s la navicella del
mio ingegno. dXXodawos means of a
strange land, as rj/j-edawos means of our
land. Trapapielfiofiai, pass by (in Pyth. II.
50 irapapLeifierai deX(f>iva, outstrips the
dolphin in speed) is here used in a causal
sense; but observe the limitation, epbv
ttXoov is not really distinct from 6vp.os
the subject of wapa/ielfieai, it is merely
dvp.6s in another aspect; and thus ipAvNEMEAN III
Si
d/cpav ifjubv ntXoov Trap a pec ft ecu;
Alatctp ae (f>apl yevei re ^Jlolaav <f>epeiv.
errerai Be Xoycp BUas clcdto*;, eakbs aivelv’
oi)S’ oXXorplcov epcoTe? avBpl <f>epeiv tcpeatrove9.	avr. ft'. 30
oiKoOev pareve. Trorfyopov Be tcoapov eXaftes
irXoov irapafidfiecu is virtually equivalent
to irapafielfieai in its usual sense. The
preposition has the shade of meaning
often expressed in Latin by de\ dejlectere.
28.	ALaica> k.t.X.] I charge thee, con-
vey the Muse for Aeacus and his race; my
tale is wafted on its errand to praise noble
men by a blast of Justice. Desires of
foreign things are not the better burden for
a man; search at home. These lines of
transition from the myth of Heracles to
the exploits of the Aeginetan heroes are
often misunderstood. Pindar recalls the
ship of his soul from Gades, reminding
her that ‘Aeacus and his race’ have
chartered her to carry the Muse (Clio);
then he adds that in returning to
Aegina he is adopting the best method
of praising the victor, even by cele-
brating the bravery of the race of
Aeacus. The deprecation of aXXorpiajv
Spares applies primarily to the poet him-
self (aXXorplajv taking up aXXodairav of
1. 26), secondarily to the victor (cf. below
1. 40). In line 28 <f>apf has what the
Germans call a pregnant sense, I charge
thee (cp. Tennyson’s ‘Memory, I charge
thee, rise’).
29.	firtrai 84 Xo*yu> k.t.X.] Of the two
interpretations of this line which have
been put forward, the most usually ac-
cepted is otiose and irrelevant, the other
is unlikely. (1) Adest autem verbo meo
iustitiae summum decus, bonorum in
praedicatione positum (Dissen); or, as
Mr Fennell (taking Xfrycp differently)
translates, ‘The flower of justice concurs
with the maxim “praise the noble”’.
Whether Pindar would under any cir-
cumstances have termed such a maxim
‘ the gloss of justice ’, I may be permitted
to express a doubt, but in this context it
is at best irrelevant, having no connexion
with what precedes or with what follows.
For if it is not irrelevant, it stultifies the
point of Pindar’s argument. He cuts
short his eulogy of Heracles that he may
celebrate the praises of Peleus and
Achilles: why? Because it is the essence
of justice to praise the noble. Therefore,
according to this interpretation, Pindar
either wrote a line that had no point, or
suggested the proposition that Heracles
was not noble. Neither the procedure
nor the doctrine are Pindaric. (2) Von
Leutsch and Mezger to avoid these con-
sequences take iaXbs, not as a Doric
accusative, but as a nominative agree-
ing with awros, and make aivelv depend
on the adjective: ‘adjuncta autem meo
verbo justitia egregia ad laudandum est,
i.e. summo jure Aeacum nunc laudo’.
But eaXbs aivelv as a qualification of 5Uas
aurros is intolerably weak,—it would not
be too much to call it bathos, (dlxas)
danos is the best; it is, certainly, un-
necessary to add that the best is good to
praise. iaXbs would be in any case a
strange adjective with darros.
For my own view of the passage see
Appendix A, note 3.
30.	<Hp€iv] The metaphor of the ship
ceased in 1. 29, but the sound of the last
word in 1. 28 is echoed in verse 30.
With Kploaoves understand epdrra)v olKeiajv,
words which it was needless to express,
as aXXorpl(av, being a correlative word,
implies oUeUov and the implication is
rendered quite clear by dKodev in 1. 31.
31.	‘iroTtyopov 84] TroTLfpopos {wpba-
4—252
NEMEONIKAI T.
ykvKV tl yapvifiev. rraXaiaicri 8' iv aperal<z
yeyaOe	aval;, viripaWov alyjpav rapudv’
09 /cal Fi(o\/cov etXe p,6vos avev arpana^,
/cal TrovTiav Senv /carepapyfrev	35
iy/covrjTL. Kaopuehovra 8* evpvcrdevrjs
<f>opos), meet, but here with a more literal
shade of meaning, determined by <f>£peiv
in the preceding line,—good to carry. A
similar reference to the etymological sig-
nification of irp6cr<t>opos will be found in
Nem. vm. 48 (see note). k6<t(aos is argu-
ment or material for praise. We may en-
deavour to bring out the force of irorl^opos
somewhat thus: Thou (Pindar still ad-
dresses his soul) hast taken a fair burden
of praise, to sing withal some sweet strain.
For yXvkI> ti yapvkpiev compare fxeXiyapbiov
Kufxajv in 1. 4. The whole sentence is
illustrated by some verses in the Eleventh
(Tenth) Olympian ode
t<rdi vvv 3Apx^fTTpdrov
7rat, reas, ’Ayrjo’tdapie, 7rv7juaxfas Zverev
k6(Tfiov kwi <TTe<f>&vtp xpiWas kXalas
adv/LieXi} reXad^aio (11. 11—14).
Know now, O Agesidamus, that for thy
boxing I will sing a sweet resounding
song to be a jewel in thy crown of golden
olive leaves.
For ^Xafics of the mss., Bergk after a
scholium reads £\ax«. But £Aax« gives
inferior sense. (-Xafies is appropriate after
fidreve. Search out (like a hound on the
traces of prey) matter for praise at home.
But thou hast caught &c.
32. iraXaiaurt 8* kv aperats k.t.X.]
Endued with the excellences of older men,
the lord Peleus had joy thereini when he
cut a spear shaft surpassing great; it was
he who took Iolcos all alone, without a
host, and who clutched fast Thetis of the
sea by dint of toil and strife. Iv does not
depend on y£ya0e, but means in posses-
sion of the words kv waXaiais aperats
qualifying the subject, kv in Pindar is
elastic, and perhaps some may prefer to
take it here as meaning in the sphere of
to deal with. iraXaidis refers to Peleus’
advanced age, not to his antiquity; see
below 1. 73 (note).
33.	inrlpaWov alxpuv] virkpaXXos,
towering above others, overtopping, match-
less, is a Pindaric coinage. Its motive
is partly to be found in the preceding
dXXorplojv; the spear of Aeginetan Peleus
surpasses all others. So too the beasts
which Heracles subdued were vvkpoxoi
(1. 24). See Introduction to this ode. Of
this spear which Peleus cut him on Mt.
Pelion we read in II 143:
ItyXidSa (xeXlrfv rr\v warpl <piX<p irbpe
lidpujv
UtjXIov kK Kopvfprjs, <f>6vov kfifxevai i
<riv.
34.	FwoXkov] This name appears to
have had the digamma, fudXKbv (so Christ).
The capture of Iolcos was an act of
vengeance on Acastus, of whose relations
with Peleus we shall hear something in the
Fourth and Fifth Nemean hymns. Pindar
calls special attention to the circumstance
that Peleus’ exploit was accomplished
singlehanded (see above note on 1. 24).
35.	KaT^p.ap\|/€v] For the wooing of
Thetis see Nemean iv. 62 sqq. Kara/idp-
tttu) is to overtake or catch something
that is running away or trying to elude
the grasp, kykovk/tL is a Pindaric forma-
tion from kyKovko). As this verb doubtless
suggested k6vis to Pindar’s mind, the
idea of kyrovr/rl may have a shade of
Dissen’s non sine pulvere, but Mezger is
right in translating it hastig. The rapid
and sudden transformation of Thetis
demanded exceeding haste in the efforts
of Peleus. The novelty of the adverb
renders it more telling.
36.	€vpv<r0€VTjs] This adjective is
applied in Nem. v. 4 to Pytheas, con-
queror in the pancration, and so here itNEMEAN III.
S3
TeXa/icov lo\a Trapaardra9 iobv eirepaev*
KdL 7T0T6 yakKOTO^OV ’Apwt,£6v(0v pb€T aAtcdv	€7T.
67T6T0 For ooSe z/m> 7TOT6 <f>6/3o<? dvhpohdpuus eiravaev a/cpudv <f>p€v&v.
avyyevel 8e Tt? evSogCa fieya ftpLOei'	40
09 Se SiSa/cr eyei, yfr€(j)rj 1/09 ai^/o aXkor aWa Trvecov oi! 7tot*
arpe/cei
suggests that in massive strength Telamon
resembled Aristoclides, the victor evire-
piadevei wayKpaTiov aroXip (above 1. 16).
In the first line of the 5th Pythian ode,
evpvadevijs is applied to ttXovtos ; but it is
to be observed that ttXovtos is personified
and compared to a squire {eirtrav 1. 4),
just as here Telamon is a squire of Iolaos.
In Isthm. II. 17 we have evpvadevijs
’AttSXXwv; in 01. xn. 2, if our text is
right, 'Ip.£pav eijpvadevP, and in Oi. IV. 12
<f>dos ebpvadevluv dperav (of a victor in a
chariot race). In Homer the adjective is
applied to Poseidon.
37.	*IoX<j] The enterprise against
Trojan Laomedon was undertaken by
Heracles, Iolaos and Telamon; but in
this reference Pindar purposely avoids
mentioning Heracles’ name, which might
have seemed to overshadow the fame of
the hero of Aegina; moreover he had
already done honour to Pleracles and had
abruptly turned from the seductive theme.
It was Heracles and not Telamon who
slew Laomedon, hence threpcre, which does
not imply the individual act of slaughter,
but means wrought the ruin of, abolished
Laomedon and his city. irapaardTris
means comrade or squire (properly, com-
rade on the flank, distinguished from
eirwrarijs, man in the rear, and wpoardTris,
man in the front rank). In Nem. IV. 25
Telamon is mentioned as Heracles’ com-
panion on this expedition; likewise in
Isthm. V. 27 sqq.
38.	KaC *iroT€ k.t.X.] And once he
followed him (Iolaos) in quest of the
mighty Amazons with brazen bows. xaX-
k6to£os does not occur elsewhere. Dissen
compares Xrjfia, to^ovXkov, Aeschylus,
Persae 55.
39.	oHhi vlv k.t.X.] Nor didfear that
mastereth men ever dull the flashing edge of
his spirit. The literal meaning of dKyd]
is edge as in t-vpov dKpd], £L<f>ovs aKfilj &c.;
hence keenness of mind or spirit. In Isth.
vil. 41 ivaXlyiaov (TT^poiraiai. ax/xcu' irodwv,
the idea is that of a glancing edge: render
Tike unto lightning-flashes in the splen-
dour and speed of his feet’ (cp. atyXa
7roduv, OI. Xlii. 36).
The quantity of the first syllable of
aKfid is common in Pindar (here - as in
Isth. vil. 41; - in Pyth. IV. 64; OI. 11.
63; - Isth. in. 69).
This casting away of the reproach of
fear from Telamon completes the com-
parison with Aristoclides, from whom the
reproach of fMaXaida is repelled in 11. 15,
16.
40.	<rvyy€V€i 81 k.t.X.] See Intro-
duction, p. 39. evdo^ia is nobility or
valour, but Pindar probably intended to
suggest thoughts instinctively brave. In
fipidu) the comparative idea, latent in
all words denoting weight, is strongly
marked: compare Sophocles, Ajax, 130
fjiTjd’ 6yicov &pri puridiv' et tlvos irXtov
rj X€LPL iSplOeis rj ficLKpov ttXoijtov (3d0ei,
and (governing an accusative) Nem. VIII.
18 Kivbpav gfipice TrXovrip.
In this passage it is a question of x€lPl
(3pi$eiv: in the boxing and wrestling the
hand of Aristoclides was (physically)
heavy on his adversaries.
For the Pindaric doctrine in these lines,
see Nem. I. 25.
41.	\|/€<j>Tjv6s] Bergk was rash in alter-NEMEONIKAI P.
54
Karima ttoSl, fivpiav S aperdv dreXet vow yeverai.
%av0o<; S' 'A%iXev<; rd p,€v puevwv <t>iXvpa<; iv Sopbois, arp. y .
irals ewv advpe fieyaXa Fepya,	Oapuva
fipa'xyo'Lhapov dfcovra, iraXXwv 1<jov avepLois	45
fid%a Xeovreacnv ayporepoLS eirpaaaev <f>ovovy
Karpov? t evacpe, aw/xara Se irapd KpovLSav
ing the mss. reading to \f/€<f>eiv6s on the
analogy of dpeivds aXyeivos <f>a€ivos &c.
These adjectives correspond to 6po$ (dative
fy>ei), a\yos, <f>dos &c., whereas \f/e<f>7}v6s is
to be connected not with \pi<t>os but with
\pi<f)as, and finds an exact parallel in
<re\^vr}: ciXas.
This man, whose soul, unillumined by
native light, is fickle and unsuccessful, is
compared to a mariner sailing under a
dark welkin, yielding to the impulse of
varying blasts and never coming safe to
shore by sheer dint of strong and skilful
steering. While iro5l means the foot of
the wanderer it perhaps suggests the sheet
of the ship. Pindar chooses his language
so as to bring out unmistakably the con-
trast between the ineffectual plodder and
an inspired hero like Heracles, ov Karifia
contrasts with Kari^aive and areXei with
ri\os in 1. 25.
43.	Td pb* p^v»v] These words ac-
cording to Boeckh and Dissen opposita
sunt versibus 59 et sqq., ubi de 7'roiano
bello et iuvenili s. virili A chillis aetate
agitur ; non potuit sequi ra 51 quum multa
interiecta totaque orationis forma mntata
sit. I believe however that Mezger is
right in taking 5i in verse 49 as the
responsive to p£v of verse 43. When
he was a boy of six years old he shot
the beasts without leaving the cave of
Chiron {p.ivwv iv dbfiois); afterwards he
hunted abroad and pursued the stags.
$i\vpas] Chiron was the offspring
of Philyra and Cronos.
44.	dOvpc jxryaXa F^pya] wrought
mighty deeds in sport.
Oap.tvd] For Oafid, as though a neuter
plural of 0a/uv6s; cp. 01. I. 53 a/cipdeia
XiXoyx^v Oafuvd KaKaybpos, full often hath
loss befallen evil-speakers.
45.	Ppa\v<r{8apov] Full often bran-
dishing in his hands a small-headed
javelin, swift as winds, he would, in
battle with them, deal bloody death unto
savage lions. The smallness of the jave-
lin, suitable to the little boy, is accentua-
ted by a new word (3paxv<rl5apos, just as
the size of Peleus’ mighty lance was
described by the novel compound vwip-
aXXos. The MSS. have lerov r’ dvifiounv
iv P'dxq-. The causes of the double
mistake are clear; the omission of the
half-stop after ipya in 1. 44 led to the
insertion of r’ (in disregard of the metre),
and iv crept in from the margin {iv fidxq>
a gloss on /-tax?)* Moschopulos’ caa t
dvifMouTLv is from a critical point of view
unlikely; the corruption of taa to taov is
not easily explained, and foa dvifwis seems
to require some additional adjective, par-
ticiple or explanatory word, to express
running with windlike speed. But when
we consider the context we see that this
reading is simply impossible. Achilles
is represented as abiding in the house of
Philyra; we must imagine him standing
in the mouth of the cave and shooting
the beasts who prowl thereby. Running
is thus excluded. At a later age he
became a swift runner and his speed is
mentioned below 1. 52 in an express
clause. I have therefore followed the
reading of E. Schmid and Bergk. The
arrow, though shot by the child, flew
with matchless swiftness.
47. o*ttpxira 8t k.t,X. J All mss. haveNEMEAN III
55
Keznavpov acrOfiaiPcov itcopu^ep,
egerr)? Toirpwrov, oXop S' eirevr dp %povov*
top iOafifteop 5,Apreph re teal OpaaeV ’AOapa	5°
/CT€iPOPT iXaifiovs avev kvpoop BoXlayp 6’ eptcewp'	opt. y'.
iroaal yap tepareatee. Xeyopepop Be tovto irpOTepcop
67T09 e^<o * fiaQvpryra X.elpa>p Tpd<j>e XcOiptp
a<rOfj.alvovTa, and most atop-ara; D how-
ever gives <T(JjfiaTif B and B aopidria.
Most editors have abandoned the reading
of Triclinius adopLan—dadpaivovTL and
accept a&fiara—dadfiaivovra, which has
apparently preponderant authority. An
old paraphrase however points in a differ-
ent direction: r<£ Si aSrov aib/xan ivepyCbv
6 ’AxtXXei)s dad /jlcltos ir\qpi}s. ..Orjpas i<f>6pe t.
From this explanation Rauchenstein in-
ferred the reading dadfialvwv iKbpufcv,
which is accepted by Mezger. (The para-
phrast read oibpLari—dodp.a.lvwv.)
It seems to me that Rauchenstein’s
reading recommends itself both on textual
grounds and on the score of the meaning,
(i) Starting with <rc6/xara aaOpalvuv we
can explain the genesis of the text of the
mss. and the variant of the paraphrast.
On the one hand adfiara contaminated
aadpialvwv (perhaps owing to the notion
that it was unfit that Achilles should be
represented panting). On the other hand,
some scribe, having scruples about refer-
ring aupara to the beasts and expecting
the phrase aCopia dad pLa.lv uv, altered ad)p.ara
to aib/man. (2) There is little point in
representing the beasts haled by Achilles
as not yet dead (dodpLalvovra); whereas
the picture gains a new touch by dadp.a.1-
vu)v. The little boy pants from the exer-
tion of dragging the carcases to Chiron.
In the same way Pindar has laid stress
on the toil undergone by Peleus in
capturing Thetis by the word ^ykovijtI,
and on the labours of Aristoclides in
the pancration by the word Kap,aT(odi<ov
a-17)- __
49. oXov 8* $ir€iT ] Si corresponds to
p.iv in verse 43, with which i^trijs ro-
irpGrrov is to be connected. He abode in
the cave when he was six years old or
thereabouts; afterwards he used to slay
beasts as before, but as a hunter on the
mountains (this is implied in 11. 51, 52).
50. tov k.t.X.] On whom Artemis
and bold Athene gazed with amazement,
as he slew stags without hounds or cunning
nets; for he surpassed them in speed of
feet. irSSas (jokvs was the Homeric addi-
tion of Achilles. Here too, as in the
exploits of Heracles and Peleus, Pindar
lays stress on the circumstance that
Achilles hunted alone, without aid of
dogs or nets.
52.	Xeyojjwvov Si /c.r.X.] The transition
is somewhat abrupt in expression but not
in thought. The connexion is: Achilles
was educated by Chiron, the celebrated
trainer of heroes, who taught Jason and
Asclepius and assisted at the bridal of
Peleus, Achilles’ father. Instead of say-
ing this directly Pindar begins almost as
if he were passing to a new subject, but
comes back to Achilles in 1. 57. Xey6-
fxevov is predicate: I tell a story often
told by former poets, wporipw depends
on tiros.
53.	Pa0v|AT]Ta] Deep-counselling; this
vox Pindarica (as already observed, note
on 1. 18) has a significance for the com-
prehension of the poem. Chiron (‘he
with the hands’) was skilled in applying
balsams with gentle hands (1. 55), whereby
he could alleviate the wounds of the young
heroes under his care. Even so the vic-
tory at Nemea and the accompanying
hymn of Pindar can alleviate the wounds56
NEMEONIKAI T.
*\daov evhov reye*, /cal eirevrev ' Aa/cXairiov,
tov <f)ap/jLatcoov SiSaf-e fiaXa/co^eipa vofjbov'	55
vv/i<\>ev<re S’ avti$ arfXao/cpavov
N^/0^09 dvjarpa, yovov re Foi (f>eprarov
drlraXXev ev dpp,evoL<ri iravra dvpuov avl-cov'
of Aristoclides. The words padv^ijra
and vbfJLov are chosen to recall padvirdilip
Ne/ilq. 1.	18; fiaOv/irjTa also recalls
fJLrfTios anas chro in 1. 9; and <papp.aKU)p
suggests Akos (pbpec 1. 18. Deep-crafty
Chiron reared Jason in his house of rock,
and thereafter Asclepius, to whom he
taught the ministry of medicines with
gentle hands.
54.	IvSov T€Y€i] Compare Nem. vn.
44 Mop aXaei, but Mop OaXaaoas 01.
VII. 62, Mop 'OXtipurov Pyth. XI. 64.
55.	paXaK6\€ipa] A Pindaric com-
pound, intended to call attention to the
meaning of the Centaur’s name Xdpwp.
The gentle hand of the physician is
mentioned in Pyth. IV. 271 XPV AidXaKap
X^Pa Trpo<T@a\\ovTa rpupav £\k€os dpspivo-
Xeip. The same mss. which gave <ru)p.aTL
and oun&Tia in 1. 47, give here popJbp,
which does not afford a correct sense.
pdpos is the act or art of administering
(plput), dispense).
56.	vvpw|>€v<r€ k.t.X.] But on another
day he compassed the marriage of the
queen of well-heads, the bright daughter of
Nereus. pbp,<f>ev<je nuptias conciliavit (of
Thetis with Peleus). The marriage was
celebrated on Mt. Pelion in Chiron’s
cave. Three mss. V (pr. man.) X and
Z (pr. man.) give ayXabicappop; the others
are divided between dyXaoKoXirop and
ayXaoKapirop. The latter is accepted by
most editors, but variously explained,
(1) bright-wristed (cp. Milton’s ‘pearled
wrists’ of the Nereids, in Comus), (2)
giver of bright fruits, (3) frugibus in-
signem or fruges alentem; (4) Mr Tyrrell
regards dyXaoKapiros as the Homeric
word [$u<r-] dpiarordKeia reset, and ren-
ders blest in the fruit of her womb. It
is to be observed that the three mss.
which combine in reading ayXaoKappop
are generally more trustworthy than the
others ; in v. 39 for example of this hymn
they give &Kp.&p whereas the rest have
oKkop, and in v. 38, they preserve xa^K°~
to£op (rell. xdXKOTo^tav). Accordingly, in
order to determine the true reading,
we must start with ayXaoKapvov, which
at once suggests ayXaoKpavop (actually
written by a ‘second hand’ in D), an
epithet appropriate to the sea-goddess.
But its peculiar felicity lies in the circum-
stance that -Kpapop, besides meaning foun-
tain-head, suggests also Kapapop (Kaprjpop),
the head of Thetis, conceived personally.
This explains the reading ayXabicappop.
ayXaoicdpapop, written in the margin,
found its way into the text and became
ayXaoKapvop metri gratia. I confess that
I was a little sorry to abandon ayXaoicoX-
7top bright-bosomed, which perhaps sug-
gested Mr Swinburne’s line ‘bright
bosom shortening into sighs
5 7. 70VOV	Foi k. r.X.] And nourished
for her a son most brave, in fitting exercises
exalting all his spirit for a voyage,
apfiepa would be a suitable word to ren-
der in Greek ‘knightly exercises’; but,
conversely, it is better to avoid a transla-
tion which suggests the medieval world.
Cp. Theognis, 695
ou dtpafiai <rot, 6v/j£, irapacrxdp Appcepa
irapra •
rirXadr tup 8e KaX&p otfri <ri> plovpos
epas.
Both appcpa and (plprarop have a special
significance in this passage, for which see
Appendix A, note 3. aflfap means
training to greatness, or rather to its
fullest development.NEMEAN III
57
o<f>pa 0aXa<r<riai<i avefuov pnratai nTepL<f>0el<;	iir. y'.
vito Tpotav hophcTVirov aXaXav Av/cLwv re irpocrp^kvoL /cal <Ppvyd)V 60
AapSavwv T€y /cal ey^eo-ffropoi? kmp^L^ai^
AWioireacrc ^eXpas, iv <f>pa<rl ira^aL0\ 071*0)9 <r<f>i<ri pr) /coipavos
oiriaco
iraKiv oi/caK avetyios §dpLevrj9 fE\ei/010 Mepbvcov jjloXoi.
59.	#<f>pa k.t.X.] To the end that
sped by potent sea-blasts to Troy he
should beneath its walls abide the spear-
clashing onslaught and battle-whoop of
Lycians and Phrygians and Darda-
nians, and having fought hand to hand
with the Ethiop spearmen shoidd fix in
his soul a fir??i purpose that their chieftain,
inspiring Memnon, cousin of Helenus,
should never return again to his home.
daXdaaiai avlfiojv pirrai were an appro-
priate escort for the son of a queen of the
sea (for ptrrdis see above note on i. 68).
vwb Tpotav depends on rrepupdds.
60.	SopCicrvirov] Only found here and
Nem. VII. 10. The battle cry resounds
amid the clash of hurtling spears.
61.	eiriptfjais XctPas] For Pindar’s
various uses of Irrifilyvvfii compare Nem.
IX. 31 dyXataicriv irrifii^a 1 Xaov, Pyth.
II. 32 alfia eirl/jui-e Ovaroh. For this
particular use compare Pyth. iv. 212
KoXxoktiv ftiav fil^av (and Xen. Cyr. 11.
1, 11 ovfifiiyvuvai x^ipas).
cyx€<r4>6p°is] Pindaric compound,
equivalent to Homeric lyxt<nra\os.
62.	cv <f>pa<rl ircC£ai0*] A strong ex-
pression with which commentators com-
pare Pyth. VIII. 9 oirorav tis tcapdiq. kotov
iveXdar), after X 102 kotov Hvffero 6vfi<p.
Nearer parallels may be found in Latin.
Dissen quotes Tacitus, Ann. xv. 5 Vo-
logesi vetus et penitus infixum erat arma
Romana vitandi, and Virgil, Aen. iv. 15
si mihi non animo fixum immotumque
sederet, ne cui &c. Schol. (1) tv a iprrrj^cu
ras X€ipas Tots Aidio^i Kai KaOiKono rrjs
ijsvxvs abTQv 8ia tov ttoXe/idv, {2) if irri tQv
avrov <ppevu>v rod ’AxiXX&os ScktIov t6v
Xoyov tv’ eavTou ras X€*Pas irfijcuro, rremj-
yvias wapdtrxoi reus <ppe<rlv, iva 5 diavorfdrj
rats (ppecrlv vrrrjperridrj did tu>v x€lP&Vt
iviore yap hriOvfiov/ilv ti Karopduxrai Kai
ao’Bevovp.ev avro rroirjoai fir) virrjpeTobfievoi
rats xeP<T^v' 0 ’AxtXXeus erpdfpr) tv*
orrep av diavorjdr) dvvrjdrj did twv X€lP&v
KarepyatraoBai. According to both these
explanations x€Was ls taken with rrhi-cuto,
not with irrifii^ais (it is unnecessary to
suppose with Schmidt that the scholiasts
read irmrrj^ais). There is also another
scholium (3) rrXayius XoyLoairo Kai Kpivoi *
dvn tov ds rrlpas ay01, where Abel sug-
gests the insertion of fir) before rrXayiios,
but it seems clear that we should
read rrayiws. Bergk objecting to the
phrase rrd^aiO' ottcjs fir) reads rra£ai Garros,
assuming ddrros to be a Pindaric form of
the Homeric ratpos, and to bear here the
sense offear{cf. Hesychius darrav <po(5ov).
I retain the reading of the mss., but I do
not feel certain that it is what Pindar
wrote. Some further remarks on the
matter I reserve for Appendix A, note 4.
atplcri is Dative of the persons interested.
63.	dva|no$] Priam the father of
Helenus and Tithonus the father of
Memnon were brothers. Two questions
arise here: (1) Why is Helenus singled
out as the cousin of Memnon? (2) Why
is Memnon called fafievrjs ? If we could
assume that Pindar regarded Memnon as
endowed with the gift of prophecy, both
questions would be answered at once, for
£ajj.€vijs is an adjective applied to inspired
seers, to Chiron for example {Pyth. IX.
38) and Medea {Pyth. iv. 10). But there
is no authority for attributing such quali-
ties to Memnon. The true answer is
given by a right view of the word fafi€vr)s.58
NEMEONIKAI r.
rrfXav76? apape <f>eyyo<; AlataSav avroOev.	arp. S'
Zev, reov yap alpha, aeo S’ aywv, tov v/jlvo9 efiaXev	65
07rl p€cou iirixtopiov ^appha /ceXaSecov.
y8oa 8e vuca<f)6p<p avv 'ApiaTOtcXeiSa ttpetrel,
09 rdvhe vaaov ev/eXei trpoaeOrjKe Xoytp
teal aepuvov dyXaaiai fiepifivai,9
In Nem. iv. 13 (see note) it is an epithet
of the Sun, fafxepei deXitp, by the genial
sun, and in the same way it is applied
here to the son of the Morning (Nem. Vi.
52 <f>aewas viop ’Aoos). In fact fa/uepijs
connotes the quality of inspiration and
may be used either of the inspirer or of
the inspired (compare English genial with
German genial). Memnon is conceived
as having, by virtue of his mother, a
touch of supernatural elemental influence,
and he is called the cousin of Helenus,
because Helenus the prophet would be
specially susceptible to such influences.
So too, in the passage in the Fourth
Nemean already referred to, the poet
or musician Timocritus is described as
warmed by the inspiring sun.
64.	TTjXavyfcs apape /c.r.X.] Hereby
the Aeacidae have a star in the firma-
ment, shining afar. TrjXavyrjs is used
of the sun and the moon in the Homeric
hymns. In Pyth. ill. 75 we have d<rrlpos
ovpavlov rrjXavy tare pop <f>dos; in Pyth. 11.
6 Hiero crowns Ortygia T^Xavyiaip <rre-
<pdpon. (Compare also Olymp. VI 4.)
(peyyos is more solemn than <pdos; it is
a divine or heavenly light, here of a star,
abrbdep goes with apape, which is equiva-
lent to ijpTTjTaLy but see Appendix A,
note 3.
Pindar seems to conceive that when
Achilles killed the son of Morning he
spoiled him of his light.
65. Zev, T€ov yap atpa]	Soothly,
Zeus, they are thy blood; and thine is
the contest which provoked these shafts of
song, by the voices of young men singing
the gracious ioy of this land. The
force of yap is I call on Zeus because;
Zeus was the father of Aeacus. For the
comparison of the hymn to an archer,
compare 01. 11. 89 frrexe vvp cncoTrcp to^op,
dye $vp,4, tip a (HdWofiep etc fiaXOaxas a ure
<ppepos evKXtas diarovs Uptcs; We are
also reminded of Tennyson’s ‘ A random
arrow from the brain
66.	Iirixtapiov \app.a] This expression
recalls xaP^€VTa tt8pop x&p&s ayaXfia
in 1. 12. xdpi^a is a cause of joy ; com-
pare 01. II. 19 icXQp yap virb xaPPL&TWV
irrifia Opda/cei (also ib. 99), 01. X. 22
dir op op 8’ j-Xafiop %d/)/>ia wavpol tlpcs,
Isthm. IV. 54 KaXXlpiKOP x^pP-a. 01.
VII. 44. Pyth. VIII. 64 t6 f*£p fityiarop
t66l xaPP’dT<0P dnraaas.
67.	<rvv—Trp€*ir€i] For av/xirptirei,
apparently formed by Pindar, avparpe-
Trijs, fitting, occurs twice in Aeschylus.
Pod a loud strain.
68.	8s rdvSc /c.r.X.] who wedded this
island to glorious praise and the holy
Theorion of the Pythian god to bright
ambitions. For this sense of wpooTidrjfu
compare Herodotus vi. 126 'EXX^pup
airaPTUP e^evpup rbp apiarop robrcp yvvaiKa
irpoaOetpai (zuertheilen, Stein).
For its application here Dissen com-
pares Pyth. IX. 72 ebdaXeT avp£fu£e rtixy
tt6Xip (where the adjective ebdaXijS is ap-
propriate to the metaphor) and Isthm.
III. 3 evXoylais pLepuxOai. Notice that
evicXPi is here brought into proximity to
*ApLJTOKXelbq.;.
69.	dyXaaio*i [upCpvais] This is usu-
ally taken as an instrumental Dative;
but it seems more natural to connect it
with Qeapiop as evtcXIi X6y<p is connected
with pdaop. This is confirmed by the con-
sideration that ayXaaiai by its positionNEMEAN III.
59
UvOCov %edptov. iv Se 7reipa reXo?	fO
8ia<f>alv€TCU, cSi/ i^o^drepo^ yivrjrai,
iv iratcri viottrt 7T£U9, iv dvhpdtriv dvrjp, rpLrov	avr. S .
iv 7ra\aLTepoL<Ti, pbipos e/cavrov olov e^opev
fiporeov €@vo$. iXa Se /cal ri(T<rapa<s aperas
6 9vclt6<} aldv, <f>pov€iv S’ iviirei to Trap/ceLpevov,	75
in the verse corresponds to ayXabKpavov
in line 56; and thus Pindar indicates
that the marriage of Peleus and bright
Thetis is a type. Aegina is wedded to
e$K\€T)s \6yos, not to eikXefa; and in the
same way the sexual distinction is main-
tained in the metaphor by linking the
college of the Theori of Apollo,—a male
and plural conception—to a company of
bright Ambitions. For /lepi/ivcus com-
pare 01. I. 106 debs firjderat reaiGi fiepi/i-
vataiv.
70. 0cdpu>v] The building in which
a permanent college of Theori lived (or
met and dined).	Mantinea, Troezen,
Thasos and other places as well as Aegina
had such permanent staffs of religious
delegates. It is clear that Aristoclides
was a member of the Aeginetan Thearion.
Pausanias (ll. 31, 6) mentions Thearios
as a Dorian name of Apollo.
Iv 81 TT€{p<j	But trial (of
strength or skill) revealeth the perfection of
those powers in which one may be the
winner of excellence, as a boy among
young boys, as a man among men, or,
lastly, as an elder, according to the three
stages of our mortal life, ireipa is the
test of competition; iv welpq., in the lists;
compare Nem. IX. 28 wetpav ayavopa.
The force of $ia0cuVercu is that trial
discloses; the cloud of uncertainty is
removed thereby and the perfection (as a
fact indisputable) shines through. &v is
neuter, equivalent to robnov iv oh; Mez-
ger’s view that it is masculine depending
on i^ox<hrepos (‘ in der Probe aber zeigt
sich die Vollendung, vor wem namlich
einer hervorragt, ob als Knabe unter
Knaben u.s.w.’) affords both a loose con-
struction and a loose signification.
72. Iv ircuai k.t.X.] The three ages
of man were illustrated in this hymn,
boyhood and manhood by Achilles as
boy and man, advanced age by Peleus.
Note that instead of TraXatos or something
equivalent Pindar says rpirov, thus pre-
paring for riffGapas in 1. 74. Some
editors (after some MSS.) take fxipos with
rpirov: I have followed other mss. in
placing the comma after iraXcuripouri.
The construction is roiovros (in apposition
with ns) olov p.ipos iKaarov (iartv 6) ix°~
/iev i]/lets fipbreov idvos. Boyhood, early
manhood and late manhood are the /iipr/
of life.
74.	81 kcu k.t.X.] But life drives
a team of four excellences, for it biddeth
man be wise in that which he findeth
to do; and these excellences are his.
Each age has its own excellence, and
there is further an excellence common
to all alike, judgment, (ppovelv rb
wapKel/ievov (for irapiceifievos compare
01. xiii. 73). The metaphor in eX£, I
think, is from driving, not from plant-
ing ; so Isthm. IV. 38 £Xa wedbOev. Mr
Fennell, who translates ‘forms a series
of’, seems to take it from planting. The
same editor is certainly mistaken in
assuming four divisions of life. Compare
Mezger, p. 390, wdio follows Hermann.
apcTaS placed emphatically in the same
position of the verse as aperah in 32
indicates that Peleus is a type of one
age.
75.	6 Ova/ros alav] B and B have 6
dvaros idov, D, V, X and Z 6 /laicpbs aidov.6o
NEMEONIKAI P.
twv ov/c aireari.	^aipe, <f>lXo<?.	67® ro8e toi
TrefjLirco fie/uyfievov fjueXi Xev/ca)
<rvv yaXa/CTi, /apvap,eva 8’ eepor’ dp,<f>€7T€i,
TTO/ju aolSifiov AloXfjcrw iv irvoaiaiv avXoov,
oy/re irep. ecr™ 8’ aleros (dkvs iv ttotclvoIs,	e7r. 8'. 80
It is clear (as Mr Tyrrell has pointed out
to me) that paKpos was introduced by
some one who thought that the fourth
virtue corresponded to a fourth age,
attained only by those who lived long.
76. t»v ovk air€<m,] Mezger (after
Christ) unnecessarily reads dweaoi, a con-
jecture of Bergk. The rhythm of these
words recalls strongly icai yav <ppa5a<nre
of 1. 26. As Heracles reached the ulti-
mate land, so Aristoclides has reached
or will reach the perfection of life in
all its stages.
Xaip€,<f>C\os* k.t.X.] Rejoice, my friend!
Lo, I send you, though at late hour, this
honey mixed with white milk, fringed
with the froth of blending, a draught of
song conveyed in the breathings of Aeolian
flutes. It is a draught to still Aristoclides’
thirst, compare dnpfj 1. 6. Xafy€ 1S an
appropriate accompaniment of the cup
of song,—drink, haill Compare Pyth.
II. 67 Xa'LPe' ro^e pev...plXos...TrlpireTai,
also Jsthm. 1. 32. It is a congratula-
tory formula for offering a gift. For piXi
compare above 1. 4 ; also Olymp. xi. 98
plXin woXw KaTapplxuv, steeping the city
in honey; and frag. 152 peXurvoTtoKTUv
Krjplojv ip.a yXvKepdbrepos op<pd, my inspired
voice sweeter than honey or the honey-
comb.
Dissen has an excellent note on this pas-
sage, which I translate. “ The Theban
poet finely says : ‘ I send you a sweet
Boeotian draught for your banquet’.
For Boeotia was rich in milk and honey,
whereas Aegina was a barren island;
moreover the reeds of Lake Copais were
celebrated; and by ‘ Aeolian blasts of
flutes ’ (i. e. the Aeolian harmony, to
which the hymn was set) Pindar here, as
in other places, signifies Boeotian notes
and Boeotian flutes, the Boeotians being
Aeolians ”. Pindar indicates this intention
in his own way: ToXp in 1. 37 corre-
sponds to kioXrynv in 1. 79. Aeginetan
Telamon was comrade of Theban Iolaus;
a Theban (Aeolian) song is a meet
guerdon for an Aeginetan victor.
For the mixture of milk and honey
von Leutsch cites Aelian N. A. 7 aptX-
yov<ri yap (Tj/5ot) wepiyXbKLarov yaXa Kal
oil diovrai dvapi^ai aiinp piXi, oirep ofiv
SpGxriv "EXX^i/es—it was a Hellenic cus-
tom. The blended foam means the froth
that comes from blending (‘aufgemischter
Schaum’, Mezger). For the whole pas-
sage compare the opening lines of the
Seventh Olympian Ode.
79.	ic6\C aoiSipov] The adjective
explains the metaphor, a favourite mode
of expression in Pindar. For example
Nem. VIII. 15 plrpav KavaxaSa. 7reTrouaX-
pivav, 46 Xafipov Xidov MoioaTov. Isth.
VI. 19 KXvrats iiciujv poaioiv.
80.	€OTt 8* aicros k.t.X.] Swift
among the fowls of the air is the eagle,
which, swooping from afar, seizeth sud-
denly the tawny prey with his talons;
but the cawing daws fly low. These
words, like many others in Pindar, are
charged with a twofold meaning; they
refer apparently to the victor and covertly
to the poet,—to the Aeginetan as well
as to the Theban eagle. (For Pindar’s
association of the eagle with the Aeacidae,
see Nem. vi. 47.) By choosing the
words 8a<|>oiv6v aypav Pindar recalls
to the mind his description of Achilles
in 1. 46 XeovTeootv aypoT€pois iirpaooevNEMEAN III.
61
o? eXaftev altya, rrjXoOe puerapLato/jbevo^, 8a(f>otvbv dypav iroalv'
tcpayirai 8e koXoloI Taireiva vkpbovrai.
riv ye pukv, evffpovov KXeovs kOeXolcras, aedXofyopov XrjpLaro9
evetce v
Ne/xea? ’E7Tb8avp68ev t airo tcdi Meyaptov SeSop/cev (j>dos.
<)>6vov, and Achilles in this ode is the
chief representative of the Aeacids. The
addition tcooXv too seems chosen for the
purpose of recalling ttoooI yap KpareoKe ;
swiftness, the traditional quality of Achil-
les, is made the prominent quality of the
eagle. But there is a covert reference in
the words too; Pindar is the eagle and
his rivals are the daws. The strange
word KpaylTai, invented by the poet,
is not, I think, without significance; it
strongly suggests \payas (’Axpayas),—
daws of Acragas, and this is confirmed by
the fact that on coins of Acragas eagles
are represented seizing a hare (such a
coin is reproduced in Mr Fennell’s edi-
tion). We are thus led to conclude that
Pindar referred to some Sicilian rivals,
associated with the city of Agrigentum.
It is worth noting that Aeschylus uses
atcpayr/s (also anai- elp.) of the ypvres,
clearly meaning eagles: Prom. 803 d£v-
(TTop.ov$ Zrjvbs anpayeis Kijvas,
The connexion of this sentence with
the immediately foregoing words 6\J/4 irep
is thus brought out by Dissen: ‘Sero
quidem mittitur carmen, at a poeta, qui,
ubi rem aggreditur, earn tractat eximie’.
It is not due to chance that p.era-
fiaiopevos occurs here in the proximity
of ‘the draught’, and that in the begin-
ning of the ode /laiojaevo 1 immediately
preceded the ‘thirst’.
81. p€Ta|uuo[i€vos] Occurs only here;
starch after, go in quest of.
82.	Wpovreu] dtvell, move and feed in
low places. vtpLeadai is used of sphere
or range, cf. Thucydides, 11. 62, 2 e<f>
6<jov re vvv vtp.€<rOe as far as you range,
72, 1 r](ri,X^ap dycre vepjOfievoL ra vp-lrepa
avrwv confining yourselves to the sphere of
your own affairs.
83.	t(v y€ jx€v k.t.X.] flip invariably
implies a 5i somewhere, and it would not
be safe to follow Mr Fennell in regarding
ye fiiv as an equivalent of ye pty. Pindar
has designedly suppressed the second
member of the antithesis, but has taken
care, by his allegorical expression of the
same thought in the preceding lines, to
leave no doubt what it is. To thee,
Aristoclides, the light of glory hath
shone ; to others (the dark ones of line
41, the low-flying daws of line 82) no
such light hath come. We may translate:
To thee certainly, by favour of fair-
throned Clio, and for the sake of thyprize-
tvinning valour, a star hath gleamedfrom
Nemea and from Epidaurus and from
Megara. As Achilles won a constella-
tion of glory by slaying Memnon (1. 64),
so Aristoclides wins such a light by his
victories in the games. See Appendix
A, note 3 for the force of cLed\o<popov
Xijfia. For S&opiccv compare 01. 1. 94
to 8i kXIos TrfXbdev didopice, the eye of
glory shone from afar. cvOpovov suggests
the representation of the Muse in sculp-
ture.NEMEAN IV.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY IN THE BOYS’
PANCRATION AT NEMEA WON BY TIMASARCHUS OF
AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
The idea of the fourth Nemean hymn is the sorcery of song, revealing
itself in two ways. Song has the faculty of healing and comforting, for it can
command the presence of good-cheer or Mirth, who by the Greeks, or as
Milton says 4 in heaven ’, was named Euphrosyne; and she is 4 the best
physician of labours past.’ But besides having this gracious faculty, song can
confer upon the hero of great exploits a really kingly lot and secure for his
fame a longer life than his deeds, unsung, could inherit. These thoughts are
cunningly worked out in a double 4 eulogy ’ (1. 5) of the Aeacids and the
Theandrids of Aegina. For the boy Timasarchus, who had won a victory in
wrestling at Nemea1, belonged to the Theandrid clan ; and Pindar pays this
clan the high honour of comparing their deeds to the distinctions of mythical
Aeacid heroes.
The hymn, intended to be sung in procession and consisting of twelve
strophes, naturally falls into three parts. The first three and the last three
stanzas are concerned with the praises of the victor and his kinsfolk ; the six
middle stanzas are occupied with the Aeacids. This arrangement is agree-
ably symmetrical; the beginning and the end are of equal length, and the
centre is devoted to the myth2.
The first strophe, which may be regarded as a prelude, sets forth the magic
power of songs, ‘daughters of the Muses,’ in evoking the Grace Euphrosyne ;
and compares their comforting quality to the effect of warm water in
mollifying weary limbs. Moreover words, provided they be really graceful,—
1	For the date of the ode we have
only the minor limit 457 B.c., the year
of the reduction of Aegina by Athens.
2	Mezger divides thus:	Tpooipuov,
1—8; &px<*> 9—32; Kararpoira, 33—44;
dfJL^aXoSj 45—68 ; pLeTaKararpoird, 69—
72; <r<ppayls, 73—96. I cannot see that
much is gained by this arrangement,
which would admit of further subdivision.
The point on which I would join issue
with Mezger is the assignment of 25—32
to the apxd. The transition to the mythi-
cal world takes place at the end of the
third strophe. Mezger rightly says “ die
Ode preist die Macht des Gesanges.”
Dissen took an incomplete view when
he found the chief idea in the comparison
of the Aeacids and Theandrids.INTRODUCTION.
63
drawn out of the depths of thought ‘ in a gracious hour of inspiration ’ avv
Xaplrau Tv\a—live longer than deeds. These remarkable lines we shall do
well to bear in mind, for fragments of their language are echoed here and
there in other parts of the hymn.
It will be observed that Pindar places his poem, as it were, under the
care of the Graces, especially Euphrosyne ; and allusions may be found to the
other two sisters in ayXaov 1. 20—suggesting Aglaia presiding over games held
near Amphitryon’s tomb—and OaXrja-e a-eXivots 1. 88, implying the presence of
Thalia.
The next two strophes are devoted to Timasarchus and his victories, won
at Nemea, Athens and Thebes; and a reference is made to his father
Timocritus, who was skilled in playing the harp. The visit to Thebes
naturally introduces Heracles, in whose honour the games there were
celebrated ; and Heracles provides the poet with a convenient step to pass to
the praises of the Aeacidae, as he and Telamon had been comrades in an
expedition against Troy1.
Of Telamon three exploits are mentioned, the sack of Troy, the conquest
of the Meropes of Cos, and the slaying of the giant Alcyoneus. This mighty
man of Phlegrae, before he fell by the hands of Telamon, had captured
twelve chariots, killing the twenty-four heroes, charioteers and fighting men,
who were in them. And at this no one, who knows by experience what
fighting is, will be amazed ; for ‘ give and take’ is the use of battle.
Here Pindar feigns to check himself. If he told the tale of the Aeacids
at length he would exceed the limits of the projected Ode and the time at
his disposal. He feels indeed a spell laid on his soul by the festival of the
new moon,—a moon-spell, as it were,—compelling him to touch on the
theme. But he must resist the temptation of telling a long story. The
principle that one should sow with the hand and not with the full sack—
said to have been inculcated by Corinna—had certainly taken root in
Pindars mind and he expresses it here in some curious lines2, directed
against contemporary poets, who censuring his manner of weaving odes on
a warp of myth, used to fill their own compositions with wisdom, expressed
abstractly.
After this digression, the lyre is bidden to ‘weave’ a song, pleasing to
Aegina; and an enumeration of great Aeacids follows : Teucer king in
Cyprus, Ajax in Salamis, Achilles ruling over ‘Bright Island’ (Leuke) at the
mouth of the Danube, Thetis governing Phthia, Neoptolemus reigning over
the sloping hills of Epirus, finally Peleus, and of him more is said than of the
others. The capture of Iolcos, the plot of Hippolyta, the ambush which
Acastus laid, and the assistance given by Chiron the centaur, are briefly
touched on. Then the marriage with Thetis, who changed herself into fire
1 The transition is managed with a debs as tdrjKe k.t.X.
relative (1. 25) %bv <p irore Tpcotav k.t.X. 2 See note on these difficult lines
Exactly in the same way Pindar passes to	(36 sqq.), whose true meaning was first
the myth in the Third Nemean, also at discerned by Mezger.
the beginning of a strophe : 1. 22 rjpus64
NEMEAN TV.
and savage beasts to elude his embraces, is described, and we see the kings
of heaven receiving Peleus among them, and ‘ weaving ’ for him and his race
gifts of sovranty. The marriage of Peleus, like the marriage of Heracles, is
an emblem of the highest limit of mortal ambition ; we have reached as it
were Gades, and have no cause to go further westward. ‘ The tale of the
sons of Aeacus in its completeness it is not in my compass to narrate.’
Two points may be noted here in regard to the foregoing legends, (i)
Pindar, as a composer of hymns of victory, and thereby a helper of victors, is
compared to Chiron aiding Peleus against the ambush of Acastus. For the
expression in 1. 6i
kcu to fioptri/JLOV Aiodev ir eirpa) pi pop eKcfrepep
is clearly an echo of
ipo\ S’ cmolav aperctp e8cokc norpos avalJ—\popos it eir pa pi pap rcXi&et
(1- 44)
(Zeus corresponds to Potmos). (2) The gift of song, such as Pindar gives
to the victor, is compared to the gift of sovranty which the gods gave to
Peleus and his descendants. This is brought out by the use of the word
€$v(j)aip(o in the corresponding line of strophes 6 and 9 :
45	€£v(/)cup€ yXvKeia kcu to8' avTLKa (f>oppiy£ (piXos)
y	68 8a>pa kcu Kparos i^v(j)apap is yipos avrq>.
It is to be observed too that Thetis herself is an emblem of this sovranty,
Kparos1. In 1. 50 it is said
0ins 8e Kparci $0/a,
and she changes herself into nvp irayKparis (1. 62).
The further significance of the catalogue of the Aeacid heroes will be
explained by an examination of the third part of the Ode.
The distinctions of the Theandrids, consisting chiefly of an Olympic, an
Isthmian and a Nemean victory, are celebrated. Besides Timasarchus, his
mother’s brother Callicles, now dead, is specially mentioned; also his
grandfather Euphanes, a poet; and Melesias, the gymnastic trainer of
Aegina, receives a word of praise.
By a system of quaint echoes, a parallel is instituted between the
excellences of the Theandrids and the sovranties of the Aeacids; and this
comparison is quite in place, subordinate to the main idea of the hymn,
that song has the power of conferring a sort of sovranty2.
(1) The rule of Teucer in Cyprus
47 ivOa TevKpos anapx^i
is answered by
78 T ipacrap\€.
1 “ Nicht ohne Absicht wird darum
auch Thetis, die in Phthia herrscht (v. 50),
eine der hochthronenden Nereiden (v. 65)
genannt und die Gotter selbst als ‘Ko-
nige des Himmels und Meeres’ (v. 67)
bezeichnet.” (Mezger.)
2 Cf. Mezger p. 397 “es ist in My-
thus von lauter Konigen die Rede ” &c.;
and “ein solches Konigsloos ist dem
Timasarchus zugefallen, da er von einem
Dichter besungen wird.’INTROD UCTION.
65
(2)	To the sway of Ajax in Salamis
48 Atas 2aXaptv ex€L narpaav
responds
77 narpav tv aKovopev.
(3)	Achilles’ white island in the Euxine is compared to the white
sepulchral stele in honour of Callicles :
49 iv 5* Evolved neXaryei (paevvav ’A^tXevf
vatrov,
Leuke being the name of this island :
81 araXav Oepev Uaplov XlBov XevKorepav.
(4)	To the sovereignty of Thetis in Phthia
50 Qens be Kparei
®$lq
there was probably an echo in 1. 90, which has suffered corruption. Perhaps
the original was
delo'erai (f)B ipevois-
(5)	The ‘eminent’ hills, which characterised Neoptolemus’ dominions
in the west
52 fiovjioTai toBi ttpaves e£oxoi KardiceiVTcu
are echoed in the deeds ‘most eminent5 of 1. 92
eXireral tls eicao-ros e^oxarara <£a<rdat,
the emphatic word occupying the same position in corresponding lines.
(6)	Of Peleus it is written
54 EtaXioi; be nap nobl Xarpiav 'lacoXicov
TToXepiq x€PL irpooTpanav
IIrjXevs napebaKev Aipoveatriv.
The application of the capture of Iolcus to the Theandrids is really subtle.
The reader is struck by two points, (a) the curious expression Xarpiav
napebaKcv and (b) the use of Atpoves for the Thessalians. These two peculi-
arities give us the clue. In the 10th strophe we meet another curious
expression
7rarpav tv atcovopev,
78 Tipacrapxe, reav emviKioiaiv aoibals
7Tp onoXov eppevai.
We see at once that both these unusual phrases are chosen for the purpose
of corresponding. Iolcus is subject unto the Haemones (we might render, to
bring out the point) and the clan of Timasarchus is a subject for epinician
hymns. And it is with this in view that the poet writes Alpoveo-aiv ‘the
Cunning,’ to suggest ‘the cunning daughters of the Muses’ (1. 2 al be o-o<f)a\
Mourav Bvyarpes aotbal). Timasarchus is thus compared to Peleus.
It might be said that it vyas somewhat incongruous to draw a comparison
between the numerous glories of the Aeacids and the somewhat meagre list
of achievements which the kinsfolk of Timasarchus could produce ; and it is
interesting to observe how Pindar alludes to this criticism and meets it. He
implies that the Olympic victory of Callicles was an exploit which rendered
5
B.66
NEMEAN IV
further proofs of excellence almost superfluous. This is the thought that
underlies
82 o xpvcros cyfropcvos
avyas ebeif-ep an a eras,
gold being the emblem of an Olympic crown, and anaa-as echoing
airopa yap Xoyop AlaKov
72 naiftcop top arravra poi dteXdeZp
whereby it is meant that a family which can boast of an Olympic victory is
worthy of comparison even with the Aeacids.
In the last lines of the hymn, there is another allusion to the criticisms
which rival poets made on Pindar. Adopting, in compliment to the trainer
Melesias, expressions of the wrestling school, he describes himself as
94 dirakaurros ep Xoya* eXiceip
paXaica pep (fipopecop eaXois
rpa\v9 8c nakiyKOTOis effredpos.
Here eXiceip alludes to ivyyi 8y cXnopai rjrop (1. 35)—the ‘ drawing ’ which he
resisted; and the meaning of Xoyep is mythical tale (as in 11. 31 and 71),
wherein he might claim preeminence. The naXlyKoroi of 96 are the 8aioi of
38. But for the full import of these lines I must refer to my discussion in
Appendix A, note 5.
In the catalogue of the Aeacids Neoptolemus is specially significant.
Pindar is fond of likening the mimic battles of wrestlers and boxers to real
war, and in Neoptolemus, whose name meant‘young warrior/ he might
find a prototype of Timasarchus, the boy-wrestler. And Pindar indicates
the significance of Neoptolemus in his own way, by the use of a striking
expression. ‘The	peoprjpla,’ he suggests, ‘naturally draws me to the
*1 op 1 os 7ropos and the realm of NeoTrroXcpos.’ 1. 35
ivyyi 8* eXicopai rjrop peoprjpla Biyepep
responds to 1. 51
<$6 la' Neo TTToXf/xoff 8 'An el pep bianpvcriq.
And the second element of Neoptolemus is also significant. The fiovftorai
np&pes are subject unto him, even as the ftovfioTas Alcyoneus was made
subject unto Telamon. Kparel expresses the sovereignty of Neoptolemus
(1. 50); Kparaios is the epithet of Telamon. The warrior Telamon subdues
1. 27 Kal top piyap no\epi(TTap €K7ray\op 1AXkvopt}
and the name of Neoptolemus echoes this note of war in the same foot of
the same line of strophe 7 :
1. 51	&0tq' NcotTToXepos 8* *Aireip<p fhanpycriq«
Having seen the relations subsisting between the myth and the concluding
portion of the hymn, we may observe how here, as in the Third Nemean, the
last part is resonant with words answering to phrases in the ‘beginning.’ In
the first line of the 10th strophe the adjective ae&yvlap, coined by Pindar,
reminds us of yvla in the 1st strophe, where song is said to be an emollient
of the limbs.INTRODUCTION.	67
Again in the 1st line of the nth strophe there is a punctual responsion to
Oc'n*v in the 1st line of the 2nd strophe :
1. 9 to fioL depep Kpovida re At teat Nepea,
1. 8l (TTakav 0€fA€V IIapiov XlSov XcvKorepap.
The hymn which Pindar ‘ sets up’ is to be at once a tempos for Timasarchus,
and a funeral stele for his dead kinsfolk.
Moreover the comforting power of song, praised in the 1st stanza, is
explained in the nth, by its glorifying power : it can make a man equal in
fortune to kings,	in 1. 84 sets a seal on revx^i in 1. 41.
1. 4 ovde Seppop vdcop roaov y€ pa.X6a.ica. rev^ei,
1. 84 ipypdrmp ^avCKfifriv laobaipopa
And ipyparoav in this line echoes the expression in
1. 6 pijpa d* ipypdrtop xpowa>T€poi> jStoreu'et,
pfjpa being accurately answered in
1. 94 pypara, nXe/emp2.
Again yXmao-ap evpera) KeXabfjnp (an adjective found only here) in 1. 86, recalls
viop K€Xa8rj(T€ kciXXIpikop (1. 16).
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
VV. I —2. Cl	—•-w'-'-O —C/ —(9)
VV. 3 4* ^ — | “ V —	^ ^ ^ ^ — A —^	—	---; (13)
vv. 5—6. b’	- A ——C7 —ww—w—ww-----(13)
vv. 7—8. d CO w -v w-u-----v^w — vy — w — • — ||	(9)
It is to be observed that each strophe ends with an apparently acatalectic
verse and begins with an anacrusis. Hence M. Schmidt deduced that the
scansion was continuous, the anacrusis belonging to the last syllable of the
preceding line, and the penultimate syllable of that line being a paicpa
Tpiarjpos. For instance ro, the first word of the second strophe, rhythmically
appertains to fSaOhas, which precedes : thus flaBcias. to=
v, | l- |
By this means Schmidt has shewn that the first two and the last two verses in
each strophe produce measures {peyeSr)) equal in length (27 zeitig); and the
first strophe for example is symmetrically divided at the emphatic word rev'^ei.
Thus here we have an interesting example of the continuation of the
rhythm beyond the end of the verse. “Da diese aber auch an der Stelle
stattfindet, wo die beiden gleichen peyidrj sich beriihren, kann nicht der
mindeste Zweifel mehr zuriickbleiben dass grade dadurch die Einheitlichkeit
des Systems gefestigt werden sollte.”
The rhythm of this ode is logaoedic. We learn from line 45 that the
mood was Lydian. In the 8th Book of the Politics Aristotle remarks that
the Lydian mood was suitable for boys, voices. Its character was plaintive,
and perhaps Pindar’s choice of it for this hymn was determined by the refer-
ence to Timocritus, the dead father of Timasarchus. In the Eighth Nemean
we shall find Lydian harmony combined with 4 dactylo-epitritic ’ rhythm.
1	This responsion was noted by Mezger.
2	This- responsion also was noted by Mezger.
5—2NEMEONIKAI A'.
TIMASAPXfi* AITINHTH*
IIAIAI nAAAlSTHt.
''ApMTTOS €V<f>pO(TVVa TTOVCOV K€KplpL€VCDV	GTp. CL .
larpo9* ai Be ao(f>al
Moiaav Ovyarpes aoiBal de\%av viv airropLevai.
ovSe Oep/iov vBeop to gov ye pLakdatcd rev^ei
yvia, roaaov evXoyia <f>op/MyyL avvaopos.	5
prjfia S’ epypbdr(ov xpovccoTepov ftiorevei,
i. <£purros k.t.X.] Gladness is the
best physician of accomplished toils; and
songs the artful daughters of the Muses
can char77i her forth by their touch. Ei)-
<f>po<rtiva combines the ideas of gladness
of heart and good cheer. Kcicpipivcov is
explained by the scholiast as rploiv
Xafidvriov, (TvvT€\e<rdlvTU3v (peracto7'U77i,
Dissen, iiberstatiden, Mezger). The
labours no longer await judgment. In
Ne7)i. vi. 2 the participle is used in a
different sense.
3.	04\£av viv] Mezger has rightly
explained : ‘ die Lieder zaubern ihn (den
Frohsinn) hervor comparing for this use
of dlXyio, Anthol. Gr. ix. 544 tcTkhv OiX-
ycj avyvefJLlT)v. [The same explanation
will be found in Liddell and Scott.] It
seems probable that Aristarchus took the
words thus, and that the scholiast mis-
understood him as assigning the more
usual meaning of soothe to OtXiiav. The
view of the scholiast is that viv refers to
irbvovs.
4.	ov8^ 0€p|iov /c.r.X.] Nor doth warm
water so softly soothe the li77ibs as doth
speech of praise, li7iked with the lyre.
Some editors read rly&i after Plutarch
(de Tranquill. c. 6), but the mss. are
right, as is proved by the recurrence of
T€tix€L in the same foot of the same line
of the 11 th strophe. rebx€l p^dXdaKa = t7iol-
lia reddit, mollify, comfort. For tocov
—too-o-ov compare Callimachus, Hymn
to Apollo, 94 ov8£ 7roXet rotr’ hei/xev o<plX-
jifjia t6<t<ta Kvp^vrj. Homer ‘links’ the
lyre with the banquet, 6. 99 77 dairi
avv^opbs ion SaXelrj. ovv^opos (schol.
Kotviovovoa) means linked, juticta (as the
Graces in art), not ‘wedded’ (as Holmes
translates). Pindar would not have mar-
ried two feminine conceptions. Compare
Horace’s verba loquor sociatida cho7'dis.
6. prjfJ-a 8* cpyparav x.r.X.] But a
word hath longer spa7i of life tha7i
deeds,—what word soever the tongue
should draw forth fro77i the soul's depths
in the gracious hour of i7ispiration. After
6' rt re we should expect the subjunctive
and Bergk reads e^Xrj. But the optative
seems to express the event as more con-
tingent, and thus, as Dissen says, is more
modest (modestior optativus in 7*e quae
non si?ie G7'atia7'U77i ope fit).NEMEAN IV.	69
o ti K€ cfvv Xa/01tcov Tvya
y\S>cr<ra (frpevds i^eXoi fUadeias.
to fioi defiev Kpoviha re Al teal Ne/^ea	errp.
Tip,a<rap')(pv re iraXa	IO
vpuvov Trpotecopbtou ecrj' Segairo S’ A late chav
rjVTTvprjov eSo?, hitca %evaptcei koivov
<j>eyyo<;. el S’ ere ^apuevel TipLo/cpiros deXiw
<ro9 7rarrjp edaKirero, 7tolklKov
Odpua tee TwSe pbekec tcXidek
8.	<f>pcvos pa0€ia$] This expression
recalls Pindar’s adjectives padvpyjra and
padudoi-os (.Pyth. 1. 66), also Aeschylus’
PaOeTav a\okcl 81 a (ppevos Kapwobpevos
(S. c. I 578). In 01. 11. 54 Wealth is
characterized as /3adelay vwexojv PIpipvav
ay poripav. The metaphor here is a deep-
delved storehouse of song, to which the
tongue has the key. Compare also
Nem. ill. 9 p.'fjTios a pas aw 0.
9.	t6 pot k.t.X.] Such a word may it
be mine to set up, in honour of Zeus son
of Cronos and of Nemea and of the wrest-
ling match of Timasarchus, as prelude
and frontage of a hymn, depev suggests
the setting up and dedicating of a work
of architecture or sculpture (cf. below 1.
81); the wpoK&piov is related to the K&pos
or hymn, as the wpbvaos to the vaos.
vpvov wpoK&piov is equivalent to Kivpov
wpooLpuov. For the association of Zeus
and the victor in the proem compare
Nem. 1. 8.
12. rjAirupyov] Embattled towers were
a feature of the city of Aegina. It
was so strongly fortified that it held out
against the Athenians for nine months.
See Muller, Aeginet. p. 146. In Homer
etfwvpyos is an epithet of Troy.
12. SCica £cvapK€ 1 /c.r.X.] With justice
that besteadeth strangers, lighting all the
world. For Aegina’s hospitality, cp.
Nem. in. 2. i-evapKTjs, protecting foreign-
ers, is only found here. Hartung reads
EevapiUt, referring to the father of
idapi^cov
IS
Aristomenes mentioned in the Eighth
Pythian ode.
koivov	The scholia are in
doubt whether this phrase refers to Aegi-
na or to the hymn : 2<m pev Kai ttjv
Alyivav aKOvcrai, £<tti 8e Kai to woirjpa, rd
koivov (plyyos yiv6pevovm ov yap ea iv
a<pavei ra tpya aXXa (parifai kolvws.
Hartung approves of the second explana-
tion, but I think wrongly.
13. ct 8* <frt k.t.X.] But if thy father
Timocritus were still wartned by the genial
sun artfully sweeping the lyre, he would
have often, supported by this strain, cele-
brated his triumphant son, for having
sent home a zvreath of crowns from the
games of Cleonae andfrom rich Athens of
auspicious name, and because at seven-
gated Thebes beside the bright tomb of
Amphitryon the Cadmeans, full fain for
Aegina's sake, crozvned him with flowers.
For fapevei inspiring (Bergk fapevrjs,
Lehrs faBepdi) see note on Nem. in. 63.
Timocritus was a kitharistes, not a kitha-
rodos.
15. T(p8c pe\€i kXi0€i's] Leaning
against this strain, as against a pillar or
support. The words and the music
mutually support each other. Compare
kIovi KSKXipevTj, £ 307. r<p8e is almost
equivalent to roupSe, compare t6 above
1. 9, and perhaps refers partly to the
Lydian harmony. Timocritus would have
played in Lydian mood. See below, 1. 45
Avdiq. <rbv appoviq. pfKos.NEMEONIKAI A'.
70
vlov tceXafycre icaXXlvucov
KXecovaiov r air ay&vos opfiov (TT€(j>dv(ov	arp. y'.
ireptyavra teal Xiirapdv
evcovvpucov air *AOavdv, ®rj/3ai<; r iv iirTairvXoi*;,
ovv€fc ’Ap,<f)iTpvG)vo<; dyXaov irapd Tvp,j3ov	20
}£aZp,€loi vlv ov/c aeKovres avdeai pulyvvov,
16.	vi6v] A curious but intelligible
corruption has here crept into the
MSS., ij/JLvov KeXdSrjae KaXXiviKov. The
scribe associated v/jlvov with KaXXiviKov
(coming after KeXab^oe) and thought that
cros iraTTjp excluded vibv. But vlov is
absolutely required both by the construc-
tion and by the third personal pronoun
vlv in 1. 21. In 1. 16 the transition from
second to third person is an elegance, in
I.	21 it would be harsh. The restoration
of vlov is due to Bergk and was also
proposed by Hartung who observed that
Kal dwb Bypwv iwepL^as a&r(p orltpavov in
one scholium points to a personal subject
to 7rlfixj/avra. Mr Fennell proposes 1raid1
dyK€\ddr)<re, on the ground that the words
of the scholiast dvevtfyfuxTjae Kal avefiaXero
presuppose some qualification of KeXd-
8rj<re. It seems to me that a copyist who
had this reading before him would never
have written vfivov KeXddyo-e. Mezger
accepts 7ri/jLxJ/avTos, the reading of some
mss. in 1. 18, and takes it as dependent
on vfMvov. Mommsen proposed KeXdSr}
(for eKeXaSei) <re.
17.	KXcwvcuov] ‘ Dicit KXewvaTov ay<2-
va Nemea, quum Cleonaei diu praesides
essent horum ludorum Dissen. Compare
KXeajvalwv wpos avdpwv, Nem. X. 42.
opfioL of flowers are mentioned in 01.
II.	74.
18.	Xiirapdv] So Isthm. 11. 20 rats
Xiwapais ev ’Adavais, Aristoph. Acharnians
639 el 84 tls vfias vwodfawebaas Xurapas
KaX4(T€L€V ’AOrfvas, evpero wav av 81a ras
Xiwapas, d(f>vcjv Tip.r\v wepia\pas.
19.	0rjpais r* €V k.t.X.] Dissen is
certainly mistaken in taking ev Qrjfiais re
with <rT€<f>dv(i)v. re coordinates ovveKa
uLyvvov with w4fi\pavTa. The scholiasts
say that these games were the ToXdeta
(and Pausanias notices a gymnasium and
stadium ‘of Iolaus’, ix. 23, 1), but
quote Didymus to the effect that, though
the gymnasium was called ToXdeiot' the
games were ‘HpdKXeia.
20.	TvjJipov] The tomb of Amphitryon
was near the Proetid gate, where was
the stadion in which the games at the
festivals of Heracles and Iolaus were
celebrated. See Pausanias ix. 23.
22. Aly£va$ frcari] A strong affirma-
tion of the friendship of Aegina and
Thebes.
<j>iXoi<ri yap /c.r.X.] For as a friend
unto friends having come to the happy
hall of Heracles he suweyed their hospit-
able city. It is to be noticed that eXdibv
goes, not with &orv, but with wpbs avXav.
<j)iXoL<n is dative of the persons interested
and goes closely with a<rrv. The reading
of the mss. KarlSpaKev should (with
Mommsen) be preserved. For Karabip-
KopLai cf. 8 16 avrobs rjlXios KarabipKeraL.
It is clear that the Aula of Heracles was
on high ground.
(1) Triclinius read Karlbpa/JLev which
Dissen renders subiit ( = Kar48v), Mezger
‘er lief durch die Stadt hinab’. Mr Fen-
nell thinks the ‘metaphor is from navi-
gation’, ran into port; but it would
hardly be felicitous to use such a phrase
of one coming to an inland city. (2) A
scholiast read a<rrv KaP ZdpaKev as ap-
pears from his note, Kal to eti^evov aarv
KaraXapCov ras 07?/Sas,	tar’ evxv*
deatraadai rfy tov 'HpaKXlovs avX'qv. HeNEMEAN IV.
71
Alycpa9 €tca>Tt. <f>iXoun yap <j)iXo$ iXucop
%£piop aarv /careSpa/cev
'Hpa/cXio? oXftiav irpos avXav.
%vv at 7Tore Tpotav /cparaio? TeXapdop	arp. 8'. 25
7ropOrjae Kal M.ep07ra$
/cal top peyav 7ToXepurTap €K7rayXop ’AX/cvoprj,
ov rerpaopias ye irplp 8v<o8e/ca 7reTpat
rjpatds t iirepfieftawTas ifmro8dpov<i eXev
819 to<toi/?. «7reipoparkas £oop /ce (jtapeir)	30
Xoyop 6 prj avpiefc' eirel
pe^oprd rt /cal iradelp eoucep.
rd pa/cpd 8 e^epkireip epv/cei pe
also read 6XjSios (/car’ evxyv); see Bergk’s
note on the line. (3) Bergk proposes
KarkSpacrev, in the sense of Kark(3aXev
‘overthrew his opponent in wrestling’,
'iSpa being a technical phrase in wrestling
(Theophr. Char. 27 ttjv kSpav CTpktpeiv,
Theocr. XXIV. 109 kbpooTpbfpoi av8pes).
But the mere fact that he is obliged to
read Trap' aiiXdv for irpos avXdv in 1. 24 is
decisive against this proposal.
24.	‘HpaicXIos avXdv] This is gene-
rally supposed to be the Heracleion men-
tioned by Pausanias (ix. 11) as standing
just outside the Electra gate.
25.	£vv <»> k.t.X.] With whom doughty
Telamon once on a time destroyed Troy and
the Meropes, and the mighty warrior, fell
Alcyoneus, yet not ere he had subdued
twelve chariots by hurling rocks and twice
as many steed-taming heroes who drave
therein. The Meropes inhabited the
island of Cos. Of Heracles in Cos, we
read in Homer E 255 Kal puv twetra
K6o)v8' eb vaiofjtkvrjv dweveiKas.	The
battle of Alcyoneus and Heracles took
place at Phlegrae. These three expedi-
tions of Heracles are mentioned together
in the Fifth Isthmian Ode (31 sqq.) :
elXe 8i Hepyapdav irk<f>vev obv Ketvtp
Mepbirtov
k$vea Kal rbv fioopbrav otipei' (crop
reBpos	arp. e.
QXlypatcnv evpoiv 'AXkvovtj ofarkpas ov
rpeloaro
Xe/wrl*' (3apv<f)66yyoLO vevpas 'UpaKXkrjs.
The form tyv does not occur elsewhere
in Pindar, except in composition.
30. Sis tSctovs] In each chariot there
was a charioteer and a Trapaipdrrjs. In
1. 29 the quantity of the second syllable
of ijpwa s is not determined, a long or a
short being equally admissible. But in
four places in Pindar the w is short: Pyth.
I- 53’ ni- 7> IV* 58 and frag. 133.
(tfrapopdxas /c.r.X.] Battle- skilless
would he show himself to be, whoso under -
standeth not my tale ; for it is not strange
that he who doth a deed should suffer.
The tale will be understood by the
Theandridae who are not direipofiaxai but
treipav ZxovT€S> see li°e 76, and especially
by Timasarchus, who had really earned his
victory. Schol. ws yap 'HpaKXys iwl ptkv
ttjs dpxvs iXelirero, vorepov 8k iviKr}<Tev,
ovtoj Kai 6 dffXrjTTjs. wore cikos dvai avrbv
TT€TTTO)Kkvai 7) (LXXo TL T010VT0V VTTOp.€tVai.
32.	pe'tovra ira0€iv] This is the prin-
ciple of reciprocity; whereas Aeschylus’
celebrated bpdoavTi iraBelv is the law of
retribution. Compare Sophocles, fr. 210,
quoted by the scholiast;
rbv Spwvrd irob tl Kal iradeiv otpelXerai.
33.	rcl peuepa 8* /c.r.X.] From telling72
NEMEONIKAI A'.
copal t iTreiyofievat*
Ivyyi S’ ekfcopucu rjrop veopbrjvla diyepev.	35
6fi7ra} icehrep eyet fiadela ttovticL^ akpua
pueao-ov, avrirecv im^ovkia' acf>6Spa 86%op,€V
Satcov vnreprepoi iv (f)dei KarafUalveiv'
(frdovepa S’ akko$ dvrjp ftkenroov
yvoop,av tceveav cncora* /cvklvSei	40
the long tale to the end the rule of my art
withholdeth me, and the onward pressing
hours. i^e^TreLv, to relate completely. A
passage in the First Isthmian throws light
on this sentence; 1. 60 irdvra 8’ ii-enrciv...
afpcupetTai ftpoLX^ g^Tpov gxwv v/jlvo$. The
structure of the Ode depends on fixed
principles; the time allotted to this ode
is fixed; and thus it is impossible to give
more than a certain space to each subject.
For T€0p,6s compare 01. vn. 88 rlfia [xkv
vpvov redphv ’0\v/j.ttlovhear, and Isth. V.
20 Tidpuov got 4><xpX aafptffTCLTov. Here
probably Pindar intended that redp.bs
should recall 6£p,ev of 1. 9. For epbiceiv
with infinitive compare Euripides, Heracl.
691 pd\ rot pi ZpvKe dpav TrapeoKevaapd-
vov.
35. t'vyyi x.t.X.] But I am drawn on
by a new-i7ioon-charm to touch thereon
(that is, upon the tale of the Aeacidae).
The context clearly shews that Dissen
was right in not taking veopLTjviq. as the
object of diyitiev (a possible construction
suggested by i]<rvxLq- Oiylfiev in Pyth. IV.
296). But I think he is hardly right in
taking it as a temporal dative.—vov^via
(sc. rifitpa) is merely the feminine of the
adjective vovfxr/vios which occurs in Lucian
{vovfirjvio 1 aproi, Lexiphanes 6). There is
no reason why vovp.7jvLq. should not qualify
tvyyi. ivy£ is properly a moon-charm,
Tw being the moon-goddess at Argos;
and the choice of the word here is
suggested by veopxyiq.. gXicopai is the
vox propria for the attractive working of
a magic charm; so in Theocritus Phar-
makeutria, ury£, eX/ce tv ttjpov epJov ttoti
6Qp.a t8v avdpa.
36. %inra k.t.X.] Albeit the deep sea
brine hold thee up to the waist, yet strain
against the conspiring waves. Stirely
reaching land in the full light of day we
shall seem superior to our foes; while
another mail, with the {blind) eyes of
envy, in a dark space whirleth a fruitless
saw that falleth to the ground. The
metaphor is that of a man struggling with
the sea; and in compliment to the victo-
rious ttclXcuo’ttjs the struggle is represented
as a wrestling match (cf. /xiagov :
Aristoph. Acharn. 571 eyw yap 2x°g'at’
/xioos).—I have adopted Donaldson’s K€i'-
2T€p (accepted by Bergk) for Kairrep which
demands the participle.
Padela aKpt,a, suggesting <ppevos pad etas
of 1. 8, points the meaning of the passage.
The idea is : I adhere to my principle of
making myths the centres of my epinician
hymns; and I shall certainly bear the
palm, provided the very depth of my
imagination does not seduce me into
exceeding the due limits. Perhaps Pin-
dar was thinking of the advice which
Corinna is said to have given him in his
youth.
38. €V <|>a€i Karaf3aCv€iv] Not like
‘the dark man’ of Nem. in. 41 who
oti 7tot' aTpeiceC KctTlpa tto8L To e? <paei
is opposed <tk6tip in 1. 40.
40. 7v»|i.av] Moral reflexions, maxims,
saws, as opposed to \6yos (cf. 1. 31) and
/xvdos. kv\ivSei iactat * tosses about sug-
gesting that the yvco/xai are trite as well
as empty, xagaL 7reToiaav (= 7re<rov<rcu'),
aorist because it is a momentary act, opp.
to Kv\iv8ei.NEMEAN IV.
73
\«	—t
yafiai nreToicrav. ejiot, o oiroiav apeTav	<TTp. & .
ehco/ce TTOTfjuos ava%>
ev FoiS* otl 'xpovos epircov ireirpcopbevav rekeaei.
i^v<j>acve, yXv/cela, /cal roS* avr'uca, <j>oppuyi~,
AvBla avv appiOvCa pueXos ire^>LXrjp,ivov	45
Olvwva re /cal Kvirpa, evda Tev/cpos amapyti
6 TeXapuoovidSas* arap
Acas %aXapuv e^ec irarpopav'
iv S' Y&vgeivfp 7reXdyev (fraevvav 'A^cXei/s
va<rov' ®€Tt9 Se /cparel
41. €jjloI 8* oiroCav] But whatsoever
excellence lord Destiny gave me, the course
of time will, / am well assured, bring to
its allotted perfection. The excellence
meant by Pindar is the art of weaving
legends into his Epinician Odes. For
iroTfLos avaij, compare Nem. v. 40 and
Pyth. ill. 86 Xayirav ydp tol rbpavvov
bepKerai <r’ 6 /Leyas irbr^os.
43.	7rc7rp«fxevav] Proleptic with reXt-
<i€L. Compare below 1. 61.
44.	€£u<f>atv€ k.t.X.] Siveet lyre, weave
out forthright on warp of Lydian harmony
the ivoof of this lay also, beloved by Oenone
and Cyprus. Compare Pyth. iv. 275 Tiv be
TOVTOJV ii;V<f>aLVOVT(U X^PLT€S‘ K0LL TOb\ is
this song also, in spite of cavillers. Some
translate and that too immediately, but
such a sense is pointless here.
46. Olvcova T€ Kal Kvirpto] Oenone is
the old name of Aegina, and Pindar seems
to have chosen it here in order to suggest,
by the collocation with Kbwpip, wine and
love (olvos and Kbirpis), symbols of Euphro-
syne. The song of the Theban is beloved
by Aegina (tre<f>i\r)iitvov), as the Aegine-
tan lay was beloved by Thebes (plXoiai
(plXos, 1. 22).
airdpx^] (1) In later writers awdpxu
means to lead off a dance, and Mezger
attempts unsuccessfully to introduce this
meaning here. He translates ‘er eroff-
net den Reigen—der im Folgenden auf-
gefiihrten Konige aus dem Aeakiden-
geschlecht ’. As there is no special reason
arp.
50
for beginning with Teucer, there is little
point in such a statement; moreover
(especially coming after &0a) the word
would require some explanatory addition.
(2) Mr Fennell suggests that “the word
may here mean ‘receive dirapxai1 i.e.
offerings made to the dead hero-founder
of the Aeakid colony in Cyprus”, arguing
that aTrdpxopwu (offer firstfruits) is a
‘causal middle’. The supposition that
dw&pxu could mean receive an dirapxh
seems to me extremely hazardous. (3)
The most simple and satisfactory explan-
ation is that &ito has the same force as
in awouctcj, aTrobrj^oj etc. diroucei means
he lives at a distance; awdpxei means he
reigns at a distance (in the new Salamis),
and contrasts with £x€L varptpav in 1. 48.
So Dissen, Teucer procid a patria regnat.
Some emendations have been proposed:
Bergk airdpKei (= airripKei sccessit, cf.
Hesychius, dirrjpKev * dTrebirjpujKev), Pauw
eirapxei, Rauchenstein awoucci. BD have
the lemma u7rdpxet* The scholiast inter-
prets by Tjye/Aoveijei.
49.	<f>acvvdv vacrov] Leuce (White
island, now Snake island), at the mouth
of the Ister, where there was a temple of
Achilles probably founded by Aeginetan
sailors. A scholium explains the name of
the island—bid rb 7rXrj0os t&v ivveoa-
<Tevovrojv dpvicjv fjroi epubi&v (pavraaiav
yap ToiadTTjv rots irXbovdi waplx€l*
50.	0€ns] The cult of Thetis was
widely spread in Thessaly, and as the7 4
NEMEONIKAI A'.
Neo7TTo\e/409 S’ 'Aireipto hiairpuaLa,
ftovlSoTat, t661 TTpooves e^o^oc /caratceivTcu
AwSdvaOev dp^opuevoL 7rpo9 ’loviov iropov.
YiaXiov Se Trap 7roSl Xarpiav ’lacdkKov
irokepbia X€PL Trpocrr pair gov	55
1177X61)9 7rapeScofcev AipLoveao-iv,
SdpLapros '\Triro\vTa<; ’Akcuttov SoAiais	arp. 77'.
rkyyauri xpV<T(*'/J'€v°$*
wife of the Aeginetan hero Peleus she
has a place in this enumeration. One
scholium mentions a 0erlbeiov or Thetis-
temple at Phthia; another quotes Phere-
cydes: threira U.7j\ebs $X€T0 Qdlav
Kai Otriv iwl tu>v hnrwv Tobrwv dywv
oind iv <£apo&Xip Kai iv Oendelip 6
KaXeiTCU airb Trjs Qindos iroXetas.
51.	NconToXcpos 8* k.t.X.] But Neo-
ptolemus rules over the long tract of Epirus
where high lawns of pasturage recline,
shelving even from Dodona as far as the
Ionian strait. dtaTrpboios is a Homeric
word, occurring in P 748 ttpwv iredioio
biaicpboios t€tvxvki*)s, while the adverb
dicnrpvoiot' is used of piercing sound.
Mr Fennell is right in connecting it with
diairpo (Aeolic *diairpv) and in explaining
it to mean ‘right through’. Here it is
used of a line of hills, just as in the
Homeric passage it is used of one hill.
52.	fe'fjoxpi] prominentes, above the
lower lands. So in Homer, V 227 ti-oxos
’Apryeiuv.. ,K€<pa\7]v, of height. Kar&Keiv-
tcu (reclinant, cubant) lie down, of sloping
hills, opposed to steeper hills which stand
up (e.g. opdoirovs irayos Soph. Antigone,
985). Horace’s Usticae cubant is recurs
to the mind. povfioTTjs is a Pindaric
word; in Isthm. v. 32 the giant Alcyoneus
is called rbv fiovfioTav. Schol. fiovTpofpos
yap ij *HTT€ipos.
54.	HaXtov 8c k.t.X.] The domin-
ation of the Minyae in Thessaly was suc-
ceeded by the rule of the Thessalians,
and this change was connected in legend
with Peleus. Peleus quarrelled with
Acastus the last king of the Minyae and
sacked his town Iolcus. The cause of
the hostility was the love and vengeance
of Hippolyta, Acastus’ queen, who played
the same part towards Peleus that Sthe-
noboea played towards Bellerophon,
whose story may be read in the sixth
Book of the Iliad. See Nem. v. 26 sqq.
The reading of the mss. Xarpdav is
both untranslatable and unmetrical (a
molossus instead of a cretic), and I have
not hesitated to adopt Schmid’s Xa/rptav.
(So in 01. xiii. 68, imreiov should be
corrected to lthtlov.) Xarpios is a Pin-
daric adjective, occurring 01. x. 28
Xarpiov... pucrdov, the hire of a servant.
Here it is to be taken with irapibuKev,
handed over to serve, Xarpda being a
wellknown word and Xar/wos very rare, the
corruption was most natural.
55.	'iroXcp.uj. irpoo-Tpairttv] Hav-
ing turned towards it, but with hostile
(not suppliant or entreating) hand. Trpoo-
TpcTru) is regularly used of turning to-
wards in prayer. Bergk after Heyne
reads irpoTpaw&v, having impelled, which
is weak.
56.	Aipovcfnriv] Thessalians. Hae-
monia was a name of Thessaly.
58. Tc'xvawn, xp^aF^vos] The uses of
Xprjodai, to experience (cited by Dissen),
with ri>XTh dv<rrvxioL(s, dv<nrpayiais, <rvpL-
<popais &c. do not support such a use of
XpTi<f&p*zvos, the reading of the mss., in
this passage. All these datives describe
a state of the person experiencing, not
the objective cause of an experience.NEMEAN IV.
75
Ta AaiSaXov Se fiayaipq (jyvreve Foi davarov
i/c \o%ov TleXtao 7rats’ a\a\/c€ Se Xeipoov,	60
/cal to pbopaipov Atodev ireirpcopbevov e/c<\>epev
Mingarelli and Matthiae proposed or
accepted a conjecture mentioned by Tri-
clinius,	; and Bergk has adopt-
ed in his text an ingenious conjecture of
his own rixvcus xOLPaGG^PL€VOS9 bearing
the same meaning as x(t}G^/X€V0S iXaPa(Tm
adfi€vos=xapax^/s, angry with). But
the reading of the mss. is not necessarily
wrong because the explanation of Dissen
will not hold. xPVG^aL with such a dative
as t£xvollglv naturally means (not to
experience involuntarily but) to make use
of or to deal with. Peleus dealt with the
sly arts of Hippolyta and used them for
his own purpose. They led to his sacking
Iolcus; that was the use he made of
them. Cf. schol. xoXwfels reus yepydd-
<rcus e£ ’Afcdarov yvvaucos 8oXiais rixva^
Kai TdVTCLLS ds wopOyaiP rys TojXkov alriq
Xpy<rdp.€POS tin iwe^ovXebdy.
59. AcuSaXov pa)(a£pa] A sword
forged by Daedalus or Hephaestus for
Peleus and stolen by Acastus. Bergk
has successfully defended AaiSaXov the
reading of the mss., which had been
abandoned by Boeckh and most editors
in favour of 5ai8aXip, a conjecture of
Didymus. Bergk has shewn that Dae-
dalus was a name of Hephaestus by a
passage in the Hercules Ftirens (1. 469):
ds Se^iap 8b ayp aXe^yrypiop %vXop Kadiei
AaiSaXov, \J/ev8y 8ooip and by a vase-
picture in Millin’s Gall. Myth. xm. 48.
That Hephaestus stithied a sword, pta-
Xat/oa, for Peleus is proved by a fragment
of Hesiod quoted by the scholiast on
this passage and numbered frag. 85 in
Gottling’s edition of Hesiod:
rjSe 81 oi Kara 6vpd>v apiary (paivero
(3ovXii
avrop p.h axlvOou-, Kpbxf/at 5’ aSoKyra
pL&xoupav
KaXyv, yv oi ifrevge TepucXvrds ’Ap.<pi-
yvtfeis *
<bs rr)v fiaarelfwv oTos Kara UyXiop aiirv
atxf/1 viro Kcpravpoiaip opeoKipoioi 8a-
/xdy.
Moreover Zenobius the paroemiographer
states expressly (v. 20) pAp.pyrai ravrys
[fiaxa-ipas] ’Avaicptwp Kai Hipdapos ip Ne-
fiGOpUais' <j>aai 8e avrrjp vwb 'Hfpalarov
yepo/xipyp 8Qpop UyXei ooxppoovpys epera
TrapcL ddop bodypai. He is speaking of
the proverb pdya (f>popd piaXXop y UyXebs
iiri rrj p.axalpp.
<J>vt€V€ is equivalent to prepared, tried
to cause; so in (5 165 roioSeoai (f>6pop Kai
Kypa (frvreijei irdpreoaip. ck XSxov means
by an ambush of Centaurs, as the passage
cited from Hesiod indicates. Pindar was
an ardent student of Hesiod (cp. Nem.
vii. 88) and there is nothing in his words
that renders it necessary to suppose that
he deviated from the Hesiodic story.
Acastus, the son of Pelias, having stolen
the weapon of Peleus hid it on Mount
Pelion, and suborned the Centaurs to lie
in wait for the hero when he was searching
for his sword. Chiron protected Peleus
from the danger. We need not suppose
that Acastus himself took part in the
ambuscade.
61. Kai to |x6poripov k.t.X.] And he
(Chiron) was carrying out to its destined
end the fate decreed by Zeus. This is the
interpretation of Dissen and most scholars,
and, I believe, it is right. Both the
view of Mezger that Peleus is the subject
of iKfpepep, and that of Mr Fennell that
the verb is intransitive (as in Soph. O. C.
1424) and rb fibpoipLOP its subject, seem to
render the line almost otiose. There is
little point in the statement (in this con-
text) that Aids IreXdero fiovXy, and such a
remark is not in Pindar’s manner; but
there is point in saying that Chiron took
part in determining Peleus’ destinies.
Compare Hem. ill. 56 pbpupevae k.t.X.76
NEMEONIKAI A'.
7rvp Be iray/cpaTe? 0pa<Tvp,a%dpcop re Xeovrcov
6vvj(a\? d^vrarovs atcpav
T€ Beupordrcop G^da-ais oBoptcop
eyapuep vyjnOpopcop pLav NrjpetBcop,	arp. 0'. 65
elBep S’ evKv/cXov eBpap,
r«9 ovpapov /3a<ri\fje<? ttoptov t ifa^opbepoi
Scopa /cal teparos i^v(j>apap iyyepes avrS.
This interpretation is confirmed by the
echo of 1. 44, see Introduction, p. 64.
62.	irvp 8c k.t.X.] Thetis changed
herself into various forms to escape from
the embraces of Peleus, but the counsels
of Chiron enabled the hero to overcome
the fire, the lion, the dragon and other
shapes which she assumed.—Opaavpa-
Xolvojp is Hermann’s emendation of 6pa~
<TVfjLaxw•	Heracles is called Opaovpid-
Xa^os, wily-da?'ing in 01. vi. 67. In this
passage the word felicitously suggests
that the lion was a paxwd of the Nereid.
63.	aKpav tc k.t.X.] Observe the
singular aKfi&v, for which we might have
expected aicpas, points. The teeth are
conceived as forming a knife or saw, and
aKp.&v is the sharp edge of the roiv. The
singular also serves to indicate that Peleus
had to do with only one lion. We may
render : Having defeated masterful fire
and the claws full sharp of wily-daring
lions and a gleaming row of teeth most
fell he married one of the high-throned
Nereids. crxd£w has two meanings, (i)
medical, to open a vein, lance, (2) to
drop, let fall. In Pyth. x. 69 tabirav
axdcrop is drop the oar, let the oar rest,
as in Xen. Cyr. ill. 5 oxdfap ttjp ovpap
is to drop the tail. Cp. Euripides
Phoenissae 454 oxdoop db 8eivov o/ul/jlcl kcll
0vp.ov wvoaSy and, in middle, Aristophanes
Clouds 107 <rxaa’dfJ.epos ttjp 'nnnKrjp, where
it might be rendered in English slang
by cut. In the present passage the word
means to set at rest or foil; and I have a
suspicion that <rxa£w was a vox pi'opria
in wrestling for foiling the devices of an
antagonist and causing him to abandon
them. The English defeat, in its proper
sense, seems an adequate rendering.
65. vi|/u0povwv] A Pindaric com-
pound. Isth. V. 16 vxf/Wpovov KXw0i6.
66.	cvkvkXov 28pav] A circle of fair
seats.	Pindar probably conceived the
seats as joined together (‘una sedes in
qua divisi singulis diis loci ’, Dissen). In
Pyth. hi. 93 sqq. we read how the gods
feasted at the marriages of Peleus and
Cadmus, and how those heroes saw the
royal sons of Cronus on golden seals and
received wedding gifts Kai Kpbpov iraidas
j3a<Ti\i}as tdop xPvff*aLS *v ^Spais %dva re
dbt-aPTO.
67.	rds—«|>€£op€voi] Bergk illustrates
the genitive (Homer uses the dative) with
i<t>4£ofJuu from Apollonius Rhodius, Ar-
gon. III. 1000 aXX’ i} fiev Kai prjbs...
itpefr/jLipr} TrdTpTjp \hre and Sophocles
Philoctetes 1123 Kai 7rov 7roXias it6ptov
dipbs e<piifjL€Pos (where 0lpos is generally
taken with ttov).
68.	8copa Kai Kpcrros k.t.X.] wove, as
their gifts, a web of sovereignty to devolve
upon his race. The reading of the mss.
ei;€<j>apap can be racked into a certain
sense, but is by no means satisfactory.
It must be explained as a strong zeugma
‘set forth their gifts and declared the
might that would be upon his race’ (or
monstranmt ei potentiam ad posteros du-
ralurani). But €K<paLp€LP Stopa is a doubt-
ful expression, to which I have been
unable to find a parallel. I believe that
ii-v<j>apap is what Pindar wrote; the gods
are represented as weaving out or plan-NEMEAN IV.
77
Taheip&v to 7rpo$ £6<f)ov ov ireparov. dirorpeire
avTt? €vpa)7rdv ttotI '^epaov evrea vaos'	7°
anropa jap Xojov Ala/cov
iraLhtov tov airavra p,oi hieXOelv.
®eavhpLZai<ri S’ aelgijvLcov aedXoav	<rrp. 1.
Kapvj; irotfMx; e/3av
OvXv/JLiria t€ KaX 'Icrdpbol Nepuea re avvOepbevos,	75
evda irelpav e^ovre^ ohcahe Kkuro/capTrcov
ning the gifts which they would shower
upon Peleus and his race. It may be
pointed out that in Theocritus vn. 8
2<f>cuvov has usurped the place of titpaivov
in the mss. A strong confirmation of
£^b(f>avav is the fact that £^b<patve occurs
in the corresponding line of the sixth
strophe. The Theandridae are compared
to the Aeacidae, and Timasarchus to
Peleus. Even as the gods weave a web
of sovereignty as their wedding gift to
Peleus, so the lyre is bidden by Pindar
to weave a web of song and glory as a
gift for Timasarchus, see Introduction,
p. 64. d(Spa Kal teparos is virtually a
hendiadys. ixpaivu) (like <f>vreb(o) is so
constantly used in a figurative sense that
it almost ceases to be a figure. In Pyth.
iv. 141 we have a close parallel to v-
<f>alv€Lv Kpdros:—
d\\’ £/jl£ XPV Kal (r£...v<f>aiv€tv Xonrbv
oXpov.
In Callimachus’ Hymn to Apollo, 1. 56
we read defieiXta $oi(3os ixpalvei, and Plato
even uses the word with otxodo/i^/xara
(Critias, 116 b).
The MSS. give is (or els), yeveks (or
yeveas), avrcp (or aurw). Boeckh read is
yeveav ol, Dissen adopted is yivos atfr#.
The scholiast read eyyivh, restored by
Rittershuis and accepted by Bergk who
writes: ‘Librorum lectio orta est ex inter-
pretamento is yerects, i.e. posteris Pelei vel
£k yeveas, i.e. a principio ei destinatum'.
The word occurs in Hem. X. 51.
69.	TaScCpcDy k. r. X.] From Gadira to
gloomward thou shalt not pass ; turn back
again the gear of the ship to the broad
continent, ra Tdbeipa, Gades, Tr)8eipa in
Herodotus iv. 8. £6<pos for 8ij<tls, west,
is Homeric. The poet having touched
on the supreme height of Peleus’ bliss
can go no further; he has reached the
Pillars of Heracles.
70.	cvpwirdv x^pcrov] Europe (evpuj-
Tr6s = ebpts). Zvrea va6s, remos et vela
navis, Dissen; compare Ol. vn. 12 ita/x-
<pwvoL<jl r’ iv ivreoiv avXuv.
71.	diropa] It is impossible, I have
no passage. The plural suggests the
abundance of the theme. Cp. 01. 1. 52
ifiol 5’ tiiropa yaarpl/xapyov (xaKapwv tip’
eiirew, I have scruples.
72.	tov airavra] The full legend of
the Aeacidae (viewed as a whole). See
above Nem. 1. 69, and below 1. 83.
73- 0€avSp£8auri /c.r.X.] For the The-
andridae I came, true to my compact, a
ready herald of their lusty contests at
Olympia and at the Isthmus and at
Nemea, where entering the lists they re-
turn not homeward uncrowned with fruit-
age of glory. The adjective aei-lyvios,
making the limbs wax lusty, was probably
formed by Pindar for this passage.
75.	<ruv0lp.€vo$] Having made a com-
pact; so in Pyth. xi. 41, he says, address-
ing the Muse, el fuodov ye (or paoBoura,
MSS. fju<r0<p) avviBev wapix€LV	virdp-
yvpov.
76.	icXvroicdpirwv] Another Pindaric
adjective: whose fruit is glory. For
tceipav £x0VT€$> sustaining the tidal, com-
pare above 1. 30.78
NEMEONIKAI A'.
ov veovT avev aT€(f>dpcop, Trarpav iv aicovofiev>
Tifjbdaap^e, reap imvuciouriv aoiScus
TTpoiroXop efifievcu. el he toi
parptp pH €tl KaXkitckei /ceXevet5	80
arakap Oepuep Tlaplov \i6ov XevKorepap.	arp. id.
6 'xpvtrb'; e’ty'opepos
avyds ehei^ep diraaa^, vppos he tcop ayaOdop
epypareop fiacrikevaip laohaipopa rev^ei
(fycora' /ceipog dficfy ’kyepopri paieracop ipdp	85
7Xwacrap evpiro) /ceXahfjnp, *0paorpiaipa
77. Trarpav x.r.X.] Where we hear,
Timasarchus, that thy clan is a minister
unto songs of victory; that is the Thean-
dridae win victories, supply choruses and
pay poets for their celebration. For
irpbwoKos compare Olymp. xin. 54 'Apyoi
Kai TrpoTrbXois, the Argo and her emu.
Pindar’s motive in using the curious ex-
pression has been pointed out in the
Introduction p. 65.
79. cl 84 toi k.t.X.] But if thou biddest
me yet set up to thy mother's brother
Callicles a slab whiter than Parian stone,
know that gold in the hands of the refiner
is wont to reveal the ftdl radiance of its
beams, and a hymn in praise of brave
deeds maketh a man equal to kings in
fortune. For the meaning, and the al-
lusion to the Olympic victory of 1. 75,
I may refer the reader to the Introduction,
p. 66.
paTpcp] According to the scholiast,
Callicles was the brother of the victor’s
mother and Euphanes her father. fjL&rpm
itself is ambiguous as it may mean either
avus or avunculus matemus. It would
seem that the family of Timasarchus’
mother as well as that of his father be-
longed to the Theandrid clan.
81.	oraXav] a sepulchral stele. For
64pL€v compare above 1. 9. (The line is
imitated by Horace I. 19 Pario marmore
purius.) By the choice of \evKoripav
Pindar would compare the glory of Calli-
cles to the bright island, Leuce, of
Achilles (in v. 49).
82.	6 \Pv<r<>s] Gold here is symbolical
of ‘the golden olive leaves’ of Olympic
crowns (cp. Nem. 1. 17). So in Pyth. x.
67 it is symbolical of the ‘golden laurel’;
see above, Introduction, p. 66. The
refiner is the poet.
83.	diracras] Not all (7rd<ras), but in
their perfection. See above, Nem. 1. 69.
84.	T€v\€i] corresponding to retx€l in
line 4. The hymn is both a healer and
kingmaker, epy/xaruv recalls cpyfxdnop
in 1. 6. lo-odalfuov means here ‘equal in
fortune’, not ‘equal to the dalfioves' (as
in Aeschylus, Persae, 633).
85.	kcivos k.t.X.] Let him (Callicles)
dwelling on the shores of Acheron detect
my tongue resounding clear where he won
the bloom of Corinthian parsley at the
contest of the deep-thundering Trident-
wielder. KeXadrjTLS is found only here.
For papljKTVTros as an epithet of Poseidon,
see Hesiod, Theogony, 818; Olymp. 1. 72
\SapvKTvirov evTpiatvav. 'Qpoorplaiva is a
Pindaric name of Poseidon, cf. 01. vm.
48, Pyth. II. 12 opaoTplcupav Oebv. Pindar
promises to celebrate Callicles in an
Isthmian Ode, and it is a gratuitous
change on the part of Bergk to read eVex’
for IV’ iv.
88. 0&Xt)o-€] The bloom of the Isth-
mian chaplet was figurative, not literal;
the parsley was withered. Cf. schol.NEMEAN IV.
79
iv iv dywvt fiapvKTVTrov
0ak?]<T€ KopivOtois ae\ivoi<;'
rov Ev<f>ap7)s ideXoDV yepcuo? irpoiraTtop,	<rrp. ift.
■j"o cro? aeia-GTai, iral.	9°
aWoicn S' a\t,K€$ a\\oi‘ rd S' avros av tl5 lay,
Isth. II. 15 rots oVv Ta*I(r0iua aywvifa-
[ihoLS oIXlpop %ypov 6 aritpapos, vypbv 5£
toTs ra N^uea.
89. tov Ev<(>dvT]S k.t.X.] The corrup-
tion of 1. 90, in which the three mss. on
which we depend for the last 28 verses
of this ode (B, B, D) agree, renders the
meaning of this passage extremely un-
certain. Not one of the emendations
proposed is really satisfactory, as they do
not account for the corruption in our
text. Hermann proposed 6 <rd$ tLeurip
7rore, 7tcu, but why should dieurdv 7rore
have ever become aeloerai? Boeckh read
similarly abs aeivip Tore ttolI, Hartung
cLeiab aoi ttotc, 7tcu, Rauchenstein <rbs
deurev t6t€9 ttcu, Mommsen aelcrercu, 7ra?,
6 ct6s. Bergk proposed
rtop l&iHpdvys hdtXup yepaios wpowdruip
6 cos 7’ iw&ie irat
quas victorias libenter Euphanes anim-
advertit, which, besides being improbable
from a critical point of view, gives a weak
sense.
It appears to me that the unmetrical
reading in 1. 90 must be due to the in-
trusion of a gloss into the text. There
is no reason to question the genuineness
of aeicerai, which must have been the
first word of the verse. If the word or
words succeeding ddcerai had acciden-
tally fallen out and 6 <rbs, ttcu a gloss on
TTpoir&Ttop stood in the margin, the gloss
would have almost certainly crept into
the text. I propose, therefore, to deal
with the line as if we found
aelcerai
in the mss.
Pindar is comparing the Theandridae
to the Aeacid kings. He has indicated
in 1. 81 (see note) that Callicles corre-
sponds to Achilles; further in 1. 92 (see
note) he uses words which recall Neopto-
lemus. But in the list of the Aeacidae
Thetis is mentioned between Achilles and
Neoptolemus (1. 50); and we are therefore
led to suppose that Pindar, in speaking
of Euphanes, used words which recalled
Thetis. So little is said of the goddess
(Bins 8b rpareT Qdiq) that the problem
is narrowed. I conjecture that Pindar
wrote
ddcerai (f>0i fx.lv ois,
of whom Euphanes, his old grandfather,
will be full fain to sing to the dead.
Euphanes represents the Theandrids
among the tpdifiepoi, as Thetis the
Aeacids at Phthia.
91. aWouri 8* oiXikcs aXXoij Men of
each generation have their own comrades.
Perhaps Pindar was thinking of the pro-
verb fjXii; yXuca ripTrei, but aXiKes here
has a wider sense than usual and means
not coevals, but contemporaries; e.g.
Euphanes and Callicles.
Td 8* avTos k.t.X.] Each man imagines
that the deeds whereof he himself has
knowledge are the loftiest argument for
a tale. The mss. have &v ns
Mingarelli’s reading dvra is adopted by
Bergk. To this may be objected: (1)
the corruption is not accounted for, (2)
we expect op, (3) &vra rv%dp requires
the genitive (as in Nem. vi. 27). Her-
mann’s dip ns t8y cannot be entertained
as there is no reason why td77 should
have been corrupted. My reading lay
(subjunctive of taapu; Pindar uses foa/u9
tca.fx.ev and tcavn, pres, part.) accounts
for the corruption. Owing to the simi-
larity of adjacent syllables anticichi
became antichi, av tis y, and the un-8o
NEMEONIKAI A'.
e\7Terat T£9 etcacrros i^o^drara <f)d<T0cu.
olov atpecov K€ MeXvjaiav epiSa arpeffyoi,
prjp,aTa irXe/ccov, aTraXaiaro9 iv Xoyw eXtcetv,
/iaXa/cd puev <f>pove(ov iaXois,	95
Tpayys 8e iraXiytcoToi9 €(f>e8pos.
meaning 77 was changed to tvxv to make
sense.—<j>cur0cu depends on e£oxwrara.
It is usually taken with 2\tt€tcu at the
expense of the sense. Pindar is paying a
graceful compliment to the victor. ‘ Eu-
phanes thought Callicles preeminent;
I consider the deeds of Timasarchus
e^ox^rara.’
92. 4Jox«Tara] This word responds to
tt-oxoi in 1. 52. See Introduction, p. 65.
92. olov k.t.X.] ‘What an adversary
in speech were he who learned a lesson
from Melesias! How he would wrestle
with sinuous words, and resistless with-
stand constraint in the trial of story,—a
gentle dealer to the noble, but a sovereign
wrestler rough to naughty foes ! ’
For an explanation and defence of this
rendering see Appendix A, note 5.
The trainer Melesias is mentioned in
Nem. vi. 66 and Olymp. vm. 54.
VTpo(f>7} meant a wrestling-trick, ‘twist’;
iracras crTpo(pcLS arptyecrdai, Plato, Re-
public , 405 C. For e\K€iv compare Hesiod,
Scut. Her. 302 e[mx0VT0 7ri'£ T€ Ka'1
€\ky]86v.
95.	€ <r\o is] The short quantity of
the first syllable of iaXois in this passage
is to be noted; cf. Pytk. in. 66 and 01.
11. 9.
96.	&f>€8pos] Properly lying in waity
posted in resewe', and then technically of
the odd man in wrestling pairs. See
below, vi. 63. Cp. Aeschylus, Choeph.
866 roiavde ndXrjp fiovos wp £<t>ehpos 8icr(rois
fjilWei Oeios ’OpiffTrjs a\f/€ip.NEMEAN V.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY AT NEMEA IN THE
BOYS’ PANCRATION WON BY PYTHEAS OF AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
In hymns composed for Aeginetan victors one remarks that Pindar
generally introduces images and metaphors taken from sailing or swimming, or
here and there finds a place for a nautical term, evidently remembering that
his ode will be sung in the city of a seafaring people and wishing to give it a
certain savour of the sea. Now the Fifth Nemean Ode1 * * is more thoroughly
4 sea-saturate,’ has more of the marine taste, than any other of the series of
Aeginetan hymns,—sounding almost as if it had been actually composed
on the beach of Aegina, in view of her harbour and ships,—a true song
of the sea. And it is certainly possible that Pindar, enjoying the hospitality
of Lampon, a citizen who was noted for his kindness to strangers and
father of the strong boy whose victory in the pancration was the occasion
of the ode, may have written it, or at least been inspired, there. It is built
upon the legend of the temptation of Peleus by the comely and delicate
Hippolyta and his subsequent marriage with Thetis. For Pindar this
marriage, more than a mere marriage, meant the type of highest happiness
(oXjSos), in whatever that happiness may consist; Thetis is a true 4 wish-
1 Of the three odes {Nemean V.,
Isthmian IV., Isthmian v.) in honour of
the sons of Lampon, Isthmian iv. was
written latest, and a passage in it shews
that it was composed not long after the
battle of Salamis. Nemean v. is the
earliest of the three.
As to the interpretation of the ode,
Dissen thinks the murder of Phocus is
mentioned in v. 10 to warn the son of
Lampon against quarrelling, and that
the myth of Peleus is told as an edify-
ing example of chastity. Mommsen, as
usual, seeks political motives and loses
himself in conjectures. L. Schmidt
assumes that Euthymenes was defeated
at the Isthmus and specially desired that
his defeat should be referred to—a view
worth mentioning as a curiosity. Mezger
finds the leading idea in 1. 40
TroTfios Kplvei ovyyevty tpycov irepi
1TWTU3V
—the value of noble descent.	He divides
the hymn thus: apxd 1—6; Kararpowd 7,
8; 6fi(f)a\6s 9—37; pLeraKaTarpoird 38—
40; <r<f>payis 41—54.
This arrangement spoils the symmetry
of the ode, by forcing the mythical
prayer of the Aeacids into the same
division as the myth of Peleus.
For the family of Lampon see Appen-
dix A, note 6.
B.
68 2
NEMEAN V
maiden/ wunschmcidchen, as her name is actually said to mean, and the
wooing and winning of her by Peleus is an image of any high, divine success
attained by effort.
The ode falls naturally into three divisions corresponding to its three
metrical systems. And each part offers us duly one moment of the thought
which is worked out. (i) In the first system we have the prayer of the
Aeacids for the people of Aegina. (3) In the third system the victories of
Aeginetans indicate that the wish had been answered. (2) In the second
system, it is shewn, by the allegorical myth of Peleus, why Aegina has
been thus signalised by divine favour. That such is the framework of the
ode may easily be proved.
The glory reflected by Aeginetan victories in the public games on Aegina
herself is strongly emphasised in the third system. Euthymenes’ successes
are ‘for Aegina’ (Myiva 1. 41) and ‘glorify’ the Aeacids (1. 42); and the poet
rejoices
on
€<r\ot(Ti papvarai nepi Tracra 1roXts.
And that this is to be regarded as a fulfilment of the prayer of the Aeacids,
is significantly conveyed by the use of a striking expression in the third
system which echoes an equally striking expression in the first system. Of
Peleus, Telamon and Phocus praying at the altar of Zeus, it is said, 1. 11,
7T Irvav t els aide pa ^eipas a/xa.
Euthymenes in 1. 42 is described as
NUas ev ayKcopecrcn 7tltp(ov1.
The two verbs {irlrpripi and iriTV(o) are in sense distinct, but Pindar clearly
connected them, and there is a certain kinship in their meanings.
It is next to be shewn that the story of Peleus symbolizes, in brief, and
explains, the history of Aegina. Peleus won Thetis because he respected
Zeus Xenios; this is the essence of the tale. And so, it is to be inferred,
Aegina won the accomplishment of her wishes by her unremitting exercise of
hospitality.
Several hints leave us in no doubt that this is the argument.
(1)	Immediately before the tale of the prayer Aegina is called
i-evtov apovpav.
(2)	narepos 'EWavlov (to whom the Aeacids pray) 1. 10 is echoed in irarpos
i-eivtov (1. 33) whom Peleus respected.
(3)	‘ They prayed ’ is expressed by the unusual, archaic word
Secnravro (1. io)
which is rendered very prominent by its metrical position ; for not only is its
first syllable a tetrasemos (measuring four times) but it is preceded by a
pause equivalent to a tetrasemos: thus
A 6 ever- A avro.
1 The emphasis of ttltvwv is increased See below, p. 94.
by its allusive associations with ttot/ulos.INTR OD UCTION.
83
(See Metrical Analysis p. 88.) Pindar has adopted this means to express
that as the '‘wish-maid’ Oens was won by Peleus, so the wishes of the
Aeacids for Aegina were fulfilled.
But the allegory of Peleus, if it applies generally to Aegina, may be on
this occasion taken to themselves especially by the kindred of Lampon, a
man noted for his hospitality1, and whose name (in 1. 4) receives a metrical
emphasis similar to that of deacravro. And thus Euthymenes, uncle of the
young victor Pytheas and himself an unusually distinguished champion, is said
to have been made happy by the embraces of the goddess Victory and
caressed by hymns of praise, even as Peleus was blessed by the guerdon of
the sea-goddess and glorified by Apollo and the Muses. And the fact that
one of Euthymenes’ successes was achieved on the Isthmus yields a welcome
opportunity to accentuate the sea-motive by introducing the king of the ocean
himself, and also enables the poet to manage a natural but skilful transition
from myth to ‘ modern ’ history.
But why, one asks, is Euthymenes the prominent figure? why does the
myth bear on him, when the ode is expressly written for Pytheas his nephew ?
It is an instance of the dexterity of Pindar’s art. Pytheas is only a boy, not
yet of nubile age, and the infelicity of comparing his victory to a sexual union
is avoided by making Euthymenes a sort of intermediate reflector. The
artist indicates in his own way that Pytheas will be even as Euthymenes ; and
therefore he may expect in future years, like Euthymenes, to win his ‘sea-
bride,’ novTiav clkoitlv, too, perhaps even in the shape of a victory gained also
at the Isthmus.
This is the central thought. Both Pytheas and Euthymenes, his mother’s
brother, have shed glory on Aegina and the Aeacid name. The elder
champion may be said to have attained to the prize and pride of life, figured
in the wooing of the great Aeacid Peleus ; and the younger, a pancratiast like
his uncle, may hope to achieve the same ideal. Let us now see how this
thought is worked out in detail.
The stately odes which Pindar is fond of likening to the works of
architects or of sculptors have one advantage certainly over statues, in the
mere fact that they can travel easily by land and sea. They are ayaX/xara,—
a word which, meaning any gracious things that shed glory or yield delight
by their beauty, came to have the special sense of carven images, the
ornaments of a temple or agora; but they are not limited to motionless
existence on a base, like that statue for example of Themistius the victor’s
grandfather, which Pindar may have himself seen in the portal of the temple of
Aeacus, crowned with a garland of grass and flowers, as he describes it in
the closing verses. With this comparison and distinction of the two arts the
prelude opens, naturally leading up to the transmission of the present song,
proud of its power of motion, to distant lands, that the victor’s fame may be
diffused throughout the whole Greek world. And with his peculiar skill in
causing vivid pictures to rise up out of a word or two, Pindar makes us fancy
1 See Isth. v. 70.
6—284
NEMEAN V.
that he has literally issued from the workshop of some sculptor in Aegina—
we think of the famous Onatas who perhaps actually wrought a statue for this
same son of Lampon—and is going down to the wharf to embark his song in
ships, large argosies and smaller craft about to hoist their sails, bound for
distant cities.
I dwell on this proem because it determines what may be called the
imaginary background of the ode. The ‘ sweet song’ is shipped for foreign
parts ; the sea spreads out before us; and we are learning what the message
is, the literal fatrden or freight.
The sea spreads out before us from the beginning to the end of the piece,
and the circumstance that this background is implied, not expressed,
illustrates a notable difference between ancient and modern art. The ancient
poets, presupposing in their hearers and readers a swifter and more active
imagination, did less to assist it; they were more reserved; and this artistic
ironia is especially characteristic of Pindar. A modern poet, were he writing
anything similar, would probably describe the sea in express words and
pause in his progress to make his reader hear the wreathed horn of Triton or
see Proteus rising from the wave. But Pindar does not think it necessary
to do that. Those who have really eyes and ears for his words will hear and
see the Greek ocean rolling and sounding before them; and it will soon
become transfigured, not through any extraneous description, but in the
natural progress of the work, by the presence of mermaidens and ocean-
kings.
The message of the ‘ sweet song’ is that Lampon’s son Pytheas has been
proclaimed victor at Nemea in the pancration contest which required
superiority in both boxing and wrestling. Pytheas is a strong-bodied boy
not yet adolescent, and there is an allusion to the joy which his mother will
soon have in her son’s puberty, when his cheeks display, like a physical sign
of summer heat, soft down compared to the plumage of a grape, and
suggesting even some Dionysiac association of the voluptuousness of nature.
The pride of parents in their offspring’s puberty is a pagan feature, which had
not disappeared in the days of St Augustine.
Pytheas’ victory is one more distinction for Aegina, the city so good to
strangers—‘ foreign faces ’ in her streets and harbour may have been some-
times noticeable—, and to the Aeacidae, whose descent is from Cronos and
Zeus and the golden daughters of Nereus. Thus, at the beginning of the
hymn, the usual formality of making mention of Zeus is informally complied
with, and at the same time the waters begin to change under the golden
wand into a mythical sea where wonders may occur.
Peleus and Telamon and Phocus were the original Aeacids. The mother
of Peleus and Telamon was Endais the daughter of Chiron, the centaur;
Phocus was born of the nymph Psamathea, ‘ the sand-maiden,’ on the sea-
beach, €irl prjyfiivi ttovtov. These three sons of Aeacus stood by the altar of
Zeus Hellanios in Aegina, and raising their hands to the firmament prayed
for the glory of their island and her wealth in men and ships. They prayed
together; but a misfortune led to the banishment of Peleus and TelamonINTR OD UCTION
85
from their home. This event, of which Pindar speaks with dark shy
reticence, was the death of Phocus, whom, in a fit of jealousy because he was
their father’s favourite, his half-brothers slew. Can we profitably or fitly
apply the moral standards of ordinary men to the deeds of half-divine heroes ?
Pindar perhaps asked himself, and in the full spirit of ‘ hero-worship ’ he prefers
silence, suspension of judgment (as if the question were a supernatural
mystery), leaning rather to interpretation in favour of the heroes.
At this delicate question the poet, with conscious abruptness, pulls
himself up, remarking on the advantages of silence which is often the fairest
speech, true ev^pia. And having checked himself as at some impassable
obstacle he prepares for a new start, likening himself to a leaper who has
nimble knees and can leap far, if his theme be happiness (0X805), or
prowess in games or war,—and then, recalling his imagination as it were
from an excursion into the gymnasium back to the scene really before
him, likens himself to an eagle which can shoot across the ocean, n4pav
irovToio. The eagle had a peculiar fascination for Pindar, so that references
to it are quite a note of his poetry, the most striking passage being that in
which the bird of Zeus is described as sitting on the God’s sceptre, lulled to
sleep by the charm of golden Phorminx, his supple, almost fluid (vypov) back
trembling a little and somewhat voluptuously, to the influences which agitate
the air.
The idea that the eagle is sensible to the concord of pleasant sounds was
in Pindar’s mind here too, for having compared his own spirit of song to the
power of the bird to fly over seas, he goes on to describe the quire of the
muses singing on Mount Pelion at the marriage of Peleus and Thetis, and
Apollo himself, as Musagetes or Muse-leader, sweeping the seven strings of
the lyre with his golden plectrum. And thus the connexion of thought is
really close between lines 21 and 22; there is not, as at first might appear, a
break and then a fresh start. Phorminx has an attraction for the eagle,
which therefore shoots forth to Mount Pelion to hear her—for the instrument
is half personified—answering to Apollo’s touch : this is the graceful figure.
The treatment of the lyre (whose seven strings are called seven tongues) as
though she were alive, and her vibration the actual pulse of an organism,
may be compared to the personification of the violin by modern writers1.
But there is more than this behind; the eagle flying to Pelion has other
feathers for the poet’s shafts. As we shall see in the Sixth Nemean Ode,
Pindar regarded the eagle as a special omen of the house of the Aeacidae,
partly on account of the connexion of both with Zeus, partly for the
sake of the resemblance of aUros and Aiaxoy. So here too the eagles, to
which Pindar compares himself, are the Aeacidae ; just as his metaphor of
the leaper has reference to a leap of Euthymenes, as we shall see hereafter.
Odes are sung on Mount Pelion for the eagles2, that is for the Aeacidae,
1	For example in Mr Eric Mackay’s	irpoQpwv Se iceivois.
Letters of a Violinist.	According to Schmidt’s analysis of the
2	See note, I. 22	metre, Trpo<pp(*)v is rendered very promi-86
NEMEAN V.
chiefly for Peleus ;—and this thought is important for the understanding of
the application of the myth.
The nome sung by the Muses began, according to the rules of such
compositions, with the praise of Zeus, then told the story of Peleus and
Thetis, and how Peleus was tempted by Hippolyta to dishonour the bed of
his host Acastus1. Hippolyta is described by a word which the Greeks often
used of oriental luxuriousness or soft-living, djSpa, which here almost means
4 sensual5; she was like one of those 4 comely and delicate women’ spoken of
in oriental scriptures. Peleus rejected her bold straight words, so direct that
they were really abashing, not from any idea of abstract right and wrong, but
because Acastus was his host, and he 4 feared the wrath of father Zeus who
protecteth the host and guest.’ Then Zeus, in recognition of his piety,
promised him that he should wed one of the princesses of the sea.
This episode of Peleus’ temptation is introduced, like every episode in
Pindar, with a purpose. It is a typical instance, not of chastity—far from
it—, but of reverence for Zeus Xenios, for the rights and duties of guest and
host; and this reverence receives a conspicuous reward. Even so Aegina
herself, as Pindar never wearies of telling, was a faithful votary of Zeus
Xenios, <£i\a $€i/a>v apovpa (1.8); her children, and among the rest conspicuously
Lampon, the victor’s father, were kind to strangers. And Pindar implies
that the great successes gained by Aeginetans—in this instance by
Lampon’s kindred,—at the Hellenic festivals are a divine reward for their
hospitable manners.
Zeus plans that Peleus shall wed a sea-maiden (■novrlav), one of Nereus’
daughters, called golden before and now described as spinning with golden
distaffsj and he secures the consent of Poseidon. With these words we
become conscious of the sea again; we prepare to leave Mount Pelion; we
see Poseidon driving from Aegae to Corinth ; and the peals of Apollo’s lyre
pass suddenly into the sounds of the flutes which greet the coming of the
sea-king to his Isthmian games.
And now comes the application of the myth :—the kindred of Lampon
may be compared to that greater Aeginetan family, the Aeacids, the eagles,
who fly beyond the sea. As Peleus won the goddess Thetis, so Euthymenes
enjoyed the embraces of the goddess Victory; and this exploit resembled its
model also in having taken place beyond the sea and under the auspices of
Poseidon. And moreover, in celebration of his victory, Euthymenes was
caressed by hymns as by something tangible (ei/mucras), even as the eagle
Peleus heard the nomes of Apollo and the Muses on Pelion. Euthymenes
was a pancratiast, like Pytheas, but it seems highly probable that he won an
Isthmian victory in jumping, as Pindar would hardly have chosen the
nent in recital. So in 1. 46, Nhrou r’,
referring to the Pythian games at Megara,
has a like prominence. The implication
seems to be that as Apollo shewed him-
self favourable to the Aeacids, so he was
kind to Euthymenes.
1 Hippolyta persuaded her husband;
weiaanr' aKolrav. This is afterwards
echoed, for the sake of pointing a con-
trast, in 11. 36, 37 wpaijeiv akoltlv—IIo(7€t-
dauiva wdaais.INTROD UCTION.
87
metaphor of the leaper and used technical terms (see above), if it had not
borne specially on the matter in hand. An unfortunate corruption in the
manuscripts renders the exact expression uncertain, but it seems likely1 that
Euthymenes was represented ‘ darting’ or ‘ leaping ’ to meet Victory.
Successes at Nemea, at Aegina and at Megara had also fallen to the lot
of Euthymenes, and Pindar indicates them as if they were successes in love.
Nemea, the nymph, was true to him (apape, ‘clave to him’); and the month
Delphinios, in which the Aeginetan and Megaric victories were gained, is
spoken of as a comely youth whom Apollo once loved and who now be-
stowed his favours upon the champion of Aegina. Moreover Megara is
called ‘the hill of Nisus with fair arms or hollows/ evayKtjs, a coinage of
Pindar, suggesting the hollow of the arm and recalling the phrase of a few
lines before, NUas iv dyKaveo-o-i.
By these victories Euthymenes has shed glory on his race, which, as
Aeginetan, is closely connected with the race of Peleus (1. 43). Even so
Pytheas by his recent victory was said, at the beginning of the hymn, to have
done honour to the Aeacids. And thus Pytheas is compared to Euthymenes
who was compared to Peleus2.
And in this 43rd line we are brought back for a moment, as by a sudden
flash of association, but with design on the part of the poet, to the sculptor’s
workshop from which he issued at the beginning of the poem. The word
ayaXkci, ‘brightens with glory/ recalls the dyaX/xara, ‘bright or glorious
things/ which the sculptor makes and the poet makes too ; and the words
occur in almost the same parts of metrically corresponding verses. Pindar
has wrought an dyaXpa for Euthymenes no less than for Pytheas.
The naming of Apollo here, in connexion with Euthymenes’ victories at
Aegina and Megara, is also notable, and the idea seems to be that, as Apollo
patronised Peleus, so he is favouring Euthymenes.
A reference to the Athenian Menander, who trained Pytheas for the
contest in which he won ‘ a sweet meed for his toils/ leads up to a sort of
exodion in praise of Themistius, the father of Euthymenes and Pytheas’
mother. The poet reminds us of the background—the sea and the ships;
he bids the Muse hoist the sails to the sailyard, using a technical phrase of
navigation. Themistius in his day had won two prizes, for boxing and in the
pancration, at Epidaurus, and his statue stood in the portal of the temple of
Aeacus, crowned with chaplets of flowers and grass, under the auspices of the
fair-haired Charites. Without some mention of (or, at least, allusion to)
the Charites or beings of kindred nature an ode of victory would perhaps
have seemed ungraceful.
This hymn, of whose thought I have sketched the framework and
tried to suggest the spirit, is full of pictures and expressions, which lay hold
of the imagination and dwell in the memory, although they are marked by
1	See note 1. 43.	and fiaTpoiroXLv 1. 8; and also by the
2	This comparison is further indicated circumstance that 1. 43 is addressed to
by <T0iv€i yvLcjv Opaaei 1. 39 compared Pytheas.
with evpwdevrfs 1. 4; by fiarptas 1. 4388
NEMEAN V.
the temperance or irony of the severest Greek art. The statuary; the sea-
faring language beloved of Aeginetans; the grace of adolescence; the
golden Nereids,—that note of gold sounding again in the god’s golden
plectrum and in the golden distaffs of the nymphs ; the heroes praying by
the altar; the ‘ Sand-maid ’ in travail by the sea-beach; Apollo Citharoedus
leading the heavenly quire; Poseidon who cometh from Aegae ; the festive
companies at Corinth; the statue of Themistius, with garlands of grass and
flowers—these among other impressions and pictures come to us successively
in the bright sea air.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
V. I. Cl. — . — \j — o — \j —	---—	------ -------------- w — A (l4)*
vv. 2—4* b. ~ v ^ -■ v w — — —	| ~ 'w'--—	-----v-/ —
A I fl\------------ ^-----W-----(22).
VV. 5, 6. CL .	— w-----w — w	---- --------—	--(14)*
The strophe is of mesodic structure, the formula being
14 : 8 . 6 . 8 : 14
and thus the mesodus itself is mesodic. To carry through this structure
Schmidt has to assume that the first syllable of the fourth line of each
strophe (in other words of the third part of the mesodus) is a paKpa rerpa-
<rrjpos (LJ) preceded by a pause or Xeippa of equivalent length L This pause
would have the effect of accentuating strongly the first words of these lines,
namely Aap.7r(ovos, Oe&cravTo, npocfrpoov Be, ireL(rai(T, irorpos Be, NIcrov r, and, as
such an accentuation really assists the comprehension of the hymn, I am
strongly disposed to concur in Schmidt’s analysis.
Epode.
vv. 1, 2. a.
W A — yj — w w — O | — w — — — v-r---------j —	-------- ^
(17)-
W. 3, 4.	a'.	___
-v;u — w—• — • | — \^ — — --------| — w—---w w — uv — \D — v_/— A	(iy).
vv. 5, 6. b. —• —	-------w—A —\j—--------------------------------w— (14)*
The structure is epodic, the epodos (b) being itself perhaps mesodic. Thus:
d. 8 + 9
Cl. 8 + 9
b. 6.2.6
The rhythm of this ode is dactylo-epitritic.
1 Schmidt says ‘eine Triseme der eine	not trisemoi; a trochee in this rhythm
triseme Pause voranging’. This seems to	being equivalent (by tovt}) to four metri-
be an inadvertence. The feet of a dac- cal units ('w'), or in musical notation
tylo-epitritic composition are tetrasemoi four quavers.NEMEONIKAI E\
nYQEAt AITINHTH*
IIAIAI IIArKPATIASTHi.
Ovtc avhpLavTOTroios elfi, &gt iXivvaovra ^epyd^eaOac ar/aXpuar
iir aura? ftadpbiSos	crrp. a.
earaoT' a\V iirl ira<ra$ oXkciBo^ ev t aicaT(p> yXvtceV ao&Sd,
<rrel% air AiyLvas, BiayyeXXoia, on
Adparcovos vlo5 Tlvdkas evpvaOevr?9
Ne/^ezot? iraytcpariov are^avov,	5
oiiirco yevvac (f>aiv(ov repewav p*arkp oivavQas oirwpav,
1.	ovk dvSpiavTO’iroios cip.* k.t.\.] I
am not a maker of statues that I should
frame images to stand in repose on the
self-base. In Isthm. II. 45 he uses the
same expression of his hymns, eirei tol
ovk eXivtaovras abroiis dpyatr&pav. iXivvco
is used of rest on a holiday.
&ir* avrds] More usually iirl ras avras.
But self and the same (der selbe) are one
notion; self-same is merely a superlative
of same. There are some examples of
this use in Homer, see M 225, SP 480,
0 107, k 263, 7r 138. We may reproduce
the unusual omission of the article by
imitating Shakspere’s ‘ self-metal ’ &c.
pad pis occurs in Pyth. V. 9 depav airb
Padfjudtov (steps).
2.	dXX* eiri 7ra<ras	But, O
sweet song, hie thee from Aegina on every
argosy and in every skiff, spreading the
tidings that Lampon’s son, Pytheas of
massive strength, is winner at the Nemean
games of the crown in the pancration,
though his mother seeth not yet upon his
cheeks the tender summer-ripeness of the
grape-down.
For evpv<rdevris compare above III. 36.
I have retained viKrj, the reading of the
mss., which editors generally alter to vUcy
(impft. from viKrjpi) after Heyne. But,
as Bergk remarks, the poet quotes the
herald,—1'epetit poeta praeconis vocem.
For viKav ‘ to win ’ with accusative
compare Nem. x. 48 xa^o^...6Vre...
ivUaaav.
6. Y^vvcri] So the Mss.; Hermann
unnecessarily yivvt. The word includes
the chin as well as the cheeks. Bergk is
right in taking party’ as the dative case.
It is possible that Pindar might have
said ‘the summer-season, tender mother
of the grape-down’, but he would have
hardly made it the object of Qaivuv
yivvai. A youth displays the grape-down
of puberty, not the mother of the grape-
down, on his cheeks. The mother’s
interest in the adolescence of her child
is a graceful touch. Bergk compares
Pyth. VIII. 85 obdi poX&vrcov Trap party’
dp<f>i y€Xws y\vKbs wpaev x^PLV‘ For
oivdvOas oTrujpa compare Euripides, Phoe-
nissae, 1160 apn oivcowbu yivvv.NEMEONIKAI E\
90
etc Se Kpovov teal Zrjvds ypcoa5 al%fiaTa$ <f>VT€V0€VTa<; teal airo
Xpvaeav NTjprjiScov	dvr. a.
AlatclSa;<? iyepapev parpoiroXiv re, <f>L\av %evcov apovpav'
rdv 7tot evavSpov t€ teal vavo’itcKvrdv
detraavro Trap jScopov 7rarepos 'JLWaviov	IO
oTavTes, ttLtvclv t et? aWepa slpa9 apa
’Ei/SaiSo? apvyv(OT€<? viol teal (3 La Qcbtcov tcpeovroSy
6 rds deoVy ov Wapadeia ritcr iwl prjypivi ttovtov.	inr. a.
a IS eo pat pkya fenrelv iv Si/ca re prj KetcivSwevpevoVy
7.	Ik 81 Kpovov k.t.X.] And that
(6V1) he glorified the warrior heroes
sprung from Zeus and Cronos and from
Nereus’ golden daughters, even the Aea-
cidae, and the mother city, land that
loveth sti-angers.
Aeacus, the son of Zeus and Aegina,
married (1) Endais, daughter of Chiron,
and begat by her Telamon and Peleus,
(2) Psamathea, the Nereid, whose son
was Phocus. Telamon and Peleus were
connected with Cronos both on the
mother’s and on the father’s side as
Chiron was Cronos’ son.
8.	<)>CXav fjlvwv k.t.X.] For this praise
(which here has a special bearing on the
thought of the hymn, see Introd. p. 82,86)
compare above iv. 12. For <f>l\os with
genitive compare Pyth. HI. 5 vbov avbp&v
(pl\ov. fxaTpdvoXiu means, I think, more
than 7rcLTpida, home, and refers to the
fact that Aegina’s descendants, the Aea-
cids, ruled in other lands (Telamon and
Ajax in Salamis etc.), which might
therefore be regarded as in a certain sense
affiliated to the island.
9.	rdv ttot* k.t.X.] For ivhose excel-
lence in men and fame in ships they once
on a time offered vows, standing at the
altar of father Hellanius, and together
spread their hands to heaven, even the
notable sons of Endaisy and the mighty
lord Phocus. For this construction of
dloaavTO Dissen compares Pyth. vill. 72
deCov oinv d(f>dLTov clltIoj, for the undying
care of the gods / pray. The present of
i0€<r<rdfi7)v has not survived; the participle
Oeaaapevos is found in Hesiod and Archi-
lochus, and the adjective air 6d ear os in
p 296. Fick has conjectured that 0!m,
Wunschmddchen (as well as ttoOIoj) is
akin, and I have pointed out in the
Introduction that Pindar connected them.
Observe that vavoiKXvrdv is treated as
two separate words and takes a feminine
termination. In the mss. it is written
pavoi kXvt&v.
10. (E\\av£ov] ‘Myrmidones quum
in Aeginam venissent condiderunt ibi
Jovis Hellenii fanum, patrii sibi numinis,
cuius religiones secum adduxerant ’.
Dissen.
12.	dptyv«T6s] An equivalent of the
Homeric aplypuros, only found here.
For Endais and Phocus, see above, note
on line 7. Endais was also called Mc^e-
drjtsy schol. II. $ 185 (Bergk).
13.	6 Tas 0cov] the son of the goddess,
he zuhom Psamathea (sand-maiden) bore
on the beach of the sea. ticZ prjy/iipi,
(0aXdajris) is Homeric.
14.	alSlopcu k.t.X.] / shrink from
telling of a great venture, perchance un-
rightly made, in what wise they left the
glorious island and what fortune drave
them from Oenone. The inauspicious
event alluded to is the death of Phocus,
the favourite son of Aeacus. His brothers
Peleus and Telamon slew him through
jealousy, and were in consequence obligedNEMEAN V.
91
7r<w9 hr) Xlirov evicXea va<rovi teal rt? avhpas aXtcipbOVS	15
Saifjbcov air Olvoivas eXaaev.	cTTaaopuai. ov toc airaaa tcepSlcov
(pacvoLcra irpotrcoirov aXadet drpetcry
teal to (riyav iroXXa/as eVrl <To<f>(orarov avOpcoirtp vorjacu.
el S’ oXftov rj ^eipwv filav rj G&apOrav eircuvrjaai iroXepbop
SeSo/crjTai, fiaKpa fioL	<TTp. /3'.
avroffev aXfiad’ viroafcdirToi e^a) 7ovartov iXa<f>pdv opfidv. 20
to leave Aegina. See Pausanias, 11.
29, 7. The reserved language of Pindar
concerning the deeds of heroes is charac-
teristic. When Dissen interprets pAya
as /acinus malum et audax, he misses the
point. The poet calls the act great; he
does not qualify it as bad. Keiavdvvev-
fxivov suggests the hazard of the deed, not
its moral quality, and the sole ethical
criticism, fir] ev dUq, is ventured upon
in the most mild and tentative form—
‘peradventure, not justly’,—for this is
the force of pi].
16. ordcropcu. /c.r.X.] I will halt.
Soothly, it is better that unbending truth
should not shew her visage in all its ful-
ness (drraaa), and to hold his peace is
oftentimes man's wisest way.
Similarly in Olymp. 1. 52 Pindar breaks
off when he touches on a legend that shews
the gods in a doubtful light: a<pi<TTapai *
aiApdeia XtXoyxev Oapipa KctKaydpos,
I stand apart; loss ever and a7ion hath
overtaken evil speakers, ov KepSUov means
is not so good as silence; compare 01. IX.
103 avev Oeov oetnyapivov ob OKcuorepov
Xpi}fi eKaoTov. We might have expected
ov KepdaXtov; but the comparative is used
because speech is compared with silence.
This usage forms a sort of intermediate
link between the ordinary use of the
comparative and such forms as de^irepos,
07)\lJT€pOS.
18. votjorn] for a man to consider; =
crocpUTaTOV vorjpa.
iq. \€ipwv p£av] Eminently a quality
of pancratiasts. <ndapirav rroXepov, mailed
war (distinguished from the war of
games).
20. aXjiaO* wooricdirToi tis] Pindar
compares himself to a leaper who can
leap far, if his theme be bright fortune
or mighty exploits in the arena or on the
battlefield. He wishes therefore that a
long strip of ground should be prepared
for his leap, his starting-point or fiarrip
being the death of Phocus (abroOev):
fodiie magnam saliendi arenam (Dissen).
The ground dug for the long jump was
called ra icrKapplva, and vrrep tol icr/cap-
fiiva Trrjddv became a proverb. The
distances of individual leaps were marked
by small trenches called (366pot or <tk ap-
parel. aiXpara paKpd, a place for long
leaps, is an expression like at opviOes,
bird-market, oi rreoa 0/, the place for play-
ing ireoaoL In early Greek the com-
pound vwoaKaTTio occurs only here, and
commentators have not explained the
force of the preposition. The ground
dug up might be regarded in relation to
the leaper when actually in the act of
leaping; or viro- might be on the analogy
of virorbirruj; but it seems to me that
Pindar, though comparing himself to a
leaper, is already, in anticipation, con-
ceiving himself as an eagle aloft, and
that bwooKairTo 1 ‘dig beneath me’ is due
to this anticipation—a suggestion, in fact,
of the second metaphor.
yovarcov tXa<|>pov oppav] I have
the power of light springing in my knees ;
oppi] means power of motion. Note the
masculine termination of iXa<f>pov.92
NEMEONIKAI E'.
/cal irkpav ttovtolo irdWovr aleroL
irpo<j>p(ov Be Kal Kelvois det,B' iv IIaXla>
Motadv 6 tcdXkiGTOs %o/>o9, ev Be pikcrais
<j>oppuyy ’A7toWcov 6TTTdy\(0aaov yjpv<jk(p ifXaKTptp Blcokcop
ayelro TravToicov vopucov. ai Be TTpcoriarov peep vpuvrjaav Aio?
dp'xppuevai <rep.vdv %knv	avr. ft'. 25
YlrfXea 0\ £9 rk viv dftpa KprjOet? 'lmrokura Bo\(p nTeBaaai
rjdeXe i~vvdva IVlayvrjrcov gkottov
7reiaaia aKoirav ttoikLXois ftovXevpiacriv,
tyevarav Be iroirjTov avvkira^e Xoyov,
21.	Kal iripav k.t.X.] Eagles poise their
flight even beyond the ocean. iraWovTai
smooths the transition from the Ieaper to
the eagle, as it might apply to either.
22.	irpocjjpcov 81 k.t.X.] But for them
too on Pelion the quire most fair of the
Muses graciously sang, and in their midst
Apollo, sweeping the seven-tongued Lyre
with his golden quill, led the chant of
diva s strains.
The imperfect tenses aei5e and hydro
present the picture of Apollo Musagetes
and his quire.—Kctvois, strictly referring
to atero:s, shows that the Aeacids (1. 8) are
symbolized; see Introduction, p. 85.—
It seems probable that both here and in
Nem. I. 33 wpotppojv was intended to con-
vey the idea of foreknowledge, as well as
that of goodwill. Such a suggestion was
peculiarly appropriate in the case of
Apollo. [I observe that Mr Verrall
notes a similar intention in 7rpo0povws,
Again. 183.]
24.	SwuKwv] Apollo with his plectron
chases and agitates Phorminx, as the
wind chases and speeds a ship. Seven-
tongued Phorminx is almost personified.
vojxujv means vopuav KidapcpdiK&v, nomes.
25.	Aids apxdpcvai] See note on 1.
8; also 11. 3.
26.	d>s tI viv k.t.X.] And how delicate
Hippolyta, Cretheus’ daughter, was fain
to bind him by guile^ having won to her
plan the chief of the Magnetos, her husband,
by artful counsels. tteioaura £vvava is
equivalent to wdcraoa ware kolvwvov etvai,
having persuaded to be her partner in the
plot (so also Mr Fennell). £uvav (^vvaujv):
i-vvos; compare veav: veos, p.eyuttq.v :
pdyurros. Bergk, taking i-vvava to mean
husband, alters aKoirav in the next line
to "Akcuttov, in order to avoid the re-
dundancy ; but the mere fact that ’Akcuttov
occurs in 1. 30 is decisive against his
reading. It is characteristic of Pindar
not to repeat proper names, unless
they be very important, and even then
seldom.
Kpi)6€ts] Hippolyta (also called Hip-
podamia) was daughter of Cretheus, sister
of Pelias and Aeson (Jason’s father).
Many cities of the Magnetes were subject
to Acastus, lord of Iolcus.
29. o-vvlirafjc] She framed (like a
joiner). The variant in D
read by Triclinius, seems due to a mis-
understanding of the text. avp.TnjyvbvaL
is a most appropriate word, ttoitjtos,
invented, manufactured\ not genuine. It
is interesting to observe the force of
i|/€v<rrav, for which another poet might
have written xj/evdi). xj/evarav (lying, not
false) invests the \6yos with a certain
independence, gives it a material existence
apart from the speaker, as if it were a
material frame existing independently of
its artificer. The X070S, when constructed,
lies on its own account.NEMEAN V.
93
6)9 dpa vvfjifaias iireipa Kelvos iv Xetcrpois ’KicdaTov	30
evvas' to S’ ivavriov eaicev' ttoXXcl yap vcv rravrl 6vp,(p iir. j3.
7rap(f>apbeva Xiravevev. rov Se opyav Kvltpv ahreivol Xoyor
€v@v$ 8' dtravavaro vvp,<f>av, %eiviov irarpo9 %oXoz>
Beiaat,9* o S’ i<f>pda6r) Karivevaiv re F01 opcrivefyrp? e£ ovpavov
Zei)9 adavdroov ftaaiXevs, war iv rdyei	35
rrovrlav \pvcraXafcdrcov riva NrjpetBeov irpa^eiv aicoirtv,
yapfipov Hoaeihacova ireiaai^,
viaaerai 'IcrOpuov Acoplav*
30.	dpa] apa (dpa) has its frequent
force of introducing an untrue allegation:
saying forsooth that he attempted to lie
with Acastus’ bride, and board his bed.
vvfi<t>das suggests the youth of Hippo-
lyta.
31.	t8 8* cvavrfov /c.r.X.] The fact
was far other; for she besought him
much and often with all her soul, beguil-
ing him. But his mood was stung by her
sheer words, and forthright he repelled
the bride, fearing the wrath of the Father
who protects hosts and guests, ivavriov,
he did not tempt her, but she tempted
him. Xtravevev, the imperfect of repeated
attempts.
32.	tov 8^ opyav /c.r.X.] The reading
of the mss. involves the assumption of
fopyav, which is supported to some extent
by the adjective dbpyyjros. As this as-
sumption is possible I have not ventured
to depart from the codices. None of the
proposed readings is probable; Boeckh
rov fxkv, Rauchenstein rod 5' &p*, Bergk
rod 5’ vri (Pindar elsewhere uses vttokvL^w
of love’s sting), M. Schmidt tov Si icdpfav
(Aeolic for Kapdiav).—iicviipov might be
rendered nettled.
alimvof] sheer (as it were with no
slope to soften the approach), unresemed.
The word suggests that the proposal of
Hippolyta was made with a shameless
directness. Compare a Ittus 6\€0pos.
09 AlyaOev 7rorl tcXeirav 6ap,a
cnp. y .
Tennyson speaks of ‘the downward slope
of death’, aiirbs o\eOpo% is death without
the downward slope.
33.	{javfov iraTpos] Zet>$ £ivios. Re-
spect for this god is characteristic of an
Aeginetan hero; cf. 1. 8.
34.	6 8* c<|>pa<r0T) /c.t.X.] But Zeus,
king of immortals, the cloud-awakener,
considered it and vouchsafed unto him from
heaven in token that he would speedily
compass for him, to be his bride, a sea-
maiden, one of Nereus’ daughters with
the golden distaffs, and persuade thereto
Poseidon their sister's spouse, who often
proceedeth from Aegae to the famous
Dorian Isthmus.
6poive<f>iis ( = ve^eXrjyep^ra) does not
occur elsewhere, wore is regular after
verbs of promising.
36.	irovrCav] So mss. Heyne’s tov-
rtav is adopted by most editors, as it
seems to me unnecessarily. In the case
of two nouns and two adjectives Pindar
is usually even-handed. Peleus is to have
a sea-bride and she is to be one of the
Nereids. The adjective xPv<TrA<LKaTos is
applied in the Iliad to Artemis. In
Netn. vi. 62 it is used of Leto; in 01.
vi. 104 of Amphitrite. Here the epithet
recalls XPV<T€*v Nrjprjtdwv of 1. 7 to mind.
yafi(3p6v means that Poseidon was the
husband of Amphitrite.
37.	Alya0€v] From Aegae in Achaia,94
NEMEONIKAI E'.
evOa juv €v<j>pov€<? Tkat, crvv /cakdfioio fioa Beov Be/covrcu,
Kal aBevet yvicov ipL^ovri Bpaael.
7roT^o9 Be tcpLvei o-vyyevfjs epy&v nrepl	40
iravrcov. tv S’ Alyiva Beov, "EvBvfieves,
NUa$ ev dyicdveacn ttitvoov iroiKikcov e\]rav<Ta$ vpuvcovy
Perhaps Pindar represents the sea-god
proceeding from Aegae to Corinth in
order to suggest that he also favours the
almost homonymous Aegina, which was
doubtless associated in the poet’s mind
with Aegaeus and Aegaeon, names of
Poseidon, and with the Aegean sea.
Here addressing Poseidon in Iliad 0 203
says
oi 81 tol els *E\Ikt)v re Kal Alyas Stop'
dvayovai
noWa re Kal %apfevra.
38. £v0a |Aiv a-.t.X.] puv followed by
Beov is illustrated by two Homeric pas-
sages referred to by Dissen: a 194 8tj yap
fuv Ztpavr’ hnh'f/pu.ov elvai, <rbv 7rarlp\ and
f 48 r/ /juv Zyeipev TXavaiKaav eihreirXov.
Bergk reads tvda puabl because a para-
phrast has 8wov 8t/ /laXtara, but that yuaX’
would have been altered to puv is im-
probable. The presence of puv serves to
make Beov more emphatic than if it stood
alone; we are reminded that the ya/xppos
(relation by marriage) of Aeginetan
Peleus is a god.—Render, where merry
routs receive him, the god\ to the sound of
the pipe-call, and vie boldly in hardihood of
limbs. Poseidon is supposed to arrive at
Corinth on the first day of the Isthmian
games and to be met by festive companies
of young men.
40. iroT|i,os <rv776yi}s] The fortune
or destiny that is born with a man (not
vis ingenita as Dissen renders), avyyevr/s
is almost equivalent to hereditary. For
tot/jlos compare Nem. vi. 5 and iv. 42.
Pindar associated it etymologically with
rccreiv, ttItctw, the fall of fortune; and
this association clearly determined his
choice of language in the following
sentence: But at Aegina, Euthymenes,
where thy fall was in the arms of the
goddess Victory, thou wert caressed by
artful hymns and at the Isthmus thou
didst shoot forth to greet her.
The emphasis laid on tcot/xos by the
pause which precedes it and the metrical
value of its first syllable (assuming
Schmidt’s metrical analysis to be cor-
rect), supports my view that a paro-
nomasia is intended. See above, p. 82.
41.	0€ov] Rightly restored by Schmidt
for Be as the reading of the mss. Pindar
uses a Beos, see above 1. 13 6 ras Beov.
0eas is due to a marginal explanation of
some one who wished to indicate that
Beov was to be taken with Nt'/cas.
42.	NCicas] Victory is the goddess
won by Euthymenes (and Pytheas) as
Thetis was won by Peleus. \f/ab(0 is not
elsewhere used by Pindar of winning the
meeds of victory (like /xlywaBat), and
here it must have some special force.
In Olymp. vi. 35 the word is used of
Evadne’s first taste of love, yXvKeias
irpCrrov 2\f/av<r’ ’A<ppo8lras. We may, I
think, infer that xf/abu) was specially used
by poets of the touches of amorous en-
counters and that here it serves to bring
out Pindar’s parallel between the prizes
won by Peleus and by Euthymenes. It
is to be observed that Pyth. ix. 130
should not be adduced to shew that
Pindar used 'tyabu with the dative. The
words are os av irpCrros Bopkv apupl poi
xpabaeie ttIttKols. ap.^>l makes all the
difference. In the same ode however we
find \pebdet Btyeiv (1. 46) just as in Pyth.
IV. 296 aavxiq- Bt.ylp.ev, and in Pyth. X.
28 ayXatais airropLeaBa.NEMEAN V.
95
\<r6fiol r ai%a$ avra. /cal vvv reo? fiaTpcos dydWei Keivov
o/jLoaTTopov edvos, FTvdea.
43. TcOpoi t* ai£as avra] No line
in Pindar has experienced rougher usage
at the hands of commentators than
this. They have all without exception
condemned as corrupt and altered in
various ways the middle and latter por-
tions of the verse, which however furnish
a perfectly intelligible sense; and they
have, almost without exception, allowed
the first words TjroL /leTail-avTa, which are
unintelligible and evidently unsound, to
remain. The reading of the mss. (B, B,
D) is
fproi pLerat^avra teal vvv rebs fiarpios
ayaXXei Keivov opxxTTopov kOvos II v-
0kas.
Mezger was the first to see where the
corruption really lies and to detect that
the scholiasts had a different reading
before them. In the scholium on 37 wre
find Ei)0v/xiv7}s 6s eviK^aev^Iadpua, and in
that on 38 eTra iiroiaeL Sib, rl tov Tadfiov
epiv^<T0rj. It is clear from this that a
victory gained by Euthymenes at Isthmus
was mentioned, and this- is just what the
description of the Isthmian festival would
lead us to expect or even predict. Mez-
ger tentatively restores Tad/ioi r* iird
vIkt)s, which is infelicitous and evidently
improbable; it is weak, and Pindar would
not have used vlicys after Nbcas in the
foregoing line, ^rot clearly has come
from a gloss; but pLerai^avra could hardly
come from pier’ Atyivav as Mezger sug-
gests, and the supposed gloss itself (“um
den isthmischen Sieg als den spateren zu
bezeichnen”) is an extremely unlikely
one. The reading which I adopt assumes
that the three first letters of the line IC0
were through some accident lost or ob-
literated; that from MOITAl5AC<\NT<\
was elicited pLeraU-as avra (some Tri-
clinian mss. have fierat^as); and that
this was * emended ’ to /j.€TaU-avra for the
sake of the metre, which was completed
* /
avr. 7 .
by the prefixion of a convenient fproi
from the margin. cu£as shot forth, is
appropriate to a victor in a foot race, or
in a long jump. The leaper shoots like
a bird SP 86r.
We may assume that Euthymenes was
victor in leaping, for thus the metaphor
used by the poet above 11. 19, 20 wins an
appropriateness which it would otherwise
lack. This circumstance I regard as a
confirmation of the reading in the text.
teal vvv T€os paTpws /c.t.X.] That
Euthymenes was the maternal uncle of
Pytheas is stated by Pindar himself in
Isthm. v. 62:
apavTo 7hp vltcas airb irayKpariov
rpeis air* TaOpLov tcls 5’ <xtt’ eb<f>6XXov
N eplas
62 ayXaol ttaiSis re Kai puxTpm.
It is therefore clear that reds must be
addressed to Pytheas and that Ilv^as is
a mistake for Ilv&a, the vocative. This
conjecture of Mingarelli is confirmed by
a scholium which mentions Ilv^as as a
variant: KaTaXXrjXoTepov 5k kvioi ypaxfiovci
IIvdias tv1 rj pLrjrpcvs TlvOias. The correc-
tion is further confirmed by the following
lines which evidently apply to Euthy-
menes, not to Pytheas. That Euthymenes
won a victory at Nemea is proved by the
plural rds 5’ in Isthm. V. 61, just quoted.
kclI vvv *on the present occasion’; the
victory at Corinth is a thing of the past
(^avtras), that of Nemea is recent.
kcCvov is generally misinterpreted. It
refers to Peleus; compare Keivots l. 22
and Keivos 1. 30. [I observe that Tycho
Mommsen also refers Keivov to Peleus,
though otherwise his interpretation di-
verges.] Just as in 11. 7, 8 Pytheas was
said to glorify (yepalpeiv) the Aeacidae,
so Euthymenes is here said to adorn
(ayaXXeiv) the Aeginetans. The render-
ings of Dissen and of Mr Fennell give
an impossible sense to 20vos.9 6
NEMEONIKAI E'.
a Ne/iea fiev apapev /xet9 t* im](c&pi0$, ov <f>i\rj<T 'AiroWcov'
aAucas S' ekOovTas oIkol t itcparei	45
NLvov t iv evay/cei Xocfxp. xaipto S’, oti
eaXoiai fjbdpvaraL irepi irdaa 7ro\^9.
HaOi, ykviceidv rot ^AevavBpov avv Tt/^a p,6x0(ov dp,oi/3dv
iiravpeo. xpr) S’ air ’AQavav T€ktov d0\r)Tal(nv efi/xey.
el Be ®€pLLanov itc€L$> &ar aeiBeiv, fj,rjfcen piyei* BlBoi
>	f
€7r. y .
5o
We may render 11. 43—47 thus:
thy mother's brother, O Pytheas,
sheds radiance on the race of that hero's
kin. Nemea stood fast by him and the
month of his cotintry (Delphinios) which
(Delphian) Apollo loves. But at home
and on the fair-gladed hill of Nistis he
conquered the comers of his own age. I
rejoice that the whole city joins in the
conflict for noble prizes.
dyaXXci] Adorns, with the further im-
plication that he furnishes material for a
statue of song. The word answers to
ayakfiar' which occurs in the first verse
of the first strophe, and occupies nearly
the same position in the line.
44. d'papev] Nemea was true to him.
All commentators wrongly interpret fa-
voured him, which would be i}pape.
Mr Tyrrell was the first to point out their
error and to assign to dpapev the full
meaning of the perfect, which was re-
cognised by the scholiast: irpoaripiiooTcu
avTtp 7rpbs rb vlkolv del. The expression
ev airavTi Kparet Kepavvbv apapora in 01.
XI. 91 is to be similarly explained, the
thunderbolt which clave to him, or stood
him in good stead. (Cp. Isthm. II. 19.)
The phrase in the present passage suggests
the fidelity of a bride. Dissen compares
’Nifj.ea t' ovk ami-oei (01. xin. 34) Nemea
countervailed not, but this is not quite
the same. The fids (fi'ffv) imxupios is the
Aeginetan month Delphinios which was
probably also a Megarian month; in it,
through Apollo’s favour, Euthymenes
conquered at the Aeginetan Hydrophoria
or Delphinia and at the Megarian Pythia.
The Delphinia are referred to in Pyth.
viii. 66.	<pi\7)cr' is wont to love when it
comes round; this seems to be the force
of the aorist.
45.	aXiicas IXOovTas] His coevals
who had come. Pueros Aeginetas, ad
certamen qui venerant, Dissen; but Mez-
ger is right in not limiting ctXixes to
Aeginetans. Euthymenes conquered the
same pancratiast competitors (hailing
from all parts of Greece) both at Aegina
and at Megara. iKparet was the victor
over.
46.	€va*YK€i] A Pindaric formation,
not occurring elsewhere; for its signifi-
cance see Introduction, p. 87.
48.	McvavSpov <rvv Tv\q,] Compare
<rbv ’Kapirwv tvx$, IV. 7. Menander was
a famous Athenian trainer in gymnastic.
For the introductory todi compare todi,
KeXadrfOQ), 01. x. n. The meaning is:
/ say unto thee, Sweet is the meed that by
Menander's aid thou hast won from thy
labours. The genitive fioxScov depends
on both iwabpeo and dfioifiav. eiraupco,
second aorist. In Pyth. ill. 36 we find
the aorist active, 7eirovtov ttoWoI enravpov.
49.	XP1! /c.t.X.] Meet it is that
athletes should have their fashioner from
Athens; a manifest paronomasia on ’A0a-
vai and ddXrjrai.
50.	€t 8c ©€|i£crTiov frccis /c.r.X.] Pin-
dar now addresses himself; But if thou
art come with the thought of singing
Themistios, be cold no more for the task ;
be generous with thy voice, spread sails to
the topmost yard, and proclaim that as a
boxer and in the pancration he was vie-NEMEAN V.
97
<f>covdv, dva S' IfTTia relvov nrpo? £vydv tcapyaaiov,
irvKTav T6 viv teal irayKparicp $6ey%ai eXelv 'JLmSavptp Snrkoav
vitc&vT aperav, irpoOvpoiatv S' Alatcov
avOewv 7Toiaevra <f>epeiv (TTetpavcopLara avv %av6ai$ l^dptaa-iv.
torious at Epidaurus and won a double
glory, and that by favour of the fair-
haired Graces he (his statue) wears grassy
flower-chaplets in the portal of Aeacus’
fane.
Themistios is said to be the father of
Euthymenes and therefore the maternal
grandfather of Pytheas. He is mentioned
in Isthtn. v. 65. The phrase ptjkIti
piyei arrests the attention. Be reserved
no longer implies that there were reasons
for reserve in reference to somebody else.
This suspicion is strengthened by two
circumstances; (1) the ode, formally in
honour of Pytheas, is far more a pane-
gyric on Euthymenes, who is compared
to the hero of the myth; and (2) in line
14 sqq. a theme is introduced, to be set
aside as deserving of silence. We can
see that there is something between the
lines, but we cannot trace the letters.
8£8oi] Hermann for 8L8ov. It hardly
means utter; rather lend, devote.
51.	icrrCa] The phrase is chosen as
suitable to the name Oep-loTLos which
Pindar, for the occasion, derives from
de/jLovv iorla (cf. tXtjoIo’tlos) to set the sails
in motion. KapxML0V is l^e masthead, and
£vybv Kapxacrlov the sailyard, called so
from its resemblance to a yoke at the end
of the pole in a car.
52.	,E,iri8avp(p] At Epidaurus were
held games in honour of Asclepius. Cf.
Nem. in. 84. 8nr\oav, namely in boxing
and in the pancration. aperav, fee of
excellence.
53.	dv6&>v iroia€VTa crT€<|>avcojiaTa]
A dictio insolens with which Bergk com-
pares 01. VII. 80 pLrjktav Kviadeaca irop.Tra.
The garlands were woven of grass and
flowers. It is to be observed that iroidcvra
is scanned as a trisyllable: Hermann
reads iroiarra. Xapunriv; this dative
was restored by Schmid for mss. Xapio-iv.
X^puri : X&Pl(T(TL : XapLT€<T<Tl :: w0<rt : 7ro°'’
<rl : ir68€<r<ri.
B.
7NEMEAN VI.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY AT NEMEA IN THE
BOYS’ WRESTLING CONTEST WON BY ALCIMIDAS OF
AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
The young victor celebrated in this hymn belonged to the Aeginetan
family of the Bassidae, whose members had won many crowns, at the great
Hellenic games, for wrestling and boxing. But a curious feature marked
these successes; they were gained in alternate generations. Thus the
victor’s father Theon had achieved no personal distinctions, while Theon’s
uncle, Praxidamas, had been a renowned wrestler ; the father of Praxidamas
was even as Theon, and perhaps, a generation further back, a certain
Agesimachus may have performed some deed of glory. This coincidence, as
we should call it, set Pindar a-thinking and gave him an idea for his Ode1.
He reflected that in a peculiarity which might at first sight seem a sign of
weakness, the Bassids really resembled the great first Mother herself. The
fields of the Earth must sometimes lie fallow that they may gather strength
and yield an abundant increase. Thus the Bassids imitate the Earth ; nay,
it would even seem that the nature or essence of Earth, the common mother
of gods and men, had passed in unusual measure, by some special favour,
into the seed of this family. And this similitude to Earth, this partaking in
her nature, may be considered the auspice of the house, and is the key to its
marvellous successes. Such is the thought, which Pindar works out with
a curious subtlety, playing upon the names epa and ala. If the last Ode
was a Song of the Sea, this Ode is a Song of the Earth.
The first strophe of the Ode, is one of the most solemn passages in
Pindar. Both gods and men derive their origin from one source, the Earth;
and there is consequently a resemblance between them, notwithstanding the
vast distance which separates the certainties of divine existence from the
impotence and ignorance of human life. The Greek gods were not like the
1 Mezger describes the ode as “ein
volltonender Lobgesang auf die Unver-
wtistlichkeit der im Menschen wohnenden
zur hochsten Entfaltung drangenden Na-
turkraft ”; and he divides it thus:
7rpoolpiov i—7; ap%d 8—28; Kara-
rpoird 29, 30; 6/JL(pa\6s 31—53; pera/ca-
rarpoird 53—57; <T(ppayls 57—66.
According to my view the natural di-
visions of the matter correspond to the
three metrical systems.INTRODUCTION
99
Semitic God, alone, unbegotten, uncreated ; they were far above man, but
they were not infinitely above him; and thus the Greek religion was a sphere
for beauty rather than for sublimity. When we read that God made man in
his own image, the thought strikes us as sublime; for while on the one
hand the omnipotence of God, compared with our own nothingness,
annihilates, on the other hand the idea of our resemblance to the Infinite
elevates; and the simultaneous occurrence of these two feelings is
the note of sublimity. But the Greek gods are not infinite. We admire
them, we worship them, we may fear them; but, after all, we and they
are sprung from a common mother. They are the favoured children,
who have the sure abode; we wander, outcasts, in a land of uncer-
tainty and chance. I dwell on this, because the passage before us is
sometimes called sublime, and sublime in the modern sense seems hardly a
correct description. It is lofty (Xefis v^rjXij); it is written in the grand style ;
but the thought can scarcely be said to contain the element of sublimity.
The brazen firmament, which stands sure, is contrasted with the ignorance
of men touching the way by which their destiny shall lead them, from day to
night and from night to day ; man’s life, subject to changes and chances, is
really ‘ nought’ compared with the life of the gods. But the main thought is
that men and gods have a common mother; we are all the sons and
daughters of Earth. These reflections may produce a solemn mood of mind;
we may feel a certain dejection at the contrast, or a certain satisfaction in
the resemblance; but the atmosphere is too calm and temperate for the pains
and pleasures of sublimity.
It is worth noticing, as a literary curiosity, that, while Pindar here
contrasts the certainty of the brazen heaven with the blindness and
ignorance of men, Mr Swinburne, in lines which suggest this passage of
Pindar, at least in a verbal echo, ascribes to iron heaven the qualities of
witlessness and deafness :—
‘ Shall the iron hollow of doubtful heaven
‘That knows not itself whether night-time or day be
‘ Reverberate sounds of a foolish prayer?’1
The fact that men are the children of Earth is illustrated by the family of
Alcimidas the victor; the Bassids, like the fields, alternately rest and work ;
the nature of the universal mother is peculiarly manifested in them. And
this special connexion with Earth has been a good auspice for the successes
won by the active generations. The boy Alcimidas has even now come
from Nemea, a triumphant wrestler in those ‘lovely’ games, e paredv aeOXcov,
of Zeus ;—‘ lovely,’ but does not that signify 4 EarthAy,’ related to tpa,
earth ? and does not this omen explain the victory of the really Earth-born
Alcimidas ? Yes, his relation to Earth is the omen or bird which he has
followed like a hunter, even as Praxidamas2, his great uncle, before him.
This Praxidamas was the first Aeginetan who won an olive crown on the
1	The Triumph of Time,	statue was erected; Pausanias vi. 18, 5.
2	The first victor to whom an athlete-
7—2IOO
NEMEAN VI.
banks of the Alpheus. And Pindar chooses an unusual word for the chaplet
of olive: he calls it tfpvea, shoots, suggesting that here too there is a
mysterious connexion with Zpa. Praxidamas also won five victories at
Corinth and three at Nemea; his brothers too were distinguished in
athletics ; and thus on their father Soclides, who had achieved nothing
himself, the fame of the sons was reflected.
In boxing, as well as in wrestling, the Bassid family was unusually
distinguished, and Pindar ventures to say that no family had won so many
boxing-matches on the Isthmus. It is a bold affirmation ; and he bids the
Muse direct upon the Bassidae a glorious or glorifying breeze of verses, song
being the true gale to waft the noble exploits of dead heroes across the sea
of time. The Bassidae were an ancient race with a fair record of brave
deeds, an abundant theme for poets. Or, as Pindar puts it, reminding us
again of the Bassid omen, they offer a rich soil to those tillers who work in
the service of the Pierides, the Ladies of Fruitful-land1.
The successes of Callias and Creontidas—Bassids, though probably not
very nearly related to Alcimidas—may be taken as examples. In the Pythian
games, by the sanctuary of Apollo, Callias won in boxing; the gods
themselves protected him ; he found favour with Apollo and Artemis, the
children of Leto. And here again the omen of Earth is true to the Bassid ;
the two gods are called epi/ea Aarovs, suggesting a connexion with the Earth
(epa), which inclines them favourably to Callias. As for Creontidas, he had
won victories at Corinth and at Nemea, and in both cases his honours were
due to the mysterious distinction of his family. Not the Corinthians, nor
yet Poseidon, are said to have honoured him at the Isthmian games, but the
Isthmus itself, that ‘unwearying bridge/ which suggests so strongly Earth’s
solid steadfast endurance. And at Nemea a like omen prospered him.
Nemea lies under the mountains of Phlius, dark shady ‘old-world’ moun-
tains, in which one might expect to come on curious traces of primeval
Earth-worship. Such are the suggestions of the word nyvyLois—
8acrKiois $\iovvtos vit coyvyiois optcriv,—
and dao-Kiois, with deep shades, contains the Earth-omen of Da or Damater
(Demeter).
No hymn in honour of an Aeginetan, in honour even of a Bassid, would
have been complete without some mention of the great Aeacid family,
of which Aegina was so proud. The Aeacids may be considered a mythical
prototype of the Bassids ; they are both ancient families2, they have both
shed great glory on the island3, they have both given ample arguments to
poets4. And like the Bassids, the Aeacids have an omen5,—a bird literally,—
the eagle of their name, which flies over land and sea6. But they have yet’
another auspice ; their name Alaidbai is connected not only with aUros, but
1	Hiepia = irleipa.	4 Cf. 11. 29, 31—32, with 44, 45.
2	Cf. 11. 30 and 52. See note on 1. 44	5 Cf. ataav 1. 13, al<rav 1. 46.
for the parallel phrases.	6 1. 47 Ararat 5’—owp' avrCov.
3	Cf. eu/cXea 1. 28, with €vk\£cl 1. 45.INTROD UCTION
IOI
with ala, Earth, and thus, in a quite peculiar sense, they are the prototypes of
the Bassidae1. Achilles’2 victory at Troy over Memnon, the son of shining
Morning, was achieved under this Earth-auspice; for he descended on the
ground from his chariot and made the conflict heavy3 (as though the weight
of Earth were on his side) for the Ethiopians.
Ancient poets have rung changes on the deeds of the Aeacidae, and
Pindar conceives himself as following in their track along a spacious
highroad, with a burden of his own. He is fain to bear on his back a double
load ot earth, even the Earth-auspices of the Bassids and the Aeacids. ‘But
I with willing back, in quest of a double load, hied me as a messenger,
proclaiming this twenty-fifth victory, won by Alcimidas for his race renowned.’
The Greek participle, which I have rendered ‘in quest of,’ /xcdenw, was
applied in the first part of the Ode to Alcimidas pursuing his omen ; and
Pindar has taken care to set the word in the same position in correspond-
ing lines4.
1. 13. 7Tais evaycovios, off ravrav pLtdeirav Aiodev ai&av,
1. 5b. Ovfjiov. iicovTi d* eya> vtora* pLeOencsv dldvfxov a^Sos-
This artifice explains the allusion of dldvpov ax&os.
It is worth observing how Pindar turns aside, just before this fifty-seventh
verse, to introduce a naval metaphor, to suit an Aeginetan audience. ‘That
wave which rolls by the rudder of the vessel from time to time, doth more
than others, they say, shake a man’s spirit.’ The poet would say that
he has a more lively interest in the Bassidae, now living, than in the
Aeacids ; he is not an epic bard.
The ode concludes with a mention of the circumstance that Alcimidas
and Polytimidas (his brother perhaps) would have obtained crowns at
Olympia, had they not been unlucky in drawing lots, and with a tribute of
praise to the trainer Melesias who for suppleness of body is compared to a
dolphin cleaving the water.
From this examination it results that the poem falls into three parts,
corresponding to its three metrical systems. (1) At the very threshold
Pindar gives us the key to the meaning of the whole ode, and the rest of the
first system is occupied with Alcimidas and the ‘modern’ Bassids. (2) The
second system is devoted to Bassids of more ancient date. (3) The third
system tells of the Aeacids and especially Achilles; and then returns to
Alcimidas and his contemporaries. The thread connecting the three parts
1	This explains Alaiddcus in 1. 17 :—
Kcivos (Praxidamas) yap ’OXv/awlSvikos
£wv Alaiddais
ipvea irpQros %Toaaev ax’ ’A\<f>€od.
He won Zpvea for the Aiaiddat (as it
were earth-flowers for the earth-sons).
2	Achilles is the prototype of Alcimidas
(as the Aeacids are of the Bassids); and,
according to my reading of 1. 50, Pindar
indicates this by <pave corresponding to
Tri^avT1 in 1. 14.
3	Perhaps this is over-subtle; but it is
supported by a%0os in 1. 56. The curious
phrase /3api> veiKos <j>ave (or detge) requires
some explanation.
4	Mezger, of course, observed this re-
sponsion, but did not discern its full
significance.102
NEMEAN VI.
is the idea of the power of Earth, the common mother of gods and men,
revealing itself in favoured human races. In the human stock of the Bassids,
as well as in the Aeacids who were of divine origin, the authentic earth-
qualities come out ; and Pindar suggests that his song, in which both these
families are praised, bears two loads of earth, symbolizing the two great races,
gods and men, who are sprung from Gaia.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
VV. I, 2.	a.	vy^.. — . — w — — vy — • v£) 0 — A 1	(16).
			
vv. 3,4.	d.	' — CJD ^	kj — t\	(16).
vv. 5-7.	b.	' . I J.yjyj-^'J	| uv-'-ww-uu - A 1 . I A| — v-/ — W ~ 1	(20).
The structure is epodic, and the formula
a. 8.8.
a
b.
8.8.
Epode.
VV. I,
A.
A
' \jkj
' — ^--------------I
vv. 3,
d.
4-
vj A
(II).
(II).
B.
vv. 5—7- b.
vv. 8,9. b*.
, _._L ^	■
, — ^ "
\J — A
----J- yj'
The rhythm of this ode is logaoedic.
(9).
(9).NEMEONIKAI s'.
AAKIMIAHi AITINHTHi
IIAIAI IIAAAlSTHt.
f'Ei/ dvSpcSv, €v 0ewv yevo?' i/c puca? Se irveofiev	crrp. a.
pLarpos dpLcjyoTepor Sieipyei 8e iraaa /cetepipbiva
hvvapus, <w? to puev ovhev, o Se ^aX/ceos da<f)a\e$ alev e®09
i. €V—£v] Editors are divided as to
whether these words mean iv avdp&v ical
0e&v ylvos or £v dvdp&v, h-epov OeCov
ylvos. I have no hesitation in adopting
the former explanation. It is on the
ultimate, primal unity that Pindar wishes
to insist; he admits the vast differences,
but he accentuates the likeness. As to
the Greek words, one may indeed con-
cede that they might possibly bear the
other meaning and that the second %v
might exclude, not repeat the first, but
I submit that they do not naturally bear
such a sense, which would almost necessi-
tate iv di de&v yevos. The opposition is
one which demands pkv—; p.kv may be
left out, but both particles can hardly be
dispensed with. Moreover the following
7rvtopiev, in the first person plural, seems
to imply the association, not the distinc-
tion, of the two kinds of beings in the
foregoing clause. apLcpdrepot = we men,
and the gods, who are classed with us as
of a common race.
2* parpos] Earth, Gaia, the mother
of Iapetos who was the father of Pro-
metheus. Earth was bom after Chaos
according to Hesiod’s Theogony (116)
avrcLp £7reiTa
yat’ evpvarepvos irdvTWP %5os do<pa\ts
alel
ddavariov 01 txovai Kdprj mcpdepros
’OXtf/arov k.t.X.
Sicfpya k.t.X.] didpyei, separates, keeps
apart, as it were places a wall betwixt
(eine Scheidewand, as Mezger says), is
equivalent to an active of the intransitive
diafilpu). Svvajus K€Kpipfva is a distinct
power, or power in which they differ,
and 7ra<ra means in every particidar case.
K€Kpi)uIvtjv yeverjv, an expression used by
Hesiod {Scut. Her. 65) in distinguishing
Iphicles from Heracles, is a good paral-
lel, quoted by all the editors. Schol. ij
d/J,€T&(3\7)TOS 7} 7} K€X<*>PUTfxivT). In NdH.
iv. i we met this participle in a different
sense.
3. cos t6 piv k.t.X.] Whereas (or in
that, explanatory) the one is nought, while
(for the other) the brazen heaven abides
as a perpetual sure abode ; a reminiscence
of Hesiod {Theog. 128) who tells how
Earth brought forth starry Heaven
o<pp’ eirj [MiKdpeaai 0eois edos dacpaXh
alei.
A passage in the Sixth Isthmian Ode
(1. 42 sqq.), although its connexion is
different, has some points of similarity
which render it worth quoting.
0vd<TKop.€v 70ip o/wDs awavTcs'
daLpcw 5’ Afros' ra /laKpa. S’ et ns
7ra7n-cuVei Ppax^s €^lkI<t0oll xdXKoiredov
0€&v %5pav.
Here too is the contrast of mortals and
their defective powers (fipaxts) with the
gods and the brazen floor of heaven.104
NEMEONIKAI <r\
fievei ovpavos. dXXa tl irpoa^epo^v epmav
rj pueyav voov rjrot, (frvaiv adavaTOis,	5
/caiirep i<f>apuepiav ovtc elSoTes ovSe puerd vvktok
4. dXXct n /c.r.X.] But albeit we
(mortals) have some likeness either in
great mind or at least in our nature to
the immortals, although we know not
what rule or measure, day by day nor in
the night seasons, our master destiny has
drawn that we should run thereby.
irpoatpipeiv, to be like, is the conjugate
of diaipbpeiv (implied in dielpyei), and
although this intransitive sense is not
common, no difficulty need be made.
Dissen refers to Frag. 43 {apud Athen.
xii. 513 c)
£} T&KVOV
tcovtIov Orjpbs irerpalov yyxarl pAXiara
voov
irpo<T<f)ip(tiv iraaais 7roXlecrcriv opdXei,
where however voov may be the object of
7rpo<r<p£p(x)v. <pb<riv is not the bodily, as
opposed to the mental nature; it is rather,
M as Mezger explains, the whole nature or
|! Wesen of man. <t>b<ns dvdp&irov is equi-
valent to ‘the animal man’, man from
an anthropological point of view. It
must be admitted however that (ptieiv
'tiapuavelav ZXaxev (Isthm. III. 68) sup-
ports the interpretation ‘body’, tfroi ‘or
at least because the assumption of
similitude in <j>b<ns is less bold than a
comparison of intellect.
6.	p.era vvKras] Perhaps in midnight
hours, just as /ue0’ rjfibpav means at noon.
More probably however it simply means
in the night-watches, cf. fiedrjfxepivos,
diurnus. Hartung strangely wishes to
introduce vvx^v for the sake of coor-
dination with i<papL€plav. '
7.	a|A|A€ iroTp.os k.t.X.] The mss. have
7t6tjlos avTiv’ pa\f/e. Against Triclinius’
obvious correction &vtiv’ there are three
objections: (1) it is too obvious; (2) the
sense demands riva not avriva; (3) the
metre requires that the second foot of
the line should be — or or
Various emendations have been proposed.
Hermann’s olav riv’ was accepted by
Boeckh; Ahrens proposed al<rav rlv\
Hartung reads oi>8£ wx^w tIs apcpu tt6t-
fios ivbypaxf/e. But none of these pro-
posals is in the least satisfactory. The
reading which I have printed in the text
satisfies the conditions of the problem.
in uncials is very like an«\n, and
if one of the similar syllables fell out
&NTIN {tiivTiv’) would be left. (For 7r6r-
/j.os &va£, peculiarly suitable in this con-
text, see Nem. IV. 43.) It is somewhat
difficult to determine what words were
read here by the writers of two old
scholia which have come down: (1) Kaitcep
ovk ddfrres efre iv Tjfitpq. eifre iv vvktI
iroTpLos Zypaxf/e ttjv &p.a.pp.tvr\v tj/mv ical
rbv Odvarov. This seems to point to a
lection et tiv\ (2) kclItoi fiij yiyvuxtkov-
res p.7]T€ ra 7rpbs tt\v i)p£pav pLrjre ra did
vvktos itropieva pirjdb et tis [D, but ocms B]
i]fjicis p.opos KCLTaK^Kpucev els (tkottov Tiva
KaX (TTadp,7}v 5pap.eiv. The reading of D
might point to av tiv’ of the mss. ; as for
boTis, Dissen thinks that the scholiast
found a gap in his text, and filled it by
this pronoun.
ttotI o-Ta0(j.av] The point is not that
we are ignorant of our goal (which is
death), but that we know not the course
of our lives, which may alter from day to
day and from night to night;—we know
not what a day may bring forth. We
must not then follow editors who force
<rT&dpia (which in Pindar always means j
measure, rule or norm) into the meaning |
of goal (so the schol. interpret by ddva-
tov) ; and we may ask them, what, if
aradpia means goal, is the sense of e<pap.e-
plav and fiera vbKTas ? Is there a new goal
every day and every night? and if not,
why should the ultimate goal be called
etpapiepiav ? (rradpia is the line by whichNEMEAN VI.
l°5
dfifjbe TTOTfJLOS aval; tip eypayjre Spafielv 7rorl aradpuav.
T€Kp,aipei teat vvv ’A\Kip,iha<z to <tvyyeves ISelv	avr. a .
ayyi fcap7rocf)6poc<; apovpaiaiv. avr ap,eil36p,€vai
toKa p,ep &v jULov avhpacriv iirrjeravov i/e ireSicop eSoarap,	IO
tokcl S’ avr dpaTravadpuepat aOivov epapyfrap.
fjkde rot Nep,ea<; if; ipar&p aeOXtop
destiny determines the course of our life,
but we have to run without seeing the
line, and therefore know not from day to
night and from night to day where our
course will lie. An exactly similar ex-
pression, in point of the Greek, occurs in
Pyth. VI. 45 Opa<nj(3ovXo$ irarpipav [m-
Xiara irpbs crradfxav l(3 a, he walked by the
line that his father had drawn, followed
in his tracks.
Mezger translates, ‘obwohl wir weder
den Verlauf des heutigen Tages kennen,
noch auch wissen, nach welcher Richt-
schnur nach Verfluss der Nacht zu laufen
das Schicksal uns vorgezeichnet hat ’,
that is, we know neither the course of to-
day nor that of to-morrow. He is right
in his interpretation of irori (rraBfiav, but
I cannot agree with his view of fiera
vlncras.
lyparpc dfifie dpapiciv, prescribed that we
should run, a single act of destiny at our
birth. Mommsen and Bergk rightly hold
that the scholia do not necessarily imply
a reading &p.p.i, inferred by Kayser, Har-
tung and others.
8.	TCKjMupci K.T.X.] The active of
T€KfiaipofiaL (to judge by signs) is rare;
it occurs in 01. VI. 73 rcKfialpc 1 XPvV
eKaoTov, and means ‘to give a token or
sign’. Now too Alcimidas sets as a token
thereof his natural quality, for in aspect
it resembles fruitful fields which, alter-
nating, now yield of their soil an abun-
dant crop unto men, and anon take rest
and gather strength. Hartung’s reading
'AXicifiida (genitive) for MSS. ’AXici/ildas
is unnecessary; rb avyyevbs is the object
of T€Kfmlp€L. The scholiasts read the
nominative, 6 ’AX/a/^Sas, <prj<rl, <ra<pbs
iroiei T€K/j,r)piou<Tdai Tjfias, and SrjXdi 5b kclI
<ra<ph TToiei rb cairrov avyyeves 6 'AX/ct-
fiidrjs. &yxi is used like an adjective, =
ayxL eoucos (cf. Homeric dyx^ra icpKci),
and takes the infinitive of definition,
ibeiv. ayxov is used with the dative of
nearness in space Nem. ix. 39.
9.	apovpauriv] Mezger has the credit
of having been the first to observe the
point of this comparison. The alterna-
tions in the productiveness of the fields
are a manifestation of the nature of
Earth, the common mother of men and
gods (line 2); and thus a peculiarity
derived from that common mother can-
not be regarded as a misfortune.
10.	ptov eirqcTavov] Hesiod, Op. 31
(pnvL fXT] pios hbov eTrrjeravbs xara-
Kcirai
<bpaios rbv yaia (pipci, ArjfjLrjrepos &kt7)V.
In a scholion it is explained by ra irpbs
rbv filov darptXrj /<al irXobaia.
11.	?papi|rav] The idea seems to be
overtake and lay hold of, clutch back, as if
the oBivos were trying to escape.
12.	ijX04 TOl K.T.X.] He came from
the lovely games of Nemea, a boy com-
petitor, who, in pursuit of this bird from
Zeus, hath now proved fortunate in the
wrestling bout, as a hunter moving in the
footsteps of Praxidamas, the brother of his
father's sire.
This passage has never been really
explained by commentators. Two ques-
tions arise; (t) what is the meaning of
rafrrav fieBlircoy AioOcv aTaav? (2) what
is the force of comparing Alcimidas to a
hunter ?IO6	NEMEONIKAI s'.
irals ivayoovios, 09 ravrav fieOeirwv AioOev alaav
vvv 7re(f>avT ovtc a/jufiopos dfuf)l 7raXa /cvvayeTas,
L^vecnv ip Upa];i,8dfiavTO$ eov iroSa vepwv	iir. a. 15
irarpoiraTopos opaipiov.
Kelvos yap 'OXvpiriovucos imp Ata/ciSai?
epvea irpSno^ eroaaev dir ’A\<f>eov,
Dissen observed that the hunting meta-
phor begins with nedhruv (which we find
with 2Xa<j>ov in 01. ill. 31). The game
accordingly is TavTav alcrav, which Dissen
renders ‘hanc fortunam, victoriam ludi-
cram’, Mezger ‘diesem (der Kampfspiele)
Loose’. It has been already pointed
out (on in. 16) that in Pindar al<ra does
not always mean lot or share, but also
omen, auspicium; and the present case is
an instance. Omens were so closely
associated with the most common form
of omen, the bird-omen, that 6pns is
constantly used of an omen in general;
while, on the other hand, aha is occa-
sionally almost equivalent to bird (see
below, line 47). Thus, as suggesting a
bird, it is peculiarly appropriate with
fiedlmav.
But what is ‘ this omen ’ ? rabrav shews
that it has been already mentioned.
When we reflect that the whole point of
the foregoing lines is a resemblance of
the nature inherent in Alcimidas to the
nature of the earth, and when at the
same time we observe the unusual epithet
applied to atQXw, we detect the bird
which plays hide-and-seek, like many
other birds in Pindar. The temperament
of earth (2pa) in Alcimidas is an omen
that the Nemean games will prove really
lovely and pleasant {l par a) to him; and
this auspice is from Zeus, as the god of
those games.
The further significance of these words
will be seen in 1. 45 sqq.
14. ap<t>t] see on Nem. 1. 29. irt<pavr'
is for irtyavrai, not for irtyavro. The
elision of -cu is common in Pindar: cf.
01. XII. 6 KvXlvdovT’ iXrrldes, Pyth. xi.
53 pdp.(f>ofjL> ato’av.
r5* ^Xv€<rtv] Cp. Pythian, x. 12 ifi-
pipaKev txveaip TraTpbs ’OXv/uLTnovbca.
16. 6|uu|i£ov] This word is generally
taken as an emphatic epithet of trarpo-
iraropos. If Praxidamas was Alcimidas’
grandfather, it is hard to see how any
intention of stress could justify such a
superfluous addition as *of the same
blood’. Bergk’s ingenious theory cer-
tainly gives force to the word, but cannot
be considered in the least probable. He
supposes that Theon, who was named
Alcimidas’ father in the list of the Ne-
mean victors, was his father by adoption;
hence Alcimidas had two paternal grand-
fathers (1) the father of Theon, (2)
Praxidamas. Thus Praxidamas is called
ofialpuos to distinguish him from Theon’s
father. The only ground for this theory
rests on the circumstance that Theon is
called Kpifis, a Cretan, in the aforesaid list
(schol. ed. Abel p. 173).
I believe, the scholia notwithstanding,
that dpxupUov is equivalent to opai/iov,
brother, and that Praxidamas was the
great-uncle, not the grandfather, of the
victor. The genealogy was:
Agesimachus
Soclides
,1-------1------1.
(TraTpowaTojp) Praxidamas
Theon
Alkimidas
18. Ipvca jc.t.X.] This line is defective
in the mss., the word between vpwTos
and aw1 having accidentally dropped out.NEMEAN VI.
107
/cal TrevraKt^ 'lad/ioc o-recfxivcocrdfievos,
NefJbia Be rpi9, eiravae Xddav	20
%a>K\eiBa, 09 virepraro^ 'Ayr}aifid%<p vlecov yevero.
€7T€t Foe rpe?9 ae6Xo<f>opoL 717*09 atepov apera?	arp. ft'.
fj\0ov, O6T6 7roP(ov eyevaavTO. avv 6eov Be Tvya
erepov ov Tiva Foltcov diret^dvaro irvypbayLa TrXeovcov
rapbiav arefpdvcov p>vyjp fE\\a8o9 air da a^.	25
Hartung proposed iSpix/zaP, Bergk bei-
kcv; Mr Fennell reads iirdpicea’. Why
any of these words should have dis-
appeared, is not explained. I read
$TO<T<rev because its omission from the
text is intelligible on the principle of
parablepsia. In uncials the line was
written
epNeAnpoTOC€TOceN<\TT<\A<J>eoY
It is clear how easily one T0C6 might
have been accidentally omitted and the
unmeaning €N which survived would
have been discarded. For this rare aorist
see Pyth. ill. 27 Too-acus, IV. 25 iniro^cre,
X. 33 iTTlTOO-CTCUS.
The word tpvea may well strike one as
curious for the corona oleagina, but it is
chosen with the special purpose of sug-
gesting 2pa} the Earth (like iparQv above
1. is, and tyveo-i below 1. 36); connexion
with the Earth is the favourable omen for
the Bassids.
21.	vn^pTdTos] Generally interpreted
eldest (so schol.); but (1) this use is
hardly possible without the addition of
some word like yeveq. (cf. A 786 yeverj
vniprepos), and (2) in el, which follows
in 1. 22, has no point unless vwipraros
means best. Pindar says that Soclides,
who was personally the least distin-
guished, became through his three sons’
victories the most distinguished of the
sons of Agesimachus. This interpreta-
tion gives the most natural meaning to
bnipraros, secures for yivero its full force
and explains inei. [After this note was
written I discovered that Boeckh had
proposed this explanation.]
I follow Bergk in accepting
handed down in two Byzantine mss.,
for 2w/c\e/5a, which is inadmissible be-
fore 5s.
22.	£ircC F01] B has preserved the
right reading ol (/oi) = abr<p, Agesi-
machus. The other mss. have iirel oi
(nom. plur.). Dissen illustrates wpbs
aKpov aperas fjXdov by Isthm. ill. 50 irplv
riXos a Kpov IkIcOcu.
For ttSvojv lyefoavro compare Pyth.
X. 7 yeverac yap didXcjv.
23.	arvv 8cov k.t.X.] But by divine
grace (or concurrence) no other house hath
been ordained by the art of boxing to
husband her more crowns, won at the city
on the Bay of Greece. nvypaxia is per-
sonified; the victories and crowns are
hers; and the victorious families are the
rapdeu. Thus the appointment is made
in her own interest, and this is expressed
by the middle direfpdvaro.
25.	'EXXaSos a-iracras] Corinth,
ebratras has its strict force,—Greece en-
tire; the bay of Corinth is conceived as
Panhellenic. A modem writer might
express the idea by using a capital letter.
The k6Xttos Kpioaios (as it was called in
the 5th century B.c.) might be well
named the Bay of Greece; the expression
could not be applied to the sinus Ar-
golicus or the sinus Pagasaicus. fivxbs
is the corner or head of the gulf. Aes-
chylus calls the Propontis p.vxlw IIpo-
novTida, and Homer’s
&m ■jrSXts ’E<pbpr} p.vx<p "Apyeos iirwo-
jSoroio (Z 152)
is familiar.io8
NEMEONIKAI r'.
e\7TOficu fieya feiirwv axoirov av T€Tv%€iv
(St diro rogov lek* exiOvv iirl tovtov, aye, Mol<ra,
ovpov irrktov ev/cXed* ol'xppevtov yap dviptov
doiSal teal Xoyoi rd tcaXd <r(f)iv epy itcopiaav,	dvr. fS.
J&a<T<ri8at<Tiv a r ov (nravL^ei' nraXatyaTo? yevea,	30
26.	^Xtro|i,ai] / hope that, having
spoken a great word, I may hit the mark
therewith, as one shooting from a bozv.
The great word is the boast of the two
preceding lines, which Pindar now pro-
ceeds to justify by recording triumphs of
the Bassid family in the remoter past.—
B has &VTOL (TKOTTOU T€TVX€W, D avra
okottov Tvxeiv, and a scholiast observes
Zvioi ypd<f>ovatv hv reru%et^. MingarellPs
<tkoitou avra Tvxeiv is generally accepted;
but if it were the original reading, no
motive can be assigned for the transposi-
tion in the mss. I hold that Pindar
wrote av Tervxeiv, which some mss. pre-
served intact, while others (from which
those extant are descended) suffered a
corruption owing to a wrong division of
words—av re tvx&v. A very natural
correction was avra, and if this were
written above the line or in the margin
it might easily be inserted by a copyist.
B presents a contamination of both read-
ings.—For construction of civ rerux^v,
cf. Soph. Phil. 629.
27.	6v0uv* eiri tovtov /c.T.X.] The
transition here is marked by an abrupt
change of metaphor. Come, O Muse,
send straight upon this house a fair wind
of verses, laden with glory. Elsewhere
Pindar has odpov vp.v(ov ati^s (Pyth. IV. 3).
The mss. have a)0vv, but Schmidt’s cor-
rection is certain, for (1) a long syllable
is demanded by the metre, (2) aye ovpov
is at least an unlikely expression. In
1. 28 the MSS. have euicXea ‘ irdpoLXopdvwv,
a syllable more than the corresponding
lines in the other strophes. The simplest
remedy is to omit Trap, which may have
come in from a gloss; so Bergk, who
also suggests €vk\P' d-Koixopdviav.
According to the scholia tovtov refers
tO (TKOTTOV.
28.	olxo|A€vo>v x.r.X.] For of Us heroes
dead and gone songs and tales conveyed
the noble deeds, whereof the Bassidae
have no scant store.
doiSal ical \6yoi, Pauw’s correction
for aoidoi Kal \6y101, is adopted by Bergk.
The reading of the mss. requires the
scansion of Xo'7toi as a dissyllable, which
seems extremely doubtful. The best ar-
gument for retaining \6ytoi is the circum-
stance that it occurs in the first line of
the third strophe; but this argument is
not really cogent. Pindar’s system of
responsions does not require the recur-
rence of exactly the same word; a cognate
word, similar in form and sense, is suffi-
ciently significant.
Dissen takes bcopLioav to mean fove-
runt, servarunt. But the metaphor is
clearly preserved; songs are the breezes
which waft the Bassid ships. KOfil^uj in
the sense waft is too familiar to need
illustration.
30. iraXaC<f>aTOS x.r.X.j They are an
ancient family, who lade their ship with
their own praises, and can furnish the
tillers of the Pierides with many a hymn
in honour of ennobling exploits. For
vav(TTo\elv with the accusative, cf. Euri-
pides, Orestes 741 Kal ddpapra tt}v /ca-
kIo-ttjv vav<TTo\Cbv e\7]\vdev; it is more
usual in the intransitive sense of sailing.
Poets are called the ploughmen of the
Muses (cf. Nem. x. 26 Molaauriv HduK*
apotrai, Pyth. vi. 1, 2 ’A0po5tras apovpav
rj Xaplrtov av air o\L£ofiev), because the
family of Alcimidas has been compared
in 1. 9 to a tilled field (see Introduction).
In choosing litepldwv Pindar had aNEMEAN VI.
109
iSia vavGToXeovTes im/cd/ua, UteplScov dporcus
Svvarol Trapkyjziv iroKvv fi/tvov dy€p(&x°>v
kpyfjLaTwv €V€fcev. /cal yap iv ayaOka
Xeipa<> ifiavri SeOels Tlvdoovi /cpamjaev airo ravra9
atfia 7rarpa$ xpua-aXafcaTOU 7rore KaXXia? dSwv	35
epveai AaTovs, irapa KacraX/a re Xapircov	eir. ft.
eairkpio^ ofiaScp <f>\iy€v*
ttovtov T€ yk(f)vp' a/cdfiavro9 iv d/n<f)i/cTi6va)v
thought of its connexion with irieipa. In
Homer aylpwxos is only used of persons;
Pindar applies it to noble deeds, cf. 01.
x. 79 ayep6xov vIkgs, and to wealth,
Pyth. 1. 50 ttXovtov aretpavcofi ay ipioxop.
33. Kal yap x.r.X.] For once on a
time Callias, who had the blood of this
clan in his veins, at the divine Pytho, his
hands bound with a strap, won a victory,
having found favour with the scions of
Leto of the golden distaff. ravTas is
emphatic and corresponds to ralrrav in
the corresponding verse of the first anti-
strophe; the omen of the Bassidae (al-
luded to in dporais) is not to be forgotten.
The collocation of atfia irarpas (for atfia
in apposition to Callias, Dissen com-
pares <nr£pfi airo KaWi&vaKros 01. VII.
83) is designed to recall irarpoir&Topos
ofiaifilov of 1. 16. The exploits of the
ancient members of the house are com-
pared with the modem achievements
recorded in the first part of the ode.—The
victory of Callias was for boxing; schol.
tcl irvKTiKa gkc{>7) /i€Ta x«pas Xafi&p. The
old mss. have IfiavTuBds, but Triclinius
read IjiavTi ScOcts, which is accepted by
all modern editors. The caestus of the
Greeks seems to have consisted in a strap
rolled round the hand.
36.	Ipvco-i] typos is used similarly by
Sophocles, Oed. Col. 1108 c3 <plXrar*
tpprj. Apollo and Artemis, who presided
together at the Pythian games are called
in Nem. IX. 5 HvOQpos alireivas bfioicXapois
iTTOTrrats. They are here called the Ipv-t\
of Leto, to suggest a connexion with Ipa,
the Earth,—the Bassid omen. See Intro-
duction, and above 1. 18.
37.	6pdS<p <|>\£y€v] And at eventide
by the waters of Castalia he grew radiant
to the dinning music of the Graces. The
victor is saluted by the loud comus-song
of young men in the evening and the
Graces are conceived to wrap him in a
blaze of light. So in the Fifth Pythian
the poet addresses the victor Alexibiades,
‘the Graces, with lovely tresses, make
thee bright9 at 5’ ifvKOfioi (pXlyoprL Xapt-
res. ofidd(p is a curious word to denote
the comus, as tifiados suggests an un-
musical din (cf. Isthm. vii. 25 x^K€0V
GTovoevra tifiadov). <f>Xlyep, splendebat is
intransitive here as in 01. 11. 79 Apdefia
5b xPv(rov <f>Xiyei (which Sir Francis
Doyle renders by flowers of fire). Else-
where in Pindar (except frag. 26) it has a
transitive sense. So the Graces are said
to illuminate a victor, Pyth. v. 45 <rb 5’
TfVKOfioL <pXlyoPTi Xapires. See Nem.
x. 2.
38.	irovrov t€ k.t.X.] And the sea-
bridge of unwearying strength honoured
Kreontidas in Poseidon's sacred precincts,
at the three-yearly festival which the
neighbouring peoples keep with the blood
of bulls. The significance of yl<pvp’
aicafiapTos has been explained in the
Introduction. As to afupiKTiopwp Dissen
notes : constat quidem praesides Isthmi-
orum Corinthios fuisse, cum Corinthiis
vero aliae complures civitates inde a
mythico tempore ad hos ludos celebrandos
conjunctae fuerunt, quae etiam posteano
NEMEONIKAI r.
Tavp0<f)6v<p Tpi€T7jp ISc KpeovriSav
ripbaae Tlofreihaviov av Tepuevos'	40
ftoTava, T6 vlv 7ro0’ a \kovros
vuc&vt 7)p€<f)€ 8a<r/cioi$
<t>\lOVVTO<i V7T OtiyVyLOCS opetriv.
ifkaTeuu irdvroOev XoyLoiaiv ivrl 7rpocroSot,	arp. 7'.
Oeioplas mittebant, ut Athenienses, Ac-
cording to modern mode of speech the
Isthmian was a biennial feast.
It is worth noticing that the Isthmian
and Nemean victories of Kreontidas are
mentioned in the same verses of the
second Epode, as the victories of Praxi-
damas gained at the same places in the
first Epode. Cf. 1. 19 with 1. 40, and
1. 20 with 1. 42. The Olympian victory
of 11. 17, 18 was the preeminent distinc-
tion of Praxidamas; the Pythian victory
(33—37) °f Kallias corresponds.
39. KpcovrCSav] Creontidas is the
proper name of an individual, not (as the
scholiast says) a description of Callias
(‘son of Creon’). Bergk observes that
the name Creontidas is on a scarabseus
discovered at Aegina. Rauchenstein con-
jectured KpeovTtSav of the Corinthians.
41.	PoTava	And once on a
time the herb of the lion covered his brow,
when he was victorious beneath the deep
shades of the old-world mountains of
Phlius.
In Isthm. ill. 11 Nemea is described
KolXq. XIovtos padvartpvip vairq. Bergk
wishes to introduce 7roa in 1. 41 for
ir60’ a, but this is quite uncalled for.
a fiorava Xlovros is the parsley, which
woven in a garland formed a sort of roof
for the victor’s head.
42.	vtKwvT* t|'p€<j>€ Scunctois] This
verse presents an interesting critical pro-
blem. The MSS. have vucaxravT'
BcutkIois. Triclinius read	d<TKioL5t
and this led to Schmidt’s reading vuca-
travr’ £/)*«/>’ dffKlois. On the other hand
Hermann, followed by Bergk, seeks the
error not in 8cl<tkIoi$ but in the first word
of the line and reads vik&pt’ ijpe<p€ Sa-
(tkIols. We have already met the imper-
fect and present tenses used of the victor,
viKq. he is the conqueror, evUa he was the
conqueror, so that viKCjvra (impft. part.)
would be quite in Pindar’s manner here;
further it was liable to be interpreted in
the margin by an aorist participle, if not
‘emended’. It might be observed in
support of daaiclois that it occurs as an
epithet of oprj in Euripides, Bacchae, 218;
and that, had d<r/cfots been the word of
Pindar, it was hardly likely to become
dacnclois. But what decides me in favour
of Hermann’s restoration is the circum-
stance that Pindar alludes throughout to
verbal connexions between the Earth and
the places where the Bassidae, her true
children, win their laurels or parsley, and
the MSS. reading &*-<ndois presents us
with an allusion to Ad, Arjd>, ATjfjLijTTjp.
The choice of the word uyvyloLS in the
next line (see Introduction) emphasises
the point by taking us back to the days
of ancient Earth worship. Bergk reads
<byvyloi’, and proposes wXvyiois (dark).
44. irXcmtai k. r.X.] Broad on all
sides are the approaches for tellers of tales
to adorn this island clad with glory.
Compare Isthm. III. 19 &m p.01 deuv
Zkclti /xvpLa 7ravrq KiXevdos. Here he
says, the ways are broad; in a similar
sense in 1st A. II. 33 he writes, the way is
not steep (oudi icpoodvrys). Dissen com-
pares a line of Bacchylides, d Si \lyei rts
aXXws, 7rXareta kIXcvBos.
Observe that the lines in strophe and
ant. y in praise of the Aeacidae areNEMEAN VI
in
paaov ev/ckia rdvSe Koapelv* inrel <r<f>iv AlclklScu	45
enropov ego^ov cucrav apera9 anroheucvvpevoi peyakas.
nreraTcu S’ inri re 'x/Bovcl /cal 81a dakaacras
rrjkodev ovvp avroov' koX i$ KiOlonras
Mkpvovos qvk dnrovocnrjaavTos enrakro' ftapv Se <r<f>iv
vel/co9 ’A^\€t)9 <j>ap€ j^apd^e /caftas acf? apparcov,	5°
1. 46 aperas pe-
7<£Xas.
1. 45 etf/cX^a.
1. 45 Alaidbai.
1. 46 (fftpiv) ZlTO-
pov Zgoxop at-
<rap.
1. 52 iraXaio-
repoi.
parallel in thought and phrase to strophe
and ant. {3 in praise of the Bassidae
1. 29 aoLdai Kal Xo- 1. 44 Xoyloicnp.
yoi.
'll. 29, 30 tcl /caX&
,.Apya...ad ov
(nravlfa.
L 28 ethcXea.
1. 30 Ba<rcrlbai<rip.
1. 32 7rap^x^LP 7T0-
Xi)p iippop (Ilie-
pidojp aporais).
1. 30 ira\al <f>aT05
yeved.
45. circC o*<t>iv /c.r.X.] For to them {the
bards, \6ytoi) the Aeacidae brought a pre-
eminent auspice by giving proof of great
excellences ; yea, it flies afar, their name,
over land and across the sea, and it winged
its way to the bourne of the Ethiopians
when Memnon returned not. The aftra
of the Aeacidae is the eagle, as we have
seen in the Fifth Ode; and their eagle-
name flies over land and sea. This con-
sideration establishes opvpl in 1. 48,
against Bergk’s reading /cX^os, for which
he seeks to find support in a scholium.
For the expression cf. Agamemnon 581,
inrtp daXaoarjs Kal x^opbs iroTwpdpoLS. For
the death of Memnon see Nem. ill. 63.
49.	giraXTo] So Schol. tovt4<ttip ^iraX-
Orj, bp\i]d7] for mss. iirdXro (aorist of
c(pdXXopai). Two considerations decide
in favour of ZiraXTo, aorist of iraXXu)
(^iraXro : 7raXXw :: aXro (£-aXro) : aXXo-
pai): (1) the M in eiraXro has no force.
(2) irdXXopai is the word used by Pindar
for the rush of the eagle; Nem. v. 21 Kal
iripap ttoptolo ttclWopt* alerol.
50.	v€iko$ /f.r.X.] This line, as it
stands in the mss., will neither give sense
nor scan:
pcikos tpired ’A%tXeiV x^dl Kappas
a0’ apparuip
(variants:	bred, ’AxtXXetfs, Ka(3(3as).
Countless emendations have been pro-
posed, but not one of them is quite
satisfactory. We have two clues, the
metre and a scholium. (1) The metre
required is
(2) The scholium is: (3apeiap dt Kal iira-
X0y P&xyv && (piXopcLKlap avrois eictbugep
(lege airlbeigep, Bergk). The metre sug-
gests that the verse began with pcikos
’AxtXetfs, that a verb of trochaic quantity
fell out after ’AxtXetfs, and that epired
was foisted in from the margin in the
wrong place. The scholium indicates
that the lost verb meant shewed; conse-
quently Dissen and Bergk read pcikos
’AxiXcvs beige. But Mr Fennell (with
whose view of the passage I do not
otherwise agree) appositely remarks that
the scholiast’s intbeige is a reason for
avoiding beige. Here as elsewhere the
art of Pindar himself enables us to correct
errors in his text. <f>ape is the word
required here, and 4>ape is rendered al-
most certain by pvp irb^apr1 in the cor-
responding line of the second antistrophos
(1. 13). Pindar thereby suggests a com-
parison between Alcimidas and Achilles.
As to the last words Dissen and most
editors adopt xaAca^ Kara)Say. But as it
is in the highest degree improbable that
Karapds should have been altered to
Kapfias, I have no hesitation in adopting112
NEMEONIKAI s'.
(ftaevva? vlov evr ivapigev ’Aoo? a/ca	clvt. y .
ey^eo? (Jatcoroio. /cal tclvtclv fiev iraXatorepoL
ohov dfia^irov evpov* eirofiai Be /cal avros e^wv pueXerav*
to Be 7ra/9 7roSt z>ao5 eKiaaofievov alel
kvfiarcov \eyerai iravrl fiaXiara Bovelv	55
Ovfiov. e/covn S’ e^ycu z/cotg) fiedeircov BiBvfiov ayOos
ayyekos e(3av irkfiirTOV inr ec/cocri tovto yapvcov
evxo$ aycovcov airo, roi)? ivenroKTiv tepovs,	eir. y'.
’AA/cifiiBa to y eirdp/ceaev
the reading of Hermann and Schneidewin
Xa/xaffc Kafias. Kciwerov in 01. VIII. 38,
is an exact parallel to Kafias.
51.	aic$ fyxeos ta-Koroio] With the
point of his wrathful spear. Compare
Horace, Carm. 1. 3, 36 iracunda ponere
fulmina. The mss. have cu’XM*?? which
does not suit the metre. Editors follow
Schmid in reading aKpq., but it does not
seem likely that a usual word like aK/xq.
should have been thus corrupted. I hold
that aixw was a gloss on the rare aic$,
which I restore also in Nem. x. 60.
52.	Kal Tavrav k.t.X.] And this high-
way the ancients discovered ; and I follow
them, with a burden of my own. oSos
dpaijiros is one of the ‘broad approaches*
of 1. 45; and consists in praising the
Aeacidae by narrating the deeds of
Achilles at Troy {ravrav). waXaiorepoi
means, not more ancient but, ancient as
opposed to its correlative vetirepoi. The
ancients sang of the Aeacidae; I, a
modern, sing of the Bassidae, who are
also an ancient race (1. 32). |i*X£rav is
the cura carminis or theme. Dissen’s non
sine studio, suggesting subjective care or
zeal, is hardly to the point; rather ipse
quoque habens quod mediter. Compare
the use of piX(o in Homer: ’Apyw iraoi
p.fXov<ra p jo, avQpArrouri pdXu), t 20.
54. to irdp nrohl k.t.X.] But the
wave which at each moment rolls close to
the rudder of the vessel, according to the
saw, most deeply shakes the spirit. A
proverbial sea-metaphor is introduced
but without disturbing the metaphor
of the highway, which is continued in
1. 57. Dissen and others take ttovs
here to mean keel; its regular nautical
meaning sheet being inappropriate. In
the scholia it is explained as rudder:
irobs pkv ve&s rb in)bdXiov, and this ex-
planation, I believe, is correct. This
passage and Odyssey k 32 {aid yap rroda
vybs evdbjuuov ovte rip &XX(p	erdptav)
taken together entitle us to conclude that
irorjs had the meaning helm as well as
sheet. For the sense of the lines cf.
Nemean iv. 91, 92.
56. Ikovti x.T.X.] But with willing
back, undertaking a double load, I went
as a messenger, proclaiming this twenty-
fifth glory won in the games, yclept
‘ sacred ’,—even this ivhich Alcimidas
secured for his glorious race.
The double burden is the praises of
the Bassids and of the Aeacids (see Intro-
duction, p. 101). Were it not for his
special intention of connecting the Bassids
with Earth, Pindar could not have used
language suggesting that his song was a
load, axOos, which always implies op-
pression. (Cf. for example, Agamemnon,
176 ei to fiarav airb (ppovrldos &x@os XPV
fiaXeiv irTjrv/buos.) As it is, dx^os is
happy, suggesting axOos apovpas and the
heavy quality of earth.
59. ’AXtupCSa] This Aeolic form of
the nominative has been restored byNEMEAN VI.
tcXetra yevea' $vo p,ev JZpoviov Trap repbevei,
irai, <re t evo<J$i<Te /cal TIoXvripLiSav
fcXapo9 TrpoTrerr)<; avde ’OXvpbirbaho9.
S€\<f>cvi fcev	aXfia9
tVoz/ (nroipbi MeArjciav,
'Xeipwv T€ /cal Ict^vo? avio^ov.
113
60
Bergk for ’AXtafitdas. eirdpK€<r€ (only
here in Pindar) is explained by tpootdrjKe
in the scholia.
61. 8vo fUv x.r.X.] A precipitate lot
(that is, drawn too soon) withheld from
thee, boy, and from Polytimidas two
Olympian crowns, hard by the temple of
the son of Cronus. The combatants in
wrestling matches were paired by draw-
ing lots. When the number of com-
petitors was odd, one drew ‘a by’ and
was called tyedpos. In the case of
Alcimidas and Polytimidas it would seem
that really inferior boys had the luck to
draw byes, and because they were fresh
defeated their superior opponents who
were wearied by the labours of previous
contests. My rendering of xpoxcnjs im-
plies that the drawer of the last lot had
the advantage of being the £0e5pos. If
it were proved that the first lot was the
‘by’, we should have to interpret irpo-
7rerfy in the more general sense of ran-
dom.—vo<r<plfa, to rob of is used with
two accusatives (cp. Soph. Philoctetes,
684) as well as with acc. and gen. ’0
Triados (vheas) of an Olympian victory.
65
A scholiast gives a curious explanation
of K\apo$—7] Trpoei-avdrjjLS tlov Tpvyfiv.
aweicpidiiffav yhp Ss ov waiducrjv 2xovT€S
7)\ikLclv 8ui ro irporjvdrjKtvai t&s r/)lxas*
7rpb Spas yovv rb avdos atWots rrjs rj(3r)s,
0?]<tL, (TvveKXrjpSdrj * oStos yap K\ijpos
avdovs.
64.	8€\<f>iv£ kcv k.t.X.] To a dolphin
darting through the salt sea would I liken
for swiftness Melesias, charioteer of hands
and strength. Compare Simonides, fr.
149 (206) TraXauTpLoabvTjs 8ei-ibv ijvloxov.
See further Appendix A, note 7.
65.	t<rov <nroip.i] This is my own
correction of the reading of the mss. taov
etToipu, which does not suit the metre.
In his 4th edition Bergk reads ehcdfaifu
dubitanter, and suggests i£l(TKoipu or avr-
ivKOLfu in the note. But these conjec-
tures cannot be entertained as there is no
apparent reason for their corruption.
cttoimi was doomed to be read erroiMi
which was of course interpreted diroipi.
oiroi/u is aor. optative corresponding to
£<TTT€T€ (B 484, &C.) as (eWL^ffTToLpriV
corresponds to toireode. The present is
preserved in ev-viiru) {iv-alirw).
B.
8NEMEAN VII.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY AT NEMEA IN THE
BOYS5 PENTATHLON WON BY SOGENES, OF AEGINA,
SON OF THEARION.
INTRODUCTION.
The victory of Sogenes of Aegina in the boys’ pentathlon at Nemea, in
the year 461 B.C., was a consolation, late and all the more welcome, to his
father Thearion, a man who had been himself disappointed of winning the
fame which he desired. It appears that Sogenes was the son of his old age,
born after a long childlessness—perhaps elder sons had died— and called by
the significant name ‘ Saviour of the family,5 as a sacred vessel containing
the future of the race. An old man, dejected by a life of disappointments
and perhaps weakened by ill health, Thearion must have been cheered and
elated by the news of his son’s victory, rendered unusually conspicuous by
the accidental circumstance that Sogenes was the first Aeginetan who won
in the pentathlon at Nemea1.
Pindar, a friend of Thearion, was employed to celebrate the occasion,
and wrought, in a more than ordinarily elaborate hymn, all that song can
work of consolation, for a man whose past life was somewhat heavy to
remember, and whose future was not his own. In fact this Seventh Nemean
Ode is for Thearion a song of consolation, immortalising the new hope of
an old man, who makes, as it were, a fresh start in life through the success
of his son.
And this Ode had a special personal interest for the poet himself. Some
words in a paean2, which he had recently composed for performance at
Delphi, had wounded the susceptibilities of the Aeginetans, sensitive regarding
the honour of their national heroes. Having occasion to mention Neopto-
lemus, whose death at Delphi was enveloped in some mystery, he had
spoken of him as ‘ slain in strife with servants of the temple, in a matter
1 Schol. 7rpcdTos 6 ^loyfrrjs AiyivqrQv
ivLK7}(T€ 7rats cov TrevradXip Kara rrjv vd'
Nevada*	5£ 6 7revradXos 7rpQros
Kara tt)v iy' JSe/jLedda. vd' is Hermann’s
emendation for id', but there is no reason
for changing ty'. As Bergk says, quin-
quertii certamen viulto ante [before the
53rd Nemead] institution esse constat
siquidem Eurybates A rgivus Nemeae quin-
quertio victor ante proelium Marathonium
a Sophane Atheniensi occisus est, vid.
Pausan. I. 29, 4; Herod. VI. 92, et
IX. 75.
2 See note on line 64.INTROD UCTION
115
concerning due honours.* The mere words seem innocent enough, but
there were tales in circulation touching the hero’s mysterious death, not
quite flattering to him, one legend especially charging him with the intention
of sacrilege, and the susceptible countrymen of the Aeacids perhaps dis-
covered in the paean a suggestion of this enormity. At least they accused
Pindar in strong language of having traduced the fame of Neoptolemus1,
and the opportunity of injuring a rival was doubtless seized eagerly by other
poets2 who were his competitors for the favours of rich Aeginetan families.
We may suppose that a cloud overcast for a while Pindar’s reputation at
Aegina, where he had extensive connexions; that victors shewed their
dissatisfaction by not employing him to celebrate their achievements ; and
that Thearion was the first who ventured to ask him for an Ode, at some
personal sacrifice too, for his fortune was only moderate3, and the price of
immortality from the greatest lyric poet of Greece was perhaps a serious tax
on his purse. Pindar embraced the opportunity to right himself in the eyes
of his Aeginetan critics, explaining that he meant no wrong to the fame of
their hero; and he has dexterously interwoven this motive with the main
theme of the poem, making Neoptolemus a mythical prototype of Sogenes.
This Ode has won the reputation of being encompassed with insoluble
difficulties, but it carries its own explanation with it and yields readily to a
really close study. All that has been said here4, can be deduced directly
1	eX/c&rcu Zireai, 1. 103 (an expression
as strong as our mauled).
2	Especially, I believe, Bacchylides.
See note on 1. 102 sqq.
3	1. 58, €oik6tcl Kaipbv o\(3ov. That the
expenses involved in paying the poet
and the chorus were no mere trifle to
Thearion will appear in the course of
the analysis.
4	Hermann rejects the notion that
Pindar is apologising for a paean, and
finds the whole idea of the Ode in a
consolation to Thearion. L. Schmidt
combines, as I have done, both ideas.
Dissen, accepting the story about the
paean, assumes that the house of Thearion
was unpopular at Aegina and that Pindar
by the myths of Ajax and Neoptolemus,
who were illtreated by contemporaries,
bids Thearion be of good cheer. Momm-
sen, as usual, tries to find political ten-
dencies in the Ode and supposes that
Odysseus and Ajax signify Athens and
Aegina; but this theoiy was easily dis-
posed of by Rauchenstein, Philologus,
xm. 421.
Mezger divides the Ode thus:
apxa 1—16; KararpoTra 17—24; op-
<pa\os 24—74; pLeTCLKaraTpOTra 75—79;
<T<f>payls 80—101; e^odiov 102—105.
Both apxa and <j<ppayls deal with the
divine blessing which has been vouch-
safed to^ the house of Thearion, (1)
through Ilithyia, (2) through Heracles
(cf. a\/cd, responding in v. 12 and v. 96).
Both kclt. and per. deal with song, the
former emphasizing its necessity, the
latter representing the Muse weaving a
crown. The 6p<f>d\6s consists of two
parts, the first mythical, the second con-
cerned with the present.
He finds the leading idea of the song
expressed in w. 7—10: (1) the Aeacids
favour the Aeginetans in their agonistic
ambitions and enterprises, and (2) there-
fore Sogenes, sealed for such glory from
his very birth, is now celebrated in the
island which is distinguished for its love
of song. These two elements of the
Grundgedanke are worked out in the two
parts of the 6p(f>a\os; so that in the
mythical narration Neoptolemus’ function
8—2ii 6
NEMEAN VII.
from Pindars words; for, even if a scholiast had not preserved in a note the
verse of the obnoxious paean, we should have known from the last lines of
the Ode that Pindar had offended Aegina by some unguarded word con-
cerning Neoptolemus.
An invocation of Ilithyia, the goddess who presides over the births of
children, alleviating the mother’s labour, and extends a beneficent influence
over the troublesome years of infancy, was chosen by Pindar as an appro-
priate introduction. For as all the hopes of Thearion were concentrated in
Sogenes, he owed a peculiar debt to Ilithyia for having preserved the boy,
to be a strong youth, through the dangers that surround children before and
after birth. She is daughter of Hera, who presides over marriage, and
beside her at the bed of travail stand the Fates who know the future ; these
associations are mentioned in the invocation. She watches over the being,
whom she ushers into the world, during all his days and nights —friendly
nights, for the Greeks propitiated the dangers and darkness of Night by
calling her ‘ the friendly season ’—until she hands him over to the guardian-
ship of her sister Hebe, to describe whose gleaming limbs, strong for all
active masteries, Pindar compounds a new adjective, ayAaoyiuo?, which
suggests a work of plastic art.
But the lots of men vary ; Thearion, we can read between the lines, was
not like Sogenes; and Sogenes, as a glorious conqueror in the pentathlon,
must thank the indispensable favour of Ilithyia.
After these verses of thanksgiving—naturally occurring to a really religious
mind looking back at a childhood which was now drawing to a close under
happy auspices—the poet passes to the victor’s country. Sogenes is a
victor, and is now being celebrated in a song. Both circumstances are
natural, for he dwells in a city, where there is a lively spirit of ambition for
success in the national games of Greece, nourished as it were by the
Aeacid heroes themselves; and the same city ‘ loveth dance and song.’
But we are sped quickly over this praise of Aegina,—with a Pindaric
rapidity, one might say—to a main thought of the poem, the power of song
to illumine. Great exploits are buried in darkness, unless they are rescued
by a poet, who reflects them into some perpetuating mirror, the streams of
the Muses for example, or the shining surface of the headband or fillet worn
by Memory, their mother. But while the flowing waters of the Muses (a
feature in Pindar’s poetical world) are a reflecting surface, the liquid
substance, inviting as it were actual contact, suggests a second metaphor;
as umpire is the most important moment,
and in the second division Thearion’s
intelligence, revealed in a recognition of
the value of song, assumes the prominent
place.
The expositions of Dissen, Schmidt,
and Mezger are all instructive, but they
are very far from completely explaining
the Ode, as any one who reads it carefully
may see for himself.
The three divisions which I indicated
in the general Introduction nearly corre-
spond to the main divisions of Mezger.
(i) System i. (2) Systems 2—4.	(3)
System 5 (beginning at 1. 80).INTRO D UCTION
II7
and a successful combatant is said to ‘cast a honeyed argument’ into
the streams of song. The thoughts and language of these lines are echoed
again in the progress of the poem ; the darkness, the streams of the
Muses, the honey (with a savour of wine or sleep), the gleam of Memory’s
fillet, recur, as we shall see1.
A certain abruptness in Pindar sometimes gives us the impression that
he has passed to a new subject, without having smoothed the way for the
transition ; whereas a closer examination shews that the new thought is
really confederate with those which have gone before. And so, here, having
declared that song is as a light shining in darkness, he proceeds to say, in
the epode, that wise men consider the wind which is to blow three days
hence, and will not damage their true interests by any shortsighted calcu-
lations of mere lucre. They are really wise; for rich and poor must alike
stand in the presence of Death. At first hearing, these words sound like a
riddle ; are they connected or not, one asks, with the things said about the
power of poetry ? The next sentence helps us to solve the difficulty. ‘ I
trow,’ Pindar proceeds, ‘ that through the sweet speech of Homer the report
of Odysseus’ experiences has exceeded the reality.’ This shows that he is
still dwelling on the potency of poetry; and it becomes clear that the wise
men are they who are content to sacrifice an ample sum of gold for the
sake of future fame—the wind that cometh on the third day. And the
remark is specially intended for Thearion; he is one of those wise men; and
the poet indicates this by a favourite artifice2.
But the mention of Homer and Odysseus leads to a new subject.
Homer is not Pindar’s ideal poet; in fact Homer affords an example of the
power of ‘ sweet verses ’ misused. Pindar was a countryman of Hesiod and
he did not forget the mythical contest between Hesiod and Homer; he
conceived the poet of the Odyssey as a sort of ‘ sophist,’ one who deceives
his readers by cunning words, the friend of the crafty Odysseus. And so
here, with a clever play on words, he introduces the story of the death of
Ajax, to whom, in consequence of the wiles of Odysseus, the Greeks had not
adjudged the golden arms of Achilles. Ajax is the type of the brave, but
ineffectual hero. If the masses, who made the award, had been keen enough
to see that Ajax was the true eagle (Atas akros), that hero would not have
slain himself. Homer himself was blind (Pindar hints), and a mass of men
is blind also3.
1 (tkotov (1. 13) and poaiai (1. 12) recur
together in gkotcivov (1. 61) and pods
(1. 62).
pLe\l<f>pova (1. 11) is echoed in /xe\i (1. 53,
corresponding line of antistrophos).
To XnrapdpLirvKos (1. 15) answers \nrap(p
(1.99, corresponding line of antistrophos).
To d\Kal (1. 13) answers dX/rap (1. 96,
same foot in same antistrophic line).
2	£p.a0ov otib' virb idpdei \dfiev (1. 17)
is the second line of the first epode. In
the second line of the third epode, speak-
ing of Thearion, Pindar writes
(rdveaLV q$k aTrofiXairrei <f>pevG)v.
This responsion serves to indicate that
Thearion is specially alluded to in 1. 17.
3	See note on 1. 24.118
NEMEAN VII
It is clear that the story of Ajax is introduced with special application to
Thearion, whose life had been 4 brave’ but ineffectual, and who, as some
lines indicate, was sensitive to calumny and disparagement. Ajax is said to
have been the bravest, after Achilles, of those who came to Troy to recover
Helen. Troy, where so many heroes of Greek legend won their laurels, is
a figure or type of the games of historical Greece; and the circumstance
that Ajax, albeit valiant, never returned to his home with booty and prizes is
an indirect consolation to Thearion for having contended in games without
success. It seems, moreover, to be suggested by the use of a somewhat rare
adjective that the death of Ajax was easy; a smooth sword (Xcvpov £i<pos)
pierced his heart.
The ineffectuality of Ajax, the prototype of Thearion, is contrasted with
the success of Neoptolemus, who serves as a parallel to Sogenes. The
transition from the first myth to the second is managed by another reference
to the equalising power of Death. It was said above that Death takes not
account of wealth ; now it is said that Hades regards not renown. Yet
there is a distinction even in death. Those favoured heroes, who visit
Apollo’s temple at Delphi, the centre of the earth, as guests of the god
himself, may be said to have won true and abiding honour. For at Delphi
there was celebrated a feast called the 4 Entertainment of Heroes,’ at which
Apollo was supposed to entertain those who in their life-time had made a
pilgrimage to his Delphic shrine. This feast was honoured with games
as well as sacrifices, and the Aeacid hero Neoptolemus had received the
privilege of acting as an ideal president of the gymnastic contests.
For the body of Neoptolemus lies in holy ground—in an immemorial
grove—hard by the temple; he is the representative of the Aeacids at
Delphi. He sacked the city of Priam, winning spoils and glory; but as he
sailed homeward, winds drove him from his course, and instead of reaching
Scyros, he found himself in Epirus. There he became king of Molossia
and was succeeded by a line of Neoptolemids. But his own reign was
shortened by an accident. He visited Delphi, to make a rich offering of
his Trojan booty to Apollo; and in a brawl touching sacrificial meats he
was killed—by a priest of the temple, according to the legend, but Pindar
is careful here to call the homicide 4 a man ’ merely, in order to avoid the
least appearance of charging the hero with sacrilege. And emphasizing the
innocence of Neoptolemus, he adds, 4 The hospitable Delphians were made
heavy at heart exceedingly.’ But the unlucky stroke proved happy in the
event, for Neoptolemus received the high honour of burial in the precincts of
the temple and of becoming the president of the games at the Feast of Xenia.
This myth serves the purpose of explaining to the Aeginetans Pindar’s
true view of the life and acts of Neoptolemus, whose memory he was said
to have treated with scant courtesy; but, for the comprehension of the
whole hymn, this is an aspect of only secondary import. Our chief concern
is to determine the drift of the myth, in relation to the rest of the Ode. Two
things are clear: Sogenes is compared to Neoptolemus, and Neoptolemus is
contrasted with Ajax. Ajax was ineffectual and did not come back fromINTRO D UCTION.
119
Troy; Neoptolemus sacked Troy and returned with the prizes of victory.
In the same way Thearion had failed, Sogenes had won. It would be
inconvenient to anticipate, but we shall shortly see that the parallel between
Sogenes and Neoptolemus is carried out in detail, so that even the
sovranty in Molossia is not insignificant.
At the beginning of the third strophe, after the mention of Neoptolemus’
death, we hear the sound of a new note—friendship which is sanctified
by hospitality:
ftapvvdev 8e 7T€picrcra Ae\(j)oi £ e payerai,
and this note of hospitality resounds again and again from this point to the
end. Neoptolemus is a president at the Xenia; and though Pindar does
not use the word, he renders the idea even more prominent by an allusive
phrase, evd>pvpop is 8Uap, meaning that the hero’s office is to preserve that
justice whose name is lovely, the right of hospitality (8Uav t-eviav). We
shall soon learn how this idea bears on Sogenes and his father.
We are now reaching the middle of the Ode where Pindar has chosen to
end his mythical narrations. In the land of Greek legend the stories of the
Aeginetan cycle form a great high-road, tempting for a poet to pursue;
but that Greek moderation, which so carefully defined the proportions of all
artistic work, reminds him that the sweetness of honey may cloy, and the
delectable flowers of Aphrodite ‘the Foam-born’ queen, may pall through
intemperate use. The recurrence of the metaphor from honey suggests
that the deeds of Neoptolemus, like the exploit of Sogenes, are a ‘sweet
argument’ for the Muses, and helps to indicate the intended parallel.
But Pindar in this passage implies, I believe, a ‘darker purpose.’ He
cries to Aegina, that he is emboldened to proclaim for the brilliant deeds of
her heroes a high-road of praise, starting from their home (oiKoSep) ; and the
form of expression suggests that the adventures of Neoptolemus are not
conceived as occurring on the high-road, Kvpia 686s- This conjecture is
confirmed by the line which describes Neoptolemus’ return from Troy (1. 37),
anoTrkioav
Sicvpov pep apaprep, lkopto 8* els *E<j)vpap nXayepres1.
He missed Scyrus strongly suggests deviation from a odos otevpatTa2
oLKabe. Now the stress laid on the circumstance that Neoptolemus did
not return home, has probably a reference to the victor. In a subsequent
verse (91) Pindar gives Sogenes an indirect admonition to be an obedient
boy and honour his father. It would seem that Sogenes had been some-
what intractable3, infected with the ‘taints of liberty’; and perhaps, after
1	For the reading wXayipTes, see note.
2	(rKvpojTa 080s (paved road) = Kvpia o56s
(high-road); cf. Pyth. v. 93 imroKporov
<TKvpwTb.v 68op.
3	Such a conjecture had been thrown
out by Mr Arthur Holmes, who observes
that 11. 90 sqq. “lead us to infer that the
previous relations of Sogenes to Thearion
had not been of a duly filial character;
probably the young man had left his
father’s home and been living on terms
of some estrangement.” For further con-
firmation see below , p. 123.120
NEMEAN VII;
his victory at Nemea, he had not returned immediately, like a dutiful son,
to his home at Aegina. One might imagine that he paid a visit to Corinth,
that city of pleasure, so attractive and dangerous for young men, so dreaded
by solicitous parents lest it should prove the 4 blastment ’ of youth. And if
this were the case, it would be quite in Pindar’s way thus quaintly to 4 breathe
his faults ’ and to press home the allusion by that ambiguous name Ephyra,
which, meaning in regard to Neoptolemus a town in Epirus, might suggest
Corinth, called in Homer Ephyra, to the guilty conscience of4 the wild boy.’
The word 4 honey,’ which has already taken us back to the early stanzas
of the Ode, prepares us for further echoes of the thoughts there expressed.
In the invocation to Ilithyia it was said that men’s endowments and
destinies differ. And the myths have illustrated this remark in the different
careers of Ajax and Neoptolemus. It is therefore fitting and really artistic
to remind us of this truth again, before we hear of the non-legendary careers
of Thearion and Sogenes in the second part of the poem. But Pindar does
not merely ‘repeat himself’; he adds something new. 4 In his nature and
in his life each man differs from another; but no man can win happiness
entire; or at least, though a few may have gained it for an hour, Fate has
bestowed it on none as a lasting gift.’ A few may have gained happiness,
unchequered and complete, for an hour ; Pindar is thinking of Cadmus and
Peleus, who married goddesses and beheld the celestials at their weddings.
But only for an hour; Cadmus and Peleus saw sorrow and heaviness before
they died. This is meant as a consolation for Thearion, whose life has not
been happy, and Pindar turns to address him.
Fate, he says, has endowed Thearion with three things—in moderate,
not abundant, measure; a sufficient fortune, an ambitious spirit, and in-
telligence. Like Ajax he was brave and yearned for distinction ; and like
Ajax (we read between the lines) he failed to win the golden armour.
Unlike Ajax however, he is possessed of intelligence; he is one of those
wise men (as we have already seen) who consider the wind that cometh on
the third day.
But besides these gifts of Fate, which could hardly be thought to have
distinguished Thearion above his fellows, but were merely, as we say now,
4 respectable,’ he possessed a quality which gave him a real claim to a
poet’s praise,—hospitality. Pindar, his guest-friend, had experienced his
kindness at Aegina, and solemnly sings, ^ Vivos equ, striking again the note
which he had sounded before in regard to the relations of Neoptolemus
to the Delphian priesthood. But the note is repeated still more distinctly in
the next line but one ; Thearion’s renown for hospitality is not only true of
him, but is what we should expect of him; he is merely true to his own
family name ; he is Thearion, the Euxenid, that is, ‘the Hospitable.’
And here again Pindar suggests a comparison with Ajax. The fate of
Ajax was due to the circumstance that the blind crowd did not recognize ‘the
literal truth’ (erav akaBeiav) that he was the eagle. Let Thearion, unlike
Ajax, be superior to cavil, and instead of repining that he was not successful
on the plain of ‘Troy,’ let him pride himself on a noble quality whichINTRODUCTION
121
‘literally belongs’ to him (enjrvfiov kK4os). We heard how the stream of
the Muses, somewhat as a mirror, rescued doughty deeds from obscurity;
we have seen how Ajax had no friendly Homer to reflect his fame; and now
Pindar, resuming the metaphor, declares that he will rescue Thearion from
‘ dark blame ’—the oblivion whereto cavil might consign him—by ‘ streams
of water.’ ‘ This ’ he adds, ‘ is a meed meet for good men’—for good men,
even though they be not great.
And now, with an apparent abruptness, we are taken at the beginning
of the fourth strophe to the western coast of Greece,—Epirus. Pindar was
a proxenos of the Epirots, whom he describes as Achaeans dwelling on the
Ionian sea, and he declares, that, by virtue of this relation, he will receive
no blame from them, though they, more than all men in Greece, might be
expected to be jealous for the honour of Neoptolemus. But what, we ask, is
the meaning of this allusive reversion to the subject of Neoptolemus, intro-
duced here, along with some declarations of proud self-assertion1, between
an address to Thearion and an address to Sogenes? The words npo^evia
iriuoida—this recurring note of ‘hospitality’—supply us with the key2. ‘ I
am the gclvos of the Euxenidai,’ Pindar has already said to Thearion; and
now he would convey to Sogenes, ‘ I am the friend of the Epirots, and they
will not misapprehend my words touching Neoptolemus; even so, I am the
friend of the Euxenids, and therefore, O Euxenid Sogenes (1. 70, compare
1. 91), do not misapprehend my indirect strictures on certain escapades, of
which you know.’ By this means Pindar, in passing from the father to
son, indicates the parallel which he has instituted between Neoptolemus
and the victor; and at the same time implies that he does not consider
Neoptolemus quite immaculate.
An incident in the pentathlon suggested a metaphor to Pindar for clothing
his explanation to Sogenes3. It happened that one of Sogenes’ competitors,
who expected to win in the spear-throwing and was formidable in wrestling,
1	* My regard is clear and bright, o/ul/jlclti
dipicofiai \afJLTTpov.’ This is equivalent to
a declaration that he will not treat
Thearion or Sogenes, and that he did
not treat Neoptolemus, as blind Homer
treated Ajax.
He goes on to disclaim excess or
violence, and expresses a wish that the
time to come may prove kindly, choos-
ing, with Greek moderation, the adjective
efltppw, which suggests, not the light of
day, but the kindliness of an innocuous
night. And Pindar makes a confession
here that his Odes really require study,
and are not for all who run. ‘If a man
understand me (p.aOJjv—as a wise man
will, who knoweth the wind of the third
day) he will proclaim whether my
speech be out of tune and my words
awry.’ xf/ayiov 6apovt see note on 1. 69.
These words are meant more for Sogenes
than for Thearion, as the sentence paO&v
—evviirwv is closely connected with what
follows, see note on dvepet. xpdyios,
Jhwart, oblique, may be intended to
contrast with ebdvitvoov Zetfrtipoio of 1. 29,
and suggest that, like that breeze, the
‘swift tongue’ of Pindar ‘blows straight ’.
2	The emphasis on itpo^evlq. is indi-
cated by the metrical responsion of irpo-
irpeCova geivov in a similar position in
the second line of the 5th strophe.
3	For this interpretation, I must refer
to note on 1. 70.122
NEMEAN VII.
stepped inadvertently beyond the line behind which the akontistai were
supposed to stand, and was thereby disqualified. Knowing that he had no
chance of sufficient distinction in the other events (quoit-throwing, running
and wrestling) to win in the pentathlon, he retired from the contest, and the
consequence was that Sogenes had one opponent less to conquer in wrestling.
The labour of the wrestling-contest, in the heat of the day, was severe, and
for the victor the defect of one formidable competitor was really a stroke of
luck. So Pindar makes use of this agreeable reminiscence, in deprecating
any offence which the tone of his Ode might possibly cause to the boy.
Comparing his ‘swift tongue9 to the javelin, he denies that he has advanced
his foot beyond the designated mark; and recalls how the javelin-throwing
had released Sogenes’ body, before it was bathed in sweat and broiled
in the sun, from the toils of wrestling.
But in this passage there is another thought implied, not indeed directly
expressed, but indicated unmistakably by the choice of words.
vnopvvca
fxi) repfxa npofias glkovB’ tore ^aA/coTrapaoi/ op a at
Boav y\S<r<rav os ck a* eirep^ev ncLKauTpaTeov k.tX.
We are forced to notice the collocation of Boav and optrai (not just the
word we might expect for hurling a javelin, though oplveiv is used elsewhere
of exciting the tongue), and the strange, perhaps unparalleled, use of
eKnepnciv. We can hardly avoid the conclusion that Pindar chose these
expressions with the design of recalling those west-winds which conducted
Ajax on his swift ships to Troy town :
Boals
av vaval iropevo-av evBvTrvoov Zecfrvpoio iropiraX
7TpOS ¥lAou TToklV.
By these echoes Pindar would suggest that Sogenes is contrasted with his
father Thearion as Neoptolemus is contrasted with Ajax1. Ajax was swiftly
conducted to the city of Ilus, but he never returned ; whereas Neoptolemus
sacked the city of Priam and did return. Now it would have been hardly
graceful to say in so many words that Thearion had appeared in some lists as
a competitor for glory and had returned uncrowned, whereas Sogenes had
been victorious. Accordingly the meaning is conveyed by an indirection.
Ajax went to T?'oy by virtue of swift winds; Sogenes returned from Nemea
by virtue of a swift spear. That is as much as to say ; Thearion failed, but
Sogenes succeeded.
This comparison of laurels won at Nemea to laurels won at Troy is
continued in the following line, ‘ If toil there was, greater is the delight that
ensueth,’ reminding us of the city of Priam, where the Danai toiled2.
‘ If toil there was, greater is the delight that follows. Let me be. If,
1 The contrast of Ajax and Neopto-	sacked the city; Ajax only went to it.
lemus is indicated by Upiapov ttoXlv eiret 2 el irovos 9jv 1. 74, tql koX Aavaol
7rpaOev in 1. 35, closely following on the Tcovrj<rav 1. 36.
wpos T\ou ttoXiv of 1. 31. NeoptolemusINTR OD UCTJON
123
lifted too far, I littered a loud scream, with a victor certainly I deal not
roughly in paying a gracious debt. It is a light thing to twine garlands.
Sound a loud note ! Surely the muse is welding together gold and white ivory
withal asid the delicate flower which she has filched from the foam of the sea.*
The special bearing of these lines on Sogenes is indicated by Pindar
in his own way. The delight which follows toil is an echo of the delight
bestowed by those flowers of Aphrodite, which pall on the senses through
immoderate use. The third line of the fourth antistrophos \
€L JTOVOS rjp, TO Tep7TVOV irXeOV 7T€b€pX*Ta.l
corresponds to the third line of the third antistrophos,
kcll pi\i Kcii ra repiTv avOe ’Acfrpobio-ia.
It is clear then that by the loud scream (avk<payov), for which he half
apologises, the poet means his saying about honey and the flowers of
Aphrodite ; and we are led to detect therein a reproof to Sogenes. The
mutining of the blood, so often a consequence of protracted athletic labours
‘ in the morn and liquid dew of youth,’ had seduced Sogenes into ways of
pleasure which his seniors could not approve of; and Pindar gently remon-
strates. ‘ You are entitled,’ he says, ‘ to the delight which is the meed
of labour; but the delight, which you have chosen, soon cloys. Take rather
the delight which I can give you, the fairer reward—not the flowers of the
foam-goddess1 2, but rather the foam-lily, the coral which the Muse filches
from the sea, and welds into a chryselephantine crown.’ To quote a modern
poet, ‘ the foam-flowers endure when the rose-blossoms wither.’3
The past and present fortunes of Sogenes—his childhood under the
protection of Ilithyia, and his victory—have been touched on ; and now
Pindar turns to consider his future, in the last part of the Ode. The
house of Thearion in Aegina was adjacent to two temples of Heracles, and
it is in the hands of his ‘neighbour’ Heracles that Pindar lays the prosperity
of Sogenes’ manhood. But in true Pindaric style, instead of connecting the
close of the hymn directly with the foregoing stanzas, he turns away from
Sogenes and begins an apparently new subject, the praises of Zeus. The
victories of Aeginetans were generally, perhaps always, celebrated in the
Temple of Aeacus, and it was usual for the victors to dedicate their crowns
there. Aeacus was a son of Zeus, and there was therefore an additional
reason (besides the fact that the Nemean games were held in his honour) for
celebrating the king of the gods in the Aeaceum—‘on this floor’ (banebov av
roSe)4.
1	This responsion is noticed by Mezger,
but not rightly interpreted.
2	av$e ’A(ppodiaia; the Greeks always
connected *A<f>podLrr} with a<f>pos. The
expression wTas chosen for the sake of the
contrast with \elpiov avdep.ov (see note,
1. 79) which the Muse is described as
7rovrlas ixpeXoicr’ eiptras. \eipiov suggests
perhaps the colour as well as the delicate
texture of white coral—a true foam-lily.
3	Roses were the flowers of Aphrodite.
The line is from Swinburne’s ‘A For-
saken Garden.’
4	Sarredov echoes Iluffioun SaTrldois of
1. 34, and connects Neoptolemus with
Aeacus.124
NEMEAN VII.
The introduction of Aeacus has a fitness and necessity of its own ; but it
is also a means for introducing Heracles, his brother and guest-friend.
Now the Euxenidae are citizens of the state whereof Aeacus was prince,
and therefore they may claim the friendship of Heracles—with more
particular reason too by virtue of their name, Ev&vibat.
era fiev 7ro\iapxpv cvtopvpco narpa,
'HpdffXee?, aio Se irpoTrpe&va pep t-clvov afcXfaop r.
That the ‘clan of fair name5 means the Euxenidai is clear from three
indications1. In the first place noXiapxop responds to itoXip in the corre-
sponding line of the first antistrophos, where the Aeacids are referred to :
7to\ip yap (frCkopoXiTop olicei dopLKTvncdp
Alaiadap.
‘Sogenes dwells in the city of the Aeacids,5 and Aeacus is the ‘city-
prince5 of Sogenes5 clan—these statements are the same fact from opposite
points of view. In the second place, the collocation cvatpvpa warpa echoes
Ev£«>iba irarpade of 1. 70. In the third place, we have already met exxopvpop
referring to the fair name geipos, in connexion with the Xenia at Delphi ;
and we may infer that here, similarly, it designates the Euxenidai. But
apart from these indications, the argument of Pindar requires this interpre-
tation ; for his object is to bring Heracles into connexion with the family
of Sogenes.
But not only by virtue of the ancient guest-friendship existing between
Aeacus and Heracles, sons of Zeus, but also by virtue of the casual
circumstance that his father’s house in Aegina adjoins two Ileraclea (one
on each hand, like the arms of a yoke projecting on either side of a chariot-
pole), may Sogenes depend on the aid of him ‘who subdued the Giants.5
With Heracles, his neighbour, to prosper him (Pindar suggests, with indirect
admonition to the lad) Sogenes were fain to dwell in that rich street, where
his fore-fathers had dwelt, hallowed by the two shrines, ‘fostering a spirit of
tenderness5 (the Roman pietas) ‘ to his father.5 The less cogent argument
from neighbourhood, which had not the binding sanctity of the relation of
hospitality, is dignified by an echo from the old Boeotian poet, who in his
work on husbandry had occasion to refer to good and bad neighbours2.
Now throughout this stanza the parallel between Sogenes and Neopto-
lemus is sustained. As the son of Achilles was the guest-friend of ‘the
hospitable Delphians,5 and still presides at the Xenia ‘of lovely name5;
even so the son of Thearion has the advantage of an ancient tie of
hospitality with Heracles, less likely to fade away owing to the fact that
he is one of the Euxenids, a clan ‘of lovely name.5 And as Neoptolemus is
buried close to the house of the Pythian god, Sogenes5 dwelling is hard by
the shrines of Heracles in ‘ a hallowed street.5 And the street is described
as rich—enriched doubtless by the Euxenids, even as Delphi received in
the treasure-house of Apollo rich offerings from Neoptolemus3.
1	See note on 1. 85.	3 evtcrripopa 1. 92 ; Krtav aKpodivlw
2	Line 87.	1. 41.INTRODUCTION
125
Heracles (Heracles Alexikakos\ in his capacity of helping men against
harm) is invoked to preside over the future life of Sogenes, as Ilithyia had
presided over his childhood. And thus the Ode closes with an appeal
to Heracles, rendered effective by echoes of that address to Ilithyia at the
beginning—an artistic device aided by the kindred associations and con-
nexions of the two deities. For Heracles was in name connected with
Hera, Ilithyia’s mother, and was the husband of Hebe, Ilithyia’s sister.
We remember the saying that each man is yoked to a different destiny,
and that through Ilithyia’s help Sogenes had distinguished himself from
others by excellence in athletic contests. Weil,—Heracles is now asked
to harness the youth of Sogenes and the old age of Thearion to a life
of ‘ steadfast, durable strength.’ Dwelling together in their Aeginetan house,
they are to be as it were the two trace-horses of that fanciful car, whose
pole, their house, is joined to the two temples as the arms of a yoke, the
car itself being the 0loros cimchoaOcvris, ‘ life enduringly strong.’
The wonderfully careful choice of language in this passage is charac-
teristic of Pindar :
cl yap <r<lH<riv c pncdoaBcvca ftiorov dppooais
ijfta Xnrapa re yqpa'i dianXcicciv
cvbalpov covra.
iimchoaOcvrjs, an adjective coined for his purpose, echoes two expressions
occurring in other parts of the Ode, whereof one referred to Sogenes, the
other to Thearion. The second half of the compound echoes nai ficya-
XoaBcvcos "Upas of line 2 ; while the first half recalls tcXos cpmcbov <3pc£c
of line 58. Again Hebe, the goddess of youth (iJ0a), was celebrated in the
opening invocation, while Awrap<3 is an echo of the shining fillet of Memory,
which was especially meant to console Thearion (1. 15).
But Pindar has not exhausted the resources of the myth of Neoptolemus,
and, looking still further into the future, he prays that the children’s children
of Sogenes may possess for ever the honour which the family now enjoys,
and honour fairer still; we are not to forget that Sogenes is ‘saviour of the
race.’ In this prayer the words which had been used of Neoptolemus’ pos-
terity reigning in Molossia are repeated1 2.
And it is just this echo, bringing us back involuntarily to thoughts of
him, that renders the transition to Neoptolemus, in the last four lines of
the Ode, unstrained and really artistic. Otherwise, they would be almost
offensive, as an abrupt ‘appendix.’ In these lines Pindar disclaims the
charge of having traduced Neoptolemus, and refers to the want of inventive
power shewn by his rivals, who perhaps had tried to poison Aeginetan
opinion against him ; they can never find anything newer to say in praise of
1 This function is indicated by &Xk&v,
1. 96. dX/cav responds to aXKal 1. 12 (as
Mezger noticed), and the responsion indi-
cates that Heracles and Pindar (both
%€ivoi) are to perform somewhat the same
function for Thearion and his son. The
thought is emphasized by the further
responsions of irpo^vlq. (65) and £eivov
(86); Xnrapd/uLTTVKos (15) and Xnrapip (99).
2 See note.126
NEMEAN VII
Aegina than that Aeacus was the son of Zeus1. It seems probable that
Bacchylides was the rival at whom this arrow was chiefly aimed; Pindar’s
words at least are remarkable enough to justify the conjecture that some
special allusion is intended. ‘ To repeat the same words three times or four,
like rhymeless-barkers repeating to children, “A son of Zeus Corinthus
hight,” argues lack of wit.’ iiayj/vXdKas, which I have rendered rhymeless-
barkers, was certainly coined by Pindar to convey some point, for which the
dignity of poetry demanded a decent veil. I believe that fiayjfvXaKas is a
parody on Bacchylides (BaKxvXxdrjs) to which it corresponds in scansion.
The malice of Pindar, who may have had good cause for offence, might
have resolved the name of his rival into two parts, suggesting the wild
utterances of intoxication and the barking of a dog. fidyjr was just the word
to parody the former, while -vXdicas rendered evident an imputation which
accident had laid, and Pindar had discovered, in -vXifys.
All the ‘stages’ of life, from the portals of birth, where stand Ilithyia
and the Moirai, to the bourn of Hades, are touched upon—the tenderness
of childhood, the strength and waywardness of boyhood, the gleaming limbs
of youth, the trials of manhood, old age ; but one relation of life, applying to
all seasons, may be almost said to dominate the Ode,—the friendly intercourse
of men, sanctified by Zeus Xenios. Such a relation existed between Neopto-
lemus and the Delphian Xenagetae; Neoptolemus presided at the games
of the Delphic Xenia; Pindar is the firoxenus of the Epirots ; he is the
friend (.xeinos) of Thearion ; Heracles was the xeinos of Aeacus and may
extend his friendship to the descendants of Aeacus’ subjects. This motive
is suggested by the name of Thearion’s clan the Euxenids, who might be
expected, in loyalty to their name, to develope this graceful side of life.
One might compare this elaborate Ode, a characteristic work of Greek
art, to a chryselephantine statue, in which every line of carving is calculated.
To use Pindar’s owrn figure, in the verses of white ivory and rhythms of
ringing gold, forming a true crown of Memory, are reflected, as in a mirror,
the gleaming limbs of Sogenes, the strong young wrestler (round whom,
less distinctly seen, delicate desires hover), and in the background his
home at Aegina—we can see the house adjacent to the two temples, in a
quiet street,—as a hallowed place, suggesting immemorial religious obser-
vances, performed in common with the other houses of the Euxenid clan,
at a hearth now depending on him for its future existence.
The whole life of the boy, past, present and future, is the warp of the
work (to adopt another Pindaric metaphor) whereinto is woven the history of
Neoptolemus, skilfully sketched as a parallel to Sogenes. And over the
cloth, thus wrought, are embroidered ‘foam-lilies,’ with an amorous perfume
1 That this is the real meaning of	that Zeus was the father of Aeacus, an
Pindar’s ‘last words’ on the subject of	assertion which is curiously introduced
Neoptolemus, I am convinced not only by the word Xiyovn (1. 84)—clearly an
from the words themselves, but from the allusion to the iterations of other poets,
assertion at the end of the third epode See note on 1. 105.INTRODUCTION.
127
of the foam-born goddess herself in some of them ; such as the sheen of
Memory’s fillet, the argument of honey, the luminous streams of music, the
criticism on Homer, the flowers of Aphrodite, the yoking of the father and
son as two steeds of a chariot. And Death, whose existence is recog-
nised as a significant fact of life, is hushed away in the sanctuary of
Apollo—where dead heroes still prolong a curious Greek existence—, and
Sogenes might contemplate, without shrinking, the day (not definitely
referred to, but thus happily suggested) when he himself should lie in
hallowed ground, in the precincts of the temple of Heracles, close to the
house of his fathers.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
A.
VV. I—2. <X. 0— —	— w—• — v_/ — v-/ — A | —
v. 2. b. — ^ — vy — A
VV. 4, 5. (I*. —	— • — v-» — ^	—V-*
vv. 6,7* c. — ^ w — • — w
vv. 8,9. c. vL w ^	^ -
We have thus two parts of which the first is mesodic.
i5( = 7 + 8)-3- i5(=7+8),
13(=6+7)- i3(=6 + 7)-
B.
- ^	-------I —	v-/ —	w uu w —	— —
/ / /
• ^ KJ — KJ------------------; ---- V*/ V-/ — V./ — • --------- v-/ ---- V-/	W —
(13)
(13)
J CO	— •— VJW — — • (15)
(3)
. —wuyw-wy —	^ (15)
Epode.
VV. I,	2.	a.	- — • CO u- A 1 yju w — ^ w — . —w— A A 1 1	(12)
vv. 3,	4-	a'.	— w — ^ — • CO vy — ^ — a | CD ^ — v-/ w —■ • CD ^ ^ — A	(12)
v. 5-		b.	CD^w — w — • |CD- a	(10)
The structure is epodic. Schmidt argues that as the last verses of the
strophes are acatalectic, the first syllable of the epode cannot be an ana-
crusis, and assumes a Vorpause, which enables him to constitute the
epodic symmetry.
i2( = 5 + 2 + 5) • i2(=6+6)
io(=4+2+4).
The rhythm of this ode is logaoedic. We may assume that the musical
harmony which accompanied it (as also New. vi.) was Aeolian.NEMEONIKAI 71.
SnrENEI AIFINHTHi
IIAIAl IIENTA©AOt.
’EXeldviciy 7rdpeSpe 'M.oipav fiaOvfypovwv,	arp. a .
7ral pL€ya\oa0€veo<;y clkovgov, "Hpas, yevereipa retcvtov' avev aedev
ov <f>ao<;, ov pueXaivav hpcucevres ev(j>povav
reap dSe\<f>edv i\d%op,ev dyXaoymov "Hfiav.
dvairveopbev S’ ov% airavres iiri
1.	'EXcCOma, k.t. X.] Ilithyiay as-
sociate of the deep-thinking Fates, daughter
of Hei a whose strength is vast, hearken,
0 thou who bringest children to the
birth. In Hesiod Theog. 922 Uithyia
(EIXeidvia) is counted among the daugh-
ters of Hera, the goddess who protected
marriage. In Homer, A 270, the con-
ception is plural; fioyocrroKoi elXeidvicu,
"Hpvjs dvyartpes. The worship of Hera
at Aegina is said to have been derived
from Argos, where she was held in
higher honour than in any other part
of Greece. The association of Ilithyia
with the Fates is so natural that perhaps
it hardly needs illustration, but I may cite
Olynip. VI. 42
6 XpVffOKbfJLCLS
TpavpLijrlv t ’EXeiOviav Traptaraaiv re
M olpas.
fiaOvipptav (equivalent to padvfirjTa or 0a-
OtfiouKos) occurs in Solon.
2.	|i^yaXo<r0€v4os] The force of this
adjective is that the odlvos may be com-
municated ; cf. below line 98. ycvircipa
does not occur elsewhere either in this
sense or in the sense of mother; in
Euphorion, 47, it means daughter, just
as yevtrrjs means (1) father, (2) son.
fuaa*	5
avev <r£0€V k.t.X.] That is, avev atdev
ovk iXdxofiev '"Rfiav hpaKivres <paos re /cat
filXaivav eir<pp6vav ( = <reo &cart eXdxofiev
k.t.X.). Not without thy grace saw we
light and black night and enjoyed the
presence of thy sister, bright-limbed Hebe.
The thought is that we reach the season
of Hebe by living through a series of
days and nights. Rauchenstein is cer-
tainly wrong in finding a reference to
the darkness of the womb in /xlXaivav
elxppovav. Compare below 1. 67.
4.	"Hfav] A daughter of Hera and
so Ilithyia’s sister. Her limbs are
bright and glorious; probably Pindar
had some work in marble before his
mind. Mr Fennell makes the sug-
gestion that the epithet is ‘causative
= bestowing victorious limbs \ Such an
interpretation transports us from the
realm of poetry to the realm of prose.
Hebe is not a mere abstraction.
Observe that dde\<f>edv is trisyllabic; so
ddeX<p€OL(TLvt Isth. vn. 35. The form
adeX</>os is not found in Pindar.
5.	dva/irWo|A€v k.t.X.] But we draw
not the breath of life, all as onef for the
same ends, avairvew, simply respire. M
t<ra (Triclinius’ correction for mss. e7r’NEMEAN VII
129
eipyei Bk irorptp £vykvff erepov erepa. <tvp Be tip
/cal 7rafc 6 ®€aplcovo<? apera tcpideU
eilBoljos aelBerat iZtoyiprjs puera ttsvtaeffXois.
ttoXlp yap <j)i\6pLo\7rov obcel Bopucrvircav	opt. a.
Aia/ciBap • puaXa S’ iOiXopn avfiireipop ay cop la 6vp,op dpucjoeTreip. 10
el Be rv'yrj r^9 epBoop, pueXtypop* air lap
foa) with a view to equal destinies. This
sentence illustrates the difference of
iravres and airavTCs, both of which mean
all, but while the latter emphasizes
the unity, the former accentuates the
plurality. The thought that a number
of men should have exactly the same
destinies, groups those men closely to-
gether, hence dicapres; if Pindar had
used a positive expression, he must have
said hvairveopjev warres M &repa.
6. cCpyct & k.t.X.] But each of us,
yoked to his destiny, is severed from his
fellow by a different lot.
The mss. have fvyop 6\ and most
editors follow Schmid in reading £iry€V0*,
which is a very slight change; e was
liable to confusion with O.—Each man
has his individual tot/xos, to which he is
yoked, and the things for which he is
destined are Hrepa (not t<ra) from the lots
of others. Thus individual lives are
differentiated; and etpyei expresses the
individualisation.
irvv 8^ rlv /c.r.X.] dpera in games is
the mark which differentiates Sogenes,
and his destiny is determined by the
special care and favour of the goddess
Ilithyia, whose services to him are
expressed in his name, 2(o-ylvrjs. KpiOcCs
resumes the sense of etpyei; Sogenes is
distinguished by valour, and wins a song
as glorious among pentathlon-victors.
Dissen is wrong in supposing an opposi-
tion between Trorpup and <rvv rip.—The
note of the scholiast is worth quoting:
tvioi Se <f>a<ri irpos rotipo/xa rod 2«yivovs
Trapei\KvoOcu tt)P 'ElXelOviav. elvai yap
afrrty awyevrj rivd did to ra yevd/ieva
B.
dpao&frcr. top o$p Hlpdapop \fyvxpevod/j.epop
irpos rotivo/xa ttjs EfXei0uta$ pe/xinjcrdai.
The frigidity is a matter of opinion, but
the supposition of the Zpioi touches the
truth.
9.	iroXiv yap k.t.X.] For he dwells
in the song-loving city of the spear-clash-
ing Aeacids. (piKopokirov and dopucrbwutp
(both 6bra£ elprjpdpa) give or suggest the
reasons (introduced by yap) for Sogenes
receiving a song of triumph and winning
a victory.
10.	paXa 8* 4(MXovti k.t.X.] Right
fain are they (the Aeacids) to foster a
spirit conversed in the art of the games.
The word <ri>p,ir€ipov is coined by Pindar
to combine the two kindred ideas of
ovvorra and Z/xweipop. I have ventured
to render it by coining the expression
conversed in, which suggests conversant
with (ovpoPTa), and versed in (Zpnretpop).
The subject of e0eXom is clearly Aiaddai,
not as Dissen tcoXirai (implicit in ?r6Xts).
For dv/xbp dfKpbweip compare 1. 91.
11.	cl 8c k.t.X.] A successful exploit
is an argument, sweet as honey, cast into
the streams of the Muses (lit. by a suc-
cessful exploit, one casts etc.); for mighty
deeds of prowess are wrapt in deep dark-
ness, if they remain unsung; yea, for
fair works we know one, one only mirror,
if by grace of Memory with the shining
headband, they win the meed of toils in
lines of sounding song.
The adjective ixe\i<ppwp, honey-hearted,
(not sweet to the heart, as Liddell and
Scott explain) is used in Homer of sleep
and wine. alrfav is a cause or argument
for song. The streams of the Muses are
9130
NEMEONIKAI Z'.
poaicn Moiaav eveftaXe' ral pueyaXat, yap dX/cai
akotov iroXvv lifiv&v e'XpvTL Beo/xevai'
epyois Be KaXoi9 ecroTrrpov iaapiev evl avv Tpoira,
el M.va/io<rvva<; eKari XiirapdpxrvKos	15
evprjrat anroiva pLoxdcov KXvTal9 irrecov aoiBals.
<ro<f)ol Be fJbiWovra rpiralov avepbov	iir. a.
epbadov, ovBy into KepBei fiXafiev*
d(j>ved 9 Trevi'xpo? re Qavcurov nrdpo9
conceived as already flowing; the /ie\l-
</>pwv alrla determines that the flowing
element shall be as honey. Compare
below 1. 53. For the absolute use of
tvx&v cf. 01. II. 52 to db rvxeiv irapaXbet
dv<r<f>povav.
12. dXicaf] Compare below aXk&v,
1. 96. The sentiment of these lines is
reproduced in a stanza of Horace (iv.
9» 26)
omnes illacrimabiles
urgentur ignotique longa
nocte, carent quia vate sacro.
The metaphor of the mirror begins with
ckotov. For %xeLV ckotov Dissen cites
Euripides, Incert. fr. 51 ij d* ebXapeia
ckotov tyei Kad’ 'EXXaSa.
15. Mvapocrvvas XiirapdpirvKos] The
striking adjective Xnrapapnrv^, which
Pindar seems to have coined, is chosen
on account of the metaphor. The head-
band of Memory is conceived as a bright
surface which reflects. In Pyth. 111. 89
we find xPvo’afJ''ir^KO)v Moiaav (in 01. vn.
64 this adjective is applied to Lachesis).
Xnrapd/jnrvKos is emphatic, compare below
line 99.
17. <ro<j>ol 84 k.t.X.] Wise men learn
to know the wind that is to blow on the
third day, and are not perverted at the
beck of gain. Difficulties have been dis-
covered in the words Kkpdei p\dpev,
and paXov of Triclinius (which might find
a doubtful support in Xafiev of D) led to
Donaldson’s aico Kepdei pdXov. But p\a-
pev is demonstrated to be right by airo-
pXdwTei in the corresponding verse of the
third epode (1. 60); cf. Mezger, p. 374.
Dissen and Mezger however are hardly
to be followed in their assumption of a
tmesis and a verb vTopXdnrTio. It is
quite legitimate to suppose that Pindar
might have coined such a verb if he had
wished to express some subtlety for
which ftXairTcj was inadequate; but it is
clear that in the present case the com-
pound verb would have no force. And
even if we could think some shade of
meaning into it, the interpretation would
be infelicitous; for we should thereby
lose the poetical phrase virb Kepdei, which
is more suggestive and ‘elegant’ than
Kepdei alone. Gain is the seducer, the
influence which causes the pXaphi and
biro expresses a little less than subjection,
a good deal more than accompaniment.
In fact vicb Kepdei suggests phrases such
as i<p6prj0ev v<t> "E/cro/n and wpro Kvp-a
irvoir) vtto, on the one hand, and on the
other hand bir* avXT]T7]pi tpbcO* Zklov
(Hesiod, Sc. Her. 283).
pXdpev was the reading of the
scholiast who wrote:	ovx vtttiovvtcli
irpos t6 Trapov ay ado v, and again obyl
81& r6 irapbv Kepdos, Kepdos db to tou
irXou evdiov, ifyfuudrjcav tov perb ravra
irXovv k.t. X.
19. a<f>v€6s irmxpos re k.t. X.] The
rich man and the poor man hie together
to the presence of Death. The mss. have
Oavarov irapa cafia. The reading of
Hermann Oavarov napa Oa/aa must beNEMEAN VII.
131
a/ia v&ovtcu. iyco Be yrXeov eXiroficu	20
Xoyov ’OSu(r<r€o<? rj iraOav Bia top oBveirr) yeveaB* r/0fir) pop.
itrel yjrevBeai F01 irorava payapa	trrp. fi'.
rejected because dapta (as Dr Ingram
has shewn) can only mean often, which
has no sense here; and for the same
reason Bergk’s davarov iropov <rdfia (cf.
craptva’ dapxvd, avvexus* Aaicioves, Hesy-
chius) cannot stand. Wieseler’s davarov
irepas &pa has found favour with many,
but on closer examination its specious-
ness disappears. In the first place, the
textual critic asks, why should such a
very simple and common phrase have
been corrupted in the mss.? In the
second place, we have to assume that
irepas davarov (that is, the end of life
which consists in death; would not
Pindar have written either reXos davarov
or irepas (3lov?) is used in a very rare
construction (veoptai without a prepo-
sition, H 335) with a verb of motion.
The reading which I have adopted
davarov irapos 8,pa vkovrai both satis-
fies the critical conditions of the prob-
lem and ascribes to Pindar a simple
poetical picture instead of a common-
place phrase. The preposition or adverb
irdpos is generally used of priority in
time; it is comparatively rarely employed
to express relations of space. Hence a
scribe, unfamiliar with the more ancient
usage, in deciphering an uncial ms., read
TT&poC&MA as irapa odjia (<rapa=<ri)pLa,
a tomb), regarding 0 as a mistake for A.
In the case of irepas &pu such a mis-
reading would have been unlikely because
irepas was familiar; in the case of irapos,
it was natural, because irapos, in the
sense of before (temporal), yielded no
sense. For irapos in front of with, genitive,
cf. Euripides, Phoenissae 1271 axirets
ru>v8e dtopArtov irapos, Orestes 111 <3
reicvov, tgeXd’fEpptovij, Sopuov irdpos (note,
after a verb of motion), 1216 Soptuv irapos
pjvovaa, &c. irdpos calls up a picture
of the rich man and the poor man stand-
ing together in front of Death.
Bergk’s suggestion iropov is at least
more poetical than Wieseler’s irepas;
it reminds us of Tennyson’s ‘dolorous
strait ’.
20. Iyco Be k.t.X.] I trow that the tale
of Odysseus surpassed his suffering on
account of the sweet minstrelsy of Homer.
eXiropat I imagine. The mss. have 7}
iradav which I retain; Triclinius’ irddev,
with which we should have to understand
a, is hardly possible.
22. btrel k.t.X.] For his falsehoods,
through winged artifice, wear a flower
of dignity; but craft deceiveth and leadeth
astray by words, and the heart of most men
in company together is blind. Foi, that
is 'Opd)pip. For iroravq. ptaxavql of poetry
compare Pyth. VIII. 33 trw rebv xpe'os,
w it at, vetbrarov koXCov ejutq. iroravbv apt<f>l
ptaxavq,. Dissen illustrates &r«ro by
Aristophanes, Clouds 1025 tbs tjSu aov
roT<n Xoyots cruxppov eireartv avdos, com-
pare the scholium, rots yap irepl 'Odwaitas
KeKijpvypiivots aefjtvoTTjs rts iirrjvdet.
The mss. read irorav£ |iaxav£> Her-
mann inserts re, Schmid ye. The passage
quoted from the Eighth Pythian suggests
that *|«J>1 fell out, and if we write the
words in uncials we find this suggestion
palaeographically sound.
nOTANAIM<J)IMAXANAI
The close succession of 1 m, im, led by
‘parablepsia’ to the omission of <|>im ;
and thus produced the same effect as the
omission of m<|>i. For the scansion of
iroravq. apt,(f>i cf. 01. XIII. 99 8i] d/x0or^/ow-
dev (the certain and universally accepted
correction of Mss. 5’ dptfportpwdev by
Boeckh and Hermann). I would write
however 81} ’pufroriptodev, regarding it as
a case of prodelision.
9—2NEMEONIKAI 7.
132
<re/ivov enrearl n’ <ro<f>la Be tcXeirrei irapayoura fiv0oi$’ rv(j>\dv
S* v
Tjrop o/u\o<; avSp&v 6 7r\e«rT09. el yap ijv
irav aXaOeiav ISepev, ov rcev 07t\cdv xoXaffeh	2$
6 /caprepos Ala? eira^e Sid <f>pev£v
\evpbv	ov tcpdriarov ’A^tXeo? drep pid^a
%avda> Meveka Sdpapra Koplaai Ooais
23.	<r<xf>£a] This <ro0la, crafty skill
in poetry, is other than that of the wise
men of line 17.
24.	ct Yap tjv k.t.X.] Bergk’s brilliant
emendation trap, for iav of the MSS.,
has elucidated this passage. For the
rare word 4tos (= 4rvfMos, 4tt)tv/jlos) Bergk
gives abundant authority. In a scholium
on Homer A 133 we read: 4<ttip 4rbs ical
<nj(j.atpet rbv dXrjdi), 41- od Kai irXeopaopup
rod e ireos* tovto icapd rb 4(0 rb birdpxu,
4 pi' 41- abrov 4rbs 6 dXrjffqs. Joh. Alex.
de acc. p. 29 ws 4ra TrjpePLdCop (so Bergk
for T7)fjLevl5os) xpfoeov y4pos. Corp. Inscr.
Gr. I. 569 <ja<pus 4rd r eloaKove Kal
Xoyois ireipap pad&p k.t.X. Compare also
’Ercu0/\a a name of Persephone. Bergk
restores the word in two other passages
of Pindar; (1) Nem. x. n, q. v.; (2)
Isthm. II. 10 prjfi.' aXadcias <4ras> ay-
XicTCL (HCUPOP.
In the present passage 4tclp has that
shade of meaning, which Mr Verrall has
shown to be constantly associated with
4tv/jlos and 4rriTvpos (cf. also below 1. 63
kX4os 4t7itvplop), an allusion to the signifi-
cance of a name. Pindar alludes (1) to the
fancied connexion of the name Alas with
aleros, the bird which Homer called
TeXeioraros Tererjpwp (0 233), and which
in Pindar is the auspice of the Aeacids
(the family of Aias); this true bird of
Ajax is opposed to the * winged artifice *
of Homer the poet of Odysseus. (2) He
alludes to the name "Opypos, which ac-
cording to an Ionic Vita Homeri meant
blind in the Cumaean Aeolic dialect,
and which he associates with the opuXos
of blind heart. Had it been possible to
descry the literal truth, it would have
been recognized that Ajax was the true
eagle and that the adherents of Odysseus
were as blind in heart, as his poet in
vision.
Render: For if they could have dis-
cerned the truth assured by his very name,
the staunch Ajax would not, in wrath
for arms, have planted the smooth sword
blade in his breast,—Ajax the most valiant
in battle, save Achilles only, of those who
were borne on swift ships in course direct
to the city of Ilus, by conduct of the
Zephyr, to recover his wife for fair-haired
Menelaus.
26.	6 KopT€pAs Afas] Cf. 6 Kaprepos
BeXXepo<p6pTas, 01. XIII. 84. Compare
the verses on the death of Ajax in
Nemean vm. 23 sqq. and Isthm. III. 34.
Horace calls Ajax heros ab Achille
secundus, Sat. II. 3, 193, a tradition
derived from Homer, B 768
dvSp&p d* ad ply apio-ros 4rjp TeXapu&Pios
Afas
'AxiXebs pipnev' 6 ydp iroXb
<f>4praT0$ rjep.
27.	Xeupov] This adjective is gene-
rally used of sand or rocks. See Intro-
duction, p. 118.—Ajax fell on his sword,
which he fixed in the ground (cf. Soph.
Aj. 828 TreicTurra rtpbe wepl peoppaprep
£/0ei)> and ?7ra£e (which means fixed, not
plunged) suggests that the sword did not
move.
28.	KopCcrai] Infinitive of purpose
or end. Pindar generally prefers forms
in -l£a1 (Koplfai) and -a£ai from verbs
in -1$iw and -a£w. See above note on
11. 24.NEMEAN VII,
133
av vaval iropevaav evBvirvoov Ze(f>vpoio 7rofi7ral
777009 vI\oi/ 7ro\iv. aWa kolvov yap ep^erat	avr, ft'. 30
KVpL ’A/Sa, 7T€(T6 S’ d8o/C7]TOV €V KoX SoKCOVTa* Tlpid Se 7(v€TCUf
29.	ctfOvirvoov] An adjective coined
by Pindar. Its purpose is to contrast the
direct journey to Troy with the wander-
ings of the returning squadrons, referred
to below in line 37. For the Zephyr
wafting the fleet to Ilion cf. Aeschylus,
Agamemnon 1.674 Ze<pbpov ylyavros avpq
30.	aXXd koivov k.t.X.] But to all
alike eometh the wave of Hades (to swallow
them), yea it falleth unexpected on one
man and also on him who expecteth it.
So Mezger. (For kv with the accusative
cf. Pyth. 11. 10 8l<f>pov tv $' appuara. For
Kal occupying the same position as re,
Latin que, cf. vvv tv Kal reXcvrq 01,
VII. 26.) Dissen’s rendering caditque
in ingloriosos et gloriosos assigns an un-
supported meaning to dSb^Tos; and there
is the same objection to Mr Fennell’s
‘ingloriously even on a glorious hero’.
Mezger’s view is supported by the schol-
ium ifnrliTT€i 6 ddvaros bpuoUos Kal wpeo^v-
rtpois Kal veurrtpois, (This scholium sup-
ports the suggestion, put forward in the
Introduction, touching family sorrows of
Thearion.)
31.	Tifftd yCvercn k.t.X,] But those
have honour, whose fame a god causes to
wax fair and fine, even the dead war-
riors, who come to the great navel of large-
bosomed earth.
The MSS. have redvaKbrojv poadouv *
rol yap fxtyav dfupaXov evpvKbXTrov tpuoXe
xOovos, tv Ilvdiotat 8t SairtSois k,t,\.
The scholiast testifies to the reading
jjlqXov and Didymus read poadowv irapb.
putyav k.t,\. Much has been written on
these lines and many emendations have
been proposed. In the first place, the
metre shews that ydp is corrupt and that
a pyrrhic preceded fityav; we can hardly
hesitate to accept Didymus’ ttapa, as the
corruption is explained by the close simi-
larity between TT A P and TAP. In the
next place it is clear that this corruption
led to the punctuation after fioadowv,
which is evidently the antecedent of rol.
In the third place, the singular tpuoXe and
the strange (I believe, impossible) antici-
pation of Neoptolemus in this sentence
were consequences of the false punctua-
tion. In fact the key to this passage is
the recognition that the tale of Neoptole-
mus cannot begin until 1. 34 with tv IIu-
dlouri 8i SairtSois. Such emendations as
pubvos for tpioXe, yairtSois for SairtSois,
II vdioial re for Uudlotai 8t are quite
arbitrary. Mr Arthur Holmes proposed
/Soaffoov Xoyov.
As to the warriors who come to Delphi,
I may translate the note of Dissen: ‘ At
Delphi were celebrated £tvia at which
the god was supposed to entertain those
heroes who formerly in their lifetime
had come to Delphi on various occasions
to worship him. There was a solemn
procession at which many victims were
killed (cf. below 1. 46 fy>w£cus iropuirais
icoXvdtirois)*. Schol. yiverai tv Ae\<poi$
ijpwoi £tvla tv ots Sokci 6 deos twl £tvta
KaXeiv robs ijpwas. In Homer fioadoos is
an epithet of a chariot (hastening to help)
P 481; cf. N 477; and here too it
has its proper meaning of helper, refer-
ring especially to the heroes who aided
Menelaus in recovering Helen,—those
who hastened to Troy on swift ships,
doats av vavol (cf. fioa-docov).
The epithet dfipov is applied to glory
won in war or games; cf. k08os aflpbv
Isthm, 1. 50 and 01, v. 7. Observe that
npua is represented as superior to X070S;
it is conferred by a god, not by a poet
(‘Xoyo^ habet Ulysses at non npudv\
Dissen).134
NEMEONIKAI Z'.
<Sov Beds aftpov av^ei Xoyov TeOvatcoTeov
/3oa06cov, Toi ir a pa plyav opcfraXov evpvtcoXirov
poXov yBovb^. ev HvOioiai 8e SairiSoi?
tcelrai Uptapov ttoXlv NeoTrroXepos eirel irpdBev'	35
ra teal Aavaot irbv^aav' 6 S’ diroTrXewv
'Ztcvpov pev apaprev, lkovto 8' eh ’E<j>vpav irXayevre9.
M. 0X0 era La S’ ipfiaalXevev oXiyov
Xpovov' cut dp ykvos aiel <f>epev
33.	tvpvKoX-irov] Pindaric coinage.
Cf. evpijoTepvos of Tata in Hesiod, Theo-
gony, 117.
34.	€v IlvOCowri k.t.X.] But Neopto-
lemus lieth in hallowed Pythian ground,
after sacking the city of Priam, whei'e also
the Danai toiled. But he, sailing home-
ward, missed Scyros, and they came to
Ephyra, driven from their course.
The place of Neoptolemus’ burial is
mentioned below 1. 44—an ancient grove
close to the temple, bairebov is the
ground of the dXoos.—Dissen explains
the consecution kcitcli eird wpaffev thus:
‘nunc opus fuit hac laude [Troiae exci-
dium] ad dignitatem et praestantiam
herois declarandam, tantopere fato hono-
rati\
37. Sicvpov p4v] Cf. T 326. Ephyra,
a town in Epirus, capital of Thesprotia;
see Strabo VJI. 324: vwtpKeiTcu ro&rov
rod koXttov Klxvpos, 77 Tporepov 'E(pvpa,
iroXis QeowpioTcoi'. See Introduction, p.
119.
'irXayevTCs] The MSS. give wXayxQtv-
res (and wXaxOevTes). Boeckh, in order
to rectify the metre, transposed lkovto
and 7rXayx0&'res (augmented lkovto be-
coming unaugmented lkovto), but this is
‘robbing Peter for the benefit of Paul’,
as the final syllable of afiaprev is thereby
lengthened. In any case the hypothesis
of a transposition, when there is no
special reason, is improbable and uncriti-
cal. Bergk’s tcXq.vo.lolv cannot be ac- '
cepted, for there is no reason why it
should have been tampered with. I have
€7r. (3.
adopted my own conjecture xXayevres,
an unfamiliar second aorist of TrXafa,
which was naturally changed in the pro-
cess of transcription to the familiar first
aorist xXayxOtvTes. In regard to this
form it is to be observed that, while the
second aorist passive of ttXtjoow is in-
variably eTrXyyrjv, its compounds eKTrXrjo-
ou and KaTaTrXrioo(o have e&TrXayrjv and
KaTeirXdyrjv in Attic (etjeTrXriyrjv and
KaTeTrXTjyrjv in older Greek). Why these
double forms ? Had ttX^oooj two second
aorists ewXrjyrjv and eTrXdyrjv, of which
the latter became wholly obsolete in its
simple verb? But iirXyyTjv can hardly
be a ‘new formation’, for it is the form
in older literature, and -eTrXdyrjv is first
found in Attic writers. I believe that
CTrXayTjv is the second aorist of 7rXa£o> (a
verb, indeed, etymologically related to
ttX^oolo), and that it contaminated the
Attic conjugation of ckt-Xtittlo, owing to
the connexion between the meanings of
hKTrXriTTeodaL, to be driven out of one’s
senses (cf. irXdyLos), and of irXd^eoOai, to
be driven out of one’s course. The
difference between eTrXayrjv and ewXdyx-
07jv (which has perhaps been intruded
into the place of eirXdyrjv in other pas-
sages also) is that the former has a passive,
the latter a middle meaning.
38.	Mo\o<r<r(q.] There was an Aea-
cid dynasty in Molossia; Neoptolemus
was succeeded by his son Molossus.—
e/uLpaoiXetio) is a Homeric compound.
39.	drdp yivos k. r.X.] But his race
after him for ever had this prerogativeNEMEAN VII
i3S
tovto Foi yepas. «%€to Be 7rpo9 Oeov,	40
tcrkav dycov TpotaOev dtcpoQivLwv'
iva icpe&v vlv vwep p,dya<$ eXaaev avrcrvyovr dvfjp payaipa.
13dpvvOev Be wepiaad &e\<f>oi £evayerai.	<7779. y .
aWa to p,6p<np,ov aweBooicev' ixPVv TLV' evBov aXaet TraXacrartp
Aia/ccBav /cpeovroov toXolttov epupevcu	45
Oeov wap' evreiyea Bopuov, qpcocai? Be wopxraXs
Oepucncowov o'ucelv iovra woXvOvtol9
evdvvpLov 69 Sltcav. Tpia fewea
(that is, his descendants were kings in
Molossia). aTdp = autemf <ptpev = habebat,
foL Dat. commodi.—This remark is not
without its special purpose; see below,
1. 100.
41.	kt&xv* aywv k.t.X.] Taking with
him rich first-fruits of the booty won from
Troy, as an offering to Apollo.
42.	tv* Kpccov k.t.X.] Where (at Del-
phi) he engaged by chance in a combat
touching flesh-offerings and was smitten
by a man with a knife. The man who
slew Neoptolemus was Machaereus, a
Delphic priest.—The anastrophe of tiirep,
separated by vlv from its case, is unusual,
perhaps unparalleled {rrorl crk irdvra Xoyov
in Pyth. 11. 66 is the extremely doubtful
reading of Boeckh). With /mxas avTi-
tvxovt* cf. avTiacrai iroXe/ioio. By clvtl-
tvxovtcl, instead of avTidoravra, Pindar
expresses that the conflict was casual, not
aforethought.
Various traditions concerning Neop-
tolemus* visit to Delphi are given in the
scholia, but need not be quoted here.
43.	pdpw0€V 8^ k.t.X.] And the hos-
pitable Delphians were vexed exceedingly.
(Sapvvdev for iftapjjvdrjaav. ^evaylrai oc-
curs only here.
44.	aXXd k.t.X.] He (Neoptolemus)
however paid the debt of fate. But meet
it was that there should be one of the
Aeacid kings in the precincts of the grove
most ancient, hard by thegocTs fair-walled
house, and should divell there to preside at
BiapK6<J6l'
the processions of heroes, honoured with
many sacrifices, for enforcement of aus-
picious guest-right.
For tvdov aXtrei cf. tvdov rbyei Nem.
ill. 54.—OefucrKOTTOv does not occur else-
where, but may be compared to another
Pindaric compound 0epi(TKpl(jjv) Pyth. v.
29. Neoptolemus presides at the
to enforce the laws of guest-right, which
Pindar, alluding to the Euxenid name,
calls ebibvvjuos bUa: see below 1. 85 ebw-
vbfjup Trdrpq..—Various views have been
held regarding the punctuation of 11. 47,
48. Some place a full stop at iroXv$bTois,
reading 1. 48 as one sentence, but this
does not yield a fair sense. Others punc-
tuate at eb&vvpov. The recognition of
the true meaning of evdvvpos bUa decides
for Hermann’s punctuation, which I have
followed.—Pausanias (x. 24. 5) mentions
the tomb of Neoptolemus, and adds Kal
oi Kard &ros ivayl^ovoLv oi AeX<f>oL.
48. TpCa k.t.X.] Three words will
suffice; no false loon is the witness; he
(Neoptolemus) presidetk over doughty
deeds. t|/€v8is (not found elsewhere) is
contemptuous, like ydarpcs. As a rare
word it is designed to attract attention
and to suggest that Pindar does not imi-
tate the Homeric xf/ebdecrL of line 22.—The
idea of Hermann (adopted by Mezger)
that the following words Atyiva—iKybvojv
depend on fyy/wnnv, and that the new
sentence begins at Opaab is certainly
wrong. Neoptolemus is an imoTdTrjs of136
NEMEONIKAI Z\
ov yfrevBt^ o pbdpTvs' epypaaiv eirurraret
AXy iva, re&v A^o? r i/cyovwv Opaav p,oi toS' elirelv	50
(fraevval? aperac? oSov tcvpLav Xoycov	dvr. 7'.
obcodev * a\\d 7^/3 dvasrravcns iv iravri 7Xv/ceia, fepytp * tcopov
CO V
o
/cal yaeXc /cal Ta repirv avOe ’A<f>poSiaca.
<j>va 8’ etcacTTOs Siafyepopev ft lotov Xa^ovre9,
6 /xez/ ra, Ta S’ oXXol' Tvyelv S’ ei/* ahvvarov	55
evhaipbovlav airatrav aveXopevov' ov/c e%a>
ehrelv, T«a tovto Mol pa tcXo? e/iireSov
(bpe%€. ®eapi(OVy rlv 6 eoucora
the games, not a mere irpoardrijs or special
defensor in the interests of Aeginetans.
?pypcuriv means the exploits of all com-
petitors in the games celebrated at the
Delphic xenia. Those who are familiar
with the manner of Pindar will recognise,
I believe, that Atyiva begins a new
sentence.
50. Afytva k.t.X.] I am emboldened
(dpaab (lot robe = ton fioi rode rb Oaptros),
O Aegina, to proclaim for the bright deeds
of bravery of the children of thee and Zeus
a stablished highroad of praises leading
from their home, ape-rats is Dative, as
Dissen takes it, not instrumental.—Mr
Fennell is right in comparing KvpCav o88v
with obbv dfia^LTov (Nem. Vi. 53), but the
former is somewhat stronger. The idea
is that the deeds of the Aeacids are a
highroad in the land of Greek myth.
52. a\Xd yap k.t.X.] But I will not,
for in every work rest is sweet; yeay
honey can pall and the delicious flowers
of Aphrodite's garden. For the signifi-
cance of these words see Introduction;
also above 1. 11 (fieXtypov1) and below
1. 74.—Mr Fennell reads repirvavdea, a
compound which, had it been found in
the mss., we should be strongly tempted
to emend. He does not translate his
reading, but I suppose that it means ‘the
uses of Aphrodite, whose flower is de-
light’. The text is quite sound, the
Kaipbv oXftov
grammar being ra repirv avdea, dvde
’A<ppo8i(TLa. That the pleasures of food
and love have a limit is a commonplace;
the proverb is introduced here in words
which fit it for a figurative application.
54.	8* Kkcuttos k.t.X.] By our
individual natures we differ and the gifts
of life are variously allotted to men; but
that one man should win the prize of
happiness complete is impossible ; I cannot
say to whom Fate hath proffered this con-
summate gift as a sure possession.
Pindar returns here to the reflexions
of 11. 5—6.—The singular number of [5io-
tcCv is due to e/catrros. fiiord itself is a
collective word which includes many ex-
periences ; hence the plural ra in line
55—the things which make up the indi-
viduals fhora. dvcX&rOcu is often found
in Herodotus of winning victories, aira-
<rav has its strict force, in all its fulness.
For Motpa compare 1. 1 ; for tpnrebov
(predicate extended) see 1. 98. Compare
Introduction, p. 125.
A passage in the Third Pythian, 1. 86
sqq. illustrates Pindar’s thought:
aikv d’ d<T(pd\rjs
ovk fryevr otir Alaicldq. irapa H^Xet
otire icap' dvndttp KddpL(p‘ X&yovrai
fiav Pporujv
6\fiov virlprarov ol	dire k,t.X,
58. 0€ap(o»v k.t.X.] But to thee, O
Theariotiy she gives a meet measure ofNEMEAN VII.
137
SlScoai, roXfiav re tcaXwv apopuevip	67T. y'.
avveaiv ovtc diro^XaTTrei <f>p€v&v.	60
geivo<; elpu' atcoreivov amkyoov yjroyoi/,
vSaro9 c5t6 pod? <})i\ov e? az/fy)’ cfywz/
/c\io$ irrjTvpbov alveaoo' 7roTi<f>opo$ S’ ayadolai pu<T0b$ ovtos.
idov S’ €771)9 ’A^ato? ot; puep^erai pu avfjp	crrp. S'.
7W<z/, and, having endued thee with a
spiritfain of fair adventures,	perverts
not the understandingfrom thy breast.
Kaipos] due measure (to (jlIoop), not
necessarily of time. Christ’s KXapov is
not needed. Compare Pyth. I. 56 otfrw
5’	0eos dpOwTTjp iriXot...&p tparcu
Kcupov didotis (gratifying his desires in due
measure'). roXp,av is the temper which
undertakes courageous deeds. airopXoir-
t«i means disables and expels from,
4>pepGjv depending on a7r6. The expres-
sion corresponds to ftX&pev in 1. 18 (the
second verse of the first epode); Thearion
was one of the wise men who gauge the
wind of the third day. See Introduction.
61. £clvos dpi k.t.X.] I am your guest -
friend. Averting the dark shadow of
blame, as by streams of water directed
upon my friend> will I sing of a glmy
true to the letter. This is a meed that
cometh to good men. The meaning of
kXIos fcnjTvpov is evident from the atmo-
sphere of its environment (if I may be
allowed the expression);—i-eivos in 1. 61,
wpo^evlg. in 1. 65 shew that the kXIos
literally true is the name of Sogenes’
clan, Ei)^€vl8ai (see below 1. 70) which is
called a cbdrv/jios varpa in 1. 85. For the
force of iThTVfiov, as shown by Mr Verrall
for Aeschylus, see above, note on 1. 25.
The streams of water signify neither
the abundance nor the gratefulness of
the praise as Dissen and Merger re-
spectively hold. The surface of the
water is to be a clear reflector of the
fame of the Euxenidae, which will thus
shine through the darkness. The similar
collocation of poauriand ok6top in 11.
12,13 proves this beyond all doubt.—The
circumstance, that the last syllable of ei/u
would naturally be lengthened before ok
while the metre requires its brevity, has
caused the suspicion of commentators to
fall upon otkot€iv6v. It is possible that it
may be a gloss on some rarer word of
identical meaning; but it would be hazar-
dous to emend, werpatrj re okvt\ in Hesiod,
Works and Days, 1. 589 may be quoted
in defence of the metrical liberty, and
ok6tov in 1. 13 distinctly supports okotci-
vbv. We certainly cannot accept Bergk’s
KeXaivbv or ipefievvbv.
64.	8* lyyvs k.t.X.] But if an
Achaean man be near, who dwelleth on
the Ionian sea, he will not blame me; I
trust in my office of proxenos. In the
streets of Aegina there were many foreig-
ners, and Pindar might count on the
possibility of an Epirot (Molossian) being
actually there when the ode was sung.
A man from Epirus would be jealous for
the honour of Neoptolemus (see below 11.
102 sqq.). Mr Arthur Holmes, I believe,
was the first to point out the meaning of
avhp.—For ivip compare the
passage of Strabo quoted above on 1. 37,
and it. 326 ra trip tov ’Iovlov koXttov,
also Thucydides, 1. 46 ton Si Xip.i\v rat
tt6Xls virtp avrov kcltou airb OaXdoorjs
(quoted by Dissen). Mr Holmes (The
Nemean Odes of Pindar with special
reference to Nem. vii.) has this note on
inrip: ‘ If inrtp be really to wept what the
highest vertical point of a curve would be
to the curve itself, what preposition could
more exactly describe the position of
Kichyros, the city of Thesprotia, here138
NEMEONIKAI Z'.
'lovias virep aXos olfcecoV irpof-evta ireirot6\ ev re Sa/norais 65
ofifiaTL 8e pKop.au Xapirpov, ov% virep ft aXa>v,
ft tala iravT etc irohos ipvcraus, 6 8k Xo tiros €v<f>po)V
iroil y^povos Spiro 1. padcov 8e tls avepel,
supposed to be mentioned? We know
from Strabo that Kichyros stood upon a
cliff; the sloping of the coast might well
represent the higher portion of the curve
whose lower portion would be the reflec-
tion in the waters’.—The MSS. have Kal
itpoi-evlg., a long syllable too much for the
metre. Hermann omits Kal, while Momm-
sen reads Kal %evlq.. The omission of Kal
is clearly a gain for the structure and
style; and I think Kat can be explained
as a gloss on re: £v re 8ap6rats = Kal ev
SaphTais.—This passage shews that Pin-
dar was proxenos for the Epirots. Dissen
observes ‘ suspicor Pindarum hospitia
gratuita habuisse per Graeciam qualia
Amphictyones alio tempore decrevere
Polygnoto; cf. Plin. Hist, Nat. xxxiv.
2, 33’• But this passage does not prove
the suspicion.
From a scholium on 1. 64 we learn the
fact that offence was given to the Aegi-
netans by a Paean of Pindar: KadoXov
yap diroXoyei<r0ai ftovXeTcu irepl rod Neo-
irToXlpov dav&rov irpbs robs Alyivr/Tas *
€K€lvol yap ijTUpvTO tov IlivSapov otl ypd-
<t><av AeXcpois rbv TLaiava H<p7]’ dp.(pLiro-
Xoiai pi.apvap.evov potpidv irepl npav
airoXoiXivai.
65. fv re SapoTcus k.t.X.] And
amongst my fellow citizens my glance
is clear, for I have not broken bounds
and have removed all violent uses from
before my feet; but may the time to come
draw nigh with kindly purpose. The 8a-
p.6ra 1 are the Thebans as opposed to
$£vot. With opjxaTk k.t.X. cf. Nem. X. 40
ph) Kpimreiv <f>aos 6p.pd.Tiov, where the con-
nexion however is very different. Xapirpov
84pK€<r0ai is the clear gaze of a free soul.
vircpPoXcov = birepfiaXibv pdrpov, excedens
modum (Dissen). Donaldson appropri-
ately cites a gloss of Hesychius, virep-
(3oXla * Kopos, tippis.—epvoaLS eK iroSbs
refers to dragging away impediments
from one’s path, irorl—tyiroi, tmesis.
68. paOuv 84 k.t.X.] But whoso
understandeth me will proclaim, whether
I come with the discords of crooked parley
on my lips.
av€p€i] The mss. have Av ipei which is
supposed to be an instance of the Homeric
construction of av with the future indica-
tive. But (1) this construction is extremely
doubtful, out of Homer. The few in-
stances cited from Attic prose writers
are clearly due to errors in the mss.
The passage in Euripides’ Electra, 1. 484
(kAv £t’ 4rt <I>6vlov o\j/opai alpa) is ob-
viously corrupt (see Weil’s note). (2) If
we allow that Pindar may, in this single
passage, have adopted this epic con-
struction, it is hard to see what force
the words Av ipei can possibly have.
(3) Even without Av, ipei would be in-
tolerably weak, and the statement point-
less. (4) As the text stands this sentence
is isolated; some connexion with what
follows seems required.—It is hardly
necessary to mention the suggestion that
Av should be taken with pa06v.
The difficulty has arisen from a slight
error of a copyist who divided avepel into
two words, just as, below 1. 89, he divided
dvtxoi into Av tyoi (see note). In Pyth.
I. 32 (and x. 8) we find avkenre, aorist of
amyopeuco, used of the herald proclaiming
the victor in a contest, dvepei, the future,
has a similar force here; for these words
(pa0u)v k.t.X.) are closely connected with
the following lines. When the opponent
of Sogenes overstepped the line marking
the beginning of the spear-throw (see
next note), the question arose whether he
was disqualified; and when the judges
gave it against him, their judgment mustNEMEAN VII.
139
el Trap pe\o$ ep^opai yfrayiov oapov ivveircov.
EivgevlSa irarpade 'Zmyeves, virop,vv(o
have been made known to the spectators
by a Krjpv%. Pindar applies this incident
to his own case (see Introduction), and
avepei introduces the metaphor of the
following lines, puadCsv 84 ns avepei means
when the truth is ascertained, proclama-
tion will he made; whether etc. This
restitution can hardly be called a change.
It removes all difficulties of construction,
and restores the continuity of thought.
For imp plXos cf. 01. IX. 39 rb Kav%d<r-
dai irapk Kcupbv pavlaunv vttokp4k€l, un-
seasonable vaunting sounds a jarring chord
of madness.—Hesychius gives the gloss
xf/ayiov * irXayiov, Xo^bv, 4tik€kX<.p4vov. It
is only to be wondered that B has pre-
served the right word, uncorrupted.
Schneider’s \poyiov and Ahrens’ ipeXXov
are worthy of Byzantine scribes.
70. EvJcvCSa k.t.X.] Sogenes, of Eu-
xenid clan, I swear that I overstepped not
the line when I propelled my swift tongue
like a bronze-tipped spear, which released
thy neck and thews from the sweat of
the wrestling-bouts, ere thy body met the
rays of the burning sun.
The mss. have d<irop.vvc», which would
mean, I swear that I propelled not. With
Bergk I follow the reading of the scholiast
vTropLvbv). |U] refers only to xpopas ‘ with-
out having overstepped’, rippa. is the
line which must not be overstepped by the
throwers. The mere use of irpofiaivu)
(‘ step in front of ’) excludes the old idea
that r4pp.a meant ‘ the limit of the throw ’;
in such a sense, wpofias assuredly could
not take the place of virepfiaX&v.
In this difficult passage German criti-
cism has conspicuously failed, and more
light has been thrown on the problem of
the pentathlon by the researches of Prof.
Gardner, Mr Fennell and Dr Waldstein
than by the learning of Hermann, Dissen
and Dr Pinder. There can be no doubt
that Pindar’s words contain an allusion
70
to some circumstance connected with
Sogenes’ victory, and there might seem
to be a choice between two alternatives.
(1) Sogenes’ victory in the spearthrow-
ing was decisive for his victory in the
pentathlon, and the wrestling test was un-
necessary. The order of the five events in
the pentathlon was as follows: dXpa, anew,
Slokos, bpofios, ttclXt) {leaping, spear-throw-
ing, disc-hurling, running, wrestling). The
order akujv, 8L<tkos is generally reversed,
but Dr Waldstein’s observation that * the
Diskos as compared with the Akontismos
was paptis, while the Akontismos was light
and required above all steadiness of eye
and arm’ (apud Fennell, Nemean and
Isthmian Odes, p. xx) is decisive for the
priority of the spearthrowmg. If one
competitor won three of the first four
events, he was declared victor and no
wrestling contest took place (a case of
rpus.yp.6s, or a7rorpta|ai). This might
have been achieved by Sogenes. If so,
the question arises, why does Pindar
specially mention the spear throw, the
second event, as decisive? This difficulty
might be removed by the supposition that
Sogenes’ strong points were leaping and
running, and that his victory in spear-
throwing was an unexpected stroke of good
fortune. This good fortune might have
been due to the circumstance that a
superior opponent overstepped the line,
and thus rlppa irpopas would have a
special point.
Against this view the word €££ir€|&\|rcv
seems to me to be decisive. 6ktt4ptt(o is
by no means a synonym of 4kX6<o. Such
a phrase as iKirlpTreiv kclkov could not be
used if the evil had never existed ; and in
the same way 4kt6ptt€lp TraXaKrpaTwv
would be a false phrase if no wrestling
had taken place. This consideration
is fatal also to the theory of Mr Fennell,
(who takes 8s	“which is wontNEMEONIKAI Z'.
140
fjLrj repfJLa irpofids atcovd’ core ^ouKKoirdpaov 6per at
6oav yXwaaav, 09 etc a hreptyev TraXaiapdreov	dvr. S',
avykva /cal erdevos aSLavrov, aWcovt rrplv de\i<p yvlov ipireaelv.
el ttovos rjv, to repirvov 1r\4ov ireSep^eraL.
ea fjte* vuc&vrl ye ^apiv, ei rt 7repav depffel?	75
dve/epayov, ov rpa^v^ elpi /caradifiev*
eipeiv crecfrdvovs i\a(f>p6v. dvafidkeo. Molad roi
KoWa xpvaov ev re Xev/cov eke^avd' dpa
to dismiss”) that Sogenes ‘discharged
his spear in the pentathlon with his foot
advanced beyond the line, which marked
the beginning of the throw, and so having
failed to gain the third victory was
obliged to go on to the wrestling This
view moreover attributes to Pindar the
statement, ‘I have not overstepped
the mark, as you aid’. But though I
am unable to accept Mr Fennell’s inter-
pretation of this passage, I must grate-
fully acknowledge the instruction that I
have derived from his learned essay on
the Pentathlon.
(2) The expression i^Treprf/ev iraXaur-
par 10 v clearly implies that Sogenes
wrestled, but a fortunate accident re-
leased him from the labour betimes; and
the fact that he wrestled is confirmed (as
Mr Fennell points out) by d ttovos tjv
1. 74. The fortunate accident was of
course connected with the spear-throw-
ing. An opponent of Sogenes trans-
gressed the line behind which he should
have stood and was disqualified for an
event, in which perhaps he hoped to win.
He consequently retired from the compe-
tition, and Sogenes was released from the
necessity of contending with an additional
adversary, probably a dangerous adver-
sary, in the wrestling. This view is held
by Bergk, and it demands a slight altera-
tion in the reading of the mss. The
second personal pronoun ere is required
after e£brep\f/ev, and so Bergk reads 0 <r*
for Ss, translating id quod te discedere fecit.
But 5 would almost necessarily mean to
(Lkovtol op<rai, not t6 rippa Trpofirjvai. 8s
is right; the spear, that is the spear-
throwing (owing to the accident which
befel his rival), delivered him from
one wrestler. The mistake lies in 0-2-
wepyf/ev, a most natural and simple cor-
ruption of 2k <r* 2vep\//€v, from which in
pronunciation it can have but very
slightly, if at all, deviated.
71. xa^K0irctp9’0V] The expression
XdXKOTcapq.ov &kovtcl occurs in Pyth. I. 44.
In Homer the epithet is only used of
helmets. Oodv is used on account of the
metaphor; cf. Nem. x. 69 olkovtl Oof.
For 3p<rai with yXuxraav, cf. 01. xm. 12
roXpa t£ poi evdeta yX&cnrav bpvijei Xtyeiv.
73.	cCSCavTOv] That is, dpidpwri.
74.	ct tt6vos qv /c.t.X.] If toil there
was, greater is the delight that followeth.
Tcpirvov answers to repirva in 1. 53 (see
Introduction).
75.	£a pe /c.t.X.] Let me be. If, lifted
too high, I uttered a loud scream, to a
victor certainly my art is not rough in pay-
ing her gracious debt. It is a light thing
to twine garlands. Sound a loud prelude;
surely, the Muse is welding together gold
and white ivory and the delicate flower
which she has filched from thefoam of the
sea. 2a pe implies, ‘ I will not deceive or
disappoint you’. For avtKpayov cp.£ 467.
77.	dvapaXco] addressed by the poet
to himself. Schol. dvri rov dvaKpobov Kal
apxov ri X2yeir iXcuppus irepl t&v <rre-
<f)dv(ov.
78.	xpvtnSv] In no other passage in
classical Greek poetry, as far as I know,NEMEAN VII.
141
/cal Xeipiov dvdepov iromLa? vfaXoia iepcras.
A *09 Be pepvapevos dp<f>l Nepea	eV. S'.	80
7roXv<f>arov dpoov vpvcov Bovei
davya. fBaaiXfja Se 6e&v irpeirei
BaireBov av roBe yapvepev dpepa
onrl' Xeyovn yap kla/cov vlv vnto parpoBo/co49 yovais fyvrevaai,
era pev iroXlapyov evcovvpq* irarpa,	arp. e. 85
is the first syllable of xpwo's shortened.
The v of xptfo^os, on the other hand, may
be regarded as common; in Pindar it is
found short ten times (e.g. Nem. v. 7).
79.	Xctpiov av0€|«>v] white coral, ‘ the
foam-flower’, \elpiop is adjectival ( = \el-
pivos), and while it suggests the lily means
slender or fine. Compare xP°a Xeiptoepra
delicate skin, N 830; ora Xeipibeooar, of
the thin small voice of grasshoppers,
T 52. Compare also Hesychius Xetpws*
6 iaxvbs Kal d>XP°s» and \eipi6evra • airaXa,
\eibiop yap to dp6os • Sia [read &p0os 5tdJ
tt)v \doT7jra...
This foam-flower corresponds to the
&p0€a ’A(ppo8L<jia, flowers of the foam-
born queen, of line 53 (see Introduction).
80.	At£s 84 Ac.r.X.] Zeus is mentioned
because he was celebrated by the Nemean
games (d/i<f>l, in connexion with, in regard
to), Sovelv, to shake or set in motion
occurs in Pyth. 1.44 aKovra wa\d/xq Sovktav
(;making the spear vibrate); Pyth. vi. 36
of a soul shaken by passion, 8optj0€utcl
<f>prf)v (cf. ib. iv. 219). In Pyth. x. 39 we
find it used of lyres and flutes :
Travrq. 8k X°P°i Trap0kv(ap
\vpau re jSoal Kavaxai r* ab\(dv 8op4ov-
toll
which we might render, all the air is
shaken by dances of maidens and loud
notes of lyres and ringing music of flutes.
Dissen’s interpretation of Sovei. in the
passage before us, as a metaphor from
spear-hurling, can hardly be accepted,
especially in view of the passage cited
from the Tenth Pythian. We may trans-
late:
In praise of Zeus, whom Nemea calls
to mind, let the sounds of many voices
vibrate to low music. Meet is it on this
floor with utterance soft to sing the king
oj the gods.
iToXv<t>aTOS 0p6os] is the sound of voices
singing in harmony, aevxq and aplpq
6ttL are expressions appropriate to the
music of the lyre, as distinguished from
the music of the flute.
83.	SaircSov] The floor of the Aeaceum,
where the victory of Sogenes was cele-
brated. This is clear from ro$e; the
connexion of thought being that as Zeus
is the father of Aeacus, it is meet to cele-
brate him in the house of his son.
84.	|ia.TpoSoKoi$] tMaTp68oicos (accent
so) is not found elsewhere, viro, by virtue
of; compare Isth. v. 44 etycus bird 0e<r-
Treolais. viv is the subject of (pvrevoai.
85.	4t£ \Uv k.t.\.] A prince for a
family of truly auspicious name (lit. a
ruler of their city for a true fair-named
clan). Aeacus was the first dpxbs of the
tto\ls to which the Euxenidae belonged.
The mss. have kpJq which yields no sense.
Pauw proposed rep, but the following
clause excludes the second person here.
Hermann’s kq. has found more supporters;
but there are two objections to it. (1)
kq was not likely to become ip.q ; (2) the
remark that Aeacus was a iroXlapxos for
his own warpa, the Aeacids, is weak and
irrelevant. He was more than irdKiapxos
for the Aeacids, he was their irpbyoros;
there is some meaning in calling him a
iroXlapxos for other families of Aegina.
It is clear that the irarpa meant is that ofNEMEONIKAI Z'.
142
fHpa/c\e€?, <reo Se irpowpetSva pev tjelvov dhe\<f>e6v r\ el Be
y ever cu
dv8po$ avvp Ti, <j>alpev tee yelrov eppuevai
votp <f)c\r)<ra,VT drevei yebrovi ^app,a irdvT(ov
iird^iov' el S’ avro /cal 0eo9 avkyoi,
iv tIv k eQekoiy Tiyavra9 09 iSdpuacras, evrvx&s	90
valeiv irarpl 'Icoyevrjs draXov dp,(f>kiro3v
dvpuov irpoyovcov ii>KTr}p,ova %a6kav ayvidv.
iirel Terpaopoiaiv dppuaTcov
the Euxenids; and a connexion between
the Euxenids and Aeacus is a necessary
link in Pindar’s argument, (a) Heracles
is the l-eivos of Aeacus; (b) Aeacus is the
prince of the city to which the Euxenids
belong; hence (c) Heracles may be ex-
pected to interest himself in the Euxenids.
Line 85 expresses (b). This interpreta-
tion is confirmed by the adjective evuvv-
/uos, which here refers to the name Ei)£e-
vldai, just as in 1. 48 it referred to the
££v ca at Delphi. Heracles and the Euxe-
nids are conceived to be joined by the
bond of £eWa, even as the Delphians and
Neoptolemus. (See Introduction.)
The word, then, replaced by ifiq. must
be a word likely to be corrupted and
must be compatible with the reference
of irarpq. to the clan of Sogenes. irq
(see above, note on 1. 25) satisfies these
conditions perfectly. It emphasises the
reference in evwvpup,—a clan whose
actual name is auspicious—and answers
to irijTviiov k\£os in 1. 63.
86. 'HpcticXccs /c.r.X.] Thy own dear
guest-friend and brother, 0 Heracles, irpo-
‘irpc&va £c?vov corresponds to irpo^eplq.
(same position in line) 1. 65. irpoirpewp,
a word only found here (perhaps con-
nected with proprius; compare dirioip :
socius).
cl 84 ycvcrai /c.r.X.] But if a man hath
any fruition of man, we should say that a
neighbour is to his neighbour a priceless
joy, if he loved him with steadfast heart.
£vyoi$	avr. e.
yeberai would be in prose airokabei.
Pindar is thinking of Hesiod, IVorks and
Days, 1. 344
Trrjfjia kclkos yeirew, ocraop t aya$bs fily*
6veiap,
tfifxopl tol TtpLrjs oVr’ Zfi/iope ydropos
IcrOXov.
Aleman, fr. 50 (Bergk. P. L. G.) pdya
ydrovi ydrwv. For vo(p drevlicf. Hesiod,
Theog. 1. 660.—For other reminiscences
of Hesiod cp. above Vi. 3; note on iv.
59; Isth. V. 66 A&fiw<ov 8£ p.e\lrav tpyots
dirafap 'H.<rt68ov fwAa ripiq. tout* tiros.
89.	ci 8* avTo /c.r.X.] But if a god
also should uphold this truth (principle),
or be true to this saw. Kai deos opposed
to dvrjp. avro is the sentiment of the
preceding statement, av^xoi, is a certain
restoration of Thiersch for dp fyoi.
Bergk however reads aXtyoi.
90.	4v rCv k 404Xoi /c.r.X.] Resting
on thee, who didst subdue the Giants, Soge-
nes were fain to dwell happily in the
wealthy, hallowed street of his ancestors,
fostering a spirit of devotion to his sire.
Observe that irarpl Ztoyevrjs responds
to Trarpade Z&yeves in 1. 70; and that
&(jL<p€TT(i)v dv/jbv repeats dvp.op dpitpeireip of
1. 10. For the significance, see Intro-
duction, pp. 119 and 121.
93. eircC /c.t.X.] This passage has
usually been misinterpreted. (1) Dissen
translates, quum quadrigalibus velut cur-
ruum in jugis domum habeat inter delubra
tua ab utroque latere. This no doubt isNEMEAN VII.
143
iv T€/M€V€(T<n Bofiov €X€l Te°fc> dp,<f>0T€pa<; Icov yeipo^. do pba/cap,
tlv S’ hrkoucev f/Hpa? 7toctiv re TreiOepbev	95
tcopav T€ ykavKwwtBa—Bvvaaai Be—fipoTolcriv aXtcav
apba^aviav Bvafiara)v 0ap,d BiBopuev.
el yap afyiaLV epbireBoaOevea $ Lotov app,6aai<;
rift a \nrapa> re yrjpal Bia7r\e/con?
evBatpov iovra, iraLBoov Be iralBe9 e^oiev alel	IOO
the general meaning; but he is wrong in	—thou canst, an thou witty—to bestow
assuming that the reference is to waggons full often upon mortals mighty help
with two yokes. (2) As there was only	against difficult distresses. Heracles is
one yoke in the fourhorsed chariot, Mr	invoked in his capacity of aXdjiKaKos;
Fennell attributes to Jvyots the meaning	Athene is to be persuaded on account of
of tot, the two middle horses harnessed her title 'AXaXKopePTfts, connected (rightly
to the yoke; compare Pollux, 1. 141 cop	doubtless) with dXaXiceip. Hence the
ol pip bird t<£ ^iryy ?byioi, oi Si etearepudev	choice of aXicdv which responds to dX/ca£
irapljopoL. But this use of £vya has no	inline 12.— Bergk saw that Sifrcurat is a
authority. Nor does Euripides’ phrase parenthesis, and that bcbopeit depends on
T€Tpd£v£ oxos (a car harnessed to four	ireidipev; but he is wrong in doubting
horses) prove ‘ that {vyd was used cata-	dapa. A modem writer would inevitably
chrestically for horses ’ here, or even that it say ad; Greek reserve limited the prayer
might be so used. Mr Fennell supposes to Bapd.
that the house of Sogenes is compared to	98. et yap k.t.X.] It were well, if thou
the appa, and the temples of Heracles to	shouldst harness their youth and happy eld
the two yoke-horses. The preposition iv	to a life of steadfast strength, and eked it
does not suit Mr Fennell’s theory, as he	out in happiness to the end; and if their
confesses himself. Mezger’s note on this	children's children possessed for ever the
passage is vague, but his view seems to	honour which is now theirs and honour
be similar.	nobler still hereafter. ipiredooBep^s, only
The passage admits of a simple inter-	here (cf. peyaXoodepijs 1. 2, and ipiredop
pretation, if we hold fast to Pindar’s	1* 57)* Another airai; dprjpivop com-
language. £vyop must mean yoke and	pounded of tpwedos is found in Ol. 1. 59,
ip implies the very closest proximity.	also qualifying (Mop, ipwedopoxBos. apfio-
The relation of Sogenes’ house to the	<rais is the participle (Bergk, reading
temples is compared to that of a chariot-	8iaTr\iK€tp, makes it optative); for the
pole to the two arms of the yoke, which	metaphor from a chariot (carried on from
is attached to its extremity. The plural	1. 93) see Introduction, p. 125.
£vyois is used to suggest the apparent 99.	We remember that Hebe
plurality of the yoke, its two arms, and	was the wife of Heracles and the
corresponds to Tepepr). We may translate:	daughter of Hera (K 95).—diaxXiiceip, like
For he hath his house at the precincts of	tKIkclp and KaTairXiKecv, might be used
thy temples, which face him, like the yoke-	with filop in the sense of diayeiv. Pindar
arms of a fourhorsed chariot, on either	has it of weaving a dirge, in Pyth. xn. 8,
hand as he goeth forth.	Bpyjpop diaTrXi^aio’ ’Adava.—Xnrap(p yfjpa'C
94.	<0 pcucap k.t.X.] But thee, O	{lauta senectus) is Homeric; see X 136.
blessed lord, it beseemeth to persuade both	Xurapw responds to XnrapapirvKos 1. 15.
the spouse of Hera and the owl-eyed maid 100. iraCSuv 8€ k.t.X.] These words144
NEMEONIKAI Z\
yepa? Toirep vvv /cal apeiov omOev.	eV. e .
to S’ ipov oil 7tot€ <f>d<ret /ceap
drpoiroiai 'NeorrToXepov iX/cvaat,
eireai' ravrd Se rpl? re.Tpa.Ki r apiroXeiv
arropia reXeOei, reKvoiaiv are payfrvXaKa? Aid? Kopiv0o$. 105
respond in meaning to 11. 39, 40. yhos
answers to walStov iraiSes, alel to alel,
ye pas <f>epep to ye pas Uxoteu,
102. rd 8* ifiov x.r.X.] Never Tvill
my heart confess to having wrought wrong
to Neoptolemus by verses inflexible (i.e. irre-
vocable) . But it argues lack of wit to say
over the same words three times and four,
like barkers rhymelessly repeating to chil-
dren, ‘ Corinthus is a son of Zeus ’. drpo-
iroicrt, not indecoris (Dissen), but that can-
not be turned away. For dpiroXctv cf.
Sophocles, Philoctetes, 1238 potXei rpls
avairoKeiv pi	paxf/vXaKas is accus.
plural, co-ordinate with the unexpressed
subject of dpiroXeiv, It is usually taken
as nominative to an understood dpiroXel.
Mr Fennell holds that it qualifies KopivOos
which he apparently regards as coordinate
with (to) ravra dpvoXelv, Schneider
proposed pa\f/vXaKais agreeing with t4k-
vols (cryingfor nothing).—In these words
Pindar clearly refers to rival poets whose
uninventive genius he depreciates; and
|uu|n>\dicas (a word coined for the occa-
sion, perhaps on the analogy of pa\pl-
top os, see Hesychius sub voce pa\pl<ptopop)
gives a clue to the identity of the person
against whom this shaft is chiefly aimed.
pa\f/-vXaKas suggests its metrical equiva-
lent BaKX-vXtdys; and while -iTXa/ras
corresponds closely enough to -vXlSrjs for
the purpose of a parody, Ba*x- suggesting
the wildness of intoxication is rendered
by pa\f/. See Introduction, p. 126.
Ai8s KopivOos, a proverb, explained
thus in a scholium: The Megarians, who
were a Corinthian colony, were treated
arrogantly by the Corinthians, and when
they became strong enough revolted.
Then the Corinthians send envoys to
Megara, and these irpocreXdovTes els ttjp
CKKXrjalav aXXa re 7roXXa 8l€^t)\0ov /cat
tIXos otl 8lk altos hv ffTevaj-eiep M rots
yevojudvois 6 Atds Kopcpdos, el ar) \t)\J/oito
81kvjv vap airrCop. k<fl ols irapo^vp$kPTes
ol Meyapeis rovs Tpeofieis Xldois eftaXop •
/cat perk piKpor ewiftoT)drjaaPTtop rivtov rots
Kopipdlots Kal pax7!* yevopkprjs PiKijoapres,
<pvyf) tGov KopipSltop &7ro<pvyoPTtop itpairto-
pepoi, KTelvopres dpa iraleip top Alos
KoptpOop iKlXevop. odep tprjolp 6 Arqptop
4tl Kal pvp eirl rOov dyap pep aepvvvopkptop,
KaKtos 8k Kal 8eCXGos dwaXXaTTOPTtop ttjp
vapoiplap to6tt)p rerax^at*—For the point
of the proverb in this passage, as an
allusion to Xlyovrt yap AlaKov k.t.X. in
1. 84, see above, Introduction, p. 126.NEMEAN VIII.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY AT NEMEA IN THE
STADION WON BY DEINIS OF AEGINA.
INTRODUCTION.
The Ode in honour of Deinis, who won a footrace at Nemea about the
year 491 A.D.1, is intended for his country Aegina perhaps more than for
the victor himself. It was written in the day of her humiliation; and the
death of Megas (Meges), the father of Deinis, gave Pindar an opportunity for
introducing some mournful Lydian measures, which might at the same
time convey his sympathy to the island in her distress. The allusions to
the political situation could scarcely be clearer than they are without
becoming more than allusive.
When the ambassadors of Darius visited Greece in 491 to demand
earth and water as tokens of subjection, Aegina had submitted, and Athens
had eagerly seized the opportunity of humbling her rival, by accusing her at
Sparta of treachery to the cause of Hellenic freedom. The Spartans
listened to the charges and the result was, chiefly owing to the activity
of king Cleomenes, that ten of the noblest Aeginetans were sent as
hostages to Athens. It was said by a political opponent that Cleomenes
was bribed by the Athenians2. At this time then the Aeginetans felt that
they were compassed about by enemies, and might be glad to receive
expressions of sympathy from a poet of fame.
Pindar makes the sorrows of Ajax the central point of his hymn. He
often takes this hero as the type of a true man succumbing to envy, and
unable, from mere want of words, to meet the arts and policy of a fluent
rival. In this case the story of Ajax was particularly suggestive, for
Odysseus	was a suitable	prototype	of	the Athenians, so noted for their
readiness	of speech and	wit. The	case of Ajax shews that the art of
cajolery by cunning words is of ancient date. But it is some consolation
to reflect	that the power	of words	to	heal pain is of ancient date too ;
and Pindar suggests that	he comes	to	minister a song of healing to the
wounds of Aegina. It is also a consolation to remember the power of
1 Mezger was the first to determine tion of Aegina after 457 b.c.
the true date of this ode and explain the 2 The full account of these events will
political allusions (pp. 325, 326). Dissen be found in Herodotus vi. 49, 50.
thought the hymn referred to the condi-
B.
IO146
NEMEAN VIII;
her great hero Aeacus, and that the men of Athens and Sparta were once
upon a time proud and eager to acknowledge his lordship. Such are the
chief elements from which this Ode is constructed. We shall now see how
the poet has worked them out1.
A bright prelude, invoking H6ra, the may time of life,—closely associated
with the sweet and bitter uses of love,—is in keeping with the youth of
Deinis and meant perhaps to turn his thoughts from the grave of his father
to the advancing hours. But the ambrosial pensioners of Aphrodite’s
train carry us back to the bridal bed of Zeus and Aegina, where Aeacus
was conceived; and the transition to the great hero of Aegina is managed
with Pindar’s unfailing skill. We hear how the prince, in whose temple the
Ode is being sung, grew up to excellence in body and mind, and became
the king of Vine-land (Oenone)—the old name of Aegina. And his greatness
was so eminent that the most noble of neighbouring lords voluntarily2
became his vassals—including the Athenians3 and the Pelopids of Sparta.
And now Aeacus is invoked in behalf of Aegina and her citizens, to secure
them the continuance of this prosperity4. The poet is not singing merely
a song of triumph; he comes rather as a suppliant6 to clasp the knees
of Aeacus, while he offers his Nemean hymn which he describes as a
Lydian headband of music, richly embroidered—a characteristic metaphor
taken from the band round which the wreath of victory was twined. This
wreath of victory furnishes an opportunity for the supplication; and the
impression conveyed is that when Deinis and Megas have introduced Pindar
into the temple of Aeacus, their occupation is almost over; Deinis is lost
among the citizens of Aegina, of whom solely the poet is thinking, until he
addresses Megas in line 446.
The protection of a god may secure the permanence of well-being: this
is Pindar's thought in supplicating Aeacus and he illustrates it by the case
of Cinyras7, the beloved of Apollo, who had been blessed with passing great
wealth in Cyprus of the sea. And Pindar indicates that the prosperity of
Cinyras is to be compared to the prosperity of Aegina, not only by the
1	Mezger divides the ode thus:
irpoolfuov 1—5; apx& 6—18; kcltcl-
Tpotra 19—22; 6fi(pa\6s 23—34; fj-eraKa-
TdTpoTa 35—39; (Hppayis 40—51.
If we discard his nomenclature, this
division is reducible to a triple division
corresponding to the three metrical sys-
tems.
2	The spontaneity is emphasized by
dpoari at the beginning of the sentence
and cKovres at the end, 11. 9—10.
3	The application to contemporary
Athens is suggested by a-rpards. See
note 1. 11.
4	That this is the object of the suppli-
cation is shewn by 7dp in 1. 17.
5	k£ras is emphasized by its position
in the sentence.
6	The only direct references to the
victor and his father are in 1. 16 and 11.
44 4®*
7	The reference to Cinyras forms the
first line of the second system. By this
Pindar gains two advantages; (1) the
first and second systems are formally
connected by ocrirep; (2) the wealth of
Cinyras, compared to a fruit-tree, re-
sponds, metrically, to the vine-tree, which
in the first line of the 3rd antistrophos
symbolizes Aegina.INTRODUCTION.
147
expression 4 Cyprus of the seaf but also by a hint that the Cyprian goddess,
so gracious to her priest Cinyras, had also been especially favourable to the
union of Zeus and Aegina (notfieves Kvnpias dapav, I..71).
And now approaching the main theme, the tale of Ajax, which, being
interpreted, will explain why he should now clasp the knees of Aeacus in
supplication, Pindar professes to be apprehensive of publishing a new version
of an old story, lest envy, like some fell disease, should fasten on him. For
he too has envious rivals to complain of, like Ajax of old,—like Aegina
now,—like all who are worth envying.
Ajax, according to Pindar’s new version2, is the man of valour who
really deserved the golden arms of Achilles. But unfortunately he had no
powers of speech ; and his rival Odysseus, by flattering words, seduced the
Greeks into giving their votes in his own favour. The votes are represented
as given secretly3 4 5—as though the Danai were really ashamed of an act of
injustice, knowing well that Ajax was the better warrior.
Such is the power and such the antiquity of ndpcfrao-is, compared to a
false physician, who is attended on her rounds by flattering tales. She is
said to treat with violence the illustrious, while to the obscure she can give
an artificial frame of glory, though they are really unsound patients4.
And now we reach the third part of the Ode, where those who have
suffered like Ajax through the arts of the false physician may find salve for
their wounds from the true physician. Pindar at least is not like the Danai,
—is not a friend of Parphasis5. Some pray for more land (and we read
between the lines 4 like Athens coveting Aegina’); some pray for gold (and
we think of Sparta receiving bribes); but the prayer of Pindar is that he may
please the citizens of Aegina, and be just in his praise and in his blame6.
For just praise is really important. Excellence or ‘virtue’ in its Greek
sense, aperd, may be compared to a plant whose growth requires the dew of
friendly praise. For this simile Pindar selects the vine, indicating thereby
that his words are meant for Vine-land,, Oenone, and that the growth of
Aeacus, who had so many friends among the surrounding princes, was
a type of the growth of opera7.
1	Observe too that Cinyras is compared
to a tree laden with fruit, and cf. notes
on 1. 18 and 1. 40.
2	Elsewhere (in Nem. vn.) Pindar
repeats this new version: but it is clear
from his words that in this Ode (491 B.c.)
it was put forward for the first time.
3	Kpvfaaun iv \f/a<pois, by ballot-pebbles
cast secretly into the voting vessels.
4	See notes on 11. 22, 32, 37, 48 for the
metaphor of the physician which pervades
the Ode.
5	He prays against the contagion of
envy 11. 36—37. See note.
6	Line 39 alveuv alvrjTa	is in-
tended to contrast with 1. 22 a7rrerat 5’
i<rXQv k.t.X.
7	Compare 1. 7
2(3Xa<tt€v d’ vibs 0ivwvas ^aatXevs
X€lpi Ka'L fiovXcus apiaTOS
and 1. 40
atii;€Tcu $’ aperdf xXwpats ilp&cus ws
ore divbpeov 01 pas,
(where otva$ is my emendation). The
comparison to a tree with fruit is an echo
of the reference to Cinyras (<pvr€v0ds
1. 17, ?ppt<T€ 1. 18).
10—2148
NEMEAN VIII.
Yes, friends are useful, and not only in days of difficulty and distress,
though of course chiefly then ; but also in the hour of joy can friendship
render pledges of her loyalty1 2. And this is, after all, an occasion of joy, the
victory of Deinis, clouded indeed by the death of his father Megas. The
power of friendship or the art of the most friendly physician cannot bring
back the spirit of Megas from the underworld; but the Muses can help at
least to assuage the pain.
And Pindar here uses one of his most remarkable expressions,—
ringing almost as a gauntlet of defiance cast at the feet of Athens and
Sparta. He will not offer his services to Aegina covertly, as the Danai, in a
bad cause, served Odysseus by secret pebbles; but he will support her by a
loud, really clamorous, stone of song—a stone that crieth out. And the
same stone served too as a sort of funeral stele for Megas. Aegina and the
Chariadae (the clan of Megas and Deinis) are here closely associated, and
we may suspect that this clan was in a special manner connected with the
political difficulties of Aegina ; one might even conjecture that the death of
Megas had been in some way brought about by the rupture with Sparta.
The ministry of song is like the art of the physician; and the poet
may expect to exorcise pain by his literal charms\ The word Beparrevco
has a double sense, of which Pindar takes advantage to make his
point3. It may mean to attend as a physician, or to pay court to and flatter.
And these meanings express the distinction between the friendship of the
Danai for Odysseus and the friendship of Pindar for Aegina.
The contrast is carried further. The antiquity of Parphasis had already
been declared, but one must not on that account be dejected. One must
remember that the hymn of victory, the sovereign healer, is also ancient of
days4.
It will be seen from the foregoing analysis that the Ode falls naturally
into three parts, each occupying a metrical system. (1) In the first part
Aeacus is put forward as a hope and divine security for Aegina against all
distresses ; and the poet offers to him his poem, as a suppliant. (2) In
the second part, the myth of Ajax illustrates the power of envy, and shews
the ways of Parphasis, the false physician. (3) In the third part we learn
that there is also a true physician, here represented by the poet, whose
musical offering to Aeacus is at the same time a charm to heal the wounds of
Aegina.
This hymn, then, is the ministration of a friendly physician. The note
of friendship6 lurks even in the opening lines, in that joyous atmosphere
1	Pindar is a voluntary and loyal friend
of Aegina, as the surrounding princes
were loyal friends of Aeacus. 7rt<rra in
the last line of the third antistrophos
(1. 44) corresponds to irelOevO' in the
last line of the first antistrophos (1. 10).
2	This is the force of ijraoidais 1. 49.
2 depawevcrav 1. 26. See note on 1. 48,
where it is shewn that 7rpb<r<popov throws
a reflex light on airropai in 1. 14.
4	y\v ye phv di] waXat, 1. 51 and 7jp Kai
7raKai 1. 32. The contrast expressed in
these words was observed by Mezger.
5	The Pindaric plural (piXorares, used
in the sense of tyurres, suggests <pi\ia as
well as <pt\o77js.INTRODUCTION.
149
where tender beings hover about the goddess of love or sit, delicately
enthroned, on the eyelids of boys and maidens. The peculiarly solemn
invocation to Aeacus, the dexterous allusions to the conduct of Sparta and
Athens, the comparison of the tree at Aegina to the tree at Cyprus, the
elaborated character of Parphasis, the bold metaphor of the loud stone of
music,—all these thoughts, like the leaves of a garland arranged round a band
or mitra,, depend on a subtle thread, at first not apparent, but hidden away,
as it were, in the Lydian warp. This thread is the contrast between the
true and the false physician, or the friend and the flatterer, worked out by
a skilful use of words which had special associations with the operation of
disease or the ministration of medicine—the disease here being envy, which
Pindar regarded as perhaps the most dangerous of all moral maladies.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
v. 1. 2. a.
-1^ —	-----------— | ~\J—— — — “ ^	A |	16.
v% 3. b. —— v-/ — w------— w —---A A |	9*
vv. 4. 4. 5. d.
y/ —----------—ww —|	--|	l6.
The structure is mesodic, and the formula
8.	8. 9. 8. 8.
Epode.
VV. I. 2.	a.	
J A —			 A I -V	vv-wv/- A |	H-
vv. 3. 4.	«'• , , . |	
	—. . — V/ — W — V-/ — j w ““ v-/ W A 1 7/. 5. b. — v-/	w/ v/ — — • — v/— A | 7*	14.
B.
v. 6. c. -w-------------------w-v-wv-ww-4-1* A
V. 7. c\ — ^ —-------w---------------V/ — A
The first part of the epode is epodic, the second antistrophic.
10.
10.
The rhythm of this ode is dactyloepitritic.
was (partly at least) in Lydian mood ; see 1. 15.
The musical accompanimentNEMEONIKAI H'.
AEINIAI1 AiriNHTH*
STAAIEI.
r/flpa 7TOTVia, /cdpvl\ ’A^poStra? dfifipoaiav tfrikoraTCOV, <rrpt a.
TrapdevrjioL9 veoi<s Traihcov r i(j)l£ot,<ra y\€(f>dpoL9
1 I have followed Schmid in correcting
A etvig., a mistake of the Byzantine scribes.
1. "Hpa k.t.X.] wpa is the season of
youth in its ripeness, here personified.
In the Tenth Olympian the victor is
described (1. 103) as Idiq. icaXbv Copq. re
KeKpapAvov; his comeliness is tempered by
puberty; and in the next words a wore
avatdia Tavvfv/jdei ttot/jjov dXaXfce obv Ku-
irpoyevei (she who once, in conjunction
with Aphrodite, secured immortality for
Ganymede) iopa is almost personified.
uoTvia is used by Pindar of the nymph
Libya (Pyth. ix. 55), the Grace Aglaia
(01. xiv. 13), the Muse (Nem. 111. 1),
Persephone (fr. 37), a/n-is’AeXfov (p. 107,
9), and once of Aphrodite, with a genitive
case (Pyth. iv. 213 fieXewv). Mr Myers’
translation, Spirit of youth, is attractive,
but suggests modern associations.—The
plural of <|>iX6Tas (a word which implies
sexual enjoyment; compare the Homeric
<Pl\6ttjti Kal evvr/) occurs three times in
Pindar: (1) here, (2) Pyth. iv. 92 o<ppa
tis rav iv dwarQ (ftCXorartav eTrixf/afeiv
iparat, where suggests love touches,
(3) Pyth. IX. 39 KpvTTTou KXaides ivri cro-
<pois Heidovs lepav <f>iXoTaT(ov. ap.f3p6<rios
denotes the peculiar effluence exhaled by
divine persons or things. It is rarely met
in Pindar. In fr. 198 we read of the
The superscription does not occur in the
older mss.
delectable a??ibrosial water issuing from
the fair spring of Tilphossa (fj.eXtya.0es
a/jLppbcnov tidwp); in Pyth. iv. 299 of a
fountain bubbling with ambrosial verses,
irayav ap.fipooluv iiriojv, where the adjec-
tive could hardly have been used but for
the image of the spring. Each verse,
frros, is a bead of water with a divine
effluence.
Render:	Sovran Youth, herald of
Aphrodite's ambrosial Loves, whose seat is
on the young eyelids of maidens and of
boys, him thou dost bear aloft with kind
constraining hands, but another with touch
untoward.
2.	€<|>(£oura] The seat of desire (as
of sleep, Pyth. ix. 24 and Moschus 11. 3
fjirvos fiXetp&potoiv ifplfav) is the eyelids;
cf. Soph. Antigone, 795 vik$ S' ivapyrjs
fiXe<f>ap(av tpepos evXiKTpov vbptpas.—The
received reading are Trapdevrftots involves
the insuperable difficulty of a sentence
without a verb (are fiaordfas being
equivalent to a participle coordinate with
i(pL£oLoa). It is clear that a word has
fallen out before italdtov and that are is an
awkward insertion to rectify the metre.
The line began with irapOevTfiots (B
wapdemfiotot, D wapBevlotoi) and it is notNEMEAN VIII;
151
top fiev dfiepotavdyrca9 X€PaL ySacrrafe^, erepop S’ erepai9.
ay air aid Be /caipov p,rj irXapaOepra irpb<$ epyop etcacrrop
tg)p apeiopcop ipcoToop eiriKparelp BvpaadaC	S
otofc /cal A109 A lylpas re Xetcrpop iroipuepes ap^eiroX'qaap olpt. a!.
Ki/7T/owi9 Bdpcop* efiXavrep S’ u/09 Olpcopa9 ftacnXev*;
KaL fiovXal9 api(TTo$• 7roWd iw 7ro\\ol Xirapevop IBeiP'
difficult to discover the word which has
been accidentally lost. By writing the
words in uncials we can see how easily
viois might have been omitted by a copy-
ist (by parablepsia).
TTAp06N6IOICN€OICTTAlAON.
vcois is not superfluous; cf. Nem. in. 72
e? Trawl vioun irats, and Pj/M. x. 59
vlaiolv re wapdivoun /liXtifia. We have
the opposite of * young eyelids * in Pyth.
IV. 121 4k 8* dp* avTov wop.</>6Xv^av d&Kpva
yrjpaXiuv yXetpdpav, tears welled from his
aged eyelids.
3.	dvdytcas] Compare Spenser’s, * deare
constraint.’—The mss. reading can*be
defended by Pyth. iv. 234 avdyKas 4vre-
<riu instruments of constraint (wherewith
Jason binds the necks of Aeetes’ oxen).
Observe that afiepos is treated as an adj.
of two terminations ; in Nem. vn. 83 and
ix. 44 we have the usual feminine forms.
(3aordj> (gestare) is used here in its literal
sense, bear (as in Pyth. iv. 296); but
Pindar elsewhere has it in the figurative
sense of exalting (—p.eyd\bvecv), 01. xn.
19 and Isth. in. 8. This transition sug-
gests the idea of ‘chairing’, erlpais is
euphemistic for rough (schol. <sKXrjpdis);
we may best render it in English by a
negative word, untoward, ungentle.
4.	aycwraTa] It is good and pleasant;
for plural cf. Airopa, above IV. 71. p.rj
<irXava04vra is not quite fir\ a/xaprovra, nor
is afxaprev quite the same as iwXavddrj in
Nem. vii. 37. a/xapreiu is to miss the
destination, irXavridrjvou to deviate from
the road, here Koupos, due measure.
The 0iXorarey, pensioners of Aphro-
dite’s train, lose their personality and pass
into the Spares, objects of love, in line 5;
again in line 6 these 4pares partly resume
their personality and become the shep-
herds who dispense the gifts of the Cy-
prian queen.
5.	ap€i6vo>v] praestantiorum; ‘die
besseren Liebesfreuden’ (Mezger); cf.
apdpois, 1. 3. liriKpaTctv, potiri.
6.	otoi icat k.t.X.] Even such loves as
ministered round the couch of Zeus and
Aegina, dispensing the gifts of the Cyprian
dame ; and a son grew up, king of Oenona
(Vineland), most mighty and wise.
In 01. x. 8 iroifJLrjv is used figuratively
of an heir, dispenser of wealth. (It does
not occur elsewhere in Pindar.) woifxalva
is also used figuratively, but rather means
fovere (01. xi. 9 ; Isth. iv. 12.)—-dpjniro-
Xctv means to serve as an d/KphroXos (Oe-
pawebeiv, Schol. Pyth. IV. 271), but sug-
gests the notion of hovering round. pXcurrc
occurs in 01. vii. 69, but the verb is not
found elsewhere in Pindar. Notice that
e is short here before (ZX.—For Olvco-
vas see above iv. 46 and v. 15; and
compare below, note on 1. 40. The close
approximation of Kvirpla. and Oivibva is
designed (see Nem. iv. 46).
A scholiast explains the connexion of
Hora with Aegina thus: elra iiriKupuacr-
rtxws rav irarpiav i^dirrerat, X4yav rrjv
Alyivav 5i’ a pate par os bwo Aids dpijp-
irdcrdcu.—With xeiPL K(d povXais aptoros
the Homeric line (r 179)
dpufrorepop (ZaaCXebs r’ dyaObs kpar epos
r alxMTifis
is compared in the scholia.
8. iroXXd viv k.t.X.] Many prayed
earnestly to behold him (desiring help or152
NEMEONIKAI H'.
d/3oarl yap r/pcbcov acoroi 7repivai€Ta6vTQ)v
rjOeXov tceivov ye ireiOeaff* dvafyais e/eovres,	lO
oi re Kpavaals iv ’A0dvai<riv apfiotyv (TTpaTov	iir. a.
oi t dvd 'Zirdprav Tie\o7rr)idhai.
hcera<; Ala/cov (repuvwv yovarcov iroAio? ff virep
dtrrdbv ff virep tg3z/S* cmrop,ai <f>ep(t)v
Avhiav pbirpav Kava\ahd ireTrouciApbevav,	15
AeLvios Suradov araStcov /cal irarpo9 Meya Nep,ealov dya\p,a.
counsel, because he was xeLp'L K0LL fiovXais
api<TTos). The phrase iroXXa Xiraveveiv,
make many entreaties, occurred above
v. 31.
9. d^oa/rf K-T.X.] For unbidden the
jloiver of heroes who dwelled round about,
were fain to submit to his dominion, of
their own will—they who marshalled a
host in craggy Athens and the Pelopids in
Sparta's plain. apoari and avai-lai (plu-
ral) are awa^ dprjfilva. The singular
ava$-ia occurs only in a fragment of Aes-
chylus.—Pindar’s usual word to express
wepiva.L€T&ovTes (which he uses only here)
is irepiKTloves.—The point of these lines is
that the heroes became vassals of Aeacus
voluntarily; and this is brought out by
introducing the sentence with dpoari and
ending the strophe with ckoptcs.—For
dWos see note on 11. 9. The phrase
‘flower of knights ’ occurs in Troilus and
Cressida, ii. 3.
11.	Kpavacus ev ’AOavauriv] This
expression occurs three times in Pindar;
here, OI. vn. 82 and 01. xm. 38. In
Aristophanes, Birds 123, Athens is called
ai KpavaaL, and in Acharnians 75 Kpavad
7toXls. The epithet of course referred to
the Acropolis. In Isth. 1. 4 Kpavad is an
epithet of Delos.—The words d'ppo&ov
OTpaTOV, of the Athenians, are remark-
able. arparos clearly alludes to the
Athenian democracy of Pindar’s time;
in Pyth. 11. 87 he calls a democracy
Xdppos <ttparos.
12.	dvd Siraprav] In Sparta. Cf.
Pyth. xi. 52 dvd 7roXiv, in the city; Isth.
vii. 63 "lo-Qpuov av vairos; Nem. vi. 46.
The form IleXoTrrjidScu is related to an
hypothetical *IIeXo7reu$, dative IIeXo7r^t, as
’A/JL<piTpv(ovia8r)s to ’Ayu^irpi/wv, dative ’A/a-
<f>LTpbu)VL. From	dative IIAoirt,
comes IIeXo7rt577S. Pindar makes the
power of the Pelopids contemporary with
Aeacus, contrary to the usual chronology
of the legends ; see Muller, Aegin. p. 36.
14.	dmropxu] For the force see note
on lines 37 and 48.
15.	AvSfav k.t.X.] A head-band of Ly-
dian music broidered with ringing threads,
—a hymn partly sung to Lydian harmony.
Kava\a8d refers to the sound of the instru-
ments, especially flutes. Compare Soph.
Trachiniae, 641 avXbs ovk avapalav iaxwv
xava%dv iiraveunv. Pyth. x. 39 has been
quoted above on vii. 80. In the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo, 1. 185 (or Hymn to
Pythian Apollo 1. 7) Kavaxh is used of
the lyre:
roio 8b (p6pfuy£
Xpvotov virb irXrjicTpov Kavaxw ^X€L
ifiepoecroav.
For the metaphor cp. v<j>alvu) woikIXop av-
drjfia, I weave a broidered anadem, frag.
179 (Schol. Nem. vii. 116 eirei to Troi'qp.a
v<pa<rp.aTi irapboiKcv). The pur pa was a
band of wool which formed the founda-
tion of the crown of leaves.
16.	Ncpcaiov ayaXjjia] A thing of
grace from Nemea, to deck two victories
won in the race-course by Deinis and his
father Megas. For the adjective Nefieaios
see above 11. 4. &yaXp.a suggests that
the ode will serve as a statue for DeinisNEMEAN VIII.
153
cvv 0€(p yap rot <f>vT€v0€l<? o\/3o<? dv0pd>7roi<rt, Trap/iovcorepo9*
CTTp.
ocnrep /cal Kivvpav ’iftpiae 7rXovTtp irovria ev ttot€ KvTrptp.
icttafiat, hr} Troaai Kov<f>oi$y dpirvecov re irpiv ti (frdpev.
7roWa yap 7roXka XikeKrai' veapd S’ i^evpovra hopev ftaaavtp 20
€5 eKey'Xpv airas icivhvvo9* oyjrov he Xoyoc <j>0ovepol<Tiv'
airrerai S’ ecrk&v dec, yeipovecrai S’ ovtc epl^ei.
and a sepulchral stele for Megas (cf.
Nem. x. 67).
17.	<rvv 0c$ yap k.t.X.] Pindar suppli-
cates Aeacus, because weal planted under
the auspices of a god—Aeacus is the son
of Zeus—is more likely to be permanent.
Trdp/JLovos = irap/AoitL/JLOS (Pyth. VII. 20 trap-
p.ovip.av €vdaip,ovlav). For the meta-
phorical use of <pvT€jj(a cf. Isth. v. 12 abv
tI oi 5aIp.&v (pvrebu 56%av, and above
Nem. IV. 59.
18.	o<nr€p k.t.X.] The antecedent of
8cnrep is deos. Cinyras, the beloved of
Apollo, is mentioned in Pyth. 11. 15.
t'Ppur€ sustains the metaphor of <pvrevdds
—a tree laden with fruit; cf. fipidyai 5£
5lv5pea tcapw(p, r 212. We met (3pld(o in
its intransitive sense Nem. ill. 40; here
the aorist is transitive, to load. Trans-
late, weighed down the branches of Cinyras
zuith wealth.
19.	ftrTOjj.cu k.t.X.]	/ stand on feet
lightly poised. To render on light feet
would not convey the meaning, while on
tiptoe hardly represents Pindar’s style.
The metaphor from starting in a foot-
race is appropriate to Deinis’ victory in
the stadion. Kob<f>oiaiv eKveuaaL 7roalv oc-
curs in 01. Xiii. 114, there too alluding
to distinctions of the victor Xenophon in
races. In Pyth. ix. 11 we have x€pi
Kotj<pq.y in 01. XIV. 17 Kov<pa (3ijSQvra.
T€ connects ainrvlwv with Troaai Kob<pois.
<(>d|A€v is the only form of the pres. inf.
of <J>apd found in Pindar.—In explanation
of dp/irWwv a scholiast remarks:
oi fxcydXa <j>ojvdv deXovrcs olov rpay(p5ol
irpoaavawviovaLV iirnroXv, tv’ 8rav cu/acpu)-
vyawaw €%apic€oy hrarXlov ij <pojvr).
20. iroXXa yap k.t.X.] Many tales
have been told in many a wise. But to
discover new things and deliver them to
the touchstone for men to prove, is the
height of danger. For tales are a treat to
envious men, and envy ever assaileth the
noble and striveth not with the mean.
The mere translation of these lines
offers no difficulty; but touching their
meaning commentators are divided.
(1) Dissen refers ttoXXcl XiXeKrai to Ciny-
ras, and explains: ‘ si carminis ratio pos-
tulasset longiorem de Cinyra narrationem,
non tacuisset Pindarus nec timuisset
reprehensores; nunc autem orditur de
Cinyra et statim iterum mittit eum, nulla
alia de causa quam ut quasi timens invi-
dos de invidia ipsa dicat ad eamque sen-
sim transeat ’.	(2) Mezger explains ‘ die
verschiedensten Dinge sind zwar schon
auf die verschiedenste Weise dargestellt
worden (ohne dass einer etwas dabei
riskirt hatte) and supposes the novelty,
for whose reception Pindar feels appre-
hensive, to be the ascription of Odysseus’
victory to his art in twisting words.
Mezger understands by Xoyot tales, * Er-
zahlungen, Gedichte ’. (3) Mr Fennell’s
interpretation nearly coincides with Mez-
ger’s, but he explains Xoyot as discus-
sion, criticism.—In my judgment Mezger
is right. I believe that Xoyos was gene-
rally used by Pindar of his myths, as
clearly in Nem. IV. 31 Xoyov 0 /j.rj %vvids.
There can, in any case, be no question
that the lines apply to what follows, and
not to what is said of Cinyras.
22. airrerai] The subject is 6 4>B6pos,
implied in <p$ovepoiaiv. Dissen quotes154
NEMEONIKAI H'.
/celvo? /cal Teka/JLobvos Sdyfrev viov fyaayavtp dfjbfyucvXicrcus. dvr. /8\
fj tlv ayXtoaraov fiev, rjrop S’ aX/ccfiov, XaOa /carpet
iv Xvyptp veUei* fikyiarov S’ aloXcp \/revSec ye pas dvrerarai. 2$
/cpvfyiaiGiydp iv yfrd^oLS ’Ohvorar) Aavaol Oepairevaav'
yjpvakwv S’ Ala? arep'qdels ottXgov <j>6va> rraXaiaev.
17 /aai/ dvofJLOLa ye Bdoiaiv iv deppbw %poC
€7T. /S'.
Aeschylus, Persae, 13 where ’ Aoiaroylvvis
supplies the nominative ’Atr/a to the verb
Pavfa, The metaphor in airrerai is from
a disease, cf. Thucyd. II. 48 ^aro
avdptbwiov; and in the following line
da\J/€v carries on the figure. We shall
see the medical metaphor recurring in
Oepdwevaav, 26, in 11. 32—34 (where
Parphasis is the false physician) and in 11.
48—50 (where Pindar is the true physi-
cian): also in 11. 36, 37. Parts of dVra;
occur four times in this Ode (14, 22, 36,
37)-
23.	Kctvos k.t.X.] The son of Tela-
mon too felt the eating malady of enzy,
when his flesh closed upon the sword.
Kdvos — o (fidbvos, which is said to have
‘rolled Ajax round his sword’. Compare
TcetTTurra ripde ire pi veoppdvrcp	Sopho-
cles Ajax 828, (pa<rydv(p Trepnrrvxvs 899,
iyxos Trepnrerls 907, also Isthm. ill. 54
aXKav rapdav irepi $ (paoydvip [where
however Mr Tyrrell proposes to read
Suc&v ire pi, = irepipaX&v],	For KvXivSu)
cf. KV\Lv86pL€VOS 7T6/H Xa^KV> ® 86.	8a\j/€V
carries on the metaphor implied in 8\f/ov.
24.	ij tiv* k.t.X.] Verily, oblivion
burieth many a one, whose tongue is silent,
but his heart valiant, in dolorous strife;
and supreme honour has been the prize of
shifty falsehood. Ajax and Odysseus are
types. Xd6a KaT^tt means that Ajax
was not sung, like Odysseus, by Homer.
Xvyptp has the penult short here, but in
Pyth. XII. 14 we find \vyp6v. dvx£ra,Tcu
iprotenditur, ducta locutione a praemio
certaminis ad consequendum proposito’,
Dissen. Compare below 1. 34 avrelvei.
relvia has often the force of teneo rather
than of tendo.
26.	Kpv<j>£cu<ri k.t.X.] The Greeks
balloted in favour of Odysseus; Pindar
implies that they would have been afraid
to vote for him openly. Compare Sopho-
cles Ajax 1135:
Teucer. kXIttttjs yap avrov ^/i}<poiroibf
ijvpidrjs.
Menelaus. ev rots SiKaarais kovk epoi
rbb' io<f>dXij.
27.	<f>o'vu> TraXaurcv] Wrestled with
death, iraXaioev suggesting agony and
<f>6vos implying a violent death attended
with bloodshed. iraXalio is constructed
with a dative, cf. Pyth. ix. 27. For its
metaphorical usage see Pyth. iv. 290
keivos "ArXas ovpavtp TTpociraXaiei, and
Hesiod, Works and Days 413 cLttj<ti
rraXaiet.
28.	1} p-av k.t.X.] Of a surety, utt-
equal were the gaping wounds they dealt
in the warm flesh of the foemen, when
they were in the battle-press beneath the
spear defensive,—over the body of Achilles
new-slain, and on other days of labours
fraught with death to many. For prj-
yvvpu of wounds cf. Sophocles, Ajax 834
wXevpav Siappr/i-avra T<pde <f>a<rydvip.—irc-
X€fu£o|j.€Voi, Wakefield’s emendation for
7roXep.L&p.evoi, is supported by the scho-
lium vir’ &Xei;ip.pp6Tov Xbyxys kivou/xcuol.
zreXepdfa means to shake, ireXepl$opat to
quake (used of the earth) and in battle to
be hard-driven. dXc££|&pporosis a Pindaric
compound, occurring also in Pyth. v. 90
’AiroXXotvlais aXe^tfipphrois iropiirais. On
the analogy of aXe^UaKos, dXe^itpdppaKos,
aXei;idpr) etc. it ought to mean keeping men
away. In a fragment of Critiashowever weNEMEAN VIII
iS5
eXtcea prj^av TreXepitypevoi
vir dXegtfifipoTw Xcrf^a, ra pev apcf)' 'A^cXel veofcrovw, 30
dXXcov T€ pbyQtov iv 7roXv(j>06poc9
apepais. i^dpd S’ apa 7rdp<f>a<ri<; fjv teal iraXai,
aipvXoDV pvdcop 6po<f)oiTo$, f>oXo<f>pa8r]<;} kclkottoiov oveiSos.
a to pev Xapirpov ftiarat, twv S’ dtfidvTcov tevSo9 avTeivei aaOpov.
<rrp. 7'.
etrj prj irore pot toiovtov rjdo$> Zev irarep^ dXXd tceXevOoi? 35
dirXoaLs £0x29 itfxnrTolpav, Oavdbv <09 iraial tcXeos
prj to Svcr^apov irpoadyfrco. 'xpvaov eij'XpvTcu, ttcSlov S’ erepoi
find &\ei;i\oyos in the sense of shielding
and promoting discourse. Were it not for
the passage in the 5th Pythian we might
explain dke^lppporos \&yxa as the lance
which wardeth men off. vcSktovos (equiva-
lent to v€oa<payr/s) is only found here.
For ra piv—aWcov rt cf. pa\a phv Tpo<f>dis
erotpov tmrwv, xatpoi'ra re geviats irav-
86k<hs 01. IV. 16.—€V iroXv<j>06pois is
Boeckh’s emendation of mss. wo\v<j)0b-
pouriv iv. It seems that iv was acci-
dentally omitted after pbxOw and then
inserted in the wrong place.
32-	*X®pd S’ K.T.X.] Yea, deadly
guile in speech is from of old\ walking
with flattering tales and itnagining de-
ceit, a shame that worketh harm,—who
treateth the illustrious with violence, and
for the obscure setteth up glory of heart
unsound. irap<f>curis, distortion or perver-
sion of truth (calumnia), corresponds to
the verb Trdp<f>api which occurs more
than once in Pindar; cf. above Nem. v.
31 (middle); 01. vii. 66 OeQv 8’ opKov
piyav pi) icap^apev; Pyth. IX. 43
irap<papev tovtov \byov. The adjective
opocjxKTos (probably first used by Pin-
dar) is not companion, but fellow-visi-
tant. Parphasis is a false physician,
who pays visits in the company of
flattering words (<f>otrdv is the word for
a physician’s visits).—cupvXos combines
the ideas of crafty and bland. 80X0-
<J>paSq's occurs in the Homeric Hymn
to Hermes, 1. 282. KaKOiroios is not
found in an earlier author than Pindar;
it probably had a medical flavour, nox-
ious, deleterious.
34.	d<|>avTQ>v] Those who ought to be
obscure. Cf. Pyth. xi. 30 6 8i xaA”7Xa
irviiov acpavTov fiplpei, 01. I. 47 ws 8*
d(pavros iwe\es. dvrcCvci indicates that
the sentiment of line 25 is echoed; but
it suggests the tension of a really unsound
body to present an artificially healthy
appearance, oaBpbs is a medical term.
35.	toiovtov iJ0os] That is w&p<j>cuns.
tydirroficu is used by Pindar both with
the dative (01. I. 88, Pyth. vm. 60) and
with the genitive (01. ix. 12, Nem. IX.
47). airXoais is opposed to the crooked
ways of irdp<pa<rts and her comrades, the
aipbkoi pvOoL.
37. irpocrdxl/w] This verb is not
found elsewhere in Pindar, and its oc-
currence in such close proximity to i<f>air-
rolpav is noteworthy. In Soph. Oedipus
at Colonus, 235, we have irpoodineLV
XP&s 7r6\ei. Soph. fr. 514 Tpoodwreiv
<pappaKov. Here the suggestion is of the
transmission of a disease. Pindar wishes
that he may not come in contact with the
noxious presence of Envy and convey the
contagion to his children. Cf. the use of
TrepiaiTTeiv with 8vei8os, al<rgtnn\v &c.
Xpvcrov k.t.X.] Some pray for gold\
others for boundless land. I pray that I
may win the favour of my fellow-citizens
and without forfeiting it may hide my
limbs in earth, praising things of goodNEMEONIKAI H\
156
airepavTOv' £ya> S’ daroLS aScov teal %dovl yvla Kakv'tyaLp?,
alvecov alvrjra, p,op,<j)ap 8* iTnaireipcov aXcrpols.
apr. 7'.
avIjeTcu S’ dperd, ^Xcopai9 iepcai? <09 ot€ SepBpeop oepas, 40
£p (rotyois dpSp&p dep0€L<r £p Sucalois re, 7rpo9 vypop
alOepa. yfieiai Se 7rapTolai <f>LX(OP aphp&p' ra p,ep dp,<f>l ttopol9
report and sprinkling blame on trans-
gressors. erepoi is understood with x/>u-
<r6v. Bergk reads Kay for Kal but Karin
with the dative is not found in Pindar.
Kal really presents no difficulty: having
pleased the citizens in my lifetime, may I
die still pleasing them (‘etiam moriar
tabs’, Dissen). For the allusions in
Xpva&v and irebiov seeIntroduction. XPV(T^V
echoes the xpwr&w dwXuv (1. 27), desired
of Odysseus and Ajax.—aorots refers to
the citizens of Aegina, daruv ruvde of
1. 14.
40. atfgcTtn 8* opera x.r.X.] A cor-
ruption in the mss. has spoiled this line.
They give cos ore divdpeov atocrei <ro<f>ois.
Boeckh’s emendation fooei tv <ro<poTs has
been generally accepted ; but it is clear
that the corruption lies deeper, as q.<r<ru
is an unsuitable word. As Bergk says:
‘sufficiebat atf£erat, quod additur aiWec
non solum otiosum sed etiam incommo-
dum est, siquidem Upaats et alcraei non
satis apte conciliantur’. [Mr Tyrrell
however has called my attention to 2 506
where tjlooov means rose up. This pas-
sage might in some measure defend the
use of aloau with divdpeov.] It is also
to be observed that the simple verb aiaau
does not elsewhere occur in Pindar, and
that perdloou is not only never contracted
to per^aou but has the antepenultimate
always long. Bergk proposes aXvtp iv,
but Pindar would not have used alvos
after alviuv alvrpra in the preceding line,
and tv <ro<poh avdpuv sufficiently indicates
his meaning.
I have ventured to read us ore divdpeov
oivas, tv. The syllable 01N fell out acci-
dentally after ON, and then the unmean-
ing letters &C6N were emended to &IC6I.
Pindar compares the growth of dperd
in the favourable environment of wise
and just men, to that of a vine watered
by dews. Of such a growth the Aegi-
netan hero, Aeacus, was a type; his
birth and growth were described in 11. 6
—8. And Pindar in his favourite way
indicates this. Aeacus was the king of
Oenone, Vineland,
tp\aarev 5’ vios Olvuvas jScuriXebs,
and dpera (Aeacus was apiaros) is com-
pared to the vine;
avijerai d’ dperd us ore divdpeov oivas.
Excellence waxeth as the tree of a
vine fed by tender dews, and is exalted,
amid wise and just men, to the yielding
aether, vypov connotes the elasticity
of the aether. Indefinable approaches
the meaning, but a positive word is re-
quired. Here, as often, a modem poet
supplies the most adequate equivalent,
and I have taken a hint from Shakspere’s
yielding air.
tv <ro<f>ois tv diKaiois re refers especially
to poets—such as are not like the poet of
Odysseus.
42. xP€^at &€ K.r.X.] Divers are the
uses of friends; supremely in hours of
distress, but joy also seeketh that one should
set up for her visible pledges.
B has mar a * u Miya, D wiorav u
"Mitya. The scholiast explains iirifyrei di
Kal 77 ruv 6p.pA.ruv rip^is rb irurrov, wore
6i<rdai tv 6ppaai. Triclinius read irlanv,
and Mommsen from the scholium deduced
ttl(tt6v. But it is difficult to believe
that either ttkttov or wlanv could have
become corrupted to Tcurra before w.
Bergk suggested tturrd vip (v<p is outNEMEAN VIII.
IS7
uTrepcoTara * fiaarevet Be /cal repyfn9 ei; opupacn Oeadai
mar a foi. Meya, to S9 avn9 redv	KOfii^av
oil fioi Bvvarov. /ceveav S’ €\7t/8g>z/ xavvov r^\o9*	€7r. 7'. 45
creO Se 7rarpa XapcaBat,? re Xdfipov
of place here). The reading adopted in
the text involves scarcely any change and
improves the sense. OI before a vocative
was liable to become w. The addition of
fot removes ambiguity and makes it clear
that joy seeks, not to make but, to have
made for her (by poetry) a visible pledge
of her existence. For the reflexive use of
fot in Pindar cf. 01. xm. 76:
deity re...
cos rb fot avra
Tirjvbs...tolls 2topev
8afiaol<f>pova XPV(T&V
where fot refers to the subject of deity.
For the position of foi at the end of the
sentence, cf. New. x. 79 Zevs S’ avrlos
rfXvdb fot, where it ends a clause.—The
plural Tiara corresponds to vTepdrrara
preceding. In 01. xi. 6 hymns are called
a Tiarbv opKiov fieyaXats ape rats, which
illustrates the use of Tiara here.
44.	Meya] But bring back thy soul
again, Megas,—/ cannot. A slight break
in the translation may partially repro-
duce the effect of carrying the sentence
into the epode.
45.	Kcvcav k.t.X.] And the end of
fond hopes is vain; a parenthesis, keve6s
and xa^vos are similarly associated in
Pyth. II. 61 Xa^V(t- TpaTidi TaXatfiovei
Kevea (where however nevebs is more ob-
jective, xa^vos subjective, while here it is
the reverse). One might translate Mil-
ton’s ‘vain deluding joys’ by rbpxj/tes
Xavvai re Kal Keveai.
46.	o*€v iraTpcj x.r.X.] But for thy
country and for the Chariadae to rest on,
I can set a loud stone of music in honour
of the feet of two men which twice won
auspicious fanie. Svvarov is carried on
from ov fjioi bvvarbv to vTepeicrai. From
the schol. avaarrfpity Mezger proposed
vTepiaaai (from vTepeiaa), supposing the
song to be compared to a stone placed over
the tomb of Megas. But vTepbaaai (right-
ly rejected by Herwerden) would almost
necessarily require a genitive to follow;
it could hardly be used absolutely, vrrc-
pcurai, from for-epeidw, suits the dative
tiIrpq, Xapiadais re, where irdrpq. is most
simply taken as country, not clan (so
schol. rfj 8b ofj tarpibi).—If Pindar had
meant primarily a gravestone he would
not have used XlQos, which is extremely
rare in this sense; the only case quoted
in Liddell and Scott is 17 XLdos in an epi-
gram of Callimachus. The point of this
bold metaphor of a sounding stone is
different. The poet contrasts his own
honesty with the flattery (T&p<paois) of
others, illustrated by the case of Odysseus.
The Greeks, whose spirit is reflected by
Homer, served Odysseus by secret pebbles,
Kpv<f>iaiai ev \f/d<pois OepaTevoav (1. 26).
Pindar casts no secret pebbles for his
heroes; he sets fast a loud stone of song.—
For loud is the meaning of Xaf3pos (so
schol. evrovov piovotKTjv arfjXrjv) which is
generally misinterpreted (Cookesley even
proposed r iXaej>p6v). A false connex-
ion with \afi(3dvcj has not only misled
lexicographers, but affected the later use
of the word. In Homer Xafipos always
means loud or boisterous; vdiop Xa(Spbra-
rov (P 385) is clamorous raint Zbipvpos
Xafipos (B 148) the loud west wind &c.
In Pyth. III. 40 aiXas 5’ a/JL(pb8pafxev
Xafipov 'Afpaiorov, Xappov signifies the
noise made by the fire. In 01. vm. 36
Xafipov a/jLTvevaat KaTvbv, the noise of
the rushing fire and smoke in the confla-
gration of the walls of Troy is suggested.
In Pyth. II. 244 bpaKovros 5’ etx^TO Xa-
pporardv yevucov (the reading is somewhatI5«
NEMEONIKAI H'.
vnrepelacu XiOov Moiaaiov €/ca,Ti nroStSv €V(ovvficov
SU Srj 8volv. %cdpto 8e nTpo<T<f>opov
iv /-Lev epyq) /copnrov lets, inraoiSal? 8* avrjp
vdSvvov icai ti$ /ca/iarov 0r)/c€V. f\v <y€ pbdv inTuctopuo? vpvo9	50
8rj iraKai /cal nrplv yeveaOai rap *Ahpaarov rav t€ KaSpelcop epiv.
doubtful), the epithet becomes much more
effective when we recognise that it does
not mean * voracious *, which would be
somewhat otiose, but expresses the loud
hissing of the monster. 6 Xa/3pos OTparbs,
Pyth. II. 87, means the noisy mob, and
\a(3pos has the same sense in 01, 11. 95
(XdftpoL KbpaKes). \af3peijo/j.(u means to
talk loudly, hence talk rashly, brag; and
the same meaning is apparent in the
Aeschylean compounds XappooropLeXv and
\af3p6(rvTos. In the Atalanta in Calydon
Artemis is invoked to come ‘with clamour
of waters and with might’; XajSpois obv
VSaoiv would be a good Greek rendering.
The use of the word in later authors was
affected by an association with \aj3elv,
and it acquired the sense of violent
greediness.
birepeurai, it may be observed, suggests
propping with a pillow, and perhaps had
some special medical use.
47.	cvwvvpwv] An allusion to the
names of the father and son, M^yas and
Aeivis (jityas and deivos).
48.	XaCpu & k.t.X.] I rejoice to
minister due praise in honour of an ex-
ploit ; and many a man ere now exorcised
the pain of toil by songs, Howbeit the
hymn of victory is of ancient date, even
before the strife arose between Adrastus
and the folk of Cadmus. Taking irpo<r-
4>opov in connexion with the following
declaration that song is a physic for pain,
I believe that there is a play on a medical
sense of the word, irpoofpipeodai means
to make an application, or to administer
medicine. This supports my explanation
of \L0ov as a contrast to ^atpots of 1. 26;
for then we have the further contrast of
depdirewav there with the true physician
of 11. 48—50.—vwdvvia is used by Pindar
in Pyth. ill. 6. For irpo<r<t>opos with iv
cf. 01. IX. 80 elijv evpT]<TL€7r^s avayeicrdat
irpoo<f>opos iv ’M.ourdv 8L<f>pip.
irp6o<f>opov responds (as Mezger has
noticed) to airtofidi <pipiov in the same
line of the first epode. The responsion
shews that airro/iai there is intended to
suggest, beyond its primary sense, the
touch of a friendly physician.
50.	yt pav] Cp. Isth. ill. 18 arpurol
ye fiav iratdes 0eQ>v, howbeit the children of
the gods are proof against wounds. 01.
XIII. 104 vvv 5’ ~l\irofiai filv, iv delp ye
fibv reXos. So also Pyth. 1. 17 and 50;
vill. 18.
51.	8tj iroXai] Contrast with Kai
iraXai of 1. 32. Song supplies the anti-
dote of calumny. In Isth. vn. 1 the comus
is called a Xifrpov evdotjov Ka/idruv.—The
Nemean games were said to have been
instituted by Adrastus before his expedi-
tion against Thebes: OTparevodvroiv yap
tujv irepl ’Adpacrrov ini Qyjfias 6 'Apxifiopos
biro rod dpoLKOvros 8i€<j>dap77, oi 8e iir’
avT(p tov fiopov ap^avTL to Nifiea IdrjKav
(schol.).[NEMEAN] IX.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY AT SICYON IN THE
CHARIOT-RACE WON BY CHROMIUS OF AETNA.
INTRODUCTION.
Ecce iterum Chromius/ residing not now in Syracuse, as when the
First Nemean Ode was written, but in the city of Aetna, recently founded,
whither Hiero had sent him to govern it, or at least to take some part in the
administration. In his new abode he celebrated (perhaps in 472 B.c.1) the
anniversary of a victory won by his mares, years before, in a chariot race at
Sicyon, in Apollo’s games held there and in those days only less famous
than the Pythian festival of Delphi; and a comus or ode for singing in
procession to the sound of lyres and flutes was composed for the feast by
Pindar. This Sicyonian Ode has been included in the Nemean collection,
along with two other ‘unattached’ hymns, which have as little to do with
N emea.
The thoughts of the First Nemean and the Ninth ‘Nemean,’ separated
in date by at least a year or two, are superficially similar but not the same.
In the earlier hymn, a hope was held out of the ‘golden’ Olympian wreath ;
whereas, in the later, Chromius is regarded as a man who after an active and
brilliant career may, and, if he understands the art of life, will now enter into
his rest. Old age, ‘friendless, music-less old age,’ which to the Greeks
seemed such a dismal prospect, was now for Chromius appreciably near; and
Pindar asks himself, how his patron might make the most of the intervening
years ? He has ascended to the highest rung of ambition’s ladder, to use the
modern phrase ; or, in Pindar’s own metaphor, he has upclomb to the loftiest
mountain-top that may be trodden by mortal feet. He is laden with riches,
1 See Introduction to the First Nemean.
Aetna took the place of Catana in 476 B.c.
(Diodorus, xi. 49), but Catana was restored
in 460 B.c. (Diodorus, xi. 76), and thus
we have a posterior limit for the date of
this Ode. The alleged data for a prior
limit are (1) the last stanzas, which have
been supposed to suggest the presence of
Pindar himself at the festivities; Pindar
went to Sicily before summer 472; (2)
the application of the epithet veoKrlarav
to Aetna in 1. 2. Boeckh supposes the
date to be Ol. 77, (472—471 B. c.).
Leopold Schmidt thinks that this hymn
was composed at the same time as the
Third Pythian.
I am inclined to think that a longer
interval than Boeckh imagines separates
the two hymns to Chromius, both of
which were possibly composed while
Pindar was in Sicily. But see further
Appendix C.160	[NEMEAN] IX.
and crowned with glory. Well; let him fully grasp the truth that he has no
other worlds to conquer, assured that his estate is really blessed, and let his
remaining years be a ‘gentle time of life’ (alav ape pa). It seems possible that
since his Nemean victory Chromius had actually competed unsuccessfully
for an Olympian wreath.
That a prominent Sicilian noble should have such a ‘gentle time,’ an
evident condition was that his country should not be moved by the alarms
of war; and this thought forms, literally, the central point of Pindar’s comus.
The great idea of the composition,—presented to us in a series of striking
reliefs, connected by the most dexterous transitions,—is the contrast of
war and peace. Not, of course, that all fighting is condemned ; wars may
be just or unjust; but any war is to be regretted. As typical of wars
displeasing in the sight of heaven is chosen the ominous expedition of the
Seven against Thebes, and the hero Amphiaraus is contrasted with Chromius.
For Chromius was a tried warrior, who had proved his valour in battles by
land and water, but his cause, Pindar says, had been always righteous, and
therefore his last end will not be like that of Amphiaraus, a righteous man
himself, but unhappily involved in evil communications.
Opening with a jocund scene—the Muses coming from Sicyon, the
guests crowding into the house of Chromius, the striking-up of musical
instruments—the Ode soon passes into an unpeaceful atmosphere, resounding
with the tramping of horses and the rattling of chariot-wheels. The noise
of steeds and men contending resounds from strophe to strophe, echoes
answering one another, as it were, in the same rhythm out of corresponding
nooks; so that this hymn, deprecating war, has quite a martial sound,
calculated to awaken in Chromius the memories of his own battles. At
length the clamour of fighting dies away, and returning to the jocund scene,
as after a dream or by magic, we see the things of peace,—the feast, the
poet, the winebowl mixed, and those silver phialae or flat-shaped goblets,
which had been the prize in the chariot-race at Sicyon, on this anniversary
doubtless set in a conspicuous place.
Another element, which contributes to the general effect of the hymn,
is a covert comparison of the life of Chromius to an initiation and
education in divine Mysteries. Greek Mysteries connected with the worship
of various deities, such as Persephone and Dionysus, consisted of ‘sights and
acts.’ A toilsome groping through darkness, followed by a gradual or
sudden apparition of light, was one of the acts or dramata which awaited
the young mystes; and one may gather from fragmentary records that
initiation involved bodily labours, designed for spiritual purification. Light,
with sight thereof, one may conjecture, was the great idea round which the
mystical rites revolved, their aim being an education both of the physical and
of the mental eye, and the completely initiated therefore being called ‘ the
seer’ (iiroirTrjs). Flowers were a feature or an accessory of some of the
ceremonies, and certain kinds at least, such as the asphodel, the hyacinth
and the pansy, had symbolic meanings, closely connected with myths. And
as in all institutions of a religious character, there was a mystical vocabulary,INTROD UCTION.
161
ordinary words being taken in a higher meaning, or, by an association
with special rites, becoming specialised.
Into this matter of the Mysteries, which excite our wonder now—wonder
being here really equivalent, as Bacon said, to ‘broken knowledge,5—I only
go so far as seems necessary for understanding certain allusions in the Ode,
and it is enough to point out these three features, the occult language, the
occasional foreground or background of flowers, and the central idea of light,
called in mystical phrase $4yyos. The poet compares his hymn to a ‘ spell,’
and the secret suggestions, coming in, as we shall see, at intervals, invest it
with a solemn air, perceptible even amid the din of men and horses.
Before beginning the analysis of the composition, we must observe its
formal structure, which illustrates the affinities of Pindar’s poetry with plastic
art. The hymn may be compared to a frieze of eleven groups, the whole
work having a well-marked centre in the sixth group, while each group has a
little centre of its own. The strophe consists of three measures, of which
the first and third correspond in rhythmical length, having each eighteen
beats, while the middle has only eight. Thus the formula of metrical division
is
18 : 8 : 18.
To seize the rhythmical charm of the Dorian strophes, we must further
subdivide into clauses and observe the repetitions. Let us take for example
the second strophe.
Measure I. eori 84 ns Xoyos dvdpcj\ir(ov r trike <rp.4vov i&kov (clauses I, 2)
prf xa/Liai (nya KaXvyfrai	(clause 3)
0€(nr€cria 8* sirkav' Kav^lxais aoi8d npocrtfeopos (clauses 4, 5)
Measure 2. aXA* ava ptv (3popiav <£op|/uyy* ava 8* avkov iif avriov (clauses 6, 7)
opaopev ^	(clause 8)
Measure 3. Imriav a40ka>v Kopv(j)dv art	(clause 9)
OrjKtv 3,A8paoTos eV *Ao-a>|7ro{) pt46pois c6v 4yd) pvaa- (clauses IO, 11)
€7ra(rKij(T(o KXvjrals fjpcoa npais	(clauses 12, 13)
It will be seen that clauses 4, 6 and 7 are exactly the same in feet and
rhythm as clauses 1 and 2 ; and that clauses 12 and 13 repeat the rhythm,
but here the dactyls are replaced by trochees, which produce the effect of
coming to a pause.
The hymn opens with a picture of the Muses, coming, in a rout or comus,
to Aetna from Sicyon, where they were in attendance on Apollo, then of
course present on the occasion of the same games, at which Chromius
had won his victory. This skilful indication of the anniversary character
of the feast, brings at the same time, by a sort of unnoticed jugglery, Apollo,
as lord of the Muses, into more special connexion with the hymn itself.
We next see the doors of the rich house at Aetna thrown open, and the
guests crowding in; then the chariot and horses, which had won the
victory, and Chromius himself appear; the young men prepare to lift up their
voices ; and we listen for a hymn, which, as the poet warns us, is to have a
11
B.162
\NEMEAN] IX.
certain mystic strain in it, the solemnity of a ‘ spell5 (avSa), suitable for the
ears of those arch-hierophants, Apollo, his sister and his mother. One must
not let silence, he adds, bury a fine achievement in the ground—a saying, we
may suspect, of mystical significance, just as our equivalent ‘ to hide a light
under a bushel ’ has a religious association ; and referring to his own special
method, he proclaims legendary tales as suitable (most suitable, he thought
perhaps) to the praise of a victor.
This is the introduction, a sort of mise en scene, occupying the first strophe
and part of the second. Then the musical instruments are ‘awakened’
and translate us at once to the mythical world, to the river Asopus
near Sicyon, where the hero Adrastus founded feasts and games, including
chariot contests, and made his city glorious. This picture—the river Asopus,
feasts and carven chariots—is strictly appropriate to the theme of the Ode,
but it serves also to introduce the story of the Seven against Thebes, of
whom Amphiaraus1 is selected as the prominent hero, while Adrastus,
sinking among the Adrastidae, passes out of sight.
Adrastus, the son of Talaus, was a prince of Argos, and his presence
at Sicyon was caused by a quarrel between his family and his cousin Am-
phiaraus, another Argive prince, a prophet and the grandson of a prophet.
Their family factions led to bloodshed and to the exile of Adrastus from
Argos ; Pindar does not mention the death of his father or brother, merely
saying, ‘ the sons of Talaus, overborne by a sedition, were no longer
regnant ’; and then adding, in reference to Amphiaraus, ‘ the strong man
does away with what was just before.’
The strong man ; yes, but there was a fate stronger than he, destined to
overthrow him through the covetousness of a woman. And Pindar brings
this out by a really telling artifice, a bold approximation, which has, as
a matter of fact, given some trouble to his commentators, who have failed to
perceive the deliberate stroke of art and suspected something wrong in the
text. The sentence about the strong man ends a strophe, the word * strong ’
(lit. stronger) emphatically beginning the line, and ‘man’ coming at the
end:—
Kp€(T(Tcov	Kcnnravei Slkciv rav irpoaOev dvrjp.
The next strophe passes to the reconciliation, but it begins with the very
word which so emphatically ended the preceding line, apjp is still sounding
1 Boeckh found the main idea of the
Ode in a parallel between the relations of
Hiero and Thero, and those of Amphia-
raus and Adrastus. The quarrel of Hiero
and Thero was arranged by a marriage of
the king of Syracuse with Thero’s niece,
which would correspond to the marriage
of Amphiaraus with the sister of Adras-
tus. The mere consideration that such
an idea would be utterly unsuitable as
the ground-work of an ode for Chromius,
is sufficient to refute Boeckh’s view. Dis-
sen thinks that the expedition against
Thebes is merely a warning against un-
just wars.
L. Schmidt says that Pindar is painting
a picture of peace and repose, which he
wishes Aetna and Chromius may enjoy;
and this practically is the conclusion of
Mezger, who points out the contrast
between the horrors of war and a poTpa
efivopos.INTRODUCTION. 163
in the ears of the friends of Chromius, we may suppose, when the singers of
the comus continue
dv8po8dp.avr 'EpicfivXav, opKiop as ore marov.
‘ Man-quelling Eriphyle,’ the sister of Adrastus, was given to Amphiaraus,
‘as a firm pledge’ (how ironical!) in token of reconciliation, and the power
of the Adrastid house revived. It is said that the sister was to arbitrate,
should disputes arise between her husband and her brother, and on that
account was called by Pindar ‘man-quelling.’ And doubtless this is
designed to be the surface meaning, appropriate to the context; but there is
a second intention, and the second intention is here more obvious than the
first. No one could hear the epithet ‘man-quelling’ applied to the
notorious Eriphyle without remembering the necklace and how she com-
passed her husband’s death. Thus dv8po8ap.as, occurring several lines
before the account of Amphiaraus’ fate, quite naturally and in a different
connexion has the effect of an omen, suggesting that even in the day of
his successes there were evil presences near Amphiaraus. The device of
bringing avrjp at the end of one strophe and dv8po8apavr at the beginning
of the next into close proximity forces the omen on the attention ; the
effect is heightened by the omission of the usual particle of transition
(which commentators have tried to amend); and by reading over the lines
we can feel how their rhythms, at once similar and different, further the
success of the artifice. The comparison between Pindar’s work and
sculpture suggests an illustration. Let us suppose the third and fourth
strophes translated into two adjoining groups in relief. At the extremity
of the third group would be represented Amphiaraus, the strong man,
triumphant after the fall of the Adrastids ; at the adjacent extremity of the
fourth group we should see Adrastus placing his sister in the hands of his
conciliated rival. Well, if the sculptor turned Eriphyle’s face backward, and
represented her looking with an ominous expression towards the triumphant
figure in the third group, which she of course is not supposed to see, the
direction of her unconscious eyes might have the sense of an omen for
the spectator; and this sense might be accentuated by accessory details.
From the revival of the Adrastid power we pass to the unhappy
expedition against Thebes, impious (Pindar deems it) as undertaken in
disregard of the signs and warnings of Zeus, who thereby ‘bade them forbear
the journey’; and he describes the host hastening to the open jaws of de-
struction in a wonderfully successful arrangement of words, whose sound
and meaning seem to have between themselves some secret affinity or under-
standing,—one of those effects, which Greek art, perfectly concealing her own
‘art,’could compass by the simplest words and rhythms dexterously arranged
with regard to the vowel sounds,
<pciivopevav 5* ap is arav cnrevSep 07x1X09 iKeaOai
XaXiciois ottKoktiv iirireiois re <rvv evrcaiv.
Their doom, as it were, shone for them; and then we have a picture of
seven pyres on the banks of the river Ismenus, fire ‘feasting on the blanched
II—2164	[NEMEAN] JX.
bodies’ of young men, the smoke rising fat with the nutrition,—a Feast of
Fire; and in the background, obscured by the vapour, a faint vision or
suggestion of that ‘ sweet home ’ which the dead had wittingly surrendered.
And Pindar’s language implies perhaps a comparison of the Expedition to a
kind of false Mysteiy; the army is djawn to a false light, and the word
4 white-flowered ’ (\evKav0ea), although the second part of the compound has
lost its individuality, reminds us that, in the presence of the figurative
blossoms of death, there were no real flowers (to be looked for in the case of
a true mystery).
For Amphiaraus a separate fate was reserved by the special mercy of
Zeus. In the panic he was fleeing from Periclymenus, and could not have
escaped him, but that Zeus, willing to spare him the shame of falling by
a death-wound dealt behind, clave the earth with a thunderbolt and opened
a grave to shroud the hero and his horses. The vision of the hero Amphi-
araus fleeing, though, as we are told, he had the spirit of a warrior, must
strike the sentiment of most modern readers as incongruous; and that
is because their sentiment is not attuned to Greek moderation. Pindar
formulates the principle here in words, which appear nowadays almost
to invite ridicule; ‘for even sons of gods flee in superhuman panics.’
In the eyes of a Greek, bravery, when it defied the powers of Zeus, had
passed beyond the due measure of bravery and was no longer worthy of
praise ; such rashness was the quality that one might find in a barbarous
Celt.
It is worth noticing how Pindar hints that the death of Amphiaraus was
in some sort a retribution for his part in the civil war at Argos which had
exiled Adrastus. In 1. 14 the Adrastid party is described as
(3ia(r0€VT€s Aua,
these words ending the line; and the corresponding line of the fifth strophe
(1. 24), where Amphiaraus’ death is described, closes with the words
K€pavvco Trcififtia,
this responsion clearly suggesting that as Amphiaraus had smitten Talaus
and his sons, so the bolt of Zeus smote the smiter1. And if an emendation
adopted in the text is true2, Pindar has accentuated his thought by the
responsion of audpa in 1. 25 to avrjp in 1. 15 ; ‘the strong man’ is shrouded in
the depths of the earth, Zeus being a stronger than he.
We have now reached the centre of the Ode. Having told what befel
the Seven against Thebes, the artist treats that war as a type of what an
unrighteous war may be, and places exactly in the middle of his frieze a
prayer to Zeus—the god who by his omens had vainly discouraged that
expedition—that for as long as possible Sicily may be exempted from such a
conflict. The most serious foes then threatening the Sicilian Greeks were
the Carthaginians; but the artistic effect of the prayer would have been
1 The adjective iran-filas, omnipotent,	expression is riveted in the mind by the
was, as far as we can judge, coined	rarity of the word Atfa.
expressly for this place, and the other 2 See note on 1. 25.INTROD UCTION
165
spoiled if the generality of the statement had been confined by an express
mention of a particular enemy. But it was quite in Pindar’s manner to
introduce an allusion where a direct reference would have been inartistic;
and the allusion here is so unmistakable that commentators took the second
meaning for the first and mistranslated the passage, until Mezger, a few years
ago, saw the true explanation1.
4 If it be possible, O son of Cronus, I would remove to an indefinite
distance such a brute arbitrament of empurpled swords/ efroiviKoaToXw
cyxtoav. The adjective suggests a 4 Phoenician armament/ and one may
attempt by 4purpled’ or 4purple-mantled’ to hint at the Phoenicians of
Carthage.
Having deprecated such a war as that which the legends of Argos had
led him to describe, Pindar further intreats Zeus for the citizens of Aetna,
that they may have a happy experience of political life and that their city
may be brightened with festivities and the triumphs of peace. ‘Peace be
within thy walls, and plenteousness within thy palaces.’ And there is
some reason to hope for good things in store for them; victories, for
example, in chariot-races because they are devoted to horses, and brilliant
feasts because their souls are free from the bondage of avarice. In
attributing this liberality to the men of Aetna, Pindar of course has one
individual chiefly in view, Chromius himself. And he makes this clear by
the immediate transition2. Love of money is the enemy of the goddess
Aidos,—an enemy capable of overreaching by stealthy ways, but unable
to steal the heart of Chromius. Pindar appeals to proven bravery in battle
by land and sea; and draws a picture of the goddess Aidos arming him,
spiritually, for war—a picture reminding modern readers of a lady buckling
the armour of a medieval knight. ‘Aidos who bringeth glory’; but the glory
of war is indeed won through horrors, which Pindar suggests in vigorous
phrases, descending from ‘the danger of the sharp battle cry’ to the
4 contagious blastment of Enyalius ’ and deeper still to 4 the war-cloud whose
rain is clogging blood.’
Thus we have come back to war again, after a transient vision, in between,
of a peaceful future for Aetna. The wars of Sicily, in which Chromius took
part, are the companion picture to the expedition against Thebes, and
Chromius is the figure contrasted with Amphiaraus. The presiding influence
in the mythical war was Ata; the spirit of Chromius’ enterprises was
Aidos3. Men and horses are resonant, both here and there, sometimes at
the same points of the repeated musical successions4; and the ‘martial soul’
1	p. 118. See note on this line.
2	Also by having Kredvwv in 1. 32, and
afterwards, of Chromius alone, Kredvois
iroXXois in 1. 46.
3	Compare line 21 (first of 5th strophe)
(f>ouvop.iuav 8’ ap is arav cnrevdev opuXos
'ucio-dcu with line 36 (first of 8th strophe)
o(ip€K€V iv 7roXipup Kelva Oeos ivrvev
aOroG.
4 1. 18 ayayov arpardv dvbpCov aiaiav
:: 1. 38 ttotI dvapieviw avbptav an%as.
1. 22 xaXxiois ottXolctlv iirireiois re crvv
ivrecFLV :: 1. 32 Xaov, ivrl toi <f>i\nr iroi.
Also 1. 33 avbpes. diriarov £ei7r’* k.t.X.166
[.NEMEAN] IX.
of Amphiaraus (for whose end Zeus made provision) seen fleeing before
Periclymenus has a metrical position exactly corresponding to the ‘ soul ’ of
Chromius, armed by the goddess with a weapon for pursuit1.
For Chromius, thus conceived as (in our phrase) ‘the soul of honour/
the cloud of war is the medium through which he reaches light and flowers,
as in a mystery. The effect and the connexion of thought in this passage
are lost, if we read the sentences apart. “ Few be they who have the heart,
and hands to take counsel to turn upon the ranks of the foemen the war-
cloud whose rain is blood that cloggeth the feet. Verily it is said that for
Hector glory burst into flower near the waters of the Scamander; certainly
by the deep-cliff’d banks of the Helorus, which flows into the ‘ Passage of
Rhea/ such a light (<f>iyyos) gleamed for the son of Agesidamus in his
early manhood.” The battle of the Helorus was Chromius’ initiation in
mysteries; he had to face the dark cloud, he had to walk in places where
his footing was imperilled and his feet impeded; and then he found
himself near river banks, strown with flowers of glory, in the presence of a
new mystic light.
The scrupulous accuracy of Pindar’s art is illustrated here by the
introduction of Hector. The flowers of glory are intended to be contrasted
with the ‘ white-flower corpses ’ that were buried on the banks of the
Ismenus ; but if Pindar had strown these flowers by the waters of the
Helorus, his contrast between Chromius and Amphiaraus would have been
wounded or blurred by the introduction of a new contrast between Chromius
and the other warriors who fell at Thebes. And so, without sacrificing the
precision of his comparison between the two individuals, the artist translates
his flowers to the banks of the Scamander, and names Hector, as the type of
a class of warriors, to which Chromius himself belongs, patriotic warriors,
contrasting them with the other class represented by Amphiaraus and his
fellows. This accuracy of thought is emphasized by the adjective fiaOv-
Kpijfipourij applied to the shores of the Helorus, and responding metrically
to the adjective ftadv<rT€ppov, which describes the earth opening her bosom
to enfold the son of Oicles :
1. 25, Zeus rav (3a6voT€pvov \66va Kpv\)r avbp apt tWots
1. 40, ay\ov,	fiaOvKprjpvoHTi b' ap(j) aKrals ‘EXaipou.
‘In deep places darkness shrouded Amphiaraus’;
‘ By deep places light illuminated Chromius.’
Greek art, at its best,—Pindaric art, for instance—is marked by the
rejection of unserviceable ornaments and superfluities. In this passage one
might think that Pindar himself is errant for a moment, and that the clause
determining the sea into which the Helorus flows is on the most favourable
view an unnecessary topographical exegesis, not woven into the spiritual
corresponds in metre (although it is not 1 Ovpbv (1. 27) paxarav :: dvp'ov cu’x*
the same line of the strophe) to 1. 16 av-	parav (1. 37). This responsion was
dpodapavr’ ’EpuptiXav k.t.X.—We have
iinroLs again in 1. 34, and we had Kparfr -
nnrov in 1. 4.
noticed and appreciated by Mezger, p.
119.INTRODUCTION.
167
texture of the composition. But. on closer examination this criticism turns
out to be unfair, and ‘the Passage of Rhea,’ so far from being trivial,
becomes a phrase of spiritual significance. At Helorus the light of success
had regarded Chromius, but this was only his first achievement, to be
followed by others ; or, Pindar puts it, the Helorus conducts to the sea which
may be considered a passage to scenes of future triumphs, noted immediately
after,‘exploits on the dusty dryland and on the adjacent ocean.’
That this is really the bearing of the ‘ Passage of Rhea,’ is indicated if I
am not mistaken, in the course of the following lines. Having thus summed
up the career of Chromius, the poet proceeds to point a conclusion which has
a positive and a negative side. A youth and manhood1 spent laboriously,
under the guidance of Justice, ought to be followed by a calm space for a
man, who has not yet reached the threshold of old age, and is no longer a veos.
This Chromius may claim. And the gods have in full measure given him
bliss—the supreme aim of all Mysteries2,—having laden him with riches and
honour and glory. This is the positive side of Pindar’s conclusion. The
negative side is an injunction, that he should be content now to embrace the
prospect of that calm life, making up his mind that he has reached the
highest summit possible for mortal feet—reached it, we are reminded by an
echo, through clogging blood and dangers3—and that there is ‘no passage ’
to any higher point beyond4. At the Helorus, when he was young, he was
near the Passage called by mortals ‘ of Rhea,’ and there were worlds to win :
but now he stands, where is no passage forward known to men,—no war,
at least, if Zeus be gracious to the prayer which the poet addressed to him5.
‘No war; but peace, and the things beloved of peace,—banqueting, and
song. Wine and song are in place now; for song has the magic virtue of
touching into young bloom an old victory, and the wine-cup maketh song
bold. Therefore mix the wine and fill the cups ! ’ These lines, savouring of
the true comus inspired by Dionysus, take us back, after our march along
sombre ways, to the cheerful scene before Chromius’ house in Aetna, a scene
which we now regard from a wider aspect in the light of Pindar’s lesson in
the art of life. Echoes of the words which we have heard still haunt the air,
awakening that feeling which Lucretius stereotyped in his suave mart
1	etc ttovojv 5’ | ol <rt/v vedTart yhavrai
ctw re SUq (1. 44). In point of ‘youth’
Chromius and his countrymen resembled
the warriors who fought at Thebes; but
in point of ‘justice ’ their causes differed.
Observe the responsion of this line to
1.24
eirra yap daiaavro irvpal veoyviovs
<pwras.
2	irpos daipLoviov davp-acrrov o\(3ov, I. 45.
See note. What Amphiaraus won from
the deities was a panic (daifioviouri 0o/Sots,
1. 27); compare Mezger, p. 121, ‘den
8ai/iovioi <j>o(3oi wird ein daLfwmos o\(3os
gegeniiber gestellt.’
3	The emphatic dual irodoiv at the end
of the measure could be dispensed with
by the sense; but it has the effect of
recalling how the same two feet had often
walked through carnage, <povov irapTrodiou
1. 37, where <j>ovov ends the same measure.
4	I must refer the reader to the com-
mentary on this passage.
5	This is indicated by the use of 7ropo-w
here, echoing ws wopaurra in the prayer.
The thought, which we read between the
lines, is rendered clear by the immediate
succession of atrvxi'a, Peace.[NEMEAN] IX.
168
magno—; and it is suggested1 that, if Amphiaraus was smitten by the
violence of lightning, nothing worse will overbear Chromius than the gentle
violence of the (child of the vine,5 now inviting him in the silver goblets,
which his horses—another echo—won at Sicyon2. These goblets were not
indeed the sole prize awarded for that victory; attached to them were wreaths,
‘ Apollo’s crowns, twined by Themis,5 this curious epithet BcptirkiKTois being
probably designed to convey a mystic allusion3.
The Ode concludes with a second prayer to Zeus, to be taken in connexion
with the former prayer against war, to which it forms a sort of complement:
‘ I pray that I may sing such excellence as this (success in the games), the
Graces assisting, and that, above many singers, I may worthily magnify
Victory, shooting my dart very near the mark of the Muses.5 The connexion
of the first and the second prayer is marked by a responsion4;
1. 29 iy-)(i<ov ravrav Oavarov iript kcu facts K.r.X.
1. 54 ^V)(Ofiai ravrav aperav KeXadrj&ai K.r.X.
It is characteristic of Pindar to desire in his prayer not perfection, but
only a close approach thereto; yet if we judge that in this comus he
hit, absolutely, the mark of Poetry, we shall hardly transgress seriously the
limit of even Greek moderation.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
vv. 1,2. A
- w —	— —	---I— -------vy---- vy —	^
V. 3* B ——	— A
V. 4, 5- A'
—	---— w	w-----—	----—-----------| — w —
The rhythmical formula of this mesodic structure might be expressed in
the number of beats, thus
6 . 12	8	12 . 6
Schmidt remarks :
‘ Hinsichtlich des Centrums sei noch angemerkt dass die Centre der
Strophen a und ia die Hauptsachen enthalten ; wegen der zwei Trisemen
aber dass alle Strophen (10) ausser der fiinften, wo 'lvprjvov an der Stelle
steht, auch die Notirung *—a - zulassen, und auch wohl gehabt haben,
a. a. O. aber nur pcrptKrj avdyKrj davon abgewichen ist.5
1	fitardv ttcu8 apirt\ov 1. 51, a remark-
able expression recalling /cepawy Trapftiq.
1. 24. The steeds of Amphiaraus were
swallowed up with him; the mares of
Chromius secured him the phialai.
2	LinroL responds to hnrelois 1. 22 and
<f>l\iinroi 1. 32.
3	See note 1. 52.
4	Mezger, p. 121. ‘Wie der Dichter
jene Waffenprobe weit von sich wegweist
(7reipav ratirav, v. 29), so freut er sich
diese zu preisen (etixopai ravrav v. 54) \[NEMEONIKAI] ©'.
XPOMIfli AITNAIfli
APMATI.
K(OfJLa<To/jL€v 7rap* ' AttoWwpos 'ZucvcovoOe, Mo£<nM,	arp. a.
rap veotcTiGTav is Airvav, ev0* avairewTapbevai gewcop vevLicavTcu
dvpai,
o\/3tov is Xpoptov Scop,'. aU* iireoop yXvtcvp vpupop TrpdaaeTai.
to Kparr}(mnrov yap is app avafiaivcov paripi teal BiSvpbois
nraLBeaaiP avBap puavvei
i. K«|xd<ro|A€v /c.r.X.] In Isthm. ill.
90 and Pyth. ix. 89 the future of KWfiafa
is middle, K(t)p.a%op,ai, KW/jAco/xat. In
those passages however the sense is
‘celebrate’, while here the word bears
the more literal meaning, ‘proceed as a
comus or band of revellers’, comissor.
As the ode is sung on the anniversary of
Chromius’ victory, the Muses are sup-
posed to be with Apollo at the Sicyonian
Pythia, and are called to Aetna. Render :
We shall go in revel forth from Sicyon,
from the presence of Apollo, 0 chaun-
tresses, to new-built Aetna, where doors
zvide open are too narrow for all the guests,
in the wealthy house of Chromios.—to 5i
vcvfoavrcu avrl tov rjTTrjvTcu (schol.). 6\-
fhov is Xpo/iiov d&fxcL defines is Airvav
more strictly.
3. irpd<r<r€rat] One may feel a doubt
between irpaaoere, the reading of B
and of the scholiast (who explains dia-
vverare), and KpaercreTai of D. Kpacoeiv
with the accusative in the sense of make
is characteristic of Pindar, and he may
bid the Muses, make (or deal) a sweet
hymn of legends. With irpaaoerai, Chro-
mius exacts the ode (a sense which kpac-
es oito bears in 01. x. 30). I have decided
for TTpaaoerai because it is metrically
preferable. No other line in the ode
ends with a short vowel (a, e, v, or t),
though we have ov, ep, Xv, etc.
4. Kpanfovinrov] One of Pindar’s
lofty compounds. Compare Kpar^olpsixos
{Pyth. ix. 86), Kparyjaiwovs {Pyth. x. 16),
KpaTTjoifilas (fr. 16).—See Introduction,
pp. 165 (note), 166 (note), and 168 (note)
for echoes of Xkkos.
ira£8€<r<ri] Pindar uses both this form
and wauil, as he uses wool, koo<tL and
w6de(r<n.—The mother and her two chil-
dren are Leto, Apollo and Artemis,
whom we met together before, Nem. VI.
36. By ascending into his chariot Chro-
mius proclaims a song in honour of
Apollo, who in the worship at Sicyon
was associated with his sister and mother.
avSdv has roused the suspicions of editors,
as it would seem to bear here the un-
usual sense of song. Boeckh read Kalbeoo
aoidav; Hermann avxav (in the same
sense as Katixa below, 1. 7), which how-
ever can hardly win much support from[NEMEONIKAI] 0.
170
TlvOdovo5 aiireivds opLotcXdpoLs eiroirrai*;.	5
€<ttl Be rXoyo<z avOpdircov, rereXea-pievou i<rXbv	crrp. /3\
pur) ^apual <riya /caXvyfrac' 0€<nre<ria S’ hrkwv Kav,yai? doiBd
TTp6(T<f)OpO<;.
aXX' dvd pbev ftpopbiav <f)6ppuyy\ avd S’ avXov iir avr&v opaopuev
the scholium to Oavfia^eoOai. Bergk sug-
gests atyXav. Of these, Hermann’s is the
best, because it might conceivably have
been changed to abdav. But the expres-
sion avxav (accent so) fiavbeiv seems
hardly natural.—It might seem suspi-
cious that abdd does not occur elsewhere
in Pindar, and indeed I once thought
that Pindar wrote abyav, a blaze of light,
thus hinting at a Xafnradrifpopia or torch
procession in honour of the three divini-
ties, by which Chromius intended to
celebrate his victory. But I now feel
sure that abdav was written by Pindar,
designedly chosen as a word of cere-
monial import. Its special use for an
oracular utterance is well known; and
it is to be further observed that dnravdQ
was a cry used in mysteries and solemn
ceremonies. Moreover in 01. II. 92, we
find abdaoopiai evbpKiov Xbyov aXadci vbip
of a very solemn affirmation, and in
Nem. x. 80 and 89, the active is used
of the speech of Zeus, abba suggests
a spell of song, and atfSaeis in a graceful
fragment of Pindar (194) suggests the
same idea:
KCKporrjTa 1 xputrea KprjTris iepaioiv aoi-
5ats’
ela reixifapiev ijbri iroudXwv
k6<timov abdaevra Xbyiov *
6s Kal TroXvKXeirav irep ioloav opuos Orj-
fiav eri pLaXXov iTraoKrjaei dz&v
Kal xar’ dvdpibjrojv ayvias.
Here we lose the effect of the epithet of
k6(t/jlop if we do not recognise that it
implies the potency of a solemn spell:—
come let us build straightway a fair wall
of manifold, murmuring tales.
5.	opotcXapois] consorlibus. In 01. II
49 bfibKXapos means partaker in the same
lot, namely victory. ciroiTTais = eirioKb-
ttois. Apollo and Artemis are the joint-
inthroned governors of steep Pytho.
6.	2o-ti 8c k.t.X.] Men have a proverb,
‘ Hide not a deed of noble achievement on
the ground, in silence’ (lit. that one should
not hide). xa/JLaL KaXvxf/ai corresponds to
our hide under a bushel. The positive
equivalent is found in Pyth. vm. 33 frw
Ttov xp£°*—iroTavov (noted by Mezger).
7.	Octrirco-Ca x.r.X.] A lay of divine
tales is meet for sounding praises. This
sentence has caused a good deal of dis-
cussion. There can be no doubt, I think,
that Pindar intends to say in 11. 6, 7,
‘a noble deed demands praise, and the
fittest praise is a lay of legendary tales ’,
ciTcwv bearing the same sense as above,
1. 3. It is clear then that Benedict’s
correction Kavxais for Kabxas is right, a
dative being absolutely required after
Trpb<r<popos. The opposition of Kabxa to
silence is illustrated by Isthm. iv. 51
aXX’ opuos KabxVPa Karafipexe oiyq,. The
sense shews that iirlcov depends on aoibd,
not on Kabxats,—aoida iirliov being the
vpivos eirltav of 1. 3. decnreoLa, going so
closely in sense with iirliov and yet gram-
matically connected with aoida, lessens
the harshness of separating iweuv from
aoida, because it removes all ambiguity.
Cf. Oeoireolitiv cttIujv (Isth. ill. 57) of the
Homeric poems — ‘the tale of Troy
divine’.—Kabxv, a rare word, may be
compared to avxn> jSXactttj, etc.
8.	aXX* ava x.r.X.] But we shall
rouse the pealing lyre, yea and rouse the
flute to celebrate the supreme horse-races,
those and none other, which Adrastus[NEMEAN] IX.	171
ImrLwv aedAcop tcopv<j>dv, aje <Poi/3<p drjtcep "A&paaros eir
’A<T(07rov peed pots' wp eyco
ptpaadels eiracTK^aca kAvtclIs ¥}p(oa Tipuais,	IO
09 Tore ptep fiaaiXevcop /ceWt peaiai 0* eoprals	<rrp. 7'.
la'Xyos t dpSpwp dp,iXkat9 dppbaal re yAa<f>vpois ap,$aive tcvSaipcop
ttoAlp.
<f>evye yap 'Apufadprjp irore 0pa<Tvp,rj8ea /cal Setpdp (TTaatP
established in honour of Phoebus by the
waters of Asopus. avd is adverbial, with
op<TO(JL€v (so called tmesis), fiplfierai is
used of the lyre Nem. xi. 7.—The mss.
have €Try avrbv, and all editors read &r’
avrav after Schmid. It is possible that
this is right, but the change seems too
bold, and I content myself with the
simpler emendation eir* avTwv, which
cannot be called a change, as it was
originally written
eiT&YTON.
The meaning is the same as with the
reading avrav, for KOpv<pav bndojv d40\<ov
= €^ox(hrara hrma ae0\a (whence the
relative for which we might expect dv).
avr&v is, as Mezger says of abrav, ‘im
Gegensatz zu den einleitenden Versen;
der Dichter wendet sich jetzt zum Kern
des Gedichtes, zur Stiftungssage’.—For
the separation of the preposition from
its case cf. Nem. x. 48 nap Atos 0t)k€ 5p6p,(p.
For Kopv<f>& cf. Nem. x. 32, 1. 34.
9. cSv K.r.X.] Making mention where-
of I shall trick out the hero with sounding
words of honour. Cf. fr. 194 k6<t/iov
abdaevra \byojv, 5s Kal TroXvkXeirav nep
ioiaav oficas Qriftav in /xdWov enatncriaei
0cQv Kal Kar dvOpthncov ayvias. [Homer
p 266 iwTjfTKTfrai 54 oi ab\i) roLx<P Kai
0piyKoi<TL.] That the word inacnceiv is
here adopted by Pindar from the language
of the mysteries seems possible, if we
observe the gloss of Hesychius eiraaiceiv •
alpeadai, ayveveiv, and this possibility
becomes really probable from the circum-
stance that in the fragment, just quoted,
e7ra<7K77<7ei is in close junction with abda-
€vra, a word which, as we have already
seen, had mystical associations.
This uncommon expression, used in
reference to Adrastus, is answered in
1. 54 by TLfia\(peLV \6yois (also unique in
Pindar) in reference to the victory of
Chromius.—Otjkcv, here of establishing
games; but 0eivai aywva was also the
technical expression for administrating
games.
12.	tcrxvos t* k.t.X.] ajalWais is con-
structed with both genitive and dative
(as Olymp. v. 6, 7): and by contests which
prove mails strength and races with carven
chariots he made the city bright and
glorious.	In Pyth. 1. 31 the phrase
Kvdatveiv tt6\lv recurs (cf. Ol. x. 66).
For a|i.<|>aive cf. Pyth. ix. 73 iv0a vucavais
avi<f>ave Kvpavav, and Pyth. IV. 62 /^cunXe’
afj.(pavev, declared king.
13.	*A|u|>iapT|v 'irorfj B has preserved
nori. The question is whether we
should, with most editors, adopt ’Apxfri-
aprjov re from D; or follow Bergk in
reading ’ AfA<f>iapr)v and keeping 7rori.
Metrically the reading of D is preferable
to the emendation of Bergk; for in
the corresponding lines of all the other
strophes the third foot is a spondee.
This consideration however is not de-
cisive and must yield to others; but
it may be mentioned that in the present
Ode the second foot of the seventh
strophe is ivrl, a trochee, whereas
elsewhere the corresponding feet are
spondees. From a critical point of view
Bergk’s reading is in my opinion inex-
pugnable; for, assuming it to be correct,172
[NEMEONIKAI] 0'.
irarpaxov ottcwv anro r ''Apyeo? ' dpxpi 8* °^K €<rav TaXaov
7raiSe?, /3ia<r0€VT€$ \va.
Kpecracov Se Kairrravet, SUav rav irpoadev avr)pn	15
dv8po8dp,avr 'EpMfrvXav, optuov 009 ore mcrrov,
<TTp. S'.
the corruptions of the mss. were almost
inevitable. The usual form of the proper
name in Pindar is ’Apfiiapyjos, and though
he uses 'ApQiapris in this very hymn 1. 24,
(the Etym. Mag. bears witness to the
existence of the form), it is clear that the
scribes had a very strong temptation to
alter the rare into the more usual accu-
sative by the insertion of an omicron.
Hence the reading of B. The next
step was to observe that the metre was
at fault and to amend it by the obvious
resort of clipping irork into re. Hence
the reading of D. In point of sense,
the verse with wore is superior to the
verse with re.
0pa.crvp.Tj Sea] This epithet (boldhearted)
is applied to Salmoneus, Pyth. iv. 143,
and to Alexander, son of Amyntas, frag.
120. In two other places 0paa8s and
Setvos occur in close collocation: Pyth.
II. 64 0pda os SetvQv TroXkpuv, and New.
IV. 64 0paaupaxdvojv Xeovrwv...Seivordruv
oSovtwv. Else in Pindar Seivds occurs
only twice, Pyth. 1. 26, of ‘wells of
flame most dire’ and New. X. 65.
14. TaXaov iratSes] Pronax and Ad-
rastus were the sons of Talaus, who was
the son of Bias. For these somewhat
obscure mythological relationships it will
be best to quote the scholium :
oi Si tpaai ’ UpoTros ifiaalXevae rod
"Apyovs, twv 0vyarkpujv Sc avrov paveiawv
MeXttyHTOvs pAvns tav irapeykvero * opoXo-
yrj0kvros 8k avr(p p.ia0ov tQv SveTv pepQv
ttjs paaiXeLas €Ka0r)pev auras' cos iica-
0r)pevy fXafie nark ttjv viroax^aiVy Kai to
pkv ij/iiav iKOLvibaaro rip adeXtptp Biavn,
to 8k ijpiav Kartaxw aurtp, ware yev-r\0r\vai
tt)v o\r)v (SaaiXeiav Tpipeprj, MeXapLwoSi-
8as, BiavriSas, UpotHSas. MeXapiroSos
pukv o8v ’AvTL(pdT7)Sy 08 'Oi)cXr}s, 00 ’Apfad-
paos' Biavros 8k TaXao's, 08 "ASpaaros.
npoirov Sk MeyaTrevOTfS, 08 *lirwovovs 08
’Kairaveds, 08 S0kveXos. 8ia<popa Sk eye-
vrj07f rots ire pi ’ Ap<f>iapaov Kai "ASpaaTOVy
cocrre tov pkv TaXaov viro rod ’Ap<f>iapaov
diro0aveivy tov 8k *A8paarov <f>\ryeiv els
2tKvu;i'a, k.t.X. Menaechmus of Sicyon
mentions the death of Pronax on the
same occasion, in a passage quoted by
the scholiast and worth reproducing here
if only for the sake of a certain emen-
dation of Carl Muller: xpdvov wapeX-
0ovtos iroXXov TLpCova£ pkv 6 TaXaou /cal
Avaifiaxys ttjs HoX8/3ov (3aaiXe8cjv ’Ap-
yeicjv dwo0vriaKei, KaraaTaaiaa0ds (Muller
for Karaara0€Ls) virb ’Aptpiapaov Kai tQv
~M.eXap.Tro8t.SQv Kai tQv 'Ava^ayopiSQv.
PicmHMvtcs Xva] We met a part of
piaoj in vill. 34, here we have a part of
Piagto'y they are both unique in Pindar’s
extant poems. X8q.t an extremely rare
word, equivalent to crraVts, its literal
sense being clearly ‘ deliverance \
15.	Kp€<rcrcov k.t.X.] When a stronger
man cometh, he doeth away with existing
right. Schol. 6 8k iaxvpos avrjp rb irpo-
uirdpxov SUaiov KaTaTra8ei. The point of
the verse, applicable to most conquerors,
disappears, if we take SUrj in the sense
of lis. Mezger interprets rightly ‘ Macht
gelit vor Recht ’.
16.	dvSpoSdpavr* ‘EpwfnJXav] The
German language with its Mann of
double sense might render here, better
than English, an effect of Pindar’s art.
The strong ‘man’ of 1. 15 is immediately
followed by the ‘ Man-quelling Eriphyle ’;
and as we hear of the might and success
of Amphiaraus, we are reminded by an
ambiguous word, as by a bird of ill omen
flitting across the page, that he was to be
subdued through the perfidy of his wife.[ATEMEAN] IX.	173
SovT€9 Ot/c\etSa yvvaitca, ]jav$otcofiav kava&v "f^aav fieyunoL'f.
And this juxtaposition of dvqp ending
the third strophe, and dvdpoddfiavr7
beginning the fourth strophe, a striking
artifice, is emphasized by the designed
omission of the usual particle of tran-
sition. Other examples of such an
omission will be found in Nem. x. 61
and 75.
The reconciliation of Amphiaraus and
Adrastus was sealed by the marriage of
the former with the latter’s sister Eri-
phyle: schol. vorepov /xivroi ovveXrjXvdaoL
iraXiv, i<f>7 (p <jvvoLKi\<Tei rrj ’Epi<f>dXy 6
’A/u,<piapao$f tv* et n fxiy ipurfia fier
afAporipoun yivrjrai, avryj Siairg.. And
on the strength of this von Leutsch and
Mezger hold that Eriphyle is called
avdpoddfias, not in reference to her con-
nexion with her husband’s fate, but ‘ weil
sie zur Schiedsrichterin zwischen ihrem
Gatten und Bruder bestellt war, wenn
allenfalls Zwist unter ihnen ausbrache’.
And this suggestion has a certain value,
but it must be supplemented by the
ordinary explanation, which v. Leutsch
rejects. As I said above, dvbpobdiiavr
is ambiguous. Well, the - interpretation
of von Leutsch is the harmless superficial
meaning, while the ordinary explanation
gives the ominous under-meaning. Only
in this case the parts are inverted, and
the under-meaning is the more obvious.
dvdpoddfiavr’ is preserved by B. B gives
dvbpobdfiav r’, D has dvbpo/idbav r’.
The adjective dvdpoddfias occurs in Nem.
ill, 39 and frag. 166.
17. 8ovt€$ k.t.X.] Having given to
Amphiaraus (the son of Okies') Eriphyle
to wife, as a firm pledge, they—the sons
of Talaus—were most mighty among the
yellow-haired Danai. Such is the mean-
ing of the MSS. reading as it stands—yaav
fiiyurroi. Either this verse or the next is
metrically incomplete (the mss. divide
the lines after icai ttot is); and the
question is whether the text is right as
far as it goes, or are the words i{<rav
pfyurroi themselves corrupt, perhaps a
gloss. It is clear that rjoav cannot be
right, as the Pindaric form is invariably
i<rav (in 01. ix. 53, where the mss. vary
between d7 yaav, d7 iaaav and 5’ laav
Bergk has rightly restored 517 Vay), and
Boeckh’s iaaav does not improve matters.
And if we condemn rj<rav we must con-
demn (xiyioToi, a word very likely to
have ousted from the text some more
coloured expression, of which it was a
marginal explanation. This is the
view of Bergk.
Assuming then that the original words
of Pindar after Aava&v have been lost,
let us see whether we have any means
of finding them. To begin with, we
have the gloss yaav /jLiyiaroi; and we
have also the paraphrase of a scholiast
to the same effect, ical ovtuj t£>v %av0oKb-
fitov 'EMip'Ott' iyivovro TrepupavioraTOL
(Bergk for MSS. ttepupaviffrepoi) oi wepl
"Adpaerov. There can, I think, be no
doubt that the writer of this scholium
had the genuine text before him, for iyi-
vovto Trepc<pavi(TTaTot is unlikely as an in-
terpretation of f)<rav pdyKTTOi. Now the
sense demands a part of yivop.ai rather
than a part of etpu; hence Bergk (para-
phrasis vestigia legens as he says) supplies
rcb irp&r' iyevr’ *Abpaarlbat.
7Abpaorlbai is hardly right: oi tepi VASpaa-
rov in the scholium does not imply that
the subject of the sentence was expressed.
Moreover iyevro is always singular in
Pindar (see Pyth. vi. 28, frag. 147),
who uses iyivovro very often, and it is
therefore necessary to modify Bergk’s
reading, while we attribute to him the
credit of a good suggestion. I propose
ttp&roi 'yivovro, but feel unable to decide
whether the lacuna should be marked in
1. 17 or in 1. 18. On behalf of irp&roL it
may be said that it is a word likely to have
been elucidated by a marginal synonym,
inasmuch as Pindar rarely (once or twice)
uses 7rpwros in the sense of fiiyiaros.174	[NEMEONIKAI] 0'.
/cat ttot 69 €7rra7rv\ov<; ®rj/3a<; aywyov aTparov apBpcbv ala Lav
ov tear cppl^aov oSov ovSe Kpop loop aarepoirav eXeXi^ai^ oitcoOev
fiapyovpbevovs
aTei'xetv iirwrpvp*, aXXa <f>€Laaa0ai KeXevOov.	20
<f>aiPop,£pav S’ ap 69 arav airevBep o/u\o9 i/ceadat
XaX/ceoL? oirXoLatP iTrireloL9 re avv evreatv' ’la/irjvov
o^Oatai yXvtevp
arp. €.
o 67r
Other editors, accepting i}<rav or 2<r<rav
ptyioroi, have filled up the gap in various
ways. Boeckh punctuating at plyuttol
read drj rbBev, suggested by the scholium
on 1. 18, ivrevBev dr] kclI els ras Qrjftas
k.	t.X. Hartung accepts 8rj rbBev but
connects the phrase with the foregoing
words, punctuating at rbBev. Rauchen-
stein reads tovt&ki (punctuating at plyi<r-
roi), which Schnitzer praises. Bergk’s
earlier conjecture Xaylrat deserves men-
tion. [See further Appendix A, note 8.]
18—20. Kat ‘ttot* k.t.X.] And on a
time they led a host against Seven-gated
Thebes, sped on their way by no well-
boding birds; nor did the son of Cronus
swinging a bolt of lightning urge them to
set forth, in fury fell, from home, but
bade them spare the journey.
Observe that the penultimate of Kpo-
vCwv is long here, as in Pyth. I. 71. In
the other five places where it occurs in
Pindar it is short (as below, 1. 28).—Else-
where Pindar uses arepowd.	eXeXlj;w
{vibrare) occurs in 01. ix. 13 and Pyth.
l.	4 of the phorminx.
In 1. 20 the sense of iiclXeyae implied
in irrurrpvve is carried on to <f>cC(ra(rOai.
21. 4>aivop^vav k.t.X.] But certes,
the company sped on their way to doom
clearly revealed, with brazen armour and
steeds and the accoutrements thereof (that
is, chariots'). In elucidation of (fsaivopd-
vav all the editors quote Archilochus, frag.
98 (ed. Bergk) <pa.ivbp.evov rarbv oiicad’
ayeaBai. The point is that the doom
was revealed by omens, wrircCois 2vt€<ti
refer here to the chariots (not merely the
harness) as in 01. xm. 20 (this use is
noticed by schol. 11. 12 277, see Rumpel’s
Lexicon, sub Ivros). Ivtos is a favourite
word of Pindar for gear and instruments
of various kinds; for example, it is the
Pindaric equivalent of ‘ a musical instru-
ment ’.
23. €p€iorctjjL€Voi] We have to decide
here between the claims of ipetadpevoi,
the reading of B, and ipvotrapevoi, Her-
mann’s correction of ipvoapevo 1, the
reading of D. The numerous ‘emenda-
tions’ which have been suggested (such
as oXeoadpevoL Benedict, dirovpdpevoi
Hartung, epvKbpevoi Herwerden) may be
safely neglected, as so many wild guesses;
and in not a single case has any serious
attempt been made to account for the
origin of the MSS. readings.
ipv<r<rdpevot has been explained in two
ways. (1) Dissen translates inhibentes.
This meaning may be arrived at through
the idea of defending oneself against, pre-
venting; but in this sense, vbarov ipva-
adpevoi is an unnatural expression, and
quite inappropriate to the context. (2)
Mezger seizes another sense of epbecrBai,
—draw towa7'ds oneself; and translates
‘um die siisse Riickkehr ringend’ (com-
paring 2 174), striving for sweet return.
Against this view—modified and ren-
dered attractive by Mr Tyrrell’s happy
translation after the tug of war for sweet
home—the tense seems to me an objec-
tion. ipvoadpevoi cannot strictly mean
‘in a struggle for’; and could it meani7S
[NEMEAN] IX;
voarov ipeiadfievoi \evtcav6ea
aoofiaT iiriavav tcairvov *
(as Mr Tyrrell’s view implies) ‘having
tugged in vain for’?
The reading epeiadp.evoiy which has the
superior MSS. authority of B B, has
baffled commentators (epv<radfievoit I have
no doubt, being only the earliest ‘ emen-
dation’), yet its appearance in the text
seems inexplicable, unless we assume it
to be genuine. And if we analyse the
meaning of ipeiSia, we shall see that the
phrase is really significant, epeiSio means
to fix a thing in a position from which it
cannot be dislodged without external
intervention; epdSeiv aytcvpav x^ov^ to
fix an anchor firm in the ground, ipeiSe-
<r0ai Xi0ov iiri toix<p, to set a stone firm
on a wall, are typical instances. Now
when the Argive army went against
Thebes, their doom was sealed and they
were destined never to return home.
Dealing with this, a modem writer might
say that, when they arrived at Thebes,
they buried their hopes of seeing home once
more on the banks of the Ismenus. Now
Pindar expresses this objectively and
with a different metaphor ; yXv/cbs vboros
sweet return (the nearest Greek equivalent
for our ho?ne, sweet home) being conceived
as a sort of burden or cargo, which the
host carried with them, but, instead of
retaining it, fixed in an immovable posi-
tion on the banks of the foreign river.
This imaginative transformation of the
abstract conception yXvKbs vboros, as if it
were a kind of talisman, carried in the
hands, is the only difficulty in the pas-
sage. The interpretation of the scholiast,
Trjv otKoi avaKopuSrjv diri0evTof though it
hardly explains the metaphor, gives the
sense and is certainly a paraphrase of
epeurdpievoi (not of epvcr<rdpLevot). We
may render the whole sentence thus:
And on the banks of Ismenus, having
laid down their longings for sweet home,
as blanched corpses they fed fat the smoke.
It will be noticed that I have used a
subjective phrase to express the force of
the middle in epeurapievoi.
XcvKavO&i k.t.X.] i in itlaivu, here long,
is short in Pyth. IV. 150.—A slight slip
in the mss., and a divergent explanation
in the scholium have given rise to a doubt.
From <y(bjJLa<nv iiriavav B, and <rc6/Acuri
iiriavav D, it might seem simple to de-
duce cnbpiouri iriavav (Hermann). But
the scholiast clearly read crt6piar iiriavav
and connected it with XevnavOia, for he
offers us the choice of connecting the
adjective with either oivpLara or Kairvov.
The words are:
Xevicav0ia SI Xiyet ra ocbp-ara • yive-
rai yap ra awpara tujv KatofjJvcop veKptav
\evKa,	7} rbv Kajrvbv, 5tl 6 Kawvbs
Si a Trjv TripLeXty \evKbs c<tti /cat ftapbs
K.T.X.
A moment’s consideration will demon-
strate that the reading explained by this
scholium is right. If Pindar had written
<rd)pia<Ti iriavav, the variant alopiara imply-
ing a more difficult construction would
never have appeared ; whereas if he wrote
<rd>p.ar iiriavav, it is extremely natural
that scribes not apprehending the syntax
should have changed <rt6puar to 01bpuifft.
This a priori consideration is completely
confirmed by the evidence of the mss.
—namely by the tell-tale augment. "The
scribe who passed by Kpb\f/ev in line 25,
would not have added an epsilon in line
23, if he had found iriavav. In other
words, were odjpiaai iriavav the true read-
ing, the corruption in the mss. would be
almost unintelligible; whereas if o-tu/uar’
iiriavav is genuine, the traditions of B
and D are completely explained.
The word XevKav0iqs (familiar from
Sophocles’ XevKav0is Kdpa) is one of those
words in which the second part has
almost lost its original identity of mean-
ing, and it differentiates itself from the
simple XevKos by a subtle association rather
than by any tangible property; being in176	[NEMEONIKAI] O'.
kind yap haiaavro irvpal veoyviovs fedoras * o 8* 'Ap,<f>idpr)
(r^Laoreu^ Kepavvtp irafiftiq
fact a more exquisite word, so that in
rendering we may adopt blanched, a more
exquisite word than white. But in this
instance, -avQi)s has really a function to
perform, and the insignificant ‘ bloom *
of the dead on the banks of the Ismenus
is designed to leave an impression, to be
contrasted shortly with ‘ flowers of fame *
plucked hard by the waters of the Sca-
mander and the Helorus.
24. 8aC<ravro] Feasted on the limbs of
the young men : schol. ra tG>v vitov Karev-
<*>XyOy<rav Ka'L KarlffAeijav. This is the
only place in Pindar where dalvvfu is used
metaphorically ; it keeps up the metaphor
of briavav. veoyvlovs (a Pindaric coinage,
occurring in Fr. 123 as an epithet of
Youth) is emphatic and responds to veb-
ran in verse 44 below (see above, lntro-
duction, p. 167).
<rxCo-<r<us] The mss. here present
a problem of some difficulty. B prima
manu, and B have (rxhrcus, D and B
secunda manu have vyioev and crxtVe
respectively; all three mss. agree in
reading Kpb\j/ev 5’ af i7T7rots in 1. 25.
Here is a dilemma: if <rx“r<r«' is right,
how are we to account for the reading
(rxfcrots, which, as the text stands, lacks
a construction? If on the other hand
(rxfotrais is right the text in line 25 must
have suffered some corruption. Mr Tyr-
rell has suggested that we should read in
line 24 o’xl'Cro* ev KepavvQ, 4v having an
instrumental force as in ev x€P^s axfi*
If we suppose that through ignorance
of this usage ev was omitted, it is
possible, but, I think, improbable, that
<rxhrats might have been elicited from
CXICC.—I believe that we must accept
<rx^ais an^ seek for the error in the
following line, aji.* frrirois is clearly
sound, Kpw|/- at least is sound too, and
the fault must lie in the letters e v d. Now
it seems probable that an accusative
followed Kpvxf/e; in reading the whole
sentence one feels that a second indica-
tion of Amphiaraus would be a distinct
improvement. And here Pindar’s arti-
ficial method of responsions supplies us
with the clue and suggests that by the
word avdpa he could have emphasized
the contrast between the day of the
hero’s success, mentioned in line 15
(Kp4<r<T<t)v avrip) and the day of his destruc-
tion. I therefore propose to read
Kpbxj/ avdp' af lttttols
and I think one feels that af iinrots
almost requires Avdpa. To explain the
corruption, we have only to suppose
the accidental omission of p. Kpv\j/av8
was necessarily read Kpbxf/av 5\ and Kpv-
\j/av inevitably changed to Kpv\pev. The
correction of <rxtV<rcus to crx’^o-ev followed
immediately, but fortunately the traces of
the participle have not been obliterated.
My restoration of avdpa is confirmed by
TrauPCq. {omnipotent, resistless), a word in-
vented by Pindar for this passage, for the
purpose of an emphatic responsion to
pia<r0lvT€S of 1. 14. As the children of
Talaus were overpowered by Amphiaraus,
the strong man who upsets existing right,
even so Amphiaraus was quelled by the
all-powerful lightning of Zeus, the man
himself and his horses.
Rauchenstein reads yav ^aObarepvov,
X&ovl Kpbxpev 5’, and Bergk (who keeps
o-xfiroxus) follows him, except that he
changes 5’ af to Oaf (which is of course
untenable). To this change its author
was led by the interpretation of the
scholium: dt4<rxLcr€ Kal Sdoryoe rfy yrjv
ir\areiav...Kai otircos inro ryv yrjv 4Kpb<f>0rj
k.t.X. This is an absurd way of dealing
with the scholia, and, logically followed
out, would lead to a curious text. The
interpretation does not imply anything
more than the reading which the mss.
present, and I need hardly observe how[NEMEAN] IX.	177
Zev9 rai> /3aOvarepvov %6ova, /cpiiyjr avSp’ apu imrois,	25
Sov/n IlepA/cXu/^ei/ou 7t/mz/ i/cora rvirkvra pua^arav	<rrp. r'.
dvpuov alayyvOrjp^ev. iv yap Satpboviotcn (f>6/3on? <f>evyovTi /cal
TraiSes dewv.
el Svvarov, YLpovloav, ireipav fiev ayavopa <f>oivi/co<rr6\eov
iy^ecov ravrav Oavdrov 7repi /cal £©<29 dvafiaWopLcu ©9 Tropatara,
polpav S’ evvopLov
inferior is Rauchenstein’s gratuitously
redundant sentence. Are we to make the
justifiable pleonasm of a scholiast a
standard for Pindar ?
25.	pa0vcrT€pvov] Deep-chested,\ sug-
gesting the deep fissure in which the
chariot was engulfed. In Isth. in. 12,
the adjective is used of the vale of Nemea.
See below on verse 40.
26.	IIcpucAvpivov] Schol. ry IlepiKAt/-
pdvip, 6s rjv vios Uooeid&vos Kal XXwpidos
tt)s Teipeolov o/jubvvpLos t<$ Nt/A&os.—Of
Ti$7rrw Pindar uses only the present and
second aorist participles passive.
paxurdv Ovjxov] Ere—he was shamed
in his valiant soul, or felt a soil on his
warrior soul, aloxpbs and aloypvw imply-
ing originally a physical disfigurement.
The unusual phrase pxixaTdv 8vp.ov (0wra
liaxciT&v occurs in Nem. 11. 13, cf. Isth.
vi. 31) is echoed, with a variation, below
1. 37 in alxp>aTdv 0vpov.
27.	kv yap k.t.A.] For in panics super-
human^ even sons of the gods flee; and
therefore the flight of Amphiaraus (im-
plied in vCoto) may be condoned. Schol.
iv yap rots fxeylorois Kal ivOlois <p6(3ois k.t.X.
The author of the panic in this instance
was Zeus (6 yb,p Zeds ovve/xdxct r6re rots
©ijpcuois, schol.) and to him the poet
appeals in the next line.
28.	cl SwaTOV k.t.X.] If it be possible,
0 son of Cronus, I had fain defer as long
as may be (indefinitely) a brute arbitra-
ment of purpled (or purple-mantled) swords,
such as this, fought for life and death.
Mezger was the first to see that <|>oivi.ko-
crroXwv is an adjective (he compares \1v6-
(ttoXos, (fioiviKoelfJLWv) ‘ mit Roth d. h. mit
Blut iiberzogen not a proper name, as
the scholiast and previous commentators
explained. Thus ravrav becomes intel-
ligible—such an enterprise as that of the
Seven against Thebes; and the sentence
is seen to be in close connexion with the
preceding myth. Of course <Polviko<tt&-
Xwv alludes to the Phoenicians of Car-
thage, by whom Sicily at this period was
continually threatened. It is impossible
to bring out satisfactorily in English this
second intent; I have made an attempt
to suggest it by the word purpled (cf.
Julius Ccesar, hi. i, 158, ‘purpled
hands ’), in allusion to the famous Phoe-
nician purple. The scholiast explains
wetpav as tijv XrjoTpiKrjv iwidecriv (pirati-
cal descent), but here it means the test or
contest of two parties, rather than the
enterprise of one. In choosing ayavopa
Pindar probably dwelt on its etymology,
and gave its meaning a shade of blame :
too spirited, rash, overdaring, is the force
which we must attach to it. Mr Tyrrell
has suggested the translation brute arbi-
trament.
29. avapdXXopat] ‘ Dicuntur facere
precantes id quod precibus effectum
volunt’, Dissen. After d dvvarov, cos
TropcrtcrTa must not be translated by the
stereotyped formula as far as possible; it
means indefinitely far.
|M>ipav 8* ctivopov k.t.X) But I beseech
thee to bestow on the men of Aetna for
many generations the gift of a well
governed state {‘ evvopla, respublica bene
constituta legibus, qualem Aetnaei Hie-
B.
12i;8
[NEMEONIKAI] 0',
alreco ere iratalv Bapov Kirvaiwv oira^eiv,
30
Zev irdrep, ayKataitriv 8* darwofiois iiripulgcu	arp. f'.
\aov. evTi tol (\>L\nnroi t avrodi teal /creavcov yfev^as c^optcs
/epeaaova?
avBpes. olttkttov eenr' alBdo9 7dp into /cpv<j>a /cepSei icXenTTercu,
a (frepei So^av. HLpopbiw k€v viraaTrl^tov irapa Tre^ofiocu? iinrois
re vadov t iv p*dyai<s
roni debebant, Dissen ’). Sapov does not
occur elsewhere in Pindar.
31.	dyXatawriv 8* acrruvopois] Schol.
Kal TroWais cixppoatvais impi^at robs 0%-
Xoi'S, eb<j)poabvais di dvaarpe<f>oplvais nark
tt]v ttoXiv. Dissen, decora ludicra quae ad
urbem pertineant (dorwopos urbicus op-
posed to dypovopos rusticus). The schol-
iast is not quite accurate in his interpre-
tation ; though both d7\ata and ev<ppo-
abvyj are graces, they are distinct, the
first being an objective quality, bright-
ness, splendour. The subjective side how-
ever is implied in \adv impT^at. We
may render, to touch the people and their
city with splendours, or, expanding the
meaning, to gladden the people by splendid
celebrations in their city. Successes in
games (as opposed to war) are chiefly
meant. With €m|Jii|ai cf. 01. i. 90 iv
aip.aKovpla.is ayXaaiai pipiKrai.
32.	<|>CXiiriroi] Responds to iinreiois
1. 22 and lttttol 1. 52 (see Introduction,
p. 165). civt60i, in Aetna.
t|ruX,ds /c.t.X.] With souls unenthralled
by wealth ; so Pyth. vm. 91 Kpiaaova
irKobrov piptpvav. oi>x ijaawv is a more
common phrase. Here clearly, though
the plural is used, Chromius is meant, and
the man of moral might (k pia a ov as
avdpes) reminds us of the Kpiaauiv
dvi}p of 1. 15.
33.	cwrurrov Uiir k.t.X.] My words
are hard to believe; for love of gain
secretly stealeth away Aidos, who bringeth
glory. Like vipeats, atScos (sense of
shame, feeling for honour) is untranslat-
able, and it is better to preserve the
Greek in construing; especially in this pas-
sage where she is conceived as a goddess
(below 1. 36). Observe the alliteration of
three initial kappas, as if the very letter k
had some mysterious association with
stealth and baseness. [The mss. have
vTroKpvipa, but Boeckh restored bird Kpbtpa
from vTroK\lirT€Tai in the scholia.]
34. XpopCto kcv k.t] Wert thou
the squire of Chromius, beside footmen or
horses, or in conflicts of ships, thou would'st
have discerned amid the danger of the
shrill battle-whoop, that in war that
goddess (Aidos) harnessed his soul with
a spearman's might to repel the destruction
of the war-god.
Owing to a false accent in the mss.
and the schol., the meaning of this passage
has been distorted. Interpreting ovvckcv
(1. 36) as because, scribes and commenta-
tors were obliged to take kIvSwov as the
object of iKptvas, and av (accented) as the
particle, a repetition of kcv. Thus changed
the sentence was charged with a far-
fetched meaning; and it is difficult to
see how the privilege of being Chromius’
squire particularly conduced to the dis-
cernment of danger (were the perils of
battle so hard to discern?) or in what
the point of the statement consists. The
squire of Chromius would have had a
better opportunity than others of judging
of the conduct of his master; and it is
clear that ovvckcv (better perhaps otfvcKcv
as Christ writes) means that, a sense
which it regularly bears in Homer after
verbs of knowing, thinking, &c. The
restoration of av (avd) is due to Bergk.[NEMEAN] IX.	179
efcpwas av klvBvvov 6%eia<; avra?,	35
ovvetcev iv 7ro\efi(p Keiva Oeos evrvev avrov	<rrp. vj\
Ov/jlov aljyiarav apuvveiv Xoiyov ’EvvaXLov. rravpoi 8e fiovXevfrat,
</>6vov
rraprroZLov ve<f>eXav rpeyfrat irorl Sva/ievecov avhpwv crriyas
X€Pa>L K(*1	hvvaroi• Xiyerai puav f,E/cropi puev /c\eo? avdfjcrac
'2tfcap,dv$pov xfvpLatriv
The scholium is curious: rip Xpopilip
av/nrapiov av iv re Trefo/z-ax^a *ai iwirofiax
Kai vav/iax^i ixpivas oUs ns 6 Klvbvvos
6 t&v TroXi/xojv. (paiverai 8i oti ftotikerai
avrov a>s dvbpetov Kai SiacrdofovTa robs
avvbvras avr<p a<f>6(3m Trapaaryjaai. iirei
7rws av ay ados yivoiro Kpirrjs julctcl biov s
ava<TTpe<p6fJL€vo$ iv rip iroXipup; That is,
the squire of Chromius, secure under his
shelter, would be able to make observa-
tions at his leisure. The simpler explana-
tion was that one who was always by the
side of Chromius would see those deeds
of bravery which make battle really
dangerous. — With 7r€£o|3o<us compare
7refopL&xai, Pyth. II. 65.—For the office
of Aidos here the schol. appositely cites
E 531
albofiivwv 5’ avbptiv ttXioves (tool iji
icitpavrai.
Bvpov alxfictTav] An echo (as Mezger
pointed out) of piaxardv Ov/xov, 1. 26.
Here however aixjJLardv should be taken
proleptically with ivrvev, the clause
dpubveiv Xoiyov being a further prolepsis.
Compare Coriolanus 1. 4, 25 ‘with
hearts more proof than shields ’. For
alxpiards compare Nem. v. 7, Pyth. IV. 12,
01. vi. 86.
Xoiyos occurs only in this and one
other place in Pindar, and a comparison
of the two passages is instructive. In
Tsth. VI. 28 we read
t(TT(T> ydp <ra<pis, 8<ttis iv rabrq vetpiXq
X&Xafav at/iaros irpb (ptXas rrdrpas
a/iiverai,
Xoiybv avTHpipwv ivavrlip arparip k.t.X.
In both cases \0170s is brought into
direct connexion with the metaphor of a
storm-cloud raining blood. For Xoiyos
originally meant the influence of hostile
forces of nature, a storm for example or
a plague. Xoiybv ajxvveiv, in the pas-
sage before us, is to repel the ruinous
storm of Ares. In the Sixth Isthmian,
similarly, the picture is a black cloud,
hailing blood, and full of destructive
influences, the endeavour of each army
being to turn the contagion, Xoiyos, upon
their opponents.
37. iravpoi 84 k.t.X.] For the mean-
ing of this passage see above, p. 166.—
povXcvorai depends on bvvarol, and Tp&|/ai
on (3ovXev<rai. Many parallels might be
quoted for the metaphor of a war-cloud.
In Isth. ill. 35 we read of war's rough
snowstorm, rpax^Ta vicpas 7roXifioio. In
Vergil, Aen. x. 809, nudes belli is different.
irapiroSCov is ct7ra£ eiprj/iivov. irapa-
Troblfa meaning to impede, entangle the
feet, throws light on the coinage wapairo-
8ios, which clearly signifies clogging, or
pestering the feet.
39. kX4os av0T]<rcu] Story tells that
glory flowered for Hector hard by the
pouring waters of Scamander. Schol. rbv
8i "EKTopa TrapdXr)</>€ Kai o$k Mavra 97
'AxCKXia, Tip Kai rbv MEKTopa iicixaxfioQai
vTrep Trjs irarplbos, ws Kai tov Xpopaov.
It has been pointed out in the Intro-
duction that Pindar chose the word
dvOrjaai (similarly padoKp^fivoiai in the
next line), and mentioned the Scamander
with a special purpose.
12—2180	[NEMEONIKAI] 0.
ayxov, fiadvicpriiivoiari S’	a/crai? 'EXcopou,	40
evda 'Pea? iropov avd promt KcCkkoiai^ SkSop/cev	arp. O'.
7rcuSl tovt 'Ayr)<ri8djjiov <f>kyyo$ iv akucla irptora* tcl S’ aXXat?
dp,kpcu<z
40.	Pa0vKpi]|i.vowri] By the deep-
hanging {deep-cliff' d) banks of Helorus,
where the battle was fought, about 492
B.c., in which Hippocrates of Gela
conquered the Syracusans, and so became
lord of Syracuse. There Chromius won his
first laurels.—(SadtKprjpvos (which occurs
in Isth. ill. 74) responds to (Hadtorepvov
in 1. 25, one of the many verbal indica-
tions of the contrast between Amphiaraus
and Chromius.
41.	2v0a *P4a$] The mss. have M*
'Apetas, a reading condemned by the
metre and incomprehensible. We cannot
hesitate to follow Bergk in reading hda
'Vlas (accepted by Mezger). The sea of
Rhea is the Ionian sea, as we learn from
Aeschylus, Prometheus, 826 y^as irpbs
plyav koKttov 'Vlas, ‘the bay of Rhea7,
being interpreted in the following lines
as jjlvxos ’lovios. The use of iropos presents
no difficulty, cf. Nem. iv. 53 itpos ’Ioviov
iropov. The source of the mss. corruption
is indicated in a scholium:
6 Bl rrjs 'Apetas iropos avejfjyyTos Igtl *
Bib Kal aBijXov efre 'Apetas etre ' Velas
\cktIov etre v<p' Iv ' Apeiaairopov. It is
clear that 'P&is was written 'Vetas, and,
the phrase not being understood, the
words were falsely divided.
The idiom IvBa irbpov KaXloiai for
IvBa b...iropos Kakobpevos lari, is too
familiar to need illustration. 2v0a means
of course that the Helorus flows into the
Ionian sea, and may be rendered at whose
mouth. For the bearing of this clause
on the meaning of the hymn, see above
Introduction, p. 167, and below note on
1.47.
42.	tovto <f>€yyos] Even such a light
(fame, like Hector’s) began to shine in
his early manhood for the son of Agesi-
demus. tplyyos BIBopKev is the language
of the mysteries, and an examination of
passages in Pindar where eplyyos occurs
shows that he constantly used it with a
mystical reference.
(1)	01. II. 56 iTVfJuSrraTov avBpl eplyyos.
Here the force of the phrase depends on
the mystical meaning of eplyyos; ‘a light
to a man, in the deepest sense’, that is,
not the vulgar, superficial, but the tech-
nical, mystical sense.
(2)	Pyth. IX. 90 "Kaptreov KeXaBevvav
pij pe \tirot KaBapov eplyyos. The epithet
Ka.0a.p6v, of religious significance, indicates
the religious sense of (plyyos.
(3)	Pyth. viii. 97,
eirapepoi • rl 51 tis ; rl S’ otf ns; crKias
6vap
avBpioiros. aXX’ orav aXy\a BiogBotos
Zk0y,
\apirpbv eplyyos lireGTiv avBp&v Kal
peCki%os alcbv.
This is obviously a passage in which
Pindar might well have availed himself
of language associated with the deeper
‘ cathartic ’ teaching of the mysteries, and
the aty\a BiogBotos, splendour bursting
upon darkness, suggests a mystical drama.
It is also to be observed that petki\os
alibv is equivalent to aluv aplpa in 1. 44
of the ode which is now before us.
(4)	Frag. 1 S3
BevBplwv 5£ vopbv iroXvyaBys Alovvgos
ab^dvoi
ayvbv eplyyos dirdpas,
a passage which Plutarch (de Iside et
Osiride, c. 35) quotes to shew that
Dionysus was esteemed by the Greeks
lord not only of wine but of all moisture
in nature. These wider functions were[NEMEAN] IX,;
181
iroXXd jj,€V iv Kovia ykpatp, ta Se yevrovi 7tovtm (frdaoficu.
ite ttovcov 8’, ot crvv veoran yev&VTcu <rvv re SUa, reXeOei 7r/00?
yfjpa? alcov dpuepa.
iaToo Xayobv irpos Saipuovcov davpbaarbv oXfiov.	45
el yap &p,a fcreavois iroKXol9 eiribo^ov dprjrac	arp. t.
doubtless explained at large in the mys-
teries of Dionysus. The description of
the god as the ‘holy light of summer’
certainly sounds like an echo from some
mystic ritual.
In Pyth. IV. in (fad irdfiirponov eWov
(piyyos, the light of day) it is not used in
a metaphorical sense. See also Nem. in.
64 and iv. 13.
41. tci 8* aXXcus k.t.X.] But his
exploits wrought on other days, many on
the dusty dry land, some on the adjoining
sea, will I declare. The schol. wrongly
takes aXXais a/xipais with <pd<rofj.ai, and
reads x^/0<7W for	making Koviq. a
substantive. Mr Fennell prefers to
regard Koviq. as a substantive,	as
the epithet; but x^05 is always a
substantive in Pindar. The adjective
Koviq. (pulverulentus) is added to suggest
the moil of battle. Mezger indeed ex-
plains the phrase ‘im Gegensatz zu den
feuchten Ufern des Helorus*, but this
seems extremely doubtful. The battle
chiefly referred to in the words ydrovi
TTQVTtp was that of Cumae, in which the
* Etruscans were defeated.
As to <J>d<roptH (compare aiiddoo/xai, 01.
11.101) I may refer, for the vexed question
of the future middle, to Dr Donaldson and
to Mr Fennell.
44. €K irovcDv 8* k.t.X.] But from
labours, which are wrought with youth
and justice siding, there ensueth even unto
old age a calm life. Youth and Justice
are conceived as ‘ siding champions ’ (see
above, Introduction, p. 167). reXidoo is a
poetical word for the result of a process,
alcov is found feminine also in Pyth. iv.
186 and v. 7 but masc. Pyth. vm. 97
and elsewhere. Other noticeable genders
in Pindar are 17 kIwv (Pyth. 1. 19, etc.),
77 aldi\p (01. 1. 5, XIII. 88, 6 ai$i)p Nem.
VIII. 41), 77 Tdprapos (Pyth. 1. 15), 77
Mapad&v (01. XIII. no).—In the scholia
it is suggested that dfxipa is a substantive:
faeibav rives iv veoTTjn T€Ttovt]k6t€S uxtl
Kal pepuoKoTes Sikcu'ws, ij/xipa /xla iv rip
777pq. (TvyKpiTLKTj i(TTL irpbs 8Xov rbv aiQ>va,
and other explanations also are put for-
ward there.
45.	to-Ttt k.t.X.] Let him (Chromius)
know that he hath won from the gods
wondrous weal (a blissful lot), davjxaaTos
had mystical associations for the Greeks,
who used it of superhuman things re-
vealed ; and if we were called upon to
render ‘ beatific vision ’, davfxaaros might
be used.
46.	ct yap k.t.X.] For if a man win
glory and repute with great riches, fur-
ther than this there is no way open for
a mortal to attain with his two feet yet
another (higher) summit.
There is a serious difficulty in the text
here, and editors have not fully met it. B
B have kv8os, ovk tn icbpcru) Ovarbv k.t.X. ,
D has ovk fan vpfaoj. Both these read-
ings are unmetrical, and emendations have
been proposed: Triclinius ovk fa' farl
itp6<r(o (irbpfTw), Boeckh ovk fanv tl iropcrw,
Hermann ovk fanv to irbpau, Momm-
sen ovk fanv 1rpb<ru> rbv, etc. But none
of these suggestions meets the difficulty.
Triclinius’ reading is impossible because
there is an fai already in the line;
Boeckh’s rt is merely ‘padding’; and
obvious objections may be made to the
other conjectures.
In one point all the editors concur,182	[NEMEONIKAI] 0'.
kvSos, ov iropaco Tripos tls Ovarov gtl (TKottccls aWas icfrayfraadai
7ToSoLV.
^(Tvyia Se	fiev ovpmoaiov* veodaXrjs S' av^erai
namely in retaining Ion of D, and here
I dissent. More than once already have
we met cases in which the reading of
D is merely an emendation of a corrup-
tion in B B, and in the present instance
it is evident that l<rrt is a correction of
In, made for the sake of the sense.
Consequently l<m has no real mss.
authority. Nor is it at all likely that In
in B B is a corruption of l<rn. For why
should lori, which makes obvious sense,
have been changed to In, which yields no
construction, especially when another In
followed ? It may. be said that l<m and
In are very like each other; but in the
case of such simple words similarity of
the ductus litterarum is hardly worth
considering, if there is no further motive
for confusion. In any case the mere
retention of !<m does not satisfy the
metre, so that we may safely seek for
some other clue.
In the schol. a parallel passage is
quoted from the Third Nemean: dwirlp-
/SXtjtos 7dp, (prjoLv, avrr) r\ dpcTrj. waplouce
51 ttj &via dLavolq. * Et 5’ i&p KaXos epdiov
t ioucbra p>op<f>a, ovkItl 7r6p<ru), koX ra
This suggests the origin of the
reading of the mss. Either this passage
was written in a marginal note, or some
one, with this passage in his mind, jotted
ovk£tl wo paw, to indicate that In (dvarov
&i) should be joined with ov. This note
crept into the text, perhaps to fill up a
lacuna.
We are left then with the words ov
iropacjj and must now consider whether
it is possible to restore the three missing
syllables	In most cases the only
cause of the loss of a word in the middle
of a line is parablepsia, when two words
come together similarly spelt. Here
fortunately we have not to seek far for a
word, similar to wbpaoj, which will yield
admirable sense. Writing
oynopconopocTic
we see how easily a transcriber might
have unconsciously omitted wdpoa. Then
ns, left without any construction, was
designedly removed, and In introduced
from the margin.
Thus I arrive at the reading in the
text; but, once it is found, I discover,
owing to Pindar’s careful mode of writing,
‘internal evidence* to support it. The
metaphor is from climbing mountains. A
man, having reached that height of wel-
fare, to which e.g. Chromius has climbed,
need not hope to reach any higher summit;
there is no path beyond the point attained
(for <TK0Tnd meaning mountain-summit
see fr. ioi (TKomaiaiv fJLeyaXais oplwv tiwep
eo-ra). The career of Chromius has been
a gradual mounting higher and higher;
when he reached one pinnacle, he
bridged a passage to another ; now he is
on the utmost. His first great success was
won at Helorus, near the passage of Rhea,
—an actual physical passage to further
heights of glory won in battles on sea or
land. But now that he has scaled those
heights, there is no other passage of Rhea,
—as it were, no other world to conquer.
Thus the emendation of 1. 47 and the
'Plas 7rbpos of 1. 41 mutually illuminate
each other; it is seen that the reference
to the Ionian Sea is not a useless orna-
ment, in the style of modern art, but has
a definite, really telling, function in the
design of the hymn.
iropco) echoes iropaiara of 1. 29. Chro-
mius might look on a war with Carthage
as the way to a higher summit.
48. aoru^Ca k.t.X.] Repose {peace,
the alwp apiipa of 1. 44) loveth the banquet,
and by virtue of soft lays victory buddeth
afresh; yea, the voice waxeth bold beside
the bowl. veoddXrfS is proleptic. fiaXOaKq[NEMEAN] IX.	183
fiaXdaica vifca<j>opia <rvv docSa• OapaaXea 8e 7rapa /cpaTrjpt (fxovd
yiverai.
iy/cipvdrco rt? viv, yXv/cvv tcoopuov 7rpo<f>dTav,	5^
apyupeatcc Se vcopudro) (fuaXauri fiiaTav	<TTp. id,
dpjirekov 7ral8\ a? 7rod’ imroi /cnycrdpLevcu Xpoplq) irepb^av
0€p,i7r\e/eToi<; apua
AarotSa <TT€<f)dvoLs etc ra? lepa? 'hacv&vos. Zev irarep,
ev^opuai ravrav dperdv KeXahfjcrai avv Xapire<T<TLvy virep ttoXXgqp
t€ Tipbdkfecv Xoyots
aoidg. means soothing or comforting des-
cant, but we may adopt Milton’s soft lay.
Compare Pyth. Vlll. 31 (pBiypari paX-
da.K(p. For the metaphor see Nem. vm.
40.
50. cyKipvaTd) k.t.X.] Mix it (the
bowl), sweet inspirer of the comus, and
dispense the potent (overbearing) child of
the vine in the silver cups, which once on
a time his mares won for Chromius and
sent to him from sacred Sicyon with
crowns of Apollo by Themis plight.
Mezger wrongly translates 7rp<x|)arav
‘den siissen Vorboten des Festes’, attri-
buting to irpo- the sense which it bears in
prophet. cyKLpvaTw tis is the Greek
idiom, where we use the second person
imperative.
As wine is called the son of the vine,
so the vine is called the ‘ wild mother ’
of wine in Aesch. Pers. 614. (Sia/rav
(schol. tov pi&£e<T0cu eidbra Kal els pidrjv
ayeiv), a Pindaric word, suggests that
Dionysus, not the lightning of Zeus (Trap-
piq Kepavvip 1. 24), is to master Chromius.
The contrast with the heroes who marched
against Thebes is also kept up by the re-
sponsion of Xttttol with brireiois in 1. 22.
52. OcfuirX^KTOis] Themis was asso-
ciated with Apollo, as we are told in a
scholium: kolBo irdpedpbs €<ttl tov ’Att6\-
Xojvos i) Qlpts x<£pur tov xPV&Typlw Kal
ydp rjv TTpo<pr)Tisf and in Pyth. XI. 9 we
read 6<ppa Qip.Lv lepav ILvOCjvd re Kal
dpOodlicav yds 6p<paXov KeXadrjTov. It is
appropriate then that she should be con-
ceived as the weaver of Apollo’s garlands
—the due twining thereof being a poetical
symbol that they were fairly won (‘wohl
erworben’, Mezger). There is a hint
thrown out in the scholia that Pindar is
alluding to a report that the Pythian
games at Delphi were not fairly conducted
by the Phocians (xprjpavLv avbeadai).—
We must not forget that Dika (who
plays a part in this hymn) and Eunomia
(referred to in 1. 29) were daughters of
Themis and closely associated with her,
compare 01. ix. 15 and xm. 8, also fr.
I. 5; moreover Bipxs and Uktj are called
by Maximus of Tyre, pv<ttlkcl Kal Beoirpeirri
ovbpara.
The reading of the MSS. ap<pl (for apa)
suits neither sense nor metre, and Schmid
rightly restored ajui from the scholiast.
Letters and syllables at the end of a line
run the risk of effacement, and here it
would seem that the final A was oblite-
rated and AM incorrectly supplemented
by <pi.
54. ctfx.op.cii k.t.X.] I pray, O father
Zeus, that such excellence as this may be
the theme of my hymn, the Graces assisting,
and that beyond many poets I may worship
Victory by my words, shooting very near
to the mark of the Mieses.
ravrav dperdv, such excellence as that
of victory in games, is opposed, as a
more desirable theme of song, to excel-
lence in war, and the opposition is indi-184	[NEMEONIKAI] 0'.
NIKCLV, dfCOVTL^OOV GK07T0L Wf^LOTa WloiGaV.
55
cated by the responsion of toOtclv in 1. 54
to ravrap in 29 (both occurring in prayers
to Zeus) as Mezger has pointed out. In
Pyth. 11. 63 we find KeXadetp associated
with dperd (dp<f> apery KeXadtwp), and
both words, I think, had mystical asso-
ciations. In Pyth. IX. 89 we have XapL-
tup tceXadevvav.
Ti|iaX4>€iv, a word of peculiar solemnity,
(a favourite of Aeschylus, occurring only
once in Pindar, otherwise rare) is by no
means a synonym of the vulgar Tipdp,
and we lose its flavour if we translate it
by honour. It is almost invariably used
of homage paid to divine beings. In
Aristotle’s Politics, Bk. iv. 15, we have
Tijm\<f>€ip robs dcovs, sounding like a tech-
nical expression ; in Aeschylus, Agamem-
non, 922 dcovs tol roicrde npaX(pelp "gjpcup,
Eumenides, 15 poXbpra d’ airrov TipaX<j>ei
Xeus (of Apollo), ib. 807 vtt acrrup tupSc
TipaX<f>ovp£pa$ (of the Eumenides), ib.
dioodbrois (TK’qTTTpoLcrL TLpaXcpobpcpop (of
Agamemnon, but dioabbrois is significant).
As the word comes from TipaX<f>rjs which
means fetching a price, costly, our best
translation will be worship, which is not
only a most solemn word but suggests
worth as TipaX<peip suggests price. If we
were required to render in Greek ‘Thy
most precious blood’ or ‘Thy precious
death’, alp.a ripahtploraTOV and TipaX<j>rjs
o(f>ayr) would be suitable equivalents.
This shade of meaning of TipaX<peip has
a bearing on the text of the passage
before us. It proves that vucav the
reading of the mss. is wrong and that
vUav (rather XUav) the emendation of
Ceporinus (and recognized in the scholia)
is right. Tipa\<peiv demands as its object
the name of a divine being. In the
passage of Aeschylus, where it is used of
Agamemnon, he is expressly described
as a vicegerent of Zeus, and the verb
felicitously suggests the divinity that
hedges a king. And the mss. themselves
let the secret out. Had Pindar really
written virep ttoWoLv vlkolv, why should
iroKkav have become iroWQv and viKav
remained unaltered ? On the other hand,
if Pindar wrote virkp ttoSXCjv vUav, it is
quite intelligible that a scribe who did
not understand the phrase vwkp iroWtav
(in proof that such want of insight existed
I may point to the scholia) altered vUav
to vucav without at the same time altering
ttoWQp, and supplied aperdp as the object
of Tipa\<f>eip. For vir^p in the sense of
superiority see Isth. 11. 36 and frag. 61.
55. orKoiroi*] The MSS. give (tkottov.
Ahrens restored the rarer form of the
genitive, metri gratia, and this is better
than Bergk’s <tkoit<£, for we find dtyxwrm
with the genitive in Isth. 11. 10 prjp'
aXaddas eras ay^tcrra fiaipop. For the
metaphor cf. Nem. vi. 27. To hit the
mark of the Muses would be to write a
perfect poem.—All the MSS. have Moktcu'
and we need not pause to consider Mo?<rai>
and Mol<rais, worthless readings discussed
in the scholia.[NEMEAN] X.
ODE IN HONOUR OF A VICTORY IN WRESTLING WON AT
THE HECATOMBAEA OF ARGOS BY THEAEUS, SON
OF ULIAS, AN ARGIVE.
INTRODUCTION.
More honoured by time and richer than any Greek city, except perhaps
Thebes, in mythical associations,—impressing the visitor by numerous tombs,
heroa, and temples ascribed to legendary founders,—Argos with its sur-
rounding territory was regarded as holy ground, dedicated to Hera. As you
approached Mycenae from the north, you might feel that you were entering
‘precincts’ (’Apyeiov Tempos), and the city had, conspicuous enough, vestiges
of her peculiar history, and perhaps a strange flavour of her own, which
a visitor would notice, just as nowadays we are conscious of a certain sin-
gularity in the atmosphere of such towns as Bruges or Westphalian Munster.
In the beginning of the fifth century, she took a part in the general spread-
ing and developing of the art of sculpture, winning fame as the seat of the
school of Ageladas, who taught Polycletus : and thus she found an oppor-
tunity of decorating her streets and buildings with beseeming works in
bronze and marble, a new brilliant expression of her ancient distinctions.
While the city could point to many passages in her early history as
proof of a ‘surplus of grace’ vouchsafed from Zeus, there were Argive
families which preserved old tales specially connected with themselves—
these too contributing to determine the atmosphere of the place. In Pindar’s
time there was a family there, of unrecorded name, which looked back
fondly to a day when a remote ancestor, one Pamphaes, entertained at
his house two young strangers, who proved to be Castor and Polydeukes,
henceforward gratefully regarded by the descendants as their approved
patrons. Two members of this family, Thrasyclus and Antias, distinguished
themselves unusually by successes at public games, and a lady, perhaps their
niece, who married a certain Ulias, might imagine that through her rather
than her husband was bequeathed the quality of athletic excellence to their
son Theaeus1, and a portion of the virtue of the Dioscori.
1 The date of the ode is supposed to	in which the Argives and the Thebans
fall between 01. 78. 1, the year of the	were opposing parties. As to the prior
‘ reduction of Mycenae and 01. 80. 4	limit Dissen writes ‘ Constanti traditione
(456 b.c.), the year of the battle of Tanagra,	Persidae olim non Argis vixerunt sed186
[NEMEAN] X;
In the ode, which we are about to consider, commemorative of a
wrestling victory won by this Theaeus at the Hecatombaea, a festival of
Hera in Argos, there is no direct description of the personal qualities of
the victor, so that we can only judge of them by inference from the imposing
array of his successes, and his ambition to crown them by a yet unachieved
Olympian victory. These successes, the distinctions of his mother’s kin, and
the glories of his city, were in themselves material sufficient for an ode; but
to these, Pindar, taking advantage of the special relation of Castor and
Polydeukes to the house of the victor’s mother, has adroitly superadded a
myth, including the passage of Castor’s death-wound, the strife of Polydeukes
with the sons of Aphareus, and Castor’s resurrection through the inter-
cession of his brother. In fact the Ode is divided metrically into five
systems; in the first are enumerated the great heroes and the fair women
of Argos; in the second the exploits of Theaeus are celebrated and
his ambitions encouraged; in the third his mother’s kindred are con-
gratulated on agonistic victories and on their favoured ancestor Pamphaes,
this incident bringing us to the Tyndaridae, whose story is told in the last
two systems, the fourth closing with the death of the sons of Aphareus, and
the fifth containing the relation of the successful intercession of Polydeukes.
But these five parts are interdependent and closely connected in thought,
by means of parallel details, subordinate to a central motive1, the victor's
ambition to conquer at Olympia. The reflexion that the gods are faithful
might encourage Theaeus to count on the aid of the Tyndarids, and this
idea is made prominent in the myth.
This legend, handled here in Pindar’s happiest style, and touched in
Greek measure with pathos, is for a modern reader perhaps one of the
most attractive passages in Pindar, and it admits of dislocation from its
context, to be read as an independent tale. In Greek mythology those twin
riders,—suggesting the medieval Doppelganger,—are engaging figures,
tempting us to think into their legend an element of that which we call
‘romance,’ especially through their mutual devotion, stronger than death,
and their strange double life, passed in heaven and beneath the earth on
alternate days.
Mycenis et Tirynthe; tamen hunc Pin-
darus, ioropiKurraros poeta, Amphitryonem
Argis dicit nutritum’, and attempts to
explain this difficulty by the supposition
that the Ode was written when Mycenae
and Tiryns had been subjected to Argos.
But this is not cogent, and Mezger justly
remarks on the freedom ‘ welche sich die
Griechen in solchen Dingen erlaubten ’.
In any case the reduction of Mycenae
and synoecismus of Argolis probably
took place at a much earlier period (see
Mahaffy, Hermathetm, III. 60 sqq.).
1 I do not mean to say that this is the
Grundgedanke, but it is a motive which
has determined the whole moulding of
the hymn. Dissen, to explain the ode,
resorts to the gratuitous hypothesis that
Theaeus had distinguished himself by some
exploit revealing brotherly love {fraterni
amoris documenia). L. Schmidt and
Friederichs find the main idea in 1. 54
Kal {jlclv 6e&v TncrTbv yfros, and Mezger
approves of this interpretation, working
it out more fully and recognizing that the
truth of the myth ‘soil seine Hoffnung auf
einen olympischen Sieg starken’.INTROD UCT10N
187
This divided life may be, as mythological students suggest, in its actual
origin a ‘nature-myth/ meaning the succession of light and darkness;
certainly it might well serve, like that succession itself, as a poetical
emblem of the alternation of hardships and joys, which those who would
lead full lives must accept as a condition. ‘The sons of Tyndareus,5 as
Pindar calls them, using this name in preference to the more usual designa-
tion Dioscori ‘sons of Zeus1,5—perhaps from an inclination to emphasize a
link that bound them with men,—had moreover the repute of being present
saviours and aiders, especially to mariners, thus exercising their renowned
strength in beneficent ways.
Inviting the Graces to sing the praises of Argos2, the poet ushers his
mythical reminiscences as it were into the air of art, associates them at
least with the works which the sculptors of the day were executing. The
Argives could hardly hear of Danaus and his daughters or of the tale of
Perseus, without thinking of reliefs recently wrought to adorn their temples;
for their city was ‘ ablaze with countless works immortalising brave deeds.5
And thus Pindar prepares a gracious background. Danaus3 first and
his fifty daughters, sitting on bright seats; then the quest of Perseus4,
represented perhaps on horseback (as in a contemporary clay-relief of
Melos), in his dropped hand the head of Medusa, ‘the contriveress5; Io
and her son Epaphus, founders of Egyptian cities; and, meetly in a place
apart from her sisters, the singular daughter of Danaus6 who declined her
father’s command and spared her husband. Next comes Diomede, whom
Athena made a ‘deathless god5; then Amphiaraus, whom earth received
in her bosom through the kind bolts of Zeus; then Alcmene and Danae, to
1	Atbs Kovpot Hymn. Horn. 33, 1;
Ai6<TKopoi in early inscriptions; Doric (in
Sparta) AiovKUpoi. In early times, and
especially in Laconia, the name Tyndari-
dae was the most important designation.
See Roscher’s Lexikon der gr. und rom.
Mythologies p. 1154; where we read:
‘Das Natursubstrat ihres Wesens ist im
allgemeinen ohne Zweifel das Licht, doch
nicht in seiner Ruhe, sondern in seinem
Ubergange vom und zum Dunkel5.
2	An Argive would remember the
ancient statues of the Graces which stood
in the pronaos of the Heraeon, a
temple of Hera near Mt Euboea. See
Pausanias 11. 17, 3, tv 5b rip irpovdip
rfj pibv Xapires, ayaXpiard eGTiv apxcua,
tv 8el-iq, 5b kXivi7 rrjs "Hpas. In this temple
was afterwards placed the great sitting
figure of Hera, in gold and ivory, wrought
by Polycletus; her crown was adorned
with sculptured representations of the
Graces and the Hours. Here again we
see the connexion of Hera with the
Graces.
3	Danaus was said to have built the
temple to Apollo Lycius (Paus. II. 19,
3) at Argos, where there was a Bpbvos
Aavaov.
4	The Tjpipov of Perseus was on the left
side of the road from Mycenae to Argos
{id. 18, 1). For Medusa’s head see my
note.
5	In the temple of Apollo Lycius there
was an image (£6avov) of Aphrodite said
to have been dedicated by Hypermnestra,
as a monument of her acquittal for
sparing her husband {ib. 19, 6). For
the same cause she built a temple to
Artemis Peitho, where her tomb was
shown {ib. 21, 1, 2).188
[NEMEAN] X.
whom Zeus revealed himself, proving that the repute of Argos for supremacy
in the beauty of its women was really true, inasmuch as the supreme god
selected them; and after these came Talaus and Lynceus, also notably
favoured by Zeus, who, as Pindar curiously expresses it, ‘ married the fruit
of their minds to unswerving justice.’
This ‘dream of fair women’ and heroes occupies the first strophe and
antistrophos: the crowning grace, reserved for the epode, was that
bestowed upon Amphitryon, who, when his expedition against the Teleboae
had been successful, was permitted to succeed Zeus in the embraces of
Alcmene. The king of the immortals had come to his house in his dress
and favour, clad in brazen armour, with the dreadless seed of Heracles in his
loins. And the marriage of Heracles and Hebe, for Pindar a type of
beatitude,—with a picture of the bride, supreme in beauty, moving beside
her mother Hera, as she was constantly represented in art,—forms a kind of
consummation for the eyes of pious Argives to rest upon.
The brass armour worn by Zeus, in this epiphany, in imitation of a
mortal, sounds a note which recurs again and again through the Ode \
Pindar sometimes selects a material thing, whose reappearance at certain
intervals—almost like a physical touch—reminds us of an idea that we
might forget. Brass lent itself without constraint to the central idea of this
hymn, as an emblem; for, associated with contention, and as a baser metal
than gold, it could suggest the state of a mortal not yet deified, or of an
athlete not yet an Olympic victor, such a victory being symbolised by
gold elsewhere1 2. Figuratively, one might say that the Ode dealt with a
possible transmutation of brass to the more precious metal. The sheen of
the brass—like a torch passed on in a torch race—flashes from system to
system, until in the last verses it grows dim in the intenser light of ‘the
golden houses of heaven ’.
Observing that he has not exhausted the praise of Argos, the poet passes
from the marriage of Heracles to the achievements of the victor, Theaeus, in
wrestling. The bridge to the new subject3 is made by a general observation,
which seems to be suggested by the praises of the city, but is immediately
applied with emphasis to the praises of the man. ‘ Moreover men’s envy is
grievous to encounter; but nevertheless awake the lyre, and turn to thoughts
of wrestlings.’ The list of victories follows; two (the occasion of the ode),
won at the Argive Hecatombaea, where the prize was a shield of brass ; one
at Delphi; three at the Isthmian, and three at the Nemean games. More-
over he had been twice victorious at the Panathenaea, and here was a good
1	The word occurs in every system :
(First epode) 1. 14 iv xa^Kl°LS oir\ots.
(Second strophe) 1. 22 ayuv rot x^X/ceos.
(Third antistroph.) 1. 45 %a^ov pvptov.
(Fourth stroph.) 1. 60 x<*X^as X<$YXas*
(Fourth epode) 1. 70 iv ir\evpat<n x^k6v.
(Fifth epode) 1. 90 xa^optrpa Kaaropos.
2 01. I. 1 6	xpwros—Stair piiret k.t.\.
3 Mezger divides the ode thus :
apxd, 1—18; Kararpoird, 19—22; op-
<l>a\6s, 22—48; peraKaraTpoiraj 49—54;
(r<f>payi$, 55—90.
The apxd, he remarks, and the <r<j>payls
contain the mythical portions of the hymn,
so that in its structure it resembles the
Ninth Pythian.INTRODUCTION
189
augury for his future success at Olympia; for the prize at the Athenian
festival, a jar of olive oil, might be considered an omen or earnest of an
olive-crown. Professing that Theaeus hesitates to utter his heart’s desire,
Pindar confides it indirectly to Zeus, whose graciousness in olden time to
the men and women of Argos might well encourage a supplication. An
Olympic victory would be ‘the perfection’ (reXos) for the career of Theaeus;
and by using this word, appropriate to marriage, Pindar suggests Hera ‘who
perfecteth’ (reXeia, 1. 18), and implies that an olive-wreath would be the
heavenly reward of this man, even as the marriage with Hebe was the meed
of Heracles. And it is signified that Theaeus is prepared, like Heracles, to
en dure labours, in no wise expecting to enter into a heritage of glory without
hardships, but quite aware of the unexempt condition of mortal frailty.
‘ Great is the glory, for the strife is hard’; and the glory desired by Theaeus
is the highest attainable, a supremacy at the games which Heracles insti-
tuted at Pisa.
In reflecting on the athletic powers of Theaeus it was natural to re-
member the similar exploits of Antias and Thrasyclus, two kinsmen of his
mother, and to record them was a compliment required by the usages of
the epinician hymn. Thus a hereditary transmission of muscular qualities
justifies, as it were, the success of the victor; but Pindar, going a step further
back, explains the athletic vein in the family by a divine visit, vouchsafed
to a remote ancestor by those lords of athletic contention, Castor and
Polydeukes. Preparing the way for this incident, which he reserves for the
epode of the system, he opens the subject by declaring that Honour, won in
games, is a frequent visitant ‘ of thy mother’s family,’ in company with the
Graces and the Tyndarids. ‘If I were a kinsman of Antias and Thrasyclus
I should make bold not to conceal the light of my eyes.’ A catalogue of
their victories follows.
In the third strophe and third antistrophos, there is imagined a parallelism
between the distinctions of the kinsfolk of Theaeus and the distinctions of
Argos, which were rehearsed in the first strophe and antistrophos.
(1)	The influence of the Graces is shed over both records1. In the con-
cernment of art they were associated with the city favoured by Hera; in the
concernment of athletic prowess they are associated with the family favoured
by the Tyndarids.
1. I. Xapires.	1. 38. XapLT€(T(ri.
(2)	Thrasyclus, whose name connotes inherent bravery, responds to the
brave deeds of the Argive heroes.
1. 3* pvplcus epyoav Spacremv evciccv (ist Strophe).
1. 39*	kcu c<ov Opao-vicXov (3rd strophe).
1 Mezger, remarking that the mention rehrt...; die Unterstiitzung der Tyndari-
of the Graces in v. 37 ‘weist auf v. 1	den, die von seiner Familie besonders
zuriick’, says: ‘Die Unterstiitzung der	verehrt wurden, ist ein Erbe von seinen
Chariten verdankt Theaos seiner Zugeho- Vorfahren’ etc.
rigkeit zu der Stadt, die sie besonders ve-i go	[NEMEAN\ X.
(3)	Victories won in chariot-races,—literal carryings of victory—by these
men, Antias and Thrasyclus (perhaps others too), attest the proverbial excel-
lence of Argive horses; just as the epiphanies of Zeus, the supreme god,
attested the supremacy in beauty of Argive women. Here the fifth line of
the third strophe answers the fifth of the first antistrophos.
1. II. Zevs €1T 'AXicpijvav Aavaav re /jloXcop crop KaT€(j)av€ Xoyop.
1. 41 \ oppara)v. viKa<f)opiai$ yap era7s Ilpoiroio rod* imrorpocpop aarv k.t.X.
(4)	The prizes in brass tripods and shields won by the athletes are
beyond number, like the works of art which represent the worthies of Argos.
1. 3* pvplais epycav Opaaiav ev€K€P.
1. 45. aXXa xa^ov pvpLop ov bvparop.
(5)	An enumeration of these prizes would be too long; even as the
tale of Perseus is a long one.
1. 4. pan pa pep ra Uepaeos ap<f)\ M eboioras Topyovos.
1. 46. i^eXeyxci V pa< pore pas yap apiflprjcraL cr^oXas".
(6)	Victories won at the ‘high situate’ cities of Achaea, at Tegea and
at Clitor, contributed these things of bronze ; as the cities founded in Egypt
by Io and Epaphus supplied subjects for art.
1. 52. iroWa b* Alyv7TT<a ’ico ktictcp a art] rais *E7raffrov naXapais.
1. 47. ovt€ KXeirajp Kal Teyea Kai *A^ac<5i/ vy/fi^aroi TroXies.
Having told the achievements by which the victor’s kinsfolk had gone
beyond the mark of ordinary successes, Pindar proceeds, in the epode, to
narrate how Castor came, and his brother Polydeukes, to the house of
Pamphaes, as guests; a visit which makes us cease to marvel that his
descendants are goodly athletes, seeing that those twin beings, who preside
over games ‘in conjunction with Hermes and Heracles,’ preeminently care
for the interests of just men; and the gods are really true to such a claim as
that of guest-plight.
The first epode and the third epode answer too. Pamphaes entertaining
the divine brothers seems to hold parley, across the interspace, with Amphi-
tryon, whose house was visited by Zeus. And just as the coming of Zeus was
an event ultimately followed by the marriage of Heracles, so the coming of
the Tyndarids was an event which may signify an Olympic victory in the
future. This approximation of thoughts is clearly indicated by the position
of the name of Heracles in the same foot of two corresponding lines.
1. 17. arrepp abeipavrov (faepcov 'Hpa/tXeof * ov /car "OXvpnov—.
1. 53* poipav 'Eppa Kai avv 'HpaicXei buirovri OaXciav.
It is observable too that po7pa Oakeia is an expression suited to the
marriage of Heracles; and that it suggests the poipa to-X&v, pertaining to
Argos, mentioned in 1. 201 2 3.
1 For the reading see note.	strophe, are really connected with the
2 For the reading see note.	preceding system.
3	11. 19, 20, though in the secondINTRODUCTION.	191
A second responsion confirms this explication of the chain of thought.
The first epode ends with the addition of Hebe
eort, KaXkla-ra Becov (1. 18) ;
the third epode affirms, at its close, the truth of the gods,
Ka\ jiav Becov mcrrov yevos (1. 54)*
Like Heracles, Theaeus has a claim to the grace of the gods1.
The story of Castor and Polydeukes, related in the fourth and fifth
systems, illustrates the declaration that the gods are faithful. It begins and
ends with the strange life of the brothers,—a twi-life, we might call it,
alternating between hollow subterranean places in Therapna where they lived
indeed, but with scarce conscious life, and the palace of Olympus. This
curious condition came about in this wise. The brothers, though peers in
strength and undissevered comrades, were not quite peers in the accident of
birth ; the two names, which they jointly bore, Tyndarids and Dioscori,
pointing to this difference, as Castor was the true Tyndarid and Polydeukes
the true son of Zeus. Thus Castor had a mortal quality in his nature and
was doomed to death. But Polydeukes, his comrade in all uses since their
associated birth, would have preferred sheer death to life unshared by his
brother; and when the fatal hour for Castor came, Polydeukes, true to his
comradeship, won the consent of Zeus to share his own inheritance of
heavenly life with Castor, on his part sharing Castor’s inheritance of
subterranean existence. Such was the bargain with fate.
Before I point out in detail the significance of this legend for Pindar’s
purpose, it will be well to reproduce it in his own words.
‘ Changing their abode daily, alternately they dwell in the house of their
father Zeus, and on the next day are hidden in the hiding places of the earth
in the hollows of Therapna, fulfilling a like destiny; for when Castor
perished in war, Polydeukes chose this appointment of life, rather than to be
absolutely a god and inhabit heaven. For with the point of a brass spear,
Idas, angered in some matter touching oxen, wounded Castor. Them (the
Tyndaridae) Lynceus, who had a keener eye than all men on earth,
looking abroad from Mt Taygetus, saw sitting in the trunk of an oak. And
with storming feet they twain came speedily, those sons of Speed, to the
place and did swiftly contrive a great thing to do, and suffered dire distress
by the hands of Zeus. Instantly came Leda’s son (Polydeukes) in
pursuit; and these (Idas and Lynceus) stood opposite, hard by their father’s
sepulchre. Thence catching up a headstone, grace of Hades, a polish’d
rock, they hurled it against the chest of Polydeukes ; but felled him not nor
made him to flinch. And then rushing forward he plunged brass in the
1 Observe the following responsions of
phrase:
1. 14 freer’ es Kelvov yeveav :: 1. 51
eyyevts 2/nfj.ev.
1. 16 iffrjXdev :: 1. 49 £\06vtos ,
I have pointed out in note on 1.
37 that many of the expressions at the
end of the third system echo the words
at its beginning ((TTpoQ'fj’y).[92	[NEMEAN\ X.
sides of Lynceus. But against Idas Zeus drave a fire-charged lurid thunder-
bolt ; and the brothers were consumed together all alone in the lonely place.
For men, a strife with stronger beings is hard to converse with.
(Strophe 5.) Quickly returned the Tyndarid to the might of his brother,
and found him not yet dead, but shuddering in his jaws with hard-drawn
breath. Shedding hot tears and moaning heavily, he lifted up his voice and
cried ; “ O father, son of Cronus, what, oh what release from my sorrows
will there be? Upon me too, my lord, as tipon him, lay the doom of death.
From a man, bereft of his friends, honour has clean departed’; and of
mortals few are they who in hard-besetting need are faithful, to share in the
travail.”
(Antistrophe 5.) Thus spake he, and Zeus came and stood before him,
and pronounced these words : “ My son art thou; but after I had begotten
thee, this man was conceived by thy 77iother of the drops of her husband’s
mortal seed. But notwithstanding, I offer thee the choice of these two lots.
If thou art fain to eschew death and loathso?ne eld and dwell thyself {without
Castor) in the mansion of Olympus, with Athe7te and with swart-speared
A res, this guerdo7i is thi7ie to have; but if thy zeal is for thy brother, and it
is thy purpose to give him an equal share in all, then shalt thou breathe for
the half of thy days in a place beneath the earth, a7id for the 7noiety i7i the
golden house of heaven.” When he had thus pronounced, Polydeukes
halted not between the two ways, but unclosed the eye and then released
the voice of brass-girt Castor/
There is a certain witchery in the myth of these two young Tyndarids,
men and also gods, alive and yet not always quick, knit closely to each
other, ever since a birth of curious circumstance, by fibres of sympathy
and features of similitude, being almost doubles or ‘shadows/ and to
men never coming save as a pair, nor often conceived apart. There is
light about them, but it is light experiencing a change, or double (a/x^tXw/ciy),
partaking of the gloom of hollow chambers at Therapna ; the outgoings of
the morning and the evening have passed, shimmering, into the story of
the Laconian horsemen. For they usually rode on horses (like the Vedic
agvins); and they were not heedful of the love of women. Such love
was replaced by that mystical friendship for each other, which became a
type,—comradeship here actually overcoming death, through the conviction
that ‘ there are worse things waiting for men than death ’ in the world.
The names and qualities of Idas and Lynceus, with whom the Tyndarids
associate and quarrel in the highland glens of Arcadia or Laconia, suggest
(as latent in the legend) strange creatures of the woods, endowed with super-
natural powers, like Pan, and perhaps of his society,—creatures surpassingly
fleet of foot, and of sight potent to pierce through opaque masses of earth or
stone or tree1. Idas may be ‘the man of the wood’; and Lynceus is the
‘ lynx-man/ whose eye is keener than all on earth ; which reminds us of the
1 Schol. on v. 62; 6 dt Avyiceds di-vSep-	yip6p.epa gkltreiv, Idwv 8icl tt}$ bpvbs top
K7)S ware Kal dia \16ojp Kai dia yrjs ra	Kcurropa trpuxre X6yx$*INTRODUCTION.	193
keen vision of Pan (ogea SepKopepos), whose back was covered with the
spotted skin of a lynx :
Xai(f)os 5* €7r\ para da(f)oiuop
XvyKos
Their father’s name, moreover, Aphareus, the Speedy or Sudden one, suits
the sphere of the swift children of the forest.
But while the story suggests this ‘Arcadian’ origin, it is a digression
here, for Pindar is not concerned with this idea. He is rather concerned
to bring out a parallel between the myth of the Tyndarids and the
circumstances of Theaeus.
Let us see. The heart’s desire of Polydeukes was that he and his
brother should share Olympus together, even though this implied a mixture
of hardship with happiness. The heart’s desire of Theaeus was a victory at
Olympia, for which he was prepared to endure travail. The parallel is thus
indicated by a responsion in the first lines of the second and the fifth
epode.
1. 31 ootis apiXXaTai 1repl
<ov ae6Xoav KOpvcjiais.
1. 85 ft KaaiyvriTOv ire pi
pdppacrat.
In both cases a prayer is directed to Zeus, and in the same metre; and
in both cases the real petition is not declared. In the last lines of the second
antistrophos Pindar entreats Zeus for Theaeus :
1. 29 Zev narepj reop pap eparai (jopepl (riya Foi erropa* nav 8e reXos
iv tip epycop *
In the last lines of the fifth strophe Polydeukes addresses Zeus :
irarep Kpopioop, ris 8r) Xvcris
1. 77 €(T(T€Tai 7T€V04(OV \ KCU €po\ SdvaTOV (TVV TG)S* €77IT€lXop, dva^.
oi^erai ripa k.t.X.
In 1. 29 tcXos leaves the issue doubtful; in 1. 77 the t4Xos named is not that
which is desired.
Again the real desire of Polydeukes, uttered by Zeus, is compared with
the request of Theaeus, under the form of a paronomasia. To both there
were two alternatives open; they might ask for happiness, without a
disposition to undergo hardship, or they might ask for it not unconditioned.
For Polydeukes this alternative is stated plainly at the end of the fifth
antistrophos; for Theaeus it is suggested at the end of the second anti-
strophos.
1. 30 (ep tip epyiop') ov8* apo^Oa) Kcipdla 7Tpoo'0epo)i/ roXpap TrapaiTctrcu \dpiP.
el pep daparop re (f)vya)P Kai yrjpas ane^dopepop
1. 84 clvtos olneip a it os OvXvprrov OfXeis k.t.X.:
—this would have been the wrong request for Polydeukes.
B.
1 See Homeric Hymn (xix.) to Pan, 11. 14 and 23.
13194
\NEMEAN] X,
But the analogy, most evident in the conclusion, is carried on, directly or
indirectly, throughout the whole passage. The son of Leda in 1. 66 responds
to the son of Ulias in 1. 24.
24 OvXia itcus ev6a—
66 rj\6c Atjdas nais—
and we observe that, as Theaeus derived his valour from his mother,
Polydeukes inherited his divinity from his father. And both were engaged
in ‘ a brazen contest,’ associated with oxen :
1. 60 top yap *1 Bas dp.(j>\ ftovo-ip 7ra>s xo\e>0c\s trpaxrev ^aXiceas Aoy^as a#ca,
and, in 1. 70, Polydeukes drives brass (xoXkop) home in the sides of Lynceus.
Theaeus was concerned in such a contest at Argos,
1. 22 ay<Lp toi x^Xkcos
ba/jLOP orpvpei 7TOTi fSovOvcriav ^Hpa?.
The requirements of this analogy explain the curious phrase x^K€°s «ya>i/;
for a direct reference to the prize, a shield of bronze, would have affected the
comparison with a sort of awkwardness, a prize not answering well to a
weapon of offence.
Again the contest is in each case described as a labour or trial (nopcap,
in 6th line of 2nd strophe, 71-01/9 in 6th line of 5th strophe)1.
But the direct analogy of the deeds of Polydeukes with those of Theaeus
is not continued throughout; the comparison is partly sustained by a sort of
reflexion, through an intermediate parallel, namely the list of eminent
Argives in the first system. Thus in the last three lines of the fourth
antistrophos we find responsions connecting them with the last three lines
of the first strophe.
1. 4 Medoiaras Topyopos.
1. 64 e/ii/o-avr* coK€(os.
Here the contrivance of Idas and Lynceus is likened to the thought of an
arch ‘ contriveress,’ and the comparison of Polydeukes to Perseus is
implied. In 1. 65 the waXapais Aios answer to the naXdpais *Eird<f>ov (son
of Zeus) in 1. 5 ; in both cases Zeus was a present help to his sons, begotten
of Io and of Leda.
Moreover Polydeukes is compared to Hypermnestra. Just as death
threatened him from the spot where his foes stood hard by their father’s
tomb, so Hypermnestra was threatened by death through keeping her
sword hard pressed in her scabbard,
1. 6 ip KovXea> Kara<rxoi<ra £l<f)os.
1. 66 Tvpfi<p (rx^ftop Trarpcotto.
And as she did not flinch (oil irapeirXdyxQr}), though her queenly seat with
her sisters (ayXaos 6poposi see dyXao6p6p<ov 1. 1) might be converted into an
1 The responsion was observed by KapUq. 1. 30.
Mezger, who compares also	ap6x^9INTRODUCTION	195
emblem of the world of death, even so the headstone (aya\p ’AiSa) hurled
at Polydeukes did not make him to quail.
We have already seen how the doughty deeds of the maternal kinsfolk of
Theaeus are compared to the glories of Argive legend. Now we understand
that the list of famous Argives serves as an interposed mirror, reflecting the
tale of the Dioscori into the tale of the victories of this Argive family. That
the ultimate purpose is to institute a comparison between the third system
and the fourth, by means of a common reference to the first, is indicated by
a responsion connecting the third and fourth epodes :
1. 5° «** KacriyvqTOV UoXvdev kcos.
1. 68 €flf$a\oV (TT€pV<p TLo\v 8 € V K€ O £•
The aid rendered by Zeus to Polydeukes, in slaying one of his foes by
the lightning which consumed them both, was an omen of the higher favour
which he granted to his son, a little later. Similarly the jar of olive oil won
by Theaeus at Athens was an omen of an olive wreath to be won at Olympia.
This is brought out by yaia Kav0ci<ra irvpi in 1. 35 (5th verse of 2nd epode),
and 7rvp(j)6pov and tKaiovr', 11. 71 and 72 (5th and 6th verses of 4th epode).
Similarly the brass, won by Theaeus at Argos and by his kinsmen elsewhere,
is contrasted tacitly with gold, the emblem of Olympian victory ; just as the
brass weapons of Amphitryon are contrasted, tacitly too, with the golden lot
of Heracles, reflected upon the mortal hero ; and as the brass, which flashed
in the combat of the Tyndarids with their adversaries, is contrasted, now
explicitly, with the golden sheen of Olympus.
But with ‘the golden houses of heaven’ the hymn does not conclude.
The victor, for whom the legend of the Dioscori is a figure teaching him
that ‘the gods are true1,’ had not yet attained his heart’s desire,—toward
such attainment a season of hardship and endurance being still in prospect,
and the end, like all things dependent on mortal frailty, uncertain. And
therefore with the unerring instinct of the Greek artist, who is never
impatient of the divine repression demanded for the perfection of art,
Pindar turns our eyes from the gold and guides them to the brass girdle
of Castor, now ‘released.’ When the music has unfolded the vision of
Olympian happiness, we slide down from the heights, and are reminded
that it is earth still.
1 The importance of this statement Kal
pkv 8eiop 7tut top yfros (1. 54) is accentua-
ted by the echo in 1. 78 wavpoi 5* ip w6v(p
vuttoI PporQv, ‘wobei zu beachten ist,
dass beidemal das entscheidende Wort
(ttkttos) an betonter Stelle als vorletztes
Wort der Strophe (Epode) steht. Der
Mythus enthalt also ohne Frage das Lob
der gottlichen Treue ’ (Mezger).
13—2196
[NEMEAN] X.
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
A.
V. I. a.	w — yj — O — V/-v^N^ —A	(8).
£/. 2. d. — w-vo-wv-------vv —- A	(8).
B.
w- 3, 4* &
7/. 5.	#".
7/. 6.
^------------------------------------------------------“ ^ ~ A (12).
^ — — — v^\j —	—	A	(8)*
w-----------------1 --------------------------1 ^ ~ A	(12).
Thus the strophe falls into two parts, of which the first (A) is antistrophic,
and the second (B) mesodic,—the mesode being of the same length (jieyeSos)
as the two measures of A.
The formula is
8.8 : 12.8. 12.
Epode.
A.
V.	I.	a.	— v		— w A
V.	2.	d.	— v-» — — “ V>vy — 	vy — A
B.
(7).
(7)*
w. 3, 4. b, ——	— ^ —	— ^/v^ — A ^v~/ w^	^ (xx)*
V. 5. a .	~ KJ-----vy------vu-v/vy-C/	(7).
v.6. b'. dj^------------^------------------------------v,-A	(11).
The structure of the epode is exactly the same as that of the strophe,
except that the ixcycOr) are shorter, the formula being
7.7: 11.7-11-
The rhythm of this Ode is dactylo-epitritic.[NEMEONIKAI] I\
GEIAI Qi APTEIQi
IIAAAlSTHi.
arp. a!.
Aavaov iroXw ayXaoOpovcov re irevTrjKOVTa tcopav, Xaptre?,
* &pyo<$ f/H pas 8 go pa Oeoirpeires vpvelre' (fyXeyerai S’ aperal9
1. cryXaoOpovttv] This epithet is ap-
plied to the Muses also (01. xm. 96)
and refers to their representation in works
of art as seated. See above, Introduction,
p. 187. The first scholia on this Ode
are worth quoting at length:
friol <f>a<rtp els 7rXelovs vIkcls t8p etcIpikop
0vvt€t&x6cu ’ Xafieip yap avrbv Kal *I<rdpua
Kal IIi$0ta Kal Xbpea. irepl 8b tup 'OXvp.-
7rlup etfxerat 6're (fryel' Zev irdrep, tup
ye jaav tparat [1. 53]. 6 8e UlpSapos ore
fiobXoiro iiraiveiv ras irarpidas tup veviKit7-
k6tup adpoi£et.v etude ra weirpayfitva rats
7T6\eai TepKpavijt Kadus ev rrj <pSrj, rjs 7}
apx'b' ,l<r/JLV)vbv i) xputr^Xd/caTOV Me-
Xiap [fr. 29]. 6 8b X6yos‘ tippeire, u
Xdptres, tt]v rod Aapaov tt6Xlp Kal rots
irevTrjKovTa airrov dvyarbpas. § 6 pods
o\os* rV tov Aapaov ttoXlp Kal tup 7reprf)-
Kopra dvyarkpup atWod, (prjpl 8b rb^ApyoSf
7]tls ttSXls ’Apyelup olK7\Ti\piop detu8bara-
t6p i<rri rrjs ’Upas, vpprjeraTe, c3 Xapires.
bcrn 8b irapa rb 'OfirjpiKbp*
rjToi ifJLoi rpeis fibp woXb ^Ararat ei<n
wbX^es,
*Apyos re hwdprrf re Kal evpvdyvia
M vkt\vt\.
Kal KaXXlpaxos*
rbv /jlep apL(TKv87]S evpis dprjKe Atos
*Apyos tdeip l8l6p wep eop Xdxos' aXXa
yepbdXji
Zrjpbs owus CKoriy rprjxbs aedXos 2oi.
(rbp in this fragment of Callimachus is the
Erymanthian boar).
2. Oeoirpeirls] meet habitation for a
god.
^XcycTai k.t.X.] The usual explanation
of these words will not bear close ex-
amination. If aperal and bpya dpaaba
are hardly distinguishable, there is no
meaning in hcKep. One may seek to
avoid the difficulty by translating aperals
by laudibus, but it is clear that aperi) is
not a synonym of tiraipos. Let us observe
Pindar’s metaphorical use of the verb
<f>Xbyu. In Pyth. v. 45 we read,
’AXe£i/3id8a, <re 8’ rjvKopot. (pXbyopri
XdpLTes.
pia/cdpios, 6s 2xcts
Kal 7reSd pAyap Kdparop
Xbyup (peprdrup
ppapyjop'
and in Isth. VI. 23
(pXbyerai 8b IottX6kol<tl Mofircus.
This figurative illumination is attributed
in the first passage to the Graces and in
the second passage to the Muses, that is
to the deities who preside over art and
literature. And similarly the sentence
under consideration is immediately pre-
ceded by an invocation of the Graces, so
that we are left in no doubt touching the
agency by which the city is lit up.
Monuments of marble or monuments of198
[NEMEONIKAI] I'.
fjuvpLcu5 epyav dpacreeov eve/cev.
pa/cpa puev ra Ylepaios dpu<f>l Mehoi<Ta<z Yopyovos'
TroWd 8’ AtyvTTTG) ’Icy fcricrev da-TTj rat9 ’E7Taxf>ov ira\dpai<;. 5
song (/jLvajuLjja Xbyuv, compare the lines
quoted from the 5th Pythian) might both
claim the patronage of Charites—charis
being, so to speak, exhaled by every
work of art,—and in the present case the
former are clearly intended. The Heroon
of Argos was adorned with Argive heroes
and heroines in marble, and by the
epithet dyXaodpbvwv Pindar calls this to
mind at the very outset. It follows that
the dperal here meant are works of art,
and we may translate thus;
It is litten by countless memorials of
valiant deeds.
If we were rendering in ancient Greek
such a phrase as ‘the tale of Troy di-
vine illustrated by Flaxman’, (pXiyeoda 1
would perhaps be a suitable verb to
use.—For dpcn] see further Appendix
A, note 9.
4.	paKpd piv k.t.X.] The tale of
Perseus and the Gorgon Medusa is long.
ra a|x<j>i—means the labours about; Dis-
sen compares Aeschylus, Prometheus, 702
rbv apLfp’ iavrrjs adXov. Schol. fiaicpd
ovv, (pr)(TL, ra dirjyrjpuiTCL ra irepi Hepaiws
a Zirpa^e Kara ttjv Topybva.—Pindar goes
with some fulness into this story in the
Twelfth Pythian, written for Midas of
Acragas, who had gained a victory in
flute-playing. The head of Medusa was
supposed to lie buried in a mound near
the. agora of Argos. Pausanias II. 21, 6,
tov be ev Trj ayopq, tov ' Apyeluv oIkoBo-
p.'/lpuiTos ov pLaKpav x&lJ'a yvs toTiv* ev 5b
avT(p KeicrOcu ttjv MeSotflnys Xiyovcn ttjs
Topybvos Ke(f>a\fjv.
5.	uoXXd 8* /r.r.X.] The mss. have
a
KCLTUKio-Oev (B KartpicurOev). This does
not suit the metre, which requires here
The corrections proposed can-
not be seriously entertained, as none of
them involves an explanation of the cor-
ruption. I may mention Boeckh’s rd kot-
<pKi<rev, Hermann’s owq. iKTidev, Momm-
sen’s rd KarbcTidev, Rauchenstein’s Kara
valerai, and Bergk’s transposition, TaXd-
Plclls KarlvaoOev acrrea rats ’Eirafpov. The
schol. explains the text found in the mss. ;
7roXXd 5’ av etr) Xiyeiv, ottojs iv ttj Alybirrcp
Karipidodrioav irbXets vwb tCjv tov ’Etrd<f>ov
Xeiptiv.
It strikes one as strange that, in this
roll of the worthies and the fair women
of Argos, the illustrious heroine Io
should not be recorded by name. The
Danaids are mentioned, and a long verse
is devoted to Hypermnestra. Although
Perseus is recorded in 1. 4, his mother
Danae is named, along with Alcmena
in 1. 11. We might expect similarly to
read the name of Io as well as that of
her son, Epaphus. Now it is remarkable
that in the Prometheus of Aeschylus
(1. 834) the colonisation of Egypt is
attributed to Io and her children, con-
jointly:
ovtos o’ odivoei ttjv Tpiywvov is x^va
NeiXurnp, ov Btj ttjv pxiKpdv diroadav,
’lot, TrlirpcjTcu <rol re Kal tIkvois ktLocu.
This suggests that Pindar wrote
AirYTTTfllinKTICEN.
It is evident that one 1 might have easily
fallen out; the result would then be
oj/cTurev, which would be inevitably cor-
rected to (pKioev. As the sense of the
sentence, which had lost its true nomi-
native, now demanded a passive verb,
(fiKiodev was an easy change, and the
defective metre was roughly supplied by
the addition of /car-.
The sole objection which can be
alleged against this restoration is that
it involves an irregularity in the metre,
namely the condensation of two shorts
into one long. But this is an irregularity
which Pindar not infrequently allows[.NEMEAN] X.	199
oJS’ 'TTrepfivrfcrTpa 'irape'irXdy^Or], p,ov6yfra(f)ov iv fcovXeqy Kara-
ampler a ft<j>o?.
Ato/jtrjSea S’ dptfiporov t~avda 7totc r\av/c<S7r£9 eOrj/ce Oeov' dvr. a.
yata S’ eV ®r)fiats vireheiCTo KepavvtoOetaa Atos fieXeatv
fidvrtv O t/cXetSav, TroXefioio vi(j>os*
himself. For example in the Seventh
Nemean, 1. 35, we have Neo7rro\qitos
where we should expect five shorts.
Other instances will be found in the
Third Nemean (epode, cf. 11. 20, 41, 62,
83), Sixth and Seventh Nemeans etc.—
There is no objection to the hiatus after
ip in arsis; cf. for instance Isthtn. 1. 61
'Hpodorip (ziropcv.
If we observe (1) that an express
mention of Io by name seems almost
imperatively demanded in this list of
Argive heroes and heroines,—Epaphus,
who had no personal connexion with
Argos, being scarcely an adequate sub-
stitute,—(2) that the expression rats ’E7ra-
0oi/ waXdpcus suggests that Epaphus is
represented as the agent of someone else,
(3) that in the passage quoted from the
Prometheus Io is associated with her
children in the foundation of Egyptian
cities; and then find that the reading
to which these considerations point, ex-
plains satisfactorily the corruption which
has beset the text of our mss.; we are
entitled to conclude that the restoration
admitted in the text rests upon a satis-
factory basis.
6. irapiirXdyx®1!] stray from the true
way. The active occurs in Olymp. vn.
31 at (ppev&v rapa^cd iraptTrXay^av ical
ao<f)6v.
pov6\|sa<f>ov k.t.X.] having kept her
dissentient sivord tmsheathed. For povo-
0a0os unconsenting see Aeschylus, Sup-
pliants, 385. The mss. have pov6\j/a<f>ov,
to agree with £/0os, and this is more
poetical than povo\f/a<pos, which was re-
stored by Hecker, (whom most editors
have followed) on the strength of a
scholium.—Pindar has the form icoXeos
in Nemean 1. 52, and the mss. have
KoXeip here, but the metre demands
KovXccp which Hermann restored; com-
pare the double forms "OXitpiros and
OtiXvpvos.
Horace’s familiar splendide mendax et
in omne virgo nobilis aevum is resonant
and catching; but an ear which is a
little impatient of rhetoric in poetry may
prefer Pindar’s ov wapeTrXdyx^V- Horace
declaims, with an epigrammatic turn,
the maiden’s praise, in the tone of an
advocate; Pindar declares her justified,
with the more effective reserve of a
judge.
7. Aiopq$€a] From a scholiast on
this line we learn that Diomede, accord-
ing to Ibycus, married Hermione and
lives in immortality with the Dioscori;
also that (according to Polemon) he
enjoyed divine honours in Italy, at Meta-
pontum and Thurii. Another note gives
an account of his vengeance on Melanip-
pus who had wounded his father Tydeus.
Tydeus in his wrath felt the craving of a
cannibal and tasted the flesh of his
enemy, thereby incapacitating himself to
receive the guerdon of immortality pro-
mised by Athena, who transferred her
high gift to the son,—Kai obic ton irapa
rots loTopiKois evptoda 1 avrov top ddvarov.
Argos preserved the shield of Diomede
in the temple of Athena, and Callimachus
tells how it was laved along with the
Palladion (brought by Diomede from
Troy) in the Xoerpd IlaXXdSos (1. 35):
wddva, <piper ai 8t ical a Aioprjdeos doirls,
cos t0o$ yKpydwv tovto ttoXolIotcltov.
9. iroX^poio v^4>os] This expression
is Homeric, applied in the Iliad to Hector
(P 243). Editors compare fulmina belli,200	[NEMEONIKAI] I'.
/cal yvvai^lv /caXAi/cofioLcnv dpiarevet iraXai'	10
Zet)? iir yA\/cfJt,r)vav Aavaav re pboXdv irov KaT6(f)ave Xoyov'
7rarpl 8’ ’ASpdaroco Avy/cel re </>p€vd)v Kapirov evdela <rvvdpfio!;ev
hUa*
Opiyfre 8’ al^av ’Ap,<f>iTpva)vo<;. 6 S’ oX/3q> (fripTaTos eV. a.
Lfcer e? K6Lvov yevedv, iirel iv %aX/ceoi<; 07r\<H9
TrjXefioa? ivapovn Foi oyfnv ieiSopbevos	IS
and ifjL&pvaTo Taos alWrj. (Nubes belli in
Virgil means a cloud of arrows.)—For
the valour of Amphiaraus and his fate
see the preceding Ode; also Olymp.
VI. 17 dfx^orepov fidvnv r9 dyaObv Kal
dovpl iidpvaoOai. There was a temple
to Amphiaraus in Argos; see Pausanias,
II. 23, 2.—The participle Kepavviodds
occurs in Hesiod, Theogony, 859.
10. Kal yuvaigC k.t.X.] For fair-
haired dames also Argos is peerless since
olden time, and the visitations of Zeus to
Alcmena and Danaa declared the report
merely true.
Mv, for top of the mss., is due to
Bergk; see note on Nem. vn. 25. As
Zeus is supreme among the gods, his
choice establishes the supremacy of Ar-
give beauty—this is the force of irov.
Schmid reads tovtov from the scholia.
12. iraTpl 8’	] So lemma D for
warpl r, which however is possibly right.
—Talaus was the father of Adrastus;
Lynceus was the husband of Hyper-
mnestra.—For KapirAv <f>p€vwv compare
Pyth. 11. 74,
6 8i *Pa8dp,av0vs ed iriirpayev on <ppev<2v
ZXaxe Kapirov apubixyrov, ovd’ dirdraKn
Ovpibv ripicorai (fvdodev k.t.\.
This phrase is perhaps the nearest Greek
equivalent to our heart. Zeus wedded
their hearts to unswerving jtistice.
Lynceus was buried with Hyperm-
nestra, (Pausanias 11. 23, 2), and near
them Talaus, robfcov 8b dwavTucpb TaXaoO
roO BLavros ian rd<f>os. The house of
Adrastus was shown in Argos (ib. 23,
2).
13.	0p€\|/€ k.t.X.] And he nourished
the spear-point of Amphitryon, that is,
favoured the success of the warrior
Amphitryon. Compare Kdaropos alxva,
Isth. jf. 33, and Terpander (ap. Plutarch
Life of Lycurgus, c. 21);
tvd9 cu’x/Aa re vicov daKkoi Kal Mov<ra
\iyeia
Kal AUa ebpvayvia.
6 8* oXpa) <jj€pTaros k.t.X.] But he
(Amphitryon) had the surpassing fortune
to enter into kinship with Zeus (koIvov),
when in bronze armour, in the similitude
of the slayer of the Teleboae etc. The
scholiast wrongly refers 6 5’ to Zeus and
Kdvov to Amphitryon, but explains tkct*
is yevedv rightly :	‘ Zeus procreated
Heracles on the first day, on the next
Amphitryon procreated Iphicles, and the
stocks of both were mingled’. Mezger
translates ‘ er trat in seine (des Zeus)
Verwandschaft ein’, and so Dissen ‘in
affinitatem Iovis venit ’. Compare Pyth.
IX. 84 tIkc oil Kal Z7}vl pLiyeiaa 5ai<f>pu)v
...}A\KpL^va 8i8tjp.(tiv crdivos vUhv.
eirel is explained by the scholium:
ad\ov yap 17 ^AKk^vt} t6v iavTrjs ydp.ov
TpovdrjKe rep robs TrjXefioas KaTairoXe-
fj.ij(TovTL. The Teleboae were a people
who dwelled in Acarnania.
15. Ivapovn Foi] B B have ivape’
tL oi, D has 2vape. tl oi. Hermann
(followed by Bergk in his 4th ed.)
read ivapev t£ 8\ Schmid proposed
ivapovn, Rauchenstein ivapovn oi. The
scholium does not bear grammatical
analysis :
ore ydp rots o7t\ols avaipouvros avtov201
[NEMEAN] X.
adavdrwv jHaaiAev*; avXav iarfkOev
cnrepfi aheifiavTov (pepcov 'Hpa/eXeo?* ov /car ''OAvpirov
aXofto? r/Hj8a TeXela Trap a fiarepi fUalvotcr ecrri, KaXXlara Oe&v.
arp. y8'.
ftpcL'Xp P'OL (TTopua irdvT dvayrj(ra<Td\ ocrcov ’Apyelov e^ec T&p,evo<;
tous TrjXeftoas, rrjVLKavra tt\v o\piv a<po-
fxouodels 6 Zebs r<p ’Aptfptrpijtovi Kai ovtojs
els rbv oXkov i\0u>v tt}s jAXk/it]V7js
criaaeu afar) taxi rbv 'HpaKXla icnretpev.
Hence Mommsen deduced ivapovros,
which Mezger accepts. The circumstance
that ivapovros involves a deviation from
the metre of the corresponding lines in
the other epodes (introducing in place
of —) would not be a fatal objection;
but it is impossible to see how the reading
of the mss. arose from ivapovros. The
scholium does not prove a genitive abso-
lute. Hermann’s reading appears to do
more justice to the mss.; but this ap-
pearance is deceptive. The questions
arise—why should 5’ have fallen out?
why should a simple word like r<f have
been corrupted? And it must be ob-
served that iv xaX/^ots o7r\ois protests
against any reading which retains ivapev;
for the picture clearly is, not Amphitryon
fighting in Acarnania in bronze armour,
but Zeus in bronze armour entering his
house in Thebes. This consideration
recommends Rauchenstein’s evapovrt ol,
which, I am persuaded, is the true read-
ing. The order of words is most felici-
tous. T^XejSdas ivapovrt immediately suc-
ceeding xa^i<ioLS oVXots suggests, without
bringing this expedition into undue pro-
minence, that the armour was supposed
to be spoils (ivapa) taken from the
Teleboae. Zeus came in Amphitryon’s
similitude and dressed as he would
appear after the success of his enter-
prise.—The cause of the corruption was
a false division of the participle, evapov
was read as third plural (for ijvapov) after
iirel, and subsequently corrected to the
singular; n was accented, and left, though
really unmeaning. To -ri lot in the other
epodes corresponds a long syllable; but
cf. Nem. v. io where wariptis corresponds
to and see note on 1. 5 above.
17. dScCpavTOv] intrepid, applied also
in Isth. I. 12 to Heracles, rov abelptavrov
’A\KfJLr)va riicev iraiba.
0$ k.t.X.] whose wife Hebe liveth in
Olympus, fairest of the gods, walking
beside her mother ‘who maketh perfect\
Compare the last lines of the First
Nemean, for Heracles’ union with Hebe;
also Hymn. Horn. xv. (addressed ‘to
Heracles the lion-hearted ’) 7, 8
vvv 5’ 7)871 Kard KaXbv %8os vt<f>6evros
’OXt'//AITOV
valet repwoptevos Kai	KaXXlcrtfrvpov
"H(3t]v.
TcXcCa is the designation of Hera as the
patroness of marriage: schol. fort yap
avrt) yap,7)\la Kai £vyla. iort 8i 6 yaptos
riXos 81 a rb reXetorTjra (3tov KaraoKevd^etv
(reproduction being regarded as the riXos
of the individual). Aeschylus {frag. 373)
has "Hpa reXela, Zrjvos evvala bdjutap. In
the Heraeum near Mycenae there was
an altar adorned with a relief of the
marriage of Hebe and Heracles; see
Pausanias II. 17, 6 puptbs ix^ iir€ipya<r-
ptivov rbv Xeyoptevov "HjS^s Kai 'UpaKXiovs
ydptov * odros ptiv dpybpov k.t.X.
19. Ppa\v poi <rr6|i.a k.t.X.] My
mouth is of small measure to rehearse all
the fair things wherein the precincts oj
Argos have share. Compare Isth. vi. 44
(3paxvs i^LKiadat xdXKdTredov Bewv 28pav,
one is of too small stature to come unto the
bronze-floored abode of the gods. For
dvaiy€i<r0<u compare Isth. v. 56 iptol 8i
ptaKpbv iracras dvayr)<ra<r9’ aperds (Minga-
relli’s restoration; mss. ayr)<ra<r$’), and202
[NEMEONIKAI] r.
fiolpav iaAoov' eart, Se teal tcopos avdpcoirmv ftapvs avnaaai' 20
aU’ oyL6&)9 ev'xpphov eyeipe Xvpav,
/cal 7raXata-pLarcov \d/3e (fipovriS*. ayoov tol ^dA/ceos
Sapuov orpvvei ntotl ftovdvalav	? dedXcov re KpLaw*
Oi/Aia 7ra?9 €i/0a. vi/caacu9 819 ear^ev Oeiaio? €v<f>6pcov Xddav
7TOVCOV.
dm. 0.
itcpaTrjae Se teat ttoO' f/E\Xai/a arparov TlvOSvc, Tvya re poXwv 25
/cat top ’lo*0/io£ #al Ne/u,ea aTecjyavov TsUoiaaiaiv eStotc dpoaai,
T/ot9 yu,ep iv ttovtolo ttvAxugl Xayj&v,
01. IX. 80 efijj' €vp7)<Ti€TT7]s avayciodai
vpbofpopos iv ’M.ourav di<f>pip. In a well-
known passage in the catalogue ‘ Homer ’
despairs of enumerating the heroes, if he
had even ten mouths.
The whole city of Argos is regarded as
in a certain sense ‘holy ground’, dedi-
cated to Hera, as Pindar expresses by
ripevos. Dissen compares Soph. Electra,
5	AXoos ’Ivdxov Kbprjs.
20.	iorri Se /c.t.X.] There is moreover
the envy of men, grievous to converse
with. dvndo*ai is properly a neutral
word; here it means incur. The schol.
explains ‘men are not pleased to hear the
wondrous deeds of others, but they are
straightway sick of the praises sounded,
for envy’.
21. aXX* ojiws k.t.X.]	Natheless,
awake the harmonious strings of the lyre,
and turn to thoughts of wrestling matches.
Compare 01. IX. 13 avdpbs ap<f>l iraXaLer-
pa<riv <f>bpptyy’ iXeXlfav.
22.	dywv \oXkeos] The brazen con-
testy so called because the prize at the
Heraea was a shield of bronze. Compare
01. VII. 83 o r iv 'Apyei %a.Xkos eyvw viv,
the bronze in Argos knew him. The
victor was also crowned with myrtle.
Compare the schol. on 01. vn. 83:
reXetrat /card rb " Apyos tol "IIpcua a ical
'J&icaTbppaia /caXetrat irapa rb iKarbv pods
Oveodai rrj deep, rb Si bradXov do iris xaX/c?),
6	di orifpavos iic pvpoivrjs.
This elucidates Povfh/crCav. As for Argive
shields, they were said to have come into
use in the reign of Proetus (Pausanias 11.
25,	6).
€v<j>opo)v] So the mss. In the scholia
is mentioned a variant, eixppbvojv:
ypd<p€TCLl di KaX CV<f>p6vttiV * €V(f)bpiOV piv,
iwel evcpopoL eioiv 61 toiovtol ttSvol rep
apLcrra adXa ivrjvoxivcu * eveppbvcov di, t&v
€V(ppaVTLKUJV.
ev<p6p(av has been taken in two ways,
(1) easily borne, (2) fruitful (Mezger).
[Bergk prints ev<f>bp(as, Schmid (uncriti-
cally) proposed dv<r<f>bp(ov.] The first
rendering (‘facile ab eo perlatos’, Dissen)
is hardly possible; in this sense, exjepopos
could only mean light, which is not
suitable. On the other hand, Mezger’s
explanation fruitful, remunerative, gives
excellent sense.
25.	"EXXava arpa/rov] the athletic
world of Hellas; so Pyth. xi. 50 :
Uvdoi re yvpvbv iirl orddiov Kara^dvres
rjXeyi’av
'J&XXavlda OTparidv cixtfrari.
tvx#, under the guidance of fortune, on a
lucky day.
26.	apoom] he gave the Muses a
fruitful argument, lit. soil for the Muses
to plough, see note on Nem. vi. 32.
This is a continuation of the metaphor in
evepbpcjv, 1. 24.
27.	TpC$ /c.t.X.] Scilicet oripavov.
Schol. rpls piv yap KXrjpiodels ivUrjcre tol
"lodpia: wbvrov yap irbXas elwe tov *loOpjbv
did to OTevov.203
[.NEMEAN] X.
Tpis Si /cal aepvols SaTreSois iv ’ASpaareLcp vopco.
Zev irdrep, r&v pay eparac cjypevl any a F oi cropa' irav Si reXos
iv t\v epycov * ovS* apvyOcp tcapSia nrpocrcfiepcov roXpav irapanevrai
Xapiv'	30
yvooT aeiSa) 0€<p re /cal octtls dpiXXaTat irepl	iir. ft.
ia-^arcov aeOXcov /copvfyais. iiiraTov S' ea^ev TUaa
'Hpa/cXeos reOpov' aSelai ye pev apfioXaSav
28.	rpCs k.t.X.] At Nemea. For
the ascription of the foundation of the
Nemean games to Adrastus, see Nem.
VIII. 51. Schol. rpls bb tcl N^uea Kara
T7\v ’ASpdarov dtoUrjaiv Kai vofiodiTrpnv
reXov/ieva. Render, according to the
foundation of Adrastus. Compare Isth.
II. 38 cv HaveXXdvuv vbpup, according to
the universal use of the Greeks.
29.	Zevircmp k.t.X.]	0father Zeus,
his mouth is dtimb of his heart's desires ;
in thee lieth every issue of works; nor
doth he with heart unapt for toil sue
amiss for a grace, but he hath the addition
of endurance.
The desire of Theaeus was an Olym-
pian victory. For Zpa/iai in such a context,
cf. Pyth. XI. 50 0eb0ev ipcufirjv KaXCbv.
irapairctrai has been explained in three
ways: (1) closely with ovdi, in the sense
of deprecate, decline; 4 neque profecto
ignavo animo deprecatur gloriam ’, Dissen;
(2) ‘eine neben hinausgehende Bitte thun,
die keinen Erfolg haben kann, weil sie
verkehrt bittet ’ (cf. irap<f>a/iev, irapayety,
i. f etc.) Mezger, and so Rumpel 4 t^fere
/ precor’; (3) Schol. ttapa <rou alreirai.
Mezger’s interpretation, pray amiss,
misask, is clearly right, and a confir-
mation of it will be found in my note on
1. 84. Pindar says that Theaeus does not
trust in faith alone; he would fain gain
his desire by both grace and bravery.
31. yv»T* acCSco] The burthen of my
verses is well known both to god and to
whosoever contendeth for the summit of
the supreme contests (Zeus and all athletes
know what I mean).
One scholiast referred bans especially
to Theaeus, and his corrupt note (etiyvwa-
ra di Xiycj aur<p rtp 0e<£ Kai t<£ Qeialip
oans Qeiaios d/JuXXarai k.t.X.) unneces-
sarily gave rise to Hermann’s conjecture
yvojTb. Qeiai(p re koX bans, and to Kayser’s
ot for deep. Philip Melanchthon, from the
continuation of the same scholium, sub-
stituted Kopv<f>as for Kopv<f>ais.—For the
collocation of Haxaros and Kopv<pd cf.
01. I. 113 :
inr* dXXocat. 5’ aXXot fieydXoi * rb $’
taxarov Kopvfpodrcu paaiXevai.
For the application of Kopv<pd to the
Olympian games, see 01. 11. 14 25os
’OXvjULTrov vi/AUiv dl0Xcw re Kopv<pdv.
32.	friraTOv k.t.X.] For most high is
the institution of Heracles which Pisa
won (cf. 01. VI. 69 T€0/wv fikyiarop
d£0Xu>v, and Nem. XI. 27). virarov £axev
is an etymological explanation or analysis
of eaxdrw. The same connexion of
words is suggested in Isth. vi. 36:
Trpofidxtov dv opuXov, £v0' apiaroi
taxov ttoXIfJLOio veiKOS laxdrcus iXiriaLV,
where the noblest encountered war, with
hopes most counter to them.
33.	dSctat yt pAv k.t.X.] Sweet, surely,
prelude-wise at their ceremonies the chants
of the Athenians twice celebrated his
praise; and in earth burnt in the fire,
came to the brave people of Hera the fruit
of the olive, even within the walls of
painted vessels.
Olive oil enclosed in a painted vase
was the prize at the Panathenaic festival.
Pindar regards the success of the victor
at Athens as an omen of future successes204
[NEMEONIKAI] I'.
iv rekeral? 81? ’Adavaicov vlv oput/xu
/cco/JLaaav' yata 8e tcavOeLaq irvpl tcapTros i\ala9	35
epuoXev r/Hpa$ top evavopa \aov iv dyyetov ep/ceaiv irap/rrouciXoii
i(f)€7T€i/ Se, ©etate, parpcocov TroXvyvwTov ykvo? vpierepav arp. y.
at Olympia; the olive-juice of Athena
being a sort of prelude {apfioXabav) to
the olive leaves of Zeus. See more fully
above, Introduction.
6|x<|>t{ means a solemn voice or utterance,
(compare Milton’s ‘ saintly shout ’) and is
appropriate to the context with reXerais.
It does not occur elsewhere in Pindar,
save in two fragments ; fr. 75, 1. 19
axd r op<pai peXluv obv avXots (an in-
stance of the schema Pindaricum\ and
fr. I52 peXlOOOTCbKTltiV Krjplojv ipd y\VK€~
poor epos dpcpd, my voice more sweet than
Honey or the honeycomb.—In Iliad $ 364
d|i.f3o\a8T]v is used of the surface of
a seething cauldron; but in the Hymn
to Hermes 1. 426 it has the meaning
which belongs to it in this passage.
35.	7aCq. k.t.X.] Schol. 7alav 8i
KeKavpivrjv elwe ttjv vdptav iv rj rb IXaiov •
owrarai 7dp 6 Kipapos. 81a 8b robrov
orjpalvei robs to. Uavadrjvaia veviKrjKbras *
rldevrai yap iv ’Adrjvais iv iwadXov ra^ei
vSpLai wX^peis iXaiov. 8ib Kai KaXXi-
paxos '
Kai yap 5Adrjvaiois Trap iwi oriyos iepov
TjVT at
KaXwibes ov Koopov obpfioXov, aXXd
waXrjs.
...§.. .ovk ion 8e i£a70*777 iXaiov i£ 'AOtjvujv
el pt] tois vikCooi. This last note gives
special force to IpoXev.—wapwoUiXos
occurs in both the Iliad and Odyssey.
37.	€<j>€Tm k.t.X.] MSS. Iwerat. It
has been supposed that Pindar in two
passages has contravened the universal
Greek usage of constructing Iwopai with
a dative, and assigned to it an accusative.
One passage is 01. vi. 71, where a cor-
rect punctuation suffices to abolish the
anomaly: e£ ov woXbkXeirov xa0’ "EXXijj'as
yivos T apiSav oXfios ap* lower o' k.t.X.
The other case is the passage before us.
Dissen owns that Iweodai with a d^ve
‘ verisimile non est’, and takes yivos as
an accusative of place, ‘pro Iwerai is
yivos, constructum ut ftalveiv 01. II. 95,
aliaque multa verba eundi’. He explains
the meaning thus: ‘es folgt, geht aber zu
den miitterlichen Vorfahren der Ruhm
der Kampfe hinan’. Even if we admit
that the construction is possible, the sen-
tence is a curious mode of expressing this
meaning.
The note of the scholiast is: iwaKoXov-
0ei, tfrriaL, Karb. rb woXvyvcorov vp&v yivos
rb dwb rijs prjrpbs * p^rpioes yap oi dwb
prjrpbs wpbyovoi * evayojv rip-fa k.t.X.
From this note Hartung deduces that
the annotator had before him not vperi-
pwv but bpirepov, and reasoning that the
former could not have arisen from the
latter—‘denn das natiirliche pflegt nicht
leicht in das unnatiirliche umgeandert zu
werden’—, suggests ‘dass yivei bperipip
geschrieben stand’. He proposes to read
woXvyvurip ylvet, which he supports by a
scholium on v. 49 : 81d tovto iv rots iwdvio
elwe* Xapireoot re Kai obv Tvvdapibais rrjv
vIktjv avrCov iXrjXvdivai Tip yivei.—Bergk
reads we8’ ebyvwrov (Iwerai we8d=pediwe-
rai); but the mere fact that woXbyviarov
does not occur elsewhere makes the
assumed corruption improbable.
An examination of the passage will
soon show us that the seat of the
corruption is the verb Iwerai itself. (1)
lweraL..,dapdKLS is a distinctly unhappy
expression; the sense rather demands
a verb signifying to visit. (2) As
Iwopai requires a dative, it is incon-
ceivable that, if there were originally a
dative in the passage, it should have been
changed to the accusative. Therefore
205
[NEMEAN] X.
evaycov TCfjua Xap/reoW re Kal avv TvvSapiSai? Oafiaicis.
d^uodeirjv K€v, iwv ®paavtc\ov
’Avrla T€ %vyyovo$, ''Apyei p,rj Kpvirieuv <f>do$	40
op,p,aTcov. viKa<j>opian? yap i
the probability is that frrercu has taken
the place of a verb which governs the
accusative.
The word which exactly suits the
passage is itpiiret, visits. The words
then mean:
Honour, queen of noble contests, doth
often haunt the far-famed race of your
mother's kin, Theaeus, by favour of the
Graces and the Tyndarids.
The corruption was due to an accident.
Letters at the beginning and end of lines
and strophes are more liable than others
to obliteration. If such a chance befel
the first two letters of E4>ETTEI, it is
clear that the surviving eirei—the sense
requiring a verb and the metre an
anapaest—was very likely to be inter-
preted as a mistake for iirerai.
But there is another reason for accept-
ing i<f>4irei. Looking down to the epode
of the present system (ep. 7'), we find
a cause assigned for the athletic prowess
of Theaeus’ maternal kinsfolk. Pam-
phaes in mythical days had entertained
the Tyndarids, and .they are the stewards
of the games at Sparta, which they order
in confederacy with Hermes and Heracles.
Now the words in these lines (51—53)
are selected so as to recall strophe 7.
Thus
iyyepis, 51: ytvos, 47,
aydpcop, 52: ebdyiop, 48,
OdXeiap, 53: ddXijoep, 42,
these echoes serving to emphasize the
logical connexion of the system, and
linking the Tvpdaplbais of 1. 38 with
their next introduction in 1. 49. In
the same way diiiropn 1. 53 is an echo
of itpiicei 1. 37. The share which the
Tyndaridae have in the success of the
kin of Theaeus, is brought into relation
with the share which they have as the
V ITpoiTOio to8’ imrorpo^ov
1
" ‘starters’ (afpenfipioi) in the games at
Lacedaemon.—It is interesting to ob-
serve that a like echo occurs in the
First Pythian. The fourth line of the
2nd antistrophos begins
6s tout e<f>4weis opos,
and the fourth line of the 3rd antistrophos
ends
pvp ye ptav tclp $l\okt7]tolo btrav etpimop.
39. d|ui>OcCr)v /c.t.X.] schol. eyc6, <prjol,
KCLTai-uodelrjp tGjp irepl QpaovKXop Kal
’AptIclp crvyyepyjs <op ip T<p "Apyei didyeip
Kal $rjP, £ pda ovk ap dTrapprjotaoTos dieri-
Xeoa ovdi Kano (3X4wiOP Kal Kphirnop
epLavTou rb iXevdepop. ol yap pik&pt€S
pterd wapprfolas apto ftXiwopTes fiadlfrovoip,
ol 84 TjTTTjpiipoL did T7jp aioxbprjp °VX
ovnos.
4<ov jjvyyovos, were I a kinsman. phj
Kpbirreip <paos dpipidnop is expressed posi-
tively in Nem. vii. 66 (84pKeo0ai Xapt-
irpbp).
41. viKct(j>opCais k.t.X.] The reading
of the mss. is :
piKacpoplaun yap boats hnroTpb<j>op aorv
rb IIpotroio k.t.X. Boeckh read piKa-
^poplait yap boats IlpoiToio t68* iTTorpb<f>op
darv, Hermann piKa<j>oplais 7dp boats
linroTpbipop aorv rb oop, IIpoire, daXrjoep.
Bergk remarks ‘non Argos, sed victoriae,
quas maiores Theaei...rettulerunt, prae-
dicandae’, and reads (ed. 4) vtKacpoplats
yap ooais Upolroib r’ dp1 linroTpb<pop aorv
daXrjoap (the accidental omission of r*
dp’ would lead to the change of daXrjoap
to daXyoep).—The ‘ reason ’ for Bergk’s
emendation will hardly recommend itself.
Leaving aside for a moment the difficulty
presented by 6<rcus, we can see nothing
suspicious in the sentence. By victories
the horse-rearing city, of Proetus, burst
into bloom (won crowns) at Corinth on the
inland gulf and at the hands of the men206	[NEMEONIKAI] I.
acrrv 0a\7]<7ev Kopw0ov r iv	/cal KXeeovaicov 7rpo$ dvSpoov
rerpciKL9’
of Cleonae (at Nemea), four times. For
OaKito cf. Nem. iv. 88 (in Rumpel’s
Lexicon Pindaricum, the quantity is
wrongly marked short).—Some trans-
position however seems necessary, for the
line as it stands in the mss. ends in the
middle of a word (IIpolr-oio). I have
adopted, as simplest, the proposal of
Boeckh, though I confess that I regard
such transpositions as suspicious. Her-
mann’s conjecture need not be enter-
tained, as it has no support from either
mss. or scholia. The scholium is :
vbaais ydp bnrorpo<plaLS, <prj<rlv, clvttj i)
7r6\is ovk idaWev t) tov IlpoLrov, rovro
fliv iv T(p KOpLV0l(p ’I<T0fl(p rovro 8i iv 777
Nefiiq. rerpaias VLtcrjoaca ’ K.r.X.
It is clear that 6(rats is inconsistent
with rerpdKis, and the unmetrical vuca<po-
plaun in the mss. points also to an ancient
corruption in this spot, otrais was sub-
stituted for another word, which was not
intelligible. I believe that this word was
ah.
vu<a<poplais ydp ah
became metri gratia
viKa<popiat<ri ydp ah
and then census gratia
viKa<f>oplai<ri ydp ooats.
If this be so the problem is to deter-
mine the origin of ah, and here the scho-
lium comes to our help. The scholiast
evidently had a different text before him ;
he read neither vuca<f>oplaL(n nor hnrorpb-
<pov, but ftoais ydp iTnrorpo<pLais or imrorpo-
<fdais ydp 8<rais, the line being probably
filled up by words corresponding to o$k
and avrr) in his note. We must inquire,
what could have elicited iTirorpo^Lais from
lTTroTp6<f>ov ? It is clear that, if the article
rah preceded IwtotpoQov, there would
have been a very strong temptation to
alter the adjective to a dative plural.
This consideration places the solution in
our hands, rah arose from irals, just as
in 1. 11 above rbv arose from irdv.
As for the meaning, irais is peculiarly
suitable here. The victories referred to
were clearly won in chariot-races, as the
close collocation of lTnroTp6<f>ov indicates.
Thus they were viKa-<f>opiai, in the literal
sense of the word; the horses, as it were,
bearing Victory like a charioteer. In the
case of running, wrestling and other non-
equestrian contests, vucatpopla could not
bear this literal sense, irals expresses
this shade of meaning; I have already
referred to Mr Verrall’s elucidation of
irv/ibs and ir'fp-vfios.
Another consideration weighs in favour
of irals. I have explained fully in the
Introduction (above, p. 189 sq.) how Pin-
dar establishes a comparison between the
mythical glories of Argos and the special
glories of the kinsfolk of Theaeus. This
comparison is carried out by responsions
between the first strophe and antistrophos,
and the third strophe and antistrophos.
Observe:
11. 1, 2 X&pires 1. 38 Xaplreaoi
1. 3 ipyov dpacriwv 1. 39 icbv Qpacnj-
iveKev	k\ov
1. 3 /ivptais	1. 45 dXKd xd\*8v
/xvpiov
1. 4 jmaKpa fxiv	1. 46 fia/cporipas yap
1. 5 acrrrj	1. 47 vxpifiaroi tt6-
\l€S
The import of these responsions has
been set forth in the Introduction. They
form a strong confirmation of irals in the
fifth 1. of the third strophe, corresponding
to irdv, Bergk’s certain restoration in the
fifth line of the second antistrophos. As
the choice of Zeus established the ex-
cellence of Argos ‘ the city of Danaus ’
in women, so the victories of Thrasyclus
and Antias establish the excellence of
Argos * the city of Proetus ’ in horses.
The Homeric epithet of Argos is i7r-
iroporov.[NEMEAN] X;	207
%ucv(dv60€ S’ apyvpto0evre? avv oivrjpal^ <fnd\at<; aireftav, avt. 7'.
he Se ITeXXa^a? lirieacrdpevoi v&tov pLaXcuccucri /cpo/cai9*
flWa yak/cbv p,vpiov ov Svvarov	45
i^eAey^eiv' p,a/cpoTepa$ yap dpi0p,r}aai cr^oXa?.
ovt€ KXetTcop /cal Teyea zeal 'Kyai&v vtyifiaToi 7ro\i€<;
/cal Av/catov Trap Ato?	SopLtp <rvv irohwv %€ip(Sv re vucacrai
crdeveL.
43.	apyupuOlvrcs] For the prize at
the chariot-race of Sicyon, see Nem. IX.
51. Just as in 1. 22 the contest whose
prize is a bronze shield is named a bronze
contest, so the victors in a race rewarded
by silver cups are said to be silvered.
airway, schol. avex^pyjaav irrl to vApyos.
The Aldine ed. has iirifiap.
44.	Ik 81 IlcXXdvas] Schol. rlBerai 8i
TrcLxla ifidna ip HeWrjvr) ayva<f>a' 8vaxe^
fiepoi Si oi t6ttol. irepKppacrTiK&s Si ttjv
X^oLviSa fiakaK^v KpbKrjp eZire* Kal iripudi
xf/vxpdp ottSt evStapop (p&p/iaKOP avpap
IleXXdi/a ttapix€l \Ol. IX. 97, MSS.
IleXXdj'a, or p, <pipe\.
€jcXlYX€tv] to *es* by measure. Schol.
Xiprjra yap enpLwvTO ip ttoWols t&p 0,706-
pcjp Kal &<nd8a xcoX/c^y.
47. KXcCrwp /c.r.X.] It is supposed
that the games at Clitor were called
K6peoa, from the K6prj (Persephone) who
was there worshipped with her mother;
see Pausanias vni. 21. 2. At Tegea
were held the’AXeaoa in honour of Athene;
see Pausanias vm. 47. 3. Cf. Hermann,
Lehrbuch der Gottesdienstlichen Alter-
thiimer der Griechen (ed. Stark) p. 336,
and Curtius, Peloponn1. 254, 273.—For
the high situate cities of Achaea cf. B
573>
o'i 6’ 'Tre/M/crb;*' re Kal aiireiPTjp Vopoeo-
<rap
ILeWrjprjp r &X0V Aiyiop a/i<p€pi-
fJLOPTO.
It is not known in what cities games
were held. In many Achaean towns
(Dyme, Patrae, Aegium, Tritaea, as well
as Pellene) there were temples of Athena,
and perhaps in some her worship was
attended with gymnastic contests (see
Pausanias vn. 17 et sqq.).
48. Avkcuov] The temple of Zebs
AtiKaios in Arcadia. Pausanias (vm. 38.
5) describes this strange ri/iepos, in which
men and beasts were said to cast no
shadows: icroSos 8i ovk Hot ip is airrb
dpBpdnroLs. For games at Lycaeum, cf.
Simonides, 155 (Bergk P. L. G. ill.
p. 501), where a list of victories is
given, among the rest Sbo S' ip Avicalip.
—6t|k€ viKacrai means set as prizes to
win. <rvv goes with a dip a, by dint of
the strength.
The scholiast has confused the sense of
the passage, and copyists have corrupted
the text, through the idea that Spo/up
(so MSS.) belonged to the latter part of the
sentence. B has woSQp re x€lP&p re, so
that Spopap ttoSCjp should balance x€lP&v
(TdipeL. D attempts to rectify the metre,
without due consideration of the meaning,
by omitting re after xeLP&p* The note of
the scholiast is: 8p Kal rb Afaatop ZdrjKe
Xo^kSp irapa T<p rod A Lbs fiupip tois Svpa-
fiipois piKrjtrai obp ttoSujp odipei, Spbpup,
Kal x€lP&v	7rdXtf Kal TayKparitp Kal
Trvyprj.—From Svpapdpois Mommsen de-
duced Saeiaip which he substitutes for
Spofup otp; but the participle in the
scholium is merely an elucidation of the
infinitive construction. M. Schmidt fol-
lowing in the same track and regarding
Spopup as a gloss on ttoSwp crOipei, reads
d£\ov<np woSup k.t.\. Rauchenstein ob-
jecting to <sbp proposed Spofioioip. Bergk
has t iplKatraPy the subject of the verb
being the ancestors of Theaeus, and takes
<rbp not with oBipet but with the verb.208
[NEMEONIKAI] I'.
Kdaropos S’ i\0ovTO<; 67rl %eviav Trap Ua/JL<j>dr)	iir. 7'.
/cal Kaai'yvr)Tov HoXvSev/ceo9, 01/ Oavfia afylcrw	5°
iyyeves e/i/iev deOXrjTais ayadoicnv' iirel
evpvyopov racial 'Zirapras dydvcav
fjbolpav fE^aa /cal avv fHpatcXei hieirovri dakeiav,
In regard to Bergk’s emendation it
may be observed that it is gratuitous to
change n/catrat, and in regard to his
explanation of obvi there is the serious
objection that <twvlkolv means to take part
in a victory, a sense inappropriate here.
crbv signifying by means of is characteristi-
cally Pindaric, and may be supported,
for example, by kv\ cvv rpomp in Nem.
vii. 14. The proposals of Mommsen
and Rauchenstein are due to a too curious
examination of the scholiast’s words.
The only difficulty lies in icap 5po/*y,
which is hardly explicable, iv 8pofMp
is required and Bergk’s citation irapk
Tvpavvldi is not a parallel. I have
ventured to print S6p.<p, for though in
ordinary circumstances dopup would be
more likely to usurp the place of Spopup
than conversely, here dpopap insinuated
itself into the text from a gloss on tto8w
adivei with the utmost facility, or perhaps
came not from a written, but, so to speak,
from a mental gloss, a copyist ‘correcting*
86pup, in view of the context, as an
obvious clerical error. For Sopas used
of a temple, see Nem. vii. 46, Pyth. vii.
10.—A parallel passage in Pyth. x. 23
merits quotation:
5s dv X^pvt-v V tto5lov dperq. Kparljaais
rot pLiyurr’ aid\ojv 2\rj ToXpup re /cat
adlvei.
49.	Iirl £cvtav /c.r.X.] to the home of
Pamphaes, seeking friendly entertainment.
Pamphaes was a remote ancestor of
Theaeus’ mother. Many epiphanies were
attributed to the Tyndarids, for example
they were said to have appeared in a
battle fought at Sagra between the
Locrians and Crotoniates. The story of
the rescue of Simonides at the court of
Scopas is well known.
50.	ov Oavjjia <r<|>C<riv /c.r.X.] No
marvel that it should be a quality of their
race to be good athletes. <T<t>l<rivy the
persons spoken of in the preceding strophe
and antistrophos. fyqicv, as Mezger point-
ed out, does double duty, linking (1)
davpia with eyyevls, (2) eyyevls with
dedXrjTcus ayadoiaiv.
51,	52. Iirct /c.r.X.] The Dioscori were
regarded as patrons of gymnastic contests.
In Sparta they were worshipped as
‘Starters’: irpbs 8e rod Spopiov rrj apxv
AiovKovpol t6 daw ’Atperripioi, Pausanias
III. 14. 7. They were related to have
won victories in the Olympic games,
Castor in the footrace, Polydeukes in
boxing (Pausanias v. 8. 4), and their
altar stood at the entrance of the Olympic
hippodrome (ib. 15. 5). They also con-
tended in the stadion of Hermione (Pausa-
nias, 11. 34. 10). These links with the
games instituted by Heracles and with
Hermione, explain ’Eppq /cat abv 'Hpa-
/cXe?.
To the Dioscori was ascribed the in-
vention of the war-dance in Sparta (see
Athenaeus iv. 14 c; schol. Pind. Pyth.
v. 128), and thus the epithet cvpvx^pov
(spacious for dancing) in this context is
seen to be peculiarly appropriate. Pindar
applies the adjective also to Asia (01. vii.
18), Libya (Pyth. iv. 43), and Argos
(Pyth. viii. 55). For poipav ay&wv cf.
01. VI. 79 5s ay was (?x€L P^oipdv t &i$\w.
For SierrovTi and OaXeiav see above, note
on 1. 37, and Introduction p. 190.
Render: For the guardians of Sparta's
spacious dancing-floor, with Hermes and
Heracles, order games, their graceful
charge, and for just men they care ex-
ceedingly. Yea verily, the gods are sure.[NEMEAN] X;	209
fia\a fJLev avSpSv Sucaicov 7repi/caSopievoi. /cal puav Oedov ithjtov
yevos.
arp. 8'.
perapeL/36/jLevoc 8’ ivaXXai% dpuepav rav p,ev irapa irarpl (f>iX<p 55
A l vipbovrac, Tar 8’ r7ro /cevdeai yalas iv yvaXois ©epdirva9,
7rorpLov dpL7ri7r\avT€$ opboiov' iirel
tovtov rj irdpurav Oed9 epbp^evai ol/celv r ovpavdp
eiXer aidova <f>6ipbevov IIo\u8et5/C979 Kaaropos iv 7roXepicp'
tov yap *'ISa? dpufn ftovalv 7T<W9 ^oXcoOe 1$ erpcoae'	vaX/cea9
Xoyxas a/ca.
54.	fictXa (ji^v] implies another
clause, unexpressed and unnecessary, ofi
Si dvdpwv adhcuv TrepiKadofievoi. One of
the functions of the Tyndaridae was the
saving and helping of men; see Introduc-
tion.
0€<ov] For the responsion of 0eG>v 1.
18 and the echo of 7tl<tt6v in 1. 78 see
Introduction, pp. 191 and 195.
55.	fi€TajJL€Lp6[JL€vot] Passing from
heaven to Hades and back again; ivaX-
Xa£, day about (schol. ivaXXdaaovres rds
y/aipas). Compare X 301,
robs dfi<poj faofis Karix^ (pval^oos a la
ol Kal vip0ev ytjs TLfirjv ttpot Zrjvos
fyovres
&\\ot€ fxkv fwow’ ireph/JLcpoi, AXXore 5’
afire
redvdaiv, nuty de XeXoyxatTtv t<ra 0eoi<n.
Pyth. XI. 94 viol 0eu)v to fxiv Trap’ afxap
edpaurt Qepdirvas rb S' oUiovres &dov
’OXfi/iTov. Also T 243.
56.	viro K€v0€<ri k.t.X.] in the subter-
ranean hollows of Therapna (schol. iv rots
vwoyeioLS rrjs Qepdirvas). inrb Kefi0e<n = iv
inroyelois Kevdeai. yvaXa occurs in Pyth.
viii. 61 of the vales of Pytho. Compare
Aleman frag. 5 fiirb rrjv yrjv rrjs QepdTrvrjs
eTvai Xiyovrai {wvres.
ap.,iri7rXdvT€s] eking out, fulfilling.
Iircf k.t.X.] For when Castor perished
in war, Polydeukes preferred this way of
life to being completely a god and dwelling
in heaven. cEXcto takes yj like a compa-
rative.
60
60. t6v yd.p "I8a$ /c.r.X.] Schol.:
‘ the tale is as follows: Lynceus and Idas,
the sons of Aphareus wooed Phoebe and
Hilaria, the two daughters of Leucippus,
and at the marriage festivities invited the
Dioscori to the banquet. But they carried
off the maidens and fled, and the bride-
grooms pursued. And a battle took place
between the sons of Aphareus and the
Dioscori, for the matter of the marriage, and
Castor is slain. Then Polydeukes slew
both, Zeus assisting him in the work and
sending lightning against them. But,
according to Pindar’s version, the quarrel
arose not on account of brides, but on
account of driving away oxen ’.
In making the matter a dispute about
oxen, Pindar agrees with the Cypria,
frag. 9. The four heroes made a joint
raid in Arcadia and stole a herd of oxen.
Idas and his brother managed to drive
the whole herd to Messenia, but Castor
and Polydeukes went in pursuit and in
turn appropriated the whole spoil. This
was the cause of the ire of Idas, tov is
Castor.
dic$] Here and in Nem. vi. 52 aixpq
is found in the mss. where it is metrically
impossible. Editors with one accord
read	But had aic/iq., a common
word, been originally written, it would
never have been altered. I therefore
restore the rare word d/cd in both pas-
sages (see note on Nem. vi. 52).* In
Isthm. ill. 69 cu’x/a$, which editors after
14
B.210
[NEMEONIKAI] Y.
airo Tavyerov ireBavya^mv iSev Avy/cev<s 8pvo$ iv crreXe^ei dvr. 8'.
rffievos. Keivov ydp iiriyOovitov wavrcov yever o^vrarov
ofifia, \cu\jrr)poi<; 8e iroheaciv d<f>ap
Pauwius used to change to a«r/u£, has been
rightly defended by Christ.
61.	airo Tavy^rov k.t. X. ] Spyingfrom,
Taygetus Lynceus saw them sitting in the
trunk of an oak.—Asyndeton in narrative
is characteristic of Pindar; cf. below
1. 75.—The mss. have tt6Sj abyafiov.
‘ircSavyaSwv is the excellent correction of
Triclinius. 7re5- has the same force as
fierb in fierafialofiai: looking for them.
Mr Fennell ingeniously proposed wcpav-
y dfav.
62.	ijpivos] mss. ijfievos, corrected by
Didymus. Thiersch attempted to improve
on this by writing ijfiiv<0.—Aristarchus
read ijfievov (which Bergk accepted in his
latest ed.), in order, acc. to the schol.,
to make Pindar’s story agree with the
account in the Cypria. But, as Didymus
pointed out, the tale in the Cypria (see
below) represents both brothers in the
oak. It seems probable that the words
rjXOe A^Sas iraTs Subnuv misled Aristarchus
into the idea that Castor and Polydeukes
were not together, when the deadly stroke
was dealt. But rjXOe is relative to the
place which the assailants had reached in
their flight, not to the oak. From a
critical point of view ijfiivos is impreg-
nable. ijfievov would never have become
irjfievos, whereas rifiivos could hardly have
avoided such a corruption without the
intervention of a miracle. — As the
scholia on this line are of considerable
interest and have excited much discus-
sion among German scholars, the space
required for their reproduction will not
be misexpended. Schol. 6 pdv fApla-
rapxos ai-ioi ypd<peiv rpievov, aKoXobOtas
rrj iv rots Kvrrplois Xeyofiivrj laropiq. * 6
yap ra Kbrr pta avyypdxpas <f>r)al rbv
Kdaropa iv rrj Spvt KpvcpOivra 6(pdrjvai
inrb Avy kIw * rrj 8i avrrj ypa<prj Kal
’AttoXXoSupos [see Bibliotheca III. n, 2]
KarrjKoXobBrjac. wpbs oik <prjai AlSupos'
afKporipcjv bird rrj dpvt Xox<kvr<av, rov re
Kdaropos Kal rov IIoXvSebKovs, fibvov 6
AvyKebs rov Kdaropa eT8e; fihwore obv
<t>y}Oi Seiv avayiv&OKeiv ri)v rrapaXhyovaav
avXXaprjv d^vrbvw ijfiiv os ws ijpp.ivos iva
Kar afi<t>oiv aKobrfrai* tSe AvyKebs Spvbs
iv areXix« iffiivos, avrl rod iffiivovs, SrjXov-
oti robs AioaKobpovs' <bs deXXorros Kal
rphros* oi>x %Sos earl, yepati, dvrl rov ou%
28ovs. § xaparlBevrai [rraparlderai ?] Si
xal rbv rb Kvrrpia ypdxf/avra ourcu Xiyovra
ali//a 8i AvyKevs
Hrjvyerov rrpoaifiaive rroalv rax&aiti
rrevoiOtbs *
aKporarov d’ avafias SieSipKero vrjaov
airaaav
Tavra\i8ov UiXorros, rdxa 8* eiaiSe
kvSl/ios rjpcos
ot-ioiv 6<pdaXfioiaiv iaco koIXtjs Spuds
dfupo)
Kdaropa S' ImroSa/iov Kal aeBXoipopov
HoXvSeuKea.
vvi-e 8’ dp ayxl aras fieydXrjv Spvv
Kal rb i£rjs. 0 filv ovv Kdaricp iXox& rbv
*I8av, (jyrjalv [Didymus], iv koIXtj Spvl Kpv-
<f>Bels Kal rbv AvyKia’ 6 8i AvyKeSs <5£i/SepKrfs
ujv &are Kal 81a XLBtov Kal Sib yifs rb
ytvofieva (HXiireiv I8uv Sib rrjs Spuds rbv
Kdaropa irpioae Xoyxv•
kcCvov “Yap k.t.X.] For of all men
on earth his eye was keenest; cf. Swin-
burne’s ‘keenest eye of Lynceus’ (Ata-
lanta in Calydon, p. 52).
63. \aki|nf]pots k.t.X.] And with storm-
ing feet they arrived speedily, and con-
trived swiftly a great deed, and underwent
sore usage, those sons of Speed, by the
handlings of Zeus. There is a play on
the name ’A^apevs, which Pindar con-
nected with a<pap, and interpreted Sudden
or Speedy. It will be observed that
words noting speed are mustered: Xanf/rf-
pdis, &<pap, u)kIu)S, ’Atf>apr]ri8ai, avrlra.211
[NEMEAN] X.
i^LKeaOaVy teal fieya fepyov iprjaavT oo/ceco9,
/cal ttclQov Seivov TraXdpais *AffraprjTbSai A£09* avri/ca yap 65
rJXtfe ArjSas irat? Sico/ccov' toI S’ evavra Gradev rvp,j3q> ayeSov
rrarpwttp *
evdev dpirajjavre9 ayaXp *Ai?8a, %earov irerpov,	eV. S'.
epffaXov Grepvcp IIoXi/Set/Keo?* aX\’ ov viv <f>Xd<rav,
oiJS’ dveyaaaav' icfroppadel9 S’ ap’ a/covrc dotS
fjXaae Avy/ceos iv irKevpalab yaX/cov.	JO
Zei)? 8’ 67r’ vI8a 7rvp<f)opov irXa^e yJroXoevra /cepavvov'
apa S’ e/caiovr iprjpoc. yaXeira S’ e/w dvOpcoirob9 opiXeiv
KpeGGOVCOV.
For Xauf/ypois cf.	IX. 121 <£1/76 Xat-
xprjpop dpo/JLOP, and (9/. XII. 4 Xaixf/ypoi
woXe/ioi, storming wars.—The form *A<|>a-
pTjTtSai is noticeable. It seems to imply
a nominative ’A<j>apys (Gen. -?ttos) or
’A(paprjTos, but of such forms there seems
to be no trace. From ’A(papetis we should
expect’Atpapeldys or’AtpapyCadys.
Ipjo-avT* is Schmid’s correction of
bycpyaapT D, efJLVTjcraT BB.— For the
responsion of 'iraXapais to the same word
in 1. 5 see Introduction, p. 194. The best
comment on waXa/xy in this context is
Pindar’s own coinage wvpwaXa/xop
(3bXos opaucTtiwov Atos, 01. x. 80.
65. avrCica yap at.t.X.] For instantly
came the son of Leda (Polydeukes) in
pursuit. But they were stationed over
against them, hard by their father's tomb;
from the which having snatched a headstone
of Hades, a polished rock, they hurled it
at the chest of Polydeukes; but they did
not fell him nor force him to flinch; nay,
rushing upon theni with rapid lance he
drave home the brass in the sides of
Lynceus.
<t)(€86v in Pindar is always used of local
proximity.
67. dyaXp *At8a] A stele in honour
of Hades. Schol. cT'ijXyp ivbs t&p KUfihtap
apirdaapTei aw6 rod rv/xpov rod warpos
atrwp ’A<papb<os. Dissen compares jxbXos
’Aida (dprjpos) in Euripides, Elcctra 143,
and other similar phrases.
For the significance of this incident
see above, Introduction, p. 194 sq.
68. IIoXv8€vk€o$] This word occurs
in 1. 50, the second verse of 3rd epode,
and in the same position in the verse.
Kal Kaaiyprjrov ILoXvdebKeos (50)
t/jipaXop (TTbpPip ILoXvdetiiceos (68).
See Introduction, p. 195. <pXaw like OXdto
is a word appropriate to boxing.—The
active of x^°lJLaL occurs in Xenophon,
Anabasis iv. i, 12. dWx«-0’O’av (schol.
vwox<opy<rai ds TovwLcroj wewonfjKafrip) was
restored by Wakefield for dpb<rxaaav D
(and mss. of Triclinius) and aptyaoap
B.
71.	Zevs 8* eir T8<ji ac.t.X.] And Zeus
whirled against Idas a fiery bolt of lurid
(or sooty) lightning; and in the lonely place
they were consumed together.—wvp(f>opos
(ignifer) and ypoXbeis are awa£ dpy/xbpa in
Pindar; and no part of wXyva 10 occurs
elsewhere in his extant works. The
sense of irXaijt here (not strike, but cast
or hurl for a stroke) is also unusual.
Schol. 6 db Zei)s wvp<f>6pop Kal rttpp&dy
Kepavpbp wpoolppy^ev afJKporbpois, ojxou db
iKaloPTo ipr)fi<i)6hPT€S,
72.	\aXcird 8* £pis x.r.X.] For men, a
strife with stronger than they is difficult
to encounter. Compare 01. XI. 39 pcikos
db Kpecrabpup awodbad’ awopop.
14—2212
[NEMEONIKAI] l\
(TTp. € .
rayiax; S’ inr dSe\<j>€OV ft lav irakiv ycoprjarev 6 T vvSaplSas,
teal vlv ov7rct) reOvaor, aaOfiaTi Se typiaaovra, nrvods e/ayev.
BepfJbd reyycov Safcpv afia arovayak	75
opBiov (fxovaae' VLarep IS.povitov, rk Sff \v<n$
eaaerai irevdicov; /cal ifiol davarov ervv t&S* inrireikov, aval;.
oXyerat ri/ia <f>CXcov Taroopbivw <£am* nravpot, S’ iv nrovco nnarol
ftpoTwv	'T.
74.	KaC viv x.r.X.] And he found him
not yet dead, but with a gasp shuddering
through his jaws.
BB <ppl<r<rovT* apLWPobs	D <f>pl<r-
<fovt apairpoas inix** Schmid read <f>pl<r-
aovra 7rpoas bKtx^p. From the reading of
the scholium in D rots 8b yopks [B tcvo&s]
VTro\J/vxpovfjdvas virb rrjs (pplKrjs, Mommsen
restores both in the scholium and in the
text ybpvs (orybpvas). Compare Nonnus,
Dionysiaca XX v. 534 Kal \j/vxpcus ywtiea<ri
ira\ip.Trvoov aad/ia titclIvuv (quoted by
Abel in note on scholia, p. 325). I fail
to see (1) why ybpvs should have been
corrupted to yopas (indeed yopas has
rather the appearance of a blur) and (2)
why ybpvs should have been altered in
the text and left no trace.—The true
reading is clearly irvoefe, restored by
Schmid; afiirpo as was a very natural
gloss, subsequently regarded as a correc-
tion and introduced into the text. Just
as aKoal was used in the sense of ears and
o\f/eis in the sense of eyes, so ttpools here
means the regions of breath; and this
meets the objection that <f>pl<r<r€ip can be
used only of parts of the body (<pplaaeip
de membris vel partibus corporis did solet,
Bergk). For a vowel short before ttp
see Nem. ill. 41 aXXa wpbtap.
75.	0€p|xcl k.t.X.] BB depfxh 5b rbyywp,
D depficL 8b rbytop. Various proposals
have been made for the restoration of the
metre. Schmid Oepfib. dr) rbyywp, Schneid-
ewin OepfjLa 5b ar&fap, Hermann Oepfib.
8b ariyujp. Bergk saw that the corrup-
tion more probably lay in the latter part
of the line, 8b being an insertion, partly
to fill up the complement of sylla-
bles, partly to supply the usual transi-
tionary particle. He first proposed to
read apa oropaxcus, dpa belonging to
(j>d)pa<T€; but in his 4th ed. reads 8cucpv
bird aropaxcus, tears falling to the sound
of groans. He does not however explain
how bwb fell out.
In forming a judgment on the passage,
four points occur; (1) the effect is bet-
tered by the absence of 8b; (2) aropaxais
almost requires a preposition ; (3) in the
two other places in Pindar where Saicpv
occurs, Pyth. iv. 121, frag. 122, 3, the
first syllable is long ; (4) 8rf) is improbable
as it occurs in the following line. I there-
fore propose
OeppxL rbyycjp Satcpv* a/xa aropaxcus
lacrimas inter gemitus fun dens, shedding
warm tears and maJdng moan.
AAKPYAMA
was probably read SaKpvfia or SaKpvfiara
and afterwards corrected to ddicpva.—<rro-
paxd does not occur elsewhere in Pindar.
Compare Soph. Trach. 848 rbyyeip 8a-
Kpvojv ax^ap.
76. op0iov <|xova<r€] lifted up his voice,
or cried with a loud voice, * 0 father,
Cronos’ son, when, O when will there be
deliverance from my sorrows ? Upon me
too, 0 lord, lay the charge of death along
with him. Honour clean forsakes a man
when he is reft of his friends. But in
the hour of need few mortals are true, to
take a share in the travail of a comrade'.
78. iravpoi x.r.X.] For responsions cf.
11. 24 and 54. The scholia explain irav-
poi as really meaning an absolute negative:\NEMEAN\ X.
213
avr. €.
fcafidrov peTaAapftaveiv. cS? evveire* Zei)? S’ clvtLo<; r}\v0e F01
teal toS* i^avSaa eiro?* ’EaW /ao* W09* rovhe 8* eirena	80
(nrepfia 9varov puarpl rea TreXaacus
(rra^ev fipax;. aX)C wye TfSvSi toi epsirav cupeaiv
irapSiScopu' el p,ev Oavarov re <j>vy(op Kal yfjpas dire^Oopbevov
auT09 olfceiv alro9 OvKvpirov deXeis <tvp t ’AOavaia tceXatvey^el
t *Apei'
<xptI rod ob8b oXlyot' cos Kal wap’ *0/jl-
1} oXlyop ol waiba ioucora yelvaro Tu-
5eiJs.
K.T.X.
79.	avrCos ^[Xv0^ Foi] I have printed
the reading of D, but it is remarkable
that BB have avrla. I am inclined to
believe that Pindar wrote aprC iXTriXvOt
foi, the perfect tense vividly expressing
that Zeus has already drawn nigh while
Polydeukes is still speaking. eAeAy0€
was liable to become ijXvtie, and the
divergency of the MSS. would thus be
accounted for. The fact that iMjXv6a
(though occurring in Herodotus) is not
found elsewhere in Pindar makes me
hesitate.
80.	££av8a<r] Observe that avdav is
used here and in 89 of the utterance of a
god.
4<r<r£ pot vlos x.r.A.] My son thou art;
but after me the hero, her lord, approached
thy mother and begat him with drops of
mortal seed. lirciTa is used as if / begat
thee had preceded. tov8€ awlpfia <ttcl%€p
= Tovde taweipe (cf. \f/y<f>ovs ZOcpto with
an object, = i\f/rj<pl<TaPTo, in Agamemnon,
1. 816, according to the usual explana-
tion).—crwlpfia dvarbv contrasts with the
(Twlpfi addfiaprop of 1.17. <rrd£€v is the
correction of Pauw for iara^ep of the
MSS.
82. dXA*—2|nrav] Noth withstanding
the fact that thy brother is a mortal.
dye has a consolatory force. tQpSI toi
atpectp wapbldcjpu, I place these courses at
the disposition of thy choice.
83.	yrjpas curexOojwvov] loathed eld,
a notion characteristically Greek.
84.	avTos k.t.A.] The mss. have
abros "QXvhwop edlXets <rbv t ’Adavalq.
K.T.X.
a line metrically defective. If we read
0bXvjawop dtXeis we require four addi-
tional syllables, either after OlXets (- - ~ -),
or before OtfXv/iwop (-----~); and the
sense demands a verb signifying to dwell.
The scholiast shews that he had such an
infinitive in his text, by the paraphrase ab-
rbs fiovXei rbp ovpavbv oIkclp avv i/jtol Kal
*A0tjv$ Kal “Apet, words which have been
thought to point to ifioi or some equivalent
before <rbp. Benedictusaccordingly inserted
oUeip i/JLol. Boeckh vakiv e/utoi after deXeis.
Schmid read OtfXv/xwop KarotKrjaat $4Xets,
Mommsen ObXvpLwop plptetp pdXXeis eptol,
Kayser poets oUetp eptol, Hartung avpouceip
ptot iOlXets.
Among all these conjectures there is
little to choose, for not one of them pre-
tends to account for the omission of the
words supplied. It is clear that a verb
meaning to dwell is required after BlXets,
and it is safer to adopt oIkcip from the
scholium than to guess a synonym. As
for ifiot, we may well believe that, as
Boeckh said, the scholiast added that
frigid <ri>p eptol out of his own head.—My
restoration, printed in the text, explains
the corruption as an instance of para-
blepsia.
<\YTOCoiKeiN<NiTOCOYAYMTTOY0eAeic.
When he had written abros, the scribe
glanced again at his ‘ copy’, and his eye,
falling not on the word he had written214	[NEMEONIKAI] I.
€<tti crol tovtcov Xd'xps' el Se Ka<riyvr)TOV irepi	eV. e. 85
/xapvaaai, iravTWv Se voel? airoSaaaaaQat, flaov,
rjpMTv puev tee irveot,9 yalas virevepdev ioov,
tfpuerv S’ ovpavov ev xpv<Teoi<; SopLoiaiv.
089 dp9 avSdaavTos ov yvwpba SnrXoav Giro ftovXav.
but on the almost identical aZros, passed
on to ObXvpurov, so that the two words
oiicciv atTOS were omitted. OvXvpnrov was
subsequently altered to OtfXvfirrop, as the
object of diXeis. (For *OXv/jlitop in the
mss., cf. 01. xiii. 92, where the mss.
have ’OXup.7np for OiiXvpnnp.)
The rare word alros occurs in 01. III.
17, where the reading of the best mss.
has been rightly preserved by Bergk:
maTa <f>popio)p Aibs alrei rrapSoKip
aXtrei.
The word is recognized as Pindaric and
explained by Eustathius 38r, 27; Xiyei
8b Kal Hlvdapos kv 'OXvpnnovlKcus kouv&s
alros rb 4p8ialrr)iia, olov Aibs alrei irav-
86 Kip. Pindar uses his rare words delibe-
rately, and part of my justification of aXros
is a demonstration how it contributes to
render perspicuous the chain of thought.
Theaeus’ contention for Olympian honours
answers to Polydeukes’ contention for
his brother’s fellowship, as is indicated
by ire pi (afuXXarai) in 1. 31 answering
exactly to rrbpi (pappaaai) in 1. 85. And
there is a further parallel. For Poly-
deukes it is possible to make two requests;
he chooses that which involves hardship.
And so likewise Theaeus has a choice
of prayers; it is said in line 30 that he
does not ask amiss, but his heart has the
will to endure travail, if need be. Well,
Polydeukes would have asked amiss (7rap-
aireirai) if he had chosen the alros
QiiXvpurov unreservedly, without the habi-
tation underground; just as Theaeus
would ask amiss if he prayed for an
Olympian victory, his alros Ot’iXv/jutov,
with a heart unprepared for toil, alros
and rrapaireirai occur each in the last
line of an antistrophos. It is well to
observe that in the Third Olympian Ode
also, the introduction of this word alros is
the occasion of a paronomasia, there
AirioXos (as I pointed out in Hermathena,
1887, xiii. p. 187).
KcXaiveyx^ T* "Apci] Other epithets
applied by Pindar to Ares are fiadvrroXe-
p.0Sy (haras,	(as in Homer), x^X-
Ka<rms. On this passage Dissen writes
* h.e. vivere in consortio bellicosorum
deorum, ut ipse bella amas et gloriam
bellicam’. For the connexion of Ares
and Athena cf. Hymn. Horn. xi. 2 8eivr)v
y avv "April pdXei rroXe/jirjia 2pya. In the
Homeric hymn (really an Orphic hymn,
most probably) to Ares, he is called
SopvoOephs Zptcos ’OXvfirrov (1. 3) and SiKaio-
rariov ayb (fxarGjv (1. 5).—Swart applied
to the war god’s spear means bloody; cf.
KeXaive<pbs aljma in I 36, fxeXavberov (povip
£l(pos in Euripides, Orestes 821, KeXaivbv
£l<pos in Sophocles, Ajax 231, &c.
85. Ken K.T.X.] it is thine to inherit
this lot. Hermann gratuitously reads tup
pJkv for tovtojp, after pJbp tovtojp of the ed.
Romana.
cl 8c k.t.X.] But if thou contendest for
thy brother, and it be thy purpose to im-
part to him a like share in all things,
thou must draw half thy breath in places
under earth and the other half in the
golden halls of heaven.
For fiappapai with ire pi Dissen com-
pares II 497 adrap brretra Kal avrbs ipiev
rrbpi fiappao x^XKip.
87. rj|Uo*v] Schol. rb pibp rjpuou rod
Xpopov 4^eis inrb rfy yrjp diarplfiwp, rb 8b
rj/uav ip rip ovpapip Kal rots rtpXois tup
dewp 0LK01S.
89. ov *yvc6|xqL k.t.X.] Schol. ov Kare/Jie-
pladr) rfy yp&firip 6 UoXvSevKrjs. Com-
pare 01. VIII. 85 evxopicu apupl koXup
fxoipq. pbfxeaip SixofiovXop /jirj dbpiep. Poly-215
[NEMEAN] X,
dva S’ ekvaev fjuev ocfrOaXfJuov,
KaoTopo?.
deukes divided not the bent of his judg-
ment, lit. set not two counsels in his
judgment.
90. dva k.t.X.] But he (Polydeukes—
not Zeus, as is wrongly suggested in a
scholium) unclosed the eye and then released
€7T€lTd Se (ftcovav %aXfCOfjLLTpa
90
the voice of brass-girdled Castor. This is
the \uais prayed for in 1. 76.—The ptlrpa
was a woollen girdle plated with bronze.
In Theocritus, xx. 136, Castor is ad-
dressed as TaxvirojXe dopucrcroe xd^Keodu)-
py£-[NEMEAN] XI.
ODE IN HONOUR OF ARISTAGORAS OF TENEDOS, ON THE
OCCASION OF HIS INSTALLATION AS PRYTANIS.
INTRODUCTION.
The island of Tenedos, noted for the beauty of its women—‘the most
beautiful in the world,’ an ancient writer said1—was perhaps a land of
handsome men also; two handsome men at least, commemorated in
Pindar’s verses, have survived the despites of time. In a skolion, admit-
ting us to a secret of his personal life, he records the masterful, perhaps
voluptuous, beauty of Theoxenus of Tenedos and its influence on his own
‘love-tost’ soul, here suffering a rapture and expressing itself in rapturous
words, which may be set beside the poem of Sappho, also fragmentary,
addressed to a young girl. The colder and maturer comeliness of Arista-
goras, nobly born in the same island, has been likewise thrown up from the
sea of lost beautiful things, and still lives, visible at least to the imagination,
through the accident that Pindar was invited to write a hymn for the
occasion of his investiture with the office of President of his native city2.
No man in Tenedos could have enjoyed a more enviable social position
than Aristagoras. Among the ancient families there was one which traced
its origin to the Peloponnesian city of Amyclae, from which at the time
of the Dorian invasion a noble named Pisander had gone forth in company
with Orestes himself, and sought a new home in the ‘Trojan island,’ at
the head of a party of Aeolians, whom he had enlisted in Boeotia. One
of the Theban adventurers who sailed to try his fortune with Pisander was
Melanippus, a hero who had won some fame in legend by wounding
Tydeus. The Melanippids and the Pisandrids were thus peers in claims
to ancient nobility, and at a date which cannot be more closely deter-
mined than as probably prior to 500 B.c. Arcesilaus a Pisandrid married
a Melanippid lady. Their son Aristagoras had inherited from this noble
ancestry a beauty of that lofty, physically intrepid type, which inspired Greek
1 Nymphodorus quoted by Athenaeus,
Bk. XIII. 609 E /cat Nu/u06dw/>os 5’ iv t<$
tt)s ’A<ffas rrepiwXip KaWlovds ylvetrdai
tu>v wavraxov yvvcuK&v ev Tevtdy rrj
TpOH/Cfl V7)(Up.
2 The ceremony was called eiVtriypta.—
For this Ode, the only complete extant
work of Pindar which is not an Epinician,
see the general Introduction, section 2.INTRO D UCTION
217
sculpture, lending itself well to repose,—statuesque or * moveless ’ (arpt^s)1.
He had won sixteen triumphs in wrestling and that combination of wrestling
and boxing which was called the pancration, at games held in neighbouring
Asiatic cities, but had never contended in the greater Panhellenic festivals,
restrained through some diffidence, ill-judged in Pindar’s opinion, of his
parents.
Excelling in beauty, and distinguished by success, truly of a somewhat
provincial kind, the President (.Prytanis),—in the picture drawn by Pindar—
accompanied by the Senate, enters the Public Dining-hall of the city to pro-
pitiate Hestia with the sacrifices and libations, which were used to celebrate
the annual installation of a President. In her shrine there was a statue of
the goddess, with a golden sceptre in her hand, and here the chief citizens,
who were themselves her only priests, might feel drawn together as members
of a large family, standing round the public ‘hearth.’ A banquet was
prepared, and perhaps, while the senators and their guests feasted, the hymn
composed by Pindar was sung to the sound of lyres.
This hymn falls into three parts. Hestia is invoked to welcome her
worshippers, and to keep in glory and defend against perils during his year
of office the new Prytanis, who may perhaps have had grave cause to
fear the outbreak of some domestic faction2. The goddess is invoked to
defend; but the man himself—really blessed by nature and fortune—is
admonished that surpassing beauty, wealth and brave exploits cannot
deliver a mortal from the supreme shroud of clay. The terms in which
this gloomy fact is expressed suggest that Aristagoras was a ‘glass of
fashion’ as well as a ‘mould of form,’ somewhat of an ‘exquisite’ perhaps in
personal adornment, or studious at least to compose the folds of his tunic
and mantle for displaying most becomingly the graces of his limbs. ‘Let
him remember that the limbs which he dresses are mortal and that the end
of all his dressings will be a shroud of earth?
This is the first part of the hymn. The second tells what Aristagoras has
done and what he has left undone. His brilliant victories deserve praise and
song; but a man of such quality might have confidently striven for crowns
at Olympia or Castalia. The ‘halting hopes of his parents’ held him back,
and Pindar, deprecating diffidence, as much as vain confidence, suggests
a picture of one denied grasping the prizes he might attain, by a hand
plucking him from behind—the hand of the faint heart, that, as we say,
‘never won fair lady.’
In the third part of the ode the ancestry of Aristagoras is mentioned, with
an implication that the blood of heroes, not perhaps perceptible in previous
1 Such is the impression made on me
by Pindar’s daTjrbv ddos arpepiav re
(T&yyovov, where the felicity of arpepia is
its double intent, signifying both physical
and moral character.—The word moveless,
which I used above, served Wordsworth
in a description of a swan.
2 The strong phrase <nV drptoTy KpadLq.
in 1. io, combined with the significant
mention of good citizens in 1. 17, supports
Mezger’s assertion ‘dass es an unruhigen
Elementen in Tenedos nicht fehlte ’
(p. 484).218	[NEMEAN] XL
descendants, is at length reasserting its continued life in him. As in crops
and trees, so in the generations of men, nature reserves her forces. It was
strange (Pindar suggests) that his parents should be unaware of the heroic
powers indwelling in their son ; for in his case the horoscope was super-
ficially patent; though generally such insight is hardly possible for mortals.
Errors in this kind of divination more frequently move in the path of extra-
vagant hopes, and in this connexion, by a subtle poetical enchantment there
rises before us, dim and unobtrusive, a vision of life, as a sea, and men
thereon sailing in ships, the which are great enterprises, bound on many
quests, and driven by the wind of Fate. They are unable to desist from
rowing, because they are chained to the oars of Hope; and in the heaven,
alas! Zeus has set no sure pilot-star. Moreover the rivers of foreknowledge
flow not into this sea, but have their course in other far regions. The
vision vanishes ; and the conclusion is the doctrine of the Measure, the
principle of all Greek wisdom, which regarded excessive desires, sighs for
the unattainable, as a form of madness.
It will be observed that the thread—the logical thread, we may say—
round which this ode is spun, is curiously simple. In the first system we
are reminded that the strong and fair are mortal; this established, the
second and third systems deal with the two great errors to which such
mortals are exposed, undue diffidence and undue confidence,—the former, of
course, the rarer and less harmful1. To catch and hold the Measure is
really the problem of the art of life; but the implied comparison of this art
to that of guiding a ship without charts or fixed stars suggests gloomy
forebodings touching the chances of the mariners. Here we have a glimpse
of what we may call a resigned pessimism, latent in the depths of the Greek
spirit, sometimes peering forth, ultimately proving an element of decay, but
never, in early days, troubling its cheerfulness or impairing its grace.
1 The consecution of thought is indi-
cated by Ovara 1. 15, fipoT&v 1. 29, Qvarbv
1. 42. Mezger has noticed that oKvrjpd-
repai iXirLdes in 1. 22 is the counter-phrase
to iXiridi in 1. 46 (followed by d^&repcu in
1. 48). I may add that Keved^poves a^xcu
(29) are opposed to the true avxv of
Aristagoras implied in fieyavx^ iray-
Kparlcp (21).INTRODUCTION.
219
METRICAL ANALYSIS.
Strophe.
A.
v 1, a. - ^----------------- A 7*
Vt 2. a'-	--------7-
B.
-i; y	^ yy — ^ ^ ~
v. 4- ^	--------
v .5- *	-------------
— v-/ v-> — A 6*
-A	6*
------\j \j — A 8.
Epode.
w. i—2. a. —w
W. 3----4. tf'. -2-^v/ —
vv. 5—6. b. — ^---------
— ww —wvy— A | — v->-------A X3*
— W -—| —W“WU“““v^'^“’",v,/“ A 13*
—w—A |—v/ — •—w--\j\j \j\j— A	I3*
The rhythm of is so signally different from a, a, that, although it has
the same fityeBos, it is clearly meant to be epodic. The rhythmical con-
struction of the first epode is adapted with singular felicity to the sense.
The rhythm is dactylo-epitritic.[NEMEONIKAI] IA'.
APISTArOPAt TENEAI Qi
IIPYTANEI.
Hal fPea?, a re Trpvravela XeXoyxas, fE<7Tia,	crrp. a.
Zrjvos vyfri(TTOv Kaaiyv^ra /cal opuodpovov f/Hpa9,
€V puev ’ApiaTayopav Se^at reov e? daXapuov,
ev 8’ eraipov9 dyXac3 <r/cdrKT(p TreXas,
01 <76 yepaipowre? opddv <\>vXa<T<70i<n,v TeveSov,	5
7roWa /xei/ Xoiftalaiv ar/a^opbevot irpcvTav dewv,	dvr. a.
7roXXd 8e /cviaa' Xvpa Se <r(j)t fipepberai tcaX aotSd*
1.	irpvTavcta X&oyxas] Schol. ra
TrpvTavela <pri<n Xax^Tv tt)v 'Ecriav, irapb-
<rov ai tlop wbXecop ear'icu iv toTs irpvra-
velois a(pL8pvvTCU ical to iepbv Xeybfievov
wOp iwi Tobrujv air6k€itcli. XiXoyxas signi-
fies that the Prytanea are part of Hestia’s
sphere, assigned to her in the mythical
division of functions among the gods, see
01. vii. 55.
2.	opoGpovov] sharer of his throne
(‘throno duas sedes habente’, Dissen).
For a throne of many seats, see Nem. iv.
66.
3.	€V |A€v ac.t.X.] Welcome Aristagoras
into thy chamber, yea welco?7ie his com-
panions near thy shining sceptre. It is
impossible to reproduce the force of OaXa-
fMos applied to the shrine of a goddess;
used of a woman’s habitation it can be
rendered boiver.—It was first pointed out
by Boeckh that the eralpovs are not robs
<rv/JLwpvTavebovTas, as the schol. says, but
the senators of Tenedos. It is not known
what the official name of the senatorial
body was; we may assume it to have
been povXrj. We learn from this passage
that in Tenedos, as in Athens (see Pau-
sanias, 1. 18. 3), a statue of Hestia hold-
ing a sceptre stood in the Prytaneum.
5.	op0av k.t.X.] Keep Tenedos from
falling, yepaipovres refers to the eiVtr^-
pia or inaugural sacrifices. There were
no priests of Hestia; her worship was
maintained by the care of the prytanis
and senators.
6.	iroXXa p^v /c.r.X.] often worshipping
the frst of the gods with libations, often
with sacrificial savour.
Schol. TrpWTTJV 8k TCLVTTJV et7T6 ka06OOP
air’ abrijs rjpyovro. Kal 2o0o/cX^s * *12
irp<ppa Xoipijs 'EtrWa. This note sug-
gested to Bergk the conjecture wpippav
dew, which might explain the accent
in D, wp&Tav deQv.
7.	Xvpa 8i o-<|h k.t.X.] The lyre peals
for them and the song. For ppifieraL of
the lyre see Nem. ix. 8.[NEMEAN] XL	22 I
Kal %eviov Aios aaKeirai ®e/U9 aevaois	
iv rpaire^ai^* aXKa avv So^a T€\o9	
SvcoSeKafirjvov irepaaai avv drpeora) KpaSta.	10
dvhpa S’ iydo p,aKapi£co fiev irarep ’ApKeaiXav,	* / €7T. a.
8.	Kal gevtov Aios k.t.X.] Schol. kcU
rov l-evlov Aios 04pus doKeirai Kal diroad>-
feral Trap’ avrots 8iairavrbs iv rats rpair 4-
fais’ avrl rod ^iXb^evol elaiv. Dissen
quotes Athenaeus IV. p. 143, F ijaav 84
Kal %eviKol Oolkoi Kal rpairefa rplrij deltas
elaiovriav els ret av8peia t}v j-evlov re Albs
%evlav re irpoaijyopevov (cp. c). For the
expression doKeirai 64piis and for the
connexion of Themis with Zebs l-4vios,
compare 01. vm. 21
4vda Sc6rct/>a Aios t-evlov
irdpeSpos aaKeirai 04pus
4%ox dvdpdbiruv.
Cp. also iiraaK^aio, Nem. IX. 10.
dUvaois] perpetual, never running dry.
Compare aevdov irXobrov, inexhaustible
wealth (fr. 119), aevaov irvpos unquench-
able fire (Pyth. I. 5), divaov irarpbs ’OXvpi-
irloio npAv, the eternal honour (01. xiv.
12). I observe that Mr Fennell takes 4v
here in the sense of with, but I agree
with Rumpel that it has the more literal
meaning of place. The tables are not
only the instrument, they are also the
place of the daKyjais.
9.	aXXd ervv Sofjtj, k.t.X.] No really
valid objection can be brought against
the repetition of abv. Mommsen has
appositely compared such expressions as
Kar ataav ou8’ virkp ataav, oTos avevd*
aXXuv, where an idea is expressed both
positively and negatively. May he pass
with glory the twelve-month of office, yea
with heart unscathed, dotja is positive
and objective, arpioros Kpadla is negative
and subjective. In my judgment the
repetition of abv is happy. Editors have
proposed many emendations (Kayser r
iv arpdorw, Rauchenstein atf>iv arpdmp).—
B B have irepdaai, but Boeckh from
lemma D ire pda ai read aXXd viv Sofa...
irepaaai, and Dissen aXXd abv Sofa...
irepaaai viv. It is worth quoting the
scholia in full because they point to both
irepaaai and irepaaai.
Schol. etfx^Tcu rr\v apxw p^era dofys
avrbv 8iareX4aai. abv arpibrip Kal dXbirip
rrj KapUq, rovrianv airralarip Kal a(3Xa(3ei,
rijv eviavalav apxw biavvaeie. 8rjXov 84,
KaOus Kal irpoeliropiev, 8id ro&rojv, 8n o$k
4anv iirlviKos ij (p8i).	§ 6 84 vovs• irapd-
axov ovv avrois avv ev8o£l<p i^eviavrrjaai
rijv Tcpvravelav avv aXbmp Kapdiq..
The last note clearly points to 'ircpaoxu
and also to the double abv. Now as
itepdaai is quite simple, it is difficult to
see why irepaaai should have been foisted
in; whereas, if irepaaai were in the
ancient MSS., irepdaai was an obvious
simplification. I believe therefore that
irepaaai attested by D and by a scho-
lium is the right reading. The infinitive
depends on an imperative like 80s, which
is not expressed but can be easily under-
stood from the general notion of gracious-
ness implied in 84%ai. The intervening
words Xvpa...rpair4fais should be treated
as a parenthesis. In point of sense, it
will be conceded I think that the op-
tative is weak after the address to
Hestia, and that the context really
demands that Hestia’s protection for
the whole year should be expressly
invoked.
11. dvSpa 8* eycS k.t.X.] A goddess
was the centre of the first two strophes ;
here in the epode the transition to the
mortal is emphasized by the position of
&v8pa in a loose construction (‘oppositio-
ns causa praemissum', Dissen). As for
the man—I deem his father Arcesilaus222
[NEMEONIKAI] IA'.
/cal to OarjTov he pas arpepiav re %vyyovov,
el he ns okftov €%o)v pop(f>a Trepapevarerai aUwi;,
ev r aedXoLcnv dpiareimv inehei^ev $Lav%
0vard pepvda0eo TreptareWcov pe\rj	15
/cal reXevrav diravrcov ydv eiri ^ecraopevos.
ev \6yots S’ darwv arya0ols pev eiraiveladai xpedov, <rrp. y8'.
blessed, and I praise his (the son’s) ad-
mirable body and the intrepidity which he
inherits. Dissen notes the Zeugma ‘ quum
e fjLdKapLfa eliciendum sit euWw ad secun-
dum membrum’. Mezger takes it other-
wise ; ‘ den Mann aber preise ich selig
wegen seines Vaters Arkesilaos und
seiner stattlichen Gestalt und der ihm
angebornen Unerschrockenheit’. But
fiaicaplfa takes accusative and genitive,
the only example of two accusatives that
I can find being that quoted in Liddell
and Scott; Aristophanes, Wasps, 588
tovtI ydp Tol <T€ flOPOP TOUT (OP <op etprjicas
(MKCLplfa,
where it seems to me that tovtI is on a
different footing, being a sort of cognate
object (as it were, tout op fiaKaptafibp
fJLOVOP fMucaplfa).
Schneider and Bergk unnecessarily
read dpTe/ilap, which would almost imply
that Aristagoras had recovered from an
illness or been preserved from some
danger. Neither this word nor arpefilap
elsewhere occurs in Pindar. A scholiast
had the silly notion that ’Arpcfilap was
the name of a sister of Aristagoras.—The
choice of arpcjiCav is really a felicity.
It suggests the character of Aristagoras’
beauty, calm like that of a statue. In
Plato’s Phaedrus (250 e) drpe/irjs is used
of the (pacrpcLTd in Mysteries, 6\oK\rjpa
5b koX aw\a Kai aTpe/ii} koX evSalfiopa
(pao-fiaTa. aTpefids in Homer is generally
used of pose.
13. ct 84 tis k.t.X.] The reading of
D is fjLopfiq, wapa/ieboeTai d\\(op, B B have
wapafityerai.— wapafievo/iai, like wapafiei-
pofxcu (cf. Pyth. II. 50) praeverto, must be
followed by an accusative; accordingly
Boeckh read fiop(f>dp, Hartung AWovs.
Bergk on the other hand reads wpoafiebae-
Tcu which he supports by glosses in Hesy-
chius. The question is: is it likely that wpo-
would have been changed, by accident or
intention, to wap-7 I am disposed to think
that Pindar wrote •ir€pa|i€v<r€rai, the
preposition (Aeolic for wepl, see below, 1.
40) having the same force as in wepiTo^ebto,
wepiyipofiai. This was much more ex-
posed to the chances of corruption. Cf.
the conjecture of Mr Postgate, 6 wlpaWop,
in Nem. ill. 33.
15. Ovard /c.r.X.J Let hini remember
that the limbs which he clothes are mortal,
and that the last vesture of all will be
a shroud of earth. reXeurcb awdpTUjp is
adverbial, but it means the end of all his
dressing will be a dress of clay. See
Introduction, p. 217.
17. 4v Xoyots zc.r.X.] Schol. b 5b r#
tQp ayadojp yp&fi-rji hwaipeiodai robs aya-
dobs wpoaifKU, <pT)<rtp. § rj of/ror Tobs
Toiobrovs Kal Toiavra rjo-KrjKbras dpxoPTas
det bwb t(2p d<TT(op t<op ayadtop Kal \6yois
iwatpeiadai Kal KOOfieladai woiijfiaacp.
The MSS. have ay ad oh fib alpeiadai.
The metre shews that a short syllable
has fallen out, and Triclinius emended
dyadoiat. Mingarelli read ay ad 0101 /up,
Mommsen and Bergk dyadoial pip. It
would be wrong to change the signifi-
cant jab, but I think that instead of
adding the t to dyadois we should read
iwaipetadai (not contradicted by the
scholia). The omission of the syllable
was due to parablepsia ;
MeNen<\iNeic0<M
The scholia rightly separate ayadoh from
X0701S: In speech it is meet that he should[NEMEAN] XL	223
/cal fieXiyBoviroiai BaiBaXdevra fiiXeiv iv doiSals.
i/c Be TrepiKTLovcov i/c/caiBe/c ’Apiarayopav
dyXaal vl/cat yrarpav r evcovvfiov	20
€GT€<j)dvQ)Gav 7raXa /cal fieyavyel Tray/cparia).
iXiriBes S’ oKvrjporepai yovicov TraiBd<; fiiav	avr. 0.
€<t%ov iv ITvOoovi ireipaadai /cal ’OXvfiiria dedXcov.
val fid yap op/cov, ifidv Boffav irapa YiaaraXia
be praised by good citizens. ay ado is plv
implies a KaKol Si, which Pindar does
not express, the fiiv being sufficiently
eloquent.
18.	8ai8aX0lvra] Compare 01. v.
21 alrijoiov itoXiv Ebavoplaioi rdvbE kXvrats
baibdXXeiv, and 01. I. 105 iriiroida bi
%ivov KXvraioi baibaXiaoi/iEv V/xviov 7rru-
Xais. Translate tricked out. With fie-
Xiyboviros {aw. elp.) cf. fiEXhcopuros and
fieXlppodos. — The MSS. give /ieXi^I/iev
aoibais, which cannot stand, as aelboj and
aoidd do not suffer synizesis in Pindar.
Pauw proposed /ieXi{Ev, Mommsen /ie-
fitxO* Iv, Christ /iIXeool KXisoOai. After
considerable hesitation I have come to
the conclusion that Hermann’s pIXciv Iv is
the true restoration of the passage. The
corruption, I believe, arose thus. In
uncial mss. N, written a little crookedly,
tends to assume the appearance of Z, and
thus M E A EIN E N might become M E-
AEIZEN, which would be read /ieXi^ev
(as ei and 1 were constantly confused in
mss. owing to itacism, this interpretation
would be inevitable) and subsequently
corrected to fieXitf/iev.—iv aoibais con-
trasts with iv Xoyois, and fiiXeiv means be
a theme.
19.	Ik 81 trcpiKTiovcov k.t.X.] Neigh-
bouring states crowned Aristagoras and
his clan of auspicious name for sixteen
splendid victories in wrestling and in
the ennobling pancration. The force of
iic is that a stranger carried away prizes
or crowns from among the native inhabit-
ants. Compare Pyth. iv. 66 kvSos
d/KpiKTidvojv iwopev hrirobpafilas. Isth.
VII. 64 iirel irepiKTiovas ivUaoE bi) wore Kal
Keivos avbpas.—ireiTpav cvcovvpov means
the Peisandridae, a name of good omen.
21. p€yav\€t] glorioso.	The MSS.
have fieyaXavx^ii but Schmid’s correc-
tion fieyavxet, which restores the metre,
may be regarded as certain. The cor-
ruption was quite natural as composites
with the longer stem are far more
common.
22.	IXirtScs oKVTjporcpaiJ The halting
hopes of his parents refrained their power-
ful son from essaying contests at Pytho or
at Olympia. It is hardly necessary to
remark that ixw weipdodai and ix03 PV
weipdoOai are alternative expressions, the
latter being the more common. Dissen
quotes oxv™ irrjbav, Euripides, Orestes
267.
24. val pa yap optcov] For as I live;
yap explains d/cvripbrepai (unduly diffident).
See Hesiod Theog. 231
opKOv O' 8s brj irXeiorov imxOovlovs
avdptbirovs
wrj/ialvei, tire kev tis ekwv iirlopKOV
6/16001j.
Ipav 8o£av, in my judgment, an adverbial
accusative (cf. to obv fiipos), not to be
taken with val fia as Mezger takes it.
Dissen is hardly correct in construing
irapa KaoraXlq. with fioXibv ; it goes with
brjpidjvTiav. Had Aristagoras gone and
striven at Castalia or the hill of Cronos,
he wTould have returned more honourably
than his rivals.—In 01. xm. 44 Pindar
has the form brjplofiai; the Homeric224
[NEMEONIKAI] IA.
Kal Trap* evSevSptp fioXwv o^dp Kpovov	25
KaXXiov av Srjpicovrcov ivoarr/a dvrirraXcov,
TT€VTa€T7jpiS* eOpTClV *H/>a/c\e09 T€0/MOV	€7T. /3'.
kg) fiber acs apbrjaa/ievos re Ko/iav iv irop<f>vpeoi<;
epveaiv. aXka ftpor&v rov fiev Keveotfypoves av%at,
ef dyadbbv eftaXov* rov S’ av Kara/i€fi<f>devT dyav	3°
la'xyv oIkclcov 7rapea^aXev tcaXgov
Xeipo9 eX/coov oTrleraco Ov/ib? aroX/io9 icov.
av/ifiaXelv fiav evfiapes rjv to re Yleicrdvhpov 7raXat	arp. yf.
form is Srjpidopai, With	Kpbvov
cf. 01. IX. 3 Kpbviov Trap’ oxOov.—Schol.
cv&v8pa> 5ia tA tOjv iXaiCiv <pvrd.
27.	,ir€VTa€TT]p£8*] A festival which
we should call quadriennial the Greeks
called quinquennial. WGp.iov, prescribed
according to fixed rules, has much the
same force as the Latin sollennis; Tedpbs
corresponds to institutum. The first syl-
lable is short here; in Isth. v. 20 it is
long, Tedpubv poi <f>apl <ra<f>l<TT<iTov elvai.
28.	Iv irop<j>vp4ois ?pv€criv] having
bound his hair in glistering branches.
The expression loses its strength if we
take bv as merely instrumental; the
victor’s locks are conceived as actually
in the wreath of olive leaves. The poet
permits himself to apply to this wreath
the name of a colour, not literally appro-
priate to it, and intended altogether in a
figurative sense. Regal ‘purple’ might
be considered the queen of colours and
used as a metaphor for supreme excel-
lence ; and in the same way Pindar
borrowed the most precious of the metals
to describe the badge of Olympian vic-
tory. See 01. XI. 13 eirl CTeepdvip xpvabas
eXatas, and Nem. 1. 17. (Cf. also Pyth.
III. 73 vyleiav xPva^avi golden health.)
For bpveaiv see Aem. vi. 18.
30. c£ ayaOwv IfaXov] Cause him to
miss his desires (an aorist of generality);
the passive IkwIwtw in this metaphorical
sense is more familiar. (B B have tXapov,
a not unfrequent confusion in mss.)
tov 8* av k.t.X.] Whereas another,
underrating his strength, lets the honours,
that were within his reach, slip from his
hand, plucked back by an unadventurous
heart.—Mezger takes KaTap.ep.<f>6bvTa in
a passive sense (comparing Diogenes
Laertius, vi. 47), blamed in point of
strength.—wapa0<f>dXXoj has much the
same meaning as iKpdXXw, cause to fail
in, deprive of, but, appropriately to the
sense, is gentler. Over-confidence ex-
pels ; over-diffidence leads astray.
33. (rvppaXciv /c.t.X.] Surely it was
easy to conjecture in him the ancient blood
of Pisander from Sparta—for he came
with Orestes from Amyclae, conducting
hither (to Tenedos) a bronze-mailed host
of Aeolians—mingled near the stream of
Ismenus with the blood of his mother's
ancestor Melanippus.
Schol. avpipaXeiv Xlav ebpapbs rjv Kal
<rr)pL€id)ffa<rdai rbv idbvra ’Api0Tay6pa.it oti
t6 trdXai avrov afjua Kal rb ybvos rfv awb
Ueiaavdpov tov 27rapriaTov’ <bs awb tivos
Heiaavbpov tCov waXaiQ>v 6vtos tov ’Api-
CTaybpov. ovros 51, (prjai, avv 'OpioTrj
aw(pKT)0ev ck HwapT^s Kal tt\v Tbve5ov
KaT(pK7)0€. Tevbbios yap 6 ’Aptaraybpas.
we pi 5b Trjs ’O pbarov els ttjv AloXida
dwoiAas *EXXaviKos ev Tip wpdrrip AIoXik&v
laTopTjKev. 6 5b MeXaviwwos ovtos Qrj-
(3aios rjv iwl tov woXbpov avaras Tip Tv<5e?.
k.t.X.225
[NEMEAN] XI.
al/x airo 5^7rapra?—'AfivtckaOev yap efia crvv ’Opeara
AIoXgwv arparLav xaXKGVTGd Scvp avaycov—	35
/cal 7rap' 'lcrprjvov poav KGKpapiGVOV
etc M.€\apL7T7roio puarpcoo^. dpyaiai S’ aperal
dpa^epovr dXXacaropLevai yeveal9 avSpwv adevo<z'	avr. y'.
iv a^epw S’ ovr cov puiXaivai tcapirov eSoo/cav apovpaiy
SevSped t ovk iOeXet, rraaai^ gtgcov rrcpohoi^	4°
av0o<s evwSes <f>epeiv rrXovTtp \rLaov,
a\\’ iv dpLeiftovTi. teal dvarov ovtq)? g0vo9 ayei
pLOLpa. TO S' GK A409 dvOpCtiTTOlS <Ta<f>G<; 0V% €7TGTai	G7T. y'.
This scholium recognizes the reading
of the mss. Xlav. The metre requires a
long monosyllable here and most editors
read pav (due to Pauwius). The simi-
larity of AI and M accounts for the cor-
ruption.
36.	poav] Bergk’s correction of poav;
compare schol. irapa rd Tafirjvov petipara.
The genitive is forcible and idiomatic
(corresponding to dirb 27tapras), and
scribes familiar with wapd icorapjov, etc.,
were tempted to alter the accent.
37.	ap\atai /c.r.X.] This is the way
of men s generations ; their original excel-
lences change and then win strength anew.
(7ei/ea?s is dative of those interested.)
Aristagoras, Pindar implies, is the suc-
cessor of Pisander and Melanippus; the
intermediate generations were obscured
(tCov 5e p,era£i> ijpiavpujplvojVf schol.).
Schol. ai apxcdcu tGjv irpoyovcov, <pr)crlvi
dperal varepov €KXdp.7rov<rtv....§ fj oflrws*
al iraXaial aperal dirotpipovrai odlvos
ivaXXa<r(r6p,evai rats r&v dvOpdowtov ye-
veais.
39.	4v o"X€po>] continuously, opp. to
dWaacopLevai.—piXaivai is chosen with
the purpose of pointing the illustration
by a play on MeXcm7nros.
40.	S^vSpcd t* /c.t.X.] Neither are
trees fain to bear in each revolving year
an equal wealth of flowery fragrance, but
rather by turns. irepoSois, Aeolic for
irepiodois. It is curious that B B omit
TrXovrip before Taov (sic). Bergk reads
ttXovtw<jiov, formed like xaPlT^l01,t a
Rhegine adjective, see Ibycus, fr. 51 (P.
L. G. ed. 4).
42.	Kal 0vaTov /c.t.X.] On this wise
the race of mortals also is driven by the
wind of Fate. The MSS. have ovtg)
(T&lvoSi which Heyne corrected, with the
help of the scholiast’s words rb tG>v
avdpdjTTOJv ylvos. The scribe had adlvos
in his mind from 1. 38, and when he came
to the words
OYT6OC€0NOC
he unhesitatingly read ovrmrdlvos, trans-
posing two letters and violating the metre.
A similar instance of contamination
from the general context is the familiar
Xbova' dv 7) ,<f>airTovo,a in Sophocles’
Antigone, 1. 40, where a scribe wrote
Qdicrovaa, because his mind was full of
the idea of burial, the subject of the
context. In the present case, the occur-
rence of adtvos in 1. 38 would be a point
against it in 1. 42, even if the metre
were not decisive.
ayti means drive, like a wind. Inter-
preters have missed the felicity of this
passage through not perceiving the meta-
phor from sailing.
43.	to 8* 4k Aios k.t.X.] And as for
Zeusy no clear sign in heaven accompanieth
men on their course; but, albeit, we em-
bark in vessels of proud designs, devising
many works. For our limbs have been
15
B.226
[NEMEONIKAI] 1A \
rite/lap • dU’ e/nrav fieyaXavopiai? ififiaivofiev,
epya re 7roX\d pevoivdovre^’ SeSerai yap dvaiSei	45
iXiriSi yvia' vrpopaOeia? S’ airo/ceivTai poai
tcepBetov Be %pr) fierpov Orjpeve/iev'
cnrpoaiKTtdv S’ ipcorcov o^vrepai pavLat.
fettered by importunate Hope; and the
streams of foreknowledge are situate far
away. rb 5’ £k Aids is more emphatic
than Ik Aids, pointing the antithesis be-
tween Zeds and pcoipa. T^Kpap suggests a
guiding star; cf. rd/c/iwp of the moon in
Horn. Hymn. 32, 13 rlKpuop 81 Pporoioi
tItvktcli. The reading proposed by Christ
& patpojiev for ipifiaivopLep surrenders the
metaphor. For epifiaipu) in this meta-
phorical sense Dissen compares Plato,
Phaedrus 252 E lb.v ovv per) irporepop
ipipepwci T(p IrriTydeijpiaTi. Mr Fennell
happily suggests that SlSerai yvia may
be “a metaphor from a slave chained to
the oar”.—dvaiSei, exceeding due measure,
corresponds to a common use of impro-
bus, as in Virgil’s labor omnia vincit
improbus.
45. fyyya T€ iroXXa] B, D Ipya rl,
B epya re, Bergk epya ye, Mommsen
Ipy’ are, Hartung epya ret. Schol. aXXa
pLeyaXrjyopovpLev pceyaXa re pLevoivuvres Kai
(ppoPTlfovres virlp eavrovs.
The reading of the mss. is clearly
correct. It is more difficult than any
of the corrections, and that it is more
logical than either they or pl€polp<2pl€p
(which might have been easily written)
would be, may be shewn by an analysis
of the thought. The (1) central notion
is, we are at sea; and our position is
defined by (2) the nature of our vessels
and (3) the object of our voyage.
The simplest grammatical connexion of
these three moments would be: ttXIoplcp
ipfiaivovris re pLeyaXapoplais epya re
xoXXd PL€poipu}pt€$, but Pindar^ abbre-
viates it by making the first participle
do duty as a verb, epifiaipopLep, we are
embarkers in.
(uvoivwvrcs] meditantes.
46.	poaC] pod is used metaphorically
in 01. II. 33,
poai 5’ aXXor’ &XXai
ebdvpuap re pierc/i. Kai ttopujp es apdpas
efiap.
Schol. ttjs 81 irpoypwoeujs ai 080I tLiroOep
tjPlwp Keiprai. But o8oi (another metaphor)
misses the point of poai. The rivers of
foreknowledge do not flow into the sea,
on which mortals sail.
47.	K€p$€<OV & K.T.X.] It is good tO
observe a measure in the chase for gain;
sharp are the fits of madness wrought by
unattainable longings. Bergk charac-
terises the last line by the words “sin-
gularem audaciam sermonis Pindarici”,
and adds “nam poeta dicere volebat
oiTipes airpooiKT(op epuaip, rofrrwp 6£. pi.,
qui cur airpocriKnop 5’ epwprwp scribere
noluerit planum est
The comparative oJvTepai suggests,
more emphatically than o£eiai, its op-
posite ppaStirepai or aptfiXurepai; and
here, succeeding eXwiSi at such a short
distance, it inevitably reminds us of the
lagging hopes, eXiribes oKvqpoTtpai, of
1. 22 (so Mezger). The use of the com-
parative to suggest a correlative may be
illustrated by OrjXvrepos, Irepos, 8e£irepos
etc. See further Appendix A, note 10.APPENDIX A.
Note i. I. 58, 7raA.iyyAci)<r(ro$.
In commenting on this word I omitted to refer to an Homeric
expression which throws some light on it. In A 357 we read
tov 8* €7ri//,€iS?7<ras 7rpoo-icfyrj KpeiW ’Aya/xe/zvcov
<os yv<3 xwo/Aei'oio* 7raXiv 8* o yc Xa^€ro /jlvOov.
The most obvious meaning of the last words is ‘ he withdrew his remarks.’
Agamemnon had chided Odysseus, and, when Odysseus replied angrily,
he retracted his injurious words. But this meaning will not suit the
passage in the Odyssey where the same phrase occurs, v 254. There it
is used of Odysseus telling a false tale of his own life to Eumaeus.
Commentators give no hint how the two passages are to be reconciled.
In order to reconcile them, we must get rid of the idea that XdJ^cro
/jlvOov means ‘ took back his word ’ in the Iliad. Both there and in the
Odyssey it means ‘grasped* or ‘laid hold of a word,’ in accordance
with the regular usage of Aa£<yuu. In both cases, moreover, irdXiv has
the same sense : ‘ reversely.’ The difference lies in the context. In the
Iliad 7raA.1v reverses what Agamemnon had said before, the 7raA.1v
is a palinode; in the Odyssey 7raA.1v reverses the truth, the 7raAiv
fivOos is a falsehood.
This apparent difference in the meaning of 7raXiv, owing to a real
difference in the things on which its sense operates, illustrates the two
uses of 7raX[yyXo)cr(ro<s in Pindar, as pointed out in the Commentary.
Note 2.	11. 9, aayros.
There are several passages in Pindar where the point obviously turns
on a supposed connexion of awros with arjfu, cf. the Homeric awTcto
(aa)T€tT€ yXvKov virvov). Indeed it is not impossible that aWos may have
actually meant breath as well as gloss; it is even conceivable that breath
IS—2228
APPENDIX A.
was the primary meaning, and that awros is cognate to acorcV In any
case the Greeks connected them. In the general Introduction (p. xix) I
pointed out a passage in the Sixth Isthmian where aa>Tos has a suggestion
of this kind, and here I may call attention to other instances.
Pyth. X. 51 sqq. icdirav (r^aaov, ra\v 8* ayxvpav epeurov ydovi
irpwpaOc, ^otpaSos aXtcap 7rerpas.
cyKw/uW yap awros vpvmv
€7r* aXXor aXXov tore peXuraa Ovv€i Xoyov.
Here atoros vp.vwv, joined with 0vvci and in collocation with a sea-
metaphor, could not be justified, if it did not suggest gate of hymns, as
well as fairest of hymns. Again in Isthm. 1. 51 the strange phrase
iroXiarav Kal £a/u)v yA.axr<ras oudtov is justified by the suggestion breath of
the tongue; and unless he intended to convey this suggestion, I cannot
think that Pindar would have ventured on the expression yAoicro-as
acorov.
The phrases £coas awros (Isth. iv. 12) and €v£o>as aam>v {Pyth. iv. 131)
obviously allude to the breath of life, cf. ataiv, and perhaps ftovtrtKa? cv
acoru) ((9/. i. 14) suggests the breathings (irvoat) of flutes. Another
instance of this secondary significance of awr05 will be found in Note 3
of this Appendix.
In the present passage the argument seems to turn on a similar
allusion. It has been pointed out in the note on 1. 8 that alwv tvOv-
7ro/x7ros is metaphorical, a straight-wafting breeze of time (or life). Now
the strong verb o<jf>€tAa, and the strong conjunction cfarcp show that there
must be a definite inference, and I have no doubt that the inference is
from alwv to aWos. The Tiniodemidae had a fair wind (alojv); we may
infer that Timodemus will also have a fair wind (aWos). This
etymological, allusory argument is highly characteristic of Pindar.
A confirmation of this view is furnished by 1. 14. AtavTos atcovo-ev
responds to k&XXkttov aam>v, and it has been pointed out (see note
on 14) that Atas is conceived as a mighty wind, and that this is the
justification and motive of akowcv, in which commentators have found so
much difficulty. If aWos also alludes to ofy/u, there is greater significance
in the comparison of Timodemus to Ajax.APPENDIX A,
229
Note 3.
III. 26 sqq.	Ovfj.4, Ttva 7rpos aX\oSa7rav
aKpav ifJiov tt\oov 7rapa/xet/?eat;
Aia*<3 (T€ <£apl yeva re Moicrav <£ep€iv.
29 €7T€T(u Sc Xoyoj Sikcls acoros, eoAos alvliv
ov8’ dAAorpicov epwres avSpl cfrepeiv Kpeacroves.
OLKoOev p,dr€V€.
Verse 29 is one of the most difficult in Pindar. There is a difficulty in
the mere translation, and there is a further difficulty in discerning its
connexion with the lines which precede and with the lines which follow.
That a close connexion must exist in both directions is obvious; for if
we leave the line in question out of the context, the train of thought is
consecutive. Pindar supposes that the Muse is in a ship, steered by his
soul (Ovp.os). He charges the steersman to come back from the pillars
of Heracles, as it is for the sake of Aeacus and his race that the Muse is
sailing. Then—if we omit the enigmatical line—he observes that we
should not resort to foreign tales, when there are good tales at home;
the cycle of Aeginetan legend is ample enough. Or, in the language
of the metaphor, desires of foreign things are not a good freight
(<£cp€lv). Thus the connexion of thought between line 28 and line
30 is close. According to all hitherto proposed interpretations
(criticised in note on 1. 29), the intervening words break this con-
nexion with a frigid commonplace. We may conclude that if the line
is sound 8i*as aWos must bear some further significance than essence of
justice.
Now we saw in Note 2 of this Appendix that in Pindar’s use awros
has frequently the secondary meanings of breath or breeze. The present
passage is another instance. A blast of justice is just the expression
required by the metaphor in the preceding lines. The poet’s soul is
compared to a craft, bearing the Muse and his tale (Ao'yos); its errand is
to praise noble men (the Aeacids and Aristoclides); and it is escorted
by a breeze of justice. Translate: My tale, on its errand to praise noble
men, is escorted by a wind that blows fair. The justice consists in
choosing the Aeacidae for the burden of the hymn, as explained in the
following lines—oIkoOcv p.dr€V€. In aivctv the original dative sense of
the infinitive comes out; cf. Homer, v 33
ao'7rao"ta)5 8* apaTVa) KariSv <f>aos rjeXioio
$6p7TOV C7T0t)(€0’^at.230
APPENDIX A.
But it will be asked, Why should praise of the Aeacidae be called the
perfection of justice ?—for ‘ breeze ’ is only the less usual sense of acoros.
It may be explained as a conclusion from Ataxo's to awros (cf. the
inference from ataiv to aarros in n. 8, 9).
This interpretation secures to the context a connected meaning.
But it is strikingly confirmed by a subsequent passage in the Ode.
The sailing of Achilles to Troy is introduced thus (1. 57 sqq.)—
yovov T€ FoL (jttpTClTOV
drtTaXXev iv appivoccn rravra 0v}xov av£a)v •
o</>pa OaXacrataLS avep-cuv pnrcuai TrepcfrOtLS k.t.X.
These words are remarkable. In the metaphor of the ship, which we
have been considering, the idea of burden or freight was emphasized by
<f>ip€iv (1. 28), <f)€p€iv (1. 30), iroTLcfiopov (1. 31) occurring in rapid succession.
It is more than a coincidence that (friprarov occupies the same position
in the 7 th line of antistrophos y as <(>^p€iv in the 7 th line of strophe ft.
The recurrence of Ovp.6<; in the same connexion shows this. The soul of
Achilles, figuratively, is a ship bearing him to Troy, just as the soul
(0vfW 1. 26) of the poet is a vessel of imagination, which bears the Muse.
And the unique phrase iv appivoicn points this allusion to the ship.
appieva was a vox propria for the rigging or gear of a ship, and could
not fail to suggest a naval metaphor. I suspect that there is a similar
double meaning in Theognis, 1. 69 5 :
ov hvvapai aot, 6vpe, Trapacr^fiv appcva rravra •
rirXaOi* twv Se /caXav ovri crv povvos ipds,
where the juxtaposition of KaXwv and appeva suggests ropes (KaXoi) and
tackle.
Now just as the craft of the poet is wafted by a breeze of justice on its
way, so the craft of Achilles is wafted by sea blasts, OaXacrvLais avipwv
pnralo-i. And the destinations of both voyages are similar,—to kindle
lights of glory.
At Troy Achilles slays Memnon and
rrjXavyls apape cfreyyos Ata/aSav avroOev,
‘ thereby a star of the Aeacidae shineth afar in the firmament/ apape
shows that the <£eyyos is a star. Cf. Aratus, Phaenomena, 453 ovpavw ev
ivaprjpev dya.Xp.ara vvktos iovcrrjs, 482 dprjporos *Hvlo)(olo, etc. And
Aristoclides, who is compared to Achilles, has his constellation too.
1. 83 tlv y€ piv9 tvOpovov KXcoiJs ideXofoas, a€$Xo(j>6 pov Xrjparos
€V€K€V
Nepeas *EmBavpoOtv r aito Kal Mcyapwi' SiSopKev </> a os*APPENDIX A.
231
There is a suggestion in these words of a star shining on a ship whose
burden is the prize of victory. For atQXo^opov Xrj paros is a phrase
intended to recall 7rortyopov kov^ov eXafies (1. 31). The play on Xrjfxa
and XfjfLfJLa would hardly be evident, if it were not more distinctly
suggested in the immediate vicinity of A^aro?; but Pindar has provided
for this. Two lines before ZXafiev aTif/a (81) is used of the eagle, to
whom Achilles, Aristoclides and the poet himself are all likened.
And thus Pindar has indirectly insinuated that his own hymn of
victory has lit the light of fame for Aristoclides.
But the eagle too has some bearing on the words (S<W awros) which
this note is intended to explain. lAa/Sev and pLerap.ai6p.evos in 1. 81
recalling fAa/fo and pdreve in 1. 31 make us bring the two passages into
connexion; and we are reminded that aleros is the omen of the house
of AiaKos. These three words, Ata#cds, aa>ros and aleros are associated
together (just like cua>i/, awros and Alas in Nem. 11.), the link of meaning
being wind or breath; and this note of wind is struck in l<rov avepois
(1. 45) of the flight of an Aeacid’s javelin. The quality of the eagle
which is emphasized is its swiftness,—that in which it resembles wind.
Note 4.
III. 62, ev cj)pa(rl 7ra^aiO' 07T<os.
This expression excites suspicion, because no parallel can be
adduced. But there are other reasons too for regarding the passage
as possibly corrupt. (1) eiripC^ais AlOioireaai x€tya<s *s a solecism.
empiyvovai is used in this sense but not e7npuyvvvai x€^Pas> t° which our
familiarity with the Latin phrase conserere manus unconsciously reconciles
us. (2) The whole sentence may appear rather forced. We are told
that Chiron educated Achilles, to the intent that (o</>pa) he should
withstand the enemy at Troy and having engaged with the Ethiopians
should fix in his mind the resolve to prevent the return of Memnon.
It is certainly a strange way of putting the matter. We should rather
expect the clause of purpose to cease at AapSavwv re, and a new
indicative clause, stating what Achilles did or resolved, to begin at Kal
iyxeo-cfropois	(3) A stronger objection to the whole sentence
may be based on the circumstance that in the extant works of Pindar
there is no other case of oirm or owcos paj in a final clause. This
conjunction occurs only in two other places :
OL X. 57 Kari^pacev—Trevra07rw? apa ecrracrcv koprav.
Erag. 61 ov yap eo-0* 07ra)s ra 0e<3v /3ovAcup,ar ’ kpevvacrzi fipoTca
(f>pevi232
APPENDIX A.
In reply to these objections it may be said that none of them is
conclusive; and it may be urged in support of the text that the strange
form of expression is designedly chosen to emphasize the attribution of
the Fourth Virtue (<f>pov€iv to napKt'ipxvov 1. 75) to Achilles. This has
been noted in the Introduction to the Ode.
Note 5.
IV. 93 otov alvioiv K€ MeXytrcay epcSa (TTp4<l>oi>
prjpjOLTa ttAckcov, airaXauTTOS iv Xoyoj eX/cecy,
pLaXoLKa pikv cppovioiv coAois,
Tpaxys Sc 7ra\tyKorots Ic^cSpos.
The current explanations of this difficult passage cannot be regarded
as satisfactory. It is generally supposed to mean nothing more than a
compliment to Melesias, couched in terms borrowed from the wrestling
school. If this was Pindar’s sole intention, he cannot be congratulated
on his language. i How one would wrestle in a word-contest, if one
were praising Melesias!’—this, if it has any meaning, implies that
Melesias cannot be fitly praised, except in verses of a pugnacious or
controversial character. But why not ? Melesias doubtless had enemies;
but it would surely be feasible to extol Melesias to the skies without
engaging in an encounter with his rivals. Nor is anything gained by
taking Euphanes as the subject of the sentence. The conceit that if
Euphanes were alive again his occupation would consist in fighting the
battles of the trainer Melesias against critics is frigid enough. But if
Pindar had meant this, he would have used very different language; he
would not have used the present tenses alviwv kc o-Tptyoi without some
introductory phrase to indicate that the dead singer was supposed to be
alive. For example, in the first part of this ode the idea of Timocritus
surviving to celebrate his son’s victory is expressed in the clearest
language (et 8* en i6dXTreTo...6dp,a kc kcXcxSt/o-c). A reference to Eu-
phanes here seems to me to be both irrelevant and not countenanced
by the Greek. The subject of atvcW and o-rptyoi is obviously ns,
understood from the preceding sentence.
There is another consideration which seems fatal to the received
view. The language in these last four lines is strikingly forcible; but
if the received view were correct it would be at the same time in-
expressibly weak. For nothing could be weaker than to use this strong
language of a hypothetical case. It is almost as if, after composing
eleven and a half strophes in honour of Timasarchus, the poet added,APPENDIX A.	233
‘ But if I were charged to praise Melesias, then would I put forth my
strength as a wrestler in verse.*
Now Pindar leaves us in no doubt that so far from meaning this he
regards the present hymn as a specimen of his skill in the art of poetic
wrestling. For each of these carefully chosen phrases is intended to
recall some phrase which occurred before. (1) pi^ara 7tXckwv answers
to prjjia in 1. 6, according to the canon of Mezger; and this means that
‘the word’ which is to glorify Timasarchus is an instance of the
wrestler's ‘word-twisting.* (2) There can be no question that lv Xoy<p
refers to the mythical tale, which was the special feature of Pindaric art.
This, as we saw, was the meaning of Xoyov in 1. 31 and Xoyov in 1. 71.
But a danger threatens the teller of such tales. He is tempted to
exceed limits and give the myth an undue proportion. Into this fault
Pindar himself is said to have fallen in his youth, and to have been
warned against it by the counsels of Corinna. We saw that he referred
to the subject in 1. 33 sqq. Professing to be unable to relate the story
of the Aeacids at length, he feels nevertheless that a charm draws him
to touch on it. The attractive power of the myth, to which the poet
must only yield in measure, is expressed by the word cAkw (&ko|uu
1. 35). This explains the second edge of diraXaio-Tos iv X6y<o gXicuv.
In relating a myth Pindar grips his subject, so to speak, and does not
let it grip him. The point turns on the double meaning of lA/cctv, as a
term in wrestling and as a term in magic. (3) poXcucd (<f>pov£u)v iaXols)
is an echo of paXOaicd in 1. 4. And this clearly suggests that the hymn
which is to soothe Timasarchus after his labours is an instance of to
fiaXaKa <l>povctv io-Xois. (4) We shall hardly be wrong in supposing
that	like cXkclv, has a double signification. For otherwise
tyeSpos would have no point, and the simple iraXaio-Tris would be a more
suitable word. It is not fitter to compare a poet to a man who draws a
‘ by,’ than to compare him to one of the paired wrestlers. But there is
fitness in using the technical word if it has a second implication which
is appropriate to the poet and not to the wrestler; and I think it may
be shown that	is used here for the sake of such an implication.
Pindar presented to us a picture of his Lyre weaving a song in honour
of Aegina (1. 45), and I pointed out in the Introduction to the Ode that
this picture is, so to speak, set by the side of another, in which the gods
weave gifts of might for Peleus and his descendants. The prominent
feature in the second picture is the cvkvkXos ZSpa on which the lords of
heaven sat (c^o'/aci/oi). And from this we may supply a defect in the
first (a slighter sketch), and imagine the Phorminx and the poet himself
sitting on a e8pa, as the song is woven. Now &J>c8pos may mean ‘seated234
APPENDIX A.
on' as well as ‘lier-in-wait,’ and this secondary meaning justifies and
explains its use in the passage under consideration. It is clearly an
echo of £8pav (ras) €<f>€£6[i€voi, and suggests the poet seated at the
work of composing his song. This conclusion is strikingly confirmed by
yet another correspondence of words. (5) The song woven by
Phorminx is described thus :
AvSta crvv apfiovla |wXos Trt<f>ikqp.ivov
in the 5th verse of the 6th strophe. It is no accident that McXTjo-i'av
echoes /acXos in the 5 th verse of the last strophe. This //.e'Aos is the
work of the poetical ‘wrestler/ who is none other than Pindar
himself.
We shall now find it less difficult to answer the question: What is
the meaning of aivioiv kc MeXrjalav o-rptyoi ? We have only to remember
that alv€(o does not always imply the praise conveyed by panegyric; it
may also express ‘ the sincerest ’ form of praise—imitation. This is the
force of the word in Isthmian vi. 32 /Aa^ardv aivccov McXcaypov, aiveW
Sc K(ii'fEKTopa, where it differs little from ^Xam And this signification
admirably suits the present passage. Pindar represents himself as
imitating in his own art Melesias the master of another science. Pindar
is the wrestling poet; Melesias is the wrestler with a poetic name.
4 What a master in words would he be who should excel in poetry as
Melesias excels in wrestling !’—this is, in effect, what Pindar says; but
he uses words which show that he meant to compare himself to Melesias,
and to designate this hymn as a specimen of poetic wrestling, not
without a glance at his rivals.
It is hardly necessary to refer to the explanation of olov in the sense
‘for instance.’ There is no idea in the last four lines, however
interpreted, which can be regarded as an ‘ instance ’ of the preceding
idea.
Note 6. Lampon (Nemean v.).
In Herodotus (Book ix. c. 78) we read of a certain Aeginetan,
Lampon the son of Pytheas, who proposed to Pausanias that Mardonius
should be impaled. It is clear that this Lampon (whom Herodotus
calls Afyiv^TcW ra Trp&To) was a member of the same family as the
Lampon of whom we read in Pindar. For the father of Herodotus’
Lampon had the same name as one of the sons of Pindar’s Lampon—
Pytheas; and this can hardly be considered accidental. But Muller
went much too far when he proposed to identify the two Lampons.
The father of Pytheas and Phylacidas was the son of Cleonicus (Isth. iv.APPENDIX A.
235
55, v. 16), and it is quite gratuitous to suppose either that Cleonicus and
Pytheas were the same person or that Cleonicus was Lampon’s true
father and Pytheas his father by adoption. The only conclusion that
we are entitled to draw is that the two Lampons belonged to the same
Trarpa, namely that of the Psalychiadae, as we learn from Isth. v. 63.
At the utmost we might venture to suppose with Mr Fennell that the
Lampons were first cousins, called after their common grandfather.
See Mr Fennell's judicious remarks in his Introduction to Nemea v.
Note 7. vi. 64 sqq.
The Introduction and Commentary on the Sixth Nemean had been
finally printed, when I discovered, as I believe, the solution of a problem,
which had hitherto baffled me, in connexion with that Ode. This
solution, which I offer here, throws light simultaneously on some minor
difficulties, and I must request the reader to supplement the explana-
tions given in the Commentary by this additional note.
The chief difficulty is the abruptness of the last three lines of the
Ode, which seem to have no connexion with the remainder of the
composition. Melesias was the trainer of Pytheas, and of course it
was strictly appropriate to pay the trainer a compliment. But the
introduction of this compliment as an appendix, in three lines whose
absence would not detract from the artistic effect of the hymn, cannot
be regarded as happy, and is certainly not in the manner of Pindar.
In the Fourth Nemean Melesias was likewise referred to in the
concluding verses, but we saw how this reference was carefully woven
into the fibre of the whole work (above Note 5).
Our doubts increase when we consider the form which the compli-
ment to Melesias assumes. The trainer in wrestling is compared to a
dolphin for swiftness. This simile may indeed be illustrated by the
word	which Lucian uses to express ducking in wrestling. But
still, if Pindar merely wanted a poetical image to express the qualities
of a consummate wrestler, his choice of a dolphin cannot be regarded as
specially appropriate. Perhaps we may conclude that the dolphin was
intended to suggest something more than the swift movements of a
wrestler’s limbs.
Now the two things for which the dolphin was chiefly noted were its
swiftness1 and its love for music, exemplified in the story of Arion. The
1 Compare also Pyth. II. 51 debs 0a-	234 irapcL vavv 5’ idtiei rax^ra 8e\<pls.
Xaaaaiov Trapa/xeL^eraL deXcphfa, and Frag.236
APPENDIX A.
second quality is thus mentioned in a remarkable fragment of Pindar
(235):
oXlov 8* epeOi^Oficu	viroKpuriv'
rov pXv a*Kvp,ovos iv ttovtov 7reXayct
avXwi/ tKLvrjf iparov /xeXos.
It may be shown, I think, that the characteristic of the mythical
dolphin determined Pindar to employ the image now under con-
sideration. He regards the wrestler as playing the dolphin to his own
Arion; and the name Melesias (/xeAos) lent itself to the suggestion. The
poet comes
Kal cwtos €X<j)v pLeXirav (1. 54)>
—a strange phrase which arrests the attention,—and the /xeXera is for
the benefit of wrestlers typified by McX^crias. For if Melesias is a
dolphin, it follows that the wrestlers whom he trains to excellence, are
as dolphins too.
In support of this explanation there are several points to be urged
(besides the fact that it solves the difficulty).
(1)	It has been pointed out that in the Fourth Nemean there is a
similar play on the name of the Aeginetan trainer (MtXrjaCav in 1. 93
responding to /xe'Aos in 1. 44).
(2)	If pakirav (1. 54) is intended to prepare for the allusion in
McXr/o-ta?, the introduction of the metaphor Yrom the ship in 11. 55, 56
is explained. For this metaphor requires some explanation. It
interrupts the metaphor of the 0809 a/xa^tros, and it was difficult to see
for what purpose it was introduced. But if we recognise that it antici-
pates the simile of the S€A<£u/i St’ a\p.a<s, the whole passage begins to
become intelligible. Pindar stands in the ship (like Arion) with his
/xcXcra, and the dolphins are in the circumfluent waves, which beat
against the vessel (1. 56).
(3)	The expression sacred games occurs more than once in Pindar.
As it was an ordinary term, which required no apology or explanation,
one is rather surprised at the strange form of expression in 1. 59
aytoj/cov, rovs ivejroiviv iepovs.
Why ‘games which men describe as sacred’? Why not aywvwv Uptav?
Unless Pindar intended to draw special attention to the epithet sacred\
the words tovs Iveirounv are an objectionable superfluity. There must
have been some purpose in introducing Upovs with such emphatic
formality. I believe that this purpose is closely connected with the
simile of the dolphin. It is worthy of observation that an extantAPPENDIX A.	237
fragment of a lost Isthmian Ode (Frag. 1) compares the Aeginetans to
dolphins and connects this comparison closely with song and games.
0T01 S’ dperav
8e\(fnves iv 7tovtio Tapiai t€ aro<f>di
Moarav ayamW r* acOXiav.
These words are an excellent commentary on the passage before us.
In both places, Aeginetans are compared to dolphins; in both places
(according to my interpretation) the dolphins are associated with aywvcs
and with song. Now the dolphin was sacred to Dionysus, and in this
circumstance may be found the explanation of that puzzling Homeric
expression lepos IxOvs, which should be taken as meaning the dolphin and
not a fish in general. This consideration seems to explain the purpose
of Pindar’s carefully chosen words. As the aXpa is the leaping ground
(Pindar probably connected it with aAAo/xai rather than with aXs) of
the sacred fish, so the sacred games are the element of the human
dolphins. And the association between the dolphin and the sacred
games is rendered unmistakable by a verbal echo, if my restoration of
1. 65 be correct; (nroipi echoes Ivkiroiviv. ‘Men call those games
sacred; and so it is not unfitting that I should call Melesias a dolphin
(the sacred fish).’
But we may go yet further. The simile is woven still more deeply
into the texture of the hymn. In 1. 28 we read of the ovpos eirecov, and
in 1. 29 how songs and tales ‘ waft home ’ (iKopurav) the fair exploits of
the Bassidae, and in 1. 31 of the ships which they have chartered. Now
the word eKopiaav does not receive its due until we recognise that it
means gathering home to the storehouse of the Bassids,—their storehouse of
victories. This is suggested by the notable expression in the pre-
ceding lines
€TepOV OV TLVa fdlKOV airtc^dvaTO 7n»y/xa^ta ttAcowdv
rap.tav OT€<£dva>v.
Here is a remarkable coincidence, if it be nothing more. The
Bassid house is called a Tapias orrc^dvcov, in the immediate context of
a metaphor from the sea; and the Bassid wrestlers are afterwards
(through Melesias) likened to dolphins. In the Fragment of an
Isthmian Ode, cited above, the Aeginetans are called raptai dyamW
dkOXvv, and compared to dolphins in the same breath. Are we entitled
to infer that there is some link of connexion between the simile of the
dolphin and ‘the house dispenser of crowns’? If any such connexion
exists, it must lie in some technical use of rapias in dithyrambic worship
or the mysteries of Dionysus. It is at least worth recalling that the god238
APPENDIX A.
with whom dolphins were specially associated is described in the well-
known choral song in the Antigone by the mysterious title tov raptav
*IakXov (1. 1154).
There are, I believe, similar allusions to the worship of Dionysus in
Isthmian v., and they may be briefly indicated here. That Ode opens
with a simile from the wine-bowl:
0aXXovros avSpwv tog ore cvpirocriov
Sevrepov Kparrjpa M01<7<U<0V pe\c<ov
Kipvapev k.t.X.
In 1. 9 we read <nrevheiv peXufiOoyyoig doiSatg, in 1. 40 oIvoBokov
<£<aXav, in 1. 64 apSovTt KaWfora Spocrtp. In 1. 73 the strange simile of
the Naxian whetstone was chosen, I believe, with the special purpose of
alluding to the Naxian god. But the phrase which concerns us at
present is that which occurs in 1. 57:
&v\aKL$a yap rjXOov, <0 Moto’a, rap,tag
Uv6ea re k<o/x<ov.
The felicity of this phrase lies, I would suggest, in its harmony with the
Dionysiac undercurrent which runs through the Ode.
Note 8. ix. 17, 18.
Since the note on 1. 17 was printed, the difficulty in the text has
been discussed by Mr W. R. Hardie, of Balliol College, in the Classical
Review (June 1890, p. 269) \ He holds with Kayser that e<r<rav peyicrroi
is right, and that the lacuna is in 1. 18. In the mss. a new line begins
with eTrrairvkovg, and Kayser reads
K<U 7TOT es
iirraTrvkovg eOeXov k.t.X.
Mr Hardie compromises. He leaves #cat irore in 1. 17, but carries
on €5 to 1. 18, and proposes two alternative readings :
or
(-ag as in Hesiod).
KOU 7TOT6
Xe/crov eg eirrairoXovg &ij/3ag,
Kat 7tore
@77flag eg eTTrairuXovg Xcktojv
The introduction of XcktoV (Xcktwv) was suggested
1 It is satisfactory to me to observe coincides with mine,
that Mr Hardie’s view (ib.) of x. 61APPENDIX A.	239
by E. Schmid’s lirrairuXov? Kpirov i? ®y/3a? and Beck’s eirrairvXov?
®y/3a? XeKTWV.
The first conjecture of Mr Hardie may be right, though there is
nothing to confirm it, and the cause of the omission of XeKrov is not
apparent1. But I find it difficult to believe that «rcrav (mss. yo-av)
/xcyto-Toi is genuine.
Note 9.
X. 2	<j>Xeyerai 8* dperaT?
fjLVpiais epyoiv Opaxremv evetcev.
Besides the meaning which it usually bears, apery is occasionally,
though rarely, found in the sense pvypiy irtpl apery?. A passage in
Plato’s Symposion excellently illustrates this usage.
208 D : eirei otet (Tv, e<j>y9 *AXktjcttlv virep *A$p.yrov diroOaveiv dv9 y
'A^iXXea UarpoKXw evawoOaveiv rj •jrpoaTroOave'iv rov vpierepov KoBpov virep
ry? flaariXeia? rcSv 7ratSwi/, jay olojaevov? dOavarov p,vyp.yv apery? irep 1
eavrSv eaecrOaL rjv vvv yfieu? eyopiev; iroXXov ye Set, e<j>y9 aAA* ot/xat virep
apery? dOavarov /cat roiavry? Bo$y? evicXcov? iravre? iravra itolov(tlv k.t.X.
Here apery? bears in the answer the same meaning that p.vyp.yv
apery? irepL bears in the question. But it is well worthy of note that
both here and in the other passage where this meaning is most clearly
marked, Philoctetes 1420, apery is accompanied by the same epithet.
Heracles says dOavarov dperyv ccr^ov, cos irapeerO* opaiv,—I won immortal
quality. These two passages suggest that this expression apery aOd-
vato? is the link connecting the usual sense of apery with that which
belongs to it in the line of Pindar quoted above. In apery aOdvaro?
the word may be said to preserve still its proper force (excellent
quality), but it is on the road to a new meaning. apera9 memorial of
excellence in Pindar, is, I am inclined to believe, the apery dOdvaro?
clipped. Thus aperai? pivpCai? are countless monuments, which im-
mortalise the glories of Argos.
There is another passage in Pindar which supports this explanation.
In Isth. iv. 17 we read
rlv 8’ ev ’Icr0/A(3 8nr Xo'a OaXXoicr apera9
<&vXaKL$a9 Kelrai Nep.ea Be Kal irpeirei
TYvOea re irayKpariov.
Here OaXAour opera seems to be a resetting of the phrase aOdvaro?
1 If I were convinced that 1. 17 ended prefer irp&aaere to irpdffaerai in 1. 3.
with icat 7rore I should be inclined to240
APPENDIX A.
apera. We may remember how OaXepos is used of the eternal youth
and beauty of the gods, and we may compare such passages as Isth.
III. 6 7rXaytais 8e <f)pev€(r(Tiv ov\ ofuos Travra \povov 6dXXu)v dpuXei,
and 22 (iV. 4) dip eras—aicri KAccovv/u&u OclXXovtcs aiet. We find
OaXXuv in conjunction with apcra also in 01. ix. 16, 0aAAei S’ apcrauriv
(rj ’Oirovs).
In any case, however dipemj acquired its secondary meaning, it is
clear that it might be applied as fitly to a monument in stone or bronze,
as to a record in writing or to fame in the mouths of men.
Note 10.
XI. 48, o£vT€pai.
Mr Postgate has kindly allowed me to print the following note,
which however does not coincide with my own view.
‘ oi-vTcpai means “ passing fierce.” The comparative here approxi-
mates to a superlative. To understand this, it must be remembered
that the comparative simply asserts that something possesses a quality
in a greater degree than other things. So the extent to which this
quality is possessed will manifestly depend on the number of these
other things, o^urcpos iravT<dv, iroXX&v, mW denote very different
degrees of ‘‘keenness.” Hence the comparative, besides its proper use
for the comparison of two things, has two absolute uses, one (a) “intensi-
fying,” and the other (b) “qualifying.” The context, of course, must decide
which is to be taken, (a) is the use here: so also in the well-known
meaning of vcwrcpos “ out of the common,” whence vewrept&iv, although
this may be a euphemistic use. It is clear where a negative is added ;
ov x^pov “ not very bad ” &c.; though, had the negative been actually
compounded with the adjective, the meaning of the comparative would
have been “somewhat.” Compare Plato Thecet. 177 ovk a^Scorrqoa
XiycLv (nearly = rjSvTepa). A good example of (b) is Herod. 11. 18, rrjv 8c
Aipvrjv t$p,€v ipvOporeprjv T€ yrjv Kal V7ro\f/apip.OT4prjv rrjv 8c 'Apafilrjv
re Kal 'Zvpirjv dpyiX(j>&€CTT€pr]v re Kal v-nwerpov iovaav, “reddish,
...inclining to sand” &c. as is shown by v7^o7^€T/oos.,APPENDIX B.
THE GRACES IN PINDAR.
The poems of Pindar ‘burn bright,’ to use an expression of his own,
with the presence of the Graces. Xapis may sometimes be translated
the spirit of art, but the sphere of the Charites was wider and cannot be
better defined than Pindar has defined it himself:
crvv v/ifuv
ra T€pirvdi re kclI yXvKea
dvareXXeraL irdvra ftporois,
Kel cro<f>6s, el koAos, et rts ayAaos awqp.
It was natural that they should be the sovran ladies in a world of art,
which was conversant mainly with ‘the delightful things in Hellas’;
and I propose to show here that in all his epinician hymns, except
three (possibly only one) of very small compass, Pindar either mentions
the Graces or alludes to their influence.
Nemean Odes.
I.	X<*pw 1. 6 (see note); ayXaiav 1. 13; 0aAos 1. 2; flaAcpos 1. 71.
Thus the presence of the Charites and especially of Aglaia and Thalia
is suggested1.
II.	In this short Ode there is no mention of the Graces nor even
an allusion to them. (But see below p. 244.)
III.	xapUvro. 1. 12; x°^P€	76; dy\aai(TL 1. 69; aykaoKpavov 1. 56;
ayaXpia 1. 13.
1 It is worth observing that the as- Xeirra re Kal x*pkrra Kal ay\aa tpya.
sociation of the words xaP^€ls an(l dy\aos In Homer %aplevTa Zpya means works
is as old as Homer: cf. k 223	of art, cf. £ 234.
£.
l6242
APPENDIX P.
IV.	The XapiTcs are mentioned in 1. 7; and the note of the hymn
is €v<f>pocrvvcL 1.1; but the other sisters are also alluded to in ayXaov 1. 20,
and Od\rj(r€ 1. 88.
V.	This Ode concludes with the words <rvv £av0cus Xdp«r<riv. Aglaia
is suggested byaydA/mra 1. 1, and aydAAa 1. 43; Euphrosyne bycv^povcs
1. 38. Cf. xaipa) 1. 46.
VI.	The XaptT€? appear in 1. 37 (Xapirtov o/xdSu> c^Aeyev).
VII.	X°LPLV k 75; X<^PPLa k 844 ayXaoyviov l. 4; cvc^pojv 1. 67*
Charis, Aglaia, and Euphrosyne are thus suggested.
VIII.	In this hymn we have only dyaAp,a (1. 16) to suggest Aglaia.
But the very name of the clan to which the victor belonged, Xdpia&u,
might be considered a gracious one; and Tlpa 7rorna, who is invoked
in the opening lines, was a being of kindred to the Graces. Cf. also
^atpco 1. 48.
IX.	The XdpiTcs are confederate with the poet (1. 54) and Aglaia is
honoured by dyXaiaurLv in 1. 31.
X.	In this hymn the Graces are prepotent In 1. 1 they are
invoked, Xdpircs, and in 1. 38 their name recurs XapiVco-o-t. x^PLV k 3°*
Aglaia is suggested by dyXaoOpovw 1. 1; Thalia by OaXrnrev, 1. 42 and
OaXciav 1. 53.
XI.	This work is not an epinician, but Aglaia is not forgotten in it;
cf. ayXaw 1. 4, ayAam 1. 20.
Isthmian Odes.
I.	xaP^TOiV k 6; xa^P€T€ k 32*
II.	xaP^Te(TcrLV dpapws 1. 19. ayAaiav, 1. 18.
III.	ayavaTs xaP*T€cr<rw'k 8. OaXXcov 1. 6. €V(f>po<rvvav 1. 10.
IIP. €7rtcrrd^o)v x^Plv k 9° (72) j X°^P0V k 47 (29)* ^aAAovres 1. 22 (4).
IV.	crvv Xapuriv 1. 21; xdppa k 54* OaXXoiara 1. 17.
V.	XapiTajv 1. 63; aScta x^pis k 5°i XaP€1,5 k 10. ^aAAovTo? 1. I.
VI.	k 17. OaXos 1. 24. €v<f>pava$ 1. 3.
VII.	Xaptrajv aayrov 1. 16. ayAaov 1. 3, ayAaos 1. 27.APPENDIX B.
243
Olympian Odes.
I. Xapi% 1. 31. ayXa'i^crai 1. 14; ayXaorpiaivai/1. 41 } ayXaauri 1. 943
ayaXXwv 1. 89.	€v<f>poarvvas 1. 60.
II. kolvcu XdpLTes 1. 55; XaPtv ^ 11 > X&P1* ^ I9> XaPft<*Ta)V !• 21;
€\aipov 1. 72. ayXatov 1. 80. 0aXo$ 1. 49. ev</>p<ov 1. 16; ev<f>pova 1. 40.
TrapctXveL 8v<r<j>povav 1. 57.
III.	x(*PfJLaTa 1* io9* ayXaoKCDftov 1. 5. l^aXXcv 1. 23.
IV.	Xapiiw 1. 10; xatP0VTa !• x3* tvcfrpaiv 1. II.
V.	No mention or allusion.
VI.	Xapis 1. 76. $aXos 1. 68. ^iXo^pocrwais evrjpaTois (1. 98)
suggests Euphrosyne.
VII.	Xapis ^uiOaXfJuos 1. 11; xap'lT€Cr<riv 1. 93; x®Vuv 1* 5> X^PPara
1. 44. OaXtas 1. 94. ev<f>pova 1. 63.
VIII.	XcV)tI' 1* 8°; X^P**' ^ 8. dyXadv 1. II.
IX.	Xapnw 1. 27. dyXaiaicriv 1. 98; ayXadSevSpov 1. 20. OaXXei
1. 16. €v<f>pdvOrj 1. 62.
X.	xaVtv i* 12; x^PLV ^ x7 j XC*’PLV 1* 94 i X^PPa !• 22« OaXCaiq
1.76.
XI.	No mention or allusion.
XII.	No mention or allusion.
XIII.	x(*'PLT€(> 1* 19* ayXatav 1. 14; ayXaoKovpov 1. 4; ayXaodpdvois
1. 96.
XIV.	This hymn is addressed to the Graces. Xapircs 1. 4; Xaptrcov
1. 8. Their names are mentioned 1. 13:
<3 7T0TVL ’AyXcua cfnXrjaLpLoX7T€ r Hjixfypoavva
®aXia r€
€pOL(T tp.oA,7T€.
Also ayXaos 1. 7.
Pythian Odes.
I.	X®PiS 1- 33; X®Ptv 76; X^PP^ 59- ayXaia? 1. 2. OaXiaus
1. 38.
II.	Xapnw 1. 42; xaPts 1- 17; x^P*1' !• 70; xa^P€ 1. 67.
l6—2APPENDIX B.
244
III.	SiSv/xas xupi™* 1* 72;	95* ev<£poowas 1. 98.
IV.	xapLT*s 1* 275; \alpuv 1. 61. aykaot 1. 82. OakAu 1. 65.
€v<f>po<rvvav 1. 129; €v<£pora 1. 196.
V.	rjvKopoi XapiT€$ 1. 45; x(*-PLV ^ 102 j pckos xaP*€V ^ 107* aykatov
1.52.
VI.	XapiTCOV 1. 2. ayXaiav 1. 46.
VII.	x^P** TL1* *6. fldXXoicrav 1. 21.
VIII.	Xaptrcov 1. 2i; X(*'PLV ^ &6; XaPP^TOiV ^ 64; xaW(i)V 8c icat
auTos 1. 56. fjnk6<l>pov * Aouita 1. I.
IX.	XaptTccro't 1. 3; Xaptrwv 1. 89; x^PPa 1* 64. Oakkourav 1. 8 •
tvOaket 1. 72. €V(f>pwv 1. 73; €v<f>pavOei(ra 1. 16.
X.	X®PIV 64; xa'LP€i 1* 36. ayXaiats 1. 28. Oaklais 1. 34. evcfrpo-
va>$ 1. 40.
XI.	x^Ptv 1. 58; x®Ptv !• I2* reOakora 1. 53. tvcj>po<rvva 1. 45.
XII.	XaptTcov 1. 26. <^iXayXac 1. I.
Thus Pindar in all the odes in which he does not pay a direct
tribute to the Graces, makes us aware that the air is permeated by a
literally ‘ gracious ’ influence. There are four exceptions; but of these
it is possible that one is only apparent, as there are grave reasons for
suspecting that the Fifth Olympian is not a work of Pindar. The
Eleventh and Twelfth Olympians and the Second Nemean are such
short hymns that they cannot fairly be said to invalidate my generalisa-
tion. And even of these exceptions two may be only apparent. In the
Second Nemean, in honour of an Athenian victor, Pindar may have
considered that he had done due homage to Charis, by using a verb
(de£a 1. 13) which the Athenian Grace Av£oj might take to herself. The
Twelfth Olympian, consisting of a single system, is possibly only a
fragment of a longer ode; on me, certainly, it has always produced the
impression of incompleteness. If it is a fragment, I have no doubt that
the Graces were mentioned or alluded to in the lost part.APPENDIX C.
PINDAR’S VISIT TO SICILY.
In connexion with the dates of the two odes to Chromius,
Nemean i. and Nemean ix., the question arises as to the chronology
of Pindar’s visit to Sicily. On this point no direct statement of any
ancient writer has been preserved to us. The work of Antiochus,
where there was some notice, no doubt, of the Theban poet’s presence
at the court of the Syracusan sovran, is lost, and Diodorus does not
help us. From the Lives of Pindar we only learn the fact that Pindar
was at the court of Hiero. Boeckh and Dissen however have approxi-
mately determined from internal evidence the time of Pindar’s departure
for Sicily. The reasoning is based on data furnished by Pythian hi.
and Olympian i.
Pythian hi. celebrates victories won by Hiero’s horse Pherenikos.
This horse won two victories at Delphi, according to a scholium on
Pyth. hi. (Dissen’s ed. of Boeckh, n. p. 327), which gives us the dates
01. 73, 3 and 01. 74, 3. But the ode was composed much later, not
only after the accession of Hiero to the sovranty of Syracuse (01. 75,3)
but after the foundation of Aetna (01. 76, 1), cf. 1. 69. As it must
have been written for an anniversary of the victories, we get as the
earliest possible date 01. 76, 3 (474). But in this year Hiero was
proclaimed victor in the Pythian chariot race (which Pindar soon after-
wards celebrated in the First Pythian ode), and as there is no allusion
to this brilliant success, it would seem that Pythian in. was written
and dispatched to Sicily shortly before the celebration of the games
at Delphi in 01. 76, 3 (i.e. July or August 474), so as to be sung at
Syracuse or Aetna on the day of commemoration.
Now when Pindar wrote this ode it is clear that he was in Thebes,
not in Sicily. This follows from 1. 68 sqq.:246
APPENDIX C.
kox K€V iv vavcriv fioXov 'lovtav rifjivwv OaXacraav
' ApWovcrav hri Kpavav Trap Airvaiov £evov
*******
76 i&KojuLdv k€ /3a9vv ttovtov irepdxrais.
Hence Pindar did not go to Sicily before the summer of 474.
The First Olympian celebrates a victory won by the same horse at
Olympia in Ol. 77 (July or August), 472 b.c. If it could be proved
that Pindar was in Sicily when this ode was written, it is clear that
we could fix the time of his going there between the limits of summer
474 and summer or autumn 472. Boeckh and Dissen infer from
11. 8—11 and 1. 16 that Pindar was then with Hiero.
8 oOev 6 iroXv<l>aTos vp.vos dpufiifiaXXtTai
<jo<f)U)V firyri€0’<n9 KeXafteiv
Kpovov TratS* h dcjtvedv iKopcvovs
pjXKOLlpaV *16/30)vos cortav.
16 ota 7ratfo/x,€v <f>iXav
avSp€S dpLcfn 9ap.d rpaire^av.
It cannot be denied that these verses go very near to proving that
Pindar was in Sicily when he wrote them, ola naltpiLcv are hardly the
words of a man who had not yet been on a visit to Hiero. They are
not quite as clear perhaps as cguc6p.av kc in the Third Pythian; but I
think we cannot fairly get out of Boeckh’s conclusion.
The going of Pindar to the west is thus narrowed down to the limits
of two years. We can hardly compress the limits more with anything
like certainty. If the chariot of Chromius was victorious at Nemea in
01. 76, 4 (July 473), and if the First Nemean ode was composed
immediately when the news reached Chromius, then it follows that
Pindar went to Sicily between summer 474 and summer 473. But
(1) Boeckh^ view assigning Nemean 1. to 01. 76, 4 is not certain, for
the victory might have been gained in summer of 471 (beginning of
01. 77, 2), or (2) the ode might have been written for performance
on an anniversary of the original victory.
In any case Nemean 1. was written either when Pindar was still
in Sicily, or after his visit. This follows from 1. 19 corav k.t.X. The
past tense rather suggests that he was not actually present at the
performance of the hymn, and is referring to previous hospitality
afforded to him by Chromius. But it does not follow that he was
not in Sicily at the time. I feel pretty certain that Boeckh, Dissen,
Mezger and most Pindaric commentators are right in teaching that
the Sicyonian ode to Chromius is later than the Nemean; thoughAPPENDIX C.
24 7
it is assuredly odd that in the hymn on the lesser victoiy at the
games of Apollo, no reference is made to the greater victory at the
games of Zeus. But it is by no means clear in what part of Greece,
proper or improper, Pindar was, when the Sicyonian ode was written.
It is generally assumed that he was still in Sicily, and present at the
festivities, which he encourages in the last strophes. But there is not a
word which really supports the assumption, and I own that the first
lines of the ode seem to me to suggest, if they suggest anything, that
they were written out of Sicily.
We can determine then approximately the date of Pindar’s going to
Sicily, but for the date of his return we cannot get anything nearer than
the likelihood that it took place before 01. 78, 1. For that year is
probably, though not certainly, the date of Olympian vi., which was not
written in Sicily (the other possible date being 01. 76, 1).
Perhaps this is all one is strictly entitled to say. The interpretation
however which I have given of Nemean 1. suggests a conjectural restora-
tion of the chronology. I have pointed out that Pindar holds out to
Chromius the prospect of an Olympian victory. This suggests that
Boeckh’s date is right, that the Nemean wreath was won in 473 and
that Chromius intended to compete for the Olympian olive in 472. If
he did actually take part in the chariot race then, he and his horses
were not as lucky as his sovran Hiero and the famous steed Pherenikos
at the same festival. A few years later, perhaps when Pindar has
returned to Greece, he is asked by Chromius, then installed at Aetna,
to celebrate a victory gained years ago at Sicyon. The poet writes
now in a different strain, no longer making allusions to a possible
Olympian victory, but speaking* as if the active career of Chromius
were well-nigh over.
There is one thing about these two hymns to Chromius which has
always struck me as strange. That is the absence of all reference
to Hiero. This silence stands in marked contrast with the Sixth
Olympian hymn to Agesias, where the poet takes the opportunity to
sing the praises of the Syracusan sovran. But we shall doubtless be
in a better position to judge of the politics of Syracuse and Aetna, and
the relations of Hiero and Dinomenes to Chromius when Mr Freeman’s
work on Sicily appears.APPENDIX D.
ORIGIN OF THE GREAT GAMES.
It has always been recognised as a patent fact that the great
games celebrated at Olympia, at Pytho, at Nemea and on the Isthmus,
were a most important bond of unity between Greek-speaking peoples.
But it has not been recognised that these Panhellenic festivals were
only an outcome of a fact more general still. In order to explain
this, it will be necessary to search for the origin of these festivals in the
obscurity of early Greek history. The clue to the ramifying history of
the centuries preceding the Persian War has always appeared to me to
be the struggle towards a Hellenic unity, which, politically at least,
was never destined to be realized. It was found impossible to blend
thoroughly the Ionian dX«<£a and the Dorian ofos; or, in the metaphor
of a recent German writer, the Ionian horse and the Dorian ox would
not pull together. Yet the sum of Greek history was a series of attempts
to solve this insoluble problem, and sometimes the solution seemed not
far off. Delphic influence was exerted in this Panhellenic direction,
and the Delphic amphictyony did important work in promoting the
unity of Hellas.
But besides the religious authority of Delphi, there was another
power that represented the spirit of Panhellenism and furthered its
cause. This power was the Tupawk. Greece owed to the great
tyrants of the seventh and sixth centuries far more than she confessed
or knew. The despots, doubtless, were not fully conscious of the great
historical meaning of their policy, even as Sparta was not conscious of
the significance of hers. But as Sparta represented the principle of
narrow provincial isolation, the despots were essentially the champions
of a wide and expansive Hellenedom. This, I conceive, and not
any minor differences as to the best form of political constitutions—
was the deepest cause of the eternal feud between Lacedaemon and
the tyrannts. The work of the tyrants was to tame the Dorian ox;APPENDIX D.
249
and Sparta, herself untamable, tried to hinder the accomplishment of
such bold designs. It is well-known that the commercial and social
intercourse of Greek nations was encouraged and promoted under the
rule of the tyrants, in Hellas proper as well as in Hellas beyond the
seas, and that the courts of the despots were centres of Hellenic culture.
But one work of the tyrannis, a work of the highest importance for the
history of Greece, has not been recognized as such. I refer to the
founding of the Panhellenic Games.
The foundations of three of the great agonistic festivals are generally
admitted to fall in the early part of the sixth century.
(1)	The Pythian aywv	was inaugurated by the Amphi-
ctyons in 586 after the conclusion of the Sacred War1. But the chief
promoter of this inauguration was Clisthenes, the tyrant of Sicyon, who
had been one of the leaders in the conquest of Cirrha. It was through
his influence2 that the Amphictyons decided to introduce at Delphi
gymnic and curule games in honour of Apollo on the model of those
which were celebrated at Olympia in honour of Zeus. The feast took
place at the beginning of the 3rd year of each Olympiad, that is in the
late summer of every even year (b.c.) which is not divisible by 4 (586,
582 &c.). The prize was a wreath of laurel.
(2)	About the same time the Isthmia were founded by Periander,
the tyrant of Corinth. A panegyric in honour of Poseidon and some
local games, doubtless, existed already, but this provincial festivity was
now exalted by the great despot into an aya>v crre^avtV^s, which was
celebrated in April every second and fourth Olympiad (every even year
b.c. 586, 584, sqq.3). The victors were rewarded by wreaths of dry
parsley. Both Eusebius and Jerome testify that the Pythia and Isthmia
began in the same year. If this statement is correct the games of
Corinth were a few months older than the games of Pytbo. Duncker,
however, who places the first Pythias in 590, assigns the foundation of
the Isthmian Games to 587. He thinks that Periander owed the idea
to Clisthenes. ‘ Was Periander,’ he asks, ‘ to remain behind the neigh-
1	The Pythia were renewed after the
war in 590, but the addition of curule and
gymnic contests was not made until 586,
which is rightly called by Pausanias the
first Pythias. It seems however that the
aycov did not become ffTetpavlrrji until 582
(in which year Clisthenes was victor in
the chariot race). In 586 it was still an
ayuv xpV/JLaT<-Tr)s‘
2	This is amply admitted by Duncker,
History of Greece (Eng. Tr.) 11. 369,
37°*
3	More precisely (Schomann, Gr. Al-
terthiimer, 11. 69) ‘auf der Grenzscheide
zwischen dem vierten und ersten wie
zwischen dem zweiten und dritten Olym-
piadenjahre begangen, so dass es bald
in den letzten bald in den ersten Monat
des Olympiadenjahres fiel.’—The Eleans
were excluded from the Isthmia.250
APPENDIX D.
bouring king of so small a town as Sicyon1?’ I cordially concur with
Duncker’s view (at which indeed I had arrived independently), that
Periander2 inaugurated the Isthmia, but I am not sure that he is right
in assigning the priority to the Sicyonian tyrant He is certainly not
right in fixing the date of the first Isthmia as 587. This dating seems
due to a miscalculation. The end of 587 and the beginning of 586
belong to the same Olympiad, 48, 2; and if Duncker had named
01. 48, 2 as the date, he would have been right, for this would have
implied April 586. If we regard 586 as the first Pythias, we must
conclude that the first Isthmias was nearly four months older \ and, in
any case, the Isthmia as an aya>v crrc^avtT^s were older than the Pythia.
We can hardly, I think, draw any definite conclusion from the official
order of the games, in which the Pythia came second, the Isthmia
third; for this may have been due to the circumstance that the Pythia
like the Olympia were a pentaeteris. And against this we have to place
the tradition that the Isthmia were even older than the Olympia. Grote
thought that the foundation of the Isthmia must be placed before 594
b.c., because it is recorded that Solon instituted valuable rewards for
Athenians who should win victories at Olympia or on the Isthmus.
But any date before 580 is compatible with this circumstance. In the
same connexion it is to be observed that the Athenians had a share
in the Isthmian sacrifice. Theseus was supposed to have taken part
in the legendary foundation of the Isthmia.
(3) The first Nemead fell in 573 (01. 51, 4). The circumstances
of this inauguration can only be inferred indirectly. The agonothesia
or administration of these games was vested in the citizens of Cleonae.
But we cannot ascribe the transformation of local games, which may
have been celebrated in the vale of the lion, to the sole, unaided energy
of that little city, which never possessed independent political impor-
tance, at least since the days before Phidon. Now we know that
during the reign of Clisthenes, Cleonae was made subject to Sicyon; on
this fact, vouched for by Plutarch, Curtius has rightly insisted3. We
know also that Cleonae must have thrown off the yoke of Sicyon before
the death of Clisthenes, which probably took place about 565. For
Clisthenes would never have consented to the inauguration of the
Nemean festival, supposed to have been founded by Adrastus, the
hero whose memory he had treated with such marked contumely at
Sicyon. The natural conclusion is that Cleonae celebrated her de-
liverance from the rule of Sicyon by inaugurating the Nemean aywv.
1 11. 370.	ascertained—585.
2 The date of Periander’s death is well	3 Curtius, Griechische Gesckickte, i5.658.APPENDIX D.
251
There was thus a certain element of truth in the theory of Hermann
(accepted by Curtius) that the Nemea were instituted in memory of the
fall of the Orthagorids. The fall of the Orthagorids had not yet taken
place, but an event had happened which marked the decline of the
Orthagorid power; and this event led to the institution of the Nemea in
573. But in rebelling against Sicyon and in founding the new games,
Cleonae must clearly have been aided by some state stronger than
herself. This state can only have been Argos, to which she had been
formerly subject, in the days of Phidon, the despot. Argos and Sicyon
were rivals. The power of Argos had waned since the death of Phidon;
the power of Sicyon had waxed under the rule of Clisthenes. This
tyrant had shown his hatred for the Dorian spirit rudely enough in his
renaming of the Dorian tribes, and for Argos especially by his treatment
of the memory of Adrastus. We may be sure that the liberation of
Cleonae was wrought with the help and countenance of Argos, and that
the Argives were deeply interested in that event. It is certainly in
accordance with the historical probabilities of the case that the city of
Hera should have promoted the new inauguration, on a grand scale, of
the festival associated with Cleonae, and that the Nemean aywv crr€<f>avcTys
should have been first celebrated under the Argive shield.
But a record which has been fortunately preserved leaves us in little
doubt that this is the true combination. Eusebius states that the
Argives usurped the conduct of the Nemean games in the 53rd
Olympiad (567 b.c.). That the men of Cleonae were the presidents in
the days of Pindar we know from passages in his Odes; but they did
not retain this prerogative permanently, for Strabo1 speaks of the sacred
grove cv <S Kai rd Nqxea awreXeiv 20o$ rots ’Apyctots. Eusebius had got
hold of a fact, but he distorted it. His statement really proves the
close connexion of Argos with the Nemean games in the earliest stage
of their history. We may infer that the Cleonaeans administered the
agon under the patronage of Argos. But there is no reason to suppose
that Argos and Cleonae quarrelled for the presidency, like the men of
Pisa and Elis. This is confirmed by the argument, which Grote
adduced to overthrow the statement of Eusebius, and which really
supports a modified acceptance of it. Grote acutely observes that in
the Tenth Nemean Ode (not really a Nemean) in honour of the Argive
Theaeus, the Nemean prizes gained by ancestors of the victor are called
‘prizes received from Cleonaean men,’ dnd that if there had been a
1 Bk. viri. 377. Pausanias 11. 15.	belonged to Corinth (see introductory
Holm, Gr. Geschichte, 1. 291. In later	scholia on the Nemean Odes of Pindar),
times the agonothesia seems to have252
APPENDIX D.
standing dispute between Argos and Cleonae on the subject of the
administration of the games, such a designation would have been
conspicuously unhappy.
The question touching the successors of Phidon who ruled at Argos
is obscure, but it is perfectly certain that in the sixth century the
government was carried on by kings or despots who had inherited the
traditions and ambitions, though not the power, of the great tyrant of
the seventh century. Herodotus mentions among the suitors of
Agariste, Leocedes son of Phidon of Argos. This statement has
caused great perplexity. A son of the great Phidon could hardly have
been a suitor for the hand of Agariste, nor is it likely that any Argive
prince would have appeared for such a purpose at the court of
Clisthenes. It seems clear that there is a chronological mistake. In
order to make the visitors of Clisthenes completely representative of
Hellas, Herodotus (or rather his authority) introduced an Argive prince
who really lived in the preceding century. This is a more simple ex-
planation than to assume a second Phidon, confounded by Herodotus
with the more famous despot of the same name. I shall have some-
thing more to say on the Phidon question presently; but it appears
that we cannot attempt to identify the sovereign who governed Argos
in 573. It is however quite enough for the present purpose to establish
that the Nemean games were celebrated in 573 under the auspices of
an Argive ruler. The feast recurred every second year1, in summer,
and the victors were crowned with fresh parsley.
But in connexion with the Nemea a further question arises to which
we shall have to return presently. Was the event of 573 a new foun-
dation or a revival? Is it possible that an dy<av <rr€</>avm/$ was
celebrated at Nemea before Cleonae passed under the power of Sicyon,
and that Clisthenes suppressed it, in accordance with the rest of his
policy ? It will be convenient to reserve this problem for a later stage
in our discussion.
Before proceeding to consider whether any conclusion can be drawn
1 Scaliger started the idea of summer
and winter Nemea celebrated alternately,
basing his view on two passages in Pau-
sanias, where winter Nemea are men-
tioned (n. 15, 2 and vi. 16, 4). In this
he was followed by Boeckh, Hermann,
Schomann (Gr. Alterthiimer, 11. 68),
but Unger in two important papers in
Philologus (‘Die zeit der nemeischen
spiele,’ xxxiv. 50 sqq., and ‘Die win-
ternemeen,’ xxxvil. 524 sqq.) showed
convincingly that the winter Nemea were
a late institution (in imperial times); and
also proved that the month Panemos, on
the 18th of which the summer Nemea
were celebrated, corresponds (not to
Metageitnion, as Boeckh thought, nor
to Boedromion, as Hermann held but)
to Hecatombaeon. Thus the Nemea
fell in July.APPENDIX D.
253
as to the origin of the most ancient and august of all the agonistic
festivals, I would direct attention for a moment to the Panathenaea at
Athens. The foundation of the Great Panathenaea as a pentaeterid, on
the model of the Olympia and Pythia, belongs to the second half of the
sixth century and was due to Pisistratus. Gymnic games had been
introduced at Athens in 566 b.c., six years before the elevation of Pisis-
tratus, but this tyrant was the first to establish in his city games of
Panhellenic fame and importance. It is strange that Pisistratus did
not constitute this contest an ay<ov o-Ttfavirys. In that case, the
Panathenaea would probably have ranked with the four great agonistic
festivals of Greece.
Thus all the states of Hellas, which were ever first-rate powers in
those early times, founded Panhellenic festivals,—with two remarkable
exceptions; Sparta in the Peloponnese and Thebes in northern Greece,
the two great cities where, in that period, the tyrannis was never
introduced. The Isthmia, the Pythia, the Nemea, the Great Pana-
thenaea were all established under the influence or auspices of despots.
Thus the theory put forward by Hermann, rejected by Grote, and
revived by E. Curtius, that the games, at least the Nemea and Isthmia,
were a demonstration against the tyrannis, is so far from being true
that it exactly reverses the truth. Hermann thought that the Isthmia
celebrated the fall of the Cypselids, the Nemea the fall of the Orthagorids;
that the Spartans had taken a leading[part in pulling down both these
ruling houses; and that Sparta’s influence was active in promoting the
institution of the agones. The chronological data alone suffice to
refute this theory. The hypothesis that Sparta intervened has no
foundation; the hypothesis that she helped to found the festivals is
contrary to all a priori probability. No Panhellenic agon was likely to
be inaugurated through the influence of that state; it was notorious
that the games on the Eurotas were never thrown open to the rest
of Hellas; and the sole exception which Sparta made in favour of
the Olympia was due to a political necessity. The Greek agones were
truly the visible memorial of the beneficent effects of the tyrannis.
(4) If these considerations are just, an important principle has been
established, and it remains to consider whether the Olympian games
form an exception to that principle. In examining this question we
must disregard the chronology of the Olympian register which was
compiled about 400 b.c. by Hippias of Elis on uncertain data1. In a
1 The words of Plutarch (Numa, cap.	xp&l'ovs il;aKpi($<o<rat xaXeTnSj' &<rri9 KC^
1) are highly significant: rods txkv odif	n&Xurra rods £k tQv ’0\v(jlwiovlkCjv254
APPENDIX D.
remarkable paper which appeared nine years ago in the Journal oj
Hellenic Studies (vol. ii.) Mr Mahaffy disputed the authenticity of
the Olympian register, bringing forward arguments which have never
been answered, and which to me appear cogent The arrange-
ment of events in the eighth century from 776 downwards was a
construction of the fancy and ingenuity of Hippias, based on a priori
considerations; and the reckoning by Olympiads did not come into
general use until the 3rd century b.c.1. It was always a tendency of
the Greek mind to assign an imaginary antiquity to the events of their
ancient history. Some accounts place Phidon of Argos in the ninth
century2: most modern historians have followed the statements which
place him in the eighth; but it has been shown beyond reasonable
doubt that he really lived in the middle of the seventh3. This is an
instance of the tendency to push back events into an earlier epoch.
It may be affirmed with certainty that Greek chronology begins for us
in the seventh century; and it is probable that almost all the historical
events which, according to the Register, took place in the first twenty
Olympiads, really belong to the following generations.
This is not the place to enter into the vexed question about
Phidon’s date, but as the most recent German historians, Busolt, Holm
and Duncker, have declared themselves for the old date in opposition
to the view first propounded by Weissenbom and made current by the
approval of K. F. Hermann and Ernst Curtius, it is necessary to say
a few words on the subject. As I cannot profess faith in the early
Olympiads, I am not going to contend with Weissenbom that there is a
mistake in the text of Pausanias and that in the passage where he
speaks of Phidon at Olympia, we should read the 28th for the 8th
Olympiad4. It would be hazardous in my opinion to suppose that
&vayofiivovs, &v tt]v avaypa(f>7jv 6\f/4
(pacriP *Iwirlav £k5ovvcu rbv ’HXetov air*
ovdevos dp/Aibfievoi' av ay Kalov wpos
Trieriv. Two points strike one here.
(1) Plutarch is not proving any theory of
his own, and therefore his scepticism in
respect to the early Olympiads is not
biassed. (2) There seems little doubt
that he echoes the censure of some much
older critic, perhaps of a contemporary
of Hippias. The register of Hippias
can hardly have passed unchallenged at
the time of its publication.
1	So Holm, Griechische Geschichte, 1.
285, ‘ Die allgemeine Benutzung der Olym-
piaden fur die griechische Chronologie
ist aber viel spater, besonders durch
den Historiker Timaios von Tauromenion
im dritten Jahrh. v. Chr. gebrauchlich
geworden.’
2	The Parian Marble.
3	Weissenbom, Hellen (Jena 1844).
This date is accepted by E. Curtius
(668—660 B.c.), 1. 656, but rejected by
Duncker and Busolt (after Unger) and
by Mr Evelyn Abbott.
4	vi. 22, 2.APPENDIX D.
255
Pausanias knew the right date. I shall confine myself to three remarks,
(i) The placement of Phidon in the eighth century (770—744, nearly)
was not due to any positive knowledge derived from records, but was
determined by the calculation that he was the tenth from the semi-
mythical Temenus. (2) According to Ephorus1, silver coinage was
introduced into Greece by Phidon. There seems no reason to question
the truth of the record, and here one may judge the champion of
Phidon’s early date out of his own mouth. Unger is supposed by those
who hold to the eighth century to have decided the whole question by his
elaborate arguments in Philologus2. Now Unger speaks of Ephorus with
the utmost respect as ‘ eine autoritat ersten ranges auf dem gebiete der
alteren hellenischen geschichte.’ There is therefore on his own showing
no reason to doubt the record of Ephorus. Now all the best authorities
on numismatics are agreed that money was not coined in Greece until
the beginning of the seventh century3. It follows that Phidon cannot
have lived so early as 770—745.	(3) One of Weissenborn’s arguments
for the later date of Phidon was that Leocedes, Phidon’s son, appears at
the marriage of Agariste in Herodotus4. The argument, as Weissenborn
puts it, is worthless, and his opponents easily upset it, pointing out that
the marriage of Agariste is romance (perhaps Herodotus derived his
account of it from a poem) and adding that in any case, even with the
later date, Phidon’s son could hardly have been a suitor of Agariste5.
But Leocedes supplies us with an argument notwithstanding. If Phidon
lived in the first half of the eighth century, as Busolt and Holm believe,
it is perfectly incredible that Herodotus (or the sixth century poet from
whom he drew the story) would have made him the father of a
contemporary of Clisthenes. The discrepancy would have been too
great and too obvious. If on the other hand he lived in the first half of
the seventh century and was perhaps really the grandfather of Leocedes,
1	Strabo vm. 376 (and 358). See also
Marm. Par. Ep. 30.
2	B. xxviii. and xxix.
3	See Holm, Gr. Gesch. 1. 256 4 die
griindlichsten Forscher sind sich gegen-
wartig dariiber einig, dass man sie nicht
wohl vor 700 setzen kann ’ (and Hultsch
therefore places Phidon in the seventh
century). Money was doubtless coined
in Lydia first, but there is no reason to
question the statement that Phidon first
introduced minting in Greece. Busolt
however rejects it and speaks of Ephorus
as *ein keineswegs zuverlassiger Zeuge,’
although in the same breath he accepts
the conclusions of Unger, in whose
arguments the statements of Ephorus
play a conspicuous part (see Busolt, Gr,
Gesch. pp. 143, 144).
4	Herodotus vi. 127.
5	So Holm, 1. 256 ‘Aber erstens hat
die Geschichte von den Freiern der
Agariste keinen Werth als Grundlage
chronologischer Forschungen, und zwei-
tens ware fur den Vater einer dieser
Freier 01. 28 noch zu friih.’256
APPENDIX D.
the apparition of ‘the son of Phidon1 at the court of Sicyon about
570 is less startling. We can understand Herodotus passing over
the difficulty in this case without comment. Herodotus was in a
position to have quite as trustworthy information touching the date of
Phidon as either Hippias of Elis or Pausanias, and if he had been
taught that Phidon lived two hundred years before Clisthenes he would
not have omitted to call attention to the glaring chronological inaccuracy
in the tale which he tells about the suitors of Agariste.
The revision of chronology—to which the first step was taken by
the recognition of Phidon's true date—will clearly affect the received
view touching the foundation or revival of the Olympian festival in the
eighth century. If we look merely at the probabilities of the matter, it
is not easy to believe that any great Panhellenic institution was founded
in the eighth century. We may readily grant that there were local
games connected with the worship of Zeus on the banks of the
Alpheus as early as 776; but the received view that 776 meant for
the Olympia anything like what 586 meant for the Pythia, is, I
submit, incredible; and even the cautious Duncker makes an admis-
sion which if logically carried out confirms my position. ‘The
Spartans/ he says, ‘relying on their close connexion with Elis now
[end of seventh century] adopted a legend which ascribed the
institution of the common sacrifice at Olympia to Lycurgus and
IphitusV Thus the foundation of Iphitus is as legendary as that of
Heracles or those of Oxylus and the other mythical heroes to whom
revivals of the Olympia are ascribed by Pausanias2.
Now it appears to me of the highest significance that the first
historical personage (in the strict sense of the term historical—the
personality of * Lycurgus' is doubtful) whose name has been associated
with the Olympian games is the despot Phidon of Argos. In the eighth
Olympiad, according to the text of Pausanias (in the twenty-eighth
according to the emendation which some accept) Phidon espoused the
cause of Pisa against Elis, and the Olympian games were celebrated
under his presidency. The Argive power was at this time at its
height. When we reflect that the personal names which Greek writers
connect with the administration of the festival in days earlier than
Phidon, are all mythical like Heracles or semi-mythical like Iphitus,
it seems a legitimate historical inference that Phidon did for the
Olympia what one of his successors did for the Nemea, what Clisthenes
did for the Pythia, and Periander for the Isthmia.
1 11. 246.
2 v. 8.APPENDIX D.
257
There are special considerations which confirm this view, (i) It is
recognised that Phidon fixed the length of the stadion, the Olympic
race-course1. This seems to point to a complete remodelling of old
local games at Pisa. (2) If Phidon established the Olympic agon,
we have at once a definite explanation of the legend that Heracles
was the original founder. For Phidon, in pursuing the policy of
expanding the Argive power, posed as the successor of Heracles.
He professed to be reconquering lands and cities which had been
subdued of old by the great Dorian hero2. Thus the mythical con-
nexion of Heracles with the Olympian games accords with the theory
that Phidon was the original agonothete. It may be added that, as
Duncker properly points out, ‘ the worship of Heracles was an addition
and not a very early one3 *.’ This is shown by the statement of
Pausanias that ‘ Iphitus persuaded the Eleans to sacrifice to Heracles,
for the Eleans before deemed Heracles their enemyV This was the
Elean way of putting it. According to my guess it was Phidon who
did what the Eleans attributed to Iphitus. In this connexion the
conjecture that Heraclea, a town five miles west of Olympia, may have
been founded by Phidon is noticeable5.
The oldest building discovered by the German excavafions at
Olympia is the temple of Hera, which, according to Pausanias6, was
built by men of Skillus about 8 years after the beginning of the reign of
Oxylus in Elis. The archaeologists agree that the remains point to an
earlier date than the oldest temple at Selinus; this brings us to 630 b.c.
as a minor limit. Greek architecture was not slow in developing, and
it would hardly be sober to assert that the Heraeum was necessarily
older than 660. Some omniscient Germans would fix the date at
1000 b.c., but few will be bold enough to venture without a light into
the ages before ‘Homer.’ It might be a safer guess that Phidon had
something to do with the Heraeum which men of Skillus built, and that
the cult of Hera came across to Olympia from Argos, her own special
city, in the middle of the seventh century.
It certainly seems to me impossible that the Olympian games, as a
1	Duncker, n. 245.
2	Strabo, vm. 358.
3	II. 252. Holm, Gr. Gesch. 1. 284;
‘Da Pelops der Ahnherr der durch die
Herakliden verdrangten Fiirsten eines
grossen Theiles des Peloponnes war,
muss auch in Olympia sein Kultus alter
gewesen sein als der des Herakles, der
dort nicht einmal ein Temenos gehabt zu
haben scheint [the Italics are mine], und
der wohl erst spat als Griinder des Festes
betrachtet worden ist.’ But Holm’s
* spat ’ is too early.
4	v. 4.
5	Duncker, 11. 252.
6	v. 16, 1.
B.
17258
APPENDIX D.
Panhellenic festival, should have been started without the influence,
money and enterprise of a great power. And from the origins of the
other great ayan'c?, we are perhaps justified in inferring that, in all
probability, the Olympia too were inaugurated by a ‘ tyrant.* It is clear
that the only possible tyrant who could have been associated with their
institution was the first and perhaps the greatest of all,—the earliest
pioneer of Panhellenism, the Argive Phidon. This is the a priori argu-
ment, and perhaps it is not too much to say that it is supported by the
scanty evidence of the records. Phidon, I repeat, is the first historical
person associated with the Olympian agon; and Phidon identified his
exploits with the career of Heracles, to whom the institution of the
Olympia was attributed. Such a work was thoroughly worthy of the
enlightened policy and manifold activity of the Argive despot, of whose
acts indeed we know far too little. It would hardly have been achieved
by any man of less note. And it certainly would not have been either
achieved or conceived in an earlier period. Curtius justly observed
that what is recorded of Phidon ‘ passt nur in das siebente Jahrhundert
v. Chr.1’ I feel convinced that the same remark is true of the
institution of Panhellenic games.
It is not difficult to discern the general outline of the early history
of the Olympia. Perhaps in the year 668 b.c., perhaps earlier, perhaps
later, Pisa became dependent on Argos, which then, under the guidance
of Phidon, was pushing her power towards the west of the Pelopon-
nesus. It is probable that Pisa had been before subject to her Elean
neighbours, and that she gladly exchanged dependence on Elis for
dependence on more distant Argos. Struck by the situation of the
Altis—and of this there will be more to say presently—Phidon
conceived the idea of elevating the local games, which were cele-
brated there, into a Panhellenic agon, and, while the men of Pisa
were permitted to enjoy the privilege of the agonothesia (owrcAeiv rov
aycom), the festival was celebrated under Argive auspices and started
with Argive money. So it continued in the days of Phidon and until
the power of Argos declined. Then the jealous men of Elis, when
Argos no longer held them in check, hastened to share or usurp the
privilege of their weaker neighbours, and were cordially supported by
Sparta, which was always interested in opposing Argive influence.
The tradition which recorded the existence of the Olympia in the
eighth century is a simple consequence of its history in the seventh. It
was the cue of the Elean usurpers to base their act of might on a plea
of right, and they pretended that they had been the agonothetes in
1 Griechische Geschichte, 1. 656.APPENDIX D.
259
olden times, and were only recovering a privilege of which Argos had
forcibly deprived them. It need hardly be remarked that such an
invention was thoroughly characteristic of Greeks. The Elean kings,
Oxylus and Iphitus, were brought into connexion with the agon; while
at the same time the associations with Heracles, initiated by Phidon,
were not discarded. The struggle between Pisa and Elis for the
agonothesia in the seventh century was represented as the continuation
of a struggle which had taken place in the eighth, and thus it was
made to appear that the claims of Elis reached into remote antiquity.
The connexion of Lycurgus with the Elean king was merely a reflexion
of the bond between the Spartans and Eleans in the last years of the
seventh century.
There is a further consideration which may be adduced in favour of
the guess propounded in the foregoing pages as to the origin of the
Olympia. It has been observed1 as a somewhat curious fact that the
games of the Olympic agon present no likeness to the contests described
in the 23rd Book of the Iliad. One might have expected that the
Greeks, who had such a profound reverence for Homer, would have
framed their athletic contests on the Homeric model. Mr Mahaffy has
pointed out to me that if, according to the view put forward in these
pages, the Greek games of historic times were the creation of the
tyrannis, the anomaly is explained. The Homeric contests were only
intended for the nobles; whereas the tyrants were not concerned to
promote the interests of the nobles who were their political foes, but,
on the contrary, the interests of the dtmos. The sports of Olympia
were designed to be open to every Greek, whether of noble or of
vulgar birth; and therefore the agon of Homer could be no model for
the agon instituted by Phidon and copied by his imitators. Chariot
races were only for noble competitors, and it is significant that the early
contests at Olympia, according to our Greek authorities, were foot-races.
In the days of Pindar the Sicilian kings and nobles were frequent
competitors at the Olympic games, and it may well strike us that
Olympia was a remarkably convenient centre for a Panhellenic festival,
as far as Sicily was concerned. Situated near the coast of Greece, facing
the island of the west, the Altis seemed to invite the lords of Syracuse
and Acragas to cross the Ionian 7ropos and contend for olive leaves on
the banks of the Alpheus. If it was merely by accident that the most
important festival of Greece was celebrated on a spot whose geo-
graphical position rendered it so admirably suited to be a connecting
link with western Greece beyond the seas, it was by an accident
1 By Mr Mahaffy, op. cit.
17—226o
APPENDIX D.
which certainly had important results. The games at Pisa were
frequented by the Sicilian and Italian Greeks. Thus the Olympian
celebration was adapted, through geographical circumstances, to
promote intercourse between the Peloponnesus and the West, whereas
it did not tend, in the same measure, to encourage communication with
the East1. Of the ten treasure houses at Olympia, which we know of,
five belonged to Sicilian and Italian towns.
That this was the result of an accident I can hardly believe. I
would maintain that it was the result of design. The man who
conceived the idea of the Olympian aywv	and inaugu-
rated one of the most remarkable and permanent institutions of the
Hellenic world, was not likely to be blind to the geographical aspect of
the place which he selected; nor could he have failed to consider the
political bearings of his choice. We may be sure that Phidon of Argos
was wide awake to the probable results of a Panhellenic festival near
the western shores of the Peloponnesus; and that those results
harmonized with the rest of his policy. The choice of Olympia was
plainly the choice of a man whose eyes were turned to the west rather
than to the east; and if it can be shown that Phidon had reasons for
desiring to promote intercourse with Sicily, it is clear that this will be
an additional confirmation of the view urged in the foregoing pages,
that Phidon was the founder of the Olympian games.
The great object of Phidon’s policy was to promote free traffic and
intercourse among the Greeks, in opposition to the narrow Dorian
principles so obstinately upheld at Sparta. Curtius has brought out
this feature in words which are worth quoting: ‘ Statt der Concentration
im Binnenlande die Richtung auf das Meer, statt der Trennung der
Stande Vermischung und Ausgleichung, statt des Abschlusses gegen
aussen freier Verkehr, und dieser Verkehr wird nun in demselben
Grade erleichtert wie Lykurg ihn erschwert hatte.’ Such was the
program of Phidon, and such the motive of his most famous measures.
‘To facilitate the traffic between the opposite coasts of the archipelago
was the essential aim of his legislation touching coins and weights/
1 The westward aspect has of course
been noticed by others, and, since writing
the remarks in the text, I have found it
well stated by Holm (Gr. Gesch. I. 290):
‘Schaut doch Olympia, wie mit Recht
gesagt worden ist, nach Westen. Nach
Westen weist der Alpheios, der auf dem
sicilischen Ortygia wieder zum Vorschein
kommt; im Westen, in Sicilien, hat die
Freude an olympischen Siegen auf den
Miinzen mit den Viergespannen einen
charakteristischen Ausdruck gefunden.
So ist Olympia das vomehmste Band
das die westlichen Kolonien an Griechen-
land kniipfte.’ Was all this the result
of chance ?APPENDIX D.
261
But the cities in the west must have attracted the attention of
Phidon as well as the cities in the east. In his time the settle-
ments of the Greeks in Sicily had just begun and the colonisation
beyond the seas was progressing briskly. I find it hard to believe that
the foundations of the Greek cities in Sicily are more ancient than the
seventh century. It is difficult to give any credence to the chronology
which Thucydides derived from the history of Antiochus of Syracuse,
for all the dates depend on a preconceived numerical system1, and were
clearly invented for the purpose of exalting the age of Syracuse. The
antiquity of his native city was one of the great vanities of every Greek;
and therefore, as Antiochus was a Syracusan, we are compelled to be
distrustful. I strongly suspect that in the earlier part of his history,
Antiochus was as little trustworthy as Hajek for the history of
Bohemia, or the ‘ nameless scribe ’ of king B61a for the doings of his
Magyar forefathers. But as the work of Antiochus is lost, there is no
chance here for a Palacky or a Roesler. We may regard it as highly
probable that Archias of Corinth laid the foundations of Syracuse in
the seventh century, and it seems likely that he was a contemporary of
Phidon. Archias, like Phidon, was said to be the tenth from Temenus2,
and perhaps we may accept the synchronism, as long as it does not
commit us to a definite date. However this may be,—whether Phidon
was actually acquainted with the founder of Syracuse or not,—the
conclusion that Phidon, when he chose Olympia for the ay<ov <tt€<£a-
virrjs, had his eyes on Sicily, is thoroughly in harmony with all that we
know of the aims of his policy. He doubtless regarded also other
western islands nearer home. We may well suppose that the enemy
1 Cf. the remarks of Mr Mahafly, The
Olympic Register in Journal of Hellenic
Studies, vol. n. p. 124. It is to be
observed that the sources of Antiochus
were confessedly oral; see Busolt, Gr.
Gesch. I. 224. Dionysius Hal., Arch.
1.12, quotes Antiochus’ own words about
his history of Italy, ’Avrioxos Eevotpaveos
rddc <rvv4ypa\{/e repi ’IraMr/s 4 k tQv
\6yoov ret 7rt<rr6rara Kai <ra<f>4<TTaTa
k.t.\. Thus the credibility of Antiochus
depends on the validity of his conception
of to m<TTbv. For his Sicilian history,
from Kokalos king of the Sicanians to
424 B.C., see Diodorus xn. 71.—Of
Hippys of Rhegium, who wrote on Si-
cilian affairs shortly before Antiochus,
we know nothing.
2 See Ephorus, fr. 15.—The relations
of Phidon with Corinth are obscure. It
has been inferred from some statements
that Corinth was dependent on Argos in
his reign (Busolt, Gr. Geschichte 1. 68).
For the tale of Abron and Phidon’s death
see Plutarch, Am. Narr. 2 (for Actaeon
and Archias, see Diodorus vm. 7).—
In Philologus xxvm. Unger discusses
Phidon’s connexion with Corinth, and
argues that what is recorded of this con-
nexion does not square with 668 B.c.
This is true, but only on the assumption
that 734 is the date of Archias.262
APPENDIX D.
of the Corinthian aristocracy took an interest in Corcyra, which was
then disputing the naval supremacy of her mother city (664 ?).
This effect of Sicilian colonisation on the origin of the Olympian
aydv is of course a theory which does not admit of proof by docu-
mentary evidence. But a curious legend has survived which may
be invoked in support of this theory. Just as the story that Heracles
founded the Olympian Games really supports the view that Phidon
was the true founder, so the strange fable of Alpheus travelling
under the sea to Ortygia points to an early historical link between
Olympia and Syracuse, and even suggests some more definite con-
nexion than a political design in the brain of Phidon. It suggests
at least that Sicilians were formally invited by the founder to take
part in the first celebrations of the Olympian panegyris. But we
cannot draw any conclusions as to early relations between Syracuse
and Olympia (or Arcadia) from that obscure passage in Pindar’s Sixth
Olympian Ode, where Agesias is called a <rvvoiKurrqp of the Sicilian city:
fiiofJLip re fiavreiio raptas Atos Zv IlMra
<TVVOlKKTTyjp T€ Tav kXcLVOV ^VpaKO(T(TaV.
Before we take leave of Phidon there is another question which
must be briefly touched on. There is a passage in Strabo which
seems to show that the Olympian was not the only agon founded by
him. Strabo professes to speak on the authority of Ephorus:
7rpo5 tovtols (<£a8o)i/a) €7n0i(r6aL Kal tolls v<j> 'HpajcAcovs alpeOeio-cus
7roA.€(rt /cal tovs aywvas a£iovv tlOivat avtov ovs Zkzlvos ZOrjKf tovtcov 8k
etval tov 'OXvpmaKov1.
Here the Olympian is mentioned as only one of certain agones, which
Phidon, as the successor of Heracles, administered (ZOrjKc). The only
other agon in the Peloponnesus which had any associations with
Heracles was the Nemean. The Nemea were said to have been
founded by Adrastus, and afterwards celebrated by Heracles. Hence
we might venture to conjecture that Phidon founded the agon which
was conducted by the Cleonaeans, as well as that which was con-
ducted by the Pisatans. When Cleonae fell under the power of Sicyon,
Clisthenes would not have failed to suppress a festival which was
associated with Adrastus and owed its origin to Argos. In this case
the year 573 would mark, not the first foundation of the Nemean
Games, but their renewal after a temporary disuse.
If the conclusion, which I have endeavoured to establish, is well
founded, a new feature emerges in the history of the Greek tyrannis.
1 Bk. viii. 358.APPENDIX D.
263
(1) Phidon, the founder of the tyrannis, is also the founder of the
earliest Panhellenic games, the Olympia. (2) Periander 4 der System-
atiker der Tyrannis ’ institutes the Isthmia. (3) Clisthenes, the despot
of Sicyon, initiates or promotes the institution of the Pythia by the
Delphic amphictyony. (4) The Nemea, whether originally founded
by Phidon or not, owed their first historical importance to an unknown
ruler of Argos, who plays the same part in relation to Cleonae that
Phidon had played in relation to Pisa. (5) Pisistratus, the last of the
great tyrants of Greece's early period, institutes the quadriennial Pan-
athenaea, clearly in imitation of the Olympia and Pythia.
Thus the history of the origin of the great Games has more than
a merely external bearing on Pindar and his Epinician Odes. The
poet of this Panhellenic institution was tilled with the spirit of Pan-
hellenism (or should we say Panhellenedom, and reserve Panhellenism
for the coming of Alexander ?), and he was a friend and admirer of the
potentates who preserved the traditions of the tyrannis, no longer
indeed in old Greece, but in Sicily and Cyrene. In the anecdote that
Alexander the Great spared the house of Pindar from the destruction
which befel Thebes, we may see a deeper meaning than admiration for
the memory of a great poet. For when we take a wide view of Greek
history, we must recognise that Alexander of Macedon was the true
successor of Phidon, Periander, Pisistratus and Pericles. Pericles,
who, though not a tyrant, really carried on the policy of the
Pisistratids, made Athens the school of Hellas; the work of Alexander
was to make Hellas the school of the world. In Pindar the Macedo-
nian conqueror might well have recognised a wpo<f>rjrrjs of Hellenedom
in a really wide sense,—one who looked beyond the needs and interests
of a single city, and who, while he glorified the Dorian hero, Heracles1,
was far from sharing that Dorian spirit of exclusiveness which animated
Sparta. We might say that Pindar exalted Heracles from a Dorian to
an Hellenic ideal.
1 Wilamowitz-Moellendorff (Euripides’ hat er es wenigstens nicht sein wollen,
Herakles, 1. 265) writes: ‘Pindaros ist	und da sein name ausser auf Thera auch
dem herzen und dem glauben nach ein	in Ephesos widerkehrt, so war sein blut
Boeoter gewesen; aber der abkunft nach wol wirklich Kadmeisches. ’INDEX. I. GREEK.
A
apoarl 152
afip6s 133
dyaXjxa 152, 211
ayavwp 177
ayXata 12, 178
dyXabOpopos 197
ayXaoKapTros 56
dyXadicpapos 56
aypav 60
dyXL(TTa 184
ayCjp xc£\k€Os 202
adeX<pe6s 128
advents 10
afraos 221
aidpodUas 25
A£5ws 165, 178
cuero's (emblem of Aeacids) 43,
hi. 231
Ai/xopes 74
aiTreiv6s 93
cuca 48, 106
alros 213, 214
alx/xaras (0v/>c6s) 179
ai(bv (spiritus) 33
dfca 112, 209
aKa/xas aKa/xapros, see list of Addenda
aKfxd 53, 76
afcovaev 35
aXe^Lpipporos 154
’AXKifdda (nom.) 112
aXjaa 237
d/xfioXddap 204
djjLTTPev/jLa 9
dpnroXeTv 144
d/A0t 18 (dat.); 23 (accus.); 198
’ Apufriapris 171, 176
dpafidXXofiai 140
apayoptvu) (apepel) 138
dpa&ai 152
apaxdfa 211
dpdpodapLas 163, 172
dpeiadax (opapeiadat) 30, 35
dpeXiaOai 136
apia (quantity) 22
dprdpw 154, 155
doldifxos 60
dirdpxu 73
dvas 26, 107, 129, 136
awelparos and direlpidros 15
aTeipofidxoLS 71
aTTofiXaTTra) 137
dirdKeifxai 226
dirpoaucros 226
dwrofiai 152, 154, 155, 158
dpape 58, 96, 230
apera ( = memorial of apera), 239
apLypibs 90
apfiepa 56, 230
apfxodios 14
apjxofa 143
apxa, apxofxai 11
dad/xaipuj 55
durrepoird 174
acrrvpojxos 178
arpepia 217, 222
arpowos 144
avdd i69sq.
avddcis 170
auro's {same) 89
auxa 224
60, 85,266
INDEX. I. GREEK.
atftap 210
*A<f>aprjTl8cu 211
*A <ppo5l<nos 123
’A*cu6y 137
Autos 33, 87, 227, 228, 229
B
{3a.0iJKprjiJ.vos 180
Pa.6vp.rjra. 55
padvrrebos 48
Padv<TT€pvos 177
paarafa 151
/SAos 21
(3tafa 172
/Siaras 183
172
/3\- (vowel short before) 151
PovpSrrjs 74
Ppa.xwrlba.pos 54
Ppipea0ai 220
53, 152
PpSpios 170
r
7c£\a 60
7* 35
76 /ah' 158
y€V€T€Lpa 128
A
baxbaX0ivra 223
AatSdXou p6.xaLPa 75
balvvpu. 176
ddaKios no
biboprc 61
beivds (in Pindar) 172
5eX0/s 113, 235 sqq.
AewcaXiup (Aevs) 48
&Xo/uat 33
brjpidu and brjptopai 224
biarrXiKU 143
biarcpvcnos 74
Aids Kdpiytfos 144
bbKipos 47
boXoQpab'/js 155
boveiv 141
Swards (fem.) 35
E
iyKara- 20
iyKovrjrl 51
iK(paivu 76
e\£ 59
’EW0uia 128
iXeXlfa 174
iXivvu 89
?\kw 72, 80, 233
'E Mem os, Zeds 90
iXrrLbes {hopes and fears) 19
ip.pa.lvto 22 6
eprreboodevTjs 143
w 133 (with accus.); 221
iv8ov (with dat. and gen.) 56, 135
ivros {instrument) 174
Zfyx° s 74> 80
e£v<f>a,lv(o 73, 76
^7ra\ro hi
irraaKetv 171
IhreffTi 131
irrrjeravos 105
impalvu 49
bnp^a.i (xeipas) 57, 231
irropxu (uses of) 17
ewbrrrrjs 170
ipeiaApevoi (al. ipufroapevoi) 174
tpvos 106, 109, 224
Z<rxaT0s (play on) 203
erepos {untozvard) 151
irrjTvpos 137
€t6s 132, I4I, 200, 206
iroaae 106
ed rradeiv 18
evdvwp 36
evOtirrvoos 134
evpvKoXrros 134
evpvffSeirfjs 57, 89
evpurrbs 77
e\}(f>opos 202
eui&'V/AOS 135, 141, 158
£0efyos 80, 113, 233
itpirru 204
Z
{apevrjs (meaning of) 57, 69
firydv 143INDEX; /. GREEK.
267
H
*H0a 128
'Hpa/cX^s (declension of) 49
©
BaXapos 20
0aXea> 78
0dXos 9; BaXepbs 27, cf. 239, 240
Bafia 13, 15
Bafuvd 54
©ed/Mov 59
BtXyw (charm forth) 68
0^*6* 69
de/xLTrXeKTOS 183
04<r<ravro 82, 90
©Ms (etymology) 90
diyyavu) 72
dpcurvfiaxwos 76
Bpaovpdibys 172
I
iepojirjvia 45
iepds t’xMs 237
t/Aas ((caestus) 34
’I6Xas 53
iTnrcuxjtos 13 (air. ctp.)
toy (toafu) 79
ioohalpaav 78
iVy£ 67, 72
’IwXk6s 52
K
xajSds 112
KcucoiroiSs 155
Kavaxytid 152
Kcnrvbs (of envy) 15
Kapwbs <t>pev£)v 200
Kapxdoiov 97
Kara^aivoj 50
Acara/SoXa 32
KariSpaKev 70
Acai^xa 170
K€Kptpt£vos 68, 103
KeXadrjrts 66
KeXatveyx'fjs 213
KXapos 113
KXetco (kX6>s) 48
kXiBcIs 69
KXvrdKapiros 77
aco^w 36
Kou'ds 19
Kotvbu) 47
KopUfa 108
k6pios 181
Kopv<f>al 4, 13
KOV(f>OS 153
Kpayirat 61
Kpavabs 152
KpaT'fywriros 169
KpoKurrbs 19
Kpovluv (quantity) 13, 174
KvXh'du) 154
Kutftafa 37 (with acc.); 169
A
Xappos 157
Xa7X®*'w 91
Xdrptos 74
Xelptov 123, 141
XevKCtvOfy 164, 174
Xcvpos 132
X/0os Mowcuos 158
XiirapdpLTrvi; 130
Xtwapos 70, 143
X070S 71, 153
XotTos 179
Xria 172
Xvypos 154
Aijkcuov 207
M
paiopai 46
fjtaXaKox^tp 40
p,apyovp.4vovs 174
fiarpoSoKos 141
ptdrptos 78
fiaxards (dvfjris) 177
fiaxpvXdKas 126, 144 (see also Addenda)
peyavxfy 223
ficSirta ro6, 112
judXea (limbs) 21
/*eX£ra 112, 236
fitXlyapvs 46
/leXiySovros 223
fitXltppwp 129
fitXiropat 14
p.€votv&w 226268
INDEX> /. GREEK.
Hipifwa 58, 59
fperalfavraf 95
friyvvfu (in Pindar) 13, 23
fdrpa 152
/JLVaffTTjp 13
fJLOvdlJ/CLfpOS 199
Mv/)/uMi'es 47
/wx<5s 107
N
Nebula (vipw) 48
vtflOfJUU 61
veSyvios 176
vforos 30
voc<f>lfa 113
povprjpios 72
i^c65wos 158
Iw'cU' 92
O
ot (/oi) 12
0ticoOev 49
otva 156
Olv&va (otvos) 73
opados 109
opalpios 106
’0prjpldat 32
opbkXapos 170
opt6<f>oiTos 155
6>u.0<£ 204
6£vrepai 240
oiradds and oTrd^w 46
oVws 231
dpyd 93
dpdbpavns 24
opKov (vai pa) 223
’OpaoTplaiva 78
orpvvo) 19
o<pdXu) 33
n
iraylus 57
waXalu) 154
iraXdpri 211
TraMyyXwo’O’os 23, 227
iraXlyKOTos 80
Trapfiias 164, 176
rrapiroiKCXos 204
7ravdo£la T2
ira^airo (iv (ppacrt) 57
TrapaiTeiadcu 203
irapapdpopaL 50
vapapevopai 222
TapawXafa 199
irapaacfxiXXw 224
irappovos 153
irapwddios 179
7r dfxpaeis 154
7rdr/)a 157
7re5airya^w 210
7r eXepifa 154
ITe\etd5es 34
IIeXo7ri7id8ai 152
7T<:X0S 22
TrepL(rdevr)S 48
7re/warAXw 222
irtyodos 225
it€(p6p<r€<r6at 26
TrXayivres 134
irvoal {regions of breath) 212
Troip^v 151
Troika 27
7roXlapxos 141
woXv^ivav 45
TTOpOS 180, l82
T0p<f>1Jp€0S 224
7ror2 araOpav 104
7rorl<f>opo$ 51
irbrpos &va% 73, 104
irorvia 150
Trotfs 112
wpayos 46
vpdo<T€Lv (agere) 17; (facere?) 169
irpopas 140
wpoTreT^s 113
TTpOTroXoS 78
irpoirpedv 142
wpo<T(f>opos 158
TrpooTidrjpL {marry) 58
irpoarptwo) 74
Trpo<r<p4p(t) 104
irpoippojv 92
Tpirravda 220
7Tl6<T€lP 25
p
'Vabapavdvs 17
pairra Zwea 32INDEX. L GREEK.
269
P&IS 7T0/D0S 167, 180
purf} 26
2
aibaplras 91
(rireipo) (ayXatap) 12, 27
(nripxopai 20
o-xot/tt 113, 237
cTTaSfia 104
oradpos 27
otoXos 48
<rTp£<f>ta 80
GVjXTT€LpOS 129
<rvv£irai-€ 92
(meanings of) 76
(rxcdop 211
ffX€PV (*v)	225
ra /cat ra 18
Tapias 237
ridpios 224
T€0p6s 72
reicpaipio 105
riicpap 22 6
t£kTOP€S (Kwpwv) 45
riXeios 201
Ttvayq 50
rippa 138
TTfXavyrjs 58
tIOtjpl (of hymns) 10
TipaX<f>etv 184
itypos 156
forty 137
viripaXXos 51
vTT€pei(raL 158
wripraros 107
VTTOGKaTTTLO 91
<t>
<f>aldipos 26
tf>a/u 51
<ptyyos 161, J8o
$>epae<f>6va 12
(wf») 49
tpiXoras 150
(jiXaaav 211
(pXtyto 109, 197
(pOLVIKOffToXoS 165, F 77
(ppadafa 50
0ua 16
0tf<rts 104
(f>VTetiu) (met.) 75
X
XaXKevrfjS 13
XaXKoplrpas 215
XaXicos 188
Xapts 241 sqq.
'Kapuraiv 97
Xap/ta 58
XaOvos 157
Xeipwv (x*lp) 40
Xty<ros 181
Xpdopai 75
Xpdpos 5, 20, 21
XpvaaXaKaTos 93
Xpvffos (symbolic) 78, (u) 140
94
r^euSts 135
xf/efoTris 92
53, 54
\p6X0ELS 211
*
12
uryifytos uo
u>/ci$y 20
"12pa 150II. ENGLISH.
A
Acastus 74, 93
Achamae 36
Adrastus 158, 162 sqq., 171
Aegae 93
Aegina 69, 81; games at, 96; history,
145
Aetna, town, 2, 159, 169
Ageladas 185
Ajax 117, 118, 147, 154
Alcimidas 98 sqq.
Alcyoneus 71
Alpheus 9
Amphiaraus 162, 164 sqq.
Amphitryon 70, 200
Amyclae 216
Arethusa 9
Argos 185 sqq.
Aristagoras of Tenedos, 216 sqq.
Aristoclides of Aegina 38 sqq.
Artemis 10
Athens 152
Atlas 34
B
Bacchylides, alluded to, 6
Bassidae 100 sqq.
C
Callicles 78
Castor and Polydeukes 185 sqq.
Catana 159
Chiron 40, 41, 42, 75
Chromius, see Introductions to Odes
and ix, and Appendix C
Cinyras 153
Cleonae 70, 206
Clitor 207
Corinth 107
Cos 71
Creontidas no
Cyprus 73
D
Daedalus 75
Deinis 145 sqq.
Delphinius (month) 96
Diomede 199
Dioscori 187
E
Endais 90
Ephyra 120
Epidaurus (games at) 61, 97
Eriphyle 163, 172
Euphanes 79
Euthymenes 82 sqq.
Euxenids 139, 141
G
Gadira (Gades) 77
Gigantomachia 26INDEX. II ENGLISH
271
H
Haemones 74
Hector 179
Helenus 57
Helorus 2, 166, 167
Heracles, in Pindar, 1, 201, 208
Hermes 208
Hesiod 103
Hestia 220
Hiero 6, 162
Hippolyta 74, 92
Hypermnestra 199
I
Idas 192, 209
Io 198
Iolaus 53
Iolcus 52, 74
Ismenus 174
K
Korax and Tisias 17
L
Lampon 81, 234
Leuke 63, 73
Lynceus (brother of Idas) 192, 210
Lynceus (husband of Hypermnestra) 200
M
Machaereus 135
Medusa 198
Megara (games at) 61, 96
Megas (Meges) 145
Melanippids 216
Melesias 80, 113, 232 sqq., 235 sqq.
Memnon 57
Menander (trainer) 96
Meropes 71
Molossia 134
Mycenae 186
Myrmidons, agora of, 47
Mysteries 160
N
Neoptolemus 114, 115, 118 sqq.
O
Oenone (Aegina) 73, 91, 151
Olympia, at Athens, 38
Olympic games, legends of, 1; gold sym-
bolic of, 2
Ortygia 2, 9
P
Pamphaes 185
Peleus 52, 74, 81 sqq.
Pellene 207
Periclymenus 177
Perseus 198
Philyra 54
Phlegra 26
Phlius 100
Phocus 84
Phorminx 85
Pindar, in Sicily, Appendix C
Pisandridae 216
Pleiads, Peleiads, 30, 34
Polytimidas 113
Praxidamas 106
Psamathea 84
Pytheas 81 sqq.
R
Rhea, passage of, 167
S
Salamis 35
Scyrus 119, 134
Sicyon 159, 169, 183, 207
Simonides, alluded to, 6
Soclides 107
Sogenes 114 sqq.
Sparta 152, 208
T
Talaus 172
Tegea 207
Telamon 84
Tenedos 216272
INDEX. II. ENGLISH.
Theaeus 185 sqq. Theandridae 77 Thearion 114 sqq. Thebes 174 Themis 221	Timasarchus 62 sqq. Timocritus 63, 69 Timonous and the Timodemids 29 Tyndaridae 187
Themistius 96 Therapna 209 Thero 162	U Ulias 202
CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY C. J. CLAY, M.A., & SONS, AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.A History of the Later Roman Empire from Arcadius
to Irene, a.d. 395—800. By John B. Bury, M.A., Fellow and
Tutor of Trinity College, Dublin. 2 vols. 8vo.	32s.
The Edinburgh Revieiu says :	“Mr Bury’s estimate of the different literary works
which come into his history is marked by adequate knowledge and sound critical
judgment......It only remains, before summing up our subject, to add a few words
on Mr Bury’s qualifications as an historian. His historical erudition and literary
equipment seem to us fairly adequate, and the importance of this remark will be best
recognised by those who are aware of the enormous scope of research which the
history of the later Roman Empire involves......His illustrative matter is, on the
whole, ample and correct.....With regard to Mr Bury’s style, the extracts we have
had occasion to make from his volumes will suffice to reveal its character. It is
almost invariably intelligible, unaffected, and perspicuous.A word of praise is
also due to Mr Bury’s generally shrewd insight into the causes which determine
political conjectures and events....Summing up our subject, the importance of
which has carried us beyond the bounds we at first allotted for its consideration, we
can heartily congratulate Mr Bury on the creditable achievement of an arduous but
much-needed task. His erudite and carefully executed work has gone far to restore
the later Roman Empire to its true position and importance in European history.”
The Guardian says : “ He has thoroughly grasped the great central fact of the
world’s history, which to so many, to all who talk about ‘Greek Emperors’ in the
eighth century, remains an impenetrable mystery. If Mr Bury will allow us to use
King Harry’s homely proverb, he has most distinctly ‘got the sow by the right ear.’
When Mr Bury sees an Emperor he really knows who he is. And to learn so to do
would seem to be, next to learning the alphabet, the hardest lesson that anybody can
be set to learn. . . . Mr Bury’s great merit lies in his wide and bold grasp of oecumen-
ical history. Nobody has better taken in the nature of that ‘eternal question,’ the
first stages of which are to be found recorded in the opening chapters of Herodotus,
and the latent (as yet) in the morning’s news from Armenia or from Crete. There is
no need for any one to teach Mr Bury the root of the matter. . . . Mr Bury shows else-
where that he has well grasped the cycles of Sicilian history. . . . Mr Bury has some
things to mend, perhaps some things to learn. But he has thoroughly grasped the
true substance and meaning of his vast subject. May he go on and prosper.”
The Saturday Review says: “Mr Bury is a loyal follower of Mr Freeman, and the
main object of his book is to enforce his master’s conclusions in detail by exhibiting
them in their full application as capable of giving unity to a period which was once
abandoned to confusion. . . . Mr Bury’s merits are his grasp of the structural methods
of history and the copious erudition which a right knowledge of method is sure to call
to its equipment. . . . We recognise in Mr Bury a well-equipped student, with a firm
grasp upon the essential points of his subject. . . . His volumes are the fruit of diligent
and independent work amongst a mass of difficult materials, and will have to be
reckoned with by all who follow in his steps. Moreover, Mr Bury shows a commend-
able resolve not to accept traditional views as a way out of difficulties. He is the
first English writer who has tried to take a really critical view of the characters ofJustinian and Theodora, and has seen, without trying to shelve, the difficulties in the
way of reconciling the ‘Secret History’ of Procopius with his ‘History of the Gothic
War.’. . . But he shows how the Empire, in spite of difficulties on every side, held to
its principles, and was capable of infinite readjustment to meet the needs of its
position. He has taken a larger view than any previous writer of the lives and
characters, the resources and dangers, of the later Emperors. He has followed them
into the details of their policy, and has not considered anything undeserving of his
attention. Still more, he has done his best to reproduce the life, the art, and the
learning of Byzantium. Perhaps his chapters on the literature of the times and his
estimates of the authorities whom he follows will have the most enduring influence on
English scholars. Anyone who looks into this book will recognise that, in spite of
obvious signs of immaturity, Mr Bury has in him the promise of a distinguished
future.”
The Oxford Magazine says:	“Mr Bury’s solid work—it consists of two stout
octavo volumes and 1000 pages—is a decided acquisition to our historical library. . . .
the great merit of Mr Bury’s work is the clearness with which he brings the divergent
tendencies of the different centuries, which Gibbon and all his followers represented
as one monotonous time of barbarian invasions, theological wrangles, and successful
or unsuccessful usurpations of the imperial throne........The bright and attractive
chapters on literature and on social life, which are scattered among the more solid
matter, deserve a word of special praise.”
The Classical Review says:	“Mr Bury’s volumes are an important and valuable
contribution to our knowledge of a period, the history of which has been too much
neglected by scholars.......We conclude, as we began, by commending to the
attention of all historical students, but especially of those who may have been chiefly
occupied hitherto with the fortune of Athens and the Elder Rome, this careful and
patient survey of the history of the Roman Empire during a period which witnessed
changes of the most momentous import to the nations of Europe and Asia, the effects
of which we are continually feeling in the political controversies of our own day.”
The Academy says :	“This is a most creditable piece of work, and fills a gap in
the cycle of English books dealing with the history of the Early Middle Ages.........
For the five chapters which deal with the literature of the time we have nothing but
praise. They are thorough and sound, without ceasing to be bright and interesting.
.... The sections dealing with the social life and manners are equally meritorious,
that treating of the rise and development of the Iconoclastic movement is particularly
worthy of notice.”
The Journal of Education says: “Any chapter of the book is enough to give us
confidence ; we can feel that we are in the hands of a guide who knows his business,
a scholar who is at home in his authorities, and knows how to use them..........Our
total impression of the book is one of intense admiration.”
MACMILLAN AND CO., LONDON.