Thucydides and Pindar: Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry

THUGYDIDES AND PINDAR This page intentionally left blank Thucydides and Pindar Historical Narrative and the World o...

Author: Simon Hornblower

71 downloads 899 Views 6MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

THUGYDIDES AND PINDAR

This page intentionally left blank

Thucydides and Pindar Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry

SIMON H O R N B L O W E R

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford 0x26DP Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide in Oxford New York Auckland Cape Town Dares Salaam Hong Kong Karachi Kuala Lumpur Madrid Melbourne Mexico City Nairobi New Delhi Shanghai Taipei Toronto With offices in Argentina Austria Brazil Chile Czech Republic France Greece Guatemala Hungary Italy Japan Poland Portugal Singapore South Korea Switzerland Thailand Turkey Ukraine Vietnam Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York © S. Hornblower 2004 Translations from the Loeb edition of Pindar reprinted by permission of the publishers and the Trustees of the Loeb Classical Library from PINDAR: VOL. IOLYMPIAN AND PYTHIAN ODES and VOL. IINEMEANODES, ISTHMIAN ODES AND FRAGMENTS translated by William H. Race, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, Copyright © 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. The Loeb Classical Library is a registered trademark of the President and Fellows of Harvard College ® The moral rights of the author have been asserted Database right Oxford University Press (maker) First published 2004 First published in paperback 2006 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Data applied for Typeset by Regent Typesetting, London Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by Biddies Ltd, King's Lynn ISBN 0-19-924919-9 978-0-19-924919-0 ISBN 0-19-929828-9 (Pbk.) 978-0-19-929828-0 (Pbk.) 1 3 5 7 9 10 8 6 4 2

PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The idea that Thucydides and Pindar could be fruitfully compared has seemed strange, indeed slightly mad, to many of the people I have talked to about my project. ('Thucydides and who??' was the e-mail reaction of one distinguished American Pindarist—not the one acknowledged near the end of this Preface). But that there was some sort of relationship or at least similarity was obvious to ancient literary critics, as I try to show in the final chapter of my book, where I discuss the two writers as the two great exponents, in prose and poetry respectively, of what Dionysius of Halikarnassos called the 'severe style'. That chapter forms the culmination and in a sense the justification of my thesis. Earlier in the book, however, I argue for a wider relationship than this. Modern literary criticism takes in topics not treated by the ancient critics, who for instance understood the rhetoric of speeches better than the rhetoric of narrative. The more literary Part Two of my book opens with a chapter on the section of Thucydides (5. 49-50.4) which is most clearly Pindaric in its subject-matter and handling, describing as it does in rich detail and slow motion the Olympic Games of 420 BC. I then look at the four main constituent parts of Thucydides' history (statements of method, excursuses, speeches, narrative) and I relate them to Pindar and his style. Part One is more historical and examines such issues as: the athletic milieu which both writers took for granted; the political, religious, and ethical views of the two men and the problems of arriving at them; and the world of Pindar's patrons. Prosopography and personal names feature extensively here. Since the work of E. L. Bundy, historians have been rather scared off Pindar, with the notable exception of students of colonial myth and Leslie Kurke on Pindar's 'poetics of social economy'. But with modern methods, especially the scientifically based study of Greek onomastics, something can I hope be done to get closer to the real-life inhabitants of the overlapping worlds of Pindar and Thucydides without invoking the treacherous word 'aristocracy' too often. Certain issues, such as elite mobility and the very definition of 'elites' (a slippery topic), patronage of epinikian poets and how it varied from region to region, and the origins and development of panhellenic and

vi

Preface

local festivals and sanctuaries, are briefly touched on in the present book. But they will be explored in more detail in a forthcoming collection of papers which I am editing with Cathy Morgan. That book has its origin in a University of London research seminar which we co-organized in autumn 2002 on Athletics, Festivals, Sanctuaries, Elite Mobility, and Epinikian Poetry. In particular, some of the contributors to that book will explore the contribution of archaeology with more authority and in more depth than I am competent to do, though I hope I have remained reasonably alert to the material evidence. In that connection I should like to thank Cathy Morgan for all I have learned from her and not just about archaeology but about Pindar too, and late archaic and early classical Greek history generally. This book was written between 1999 and 2003; the germ of it formed my inaugural lecture 'Thucydides and Pindar', given as professor of classics and ancient history at University College London in October 2000. I was led into the inquiry by my ongoing work on a Thucydides commentary which has reached the 'Sicilian' books 6 and 7. That these very special books owe much to epic and tragedy has often been noticed, but Pindar seldom features in modern criticism. I was struck initially by the resemblances between the departure of the expeditionary force from Athens (Thucydides 6. 24, also 32 with its libations from gold and silver cups) and Pindar's description of the sailing of the Argonauts in Pythian 4. The emotive word Tr69os, desire for what is absent, features in both accounts, and the Thucydidean instance is a hapax, a unique occurrence of the word, in his History (below, pp. 40, 334). Naturally, Thucydides and Pindar cannot be treated in isolation from Herodotus and Homer. Bacchylides and Herodotus are anyway covered by my subtitle and fall within the direct scope of the book. The obvious literary objection to an enterprise like the present one is to point to wider attestations of the phenomenon under consideration. I discuss this problem briefly below in Chapter 6, but in the end I can only say that I have always tried to remember the risk. Precise-minded historians, on the other hand, may well object that not enough attention is paid in this book to the dating of particular odes of Pindar. This is, as I explain below, pp. 41-3, partly because we have reliable dates only for most (not all) Olympian and a few of the Pythian odes and virtually no good evidence for the Nemeans and Isthmians. Even today, modern scholars can be seduced into over-confident historical reconstructions based on very flimsy dating criteria or by circular assumptions (see e.g. pp. 163, 223). Uncertainties of this sort do not

Preface

vii

however matter very much for the social historian, or for any sort of historian who is prepared to forgo the quest for biographical facts and particular political detail in Pindar's poetry. Some of the most precise historical allusions are arguably to be found, not in the epinikian or victory odes —the Persian War references in Pythian I are exceptional— but in the fragmentary poems such as the paians (below, pp. 115, 181). However these poems are by their scrappy nature the hardest of all to date. This is a suitable moment to say that despite this book's subtitle I make use not only of the epinikians but of the fragmentary poems. The greater part of the research and writing was made possible by a year's sabbatical leave in 2000-I from my two departments (Greek and Latin; History) at University College London, during which time I held an AHRB major research award. I acknowledge gratefully the support so received from these sources. My main individual academic debt is to my friend and colleague Alan Griffiths, of the Greek and Latin department of UGL. In late 2002 he read and much improved a draft of the whole book and in 2004 the proofs. The usual exemption clause applies. Another more general debt I owe is to the stimulation provided by successive years of classics students, not just from UGL, who have taken my University of London MA course on Thucydides 6 and 7 since I arrived here in 1997. Thomas Heine Nielsen and Mogens Herman Hansen of the Copenhagen Polls Centre kindly allowed me an advance sight of the material on East Lokris and Opous, in 'An Inventory of Archaic and Classical Folds' (Oxford, 2004). I am grateful to Professor W. H. Race and Harvard University Press for permission to use translations from his excellent 1997 two-volume Loeb edition of Pindar. Figure 2 appears by permission of the Roman Society and Professor R. R. R. Smith, Figure 3 by permission of Oxbow books and Mr David Brown, and Figure 4 by permission of the Soprintendenza of antiquities, Trapani, and through the kindness of Professor B. A. Sparkes. S. Hornblower University Collge London August 2003 Note: P. J. Rhodes and R. Osborne (eds.) Greek Historical Inscriptions 404-323 BC (Oxford, 2003) appeared too late for me to use in the text, but cross-references will be found under 'Tod' in the 'inscriptions' entry in the Index Locorum, in square brackets.


TABLE OF C O N T E N T S

Illustrations Abbreviations

xii xiii

PART I: SHARED WORLDS I Introduction Plan of this book Greek athletics: the background The athletic, equestrian, and musical events at the festivals Epinikian (victory) odes The function of the epinikian ode: Pindar and modern anthropology Performance and audience Pindar and Thucydides: introductory Thucydides, Pindar and 'unitarianism' Dates The shared athletic milieu

3

2 Could Thucydides have known Pindar and did he? A personal meeting between Thucydides and Pindar? Did Thucydides know Pindar's poetry?

52

3 Content and Outlook Introductory remarks Hesychia Pindar and kingship theory Medicine, the politician as doctor Hope; justice and the stronger man; love of what is distant Patriotic death; ephemerality of life Intelligence and inborn excellence Ambition; stasis Political outlook

59

x

Table of Contents 4

Religion, Myths, Women, Colonization

87

Introduction The afterlife; immortality Personified abstractions Myths: women Colonial myths Dorieus of Sparta and the 'lost clod of earth' Myths as ways of rejecting or upstaging historical claims Kinship diplomacy Mixed colonial realities Myths of possession 5

People, Places, Prosopography, and Politics

129

Introduction: prosopography, Pindar, and Bacchylides Individuals and places (A): the wide sweep (places other than Aigina, Sparta, Kyrene, Athens) Dorieus the Rhodian; east Greeks 131; Pindar and Chios 145; Other east Greek places 156; Boiotia and central Greece 159; The north: Thessaly, Dodona and Molossia, Macedon, Thrace 170; The Peloponnese (part one) 182; Sicily and south Italy 186; The Peloponnese (part two): Korinth and Argos 201; Megara 206 Individuals and places (B): Aigina, Sparta, Kyrene, and Athens Aigina 207; Sparta 235; Kyrene 243; Athens 247 Provisional conclusions Politics and panhellenic sanctuaries

PART II: THUCYDIDES PINDARICUS 6

Introduction to Part II

269

Vocabulary and parallels Authors: why just Pindar? The plan of Part II 7

The Clearest Example of Thucydides Pindaricus: 5. 49-50.4, the Olympic Games of 420 BC

Why does Thucydides treat this episode so fully?

273

Table of Contents

xi

Lichas son of Arkesilas Analysis of Th. 5. 49-50.4 8 Statements of Method; Causation Introduction Selectivity Moralizing Scruples and self doubt Causation Contingency; Dorieus of Sparta; 'derailing individuals' 9

'Antiquarian' Excursuses

10 Speeches Introduction Content of the speeches Dialogue Appendix: Direct speech in Pindar and Bacchylides

287

307 317

326

11 Narrative 327 Introduction The end of book 5 as both closure and beginning Preparation (paraskeue}; ritual preliminaries; trumpets Agon and agonisma: struggle and prize The final sea-battle (7. 70-71); the Great Harbour as grandstand The responsion between the beginning and end of the expedition Nostos (homecoming), successful or humiliating The end of book 7 as false closure; book 8. I 12

Thucydides and Pindar: A Stylistic Comparison

354

Conclusion

373

Bibliography Index Locorum General Index

376 403 430

ILLUSTRATIONS

1. Map: The Mediterranean world of Pindar 2. Pindar: Aphrodisias portrait shield

xvi-xvii 55

3. The Motya charioteer

198

4. 'Megakles Hippokratous hippotrophos' ostrakon

250

ABBREVIATIONS

Ar. Pol. Arr. Anab. AR Austin B. Bowra GAIT2

CEG Davies, PMGF Diod. E. FGE FGrHist Fornara HCT HO Harding Hdt. Hicks and Hill Hill2 /.

Aristotle, Politics. Arrian, Anabasis of Alexander. Archaeological Reports. M. M. Austin, The Hellenistic World (Cambridge, 1981) (translated sourcebook). Bacchylides. C. M. Bowra, Pindar (Oxford, 1964). Cambridge Ancient History, and edn. (1961- ). Note esp. D. M. Lewis, J. Boardman, J. K. Davies and M. Ostwald (eds.), vol. 5, The Fifth Century BC (Cambridge, 1992) and D. M. Lewis, J. Boardman, S. Hornblower, and M. Ostwald (eds.), vol. 6, The Fourth Century BC (Cambridge, 1994)P. Hansen, Carmina Epigraphica Graeca, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1983-9) M. Davies, Poetamm melicomm graecorumfragmenta (Oxford,

1991).

Diodorus. Euripides. D. L. Page, Further Greek Epigrams (Cambridge, 1981). F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 15 vols. (Leiden, 1923-58). C. W. Fornara, Translated Documents, Archaic Times to the End of the Peloponnesian War, 2nd edn. (Cambridge, 1983). A. W. Gomme, A. Andrewes, and K. J. Dover, Historical Commentary on Thucydides, 5 vols. (Oxford, 1945-81). Hcllcnica Oxyrhynchia, cd. M. Chambers (Stuttgart, 1993). P. Harding, Translated Documents, From the End of the Peloponnesian War to the Battle of Ipsos (Cambridge, 1985). Herodotus. E. L. Hicks and G. F. Hill, Greek Historical Inscriptions (Oxford, 1901). G. F. Hill, revised by R. Meiggs and A. Andrewes, Sources for Greek History 478-431 Bc (Oxford, 1951). Pindar, Isthmian Odes.

xiv IG IvO LGPM LIMC LSJ9

LSAG2 ML

Michel Moretti M-W N. 0. OCD3 OGIS P. PMG Pi. Pol. Race RE Rutherford SEG Suppl. Hell. Syll 3 Th.

Abbreviations Inscriptiones Graecae (Berlin, 1873- ). W. Dittenberger and K. Purgold, eds., Die Inschriften von Otympia (Berlin, 1896). A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, 4 vols. published to date (Oxford, 1987-2000). Lexicon Iconographimm Mythologiae Classical, 19 vols. (Zurich, 1981-99). H. Liddell and R. Scott, revised by H. S. Jones, GreekEnglish Lexicon, 9th edn. (Oxford, 1940), with suppl. by P. G. W. Glare and others, 1996. L. H. Jeffery, revised by A. W.Johnston, Local Scripts of Archaic Greece (Oxford, 1990). R. Meiggs and D. Lewis, A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century BC, rev. edn. (Oxford, 1988). C. Michel, Recueil d' inscriptions grecques (Brussels, 1900-27). L. Moretti, Olympionikai (Rome, 1957; for 1970 and 1987 supplements see Bibliography under Moretti). R. Merkelbach and M. L. West, Fragmenta Hesiodea (Oxford, 1967). Pindar, Nemean Odes. Pindar, Olympian Odes. S. Hornblower and A. J. S. Spawforth (eds.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, 3rd. edn. (Oxford, 1996). W. Dittenberger, Orientis graeci inscriptiones selectae, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1903-5). Pindar, Pythian Odes. D. L. Page, Poetae Melici Graeci (Oxford, 1962). Pindar. Polybius. W. H. Race, Pindar, Loeb edn., 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1997) A. Pauly, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll, Real-Encyclopädie d. Klassischen Altertumswissenschqft ( 1 8 9 3 - 1 9 8 0 ) . I. Rutherford, Pindar's Paeans: A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey of the Genre (Oxford, 2001). Supplementumepigraphicumgraecum (1923– ). H. Lloyd-Jones and P. Parsons, Supplementum hellenuticum (Berlin, 1981). W. Dittenberger, Sylbge inscriptionum Graecarum, 4 vols., ed. 3 (Leipzig, 1915-24). Thucydides.

Abbreviations Tod

xv

M. N. Tod, Greek Historical Inscriptions, vol. I: To the End of the Fifth Century BC (Oxford, 1933); and vol. 2: 403 BC to 323 BC (Oxford, 1948). Numbering of inscriptions is continuous through the two volumes.

Figure I Map: The Mediterranean world of Pindar.


PART I Shared Worlds


I

Introduction

Olympia, mistress of truth (Pi. 0. 8. i-2)

For the poet Pindar, as for most Greeks including the historian Thucydides, victory in the Olympic games, held at Olympia in the western Peloponnese, was an achievement comparable to the finest of excellences known to man—water, gold, the sun (0. i. iff ). Pindar's epinikians or victory odes1 celebrated such victors, mostly in the four panhellenic games, the four prestigious sets of games open to all Greeks, and only to Greeks in our period. In the Olympic games of 420 BG, a politically charged episode occurred which Thucydides described fully (5. 49-50.4) and which will be the subject of Chapter 7 below. It nearly led to an armed attack on the sanctuary by the Spartans, the most powerful Greeks at the time, because they had been excluded from those games and because a Spartan called Lichas had competed in and won an equestrian event, posing initially as a Boiotian, and got into trouble with the judges when he claimed the victory for himself. One sometimes hears people saying that politics should be kept out of sport, often combined with a plea for a return to the ancient Olympic spirit. This idealistic view has been called the 'myth of Greek amateur athletics'.2 The myth is not entirely modern: ancient commentators propagated it too. Herodotus has a story of a Persian, Tritantaichmes, who hears that the Greeks are celebrating the Olympic games and is told they compete for an olive crown. He exclaims to his commander Mardonius 'What sort of men have you brought us to fight against, who contend not for money, but purely for the sake of excelling?' (8. 26). The story has some odd features. For instance it is not offered 1 Howatson 1989 has a good short defining entry 'epinikion', an entry of a sort which we have now included in the 2002 reprint of OCD3. For 'epinikian songs' as a Pindaric expression see further below, p. 17 citing,/V. 4. 78. 2 Young 1985.

4

Introduction

as a Greek comment but as a Persian comment on Greeks; and it is factually misleading because there were in fact big financial rewards for victors, which were however awarded by their home states rather than by the organizers of the games. (For Athens see below, p. 256.) It should be clear already that the idea that ancient sport was non-political rests on a misunderstanding of what athletics meant to ancient Greeks, who liked the political symbolism of winning—the kudos or prestige it conferred. 3 There is a great difference from today in that the Olympics were a religious event,4 unlike a modern horse race. The Lichas affair is important for the thesis of the present book, which seeks to establish an intertextual5 relationship between Thucydides the historian and Pindar the poet who celebrated victories at the games. With Lichas, the worlds of Thucydides and Pindar most obviously intersect.

Plan of this book In this introductory chapter I shall first provide background material on Greek athletics and on the main epinikian poets including and especially Pindar; I shall then consider briefly the curious parallels between modern attitudes to Pindar, Thucydides, and Homer, who as an undoubtedly shared and powerful influence must never be lost sight of for a moment, when conducting an operation of the present comparative type (see further below, Gh. 6). I shall then look at the evidence for the dating of Pindar's odes, after which I proceed to discuss the shared athletic milieu and to offer evidence that Thucydides was well aware of its importance; and I suggest that he sees the great military contest of the Peloponnesian War in a Pindaric, athletic way. Part I continues the examination of broad thematic and historical issues, beginning in Chapter 2 with the question: could Thucydides have known Pindar? More important, could he have known Pindar's poetry, and did he? Chapter 3 examines certain central, non-athletic themes and preoccupations of both Pindar and Thucydides. In Chapter 4, I consider myths, especially colonial myths, women and religion. Chapter 5 discusses overlaps and differences between the treatment of particular 3

Kurke 1993. Golden 1998: 10-23 (not altogether whole-hearted) does not really convince me to the contrary; for instance the distance of the sanctuaries from the stadia (pp. 21 ff.) at Nemea surely proves very little. 5 See below, Gh. 6 p. 269. 4

Plan of this book

5

individuals (including families), cities and places in Thucydides and Pindar. This chapter is organized geographically. In Part II I turn to literary affinities, taking the 'Lichas' chapters of Thucydides (see Gh. 7 below) as a starting point for an exploration of an intertextual relationship which (I shall argue) operates at many other points in Thucydides' History as well. The brief Chapter 6 sets out the four main ingredients of Thucydides' History which will be covered in the chapters following Chapter 7. The first is statements on methodology and causation; these are the subject of Chapter 8. Then in Chapter 9 I discuss excursuses (antiquarian). Direct speech and dialogue are the subject of Chapter 10, and narrative (especially that in the Sicilian books 6 and 7 of Thucydides) of Chapter n. The final chapter (12) is an attempt at a stylistic comparison between Thucydides and Pindar, which takes as its starting point the comments of the ancient literary critics, above all Dionysios of Halikarnassos, for whom Thucydides and Pindar were the best exponents of what he calls the 'severe arrangement'.

Greek athletics: the background The origins of Greek athletics have been thought to lie in killing. Sport, it is claimed by the ethological school of interpretation, derives from primitive hunting ritual and is a sort of sacrifice—the ritual sacrifice of physical energy.6 This theory places emphasis on the more violent form of food-collecting; but pastoralism was the dominant form of agriculture in prehistoric Greece. It is further claimed that the theory explains some later features of Greek athletics—the wearing of woollen fillets and wreaths (a throwback to primitive camouflage), anointing with oil ('originally' a way of throwing animals off the scent), temporary dietary and sexual taboos, which can be paralleled and explained by the practices of primitive hunters trying to preserve their bodily fluids. Not all of this is equally convincing, thus the best evidence for crowns and wreaths is from after the victory but the theory requires that athletes should have actually competed in crowns, and this is contrary to common sense. The idea that the origin of the games lies in death ritual is however 6 Sansone 1988, drawing on Meuh 1975 (orig. 1946) and Burkert 1979. For Greek sacrifice, including modern theories about it, seeR. G. T. P[arker], 'sacrifice, Greek', in OCD3.

6

Introduction 7

an important one. So is the related idea that funerary ritual was always closely linked to victory at the games.8 The connexion is clearly made in Olympian 89 for Alkimedon of Aigina. After an allusion to victories and a 'sixth garland [which] now wreathes them, won from the games that award crowns of leaves' (line 76),

the poet continues (77-8) 'and for those who have died there is also some share in ritual observances,'

This, it may be said is a particularly strong (and therefore slightly untypical) case because Alkimedon is a boy victor and his father is actually dead (line 81). The same is probably true of Asopichos of Orchomenos, the subject of Olympian 14. Here too death and athletic glory go hand in hand because Pindar sends what Charles Segal calls a 'message to the underworld' to Asopichos' father Kleodamos:10

To the black-walled house of Persephone go now, Echo, carrying the glorious news to his father (0. 14. 20-1)

The funerary aspect of victory in the games helps, as we shall see (below, Gh. 5 p. 200 on Akragas) to explain some of the ways in which athletic success is treated by the poets—not only Pindar but Empedokles. But it has been objected that even if this explanation is right it is not the whole story: the organization of the games on a grand scale is an 'ideological gesture by the aristocracy'.11 7

Meuh 1975. Kurke 1991: ch. 3; Thomas 1995: n $ f . and: 26 n. 168 (the epinikian ode a kind of graveoffering, in direct competition with other such offerings like gravestones and other concrete monuments). 9 This poem is the main focus of Kurke 1991: 65—70. 10 Segal 1985: 203. Segal 1985: 206f. and Kurke 1991: 68f. both also cite P. 5. 96-103, where it seems agreed that 'gentle dew', Spoata pa.X8a.Ka, means a sort of offering to the dead: see e.g. Schroeder 1922: 56, note on the passage. See also O.io. 91—3, noble deeds are in vain if you go to the house of Hades without song, aoi&ds arep. 11 Rose 1982: 55. 8

Greek athletics: the background

7

We shall also discuss later and in more than one different context (below, pp. aof., and Gh. 5 p. 200) the evidence for a related and semi-religious phenomenon, the unofficial practice of leaf-throwing or uAAo/3oAia as a way of greeting a victorious athlete. The practice has left many traces in Pindar,12 and it may be relevant to Thucydides' description of the reception of Brasidas at Ghalkidic Skione, garlanded by the citizenry and greeted 'like an athlete' (4. 121. i), though I myself prefer to translate the crucial but disputed word as 'they went up to Brasidas' rather than 'they offered [agricultural] first-fruits to Brasidas'.13 Only the latter rendering would give a really convincing allusion to uAAo/3oAia, though the whole sentence is one of the best and most remarkable pieces of evidence for enthusiastic fifth-century attitudes to athletic success, precisely because it comes in a sober historian not an epinikian poet. uAAo/3oAia has been described, again by the ethologist Burkert, as 'an abreaction of aggressive feelings'; Burkert connects it with purificatory rituals.14 The practice has been discussed not only by Pindarists but by students of Greek tragedy, above all because in a climactic scene in Euripides' Hecuba, Polyxena is pelted with leaves (line 573), and thus, in the words of the scholiast, 'showered with leaves, as if she were victorious in a contest', In this description of a female virgin sacrifice the honour is remarkable precisely because the athletic resonances make it so 'specifically masculine'.15 (For the great post-classical scholar Eratosthenes' speculations on the origins of 5f., are almost as explicit on the connection between games and ritual. It is not my purpose here to set out the entire factual background to the world of Greek athletics assumed and explored by the present book.17 The first games described for us in full detail are those 17 For a succinct overview see S. J. I[nstone], 'agones' in OCD3. Gardiner 1910 remains very useful on the facts, as do two more recent books, Harris 1964 and 1972. For a lively modern sociological account, with many contemporary allusions, see Golden 1998. The ancient Olympic games have attracted the largest volume of modern literature, partly because those games were indeed the most prestigious, partly because of interest in the topic generated among authors and their reading public every four years on the occasion of the modern Olympic games; note the publication date of for instance Finley and Picket 1976 — an Olympic year, or Golden 1998: 47: 'As I write, the Atlanta Olympics [of 1996] are about to begin'. The present book is of course no exception. It is a pity that no modern scholar has followed in the footsteps of Aristotle and Kallisthenes (p. 42 n. 167) by collecting the Pythionikai, thus providing a Delphic counterpart to Moretti 1 957 on the Olympics. As Golden 1 998: 36 says, the skew in our evidence towards the Olympics is partly a function of Pausanias' interests. He adds 'Of course, that preference is itself a reflection of Olympia's prestige'. But it remains regrettable that Pausanias did not tell us more about Pythian victors; he knew Delphi very well (bk. i o), and was well aware that there were statues of athletes there: see 10. 9. 2, where he seems to say (the text is slightly corrupt) that he will pass over the [statues of] athletes and musicians as being of no importance; and in any case —he adds —I feel I have said enough about athletes of any distinction in my book about Elis (i.e. Olympia). But he goes on to make an exception for the Delphic statue of the great athlete Phayllos of Kroton, for whom see Hdt. 8. 47, Plut. Alex. 34, Tod 1946: no. 21 (Athens, now IG i 3 823), Syll.3 30 (Delphi), and Neer 2002: 94f. (the Attic 'Phaullos' vases, one of which actually calls him 'pentathlos') . But we know of others, e.g. Theagenes or Theogenes of Thasos (Syll.3 36A), and Dorieus (Syll.3 82); Frazer 1898: 5. 260 notes that the athletic statues were inside the sacred area (the Altis) at Olympia, but outside it at Delphi, and that this may help to explain Pausanias' different handling of the two places. For 'agonistic' inscriptions generally see Moretti 1953 and Ebert 1972.


9

in book 23 of Homer's Iliad, where they commemorate the death of Achilles' friend Patroklos: a formalized, emphatic assertion of life and energy in the face of death.18 But this well-known, book-long, episode describing a single very special funerary occasion is actually not the passage where Homer comes closest to a reference to the Olympic or other recurrent panhelknic set of games. That passage is in Iliad 11 (lines 698-702) where Nestor briefly says that Neleus sent four prizewinning horses and a chariot to Elis (the city which in historical times controlled the Olympic games) where they were to run in the games for a prize, in fact for a tripod. Taplin19 well remarks of the event presupposed by this passage that it 'must have been perceived as some sort of validating forerunner of the Olympic games', though he should not have added 'it may be that too-early dating of Homer has led to the neglect of this allusion', because the word 'neglect' overlooks an ancient author very interested in Homer as history, namely Strabo.20 Strabo had meditated on just this question and this Homeric passage, making it clear that both he and Homeric commentators before him (surely including Eratosthenes, see FGrHist 241 FI/J., discussed below, p. 20) had grasped exactly the implications of Nestor's speech and had exhaustively argued about it (355G, 8. 3. 30). Strabo starts by saying that in the Trojan War period there were either no games in which the prize was a crown, or else they were not famous, because (he adds) Homer mentions neither the Olympic games nor any other games that are now famous. But then he continues with a concession: some think that Homer mentions the Olympic games when he talks of'prizewinning horses that had come to win prizes' (in other words he cites 'our' passage, Iliad n. 699-700). But Strabo himself is not quite convinced: he points out that this incident took place at Elis which, he says, is not quite the same thing as Olympia, and that the prize was a tripod rather 18 Funerary games were by no means the only sort; even in Homer, the games in Odyssey 8 have no funerary function. Games might also be inaugural, thus Alexander regularly holds cavalry and athletic contests as part of the ritual of city foundation (e.g. Arr. Anah. 4. 4. i). The Ten Thousand organize themselves so as to participate in a very full set of games, as part of a thank-offering for deliverance, but also surely from sheer/we de mare: Xen. Anab. 4. 8. 25-8. In Thucydides cf. Demosthenes' strategem at 5. 80. 3, carried out under the—evidently plausible—pretext of holding 'some gymnastic contest', dyoii'a riva Trpofiaaiv yvp,viKov—further proof, if proof be needed, that Thucydides knew all about this aspect of life which he normally under-reports. (Aineias Tacticus understood the civic risks of this sort of distracting activity: 17.1). One suspects that Greeks needed little excuse for holding games 19 and contests. Taplin 1992: 39 n. 54. 20 The standard modern ///^commentary (Hamsworth 1993: 301) also disregards Strabo completely at this point.

io

Introduction

than a crown. These two objections are strictly correct but (we may feel) a little captious, so if we go with Taplin not Strabo we can accept that Homer here reflects an existing historical reality. In antiquity itself it was believed that the Olympic games began in 776 BG; the computation was done by Hippias, a fifth-century citizen of, precisely, Elis. This date is well before the date at which most scholars nowadays think the Miadwas composed, so an oblique Homeric reference to the Olympic games is perfectly possible. (Archaeologists have wondered if the first Olympic games should be down-dated a little, to perhaps 700 BG, but at present they are neither convinced nor agreed about this).21 Thucydides does not register athletic victors as routinely often as does Herodotus, who tells us for instance that Philippos of Kroton was an Olympic victor who joined the Sicilian expedition of the Spartan Dorieus (5. 47, see below, pp. no, 141); that Phayllos, also of Kroton, was a Pythian victor who fought at the battle of Salamis (8.47, cf. n. 17); and that among the lonians killed at Sardis in the Ionian revolt was Eualkides the commander of the Euboian Eretrians there present, a man for whom Simonides wrote epinikian poetry (5. 102, see below, p. 23); not to mention a clutch of athletic victors from Herodotus' backward glances at the age of the tyrants or would-be tyrants.22 Thucydides does however mention the Olympic games and victors in them a number of times, starting with a discussion of athletic nudity in his introductory section, the so-called Archaeology (i. 6. 5). Like other items mentioned there, such as Delos (1.8), this reference is programmatic, a way of signalling the importance of this festival, just as Delos, the purification of Delos, and the Delian festival or Delia were important enough to be mentioned at regular intervals through the work (3. 104, 5. i, 8. 108. 4). The Olympic victor Kylon, who made an attempt at a tyranny in the late seventh century, is flagged by Thucydides as an Olympic victor (i. 126. 3), a fact also found in and perhaps drawn from Herodotus (5. 71). The link between political aspirations and athletic success is interesting and important as we shall see (pp. 46, 235^). 21 Morgan 1990: 47ff.; cf. Golden 1998: 64^ The sanctuary is much older than the foundation of the games; see Kyrieleis 20026: 218 for the Piith-century beginnings of cult at the site of the tomb of Pelops. He cites Pi. 0. io. 24f, dpxatV oaâri Trap TTeAoTroj, 'the ancient tomb of Pelops' at Olympia, where Herakles would found the games. 22 See 5. 71 (Kylon of Athens, see text below), 6. 122, if authentic, (Kallias of Athens), 6. 35-6 (Miltiades son of Kypselos, of Athens), 6. 103. 2 (Kim on son of Stesagoras, of Athens), 6. 125. 3 (Alkmaion of Athens), 6. 126. i (Kleisthenes of Sikyon), 6. 127. 3 (Pheidon of Argos who held the Olympic games by an act of usurpation from the Eleans), cf. 6.70. 3 (Demaratos king of Sparta).


11

In Thucydides' war-time narrative the Olympic games, which were held every four years, are registered fairly often. Those of 432 are conspicuously absent, though they must have fallen in the very fully described diplomatic run-up to the war.23 One can squeeze an awareness of the 432 festival out of Thucydides' statement that in 428 Dorieus the Rhodian pankratiast (for whom see p. 134 below) won for the second time, because in the nature of things his first victory was almost certainly in 432, although 436 cannot be quite ruled out.24 The 428 games in which Dorieus was victor get full coverage because of the anti-Athenian speeches made there (3. 8-15). This is a valuable indication that panhellenic games might be used as a forum for political debate. It would however be a mistake to think (as has been thought) that because the games were Dorian the Ionian Athenians must have been excluded in this wartime period.25 Things were not so partisan; the Spartans were excluded in 420, as we shall see (pp. 273, 282), but that was for definite and stated reasons. The games of 424 get no mention, but those of 420 are covered more fully than any games in any classical Greek historian (5. 49-50) and we shall return to them in Part II. The 416 games are those boasted about by Alkibiades (6. 16). Those of 412, the last Olympic year covered by Thucydides, do not feature in his narrative, unlike the Isthmian festival of that same year (8. 10, see below). Of the other three great games, the next to be founded, and the next most prestigious after Olympia, were the Pythian games held at Delphi and sacred to Apollo. (This inverts the order of oracular prestige and reasserts generational seniority: there was an oracle of Apollo's father Zeus at Olympia, but it counted for less than that at Delphi; it was not even the oldest or most important oracle of Zeus, which was at Dodona).26 These games were supposedly founded in 586 or 582 (the date is disputed).27 They were held every four years in the third year of each Olympiad, as the four-year cycles were called.28 A conspicuous Pythian element not found in the Olympic or other great games was the musical contests. The Pythian festival and games were controlled by the ancient multi-state organization known as the 23 See Hornblower 1992: 170, but the point was first drawn to my attention by the late D. M. Lewis. 24 Moretti 1957: no. 322. 25 Hornblower 1991: 388f. 26 See Parke 1967. 27 Mosshammer 1982, Brodersen 1990; N. J. R[ichardson], OCD3, 'Pythian Games'; Gebhard 2002: 222—224. 28 See the references, including cross-references, at OCD3, 'Olympiad'.

12

Introduction

Delphic amphiktiony, and this was one of the most important things it did.29 Thucydides often mentions Delphi, but he mentions the Pythian festival only once, in the first chapter of book 5, where he says the truce of 423 lasted 'until the Pythia', |U,e'xpi Uv9iu>v. There may be some textual corruption in the relevant sentence,30 but the allusion to the Pythia is not in doubt. The Isthmian games31 held on the Isthmus of Korinth, the doorway to the Peloponnese, were founded or reorganized as a panhellenic festival in 582, that is either in the same year as the Pythian or else four years after (see above). They happened every two years and were in the territory, and under the control, of the Korinthians. Thucydides mentions them once, under the year 412, when he says that the games happened at that time, and that the Athenians, to whom they had been announced, sent theoroi or sacred envoys there (8. 10. i). The Nemean Games, south-west of the Isthmus, were allegedly founded (or reorganized after an 'earlier' i.e. mythical foundation) in 573, but the panhellenic status of the Nemea perhaps came later in the century.32 The games happened every two years.33 Thucydides never mentions them; Nemea features (5. 58-60) but only as a briefly designated place, ev Neêa, 'at Nemea'. However, Stroud has gone a little further and plausibly suggested, on the basis of this section of narrative, that it was at the sanctuary of Nemea that Thucydides saw the Peloponnesian army whose splendid appearance he describes from what is surely autopsy (5. 60. 3): 'a panhellenic sanctuary would have been an ideal setting for a historian in search of aKpijBes TI [some precise information] abouthis campaign to get"close to events on both sides" [5.26. 5J'.34 For the question of the control of the Nemean games (politically disputed in the mid-fifth century between Korinthians and Argivesbut nominally exercised by the pzwnpolis of Kleonai) see below, p. 264. These are the four panhellenic games, the 'crown' (stephanitic) games at which crowns (laurel, parsley, and so on) were awarded. But from Pindar and inscriptions (like the Damonon inscription, below, p. 236) we know of many other minor, local games or agonistic (i.e. competi29

Lefevre 1998: 245. Hornblower 1996: 42if. 31 N.J. R[ichardson], OCD3, 'Isthmian Games'; Gebhard 2002; Morgan 2002. 32 N.J. R[ichardson], OCD3, 'Nemean Games'; Miller 1990: i—8 and 2002, esp. 230: the new and revised athletic festival, with a stadium modelled on that at Olympia, perhaps began in the second quarter of the 6th cent, but was not initially panhellenic. 33 Perlman 1989. 34 Stroud 1994: 292. 30


13

tive) festivals. Pindar mentions more than twenty such games. Of these many are listed, in sometimes roundabout ways, in the dense lists at 0. 13 lines loyff. and N. 10 lines 43ff.;35 and there is a similar list at Bacchylides 10. 30-5 (note also the equestrian 'Petraian' games held in Thessaly, celebrated in B. 14, an ode for Kleoptolemos of Thessaly, for whom see below, p. 174). At Pindar P. 8.78ff., the scholiast says that the 'local contest of Hera', "Hpas T' a-ywv' z-niywpiov, refers to Aiginetan games modelled on the Argive Heraia, 'because the Aiginetans are colonists of the Argives', O.TTOLKOL -yap 2lp-yeia>v; he goes on to quote the scholar Didymos for this kinship link between Argos and Aigina, using a powerful word and concept we shall discuss later (p. 116), 'through kinship', Sia rrjv avyyeveiav. Some 'local' games, like the Panathenaia at Athens (founded in 566), were in fact very grand indeed, and approximated and aspired to panhellenic status. It is a neat conjecture that Dorieus the Rhodian was spared from death at Athens in 407 BG (below, p. 136) because of his (epigraphically attested) victories in the Panathenaia, rather than in the more prestigious games which are all that Pausanias reports for him.36 The games to Hera at Argos just mentioned (the Heraia or Hekatombaia)37 also fall into this 'approximating' category. In his Delphic inscription, Theagenes of Thasos lists a victory in the long race (dolichos) Sit the Hekatombaia at Argos alongside those which he won in the four famous games (Syll? 36A). The Heraia were also probably the games in which Theaios of Argos was victor, as recorded in Pindar's brilliant 'Dioskouroi' ode, Nemean 10; the poet there mentions the 'contest for bronze', dycov xaAfceos (line 22). Race says this refers to a bronze shield awarded as prize, and cites the scholiast in support.38 The scholiast does indeed say this,39 but we also know that bronze hydriai (watervessels) were awarded,40 and in the 19708 there was discovered in one of the royal tombs at Macedonian Vergina a fifth-century bronze tripod explicitly announcing itself with the words 'I am from the games of Argive Hera' (SEG 29. 652, cf. n. 330 = 30. 52; for illustration see 35 S.J. I[nstone], OCD3 'agones' at 41 col. 2. The locations listed in 0.13 include Sikyon, the possible location of the victory celebrated in the sixth century by Ibykos Si66 = Davies PMGF 2481".; see below, p. 21. For local games at Thebes see Schachter 1981—94: 2. 25ff. Much of the evidence is from Pindar and Bacchylides. 36 Syll.3 82 n. 4. (Pomtow). 37 The scholiast to JV. 10 identifies the two names. 38 Race 1997: 2. in n. 5. 39 Drachmann 1913—1927: 3. 171. 40 Kelly 1976: 19411. 51.

14

Introduction

Hornblower 2002: go, fig. 8. i). So Pindar's vague 'bronze' could refer to such a tripod as easily as to a shield. The Macedonian provenance of the tripod is of great significance in view of the kinship links between the Macedonian kings and Argos; see below for this topic generally, a shared preoccupation of Pindar and Thucydides, and in particular for Thucydides' comment that Perdikkas king of Macedon allowed himself to be swayed by such kinship considerations in 418/7 BG (5. 80. 2; there is a Macedonian coin of King Archelaos with the Argive wolf, for which emblem cf. below, p. 127).41 We have always known from Herodotus that a Macedonian king proved his Greekness by showing descent from Argos, and was therefore allowed to compete in the Olympic games (Hdt. 5. 22);42 now we can add that Macedonian kings competed in games at Argos itself. There are then many local games in Pindar but not in Thucydides, but conversely Thucydides mentions one set of local games not celebrated by Pindar in an epinikian ode (but see below), the Delia on Delos. He tells us (3. 104. 3) that there was in old times a gymnic and musical contest there and that women and children attended the festival (eOewpovv), just as they do now at the Ephesia (probably to be identified with the Panionia in Asia Minor).43 The Athenians 'purified' the island and reconstituted the Delian festival and games in 426 BG, adding horse races which had not existed there previously (3. 104. 6); they also made it quadrennial ('penteteric') presumably as opposed to annual (though Laidlaw inferred from a passage in Plato's Phaedo that a smaller annual festival went on alongside the quadrennial; the Panathenaia would be a parallel).44 Again (cf. above on the Olympic games of 428 BG) we should note the political intention in all this: part of the Athenian aim was surely to reply in kind to the very recent Spartan foundation of Herakleia in Trachis (3. 92), the motive of which I have argued was in part to increase Spartan influence at the Delphic amphiktiony.45 For this sort of competition for influence at the panhellenic shrines see further below, p. 264: the indirect evidence of Pindar and his scholia is crucial in reconstructing the essentially nonThucydidean picture. But for an imperially significant Athenian religious presence at Delos in particular there is direct evidence in Pindar and Bacchylides, if we move away from their epinikian odes. Pindar's Paian 5 (05 Ruther41 42 44

M. Price 1974: pi. 50.1 owe my knowledge of this to Polymnia Tsagouna. ts With Badian 1982: 34f. Hornblower 1982*. 45 Laidlaw 1933: 68f., citing PI. Phaed. 580. Hornblower 1992, cf. 1991: 522.


15

ford), 'for the Athenians to Delos', is a poem telling of Athenian colonization of Euboia and the Kyklades (cf. Th. 7. 57. 4 for Andros and Tenos, also Keos, for which see below, p. 121). The poem must antedate the reconstitution of the main Delia festival in 426 (because Pindar was surely dead by then); and Thucydides' statement that the festival 'had fallen into disuse' by then, KareXvOr], isa explicit, so to connect it with a shadowy pre-426 Delia is implausible unless we suppose that Thucydides' verb was far too absolute.46 There is no difficulty in supposing that even before 426 there was Delian religious activity by the Athenians, for whom Delos was so imperially important from the outset (i. 97. 2 for Delos as the treasury of the Athens-led lonians, and for the theme of Ionian kinship see the crucial i. 95. i). That importance was never, I have argued elsewhere,47 lost sight of even after the treasury itself was moved from Delos to Athens in (probably) 454. A context for Pindar's poem is not hard to imagine; Rutherford suggests that it should be connected with the sacred delegations sent to Delos from Marathon (FGrHist 328 Philochoros F75)48 and this is possible though we need not be too specific.49 Plutarch's Life ofMkias (3. 5) says that 'the cities', at TToAets, an expression which surely includes Athens but other cities as well,50 sent disorganized choruses to Delos until Nikias as leader of the Athenian sacred delegation (theoria) smartened the Athenian outfit up, at a date which surely falls later than 426, or else Plutarch would have associated the ultra-pious Nikias with the great purification of Delos and the refoundation of the Delia, as he nowhere does. 51 1 suggest that 46

47 48 Hornblower 1991: 522. Hornblower 1991: 520. Rutherford 2001: 298. The hypothetical annual festival mentioned above (with n. 44) is presumably ruled out because ofThucydides' general reference to disuse; see Hornblower 1991: 518. 50 Scott-Kilvert 1960: 210 translates this'other cities', but that is not what the Greek says. On the other hand I should not in my Thucydides commentary (Hornblower 1991: 518) have written as if the passage referred to the Athenian delegation only. 51 See Hornblower 1991: 518, following Boeckh who argued that Nikias' theoria to Delos must fall later than 426 because Plutarch implies it had happened several times before Nikias made things smarter and tidier. I would no longer put such weight on this, because the reference is (see n. 50 above) to 'the cities' not to 'the Athenians'. Instead I would take the reference to disorganization to extend over many years before 426 and to be evidence for routine theoriai or sacred delegations from many cities (Athens included) for many years 49

before 426. The other argument for dating Nikias' activity at Delos later than 426 (see text above and Hornblower 1996: 518) still stands and seems to me powerful, viz. that if Nikias were responsible for the purification and refoundation, Plutarch (who knew his Thucydides well) would have told us so. Rutherford 2001: 335 says that Nikias led the Athenian theonato Delos 'at the time of the plague' and cites Plutarch who however does not mention the plague. It is amodern importation. For further discussion see Piccirilli 1993: 24of.

16

Introduction

this reference to 'the cities' implies (see n. 50) that regular and routine choruses were sent to Delos during \hepentekontaetia (480-430 BC) on all sort of sacred occasions (without any anti-Thucydidean implication that a definite and particular Delia, annual or quadrennial, existed in this pre-426 period) and from many Greek states—but especially from Athens the great sea-power. A strong presence at Delos was, throughout classical and early hellenistic history, a means of asserting maritime power in the Aegean sea.52 Pindar's poem, like Euripides' Ion of 412 Be53 (line 1582), propounds a politically convenient view of Athens as metropolis of Ionia and the Gycladic islands, a view clearly but very succinctly implied by Thucydides also (i. 95. i).54 There were no decades in the fifth century when a chorus of Athenians could not have sung Pindar's Paian 5 at Delos. Similar considerations apply to Bacchylides 17, 'The Unmarried Men (ijifleoi) or Theseus, for the Keans to perform at Delos'.

The athletic, equestrian, and musical events at the festivals Of the great variety of competitive events at the panhellenic games, the most glorious and expensive was the four-horse chariot race or tethrippon, though Pindar's Olympian i, perhaps his grandest production of all, was written for the hells or single-horse race. Olympians 5 and 6 were for the mule race, for whose short history see below (p. 37). But in addition to such equestrian competitors and races, Pindar also celebrated other events with social and economic connotations which were (up to a point, see next para.) different from chariot racing. These included boxing (0. 7 for Diagoras of Rhodes), wrestling, and the boxing-cum-wrestling event (pankration) whose extreme violence Instone has rightly insisted on (see e.g. N. 2 and 3; Bacchyalides 13).55 Other 'gymnic' contests were the running races: the stadion, the diaubs or double stadion (P. 10, N. 8), the long race or dolichos (0. 12) and the pentathlon (0. 13), a combination of running (stadion), discus, javelin, long jump, 52 See Tod 99 for the Spartans after their defeat of Athens in 405 EG and Dtirrbach 1921-2: 17-21 no. 13 for the Delos-centred'nesiotic league' or league of islanders founded by Antigonos and his son Demetrios in about 31580. 53 Hornblower 2002^: 128—9; Zachana 2003: 3—5, 48—55. 54 On all these topics see Smarczyk 1990. 55 Instone 1989 and 1996: 143.

Athletic, equestrian, and musical events

17

and wrestling. For the political significance of Pindar's view that the pentathlon was not part of the original programme see below, pp. ii3f and n. 95, discussing the evidence of Isthmian i and Olympian 10. The hoplite race in armour was introduced at relatively late dates (520 BG at Olympia, 498 at Delphi) and is celebrated in only one surviving epinikian poem, Pythian 9. At Olympia and elsewhere this event closed the programme. For Gardiner this was because it signified a return to real life; for P. W. Rose more recently, this final positioning of the hoplitodromia is evidence of an insistence on specifically hoplite as opposed to aristocratic arete and is an expression of an ideological struggle between the social classes.56 Perhaps, but Telesikrates of Kyrene, celebrated in Pindar's best manner in Pythian 9 with the poet's usual emphasis on ancestral quality (lines 105, 121), does not sound much like a representative of a new anti-aristocratic order. Some of Pindar's odes were for boys' rather than mens' events; for female (equestrian) victors see below, p. 100. We should not forget the Pythian musical contests: Pythian 12 is for a victory of Midas of Akragas in the pipe-playing event. (See below, p. 199.) But the social and financial connotations of such gymnic events did not differ altogether from chariot and other equestrian events. To be sure, horse-breeding, especially for the four-horse chariot race, needed wealth at the very top end of the scale. P. W. Rose is however right to insist57 that even gymnic athletics, at any rate when carried on at or close to the panhellenic level which is the subject of the present book, needed leisure for training and the wealth needed to pay for professional trainers, of the sort mentioned from time to time by Pindar. (See below, pp. 53, 252 for the Athenian Melesias, one of the more famous ofthese.)

Epinikian (victory) odes 'Epinikian poetry', that is 'poetry for (athletic) victory', is an expression which goes back to Pindar himself. Nemean 4, for the boy wrestler Timasarchos of Aigina, refers to 'epinikian songs', ITTIVIKIOI doiSai (line 78). It might therefore seem obvious that epinikian was thought of as a distinct genre. But the position is not quite so straightforward. First, 56 57

Gardiner 1910: 286, cf. 70; Rose 1992: 160 n. 25. Rose 1982: 57.

18

Introduction

we shall see shortly (p. 30) that epinikian borrowed freely from and imitated other poetic genres. Second, the word 'epinikian' was not mandatory in antiquity even for those odes which clearly celebrated athletic victories. Thus Athenaios (573F) refers to the poem we call Olympian 13, for Xenophon of Korinth, as an 'encomium', e'yccujuiov, although Pindar wrote a separate category of encomia i.e. non-athletic praise poems (fragments 118-28).58 Of the so-called 'epinikian' odes, Neman 11 is non-athletic (it was written for the installation of Aristagoras of Tenedos as councillor), and might almost have been classed as an encomium; it presumably found its way into the epinikian category only because it has so much to say about Aristagoras' early athletic successes. In the present section I shall ignore these unclarities at the edges of definition, and shall consider the history and origins of epinikian poetry as if it were a precise entity. Since as we have seen all four of the great glory-conferring festival games were well under way by the archaic period, and since even an archaic poet as early as Homer has Achilles singing of the 'glories of men' (Iliad 9.189, surely not just military glories),59 the genre of athletic victory odes very probably pre-dated the fifth century, the age of Pindar and Bacchylides. As Pindar himself says, 'truly the hymn of victory existed long ago, even before that strife arose between Adrastos and the Kadmeians', (N. 8. 50-3), and it would be odd to say this if the genre were an invention of his own life-time. Or as Barron has nicely put it, 'it is in the last degree improbable that archaic victors were content merely with the ritual cry of r-^veAAa'.60 Barron 58 Maehler, followed by Race 1997: 2. 3498"., assigns Fi22, a poem for Xenophon of Korinth, to the 'encomia' group. But in fact Athenaios, our source for the poem, carefully distinguishes between the 'encomium' Olympian 13, whose first line he quotes, from the poem he is about to quote in full and which van Gromngen (i 960) more plausibly treats as a skohon or drinking-song. A subversive thought: can we be sure that all the other poems listed in modern editions as encomia were not really bits of epinikian poems? Might Fi20 for Alexander son of Amyntas not have celebrated the Olympic victory recorded by Herodotus (5. 22)? 59 But on praise poetry see the important remarks of Thomas 1995, rightly noting (p. 116) that poets were in competition not only with each other but with other 'modes of commemoration and transmission of fame' such as funerary monuments and epigrams: 'it is far too simple to say that the poet's mam function was to preserve and perpetuate glory', because there were other ways of doing this. See further below, Gh. 3 p. 85 for the question of ideology here raised, and Thomas in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). 60 So rightly Barron 1984: 2of. in his discussion of this passage. Note however that Pindar sometimes has political reasons for alleging great, in fact mythical, antiquity for an athletic institution, cf. below, pp. H3f. for his anti-Elean or at any rate non-Elean account of the

Epinikian (victory) odes

19

is surely right but his way of making the point needs elucidation. The word tenella was supposedly onomatopoeic, an imitation of the twang of a lyre string. On purely empirical grounds this 'twang'-theory seems more convincing than the rival explanation that the sound imitated was that of a pipe.61 That is, I suggest that 'twang' and 'tenella' are both onomatopoeic and in something like the same way. Eratosthenes (quoted by scholiast 'k' on Pi. 0. 9. i) discussed the cry of tenella and left it open whether the tenella-uttering vocalist, whom he identified with the chorus-leader or e£apxos, stood substitute either for the absent piper orfor the absent lyre-player, o avA-rjTrjs rj 6 Ki9apiar^s (FGrHistz\\ F44, probably from Eratosthenes' important treatise on Old G omedy rather than from his work on Olympic victors).62 Our earliest, but indirect, knowledge of the cry of tenella derives from the opening lines of Pindar Olympian 9, for Epharmostos of Opous— the poem which the scholiast (above) explicated by reference to Eratosthenes. The poem begins vdev 'OAfjitma, /caAAtvt/cos' d Tp

The song of Archilochos resounding at Olympia, that triumphal hymn swelling with three refrains.63

To explain this, the scholiasts quote lines of the seventh-century poet Archilochos (F3I2 West, though West classes this among the 'spurious' fragments of Archilochan poetry):

tenella, hail Herakles, glorious victor and king, you and lolaos, two spearsmen, tenella [etc., as in line i].

Eratosthenes, quoted by scholiast 'k' as we have seen, notes that this Olympic games themselves in 0. 10. But it is not easy to apply that sort of reasoning to the institution of the epmikian odes (Barren 1984: 20). 61

Dunbar 1995: 76gf has a very useful discussion of the words rrjv€\\a KO.\\IVIKOS at the very end of Aristophanes' Birds (1061765). She seems to prefer the Aristophanic scholiast's explanation that the word tenella imitated the sound of pipe-playing, while believing that this scholiast also (like the Pindaric scholiast) got his facts from Eratosthenes. In which case the Aristophanic scholiast made (I would say) the wrong choice between the two alternatives offered by Eratosthenes and we are free to disagree with him. 62 For which see Susemihl 1891-2: i. 425; Fraser 1972: i-457f.

2o

Introduction

song of Archilochos was 'not an epinikian but a hymn to Herakles'. The negative formulation of this comment is interesting, as negative formulations often are. Perhaps someone else had claimed that Archilochos wrote the first epinikian ode, and Eratosthenes' word 'not' is polemical. Or (likelier I think) Eratosthenes is making the point that contrary to what you might be forgiven for thinking, the cry of tenella was not always and not necessarily appropriate for athletic victories as opposed to victories generally. But Pindar's roundabout allusion to the tenella is surely evidence that the cry was still heard at Olympia in his day, and probably much earlier as well, even though its specifically athletic use cannot safely be pushed back to Archilochos and the seventh century. Just what sort of honours early athletes did receive was a topic discussed in antiquity, indeed by Eratosthenes again (FGrHist 241 Fizj.), though in another context (this time the book on Olympic victors, contrast the tenella fragment above). The Euripidean scholiast is commenting on the poet's description of the pitiful death of Hekabe's daughter Polyxena, on whom people threw leaves, uAAois e/3aAAov (line 574); we discussed this line and this scholion earlier (p. 7). The scholiast quotes a long extract from Eratosthenes, preceded by the statement that Euripides is here being anachronistic (i.e. because really there were no 'stephanitic' or panhellenic games in Trojan War times, cf. above, p. 9, for Strabo on this point).64 Eratosthenes says that in olden times (•TTaAcu) men competed without [the incentive of] prizes, but instead the spectators used to bring to the victor what they could best afford (or rather 'what each had plenty of, eWcr-ros OTTWS rjimopei) and throw it at him as a kind ofemnos or voluntary shared contribution.65 He then goes on to describe how travellers (? the Greek is e^Tropeuoêvotj gave various gifts [there is some textual corruption at this point], those close by crowned him, and those further away pelted him with flowers and leaves. And so on. This account of the origins of phyllobolia is perhaps no more than intelligent inference, like Thucydides' own speculations about what happened in olden times—-n-dXai again—at the Olympic games (i. 6.5, the athletes originally competed in loincloths, etc.). But it is not absurd to wonder if not only the garlanding and crowning so often 63

See Gerber 2002: 2iff. See (briefly) Easterling 1985: 8, though in view of the importance of athletics in Greek life I am not sure why she says 'oddly enough games and related matters crop up quite often' (my italics). 65 For this word and concept see P. G. M[illett] in OCD3 'eranos', and Hornblower 1991: 3iif. onTh. 2. 43. i. 64


21

referred to in epinikian poetry, but epinikian poetry itself, did indeed develop out of the two early phenomena which attracted Eratosthenes' interest, namely spontaneous phylbbolia and ritual cries oftenella. The first solid name we can now associate with epinikian poetry is that of a western Greek of the mid-sixth century BG, Ibykos ofRhegion, modern Reggio di Calabria, in south Italy. Ibykos the epinikian poet has been revealed to us only as a result of papyrus finds published and interpreted in and since the late ig6os; and 1984 was a specially important date in Ibykos studies because in that year John Barron made a good though inevitably speculative case for assigning particular papyrus fragments to four particular victors or cities.66 Ibykos flourished in about 550-520 BG and supposedly moved to Samos at some point, in the time of the tyrant Polykrates (about 535-522), whom he celebrated in his poetry.67 Traffic between later archaic Samos and the West is securely attested: after the failure of the six-year Ionian revolt in 494 BG (Hdt. 6. 22-5 and 7.164; Th. 6.4. 5-6, with some numismatic support) a group of Samians fled to Zankle on the north-east angle of Sicily, a city which was later renamed Messene, the modern Messina, opposite Rhegion/Reggio.68 Barron69 has ingeniously suggested that a substantial fragment of Ibycus (Si66, Davies /MGF249f.) was for a Spartan athletic victor; allusions to wrestling and running can be confidently restored at lines 36-7 (TraAatjôawat re KM Sp[oju,-); line 30 certainly mentions a dweller in Lakedaimon, AO.K}eSaiôva vaio[, and those Spartan heroes the Dioskouroi feature conspicuously (lines 15-21). If the victor was really compared favourably with Ionian [? and Achaian] rivals (line 28, ]av 'Idovas OVT' d[v' .Mâiou?)70 that would be of great interest as anticipating the ethnic polarities of the fifth century, when the Spartans founded a colony at Herakleia in Trachis with a manifesto on panhellenic lines, except that it stipulated that no lonians orAchaians need apply (Th. 3. 92. 5, under the year 426 BG). For the importance of a sixth-century epinikian ode for a Spartan, in view of the apparent absence of such odes in the output of Pindar and Bacchylides in the next century, see below, p. 235. Other—desperately fragmentary—poems of Ibykos may have 66

Barren 1984. For a succinct but authoritative account of his life and work see G. C[arey] in OCD3 'Ibycus', and for the testimonia and fragments see Davies PMGFi. 236-305 or in Campbell I 9968lBarron 1966: 40—5. See my forthcoming commentary on Th. 6. 69 Barron 1984: 20 for the athletic aspects and for the Spartan aspects see esp. 21. 70 That is the suggestion of Barron 1984: 21, cf. Davies' apparatus. 67

22

Introduction

celebrated victors from Sicilian Leontini (8220, Davies PMGFi. 264) and perhaps Syracuse (8323, Davies i. 299). There is even an intriguing possibility that Ibykos wrote an ode (8221, Davies 265) for a wellattested Athenian Kallias; for this see below, p. 248. Archilochos is an irrelevance for our epinikian purposes. Ibykos is much better evidence thanks to recent finds, but he nevertheless survives in a sadly fragmentary state. I can find no evidence that Stesichoros wrote victory odes, as has been claimed recently.71 Our next poet, Simonides, is a more substantial figure, though even here P. J. Parsons notes that no poem of his survives intact.72 He was Bacchylides' uncle, and like his nephew was a native of loulis on Keos, modern Kea (see below, p. 120). Forty years ago G. M. Bowra wrote that 'The Epinician, so familiar from Pindar, seems to have owed much to Simonides'.73 Our knowledge of one important aspect of Simonides has been transformed since the publication in 1992 of the so-calledNew Simonides. This is a substantial fragment of an elegiac poem about the decisive battle of Plataia in Boiotia, fought between the Greeks and Persians 479 BG, described by Herodotus in book 9, gracefully alluded to by the Athenian Aeschylus as won'under the Dorian [i.e. Spartan] spear' (Persai line 817), and celebrated by Pindar in much the same vein at Pythian i. 77-8, [from Salamis I shall earn the gratitude of the Athenians], 'and at Sparta I shall tell of the battle before [Mount] Kithairon in which conflicts the curve-bowed Medes suffered defeat', . 74 But the new poem does not directly further our knowledge of the epinikian aspect of Simonides, except (an important exception) that the parallel which the poem draws between Pausanias the Spartan regent, a reallife Spartan commander, and Achilles75 is analogous to the way Pindar uses mythical heroes to offset his human athletic victors. 71 Burnett 1985: 171 n. 2 says that Simonides is often reported as the inventor of choral epinikian (there follows a reference to Lesky), but she then goes on to say that there are 'fragments from Stesichorus that seem to come from formal victory odes (7/512 PMGf. The reference to PAfGhowever works only for Simonides not Stesichoros, and I am not sure what Stesichoros fragments she has in mind. 72 See his excellent entry 'Simonides' in OCD3. 73 Bowra 1961: 310. For the fragments of Simonides' epinikian poetry see PMG 506-20 and perhaps 555. I do not know why Page in PMG did not include Athen. 36, which says that an Olympic victor called Leophron (ethnic unknown, see Moretti 1957: no. 247) feasted everyone at the festival, like Alkibiades, and that Simonides wrote an epinikian for him. It seems to me to be in roughly the same category as no. 518 (= Hdt. 5. 102. 3) i.e. it is more of a testimomum than a true fragment. 74 See Parsons 1992 and the essays collected in Boedeker and Sider 2001. 75 Parsons 1992: 32.


23

Thucydides' predecessor Herodotus refers more or less explicitly to epinikian poetry by Simonides, when he records the death of the successful athlete Eualkides of Eretria (5. 102. 3 = Simonides F5i8, see above, p. 10), ' a man who won crown contests [cf. p. 12 above] and was much praised by Simonides of Keos', Another Simonidean athlete, but an unsuccessful one, has been detected in Herodotus. He is Krios of Aigina, whose name means 'Ram' and whom the Spartan king Kleomenes warned to get his horns sheathed in bronze (6. 50. 3).76 He looks forward to the long list of Aiginetan athletes celebrated by Pindar and Bacchylides, but this ram, said Simonides ^507), was 'fleeced, and no wonder, when he came to the glorious wooded sacred precinct of Zeus [Nemea? or Olympia?]', €TTf£a9' 6 Kpios OVK deiKfws e\9d>v es evSevSpov dy\aov A LOS re/jievos. That is, the play on the name was already made or at any rate recorded by the contemporary poet, and Herodotus' name play a generation later was secondary and perhaps derivative. The 'fleecing' looks like a mocking allusion to some defeat at the games.77 Simonides is nowhere mentioned by Thucydides, who does however quote an epigram which in antiquity was attributed to Simonides, namely the boastful epigram which Pausanias the Spartan regent put up at Delphi and which was almost immediately erased either by the Spartans or (more probably, see n. 80 below) by the Amphiktionic council which looked after the affairs of the sanctuary. (See Th. i. 132. 2, FGE XVIIIa; for the attribution to Simonides see Paus. 3. 8. 2 and Anth. Pal. 6. 197).

Pausanias dedicated this memorial to Phoibos Apollo when he had destroyed the army of the Persians.

This is cleverly ambiguous (does 'he' refer to Apollo or more ambitiously to Pausanias, i.e. which of them did the destroying?),78 but the modern consensus79 discards the epigram as not authentically Simonidean, 76 For the characteristically Herodotean play on the name Krios see Hornblower zoooa: 134 and 13511. 21. For the odes on Eualkides and Krios see Molyneux 1992: 45-54. 77 Bowra 1961: 313; for the Aiginetan aspect see below, pp. 2i8f. For the ode as somehow hostile to Krios see Molyneux 1992: 51. 78 Barren 1988: 617. 79 Page 1981: 216f. is very confident ('its ascription to Simonides is, as usual, fictitious').

24

Introduction

in which case it would be one of admittedly many such false ascriptions to the great man. But the New Simonides (above) does prove a certain preoccupation on that poet's part with Pausanias the regent, who in the poem gets elevated extraordinarily, so one might want to reopen the question of attribution of the epigram. If the boastful epigram were by Simonides, as I hereby suggest is after all possible, Thucydides would not necessarily have mentioned the fact; after all he suppresses the very plausible amphiktionic aspect to the affair altogether, so that we know about it only from the Demosthenic speech Against Neaira in the fourth century (Dem. 59. 98).80 Gomme said of the ascription of the Pausanias epigram to Simonides that it would be 'interesting, if true', and I take this to mean he was at least prepared to entertain the possibility of its truth. Since the epigram was so quickly erased, Thucydides— who was surely not yet born in 479—could not have inspected it as a physical object at Delphi, and therefore must have had it (we are told by D. L. Page) from 'oral tradition'; but why could it not have been from knowledge of Simonides' genuine output?81 That is as far as we can get to a direct link between Thucydides and Simonidean praise poetry (admittedly non-athletic), except to note the curious fact that Thucydides himself was supposed82 to have crossed over into Simonidean territory by writing a fine four-line epigram on Euripides (FGE 307 f.) which I see no reason to deny him (though Timotheos was also canvassed as the author in antiquity, vit. Eur. 4). It starts with the very Thucydidean thought that 'all Greece is the memorial of Euripides', ^vrjua êv 'EAAds 0.770.0' EvpnriSov ('though', it continues, 'his bones are in Macedon', with the thought here compare the well-known words of Pericles' Funeral Oration, 'the whole earth is the tomb of famous men', dvSpwv Th. 2. 43. 3 (I am aware that a sceptical response will be to say that these correspondences are the fingerprints of a forger). The second couplet begins with the splendid expression 'his fatherland was Athens, the Greece of Greece', and Athenaios (i8yd), who incidentally accepted Thucydidean authorship for the epigram, explicitly compared this to Pindar's equally fine phrase about Athens as the bulwark of Greece, 'E\\dSos epeiCTjua (Fy6). From Thucydidean awareness (the 'Pausanias the regent' epigram), 80 81 82

See Hornblower 1991: 218; Trevett 1990: 411. Gomme, HCT\. 434; Page 1981: 216. Page 1981: 307 and Scullion 2003: 399 are both sceptical.


25

and perhaps imitation (the Euripides epigram), of Simonides' exaltation of non-athletic individuals, I return to the narrower issue of Simonides' strictly epinikian poetry. The fragments are numerous and were composed for all sorts of event, gymnic (F5o6, running; 507 wrestling; 508, the pentathlon; 509-10, boxing) and equestrian (FF5ii—14). The anecdote cited below (p. 37) about Simonides' poem for a mule victory by Anaxilas tyrant of Rhegion brings us right into the historical subject-matter of the present book, because Anaxilas' tyranny lasted for roughly the first quarter of the fifth century and he was thus a contemporary of such great figures as Theron and Hieron, the recipients of poems from Pindar and Bacchylides. The poem for Anaxilas the athlete is what marks Simonides off from Ibykos, who wrote a poem for Polykrates83 and wrote epinikian odes for athletes but did not write an epinikian ode for Polykrates; nor do we know that Polykrates was in fact a victorious athlete. And the same Anaxilas poem ranges Simonides with Pindar and Bacchylides. Why the change? Why no athletic victory odes for Kylon of Athens, or for Kleisthenes of Sikyon, who unlike Polykrates did win at Olympia? My own answer is that we should wait and see. In other words, perhaps there were. Ibykos' epinikians were a surprise so thatpre-ig67 accounts of him are now badly out of date; and there is absolutely no reason why future papyrus finds should not change the picture radically yet again. In 1982 P. W. Rose wrote that'the first known epinician ode dates from 520 BC,M and he proceeded (cautiously) to suggest that in origin the genre represented an aristocratic 'escalation in ideological warfare', a response to 'the more threatening aspects of the relatively "democratic" tyrannies'. The evidence about Ibykos may mean that 520 is too late for this to be quite right; but in any case I am not sure what the 'relatively "democratic" tyrannies' are supposed to be on this theory.85 Only those in existence in or about 520 (such as the Peisistratid at Athens)? But the traditions imply that much earlier tyrannies, such as the Kypselid tyranny at Korinth, could be so described. The case for the posited ideological escalation needs to be made out more clearly before it can be connected with what I suspect was the slow growth of epinikian poetry. Conversely it is unsafe to argue from a link 83

Barren 1969. Rose 1982: 55. He does not say what poem he dates to 520 EG, and rightly begins his discussion by saying that we 'cannot say with any certainty when epinicia began to be composed'. Rose 1992: ch. 3, a revised version of Rose 1982, is more cautious. 85 See Thomas in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming) for good discussion of this aspect of epinikian poetry. 84

26

Introduction

between proper democracy combined with gymnic athletic success on the one hand, and absence of epinikian poetry on the other. Stephen Miller has recently tried to do this with late archaic Kroton which he regards as democratic but also prominent in the sphere of gymnic athletics. But a single epinikian fragment of Simonides, for a Krotoniate86 athlete Astylos (F. 506), renders the theory in its simple form untenable. (See below, p. 252.) Why did epinikian poetry come into being at all? I distinguish between origins and social functions and shall consider functions in the next section. The distinction is (it may be felt) artificial or even suspect, because, for instance, the widely held recent view that epinikian poetry signifies and performs a reintegration with the community at home can be and has been combined with a theory about polls development, and any such theory must be rooted in time. 87 1 do not wish to offer a critique of this or other such theories but to offer one of my own. It is that epinikian poetry may have been colonial in origin, and that the colonial practice affected the metropolitan rather than the other way round. In something of the same way, the polls itself may well have crystallized in colonial contexts and have then been returned to the metropolitan environment by a sort of back-seepage. That is, the communities from which settlers embarked were for understandable military reasons less tightly organized than the communities they founded in hostile terrain. Now praise poetry singles out and glorifies the outstanding individual, and one obvious category of such individual is the oikist or city founder. Such people were regularly and from early dates accorded heroic honours in the technical sense. The link between athletes and oikists has been noted and willbe discussed later in this book.88 Here we should note the importance of the western, colonial, context of what may well be the first hero-cult for a living person, the heroization of the Olympic boxer Euthymos of Epizephyrian Lokri in south Italy.89 Such colonial places, I suggest, took easily to more generalized 86

Page, to be sure, lists him as 'Krotoniate or Syracusan'. This is because he has himself proclamed as a Syracusan to please Hiero (Paus. 6. 13. i). This does not affect the point in my text about Krotoniate athletic excellence. 87 Note especially the implied evolutionism of Nagy 1990: 144; 'the victorious athlete is reintegrated into the community. But the community is no longer the family or tribe but the polls . 88 Below pp. 235f. 89 Gurrie 2002. See below, p. 189. Note also that some of the earliest surviving agonistic dedications for Olympic victories are for western Greeks, Pantares of Gela (Moretti no. 151: 508 EG?) and Kleombrotos son of Dexilaos of Sybaris: Moretti 1970: 295; LSAG"2 456 'The Achaian colonies' no. la: late 6th cent.? ButseeDubois 2002: 23, 'vers 600 av.J.-G.'


27

hero-cult because they were used to venerating, actually and metaphorically, larger-than-life oikist figures. The first likely praise poet, Ibykos, wrote as we have seen (p. 22) for victors from—among other places, let me not exaggerate—west Greek cities such as Leontini and Syracuse; and Simonides celebrated at least one man from Kroton. The poems of Pindar insist on the athlete-oikist connection. They do this not only by the extensive coverage given to foundation myths in such poems as Olympian 7 or the Kyrene odes Pythians\, 5, and 9. They also do it by many incidental allusions, some of them rather surprising historically, to colony/mother-city relationships.90 Thus the opening stanza of Neman 10 speaks of the many cities established by Argos in Egypt (see below, p. 206: Argos is not normally thought of as a great colonizing power); and near the beginning of Olympian 6 Pindar calls an Arkadian family 'co-founders' of Sicilian Syracuse, more normally considered a Korinthian colony (see below, pp. i84f). 91 I suggest therefore that the impetus to extravagant praise poetry came from the edges of the Greek world where outsize individuals demanded outsize celebration. If so, the origins of epinikian poetry are to be found not so much in polls formation as in new-polls formation, otherwise known as colonization. We shall see that from the point of view of communities whose Greek identity was under pressure from non-Greek neighbours, epikinian poetry was an affirmative device. Thus Ergoteles of Sicilian Himera, the only Greek city in the north of the island as Thucydides correctly calls it (6. 62. 2, cf. below, p. 192), was celebrated not only in Pindar Olympian 12 but in an inscription at Olympia where he boasts that he defeated the Greeks in the dolichos or long foot race.92 The insistence on the Greeks is defiant: we Greeks at the edges are as good as you metropolitan Greeks.93 But this argument should not be pressed too far: Theaios of (non-colonial) Argos is also praised for defeating 'the host of Hellenes at Pytho', Uv9u>vi (N. 10. 25). Perhaps a colonial literary theme became canonical and continued to be used even when it was not strictly appropriate. 90 A good sentence in Goldhill 1991: 163 is relevant here: 'it is with the new rulers of the new powers in the Greek world that Pindar's active construction of the myths of origin and place .. . can be most strikingly seen.' But Pindar does this sort of thing all over the place, not just in odes for e.g. Hiero (Goldhill's subject at that point). 91 See also p. 169 for the colonial ties between Lokriin mainland Greece and Italian Lokri. 92 Ebert 1972: no. 20, line 2, "EXXavas VIKUIV . . . etc. 93 See generally Gardiner 1910: 59, good paragraph beginning '[t]he influence of the colonies was very great', though he does not actually address the question of the growth of epinikian poetry in that connection.

28

Introduction

With so much for introduction about epinikian poetry and its origins I move on now to Pindar and Bacchylides themselves, postponing for the moment the question of performance. (See further below, p. 33.) Before leaving the history of the genre, we should note that it did not quite die out with Pindar. Euripides wrote an epinikian ode for Alkibiades' equestrian victory at the Olympic games of 416. This was not necessarily 'Pindaric' if that means backward-looking: in the late fifth century Diagoras of Melos, as Michael Silk points out to me, wrote a poem for his lover Nikodoros of Mantinea, a boxer (PMG 738; Ael. VH 2. 23). The fourth century, an age of prose on the whole, did not support epinikian poetry, though big names like Philip II of Macedon competed in an equestrian event at the games (Plut. Alex. 4. 8), in the old tyrannical manner. Dionysios I, tyrant of Syracuse, sent chariots and professional reciters (poa/iu>Soi) to the Olympic Games of 388 (or possibly 384) BG, a laughable fiasco described by Diodorus (14.109), but the idea was that they should recite Dionysios' own poetry; this was no attempt to make the ghost of Pindar drink blood. Finally there is the epinikion of Kallimachos for Berenike in the third century BG; for this see below, p. 100.

The function of the epinikian ode: Pindar and modern anthropology What was the function of the epinikian ode? The object of the victory praise poem was to praise the victor, so we have often been told since Bundy. But though the implied negative proposition here ('and it had no other purpose') has polemical force in that it discourages us from milking the poems for over-definite historical or biographical allusions, it does not get us very far.94 From an anthropological point of view, the function of the epinikian ode has in recent years been sought above all in the idea, much emphasized in epinikian poetry, of the victor's nostos or return, celebrated by the community. The athlete (the argument goes) is a potentially disruptive figure who needs to be reintegrated into the society which sent him out, or from which he set out. That reintegration is achieved by the epinikian ode.95 A parallel is then drawn with myths and rituals of 94 95

See Silk in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming), in a discussion of 0. 12. Grotty 1982: ch. 4 (drawing on the anthropologists Victor Turner and Mary Douglas)

Thejunction of the epinikian ode

29

initiation; anthropology teaches us that the initiand is also set apart for a while before his or her reintegration, a process which often involves a symbolic death and rebirth.96 At Athens and elsewhere, the name for young males on the threshold of full male hoplite status was e and the other passages collected in Bond 1981: 298, n. on Her. 876. 180 Lattimore 1962: 1951". 181 Dornseiffig2i: 67. 176

177

The shared athletic milieu

45

at Thespiai and excavated in 1882; it contains nine limestone tablets in a row, commemorating 101 names (IGj. 1888).182 The second tablet includes two names next to each other, Tiaiêveis -nvQiovixa. and UoXvviKos 6Xvfj,mo[viKa], 'Tisimeneis the Pythian victor' and 'Polynikos (a felicitous name183 which means 'he of the many victories') the Olympic victor'. The latter appears to have won the boys' wrestling event nearly quarter of a century earlier, in 448 Be.184 These names alone have any kind of description added; the other ninety-nine have not so much as a patronymic, still less a statement of military rank (contrast the Athenian Tod 104 and the other inscription discussed by Tod in his commentary). The battle of Delion appears185 to have wiped out the Thespian hoplite class with its pro-federal, pro-oligarchic sympathies; \hepolyandrion covers 'a small holocaust, so to speak, of closely connected men who lay beside each other dead, just as they had fought side by side while alive'.186 As a result of this catastrophe the vengeful Theban fellow-citizens of Pindar were enabled to raze the walls of Thespiai in winter 423, alleging 'attikismos' or pro-Athenian sympathies (Th. 4.133. i). Neither Tisimeneis nor Polynikos, who evidently fought, fell, and were interred close together, feature in Thucydides, nor did Pindar as far as we know commemorate a Thespian victor; but I suggest that Thucydides' small word 'flower' is a Pindaric salute in passing to this unusual group of casualties, 2 per cent of whom were panhellenic athletic victors. If we are to look for Pindar in an author so little ebullient as Thucydides, we cannot always expect the evidence to leap from the page. It must be searched for in places like the polyandrion containing the remains of Tisimeneis and of the 'Man of Many Victories'. The remarkable feature of the Thespian inscription is that in a military context, namely an obvious war grave, it simultaneously asserts athletic values. It is the combination that is striking. From other places, notably Athens (in abundance), we have military casualty lists.187 And

182

See Glairmont 1983: 2328"., Pritchett 1971-90: 4. 132?. Or rather perhaps an indication that his father too was a successful athlete. Polynikos'victory is also recorded by the Olympic victor-list, P Oxy. 222 = FGrHistîy, the name only is preserved, but this mention is precious because it gives us 448 as the date of his victory; and a very probable restoration, based on the order of events elsewhere in the list, indicates that the event was the boy's wrestling. He is Moretti no. 302.Jacoby prints 183

184

185 186 187

Buck 1990: 47. Hanson 1989: 201. Bradeen 1974.

46

Introduction

we have an inscribed athletic victor list (IG 12. 5. 608, early fourth century)188 from loulis on Keos, an island which Pindar charmingly imagines as boasting 'I am renowned for my athletic achievements among Greeks', yivcoCTKOjucu juev aperais ae9\a>v 'EXXaviaiv (Paian 4 = F5ad lines 22-3). Boiotian Thespiai, unlike Athens or Keos, explicitly runs the two ideas together. This book will have much to say about athletics, Pindar's world. I suggest that, contrary to first appearances, Thucydides the historian par excellence of the military world, knew all about Pindar's world as so defined and limited; the Thespian inscription tells us, in effect, not to be too surprised at this overlap between the two worlds. I have already discussed Thucydides' mention or non-mention of the various great athletic festivals (pp. 10-1 6). But the more general proof of Thucydides' awareness of the importance of athletic and equestrian success must now be given. The most obvious starting point might seem to be a well-known boast by the super-rich Athenian politician Alkibiades in 415 BG, who (Th. 6. 1 6) claimed the command of the great expedition against Sicily not in the first instance on grounds of his military talent or experience, but on the — to prosaic modern ears— unexpected and irrelevant grounds that his chariot team had won at the Olympic games held in the previous year 416. However the usability of this passage has been challenged recently (is it perhaps Thucydides' aim to represent Alkibiades as an anachronism or freak?) and I postpone discussion until I look at Athens and Athenians in more detail in Chapter 5 below (pp. 247-61). Instead I begin with a passage in the narrative of the Spartan operations in Thrace in 424 BG. These were part of an attempt to seduce the northern Greeks from their Athenian loyalties: with this campaign the Spartans were at last doing something to carry out the programme of liberation announced at the beginning of the war (2. 8. 4: 431 BG), but not much heard of for some years thereafter (for an embarrassed admission of this delay see 4. 85. 2, Brasidas at Akanthos). The historian says that the people of Skione in north Greece (Ghalkidike)189 went out to greet Brasidas the Spartan general and liberator with enthusiasm, crowning him publicly with a gold crown, loading him privately with garlands and 'going up to him as to an athlete', 188

Maehler 1982: iff.; Schmidt 1999. See below, p. 129 n. 2. For convenience I use this word in the modern Greek sense, i.e. the area covered by the nomos of Halkldlkl, although I am aware that Flensted-Jensen 2000^ has shown that in antiquity 'Ghalkidike' was used only of the central Sithonia prong of the peninsula. 189


47

190

I2i.i). The final words say it all: with them, Thucydides expects us to grasp immediately the allusion to an entire Pindaric world of athletic success and celebration of that success. Brasidas in Thucydides is presented as a kind of Achilles, a Homeric loner at variance with his jealous political superiors, a radiant figure described in notably epic vocabulary and with an idiolect or private speech-pattern; the temptation to compare Brasidas to Achilles is not a modern scholarly whim but was noted by Plato near the end of the Symposium (2210). The truth about Brasidas was slightly different in that the Spartan authorities at home can be shown to have backed him fairly consistently; Thucydides strongly suggests that they even pledged themselves by oaths (4. 86. i and the authorial 88. i) to honour any commitments about autonomy which he might make to the distant northern communities he dealt with.191 Now Achilles immediately suggests Homer, but he was also of the greatest possible importance to Pindar, especially in his Aiginetan odes (Achilles was grandson of the Aiginetan hero Aiakos); the name 'Achilles' is the last word of Pindar's last poem Pythian 8 (line 100), and in Isthmian 5 the poet does not even stop to supply the answer to his four rapid questions, 'who killed Kyknos, Hektor, and Memnon, and who wounded Telephos?': the answer each time is 'Achilles' (lines 39-42). Pindar's comparison of Achilles to a victorious athlete is not so verbally explicit as Thucydides' language about Brasidas as a quasiathlete at Skione, but in Neman 6 (lines 5o-end) Achilles' achievements in war are clearly offered as a parallel to the athletic successes of the Aiginetan Alkimidas, and the same is true of Isthmian 8: just as the Muses (the 'Helikonian maidens') pour their 'dirge of many voices', dpfivov TToXixf>a.jj,ov, over Achilles (line 58), so now 'the Muses' chariot is speeding forward to sing a memorial to the boxer Nikokles', eaavrai (lines 61—2). (In Olympian 10, by contrast, Achilles is curiously enough presented as trainer, receiving the gratitude of Patroklos for this role, just as the victorious Olympic boxer Hagesidamos now owes it to his trainer lias: lines 16-19.) There is no doubt that in Pindar the military glory of Achilles is, like that of Brasidas in Thucydides, presented in athletic terms. The comparison of the dirges to Achilles and the sung memorial to Nikokles suggests another remarkable Thucydidean passage about 190

For the meaning of the Greek see Hornblower 1996: 380—5. For the Homeric and poetic presentation of Brasidas see Howie 1999 and Hornblower 1996: 38-61; on the slippery Greek relating to the oaths note Badian 1999. 191

48

Introduction

Brasidas, his funerary cult as oikist at the northern city of Amphipolis (Th. 5. ii. i):192 the honours include games, a-ywves. Brasidas resembles an athlete in life and is honoured with athletics in death. (For oikistathletes cf. pp. 27 and 235). The northern cults of Achilles and Brasidas lodged themselves in the imagination: for Pindar, 'Achilles holds the shining island [Leuke] in the Black Sea', (N. 4. 49), and epigraphy confirms the tenacity of this Black Sea cult;193 while for the fourth-century northerner Aristotle, casually looking for an example of regulations enacted for a particular case, the example that comes to mind is precisely the regulation for 'the sacrifice for Brasidas' (Me. Eth. ii34 b ig). The 'athletic' passages about Brasidas at Skione and Amphipolis are not the only wartime mention of such things.194 Thucydides has a casual but very interesting simile in a military context earlier in book 4, where wa-n-ep OLKOVITI means 'like an easy athletic victory', literally 'without the dust' (d - KOVIS) of the arena (4. 73. 2). The addition of coCTTrep 'like', just stops it from being a full metaphor195 as it would be for the orator Demosthenes in the next century, see below. The word is extremely rare before 400 BG but it does occur in a pair of fifthcentury inscriptions from Delphi and Olympia listing the victories of the famous athlete Theagenes of Thasos (Syll? 36A, line 14, and B line 7 [Uv9oi TT]V£ aKovirei; that is, the 'easy' victories—walkovers?—were both in the Pythian games at Delphi).196 We can add perhaps that Pausanias' statement (6. 7. 4) that Dorieus is said, Aeyerat, to have won a Pythian victory OLKOVITI may well draw 192

On this passage, important for the understanding of the beginnings of what would later be called ruler-cult, see Hornblower 1996: 449—56: the antecedent honours to the Athenian Hagnon are as interesting as those for Brasidas, though less fully described. They will no doubt have included games as well. This is relevant to the question of Athenian attitudes to such matters, see below, p. 26of. On cult to actual athletes see now Gurrie 2002 (Euthymos of Lokn in south Italy) and generally Bohrmger 1979. On the offerings made to heroes see now Gurrie 2003, reasserting the distinctiveness of hero-cult, and drawing on Pindar extensively, esp. 7.4. 61—8. 193 Hedreen 1991. 194 For the general Demosthenes' gymnic contest at Th. 5. 80 see above, n. 18. 195 So Wankel 1976: 935, noting that Th. soon reverts (73. 3) to his more normal (some MSS have 196 The (acephalous) Olympia part of this inscription (366) was at one time attributed to Dorieus; see next note. For Theagenes see Pouilloux 1994. and for O.KOVITI in athletic contexts see Golden 1998:72 andn. 22: 'without needing to raise up a dust cloud in struggle or (perhaps) without needing to dust up as in wrestling'. The fullest discussion of the incidence of the word O.KOVITI is at Wankel 1976: 934f, commenting on Dem. 18. 200 (cf. below); he cites the technical or literal epigraphic occurrences of the word (Theagenes and CEG^J2, for which see below) as well as the metaphorical uses in Th., Xen. and Dem.


49

197

on good fifth-century evidence, and the same is true of his use of the same word about Dromeus ofMantinea (6. n. 4). There is a considerably earlier occurrence of the word in a sixth-century inscription from Olympia, a dedication by a Spartan athlete called Akmatidas, victor in the pentathlon.198 This uses the Lakonian dialect form (SEGu. 1227, CEG372).199 Pindar does not have the word (though he does once have the positive form eycovTjTi, 'with great effort', literally 'with dust': N. 3 line 36, used of Peleus pinning down Thetis),200 nor does Bacchylides. Bacchylides does however say of the champion race-horse Pherenikos that 'no dust from the horses in front has ever yet dirtied him', (5. 43-4)-201 We are still firmly in the literal and technical world of athletics. Euripides' epinikian for Alkibiades (see below, p. 58) has the word (ZTTOVIJTI, 'without labour', and some have tried to emend this to O.KOVITI which is possible but not compelling.202 Next (after Thucydides' figurative use, see above), Xenophon in the fourth century has a rewarding instance: he has just said that Agesilaos' military successes were just as complete when the enemy declined battle as when he had to fight them, then he continues: 'so in [athletic] contests, dytocn, the victors who win are crowned no less than those who have won through battle, (Ages. 6. 3). This sentence starts off as a simile rather than a 197 Pausanias' use of O.KOVITI about Dorieus' Pythian victory was one of the reasons why earlier scholars (e.g. Frazer 1898: 27) assigned the Olympia inscription Syll.3 366 (see previous n.) to Dorieus rather than Theagenes, who was not then known (certainly not from Pausanias) to have won a Pythian victory O.KOVITI', but the subsequent (1909) discovery of the matching 36A from Delphi, with Theagenes' name, patronymic and ethnic fully preserved at the top, tilted the balance decisively in favour of assigning 366 to him as well (cf. Pomtow in Syll.3 on the Dorieus idea: 'perperam quidem, ut tit. A nunc ostendit'): both inscriptions, that from Delphi (which is certainly about Theagenes) and that from Olympia, mention an O.KOVITI Pythian victory. The word was added subsequently at Delphi and is carved less deeply: Syll? 36 n. 3. Note also that a separate inscription from Delphi about Dorieus' victories was also found in 1909, Syll.3 82, thus weakening further the case for associating the different material in no.366 with him. 198 Moretti 1957: no. 160 (but the SEGreference should be to n. 1227 not 1215). 199 See LSJ 9 suppl. (1996): 14, entry under O.KOVLTL, who remark 'cf. perh. mod. Gk. = dust'. 200 Pfeijffer's long note on this word (Pfeijffer 1999: 318) regrettably does not discuss the negative form, with all its interesting ramifications. 201 Golden 1998: 78. 202 Bowra 1970: 145, citing T. G. W. Stinton, rejected the emendation on the grounds that O.KOVITI is unsuitable for a chariot (as opposed to a boxing) victory, but the Bacchylides 5 passage cited above weakens this argument. But it remains true that nothing compels emendation: there is nothing actually wrong with the word d-iroi^TiJ cf. Hdt. 3. 146.1.

50

Introduction

metaphor i.e. we are still in the literal world of athletics, but the reference to jj-axt] after all collapses the athletic and the military into each other. (Pindar 0. 8. 58 uses JJMXT] of athletic struggle but he is talking of the unusually violent pankration, above, p. 16, so this is hardly a metaphor.) Thereafter axoviriis used metaphorically by Demosthenes several times (15. On the Freedom of the Rhodians 3i203, 18. On the Crown 200,204 and 19. On the False Embassy 77, spelt aKovirei; cf. also Aischines i. Against Timanhos 64). It may be relevant to recall that both Xenophon and Demosthenes knew Thucydides' History well.205 In general, athletic metaphors abound in Thucydides—words for losing as well as winning. The wrestling term aaAAo) is as Williams has shown206 a special favourite (to make someone slip up, i.e. lose). Above all, the simple form and the compounds of the basic noun for contest, namely dycov (a word which also means exertion and 'agony') are various and quite extraordinarily frequent. See further below, pp. 339, 342 where I discuss some choice occurrences in a single section of Thucydides, the narrative of and surrounding the final sea-battle in Syracuse in 413 BG; the historian's insistent use of literally 'agonistic' vocabulary shows he regarded this as a terrible struggle of a quasiathletic sort, and with a glorious quasi-athletic prize. In general, I shall be suggesting in this book that Thucydides had something of Pindar in him. There is less of Thucydides in Pindar, but the Persian wars do feature (see esp. P. i. 75-8, explicit mention of the battles of Salamis and Plataia), and Isthmian*]. 27 has a sombre picture of infantry fighting (the 'cloud of war and the hailstorm of blood')207 and is a reminder that gymnasia and athletics were a preparation for, even an alternative to, war;208 the existence and closeness of the relationship is undisputed even by those who hold it to be 'indirect and oblique, a reaction against the dominant form of war rather than a preparation for it'.209 It is not surprising that, as Leslie Kurke has reminded us, we 203

SeeRadicke 1995: 158, commentary on the passage. With Wankel 1976, see n. 195 above. 205 Hornblower 1995. 206 R. A. G.Williams 1992: 2428". See below, p. 351. 207 A very similar expression is used of a naval battle in /. 5. 50 (the battle of Salamis); there is no inconsistency because this battle, fought 'in the narrows' (Iv rto arevto, Th. i. 74. i echoing Hdt. 8. 6o/3), involved epibatm (i.e regular troops, not rowers) positioned on deck (Hdt. 8. 90. 2). 208 Bowra 1964: i83f; Carey 1981: 24 (n. onP. 2. if); Perysinakis 1990 (onP. 9 and 10). 209 Golden 1998: 28; see his whole discussion at 23—8. Pohakoff 1987: 112—15 , whom he cites, seems to me to put the emphasis slightly differently ('displacement of not 'training for', p. 114; on p. 115 he uses hydraulic metaphors—outlet, channel). 204


51

hear of so many athletic victors serving as military commanders; the kudos or glory derived from the two pursuits was transferable.210 We remember the athletic victors Tisimeneis and Polynikos, buried side by side after the slaughter at Delion: the av9os or flower of Thespiai. The Thespians were hoplites. Cavalry fighters were to chariot victors as hoplites were to gymnic athletes. In the opening lines of Pythian 2, Pindar hails Syracuse as 'divine nourisher of men and horses delighting in steel', dvSpcov LTTTTOJV re criSapo;\;ap|U,av Saijuoviai rpo(f>oi (line 2, cf. Nemean i, for Ghromios of Aitna, lines :6f: Kronos' son [Zeus] has granted to her, i.e. Persephone or Sicily or both,211 'a people of cavalrymen enamored of bronze-armored war', .212 Cavalry superiority was undoubtedly one reason for the Syracusan defeat of the Athenians in 415-413, asNikiashadwarned(6.21. i). The Athenians managed to put together a cavalry force of 650 in Sicily, no small achievement (6.98. i). It was not enough. The Syracusans could field nearly double that total, an astonishing 1,200 (6. 67. 2), producing exactly the result Nikias had feared, severe restriction of Athenian movements even when they were locally and temporarily victorious (6. 70.3, nicely picking up Nikias' language at 6. 21. i). Pindar praises, and the coins celebrate,213 the Syracusan cavalry superiority which largely determines the course of Thucydides' Sicilian military narrative.214 210

Kurke 1993: 137. Braswell 1992: 44 is sure that the reference in ol is to Persephone; others (Slater 1969: 143, under t 2. a; Kirkwood 1982: 251) have taken it to refer to Sicily. But this may be a case ofwhat PfeijfTer 1999: 156 (and elsewhere) calls 'polyinterpretability' (p. 367 below). For Ghromios and his Syracusan connections see below, p. 187. 212 Quoting this passage as no. 77 in his sourcebook on ancient Greek warfare, Sage 1996: 49 comments 'in general the cavalry forces of the western Greek states were more developed and effective than those of the homeland'. 213 Kraay 1976: 209; Rutter 20000: 78. 214 R. A. G. Williams 1992: 257; Hornblower 20020: i68ff. 211

2

Gould Thucydides have known Pindar and did he?

A personal meeting between Thucydides and Pindar? So far I have by implication written as if Thucydides might have known Pindar. Is that assumption justified? Is it even possible? 'Knowing Pindar' is ambiguous between knowing the man and knowing his works. Biographical speculation is not a fashionable approach to the ancient Greek and Roman writers, but let us start with some all the same. The birth and death dates of the two men allow us to wonder if they knew each other personally: Pindar seems to have lived to about 440 BG (the traditional dates are 518-438)' and Thucydides was born in perhaps the early 4508,2 so that a meeting between the elderly poet and the teenage future historian is a chronological possibility. It is also a social possibility: Pindar was used to the company of rich men, and 1 (i) The Suda says he was born in the 75th Olympiad i.e. that four-year period which began in 520, and was 40 at the time of Xerxes' invasion a person's acme was regularly so put at age 40 (see A. T. G[rafton], 'time-reckoning' in OCDS). Lobel 1961: 4 (edition of a new life of Pindar, P Oxy. 2438) notes that we must take yeyois in the Suda to mean (as usual in the Suda) 'was born', so that the verb has a different meaning from that which it must have in P Oxy 2438 lines 4—5 where it refers to acme (y€yov€v §€ Kara, ra TTepatKa). Lobel reads KO.L Kara. rr\v in the Suda ('he was born in the 75th Olympiad and was 40 at the time of Xerxes' invasion'). Pindar Fig3, from the Ambrosian Life, says autobiographically that he was born in the year of a Pythian festival, and this festival always fell in the third year of an Olympiad (by Greek reckoning i.e. 3/5), hence the more precise 478 for the acme and 518 for Pindar's birth year. See Wilamowitz 1922: 60 andn. i. (n) The metrical Life (Drachmann 1903—27: i. 9 line 21) says Pindar died at eighty. (in) P. 10 celebrates a victory in the 22nd Pythiad, Olympiad 70 year 3, (evidence from the scholia) which gives 498, making the poem Pindar's earliest surviving ode. The fragility of all this will be obvious: in the various Lives, the acme of 478 is regularly explicitly and suspiciously synchronized with the Persian Wars, and the death date of eighty is only one candidate out of several (the mta Ttwmana for instance says he died at 66); see G. G[arey], 'Pindar' in OCD3. But we should not be hypersceptical: Pindar knew about the Persian Wars (see e.g. P. i. 76ff. for the battles of Salamis and Plataia) and the dates of his patrons from e.g. Akragas Syracuse and Kyrene are secure. His main poetic activity certainly falls across the first half of the 5th cent. EG. 2 Hornblower 1987: 1-4and Wade-Gery, OCD3, 'Thucydides'.

A meeting between Thucydides and Pindar?

53

Thucydides' family was certainly rich (Th. 4. 105. i; above, p. 37). The family of Thucydides son of Oloros (the patronymic is a royal Thracian name, Hdt. 6. 41. 2) had international connexions, like many of Pindar's victors (below, Gh. 5, passim). In particular, Thucydides Olorou, one of the two subjects of this book, may have been related to the Athenian trainer-athlete Melesias, if as is probable Melesias was the father of another famous Thucydides of the deme of Alopeke who clashed politically with Pericles.3 Melesias features in Pindar as a wrestling and as an athlete himself o trainer for several Aiginetans o (0. 8. 54, N. 4. 93 and 6. 65) and Wade-Gery ingeniously identified the trainer and athlete4 Melesias and Melesias the father of the politician Thoukydides as I shall spell him from now on to distinguish him from the historian.5 His suggestion, that wrestlingmetaphors applied in Plutarch to political in-fighting by Thoukydides son of Melesias allude to the Pindaric connection, has held up well.6 The obvious place for the young Thucydides son of Oloros to have met both Pindar, and the Aiginetan and other victors whom he celebrated, would be Olympia itself and the other three panhellenic festival sites.7 The last attested 3

Race 1990: I55f. and n. 27 is right to protest at some of the more reckless political speculations about Melesias himself, built on Pi. 0. 8. 53—64 (written for the Aiginetan victor Automedon), see esp. Wade Gery 1958: 248. Pindar is supposedly embarrassed because the death-struggle between Athens and Aigina was in sight, leading Pindar to adopt a 'sticky' manner, etc. But see below, p. 231 n. 400. On the other hand Race goes too far (p. 155) when he doubts whether Melesias was even an Athenian (as the scholiast says), rather than an Aiginetan. The name is common at Athens, but not found at Aigina at all, and this says something even allowing for the greater bulk of Athenian epigraphic evidence. 4 Carey 19891;: 287—90 for this aspect of Melesias. 5 In the 'Melesias' entry in LGPNz (1994), which covers Athens and Attica, the possible identity (between the Pindaric no. 2 and no. 7 from Alopeke) is registered, but nagged with question-marks. 6 Wade-Gery 1958: 239—70, esp. 245—53. His statement (245) that Melesias was a 'rarish name' [sc. at Athens] looks less secure than it did: there were only 12 occurrences of the name in Kirchner 1901-3, but there are 24 in LGPNz (i 994). However, Wade-Gery's case for identifying the politician's father and the Pindaric trainer went (as he himself insisted) beyond homonymy; in particular it exploited the wrestling metaphors used about Thoukydides Melesiou. Davies 1971: 231 says the identification can be accepted without reservation. Andrewes 1978: i n. 4 is a little more guarded; he says that the wrestling is an authentic touch but 'may possibly be due to Plutarch himself who was aware of the association (e.g. Per. 8. 5)'. For Willcock 1995: 109 Wade-Gery's identification is an 'attractive speculation'. Davies 236 (cf. also 231) suggests that the son continued the family connection with Aigina, lending money there, but the evidence for this is not very good: Marcellinus para. 24 (where the historian and the politician have been muddled, as elsewhere in the biographical tradition). 7 See Clark 1999 for a good discusssion of Th.'s knowledge of and likely visits to Olympia.

54

Could Thucydides have known Pindar and did he?

Aiginetan victor in the Olympic games, before the Peloponnesian war and the end of Aiginetan independence, was Taurosthenes the wrestler in the games of 444 BCS and this date for a meeting suits the careers of both Pindar and Thucydides. If so, the 15-year-old Thucydides son of Olorus and the aged Pindar watched side by side as Taurosthenes, after his victory, released a racing pigeon to take the happy news back from Olympia to Aigina. The bird, a female which had been separated from her chicks to strengthen her homing instinct, did the 160 km. trip across the Peloponnese and the Saronic Gulf in a single day (Aelian, Var. Hist. 9. 2). So much for personal acquaintance, an attractive thought.9 We can even with a stretch of the imagination visualize the meeting. Portraits of Pindar existed in antiquity;10 the most recently discovered is a labelled shield-portrait from Aphrodisias in Karia, a great sculpture centre. (Figure 2, where there has been some late antique adaptation of the original type).'' This find has made possible the identification of a number of long-known portraits as 'Pindars'. 'The new identity', writes R. R. R. Smith, 'provides a chastening lesson: long thought to be appropriate for a classical general, the portrait turns out to be of a lyric poet.'12 Apparently the type had actually been identified previously as a 'Spartan general'. Smith goes on to say that evidently fifth-century representation did not distinguish so sharply as later ages between Note also Gawkwell 1997: 124 n. 26, valuable long footnote about Olympia, justifying the suggestion in his text (p. 9) that Th. could have picked up information there. 8

Morettino. 308. That an older man would be interested in a younger one from the same social milieu hardly needs demonstrating. The Suda entry says Pindar died in the arms of his beloved Theoxenos of Tenedos, immediately after praying for the best of what life had to offer (adduced without comment by Lefkowitz 1981: 60; cf. also Caspar 1900: 170f.). The erotic poem Pindar Fi23 for Theoxenos is extravagantly expressed; Athenaios says the subject was Pindar's own beloved but that and the Suda entry may be mere inference from the poem itself which could have been a commission. Thucydides for his part leaves relationships of this sort largely unrecorded (though the Sacred Band of the 4th cent, shows that a sexual aspect could have been given to e.g. 5. 69. 2, the Spartans encouraged each other without need for speeches of exhortation). I can think only of one Spartan and one Athenian item: 1.132. 5, the Argilian man who was formerly the boyfriend of Pausanias the Spartan Regent, irai.Si.Ka. irore lav aural, and 6. 54. 2-3, Harmodios, Aristogeiton, and Hipparchos at Athens. 10 Bergemann 1991 for a full treatment. See Demand 1982: 90 and 155 n. 24 for a funeral stele of a poet dating from the third quarter of the fifth century in the style of the 'Thespian school'. This, she says, 'has been identified as the stele of Pindar'. See her pi. 2, where it is labelled 'Stele of Pindar'. But the identification is purely speculative as fas as I can see. 11 Smith 1990: 134: 'Pindar is turned from a cool aloof aristocrat into a committed, energetic exponent of the spiritual hellenism of late antiquity'. 12 Smith 1990: 133 and pis. vi—vn. 9

A meeting between Thucydides and Pindar?

55

FIGURE 2 Pindar: Aphrodisias portrait shield.

the roles of general, orator, poet and philosopher: the world view was more unified in that early period. The markedly military aspects of Pindar's literary presentation of athletic success (above, p. 50) should perhaps reduce our surprise when encountering, so to speak, Colonel Pindar in the flesh, or rather stone. As for portraits of Thucydides, they too existed, but naturally the mature historian was depicted—again with a military look, as was appropriate for Colonel Thucydides as

56


he has been called,13 with rather more justification than my Colonel Pindar. We need a further imaginative effort to turn the clock back to the young Thucydides of 444 BC.

Did Thucydides know Pindar's poetry? Let us pass on to knowledge of Pindar's poems. Thucydides knew 'the old poets', ot Tra.Xa.iol TToirjrai, in general (i. 5. 2 and 13. 5), and of course Homer in particular whom he quotes at length (3. 104, actually a Homeric hymn).14 Although the 'old poets' are cited (i. 13) for the epithet 'wealthy', dfiveios, applied to Korinth, and we know that this epithet was applied to Korinth by Pindar (Fi22, see below, p. 202), nevertheless Thucydides'expression may just be a rhetorical plural for 'Homer' (Iliad 2. 570); Pindar was surely a bit too recent to be Tra.Xa.ios, indeed Pindar himself talks about the 'older [poets]', TraAaioVepoi, Nemean 6 line 53,where he evidently means epic.15 Similarly we need look no further than Homer for the source of the question, which Thucydides (i. 5) says was found in the 'old poets', whether new arrivals were pirates (Od. 2. 73 and 9. 254). Gomme16 is however right to say that for Korinth at least Thucydides may also be referring to lost epics. In any case Pindar uses another word oA/3ia ('prosperous') for Korinth in Olympian 13. 4. The idea that Thucydides was aware of Pindar in particular needs to be argued for. After all, the comic poet Eupolis, a contemporary of Thucydides rather than of the older Pindar, says that the works of Pindar were 'passed over in silence' (Karaaeai-yaafjieva, i.e. no longer performed?) in his own daybecause of general philistinism (diAoKaAia, literally 'indifference to beauty')." But this need not prove that Pindar's poetry was no longer current in literary circles: Aristophanes was certainly familiar with Pindar's poetry (F 76, see below, p. 248; Fios).18 Euripides notonlyproduced an epinikian ode for Alkibiades in Pindaric 13

Murray 1986: 195, (echoing Momigliano on 'Colonel Polybius'). See also below, p. 104 for 'the poets' who talk about the Kyklopes and Laistrygonians (6.2.1). 15 Gf. Race 1990: 47. 16 Gomme, HCTi. 123. 17 Eupolis F366 Kock, 398 K/A, from Ath. 3a; cf. Nagy 1990:106. 18 In addition, Ar. Birds i1^20—2 (ayavo^pa^vrjavîa)^ very reasonably thought by Dunbar 1995: 649 to be a reminiscence of P. 8. i and Fiog. Hesychm is there linked by Aristophanes withPothos, another Pindaric word, see below, p. 61 n. 12. 14

Did Thucydides know Pindar's poetry?

57

manner (below) but may also, it is thought, allude gracefully to Pindar's odes to Sicilian victors like Hiero when he makes the chorus of the Trojan Women sing of the 'garlands of valour', aref/xivois aperas, with which Sicily is extolled.19 But Euripides need not have Pindar only in mind because Bacchylides also wrote epinikians, and for Hiero. Plato in the fourth century has sixteen quotations from Pindar specifically, four of them from surviving victory odes,20 and we shall see that Michael Silk has argued for a close relationship between Pindar's Pythian 8 and the Myth of Er at the end of Plato's Republic, although Pindar is not there named.21 In any case Eupolis was an Athenian and was presumably talking about Athens: we should not automatically assume that Athenian conditions were replicated in Argos, Thebes, Syracuse, Macedon, or Kyrene, places about whose social structure we know next to nothing. So let us accept that Thucydides could have known Pindar's work. But did he? Unlike Herodotus (3. 38) he never mentions Pindar by name, nor does he quote directly any victory ode by Pindar or anyone else. The standard modern work on the history of the text of Pindar22 deals with his reception by Herodotus, the tragedians and the comic poets, then jumps straight to Plato. Not a word about Thucydides.23 But there is some indirect evidence that Thucydides was familiar with the genre of victory odes, and much of the present book will attempt to demonstrate knowledge by Thucydides of the works of Pindar in particular. First the indirect evidence for Thucydides' awareness of epinikian poetry. One of the biggest names in Thucydides' history was the rich well-born Athenian Alkibiades;Thucydidesputs into his mouth (6.16.2) a speech listing the athletic successes which he insists bring glory not just to himself but to the city, a claim which recalls Pindar's Isthmian 6, in which Phylakides of Aigina 'brings to his own city an adornment 19 E. Tro. line 223 with Barlow 1986: 169. Lines 220-1 describe Sicily periphrastically as the 'land of Aitna', Alrvaiav. . . xcapav, which might well suggest Hiero (cf. P. i. 60, or JV. 9. 2 for Hiero's general Ghromios). For Sophocles' Trachmwi and epinikian poetry see below Gh. ii p. 336 n. 31. 20 Nagyiggo: in and (listing the passages with acknowledgment to Irigoin 1952) n. 157. Plato's contemporary and rival Isokrates (15. 166) said that Pindar was given a financial reward and a grant ofproxeny for calling Athens the bulwark of Greece (Fy6 Snell-Maehler). Not much of this tradition is left after the withering treatment by M. Walbank 1978: 77 commenting on his no. 5. 21 Silk 2001. See further below, pp. 91 f. 22 Irigoin 1952: n— 20. 23 Homer, Herodotus and the Hippocratic writers all feature in the index to Connor 1984. Pindar, not.

58


all share' (£vvov aarei KOO/JLOV ea> Trpoadya>v, line 69) or Olympian 4, where Psaumis is 'eager to arouse glory for Kamarina' (lines 11-12, 4 But the curious item I wish to draw attention to is Alkibiades' boast that his chariots came first, second, and fourth in the Olympic games of 416. The specification 'and fourth', and indeed the allusion to anything other than winning sounds oddly scrupulous and fussy until we realize that the tragedian Euripides wrote an ode for this same victory25 and said Alkibiades came first, second, and third. Thucydides is going out of his way to correct Euripides in his usual tacit unobtrusive manner. If so the important implication for us is that Thucydides knew about the genre of victory odes. 24 See PfeijfTer 1999: no, commentary on JV. 5. 8, annex on 'the idea of a victory being an honour to one's home town'. 55 from flat. AIL 11. 2, with Bowra 1970. See below, p. 258.

3

Content and Outlook

Introductory remarks For us, Pindar and Thucydides share one frustrating quality above all: the elusiveness of their own opinions, compounded by the difficulty of their Greek. Each text contains many assertions in the first person singular but most of them are slippery. The reasons are different in each case: Thucydides is slippery because most of the first-person statements in his text are found in the mouth not of Thucydides himself but of his speakers and are conditioned by principles of rhetorical appropriateness. ' As for Pindar, the problem is that modern work on the conventions and traditions lying behind Pindar's art has taught us to be careful about his seemingly authorial and first-person statements.2 A much-discussed example is to be found in Pythian 11, 'I censure the condition of tyrannies', fjêôfj,' aiaav TvpavvlSwv (line 53); this was once seen as a kind of public apology for the poet's involvement with the tyrants of Sicily,3 then when the poem was reassigned to a later date it was reinterpreted as a rejection of Athens the 'tyrant city'. But not long ago Young showed that the remark belongs in a long poetic tradition which begins with Archilochos in the seventh century and ends with Euripides' Ion in 412 BG (lines 621-32), not 'I disapprove of particular tyrants' but 'I reject the hateful dangerous life-style of tyrants'.4 Pindar is in fact warning against athletic arrogance which is a sort of quasityrannical behaviour. But my main point here is to stress the difficulty of identifying and using genuinely personal statements in Pindar as in Thucydides. In the post-Bundy era, it will not do simply to anthologize gnomic remarks in the odes, either with a view to establishing

1

2

Th. 1.22.1.

Carey 1981: :6n. 37; Lefkowitz 1991. 3 Wilamowitz 1922: 263 (though as Young 1968: 6 n. i shows, this view is even older, and goes back to Rauchenstem 1847). 4 Bowra 1964: 154—8, 402—5. For Athens as the 'tyrant city', see Th. i. 122. 3 and Tuphn 1985. See above all Young 1968: 1-26.

60

Content and Outlook

a coherent world-view, or else with a view to denouncing the poet's views as a 'tangle of contradiction and prejudice'.5 Since part of my aim is to explore the parallels and differences between the two writers, I begin with the (very slight) evidence for direct allusion. Pindar is not mentioned by Thucydides, though Cornford actually spoke of Thucydides 'quoting' Pindar in one famously poetic expression which he puts into the mouth of Nikias (below, p. 73 and n. 68, on Svaepwras ru>v O.-TTOVTWV at Th. 6. 13. 2, cf. P. 3. 20). Pindar occurs three times in ancient scholia on Thucydides,6 each time commenting on a thought along the lines of'war is sweet to those who have not experienced it', -yXvKv Se -n-oXeôs a-n-eipoiaiv (Fno). The Thucydidean contexts in which this thought occurs to the scholiast are a warning speech by the Spartan king Archidamus at Sparta,7 Thucydides' own comment about enthusiasm for the war among inexperienced Athenian youth at the beginning of his narrative proper,8 and a speech at Gela delivered in 424 by the Syracusan Hermokrates.9 But alas the Pindar quotation is an isolated fragment. In any case the thought is halfway to being proverbial, indeed Pindar is mentioned by name by the scholiast only on the second and third of these occasions.

Hesychia I begin with an abstract noun which has been much discussed in connection with the political attitudes of Thucydides and Pindar.10 It is a negative example with which to start the comparative part of this book, 5

See the goodremarksofRose 1982147-9; for the second approachsee Norwood 1945:44. Conversely, but less interestingly given that Pindaric awareness of Th.'s text is a chronological impossibility, Th. occurs in the scholia to Pindar—for the location of the 'Ionian sea' (P. 3. 65, explained by the scholiast with a sloppy reference to Th. i. 24.1, the position of Epidamnos 'on the right as you sail into the Ionian gulf, es rov 'loviov KO\TTOV). Th. has'/oi'ioi' KO\-TTOV, the scholiast (except for the 'correct' Vaticanus 1312) has 'loviov TTOVTOV. It seems clear that the scholiast got it wrong. 7 Th. 1.80.1. 8 Th. 2.8. i. 9 Th. 4. 59. 2, with my commentary. 10 The fullest discusssion is now PfeijiTer 1999: 426, 431—4, 466—90, arguing (against e.g. Dickie 1984) that Hesychia definitely represents a 'political idea' (426, 466), and that her personification 'may very well be a Pindaric invention' (472). PfeijfTer's most important contribution is to insist on the connexion between Hesychia and the victory of the wrestler Anstomenes (472): it is to Hesychia that the honour of the victory is dedicated. See below, p. 232. 6

Hesychia

61

because I believe that it has been too readily used as evidence for an anti-democratic, anti-Athenian, anti-imperialist outlook shared by the two writers. In Thucydides, hesychia can as we shall see be used in powerful contexts—speeches made by enemies of Athens. But in its verbal form it is also one regular narrative way of expressing 'neutrality' (a clear example is the description of the Melians at 5. 84. 2, 'at first they kept quiet, joining neither side', cf. 7. 58. i, AkragasJ. He also uses the noun in the important autobiographical passage where he talks of his exile and the scope it gave him for seeing both sides (5. 26. 5, cf. above Gh. i p. 12), and here is thought to mean 'not distracted by troubles or other activities'.11 It will be seen that the shared idea is negative: not siding o o with anyone, not being distracted. In a speech which Thucydides makes the Syracusan leader Hermokrates deliver at Sicilian Gela in 424 BG, Hermokrates, like the Mytilenean enemies of Athens earlier in the History (3. 12.1), uses the word hesychia, literally 'quiet', to mean peace as opposed to war (4. 62. 2).12 Now Hesychia was personified and praised in the opening words of Pindar's late great ode Pythian 8 for an Aiginetan victor, where it is opposed to kybris.13 Wade-Gery and Lloyd-Jones believe that it was a code word used by critics and victims of Athenian imperialism: Aigina, Mytilene, Syracuse.14 Again (cf. above) it is thought to be negative, the opposite of TToXv-n-pa-yôavvr] or meddlesomeness, although this latter concept is not at all common in the fifth century generally, or Thucydides in particular (only 6. 87. 3, in the speech of Euphemos the Athenian at Kamarina).15 But we should not over-interpret Pythian 8 just because it is so good a poem. The word Hesychia is after all something of a Pindaric favourite (nine occurrences in all)16 and is a concept which he personifies elsewhere too,17 both in another victory ode 11

Gomme,#CT4.15. Note also 6. 34. 4, Hermokrates again, on the 'customary TJavftov' of the Syracusans. Dunbar 1995: 649 (discussing Ar. Birds 1321, on which see Game-Ross 1985: lyof.) takes this passage to show that the notion of Hesychia was associated with the ideals of Dorian cities. Redfield 2003: 409 nicely adduces Epicharmos of Sicily (probably Syracuse) FIOI Kinkel: 'Hesychia is a pretty lady and lives next door to Sophrosyne.' 13 See Hubbard 1985: 83—7, esp. 84. 14 Wade-Gery 1958: 265^ Lloyd-Jones 1983 [1971] 206 n. 68; cf. PfeijfTer 1999: 467n. i. 15 For the supposed opposition see e.g. Wade-Gery 1958: 266, but see Allison 19790 and 1979^ showing how rare the word actually is. 16 Slater 1969: 227. One of them is 'hesychiafor Keos' ztPaianlV (D4 Rutherford) line 8. 17 Note also the personification ofElpdva, 'Peace', at 0. 13. 7. 12

62

Content and Outlook

(0. 4. 1 6 for Psaumis of Sicilian Kamarina, 'city-loving Hesychia', and in a fragment from a hyporchema or dance-ode (Fiog). This runs:

Let any townsman who would put the public good in fair weather seek out proud Peace's shining light, having plucked from his mind wrathful discord [ytoiy, factional struggle, see below] , giver of poverty, hateful nurse of children.

Now we know that this was said about Pindar's native Thebes, and the first two lines constitute Polybius' only extant reference to Pindar (4. 31. 5-6). Polybius censures the Thebans for medizing out of fear, and Pindar for confirming them in their decision to remain inactive; then follows the quotation, as far as dos. But as Walbank points out,18 Polybius is unjust to Pindar here because the remaining two lines (known to us from Stobaios) show that the poem refers at this point not to the Persian Wars at all but to internal strife.19 Pagondas of Thebes, a Thucydidean general who probably has Pindaric connections as we shall see (p. 159), deplores such internal Boiotian dissensions, which the Athenians were able to exploit so as to hold down Boiotia for over a decade (457-446 BC). Or so Pagondas claims, though the claim may be no more than face-saving national rhetoric. (For Pagondas' remarks see Th. 4. 92. 6, and cf. the similar claim by the collective Theban speakers at Plataia, 3. 62. 5; for the eleven-year occupation itself see i. 108. 3, an important development very economically described).20 Polybius' knowledge of Pindar may in fact have been second-hand, derived either from an anthology21 or from Ephoros.22 Fergus Millar has remarked that Polybius seems more at home in Greek history from 18

Walbank 1 957: i. 478. This has not stopped modern scholars from illicitly interpreting the whole fragment in Polybius' way, see Bowra 1964: nof, and the other authorities cited by Gehrke 1985: 165 and n. 5. 20 There is a problem of interpretation in both the book 3 and the book 4 passages: is the dissension inside individual cities, or do the speakers refer to conflicts between the cities of federal Boiotia? See Hornblower 1996: agsf., citing Lewis 1992: 116 for the first view and Gehrke 1985: 166 n. 16 for the second (preferable I think). 21 Walbank 1957: 479, following Wunderer. 22 So Wilamowitz 1922: 193, followed by Snell-Maehler. 19

Hesychia

63

the late fifth century onwards, the age of monarchs and tyrants, than in earlier periods, and that his geographical perspective is Peloponnesian and Sicilian (rather than Athenian).23 If so, one might have expected Pindar to appeal to Polybius more than he apparently does, not just because of the Sicilian dimension but because Pindar knew all about monarchs and tyrants, and in one of his aspects can be seen as a precursor of fourth-century and hellenistic writings 'On kingship'.24 We shall soon see that hesycfua features here too. The simple idea thathesychia was an anti-Athenian anti-imperialist code word must be abandoned, and with it one of the most common ways in which scholars have sought to identify the political positions of Thucydides and Pindar. Pindar and kingship theory25 Prose efforts like the 'Kyprian orations' of Isokrates have their fifthcentury ancestors in odes like Pythian i, 'guide your people with a rudder of justice, on an anvil of truth forge your tongue [to bronze]', 23

Millar 1987: 8, 13. Note however Polybius' joke about Sicily as the tea-cup or saucer in which Timoleon's overpraised career was played out: 12. 23. 24 The general idea that the 'epideictic orators were the most relevant artistic heirs of Pindar' is an old one; see Groiset 1880, cited by Rose 1982: 48, whence my quotation. Rose gives no precise Groiset reference but I assume he means p. 158, 'Simonide et Pindare ont pour legitimes successeurs les Lysias et Isocrate'; Groiset goes on to cite Ps.-Dion. Hal. On oratory, section vn of which is called TrporpeTTTiKos aBXijTatv, i.e. how to write speeches encouraging athletes, including the advice to include a section on the athlete's polis, para. 5. See also Groiset 137, 'bien avant les Lysias et les Isocrate, le lyrisme employait a profusion toutes les figures et des pensees que la rhetonque devait cataloguer'. (Rose actually makes his point ma Bundy who he says 'was, probably unconsciously, pursuing the implication of Groiset's argument that the epideictic orators' etc.; but as 'probably unconsciously' perhaps concedes, Bundy does not as far as I can see actually cite Groiset (whose book certainly does not appear in the list of 'selected works' listed in Bundy 1986: 93f). But it is perfectly true that Bundy was well aware of this aspect, cf. Bundy 1986: 14—15, comparison of Lys. 2 .2 (the preamble to the Funeral Speech) with P. /. 4. 2f, 'as perfect a prose equivalent . . . as we could hope to find' (a slight exaggeration, this). Bundy 15 n. 39 goes on to compare the final sentence of Lys. 2. 2 (land/sea) withN. 6. 47—55. My point in the text is a slightly more specific one, to do with the prose orations best exemplified by the 'Kyprian' orations of Isokrates (Isok. 2, 3 and 9, with Forster 1912 for a still helpful edition of and commentary on all three orations), and perhaps also by the (lost) orations delivered by various Greek orators and literary figures at the funeral competition held for the dead satrap Mausolus by his sister-wife Artemisia, for which interesting event see Hornblower 19820: 333-4, cf. 294 where I suggested that parts of Isok. 9, the Evagoras, may give the flavour of these 'Mausolan' orations. See Race 1986: 66 andn. 41, 121, and 146 n. 3, citing Jaeger 1947: 3. 85, and more fully Race 1987, concluding with a comparison of Pi. /. 2 and Isok. Evag. 25 For afuller treatment ofthis topicsee my paper 'Pindar andkingship theory' forthcoming

64

Content and Outlook

(line 86)26 or the praise of Arkesilas of Kyrene at the end of Pythian 4. (line 262, 'you [plural, i.e. Arkesilas' family] who have devised policy based on right counsel', 6p96j3ovXov ^r\riv eêvpoêvois. This theme returns us to the concept of hesychia, because in Pythian i Pindar observes that with the help of Zeus a man who is ruler (dy^T^p dvrjp) and instructs his son can in honouring his people turn them to harmonious hesychia, (lines 69-71). That is, Pindar's preoccupation with Hesychia should not (with Polybius) be seen narrowly and inaccurately in terms of Theban medism, nor too exclusively in terms of Athenian imperialism and its critics, but also as part of the vocabulary of'advice to princes', a genre with a long future ahead of it. As with many other themes we shall handle in this book, the germ is already in Homer: Pindar's 'peopleguiding iyrannos' (Aaye'ras rvpavvos, P. 3. 85) looks not only forward to hellenistic conceptions of the good ruler but back to Homer, who as Aristotle noted (Mc.Eth. n6i a i5f) called Agamemnon 'shepherd of the people', TToipeva Aacov, because the good king studies to promote the welfare of his people as a shepherd studies the welfare of his sheep.27 Hellenistic writers who took it on themselves to offer advice to kings had to be careful how they expressed themselves. The written word was safer than the spoken—'what friends do not dare to say to kings they write in books', as Demetrius of Phaleron remarked to Ptolemy Philadelphos28—but even when writing to a man like Hiero it was a good idea to be oblique:29 it has been ingeniously suggested that the bronze of the anvil metaphor referred to above conceals a warning against the 'destructive violence inherent in all absolute power'. The metal bronze is associated at the end of the poem with the wicked Phalaris of Akragas and his brazen bull (P. i, line 95), a Greek tyrant who is contrasted as a negative role-model with the kindly excellence of the Lydian king

in a book to be edited by Sian Lewis, and delivered at a conference on tyranny and other modes of autocracy in the ancient world, organized by her at Cardiff in July 2003. 26 For reasons which will become clear below, it is important to keep the 'bronze' element in the verb xa\K£vaj alive in translation; Bowra and Race lose it by merely saying 'forge'. 27 Aristotle's comment may suggest that Homer's 'shepherd of the people' metaphor was to Greek ears not quite as 'dead' as Michael Silk thinks, see Silk 1974: 30 and in OCD3 under 'metaphor and simile' at 967 col. i. 28 FGrHist228 T6b withj. Hornblower 1981: 178. 29 Or frivolous: see Fi26, from 'advice' to Hiero in an encomium, where the message is 'enjoy life'.

Pindar and kingship theory

65

Kroisos, a neat reversal of the poem's usual Greek-barbarian opposition.30 For this sort of reversal the parallel is rather with Herodotus, or with Euripides,31 than with Thucydides. In general, Homeric, Pindaric, Aristotelian, and hellenistic reflections on how autocratic power should be used are absent from Thucydides, though he listed the achievements of Archelaos of Macedon (2. 100. 2), was aware of the power of the Deinomenid rulers of Sicily (i. 17) and may have glanced forward to the tyranny of Dionysios (6. 38. 2-3). Persia and the satraps featured increasingly as his work went on and would surely have featured even more in the coverage of the years 4H-4O4;32 but unlike Herodotus or Xenophon he never had, or would have had, occasion to reflect on issues like the difference between good king Cyrus and bad king Gambyses, between good ruler Kroisos and bad ruler Phalaris (Pi. P. i. 94-8). Thucydides' prime concern is rather with the coercive power exercised by the citizens of one polls against those of another polls or against each other, and it is in these areas that we have to look for political reflections of a Pindaric sort. I conclude this section by returning briefly to Pindar's influence on later kingship theory, a topic with a long history. Pindar was influential in it—but in an unexpected and unfair way. I end with a word about Plato and Isokrates. In the Gorgias(484. and 488), Plato makes the realist might-is-right advocate Kallikles quote a famous fragment of Pindar (Fi6g) which begins 'nomos is king of all' and goes on to describe the unjust theft by Herakles of the cattle of Geryoneus—the tenth of the twelve Labours. Now this section of the Gorglas certainly counts as a contribution to kingship theory; Sokrates has just rejected the idea that Archelaos (king of Macedon 413-399) was really an an unjust happy man. In the early 19608 a good deal more of the Pindar poem was published from papyrus, but it remains unclear what genre of poem the fragment belongs to. What is however agreed is that Plato either wilfully, or radically as part of his portrait of Kallikles, has misused Pindar who meant by nomos something more like an affirmation that 'common acceptance of a traditional belief as a valid and binding conviction, is king'. (This is how Herodotus took the Pindar poem: 3. 38). As Dodds put it in his commentary on the Gorglas 'we can hardly 30 So Segal 1989: :8gf., and see alreadyJ. H. Finley 1955: 82 on the anvil metaphor here: 'the danger of suppressed violence lurks behind this cryptic advice'. 31 For Herodotus see Derow 1995; for Euripides see Hall 1989: 217; Groally 1994: nofT. 32 Andrewes 1961.

66

Content and Outlook

credit the pious Pindar with this shocking opinion' (that is, belief in the 'right' of the stronger.33) The explanation of Plato's error is that in between Pindar and Plato the debate about nomos zndpkysis, convention and nature, had occurred. A doubt remains: the treatment of Herakles in the poem is not as favourable as we should expect from Pindar's treatment of him elsewhere. So Ostwald34 ingeniously suggests that towards the end of his life, when the fragment is thought to date, Pindar was beginning to anticipate Euripides' 'procedure of turning a myth inside out'. But there is a risk of circularity here because even with the new discoveries the poem is too fragmentary for confident dating. Finally there is Isokrates, who mentions Pindar only once by name, for the honour paid him by the Athenians for calling them the 'bulwark of Greece' (15. 166, citing Fy6). But I have suggested (above n. 24) that he may also have had Pindar in mind as a model in his Kyprian orations which are in effect treatises on kingship (Orations 9, 2 and 3). On the one hand, Pindar is conspicuously absent from ToMkokks, whereas Hesiod, Theognis, and Phokylides are specifically recommended, as are Homer and 'the first inventors of tragedy' (2. 43 and 48). On the other hand note how Evagoras (Isok. 9. 12-20) traces the king's royal virtues to his Aiakid ancestors from Aigina, above all Teukros son of Telamon and cousin of Achilles; Aigina itself features. We are right in Pindar's world here, above all the odes for men and boys of Aigina. In Merman 4 Pindar speaks (line 46) of'Cyprus where Teukros rules in exile'. So I wonder after all if Isokrates had Pindar in mind in these Gypriot orations on kingship. So far I have treated kingship in Pindar directly, but he is a writer who often makes his points obliquely through metaphor, and we shall see next that medical figures of speech are one of the ways in which he advises rulers.

33 Dodds 1959: 270. For subsequent discussions, taking account of the new papyrus, see Ostwald 1965 esp. I25f (whence the quotation in my text), Pavese 1967 and Rutherford 1995: 163. Mullen 1982: 48 f. interestingly relates Plato's use of the nomos fragment to his view of poetry generally, and notes that Pindar would not have been admitted into the ideal state of the Laws because there Plato says that it is 'not safe to honour those still living with enkomia and hymns', Laws 8o2a. For Pindar and Plato see also below, Gh. 4 pp. 9i~334 Ostwald 1965: 130.

Medicine, the politician as doctor

67

Medicine, the politician as doctor Although in this book I shall concentrate mostly on the athletic aspect of Pindar, this is a lopsided approach, especially in view of the known existence of Pindaric genres other than victory odes. Also, there were non-athletic interests shared by the two men and evidenced in Pindar's victory odes: for instance, they were both amateurs of medicine.35 Thucydides describes the plague of 430 and 427 (2. 47. 3- 54. 5; 3. 87. 1-3), while Pythian 3 is what we might call Pindar's 'medical ode': he enumerates the kinds of medical help available, with perhaps a famous Homeric passage (Iliad 1 1. 514-15) at the back of his mind.36 Pindar says ofAsklepios:

some he tended with calming incantations, while others drank soothing potions, or he applied remedies to all parts of their bodies; still others he raised up with surgery.

(P-3-5l-3)Only cauterization is missing from this list, which in modern terminology begins with alternative medicine and continues with pharmacology and surgery; perhaps cauterization would have been thematically inappropriate given that fire is connected in the poem with disease and death.37 Temple medicine (incubation), one important type of ancient therapy,38 is not specifically mentioned, but like 'calming incantations' could perhaps be said to belong to the general category of alternative medicine. Pythian 3 is traditionally thought to have been prompted by a serious illness of its dedicatee Hieron, and this idea of an 'ailing Hieron' has survived into the sophisticated modern phase of Pindaric criticism, which is usually cautious about inferring such biographical data from the text.39 That is, the phrase 'golden health' (v-yieiav xpvaeav, line 73) 35

Gf. Race 1986: 6if. and 140 n. 33, noting that doctors and poets are both craftsmen. The second of these lines should not be athetized; see Hainsworth 1993: 280. Asshownby Youngig68: 55. 38 See OCD3 under 'incubation' (F. G[raf]), and 'medicine' section 2. (J. T. V[allance]). 39 Young 1968: 68, accepting the consolatio interpretation of the poem but rejecting the usual view of the form taken by that consolatio. 36

37

68

Content and Outlook

is personally appropriate as well as beautiful.40 One might go a little further and infer something about Pindar's intellectual interests as well as about Hieron's state of health, because elsewhere too Asklepios brings out the poet's medical side: mNemean 3 he describes (line 55) how Gheiron taught Asklepios 'the gentle-handed province of medicines', (the same ode compares athletic victory to a 'healing remedy', O.KOS vyirjpov, see below).41 But like Thucydides, who registered the powerlessness and ignorance of doctors in face of the plague (2. 47. 4), Pindar was realistically aware that medicine has what have been called'crucially limited capabilities', which contrast with the immortality conferred by praise poetry.42 Medical metaphors are natural in all genres of literature.43 Thucydides has an angry old Spartan soldier telling King Agis not to 'cure ill with ill', KO.KOV KO.KO) Ida9ai (5. 65. 2, cf. Hdt. 3. 53. 4: surely proverbial),44 and desire is said to attack or fall on people, just like a disease (6. 24. 3, see above). Pindar says that revelry is the best 'doctor' for toil, dpiaros ev(f>poavva TTOVOIV KeKpijêvaiv larpos and that songs, those wise daughters of the Muses, have the power to soothe with their touch, at Se ao(f>al Moiadv Ovyarpes doiSal deXâv viv o.Tn6jêvo.i (N. 4. 1—3). He even calls a woolly cloak a (f>dpfj,aKov (drug, cure, remedy) against the cold wind (0. 9. 97) and wine a 'life-giving remedy for helplessness', (Paian 4, 04 Rutherford, line 26, talking

40 Note also the prayer (0. 8. 85) that Zeus may ward off'painful diseases', 6£eias voaovs, from the family of Alkimedon of Aigina; Race 1990: 162 concedes, despite his generally Bundyish approach in that book, that it is 'difficult to avoid the conclusion that Alkimedon's family had suffered from them' i.e such diseases. He notes that this is a unique petition in an epinikian ode (I suppose he does not count P. 3 because the hopes there are more indirectly expressed and not exactly in prayer form). 41 Dornseiff 1921: 61, who also cites N. 8.49—50, 'many a man has with healing songs made even hard toil painless', iTraoi&ais 8' avrjp vaj&vvov KO.I TIS Kaparov BrjKfv. In the case of./V. 3, which is for the pankratiast Aristokleidas, Pfeijffer suggests that the words refer to some real physical injury: 'Aristoclidas was badly hurt' (Pfeijffer 1999: 276, cf. 226). But because JV. 8 is for a victor in the (non-violent) foot race, Pfeijffer (276 again) has to take Kap-aros to mean the 'psychical pain' of the death of the victor's father. Kaparos ('effort', 'trouble' according to Slater) does not seem quite the right word for this, and it is better to see both passages as metaphorical. 42 Young 1968: 68. 43 See Rutherford 1994: 62 and n. 38, citing Aesch. Ag. (458 EG) lines 848-50, where Fraenkel in his commentary (i 950) notes that the conception of a disease of thepolis goes back to Solon in the early 6th cent., see F 4\V line 17 for the idea ofthe body as vulnerable organism, 'an unavoidable wound comes to the whole city'. Gf. too Wilamowitz 1909: 336 on E. Her. line 542 for some further (4th-cent., prose) passages. 44 S.Ajtix^62f.


69

45

about Keos and its produce). Victory itself can be a healing remedy, O.KOS vyirjpov (N. 3. 18, for an Aiginetan victor in the pankration).46 But one application of the medical metaphor deserves special attention.47 Both Pindar and Thucydides, or at least a Thucydidean speaker, treat politics and what Thucydides would have called 'rule over others' (aAAcov apx^j, 3- 45- 6 in a different context) as a kind of medicine. Urging Arkesilas of Kyrene to restore the exiled Damophilos, Pindar says 'you are a most fitting healer, and Paian [Apollo the healer] honors your saving light. One must apply a gentle hand to tend a sore wound': (P. 4. ayo-i).48 It may49 be relevant to the medical tone of Pythian 450 that Kyrene was famous for its doctors, second only to those of Kroton according to Herodotus (3. 131.3), even though the precise reasons for that fame elude us, at least in the classical period).51 So too 45

For medical metaphors in Pindar see Segal 1989: 192; Sterner 1986: 20, 241"., 131. On this passage see Scanlon 2002: 307, in the context of a good discussion of violence and even death in sport. 47 See Brock 2000, an important discussion of medical imagery in the Greek polis. For Thucydides' remarkable use of parallel language to describe the effects of the plague and the economic damage inflicted by the Spartan occupation of Dekeleia (3. 87. 2 and 7. 27—8) see Hornblower 1991: 494andKallet 1999. 48 Citing this passage, Hubbard 1985: g6f. notes that 'Jason as the ideal statesman and athlete is thus a positive paradigm for the victorious statesman and athlete Arkesilas'. 49 As suggested by Race 1997: i. 258 (and 1986: 74), who notes the medicinal qualities of the Kyrenaian plant silphion. 50 For another medical metaphor in this ode see line 187, where the journey on the Argo is a (f>dpp,aKov xdXXiarov Ids dperds, a drug or specific for the production of [literally 'drug of] virtue; Burton 1962: 163 aptly compares Ibycus F3I3 Davies, OVK eariv dTro^Bip-evois 'the dead can no longer find a drug to win back life'. Medea's skills are on the border between the medical and the magical: P. 4 line 221 is straightforwardly and harmlessly medical ('she concocted with olive oil antidotes for terrible pains', avv 8' but at 233 she ls ^Tap.(j)dpp:a.Kos—'skilled in all medicines' (Race)? Or'all powerful in magic' (Slater)? Pindar's Medea may not be the evil witch of some versions but she is certainly not a kindly general practitioner either: note the implications of'slayer of Pehas', I7€\iao(f)6vov, at line 250. 51 On Hdt. 3. 131. 3 see the good discussion of Sherwm-White 1978: 256 n. 2, at the beginning of a chapter on the more celebrated medical traditions of Kos. She notes that SEG 9. i = Austin 1981: no. 264, the great Ptolemaic constitution of Kyrene, contains at line 43 a reference to public doctors at Kyrene, who are not to hold political office. This is valuable evidence for the existence of the institution there (though this text does not seem to feature in Gohn-Haft 1956); but are we here dealing with an exclusion (so Preaux 1978: 447, explaining it by reference to the itinerant life-style of such doctors, 'hors cite', cf. McKechnie 1989:148)? Or is it rather a privilege, so apparently Sherwin-White, who speaks of'exemption'. Shipley 2000: 347 goes even further down this road, taking the restriction to be a guarantee of political independence for public servants and an 'exemption from public service as a recognition of 46

jo

Content and Outlook

Thucydides makes Nikias say to the prytanis (6. 14) that he should be 'doctor of the city when it has taken bad advice', and that he should 'help his country as far as possible or at least not willingly harm it', an attested Hippokratic medical principle (Epidemics i.n). 52 This may seem a modest view of the art of politics, as of medicine, but Thucydides and Pindar were realists about what could be achieved by practitioners of both skills (for their realism about medicine alone, see above). For Thucydides' limited, purely intellectual, and non-moralizing view of how the study of the past, and the activity of the historically aware politician, could make people 'better', see below, p. 95. Roger Brock has argued that the doctorfigure is largely absent from sixth- and fifth-century references to stasis as sickness; what is recommended is 'community medicine' to reestablish the balance between the humours.53 He argues that cautious and gentle treatment is recommended in the few pre-Platonic passages where the doctor-as-statesman figure of speech is used; interestingly for our purposes, the two main passages he cites are from Pindar and Thucydides (P. 4. 271-2 and Th. 6. 14, Nikias to the prytanis, for both of which see above). This aligns Pindar and Thucydides against the rest of the evidence: were these two medically alert and well informed to an exceptional degree?54 I wonder however if Pindar, who knew the contribution they are already making' (though Shipley also considers the possibility that this is a 'restriction upon lower-class professions'). Note that the public doctors of Kyrene are associated with other useful groups like gymnastic trainers, teachers of archery, horse-riding and so on. 52 See my forthcoming commentary; KO.KCUS is not in all MSS but should probably be read. Note Dover's citation in his Thucydides commentary (Dover, HCTigjo: 240) of IG i 3 164. 13-14, rrjv j3Aaj3i;]i' laaScu 8[iirAiyiapp,aKov, ace. of (f>app,aKos [a scapegoat], which Mastronarde amusingly describes as 'a word which, despite modern preoccupations, is unattested in tragedy'; see also and esp. Douglas 2003, an important study which inter alia denies that the biblical scapegoat and Greekpharmakos have much in common. 53 Brock 2000: 33 for 'the highest form of community medicine'. At 32 he cites the 'moderate blending' of political elements praised at 8. 97. 2 (cf. also Rutherford 1994: 62 n. 38 for this phrase as medical metaphor), and suggests that at 6. 18. 6 the word gvyKpaffev, 'blended', is a reply by Alkibiades to Nikias' 'doctor'figure of speech at 6. 14. 54 For medicine in Herodotus see Thomas 2000: 29—42. He does not appear to be specially given to the political use ofmedical imagery (though Brock 2000: 25 cites 3. 76. 2 and 3.127. i for political 'swelling').


71

that literal medicine can 'raise up with surgery' (above for P. 3. 53) was really committed to belief in what would now be called 'non-invasive' medical techniques in non-literal contexts, that is in politics. Hope; justice and the stronger man; love of what is distant I now move on to other ways of expressing political and moral thought. But again we shall find that it is extremely difficult to identify authorial belief as opposed to sentiments that are rhetorically or poetically appropriate. The personification of Hope55 is a natural thought but a poetic rather than a prose one before the time of Thucydides: Herodotus did not personify Hope, but Hesiod, Pindar, Bacchylides, and Sophocles all did—and so does Thucydides. Hesiod's Pandora has a fully personified Hope left in her 'box' or more correctly her storage jar after everything else had flown out to plague the earth (Works and Days 94-101),56 and this Hope is surely positive despite modern attempts to take it otherwise. Sophocles personified Hope, but negatively, in one of the choral odes of his (probably) early play Antigone (?443): 'widewandering Hope is a blessing to many men, but to many others a false lure of empty-headed desires, and it comes on one who knows nothing', Sophocles' powerful negative view of Hope has been compared to brilliant figures of speech used by both Pindar before Sophocles and Thucydides after him. For Jebb,57 Sophocles was 'perhaps thinking of the fine, though again far from encouraging, personification of Hope58 at Pindar 0. 12. 5~6a: 'men's hopes . . . often rise, while at other times they roll down as they voyage [lit. 'cleave water'] across vain falsehoods Burton by contrast, in his discussion of the relevant Sophoclean chorus,59 looked forward in time, to Diodotus in Thucydides' Mytilene debate. Hope and Desire are there pictured as a feckless couple, Desire leading, Hope following, Desire thinking up the plan, Hope suggesting that fortune will be kind, 55 57

For Hope in Pindar see Theunissen 2002: 341—95. 58 Jebb 1906: n8f. Dornseiffigai: 68.

56 5Q

West 1978: 168—70. Burton 1980:109.

72

Content and Outlook

(3- 45- 5)- The three passages have in common the idea of Hope the Traveller, and perhaps the same idea is implicit in a fourth passage, Bacchylides' gnomic sentence 'winged hope undoes the thinking of mortals', TTTe[p]6eaaa • (3. 75-6).60 But who can say who was indebted to whom? For the negative Sophoclean and Thucydidean combination of Hope and Desire one could as well point to Pindar's Neman u:61 'our bodies are enthralled to cruel/shameless hope', a thought which is closely followed by a solemn gnomic closure to the whole poem, warning against the 'painful madness of unattainable desires', (lines 45 f, 48). There is one more Pindaric and one more Thucydidean passage to consider. The Athenians in Thucydides' Melian Dialogue personify Hope as a delusive comforter, -n-apa^vOiov ovaa (5. 103), and prodigal by nature, Stnmvos -yap ucrei (where the adjective is an early and rare equivalent of the later SaTravTjpos). Again, this is a negative personification. By contrast we find a more positive view of Hope in a Pindar fragment quoted by Plato in the -Republic: 'with him [the just and pious man] lives sweet Hope, heart-fostering nurse of old age, which most of all steers mortals' much-veering judgment', (Faizj.).62 It would however be wrong to conclude from this that Pindar sometimes, but Thucydides never, sees Hope positively: the twoThucydideanpersonificationsarebothfromspeeches; if he had needed to, Thucydides could have made somebody speak well of Hope (7. 67. i, 77. 2 are positive but not strong personifications). Similar warnings apply to other tempting and up to a point instructive parallels between Pindar and Thucydides' bleaker speeches. The Athenians' general position at Melos resembles Pindar's grim line in Merman 9 'the stronger man puts an end to what was justice before', (line 15).63 But Dornseiff 60

Compare B. 9. 18, 'hope steals away men's thinking', The restoration is, as Maehler says adloc., as good as certain, and does not depend on the similarity to 3. 75, the passage quoted in my text, striking though that similarity is. 61 I am not sure why West 1978: 169 puts this passage with 'good' mentions ofhope, along with F2I4 on which see below. It seems to belong in the bad uses along with 0. 12, rightly so categorized by West. 62 Gorcella 1984/5. See further below, pp. g6f., 356 for personification. 63 Bosworth 1993: 40. On the powerfully placed final noun see Dornseiffig2i: 107. Note however that the line can be taken in a different way: 'the stronger man puts an end to a former dispute' (Race). But I cannot see that Pindar uses StVa, singular, in this sense; Slater 1969: 133 gives/. 8. 24 as an ex. of the plural having the sense 'decisions, judgments of right'.

Hope; justice; love of what is distant

73

warns that such teaching, like warnings against hubris, is characteristic of Greek popular religion.64 Pindar and Bacchylides frequently express impatience with people who prefer what is distant and unrealistic to what is close at hand,65 a human frailty: as Bacchylides puts it (i. 176-7), mortals 'are always seeking to catch what eludes them', alel TO. eu | yovra Si^vrai Kiyzw. This impatience is expressed with particular insistence in Pindar's Pythian 3, which has been compared in this respect to the Realpolitik attitude of the Athenians in Thucydides' Melian Dialogue (5. 87 and 89).66 That is not the only Thucydidean speech which evokes the warnings of Pythian 3. Pindar there remarked censoriously that Koronis mother of Asklepios 'was in love with things remote', ripa.ro ru>v arreovruiv (line 20).67 These sentiments are remarkably close in both thought and precise verbal expression to Nikias' criticism of the Athenians for their Sicilian ambitions in 415, 'doomed lovers of things remote', (Th. 6. 13. 2.).68 The word for 'doomed lovers', Svaepwras, is poetic: it is not found elsewhere in fifth-century prose but was used by Euripides in his Hippolytos of 427 BG (line 193).69 But, to repeat and insist, we must not treat speeches by the Athenians at Melos, by Nikias in 415, or by anyone else, as a statement by the authorial Thucydides. The closest the authorial Thucydides gets to combining hope and desire censoriously is in the rich chapter describing Athenian motives for going to Sicily (6. 24): an epcos eVeVeae rots rraaiv oôtcos, fell on all alike or seized them (para. 3, a medical metaphor), and they were in high hopes, eue'AmSes (para. 3). But the censoriousness is not spelt 64

Dornseiffigai: 132. This is related to, but not identical with, the idea of 'not seeking beyond' human limitations; for lists of relevant Pindaric passages see Race 1990: 195, and n. 9 where he says this is not a Bacchyhdean topic, except perhaps for 4. 18—20 and 5. 50—5. 66 Young 1968: 27—68 and 116—20, a very valuable appendix on 'the theme of the near and the far' in Greek and Latin literature; see also Hubbard 1985: 11-27 and Bosworth :993: 41. For the point about the Melian Dialogue see Young 1968: 120 n. 18, where he makes the remark which I quote below, p. 277, about Th. as 'not unlike Pindar as a master of the literary art'. 67 Penan 4 (D4 Rutherford) with A. E. Housman's supplement, would vield the same thought: 'to foolish men belongs a love of things far away', p52d lines 34—5- But Housman's supplement was suggested by such passages as P. 3. 19—20, so cannot be used as part ofa cumulative case for saying that this was a Pindaric obsession. Rutherford 2001: 288 calls it a'gnome' (maxim or aphorism). 68 Gornford 1907: 206 actually says that Th. is here 'quoting from' Pindar. See further below, p. 335. 69 The authenticity of the passage is defended by Halleran 1995: 167 against the doubts of Barrett; see below, p. 335. 65

74

Content and Outlook 70

out; it is the narrative itself which will make clear that these Athenian hopes and desires (and 7r69os, desire for the absent, see above, p. 40) were delusive. Patriotic death; ephemerality of life That speeches do not simply give the opinions of Thucydides is true even or especially of the famous Funeral Oration, which claims (Th. 2. 43. 2) that the 'glory', 8o|a, of the dead men, who 'gave their bodies for the common good', Koivfj -yap ra auiâra SiSovres, 'survives in eternal remembrance' aeinvrjaros KaraXei-n-erai (these two words, we may note, form the central part of a hexameter). This is in the same mood and mode as Pindar's celebration of the patriotic death in battle of Strepsiadas' uncle, another Strepsiadas, in Isthmian 7: 'honor is laid up as recompense for brave men', riâ S' dya9oiaiv dv-riVeiTcu, who die for their 'dear country', -n-po iAds TrarpiSos (lines 26-7). But the general themes here are distributed very widely through ancient Greek battle poetry (such as Tyrtaios) and sepulchral epitaphs, so we can say only that Thucydides and Pindar have lowered their buckets into the same well.71 Itis in the funeral speech thatwe find the closest parallel to Pindar's central notion of a moment of consummate ogod-given human o glory: a difficult sentence refers (on the likeliest translation) to the death of the citizen warriors 'at the climax of their glory rather than their fear', (2. 42. 4, last two lines); for the absolute use of aK^fj (i.e. without the normal eV) Rusten compares, precisely, the lovely phrase at Pindar P. 4. 64, core $owiKa.vQôv rjpos d«:â, 'as at the height of redflowered spring'.72 But apart from the difficulties of translation, there is in any case the old problem, does this represent the thought of Pericles or of Thucydides? It is curious that Thucydides does not say that in reality the funeral speech was accompanied by athletic funeral games; but there is a crowd of athletic metaphors at the end of the speech—is this perhaps an indirect hint?73 70

Note however that Ehrenberg 1947: 64 sees in eue'AmSes 'the slightly ironical description of an attitude of light-hearted and senseless optimism'. Euelpides is a character in the Birds of Aristophanes (Ehrenberg 1947: 64 n. 57): see Hornblower 2002: 163 for the topicality of this in 414, soon after the euphoric departure of the Sicilian Expedition. 71 72 Young 1971: 20—4, 4of See Rusten 1986: 67—71 and 1989: i67f 73 See Hornblower 1991: 315, commenting on arâvov, ayajvcw, and a8\a, all at 2. 46. i, and giving refs. for the funeral contest; cf. also Hornblower 1992: 171. Gf. below, p. 337.

Patriotic death; ephemerality of life

75

On the Thucydidean Funeral Oration and Pindar see further below, pp. 88 andn. 10, 89 andn. n. Thucydides is the first prose writer to use the charged poetic word 'ephemeral'; he uses it once only, applying it to human life in his emotive personal report of the breakdown of moral values after the plague (2. 53. 2); it recalls Pindar's celebrated words in Pythian 874 'man is ephemeral, a dream of a shadow' (lines 95 f., though some think 'ephemeral' here means volatile not transient. For Bacchylides, the related word means a mortal (that is, I suppose, a transient rather than a volatile) man; eâêpov itself occurs at the fragmentary line 73 but the sense cannot be reconstructed.

Intelligence and inborn excellence Let us then confine ourselves to authorial Thucydides. Thucydides' emphatic praise of the inborn i.e. unlearned intelligence of Themistokles (i. 139. 3, oiKeia £weaei) is without parallel in his History. It resembles at first sight what Pindar says in Nemean i about inborn ability to foresee the future, (lines 27-8, or the stress in Nemean 3, for Aristokleidas of Aigina, on inborn as opposed to merely learnt excellence:75 see the very strong assertion at lines 40-1, 'one with inborn glory carries great weight, but he who has mere learning is a shadowy man'. The Marxist literary critic P. W. Rose has brought out the great importance of this ideologically charged notion of inherited excellence, and of the cluster of words with which Pindar expresses it. There is a difference here between Pindar and Bacchylides, at any rate on the incomplete evidence available to us: Rose compares the stress on inherited qualities inNemean^ (esp. lines 40-1) with the absence of any such notion in Bacchylides 13, written for the same victory.76 But, to return to Thucydides and Themistokles, 74

For ephemerality in Pindar see Theunissen 2002: 217—306. Gf. below, p. 92. On the phyaltechrie opposition see Hubbard 1985: 107—24 and 2001: 391 76 Rose 1992: 160-2; for the contrast between Pindar and Bacchylides see 162. PfeijfTer 1999: 324-8 has a long note on the JV. 3 passage quoted in my text, and remarks at the end of his discussion (328) on the absence of emphasis on inborn abilities in Bacchylides, and on the 'far-reaching political implications' of the idea as found in Pindar. He does not however, here or anywhere else, mention Rose's book or his Marxist approach to Pindaric ideology. 75

76

Content and Outlook

the notion of innate ability does not function for Thucydides quite as it did for Pindar, if it is right that for Pindar it was a 'categorical denial of social mobility'77 (but see below). By contrast, Themistokles was a 'new man' according to Herodotus (7. 143. i), not one of those born to rule. Thucydides has taken a Pindaric notion and turned it upside down. Or is this Thucydides' characteristically oblique way of correcting Herodotus? But even if so, Pindar may still, I suggest, be in his mind. Actually, however, Pindar is not nearly so categorical. Elsewhere he is well aware that the techna, taught skill, of an inferior man can bring down a stronger (/. 4. 34-5).78 To put that more prosaically, he praises not only athletes but their trainers.79

Ambition; stasis Pindar (Fa 15) deplores excessive ambition, ci-yav ^tAort^ta, among 'men in cities'. In a way Pindar is not saying much here because there is a pedantic sense in which excessive anything was, is and always will be deplorable (this is what philosophers call 'analytic truth'), and in fact could be creditable or at least neutral. Certainly in inscriptions and prose writers such as Thucydides the noun is a protean one, good or bad according to its context and the company it keeps (cf. Th. 2. 44. 4 and 65. y).80 So we cannot make too much of this verbal and conceptual connection between Pindar and Thucydides.81 For Thucydides the real and unqualified psychological evil in politics is greed, TrAeove^ta, which is coupled with iAoTi|U,ia on one important authorial occasion where it undoubtedly colours the sense of the companion noun (3. 82. 8, from the important analysis of internal revolution at Kerkyra).82 A more striking Pindaric parallel to Thucydides' own thinking is to be found in the Pindar fragment already quoted above in connection with Hesychia (Fiog). As we saw, that poem was about Thebes. Stasis, says Pindar, is a 'giver of poverty'; this is close to Thucydides' remark on the link between stasis and economic hardship, in his cer77

PfeijfTer 1999: 328. Hubbard 1985: in-12. 79 Hubbard 1985:116 and 2001: 391. 80 See Hornblower 1991: 313 and 344, nn. on the two passages, citing Whitehead 1983. 81 On the relation between Th.'s and Pindar's views onphilotimm$&£ Davies 1993: 115. 82 There is a rare misprint in Betant 1843—7: 2. 347, entry under 7rAeoi<e£ta: for 3. 86 read 3. 82. With all this cf. Hesiod WD nff.: two kinds of strife. 78

Ambition; stasis

77

tainly personal analysis of stasis at Kerkyra, modern Corfu (3. 82. a).83 The thought may again be semi-proverbial, but stasis and exile were as familiar ingredients of Pindar's world as of Thucydides': this explains some Pindaric victors who have connections with more than one place, like Hagesias of both Syracuse and Arkadia in Olympian 6 (For other Arkadians who moved to Syracuse see below, Gh. 5 p. 186.) We must however allow for voluntary emigration—just as the former world tennis no. i Pete Sampras is a second-generation Greek emigre, not an exile who is denied return. But stasis certainly explains Ergoteles of Sicilian Himera in Olympian 12 (see further below, Gh. 5 pp. 157, 196). He was originally Kretan from Knossos, but Pindar says that 'hostile faction,84 ardais dvndveipa, deprived you of your homeland, Knossos' (line :6).85 Thatpoem, with its initial invocation of'Zeus the Liberator', has a better claim than Pythian n to be considered a Pindaric turning away from the world of the Sicilian tyrants, whose splendour Thucydides himself noted (i. 17), to the self-determining city-state values which replaced the tyrants, albeit briefly and precariously. That is, Olympian 12 celebrates a regime which overthrew a tyrant.86 To return to Pindar and stasis, he expresses preoccupation with it on several occasions. Paian 9 (Ai Rutherford), 'For Thebans at the Ismenion', wonders what calamities a recent eclipse might portend for Thebes—war, wasting of crops, a mass of snow beyond telling, or ruinous strife, ardaiv ovAoêvav (line 15), or floods, and so on. The fact that stasis is just one in a long list of catastrophes may be thought to lessen its specificity here (similar considerations apply to a famous personification of stasis in the Eumenides of Aeschylus, line 859, where

83

The comparison is duly made by Kirkwood 1982: 337, commentary on Fiog. Or perhaps 'unnaturing stosis, if Silk is right (in Hornblower and Morgan forthcoming) to detect an indirect reference to the Amazons, who are described as avridveipai at Homer, Iliad'},. 189, where it means 'matching men'. 85 Steiner 1986: 115 says that 'Ergoteles decides not to remain in his native city'. There is no way of telling whether he was an actual exile (as Race 1997: i. 181 assumes), or whether he chose to depart voluntarily, forced out not by law or physical compulsion but 'merely' by pressure of adverse circumstances. Pausanias to be sure says, after listing Ergoteles' victories, that he was driven out of Knossos by factious people and then arrived at Himera where he received citizenship and other honours, (6.4. 11). But I doubt if Pausanias was here doing more than offering intelligent inference from Pindar (just as, for the athletic victories, he cites Ergoteles' statue-base for which see below, p. 192 n. 241). He does not actually cite Pindar here by name, as he does at 6. 2. 5 where the ref. is to 0. 6, but he knew his poetry very well, see below, p. 235 and n. 419. 86 See Barrett 1973; cf. also Lloyd-Jones 1990 [1982]: 59. See below pp. 83f. 84

78

Content and Outlook

Macleod insists that it is just one of a set of evils which a city's prayers conventionally try to avert).87 Again, 'hostile stasis', exOpa ardais, features in another possible Paian, no. 14 (83 Rutherford) line 3, but the poem is very fragmentary and the words are isolated. More promising, for any political historians who may be unfashionably interested in specific Pindaric allusions to the internal affairs of particular poleis, is the plea at the beginning ofwhat looks like a dithyramb for the Korinthians, that stasis may come to an end (Fyoc). This looks like real contemporary stasis. I defer detailed discussion of this to a later chapter (see p. 202), merely noting here that civic unrest in complacent oligarchic fifth-century Korinth is not otherwise attested: Thucydides knows a lot of antiquarian and prosopographic detail about Korinth but allows us very few glimpses of its inner life. It will be seen that Pindar provides enough evidence to challenge those modern historians of ancient Greece who claim (partly on the basis of evidence like the fourth-century prose treatise by Aineias 'the Tactician') that stasis was more of a feature of the fourth century than of the fifth.88 He ought to be cited more often in this connexion than he is.89

Political outlook When I was working on this book, a good friend and colleague, who shall be nameless, explained loudly in my hearing to a third party 'Simon is writing a book about the two greatfifth-centuryfascists'. This joke—but some readers may think it no more than the exact truth— may serve as an introduction to the difficult question of the personal political views of Thucydides and Pindar, not forgetting Bacchylides. 87

Macleod 1983: 26 and n. 27—which cites Pindar, Paian 9. 13-20. For a bold statement see Austin 1994: 531: 'while the greater extent and seriousness of stasis m the fourth century as compared to theffth seems clear [my italics], the character and causes of the phenomenon are more problematical.' For the general problem see Hornblower 2002^: 184-6: evidence like the fragments of Democritus also need to be taken into account. 89 Lintott 1982: 254 wisely declines to see Aineias as evidence that stasis was necessarily worse in the 4th cent, than in the preceding one, and rightly warns (252) against the 'misleading impression' created by the fullness of the fourth-century evidence; but he makes no use of Pindar. Gehrke'smore comprehensive examination of stasis (Gehrke 1985) is not much more Pindar-conscious: for instance he cites P. 10 for the socio-economic set-up in Thessaly (184 n. 4) and duly quotes Fiog on his first page (Gehrke 1985: i, and see his 165 n. 5 for the same fragment, cf. above, n. 19). But Ergoteles of Him era and other Pindaric evidence for social dislocation and exile do not feature in Gehrke or Lintott, nor does Paian 9. 88

Political outbok

79

Thucydides' personal preferences have been discussed interminably. Much of what has been written can be disregarded straight away for the reason set out at the beginning of this chapter, namely that it treats statements in speeches as evidence for the historian's own views.90 One might just as well say that Euripides himself believed that (to take a famous example, said to have been a favourite quotation of Julius Caesar) 'if one is to do wrong it is best to do wrong for a tyranny' (Ph. 524-5). Does this make Euripides a 'fascist'? But the feeling that Thucydides and Pindar are somehow right-wing figures persists ('that terrible old Tory' is how George Forrest once described Thucydides to me on a postcard). Perhaps the real trouble is that they concerned themselves with the doings of elites. Is this more obviously true of Thucydides than of say Xenophon or Polybius? (That Thucydides gives little space to women, compared to say Herodotus, is a true but slightly different point; see below, p. 99). As for Pindar and Bacchylides, their odes for Athenian athletic victors are not all for equestrian victors, or men of the Alkibiades type, nor should they all be dated to the period before the introduction of the radical democracy. (See pp. 248 n. 468, and 252). Pindar even wrote one victory ode for an ephebic victor in the Athenian Oschophoria, a festival much studied recently by students of the radical Athenian democracy (for this tantalising item see pp. 252-4 below). Greek tragedy, that paradigmatically democratic genre (we are told), is not the only literary genre with an ephebic aspect. Let us look, not at the preoccupations, but at the political views of our two 'fascists', ignoring things put into the mouths of speakers including and especially such tempting speakers as the Syracusan Athenagoras (6. 38-40, a better defence of democracy than that given to any Athenian speaker). The Greeks divided constitutional forms, simply and exhaustively, into three types: the rule of one, the rule of the few and the rule of the many. The distinction is most famously and clearly set out in Herodotus' 'Debate on the Constitutions' (3. 8o-2),91 but its earliest formulation is not there but in Pindar Pythian 2. 86-8, a passage

90 The closest to an actual 'fascist' i.e. totalitarian sentiment in Th. is 2. 60. 2, in Pericles' last speech. On this passage see Hornblower 1991: 332f., where I should have noted that the thought may owe something to Hes. WD 227 and 240, cf. Garne-Ross 1985: 36. 91 Most 1985: 112 n. 77 (where for Hdt. 2 read Hdt. 3). Pindar's tripartite categorization had a long life ahead of it: see Tac. Ann. 4. 33. i, 'nam cunctas nationes et urbes populus aut prim ores aut singuli regunt'.

80

Content and Outlook

which gains the poet an unexpected place in some modern works on Greek political institutions and theory:92

under every regime93 the straight-talking man excels: in a tyranny, when the boisterous people rule, or when the wise watch over the city.

The date of this poem is much disputed, and certainty is unattainable.94 But the range of serious possibilities extends only from 477 to 467, the death-year of the honorand Hieron. This makes it far earlier than any remotely conceivable 'composition date' of Herodotus, so for the present purpose the precise date is immaterial. Can we extract anything about Pindar's own preferences from the vocabulary he uses? There is a running scholarly argument about whether the difficult word AdjBpos, 'boisterous', 'turbulent', is or is not pejorative. It is not the worst word you could use about the 'people' or 'host' more normally 'army'), not least because of its—possibly deliberate— instability of meaning. By 'possibly deliberate' I mean that there may be no single definite answer to the question 'what did Pindar mean by AdjBpos?' That, mutatis mutandis, is what Adam Parry suggested about the equally problematic lAev9epa>s in Thucydides' final assessment of Pericles (/carefxe TO TrArj9os lAev9epa>s, 2. 65.8: either he 'restrained the people as if they were free men' or 'he restrained them as a free i.e liberal man would lead them'?)95 Parry's conclusion about was reached after considering various possibilities: 'did Thucydides, 92

For instance Hansen 1999: 66, Rhodes 2000: 124. So Race in the Loeb tr. Ostwald 1969: 30 n. 4 objects to the usual rendering of vop,os as 'regime', form of government', because he knows of no parallel for the word in this sense. He offers instead '[A] man straightforward in speech brings law-and-order to everything (he does), both under a tyranny and when the boisterous host, and when the wise watch over the city'. That is, Ostwald does not eliminate the reference to the three types of government, he merely thinks that vop,os does not describe them. But Kirkwood 1982: 158 rejects Ostwald's view, adducing Pythian 10. 70, where vopos is used of Thessaly. (Here, admittedly, Ostwald 34 n. 2 would like to read vofiov not vofiov. But the context is clearly political and a reference to 'pasture-land' would be badly out of place). On the tripartite division in Pindar see further Leppin 1999: 27—8 and n. 2; Bleicken 1979 [1998]: 150. 94 Kirkwood 1982: 140-1; Most 1985: 65-6. 95 Parry 1989: 144-5. There is paradox here (freedom/constraint); part of the point of the expression is that it echoes a well-known line of Solon but with the significant addition of'freely': [someone imprudent or inquisitive] 'would not have checked the mob', (F36.22 West): see Hornblower 19940: 69 n. 165. 93

Political outbok

81

by the word translated asfreely,mean any single one of these things, or even merely a combination of them?' It is notable that the examples we have considered are both political. Ambiguity, and choice of inherently fluid terminology, is one way of avoiding commitment, and offence; it may also indicate that one finds an issue particularly tormenting and profound. Dictionaries can hardly do justice to this common phenomenon. (For this stylistic feature, which Pfeijffer has called deliberate 'polyinterpretability', see below, Gh. 12 p. 367, where I cite an Aeschylean example which is also political). To return to AdjBpos, it is not for instance as rude and direct as the Sicilian tyrant Gelon's alleged view that the demos was a 'most unpleasant bedfellow', awoiV^jua dxupirwrarov (Hdt. 7. 156. 3); or the even franker phrase Kardparo? Sôs, 'accursed demos', used in the oligarchic epigram for the Athenian Kritias (DK 88Ai3). But on the other hand AdjBpos is not exactly polite; the essential ideas seem to be noisiness combined with violence (it is used of the wind and the sea),96 and as between these two notions, modern scholars place the emphasis according to their own sympathies.97 The reference to the 'wise', ot aooi, might be thought favourable enough to make Pindar an oligarch (though 'few' and 'wise' are not actually synonyms),98 especially in an ode in celebration or hope of benevolent tyranny, that is of the first-mentioned type of regime. But surely the truth is that none of the three regimes is being endorsed: what is being praised is straight speaking, ev9vyXu>aaia, and the enumeration which follows is no more than a paratactic strengthening device. Thucydides for his part has been characterized in the past as an oligarch, notably by Ronald Syme (who engagingly called him a 'lucid 96

At 0. 2. 86 the word seems definitely unfavourable, see next n. With Burton 1962:131 'definitely pejorative' contrast Lloyd-Jones 1990 [1973] : 115: 'it is unsafe to assume that the description is meant to be pejorative' with n. 17 (stressing the 'noisy' meaning of Aaftooj and giving ancient refs.). Carey 1981: 60 essentially returns to the Burton position: 'the primary sense is "violent" (LSJ, cf. Chantrame p. 224) and followed so closely by ao(f>oi the term must be contemptuous'. He adds that 'Pindar was not above the prejudices of his class and time'. The Burton/Carey position seems to me preferable, especially in view of the disparaging use at 0. 2. line 86 where the 'crows' are Aaftooi by contrast with the wise man who knows many things by nature; cf. below, p. 288 for this passage. 98 The mental word which does sometimes and in appropriate contexts operate as a synonym for oligarchy is 'prudence', a4


victories. Thus even at the dry level of chronology Pindar in Olympian 2 puts the foundation of Theron's Akragas 'a century' before Theron's chariot victory of 476 BG (line 93, eVa-rov ye eVe'cov); this as it happens chimes with, and is virtually the only external control on, Thucydides' foundation date for Akragas.69 But no one in their right mind goes to Pindar looking for dates, just as nobody in their right mind expects Thucydides to come up with statements such as that Sicily was Zeus' wedding-present to Persephone, as Pindar magnificently does inNemean i. 13-14; Thucydides' mentions of the Homeric Kyklopes, Laistrygonians and Gharybdis in Sicilian contexts are ironic or guarded: 'I leave all that to the poets' he says of the first two with a dismissive wave (6. 2.1) , and his formulation about Gharybdis is very cautious (4. 24. 5, the so-called, KArjOeiaa, Gharybdis where Odysseus is said, Aeyerat, to have sailed through).70 Pindar for his part does not in any victory ode actually link Sicily with these monstrous perils faced by Homer's Odysseus although other fifth-century writers including Thucydides did, and though Pindar himself gives a terrific but non-Homeric picture of the monster Typhon under the volcanic Mt Etna/Aitna (P. i. of perhaps 470 BG, lines 15!?., cf. 0. 4. 6-7 for Typhon and Etna);71 it was hard, reading Pindar's description in 2001, another eruption year, to believe that he did not himself see that of the mid-47os,72 though the idea that Pindar took it from an epic source cannot be disproved.73 Etna was a Sicilian volcano which also interested Thucydides (3. 116, the eruption of 426/5, with information about other eruptions);74 as 69

As noted by Dover, HCT4. 205. For Th. on 'Argive' Rhodes see below, p. 132. For the two italicized expressions see Hornblower 1996: i8if. 71 For Homer, Typhon is located in Gihcia, Ihadi. 783, cf. K. D[owden], 'Typhon' in OCD3. Some have thought that Hesiod associates Typhon ('Typhoeus') with Sicilian Etna, but this idea is scotched by West 1966: 393, n. on Theogortyline 860. 72 In line 27, 8avp,daiov Trpoai&eaBai, 'a wonder to behold', Zuntz 1955: 59 n. 2 saw a hint that Pindar witnessed an eruption himself. But even if one accepts that the implication is autobiographical, the next line goes Bavpa §e KCU irapeovrtov aKovaai., 'a wonder even to hear of from those present', and this could equally be taken to imply that Pindar did not witness it. 73 Von Mess 1901; Zuntz 1955: 59 n. 2. Lines 350fT. of the Prometheus Bound of Aeschylus or Ps.-Aeschylus resemble Pindar's description in ways which have led scholars to suspect indebtedness, but who is indebted to whom? For Griffith 1978: 119-20 and 1983: 150 Pindar is more likely to be the original. 74 Th. says under 426/5 that an eruption occurred fifty years earlier than the one he there describes under that year. See Gaspar 1900: 103 n. i for the dating problem, also Gomme, HCT1956: 432. (FOrHist 239 , the Parian Marble, para. 52 puts the eruption 479, but Th. implies a date in perhaps 474. Gomme remarks that Th. 'is not vouching for the accuracy of his date'; Gaspar appeals to the long-drawn out character of Etna's 'eruptions', with modern references). OnTh. 3. n6see also p. i88n. 224. 70

Colonial myths

105

did the volcanic Aiolian islands where, as he surprises us by saying, the locals believe Hephaistos has his forge (3. 88. 3). Pindar does mention the Kyklopes, but only in fragmentary poems where they are just the builders of the walls of Tiryns and Mykenai (Fyoa = Dith. i, line 6; Fi6ga line 7), as they are for Pindar's rival Bacchylides (n. 77), who also wrote victory odes for Sicilians. So Pindar and Bacchylides are not among 'the poets' Thucydides was waving at. Let us however place two rich passages side by side. The first is a set of extracts from Pindar (0. 7), the second is from Thucydides (2. 102). First Pindar. Tlepolemos had killed Likymnios 'with a staff of hard olive in Tiryns' (lines 28-9), (7KG,7TTW 0£VCUV

(jKXr/pd? o\cuaV Sei^drajv, release from terrors, combines two rather poetic nouns (Sefjua is otherwise found only at 7. 80, in the somewhat redundant expression o/3oi KM Seiâra, Athenian 'fears and terrors' in the climax to the Sicilian expedition; Dornseiff has shown how fond Pindar is of this sort of hendiadys.)77 The whole 75 76 77

Iliad Q,. 653—70; see Willcock 1995: i6yf. See below, p. 132 and n. 7: Rhodes 'Argive'. Gantz 1993: 526. Dornseiff 1921: 26f.

Colonial myths

107

expression resembles Pindar's Averts Trev9ea>v (N. 10. 76-7). The final powerful and powerfully-positioned word 'polluted', ê^taaêv^v, is unique in Thucydides, although the outstanding modern authority on ancient Greek concepts of pollution notes that it 'plays, perhaps, a larger part than any other religious motif in the austere Thucydides'.78 Thematically, what the Pindar and Thucydides stories have in common is that both are signifiers for the important notion that colonization was a murderous business; indigenous populations were enslaved or killed, earlier Greek settlers might be driven out.79 Even in less obviously romantic passages, Thucydides was sometimes working with the same sort of material as Pindar. Pythian 4, for a victor from Kyrene, peels off layer on layer of colonial activity from the mythical Argonauts down to the historical founder Battos. One arresting detail calls for special discussion. Early in the poem he describes how a clod of Libyan earth was washed overboard during the voyage of the Argonauts and this carelessness meant that Libya was not founded in the fourth but in the seventeenth generation. The story of this lost clod needs to be expounded more fully, because of the possibility that it ties in with an important episode of late archaic Spartan history treated by Herodotus. Dorieus of Sparta and the 'lost clod of earth' First I give the relevant section of Pindar, part of the long speech of Medea, part narrative part prophecy, near the beginning of the poem (lines 13-56). Medea describes how Eurypylos (i.e. Triton, son of Poseidon) long ago gave a clod of Libyan earth to the Argonaut Euphamos:

78

Parker 1983: i. His formulation at p. 13 that 'the noun imasma, ubiquitous in the tragedians, does not occur at all in Herodotus, Thucydides or Xenophon' is strictly true for Thucydides, but at 2. 102 we have, in the participle pepiaapevriv, both the equivalent verb, the basic sound of the noun embedded in the word, and above all the concept; contrast Herodotus' KaTap.iaivop.ai Sit 6.58. i, where the verb just means to dirty oneself with mourning. 79 Dougherty 19936; Segal 1 986: 93 (sexual conquest equated by Pindar with 'hellenization' or political conquest); cf. Athanassaki 2003 : 94-5. Note Rutherford 2001 : 38of, in connection with Pindar Fi40a, G8 Rutherford: 'it is as an act of colonization that Heracles' attack on Par os should be seen'; he compares Pawn 4 (Keos, see below) where 'an original island race is wiped out and replaced by a new race with the blessing of the gods'.

io8


Nor did he fail to persuade him, but the hero leapt upon the shore, pressed his hand into the stranger's, and accepted the divine clod. I have heard that it was washed off the ship by a wave during the evening and passed into the sea, borne on the watery main. In truth, I frequently urged the servants who relieve our toils to guard it, but their minds were forgetful; and now the immortal seed of spacious Libya has been shed upon this island [Thera] prematurely. For if Euphamos, the royal son of horse-ruling Poseidon, whom Europa, Tityos' daughter, once bore by the banks of the Kephisos, had gone home to holy Tainaros and cast the clod at the earth's entrance to Hades, the blood of the fourth generation of children born to him would have taken that broad mainland with the Danaans, for at that time they are to set out from great Lakedaimon, from the gulf of Argos, and from Mycenae. (P. 4. 36-49) This myth possibly lies behind a section of Herodotus' colonial narrative.80 But the narrative in question is not the main narrative about Kyrene and Libya inbook4, it is the short but packed episode about the Spartan Dorieus, son of Anaxandridas and half-brother of Kleomenes, 80 The possible relevance of Dorieus the Spartan to P. 4, though awareness of it goes back at least to Niese 1907 (n. 87 below), is not mentioned in either of the fullest modern accounts of the ode, Braswell's commentary or Charles Segal's monograph (Braswell 1988; Segal 1986). Equally there is nothing about Dorieus at the relevant points of Wilamowitz 1922, Schroeder 1922, Burton 1962, Kirkwood 1982, or Race 1997. That is, Dorieus the Spartan has largely escaped the attention of the Pmdarists, though Bowra 1964: 140 is an exception. By contrast Dorieus is central to Malkin 1994 (see esp. chs. 6 and 7), a book with much to say about Pindar, though Malkin does not cite Niese. Gf. also Dougherty 19930: 17-18.

Dorieus of Sparta and the 'lost clod of earth'

109

in book 5 (39-49). Briefly, Dorieus led unsuccessful colonies to far western Libya, in fact to the Kinyps river halfway between Kyrene and Carthage, and then to western Sicily. The episode is set in the penultimate decade of the sixth century, at a time when the Spartans do seem, to judge from archaeological evidence (the 'Laconia survey'), to have been feeling the economic pinch. The evidence for this is to be found in the marked expansion of rural settlement in Lakonia at this time. Richard Catling concludes that Dorieus' ventures indicate 'that there were substantial numbers, including Spartiates, ready to risk all in the fainthope of achieving prosperity overseas'. He continues 'while there was probably a ready pool of such men at all times, whether through desperation or appetite for glory, the willingness of Spartiates to give up their privileged existence at home makes better sense if it was in fact under some sort of threat'.81 Dorieus according to Herodotus led the expedition to north Africa because he was discontented at not being king instead of his halfbrother Kleomenes. The entire ten-chapter section is offered as an explanation of why Kleomenes was king at the time when Aristagoras of Miletus came to ask help for the Ionian Revolt; the final chapter says explicitly that if Dorieus had stayed around in Sparta and put up with the kingship of Kleomenes, he would have become king himself (5. 48).82 The problem here is that Dorieus' son Euryanax did not become king (Hdt. 9. io) whereas Dorieus'younger brother Leonidas did become king, so it would seem that Dorieus' claim was for some reason bad and Herodotus is wrong to imply that if he had been more patient he would have become king eventually.83 Kleomenes himself, says Herodotus, had become king not by manly qualities but by descent, ov KO.T' dvSpayaOirjv aywv dAAa Kara yevos. This is in itself an odd statement, with its suggestion of an elective kingship, something not 81 Catling 2002: 248, cf. 234.1 am grateful to Richard Catling for allowing me an advance sight of the whole of the important chapter from which my quotations come. 82 Herodotus explains this with the notoriously problematic statement that Kleomenes 'ruled no very long time, but died childless, ov yap riva TTO\\OV xpovov rjpê, a\\' a-ireBave aVau, leaving only a daughter whose name was Gorgo'. But Kleomenes ruled for some thirty years. The problem has been neatly solved by Griffiths 1989: 54. Read el for ov: 'for while it is true that Kleomenes ruled for a long time, nevertheless he died childless', etc. 83 Various possibilities have been proposed: the Euryanax of 9. 10 was son of another Dorieus; Dorieus was not the next in age after Kleomenes but younger than Leonidas (in which case Herodotus is badly wrong), so Niese 1907 and Jones 1967: 49; Dorieus was the son of the first true queen, sojeffery 1976: 123; Euryanax's claim was void because his father had never been king (Beloch: 1913—27: i. 2. 174, but the passages he cites, namely Hdt. 7. 3 and Paus. 3. 6. 2, do not quite support this).

no


otherwise heard of before the time of Lysander in 400 BC. In Herodotus as in Thucydides such 'presentation by negation' is worth watching. The present example makes no sense except by contrast with Dorieus, whom we have not quite met yet, but who shortly afterwards (42. i) is said to be first of his age-group and to feel confident84 that by manly qualities he himself would become king. In fact, manly qualities are not the qualifications for a king but for an oikist, and Herodotus makes clear (despite his picture of Dorieus as disappointed royal claimant who left because he couldnotbear the kingship ofKleomenes, 5.42. 2) that the first, north African colony was official in the sense that he asked the Spartiates85 for a band of men for his venture and got it. It was however not properly led out in one important respect, namely that he did not consult Delphi. When in the third year that colony failed and Dorieus returned to the Peloponnese (but perhaps not actually to Sparta) he led the same group of men to western Sicily, perhaps stopping off in Italy first to help the Krotoniates in their war against Sybaris (5. 44. i, the Sybarite version. At Kroton a different helper was remembered, cf. below, p. 299 for Kallias of Elis). This time he had four named co-oikists with him, making five in all, further proof of official backing or approval for his activities because the Spartan state went in for panels of five (see e.g. Hdt. i. 67. 5 and Th. 3. 52. 3). The colony in Sicily also failed, although this one was endorsed by Delphi to the extent that he was promised he would 'take the place he was sent against' (but if he took Sybaris then he had in a sense 'used up' this oracle prematurely and the oracle was not actually falsified). But the stimulus to consult Delphi at all was some oracles of'Laius' or perhaps Lasus,86 revealed to Dorieus by a Boiotian seer, Antichares of Eleon. These said that the whole territory of Eryx in the far west of Sicily was a Heraklid possession because Herakles himself had conquered it, TTJV "EpvKos xwprjv TTO.OO.V eivai HpafcAetSecov avrov T/pafcAeos KTrjaafj,evov. This is cryptic as it stands, but Diodorus gives the full story (4. 23): Herakles fought a wrestling match with the eponymous Eryx, wagering his cattle against Eryx's land, and after winning left the land on deposit with the locals on condition that they 84

rjTTiaraTo is from l-Triarap-ai, which often means to know (a true fact) but can sometimes, as here, mean false belief, mis-placed confidence. For a clear Herodotean parallel cf. 3.139. 3 where Syloson after giving his fine red cloak to the guardsman Darius lymaraTo that this was folly. But this is ironic because we already know that he did what he did by divine chance, ffelr) Tv-ft-i), and that it will bring him disproportionate benefits by the reciprocity system. 85 I agree with Macan that Xtutv, 'a band of men', is not in apposition to 'Spartiates'. 86 SoNenci 1994: 214. The suggestion goes back to Dobree.


111

return it to his descendants in due course: a sort of western Return of the Herakleidai. Diodorus expressly says that this did indeed come about many generations later when Dorieus the Spartan came to Sicily and founded Herakleia. This elaborate charter myth for the Sicilian phase of Dorieus' activity has prompted the thought that there might have been a comparable charter myth for the first, north African phase. (That is, the 'disgruntled dynastic claimant' motive is not enough, and indeed we have seen already that it was inadequate for other reasons). The suppressed charter myth for north Africa has been sought87 in two places: in Pindar's allusion to the lost clod of earth, in the passage quoted above from Pythian 4; and in Herodotus' allusion to an oracle given to Jason and his crew of Argonauts (rather than to Euphamos as in Pindar) which prophesied, falsely, that a hundred Greek cities would be settled round the Tritonian lake, eVa-rov TroAtas oiK-fjaai -n-epi TTJV TpirwviSa \ijwr)v (4. 179. 3).88 The Herodotean version is vaguer, and does not specifically indicate Spartan colonisation of north Africa. But Pindar can be pressed a little harder than Herodotus, the poet for once more prodigal with circumstantial detail than the historian. Four generations after the Argonauts brings us to the time of the Return of the Herakleidai when the great Dorian peoples, especially but not only the Spartans, were settling land.89 The suggestion in Pindar (as in Herodotus' less precise version) is of a historical might-have-been: north Africa might have been colonized direct from Lakedaimon by descendants of Euphamos, the ancestor of the Battiad for whom Pindar wrote the poem; and this might have happened at a much earlier date than the actual foundation of Kyrene from Sparta's colony Thera in the seventh century. If these two oracular promises were known to Dorieus in the way the story of Eryx and Herakles was certainly known to him, then we have a religious sanction for his Libyan enterprise. 87 Niese 1907: 456 f. andjeffery 1976: 186 detected in the lost clod of earth a hint at the failure of the Spartan Dorieus to establish a settlement in Libya in the late 6th cent. If so, Pindar is being reckless with relative chronology because the lost clod should antedate not postdate 630 when Therans founded Kyrene. 88 The originally poetic form of the oracle is palpable (the first syllable of TpirtovlSa is long, cf. Pi. P. 4. 20): move a couple of words around and it is not difficult to reconstruct a hexameter. Just where the Tritonian lake was situated is a problem, but perhaps not the kind for which there is a single solution. Malkin 1994: 198 suggests that the localization of the lake moved progressively westward 'following Gyrenaian colonial ambitions and expansion in Gyrenaica'. 89 Huxley 1975: 37.

ii2


But it was not a Delphic sanction, unlike that of the eventual oikist of Kyrene, Battos.90 Hence Dorieus' failure in Libya. A curious corroborating detail has been detected in the name of Dorieus' main co-oikist Euryleon, the 'wide lion' (Hdt. 5. 46. i. True, he is actually named in connection with Dorieus' second, Sicilian, attempt at colonization but we are told at 5. 43 that the aroAos or expeditionary force which Dorieus took to Sicily was the same as he had taken to Libya, so it is not unlikely that its leaders were also the same). The name Euryleon is very rare at Sparta and indeed everywhere else,91 but an eighth-century Euryleon was a Spartan leader in the first Messenian War (Paus. 4. 7. 8 and 4. 8. 11). This earlier Euryleon was an Aegeid—the Spartan-Theban clan to which Pindar himself may have belonged and whose Spartan branch founded Kyrene's mother-city Thera (Pythian 5 line 75). This, then, was a very suitable name for the oikist of north Africa in the time of Dorieus.92 If we accept that there is some connection between Dorieus and Pindar's clod of earth, what exactly is the relationship? There are two possibilities. The first possibility is that oracular promises about Libya really were in circulation in the sixth century, and Dorieus acted on them. Pindar knew that this is how things were and wrote up the story of the prehistory of the foundation of Kyrene accordingly, hinting at Dorieus and explaining why his colonization effort in north Africa was doomed. The second possibility is that the clod was entirely Pindar's invention. That is, Dorieus himself knew nothing of the prophecies, on the contrary he generated them, in the sense that it was with the fate of the historical Dorieus in mind that Pindar invented the story of the clod, as a way of explaining the failed colonization. In favour of the first view and against the second, there is the parallel but less specific oracle in Herodotus about the hundred Greek cities. This seems to be independent of Pindar, as several details suggest, for instance in Pindar the visit to Libya is on the Argonauts'journey home, whereas in Herodotus it happens 'on the outward journey, or rather on a voyage to Delphi'.93 And as we have seen Pindar's prophecy is about Euphamos, while 90 Bowra 1964: 140. Pindar (P. 4. 60) agrees with Herodotus that Battos consulted Delphi. 91 Dorieus' colleague Euryleon (Porallano. 327) is missing from LGPNÂ by what Elaine Matthews kindly confirms is an oversight. The 8th-cent. Euryleon (Poralla no. 326) gets in, with a question mark indicating doubts about his historicity; that is, he has a worse claim to inclusion than Porallano. 327. 92 Malkin 1994: 104. 93 Macan 1895: 128, n. on Hdt. 4. 179.


113

that in Herodotus is vaguer and given to Jason. It seems preferable to suppose that Pindar picked up a genuine tradition, one acted on by Dorieus, than that he was manufacturing myths so as to explain particular historical events. For this reason I prefer the first view. In favour of the second view it can be urged that if prophecies about north Africa really were in circulation in the time of Dorieus and were being taken seriously, it is odd that Herodotus did not mention them in book 5 as part of Dorieus' motivation, preferring instead to give a much vaguer oracular promise in book 4 in a context which has nothing to do with Dorieus. But this is perhaps no odder than his general explanation of Dorieus' motivation in terms of disappointed royal hopes, an explanation which as we have seen is not satisfactory. George Huxley explains the clod of earth differently, and without reference to Dorieus.94 He thinks that 'the poet deliberately rejects a Peloponnesian claim that Kyrene had been directly colonised from Lakedaimon . . . Pindar thus asserts on behalf of the royal house in Kyrene the privileges due to them and to the citizens of Theran stock as descendants of the original founders'. There is something in this V(as O O we have seen, both Herodotus and Pindar are explicit that Battos consulted Delphi, and Herodotus is explicit and Pindar perhaps implies that Dorieus did not consult Delphi). But an actual Spartan claim to have colonized Kyrene would be startling; better to invoke Dorieus, and to suppose that Pindar has in mind a failed Spartan attempt to make good a claim and is offering an explanation of that failure.

Myths as ways of rejecting or upstaging historical claims Huxley does however have a very good general point when he argues— as here in his interpretation of the lost clod of Libyan earth—that myths may be used as a way of denying historical claims. Myths can be made to do the same sort of job by giving coverage to a mythical version while passing over historical, that is to say junior and less prestigious, claims in silence. A good example of this is the way Pindar treats the heroes of myth as having founded the great Panhellenic games (above, p. 7 n. 16); this as Huxley says 'enabled him to ignore the tyrants who had dominated the festivals in more recent times' (Pheidon of Argos, Kleisthenes of Sikyon). So too in Olympian 10 the account of the origins 94

Huxley 1975: 37.

114


of the Olympic games, founded by Herakles, can be seen as a hit at the pretensions of the Eleans. The early victors named in the poem are from the Argolid (Midea) and Arkadia; and the emphatic statement (line 51) that the hill of Kronos was nameless and 'drenched with much snow', jSpexero TToAAa viaSi, until Herakles named it, is perhaps to be explained as a rejection of an Elean story that there was an ancient cult of Kronos on the hill before the games were founded (Paus. 5. 67. 6).95 This is all excellent, but none of it is confined to Pindar. The competing colonial claims, and claims about the foundation of festivals, which we have been discussing, all in different ways express truths about colonialperceptions. In particular, seniority of settlement was regularly (not just in Pindar) asserted in mythical terms; and claims about mythical founders could imply rejection of and a snub to historical founders. There are parallels to both phenomena in Thucydides: the barbarian Sikans said they were in Sicily before the Kyklopes and Laistrygonians and were earth-born senior settlers but Thucydides was sure they were not and that they came from Spain (6. 2. 2). This is an argument about rival ethnicities, expressed in Greek-style mythical and argumentative discourse.96 Again, Thucydides describes a quarrel between Kerkyra and its Korinthian founders. The Kerkyrans, he says, claimed descent from the Phaiakians of Homer's Odyssey (i. 25. 4), whose king Alkinoos entertained Odysseus; Thucydides even mentions a sacred precinct or temenos to Alkinoos himself (3. 70. 4). This claim to be descended from Phaiakians is a Kerkyran snub to the real-life Korinthian founders. The Kerkyran stories Thucydides heard about Phaiakians will not have sounded too different from Pindar's colonial odes. This makes it surprising that when far on in his Sicilian narrative (7. 50. 2) Thucydides makes his only wartime mention of Libya, Kyrene and Kyrene's own colony Euesperides (modern Benghazi) he says nothing of their colonial background. This I think is because by then the Sicilian narrative was in full flood towards the disaster at the end of the book and leisurely deviation would have been an artistic mistake. This seems to 95 Huxley 1975: 38-40 and 17. Note also his p. 39 on the statement in /. i. 23 that the mythical Kastor and lolaos ran naked in the foot-race; contrast Th. i. 6. 5 for whom naked running was relatively recent. Here too Pindar is rejecting gradualism in favour of the idea that things were static and virtually unchanged from mythical times, except that in /. i. 26 he does say that there was as yet no pentathlon and this, as Huxley notes, explains its absence in 0. 10. 96 See Malkin 1998: 29 (cf. 170) on the 'Sikans' passage: 'what natives had to say about themselves mattered little; everyone had myths, but the Greeks succeeded in convincing others that their version was, as it were, scientific'.

Myths as ways of rejecting historical claims

115

me a better explanation than the theory that Thucydides concentrated more rigorously on his main theme as the History progressed, and that the Sicilian narrative in particular is 'magnificently relevant'.97

Kinship diplomacy If we want to find specific historical references in Pindar, the best place to look is arguably not the epinikians at all but the paians.98 In the study of colonial relations between Greek mother- and daughter-cities the most spectacular gain from Pindar's poetry is from Paian 2 (Da Rutherford), which plainly attests an otherwise unparalleled phenomenon, the refounding of a mother-city (Ionian Teos in western Asia Minor) by its 'daughter' Abdera in Thrace;99 the closest parallel which A. J. Graham can point to is the possible refoundation of Italian Sybaris by its colonies.100 Pindar makes personified Abdera say:

I am of a young city,101 but all the same I gave birth to my mother's mother, after she was stricken by enemy fire. (Paian 2. 28-31)

That is, Abdera helped Teos when the latter was under pressure, at a 97

For this view Westlake 1969: ch. i esp. 2gf. Carey 2001: 19 for the definite 'here and now' ('qui e ora') in Pawns 2 (below) and 9 (which mentions an eclipse —that of 30 April 463 EC? see Rutherford 2001 : 192). 99 Seethe important articles on Abdera-Teos relations by Graham 1991 and 1992, which have much to say on P. Pawn 2 but are not adduced by Rutherford 2001 : 251—75 in the course of a lengthy and valuable discussion of that rich poem. Graham's interest was evidently provoked by the newly discovered 5th-cent. public curses from Teos, in which Abdera also features: SEGy. 985. For Pindar and Teos see Huxley 1984. 100 Graham 1992: 6gf. 101 veoTToXis, lit. 'of a new city' seems to be an appropriately new coinage as an adjective (but note the variant form vfo-nroXi; at Aesch. Eum. 687 of 458 EG —where Sommerstein 1 989: 215, in his n. on the line, rightly cites Pi. Paian 2 as a parallel). For a relevant occurrence of the place name — hardly a rare one, cf. north African Nea-pohs at Th. 7. 50. 2, modern Nabeul, cf. p. 114 above — compare Thracian Neapohs not far away from Abdera (this Neapohs was the predecessor of the important modern city of Kavalla on the mainland opposite Thasos). In a well-known Athenian inscription honouring that Neapolis (ML 89 = Fornara 156) the city is called 'New City', Nea TTO\IS at line 28, i.e. the Naples of Thrace, but the citizens are throughout (line 6 andpasstm) referred to as N£OTTO\ITO.I (Neopohtai) with an omicron not an alpha for the third letter. 98

116


date which alas cannot be fixed (but the mid-sixth or very early fifth centuries—the Persian conquest of Ionia or the Ionian revolt—are likeliest),102 and on a scale which could be classified or claimed as refoundation. Colonial closeness could go no further. From all the above it should be clear that mythical and colonial links between distant cities are important for Pindar; exploitation of such links by Greeks themselves has been called 'kinship diplomacy'.103 The abstract word for kinship is avyyeveia, spelt gvyyeveia by Thucydides; it is found in both Pindar (F52d line 33, from Paian 4), and Thucydides (seven times; but he slightly prefers TO |uyyeves—eleven times, including the all-important i. 95. i about the Ionian kinship sentiments which helped to generate the Delian League). But Greek terminology in this area is not confined to the obvious words. For Bacchylides (9. 51), the daughters of Asopos, for whom see further below, are the 'founders, apxuyovs, of inviolate cities'. Pindar, like Thucydides104 operates with the related concept of dpxayeVas'/dpx^yeY^s'105 or 'first leader' i.e. colonial founder, a term which the poet uses both for the oikist of Rhodes, Tlepolemos (above), and also, like Thucydides (6. 3. i), for Apollo the god of colonization, in the context of the foundation by Thera of Kyrene (Pi. P. 5. 60, cf. ML 5 = Fornara 18 line n; see also Pi. Fi4oa line 58). An early (?6oo BC) grave-inscription from Thera, and dating from soon after the settlement of Kyrene, has three words in the centre, Rheksanor Arkhagetas Prokles. The Lexicon of Greek Personal Names lists Arkhagetas as a proper name, but L. H. Jeffery came to prefer the view that this was a title of either Rheksanor or Prokles, who was 'the founder of some cult whose members alone could be buried there'.106 If so it may be that an originally domestic religious title was extended in the colonizing period so as to form a bridge between mother- and daughter-city. Not all colonies liked to stress the cult of the dpxijyeVjjs god; in a fourth-century treaty (Tod 195) between the Olbians and their metropolis Miletos, a document which looks at things 'primarily from the point of view of the colony', religious equality is stressed and Apollo Didymeus, the dp^Tjyerjjs, is notably absent.107 It would be a mistake to look for uniformity: colonial relations ran from 102

103 Graham 1992: 53. Jones 1999. ""* Jones 1999: 12 105 The Doric (Pindar) and Ionic/Attic (Thucydides) dialect forms respectively. 106 Jeffery, LSAG2 319 (neutral as between date and title) and 1976: 186 (the title the 'best interpretation') with plate 30. Arkhagetas: LGPJV i (1987): 84, citing Jeffery's neutral formulation but not her later, definite preference. 107 Rehm 1914: 290f; Tod 2. 271, whence the quotation. By contrast in the Kyrene—Thera inscription, ML 5, the cult title does appear in part of the decree issuing from Kyrene itself.

Kinship diplomacy

117

the close and reciprocal to the hostile (Korinth and Kerkya, see above). Thus in the Kyrene-Thera inscription, ML 5, the cult title apx^yerr]? does appear in a part of the decree issuing from Kyrene itself: contrast the Olbia treaty. It was by means of such cult tides and offices, evidently well known to both Pindar and Thucydides, that kinship diplomacy was articulated. As I have tried to show elsewhere, kinship diplomacy was important in Thucydides and his age, not just in poets and post-classical times when inscriptions attest it.108 So Thucydides, though aware that such sentiments were, as Dover puts it, 'vulnerable to attack as merely formal and specious',109 nevertheless says that the foreign policy of Perdikkas of Macedon was affected by his belief that in myth the kings of Macedon were of Argive descent (5. 80. 2). The Pindaric parallel is made by a nice verbal chime: I believe110 that when Thucydides says that the Boiotians helped Megara in 424 'because its danger was not alien', cos OVK dXXorpiov OVTOS Tov KivSvvov (4. J2. i), he refers obliquely to the myth that Megara was founded from Boiotia. Now Pindar in Pythian i uses oukallotrion in just this sense, close kinship: a son's joy in his father's success is no alien joy, xo-p/â S' OVK dAAorptov viKa.(f>opia. Trarepos (line 59. 111 The implied opposition between oikeion and allotrion, what is one's own as opposed to what is foreign, is frequent and important in Pindar generally).112 In this area we must not expect an author as reticent as Thucydides to be anything else but oblique (cf. the monosandalism with which we opened this chapter). But oblique is not the same as absent.113 108

Hornblower 1996: 61—80; see also Curty 1994 and 1995. Dover HCT 4. 220, commenting on 6. 6. i, where eimpeirios is the word for 'speciously'. 110 Hornblower 1996: GyfT., 240. 111 From Th. cf. also 6. 16. 5, Alkibiades says that after high-achievers are dead, people unrelated to them mendaciously claim kinship, gvyyeveia, with them, but their fatherlands legitimately take pride in them retrospectively, not as aliens, ov irepl aMorpltov but as 'their own', TTtpi afieTepcw. The whole sentence is a sort of kinship metaphor, andjowett actually translated Trtpi afartputv 'own children'. 112 Hubbard 1985: 33-70. 113 Thus his Athenian speakers allude only very lightly to mythical themes which in other authors, such as the tragedians, are given lengthy and explicit treatment. Athenian autochthony, a mam theme of Euripides' Ion, is fleetingly mentioned by Pericles (2. 36. i), 'we have inhabited this same land always'; and the cherished notion of Athens as taker-in of suppliants, familiar from Euripides' Heraklddai or Sophocles' Oedipus atKolonos, certainly lies behind Alkibiades' boast (Th. 6. 18. 2) about 'our readiness to help anyone, whether barbarian or Greek, who has made an appeal to us', TTapa'yiyvop.fvoi Trpo8vp,a}s TOIS aiel rj 109

n8


Similarly in his Plataian debate Theban speakers denounce Athenian injustice and they single out apparently at random their coercion of Aigina (3. 64. 3). It is, I have suggested, not random at all but another concealed mythical kinship link. Herodotus explicitly said the rivergod Asopos had two daughters Thebe and Aigina (5. 79 ff.); exactly this kinship link is emphatically present in Pindar who elaborates the Thebe-Aigina myth in Isthmian 8, a Theban poet praising an Aiginetan victor.'14 For Pindar, Thebe and Aigina were twins, the youngest daughters of Asopos, 2laa>TTiSa>v oTrXorarai (I. 8. 17-18). He was not the only Boiotian poet to be interested in this mythical family: the female poet Korinna wrote a poem about the nine daughters of Asopos (Campbell, 1992: 29-31). Aigina is mentioned among them, and so almost certainly was Thebe too. It is true that she does not appear in the extant text, but the poem is very fragmentary and Bowra was surely right115 that 'we may assume that his [Pindar's] countrywoman, Korinna, would agree with him' about Thebe. (This point is relevant to our purposes only if Korinna was fifth-century rather than hellenistic as D. L. Page thought).116 But the non-Boiotian Bacchylides (9. 54-5, in a section on the daughters of Asopos) also paired Thebe and Aigina, 'the well-built town of darkhaired Thebe or renowned Aigina', The poem in question was however written for a Phleiasian, Automedes (see below, p. 182), and it seems that in this poem Bacchylides approved and gave currency to a version according to which the river Asopos in question was not the Boiotian but the Peloponnesian or Sikyonian and Phleiasian river Asopos (cf. Paus. 2. 5. 2 for the disagreement between Thebans and Phleiasians on this point).1" But Thebe, also depicted in the Phleiasian dedication, remains the eponym of Boiotian Thebes even on the patriotic and manipulated Phleiasian version. So for Bacchylides the sisterhood of Thebes and Aigina remained secure, wherever exactly Asopos 114 See Hornblower 1991:458 f., citing Wilamowitz 1922:16, 61 f. For a kinship link between Argos and Aigina, registered by the scholiast quoting Didymos, see above, p. 13. 115 Bowra 1953: 54, the first page of a chapter all about the daughters of Asopos. See also Maehler 1982:145ff- and Fearn 2003: 358—62. For Thebe and Aigina together in iconography see Paus. 5. 22. 6 (statues) = LIMCi. 369, 'Aigina' no. 28. 116 Page 1953. According to G. Carey, OCD3 under 'Gorinna', the issue cannot on present evidence be resolved. 117 See Fearn 2003: 358f. Note also the possibility that the Sikyonian/Phleiasian River Asopos is referred to by Ibykos at Si66 (Davies, PMGF264^ line 37, ITT' Aa[ajTr . . . See Barren 1984: 21, but the idea goes back to Lobelinthe editioprinceps, P Oiy. 2735.

Kinship diplomacy

119

was located. We cannot then say that Thucydides, in hinting at this sisterhood, had Pindar specifically in mind. What I do suggest is that he was aware of, and in his own unobvious fashion alludes to, the myth to which these three lyric poets, and Herodotus, more openly refer.

Mixed colonial realities The Thebe-Aigina connection is well established, as this congruence between poetic and prose authors shows. Other colonial legends were hazier and more tentative, and this haziness may reflect mixed realities of the kind insisted on by Osborne and others. Thus (to take a colonial site for whose myths of settlement Pindar is himself a prime source) there is evidence from about 100 BG, the so-called 'Lindian anagraphe' (FGrHist^z Fi BXVII with Higbie 2003:101) that Lindians from Rhodes joined in the settlement of Kyrene; patriotic Lindian bias might have been suspected here, but in fact there is some supporting numismatic evidence. But (as if to confound facile generalization) the same region, Gyrenaica, provides a striking instance of constitutional continuity from a single metropolis: see pp. 246 f. for the line of descent Sparta-Thera-Kyrene-Euesperides. Thucydides does not always'18 bring out the mixed character of early Greek settlements. To take a simple example, he gives Sicilian Naxos as a Euboian Ghalkidian settlement. But his contemporary Hellanikos (FGrHist\ F82) adds that there were settlers from the Aegean island of Naxos—as we might have guessed anyway from the name. (Greeks were fond of reusing 'metropolitan' place-names in this way. Polybius tells of a river by Taras in south Italy 'called Galaisos by some, but most people call it Eurotas after the Eurotas which runs past Sparta', and adds 'the Tarentines have many such names in their territory and city, because they are agreed to be colonists of the Spartans and to have a relation of kinship, av-y-yeveia, with them': 8. 33). Another example of human mixture is Metapontion in south Italy, a city which Bacchylides provides with an ancient Achaian foundation legend going back to the period after the Trojan War (n. ii5-end; the point is that the Achaians of the Peloponnese are being equated with the Achaians of Homer, cf. Strabo 222 for the foundation of Metapontion 118 But he sometimes does; for Gela (Rhodian and Kretan) see 6. 4. 3 and pp. 159, 314 below.

i2o


by Nestor and the Pylians).'19 As an Italian rather than a Sicilian place, this city and its colonial origins did not qualify for detailed treatment by Thucydides in his Sikelika, though it is one of the places covered by the vague sentence in the Archaeology about how Peloponnesians and other Greeks colonized the greater part of Italy and Sicily (1.12. 4). But the Metapontines supplied the Athenians with javelin-men and triremes in 413 BG (7. 33. 4), 'in virtue of their alliance'. This allusion is tantalizing; did the Athens and Metapontines become allies only in or after 415, or at the beginning of the whole Peloponnesian War, or perhaps even longer ago? Literary sources other than Thucydides were less reticent, thus Euripides in his Melanippe Desmotis made Melanippe take refuge with Metapontos (velsim.), the eponymous king of Metapontion, where she gave birth to Boiotos and Aiolos (Hygin. 186, cf. Nauck2 415). The fragments of this play include the interesting statement, supported by Timaios, that Siris was named from a woman of that name (F4g6 Nauck2, cf. FGrHist 566 Timaios F$2). Now the city of Siris was a near neighbour of Metapontion, and was said by Themistokles to have been 'ours [i.e. Athenian] of old' (Hdt. 8. 62), a notoriously puzzling statement since its dramatic date is 480 BG and the Athenians were not established 'of old' in that region at the time of the Persian Wars. In an Athenian tragedian, the stress on the Athenian aspect to the Siris/ Metapontion story is not hard to explain. But the Boiotian/Aiolian aspect of the legend implies that 'it was brought there by Boiotians', as Dunbabin noted more than half a century ago; Dunbabin used this and other evidence to argue for the mixed character and uncertain origins of Metapontion120 —so anticipating Osborne, for whom Metapontion and Siris are exemplary instances of mixed origins.121 We shall discuss another instance in a later chapter when in connection with the excursus known as the Sikelika we examine the Pindaric tradition of mixed settlement at Opountian Lokris in Olympian 9 (below, p. 314). Plurality of myths can then indicate a pluralist reality and are thus, in a way, historically valid evidence after all, that is, they are evidence for perceptions. Foundation myths can reflect other sorts of historical reality. The foundation legends of the island of Keos—the modern Kea or Tzia (above, p. 22) were handled by both Pindar (Pawn 4, 04 119

Maehler 1982: 241 also citing Strabo 264 (5. 2. 5, 6. i. 15). Dunbabin 1948: 33. See also Morgan 2003:184 for a possible Arkadian element (B. n. 113—17 for Artemis of Lousoi accompanying the Achaian settlers to Metapontion). 121 For Metapontion (foundation; name) see Dubois 2002: 81—4 (excellent). See Osborne 1998: 262-7, and for a critique of Osborne see Malkin 2003. 120

Mixed colonial realities

121

Rutherford) and Bacchylides (i. 138-40). Bacchylides i is a poem by a Kean poet for a Kean victor (Argeios) in the Isthmian games; the beautiful reference (139-40) to the founding of a city steeped in evening sunshine, j3a9vSeieAov, seems to be a reference to west-facing Koressos, modern Koressia. Who exactly did the founding? That is not clear in view of the damaged state of the papyrus. But Bacchylides has Minos come to Keos (lines iisf.), while Pindar (Paian\. 35f), evidently drawing on the same general tradition, makes Euxantios, son of Minos and Dexithea and king of Keos, decline Kretan kingship in favour of local Kean rule. This legend122 seems to imply an ancient connection with Minos and thus perhaps original foundation of Keos from (Dorian) Krete, although the island later counted as Ionian (Th. 7. 57. 4), and was supposedly recolonized by Athenians (cf. Hdt. 8. 46. 2 about the Keians, 'an Ionian race from Athens'), and by Naupaktians.123 Now both poets, Pindar and Bacchylides, seem to know of the near-total destruction of the population by the 'thunderbolt and trident' of Zeus and Poseidon (jcepawoJ rpioSovri re, Pi. Paian 4. 43). The population so blasted included124 the wizards known as the Telchines, a race of 'Nibelung-like godlings... associated chiefly with the islands of Rhodes, Cyprus, Keos and Krete'.125 Only two female Telchines were saved, Dexithea and Makelo;126 in Pindar's more drastic version (lines 44-5), only Dexithea was saved. Modern commentators detect in this violent and apocalyptic myth a reference to an archaeologically attested event, the destruction by earthquake of the bronze-age temple at Livadi (Agia Eirene), near the site of ancient Koressos.127 But Keos hardly features in Thucydides; there is just a passing reference in the Catalogue of Allies before the final sea-battle at Syracuse (7. 57. 4). The Keans' situation did not call for the sort of treatment given to the Melians, whose fully dramatized plight leads Thucydides to put into their mouths both a statement of the period of seven hundred years since their colonization by Sparta (5. 112. 2), and a nice explicit formulation of the kinship appeal which they propose to rely on, along with shame, alaxvvr), as motives which will operate on those same Spartans, rrjs re £vyyeveias 122

For which see Burnett 1985: app. i. FGrHist 442 Xenomedes of Keos Fi = Kallimachos ^4/fez III Fy5 lines 70—1: Megakles, an obvious Athenian, the oikist of Karthaia; Aristotle F6n Rose no. 26: Keos founded by an oikist called Keos from Naupaktos. 124 As we know from Kallimachos summarizing Xenomedes, see below. 125 A. H. Griffiths], OCD3 under Telchines'. 126 So Kallimachos lines 65—7. 127 Maehlen 9 82:7f. 123

122


€V€Ka (5.104). Thucydides tells us aboutMelos, but is silent about Keos. He knew, but he did not tell; he 'left that to the poets'. But another historian, a local Kean and apparently a contemporary of Thucydides,128 did tell. He was Xenomedes of Keos, whose account was used by Kallimachos in the hellenistic period (see n. 123). He related the story of the Telchines, and related the saving of the two females, and closed with the names of the oikists of the four cities of Keos: coastal Karthaia (the only site with any substantial classical remains still visible, temples of Athena and Pythian Apollo), inland lulls (the modern chord), coastal Poiessa (modern Pisses) and Koressos/Koressia. Where, if anywhere, might Thucydides have shown any knowledge of any of this? The classical island of Keos129 was for half a century after 411 a synoikized or federal unit of four cities (or three if Poiessa remained aloof), but at other times its four cities were separate, a remarkable fact given the small size of the island. In particular, that lulls and Koressos should have maintained separate political identities is extraordinary given their proximity, a mere three kilometres apart as the crow flies, and clearly in sight of each other, the former on a hillside the latter on the seashore. In the fourth century the Kean federation was dissolved by the jealous Athenians, so uncomfortably close to the island.130 The formation of that federation, on D. M. Lewis's convincing conjecture, was contemporary and connected with that of Euboia (there is Eretrian influence on the federal constitution of Keos, and the coins indicate that Euboia also became a federal unit at this moment131) and should therefore be placed in the context of the Euboian revolt from Athens described by Thucydides under the year 411 (8. 95).132 A fuller version of that section of narrative might have led Thucydides to say a little more about both Euboia and Keos; 'analyst' interpreters of Thucydides might want to put that differently, and speculate about what a fuller and revised version of the Euboian and Kean revolts 128

FGrHist^z Ti, from Dion. Hal. De Time. 5. On which see Tod no. 142, comm. There is no good modern historical monograph on this poetically important island, home of Simomdes and Bacchylldes and subject of a great paian of Pindar. On the N. Keos survey see Hornblower and Morgan, intro. 130 Lewis 1997: 22-8. For a slightly different view see Dreher 1989 and 1995: 243 n. 247; note also the different reconstruction of Brun 1989. The essential piece of evidence for the enforced break-up of Kean federal arrangements is 7G2 2 404, improved text at SEG^Q. 73. 131 Andrewes, HCT 5. 319. For an early 4th-cent. Kean-Eretrian sympoliteia see SEG 14.530. 132 Lewis 1997: 26. Brun 1989 does not consider the events of 411, no doubt because he is primarily concerned with the 4th cent, (though he does discuss the evidence of Bacchylldes, see my text). 129

Mixed colonial realities

12 3

would have looked like. It might have been the occasion for a little antiquarian detail about Keos, an interesting and important island which for no obvious reason Thucydides almost entirely neglects. The foundation-stories about Keos were complex anyway, and their difficulty is greatly increased for us by the fragmentary condition of both Pindar's Paian 4 and Bacchylides i, and by the indirect way in which Xenomedes has come down to us, through the medium of the elegiac poetry of Kallimachos. There is further complexity in that the cities of Keos oscillated between federation or unity on the one hand and separatism on the other; separatism called for separate foundation-stories. Bacchylides has been invoked in recent, mainly epigraphically-based, arguments about all this, because he treats Keos as a unity.133 That is true, but Xenomedes insists on the different history of the four Kean cities he mentions and thus stresses separatism. What we can say is that Keos, like Metapontion, was a place whose varied myths, as handled by Pindar, Bacchylides and their prose contemporary Xenomedes, probably reflect varied immigration. There is also the intriguing possibility that the poetically recorded 'blasting' by Zeus and Poseidon is a dim memory of a real second-millennium earthquake.

Myths of possession Colonial claims were not the only claims to have been asserted via myths of possession. Cities in Greece itself, from very early times, asserted territorial claims by asserting control of the sanctuaries in the territory in question, especially (as de Polignac has influentially argued) sanctuaries on the disputed edges of that territory.134 One might in fact want to call this sort of thing 'internal colonization'—annexation of adjoining territory by aggression which needed to be justified by a religious charter. The classic discussion of such a tussle was over the Delion sanctuary after the battle of Delion (Th. 4. 97-99). 'Greek custom' say the Athenians 'dictates that the temples on a given piece of land, large or small, belong to the people in possession of that land' (4. 98. a).135 The corollary was that victorious armies felt entitled to 133

Bran 1989: 129. de Polignac 1995 [original French version 1984]; see also the various contributors— including de Polignac himself—to Alcock and Osborne 1994. 135 See my commentary on that passage (Hornblower 1996: 312) and on 97-9 as a whole. 134

124


take over the cults of the defeated, thus the Spartans take over Plataia in its cultic aspect (3. 68. s).136 The examples just mentioned are both Boiotian; but in this area of cultic control, Peloponnesian Argos provides a nice overlap between Thucydides (5. 53, dealing with 419 BC) and one of the main poets treated in the present book, Bacchylides (F4+22). Thucydides' very brief narrative at this point can, in fact, be explicated properly only by reference to Bacchylides. The historian refers to a quarrel which the Argives picked with the Epidaurians, who had neglected the sacrifices they owed to Apollo Pythaieus (?) in atonement for castration or butchering of bulls, imep fioraîaiv (or jBoTavwv, 'pastures', or even—a reading recently revived by Michael Jameson— TrapaTroraîuiv, 'for the land/people beside the river').137 The Argives, Thucydides continues, had chief control138 of the sanctuary, Kvpiwraroi Se TOV lepov rjaav .Mpyeioi. The poet gives the mythical background which the historian assumes. As so often, Thucydides is himself evidence for the religious factors to which he declines to accord paramount motivating weight. But here his handling is interesting: the Apollo Pythaieus business is introduced as a Trp6(/>aais or pretext, but then he says 'even apart from that reason', OVK civev rrjs alrias—and then follow some hard-headed considerations, desire to bring Epidauros into the Argive alliance, desire to shorten Athenian communications with Argos. The two causal words famously opposed at i. 23. 6,prophasis and aitia, are here used for the same thing, the Pythaieus business, and 'even apart from this reason' does not actually deny its validity. On this aspect see further below, p. 298 n. 38. W. S. Barrett in 1954 showed conclusively, against earlier views which took Thucydides to be talking about a shrine at Argos itself, that on the contrary the implied reference is to Asine twelve miles away, a place not actually named by Thucydides in the relevant context.139 'Melampous, son of Amythaon', says Bacchylides (F4 lines 50-3), 'came from Argos and founded an altar for Pythaieus and a holy sanctuary', 136

Smarczyk 1990: 125 and n. 207; Parker 1994: 342; Burkert 1995: 206. In defence of the reading fiorapitov see Andrewes, HCT 4. 72 citing Wilamowitz; this is retained by Alberti 1992: 273. fioravuiv was Stahl's conjecture. For TTapa-norafiiiov, which does have some MS authority (cf Alberti's app. crit. on the passage), see Jameson, Runnels and van Andel 1994: 63 f n. 11. For other views and references see my forthcoming commentary on Th. 5. 138 Barrett 1954: 439 noted, following Miiller, that the superlative Kvpuinaroi 'might suggest that there were more than two states concerned in the cult'. 139 Barrett 1954. He thought (p.438) that the ode was written for Troizen;see also Tausend 1992: 10. 137

Myths of possession

12 5

This seems140 to refer to the destruction of Asine by the Argives in the eighth century BG (Paus. 2. 36. 4-5; though note that this destruction is not now thought to have been anything like complete).141 If so, we have here a piece of'internal colonisation' at the expense of a small neighbour by one of the emerging poleis of the early archaic age, namely Argos, comparable perhaps to the expansion of Athens into Attica or the Spartan annexation of next-door Messenia. The process of annexation of Asine and its cults perhaps entailed the manufacture of a legend which made the cult of Apollo Pythaieus originally Argive and only secondarily Asinean.142 As the agent of, or at any rate evidence for, this manufacture we can introduce a third fifth-century lyric poet (in addition to Pindar and Bacchylides) into this book, namely Telesilla of Argos. She said (Fyig PMG= Paus. 2. 35. 2) that Argos was the first district of Greece to which Pythaieus son of Apollo came. The 'shadowy figure' of Pythaieus, Barrett suggests, 'suggests a late invention'. But if he is an invention he cannot be later than the time of Telesilla (early fifth century), and we might wonder if the author of the invention was the work of the famously patriotic Telesilla herself.143 Argive expansionism in the fifth century is a topic curiously underreported by Thucydides, but there are hints. We shall examine later (Gh. 5 p. 264) the role of Argos in the Nemean games at about the time of the First Peloponnesian War (461-446 BG). In the present context let us confine ourselves to what was going on at temples and sanctuaries in the Argolid, in particular the Heraion, the great Argive temple to Hera 140

Hall 1995: 581-4 and 1997: 74-7; Maehler 1997: 291. Jameson, Runnels and van Andel 1994: 63 n. n. For a possible analogy see Rutherford 2001: 343, suggesting in connection with Pindar Pawn 7 (D7 Rutherford) that the Thebans may have ousted an original hero Ptoios from the Ptoion shrine and replaced him with Apollo Ptoieus, in which case the poem 'might have had a part in reaffirming Theban control over the Ptoion'. 143 For Telesilla see G. G[arey] in OCD3 and Campbell 1992: 3f. and (testimonia and fragments with translation) 71—83. The best discussion of her historicity as anti-Spartan combatant (her status as poetess is not in doubt) is now Pierart 2003. I do not here go into the stories of impiety by a mysterious group called the Dryopians towards Delphic Apollo, leading to their resettlement at Asine, stories which Barrett 440 convincingly argues to be further Argive fabrications. For another view see Hall 1997: 76, who thinks this is all very early; but none of the ancient literary evidence is earlier than Ephorus in the 4th cent. BG (cf. Diod. 4. 37. i). 141

142

126


on the edge of Argive territory. The thirty years 451-421 were a time of peace and prosperity for the Argives (see Diod. 12. 75. 6, explicitly connecting the peace with financial prosperity and population growth).144 They were the years of the Thirty Years Peace between Argos and Sparta, tantalizingly and retrospectively referred to by Thucydides (5. 13. 4) as a reason why the Spartans wanted to settle their differences with the Athenians, the point being that the peace with Argos was about to run out and they did not want two powerful enemies on their hands at once. The allusiveness here is typical of Thucydides' coverage of Argive matters. He has, a few chapters earlier, described an episode at the Argive Heraion in 423 BG: the elderly priestess, Ghrysis, accidentally set fire to some (probably fat-soaked) fillets of wool,145 there was a terrific blaze, the temple burnt down (KareKavQ-r], a strong word) and the old woman fled over the border (4. 133. 2). The Argive Heraion is an excavated sanctuary, and the material remains clearly indicate a lavish rebuilding in the second half of the fifth century. Gould this have been the consequence of the Thucydidean fire? No, says the best archaeological opinion:146 the rebuilding began in mid-century, was made possible by the peace of 451-421, and was nothing to do with the fire. This is not entirely satisfactory ('burnt down' ought to mean 'burnt down'); perhaps the new temple arose slowly alongside the old one which was destroyed in 423. The third strand of Thucydidean evidence, alongside the mention of the Thirty Years Peace and the fire, is the definite awareness that after 421 the Argives wanted lordship of the Peloponnese (5. 28. 2) and the recovery of their 'ancient hegemony', TraAcua -^yeôvta (5. 69. 2). Ephorus (see Diod. 12. 75. 5-6) expanded this Thucydidean brevity with characteristic mythological fullness: 'this city enjoyed a high position by reason of its achievements in the past, since until the return of the Heraclidae practically all the most important kings had come from the Argolid'. The rebuilding of the new temple is part of the mid-century 'euphoria'147 which preceded and made possible the short-lived drive for hegemony after 421. Interesting new work by Jonathan Hall on the Heraion has placed the fifth-century developments sketched above in a sharper focus. 144 And for some epigraphic evidence see Kritzas 1992, cf. Hornblower 1996: 413; see now Hornblower 20020: ch. 7. 145 See my note on 4. 133 (Hornblower 1996: 41 if). 146 Amandry 1952: 272 and 1980: 236, also des Gourtils 1992: 245; Lewis CAH52 1992: 109 n. 46; see (for further refs.) Hornblower 1996: 4i2f and 2002: 82. 147 Lewis'word, seen. 146 above.

Myths of possession

12 7

Against earlier views which tended to explain the Heraion in terms of Argive state-formation and thus put its control by Argos early, Hall suggests148 that the Heraion became fully and properly Argive only in the mid-fifth century. At this point Pindar re-enters our discussion. Nemean 10, the great ode for Theaios of Argos' victory at the Argive games for Hera at the Heraion (see Gh. 5 pp. 2O4f), is, says Hall, the earliest literary evidence that indisputably connects the Heraion, the .Mpyefov Te'iuevos (N. 10. 19) with Argos.149 'As part of the reorganization of both the sanctuary and the festival [of Hera, cf. above, p. 13, for the Heraia], it would not be too fanciful to suppose that the Argives commissioned Pindar to glorify the new cultic order.' Thucydides, we have seen, knew about the Bacchylidean temple of Apollo Pythaieus at Asine. He knew about the Argive Heraion celebrated by Pindar, and about its priestesses, the list of whom was drawn up and chronicled by Hellanikos, the rival he rebukes in his first book (i. 97.2). Thucydides knew also of the temple of Apollo (actually Apollo Lykeios, the wolf-god)150 at Argos itself, where the treaty of 418 was to be inscribed on a stone stele (5. 47. n). The Argive wolf starts to appear on the city's coinage from the beginning of the fifth century.151 Thucydides had handled these proud civic coins with their wolf-motif and knew which manifestation of Apollo they represented; but he does not specify the cult-title Lykeios. The backward-looking Argives were steeped in sentiment, as Thucydides well knew when he makes them suggest a re-run of the archaic Battle of the Champions (5. 41. 3), an idea which the Spartans, hardly a progressive people, consider to be 'idiocy', juojpia. The Argives were by no means the only Greek people for whom control of sanctuaries (and 'control' is no more than a translation of Thucydides' word KvpiwraToi at 5. 53) was a way of asserting political claims; but they make a particularly instructive case history, especially when the meagre evidence of Thucydides is fleshed out with the help of the coins and of Bacchylides, Pindar and Telesilla. Finally, we must ask, how far was Thucydides, the latest in date of the four authors mentioned at the end of the preceding paragraph, aware of things said by the other three? He surely did not need Pindar to tell him about the importance and fifth-century status of the Argive Heraion, though I would be happy to believe that he did in fact know 148 149 150 151

Hall 1995: 613, summarizing along discussion. Hall 1995; for Pi. N. 10 see Hall 612, whence the quotations. Robert 1987: 66. See above, p. 14 and n. 41. Robert 1987: 66 andn. 99; Kraay 1976: 96 and no. 287.

ia8


of the ode to Theaios (N. 10). By contrast, the religious affairs of Asine, and the cult of Apollo Pythaieus, are (I suggest) much less likely to have been topics of common knowledge among elite and educated Athenians. Thucydides' formulation is extremely accurate: we should not forget ftoraîojv, a technical religious term so casually introduced in the relevant sentence and yet so deeply obscure to us that editors have forcibly and probably wrongly tried to emend it away.152 Barrett showed to general scholarly applause that Thucydides knew about the little sanctuary of Asine and its cults although he did not, in the chapter under discussion (5. 53), actually mention Asine by name at all. Equally I hope I will not be taken to be excluding on-the-spot inquiries by Thucydides if I propose, with regard to this same Thucydidean chapter, that Bacchylides and Telesilla were among the poets known to and exploited by Thucydides, though they are never actually named by him. 152Seeabove,n.137.

5 People, Places, Prosopography, and Politics

Introduction: prosopography, Pindar, and Bacchylides The historian's first impression, on reading the headings to the victory odes of Pindar and Bacchylides, is of a mass of unfamiliar names; the big exceptions are the well-known rulers of Sicily and Kyrene: Hieron, Theron, Arkesilas. But documentary controls on the other victors are not completely lacking. For Pindar there is the papyrus list of Olympic victors (P Oxy. 222 = FGrHist 415), already discussed in Chapter i in connection with chronology (pp. 41 f); this also includes the Bacchylideaii victor Lachoii of Keos (2. 18, cf. B. 6). The name Lachoii is not a common one; in the Lexicon of Greek Personal Names there are just two fourth-century men from nearby Athens who bear the name, and in all the Greek islands there is only one other, and he too is a Kean (IG 12 suppl. p. 115 no. 235 IV, 29: third century BC). For Bacchylides' two other Kean victors we have an important and much-studied inscription1 recording the Kean victors in the Isthmian and Nemean games; the subject-matter relates to the fifth century BC but the inscription was probably carved in the fourth, perhaps at a time when the island was asserting its autonomy and unity in defiance of the Athenians.2 Argeios, the subject of Bacchylides i and 2, is listed, with his patronymic Pantheides, among the Nemean victors from Keos (line 26); and the same inscription records three Isthmian victories and one Nemean by Liparion son of Liparos, the probable subject of Bacchylides 8 1

IG 12. 5. 608 (Syll? 1057), cf. Maehler 1982: 1—4. For a very full recent re-edition and treatment see Schmidt 1999. He argues that the list is not chronologically ordered, and that it was 'erected by a deme or phratry of lulis to honour its athletes past and present': Schmidt 1999: 82. 2 Brun 1989 (an article not cited by Schmidt 1999): 135 for this suggestion. In this inscription, found at the Kean capital louhs and thus presumably intended for merely local consumption, the victors are not given their city ethnics. We are meant to understand that they are Keans, although even this is not stated. In the Oxyrhynchus list of Olympic victors, Lachon is explicitly called a Kean, but that list was international and the local ethnic would not have been appropriate. So nothing follows about the internal state of Keos at the time; for this topic see above, pp. I22f.

130

People, Places, Prosopogmpky, and Politics

(cf. At?ra[ at line 2, which editors take to be part of the father's name, Anrd[pov TTCHS). Argeios is a common name, Pantheides a very rare one (there is a Pantheidas from early hellenistic Dalmatia and that is about it); Liparion is very rare, Liparos less so.3 But this papyrus and this inscription are not the only instruments available to the prosopographer interested in poetically celebrated athletic victors of the fifth century. In this chapter I shall take a closer look at some other Pindaric and Bacchylidean individuals and places, making use of onomastic evidence (i.e. the evidence of personal names) in particular to try to identify the social milieu in which Pindar and Bacchylides moved, and in which Thucydides in all probability picked up some of his information about his elite protagonists. Personal names deserve a special word. The Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, edited by P. M. Fraser and E. Matthews, of which at the time of writing four volumes have been published (1987-2000), makes it possible to speak with much greater confidence on this topic. The vast bulk of the evidence is epigraphic, that is it is derived from inscriptions, and this acts as a control on the much smaller total of names known from literary sources. We can now say whether a particular name is rare anywhere, or common everywhere, or rare but frequently found in a particular region. It is, as I have suggested elsewhere, the third of those possibilities which makes a name valuable to the literary historian,4 because it helps to attach an individual known from a literary text to a specific region; if the epigraphically attested distribution of a name makes plausible the description of origin (the 'ethnic') of an individual, it shows that the author in question was careful and well-informed about such details. So when (to take an example discussed below, p. 244) Pindar says that the father of Telesikrates of Kyrene was called Karneades, and when inscriptions show Karneades to have been a characteristically Kyrenean name but an uncommon one elsewhere, we can be sure that we are dealing not with a timeless and spatially indeterminate phenomenon but with an authentic member of that very distinctive, socially and religiously conservative Dorian society in north Africa. The Lexicon of Greek Personal Names is only half complete, but fortunately most of the great 'Pindaric' areas—the Peloponnese, 3 There is a late archaic Sikyonian Liparion (SEG n. 244. 42, the only instance in LGPJV 3A), but the name is not found at all in Attica or (apart from the athletic victor) in the islands, though at Athens we find both AiTrapos (twice) and Anrdpcw (once) and there are three AiTrapoi from Boiotia. 4 Hornblower aoooa: i q i .

Introduction to Chapter5

131

south Italy and Sicily, the islands, north Africa, central Greece, Athens and Attica—are covered in already published volumes. And for so far unpublished areas such as Asia Minor I have been able, for comparative purposes, to check particular individual names from material on file, thanks to the kindness of Elaine Matthews. But statistical claims I make for these regions should be regarded as provisional. 'It is the namingwhich immortalizes.' So wrote Chris Carey in 1989, in the course of a careful detailed study of Aiginetan prosopography in two odes of Pindar.5 This is an important as well as a pithy gnome, but Carey was there mainly concerned to elucidate intra-Pindaric connections. The Lexicon enables us to widen the sweep of inquiry and to distinguish more confidently between the local and the panhellenic name; in fact to place Pindar's people historically. Names, whether in Thucydides or Pindar, make people real.

Individuals and places (A): the wide sweep (places other than Aigina, Sparta, Kyrene, and Athens) Dorieus the Rhodian; east Greeks Pindar's Olympian f celebrates both the victories, and the home island, of Diagoras of the Rhodian polls of lalysos, Olympic boxing victor in 464 BG. He was one of a politically dominant and athletically very successful family: Dorieus, a Thucydidean figure to be considered in detail below, was only one of three of Diagoras' sons to win Olympic victories, and two grandsons of Diagoras in the female line did the same (Paus. 6. 7. 1-2). The Diagoreioi or Eratidai were as we shall see the 'tyrants' overthrown in 395 in a democratic pro-Athenian coup. The poem is unusual among Pindar's epinikian odes in that it seems prophetic. Some of the places Pindar wrote for were chiefly glorious for their mythology and their past, including their colonizing achievements: Orchomenos, Opous, even Argos. And politically, the writing 5 Carey 19890: 3, or as he put it earlier on the page '[f]or immortality the naming is essential. To be preserved in song as an anonymous father, uncle or grandfather is not to be preserved at all. In contrast, to be named in song without having one's precise relationship to the patron defined is still to be preserved'. He then gave examples from Pindar, and continued in good Pindaric ring-fashion with the quotation in my text. The odes he studied were 0. 8 and JV. 6. 6 For commentaries or extended discussions see Bresson 1979; Verdemus 1987: 41—88; Young 1968: 69—105; Willcock 1995: 109—33; Athanassaki 2003: 108—13.1 attempt to exploit the poem in its 'colonial myth' aspect above, Gh. 4pp. I05f.

132


was on the wall for myth-rich Aigina. Rhodians could match all this if they wanted to look backwards in time. For Pindar (and Thucydides), Rhodes was 'Argive', and Rhodes' own colonizing activity included a half-share (with Krete) in Sicilian Gela and its sub-colony Akragas (below, p. 196 n. 282), and perhaps a share in Kyrene.7 As for the present, in 464 Rhodes was merely a subject-member of the Athenian empire,8 like Tenedos and Aigina, two other 'Pindaric' islands. But Rhodes was also an island with a superb future ahead of it. (For once Pindar backed a real winner; contrast his monarchic patrons in Kyrene, Syracuse or Akragas who did not outlive by long his odes for them.9) In 411 the Rhodians threw off their Athenian allegiance and in 408/7 the three communities of the island, Lindos, lalysos, and Kamiros, 'synoikized' or unified politically and created a new physical city also called Rhodes (Diod. 13. 75). It was to be the equivalent of Syracuse but in the east Mediterranean.10 Helios, the sun-god, was the appointed patron god of synoikized Rhodes. This new city, with the help of Ptolemy of Egypt and perhaps an epiphany of Athena Lindia,11 resisted the siege of the Macedonian Demetrius Poliorketes a century later, and from the sale of the siege-equiment he left behind, the statue of Helios known as the Colossus of Rhodes was built by Chares of Lindos. Diodorus described Rhodes at that time as 'strong in sea power and the best governed city of the Greeks, a prize eagerly sought by the dynasts and kings' (20. 81. 2). Hellenistic Rhodes managed remarkably to maintain its independence, its possession of extensive mainland Asiatic territories (the incorporated and subjectperaia), its sea-power, and its phenomenal prosperity until the Rhodians incurred the disfavour of the Romans who in 167 ruined their economy by declaring Delos a free port. It is hard to resist the temptation to read some of this back into Pindar's ode for Diagoras, which celebrates 'Rhodes of the sea', TTOVTM .. . 'PoSos (lines 13-14) as much it does Diagoras and the Eratidai. This point must be expanded. The achievement of Diagoras was surely regarded as in a sense communal and cause for communal celebration; the closure of the ode says that 'at the celebrations of the Eratidai the city too holds festivals' (for epinikian odes performed at civic festi7

Rhodes an Argive colony: 0. 7. igff- and Th. 7. 57. 6; for Kyrene FGrHist^z B XVII. Early (478) Rhodian membership of the Delian league: Meiggs 1972: 55 f. Hornblower 2002a: 61. 10 I owe this comparison to the course of classes on hellemstic Rhodes given at Oxford in autumn 1979 by Mr P. M. Fraser. 11 FGrHist 532 D(3), part of the Lindian anagraphe. 8 9

Dorieus the Rhodian; east Greeks

13 3

vals see above, Gh. i p. 35 and n. 127). But what 'city' is here referred to? Commentators are vague or rather ignore the reference, speaking in a general sort of way of'Diagoras of Rhodes'; But the city of Rhodes did not yet exist. The family came from lalysos,12 so that is one obvious possibility. Slater, greatly to his credit since he could have got away without committing himself, comes down firmly for 'lalysus' in his entry TroAis in the Pindar lexicon13 at the point where he cites this passage. But it was at Lindos, which was an important pan-Rhodian religious centre both before14 and after15 the synoikism, that Olympian 7 was inscribed in gold letters, according to the hellenistic local historian Gorgon (FGrHlstî^ Fi8, from the Pindaric scholiast). This act of inscribing indicates continuing collective pride in the original achievement which generated the poem. So Lindos cannot be excluded either, as a place where the cultic celebration could have occurred. Or does Pindar merely mean 'the community' without thinking further about which polls'! I doubt this. Pindar may do more than refer vaguely to Rhodes as a maritime power. The poem talks of the island with its three cities near the 'jutting coast of broad Asia', Aaias evpvxopov . . . eôAo) (lines 18-19), and here it is not fanciful to see a very precise reference to the Rhodian perala: Pindar 'was, we may confidently believe, thinking of the Peraean Chersonese, which projects like a prow' (the literal meaning of eujBoAov).16 If so the poem alludes to one of the main sources of Rhodes' future prosperity and power (in the mid-fifth century the perala communities paid tribute direct to Athens).17 The three cities of the island were synoikized many decades after Pindar wrote, but the poem is governed by threes (just as Olympian 6 is structured in pairs). Above all there are three myths which 'fill the exact centre of the ode, the second, third and fourth triads'.18 There is, one feels, an oscillation between the three units of the island and the island itself as a unity. 'One or three?' the poem seems to be asking. O

O

'

O

O

I

O

12 Van Gelder 1900: 77 and n. 3 citing Paus. 4. 24. 2—3, presumably reliable on this point though see below, p. 138. 13 To which I should like here to pay tribute for its amazing accuracy, completeness and interpretative helpfulness. 14 Parker 1997: 16 and n. 30 citing Momighano 1975- For the sanctuary ofZeus Atabynos see 0. 7. 87f. and Parker 1996: 31. 15 This is obvious from the Lindian anagraphe, FOrHist^-2. 16 Fraser and Bean 1954: 131, cf Hornblower 1982^: 124 17 Meiggs 1972: 210. 18 Willcock 1995: in.

134


'One' was not an absurdity in Pindar's time (as it would have been for, say, Krete in this period).19 There was a degree of religious unity on the island already:20 the sanctuary of Zeus on mount Atabyrion (line 87) was 'federal' in some sense, like the Mesa sanctuary on Lesbos,21 and we have already noted the early importance of Lindos as a shared cult centre for the island. It is (it may be protested) all very well to speak of Pindar as prophet, but the hard fact is that the synoikism lay in the future. There is however one final intriguing possibility. The cult of Helios was the cult of the synoikized city, and it is the main focus of Pindar's interest. Given that the poem was such an object of pride to the Rhodians (Gorgon, cited above), it is possible that Pindar himself gave a boost to the unifying tendency. That is, he did not just anticipate the synoikism; he actually helped to bring it about. 22 I now pass to Diagoras' son Dorieus. Early in Book Three, Thucydidessays 'this Olympiad [of42880] was that in which Dorieus the Rhodian won for the second time', rjv Se 'OXv^Trias fj Awpievs 'PoSios TO Sevrepov IviKa (3. 8. i, not specifying the kind of victory, as he does for Androsthenes the Arkadian's pankration victory, 5. 49. i. From Pausanias we know that Dorieus' victory was also in \hepankration). If this sentence were in Xenophon, editors would no doubt register doubts about its authenticity by putting it in square brackets, as they do for the Olympic athletic material which Xenophon gives under the year 408 (Hell. i. 2. i). But nobody23 has yet tried to do this for Thucydides' sentence about Dorieus and it would be wrong to do so. What Thucydides gives us is not just a date, it looks forward to the military and political prominence of Dorieus in book 8 and beyond the end of Thucydides' History.'1* The Dorieus story is a complex but rewarding one, and 19

Parker 1997: 15 n. 30. The oikist of Gela is called 'Antiphemos of Rhodes by Thucydides (6. 4. 3) but this lack of specification is normal for people from large islands when spoken of in an international context. From Herodotus (7. 153.2) and the Lindian anagraphUFGrHist^z Cz8) we know he was from Lindos. 21 Parker 1997: 15. 22 I am here indebted to a brilliant chapter of Kowalzig (forthcoming). 23 The passage is unfortunately not discussed in Maurer 1995; but he is generally resistant to theories of interpolation in Th. so would no doubt reject this one. 24 Debnar 2001: 102—7 rlghtly insists that the mention of Dorieus was deliberate, though her specific explanation is slightly strained: the Spartans, she says (104) 'could not have done better than to choose the Olympics in which Dorieus of Rhodes proved himself "allpowerful" [i.e. he won the pan-kration]', if they wanted an advantageous setting for their attempt to persuade their predominantly Dorian allies to involve themselves in the affairs of the eastern Aegean (she means I take it that Dorieus' name suggested Dorianism). This 20


135

needs to be discussed fully: the prosopographical and thematic overlap between Pindar and Thucydides could hardly be greater. Dorieus as we have seen was a great Rhodian athlete from a great Rhodian athletic family. He, along with other relations and certainly his sister's son Peisirhodos, were exiled in perhaps the early years of the Peloponnesian War and went to Thurii in south Italy.25 Since Dorieus was already commanding Thurian ships in the Spartan interest in 412/11 BG (Th. 8. 35), his exile from Rhodes and his taking of Thurian status of some sort (see below for the evidence of Xenophon and Pausanias) had certainly occurred by that date, and no doubt many years earlier. Dorieus' family was, as we have also seen, well known to Pindar. This family much interested Pausanias, who devoted most of a chapter to them (6. 7, cf. 6. 6. 2 for an advance mention of Eukles the son of Diagoras' daughter). They led an anti-Athenian revolution on Rhodes, described by Thucydides under the year 411.26 Dorieus, despite his attested hostility to Athens, is not named in this connection, but very shortly afterwards he was sent there by the Spartan commander Mindaros to quell an uprising, presumably of the anti-Spartan democrats, which he did (Diod. 13. 38. 5 and 45.1). If we knew nothing more about Dorieus' status and movements at this time, it would have been a plausible guess that he had a role in the original revolt from Athens; but in fact we know (see below) that he was in Athenianimposed exile at the time of the coup. So the more plausible sequence is that Dorieus was not personally present at the coup which brought the pro-Spartan faction to power, but was the obvious man for the Spartans to send for to rescue that faction when it ran into trouble almost immediately. He was still technically an exile, but nobody cared about that, or was in a position to enforce it, in the immediate aftermath of the revolt from Athens. It is hardly worth asking whether, at assumes that the Spartans were betting very heavily on Dorieus' victory, that is that he was, as she puts it, 'favoured to win'. I prefer to think that Th. mentions Dorieus because he was to be important later in the war and because such athlete-politicians interested him. Note also (cf. my text) that Th. does not specify that it was a victory in \hepankration, though I agree Th. must have known this. 25

For the exile, Xen. Hell. 1.5. 19 (whole family), Paus. 6. 7. 4 (Peisirhodos specified). For the date see Hornblower 1991: 391. (The old idea that he must have moved to Thurii before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian War, because Athenian allies like Rhodes were excluded from Olympia in the Archidamian war, is without foundation because any such 'exclusion' is a modern myth.) 26 Th. 8. 44 with Andrewes, HCT5. 91, insisting on the significance of the Oxyrhynchus Historian's mention of the Diagoreioi in the context of 394, see text below.

136


this revolutionary moment, he or anyone else considered him to be a Rhodian or a Thurian. Dorieus' family also probably helped to synoikize the island of Rhodes a few years after 411 (Diod. 13.75. i, under 408); although again Dorieus personally is not mentioned.27 This family is known to us from prose historians: its early fourth-century members are the 'tyrants' who a substantial fragment of a papyrus history (the so-called Oxyrkynchus Historian) tells us were overthrown in the pro-Athenian coup of 394 (Hell. Ox. 18. 2 Chambers, calling the family the Diagoreioi, though Pindar calls them the Eratidai, 0. 7. 93); this item, known only for the past century or so, is the strongest evidence for linking the family with the 411 coup. (By 394 the family were weakened because deprived of Dorieus, their most famous member, who had been killed the previous year.) As for Dorieus himself, Xenophon under the year 407 BG tells us that the Athenian commander Phanosthenes met two ships from Thurii and captured them (Hell. i. 5. 19). The Athenians put the prisoners in chains except for their commander Dorieus the Rhodian. (Xenophon's account is very succinct here; from Pausanias it is clear that the prisoners were sent back to Athens, a stage in the narrative lightly alluded to by Xenophon's change of subject, 'the Athenians'.) Dorieus had long been exiled from [both Athens and] Rhodes (see below), condemned to death by the Athenians with all his family [KM TCOV €K€ivov avyyevwv; Xenophon evidently knew that this was an athletic and political dynasty] and was now 'living as a citizen with the Thurians', TroXirevovra Trap' avrois, an expression I shall come back to later. The Athenians took pity on him and released him without ransom, perhaps because of his Panathenaic victories rather than his more famous ones at Olympia and elsewhere: see above, p. 13 for this epigraphically based suggestion. (Xenophon's phrase 'exiled from Athens and Rhodes', uyaSa e| Adj]vu>v KM PoSou28 is slightly puzzling, and Dindorf, followed by Jacoby,29 bracketed the words Adj]vu>v KM as intrusive; if we retain them, with their implication that a single Athenian decree effected his exile from both places, this will be a piece of Athenian imperial arrogance; they evidently treat Athens and their 27 Gabnelsen 2000: lySf: detaches Dorieus from the synoikism, arguing against e.g. Hornblower 19820: 104. 28 On this see Jacoby, FOrHist 324 F4& commentary n. 13: Pausanias' statement that Dorieus was driven out of Rhodes by his political opponents 'is, if not wrong, less correct than the statement of Xenophon (f>vyas IK'PO&OV imo A8i]vaicw'. 29 FGrHist-jZ^ F4& comm. and n. 2.


137

30

subject city Rhodes as a single political unit). Xenophon has nothing further to say of Dorieus, but Pausanias says he returned to Rhodes— now formally renewing his Rhodian citizenship and abandoning his temporary Thurian status? See further below. In 395, twelve years after being spared by the Athenians, Dorieus' luck ran out, as Pausanias tells us, citing Androtion (FGrHisty2\ F46). When the Athenian Konon persuaded the Rhodians to change sides again, Dorieus was away in the 'inner parts of the Peloponnese', Trept TO. evros /TeAoTrovvâou x^P^ the Spartans arrested and executed him, presumably for failure of duty in not stopping the loss of Rhodes.31 But the execution by Spartans of a pro-Spartan is anyway not too surprising: there were Spartans and Spartans, and like another great larger-than-life athlete (see below, p. 284 for the Spartan Lichas son of Arkesilas) Dorieus was not persona grata with every prominent Spartan. Van Gelder pointed out acutely more than a century ago that although two Rhodians were commemorated on Lysander's victory monument for the decisive Spartan victory over the Athenians at Aigospotamoi in 405, Dorieus himself was conspicuously absent from this famous statue group, though one of the Rhodians is called Diagoras, obviously a kinsman of Dorieus: a marked snub.32 Lysander was himself killed in 395, probably shortly before Dorieus, so cannot have actually been the author of Dorieus' death, but that is not the point: if Lysander disliked Dorieus we can be confident that others at Sparta did too. Dorieus' moves of domicile and citizenship are a fine illustration of the life-style of such elite figures, who travelled, so to speak, under more than one passport. His family the Diagoreioi are also an interesting illustration of the way in which great families fabricated genealogies or attracted such fabrication. Thus Pausanias says (6. 7. 3, cf. 4. 24. 3) 30 Graham 1992: 58—9 notes that the exiling ofDoneus from both Athens and Rhodes, as attested by Xenophon, finds a nice parallel in the 'banning' clauses of the Tean inscriptions he discusses, which ordain exile from Abdera as well as from Teos: the epigraphic evidence, classical and hellemstic, shows Teos and Abdera to have been very close indeed (SEGqi. 985 and 26. 1306 line 24). See above Gh. 4 p. 115. Graham does not address the possibility that Xenophon's text is corrupt, but the inscriptions he discusses reduce the need to emend. 31 Jacoby in his commentary on Androtion F46 discusses this puzzle (Spartan execution of a Spartan partisan), at length, but surely comes close to the truth when he canvasses the possibility that what happened was 'an error of justice on the part of the Spartans who, having become suspicious, gave a wrong interpretation to the absence of Dorieus at a critical time'. But he adds, again surely rightly, that the massacre of his adherents in Rhodes rules out the possibility that he was really working for Persia or Athens. 32 Van Gelder 1900: 82, commenting 'em Freund des Lysandros war er offenbar nicht'; Hiller von Gaertringen 1931: 772.

138


that on the maternal side Diagoras traced his origins from Messene in the Peloponnese, being descended from a daughter of the Messenian Aristomenes (a famous Messenian name): yevos Se o Zhayopas eyeyovei 9vyarp6s. There is an initial problem about the date of Aristomenes—an anti-Spartan resistance hero certainly, but was he active in 490 BG (as Pausanias implies) or in the seventh century? The problem can be evaded if we follow Wade-Gery who, in his last published article, examined the '490' tradition fully (what he called the 'Rhianos hypothesis' after the hellenistic poet who he thought fabricated it), and who concluded 'Rhodian descendants [of Aristomenes], at whatever date, I believe fictitious'.33 He added that 'what we hear of them [the Diagorids] from Pindar, Thucydides and Xenophon, does not suggest any connection with Messenian rebels'.34 That is elliptically put; the— surely plausible—argument here is that Dorieus at least is notably pro-Spartan up till his final execution, which seems to have been a punishment for a failure of perceived duty towards Sparta, so that it is hard to believe that in historical reality the family was descended and boasted descent from a great Messenian rebel against Sparta. WadeGery's ingenious explanation of the Aristomenes story in its Rhodian aspect lay in, precisely, the death of Dorieus, kidnapped—so WadeGery delightfully conjectured—in western Arkadia ('the inner parts of the Peloponnese') after incautiously attending the Olympic games of 396 Be.35 Whatever one thinks of that (and it would fail ifjacoby was right in his suggestion that the whole story of the execution of Dorieus was 'the invention of an anti-Spartan publicist'),36 Wade-Gery's point that Messenian origins and pro-Spartan sympathies sit awkwardly together is sound. Sound also is his general line that anything Pausanias says about Aristomenes is to be treated very cautiously indeed. The story of the Diagorids as blood-Messenians is unsafe and I disregard it as literal biographical history, while noting its importance for the history of attitudes to personal and family identity. There remains the firmer evidence for Dorieus as, at least for a while, a Thurian. Thurii had been founded in about 443 in somewhat peculiar circumstances, but it should be seen as a primarily Athenian project, with no real gestures towards Dorianism or panhellenism at the outset.37 But subsequently, and certainly by the time Dorieus 33 35 37

34 Wade-Gery 1966: 292. Wade-Gery 1966: 294 and 300 n.12. 36 Wade-Gery 1966: 295. FGrHist^q.!? 46 comm. n. 6. Andrewes 1978: 5-8 is now the best discussion.


13 9

went there, 'the ties between Athens and Thourioi were loosened', as Andrewes cautiously puts it, discussing Dorieus' Thurian phase;38 I take Andrewes' word 'loosened' to imply something like 'weakened but not permanently broken', because the governing group at Thurii was pro-Athenian again in 414/13 (Th. 6. 104. 2; 7. 57. n). In view of the general 'loosening', attested perhaps by the Thurian war against Sparta's colony Taras (ML 57 = Fornara 112, Pearly 4303), there is no surprise about Dorieus going there, and indeed Jacoby wondered if he did not have 'an active share in the overthrow of the pro-Athenian party in Thurioi'.39 So far so good, but Xenophon is explicit that he was some sort of Thurian (see above), whereas Pausanias is equally explicit that, though for some at least of his athletic victories he was proclaimed as a Thurian, he 'returned to Rhodes later', ^povw Se varepov KarrjAOev Is 'PoSov (6. 7. 4). Pausanias then gives a version of Xenophon's story of how the Athenians spared him in 407, but I take this to be illustrative and out of chronological sequence, unless it refers to his intervention of 411 (above on Diod. 13. 38 and 45). That is, the sparing by the Athenians in 407 preceded the main return to Rhodes. Unfortunately the heading of the Delphi inscription giving Dorieus' athletic victories (Syll? 82) has to be supplemented, so we do not know if he was there called a Thurian (as Pausanias says was true for at least part of the time) or a Rhodian as in Thucydides (3. 8. i). He was certainly an exile from Rhodes in 407, on the evidence of Xenophon. Dorieus as we have seen may not have had first-hand involvement in the anti-Athenian coup reported by Thucydides shortly after his first mention of Dorieus' Thurian command, though we can be confident that other members of his family were so involved (see above for the significance of the overthrow of the 'Diagoreioi' in 394), and he may have been involved in intrigues at a distance. But he could well have been back in 408, the year of the Rhodian synoikism (Diod. 13. 75. i). Exactly where he was and what he was up to between 411 and 408 is uncertain, but Xenophon makes clear that he was still commanding Thurian ships in 407, and if we accept and press Xenophon's statement thathe was (still) an exile from Rhodes (Hell. i. 5.19), itwould seem that he was still at large and had not, perhaps could not, reinstall himself 38

Andrewes 1978: 8. FOrHist 324 F4& n. 4, similarly Andrewes, HCT5. 77 on Dorieus ('an old enemy of Athens, now perhaps leading the reaction in Thouria'); he also comments, apropos of the politics of Thurn, 'a reaction after the Athenian defeat was only to be expected', and cites [Plut] Mm. 835d-e. 39

140

People, Places, Prosopograpky, and Politics

permanently on Rhodes even though the island was out of the control of his enemies the Athenians. At any rate I take it that in at least the last decade of his life (he died, it will be recalled, in 395) Dorieus in some sense renewed his citizenship at Rhodes. But all this may be too strict; fluctuating political circumstances might make it possible for a.persona nongrata to 'renew citizenship' which had lapsed or been forfeited; exactly that phrase is used by Thucydides about Gylippos son of Kleandridas, who 'renewed his father's citizenship' at, precisely, Thurii in 414 BG . Dover40 wants to get rid of this out of the text although the manuscript authority for it is better than the alternative (Kara TTJV TOV , 'according to his father's citizenship'). He argues that' "citizenship", let alone one's father's citizenship, is not something which can be "renewed" '. But we know far too little about rules outside Athens to be able to say anything so categorical. Perhaps it was the Thurian status (whatever exactly it was, see below) which was renewed from time to time in intervals when Dorieus found things too hot for him at Rhodes. Alternatively it is possible that Dorieus always thought of himself as a Rhodian and that his status at Thurii was more like that of a privileged metic or resident alien than a citizen. Let us return to Xenophon's expression 'living as a citizen with them', avTois. There is a parallel in a hellenistic inscription from Elis (IvO 39, Schwyzer 425, line 5), mentioning a man from Tenedos called Age toros who is said to be Tre-n-oXirevKajp [sic] trap' dê, 'living as a citizen with/ alongside us', an expression which evidently describes some sort ofmetic status.41 We recall that Pausanias said that Dorieus was 'proclaimed' as a Thurian for his athletic victories (6. 7. 4, dv-rj-yopevovro, where the plural refers to him and his nephew Peisirhodos). This expression might mean he was not a. 'real' Thurian, just as the Spartan Lichas (below, p. 283) was not a real Boiotian though proclaimed as one at the Olympic games of 420 BG. But the right conclusion, I suggest, should be that deracine elite figures like Dorieus moved freely between poleis and that in some sense they retained their original identity, just as Phormis the Arkadian from Mainalos calls himself 'an Arkadian from Mainalos but (or 'and'?) now a Syracusan' (see below, p.i86). Stasis might deprive you of your homeland, as happened to Ergoteles of Himera (below, p. 157), but circumstances could change. We might sometimes want to call this lapsed, sometimes lost, sometimes double, sometimes 40

Dover//C7"4. yjdf. onTh. 6.104. 2.

" So LSJ9 under -na\ntvw.


141

renewed, citizenship, but the main message is that with some of the big names in Pindar and Thucydides it does not do to be too formal and legalistic, particularly where the West is concerned: Kathryn Lomas has recently and rightly observed that 'the whole issue of mobility across boundaries of citizenship and ethnicity was, therefore, a more open question in the western colonies than it was in some areas of the Greekworld'. 42 Another very relevant example is Philippos of Kroton, the most beautiful Greek of his day and an Olympic victor, whose story is told for us by Herodotus (5. 47). He fled—or was exiled, Greek euye is ambiguous—from Kroton after his betrothal, to the daughter of Telys the ruler of Kroton's enemy Sybaris, fell casualty to hostilities between Sybaris and Kroton.43 So he emigrated to that very Pindaric city Kyrene in north Africa.44 From there he joined a 'Sicilian expedition'—but one led by a Spartan,45 rather than by the Athenians as in 415 BG. Philippos contributed his own trireme and his own crew, an extravagance anticipating the Athenian Alkibiades' ancestor Kleinias, and indeed Alkibiades himself (Hdt. 8.17; Th. 6. 50.1 and 61. 6). What was Philippos' status during his stay at Kyrene? Not unlike that of Dorieus atThurii, I conjecture. I close this discussion of Dorieus with a final curious item of evidence, a fourth-century epigram which purports to be an inscription on a statue of Dorieus:

Who put up this statue? Dorieus the Thurian. But wasn't he a Rhodian? Yes, at least before he fled his fatherland, his dreaded hand having done many violent deeds (FGEpp. 276f., 'Simonides' no. L;APi$. n) 42

Lomas 2000: 183. For bad feeling about marriage as a catalyst of inter-city tensions (and so, surely, exile for prominent individuals caught in the middle) see Th. 6. 6. 2, war between Egesta and Sehnus about marriage questions and about disputed land, Trtpirt yap-iKatv rivatv KO.I Trtpi yrjs aîGftijTr/Tov. In my forthcoming Thucydides commentary I argue that the word yap-iKa should be kept quite vague and general, not rendered narrowly as 'marriage rights' as in many modern translations, but covering everything including broken engagements, refusal of suits and so on, the kind of thing which modern anthropological fieldwork in Greece shows can cause tremendous ill feeling and feuding in a society with an acute insistence on honour, cf. Campbell 1964, du Boulay 1974, and now Horden and Purcell 2000 ch. n. See p. 304below. 44 Macan 1895: 187, n. on Hdt. 5. 47. 4 notes that the Kyrene-Magna Graecia route was much travelled and cites Th. 7. 50. 2. 45 Whose name, confusingly, was also Dorieus. For his story see pp. 107-13, 301-6. 43

142


The dialogue form is thought to indicate a late fourth-century date at earliest; it is a literary exercise and reflects hostile Athenian views about Dorieus.46 The 'violent deeds' may hint obliquely at Dorieus' success at the pankration, as well as at his military activity. But at any rate the epigram shows what an impression was made on posterity by Dorieus' ambiguous status. Another Rhodian, and another boxer, Kasmylos son of Euagoras, was celebrated by Pindar in a fragmentary Isthmian ode (Fa and 3). Kasmylos is an exceedingly rare name, in fact it is not otherwise attested. But the onomastic accuracy of the source (a scholiast on Lucian) seems to be confirmed by an epigram attributed to Simonides (APi6. 23, FGBXXXI), which runs

A. B. A. B.

Say, who are you, whose son, from what country, and in what a victor? Kasmylos, son of Euagoras, a Rhodian, [a victor in] boxing, at the Pythian games.

Is this evidence that Kasmylos was a victor at Delphi as well at the Isthmia? In other words, that the epigram has some independent evidential status and is not concocted out of Pindar? Perhaps, but note that "/afyua TTV£ would not scan, because of the hiatus after Eva-yopov, and this maybe the sole reason for the change. In which case it will be rather like the Dorieus epigram discussed above, which seems to be merely zjeu d'espritb&sed on earlier literary texts. Of the Aegean islands other than Aigina (for which see below, pp. 207-35) and Rhodes, only Keos, already discussed, produced panhellenic victors commemorated by either of our two poets; in fact, by Bacchylides the Keian, though Pindar wrote a paian for the island as we saw. (On Keos see further, Gh. 4 pp. 120-3.) And more than one of his paians is eloquent about the sacred island of Delos;47 there may be an allusion to one of these in an epinikian as well (/. i. 3-4):

46

Page 1981:276. The Teisandros of Naxos mentioned at Pi. frag. 23 is not from the Aegean island but from the Sicilian town: Paus. 6. 13. 8. (But for Kykladic Naxos see Paian 12 = F52m, Gi Rutherford, line 6, Na\ £68ev, which Rutherford 2001: 365 thinks may indicate that the paian was composed for performance by Naxians at Delos). Against Barren 1980 on B. 17 see Parker 1996: 168 n. 54. 47


143

Let not rocky Delos be angry with me, on whose behalf I have been toiling.

Nemean 11 is for a man from the little island of Tenedos, in the northeast Aegean, but the event celebrated is purely civic, Aristagoras' inauguration as Siprytanis (lines 1-3), a kind of magistrate who presided, individually or as one of a college, over the city council.48 The date of the poem is not known,49 so we cannot correlate it with the history of Tenedos, except to say that the island was very probably in the Athenian empire at the time, though you would not guess it from the ode (any more than you would from Pindar's odes for Aigina or Rhodes). If the Athenians supported a democracy here, it was no doubt a very different sort of democracy from that of Pericles and Kleon. Tenedos had 'a singular record of loyalty to Athens'50 and for instance had no truck with the revolt of Mytilene in the early Peloponnesian War (Th. 3. 2. 2). Remote Tenedos is a curious place to find among the homelands of Pindaric patrons; a possible and partial explanation is the tradition that there were settlers on this Aiolian island from Pindar's home city of Thebes; the connection may perhaps receive some later epigraphic support.51 The island may have been small but it normally paid 4'/a talents to the Athenians, a very healthy total (Keos' normal tribute, for comparison, was 4 talents and many places paid much less). Aristotle singles Tenedos out for its transit trade, that is to the Asiatic mainland (Pol. I2gi b 25). A personal connection between Pindar and Tenedos is a plausible notion in view of Fi23, an erotic drinking-song for Theoxenos of Tenedos, who was allegedly Pindar's beloved (epcoêvos, but see above Gh. 2 p. 54 n. g).52 48 See OCD3 under 'prytaneis'. On JV. n see the good treatment by Game-Ross 1985: 152-68. 49 Gaspar 1900: 169—171 puts it very late, indeed it is the last ode he considers in his chronologically-organized book. 50 See Tod's good commentary on his no. 175, the Athenian honours to the Tenedians in BG 339 51 Van Gronmgen 1960: 70, adducing N. n. 36. For mid-4th-cent. evidence for a connection between Thebes and Tenedos see Tod 160 (an inscription well discussed by Lewis 1990) lines 14-15: a Tenedian called Athanodoros, proxenos of the Boiotians, makes a financial contribution to a Theban naval organization modelled on the second Athenian Confederacy. Rutishauser 2001 has valuable remarks on Tenedos (now Bozca Ada and a Turkish possession) but is more interested in the fourth century than the fifth. 52 For this poem see the commentary ofvan Groningen 1960: 51-83. Van Groningen 75-6 suggested that the name Theoxenos was a religious name, reminiscent as it is of'theoxeny', the 'entertaining of a god or gods by humans' (this definition is taken from the excellent short article 'theoxema' by E[mily ] K[earns] in OCD3). Perhaps, but a glance at the published volumes of LGPjVshows the name to be a very common one.

144


Otherwise it has been said53 that east Greece is virtually absent from both Pindar and Bacchylides, with the main exception (surely a rather large and important exception) of Rhodes. This 'absence', which is specially marked by comparison with the hellenistic and Roman periods of Greek athletics,54 may however be an accident of one sort or another (either the non-significant vagaries of the commissioning process, or else the chance of literary survival). After all, there was no shortage of possible east Greek victors: the winner of the Olympic stadion event in 476 BG was from east Aegean Lesbos, a Mytilenean with the fine Homeric name Skamandrios or Skamandros, evocative of the Troad not far away across the water.55 And there was a Milesian victor in the Olympic pentathlon in 472 BG and a victorious Samian wrestler in the same year (both FGrHist 415; only the city-ethnics are preserved, not the names). Miletos is interesting because itwas actually on the Persian-dominated Asiatic mainland, though the city itself was inside the Athenian empire; Moretti lists no other fifth-century Olympic victor from a city on the mainland of Asia Minor.56 There seems no reason in principle why Samians, Lesbians, or Milesians should not have commissioned odes from Pindar or Bacchylides, given that Rhodians to the south of the Aegean rim, and Tenedians to the north 53 Hutchinson 2001: 322-3 and n. 3, perhaps overdoing this a little; Rhodes is of course listed by Hutchinson among the exceptions to his own generalization. A lot depends on how we define 'east Greek'. What about Knossos in central Krete, the original home ofErgoteles of Himera? The histories of Rhodes and Krete are often intertwined; for instance theyjomtly founded Gela in Sicily. Much also depends on accidents of survival. If Pindar could write paians for Naxians to sing at Delos (above, n. 47) there is no reason in principle why he could not have done the same for other islands including 'east Greek' ones. See further below (Chios) and p. 115 for (Asiatic) Teos. 54 Van Nijf 2001. 55 Diod. n. 48. i: Skamandrios. This was Hektor's pet name for his son Astyanax, ffioa'6. 402 and it was also borne by a minor Trojan warrior, Ilwd^. 49. But the correct form of the name of the athlete may be the simple Skamandros, cf. FGrHist 415 = P Oxy. 222. Both are 'river' names ('potamonyms') derived from the Homeric river Skamandros, Skamandros proximately, Skamandrios perhaps indirectly. That is, the Olympic victor may have been named after Hektor's son (himself named after the river) rather than directly after the river. But the wretched Astyanax or Skamandrios was not a lucky name-model, and I notice that there is no one called Astyanax from Lesbos though there are some from other Aegean islands. LGPJV i has some fine Skamandro-potamonyms from Lesbos: Skamandrophilos, Skamandronax, Skamandronymos. (But Skamandros and Skamandrios are found elsewhere as well, e.g. in Attica). For potamonyms see Parker 2000:60 and n. 26 (including, as it happens, an amusing story involving yet another Skamandros). 56 Moretti 1957: nos 225 and 226 for the victors of 472. Even after that we have to wait until the early fourth century (a Hahkarnassian in 392 EG, Moretti no. 378, and another Milesian in 388 EG (Moretti no. 385); these were the famous Olympic games at which Lysias delivered his Olympic Oration.


145

of it, certainly did so. We certainly should not invoke any explanation in terms of the material poverty of fifth-century Ionia, because this has now been shown to be a very doubtful notion.57 I continue later (p. 156) this discussion of east Greek places, which means in effect the relevant island states, but first I wish to consider one east Greek island in detail and offer a new suggestion about it. The island is Chios. Pindar and Chios The title of this section may seem paradoxical. After all, Chios is absent from the very full index at the end of volume 2 of W. H. Race's excellent new Loeb edition of Pindar; and Pindar is absent from the 1986 Boardman/Vaphopoulou-Richardson collection of essays on Chios, except for a fleeting comparison in Dover's chapter on Ion.58 And Pindar wrote no victory ode for a Chian. Again, Gregory Hutchinson as we have just seen (p. 144 and n. 53) speaks of 'the virtual absence of east Greece from Pindar and Bacchylides' (Hutchinson does very honestly list a couple of exceptions but Chios is not among them).59 J. M. Alty and now Paula Debnar go even further and speak of the 'anti-Ionian bias' of Pindar.60 To claim, in defiance of this negative ancient evidence and this distinguished modern consensus, that Pindar wrote a poem for Chios and Chians, may seem bold, but that is exactly what I am going to do. Specifically, I shall argue that he may have written a dithyramb for the Chians, and that this lost poem is now represented for us by the small clutch of fragments nos. 71-4. All of these (including no. yi) 61 are tentatively ascribed to a dithyramb for the Thebans by Lavecchia in 2000 in his separate edition of Pindar's dithyrambs.62 Only Rick Hamilton as far as I know seems to assume that the poem was written for the Chians (he writes of'the Chian dithyramb fr. 72'), and he does not argue the point.63 On the other hand he 57

Osborne 1999. Boardman and Vaphopoulou-Richardson 1986; Dover 1986: 31. 59 Hutchinson 2001: 322—3 and n. 3. 60 Alty 1982: 14; Debnar 2001: 9 n. 37. 61 Maehler Pindar 2. 82 and van der Weiden 1991 do not associate Fyi with F 72-4. 62 Lavecchia 2000: 64—6, 273—8 esp. 64: 'de hoc dithyrambo agere videtur PBerol. 957iv, col. 1.32—col.II, 34 (de Pindari Dithymmbis agitur) TOV 'Qpiaj\vos rv$>\u>aiv I Trj[y tv\ Xiuti 58

63 Hamilton 1990: 213, cf. below, n. 78. Rick Hamilton kindly tells me that he assumed the poem was written for the Ghians because in F 72 he wrongly took the introductory words €v Xia) in the Teubner text to be ancient, whereas in fact they are modern and editorial. Hamilton does however say he likes my suggestion while finding it 'a bit circular'.

146


doubts (unreasonably in my view, see n. 78) whether the Orion myth was really Ghian. If I am not the first to think the poem was written for the Ghians not the Thebans, I welcome Hamilton's priority. However that may be, I shall maintain that there is no good reason to think the poem was written for the Thebans. The fragments concern the great mythical hunter Orion who cleared the wild beasts from Chios, which was until then called Ophioussa or place of snakes, but he then disgraced himself by raping the wife or daughter of his host Oinopion. He was however redeemed in that he was katasterized or promoted to a place among the heavenly constellations. I begin by throwing a doubt on what would be the only definitive mention of the place-name Chios in a fragment of Pindar, if we could be sure of the reading. The fragment is no. yodf line 7. Van der Weiden takes the four letters chi, iota, omicron, sigma to denote Chios.64 She prints a colon before the four letters and in her commentary65 she speculates about Chios as Homer's birthplace according to Pindar (see below) and she mentions the Orion myth in ¥72. We can add that if she is right about the reading, then Xlov could be accented properispomenon and might then represent Homer's ethnic, on which more in a moment. (Metre does not rule this out.) Van der Weiden's apparatus does not however discuss the crucial colon, which implies disagreement with the tentative preceding upsilon in the Teubner apparatus; van der Weiden's apparatus leans heavily on the apparatus of the editioprinceps (by Lobel in the Oxyrhynchus Papyri series),66 and I do not think she can be regarded as having eliminated the possibility of upsilon. In his more recent edition of the dithyrambs, Lavecchia merely reports van der Weiden's colon. The tiny mark is less likely to represent a colon than the top of the right-hand bar of an upsilon, in fact I think Snell and Maehler are right after all. In that case we need to ask if there are other available supplements for -yiov, in particular words in -vîov. A favourite Pindaric word immediately comes to mind namely kvvvyiov, 'in/into the night'. There are four instances of this word in Slater's Pindar Lexicon67 and one of the closely related evvvxos. There may 64

Van der Weiden 1991: 145. Van der Weiden 1991: 170. Lobel 1961: 97, commenting on his no. 2445 fr. 24. 67 Slater 1969: 1771"., citing P. 3. 79, Paian 18. 10 (87 Rutherford), P Oxy. 2447 fr. 19 line i, and 2445 fr. 31 line 8 (from the same group of fragments as the fragment under discussion, above, n. 66). For ewvxosseeP. n .25. 65 66

Pindar and Chios

147

well be other suitable words names or adjectives. Use of FyoDf as evidence for Chios is in my view unsafe. I now pass to an uncontroversial mention of Chios by Pindar, that which says Homer came from Chios (¥264. with Graziosi 2002: 78, but for a fuller text see 2yga Bowra). The fragment has not attracted scholarly attention for the obvious reason that belief in Homer's Chian origin was commonplace. Thucydides presumably subscribed to it because he evidently regards Homer himself as the author of what we think of as the non-Homeric hymn to Apollo, in which the blind bard says he himself lives on rocky Chios (Th. 3. 104. 5). Commonplace the Pindaric belief may be, but we still ought to ask what Pindar poem it might have come from. Naturally I shall be making it part of my reconstruction. The main evidence that Pindar wrote about Chios comes from F 72, 73, and 74. They deal with the Orion myth. To simplify a complex story, we know from Hesiod and other sources (such as the mythographer Apollodorus)68 that Orion went to Chios and wooed PMerope daughter of Oinopion who Ion of Chios says was the oikistes or founder of Chios (FGrHist 397 Fi). There Orion, the great hunter, cleared the island of wild beasts. But he then raped somebody close to his host and friend Oinopion: Oinopion's daughter in most versions, but his wife in Pindar's. Oinopion then put out his eyes. As with Gloucester in Shakespeare's King Lear, and as with the blindness of Oedipus as elucidated by George Devereux,69 there is a link between sexual wrongdoing and blindness. Orion, like Gloucester, could say something like 'that dark place | where Edgar was begot cost me my eyes'. Butunlike Gloucester the eyes of Orion were eventually healed, by the sun. He then became a constellation, modern Greek asterismos, by a process which in ancient Greek was called katasterismos. F73, from Strabo, says that Orion was born at Hyria in the territory of Thebes. This must be taken together with a curious sentence from Hyginus (Pindar F264 Bowra; it does not feature as a numbered Teubner fragment at all): 'Antimachus autem dicit (Orionis patrem [these words are not in the Latin but merely Bowra's explanatory addition]) quendam Hyriea fuisse Thebis, Pindarus autem in insula Chio.' Maehler in the latest Teubner edition (1989) does at least quote it in full in his apparatus, whereas earlier editions by Snell and Maehler 68 69

Hesiod Fi48aM/W; Apollod. i. 4. 3. See Fontenrose 1981 for the other evidence. Devereux 1973: 41, case no. n (Orion).

148


merely cited it with a bare reference. Bowra evidently thought it meant that in Pindar's view Orion's father Hyrieus was born in Chios, but Maehler now thinks it means that Orion died in Chios, which if right would be a new 'fact' about Orion and surely ought to qualify it for status as a separate fragment. But I do not see how Maehler gets this out of the Latin. Strictly this is, apart from the fragment about Homer coming from Chios, the only Pindar fragment which actually mentions the island. The main Orion fragments 72-4 certainly imply an allusion to Chios as Maehler, following Snell before him, acknowledges by adding lv Xia> in front of Fya. But those two words are purely modern and editorial: the Greek word as opposed to the Latin word for the island never appears in Pindar—if we agree to disregard FyoDf and the letters which I have suggested could be part of kwvyiov. As for Hyginus, the usual assumption is that he has made a muddle or mistake 'caused by the fact that Pindar does mention the Chian part of the Orion myth'70 (van der Weiden). Hyria was more usually considered a Theban place and Hyrieus is an eponym taking the form of an ethnic. This assumption that Hyginus was a fool may well be right; but it is just worth asking whether it may be mere scholarly arrogance to assume we know everything relevant. Let us assume that Bowra was right and Hyginus is here trying to locate Hyria and the eponymous Hyrieus. Is it totally impossible that Pindar played around with two places called Hyria, one at Thebes one at Chios, and that this was a way of linking Chios and his home city of Thebes? There are several places called Hyria in Stephanus of Byzantium though not as it happens one on Chios. This sort of ambiguity would be very Pindaric: in Neman 3 Pindar refers (lines 3-4) to 'the waters of Asopos' which is not the well-known Boiotian river but an otherwise unattested fountain on Aigina.71 However Thebes' river is surely subliminally suggested as well because Asopos and his daughters are a regular device for establishing ties of kinship between Thebes and other places, usually but not always Aigina (cf. above, p. 118). Arethusa and Alpheios are similarly used to link Syracuse and the west Peloponnese in Nemean i and elsewhere (p. 185). Returning to Orion and Hyrieus, we should note that there is no actual contradiction between saying that Hyrieus came from Chios and saying as Pindar does in F 73 that Hyrieus' son Orion was born at Thebes. Let us return to firmer ground and fragments 72 and 74. Pindar 70

Van der Weiden 1991: 179.

71

Privitera 1988.

Pindar and Chios

149

says (Fya) that 'Orion in a drunken state attacked someone else's wife', dAo;\;a) TTOT€ 9a>paxOels eW;\;J dAAorpi'a | 'Qapiwv. The rest of the mythographic tradition makes clear that the someone else was Oinopion. But these other traditions made Orion drunkenly rape the daughter not the wife of Oinopion. One might think there was little to choose between these two appalling abuses ofphiloxenia. Not so: Fontenrose, followed by van der Weiden, thinks that Pindar actually made Orion's behaviour worse by changing the daughter into a wife.72 They reason that Orion had a sort of justification for raping the daughter because he had wooed her and had legitimate expectations in return for services rendered, but had been cheated by Oinopion; whereas violence against the wife was gratuitous. I postpone the question why Pindar made the change for the worse. The 'daughter' version is given by Parthenios, who supplies the name Leiro. The name is due to a learned emendation by Jane Lightfoot in her edition of Parthenios (Erot. 20), on the basis of a Ghian inscription published by N. M. Gondoleon in 1949.73 This intriguing inscription lists the people who came to Chios with Oinopion, including his wife Nike and his daughter Leiro. But normally the violated woman or girl was called Merope, like many another mythological female. Gondoleon's inscription will be valuable to us for more than the trivial fact of the girl's name; I shall return to its evidence later in a different connection. Finally we have Fj^.: rpexfTO) Se êrd /TAîovav, dju,a S'avro) KVOJV (AeovToSdnas), 'he must run after Pleione, and with him the (liontaming) dog' i.e Sirius.74 This is from a scholiast to Nemean 2, the victory ode for the Athenian pankratiast Timodemos of Acharnai. In that ode Pindar had said 'Orion is traveling not far behind the mountain Pleiades', opeidv ye /TeAeidScov JUT) Trj\69ev 'Qapiwva veiaOai (lines 11—12), a clear reference not just to time of year but to the katasterismos of Orion who pursued the Pleiades in myth. This prompts the scholiast to quote Fy4. This is I think Pindar's only mention of katasterismos, but Boiotian patriotism was strong, and there was the precedent of that other Boiotian poet Hesiod. In the Works and Days the constellation Orion is not much more than a constellation and a time-reckoner (WD^gQ, 615; but Hesiod does there mention the Pleiades fleeing from Orion—6igff.) The full story of Orion and Oinopion's daughter is given in another 72 Fontenrose 1981: 25f., van der Weiden 1991: 177: '[fjor the attack on Oenopion's wife there is no reason but Orion's uninhibited character'. 73 Lightfoot 1999: 346—7 and 493—6; Gondoleon 1949. 74 'Lion-taming', XeovroSdpas, is from Lucian (pro imag. 19).

150


long Hesiod fragment, attributed to the Catalogue of Women by Merkelbach and West (Fi48) but to the Astronomy by earlier scholars. Although this fragment comes from the katasterismos of Pseudo-Eratosthenes (32), it is not quite certain that Hesiod connected the hunter-rapist and the constellation as explicitly as did Pindar. But in any case the parallel of Nemean 2 and the explicit statement of its ancient commentator leave no room for doubt that Orion's katasterismos was the subject of our fragment. That is all the literary evidence I wish to cite as evidence for my hypothetical Pindar dithyramb about Chios. But there is an iconographic item as well as well, a fragmentary pot by the Sotades Painter brilliantly if speculatively elucidated by Alan Griffiths in 1986.75 He shows that it represents Orion dealing with a snake in his capacity as 'Pest Control Officer' (as Griffiths puts it); in the bottom left-hand corner he detects the legs of Artemis whom Orion was also supposed to have raped. The relevance of Griffiths's article for my purposes is his interesting suggestion that it resembles the other two pots he studies, in that it dealt with death and rebirth. He suggests that Orion and his promotion to heaven by katasterismos shows that even if you were a really terrible sinner there was hope of redemption for you. Against imagined objections that this sounds too Christian he replies with the message of contemporary Orphism as picked up by Pindar. He concludes his article: 'one of the Sotades Painter's professional skills was to furnish his Athenian clients with the same eschatological comfort that the second Olympian [of Pindar] was intended to bring to Theron of Akragas.'76 What then might the poem have looked like? Bernhard Zimmermann says that the standard content of a Pindaric dithyramb included some mention of the occasion and of the commissioning polis; praise of the poet; narration of a myth; and some treatment of Dionysiac theology.77 Accordingly my very speculative reconstruction goes as follows. It was in this poem, perhaps near the beginning, that Pindar talked, as we know he did somewhere, of Chios as the birthplace of Homer. He then dealt with the foundation of Chios, perhaps introducing a Boiotian and Thessalian element into the genealogy of Oinopion (I shall come later to the evidence for that). He may even as we saw have tried to link Chios to Thebes via Hyria. He then moved to the central myth which was that of Orion. He used Oinopion as the bridge 75 76 77

GriffithsigSGwithpl.IIa. Griffiths 1986: 69—70 (quotation from 70). Zimmermann 1992 and 'dithyramb' in OCD3; Hamilton 1990.

Pindar and Chios

151

to Orion and recounted how Orion cleared Ophioussa of wild beasts, especially snakes, so that it became Chios. Then Pindar gave aversion of the rape story, making it worse than usual. Katasterismos and redemption came in here. The obvious lead-in to 'Dionysiac theology', if we want that in the poem, was the god's son Oinopion. I conjecture that somewhere in the course of the poem Pindar expressed himself warmly about the Ghian characteristics which impressed Thucydides: happiness and prudence, evSaiôvia KM aaxftpoavvr) (see below for this). I now consider objections to my suggestion. I emphasize that even if I am wrong to suggest Pindar wrote a separate poem for and about Chios, fragments 72-4 certainly dealt with mythical events set on Chios.78 First, dithyrambs are usually, though by the fifth century not always, connected with Dionysos;79 those of Pindar do seem mostly to be Dionysiac and there is a likely Dionysiac aspect to our poem because in most versions of the myth Dionysos and his followers help with the blinding of Orion. But is there other evidence to connect Dionysos with Chios? The answer is that there is plenty. In the formulation of Fritz Graf in Nordionische Kuhe, 'auf Chios, der durch Weinbau beriihmten Insel, nimmt Dionysos eine wichtige Stellung ein'.80 He goes on to point out that Dionysos' son Oinopion is inventor of wine as well as oikist of the island. In this connection Graf cites an inscription published in 1966 by W. G. Forrest. It lists 'Oinopion' as one of a series of stephanephoroi, and Graf, here developing Forrest, suggests that Dionysos (not Dionysios as Forrest had supplemented the letters Diony-) was listed as well, just above.81 This fictional tenure of a burdensome office by a god or hero is comparable to the occasional listing in a similar financial capacity of 'Apollo son of Zeus' at hellenistic Miletos, where the punctilious patronymic is charming. It simply means that no rich human being could be 78 Hamilton 1990: 213 andn. 13 says that'the myth of the Ghian dithyramb fr. 72 may not be Ghian'. He accepts that Merope, attacked by Orion, was Ghian, but then he adds 'but Strabo (9. 404 [i.e. Fy3]) speaks of a Pindaric dithyramb describing Orion's place of birth near Auhs, and it seems likely that Pindar wrote only one dithyramb about Orion'. I do not think this is a fatal objection: see above for the suggestion that Chios and Thebes may have been linked via Hyria. As we have noted (above, p. 145), Hamilton, despite his objection about the myth, seems to treat Chios as the place for which the dithyramb was composed (212—13): if this is his view, it anticipates the argument of the present section. 79 Zimmermann (above n. 77); Hamilton 1990; Hordern 2002: 17-25; Lavecchia 2000: 11-13. 80 Graf 1985: 74. 81 Forrest 1966: 197 no. 2 lines 12-13 (Oinopion). For Zhow-see line 9.

152

People, Places, Prosopogmpky, and Politics 82

found that year. So there is no problem about a Dionysiac dithyramb for Chios; on the contrary. After all the island produced a home-grown composer of dithyrambs in Likymnios of Chios, who was a contemporary of Timotheos and thus younger than Pindar.83 The Pindaric poem I am proposing could have been written for performance at a Dionysiac festival on Chios itself: Fritz Graf collects the epigraphic evidence for choruses of boys and men performing locally.84 Or it could have been composed for a Chian chorus to perform at Delphi or Delos: Simonides and perhaps Timotheos wrote dithyrambs for performance at Delos. Second, Fyi, which I have not so far considered, might be taken to constitute an objection. (I follow Lavecchia's view, see above, p. 145 and n. 62, that this fragment belongs with Fya—4). Fragment y i goes 'in his hyporchemata Pindar says the dithyramb was invented on Naxos [another good Dionysiac island], and in the first of the dithyrambs [or in the first book of dithyrambs] he says it was invented in Thebes',

This is from the scholiast to Olympian 13 where Pindar attributes the invention of the dithyramb to yet another place, Korinth. It is the combination of fragment yi with 72, a fragment also attributed to UivSapos Sidvpapfiaiv TTpwroj, which constitutes the reason for assigning all of frags 71-4 to a dithyramb for Thebes. But this works only if we think that it was only in a poem for Thebes that Pindar could have said the dithyramb was invented in Thebes. This assumption is unnecessary:86 Pindar was a patriotic Theban and the idea of the dithyramb as a Theban invention was familiar and implies no special compliment to Thebes. So Fyi is no problem. There is a further possible objection: if I am right, why did Pindar never say the dithyramb was invented on Chios? This objection presupposes a rather unimaginatively mechanical Pindar, I think. He would have risked making himself ridiculous if at whatever place he recited a dithyramb, he told his listeners 'the dithyramb was invented here'. Third, there is the behaviour of Orion. Is it conceivable that Pindar 82

Rehm 1914: 157 no. 122 e.g. col. II line 83 under 332/1 EG for 'Apollo son of Zeus' as 83 stephanephoros. Hordern 2002: 123 for Likymnios (PMG768—73). 84 Graf 1985: 74 and n. 4, citing e.g. SEGig. 569 (restored, but very plausibly). 85 Van der Weiden 1991:173-4 takes these words to mean 'in the first book of dithyrambs', in this following Irigom 1952: 37. Lavecchia200o: 276 takes it to mean 'in the first dithyramb'. The point is not important for the present purpose. 86 So rightly van der Weiden 1991: 173.

Pindar and Chios

153

should have given pride of place to so unedifying a subject as violent drunken rape? This objection is easily answered by reference to Pindar's fondness for negative exemplars. Take Ixion who tried to rape Hera in Pythian 2. As Race puts it 'the extensive narrative of Ixion's ingratitude and punishment seems excessively negative for a celebratory ode';87 but Pindaric interpreters are no longer bothered by that sort of thing. Anyway there is Griffiths's point (above) about redemption even for the worst of sinners. Orion happily hunting in the sky was luckier than the permanently tormented Ixion. We still need to explain why Pindar made Orion's behaviour worse than it was in earlier versions of the myth. We could invoke Griffiths again: the worse the sin, the more glorious the redemption. No doubt, but there is a further consideration, one which makes the idea of a Ghian dithyramb by Pindar about Orion actually preferable to a Theban dithyramb about him. If Pindar made Orion's behaviour worse, it follows that at the same time he made Oinopion's behaviour better. The myth is one of those in which nobody comes out very well, like the Tereus myth where the revenge of the Athenian princesses is as appalling as the rape they are avenging.88 But the worse the rape committed by Orion, the more justifiable the act of blinding him. In a poem for Chios, it was a nice diplomatic touch on Pindar's part to make the blinding of Orion by the island's founder Oinopion into as justified an act of revenge as possible. Deference to his Ghian hosts suggested to Pindar that Orion must rape the wife in an act of gratuitous drunken violence rather than the daughter whom—so his defence counsel would say—he had in a way earned.89 The fourth and final supposed objection concerns Pindar's supposedly anti-Ionian bias (above, p. 145) and his supposed refusal to write for east Greeks. If this could be made out it would be decisive against my hypothetical poem for Chios. But I believe this crudely anti-Ionian view of Pindar to be totally without foundation, though it is true that for instance a quarter of his forty-four victory poems are for men or boys from Dorian Aigina. But how can the anti-Ionian view be put forward by good scholars (above, n. 60)? The answer is 87

88 Race 1997: i. 228. Zachariaaooi. There is a small complication: one text of the Hesiod fragment, from the scholiast to Nicander Tlier. 15, agrees with Pindar and against the rest of the tradition that Orion raped the wife not daughter. But Merkelbach and West 1967: 72 are surely right in their apparatus to treat this as a variant reading to be rejected. Lavecchia is wrong to say that Pindar was following Hesiod in talking about the wife not the daughter, and then to cite Hesiod again for the daughter version, as if Hesiod said different things in different poems. It is the same fragment of Hesiod differently transmitted. 89

154


that they have confined themselves to the epinikian or athletic victory odes of Pindar, and ignored the evidence of his other poems, above all the paians and the dithyrambs. Even as an argument about the epinikians it is unconvincing. Alty and Debnar both get round the two victory odes for Athenians by saying that Pindar does not stress their lonianism.90 But this is not worth much because both poems are so short, each twenty lines or so. The conclusive disproof of Pindar's antilonianism is to be found in Paian 2 for Abdera, a foundation of Ionian Teos: it begins 'Abderos of the bronze breastplate, son of the Naiad Thronia and Poseidon, beginning with you I shall set in motion this paian for the Ionian people', 'Idovi rovSe AaoJ -no.io.vo. Sia)£a>. There is other evidence for Ionian places celebrated by Pindar in the paians and dithyrambs: Naxos and above all Delos; even mainland Asiatic Smyrna, Ionian after an initial Aiolian phase according to Herodotus (i. 149 ff.), is one of the numerous places which Pindar calls Xnrapov. Nor is Pindar averse to 'east Greeks', whatever exactly that means: we have looked already at his poems for Rhodian victors, and in the far corner of the Aiolian north-east Aegean there is a special Pindaric and Theban connection with little Tenedos. Aristagoras the Tenedian on his inauguration day, eyccuvia, as prytanis gets one of only two Pindaric victory odes which do not celebrate an athletic victory at all (the other is Pythian 12 for the flute-player Midas of Akragas).91 The scholiast hints at Theban settlement links with Tenedos; a curious piece of evidence confirms the special relationship, as we have seen (above n. 51). Let me now return to a point I made at the beginning of this section and move away briefly from dithyrambs. There is as I said no surviving Pindaric victory ode for a Ghian. Would such a victory have been a priori: impossible because east Greeks did not participate at places like Olympia or Delphi in the fifth century? The premise is false: we have seen that the Oxyrhynchus list of Olympic victors, records one from Miletos and another from Samos in 472 Be.92 And we recall from Herodotus that the Ghians sent a choir to famously musical Delphi (6. 27). The a priori argument can be disregarded: there was no reason why Pindar could not have written an epinikian for an Ionian from Chios, though I do not suggest he did. 90

Ally 1982: 14; Debnar 2001: 9 n. 37. For JV. n, the 'Tenedian' ode, see above, p. 143. The inclusion among the epikinian odes may be the mis-classification of an Alexandrian editor, led astray by the amount of athletic material contained in the poem, for instance lines 22—3: Aristagoras' too-cautious parents 92 stopped him competing at Delphi or Olympia. Above n. 56. 91

Pindar and Chios

155

The Dorian-Ionian opposition is in any case a little crude when applied to these foundation-poems in Pindar, Bacchylides and Ion (for whom see above, p. 147). Oinopion the oikist of Chios was in Ion's version originally from Dorian Krete; similarly Bacchylides implies Kretan colonists on his island of Keos which Thucydides, in his only mention of the island, gives as Ionian. In Gondoleon's 'Oinopion' inscription, the sons of Oinopion include not only Athamas (he is in Ion too) but Kretheus, who is a novelty in this connection. Both these are figures of Boiotian or Thessalian myth, though it is possible that this Athamas is not the famous Athamas but a descendant. But Gondoleon was surely right to think that both Athamas and Kretheus are attempts to link Chios with the Aiolians of the Greek mainland. It is possible that like Ion and like the Oinopion inscription, Pindar made Chios a partially Aiolian place; considerations of dialect (aiolisms in Chian epigraphy) show that this was not just convenient poetic fiction.93 We have seen (p. 119) that these mixed traditions often reflect a genuinely mixed reality. To conclude, I see no difficulty about a Pindaric poem for Ionian, east Greek Chios. I end by asking a question relevant to the IonianDorian divide we have discussed above. Would Pindar's Ghian hosts have been people to Pindar's taste? I think they would. I have already cited Thucydides 8. 24 where the Ionian Chians are said to be happy or prosperous and prudent; the Greek words are oligarchic94 code-words, particularly aa>poavvrj (rjiiSaifjiovifjadv re aâ KO.I eaaxfipovrjaav, 8. 24. 4-5). Thucydides there brackets the Ghians with the Dorian Spartans, people whom Pindar also found congenial, as some famous fragments prove, even though he celebrated no Spartan athletic victor as far as we know (below, p. 242). The truth is there were lonians with Dorian characteristics, and conversely. The classic example of a Dorian place with an Ionian feel to it is Syracuse, whose citizens were described by Thucydides as 'similar in character', oôtorpoTrot, to the Ionian Athenians (7. 55. 2 and 8. 96. 5).95 We should not forget how Thucydides continues that Chian chapter in book 8: he says that despite this happiness 93

Gondoleon 1949: 8f.; Grafi985: 80 andnn. for anuancedview. There is independent epigraphic evidence that fifth-century Chios was oligarchic: Forrest ig6oa: 180; cf. Andrewes, HCTy. 22 on Th. 8. 9. 3 (summer 412). On the Spartan aspect of sophrosyne at Th. 8. 24 see Humble 2002: 86. For Herodotus, Chios was a very unlucky place (Hornblower 2003). Was Thucydides reacting, as so often, against Herodotus, by stressing Chian happiness? See above, p. 82. 95 For reservations about the actual position see Rutter 20006. 94

156


and prudence the Chians were overthrown by the unexpectedness, ho paralogos, of human life, ev TOLS dv9pa>TT€iois TOV fiiov TrapaAoyots lafftdArjaav. Pindar would have understood. Other east Greekplaces I resume (from p. 145) the discussion of east Greek island places, including ones for which Pindar did not write. We might wonder why there are no fifth-century epinikian or other encomiastic odes for the rulers of Cyprus, Aphrodite's island (see the 'Korinthian' poem Pindar Fi22. 17 for Aphrodite as Kvrrpov SeWoiva, a standard title, cf. P. 4. 2 :6).96 The conventional answer would be that Greek cultural influence there was in retreat in the decades before the accession of the hellenizing Evagoras in about 411 BC. After that an Athenian honorary decree of the 3908, the relevant fragment of which was published only in 1979, called Evagoras a 'Greek benefactor on behalf of Greece' (SEGzQ no. 86, new fragment of Tod 109); andlsokrates praised him in terms which surely owe something to the traditions of epinikian poetry (for this point see Gh. 3 p. 63 and n. 24). That is, it was only in 41 1 (so the argument might go) that an 'enlightened' Greek or philhellene ruler emerged who could have been praised by Pindar97 but was in fact praised by Isokrates instead. But this picture of a benighted and 'barbarized' mid-fifth-century Cyprus derives in large part from Isokrates himself (see esp. Isok. 9 Evag. 20, 47), who is anxious to draw a very strong contrast between Evagoras and his predecessor, which is not however borne out by archaeology.98 Perhaps there was some struggling Cypriot princeling earlier than Evagoras and unknown by name to history, who like his descendant or younger kinsman could claim descent from Argos," and for whom participation in Greek games and patronage of Pindar might have served the same sort of culturally assertive purpose as they did for the rulers of Kyrene and Sicily (pp. 244, 372). Again, my point is merely to suggest that 'Cypriot dynasts did not as a matter of fact and to our knowledge hire Pindar' is not quite the same as 'Cypriot dynasts could not in any circumstances have hired Pindar'. The 'voices of the Cyprians' who celebrate Kinyras the friend 96 In Moretti's collection there is no Gypriot winner at Olympia until Herakleides of Salamis in 20480 (his no. 594). 97 For Pindar as the ancestor of kingship orations like those of Isokrates see above, p. 66. 98 Maier 1994: 309-12, esp. 310. 99 For this dynastic claim by Evagoras' family see Tod no. 194, a statue-epigram for Evagoras' early hellenistic descendant Nikokreon.

Other east Greek places

157 100

of Apollo (P. 2. 15-16) sound Greek enough; and Pindar alludes to the tradition according to which Teukros, the exiled half-brother of'Salaminian' Aias, was ruler of the other, Gypriot, Salamis (N. 4. 46-8).101 It would not have been too difficult to concoct an epinikian ode for a Gypriot victor out of this sort of material. This is incidentally the closest we can get to an affirmative answer to the question 'could Pindar have written an ode for a non-Greek?' Some of the rulers of Cyprus were not unimpeachably Greek but a Greek pedigree was a good way for a non-Greek to assert hellenism (cf. Hdt. 7. 170 for the 'Kretan' origins of the Messapians in south Italy). Conspicuous among individual fifth-century islanders who might have been commemorated by Pindar or Bacchylides, but were not, is that remarkable figure Theagenes or Theogenes of Thasos, Olympic victor and recipient of some sort of posthumous hero-cult, and therefore a figure of some religious importance at this early date in the history of the worship of human beings.102 This discussion does not forget that Sicily was an island, but it was not an Aegean one. For Krete the main103 evidence is Pindar Olympian I2 104 for the stasisexile Ergoteles of Sicilian Himera (see below, p. 192 for fuller discussion of this poem in its Sicilian aspect). He was originally a Kretan from what Bacchylides (i. 123) calls the 'desirable city' of Knossos, Ipeprav •noXiv. Not much is known about Krete in the fifth century BG and what we do know is mostly epigraphically derived. Most famously there is the Gortyn law-code (ML 41), but there is also the evidence for close ties between Argos on the one hand and the Kretan cities of Knossos and Tylissos on the other (ML 42 = Fornara 89). I have discussed elsewhere this important evidence for Argive claims to the status of founding 'metropolis'.105 100

Gf. N. 8. 18 for wealthy Kinyras 'long ago . . . on sea-washed Cyprus', TTOVTIO. tv TTOTE

KvTTpO).

101

Caspar 1900: 117 uses this allusion to date JV. 4 after 478 when Pausanias the Spartan regent (briefly: see Hill 1940: 121) recovered the island for hellenism. The conclusion does not follow. 102 See now Pouilloux 1994. He is 'Theagenes (3)' in OCD3, making his first, if very brief, separate appearance in that work of reference. For athletes and worship see p. 48 n. 192. 103 Against the scholiasts' suggestion that Alkimidas of Aigina (N. 6) was some sort of Kretan originally see Carey 19890: 2, rightly objecting that Pindar would not have passed over the fact in view of e.g. 0. 12. So too Gerber 1999: 55. 104 Barrett 1973 is fundamental on this poem. For recent commentaries see Verdenius 1987: 89—102, Kirkwood 1982: 115—18 and above all M. Silk in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). 105 Hornblower 20020: 79.

158


No epinikian poem for a Kretan victor from Krete itself has come down to us. Towards the end of Olympian 12, Pindar remarks that if Ergoteles had stayed put, 'the honour of the victor's feet would have dropped its leaves ingloriously', dfcAe-))? riâ KareffivXXoporjaev TroSwv, (line 15). On this Kirkwood comments106 that '[w]e are not told why Ergoteles would not have achieved illustrious victories if he had stayed in Crete'. Kretan athletes did win victories at Olympia in thefifthcentury107 (interesting evidence that the classical island was not as cut off from mainstream Greek culture as is sometimes assumed), so there was no absence of suitable candidates from the athletic point of view. The social structures of Dorian Krete resembled in certain respects those of Dorian Sparta, and there is no fifth-century epinikian ode for a Spartan either. For modern explanations of the Spartan silence see below: they may be transferable in part to Krete. But we know even less about what went on in Krete than we do about Sparta, so it may be that we should just admit ignorance of the reasons for what may be no more than an accident of literary survival. That is, perhaps Kretan victories were celebrated in epinikian poetry that we do not happen to have. Hellenistic and even fourth-century Kretan cities warred incessantly with each other108 and it is hard to believe that the classical ones were much different—indeed Olympian 12 is an interesting indication that classical Krete was no less turbulent in early classical than in hellenistic times. It would be natural for this rivalry to express itself agonistically as well as militarily. The question remains, why Pindar is so emphatic that Ergoteles would not have won glory back in Krete. The solution I prefer is that of Michael Silk:109 this was simply a way of 106

Kirkwood 1982:118. For a certain example see Moretti 1957: no. 296 (Aigeidas in 448, probably in the long race or 8o\iôs just like his former compatriot Ergoteles. This item is from P Oxy. 222 — FGrHist 415). In other words Kirkwood is right to be agnostic about the reasons why Pindar says what he does about Ergoteles. See also Moretti no. 274 (readings very doubtful). los por j^g ^jjj cent note already Diod. 16. 62. 3 under 346/5 EG: Phalaikos and his Phokians hired by the Knossians for their war with the Lyktians. For the hellenistic period see e.g. Ma 2000: 352-3. 109 In a paper on Olympian 12 delivered in London (17 Oct. 2002), to be included in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). In December 2002 I used a translation of this poem as a class assignment in a UGL undergraduate course on 'the Classical Greek City' (in the week devoted to S. Italy and Sicily). One of the questions I asked was, 'why do you think the poet implies that Ergoteles would not have won fame if he had stayed in Knossos?' Several students gave common-sense answers on the lines of'because there was too much stasis there for anyone to be bothered with athletics'. This will not quite do in view of the attested fifth-century Kretan victors, but there may be something in it. 107

Other east Greek places

159

flattering the people of Himera, by suggesting that Kretan as opposed to Himeran glory was not worth having. If Ergoteles was one of a draft of new Dorian (including Kretan) citizens brought there by Theron of Akragas (see below, pp. igsf and n. 258), the distinction between Krete and Himera was not all that sharp, because Akragas' mothercity Gela was a colony of Krete and Rhodes (Th. 6.4. 3) and it is therefore likely that there was a Kretan element in Himera quite apart from Ergoteles. But for Pindar's purposes the distinction (Himera glorious, Krete obscure) was nevertheless a tempting one to draw. For Keos in the northern Kyklades close to Attica, and for the tradition that it was a Kretan (i.e. Dorian) foundation although treated as Ionian by Thucydides, see above, p. 121. The evidence is mainly110 from Bacchylides, whose grandfather was supposedly a Keian athlete (Suda entry 'Bacchylides'), and who himself wrote epinikians for Keian athletes. But though Pindar did not celebrate any individual Keian as far as we know, he refers in an epinikian poem to 'wave-washed Keos', ev Kea> a[jL(/>ipvTq (I. i. 8) and he wrote an entire Paian for the Keians (Paian 4 = F52d, 04 Rutherford). Boiotia and central Greece The Rhodian Dorieus and his kinsmen, to return to them for a moment, show in exceptionally brilliant fashion that prosopographically the worlds of Pindar and Thucydides intersect. Another example is Pagondas of Pindar's own city of Thebes in Boiotia, Pindar's home region, to which I now turn. Pagondas son of Aioladas commanded the winning army at the battle of Delion in 424 and delivered a fine Thucydidean battle exhortation—but a Pagondas son of Aioladas occurs in a maidens' song (partheneion) by Pindar (Fg4b = Parth. 2, line io). ln This is a real enough Pindaric connection so we need not invoke the doubtful story that Pagondas was the name of Pindar's father. 112 Pindar wrote six epinikian odes for Boiotians; five are for Thebans.113 The other is for a boy-victor in the stadion, Asopichos from Thebes' 110

For Simonides, also aKean, see above, Gh. i p. 22. Note also that a Pagondas of Thebes won the four-horse chariot event at Olympia in 680 EG, perhaps an ancestor of one or both men? See Moretti no.33. 112 Vita Thomana, Drachmann 1903: 4 line n; cf. Lefkowitz 1981: 63; also in the Suda entry. 113 It should also be remembered that Pindar frequently includes Theban myths and material in non-Theban poems; for an example in P. 9 see Hubbard 1991; cf. also Hubbard 1992: 108 onjV. 9. 111

160


western rival 'Minyan' Orchomenos.114 (For the name Asopichos see further below and LGPN^B: thirteen Boiotians). I shall deal with the rest of Boiotia first, including Orchomenos, then turn to Thebes. Classical and perhaps late archaic Boiotia was a federally organized collection ofpoleis, some of which were dependent on others. Mogens Herman Hansen has shown that independence was not part of the definition of&polis and Boiotia is perhaps the clearest proof of this. Two episodes stand out in the history of Pindar's Boiotia: the area as a whole medized in the main Persian invasion of 480-479 (Hdt. 8. 34: BOIOJTOJV Se TTO.V TO rrA-YjOos €^TJ8i^€, 'the whole Boiotian people medized'); and the Athenians conquered and occupied Boiotia for a decade in the middle of the century until 446, an important development very sparely reported by Thucydides (i. 108. 3, TTJS re x^pas eVparâav T-YJS BoiojTias). On this see p. 162 below. As for the medism, it was, despite the sweeping statement of Herodotus quoted above, incomplete, because Plataia and Thespiai took the Greek side, as Herodotus explicitly acknowledges a few chapters later (8. 50. 2). These two cities were historically aligned with the Athenians and this is no doubt a large part of the reason why they took a different line from their neighbours. As Herodotus says acidly in another connection, 'if the Thessalians [who also medized] had taken the Greek side, the Phokians would have medized' (8. 30. 2). The Thespians and Plataians went on to fight with the Greeks at the battle of Plataia in 479 (Hdt. 9. 28. 6 and 30). The curious thing about Pindar's Boiotian odes is that they are restricted to just two cities, Thebes and Orchomenos. Why none for the many other Boiotian cities such as Tanagra? There was at least one candidate. We have seen already that Thespiai, despite its PersianWar manpower losses,115 managed to produce an Olympic victor in Polynikos, who very probably won the boys' wrestling in 448, and was then commemorated in the Thespian polyandnon after the (for Thespiai) disastrous battle of Delion in 424.116 Thespiai's important cult of the Muses117 would have made the city an attractive subject for a 114

For Orchomenos see Hornblower 1996: 252 f., citing modern work. Thespiai was not small but it was not of the size of Thebes. In the breakdown of federal Boiotia given by the Oxyrhynchus Historian (HO 19. 3 Chambers), Thespiai, Eutresis, and Thisbai provide two of the eleven federal Boiotarchs between them. Thebes had four, two for itself and two on behalf of Plataia, Skolos, Erythrai, and Skaphai. 116 Above, Gh. i p. 45 and n. 184. There are no other non-Theban Boiotians in Moretti, but Olympia was only one of the panhellenic four festivals. We do after all know that Tisimeneis of Thespiai won at the Pythian games: above, p. 45. 117 Schachter 1981-94: 2. 147-9. 115

Baiotia and central Greece

161

Pindaric epinikian ode. Nor do I think that Thespiai's 'attikism' or proAthenian sympathies (for this nice word used about Thespiai see Th. 4. 133. i) would have deterred the Theban Pindar. After all, Theban relations with Orchomenos were not always exactly easy (below). Part of the answer is that we should not confine ourselves to the epinikians only: the fragmentary poems (for which see below, n. 134) include probable poems for Orchomenos and the Ptoion near Akraiphia. It is a fair bet that Pindar wrote more poems for Boiotian places and sanctuaries than we shall ever know of. Pindar's non-Theban epinikian is Olympian 14, the short, beautiful ode for Asopichos son of Kleodamos, a youth with a good Boiotian potamonym or river-name derived from the river Asopos. The poem is a sort of hymn118 to the Graces119 or Gharites, whose cult was specially strong at Orchomenos (Paus. 9. 35. 1-7, also 38. i for Orchomenos as the home of the oldest temple to the Graces). Pindar's ode may have made it even stronger (just as his stress in Olympian 7 on the cult of Helios at Rhodes may have contributed to the adoption of that god as the patron deity of Rhodes after the synoikism at the end of the fifth century: above, p. 134). Orchomenos in north-west Boiotia, commanding the fertile western rim of lake Kopais, rivalled Thebes in mythical prestige. Pausanias uses extravagant language about its glory (eiTis'EXXi] aiv aAA^ -n-oAis emâvijs KM avTiy Is S6£av, 9. 34. 6). Having a Mycenean tholos-tomb—still the most conspicuous feature of the site—must have helped to keep alive the memory of ancient splendour (for which see Iliadz. 511-16, 9. 381). Pausanias (9. 36. 5) calls this building the 'treasure-house', 9-rjaavpos, of the legendary king Minyas. Thucydides, not always so hostile to mythical allusion as he is painted, tells us gratuitously that the city was once called 'Minyan' (4. 76. 3) and Pindar similarly loses no time in bringing in the name of the eponymous Minyai (0.14.4). Orchomenos is usually thought to have medized in the Persian Wars. The evidence is indirect, mainly the generalization about 'all the Boiotian people' already cited from Herodotus (8. 34, corrected at ch. 50 for Thespiai and Plataia but not for Orchomenos). But there is also the account of the banquet given before the battle of Plataia at which Thersandros of Orchomenos, an oral source unusually named by Herodotus, listened 118 For the hymnal character of this ode see Race 1990: 97-102; for commentaries see Kirkwood 1982: 119—23, Verdemus 1987: 103—26. 119 Schachter 1981—94: 1.140—1; MacLachlan 1993: 41—55, a whole chapter on this poem; LZMCs/i. 191-203; K. W. Afrafat] 'Gharites' in OCD3.

162


to the gloomy remarks of the unnamed but Greek-speaking Persian at the same couch (9. 16). The obvious and plausible assumption is that Thersandros was not a solitary medizer. Orchomenos, it now seems, was a tributary member of the Athenian empire during the decade of Athenian control already mentioned. The evidence is an entry in the Athenian Tribute Lists reinterpreted not many years ago by the late D. M. Lewis who proposed to read [Aepxo^Jevtot.120 But when Athenian influence was expelled from Boiotia in 446 (the battle of Koroneia) it was largely by the agency of exiles based at Orchomenos (Th. i. 113); it is possible that actual Orchomenians themselvesplayedaleadingrole. At any rate Hellanikos (FGrHist 4 F8i) speaks of the Athenians attacking 'orchomenizers'; an interesting formation implying a noun comparable to 'medism' or 'attikism' (for which see above).121 That Orchomenos was important in this period is clear though the precise extent of that importance is not. Orchomenos suffered specially badly from an earthquake which hit Greece in the winter of 427/6 (Th. 3. 87. 4) and the damaged and despondent city may have lost its control of Ghaironeia not many years after this time; perhaps the jealous Thebans had a hand in this weakening of the old rival.122 Anti-Theban pro-Athenian elements were active in the plotting which inaugurated the Delion camapign of 424 (Th. 4. 76. 3). We may be able to specify one family involved: the evidence of proxeny grants reveals a long-lived pro-Athenian (and so presumably anti-Theban) family at Orchomenos, that of Eurytion son of Potamodoros: the first such grant dates from before 480.123 In Michael Waibank's collection of Athenian proxenies this early grant immediately precedes a probably fictitious one to another Boiotian—none other than Pindar himself.124 How can Asopichos be fitted into this sad and complex story? The answer is, not very closely, except in that we can see that Minyan Orchomenos continued to count for something in Pindar's lifetime, perhaps enabled by its mythical past—and even by the celebrity of 120 JQ j3 2gQ g g ^jjj Lew;s 1997: 20 n. 43; cf. CAH f 116 and n. 72, also P.J. Rhodes at 50. See also Hornblower 20020: 34 and 318 n. 43. 121 See Larsen 1968: 33 on Koroneia: 'this was the first great victory of Boiotians over Athenians, and it was won under the leadership not of Thebes but of Orchomenus'. This goes a little beyond the evidence; cf. Buck 1979: 150; Lewis CAH f 116, 133. 122 For that control see Th. 4. 76. 3 (still maintained in 424) but contrast HO 19. 3 Chambers; see Hornblower 1996: 251. 123 Walbank 1978: nos. 4 and 73; Hornblower 1996: 252—3. 124 Walbank 1978: no. 5 with commentary.


163

Pindar's poem itself?—to punch above its real weight: myths were sometimes sources of real power (above, p. 125). Pindaric victory odes for just Orchomenos and Thebes may not be so very surprising after all. More precise calibration is not possible because of the serious problem about the date. Olympian 14 is unfortunately an exception to the usual happy situation in regard to Olympian odes, because the papyrus list P Oxy. 222 (FGrHist 415) neither confirms the scholiast's date for his victory, namely 476; nor does it mention Asopichos at all. And yet the mention of Pisa at the end of the ode (one of the standard ways of referring to Olympia) makes an Olympic victory quite certain. The boys' stadion victors of Olympiads 75, 76, 77, and 78 are all known. Caspar's conjecture of 488,125 reached by emending the scholiast's date of Olympiad 76 to 73 (gamma corrupted into digamma after omikron) and so producing 488 BG, has been widely accepted. It would make the poem one of Pindar's earliest of all, and his earliest for an Olympic victor, prompting (circular) remarks about the poem's freshness, juvenile grace etc.126 Otherwise we should need to go down to 464 or 460 (Olympiad 79 or 80) where there is a gap in the papyrus list. I suppose 484 would also be possible (Olympiad 74)—or some date even earlier than 488. The alternative, a queasy one because it cuts away at the main foundation of our Pindaric dating system (such as it is), would be that the papyrus has simply got one of the boy victors of Olympiads 75-8 wrong and Asopichos should be substituted for one of them. Whatever the right answer, no historian could feel easy about erecting a detailed story on so precarious a chronological base. Thebes' mythology was incomparably richer than that of any city in Greece and Theban themes are by no means confined to the 'Theban' odes. The five specifically Theban victory-poems are: Pythian n, the 'little Oresteia',127 for Thrasydaios, victor in the boys' stadion; Isthmian i for Herodotos who was, unusually, his own charioteer (line 15); Isthmians 3 and 4 which celebrate victories by Melissos in the chariot race and pankration respectively (this indicates either remarkable versatility 125

Caspar 1900: 5of. Gaspar 1900: 51. There was no period of his life when Pindar could not write 'fresh' poetry. Some detect a particular erotic charge in this poem (see e.g. Kirkwood 1982: 119—20) but that is no proof that the poet was young when he wrote it. 127 For the idea that Pindar in this poem echoes Aeschylus, whose own Oresteia is fixed to 458, see Hubbard 1990, comparing esp. Ag. 449—74 and P. n. 30. (This idea depends on dating the Pindar ode to 454 not the alternative year 474, but this is not quite certain: Hubbard 350 n. 22.) 126

164


or else low standards); and Isthmian 7 for Strepsiadas (pankration).128 With one exception to be discussed shortly, these are not names with historical resonance; nor can much be done with them onomastically. There is a third-century Thrasydaios from Boiotian Thespiai but otherwise this name is not specially characteristic of Thebes or even Boiotia. Strepsiades (the Attic form) is a name familiar to classicists from the Athenian character in the Clouds of Aristophanes (line 134), but it is actually rare anywhere. At Athens there is no example other than the fictitious Aristophanic Athenian who (surprisingly perhaps)129 rates a listing of his own in LGPJV2. The comic choice of name, which is derived from the root arpe- indicating 'turning', is thought to be prompted by the tossing, turning, dodging, and weaving to which the character is reduced.130 That must be right, but Aristophanes knew Pindar's poetry (Fy6, cf. p. 56) and was surely aware that the honorand of Isthmian 7 conferred plausibility and even mock-grandeur on the fictitious name. There is the third-century Strepsippidas from Boiotian Lebadeia whom Dover131 acutely picked up in 1968, long before the publication of the central Greek volume of LGPN (38, 2000). And there is now an early fifth-century Strepsiadas from another Thebes, Phthiotic Thebes in Thessaly.132 Otherwise, nothing. One of these epinikian poems in particular, Isthmian 4 for Melissos of Thebes, has a strong local cultic flavour (see esp. lines 6iff.) and it has been attractively suggested that it was written for performance at an all-night festival (rravvvxis) to the sons of Herakles at Thebes.133 Pindar wrote many other (that is non-epinikian) poems which touch on his native Boiotia and especially Thebes, to which he often proudly gives some epithet about horses or chariots. Many of these also have a strong cultic flavour.134 The loss of much of this material means that 128 For commentaries on /. 3, 4, and 7 see Willcock 1995: 60—91 and on /. i see Instone 1996: 170-88. For P. ii see Young 1968: 1-26. 129 If Strepsiades gets in, why not Bdelykleon? On the date of/. 7 see above, p. 43. 130 Dover 1968: xxv; Sommerstem 1982: 161 on line 36. 131 Dover 1968: xxv, citing IGj. 3068, line 7. 132 LSAG2 436-7 no. 3a. 133 Krummen 1990: 54-97. See above, p. 35 n. 127. 134 Hymn i (F2g), the poem which crams many Theban myths into a short space and made Kormnajoke that he should sow with the hand not the whole sack; F5ia, a hymn for Apollo of the Boiotian Ptoion, cf. 51)3, c, and d; Paian i (F52a) (note line 7 nAaf] imroi< aarv ©iy/3aj); Paian 7 (F52g), Paian 9 (Fsak), F70 and 24gb (about Orchomenos?); dithyramb 2 (F7ob), 'Herakles or Kerberos for the Thebans' (note line 26, ftpiaapp-drois, 'powerful in chariots', surely referring to Thebes though the end of the line is missing); F83 (Boiotian pigs, cf. 0. 6. 152); three partheneia (Fg4a, b, and c), cf. also Fg5 and I04b: the hyporchema Fno; fragments


165

we cannot speak with great confidence about his attitude except to say that Boiotia in general and Thebes in particular were absolutely central to his poetic output and that if more of it survived we might regard Pindar's world as less lopsidedly masculine (p. 102). It is from one of the non-epinikian poems (above, p. 159) that we know of Pagondas, who provides the most specific link with Thucydidean prosopography. There is a Theban in a Pindaric epinikian poem who, it is thought, can be tied down historically; but the alleged link is with the world of the historian Herodotus rather than with that of Thucydides. The father of another Herodotos (as I shall spell him), Herodotos of Thebes, was called Asopodoros (Pi. /. i. 34). The father got into trouble of an unspecified sort, and was then taken in at Thebes' Boiotian neighbours and rivals at Orchomenos when he was 'hard pressed by shipwreck in chilling misfortune', a vw epeiSojuevov vavayiais e£ djueTp^Tas' d\os ev Kpvoeaaq Seâro vvvrvyio. (I. I. 36-8). Now the historian Herodotus knew of a Theban called Asopodoros son of Timandros who fought, as federal Boiotian hipparch,135 on the Persian side at the battle of Plataia (Hdt. 9. 69), and modern commentators more or less cautiously suggest that he may be the same man as Pindar's victim of (surely metaphorical) shipwreck.136 The identification is fragile; it would be stronger if the patronymic were Herodotos rather than Timandros (then we would have the onomastically reassuring but not of course mandatory sequence Herodotos-Asopodoros-Herodotos for grandfather, father, and son). As for the name Asopodoros, it is a common and natural one in Boiotia generally, and Thebes in particular (19 Boiotians and 9 Thebans in LGPNy&), like other such Boiotian potamonyms or 'river194,195 (note evrippare ... ©iy/3a, 'Thebe of the fine chariot'); i g8a and b. On the supposedly feminist emphasis in this Theban material see above, p. 102 n. 59, discussing the suggestions ofNancy Demand. 135 Herodotus says he commanded the Theban cavalry only, but his command may in fact have been greater than that because at other periods 'hipparch' seems to be the technically correct word for the federal commander of the entire cavalry force of the Boiotian confederacy; cf Th. 4. 72. 4 (the only time the word occurs in all Th.) and Polybius 20. 5. 8, and, for the view that Asopodoros is the first federal hipparch, Salmon 1978: i82f, Roesch 1965: iogf. and Buck 1979: 134 and 138 n. 88 ('H[erodotus] probably speaks loosely here'). If so, Asopodoros is an even higher-ranking officer than Herodotus implies. On the other hand, 'hipparchos' canjust mean a commander of cavalry. Thus at Hdt. 7.154. 2, Gelon was promoted to 'the command of all the cavalry', Traces TTJS ITTTTOV eivai iTnrapxos, clearly nontechnical; not to mention P. Pi. 4. 45, Poseidon the horse-ruler, iVmipx0? (above, p. 108). 136 In favour of the identification: Kirkwood 1982: 283; Instone 1996: 170 and 182; Race 1997: 2. 157 n. 3. So too the four members of Mehssos' family who were taken away by the 'cruel blizzard of war', Tpaxeia vifias TroAôio, may (or may not) have died at Plataia: /. 4. 17.

166


names' derived from the river Asopos.137 Pindar himself celebrates another Boiotian whose name derives from the Asopos river, Asopichos of Orchomenos (recipient of 0.14, see above) and Thucydides (3. 52. 3) knows of Asopolaos the Plataian. To be sure, the Pindaric Asopodoros who got into trouble at Thebes and took refuge with Thebes' enemies at Orchomenos looks like a victim of stasis (for stasis at fifth-century Thebes see above, p. 62). Didymos, a respectably learned ancient authority, conjectured as much (schol. to /. i, inscr. a). But it is only a modern guess that medism in 480 was behind this stasis. The controlling group at Orchomenos probably medized too as we have seen, but if they like their Theban counterparts were disgraced after 479, it is not obvious why Asopodoros should have been welcome there. It is safer to see him as a routine victim of internal stasis without insisting that the Persian Wars come into it. Bundy is right to call the identification 'rash',138 and to say that 'the identification, even as a guess, is unsound, since it poses several problems and solves none'. (He does not however specify the problems so posed or left unsolved.) Letus move a little north139 to Opous, the principal city of the eastern Lokrians,140 who are for this reason sometimes called the Opountian Lokrians (their alternative name was Hypoknemidian or Epiknemidian Lokrians, from the mountain-range Knemis).141 It is a plausible 137

See Knoepfler 2000: the name Oropodoros should be treated as a dialect variant of Asopodoros. 138 Bundy 1986: 48 and n. 39 139 Opous is a fairly close neighbour of Boiotian Orchomenos to the south. 140 'Metropolis of the Lokrians', ^Tpo-n-oAi? AoKpatv, according to the epigram cited below n. 154, cf. Pindar's AoKpatv . . . p,arrjp at 0. 9. 20, with Nielsen forthcoming (next n.) 141 The basic study is nowNielsen 2000, and I have benefited greatly from his contribution on East Lokris forthcoming in the Copenhagen Polis Centre's inventory ofpoleis; see above, Preface and Acknowledgments. See also Larsen 1968: 50 and Meiggs and Lewis 1969: 37, commenting on their no. 20, the law of the east Lokrians about their colony at Naupaktos, dating from the first quarter of the 5th cent. (This is the inscription Gildersleeve had in mind when he spoke of the 'rude inscriptions, which doubtless give a false impression of the people' of Opountian Lokris: Glldersleeve 1899: 201, from the introduction to his commentary on 0. 9. Gildersleeve's word 'rude' was taken from Hicks 1882: 118, commentary on his no. 63, written at a time when the text in question was dated to the end rather than the beginning of the 5th cent. The inscription, for whose importance see Graham 1983: 40-60, is merely in local dialect and script. It is not 'rude' at all but long, difficult, complex and interesting, especially given the early date now agreed to be right for it.) Note that 'western Lokrians' is usually used, confusingly, to refer to the Ozolian Lokrians on the Korinthian gulf, i.e. situated to the west of the eastern Lokrians but still in old Greece. 'Confusingly' because of the existence in the 'west ' (in the sense of south Italy) of a third group of Lokrians, the Epizephynan Lokrians, on whom see below. For clarity I shall avoid 'eastern' and western' and speak of Opountian, Ozolian, and Epizephyrian Lokrians.


167

recent suggestion that the Opountians dominated the league of the Hypoknemidian Lokrians in the same sort of way that the Thebans dominated the Boiotian confederacy.142 The epigraphically attested 'Opountian Thousand' (ML 20 line 39) may roughly indicate those Opountians who had the hoplite census; this would make for an oligarchy but not a tight one.143 Pindar's talk of Themis and Eunomia hints at oligarchy. Aristotle, who wrote a mostly lost 'Opountian Constitution', appears to speak of Opous as an example of aristokratia; he says that 'one person is often made supreme over the administration of the state', TroAAoi TTOLOVOLV eva Kvpiov TTJS SioiKrjaeajs, and he instances Epidamnos and Opous, but immediately adds that at Opous this magistracy has more limited power, KM Trepi 'O-n-ovvra Se Kara TI êpos eAa-TTov.144 How far this was true a century earlier is quite uncertain. Pindar's Olympian 9145 (actually in immediate celebration of a Pythian victory in 466),146 is for a wrestling victor with the good central Greek name Epharmostos, Olympic victor in 468.147 The year 468 was a good one for Opountian athletics: Menalkes of Opous won the boxing event, also at Olympia (Moretti no. 240). It has been ingeniously claimed148 that women in general and mothers in particular are unusually prominent in this ode and that the reason for this is that Lokrian women were as a matter of historical 142

Nielsen 2000: 112. Nielsen 2000: 114!". Apart from the 'Thousand' in ML 20, the other transmitted figure is Diodorus-Ephorus' figure of 1,000 for the Lokrians at Thermopylai (11.4. 7), a full turn-out according to Hdt. 7. 203. i (Travarpari-r]). It is not clear that Diodorus really had independent reason for solidifying what he found in Herodotus, but Nielsen conjectures 3,400 for the entire adult male population of Opous and the (rest of the) Hypoknemidian Lokrians, and 1,700 for the adult males of hoplite status eligible for the Assembly, made up of perhaps 1,200 from Opous and 500 from the other Hypoknemidians. This contains elements of conjecture, and requires some faith in Diodorus, but it is compatible with the epigraphic figure of the 'Thousand Opountians'. 144 For all this see Nielsen forthcoming; for Themis and Eunomia see below, n. 154; Aristotle: frr. 56o-4Rose andPo/. 1287*5-8. 145 For which see now the full-length commentary by Gerber 2002. 146 That Epharmostos won at Olympia in 468 is certain from P Oxy. 222 — FGrHistî^, and Race 1997: i. 149 and n. 4 dates the ode to that year, and places Epharmostos' Pythian victory 'previously'. But the view of Caspar 1900: 140-2 and Barrett 1973: 32 n. 29 seems preferable, viz. to put the ode in 466, two years after the Olympic victory and in the year of the Pythian victory alluded to mimes n—12, 'cast a sweet winged arrow at Pytho', Tntpotvra. 8 ' iti y\vKitv TlvSuivaS' owrov, which goes with 'but now', dAAai'iii'at line 5. See also Lehnus 1989: 144. 147 There is a noticeable concentration in LGPJV-jE compared to the other volumes (see entries under both 'Efiapp-oaros and 'ETrapp-oaros), and inside central Greece there is a definite clustering at Opountian Lokrian places. 148 Gildersleeve 1899: 201. 143

168


fact unusually influential. I think this argument unsafe (above, p. 98 and n. 48). Opous is described by Pindar as 'famous' (line 14, fcAetvas e| 'O-n-oevTos), Sit first sight an unduly flattering description of a smallish city which was certainly no Akragas (see p. 197 for 'famous Akragas'). Opous, like Megara, Phleious, and Tenedos, is a place of the second rank and (we might think) a warning against historical constructions built on the absence of epinikian victors from this or that place: nobody would have guessed it would provide an Olympic victor (just as we would not have guessed it for Boiotian Thespiai but for an inscription: above, p. 45). That is true up to a point, but the Opountian Lokrians had two great claims to fame. One was that Opous was the home of Patroklos son of Menoitios, a claim derived from a line of Homer (Iliad 18. 326). I discuss elsewhere (below, pp. 313-16) the way Pindar handles the myths about the settlement of Opous itself—the autochthony myth of Pyrrha and Deukalion, and the mixed Greek settlement thereafter, of which the family of Patroklos were supposedly a part. The other Opountian claim to fame was their colonization of Epizephyrian Lokri in Italy. The ancient traditions hesitated between Ozolian and Opountian Lokri as the metropolis of the Italian city149 and there was even a tradition that it was founded from Sparta.150 The Spartan tradition need not be taken too seriously. As between the two branches of Lokrians in old Greece, the Opountian and Ozolian, some modern scholars have wondered if both branches might have been represented in the Italian colony. This is plausible enough aprion:(cf. above, p. 119 for such mixed foundations), but in fact the better view151 is that Opountian Lokri predominated. One of the main arguments is in fact Pindaric: at the end of Olympian 9 (line 112), there is a reference to 'your feast, Aias [Ajax] son of Oileus [Ileus in the Pindaric spelling]', and the scholiast 149

FGrHist 70 Ephoros Fi38 preferred Opountian, but Strabo (259, whence also the Ephoros citation, which is given as a rejected alternative) preferred Ozolian. 150 Paus. 3. 3. i with Malkin 1994: 62 (also discussing the tradition that the Lokrians were helped at the battle of the River Sagra by the Dioskouroi, sent by the Spartans). For Lokri as the Sparta of the West see Redfield 2003: 251-3. 151 Walbank 1957—79: 2. 334, commenting on Pol. 12. 5. 6.1 do not know why Walter 1993: 143 (cf. Nielsen 2000: 115 n. 143) says the nobility of the so-called Hundred Families at Lokri 'is a phantom; it did not exist'. It goes back to Polybius in the passage just cited, who explicitly talks of the 'so-called Hundred families', and perhaps to Thucydides too. The Hundred could have been a genuine aristocracy inside and overlapping with the Thousand. Seejeffery 1976: 75. Perhaps Walter is thinking of the 7th cent. only.


169

says that the Aianteia, evidently a festival to this Ajax, was celebrated in Opous.152 This Ajax is the so-called 'lesser Ajax', mentioned here alone by Pindar, and not identical with the more famous Ajax son of Telamon who makes so many appearances in Pindar's Aiginetan odes. The lesser Ajax raped Kassandra and thereafter and supposedly for a thousand years the 'Hundred Families' of the Lokrians had to send two maidens to Troy every year in expiation. Now it was this Ajax, with his specifically Opountian cult, who was invoked by the Epizephyrian (Italian) Lokrians in battle (Paus. 3. 19. 12), Kara. otfcetoT^ra -n-pos 'OTTOWTIOVS, 'through kinship with the Opuntians'. The double allusion, to kinship and to the lesser Ajax, tells strongly for an Opountian origin for the Epizephyrian Lokrians. There is also a Thucydidean argument, which has to do with the Hundred Families. After the battle of Oinophyta the Athenians took exactly one hundred hostages from the Opountian Lokrians, firmly specified as such (i. 108. 3), and it is a beautiful conjecture that these are none other than the families who had to supply the 'Lokrian maidens'.153 The conclusion must be that Opountian Lokri and Epizephyrian Lokri are connected as mothercity (or rather mother-area) and daughter-city. This gives special and unusual appropriateness to the arrangement of Pindar's Olympians 9, 10, and n, because the first poem is for an Opountian Lokrian and the other two are for Hagesidamos of Epizephyrian (Italian) Lokri, the foundation of which, I have suggested, gave Opous some of the 'fame' alluded to by Pindar. It is perhaps surprising that Pindar did not make more of this colonial connection, though there is perhaps a hint that the two places shared each other's law-abiding and perhaps oligarchic values, Themis and Eunomia, 'good order', at Opous (0. 9. 15-16; cf. above, p. iGy) 154 and 'strictness', Atrekeia, at Epizephyrian Lokri 152 Drachmann 1903—27: 2. 306 prefers the reading Aidvreiov T' Iv &O.ITI which certainly fits nicely the scholiast's discussion of the Aianteia. But Snell-Maehler and Race (Loeb) read

AifLV, T€0l> T' €V SatTt. 153 Walbank 1957—79: 2. 334, cited by Hornblower 1991: 173. The idea goes back to W. Oldfather, ^£"'Lokns' col. 1244. For the Lokrian maidens see Redfield 2003: 85—150. 154 In connection with this praise of Opountian Eunomia, Riet van Bremen pertinently tells me of an unpublished letter of Hadrian to the people of Lokrian Naryka(cf. D.Jaillard, ^PE 132 (2000), 143—4), wlth favourable mention of the 'laws of the Opuntians', vop,oi ol 'OTTVVTICDV. Eunomia is not uniquely Lokrian or Opountian, but the flavour is oligarchic; Pindar says that Eunomia lives at Korinth as well (0. 13. 6), and there are other references (Paian i. 10, Thebes; cf. P. 5. 67 about Apollo, in a Kyrenaian and Spartan context). Gerber 2002: 28, in his n. on Evvop,ia at line 15, aptly cites an epigram ascribed to Simomdes (FGE XXIII.2, epitaph on Lokrians who fell at Thermopylai) ^rpo-noXis AoKpatv €v8vvop,a}v '0-n-oe'ij, and D. L. Page's comment (Page 1981: 236) 'the compound [evOvvopoi] here

170


(0.10.13). Seen in this way, Olympian 9 becomes less isolated, and the allusion to the fame of Opous more appropriate. The north: Thessaly, Dodona andMolossia, Macedon, Thrace Further north still we come to Thessaly, the destination of Pindar's Pythian 10 and Bacchylides 14 and 148. This by no means exhausts Pindar's interest in the area, because there is a pronounced Thessalian as well as a Kyrenaian aspect to Pythian 9: Pindar follows Hesiod in making Apollo carry the nymph Kyrene off from Thessaly, specifically the 'wind-echoing folds of Pelion', dve/jioa(f>apd'ya>v €K HaXiov KoXirow (line 5).156 This is Pindar's only ode for a winner of the race in hoplite armour, but the father of the Thessalian boy victor of Pythian 10 was an Olympic victor in this same event (P.io. 13). I do not know if this is just coincidence; it is certainly a little unexpected given that Kyrene and Thessaly are both horse-breeding places (below), and may hint at shared skills and tastes. Pythian 10, Pindar's first poem (498 BG), has for its mythical theme Perseus and the Hyperboreans, and this has been well studied.157 But it is worth looking at the poem negatively and asking why the poet declines to address the obvious mythical subject. Considering the firm connection in myth between Achilles and Thessaly, it is remarkable that the three epinikian poems for Thessalian victors do not as far as we can see exploit Achilles. Were both Pindar and Bacchylides158 trying to keep their Aiginetan hosts happy by fixing Achilles, so to speak, on Aigina? That idea gets some support from Merman 4, the only poem of Pindar (or Bacchylides) which does speak of Achilles' connections with Thessaly, because the poem is for a victor from Aigina: if Achilles was to be a Thessalian then at least let him be so under Aiginetan patronage, so to speak. InNemean^, Achilles' mother Thetis 'rules over Phthia' (in Thessaly), ©ens Se Kparei T€s \ aydy€ii> eTTiKcup.iav di'Spaii' K\vrav OTTO..

174


family not the dynastic Aleuadai (who were possibly in eclipse after their medism in 480), and the allusion to the Agathokleadai is not very different from the Aiginetan clans who share in their victors' success (pp. 208,219), except for the pronounced stress on wealth. However the poem is undated and we must avoid circular political explanations. There is little prosopographic overlap with the world of Thucydides and the historians. There is no Olympic or other victor from Thessaly in Thucydides' text as it stands, but Olivier Masson has emended the improbable name Torylaos, a leading Thessalian in Thucydides (4. 78. i), to Torymbas, a good Thessalian name borne by a known Olympic chariot victor.173 For reasons which go back before the historical period, Thessaly was always connected with the sanctuary at Delphi to the south: the component elements of Thessaly constituted a majority in the Delphic amphiktiony which ran the sanctuary's affairs. We should therefore expect Thessalians to show a particular interest in the Pythian games, and there is some evidence for this: not only Hippokleas' Pythian victory in 498, but Xenophon's report that in the late 3708 the Thessalian Jason of Pherai did indeed plan to hold the festival and the games himself (Xen. Hell. 6. 4. 30, cf. below, p. 265). Evidence of this sort might suggest limited horizons, as does the chariot-victory of Kleoptolemos of Thessaly, which was won not at Delphi or any other of the great panhellenic sanctuaries but at the local Petraian games in the Tempe valley174 in honour of'Poseidon of the Rock' (B. 14. 20). And there is evidence for other local Thessalian ogames.175 But it would be wrongo to conclude that the Thessalians in the fifth century were insular and introverted. After all, Pythian 10 may be for a victory at Delphi but it also attests two victories won at distant Olympia by Hippokleas' father (lines 13-14). Olympia was a focus for dedicatory and other activity by western Greeks, and it is therefore relevant that Thessaly shows archaeological connections with Paestum and south Italy generally.176 Orphism is attested in both Thessaly (Pelinna) and south Italy (Hipponion). It is tempting to speculate on cultural interchange, given that communications between Thessaly and Italy across the Adriatic were 173

Masson 1990: 328—30. The Olympic victor: Moretti 1957: 259. There is, I concede, an element of circularity in emending Torylaos so as to make him homonymous with the attested athlete Torymbas and then hailing Torymbas as an athletic name in Thucydides: Hornblower 20000: 137. 174 Nilsson 1906: 71; Maehler 1982: 294. 175 Galhs 1998; Rmgwood 1927: 15—21; Moustaka 1997. 176 Maria Stamatopoulou in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming).

The North

175

not difficult once the Pindus range had been crossed. In any case Delphi was itself an international place, where western Greeks were almost as noticeable a presence as they were at Olympia.177 Delphi has already featured in this book as the site of the Pythian games (p. n); and at the end of the present chapter we shall examine the political evidence for international rivalry at Delphi. Ian Rutherford has recently argued that Pindar had a special association with Delphi, and that he 'could have been contributing to a programme of Delphic propaganda, organized by Delphic authorities'.178 Certainly, Pindar displayed deep interest in and knowledge of what we might call non-athletic Delphi, both in Pawn 8 (62 Rutherford, on the succession of the four temples at Delphi) and Pawn 6 (D6 Rutherford, Achilles' brutal son Neoptolemos killed at Delphi, a poem with a notoriously controversial relationship to Merman 7 which treats the same event with a different emphasis).179 The ancient biographical tradition acknowledged this by claiming that there Pindar, in what looks like a timeless ritual, was 'invited' every day to dinner with the god Apollo when the prophetes closed the temple, an apparent reference to the ritual of deogevia, the 'entertaining of a god or gods by humans, usually at a meal'180—except that it looks as if here the god is entertaining the man. But I doubt if Pindar was much more attached to Delphi than he was to Olympia or even to Dodona (as Rutherford himself more or less concedes).181 And I am dubious about this idea of'propaganda' (a word anyway best avoided, with a few exceptions, in the study of the ancient world)182 organized by 'Delphic authorities'. Delphi was, as we shall see in the final section of this chapter, a focus for interstate rivalry (specifically between Athenians and Spartans at the time of the First Peloponnesian War of 461-446), not an independent and unitary 177

Antonaccio 2001: 134. Five of Pindar's twelve Pythmns are for Sicilians. Rutherford 2001: 179, in the course of a section called 'Pindar and Delphi: intersecting panhellenisms'. A reference in this section was needed to Zeilhofer 1958, not to mention other more recent work such as Lefevre 1998. 179 For N. 7 see Most 1985: ch. 3, and see the very full treatment o^Pawn 6 at Rutherford 2001: 298—338. Gf. below, p. 176 discussing Molossia and Dodona. In addition, Rutherford 2001: 279 suggests that the very fragmentary Paian 3 (03 Rutherford), which appears to speak of an Apolline epiphany, may have been written for performance at Delphi, though other places are possible. 180 VitaAmbrosmnap. 2 Drachmann. The definition in the text is from E. K[earns], OCD3 'theoxenia'. Pi. Paian 6. 61, and other evidence, indicates that the festival of the theoxeniawas specially important at Delphi. See Wilamowitz 1922: 128 (discussing Paian 6) on the various overlapping senses of the word. 181 Rutherford 2001: 180. 182 See my entry 'propaganda' in OCD3. 178

176


power in control of its own propaganda machine. As for 'Delphi', the word covers several distinct entities which need to be kept conceptually apart (above, pp. n f). Delphi was the most prestigious oracular shrine in Greece, but it was not the oldest. That was Dodona, 'Thesprotian Dodona' as Pindar called it in a fragment (F6o) quoted by Strabo (7. 7. 10, 328), although Strabo goes on to note that Dodona 'later came under the Molossians' a little further north from historical Thesprotia.183 Pindar certainly wrote a poem about Dodona, which survives in very fragmentary form on papyrus and which mentions the 'fold of Tomaros' (just west of Dodona), -mvyi To^dpov (F59 Snell-Maehler; S8 Rutherford). This was classified by Snell-Maehler as a paian, but Ian Rutherford now tentatively connects it with a separately transmitted snatch of a hymn to Dodonaian Zeus, 'Mighty Dodonaian father, excellent in skill', Aa>Sa>vaie [JteyaaOeves dpiaroTexva Trdrep (F^J, quoted by Dio of Prusa 12. 8if). Perhaps all these fragments (57, 59, 60) come from the same one poem. The other fragment in the 'Dodona' group as printed in Snell-Maehler (F58, F2 Rutherford) says that Pindar agreed with the (Herodotean) tradition that made the 'doves' or priestesses of both Dodona and the oracle of Zeus Ammon in Libya come from Egyptian Thebes (cf. Hdt. 2. 57); but Rutherford184 now raises the possibility that this might be from a song to Ammon ( cf. F36 Snell-Maehler) or even Kyrene. However these fragments be distributed and allocated generically, Pindar's pronounced interest in Dodona is thus secure even without the evidence of the epinikian odes. Two of these, written for Aiginetans, use the Aiakid myth, which is a feature of every Aiginetan ode except Pythian 8, to focus attention on Dodona and the Molossian kingdom. The link is provided by Achilles' son Neoptolemos, the founder of the Aiakidai dynasty of the Molossi, a line whose most famous member was the Romans' third-century opponent Pyrrhus, himself son of an Aiakides. By accepting or asserting the connection between the Molossian royal line and the Thessalian house of Achilles (above), Pindar in his own way expresses the truth that the Molossians historically tended to look east to Thessaly and Macedonia rather than south or west.185 183 But Hammond 1967: 491 suggests that the epithet 'Thesprotian' mayjust have been a traditional one, as in [Aesch.] ^^831. 184 Rutherford 2001: 3541". commenting on his ¥2. 185 For this tendency see Davies 2000, esp. 242.

The North

177

The relevant Pindaric victory odes are Merman 4 and Merman 7, a famously difficult poem which cannot be considered apart from Pawn 6 which has Apollo killing Neoptolemos when he came to 'the land of Molossia near Tomaros', axeBov 8[e Tojjuapou MoAoacn'Sa yatav (line 109). The same poem continues shortly after (lines 123-6) with Pindar's most brilliant evocation of Aigina, 'Island whose name is famous indeed, you live and rule in the Dorian sea, O shining star of Zeus Hellanios', 6vop.aK\VTa y ' eveaai Aaipiei jU,[e]6Yotaa [TTOJITO) vaaos, [ opei., 'Aitna the mountain', where Gomme (HCT-2. 431) regards 'the mountain' as 'added to distinguish it from the city of this name founded by Hiero' (or, we may add, from Inessa, which took the name Aitna after 461, see p. iSyn. 222). This is ingenious, but Gomme himself goes on immediately and pertinently to ask 'but why was this necessary immediately after the mention [in the preceding line] of ij A'lrvt], which must be the mountain?' And Gomme also wonders (like others before him, see Steup's n.) why Th. told us 'here and not just above, if at all', that Etna was 'the largest mountain in Sicily', o-ntp p,€yiarov lanv and suspects addxkimenki i.e. interpolation. The passage is not specifically discussed by Maurer 1995, which is now the most authoritative treatment of interpolation in Th., but his generally austere approach discourages speculation along those lines. I am not convinced that we have here a concealed reference to Hiero's city (or to Inessa). 225 Dover HCT4. 219; the emendation 'by the Geloans' for 'by Gelon' is certain. For new epigraphic evidence probably connected with the final refounding of Kamarina and apparently indicating democratic re-organization on Kleisthenic Athenian lines, see Murray 1997; see n. 239. 226 On this policy see Hornblower 1991: 51. 227 See my forthcoming commentary on Th. 6. 2-5.

Sicily and south Italy

189

The most we might say (above, p. 51) is that Pindaric epithets about the wonderful horses of Syracuse and Sicily lurk beneath Thucydides' insistence on the equestrian primacy of Syracuse in 415. If Thucydides looked to Pindar for Sicily (and Dover even thinks it possible that Thucydides did not actually go there himself),228 it was for hints about the early days of colonization (see p. 104 for Akragas, and above for Syracuse). Syracuse was both a colony itself (of Korinth, see below) and a metropolis, the founder of Akrai, Kasmene, and Kamarina according to Thucydides (6. 5. 2-3) and perhaps other places as well which he does not mention (Heloros to the south, and Enna) in the interior.229 Syracuse was also on very close terms with Epizephyrian Lokri,230 which supplied Pindar with his only Italian (as opposed to Sicilian) victor, Hagesidamos, who won the boys' boxing event in 476 BG (see 0. 10 and ii. 231 For the link with Opous and 0. 9 see above, p. :68).232 The Syracuse-Lokri link helps to explain why Pindar wrote for just this one non-Sicilian city of the Greek West (see however below for Bacchylides and Metapontion). It is a pity that as far as we know neither Pindar nor Bacchylides wrote an ode for the great Olympic boxer Euthymos of Epizephyrian Lokri, who may be the first living person to have received hero-cult.233 By contrast Bacchylides' ode for a victor from south Italian Metapontion (Ode ii for the wrestler Alexidamos, victor in the Pythian games) takes us out of the Syracusan sphere of influence; little is known about Metapontine politics in mid-century but the pro-Athenian and therefore anti-Syracusan alignment mentioned by Thucydides (7. 33. 4) may go back as early as the 4308. (For the complicated foundation legends of Metapontion see above Gh. 4 pp. ngff.) 228

Dover HCT4. 466-9. For Enna see Steph. Byz. The case for Heloros, an important excavated site at the mouth of the river of the same name, is circumstantial: it is not conceivable that a Greek city in this position could have sprung up independently of Syracuse. 230 For Lokri in general see now the fine study by Redfield 2003, esp. 202—416, and for the Syracuse-Lokri connection in particular see Hornblower 1996: 433, cf. 150, and Redfield 2003: 205, 27gf. 231 For 0. ii (but ranging widely) see Bundy 1986: 1—33. 232 He was not the only victor from this Lokri, see (for three Olympic victories of the boxer Euthymos) Morettinos. 191, 214, and 227 (with Moretti 1970: 296). 233 Gurrie 2002. For athletes and hero-cult see pp. 26 and 235. The western context is significant in view of my argument above, p. 27 (western origin of epmikian?). For another Olympic victor from this Lokri see Moretti no. 297 (Keton in 448, pentathlon). 229

i go


Of these Sicilian sub-colonies of Syracuse just mentioned, only Kamarina supplied a Pindaric victor, Psaumis of Olympian 4 (and Olympian 5, if authentic); he won the chariot race in 452 Be.234 We know of two earlier Olympic victors connected with the city. In 528 BG Parmenides of Kamarina won the foot-race. But this was in the middle of the half century between Kamarina's destruction by its own colonizers the Syracusans in 552 and its restoration by Hippokrates at the beginning of the fifth. (The city continued to plunge in and out of existence because it was then destroyed and depopulated by Gelon and then later re-established by the Geloans: Th. 6. 5. 3). Perhaps the mid sixthcentury destruction was incomplete,235 or, as I prefer to believe, Parmenides was a stasis-exile of a kind we have met already in this chapter. These two explanations are not incompatible and both may be true. In the period preceding the city's depopulation by Gelon, Kamarina was ruled by the Olympic boxer Glaukos of Euboian Karystos. The stories about this man are confused: the action of the Kamarinans in sentencing him to death may have triggered reprisals by Gelon; on the other hand another source says that the death of Glaukos was the result of a plot by Gelon himself.236 But the political use of Glaukos by Gelon seems secure. It was not just in their own persons that the western tyrants continued the archaic link between political prominence on the one hand and athletic and equestrian success on the other; 237 Ghromios of Aitna is another example of a figure from a western tyrannical milieu who made a splash at the games in old Greece. Kamarina by the middle of the fifth century was an important and prosperous city in its own right, rebuilt and replanned lavishly (0. 5. 12 may hint at this: Psaumis the victor seems to be praised because 'he quickly welds a towering grove of sturdy dwellings', KoAAa re 234

For these two odes see Mader 1990. Coins support 0. 5's authenticity: Rutter 200ia:

80-2. 235 Dunbabin 1948: io6f. considers both possibilities but inclines to the first (incomplete destruction), citing Pace. But the argument (107 n. i) that Pace's 'opinion on this point is especially valuable, as he was brought up in Gamarma' is absurd. The issue is whether there is material from the second half of the 6th cent., and there is; for more recently discovered finds from this period see R.Wilson, AR 1987-8, 116 col. 2. It is tempting to bring into connection with Kamarina's violent late archaic history the remarkable series of helmets found off the Kamarman coast: R. Wilson, AR 1995—6: 70, 71; F. de Angelis, AR 2000-1:166. 236 Glaukos is Moretti no. 134. The main ancient sources for the Kamarinan aspect are the scholiast on Aischines 3.189 (with a confusion betwen the careers of Glaukos and Philammon, also mentioned by Aischines), and—for the 'plot', em/SouAiy, of Gelon against Glaukos—see Bekker Anecd. Gr. i. 132. See the discussions of Freeman 1891: 130 and 498; Dunbabin 1948: 237 416; Moretti; and Fontenrose 1968: 99-103. Holloway 1991: loof.


191 238

Kamarina received a huge territorial extension in 424, when it was awarded Morgantina, surprisingly far away to the north-east, after the peace conference at Gela (Th. 4. 65. i); this grant cannot have been unprompted but must indicate earlier Kamarinan interests in the interior. At the time of Psaumis' victory in mid-century, Kamarina was wholly independent of Syracuse. This situation continued. Thucydides situates a great debate there in winter 415/414, at which the Syracusan Hermokrates and the Athenian Euphemos each try to bring Kamarina over to his city's side (Thuc. 6. 76-87). The Kamarinans were wary of Syracuse in the fifth century, as well they might be, after their destruction and refoundation by Syracuse and their final resettlement from Gela (above). Psaumis was not a tyrant, though he was a big spender, at any rate if Olympian 5 is usable evidence and even if it is not (his victory, commemorated in 0. 4, was after all in the chariot event). We now know a little more than we did about the political set-up at Kamarina in the mid-fifth century: lead inscriptions found in 1987, published in 1991 and 1992, and now (2001) on display in the site museum at Kamarina, appear to attest a civic reorganization on democratic lines, probably carried out around 460 on the model of the Kleisthenic reforms at late sixth-century Athens (SEGî. 778-95,42. 846).239 As with Ergoteles of Himera (see above on Olympian 12) Pindar writes for a citizen of a self-determining/w/iy, albeit a wealthy and powerful citizen: the poet was not always the servant of tyrants. On the other hand the same epigraphic dossier includes what Oswyn Murray believes 'attests a quite different and older world', an inscription which reads ' ..keas [son of?] Thrasys an Emmenid is the supreme at singing among all the Doristomphoi'.240 Now the Emmenidai were the tyrannical family of Akragas, whose most famous member was Theron (see further below for this very Pindaric family), and the Doristomphoi, 'those who take pride in the spear', sound like a military brotherhood (phratry or patra, cf. p. 208 for Aigina). Murray suggests that this victory was a contest in epic poetry and that the document has found its way into the collection by chance. He sees it as the product of a different world from the new civic order which the other documents imply. As he puts it, the Thrasys text 238 This sort of 'euergetism' by wealthy citizens interestingly anticipates hellenistic attitudes, see Hornblower 20020: 50, so that it would be good to be sure that the poem is authentically by Pindar. For the replanning of Kamarina see Holloway 1991: 84. 239 Murray 1997, esp. 497 ('under the influence of recent democratic models'). 240 Murray 1997: 498 citing Gordano 1992: no. 6 (SEGqz. 846, p. 245).

192


reveals 'an older aristocratic order, that of the warrior bands, the poetic agon and the Sicilian world presupposed in the odes of Pindar' (though he goes on to concede that Thrasys might have been a visiting competitor not a Kamarinan citizen). This is an interesting analysis, but in view of Psaumis in 452 the contrast drawn by Murray may be too sharp; after all 0. 4 shows that a citizen of the new Kamarinan democracy was celebrated by none other than Pindar himself. Did Psaumis belong to the older or the newer world, or (as I suspect) is the truth rather that Thrasys and Psaumis show that the two 'worlds' comfortably coexisted? See further below for Athens. The name of Sicilian Himera, adoptive home of Ergoteles just mentioned as the honorand of Olympian 12, was a familiar one in the mouths of the heralds who proclaimed victories at the panhellenic games. An inscribed four-line epigram found half a century ago, but already known to Pausanias, confirms that Ergoteles' own victories were spread over several years and all four panhellenic venues.241 Ergoteles is thus an unusually and satisfyingly well-attested athlete, mentioned in the Olympic victor-list (P Oxy. 222), and commemorated both by a Pindar ode, and by an inscribed statue at Olympia which was seen and exploited by Pausanias, and whose base was then re-discovered in excavations fifty years ago, in 1953. Pausanias also, I suggested in an earlier chapter (p. 77 n. 85), drew on the Pindar ode for his biographical information about Ergoteles. Some athletes chose statues, others poems,242 but Ergoteles (or was it his Sicilian community which paid for it all?) used both media because he wanted to make absolutely sure his achievements were known to posterity, and we have to admit that he succeeded. In addition to Ergoteles, Himera supplied the spectacularly successful runner Krison, three times victor in the stadion at Olympia (first victory 448).243 Now Himera was the only Greek city on the north coast of Sicily, as Thucydides correctly noted (6. 62. 2), [lit. 'in that part of Sicily]

241

Moretti no. 224 collects most of the evidence. On the versified list of Ergoteles' victories SEG n. I223a (Pausanias' source in 6. 4. n) see Ebert 1972: no. 20 and Barrett 1973: 24f. and n. 7 (cf. below, n. 245 for the text). Moretti 1987 (nuovo supplemento) does not register Barrett's suggestions about the inscription or about Ergoteles generally. 242 For Aigmasee below, p. 213 and my ch. in Hornblower and Morgan, forthcoming: not much overlap between the two forms of commemoration. 243 Morettinos. 294, 306, 312.


193 244

Here "EAAa? functions as an adjective, as it sometimes can do; but the choice of word, the normal noun for 'Greece', may lend a certain emphasis: Himera was an outpost of Greece. Perhaps for the same reason, Ergoteles' statue dedication emphasizes that he defeated 'the Greeks';245 strictly the claim is unnecessary because only Greeks were admitted to the games at Olympia and Ergoteles himself was a Greek, so that logically he can only mean he defeated 'the other Greeks'. Does he add "EAAavas VIKOJV as a way of saying defiantly 'we colonial Himerans are as good as any of you Greeks from the homeland? A tempting thought, but not one which can be pressed because for instance Pindar says of Theaios of Argos, not a colonial city, that he 'defeated the host of Hellenes' at Delphi', (M 10. 25). Himera246 was a coastal city, not far to the east of the Phoenician centres at Panormos and Soloeis (modern Palermo and Solunto), which are briefly mentioned by Thucydides.247 The third Phoenician place which Thucydides names in the same context is Motya, modern Mozia, a small island off the western coast of Sicily, between Drepanon/Trapani and Lilybaion, modern Marsala. It was here that the fine fifth-century sculpture illustrated in this book as Figure 3 was found in 1979, perhaps originally an agonistic monument like the famous charioteer from Delphi and carried off as war booty from a Greek city on the island.248 To take conjecture even further, one might wonder if the city so pillaged was actually Himera, so close to the zone of Phoenician settlement (for the comprehensive sack of Himera in about 408 BG see Diod. n. 49. 4). Himera was the scene of a great Greek defeat of the Carthaginians by the combined forces of Theron of Akragas and Gelon of Syracuse in 480 (Pi. P. i. 79; Hdt. 7. 165 and Diod. n. 20-3). This249 is one possible context for the establishment of the cult of'Zeus Eleutherios', Zeus the Liberator, on the analogy of the 244 r 245

See e.g. Hdt. 4. 78. i, the Skythian Skyles' mother taught him Greek, yXtoaadv re With Th. 6. 62 compare also 7.58.2 *EpyoTeXrjs p.' dve&rjK[e QiXdvopos, oj Trore TroCTCTo*] "E\\a.vo.s viK&v 7Tu$t[a Sts

cf above n. 241. For different supplements see Barrett's long footnote, there cited, preferring e.g. &iaads I "E\\avas VIKCUV I7v8id8as 8o\iôv\. Disagreement does not touch the words "E\\avas VIKCUV, which are securely read. 246 For which see now the good discussion of Hutchinson 2001:113-15, part of the intro. to his comm. on Stesichoros. For the 'warm baths' of 0. 12. 19 see Rutter 200ia: 77 (coins). 247 For these see Th. 6. 2. 6. 248 See below, p. 197 and n. 264. 249 As is acknowledged by Barrett 1973: 34-5.

194


same cult established in Greece proper after the Persian invaders were repelled at the battle of Plataia in 479 (Plut. Arist. 20. 4, Paus. 9. 2. 5, cf. Th. 2. 71. i). But250 there was also a domestic aspect, the fall in 470 of the tyrant Thrasydaios, installed at Himera by his father Theron; or perhaps (as argued by W. S. Barrett in 1973) the fall in 466 of the Syracusan tyrant, Hieron's brother Thrasyboulos, who though far away to the east seems to have exercised some sort of fairly direct control of Himera in the early 4608. On Barrett's view the occasion for 0. 12 was a Pythian victory by Ergoteles in 466 (rather than his Olympic victories in 472 and 464, despite the inclusion of the ode among the Olympians].'151 Whether or not this exact date is right, the ancient scholiast who linked the 'Zeus Liberator' motif to the overthrow of the domestic tyranny may well have been on to something, though his details are not all reassuring and he was not exclusively right in view of the 480 possibility for the institution of the cult. 252 If so, there are implications for Pindar's political attitude—that is, that he was not always a servant and celebrator of tyrants—and these have been duly noted by Lloyd-Jones (above, p. 84 and n. no). Himera was a sub-foundation of Zankle (later renamed Messina, the name it still has today), and like its metropolis it was a Ghalkidic, that is to say, an Ionian, foundation (Th. 6. 5. i). But Thucydides goes on immediately to say that the population was mixed: there were also 250 This ls t^ explanation preferred by Barrett 1973: 35- Although (see preceding n.) he does allow that 'conceivably' the cult was already in existence, instituted in 480 'when the threat of servitude to the barbarian was averted in 480'; he continues ' but if it was, there can be no doubt that it took on new meaning now in 466'. By contrast Raaflaub 1985 tilts the emphasis the other way: at 75—6 he gives external and domestic explanations equal weight, but at 131 he slightly inclines to the external ('vielleicht besonders'). 251 This is the main argument of Barrett 1973. Historically the conclusion is attractive enough, but note that Barrett relies twice over on emendation of dates given in literary traditions viz. Diodorus on p. 33 and a Pindaric scholiast on p. 27. The Diodorus passage in question (n. 38.7) is obviously from the chronographic source (Schwartz 1959:41); this entitles it to a little more respect than if it were Ephoros-derived, and tells against Barrett's ingenious psychological argument at 33 n. 34 that the hypothetical error is that of a mathematically hesitant Diodorus himself rather than of a copyist. (The new Bude edn. of Diodorus book 11 culpably fails to register Barrett's suggestion, see Haillet 2001: 54). The Pindaric scholia, which contain actual contradictions, are perhaps more deserving of rough treatment, but one cannot be confident in chronological conclusions so reached. 252 Drachmann 1903—27: i. 150, la in A: Barrett 1973: 33f. here takes oi irepl 'leptova to mean 'the family of Hieron' but as Barrett himself is well aware, in post-classical Greek (e.g. Polybius) oi irepi X very often means X himself. The passage is thus not terribly strong support for Barrett's view that the overthrown tyrant was Thrasyboulos brother of Hieron. It looks like a plain mistake of that non-palaeographical sort which reduces the general value of an item.


195

some Syracusan stasis-exiles, mysteriously called the Myletidai. Whatever that name means, the implication is surely that they migrated in a body. He adds the interesting remark that the dialect of Himera was a mixture of'Ghalkidic' (Ionic) and Doric Greek, but that 'Ghalkidic institutions', vo^tâ, prevailed. The inscriptions of Himera more or less confirm this picture: some are in Ionic, some Doric.253 A long, recently discovered, text is largely Ionic,254 but to set against that we have the language of the sixth-century Himeran poet Stesichoros, which is mainly Doric.255 This was evidently, like Palermo in later centuries, a culturally, ethnically and linguistically heterogeneous place: on the city streets and harbourside of Himera you could no doubt jostle not only with these Dorian and Ionian Greeks, but with more exotic folk as well. The neighbours of Himera included not only Phoenicians and Carthaginians, who in peaceful times surely traded with the Greeks to the east of them, but also with Etruscans to the north256 and Elymians (who were neither Greeks nor Semites) from Egesta to the west or Entella to the south, and indigenous Sicilians of more than one variety. It was in perhaps the year 476 that the young and energetic Ergoteles of Knossos, a stasis-exile like the Myletidai of Syracuse, stepped onto the quayside of this hospitable but recently turbulent north Sicilian polls. The year is not certain but the suggestion of 4y6257 is attractive in view ofDiodorus' statement, under that year, thatTheron of Akragas, 'seeing that the city was in need of settlers [because of a recent purge of his opponents], synoikized the Dorians into it and enrolled others who wanted into the citizen body' (n. 49. s).258 (Note again the evidence for mixed 253

Dubois 1989: nos. 7, n, and 14. Brugnone 1997. 255 But his Doric was surely of a merely literary and conventional sort. See the good discussion of Hutchinson 2001: 115. 256 See R. Wilson, AR 1995-6: 104 for archaeological evidence of the 'wide commercial contacts enjoyed by Himera in the A[rchaic] and Classical] periods'; the finds include Etruscan as well as Phoenician amphoras, and Greek material from a variety of places. 257 Barrett 1973: 24. 258 The Greek is slightly clumsy but Diodorus seems to be distinguishing between what Theron did to the Dorians and what he did to the other new settlers; but the precise difference between 'synoikizing' and 'enrolling as citizens' escapes me. The Bude tr. (Haillet 2001: 66) preserves the distinction accurately ('il joignit a sa population les Doriens et inscrivit tous ceux des autres' etc.); the Loeb ed. by contrast has 'made a mixed multitude there, enrolling as its citizens both Dorians and any others who so wished'. This is fine, in a way, but it seems to ignore els and to translate the first verb as if it were a participle, i.e.. avvaiKiaas and perhaps we should indeed consider emending to avvioKiaas 254

196


population, not just Dorians). Ergoteles will on this hypothesis have been one of the first-mentioned group, a Dorian from Krete. We can take Barrett's suggestion a little further because it is probable that (not only Gela but Gela's daughter-city) Akragas had a Kretan element. Thucydides (6.4.4) does not say so explicitly, but other evidence suggests it, above all the location of the story of Minos' death at the hands of Kokalos king of Kamikos, supposedly located at S. Angelo Muxaro inland of Akragas (Diod. 4. 79 and 16. g).259 It may then be that Ergoteles came to Himera via Akragas, which would for a Kretan have been an initial and logical refuge, a greater and perhaps more attractive city than its metropolis Gela in this period. (See below. Gela, like Selinus in the far west of the island, produced no Olympic victor in the fifth century, and attracted no epinikian odes that we know of.260) If Ergoteles did come via Akragas, he could still have stepped off the quayside, going by sea round Sicily to maritime Himera in the north from equally maritime Akragas in the south.261 Akragas itself, modern Agrigento, was the second city of Sicily after Syracuse, a magnificent Dorian sub-colony whose fame overshadowed that of its metropolis Gela.262 The strictly maintained neutrality of Ta.vTTjv. (The verb avvoiKil^w is found both with and without els). But Diodorus' placing of re is sometimes imprecise, cf. e.g. 4. 80. 4. 259

See Goarelli and Torelli 1987: 106-107; Baghin 1991: I 0 Selinus (a wealthy place to judge from its temples), was a daughter-colony of Megara Hyblaia and thus a granddaughter of Megara in old Greece. So why no athletic victors or epinikians? There was anoticeably and intriguingly semiticflavour to its religion, seejameson et al. 1993: ch. 9, but in view of the cultural heterogeneity of Himera, which did produce athletes and generate epinikian poetry, it would be a mistake to build explanations on this. Not all negative phenomena can be explained, except perhaps by reminding ourselves that our evidence is seriously incomplete. 261 ButVerdenius 1987: 92 presses iv-novrio (at 0. 12. 3) too hard as evidence that Himera was what he rather quaintly calls a 'sea-side town', though it certainly was one. This ignores what follows about battles and political assemblies on land. Pindar is saying no more than that Fortune is important by land and sea, terra manque. 262 por recent archaeological work at Akragas see F. de Angelis, AR 2000-1: 180 (esp. on the temple of Zeus Olympics which, it is thought, may not after all commemorate Theron's victory over the Carthaginians at the battle of Himera in 480 EG; it could be rather earlier). There is a fine sketch of Akragas in Zuntz 1971: i8if, introducing his discussion of the katharmoi of Empedokles. Diodorus' long account of the wealth, luxury and frivolity of Akragas (13. 81—84, fr°m Timaios) is as amusing as it is informative. Overshadowing of Gela: Pol. 9. 27. 7—8 (with Walbank 1957—79: 2.159f) makes Akragas aRhodian colony and ignores Gela altogether; cf. Pindar Fug, where the scholiast says that Theron's own ancestors did not come to Gela at all but to Akragas direct from Rhodes, and then quotes Pindar: 'they settled in Rhodes . . . Having set out from there they inhabit a lofty city' [i.e. Akragas], av &e rP68ov Gf. Andrewes 1957 (article on/wfraz'atRhodian Kameiros) 31-2. Akragas coins and Pi.: Rutter 2001 a: 75. 260


197

wealthy, frivolous Akragas in the years of the Athenian invasion of Sicily (Th. 7. 33. 2, 58. i) was a severe blow for the Athenians who surely hoped to bring in the Akragantines against their rivals the Syracusans, in view of the diplomatic success of the Athenian Phaiax in the late 4208, when he briefly won over the Akragantines to an alliance (Th. 5. 4. 6). It is not surprising that this rich city's ruler Theron and his family the Emmenidai should be the subjects of four of Pindar's epinikian odes, including two of his greatest, Olympians 2 and 3, which celebrate a chariot-victory by Theron himself in 476. (For another, recently-attested, Emmenid at Sicilian Kamarina see above.) There are also Pythian 6, for the chariot victory at Delphi of Theron's brother Xenokrates in 490, one of Pindar's earliest commissions, and Isthmian 2 which is addressed to Thrasyboulos of Akragas and celebrates chariotvictories of Thrasyboulos' father Xenokrates, brother of the tyrant Theron of Akragas (lines 36ff.). It has been speculatively suggested that the amazingly beautiful marble charioteer discovered at Carthaginian Motya in 1979 (Fig. 3), the small island off the west end of Sicily, has a connection with this poem, and represents either Xenokrates' Athenian charioteer Nikomachos263 or even perhaps Thrasyboulos himself. It is surely right that it is a charioteer (rather than, say, a cult official as some have thought); it is also much likelier to be of Greek not Carthaginian origin. The statue will then have found its way to Motya as booty after Akragas was sacked by the Carthaginians in 406 (Diod. 13. 8iff.; see esp. 90. 4 for the removal of the most valuable works of art to Carthage). More than that we cannot safely say.264 Finally, we have a fragment (Fi24a-b) of a sympotic poem for this same Thrasyboulos, the nephew of Theron: Pindar sends a 'chariot of lovely songs for after 265 But dinner', Pindar says very little about the city itself in any of these poems; Akragas is merely 'famous' (fcAetvav, cf. 0. 3. 2) and 'a holy dwelling-place on the 263 For Nikomachos as an Athenian see the scholiast at Drachmann 1903-27: 3. 218 (but the Athenian material at lines igff- could possibly have given rise to this conjecture by the scholiast). 264 For the suggestion in the text see Bell 1995, an excellent study of the statue and its possible literary associations. For other suggestions see Bonacasa and Buttita 1988. Bell's theory is an involved and unashamedly imaginative one (he even has Pindar going to the potters' quarter in Athens after writing the poem and commissioning a vase by the Brygos painter depicting Alkaios and Sappho, as a present for Thrasyboulos: p. 25). If we want to attach the Motya statue to a particular poem, charioteer, and victory, /. 2 certainly offers attractive possibilities, but the boring truth is that without a dedicatory inscription no guess can be more thanjust that: a guess. 265 See van Groningen 1960: 84-103, 'les illusions d'ivresse: pour Thrasybule d'Acragas'.

i98


FIGURE 3 The Motya charioteer.


199

river', tepov . . . oiV^jua rroraôv (0. 2. 9, cf. P. 6. 6 for 'Akragas on its river', rroraîq. AKpa.-ya.vri; and for the eponymous river cf. Th. 6. 4. 4 and the coins: Rutter aooia: 75). Pindar's fullest praise for Akragas is found in another very early ode, a short piece not written for an athletic victory at all or for one of the Emmenidai but for a triumph by a private citizen in a musical event, namely Pythian 12 which celebrates the success at Delphi of the Akragantine oboist Midas. The ode266 begins with an invocation of Akragas, city and nymph,267

'I beseech you, lover of splendor, loveliest of mortals' cities, abode of Persephone, you who dwell upon the well-built height above the banks of the Akragas, where sheep graze . . .' (P. 12.1-3)

The allusion to Persephone is appropriate in a general way because Demeter and her daughter Kore/Persephone, the 'goddesses who protected Sicily' as Diodorus calls them in his narrative of Agathokles (20. 7. a),268 were so prominent in Sicilian cult.269 But it was specially apt for Akragas because of the rich and important sanctuary of the chthonian deities, in which the two goddesses were worshipped and in which so many votive offerings, such as sculptured female 'busti', have been found, probably representing Persephone, goddess of the underworld, rather than her mother.270 We have seen (p. 89) that in Olympians 2 and 3, the odes for Theron, Pindar shows definite knowledge of the afterlife beliefs known as Orphism. The underworld and the afterlife were a main preoccupation of another great and another difficult fifthcentury poet, the local Akragantine philosopher Empedokles, in his Katharmoi or Purifications.'111 As with Pindar, so with Empedokles (see 266

For a close study of this poem and its double myth see Kohnken 1971: 117-153. In the year ofwntmg(200i) an Italian translation of these lines introduces the enormous display which greets the visitor to the site museum at Agngento/Akragas. 268 Zuntz 1971: 155, also discussing Plut. Ttmol. 8. 269 M. H.jjameson], 'Sicily and Magna Graecia, cults and mythology', in OCD". See also Wilamowitz 1922: 229 n. 3, citing Hdt. 7.153 and other evidence, and noting that Bacchyhdes begins his Ode 3 for Hiero with an invocation of Demeter and her daughter (but note that in F47 Bacchylides departs from the usual tradition and makes Krete not Sicily the island from which Persephone was abducted). 270 Zuntz 1971: 150—7. Gf. 88—9 and 183 for the sanctuary Goarelh and Torelh 1987: 149 (site of sanctuary) and 157 ('busti' with the polos head-dress). 271 Zuntz 1971: 181-274; Parker 1983: 299-301. 267

2oo


below), there is a definite connection between athletic success and the afterlife; the connection of thought goes back to the Funeral Games for Patroklos in book 23 of Homer's Iliad. Life is affirmed in the face of its opposite; indeed the games as we have seen in Chapter i (pp. 5f) may themselves have their origin in death ritual, and the connection continued thereafter. 272 In the opening lines of the Katharmoi, Empedokles claims for himself some sort of immortality: '

O

O

An immortal god, mortal no more, I am going about honoured by all, as is fitting (for me), (by being) garlanded with fillets and verdant wreaths. (DK3i,Aii2) 273

The language here used is unmistakably athletic. With line 3 we may compare the verb eVcuviow used of the decorating of Brasidas 'like an athlete' (Th. 4. 121. i), or the reception of Pericles after the coercion of Samos (Plut. Per. 28. 5), the women 'bound garlands and fillets roundSamos (Plut. Per. 28. 5), the women 'bound garlands and fillets round him like a victorious athlete', aT€dvois dveSovv KO.I raiviais waTrep Brasidas, at least, is later given cult honours as an honorary oikist (Th. 5. n. i, Amphipolis): that is, the quasi-athlete Brasidas, like the real athlete Theagenes (above, p. 157) transcends the normal human limits, though only after death. But Empedokles' baffling boast274 of actual divinity in his lifetime takes him over the presumptuous edge against which Pindar warned in Isthmian 5 ('mortal things are suitable for mortals', OvardOvaToianrpeTTei, line 16). If we ask where Empedokles learned thus to express the idea of divinity in the language of athletic success, we need look no further than the successes at Olympia of his own family. His like-named grandfather Empedokles son of Exainetos won the chariot race in 496, the same glorious year in which his son, another Exainetos and uncle of the philosopher, won the wrestling event.275 At the end of the same century, another Akragantine Exainetos, surely a descendant or relation,276 won the stadion 272

Meuh 1941- See above, Gh. i p. 6 n. 10, also citing Kurke 1991 and Segal 1986. Tr. from Zuntz 1971: 192. So baffling that Alan Griffiths refuses to accept that it is really Empedokles talking about himself and suspects a Pythagoras redimvus. 275 Moretti nos. 170 and 167. 276 In the west, the name is confined to Akragas and to the three members of this family. 273

274


201

277

at Olympia twice. On the second occasion this man made history by the spectacular way he entered the city at his homecoming: 'he was conducted into the city in a chariot and in the procession there were, among other things, three hundred chariots each drawn by white horses, all the chariots belonging to citizens of Akragas' (Diod. 13. 82.7). This adventus or processional entry suggests that Empedokles was not the only member of his family to ignore Pindar's advice about 'thinking mortal thoughts'. In the west, the dogma resisted elsewhere in this chapter, about Pindar preferring Dorian patrons, has rather more force than in Greece proper.278 But we have seen that Himera, the adopted home of Ergoteles of Olympian 12, had a mixed population from the start, and that this included a Ghalkidic i.e. Ionian element.279 Olympian 12, it must be insisted, is among other things a poem about Himera, it is not just 'praise for the victor' Ergoteles.280 And were there really no lonians left in Katane at all after it was renamed and 'refounded' as Aitna? (Gf. JV. i and 9.) Population transfers and resettlements are rarely complete. Over the water in south Italy, Metapontion, one of whose citizens was celebrated by Bacchylides, was neither Dorian nor Ionian but Achaian—but the truth is that the city's foundation legends are complex.281 In general the Sicilian colonies struck outsiders as mixed to a special degree (see Th. 6. 17. 2 in the mouth of Alkibiades). A less tendentious way of putting that would be to say these attractive cities were cosmopolitan, just like the epinikian poets who visited and admired them. The Peloponnesepart two: Korinth andArgos We have seen that Pindar's poetry, and Thucydides' own personal contacts at the great Greek games, especially Olympia, were an obvious source of the historian's knowledge about the west. Another source of knowledge for Thucydides about Sicily in general and Syracuse 277 Moretti nos. 341 and 346. Under no. 346 Moretti gives the factual information about the reception ofExainetos but not the Diodorus reference for it (13. 82. 7), only the reference for the bare Diodoran statement of the victory (13. 34. i). For Exainetos' reception as excess see Gardiner 1930: 99. 278 The problem (if it is a problem) is not just a literary one. Where in Moretti are the victors from, for instance, 5th-cent. Leontini? The situation may have been different in the 6th cent.; see above, p. 22 for Ibykos. 279 Note also that Theron's additional settlers (above, p. 195) consisted of'Dorians andany others who so wished: Diod. 11. 49. 3. 280 281 Silk in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). Above, Gh. 4pp. ngf.

2O2


and its sub-colonies in particular was Syracuse's founding metropolis, 'wealthy Korinth' (above, p. 56 for the epithet), a city about which he was unusually well informed in certain respects. He gives plenty of personal names of commanders, patronymics, and so forth, and offers rich information about Korinth's past naval history and insights into their close relationship with Syracuse, which extended to the borrowing of innovations in ship construction as late as 413 BG (Th. 7. 36. 2). It was this closeness which made it natural for the Syracusans in the mid-fourth century to seek a second founder from their original eighth-century founders the Korinthians, who obliged by sending out Timoleon.282 But Thucydides gives us very little insight into internal politics at Korinth. Thus D. M. Lewis wrote in 1981 of'Corinth, the great Greek city of whose inner life we know the least'.283 Pindar, by contrast, has what seems to be a tantalizing hint that stasis was not just a risk but a reality even among the prosperous and perhaps slightly smug Korinthians (cf. above, p. 78): the surviving fragment of a dithyramb plausibly thought to have been written for the Korinthians (F7oc, where aKo-n-eAos at line 10 is thought to be the Akrokorinth) begins with the words Jotro juev ardais (dot under first omicron: Lavecchia p. 42). Apparently civil strife is being contrasted with something else, perhaps the peaceful dance (cf. JTroSa, 'foot' at line 4) on the Akrokorinth, site of an important sanctuary of Demeter and Kore. Dionysos, the peacelover (E. Ba. 417-20), may have shared their cult.284 But we can go further: the first four letters are clearly part of an optative verb which is most naturally supplemented as showing that this is not a vague war/ peace polarity, but a real expression of a hope that actual, current, stasis may be brought to an end. The letters ..]OITO ought to be part of some expression like KaraXv] OITO or ^T) yeVjoi-ro (van der Weiden and Zimmermann respectively; Peter Wilson suggests StaAujotro). 285 Of known athletic victors from Korinth, Agesandridas, who won the boy's stadion at Olympia in 472,286 is just a name to us (and 282

For Th.'s good information about aspects of Kormthian history and about individual Korinthians see Stroud 1994- For Timoleon and Korinth see Hornblower 2002^: 115. 283 Lewis 1997:12 [orig. 1981:73], cited approvingly by Stroud 1994: 2791". n.i8.InStroud's dense and valuable 38-page article on Thucydides and Korinth, Pindar is never mentioned once, although I hope to show that he provides a valuable complement to Th. 284 For the interpretation here followed see Lavecchia 2000: 218—28. 285 Van der Weiden 1991:109; Zimmermann 1988: 22 n. 10; Wilson 2002. Lavecchia 219 is non-committal but approves the general approach implied by all these attempts. 286 p Qxy_ 222 col. I line 27, printing Jrai'SpiSa? with a dot under the tau;Jacoby (FGrHist 415) prints |/ly^] aav&pi&as with a dot under the first Sigma, but lists other possibilities in his apparatus.

The Peloponmse (part two)

203

strictly not even that, because although he is listed in the Lexicon of Greek Personal Names under alpha, the name is broken at the beginning and the papyrus may actually have read -tandridas or -gandridas rather than -sandridas. Moretti no. 229 more cautiously lists him as ' [ . . . ] TANDRIDAS di Gorinto'). We know rather more about Xenophon of Korinth, victor in the stadion and pentathlon, whom Pindar celebrated in a fine epinikian ode, Olympian 13, and in an after-dinner drinking-song preserved in part by Athenaios (Fi22);287 his athletically illustrious family the Oligaithidai were also celebrated in a victory ode by Simonides.288 Xenophon's father's name is Thessalos and his grandfather's name is Ptoiodoros (lines 35 and 41), names suggesting wide international contacts (Thessaly and Boiotia respectively). Olympian 13 in its historical aspect is excellently analysed by Catherine Morgan in a forthcoming study, where she shows how closely Xenophon and his family identify with the achievements of their city.289 That city, it should be remembered, was rich from agriculture as well as trade;290 Olympian 13 should not be pressed too hard as evidence for Pindar's admiration for Korinthian industry and craftsmanship.291 Although there is an exceptionally high total of Korinthian names and patronymics in Thucydides,292 the family of Xenophon does not actually feature among them. Nor, conversely, does there seem to be an athletic aspect to the careers of the distinguished Korinthian pair Aristeus and his father Adeimantos, who are so prominent in both Herodotus and Thucydides.293 But there is another Korinthian Aristeus in Thucydides, thesonofPellichos(i. 29. 2). 294 He is a general. Now the name /TeAAtxos is exceedingly rare (just the one entry in the published volumes of the Lexicon of Greek Personal Names]; but curiously 287 See the commentary of van Groningen 1960: 19-30. For the categorization of the poem (not an encomium, despite Snell—Maehler and Race) see above, Gh. i p. 18 n. 58. 288 Barrett 1978. 289 Morgan in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). Gf. below, pp. 242, 265 n. 536. 290 Hornblower 2001: 114; Morgan in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). 291 Hubbard 1986: 48 and 2001: 391 sees 0.13 as evidence that Pindar 'valued the world of industry and techne\ this is based chiefly on lines 17—23 which praise 'technical innovations'. See also Salmon 1984: 401. The first of these innovations is the dithyramb, hardly the right sort of evidence for the thesis being advanced. The other two are the bridle and bit (on this part of the poem see the classic discussion of Detienne and Vernant 1978: ch. 7), and an architectural feature which remains obscure (see Salmon 1984: 401 n.i4). If it were not for Hdt. 2.167. 2 (the Korinthians despise craftsmen less than do other Greeks) I doubt if anyone would think of reading 0. 13 this way. 292 Stroudig94:26gf. 293 Hornblower 1996: I35f. 294 This pair are not discussed by Stroud 1994.

204


enough there is a statue of 'Pellichos the Korinthian general' in a treatise by Lucian, the Philopseudes or 'Fantasist' (paras. 18-19. LGPNÂ assumes the identity of Thucydides' and Lucian's Pellichos). The title of the treatise is not encouraging, and the historicity of the anecdote, which attributes curative powers to the statue, is far from secure. But Pellichos' statue is said to wear 'fillets and withered leaves', 'raivias KM ar€(/)dvovs %-rjpovs e'xovra, and the personal name is a surprisingly authentic touch.295 So behind this odd item there may be a genuine tradition that the Korinthian general Pellichos was or was represented as a victorious athlete. Pindar probably wrote a dithyramb for the Argives as well as for the Korinthians. The poem (Fyoa) mentions 'great Argos', also Abas, twelfth king of Argos (cf. P. 8. 55). Intriguingly, in view of the destruction of Mykenai by the Argives in the 4608 (Diod. n. 65),296 the poem seems to allude to Mykenai at the point where it alludes to the Kyklopes (line 6 K] iwAoWcov), who built the walls of Mykenai (E. IA 1499 and other testimonia).297 But there is not much left of this poem and we can not safely go further. Pindar also wrote a paian for the Argives (Paian 18 = F52S = 87 Rutherford). Like Nemean 10 (below) this claimed the Dioskouroi for Argos.298 More securely, Pindar wrote a victory ode for a victor from Argos, Theaios, who won the wrestling event in the local games to Hera (N. 10; see above, p. 13 for these games).299 Bacchylides has no epinikians for Argives, but we have seen (pp. 123-8) that he did elsewhere talk about the cults and religious pretensions of Argos (F/j.). Though Argos' population, prosperity and political fortunes fluctuate a good deal in the fifth century,300 Theaios was not a flash in the athletic pan because plenty of other Argive victors are attested. At Olympia alone we know of a victor in the boy's wrestling of 480,301 Dandis, victor in the stadion of 472 (and later victories),302 Epitimadas in the pankration of 468,303 Ladas in the dolichos of 460 (this man was one of the most famous runners of all anti295

For this sort of onomastic accuracy in writers of fiction cf. Crawford 2000. See Fontenrose 1968 for other, similar, stories about statues of athletes. 296 Lewis CAHf 107,109; Hall 1995. 297 Lavecchiaaooo: 97. 298 Rutherford 20011425. 299 On N. 10 in its historical setting see Catherine Morgan in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). 300 Hornblower 20020: ch. 7. For B., Argos, and Phleious see Fearn 2003. 301 P Oxy. 222 (= FGrHist^) col. I line 2, \_-~\KUIV. 302 Diod. n. 53. i andPOxy. 222 (=FGrHist^) col. I line 8. 303 P Oxy. 222 (= FGrHist^) col. I line 39.

The Peloponmse (part two)

205 304

quity and gave his name to a great race-horse of modern times), and Gheimon in the wrestling of 448.305 In addition, there were two victories of the 'Argive people' in the single-horse and four-horse-chariot events, in 480 and 472.306 Note that these victories by the'people's horses'need not imply anything very democratic about Argos at the time, but they do show how little we know about the political and social situation at classical Argos.307 Argive ambitions in the middle of the fifth century BG took the form of assertiveness with respect to the Nemean games, which were run by Kleonai. Control of Kleonai thus became crucial in the rivalry between the Korinthians and Argives. This aspect of the 'First Peloponnesian War' is a topic I discuss in the final section of the present chapter, that on 'polities' (below, pp. 263f.). Nemean 10 begins with praise of Argos, "Hpas Swâ Oeoirpeires, 'home of Hera and fit for a goddess' (line 2), and culminates in the account of the decision of Polydeukes to bring his twin brother Kastor back to life on alternate days, thus rejecting Zeus' alternative offer that he himself should have uninterrupted immortality—a wonderful depiction of selfless brotherly love. The dialogue between Zeus and Polydeukes is, rather unusually for Pindar, in direct speech; for this feature see below, pp. 324f The cult of the Dioskouroi Kastor and Polydeukes was firmly established at Argos, where they had at least two sanctuaries.308 Plutarch (Greek Question^, Mor. 296 e-f, perhaps drawing on the hellenistic writer Sokrates of Argos) says that at Argos Kastor was called 'half a founder', and was believed by the Argives to be buried in their territory. Polydeukes by contrast was worshipped as an Olympian god.309 So there is no doubt that Pindar's stress on the Dioskouroi was entirely appropriate. But the Dioskouroi were also and more famously 'stewards of 304 Moretti no.260, rightly concluding that he was an Argive not a Spartan. Ladas the racehorse won the Derby in 1894, and was owned by prime minister Lord Rosebery. 305 Paus. 6. 9. 3 an&POxy. 222 (= FGrHistî^) col. II line 28, spelling him Kimon. 306 P Oxy. 222 (=FGrHist 415) col. I lines 6 and 31; under 472 (his p. 308 line 5) Jacoby's \Ayp\fiiov is a misprint for \Apy\eiu>v. See Meiggs and Andrewes 1951: 151 and 359, index IV. 3. 4, entry 'counter-revolution at Argos'. 307 Forrest 1960^: 226, citing the analogy of the victory proclaimed in the name of the Boiotian people, ava.KT}pvyBivras Bouoruiv Sripoaiov, at Th. 5. 50. 4, for which see below, P-273308 Tomhnson 1972: 213. 309 Halhday 1928: 116—20. At 119 he writes 'Kastor is called imxarchagetas, because, as compared with the Olympian Polydeukes, he is not a complete archagetas'.

206


spacious Sparta', evpvxopov raîai H-n-dpras, as Pindar himself calls them (line 52), and it was an interesting transfer to make them the myth of an Argive-centred poem. The adroitly managed link between Argos and Sparta, and between the mythical world and the family of the athlete whom Pindar celebrates, is the hospitality shown to the Dioskouroi by Theaios' ancestor Pamphaes (lines 49-50). This story of the Argive reception of a Spartan cult is oblique and tactful, but it nevertheless asserts the Spartan origin of the Dioskouroi310 while acknowledging that they were also fully at home in Argos. Whether Sparta was on good or bad terms with the ruling element at Argos at the time, Pindar seems clearly to be placing the two cities on the same high level. The extent of the romantic (Thucydides would have said preposterous) Argive dream of recovering their ancient hegemony over the Peloponnese did not become clear until after 421 and the peace of Nikias (Th. 5. 28. 2, more fully Diod. 12. 75), and it would be wrong to retroject this automatically to the time of Pindar.311 But for Pindar one criterion of greatness is colonizing activity, and he certainly sees Argos as a colonizing power (in mythical times it 'established many cities in Egypt', TroAAa S' Alyv-mw KaraoiKiaev aarr], line 5).312 And in praising Macedonian kings (p. 180) he is not likely to have forgotten their Argive descent, recorded by both Herodotus and Thucydides (5. 80, see above, p. 14). We have noticed earlier in the present chapter (p. 157) yet another Argive claim to the status of colonizing power, namely as mother-city of Knossos and Tylissos on Krete. But this tie is known only from an inscription—a reminder of how incomplete our literary record is where kinship connexions are concerned. Megara Finally, there is Megara. The fifth-century city was not as insignificant as Peloponnesian Phleious, but it was the metropolis of a much greater city, Byzantion, and this (cf. above on Argos) gave it a significance beyond itself which is not likely to have been lost on the colonially-minded Pindar. We can even point to a possible context for the celebration of this colonial link. From a papyrus fragment of Pindar which has been known only since its publication in the mid twentieth century (F6a-b) 310

Halliday 1928:118. See Hornblower 20020: 77-85 for 5th-cent. Argos. And note that Kastor was supposedly regarded as 'half a founder', cf. text above and n. 309. As so often in Pindar, colonization is present both explicitly and implicitly; see above, p. 27. Argos as metropolis ofRhodes: p. 132 andn. 7. Of Aigina: p. 13. 311

312

Megara

207

comes the surprising information that a Megarian was victorious at the Isthmian games, held not far from Megara, and that Pindar wrote a victory poem for him. As with the Phleiasian victor at the Nemean games (above), closeness to the sanctuary may be relevant. These, surely, are the circles the rich well-born Thucydides moved in and got information from, especially in exile. That is an important overlap between his and Pindar's worlds. In an age without newspapers or television, panhellenic festivals were prime places for making announcements and generally for what we would call elite networking. Isocrates in 380 BG noted that the great festivals were places for 'reviving old guest-friendships313 and making new ones',

31* (See above, pp. 43, 180 for Pindar and his guest-friendships).

Individuals and places (B): Aigina, Sparta, Kyrene, and Athens Four places are of such importance, in epinikian poetry or in historical writing, as to deserve separate treatment: Aigina, Sparta, Kyrene, and Athens. There are overlaps and differences between Pindar and Thucydides, some of the differences historically explicable. Aigina When considering Paian 6 in its Molossian aspect we quoted from it Pindar's evocation of Aigina, 'island whose name is famous indeed, you live and rule in the Dorian sea, O shining star of Zeus Hellanios' (p. 177). These lines do not come from a victory ode or even a poem written mainly for the Aiginetans (though it opens the third triad now known to have been entitled 'for the Aiginetans'). It is however in the victory odes that Aigina comes into its own for our purposes. No fewer than eleven315 of Pindar's forty-four victory odes—and we can add two 313 For such guest-friendships or ritualized friendships see Herman 1987 and Mitchell 1997; also G. H[erman], 'friendship, ritualized' in OCD3. 314 Isoc. 4. 43; Herman 1987: 45 and app. A; Willcock 1995: n315 Note also the fragmentary Pindaric Isthmian ode F4 to Meidias of Aigina; the evidence is a quotation from a scholiast on /. 5. The name Af(V)i§(i)aj was conjecturally restored by Wilamowitz from the manuscript which has the dative form Mi&a). See Wilamowitz 1922: 169 n. 2, accepted by implication in LGPN 3A, which registers another Aigmetan Meidias, from the late hellenistic period. Paian 6 as a double poem: Rutherford 306, 336-8.

208


of Bacchylides' sixteen (12 and 13)—are dedicated to victors from the important island of Aigina, nearly all of whose names are known to us (the anonymous exceptions are the subjects of one fragmentary poem each by Pindar and Bacchylides).316 There is a real sense in which this figure can be multiplied several times over because of the degree to which the Aiginetan 'clans' or -n-drpai, apparently patrilineal groups larger than the oikos, feature in Pindar's Aiginetan odes. Other kinship groups feature in the odes (the genos of the lamidai at Arkadian Stymphalos, for instance, or the oikos of the Emmenidai at Akragas),317 but to an unusual extent these Aiginetan victories are treated as collective victories of the entire clan.318Just why Aigina was such a centre of elite competition is an interesting question; but we should not forget that it takes the form of athletic rather than equestrian activity on the evidence of the victory odes, all of which are for events like wrestling and the pankration. This was not a landed horse-breeding elite like those of Sicily or Thessaly or even Athens. In the first part of this section I ask 'why Aigina?' , that is, why did Pindar (and Bacchylides) write so many odes for Aiginetans? Then I shall consider Aiginetan politics andprosopography. Herodotus rather than Thucydides will be the control here. Why Aigina? There are really two related questions, why did the Aiginetans go in for sport so much, and why did Pindar write about them so much? But there is little evidence outside Pindar and to a lesser extent Bacchylides for Aiginetans as sportsmen. The two in Ebert's collection of inscribed athletic epigrams, Theognetos and Pherias, are known to us already from Pindar and Pausanias respectively.319 (For Theognetos see also Simonides, FGE XXX.) The question is in the end a Pindaric one: after all, Olympic victory lists show several Kretans but there is no victory ode for a Kretan as such (0. 12 is for a man who had left Krete for Sicily). One way of explaining Aigina's prominence in Pindar is by pointing to the kinship connection between Pindar's home city Thebes and Aigina, symbolized by the myth which made the nymphs Thebe and 316 Simonides' poem for Krios of Aigina (PMGôy) may have been less than encomiastic, 317 though it probably did have an athletic aspect, see above, p. 23. pp. :83f. and 197. 318 Parker 1996: 63 n. 26, noting esp. P. 8. 35—8 and /. 6. 62—3. On Dorianpatml see also Andrewes 1957 (Kamiros on Rhodes). 319 Pi. P. 8. 36; Paus. 6. 9. i and 6. 14. 12; Ebert 1972: nos. 12 and 19.

Aigina

209

Aigina into daughters of the river-god Asopos and thus sisters (see o o o i^ \ p. 118 for this relationship, expressed in for instance /. 8). Since the appearance of G. P. Jones's pioneering book on 'kinship diplomacy' in iggg 320 it is no longer possible to ignore this aspect of Greek history as trivial and sentimental. Both Herodotus (5. 79ff.) and Thucydides (3. 64. 3)321 are aware of this sisterly relationship, so it is not just an ad hoc invention of Pindar, although we must always reckon with the possibility that the two historians drew on the poet. Genuinely close ties between the two places are surely relevant to Pindar's marked attention to Aiginetan victors. Note however that this argument will not work for Bacchylides' two Aiginetan victors, because he did not come from Thebes. But Carey has shown that the kinship theme was weaker for Bacchylides than for Pindar; there is only one such invocation in Bacchylides and it is not very forcefully put (5. 11).322 Again, it has been argued that it was 'wealth of heroic saga' which drew Pindar to Aigina.323 This has some truth in it: Pindar's own Thebes was exceptionally rich in myth and the Thebes-Aigina link discussed above provides an easy bridge to the maritime counterpart of landlocked Boiotia. But surely the huge percentage of Aiginetan odes needs more byway of explanation than mere abundance of poetic and heroic material available. It is sometimes said that Pindar liked the Aiginetans justbecause they were archetypal Dorians. Aigina, it is said, was Pindar's ideal polis.324 So they were, and so perhaps it was, but this argument needs careful handling for reasons I set out above when discussing Ionian Chios (p. 155): Pindar was quite capable of celebrating the right sort of lonians. Let us examine the character of Pindar's Aiginetan patrons more closely. Gregory Nagy has attempted to assimilate the Aiginetan 'aristocratic families' celebrated by Pindar to actual tyrants.325 I find this attempt interesting but strained. As indicated in an earlier chapter (Ch. i pp. agf. and n. 101), it is neither necessary nor desirable to collapse all Pindaric individuals or communities into each other; elite mobility may have brought Kretans to Sicily (as in 0. 12) and Rhodians to south Italy (like Dorieus);326 but that does not mean that these places were indistinguishable or had identical social and political 320 322 324 326

Jones 1999. Carey 1995: 93. Race 1986: 101. See pp. 157, 136.

321 323 325

Hornblower 1991: 458f., n. on the passage. Gf. above p. 118. Game-Ross 1985: 67; cf. Mullen 1982: 144. Nagy 1990: 175-80.

21 o


structures. Nagy is aware throughout that Aigina is a 'difficult case' for his tyranny thesis;327 and his closing formulation explicitly draws back from suggesting that Pindar's Aiginetans were actual tyrants: ' [r] ather the point is simply that there was a pervasive thematic parallelism between the reality of an athlete's victory and the potential of a tyrant's power'.328 Put as weakly as that, the point is hard to quarrel with. But earlier in the relevant chapter, Nagy seems clearly to hanker for the stronger Aiginetan-victors-as-tyrants view when he argues that Pindar wrote for what was in historical reality a 'closed and specially privileged group within their own aristocratic communities'.329 He does not consider the point made above, about the absence of equestrian victors from Aigina. This absence may (paradoxically, given that Athens was a sort of democracy after 500) mean that Athens is a better place than Aigina to look for tyrants, would-be-tyrants or quasi-tyrants (see further below). Let us try another tack. For the activity of the Aiginetans celebrated by Pindar (and Bacchylides, I assume) Robin Osborne330 offers a double motivation. First, he says that the Pindaric evidence 'suggests an elite keen to surpass each other in conspicuous expenditure, both on competing in the games in the first place and on celebrating their victories'. In a way this does no more than restate in different words the known fact that these people won victories at the games and that Pindar wrote odes for them. Osborne's second point is more interesting and would be important if it could be established. He suggests that Aiginetan commitment to Pindaric values of the kind the games represented are in contrast with 'what Athenians were choosing in the same period'. I wonder about this. True, there is a heavy preponderance of Aigina in the lists of Pindaric victors. It is nevertheless Athens, not Aigina, which produced an equestrian victor for Pindar to commemorate, in the form of Megakles who is celebrated in Pythian 7. In other ways too the contrast should not be overdone. We shall discuss below the evidence for Pindar's and Bacchylides' other odes for Athenians, and for Pindar's poem for a victor in the Athenian Oschophoria (pp. 252ff). And we must not treat Pindar (and Bacchylides) as the only statistical recourse. In the 327

328 329 Nagy 1990:175,181. Nagy 1990:187. Nagy 1990: 176, repeated 180. Osborne 1996: 326. (He says that Pindar wrote 'some nine odes for eight different Aiginetans'. That is rather imprecise: for 'some nine' read 'eleven andperhaps atwelfth', see n. 315 above for Meidias. Bacchylides should also be factored in. We also need to recall the victories of ancestors and other kinsmen, mentioned in passing. 330

Aigina

211

period covered by Pindar's odes (roughly 500 to 446) there are several further Athenian victors not celebrated by Pindar (and no further Aiginetans in the same category) listed in Moretti's Olympionikai: alongside Pindar's Megakles we must place Kallias son of Hipponikos who won the four-horse chariot event at Olympia in 500, 496, and 492 (or 496, 492, and 484), an unrelated Kallias son of Didymion who won the pankration in 472, and [—]los of Athens who won the hoplite race in 468.331 Finally, Osborne's expression 'in the same period' is a little imprecise: Pindar's Aiginetan odes extend right down to 446 from the time of the Persian Wars and perhaps even earlier. We shall see that political tension between Athenians and Aiginetans is indeed a feature of the whole fifth century until 431 BC, and Osborne ingeniously sees the revised sculptural themes on the temple of Aphaia at Aigina as a hit at Athenian pretensions, a hit endorsed by Pindar (I do not find the detail of his argument convincing here).332 But it is not easy to see this tension in terms of straightforward conflict of values. For one thing, some of the time Pindar insists not on Athenian/Aiginetan tension but on the closeness of ties between Athenian trainers and Aiginetan athletes, notably in his etymological joke (N. 5. 49, about Menandros the Athenian trainer of Pytheas of Aigina) that a 'fashioner of athletes ought to come from Athens', *£pr\ S' O.TT' HOavdv TSKTOV'deÂ^TCucnv ejUfiev, the apparent point of this being that both words begin with 'ath-. A variant of Osborne's position is Thomas Hubbard's attempt to characterise the Aiginetan patrons of Pindar as a 'problematized elite', 331 Moretti 1957: nos. 164, 169, 176, 228, 245. For the dates of Kallias Hipponikou's victories see Davies 1971: 258. I do not include Phrymchos (victor in the boys' wrestling in 456), tentatively assigned to Athens by Moretti, following Janell, on the grounds that the name Phrynichos is frequent in Attica. This is unsound: true, there are thirty-eight pi)vi-ôi of all periods in LGPJV 2 (Attica), but in vols. i, 3A, and 38 there are twenty, ten and nine respectively. Moretti's Phrynichos is not listed mLGPNz. 332 The argument (Osborne 1996: 326, as above) goes that on their new temple the Aiginetans replaced a myth in which Aigina was symbolized as a woman desirable to the gods with episodes which put Aigina at the centre of legendary warfare in which the Greeks were united. So far so good (an assertive panhellenic theme). But Osborne goes on to argue that in the process the Aiginetans 'claimed, as Pindar's odes do also (/V. 4 and 5) Aias for Aigina rather than for Athens (where one of Kleisthenes' new tribes had recently been named after him)'. But Aias himself is not mentioned at all in JV. 5, and in JV. 4. 35 he 'holds the paternal home of Salamis' i.e. Salamis near Attica as opposed to Gypriot Salamis alluded to inline 46. After the end of the sixth century everyone knew that the Athenians now controlled Salamis so I do not see that this claims Aias for Aigina in any anti-Athenian sense. It is certainly right that Aias' family the Aiakidai are all over the place in Pindar's Aiginetan odes, but in that case I do not see why N. 4 and 5 are singled out by Osborne. In any case if Aiakidai myths are supposed to be anti-Athenian it is odd that the clearly political P. 8 of 446 (below, p. 231) is the only Aiginetan ode without an Aiakid myth.

212


meaning new-rich families who aspired to traditional landed status.333 Hubbard does see that the Aiginetans were 'not landed aristocrats and did not compete in equestrian events'; he thinks that Pindar celebrates them because he values the success brought by trade and commerce.334 Behind Hubbard lies the full-length monograph on Aigina by Figueira (ig8i).335 This old 'commercial Aigina' or 'mercantile aristocracy' position (as in effect it is) was challenged long ago by de Ste Groix in a long footnote in 1972, though the full treatment there promised remained unpublished at the time of his death in February 2000. But it has long existed, and is forthcoming in a chapter in a posthumous collection of essays to appear in 2OO4.336 This is an unusual sort of argument, where neither side is even aware of the other. De Ste Groix's very thorough chapter was written in the 19608, even before the new evidence about Sostratos of Aigina came to light (see below). He never revised it or showed any knowledge of Figueira's book. Equally, Figueira and those who follow him are naturally unaware of de Ste Groix's unpublished detailed arguments,337 some of which still have force, especially some details of his discussion of the evidence of Pindar. Nevertheless it must I think be conceded that de Ste Groix was too absolute in his insistence that the oligarchy of Aigina in c. 600-450 BG was a 'rich land-owning class of archaic type'.338 Figueira more plausibly concludes that the Aiginetan elite must in fact have been involved in the island's undoubted commercial activity, not just as passive consumers and participants.339 Pindar is crucial to the argument here, in two ways: through maritime metaphors and imagery, and through stress on xenia, hospitality or guest-friendship. As I note below (pp. 226f), and as de Ste Groix' s book will insist strenuously, the ships of Aigina which Pindar glorifies are, in their context, not only merchant ships340 but more obviously and importantly 333

334 Hubbard 2001, esp. 390. Hubbard 2001: 391-2. See above n . 291. Figueira 1981: 299-343 = cn- 5> 'The Political Structure of Aeginetan Society'. 336 De Ste Groix 1972: 267 n. 61 and 1981: 120. For the full treatment see his essay 'But What about Aegina?' in de Ste Grorx (forthcoming 2004). 337 Figueira 1981: 297 n. 98 does cite de Ste Croix 1972: 267 n. 61—for Aiginetan metics: Lampis at Dem. 23. 211, mid fourth century, is the chief exhibit. Clearly, for those who deny the mercantile aristocracy view of Aigina, the hypothesis of a large metic population of an Athenian type is an obvious recourse. But for the Pindaric period we have simply no evidence. 338 De Ste Croix 1972 (as above); cf. 2004 forthcoming: no different from 'the other landowning oligarchies of that time'. 339 Figueira 321—2. 340 On the other hand de Ste Croix denies the mercantile aspect to Pindar's Aiginetan 335

Aigina

213

the warships which triumphed at Salamis, a battle celebrated explicitly as an Aiginetan triumph (/. 5. 48). In particular, it will be argued below that 'renowned for sailing' (TV. 5. 9) refers in its context to prowess in war. The same is true of 'long-oared Aigina', (0. 8. 20), where the description is appropriate only to triremes i.e. war-ships. Even the celebrated opening of Merman 5, which tells 'sweet song', as an abstract person, to go forth on 'every ship and every boat', and spread the praise of Lampon, should not be over-interpreted, though the ship-words used are indeed mercantile. De Ste Groix observes: [fjhere is nothing here of an 'Aeginetan merchant fleet: Pindar is thinking of all the merchants who trade from and with Aegina'.341 This seems to me a better way of taking the words if we have to choose, but perhaps the whole argument is misconceived. This exhortation comes from the discursive opening to the poem.342 Pindar has just said that he is not a sculptor, to fashion statues which stand on the same base and which are thus signifiers for absence of movement. Then he goes on to say: go forth on ships and boats, which are signifiers for movement. That is all. He was not writingo with o the economic historian in mind. But if we were going to press the statues it would have to be said that the Aiginetan sculptural tradition was a real one, and statue bases were an alternative form of commemoration to epinikian poetry, which it is interesting to find associated so strongly with Aigina in the relevant books of Pausanias.343 It has been suggested344 that the Bassidai, the Aiginetan family praised in Nemean 6. 30, were themselves shipowners, because of the metaphor at line 32, vavaroXeovres, 'carrying a ship-load' of victory ship-references and ship-metaphors too completely. He gets rid of the opening ofN. 5 (see below), but for vavaroXeovTes, in which the notion of cargoes is certainly dominant, see below n. 345. The question is, how far we see these as references and how far as metaphors with a job to do; see below. 341 De Ste Groix 2004; contra, Hubbard 2001: 393 and above all Figueira 1981: 323 and esp. 324, who thinks that if all Pindar meant was that Aigina was a place to which ships resorted (the view of Winterscheidt 1938 and later adopted by de Ste Groix), then the hypothetical conservative agricultural group (Pindar's patrons are meant) would have found the idea distasteful. 'Distasteful' is too strong here. Why should they object to any such thing? 342 Race 1982^: 18. Hubbard 2001: 393 sees this essentially literary point and puts it well, but nevertheless presses it as evidence for Aiginetan maritime commerce. Even on its own terms, this argument needs to recognize that the 'static foil of statuary' is just as Aiginetan as is the maritime imagery. 343 Thomas and Smith in Hornblower and Morgan forthcoming. See also Sterner 1993 for statue-imagery in Pindar. 344 Gerber 1999: 66, cf. Figueira 1981: 323.

214

People, Places, Pmsopography, and Politics

songs. But though this is certainly a mercantile figure of speech,345 the basic idea here is simply that of the 'ship of song', found also in Neman 4, another Aiginetan ode: turn the ship's tackle, eWea vaos, back to Europe (line 70). That Pindar was specially fond of using maritime imagery for Aigina is agreed.346 But Steiner shows that the ship of song motif turns up in non-Aiginetan and non-maritime connections also;347 she cites for instance Pythian n for Thrasydaios of Thebes, where the poet pretends (line 39) to wonder if he was thrown off course by the wind like a small boat at sea. Chris Carey, discussing dvaftdaoâi ('I shall embark') in Pythian 2 for Hiero of Syracuse (line 62) observes 'the ship of Pindar's song usually appears, as here, in transitions (e.g. P. n. 3gb f, N. 4. 70)'.348 Aiginetan maritime imagery in Pindar is an extension of a predilection well attested in other contexts. This does not drain it of specific aptness for a seafaring island, but historical and economic arguments should show cautious respect for poetic convention.349 As for the many Pindaric references to Aiginetan hospitality, £evia, and 'strangers', |evot, these too have been somewhat over-interpreted; I discuss and list them more fully elsewhere.350 Clearly, the Aiginetan references must be balanced against the non-Aiginetan. My statistical conclusion, based on an analysis of the vocabulary for 'hospitalityrelated' words in Pindar, is as follows. Over the corpus of poems by Pindar and Bacchylides there are fifteen references to Aiginetan hospitality and twelve to hospitality manifested everywhere else. This is indeed a definite and impressive Aiginetan lopsidedness, though equally it would be wrong to say that hospitality is confined to Aigina (and it would have been absurd to expect it to be). Among the non-Aiginetan places, Sicily and Thessaly score well, but there is a fairly even spread of

345 Note however that the poet immediately goes on to talk, in a characteristic mix of metaphors (Gh. i p. 44 and n. 181, and for the switch here see Gerber 1999: 66 'the imagery now shifts from nautical to agricultural') about how much the Bassidai of Aigina can supply the ploughmen of the Muses to sing about. But nobody has yet tried to use this as evidence for Aiginetan landed interests. For the conceit cf. P. 6. i with Steiner 1986: 44 . 346 Steiner 1986: 67 who however also has just remarked in the same breath that 'many of the city-states for whom [Pindar] wrote were dependent on the sea'. For sea language in Pindar's Aigina odes cf. also Gzella 1981: 6 n.i and Hubbard 2001: 393. 347 Steiner 1986: 73f. 348 Carey 1981:46. We should also recall the famous comparison, afew lines later, between Pindar's song and Phoenician merchandise being sent overseas, P. 2. 67—8. 349 ^.6.32 (vavaTo\eovT£s) is not however located at a point of marked transition. 350 'Pindar and Aiginetans' in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming).

Aigina

215

places with one score each (Tenedos, Korinth, and so on). Note finally that since Pindar is himself a Boiotian we would not expect 'hospitality' to feature much in his six odes for Boiotians and it does not. Hubbard interprets the Aiginetan references as evidence that Aigina was a great commercial centre, and even suggests that Pindar is 'using the pan-Hellenic stature of his odes to promote the island's economy' like a modern 'chamber of commerce or advertising agency'.351 He is again following the lead of Figueira, for whom Pindar is alluding to the 'Aiginetan legal apparatus' when he talks of'foreigner-protecting justice', SIKQ £evapKei (N. 4. 12) or the 'virtue of just regard for strangers', (Paian 6 .131). But only a few of the Aiginetan xenia references can do this serious work (and if we are going to work these references hard we must also be willing to see a reference to private international law in the description of Theron of Akragas, 'a man just in his regard for guests', om SIKHIOV £eva>v, 0. 2. 6). In N. 3. 2, Aigina is just the 'much-visited', -n-oAvêvav, Dorian island, and in Bacchylides (13. 95) the eponymous Aigina is 'queen of a hospitable land'. These are hardly ways of stressing Aiginetan business probity. (De Ste Groix: 'it is an absurd error to treat this as essentially mere friendliness to traders'). De Ste Groix is right that most of them refer more simply to Aiginetan 'aristocratic hospitality' or guest-friendship. My conclusion on this issue is a compromise one. I do not think that either the sea and ships in Pindar's Aiginetan odes, above all Nemean 5, or his allusions to Aiginetan |evta, would have suggested a commercial aristocracy if we were not looking for it (cf. above,p. 203 n. 291 on 0.13 and Korinth). De Ste Groix was however wrong to deny so fiercely the existence of any such thing, and to discount the possibilities that Pindar's patrons engaged in trade and that Pindar was aware of this and even alluded to it. But the allusions are secondary (and some of them metaphorical), and here De Ste Groix was right. What Pindar stresses primarily and unequivocally are the glorious recent achievements of the Aiginetan navy in battle, and their attention to guest-friendship and hospitality as normally understood. These allusions to |evta are, I argue, the clue to the question which remains whatever view we take of the Aiginetan elite, and I suspect they did not feel themselves problematized but perfectly normal. Why so many poems about them? As with so many problems to do with Pindar's varied social world, the answer to the question 'why Aigina?' 351

Hubbard 2001: 394.

216


is no doubt multi-factorial: there is force in several (though not all) of the explanations considered above. We should not shrink from biographical explanations for the disproportion, unless we are to regard Pindar as a purely passive recipient of patronage with no choice in the matter. I myself argue elsewhere that Pindar's wholly disproportionate attachment to Aigina, and his very marked emphasis on Aiginetan hospitality and guest-friendship, reflect the friendly and attractive Aiginetan reality, individual and collective.352 Pindar found there an unusually hospitable ethos even among hospitable Greeks. Aigina was not so much his ideal place as his favourite place, and the allusions to |evta disclose the fact. 'How much was Pindar paid per ode?' is a question we would much like to know the real answer to (3,000 drachmas has come down to us in one unreliable-looking anecdote).353 But in any case perhaps payment mattered to him less than did the attraction of congenial sympotic company for private performances of his odes,354 or the knowledge that for public performances he could rely on finding local choruses with exceptionally high standards in dancing.355 He found Aiginetan social characteristics and cultural traditions specially congenial and returned there again and again.356 One of the attractive Aiginetan characteristics for a poet who was far from parochial himself, was surely cosmopolitanism. Aigina was an unusually prosperous island with plenty of rich families. In Greek communities everywhere and of every political type, conspicuous expenditure at the games and in the form of patronage of poets was a good way of spending your wealth. Perhaps the Aiginetan elite was particularly mobile (though hardly more so than the Athenian). Certainly some Aiginetans worked and traded at great distances from home, as nicely illustrated thirty years ago by the discovery of a stone anchor at O

O

'

352 f^gueu-a 1981: 328 maintains that Pindar regularly praises the hospitality of Aigina as a community whereas elsewhere hospitality is something he predicates of individuals. There is truth in this, but Figueira himself notes P. 5. 56-7 (Kyrene) and on the other side there is the individual praise for Lampon of Aigina at Pi. /. 6. 70 andB. 13. 224. 353 Scholiast on A". 5- ia, Drachmann 1903—27: 3. 89. See Gzella 1971: 193. The point of the story is the relative value of poems and statues. At first the poet asks for 3,000 drachmai and the Aiginetans say it would be better to get a bronze statue made for the same money but then they realize they have made a mistake, etc. The anecdote seems obviously generated by the opening of the poem, 'I am not a sculptor . ..'. On the cost of bronze statues see R. R. R. Smith in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming): 3,000 drachmas 'a little low but in the right order of magnitude'. 354 por pinciar and t ne symposium see above Gh. i p. 35. 355 for this explanation see Mullen 1982: 145. sse Hornblower on 'Pindar and Aigina' in Hornblower and Morgan forthcoming, with a table giving the relevant (Aiginetan and non-Aiginetan) passages in detail.

Aigina

217

Tarquinii in Etruria dedicated by Sostratos of Aigina to Apollo. This man's family was known to Herodotus (4. 152) for its wealth from overseas trade; the new inscription shows where the family got its wealth.357 At the other end of the Greek Mediterranean, we shall shortly meet an epigraphically attested Aiginetan interpreter at Naukratis in Egypt, honoured at Rhodian Lindos at the end of the fifth century (below, p. 220). Aiginetans got around. Accordingly we should expect all four panhellenic festivals to exhibit Aiginetan victors, and they do. The distribution of the Aiginetan odes is however lop-sided: of Pindar's eleven fully surviving odes for Aiginetans, and Bacchylides' two, all but two are for Nemean or Isthmian victories (six and three respectively, and Snell-Maehler print the fragments of a further Isthmian ode as Isthmian 9, clearly for another Aiginetan, see n. 315 above). The exceptions are one Olympian and one Pythian ode (Pi. 0. 8 and P. 8). But this lop-sidedness is partly chance, because Pindar's Nemean 6 for Alkimidas of Aigina (line 35) has an incidental reference to a Pythian victory by a relative. So it would be wrong to infer Aiginetan disdain for Delphi. On the contrary: see below for the gold stars dedicated there by the Aiginetans from their aristeia for the battle of Salamis in 480. The distribution of epinikian odes surely has something to do with proximity: Nemea and Isthmia were closer to Aigina than were Delphi or Olympia. One obvious difference between Aigina and Athens was that Aigina o o —like Sicily, another great producer of panhellenic victors—was a literal island, as opposed to the metaphorical island to which ancient commentators compared Athens (Th. i. 143. 5 and Ps.-Xen. Ath. Pol. 2. 14).358 And Aigina's population was quite unusually large. In their brilliant study of the Mediterranean Sea and region, Peregrine Horden and Nicholas Purcell explain 'why islands have large populations' (answer: zones of easy movement have the highest concentrations of peoples) , and cite Aigina as 'the clearest case of all'.359 To be sure, Athens and Attica had a large population as well, but the total area of Attica was vast compared to that of Aigina. 357 For the inscription see LSAG2: 439 no. E (SEG 26.1137) with Hornblower 200oa: 1311"., giving bibliography. 358 The pamphlet I cite as 'Ps.-Xen. Ath. Pol.' is the so-called 'Old Oligarch'. I have suggested (Hornblower 2000^) that this pamphlet was a work of fiction in the sense that it purported to be about 5th-cent. Athens but was actually written in the 4th cent, and draws on Thucydides. This does not affect the point in the text except that if I am right in my suggestion, the two texts I am now citmgfor 'Athens-as-island' are really one, cf. Hornblower zoood: 367 for the 'island' parallels. 359 Horden and Purcell 2000: 381 and 119, drawing on Figueira 1981: 22-64.

218


Aigina: prosopography andpolitics By contrast with the large number of Aiginetans in Pindar and Bacchylides, there is in the whole of Thucydides' history not one single named Aiginetan. Why this absence? The answer is that fifteen years after 446, which was the date of Pindar's Pythian 8, his last victory ode to an Aiginetan or anyone else, Aigina was forcibly evacuated, Athenian settlers moved in and Aiginetan identity was lost (for the evacuation see Th. 2. 27: summer 431, soon after the beginning of the Peloponnesian War). The Aiginetans were given new homes at Peloponnesian Thurea by the Spartans. When in 405 Lysander 'gathered up as many Aiginetans as he could', oaovs eSvvaro TrXeiarovs O.VTOIV dOpoiaas, and restored them to Aigina (Xen. Hell. 2. 2. 9), he presumably did most of his 'gathering up' at Thurea; Xenophon's language perhaps suggests a sad remnant. Thucydides is of course by no means completely silent about Aigina: the island itself, which was strategically important, naturally occurs in military contexts (e.g. 7. 20. 2); and 'the Aiginetans', as a collective, feature twenty times.360 But this total is misleading because most of the references to 'Aiginetans' either refer not to real Aiginetans at all but to the new Athenian settlers there (5. 74. 3, 7. 57. 2 and 8. 69. 3), or else relate to pre-war events, or to the evacuation itself. The one place where we might just possibly have hoped for a named Aiginetan is in the description of military operations in 424 involving the displaced Aiginetans at Thurea (4. 56-7). But though their commander is named, he is a Spartan called Tantalos son of Patrokles. This man's scrupulously recorded ethnic and patronymic serve only to emphasize the anonymity of the Aiginetans whom the Athenians summarily killed on that occasion because of 'old enmity' a phrase with a Herodotean resonance), whereas Tantalos was taken back to Athens and imprisoned there honorably with the Spartiates taken at Sphakteria.361 Thucydides, then, provides us with no direct prosopographic overlaps with Pindar's Aiginetan victors. Herodotus' narrative is more promising because the main period it covers falls before the eclipse of Aiginetan power. Sure enough, prominent Aiginetans of the Persian War generation feature in both Herodotus and the epinikian poets. Krios, 'the Ram', we have met already (p. 23); it seems that Simonides as well as Herodotus played on 360

Statistics from Schrader 1998: i. 35. Ducrey 1968: 335 n. 2. 'Old enmity' (Sid rr/v Trporepav aiei-n-ore e-Ôpav) at Th. 4. 57. 4 recalls €x&pf] TraXaitj at Hdt. 5. 81. 2, cf. Pfeijffer 1999: 433 n. 20. 361

Aigina

219

his name, and that the poet laughed at him for an athletic failure. Krios was both son and father of a Polykritos, and the younger Polykritos of Aigina won glory in his own right at the battle of Salamis (Hdt. 8. 93, cf. 92 for the patronymic). Another great Aiginetan family, that of Pytheas, was celebrated in three odes of Pindar and one of Bacchylides; but Herodotus, perhaps transmitting Athenian malice,362 gives a less than glorious role to one of its members. Pytheas son of Lampon was the honorand of Pindar's Nemean 5 and of Bacchylides 13, which celebrate the same Nemean victory; while Pindar's Isthmian 5 and 6 were for Pytheas' brother Phylakidas. They were from the -n-drpa or clan of the Psalychiadai (/. 6. 63) and from the OIKOS of Themistios, Pytheas' maternal grandfather (schol. N. 5. 50): the stress on collective achievement, and the careful balancing of paternal -n-drpa and maternal OIKOS, is as we have seen characteristic of Pindar's Aiginetan odes.363 Now Herodotus tells us (9. 78) that an Aiginetan called Lampon son of Pytheas made the disgraceful suggestion that Pausanias the Spartan regent should mutilate the corpse of the Persian general Mardonius; Pausanias indignantly repudiated this. A close relationship between Herodotus' Lampon son of Pytheas, and Lampon the father of Pindar's Pytheas, seems irresistible.364 But there is an obstacle to actual identity365 in that Pindar (/. 6. 16) calls his Lampon 'son of Kleonikos', KAeoviKov irais. How and Wells suggested that strict identity could be preserved if we either suppose that Kleonikos was a 'remoter ancestor' [sc. than father]; alternatively and even more ingeniously they wondered if KAeo-viKos, a compound of 'glory' and 'victory', might have been 'a title given to Pytheas from the numerous athletic victories of the family'.366 But the name Kleonikos is not uncommon, and we need not suppose it was a nickname any more than was Polynikos (above, p. 45, for this very aptly named athlete from Boiotian Thespiai) or indeed Pytheas itself which may suggest a victory at Delphi somewhere along the line. Similarly the prominent Aiginetan 362 Jacoby 1913: col. 465. But individual Aigmetans do not always come off badly in Herodotus: see below for his signalling of the bravery of Polykritos son of Krios and of Pytheas son of Ischenoos. 363 See Parker 1996: 63 n. 26 noting (with reference to Pindar's Aiginetan odes) that 'Pindar often slips easily from praise of the oikos, including maternal km, to praise of the TTtirpa . See above, p. 208. 364 Pfeijffer 1999: 104. 365 Identity is accepted by LGPNvol. 3A under Aa^-nutv (i). Cole 1992: 50 prefers to think that the two Lampons were close relatives, perhaps cousins. 366 How and Wells 1912: 2. 321.

22O


Nikodromos son of Knoithos, called an dvr)p SoKijuos by Herodotus (6. 88), has a name which suggests paternal or ancestral victory on the runningo track. We shall be returningo to Nikodromos and his doings o later. It is enough for our purposes if Herodotus' Lampon belongs to the same family as the father of Pindar's victors, as he surely does. The father of Lampon is not the only Aiginetan Pytheas known to Herodotus: there was also Pytheas son of Ischenoos, who was on one of three Greek look-out ships captured by the Persians in the run-up to the battle of Artemision. He was cut to pieces in the fighting with the Persian boarding-party and then solicitously bandaged up again (7. 181, good evidence of the level of Persian medical care). If he were part of the Pindaric clan we have been discussing, there would be a coincidental connection between the two athletic families of Krios and Lampon, because it was in the ship of Polykritos son of Krios that Pytheas son of Ischenoos finally returned to Aigina, after Polykritos rammed the Sidonian ship which was carrying Pytheas (9. 92). There is however no overwhelming reason, though there is a temptation, thus to bring him into some relation with Pindar's Pytheas. The same is true of a very intriguing epigraphic attestation of an Aiginetan Pytheas, whose son (his name ended in -as) was honoure towards the end of the fifth century at Rhodian Lindos, at a time of transition shortly before the synoikism of the island in 408 (for which seeDiod. 13.75 and above, p. i36).Intheinscriptionheisgivenproxeny 'of all the Rhodians', an expression which seems to indicate a federal set-up intermediate between the old three-city arrangement known to Homer and Pindar, and the new synoikized state of Rhodes which had such a brilliant hellenistic future ahead of it.367 The honorand had been an interpreter atNaukratis and so presumably spoke Egyptian.368 He moved between Naukratis and the Pindaric and Dorian islands of Aigina and Rhodes; he is a choice illustration of elite mobility even if we decline to integrate him directly into Pindar's world as his patronymic invites us to do. The last Pindaric honorand in chronological sequence was Aris367

For this interpretation of the inscription see Andrewes 1981: 92, n. on Th. 8. 44. 2, following von Gaertrmgen 1931: col. 763; cf also Hornblower 2002^: 176. For Homer see Ilwd 2. 655-6 with Kirk 1985: 225; Pi. 0. 7. 18 and 75-6. The three cities are Lindos, lalysus and 'chalky Kamiros', as Homer calls it 368

Aigina

221

tomenes son of Xenarkes (in Pythian 8 of 446 BC). An inscribed funerary monument from Aigina discovered and published recently (2002) commemorates an Aristouchos son of Aristomenes. The lettering is fourth-century, so this Aristomenes could be a near relative of Pindar's wrestling champion; it might even be the wrestler himself.369 Aristomenes is a very common name all over the Greek world, but this new attestation is only the second from Aigina, the son of Xenarkes being the first. The monument is a modest one and this fits the view of Aigina offered above: it was not an island of showy spenders. Pindar's Aristomenes was a wrestler not a wealthy equestrian victor; none of Pindar's Aiginetans were that. So much for Aiginetan individuals: few of the many honoured by Pindar and Bacchylides left much of an impression outside the athletic victory lists. But Aigina itself, and the Aiginetans as a collective, were of great historical importance in the fifth century. Five episodes stand out. First was the in every sense messy Aiginetan war against the Athenians in the early years of the century and overlapping the Persian Wars; this Aiginetan-Athenian war played some role in turning the Athenians into a naval power.370 The central section of the story involved a pro-Athenian Aiginetan notable called Nikodromos whom we have glanced at already for his athletic name, and who planned to betray his city to the Athenians. He had a grudge against his fellow-Aiginetans for exiling him at one time, though he had evidently returned by the time of Herodotus' narrative of the botched coup supported by the Athenians (6. 88-9). The chronology of Aiginetan-Athenian hostilities is far from clear, but what is crystal clear is that this was bitter stasis of a classic sort371 though Herodotus does not actually use that word: Nikodromos is the leader of the demos and against him and them are ranged the 'fat men', the Traêes, who carry out atrocious reprisals (6. 91). This stasis will be relevant to our discussion of Pindar's Nemean 5 (below). Second in the sequence (but this is for convenience of presentation only, because the two were in fact roughly contemporaneous) was the Persian Wars. Initially the Aiginetans provided Darius the Persian king with earth and water in token of submission (Hdt. 6. 49). In this they behaved, as Herodotus airily admits, no worse than all the other 369

Polinskaya2002. Thucydides and Herodotus disagreed on the size of that role; see Hornblower 1991: 48, discussing Th. i. 14. 3 and the relation of that passage to Hdt. 7. 144. 371 Further reason to be cautious of the notion that stasis was a primarily fourth-century phenomenon; see Hornblower 2002: 184-6 and above, p. 78. 370

222


islanders and indeed many of the mainlanders, but the Athenians took it particularly badly, believing it to be directed against themselves (cf. above on the Athenian-Aiginetan war. The suspicion was reasonable enough, cf. 8. 30. 2, 'if the Thessalians had taken the Greek side I think the Phokians [inveterate enemies of the Thessalians] would have medized'). So the Athenians invoked the intervention of the only 'superpower' at the time, namely the Spartans. Their king, Kleomenes I, crossed over to Aigina and demanded that the men responsible for the submission to Persia be handed over. There followed the famous exchange between Kleomenes I of Sparta and Krios the 'Ram', who bested Kleomenes for the moment (6. 50, with Kleomenes' witty advice that Krios 'get your horns sheathed in bronze, because there's trouble coming') but was eventually placed with nine others in Athens 'on deposit', Trapa9^Kr], because the Athenians were the enemies of the Aiginetans. That was the end of Aiginetan medism, because when next heard of the Aiginetans are good patriotic Greeks, providing a respectable eighteen ships for the sea-battle off Artemision (Hdt. 8. i. 2). Then they were adjudged to have won the 'meed [prize] of valour', the aristeia, after the battle of Salamis, by which time their contingent had increased to thirty (Hdt. 8. 93. i, 122; cf. 46).372 They also sent a contingent of five hundred men to the land battle of Plataia (Hdt. 9. 28. 6, cf. 69 where they are presumably among 'those with the Megarians and Phleiasians'). For all these reasons the name Al-yivdrai features on the second coil of the 'serpent column' erected at Delphi in commemoration of those who fought the Persians (ML 27). The third event was another war of the Aiginetans against the Athenians. This war started in 459 (probably but not certainly, and the uncertainty must be kept in mind. 460 is also possible).373 It ended in 458 after a nine-month siege (Diod. n. 74) with the Aiginetans' surrender and incorporation into the Athenian Empire (Th. i. 105. 2 and 108. 4). Fourth was the critical year 446. Acute difficulties inside their empire, notably the defeat of the Athenians at Koroneia in Boiotia in 446 but 372 This was in addition to the individual aristeia of Polykritos (also Hdt. 8. 93), for which see above, p. 219. 373 I follow the view of Lewis, CAH 52 1992: 500—1 that the war with Aigina did not begin until 459 (the alternative year is, as we have seen, 460). The casualty list ML33, for one Athenian 'tribe' or subdivision of the citizen-body namely the Erechtheid, lists the dead in 'the war, in Cyprus, in Egypt, in Phoenicia, in Halieis, in Aigina, in Megara' and this is best taken as referring to the casualties of the first year of actual fighting and this year (Lewis argues) is 459. The war against Aigina was a sub-war of the 'First Peloponnesian War', the first diplomatic moves in which were made in 462.

Aigina

223

including also perhaps some epigraphically attested Aiginetan restlessness, forced the Athenians to make the Thirty Years Peace which ended the First Peloponnesian War of 461-446. We are frustratingly ill-informed about the precise terms of this peace but one clause may have guaranteed the autonomy of subject states like Aigina, or perhaps of Aigina alone.374 Fifth and last, the outbreak of the main Peloponnesian War of 431 was precipitated in part by some mysterious and undated Athenian infringement of Aiginetan autonomy, perhaps but not certainly the autonomy guaranteed in 446 (Th. i. 67 2).375 This in turn led to an event we have already noted, the wholesale eviction of the Aiginetans from Aigina by the Athenians who 'charged them with being a main cause of the war', emKaXeaavres oi>x TJKiaTa TOV TTO\€JJ,OV alriovs eivai, and who then re-peopled the island with Athenian settlers (Th. 2. 27. i). This was the real end of Aiginetan independence. At one time commentators sought to correlate as much as possible of this Aiginetan history with the contents of the epinikian poems for Aiginetans. This approach went out of fashion in the Bundy era but Ilja Pfeijffer and Thomas Cole have now taken it up again. It is certainly attractive, given the unusual richness of prosopographical data about Aiginetans in Pindar and Bacchylides, to try to explore the members of this elite in detail. But there are difficulties. Above all, the dates of the relevant poems are not nearly as secure as some would like to believe.376 The chronological key to the group of poems about Lampon's family is held377 to be Isthmian 5, for Phylakidas son of Lampon and brother of Pytheas. But all this poem says is that Aigina was distinguished 'of old', TTaAat, and also vvv, 'recently' at Salamis (below)—but this need mean no more than 'in our lifetime'; it does not mean 'last Tuesday'. There is thus radical uncertainty about the dates of the whole group. There is a rather stronger presumption in favour of putting Isthmian 8 soon after the thwarted Persian invasion, the 'rock of Tantalus' which the god 'has turned away', eYpej/iev (below). Accordingly the poem, which has Zeus and Poseidon quarrelling over the sea-goddess Thetis and then acquiescing in her transfer to Peleus, has been ingeniously 374

Lewis CAH52 1992: 137, and for Aiginetan trouble 130 andn. 45, citing TGi 3 38. Hornblower 2002&: 107—8. 376 The datings in Cole 1992 are particularly confident—and vulnerable. The basic problem is that with two exceptions (0. 8 and P. 8) the Aiginetan poems of Pindar are either Nemean or Isthmian odes and these categories are as we have seen (Ch. i p. 42) chronologically the least secure. 377 For good discussion see Maehler 1982: 2. 250; see/. 5 lines 44 and 48. 375

224


seen as an allegory of the 'Hetoimaridas debate' at Sparta in the early 4703. Zeus is Sparta, Poseidon is Athens and Peleus is —Aigina? (some wishful thinking going on here).378 For such a theory (neither provable nor easily falsifiable), topicality is crucial. But even here the presumption of a date for the poem very close to the Persian Wars is just that, a presumption.379 In particular it does not do justice to the longevity of what has been called the 'Persian-Wars tradition'.380 We shall also see that there are problems about the precise dating of Olympian 8 and Pythian 8. I deal with the five events out of sequence. The fifth and final event in our series, the expulsion of the Aiginetans from their island, was a catastrophe which took place too late for Pindar to have been influenced by it. Nevertheless one may suspect that hindsighted knowledge of the catastrophe of 431 has exerted some influence, if only subconscious, on scholarly interpretations of the end of Pythian 8 of 446. The poet's prayer to 'dear mother Aigina' to convey this city on a 'voyage of freedom', e'Aeuêpo) crroAoi (lines 98-9, see below), gains in poignancy if we know that the 'voyage' was to last a mere fifteen years. But though 'Pindare poete et prophete' is the title of a good book about Pindar (Duchemin 1955) we must not attribute to the elderly Pindar a literal foreknowledge of political events. We shall return to Pythian 8 later. The second great Aiginetan experience of the fifth century, the Persian Wars and especially their aristeia at Salamis, was certainly celebrated by Pindar. The 'rock of Tantalos', the Ai9os TavrdXov, averted by the god in Isthmian 8, is, we can agree, the averted Persian invasion (lines 9-10; see above). But the clearest and fullest allusion is in Isthmian 5, written for the victory in \hepankration of Phylakidas son of Lampon and brother of Pytheas, a family we have already met.

Recently in war Salamis, the city of Aias, could attest that it was preserved by her sailors during Zeus' devastating rain, that hailstorm of gore for countless men. (/. 5. 48-50) 378 Cole 1992: ch. 4, reviving an idea of Dissen. For the Hetoimaridas debate see Diod. n. 50 (not i i . 20 as Cole 1992: 80). 379 See the justified protest of Instone 1993: 234, reviewing Cole. 380 See A.J. S. S[pawforth]'s entry of that title in OCD3.

Aigina

225

Now the Aiginetan aristeia at Salamis was the subject of a good story involving Apollo at Delphi. He declared himself satisfied with the offerings of all the Greeks except the Aiginetans; from them he demanded their aristeia for Salamis. So they dedicated to him, presumably from a tithe of their prize, a bronze mast bearing three gold stars (Hdt. 8. 122). It is an old conjecture381 that two of these stars represented the Dioskouroi, Kastor and Polydeukes, and the third the Aiginetan Apollo Delphinios, and that this is concrete evidence of an epiphany by these three saving powers. The theory is constructed on the analogy of the help given by the Dioskouroi to Lysander in 405 BG when they appeared as stars before the battle of Aegospotami, an epiphany which also led to their commemoration of the Dioskouroi at Delphi, both explicitly with statues (Plut. Lys. 12. i; ML 95 (a) and (b))—and also more obliquely with two gold stars (Plut. Lys. 18. i and Gic. de div. i. 75, describing how these stars mysteriously disappeared just before the Spartan defeat at the hands of the Thebans in 371 BG). W. K. Pritchett, in his section on military epiphanies, sets out the case impartially, though he does note at the end that Herodotus says nothing about the Dioskouroi and that we do not know that they were specially worshipped on Aigina.382 Both halves of this mild protest are strictly true, but the analogy of the gold stars for Aigospotamoi is surely a good one. As for the Dioskouroi and Aigina, Pindar does as it happens mention the 'spearmen Kastor and Polydeukes' in this very same Aiginetan ode, Isthmian 5. 33, but not for any direct association with Aigina, because the poem locates them firmly by the river Eurotas in Sparta. They are in fact part of apriamel: other cities have great heroes, thus Thebes has lolaos, Argos has Perseus and Sparta the Dioskouroi; but Aigina has the Aiakidai. The most we might want to say is that if Pindar's mention of Aiginetan bravery at Salamis prompted his listeners to think of gold stars on bronze masts and of epiphanies of the Dioskouroi, those thoughts have been fleetingly and subtly prepared for by the mention of the Dioskouroi as the Spartans' tutelary heroes. Are we being invited to compare Aigina the great sea power and Sparta the great land power? (cf. p. 206 for the suggestion that in JV. 10 the prominence of the Dioskouroi hints at a comparison between Sparta and Argos). But for Pindar, the saviours of Salamis are not the Dioskouroi but the Aiginetan sailors themselves 381 It goes back to Preller (see Preller-Robert 1896: i. 207, 2. 106), and is approvingly cited in the Herodotus commentaries of Stem, Macan, and How and Wells, and by Busolt 22 716 n. 3 367 and more recently L. H.Jeffery, CAH42 (1988) n. 24. 382 Pritchett 1971-90: 3. 241". for the Aiginetan aristeia, cf. 25 on Aigospotamoi.

226


without divine aid. So Pindar's version is actually less fanciful than that of Herodotus, if the gold stars are agreed to represent the Dioskouroi and Apollo. I suppose that Herodotus' source was Delphic, and equally, Pindar and his listeners must have derived their knowledge of the gold Aiginetan stars not from Herodotus' as yet unwritten History but from their own visits to Delphi and their own eyes. The final Persian War battle in which the Aiginetans participated383 was the great land-battle at Boiotian Plataia (see above). It was after this battle that Lampon son of Pytheas made his infamous proposal about the mutilation of the corpse of Mardonios. Herodotus' material about the Aiginetans in this final phase of the war, in contrast to his report of their acknowledged bravery at Salamis, continued to be disobliging. He writes contemptuously of those who erected tombs after the battle as a way of pretending to have participated when they had not (9. 85). His discussion concludes with what seems to be offered as an example of this sort of thing, the 'so-called Aiginetan tomb' at Plataia, which he had heard was put up ten years after the event at the request of the Aiginetans by Kleades son of Autodikos theproxenos of the Aiginetans at Plataia.384 Commentators have noted the unfairness of this imputation: there is no question that the Aiginetans, who as we have seen were present at Plataia, were dishonestly putting up a cenotaph to commemorate a battle from which they were absent. Do these various maliciously placed question marks over individual and collective Aiginetan behaviour at and after Plataia explain why Pindar in Isthmian 5 prudently ignores that battle and confines himself to Salamis? Surely not. If an explanation is needed, a better one is that he preferred to stress Aiginetan sea- rather than land-power. Modern commentators, rightly concerned to stress Pindar's rich and significant economic metaphors, have perhaps concentrated too exclusively on that aspect of Aiginetan naval activity, at the expense of the Aiginetans' fame as fighting sailors. In Neman 5, Peleus, Telamon, and Phokos pray that Aigina will one day 'be a land of brave men and renowned for sailing', evavSpov re KM vavaiK^vrdv (line 9), near the start of a poem 383

Naturally we hear nothing of them at Mykale on the other side of the Aegean. 334 'PQ ^ Qj-gd^ Macan (1908: 772, n. on the passage) showed interest in the name and patronymic of this Plataian friend of the Aiginetans, and cited Pape-Benseler. It remains true, and curious, that Autodikos is otherwise attested only at Athens. But we can improve on Macan's statement that Kleades (in the form Kleadas) is 'known at Sparta and Argos' (with the implication 'and nowhere else'), because LGPN36 exhibits—as Sir Ronald Syme used to say—two more Boiotians (from Thebes) and a Thessahan, all of them hellemstic: Fraser and Matthews 2000: 231.

Aigina

227

whose strongly maritime character has been noticed by commentators from Bury to Carol Dougherty. As Bury said it 'is more thoroughly "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'.385 Dougherty is chiefly interested in Pindar's 'poetic cargo', and in the metapoetic association of ships and songs, at the beginning and end of this poem.386 These ideas are certainly strongly present, but the combination in line 9 of the military word evavSpos (with which compare the related word evdvopes used of the warlike Acharnians at JV". 2. 17) with vavaiK\vroi surely suggests straightforward prowess in naval warfare rather than commercial activity (see above, pp. 2i2f). The first in chronological sequence of our four events is the war between Athenians and Aiginetans, an 'unheralded war', aK-ijpvKTos TToAeôs, fuelled by 'ancient hatred', e'xOpT) iraAanj (both expressions are from Hdt. 5. 81. 2; cf. 6. 73. 2. For the war see 6. 85—94. i). The chronology of the war or wars is notoriously tangled, but there seems to have been one main phase of conflict in the late 4908 involving King Kleomenes of Sparta towards the end of his life (he was dead by the time of Marathon in 490), and another in the 4808 involving an attempted Athenian-backed coup and centring on a prominent Aiginetan called Nikodromos.387 Recently Pfeijffer has argued that both Pindar's Nemean 5 and Bacchylides 13 (182-9 and 199—209) contain 'indications' (his rather strong word) of the Atheno-Aiginetan war.3881 can see no such clear indications in the Bacchylides passages; the reference to 'peace', «'[/>] TJVCH at line 189 does not automatically suggest the prevalence of the opposite state of affairs, any more than in the immediate following ode, for Kleoptolemos of Thessaly, we are entitled to detect urgent topicality in the contrast between sorrow-laden battles and clashing bronze on the one hand, and lyres, choirs and festivals on the other (B. 14. 14-16). Equally, Pindar's talk of 'steel-clad war', aiSapirav . . . -n-oXeôv (JV. 5. 19) cannot (as Pfeijffer wants) really be pressed to yield a specific 385 Bury 1890: 81 for this over-the-top and unfashionably biographical, but still rather 386 splendid, sentence. Dougherty 2001: 40-2, cf. 61. 387 Andrewes ig36/7;JefTery CAH f 1988: 365-7; Hammond CAH f 1988:501 (aminority view, putting everything before 490); Figueira 1988. 388 Pfeijffer 1995^ (326 for 'indications', said about Bacchylides) and now 1999: 59—61,128, and 176-82. OnB. 13 see also Cole 1992: 53.

228


contemporary allusion: the poet lists it alongside 'happiness' and strength of hands', oXjSov, yzipwv jSiav, as suitable subjects for song, and this can be paralleled.389 Pfeijffer's other Pindaric indication is less straightforward. When Pindar says the 'entire city strives for noble prizes', eaAotcn âpvarat Tre'pi Trdaa TTO\LS (N. 5. 46), Pfeijffer takes this to mean literal fighting, not just exertion in competition for prizes, because 'Pindar nowhere says that a city as a whole participates in the games'. So here Pindar will be saying 'I am glad that the whole 390 city/ is fighting This conclusion is not o o for things o worth fighting o o for'. entirely convincing, if the suggestion is really that a reference to collective athletic striving is positively excluded. The surrounding context of Pindar's remark is firmly athletic:391 victories at Nemea, Aigina itself and Megara, then the remark about the polls exertion, then a graceful reference to the Athenian trainer Menandros, on whom see below. And is it true that the city as a whole is never said to participate? I suggest \hatNerwan 10, for Theaios of Argos, contains an example of just this: Pindar praises the victories of Theaios' maternal relatives, then says

with how many victories has this horse-raising city of Proitos [i.e. Argos] flourished in the glens of Korinth; and four times from the men of Kleonai. (JV. 10. 41-2)

Here the word for 'flourished', OdXrjaev, seems clearly to refer to achievement by the city (cf. /. 4. 4, the Kleonymidai 'flourish ever with a god's help', 9dAAovTes alei avv 9eq)) rather than glory conferred on the city.392 That is, there is a slide from the participation and achievement of the individual athlete to the idea of the participation and achievement of 389

Pfeijffer himself (1999: 128) rightly compares 0. 2. 43—5. Pfeijffer 19950: 325 and 1999: 177. I see that Henry 2001:8 makes this point, in the course of an unnecessarily harsh review of Pfeijffer 1999- Pfeijffer's book is repetitive (both internally in that there is excessive overlap between introductions to and commentaries on individual odes, and externally in the sense that he has said some of it in periodicals already, Pfeijffer 19950 and 19950); and some of the interpretations are vulnerable. But the book contains much of value. 392 The |-ext ls no t q ul te secure but I reject the emendations (ignored by Snell-Maehler) and interpretation of Bury 1890: 205 f I do not quite understand the objection, in terms of Aeschylus, made by Henry 2001: 8, because it is sarcastically put. Seen. 391 above. 390 391

Aigina

229

city as a whole, a slide facilitated by the stress on an intermediate element, namely the larger kinship group. I suggest that the same slide is effected in Nemean 5 which therefore does after all refer to collective polls effort at the games, rather than to war with the Athenians. Greater specificity has been detected in the way both Bacchylides and Pindar handle the Athenian trainer Menandros. Bacchylides is said by Pfeijffer to be 'conscious of the fact that Menander's Athenian origin constituted a problem' (because the two states were at war at the time); that is why (13. 200) he talks of(/>96vos, because Menandros, mentioned a few lines earlier, was liable to it.393 The conclusion is surely not necessary: the praise of'Menandros 'helpful care', êAerafv re] jBpoTux/) [e] Ae'a MevdvSpov, is warm and unembarrassed, and talk of envy is commonplace. As for Pindar, Pfeijffer places much weight on the two words ^Keri pi-yei, 'hold back no longer' (TV. 5. 50), with which Pindar switches from praise of Menandros to praise of Themistios the victor's maternal grandfather.394 Pindar (it is argued) here explicitly characterizes his treatment of Menandros, in retrospect, as 'cold'; there he did hold or shrink back. This is surely over-ingenious: we can admit that Pindar is admitting that until now he has been 'cold', or has 'shrunk back', but only because until this moment he has failed to mention Themistios at all (there may have been some particular but now irrecoverable reason why his commission encouraged or required him to mention Themistios' Epidaurian victories). But now, at almost the end of the poem, he does so in splendid closural style, 'hoisting the sails to the topmost yard'. The final piece of evidence deployed by Pfeijffer in his argument that Nemean 5 is intensely political is Pindar's pointed refusal (lines 14-16) to develop the story of the fratricide of Phokos by Peleus and Telamon. This for Pfeijffer is the analogue of the stasis of the time of Nikodromos (above). He writes: ' [I] t is in fact quite impossible to imagine that, in this situation, Pindar's story about fratricide was not understood as an allusion to the recent outbursts of violence, Aeginetans killing fellow Aeginetans.'395 That ('quite impossible') is very strongly put. It will certainly not convince us unless we have already agreed that 'this situation' has been closely identified. I would not deny some general force to Pfeijffer's arguments. But rather than accepting his very tight fit with the 'unheralded war' I would prefer to say that for pretty well the whole 393 394 395

For all this see Pfeijffer 1995*: 327. Pfeijffer 19956: 323f; 1999: 82,181-3; cf- Bury 1890: 97. Pfeijffer 1999: 66. Cole 1992: 58f. also has a highly political reading of the fratricide.

230


fifth century until 431 the Aiginetans must have been aware of the risk of confrontation with Athens and a sensitive poet would not fail to realize this. They were also, patrons and poet alike, well aware of the risks of stasis, that is 'fratricidal' war in the figurative and sometimes literal sense; but in what Greek state were people not so aware, whether in the fourth century or the fifth?396 This was no doubt particularly true in the days of the Athenian empire when as Thucydides remarks apropos of Kerkyra there was a temptation for democrats and oligarchs to call in the Athenians and Spartans respectively (Th. 3. 82. i). But the Nikodromos story (assuming it has not been anachronistically contaminated by later history)397 shows that the temptation existed well before the empire was established after 478. Aigina's proximity to Athens meant that disaffected Aiginetans always had an obvious recourse and refuge in times of stasis: Nikodromos was surely neither the first nor the last. The third and fourth critical phases in Aiginetan history are 459-458 and 446, and the poem generally thought to be relevant to both of them is Pindar's final surviving datable victory ode, Pythian 8 for Aristomenes of Aigina, 446 BG. But another poem, Olympian 8 of 460, for Alkimedon of Aigina,398 has been thought to be relevant to 'phase three', the war which ended in 458, and I discuss that poem first. Chronology is crucial here, and it must first be said that the date of the poem is not as secure as those of other Olympian odes: it rests on the scholiast unsupported this time by the Olympic list (POxy. 222, FGrHistî^), which happens not to cover that year. Figueira399 argued in 1991 that Olympian 8 was not first performed 'until after the fall of Aigina; the occasion of its performance was postponed by the outbreak of hostilities, which should be put no later than spring 459'. In this poem too (cf. above on Menandros) embarrassment has been detected in the way an Athenian trainer and athlete is praised, this time the Melesias whose connections—above all his son Thoukydides the opponent of Pericles—we have discussed in an earlier chapter (p. 53). 'Here', says Wade-Gery, 'is Pindar's sticki396

See n. 371 above. It is worth bearing in mind that Herodotus' extensive coverage of early Athenian— Aiginetan tensions (coverage on which PfeijfTer relies heavily) is in part conditioned by his awareness of much later tensions, around 431, our 'fifth event' in the series. In the same way and perhaps for the same reason he is noticeably interested in the pre-history of Kormthian— Kerkyraian tensions. See Hornblower 1996: 145. 398 On whose family connections see Carey 19890: 1-6. Neither Alkimedon's own name nor that of his grandfather (as Carey plausibly argues he was) Timosthenes is specially rare anywhere. 399 Figueira 1991: 84f. with the long n. 15; this appeared just too early to take account of the chronological arguments of Lewis in 1992 (above, n. 373). 397

Aigina

231

est style: he is embarrassed. The poem was sung at Aegina, where it was difficult to praise any Athenian: the death-struggle between the two powers was in sight.' (Wade-Gery is discussing lines 53-66 and especially line 55 'let no sharp tone of envy strike me . . . ').400 None of this is quite compelling (what about the Athenian sympathizers on the island of whom there were surely some?) though it is hard not to be moved by Wade-Gery's rhetoric. If the war began in 459 as I accept (n. 373), then it was in the future in 460; it is the historian with hindsight for whom events are 'in sight' before they have happened. And Figueira's hypothesis of postponed performance is arbitrary. Perhaps the tense international situation (as we would now say) in 460 meant that Aiginetans were more worried then than in previous years, but I am not sure we would guess that from the poem without the date given us by the scholiast. In any case the radical uncertainty about the date of the outbreak of hostilities between Athens and Aigina (460 or 459?) means that precision about the political or military context of Olympian 8 is simply not to be had—always assuming that 460 is the certain date of that ode. I return to Pythian 8. This much-admired poem, with its eloquent final lines about human life as a 'dream of a shadow', aKias ovap (95— 6),401 has always struck commentators as in a strong sense political: in 1992 it rated a paragraph to itself by D. M. Lewis in the chapter of the new Cambridge Ancient History dealing with the Thirty Years Peace.402 Apropos of this victory, Lewis incidentally asks the interesting question, 'did the Phocians still maintain the control [of Delphi] which the Athenians had given them?' (a reference to the last reported phase of the 'Second Sacred War' fought at and for Delphi at Th. i. 112. 5). True, organizing and hosting the games at Delphi was the most important thing the amphiktiony did, but we need not suppose that it manipulated the results of all athletic events held there, so Aristomenes' victory is not too surprising. 400 Wade-Gery 1958: 247f. But against this way of taking the negative thought see the convincing reply of Race 1983: 114 and 116, showing that no real embarrassment is implied also Carey ig8gc: 288 (part of an argument that Melesias is at this moment being praised in his capacity as athlete rather than trainer). 401 Or so this wonderful and famous express ion has traditionally been taken. Toohey 1987 has argued for a more up-beat interpretation (man is 'a dream felt by a shade' without victor but is given life by it, i.e. in effect if you don't win you are as good as dead, and conversely winning is atonic) but I agree with Robbins 1997: 275 that this is not a subjective genitive and that shades do not usually dream. 402 D. M. Lewis, CAHf 136; cf. too Cole 1992:101-11.

232


Pindar (it is felt) is expressing more than a general sense of the evanescence and precariousness of human life; he is troubled more topically by the precariousness of Aiginetan independence in the exciting but dangerous atmosphere of 446. Incorporation in the Athenian empire in 458 had meant the end of great power status; would the Athenians go further? Pindar hopes not, and he says so. (We know they did go further,403 in our phase five which is 432/1 BG, but we must not be seduced by that knowledge.) There are two main reasons for this interpretation. First, there is the opening invocation of Hesychia, 'Quiet'; we have already discussed this in an earlier chapter (pp. 60-3) where we examined the evidence for this personified abstract noun. It has been thought to be an oligarchic word and concept favoured by the enemies of the Athenians, and there is something in this; but the word is a Pindaric favourite and is found in contexts where it has a different flavour, usually internal. It should thus not be over-interpreted as part of the discourse of anti-imperialism. Pfeijffer is right that it is interesting that the victory of Aristomenes is actually dedicated to the goddess, given that there is 'no evidence for an actual cult' of Hesychia.404 (Anywhere? Or just on Aigina?) Strictly this is true, but there was at Athens a cult of Hesychos to whom the genos or clan of the Hesychidai sacrificed a ram; the name was said in antiquity to be connected with the silence surrounding the rites of the Eumenides/Erinyes/Semnai.405 It was therefore not too great a leap for Pindar to personify Hesychia, if indeed he did.406 But it is an attractive thought that some sort of programmatic political metaphor is indicated by the word at the very opening of Pindar's poem. It is perhaps more like peace within thepolis (as Race puts it)407 than international peace, but the word cannot be pinned down too firmly: 'tranquillity, external and internal, is recommended' is Lewis' formulation (above, n. 402). There follows in Pindar an account of what happens to those who oppose hybris(insolence, intentionally insultingbehaviour) to Hesychia: they meet the violent fate of Porphyrion and Typhos (lines 8-13). These 'vanquished monsters'408 are supposed to be either Athens or proAthenian Aiginetans;409 Gildersleeve preferred the latter: 'this would seem to refer to parties within rather than parties without', though 403

As I said myself in OCD3 under 'Aegina'. Pfeijffer 1999:472. 406 fa pf e ijff er 1999: 472 suggests. 408 In the phrase of Robbins 1997: 266. 404

405 407 409

Parker 1996: 298. Race 1997: 2. 329. Pfeijffer 1999: 433.

Aigina

233

he cautiously and rightly prefaced this with '[i]f there is any special political allusion . . .'41° Pfeijffer goes a good deal further in specificity: Pindar 'implies that in 457 B.C., when the traditional elite was replaced by pro-Athenian rulers, SiVa had been violated' and so on.411 This assertion of a change of government on Aigina takes us well o o o beyond the evidence. The other main section which has been interpreted politically is the invocation near the end of the poem to 'dear mother Aigina', together with Zeus, Aiakos, Peleus, Telamon, and Achilles, to 'safeguard this city on its voyage of freedom', a section we have glanced at already (p. 224):

(P. 8. 98-100) For Pfeijffer, who thinks that 'as was made clear by the defeat at Goronea 111447, the Athenian empire was about to crumble',412 Pindar is therefore saying cheerfully that Aigina is already on a voyage of freedom, and expresses the hope that this will remain so in the future. 413 I agree with Robbins and against Pfeijffer that this is not a statement of a fact combined with a prayer, but just a prayer.414 Talk of crumbling is too positive and I doubt if Pindar's words mean that he really regarded 'the Athenian defeat at Koroneia as the liberation of Aegina'.415 Nor is the situation after 446 (when as Pfeijffer believes 'aristocratic Aeginetan hopes for recovery of their autonomy were to be frustrated') nearly as clear to us as Pfeijffer implies. In the first place, the often-repeated modern statement that the Thirty Years Peace 'entailed the recognition of the status quo' (Pfeijffer's words)416 rests on a simple mistranslation of a sentence in a speech of Pericles reported by Thucydides, as I have tried to show elsewhere. In the context, the expression 'each side is to hold what it has' must mean merely 'in the mean time, i.e. pending arbitration, the two parties are to remain on a footing of uti possidetis' *11 In the second place, it is possible that it was 446 (not458 as 410

4 Gildersleeve 1899: 328. " PfeijfTer 1999: 432. 413 Pfeijffer 434, cf. 432, 455 and elsewhere. Pfeijffer 1999: 451. 414 Robbins 1997 (replying to PjeijfTer igg^b); PfeijfTer's counter-reply (1999: 451 n. 62) restates his position. 415 PfeijfTer 1999: 453. 416 Pfeijffer 1999: 455. 417 Hornblower 1991: 22jf., n. onTh. i. 140. 2. 412

234


Pfeijffer seems to assume) which saw the recognition of the autonomy of Aigina and other places. If so, 446 was not the frustration of Aiginetan hopes of Athenian crumbling but in a way an improvement in Aigina's situation. My conclusion over Olympian 8 was that radical uncertainties about chronology make it unwise to seek to press the poem for political detail, and I would say the same for Pythian 8. 'It is the sign of a cultivated person not to ask for more precision than the subject-matter allows,' as Aristotle said (ME iog4b23). Here are some things historians do not know about Aiginetan history between 460, the assumed year of 0. 8 and 446, the year of P. 8. We do not know in which year (460 or 459) war broke out between the Athenians and the Aiginetans. We do not know how serious were the political convulsions ensuing on the Athenian coercion of Aigina in 458: no doubt there were some but without specific information we should not assume that there were two completely different regimes before and after 458; after all some people are remarkably good at coming to terms with new political realities (compare Russia and eastern Europe after 1989). We do not know whether the Aiginetan autonomy which was such an issue in 432 was guaranteed in 458, in 446 or in some other year. We do not know (a point I have not yet addressed) exactly when in the course of the diplomacy of 446 Pythian 8 was performed; the victory was late summer but we do not know how far the terms of peace were fixed and known just then or at the moment of poetic performance whenever that was. Finally we have no list of the terms of the Thirty Years Peace to compare with, say, the terms of the peace of Nikias (Th. 5.18). This uncertainty affects not only the autonomy issue, but the issue of Spartan recognition of the Athenian empire; we have seen that the passage usually invoked as evidence for that recognition actually says nothing of the sort (above on Th. i. 140. 2). This does not mean that there was no such recognition. What conclusions follow from all this? I suggest that we should not despairingly return to a Bundyish refusal to see the Aiginetan odes historically and politically. Pride in the Persian Wars, preoccupations about Athens over the water and perhaps determination to maintain their own values in face of the Athenians—these themes are present either certainly (Persia) or very probably (Athens). So Pindar's Aiginetan odes provide what we badly miss in Thucydides, a subject or allied viewpoint on the Athenian empire. But there are strict limits to how far the political detail can and should be pressed. I suggest that the interesting and profitable issue for the historian is that with which I

Aigina

235

began, namely the question of social history raised by Robin Osborne, even though I disagree with his answer. That question has to do with the activities of the Aiginetan elite and the reasons why they are so prominent in the epinikian poetry of the fifth century. Sparta In our discussion of Aigina we saw that Lampon the Aiginetan was sharply rebuffed by the Spartan regent Pausanias in 479 BC, just as Krios the Aiginetan 'Ram' had locked horns with the Spartan king Kleomenes some years earlier (Hdt. 6. 50). In contrast with the Aiginetans, the Spartans who are so prominent collectively and as individuals in Thucydides notoriously do not supply Pindar or Bacchylides with a single dedicatee, although we have seen (p. 21) that Ibykos in the sixth century may have written an epinikian ode for a Spartan, and there are plenty of Spartans in the lists of fifth-century Olympic victors in the chariot event:418 Pausanias, whose favourite poet was Pindar,419 says that after 480 and the Persian Wars the Spartans went in for chariot racing with great seriousness (6. 2. i).420 And two prominent classical Spartans belong to the interesting category of 'victor-oikists', as Leslie Kurke has called them:421 Brasidas as we have seen was both a metaphorical athlete (greeted 'as if an athlete' at Skione, p. 46 above), and also a sort of metaphorical oikist at Amphipolis and posthumously honoured with games there just like a mythical Pindaric gamesfounder (above, pp. yf. and 48). The other fifth-century Spartan in this oikist category seems to have been both a literal oikist and a literal athlete. He is Leon, one of the oikists of Herakleia in Trachis in 426 BG (Th. 3. 92. 5)—and perhaps to be identified with an Olympic victor in the four-horse chariot race in 440 Be.422 His name, 'the Lion', was eminently suitable for the founder of Herakleia: the lion was Herakles' 418 Spartans entered most conspicuously for the chariot event, but not exclusively, as is stated in some modern books. A Spartan whose name is not preserved won the dolichos ('long race', a running event) in 480: Moretti no. 211, from P Oxy. 222. Bacchylides: poem 20 ('Idas') is 'for the Spartans', but is a dithyramb. 419 Habicht 1998 [1985]: 133 (twenty-three quotations, five additional citations). 420 See the valuable discussion of Hodkinson 1989 : 95-100 (but at p. 97, for 'Paus. 6. i. 7' read '6. 2. i'). 421 Kurke 1993: 136. For the heroization of the boxer Euthymos of Italian Lokri, and the significance of the colonial aspect, see above, pp. 26, 189. 422 Moretti no. 332 for Leon's victory, but with a wrong date, 424. The date must be gone into in detail because scholars have simply repeated or contradicted each other without always, it would seem, going back to the primary evidence. In a nutshell, there are two explicit ancient statements, one in Eustathius, one in the scholia to Euripides; both go back

236


beast. (For the link between athletics and colonization see further above, p. 27). There is no doubt that the Spartans of Pindar's and Thucydides' day knew all about the prestigious associations of athletic success—and we have not even started to discuss Lichas and his father Arkesilas, for whom see Chapter 7 below. And all this relates only to successful Spartan athletes known to us because they were also prominent in other spheres; there must in addition have been many others in the 'Damonon' category. This man was an otherwise unknown fifthor early fourth-century Spartan who put up a long inscription (inscriptions of any sort from classical Sparta, with its 'restricted code' of communication,424 are a distinct rarity), which records his equestrian victories in local Peloponnesian events, 'driving the chariot himself, avros dvioxicov.425 There is also a paragraph about the non-equestrian victories of his son Enymakritidas. We might reasonably have expected to the same source Polemon, and both, beforemodemscholars startedarbitranly emendingthem,givethe same date, namely 440. First Eustathlus. As all modern scholars correctly say, the 440 date (85th Olympiad, that is aySar)KaaTrjv -nl\LTm]v 6Xvfj.Tn.dSa) is given by the Homeric commentator Eustathius, Gomm. on Homer lliadi. 852, and this date is followed by Poralla 1913:83, Barrett 1964: 204 and Hornblower 1991: 506. Eustathlus drew for his information on a Eunpidean scholiast on Hipp. 231, a note on 'Venetic horses'. (On this note and this topic see Easterhng 1985: 8 and refs. at n. 36). Second, the Euripidean scholiast himself. He gives much the same material as Eustathius, but cites Polemon for the facts and the date, which is also given clearly as the 85th Olympiad, 77? 6\vp.Trid8i, that is again 440. See Schwartz 1891: 34, the definitive edition of the Euripidean scholia; see also Preller 1838: 49 (separate edition of the fragments of Polemon). So where does 424 come from? The answer appears to be that Miiller 1839:122, which was the edition of Polemon cited by Moretti, prints (without explanation or discussion, as usual): '77$ (TT€ Eustath)'. This is simply an emendation or error by Mtiller, who was writing long before Schwartz's edn. of the Euripidean scholia. Even Andrewes HCT5. 69 speaks of Moretti preferring 'the variant date 424' from £ Eur. Hipp. 231. It is not a 'variant date' at all. Both Eustathius, and Polemon as quoted by the Euripidean scholiast, say 440. Moretti emended Eustathius' 440 to 424 (TT€ to TT&) to bring Eustathius into line with what he wrongly took Polemon to have said; then Honle 1968: I57f. and n. 5, followed by Kurke 1993: 136 and 157 n. 22, pushed this 424 date back to 428 on the grounds that it would be nicer to have Leon as an Olympic victor before his activity as oikist at Herakleia in 426. But in that case why not return to the unemended date of both Eustathius and Polemon i.e. 440? This enables us to insist on the oikist-then-victor sequence without circularity of reasoning. The length of Leon's career is not a good reason for emending 440 to 424, because an Olympic victor in 440 could certainly be politically active in 426—or 420 (Th. 5. 44) or even 411 (Th. 8. 61. 2), though see below. Having said all that, it must be acknowledged that the 5th-cent. Spartan Leons in LGPN are a terrible tangle; Andrewes (as above) is right to advise caution about identifications, on the grounds that the name is a common one in Greece (there are 176 in LGPJV-jA alone). 423

Rhodes 1994: 249; Woodman and Martin 1996: 492. In the language of Douglas 1970. 425 IG^. i. 213; Tod and Wace 1906: 64f. no. 440; LSAG"2: 185, igBf, Peloponnese no. 52 (dated pre-431 in the text, but see the 1990 supplement p. 448 where a post-403 redating is 424

Sparta

237

Pindaric-style praise poetry to have been written both for Spartans of the international distinction and high profile of Lichas, and also for Spartans of the Damonon and Enymakritidas sort;426 after all, many Pindaric victors are similarly unknown to history except—and Pindar would rightly protest that it is a very important exception—for the glory of commemoration by Pindar himself. Nor is the parochiality of Damonon's victories an obstacle to such a belief, because Pindar did not write only for the four great games: Merman 10 is for a victor in the games for Hera at Argos (and Bacchylides 14 is for a victor in the local Petraian games in Thessaly). But there is a difficulty because the same Pausanias the Periegete says categorically elsewhere (3. 8. i) that the Spartans admired poetry, and the praise conferred by such poetry, least of all men. He continues 'for apart from the epigram which somebody composed for Kyniska [on whom see above, p. 100], and before that the epigram which Simonides dedicated at Delphi [for which see Th. i. 132. 2, the controversial dedication by Pausanias the Regent], there is no other composition by a poet commemorating any of the Spartan kings'. It might be thought that this settles the matter: in the light of Pausanias' explicit o o i^ statement, Pindar cannot have written a victory ode for a Spartan. But in fact Pausanias' whole paragraph is strangely sloppy and I suggest cannot be so relied on. For one thing, as Peter Levi notes,427 Pausanias is 'wrong about poetry down to Pindar', because until the fifth century Sparta 'has a more glittering record of poets than Athens', and we can now add a fact unknown to Levi, namely that Ibykos in the sixth century does seem to have written a victory ode for a Spartan, perhaps commemorating athletic success in games at Sikyon (above, Gh. i p. 21, discussing Si66, DaviesPMGF248f). Levi goes onto say of Pausanias the Periegete 'what his accusation amounts to is that Spartan kings have no verse epitaphs, which is both true and interesting'. It would be better to say that it 'would be interesting if true', but it is in

suggested). For a translation see Sweet 1987: 1451". Sweet comments that 'although Spartans had dominated the Olympic games in the earliest years, the Spartans of this time were participating less and less in festivals outside their own territory'. Not so, or at any rate not proven. For an equestrian victor driving the chariot himself cf. Pi./, i. 15. 426 The plural ('Spartans') is justified; note 765.1.1120, withjeffery and Johnston, LSAG2: 185 and 447 no. 51 b, an anonymous victor in the Hekatombaia at PGeronthrai, who won the stadion, the diaulos, the dohchos, the pente dohchoi, and the hophte race. 427 Levi 1971: 2. 28 n. 46.

238


fact untrue because a surviving verse inscription from Delphi of 381/0 BG (Tod 120) commemorates King Agesipolis of Sparta, and was put up at Delphi by his father King Pausanias. (It is a two-line epigram under a statue base, statue by Kleon of Sikyon, epigram by a poet unknown. It ends 'Greece agrees about his virtue, EAAas S' aperav 0|U,oo)vei. Pausanias the Periegete, who knew Delphi very well, must have seen it). What exactly is Pausanias the Periegete saying here? He starts from Kyniska the sister of Agesilaos and her chariot victories,428 moves on to say that the Spartans had no taste for poetry in general (false) or for praise poetry in particular (debatable), and then denies that Spartan kings Pausanias attracted commemorar^ o after the regent o tive epigrams (false). The final point, about the absence of royal Spartan epigrams, is not only false; it is also a little odd in that it implies that the only Spartans worth commemorating were royal Spartans. In an athletic context (and he has after all just been talking about Kyniska at Olympia), we might have expected Pausanias to discuss prominent Spartans other than kings and queens—in fact, athletic victors like Arkesilas and his son Lichas. What he actually offers is both factually shaky and a logical non sequitur. 'the Spartans had no time for poetry or praise poetry, because there are no epigrams for Spartan kings.' The second half of this is false as we have seen, and so is the first: has Pausanias forgotten the verse dedication on the magnificent Delphic victory monument for Aigospotamoi (ML 95; on this monument cf. also Pausanias himself, 10. 9. 7-10)? It commemorated the commoner Lysander, whose statue was represented as crowned by Poseidon; present too were the Dioskouroi Kastor and Polydeukes, and the poet of the epigrams was Ion of Samos. The New Simonides, a poem published in 1992 which compares Pausanias the regent to Achilles,429 makes it even odder to say that Spartans disliked praise poetry. We can add that what Plato says in the HippiasMajor (285$) about Spartans liking to hear tales about the genealogies of heroes and men, and about the foundation of cities,430 suggests they would have enjoyed listening to a Pindar ode such as Pythians 4, 5 and 9 about their grand-daughter city Kyrene. It may still be said that whatever his inaccuracies and whatever the gaps in his reasoning, Pausanias could not have written as he did if in his time there had been a surviving Pindaric epinikian ode for a Spartan victor, whether king or commoner. I think this conclusion 428 429 430

For whom and for which see p. 100 n. 34. See Boedeker and Sider 2001. Hornblower 19940: 9.

Sparta

239

is probably right; but since Pausanias does not in this passage inspire a lot of confidence I shall for the moment consider the problem without further reference to him. The absence in Pindar of a victory ode for a Spartan is usually explained in general terms—the egalitarianism of the Spartan elite which ruled out individual poetic patronage of the necessary sort. The argument can take the specific form of an argument about performance: the lack of victory songs for Spartans is (it is suggested) 'a result of that community's strict control over the kinds of public occasions on which they were presented elsewhere at that time'. This is the view taken by Mark Golden in his general book on Greek sport431 and now by Stephen Hodkinson in his detailed study of property and wealth in classical Sparta.432 It is difficult to feel altogether persuaded by this argument, partly because the truth about what was and was not possible at classical Sparta (as opposed to 'invented tradition'433 about the place) is so very elusive, and partly because Pindarists are not agreed that epinikian odes were composed exclusively for public as opposed to private performance. This last argument is bound up with the disputed question whether the odes were sung by choirs or by individuals.434 One may accept that public recitation or performance of victory odes for individuals was frowned on at Sparta. But it is not so clear that private performance or re-perfomance at symposia was equally ruled out.435 There is some evidence for symposia at Sparta and perhaps for song and dance at such symposia (Ion Fay West).436 So (to sum up) there may have been private sympotic performance of epinikian odes437 at Sparta even if not public performance of them. So much for the specific issue, but in any case I am not so sure about the more general premise about Spartan egalitarianism, so let us open the issue up. The first possibility to be considered is that the evidential gap (no victory odes for Spartans) is apparent not real. After all, we do not have quite all Pindar's victory odes, and as we have seen (pp. 206 f), if it had not been for a chance discovery on papyrus in the twentieth century 431

Golden 1998:81. Hodkinson 2000: 318, with acknowledgment to Parker 1989: 149 for public ritual at Sparta. 433 For this concept see Hobsbawm and Ranger 1983. 434 Golden 1998: 81; Heath and Lefkowitz 1991 and Lefkowitz 1991: 191-206; Carey 1991. See above, p. 35 n. 133. 435 Hodkinson 318. 436 West 1985. 437 For epinikian odes and symposia see above, Gh. i p. 35. 432

240


nobody would have guessed that Pindar wrote an ode for a victor from insignificant Megara. And yet we know now he did and we have bits of it (F6a, a commentary including lemmata, that is, Pindaric passages commented on).438 But the incomplete book of Odes is the Isthmian not the Olympian book, and it was in the Olympic games that the big Spartan names feature. It may in any case be thought improbable, quite apart from Pausanias' remarks already considered, that a victory ode for a Spartan should have completely failed to attract notice in the form of quotation by ancient commentators and biographers like Plutarch (but perhaps it did attract it as we shall see). The second point is that Pindar certainly had no aversion to Sparta and Spartans.439 It is possible, but not quite agreed, that there was actually a personal connection. In Pythian 5 he says: 'And mine it is to proclaim the delightful glory that comes from Sparta, whence men born as Aigeidai, my forefathers, came to Thera' — a Spartan colony and in turn mother-city of Kyrene whose ruler Arkesilas the poem celebrates:

(P. 5. 72-6)

Now Herodotus says that the Aigeidai were a 'great clan' at Sparta, (4. 149. i).440 In Isthmian 7 Pindar says the Aigeidai captured Amyklai near Sparta and thus assisted the Dorian invasion, in a context which makes it plain that the Aigeidai are Thebans. Addressing Thebe the nymph who personifies Pindar's home city he says 'your offspring, the Aigeidai, took Amyklai', e'Aov 8' AJJ,VK\O.S (lines 14—15). The problem in interpreting the passage in Pythian 5 is to know what 'my' refers to in the expression 'my forefathers'; this is in fact the most critical text for the understanding of the much-discussed Pindaric T or First Person Singular. Is the reference to Pindar himself? Or is it an utterance by the Kyrenaian chorus? On the one hand, it has seemed a difficulty that the poet himself should say his glory comes from Sparta. 438

See Lobel 1961: 169-73 f°r discussion. Nor did Bacchylides: above, n. 418 for B. 20. 440 For this non-technical sense of (f>v\r/ cf. the Samian one at Hdt. 3. 26 with Shipley 1987:285. 439

Sparta

241

On the other hand Mary Lefkowitz has argued vigorously that if Pindar intended the chorus to speak in P. 5. 72 fE, he 'would be making an extraordinary departure from tradition and from his usual style' (because the passage makes no attempt to define the speakers' choral role and physical appearance). Her own attractive solution is that the words are indeed a personal statement by the poet, but that he mentions Aigeid fame because the clan's foundation of Thera was 'an important event in the history of Gyrene', or rather perhaps we should say in its prehistory. She thinks that some of the Aigeidai remained in Sparta and 'their descendants went on to colonize Thera'.441 As we have seen, Herodotus confirms that the Aigeidai were indeed a domiciled Spartan clan (4. 149, curiously not cited by Lefkowitz), not just a clan of Thebans who once helped the Spartans take Amyklai. If we allow that 'my forefathers' is in some sense a personal statement, it follows that Pindar is laying claim to Spartan connections. Leaving the First Person Singular aside, what of Pindar's poetry as a whole? 'Blessed Sparta' are the opening words of Pindar's first-ever ode Pythian 10. He locates not just the Dioskouroi Kastor and Polydeukes (N. 10. 52), but even Agamemnon and Orestes in Sparta (P. n. 16, 32; N. ii. 34) although most poets, though not Stesichoros or Simonides, placed the last two elsewhere, in fact in Mykenai or Argos.442 He more than once refers to the Dorian invasion in terms of the capture of Sparta's neighbour Amyklai (P. i. 65, /. 7. 14-15, cf. above). Spartans are prominent in his story of the colonization of Kyrene in north Africa (Pythian 4, but see below for Pindar's postponement of the Spartan involvement from the fourth to the seventeenth generation). And Wilamowitz, in his 1886 book on Isyllos of Epidauros rather than in the 1922 book on Pindar, showed that Olympian 6, which as we have seen is for a Syracusan of Arkadian extraction, contains coded but flattering references to Spartan institutions, planted there because the ode honours the lamids, a family of seers with strong Spartan connections.443 441

Lefkowitz 1991: 65, 63. Burton 1962: 65 thought that on this point Pindar was following Stesichoros (839, Davies PMGFp. 209, F 216), though Simonides is also possible (8549, from the same source, the scholion on Eur. Or. 46, which says that both Stesichoros and Simonides said he was killed 'at Sparta', Iv AaK£&aip,ovi). Bowra 1964: 193, by contrast, thought that Pindar differed from Stesichorus (and thus also Simonides) in that he has Agamemnon killed at Amyklai rather than Sparta, but Burton is right that the similarity (Amyklai was a Spartan obe or district) is more important than the difference. 443 Wilamowitz 1886: 162—85; Andrewes 1952: i and n. 2. Note that this helps to explain the mention of the skytalestt line 91; for this Spartan institution (a stick for sending messages) see OCD3, 'skytale'. For 0. 6 see above, pp. 182-6. 442

242


But Pindar's best eulogy of Sparta comes to us from Plutarch quoting an unidentified poem, perhaps that elusive victory ode whose absence I lamented earlier. It goes 'there the counsels of elders and the young men's spears prevail, and choruses, the Muse, and splendour' (Figg, from Plut. Lye. 21. 3). This is fine writing; it gets into modern books about Sparta at the point where the author wants to bring out the more attractive side of the generally horrible Spartan system.444 But before we get too excited about Pindar's sympathy for specifically Spartan values, let us, armed with the formula-conscious methods of Bundy and Young, consider the following Pindaric lines: 'there flourishes the sweet-voiced Muse: there thrives Ares the war-god, with the young men's deadly spears'. The resemblances are close it will be agreed, but the second quotation is from Olympian 13. 22-3, for the athlete Xenophon from Korinth, a centre of commerce, luxury, and expensive sexual vice (cf. Fi22, also for Xenophon and alluding to Korinthian sacred prostitution),445 not on the whole a city modern scholars tend to get idealistic about. To return to our initial problem, could Pindar have written a victory ode for a Spartan, and did he? We need to press the question, what sort of poem does Figg ('spears and Muses') come from? The metre is dactyloepitrite, which is compatible with a victory ode—and with other genres as well, such as hymns and dithyrambs. We might want to say that since Pindar refers to Muses, spears, and so on both in an athletic victory ode to a Korinthian and in a poem about Sparta, then there is a good chance that the Spartan poem was also for an athletic victor. Different Pindaric victory odes do often contain similarities of phrasing, thus 'well-governed', evvoôs, is applied to Aigina (/. 5. 22), Korinth (Evvoîa, 0. 13. 6), Thebes (Paian i, Di Rutherford, line 10, praying for it) and Aitna/Katane (N. 9. 29; it was a word actually evocative of Sparta, cf. Th. i. 18. i and Tyrtaios' poem Eunomia). Dornseiff even said, with some exaggeration, that for Pindar, 'cities are always Anrapos [shining]', 'alle Stadte sind Xnrapos'.446 For another example see below, p. 285 (water and gold pointedly referred to in both 0. i and 0. 3). So perhaps Figg, like 0. 13, was written for an athletic victory? But that would go too far because Pindar is quite capable of recycling the language and thought of the victory odes in other sorts of poem (or vice versa); thus Alkmene rushes from bed 'unrobed' i.e stark 444

Huxley 1962: 64; Forrest 1981 [1968]: ii3;Rawson 1969: 13. Salmon 1984: 397—9. 446 Dornseiff 1921: 43; on p. 56 this is put less recklessly, 'die Stadte heissen fast immer AiTrapoj'. 445

Sparta

243

naked to save the infant Herakles from the serpents, in both Nemean i (line 50, a-n-e-n-Xos opovaaiaa, cf. above, p. 99) and in Paian 20 (F52U lines 14-15, a-n-e-n-Xos . . . ]vopovae). So Figg might come from a paian or a dithyramb for Sparta, rather than a victory ode. But even that gives the lie to Pausanias' remark that there was no taste for praise poetry at Sparta, and the fragment should be added to such counter-evidence as the New Simonides, the Lysander monument at Delphi, and Plato in Hippias Major. The answer to our problem may be complex: the conclusion that Pindar wrote no victory ode for a Spartan does seem to be indicated by Pausanias and by various arguments from silence, above all the fact that no such ode survives in whole or part. But at the same time there is no reason why Pindar could not have written such a victory ode for a Spartan, because Pausanias' arguments to the contrary, both his argument a priori from the Spartan character, and his argument a posteriori from the absence of royal epigrams, are unsound. I leave Sparta there, but only temporarily, because my Part Two will have much to say about Sparta and we shall find Pindaric aspects in my chosen extract from Thucydides. Kyrene Sparta had a 'grand-daughter' colony in north Africa, at Dorian Kyrene,447 a colony of Sparta's own colony Thera (modern Santorini). Kyrene has featured in Gh. 4 above (pp. 107-13) for its colonial aspects, which are Herodotean and Pindaric rather than Thucydidean (even in the 'Sicilian' books 6 and 7, so initially saturated with colonial material, Thucydides does not elaborate on colonial Libya even at the obvious place, 7. 50; for a suggestion as to the reason see above, p. 114). Bacchylides does not seem to have had a connection with Kyrene, but Pindar's longest ode Pythian 4 (an epyllion or mini-epic about Jason, the Argonauts and Medea) was composed for King Arkesilas IV, as was Pythian 5. The name Arkesilas will recur in the present book as the patronymic of Lichas the Spartan victor at Olympia, and I defer for the moment discussion of the possible implications of this interesting fact (see p. 279). The Battiads of Kyrene were—like Pindar's other patrons the rulers of Macedon and like the dual kings of Sparta—hereditary monarchs, a rare thing in Greece before hellenistic times, though Arkesilas 447 For horse-breeding conservative Kyrene see Hornblower 20020: ch. 5. The chapter on 'Pindare et Gyrene' in Ghamoux 1953: 169—201 is still worth reading. Fraser 1972: i. 786—8 provides the best account of wealthy, flourishing, traditional, conservative Kyrene. See now Calame 2003 and Malkin 2003.

244


III, grandfather of Pindar's patron, has been seen as a tyrant in all but name.448 Arkesilas IV was the eighth king of Kyrene (the name alternated with Battos, according to a usual Greek naming pattern, p. 165)—and the last. The monarchy fell in about 440, perhaps just too late for Pindar to have known about its end.449 Proximity to the often disaffected Persian satrapy of Egypt was one of the defining features of classical Kyrene, and Barbara Mitchell has attractively suggested that patronage of Pindar and competition in the great Greek games (the Olympic as well as the Pythian) were for Arkesilas IV deliberate moves away from Persia in the aftermath of the Persian defeats at Salamis, Plataia, and Mykale.450 Pindar's other ode about Kyrene (the eponymous nymph whose story collapses into that of her city) is Pythian 9, for Telesikrates son of Karneiadas (for the patronymic see line 71; modern texts spell KapveidSas but this form is otherwise unattested and LGPN gives Pindar's man as KapvedSas (i).451 Note however that the text of Pindar should not be emended:452 the metre of the line requires that the second syllable be lengthened). The father's name Karneadas is a good example of a month-name or else it belongs to the category of Festnamen (names derived from a festival); either way it is religious in origin. Thucydides, in what for him is a rare sort of comment, tells us that Karneios was a 'sacred month for the Dorians', lepo^via Awpievai (5. 54. i. For the Karneia itself as a festival see 5. 75. 2 and 76. i). There is another (late) Karneadas in LGPN i (the islands and Gyrenaica), but in the same volume no fewer than 23 out of the 25 men called Karneades (the nonDoric form) are from Gyrenaica (and there are two called KapvrjdSas and 46 called Kapv-ijSas, all 48 from Gyrenaica); the other two of the 25 called Karneades are from those two good Dorian islands Rhodes and Krete. Among the 23 called Karneades (actually no. 17) is the famous second-century BG philosopher Karneades of Kyrene, the founder of the Athens-based philosophical school known as the New Academy, who must have started life as a Karneadas before his Athenian hosts squeezed his final vowel for him.453 Elsewhere in the Greek world, even 448

Chamoux 1953: 158-9. Ghamoux 1953: 209. 450 Mitchell 2000: 94. Arkesilas 'Olympic victory: Moretti 1957: oo. 451 Mr P. M. Fraser kindly confirmed, in a letter dated 19 March 2001, that in LGPN the Pindaric form KapveidSas was taken to be a 'metrical adjustment', and so the name was listed as Ka.pvea.8as. 452 Gf Hornblower zoooa: 138 for the general point here. 453 Forwhom see G. S[triker] in OCD3under 'Garneades'. 449

Kyrene

245

in the Peloponnese, heartland of Dorianism, there is no more than a small sprinkling anywhere of people with this name or its variants (for instance in the Peloponnese volume, LGPNÂ, there is one Karneadas from the Argolid and one from Arkadia, and that is it). There is no doubt that Karneadas was a very Kyrenaian name, and this surely reflects the marked prominence at Kyrene of the cult of Apollo Karneios, for whose festival Pindar wrote Pythian 5 (see lines 79-80) and that originally Kyrenaian poet Kallimachos, centuries later, wrote his Hymn to Apollo (Hymn a).454 Onomastically, Telesikrates himself is less clearly and specifically Kyrenean, though the name is found there (two hellenistic occurrences); and we know nothing of the man outside Pindar and his commentators. Pythian 4, to revert to the epyllion, closes with a plea for the restoration of the exiled Damophilos (line 281 for the name; did he pay for the ode, as is sometimes suggested?)455 This name is certainly attested in Gyrenaica (there are two others, one early hellenistic); but it is a common one, for instance there are 65 Athenian J^ô^tAot. However Chris Carey is surely right that real events and a real human disaster underlie Pindar's plea (see above, p. 40), though again they are irrecoverable by us beyond what we learn from Pindar. Despite Kyrene's reputation for horse-breeding, Telesikrates was not an equestrian victor but won the hoplite race in armour.456 Pindar's royal patron Arkesilas IV was, by contrast, a serious horse-breeder who understood the politics of horse-breeding and horse races. The local historian of Kyrene Theotimos tells us that Arkesilas sent one Euphemos to take horses to 'the festivals', ras Travrj-yvpeis, so as to win prizes, and that Arkesilas himself won at the Pythia (FGrHist 470 Fi, quoted by the Pindaric scholiast). The king also, Theotimos says in the same breath, sent additional colonists, epoikoi, to Euesperides, and this mission too was evidently entrusted to Euphemos because when Euphemos died (so Theotimos continues) Karrotos the brother of 454 Fraser 1972: 653 and n. 292 , cf 788 for the festival itself, 'held on the terrace of the sanctuary below the agora and the acropolis, on which the successive temples of Apollo were built'. The idea of public performance was contested by Williams 1978: 2f, but Cameron 1995: 63, 408 has vigorously and convincingly restated the case for performance. See also the good discussion of Krummen 1990: 98—151 (making a good case for first-hand knowledge of Kyrene by Pindar, though she is not much interested in the personal names in his Kyrenaian odes). Monarchic rule was compatible withpolis participation: below, p. 263. 455 Braswelli988: 5 f. 456 For another running champion from Kyrene see Moretti no. 269, Polymnastos, Olympic victor in the stadium in 456 EC.

246


Arkesilas' wife succeeded to the command, -^yeôvta, of these epoikoi. Now Karrotos son of Alexibios457 is a figure well known to us from Pindar: he was Arkesilas' charioteer, and as such is praised at length for his skill in Pythian 5. 26-53. W. H. Race comments458 'the scholia report that he [Karrotos] was Arkesilas' son-in-law, but there is no independent evidence to confirm this'. That is too sceptical: the scholiast explicitly cites Theotimos' authority (see above) and it is good: the Euesperides material is plausible and non-Pindaric in origin, and so strengthens the likelihood of the rest. And there is the nice confirmingo o detail of Euphemos' name, which is459 the same as the mythical ancestor of the Bacchiads in Pythian zj..460 Was he perhaps a relative from a cadet branch of the royal house? The policy of using kinsmen to fill high positions is familiar from the behaviour of autocrats in all periods of history, and especially from the period of archaic Greek tyranny. As for Euesperides, this was the later Berenike, modern Benghazi. Theotimos' additional (eV-) colonists is right, because the place already existed in the late sixth century (Hdt. 4. 204. i). It makes a fleeting appearance in Thucydides (7. 50. 2),461 who says nothing about the colonial history of the region (above, p. 114) but was nevertheless well informed about the north African coast because in the same context he mentions 'Neapolis a Carthaginian trading-place', probably modern Nabeul.462 Euesperides is a kind of'fourth generation' colony: the line of descent runs Sparta-Thera-Kyrene-Euesperides. An inscription from Euesperides, published by P. M. Eraser half a century ago (SEG18.772), attests officials there of a specifically Spartan type (ephors and gerontes], thus confirming Theotimos' implication that the place was a colony of Kyrene rather than Thera (the ephorate is found at both Thera and Kyrene but the gerousia at Kyrene only).463 Eraser comments: 'If this is correct, the magistracies and institutions of the metropolis were transmitted to the third colonial generation. No other 457

No other Karrotos from Kyrene in LGPNand only one other Alexibios. Race 1997: i. 298. 459 As is rightly noted by Ghamoux 1953: 174 n. 6. 460 The 5th-cent. Euphemos is missing, through what Mr P. M. Fraser (letter of 19 March 2001) confirms was oversight, from LGPJV i, though he expresses a doubt about the man's historicity. There is a very late Euphemos listed (from the 2nd cent. AD); and remarkably there are no Euphamoi (the Doric and Pindaric form of the name) from Gyrenaica at all. Pindar's Euphamos is of course absent because classed as purely mythical. 461 For the ethnic see Fraser 1951: 140 andnn. 462 Dover HCT $. 428. 463 Fraser 1951:137 ('the general probability is that Euesperides was founded from Gyrene, rather than from Thera'). 458

Kyrene

247

instance in which the transmission of constitutional forms can be discerned at so many removes is known to me.'464 Since the foundation of Euesperides antedated Arkesilas TV's initiative (the additional settlers) we cannot say that the Spartan feel to the city's constitution was the result of his policy. But there is a curious piece of evidence (other than the patronymic of Thucydides' Lichas the Spartan) linking Arkesilas IV to Sparta specifically. It is a very fragmentary verse dedication found at Sparta but now lost, and dating from the first two decades of the fifth century (SEG 2. 170, cf. 29. 384; LSAG 201 no. 43; not in CEG). On an optimistic restoration the text runs [2lpKeat\a p.'dv]e9riKe Sa.fj.ap [/Saat'Ataaa] Kvpdvas [/l-TfoAAoi't FdvaKTi' ] Kvpavaws Se p.' £770 [tet] The wife of Arkesilas, Queen of Kyrene, dedicated this to king Apollo; a Kyrenaian made me.

Ghamoux doubted whether the text has been restored correctly and missed a reference to the queen's name.465 If the restoration above were even remotely right it would present a nice parallel to the assertive dedication at Olympia of Kyniska the sister of the Spartan king Agesilaos (p. 100), though nothing suggests that the Kyrene dedication was agonistic. At least it attests classical closeness between Kyrene and Sparta,466 and deserves more attention from students of classical epigrams than it has had. Athens One city above all dominated Greek history, or at any rate historiography, in the fifth century BG, and that was Athens. Athens was an empire in Pindar's time but as we have remarked already (p. 143) you would not guess it from his poems for victors from subject islands— Rhodes, Tenedos, even Aigina. This silence can, if one wishes, be regarded as a sort of negative verdict: for the people who had grown up on these islands, the best way of putting Athenian pretensions into proportion was to continue with one's traditions as if the Athenian alternative did not exist. To that limited but real extent the odes offer us a sort of allied view of the empire. Pindar's non-epinikian material for Delos 464

Fraser 1951: 138, already quoted by me at Hornblower 20020: 58. Ghamoux 1953: 201. From an even later period, Christian Habicht draws my attention to the remarkable proxeny decree from Sparta, dated shortly after 188 EG, for a known citizen of Kyrene, IG^. i. 5 with Habicht 1996: yf. 465 466

248


places us firmly in the Athenian imperial context but we need more of it before we can do much to interpret it politically with confidence. So we turn to Athens as apolis. The Athenian democratic constitution was inaugurated by Kleisthenes at the end of the sixth century (Hdt. 6. 131) and radicalized further after the late 4608 (the time of the 'Ephialtic reforms', which are however best seen as a process not an event). Our inquiry will concentrate on epinikian poems written for Athenians in these 'Kleisthenic' and 'Ephialtic' phases. It is possible however that an Athenian athletic victory was celebrated by an international poet in a poem written long before Kleisthenes, in fact as early as 564 BC. That was the year of an equestrian Olympic victory by the Athenian Kallias son of Phainippos, and John Barron467 has connected this victory with a poem to a Kallias which he assigns to Ibykos of Rhegion (see Gh. i p. 22; for the poem see 8221, Davies, PMGF p. 265). That is interesting but not in itself surprising. Surprise has, by contrast, been felt at the coexistence of poetically praised athletic success and democracy. Thus it is sometimes said or implied that Pindar was tepid or hostile towards the Athenian democratic ethos,468 despite a famous fragment in which he praises Athens as the violet-crowned saviour of Greece in the Persian Wars (Fy6, derived from Aristophanes who quotes it more than once). That, roughly, was the influential view of Wade-Gery in the first half of the twentieth century; but Charles Segal in 1986 said something not very different:469 467

Barren 1984: 2if. Wade-Gery 1958: 249, splendidly written as always, says that Pindar 'lived in that dying world which Athens meant to break and build again'. He is of course well aware that Pindar praises several Athenians, but gets round this by saying (247) that he praises no Athenian after 460 (the presumed date of 0. 8, one of the Melesias poems), when everything changed at Athens (Ephialtic reforms, ostracism of Kim on, etc.). In similar vein Bowra 1953: 25 (P. 7 'in 486' and,/V. 2 'about the same time', with consequent inferences about increasingly distrustful Athenian attitudes towards athletic victories 'as the century advanced'). But the truth is that JV. 2, for Timodemos of Acharnai, is (like all the Nemeans, see above, p. 42) quite undatable; the Salamis references get us nowhere. Nor is 0. 8 one of the securely dated Olympuins. (See above, p. 230; it falls in a period, namely 467—457, which was not covered by P Oxy. 222 — FGrHist 415. It is true that the scholiast dates it to 460, but we cannot be sure about the strict accuracy of this since it is unsupported by P Oxy. 222; a date a year or two later than 460 would make a big difference politically). Golden 1998: 86 says that it may be significant that 'the last datable epimcian for an Athenian, Pindar's P. 7 for Megacles, is as old as 486'; this formulation is strictly correct but qualification implicit in the word 'datable' is important in view of the uncertainty about JV. 2. That is, we cannot say for sure that Pindar wrote epinikians for Athenians only in the days before the radical democracy. On Pindar and Athens see Hubbard 2001; this has much to say about Pindar's attitude to Aigmetans also, and has already been discussed in that connection: above, p. 212. 469 Segal 1986: 124. Segal goes on in the following pages to discuss and approve 468

Athens

249

Pindar writes for aristocratic patrons at a time when in many parts of the Greek world they are embattled against a rising wave of democratic feeling. By the very nature of their occasion and the self-selection of the audience, the Epinicia aim at promoting the traditional aristocratic values of noble birth, class and family solidarity, and the rightful inheritance by blood of tangible property and of the intangible qualities of excellence.

How true is all this? We have already made a start on this issue when discussing Aigina and modern theories of contrasting values at Aigina and Athens. For Athens, also,470 a slightly different view is possible, and preferable. Just as Pindar himself can be seen as intermediate between the sympotic world of Alkaios and the 'civic space' of Attic tragedy,471 so the Athenian system of literary patronage (through the choregia, a 'liturgy' or rich man's more or less compulsory contribution to state expenditure)472 was a compromise between state sponsorship and private spending. It was in fact an example of creative tension between democratic and older values, crucially retaining a competitive element.473 The democratic element in the equation was evidently not an obstacle to more conventional patronage of poets such as Pindar because he did in fact write two fully-surviving odes for Athenian victors at panhellenic games and there is fragmentary evidence for a third Athenian victory ode, commemorating a local victory at a festival called the Oschophoria. We shall also see (below, p. 314 on F253 Snell-Maehler, about Erichthonios) that Pindar bought into the 'autochthony' myth which was an important part of fifth-century democratic and imperial Athenian myth-making. One of the surviving epinikian odes is for a member of a family, the Alkmaionidai, which had already in the sixth century commissioned a poet to commemorate an equestrian victory won at the Great Panathenaic games at Athens; the dedication was made by Alkmeonides son of Alkmeon at the sanctuary of Apollo Ptoieus in northern Boiotia.474 Pindar's ode, Pythian 7, celebrates a chariot victory won by P. Rose's Marxist study of Pindaric ideology (Rose 1982) according to which Pindar retains an ambiguity towards the object of his praise, and 'leaves open the possibility that poetic technique may, for a price, ennoble even unworthy objects' (127). See also Kurke 1991: 4 n. 14, slightly simplifying Rose's position. 470

For Himera and 0. 12 (civically paid for?) see p. 192. Kurke 1991: 6. For liturgies see Rhodes in OCD3. 473 Osborne 1993; cfalso (on the choregia} Wilson 2000 and in OCD3, 'choregui. See also the thought-provoking remarks ofKallet: 1999 (below, n. 527). 474 See Schachter 1994. The dedication is CEG-J02. 471

472

250

People, Places, Prosopogmphy, and Politics

the well-born and well-known figure Megakles son of Hippokrates, who was distantly related to Alkibiades, another Alkmaionid. Both men fell foul of the democracy; Megakles was ostracized, which was a ten-year exile and a mechanism for avoidance of stasis, so that he is another of the political exiles of whom Pindar is so full. Two interesting ostraka cast against Megakles, and found in the Kerameikos district of Athens, were first published in 1994 (Fig. 4);475 they read MErAKAEZHinnOKPATOZHinnOTPOQOZ;, 'Megakles son

FIGURE 4 'Megakles Hippokratous hippotrophos' ostrakon. of Hippokrates the horse-breeder', a nice clear proof of the antipathies which horse-breeding, iTnroTpo(/>ia, could generate (below). It now seems that Megakles was ostracized twice, in the 4808 and again in the 4708 after returning in 480 to join the fight against the Persians; the ostraka belong to the second ostracism.476 Pindar's Megakles ode, Pythian 7, dated to 486 by the scholiast, is usually taken to refer to the ostracism by its reference to phthonos or envy which the poet says has been Megakles' reward for all his fine achievements (line 19); if so this will be the ostracism of the 4808. Alkibiades in Thucydides uses the same word in a chapter which has much to say about Olympic success, though his immediate point is not about panhellenic festivals but about brilliant expenditure on tragic choruses and local civic expenditure of that sort, which he says generates envy among one's fellow-citizens, rots /u,ev aarois (/>9oveiTai (Th. 6. 1 6. 3). Not every athletic event, surely, gener475

Brenne 1994: 16 and figs. 11—13 (SEG^&. 84). At 23 n. 32 Brenne says 'there are more [unpublished] ostraka connecting Megakles with his horses'. 476 Lewis 1984: 605 and 1997: 1141".; Willemsen andBrenne 1991: 144.

Athens

251

ated the same degree of envy, and in fact Pindar's Olympian 6 explicitly confirms that the glamorous chariot event was specially liable to envy:

but blame coming from others who are envious hangs over those who ever drive first around the twelve-lap course and on whom revered Charis sheds a glorious appearance. (0. 6.74-6)477 In a democracy, horse-breeding, iTnroTpo(/>ia, could be the basis of political attack, as the Megakles ostrakon shows; but even democracies need a cavalry force and the Athenians found financial ways of bringing the cavalry class inside the democratic system rather than keeping them dangerously outside it.478 In addition to the victory ode for Megakles, Pindar wrote (though whether we have any of it is uncertain)479 a 9prjvos or funeral dirge for a Hippokrates who was an Athenian and perhaps a relative (rather than the actual father)480 of Megakles. He was probably the 'I-n-n-oKpaTr]? (II) A\KJ^€U>VL?>OV 2lAa>TT€Krj9ev who was a candidate for ostracism in the 4808.481 If so, Pindar uses the appropriate language of the Atheniancontrolled Eleusinian mysteries to allude to the death of Hippokrates— and his rebirth to a future happier existence. (For another member of this family, Megakles the younger, see below.) The other fully-surviving Pindaric victory ode for an Athenian is Nemean 2, written for a man otherwise unknown, Timodemos of Acharnai (or was he originally from Salamis? see below). Acharnai was one of the constituent townships or denies of the Athenian state; it was in fact much the largest of the 139 denies and is the only one mentioned as such by Thucydides (2. 19. 2), who refers to its vigorous warrior population in terms oddly and perhaps deliberately reminiscent of 477

On \hzphthoMS motif here see Goldhill 1991:158f. with (for phthows in Pindar generally) 1381". with n. 228 and refs. 478 Bugh 1988: ch.2; Spence 1993: app. 4. Worley 1994: ch. 4. The key text is Lys. 16. See Hornblower 20020: 140f. and now Low 2002. 479 See above, pp. 901". The dirge: see scholiast to P. 7. i8f. 480 The scholiast on P. 7. i8a says that the Hippokrates for whom Pindar wrote a dirge (above, p. 90) was a 'relative of the victor', avyyevris TOV vt.K-ri6pov. Burton 1962: 32 and n. i seems to assume that the dirge was written for Hippokrates the father of Megakles, but I would have thought that the scholiast (always assuming he knew what he was talking about) would have specified this. 481 Davies 1971: 373; Willemsen andBrenne 1971: 151.

252


Pindar's tribute to Acharnai as 'famous of old for brave men', Aâpvai Se TraAaif/MTov evdvopes (line i6f); Thucydides for his part says that the Acharnians were a 'considerable section' ('great part', jueya êpos) of the city, that they were 3,000 hoplites (a startling and controversial figure) and that they were reluctant to see their property destroyed by the invading Spartans and itched to get out and fight them (2. 20. 4).482 Timodemos won the pankration, less prestigious and expensive than the chariot race and surely less liable to democratic suspicion. Indeed the American excavator of Nemea Stephen Miller has recently objected strongly to the still common modern notion that all athletics was aristocratic: he argues that the non-equestrian events, what he calls gymnic athletics, may even have been a levelling agent which could have contributed to the development of democracy, and he is thinking not just of Athens but of historically minor but athletically amazingly prominent and democratically precocious places like Kroton in south Italy.483 There may be something in this; but as we have seen, one of Miller's premisses is false, namely that there were no epinikian odes for any of the many Krotoniate athletes who won victories in the late archaic period. (See above, p. 26 for Simonides F5o6 PMG, a poem for the Krotoniate athlete Astylos.) The named Athenians in Pindar are not exhausted with Megakles and Timodemos; there are two Athenian trainers, Melesias (0. 8. 54ffi, N. 4. 93 and 6. 65f.) and Menandros (N. 5. 48-9), whom Pindar salutes for helping non-Athenians (specifically Aiginetans, cf. pp. 53 and 211) to victories, Melesias more than once. He was as we have seen (Gh. 2 p. 53) father of a politician with the same name as Thucydides the historian and perhaps related to him. Olympian 8 lines 54-9 makes clear (see the scholiast) that as boy and man Melesias himself had been a Nemean victor in his day.484 Finally there is a fragment of Pindar (F6c, actually a commentary) which commemorates a victory by an Athenian in a race run by ephebes (young men undergoing a phase of paramilitary service on the threshold of and in preparation for full manhood) at the Oschophoria. 482

See Hornblower 1991: 273 f. for the problems of this passage. Hubbard 2001: 388 thinks the victor in N. 2 is praised 'not so much in the context of Athens but of the valiant men of the deme Acharnae'. No Athenian would have accepted this implied opposition between deme and city, nor does this reading of the poem seem quite correct, note 'has given him as an adornment for great Athens', peydXrus SeStoKe Koapov A8dvcus(lme8). 483 Miller 2000. 484 See esp. Carey ig8gc: 287-90 against some earlier interpretations.

Athens

253

This was a local Athenian festival involving the shrine of Athena Skiras at Phaleron. The contestants carried bunches of grapes on the branch, coCTxot.485 There is independent evidence,486 in the book 'On Pindar' by the hellenistic historian Aristodemos of Thebes, that Pindar did indeed write for this event: or delete the word altogether?]487 . . . 'Aristodemos in his third book "On Pindar" says that at the festival of the Skira there was a race to Athens [or, reading AOr/vrjai, 'at the festival of the Skira at Athens there was a race'] by the ephebes' (FGrHist 383 Fg = Ath. 4956; cf. FGrHist 328 Philochoros Fi5—16). The Skira or Skirophoria on the one hand, and the Oschophoria on the other, are not identical but they are related in that both are connected with Athena Skiras, and Aristodemos' report seems to relate to the Oschophoria; Jacoby's denial in ig54488 that there was a race at the Oschophoria (as opposed to the Skirophoria) antedated by a very few years the publication in 1961 of the Pindaric 'fragment' which surely does show that there was a race at the Oschophoria.489 There was certainly a separate, though presumably rather small, literary genre called the Oschophorikon.490 The name of the Pindaric victor does not survive complete, but this item is remarkable evidence of Pindar's involvement in domestic Attic cult life at a level far removed from that of the great panhellenic festivals.491 This particular cult was associated with the epigraphically 485 See R. G. T. Pfarker], OCD3, 'Oschophoria'; cf. also Vidal-Naquet 1986: 114-17, Osborne 1994: I58f, and for very full discussion of the ancient evidence as known in the 19505 see above alljacoby's commentary (thirty pages of text, twenty of closely printed notes) on FGrHist 328 Fi4~16. 486 See Lobel 19611177. 487 Withjacoby, commentary on FGrHist 328 Fi4~16 atn. 162. 488 FGrHist 328 FFi4—16 p. 302 and nn. 177 and 179. Jacoby's statement (made twice) that Aristodemos begins his account with the words Iv I^Kipois seems to be a slip for rots 489 So rightly Rutherford and Irvine 1988; note their p. 49, conjecturally restored text. The Pindar 'fragment' seems not to feature in the extensive post-Jacoby discussions of the Oschophoria cited in n. 485 above, although as my text shows it does seem to settle one important point which bothered Jacoby in his enormous discussion of the tangled evidence known to him. (The festival of the Oschophoria has, because of its ephebic aspect, become a very fashionable topic of study since Vidal-Naquet's work on the Black Hunter). 490 See esp. Proclus Chrest. 32oa 3—6, the Oschophonka one of five types of lyric poetry falling into a mixed category, 'dedicated to gods and men . . . written for the gods but containing praise of men'. The evidence for Oschophorika is cited and examined by Rutherford and Irvine 1988. 491 The point is, this was presumably a parochial race in the sense that only Athenians, specifically Athenian ephebes, could compete. It is not the only local Athenian festival to

254


attested genos or kinship group of the Salaminioi; though part of this genos was at home in Sounion in south Attica, it is no more than commonsense to say that the name Salaminioi indicates some old though to us inscrutable connection with the island of Salamis itself.492 And the name Skira or Skiros was connected in antiquity with Salamis.493 This Salaminian connection in turn recalls the speculation of the scholiast on JV. 2. ig494 that Timodemos of Acharnai was in fact a cleruch from Salamis, and one might wonder if Pindar had a special interest in the home of 'Salaminian Ajax', as he certainly had a special interest in Ajax himself. It is of great interest that the festival concerns ephebes, and is perhaps a 'descendant of an initiation ritual and retains several vestiges of it'. 495 That quotation is from Kevin Grotty's 1982 book Song and Action, which we have noticed already in connection with the 'return' of the victorious athlete (Gh. i p. 28). Grotty's book has as its subtitle 'the victory odes of Pindar'; and he exploits the Oschophoria to good effect (his pp. n6f); but he does not avail himself of the obvious linkbetween these two topics, namely Pindar's own Oschophorikon. All in all, this is a substantial amount of evidence for athletic Athenians in Pindar, and as we have already seen (above, n. 468), we cannot take refuge in the comfortable but circular notion that he wrote for Athenians only before the radical democracy was introduced in the late 4608. There is as I have already hinted in my allusion to Stephen Miller an important point at issue here. The idea that Pindar's world was at variance with that of Periclean Athens is a mistake. It is true that the poet's special relationship with Aigina, the star in the Dorian sea as he beautifully puts it in Paian 6 (F52f, lines 123-6), may have caused the poet to regret the implications of Athenian foreign policy to Aigina. But not only did Pindar celebrate Athenian victors; more imfeature in Pindaric victory odes—but the other mentions are to be found in odes for nonAthenians. Apart from the Panathenaia, there are the games for Herakles at Marathon, and the games at Eleusis, all three as it happens alluded to in a single ode, 0. 9 for Epharmostos of Opous (lines 88, 89 with the scholiast, I34d, for the Herakleia at Marathon, and 99); for Marathon see also P. 8. 79, for Aristomenes of Aigina. Marathon and Eleusis are famous names in Greek history, but they are also, under another aspect, merely demes of \h& polls of Athens. 492

Parker 1996:312. Siula under SKipo; (a 624 Adler) says that one of the derivations of the name of the festival was from Skiros the synoikizer of Salamis, aAAm §e a-no Sipu>v dpiaroKparia. This means that the corresponding English word is best avoided, quite apart from the inappropriate associations of 'aristocracy' — tides, peerages, and so on.498 Aristotelian 'many' and 'few' vocabulary is not relevant here either. To express the modern 'aristocrat/ commoner' distinction at all we need a different pair of words: for Pindar the relevant terminological contrast is between the dyadoi and the da-rot, P. 2. 81-2, 'the deceitful citizen cannot utter an effective word among good men', dSvvara S' €TTOS €KJ3a\eiv Kpa.TO.iov ev dyaOois \ SoAtov darov (cf. P. 3. 70—1). This is a polarity whose contemptuous end has been perceptively compared by Hunter Rawlings499 to Thucydides' slightly disparaging description of the tyrannicide Aristogeiton as dvrjp ru>v darwv, 6. 54. 2, 'a man of the citizens' i.e. a commoner. Thucydides like other prose authors expresses the other end of the polarity not by Pindar's simple dyadoi — Pindar like other poets often chooses the simple in preference to the compound or the double-barrelled500 —but by the full and notoriously untranslatable expression KaXol Ka.ya.doi, the 'good and fair ones' (4. 40. 2 and 8. 48. 6).501 The truth is rather that men of Alkibiades' class co-operated with and profited from Athens' democracy and empire; Thucydides puts into the mouth of Alkibiades, on the run and at Sparta, the profoundly true remark that since the city was a democracy it was very necessary for men like himself, aristocrats if you like, to accommodate to the status quo, noXXri dvdyKr] r\v TOLS napovaiv fTreaOai (6. 89. 4) . When people 496

Thomas 1989: 213-21 and in Hornblower and Morgan forthcoming. Kurke 1998 is perhaps too quick to detect opposition between the aristocratic ethos and the mercantilism of the states which issued coins. 498 See the OCD3 entries 'aristocracy' (P. J. Rfhodes]) and 'aristocracy, attitudes to' (N. Pfurcell]). 499 Rawlings 1981: 104 and n. 56. But doro/at /. 3. 3 is neutral. 500 Dornseiffig2i: 19. 501 Hornblower 1996: I95f. giving the extensive modern literature on this important expression. 497

256


like Megakles or Alkibiades fell out with their fellow-citizens it was not because of fastidious aristocratic non-involvement in politics, though there were such quiet Athenians as they have been called.502 On the contrary, they got into trouble precisely because they played rough like everyone else and were intensely involved in the political game and wanted its prizes just as they wanted the athletic prizes at Olympia, Delphi and Nemea. In any case the democracy did not reject athletic success; Plutarch says that when Pericles got home from subduing Samos and delivered the funeral oration for the citizen dead, he was garlanded by the women as a victorious athlete, like Spartan Brasidas later (Plut. Per. 28. 4, wa-n-ep a9Ar)Tr)v viK-r)(/>6pov, cf. Thucydides' aOArjTfj).503 And by a law of Pericles' day, non-equestrian i.e. less wealthy victors in panhellenic games got free meals in Athens' Town Hall (IG i 3 131). This is generosity in a way, but it is also expressive of a determination that even non-equestrian athletic prestige must be ratified by the city: athletes must not get above themselves as in the seventh century when the Olympic victor Kylon did indeed make an attempt at tyranny at Athens when tyranny was a viable option (Hdt. 5. 71 and Th. i. 126).504 I doubt if the inscription actually indicates democratic opposition to the granting of privileges to equestrian victors, necessitating their restatement in the surviving decree;505 though the suggestion (which has been seriously made) shows that with enough ingenuity you can reverse the surface implication of practically anything. The underlying issue is simply money. To conclude on Athens I compare the attitudes to money of Pindar and Thucydides' democratic Athenians. I suggest they are not so far apart. Pindar's admiration for wealth is frank:

dvSpl <j>eyyos

wealth embellished with virtues . . . is a conspicuous lodestar, the truest light for a man. (0. 2.53-6)506 502

Garter 1986. See Stadter 1989: a6of. Gf. above p. 46. 504 That is, I more or less agree with Golden 1998: 175 who concludes a long discussion by saying, in two fine equestrian metaphors, that the Athenian demos was 'normally content to rein in its wealthy citizens and harness their resources for its own purposes'. 505 Golden 1998: 171, citing Mornssey 1978: 124 506 Note the good remarks of Segal 1986: 126-7 on this passage, and the following lines, 503

Athens

257

Does this conflict with the ideals of Pericles' Athens? Not if we accept the text of Pericles' funeral oration in Thucydides; there is a sentence whose unemended Greek means the virtuous dead Athenians avenged themselves on the enemy while continuing to pursue wealth, (2. 4.2. 4, ru>v Se l(/>iea9ai, where the reference is to -n-Xovros in para. 3). British commentators tend to be distressed by the apparent vulgarity of this and adopt the tiny but significant modern correction 'while abandoning the pursuit of wealth', d(/>iea9ai not eiea6ai. It has taken an American editor and commentator, Jeffrey Rusten, to reinstate the un-British but perhaps not un-American and certainly not un-Greek idea that pursuit of wealth could be treated as an absolute good alongside dying for one's country.507 (For the Funeral Speech see also above, pp. 74, 89 n. n, and note that another American-based scholar has shown recently and convincingly how many metaphors from banking there are in the Funeral Speech.508) On all this there was however not complete unanimity: Bacchylides once at any rate expresses a slightly different attitude from the Pindaric attitude just cited: 'wealth', Bacchylides remarks, 'may consort even with the worthless', (i. 160-1) and, again, 'I know wealth's great power, it makes even the useless man useful',

10. 49-51

from a—quite undatable—ode written for an Athenian victor in the footrace. Maehler sees here a reference to the commercial new rich, especially those whose wealth came from maritime trade. That would hardly be suitable or tactful in an ode for a victor from the great maritime city of Athens, an aspect Maehler does not discuss. What Bacchylides has just said is that 'the finest thing is to be a noble man much which 'point up the precanousness of such acquisitions [as wealth and prosperity] and the limitations of denning the human condition in terms of them'. 507 Gomme, HCT-2.132, describing the received text as 'contradictory as well as tasteless'; Rhodes 1988: 225 (and 88f. where he promotes the emendation into his text and tr.), both following Poppo—Stahl. See however Rusten 1989: 166 and above all his entertaining footnote, Rusten 1986: 61 n. 33: 'why it should be "tasteless" (Gomme 132) for Thucydides not to make these men into ascetics is beyond me; I suspect a historian so much the realist elsewhere would have regarded anyone who rejected material well-being as a madman.' Hornblower 1991 follows Rusten on the passage as a whole without discussing the point specifically. The Oxford text retains I(f>i€a8ai, as do Classen—Steup and Alberti. 508 Allison 2001.

258


envied by many', etjuev, lines 46-7. Surely the implication is that this Athenian is such a noble man; the underlying thought is, if wealth makes even a useless man useful, how much more will it elevate the noble man.509 The name of the victor in Bacchylides 10 is unfortunately not preserved, but Bacchylides says (line 18) that he has brought glory to the 'Oineidai', that is to his tribe Oineis, one of the ten Kleisthenic subdivisions of the democratic Athenian citizen-body. So even in a non-equestrian ode, Bacchylides cheerfully juxtaposes wealth and glory for democratic Athens and its subdivisions. It is worth asking whether Athenians in the days of the extreme democracy were more egalitarian in their attitude to athletic success than were other Greeks. One relevant issue is, were there prizes other than for the winner? Alkibiades in Thucydides says of his chariots at Olympia in 416 'I won and I also came second and fourth' (Th. 6. 16. a).510 The impression we get from Pindar (esp. the famous lines P. 8 83-7 on the shame of the loser) is that the metaphorical gold of winning was everything; there were, to put it in modern terms, no silver or bronze medals at the great panhellenic or 'crown' games in the fifth century. It is therefore a little odd that Alkibiades mentions the point at all. There is something in this, but note (a) that in the funeral games for Patroklos, Achilles offers prizes for first, second, third, fourth, and fifth places, Iliad 23. 262-70; (b) The position at games other than the great 'crown games' was sometimes different, thus second prizes were awarded at the Asklepieia on second-century Kos, and at the Athenian Panathenaia, at least in the fourth century:511 but note that the victor got fifty Panathenaic amphorae of oil, the runner-up only ten. The position at the Panathenaia is specially relevant to Alkibiades, not just because they were Athenian games but because the 'Attic stelai' recording the confiscations of 415 include large numbers of Panathenaic amphorai among what is probably Alkibiades' property (W. K. Pritchett, Hesperia 22 (1953) 25of, stele II lines 21 and4i-6o) and it is a good guess512 that these were won at the Great Panathenaia of 418. So the idea of prizes other than first prizes was familiar to Greeks, Athenians, 509

See Carey 1983: 166 for the complexities of Bacchylides' thoughts on wealth and success. 510 Euripides said 'first, second and third' (PMGy^, from Plut. AIL 11), but this is probably wrong and Th. is tacitly correcting it. See my forthcoming commentary on Th. 6. 16, and cf. above, p. 58. 511 Golden 1998: 70 and 111. 512 Davies 1971: 21, citingAmyx.

Athens

259

and the historical Alkibiades. In any case Alkibiades' boast is about what a splash he made and this is unaffected by the exact prizes won or not won. But there may in his speech be a trace of democratic Athenian attitudes in which the uniqueness and exclusivity of winning was tempered (a little) by a phthonos-Hmiting desire that success should be spread. (There is after all a conciliatory aspect to Achilles' generosity.) Alkibiades, and his famous speech early in book 6 of Thucydides (6. 16), has featured repeatedly in the above paragraphs; before we leave Athens, something explicit needs to be said about how we should use this evidence, which has suddenly become controversial. It has been said recently that Alkibiades' boasts, and his explicit and implicit statements about equestrian athletic success and the money needed to finance it, 'cannot be taken at face value'. True, no Thucydidean speech can be taken as straightforward evidence for the historical reality. And we can readily agree that 'Alkibiades is hardly your typical Athenian politician':513 to have your own personal trireme (Th. 6. 50. i and 61. 6, recalling Alkibiades' ancestor Kleinias at Hdt. 8. 17), as opposed to merely equipping a state-provided trireme like other 'trierarchs' (another 'liturgy')514 was like having a private jet plane as opposed to merely travelling first class. We can also agree that there are difficulties about seeing calculated expenditure of the Alkibiades sort as a positive 'lever to office'.515 And it has been rightly pointed out that Alkibiades' speech is, in the technical expression, a Averts SiajBoArjs or 'reply to slander', and should not be considered independently of Nikias' antecedent attack on his horse-breeding and extravagance (6. 12. 2) or of Thucydides' own authorial comments on the topic (6. 15).516 So: was Alkibiades an anachronism?517 Or is he after all representative of something beyond himself? Of these two views I incline to the second and slightly less recent modern view, that of Davies, not just 513

Both quotations from Millett 1998: 245, Rhodes OCD3, 'trierarchy', and Gabrielsen: 1994. See Millett 1998: 244!"., arguing against Davies 1971: xvii (Millett's reference to p. xix is a slip). Some of the difficulties, not discussed by Davies or Millett, are purely linguistic and turn on the interpretation ofThucydides' Greek. Nikias alleges (6.12. 2) that Alkibiades seeks and this (see Dover, HC"1r4- 237) could refer either to (morally dubious) financial gain necessitated by heavy expenditure, or to gain in prestige, leading to further office-holding, acquired through heavy outlay of money while holding an earlier office. Dover prefers the first view, but in any case he notes the implication of Lys. 19. 56f. that people might indeed spend money on liturgies so as to secure election to offices and thereby 'to make twice what one has spent'. 516 Golden 1998: 170. 517 'Anachronism' is not quite proved by Euripides' ode for Alkibiades, discussed by Bowra 1970; for this victory ode see above, pp. 58, 85. 514 515

260


because of the implications of the Pindaric evidence cited above, not all of which can be securely and conveniently dated to the period before the radical reforms of the late 4608 (for the dating point see p. 248 n. 468), nor because of the implications of Pericles' remarks about pursuit of wealth (it must be conceded these are from a speech and thus of doubtful evidential value), but above all because of the statistical pattern formed by the known Athenian victors in the four-horse-chariot events in panhellenic contests.518 There are twelve such victors in the generation 433-400, as opposed to only one such entry (and two entries for the two-horse events) in the generation 400-366 (and we may note that a like-named son of Pindar's Megakles falls only just outside this generation, with an Olympic victory in 436; he features in the Clouds of Aristophanes as a 'relation' of the fictitious Strepsiades).519 This tells against the idea that a new sort of politician, more professionally competent, more rhetorically sophisticated, and less interested in the elite and condescending 'politics of largesse', came on the Athenian scene after Pericles' death.520 This is an idea which admittedly goes back to Thucydides himself (2. 65 with the neglected 2. 53. i on the rapid turnover of property after the plague). The real shift in values and attitudes to money and liturgy-paying took place, I believe, after 400 and the loss in 404 of the empire which had brought economic gains to all classes alike.521 In the 'Alkibiades generation', that which was active and prominent in the Peloponnesian War, wealth and its display in athletic contexts was still, even at Athens, to some extent what Pindar had called it, a 'conspicuous lodestar, the truest light for a man' (see above). We should not forget that the living Athenian Hagnon, who was still politically active in 413 BG, received oikist cult at Amphipolis after 437 BG on the explicit evidence of Thucydides himself (5. n. i, TO. A-yvtoveia otKoSo^âra);522 like the replacement cult for Brasidas instituted fifteen years later (above, p. 48 n. 192), this cult for Hagnon will surely have included athletic games, aycaves. But for those two long Greek words of Thucydides, we should never have guessed that such a 518 See the chart at Davies 1981: 102, with the refinements of Golden 1998: 171-5, who however basically accepts Davies' view. See also Rhodes 1986: I37f. 519 Moretti 1957: no. 320; Davies 1971: 381; Ar. Clouds lines 46f. (Strepsiades married the niece of Megakles son of Megakles), cf. lines 70 and 124, with Sommerstem 1982: nn. on the lines, and Brenne 1994: 16. On the 'horsiness' of the name Pheidippides (son of Strepsiades) and the other names considered by the boy's parents at lines 63ff., see Dubois 2000. 520 For the classic statement of the 'new politicians' thesis see Connor: 1971. 521 See Hornblower 2002^: I45f522 Hornblower 1996: 452iT.

Athens

261

thing was possible for a citizen of democratic Athens in the latter part of the fifth century BC. Hagnon is a warning not to think we know exactly what was and was not possible even in a state so well documented as Athens of that period. I suggest that the political and cultic symbolism of athletics was no mere anachronism, even in the Athens of Kleon, and certainly not in places where elite values were more obviously and firmly entrenched. As late as 421, as we learn from a pair of lists in Thucydides (5. 19. 2 and 24.1), an Athenian who swore to the Peace of Nikias and the subsequent alliance with Sparta had the splendid name Isthmionikos, 'victor at the Isthmian games', he is evidently from an athletic family523 and is perhaps to be identified with the 'Isthmonikos' (sic) who built the 'bath-house of Isthmonikos' (IG i 3 84)—and perhaps, as we have known only since 1991, a candidate for ostracism at some point (but not necessarily ostracized).524 These families were useful to, and used by, the democracy. Alkibiades, we are told (Th. 6. 16.4), was suspected of aiming at a tyranny. The charge is a matter of lifestyle, eViTTjSeujuaTa, rather than of a definite political programme.525 But Lisa Kallet has recently suggested that the Athenian demos or people saw itself as a kind of tyranny, not just in the sense in which the Korinthians call Athens the 'tyrant city' (Th. i. 122. 3)526—that is, as a bullying autocrat in foreign relations—but as an internal or domestic tyrant in one of the 'life style' senses of tyrant, i.e. the magnificent spender, a 'very positive and empowering notion'.527 As for the attitude of such Athenian individuals and families to foreign policy, Andrewes put the matter well, in his deconstruction of Wade-Gery's notion that people like Thoukydides and his father Melesias were representative of panhellenism in a non-Periclean and international sense. 'The athletic world of Pindar and Melesias was "international" in the sense that its members were drawn from many cities and in some respects felt more sympathy with one another than with the lower orders of their own cities, but this was not reflected in their conduct of inter-city politics or war.'528 That is, they were good Athenian patriots or partisans. 523

Andrewes and Lewis 1957: 180. Hornblower 1996: 487. 525 Seager 1967; Gribble 1999: 190. 526 See Tuplin 1985. 527 Kallet 1999: 52—4 on 'The Demos as Tyrant', citing Th. 6. 15. 4 at 52; the quotation in my text is from 53. 528 Andrewes 1978: 7 and n. 19. 524

262

People, Places, Prosopogmpky, and Politics Provisioned conclusions

From this long review of Pindar's Greek world certain conclusions emerge, some negative but not (I hope) less worth having for that. The men Pindar wrote for are also some of the men Thucydides talked to; comparative onomastic evidence can serve as a control on their historicity. In the case of Aigina the prosopographic links are with Herodotus rather than Thucydides, for understandable historical reasons to do with the downward plunge taken by the history of classical Aigina. The mobility of some individual elite figures in both Pindar and Thucydides led us to ask whether dual citizenship, or rather an indifference to the 'rules' governing citizenship, was a more common reality than is usually thought. We noticed in particular the phenomenon of the 'stasis-exile': Pindar's poetry is neglected evidence for fifth-century stasis. At the community level we noticed particularly dense social traffic between certain places and areas such as Syracuse and Arkadia. And generally I hope in this chapter to have demonstrated—despite its firm geographical subdivisions—the endlessly interconnective and overlapping character of the histories and lives of many of the communities I have discussed. Links are furnished by colonial and other more spurious kinship ties, intermarriage, proxeny, emigration, shared subjection to the Athenian empire, and finally and most obviously in the context of the present book, by 'agonistic mobility' of the kind which, to name an example at random, brought Ghromios of Sicilian Aitna across to compete in the games at Sikyon (TV. 9). We found no Pindaric bias against lonians, particularly once we moved away from the victory odes. It was worthwhile asking about the places Pindar did not write for though he might have done (Cyprus; certain Sicilian cities; Thespiai; Sparta) but we found no easy explanations: gaps in the evidential record must always be remembered. For the lopsidedness in the distribution of the victory odes, especially the marked slant towards Aiginetans, the explanation is multifactorial but Pindar's own personal tastes and predilections should not be overlooked. Finally, Pindar's attitude to Athens and Athenians cannot be explained in facile terms of a distaste for the radical democracy which emerged after Ephialtes and the 4603: to single out one small item of evidence on which to end, Pindar's attested Oschophorikon points in a different direction, written as it was for a democratic ephebic contest. His opinion on the Athenian empire deafens by its silence, at least in the epinikians. The variety of political

Provisional conclusions

263

regimes discussed in the present chapter—from the single rulers of Kyrene and Sicily, through newly liberated Himera, to the moderate oligarchy of the 'Opountian Thousand', the political set-up at Athens' loyal ally Tenedos, and finally democratic Athens itself—remind us that Pindar's poetry is not just for 'aristocrats', if by that is meant something marginal or superannuated. Much of it is easily compatible with /w&-commemoration and community performance, and that is particularly true of the poems other than the epinikians.529

Politics and the panhellenic sanctuaries So far in this chapter we have looked at the elite individuals who competed in the panhellenic games, and at the communities they came from. We saw that numbers of these men could have walked, and that some did walk, without discomfort from the pages of Pindar into those of Thucydides and back again. We have also examined the political implications of athletic victory at Athens and Sparta; we shall return to the question of tensions inside the Spartan elite when we consider the career of Lichas son of Arkesilas and the way he was regarded by his fellow-Spartans (p. 284). Panhellenic farfo^-conferring games were politically important in another respect also, because such festivals as the Olympic games also acted as a focus for inter-city rivalries. Thucydides and Pindar alike show little overt awareness of the way the panhellenic festivals were exploited as part of the fifth-century struggle between the larger Greek cities, especially those of the Peloponnese. For the archaic period the phenomenon has been excellently explored by Catherine Morgan in an important book.530 For the fifth century the evidence is more elusive, but it is there all the same. In other words Pindar, rightly used, can after all help with the understanding of the politics and warfare of the period. Previous generations of Pindaric scholarship sought in vain to identify the battle in Isthmian 7—perhaps Oinophyta in 457 BG (Th. i. 108.2), during the first Peloponnesian War of 460-446? But in 1971 David Young showed that the whole enterprise is misguided: the poem, and the battle, are simply not dateable.531 Pindar does throw 529 See Gh. i pp. 33-6, 'performance and audience', and for Thebes and Kyrene see above, p. 164 and 245. For Rhodes see p. 132. 530 Morgan 1990. 531 Young 1971: 3-14. See above, p. 43.

264


light on the First Peloponnesian War, but not in that way. A strong case has been made for seeing this war as a tussle between the Korinthians and Argives for control of the little/wfo of Kleonai which administered the Nemean games;532 the case rests in part on the ancient scholia to Pindar's Nemean Odes, especially 'hypothesis c' and 'hypothesis d', but partly on hints in Pindar himself. The Korinthians, it seems, not only took over the Nemean festival. They had already (perhaps as early as the 4703) changed the crown in their own Isthmian games from pine to parsley, thus assimilating those games to the Nemean ones—a DorianizingO Ogesture.533 Thus in /. 8. 63-4, Kleandros of Aigina 'won -J L~ O the Dorian parsley in the Isthmian glen', os "laOîov av vd-n-os \ Awpiwv e'Aaxev aeAivwv. And Nemean 4 in its opening section has Timasarchos of Aigina 'bringing a wreath of crowns from Kleonai's games' i.e the Nemean games, KXtwvaiov T' O.TT' dycovos opôv arefidvajv Treî/iavra (lines 18-19) but refers near the end of the ode to a victory in the contest of Poseidon (i.e. the Isthmian games) where Kallikles the uncle of Timasarchos won the 'Korinthian parsley', Kopiv9iois aeAivois (line 88; see also 0.13, for Xenophon of Korinth, line 33: more parsley at the Isthmia). Pindar's stress on Kleonai (also emphasized at N. 10. 42, an ode for an Argive victor, where 'the men of Kleonai' is a way of referring to the Nemean games) can be seen as evidence that he was aware of these tussles though naturally non-committal. After all, he wrote for both Korinthian (Xenophon) victors and also for Argive ones, both directly (N. 10, for Theaios, cf. above, p. 204, and perhaps cf. also Fyoa, dithyramb i) and indirectly (see above for the Macedonian kings, who claimed descent from Argos: above, pp. 14, 206). There was another struggle for influence at a panhellenic sanctuary in this period, namely Delphi, where the principals were the Spartans and the Athenians.534 This has not left apparent trace in Pindar's Pythian Odes, and Thucydides is not at his most forthcoming on this topic; but his spare account of the Second Sacred War (i. 112. 5), the should be seen as part of a longer process of which the Spartan foundation of Herakleia Trachinia in 426 was a part (Th. 3. 92)—an attempt to increase Spartan leverage in the amphiktiony at Delphi.535 The parallelism is neat and seductive: the 532 Lewis 1997: 9—21 and 1992: io6f., 1091".; Adshead 1986, putting the period of Korinthian assertion rather earlier than Lewis. See also Perlman 2000:140-1 and Morgan in Hornblower and Morgan forthcoming. 533 Adshead 1986: 76-82. 534 Hornblower 1992. 535 Sanchez 2001: 117 n. 185 is not persuaded by this suggestion of Hornblower 1992, but

Politics and panhelknic sanctuaries

265

Korinthians and Argives compete collectively at Nemea just as their individual athletes compete there individually (Xenophon; Theaios). Correspondingly the Athenians and Spartans compete at Delphi both for national influence (above) and as individuals (Megakles the Athenian in Pythian 7, and the anonymous Spartan in Sophocles' fictional account in Ekctra line 701, a carefully dressed list with an equally authentic pair of'Libyans' i.e. Kyrenaians in the next line and a Thessalian and Boiotian to follow). Pindar and Thucydides were surely well aware of the inter-polis rivalries played out at the four great sanctuaries every two or four years, but we cannot demand explicitness from either of them.536 Thucydides preferred to stress other aspects of Greek intercity politics, and the realities of patronage meant that Pindar could not be too explicit. Nevertheless we must insist that it is on slight indications in, precisely, Thucydides and Pindar (and their ancient commentators) that modern reconstructions rest. Are they right? I think they are indeed importantly right and true, and I have suggested elsewhere that such struggles for influence were common at all periods of Greek history, and that it is Thucydidean reticence and selectivity which has stood in the way of the appreciation of the truth. 537 1 end this discussion by jumping a century forward from Pindar and half a century forward from Thucydides. Xenophon has an interesting report about the circumstances of the assassination of the Thessalian despot Jason of Pherai in 370 BC. He was struck down after having sent round to 'the cities' telling them to send sacrificial animals to Delphi, where rumour had it that he was planning to take charge of the sacred assembly (panegyris) and the games himself (Hell. 6. 4. 29-30). This is self-assertion of a particular sort, more brazen than but definitely comparable to the inter-state struggles for influence at Delphi and Nemea of the mid-fifth century (above). Jason was however an individual not zpolis and this ranges him rather with archaic offers no new arguments, merely the consideration—neither new nor in dispute—that we do not know for certain when Herakleia got the Malian amphiktionic vote which it has by the third quarter of the 4th cent, when the epigraphic evidence starts to be informative. Sanchez does not cite Hornblower 1991: 502, where with acknowledgement to Bequignon further arguments are offered for 426. 536 Lewis 1997: 21 flirts with the idea that the 'young men's spears' of 0. 13 (see above, p. 242), a poem which he puts 'late 464 or 463', alludes to Korinthian aggressiveness in the run-up to the First Peloponnesian War, but in the end he pulls back, partly on the grounds that these lines are a compliment 'amply justified by the Corinthian record in the Persian Wars'. 537 Hornblower 1992.

266


tyrants like Pheidon of Argos who took over the Olympic games—but it also ranges him with hellenistic rulers like Kassander who presided over the Nemean games in 315 BG (Diod. 19. 64. i, from the excellent source Hieronymus of Gardia). There was never a time when the panhellenic games did not matter: Nikanor proclaimed Alexander's 'exiles decree' at the Olympic games (Diod. 17. 109. i, 18. 8. 3), and Titus Ojiinctius Flamininus proclaimed the freedom of the Greeks at the Isthmian festival in 196 BG, as did Nero centuries later.

PART II Thucydides Pindaricus


6


In Part I I I shall try to demonstrate an intertextual relationship between the prose of Thucydides and the poetry of Pindar and Bacchylides, first by analysing a particular section of Thucydides book 5 closely (5. 4950. 4), and then by extending the analysis to the rest of the History, in particular by examining (Gh. 11) a larger narrative unit, namely books 6 and 7 as a whole. In the present introductory chapter I try to justify the procedures I follow, and to answer possible objections. The word 'intertextuality' is a useful general term to describe literary relationships which may or may not be acknowledged or even conscious but which form a system outside which 'a literary work cannot exist'. This very strong formulation is that of Gian Biagio Gonte, who continues 'a text can be read only in connection with, and in opposition to, other texts'.1 'Intertextuality' avoids questions of authorial intention or consciousness; we can use it to cover everything from echoes and parallels which may or may not be deliberate or conscious, through allusions (the common expression 'infirmity of purpose' alludes to a line in Shakespeare's Macbeth without actually mentioning Shakespeare), to direct and explicit quotation or citation. Intertextuality also covers such wider notions as 'debt' and 'influence'; Thucydides never mentions or quotes from Pindar, as he does from Homer or the Homeric Hymns (3.104), so the most that can be proved is parallel, allusion, and influence. I do believe that Thucydides knew Pindar's work, but this in effect biographical conclusion is perhaps not in the end of the greatest importance. I hope that even those who deny awareness and conscious imitation will agree with what is after all a more important proposition, namely that the text of Thucydides can be understood better by comparison with that of Pindar. Perhaps the process of comparison can also improve understanding of Pindar. 1 Gonte 1986: 29. See also G. B. [Gonte] and G. W. M[ost], 'imitatio in OCD3, and D. P. F[owler] and P. G. F[owler], 'literary theory and the classics', also in OCD3, 872 col. 2: 'all texts (and not only literary ones) are always already of necessity shot through with the presence of other texts.'

270


Vocabulary and verbal parallels In this book I sometimes claim to identify words, names, and phrases which Thucydides and Pindar or Bacchylides have in common; my working assumption is that the rarer the word (rare in Pindar and Bacchylides, rare in Thucydides, rare absolutely), the likelier it is that we can make meaningful inferences from its use by Thucydides. I use 'locally' rare to mean rare in a particular author. Slater's Lexicon to Pindar and the Index, Lexicon, and Concordance to Thucydides by Essen, Betant, and Schrader respectively, make it easy to make confident statements about the distribution of a word or expression across my two central authors, and the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (TLG) allows a comparative check across the whole corpus of Greek literature, including inscriptions and papyri (Kenneth Dover in his autobiography2 rightly insists that the source of linguistic evidence closest to Thucydides is epigraphy.) But the rapid flow of papyrus publication means that we still need to be cautious about formulating assertions about the rarity or uniqueness of a word. Nevertheless (to take an example from p. 285 below), the conjecture that Thucydides was doing something special by using ('coining' would be question-begging) the unique word dycovicns- for 'competition' is strengthened by a computerized search which shows that the word is not found again until Procopius. We must however not overinterpret a locally rare word which may simply be a technical term appropriate in a slice of thick description (like pafiSovxos for 'umpire' at 5. 50. 4), or else an unusual word appropriate to its technical context. For example Thucydides and Pindar both use, once and once only, a word related to or formed from oAia9dvoj, 'I slip'. Thucydides in a detailed naval description (7. 65. 2) uses diroXiaOdvoj about a grapnel slipping off a. leather covering; Pindar has the closely related word oAia9r]p6s in a metaphorical context (P. 2. 96, a 'slippery path', oAia9r]pos olpos). But the basic verb oAia9dvoj is in Homer, Aristophanes, and the Hippokratic writings; 'slipping' is not an out-of-the-way idea.

2

Dover 1994: 73.

Authors: whyjust Pindar?

271

Authors: why just Pindar? An objection, and a good one which I have always sought to bear in mind in this book, is that the feature or expression is found in Homer or some other author whom we may suppose Thucydides to have been familiar with. Other such relevant authors are (to ignore lost works like the Epic Cycle) the tragedians and Herodotus, whose own relation to Pindar would be worth exploring in detail. And it is arbitrary to isolate the praise-poet Pindar without bringing in Bacchylides and Simonides systematically. It is certainly true that some of the features, such as ring-composition (p. 338 etc.), which I discuss below are found in all four authors: Homer, Pindar, Herodotus, Thucydides. In particular, it maybe thought that Homer's influence is felt everywhere in Greek literature so that it is bad method simply to place Pindaric and Thucydidean passages side by side and claim a direct relationship rather than common origin and inspiration. The point about the pervasiveness of Homer is certainly right, but not all later literary devices are conspicuously Homeric, for example metaphor. And there are other features which Pindar and Thucydides share, which I would not want to say are shared by those two and only those two authors, but which characterize them to a special degree: difficulty (this is not Bacchylidean), extreme concision, verbal innovativeness, and violently dislocated word order. These are discussed in Chapter 12. As for ring-composition, I shall argue (Ch. 9 p. 315) that Thucydides is specially prone to use it in those sections, namely the excursuses, which correspond to the myths in a Pindaric victory ode.

The plan of Part II Thucydides' text is often treated as if it fell into just two categories, speeches and narrative. But there are, as I have argued elsewhere, really four component elements.3 The other two are the material on method, including statements of causation; and the disquisitions (for instance that on stasis in book 3. 82-3 or on the plague at 2. 47. 3-54) 3

Hornblower 1995: 51.

272


and the 'antiquarian' excursuses like the Archaeology, the Sikelika, and the account of the end of the Pisistratid tyranny (6. 54-9). Chapters 8-11 will deal with these four elements of Thucydides' History. Dionysios of Halikarnassos complained that Thucydides 'breathlessly', aTTvevari, threw together 'battles on battles, paraskeuai on paraskeuai, and speeches on speeches', s and SO exhausted the reader, ware [jtoxdeiv ju,eV Tr\v Sidvoiav TOIV a.Kpou>jj,evu)v. Dionysios then quotes Pindar (N. 7. 52-3) against Thucydides: 'even honey and Aphrodite's delightful flowers can be cloying', Kopov S' e'xet KM jue/U KM (Letterto GnaeusPompeius 3). Here the meaning of paraskeue is presumably 'armament' rather than 'preparation' (see below, p. 329). It is interesting that Dionysios, who could perfectly well have quoted Homer (Iliad 13. 636-9) for the thought that 'you can have enough even of a good thing', should instead have gone to Pindar for his formulation of it. We shall try to show in the following chapters that Dionysios (who as we shall see, p. 308, did go on to admit that the excursuses in Thucydides relieve the exhaustion thus produced in the reader) did an injustice here, both to Thucydides' narrative and to his speeches. In particular we shall try to show there is Pindaric brilliance in Thucydides' description of one particular TrapaaKevij, whether taken as 'armament' or 'preparation', namely the TrapaaKevij sent from Athens against Sicily in the early part of book 6. And then we shall try to show in Chapter 12 (Conclusion) why Pindar was exactly the right poet for Dionysios to quote in a Thucydidean connexion. O

O

O '

O

7

The Clearest Example of Thucydides Pindaricus: 5. 49—50. 4. 4, The Olympic Games of 420 BC

Why does Thucydides treat this episode so fully? The two chapters of Thucydides I shall concentrate on in the present chapter describe the Olympic games of 420 BC. No reader can fail to notice the change of unexpected wealth of narrative detail in these two chapters, a feature made more effective by being placed in the middle of a long narrative of diplomacy occasionally punctuated by fighting. The normally chattier Herodotus has nothing like it at this level of detail.' I shall try to show how and why their narrative technique is clever and revealing from the literary point of view. But literary considerations should not be our only concern. There is great historical interest here too. The general background is that ten years of war between Athens and Sparta ended in the previous year 421 with the signing of the Peace of Nikias, but that peace was precarious; the general mood in Greece was suspicious and tense. Open war broke out again after 415 when Athens invaded Sicily. The 420 games were the first games of the peace years. That is the general background. The people of Elis controlled Olympic games and sanctuary; a dispute between Elis and Sparta had led to a very heavy fine on the Spartans (200,000 dr., i dr. is a day's wage) and their exclusion from the Olympia festival and sanctuary for non-payment. The umpires flogged Lichas on the course, Iv TW dycovt, when he crowned his charioteer publicly. Lichas' gesture was intended, Thucydides says, to show that the winning chariot was his and not that of the Boiotian state in whose name the victory had been announced. He thus provocatively exploded a fiction made necessary because the Spartans were excluded. Thucydides, who I guess was present in person (see p. 53 and n. 7), says that everyone feared the 1 For his account of Alexander of Macedon's entry for the Olympic games see 5. 22; for Demaratos and others in Herodotus who allowed their Olympic victories to be proclaimed in the names of others, see below, p. 284.

274

5- 49~5°- 4; &% Olympic Games 0/420 BC

Spartans would make an armed attack and force their way in (50. 4). It is not quite clear how close they were physically; the Greek words /u/ij which I have translated 'make an armed attack', mean literally 'comewith arms', which might imply 'come from a distance' (and that may also be the implication of'sacrificed at home', OIKOI e'9vov, line 31). Olympia is 56 miles (90 km.) from Sparta, a reasonably safe sort of distance. On the other hand, people's fears near the end of the whole section (50.4, KM ISoKei TI veov eaeaOai, 'the anxiety became intense and everyone thought that there would be a disturbance') seem to be very immediate, so it may be possible that some Spartans were encamped around in a menacing sort of way. Recently discovered archaeological evidence for a pitched battle at this time in the actual sanctuary of Nemea, and attested fighting at Olympia itself during the Games of 364, show that this kind of attack could indeed happen at a sacred panhellenic site.2 What are these two chapters doing? Why are we told so much about one brief moment? After all, the coverage of the episode is only seven lines shorter (41 : 48) than that devoted to a whole year (417 BC, year fifteen of the war) later in book 5 (chs. 82-3). In narratological language, chs. 49-50. 4 are emphatically 'scene', whereas 417 BC is 'summary'.3 One could put this in other ways, using narratological terms like 'pace', or 'rhythm',4 but the point is clear. Another question: why are we told so much about matters not normally prominent in the History? I now consider six approaches to this problem, ending with the one I myself find most attractive, though I stress that no one of them need be exclusively true, and that several of them could and probably should be combined. Then I shall return to chs. 49-50 in detail. First, there is the 'analyst' view that book 5 is unfinished and in a raw state. On this view, the detail of chs. 49-50 would not have survived a hypothetical final revision. We are lucky to have it, butThucydides did not really mean us to have it, any more than he intended us to have raw treaty texts in Doric dialect later inbook5 (77,79). This is the least attractive of the six views. It is certainly the least fashionable in the year 2004. But it has been held; the standard commentary talks of the 'scrappy disjointed' character of book 5 from which it comes;5 a variant is the view that Thucydides progressively ceased to include so-called irrelevant 2 3 4 5

Miller 1990: 61; Andrewes, CAH5* (1992): 488f. Richardson 1990: 9. See Bal 1985: 68-76; Hornblower 19946: 138. Andrewes, HCT^. 377.

Why does Thucydides treat this episode sofully? 6

275 7

material as his work on the History went on. At the extreme we have the suggestion that book 5 is not by Thucydides at all, Xenophon wrote it up from notes left by Thucydides, like Deryck Gooke reconstructing Mahler's Tenth Symphony. Such analyst views cannot be formally disproved, and my own counter-argument will take the form of an attempted demonstration that much art and thought has gone into the Lichas chapters, and that is an argument of an essentially though not quite necessarily Unitarian type. The only conceivable charge against these chapters might be that Thucydides over-inflated a trivial event which came to nothing. But that is wrong, because as we shall see when we look at my second view, the 420 exclusion and Lichas' flogging were enough on their own to cause a Sparta-Elis war of 400 BG, to which I now turn. The second approach is more interesting. It starts from the premise that Thucydides sometimes shows awareness of events whichhappened after 411 when his own narrative breaks off, and even of events after 404, the end of the Peloponnesian War, and that this awareness may explain the generosity of his coverage. So his long appraisal of King Archelaus of Macedon (2. 100) surely implies his reign had now ended, as we know it did in 399 (Diod. 14. 37. 6).8 In the present case, later events are certainly relevant, most obviously Lichas' own prominence in 411 as described by Thucydides himself in book 8.9 But there is also a post-404 event outside Thucydides' narrative which he must have known about, namely a war between Sparta and Elis in 400. The cause of this war was precisely revenge for the Olympic ban of twenty years earlier, 420. Our main and earliest10 source for the war is Thucydides' continuator Xenophon. He says (Hell. 3. 2. 21-3) that the Spartans were angry with the Eleans for banning them from the festival and for flogging Lichas. One question any reader of Thucydides and Xenophon with any curiosity will ask is, were the Spartans excluded for all the twenty years 420-400, or did they pay up quickly and get the ban lifted? This matters, because if as most people think the exclusion also applied to the games of 416,412,408, and 404, the Spartans' grievance against Elis would be more serious and we should have to revise our interpretation of Thucydides' Lichas chapters accordingly. But I have 6 7 8 9 10

Westlake 1969: ch. i. Canforaigyo. With Beloch 1913-27: 3. 2. 55. From ch. 39 onwards, see chs. 43, 52, 87, and esp. 84 where his death is anticipated. Not the only source. For Diodorus and Pausanias see Hornblower 2000C.

276

j. 49-50.4, the Olympic Games 0/420 BC

argued in detail elsewhere11 that Sparta paid up and the ban was lifted well before 416. That is, the twenty-year Olympic ban on the most powerful Greek state of the time is a modern assumption and invention; such a ban would surely have left more of a trace on the tradition. Be that as it may, the second view is that Thucydides had the 400 war in his mind and made a meal of 420 accordingly. The third view is that of Tim Rood.12 Thucydides' uncharacteristic attention to religion and athletics in these two chapters are, says Rood, his way of indicating a peaceful interlude. Rood thinks the Lichas chapters show a lightness of tone found nowhere else in the History, and that Thucydides by this technique 'suggests a static world of local disputes, a brief reassertion of normality within the great disruption of the Peloponnesian War'. He adds 'athletics are mainly found in treatments of the past'. I agree that Thucydides does sometimes do this: in an earlier year he describes at length the genuinely peaceful reinstauration of a four-yearly festival on the island of Delos (3. 104); the technique resembles the peaceful scenes depicted on the shield of Achilles in book 18 of Homer's Iliad, which remind us poignantly of the normal world far away from the fighting. This is an interesting, plausible suggestion, a great improvement on the 'analyst' view that chs. 49-50 are merely out of scale. But though Rood's view helps with the problems of book 5 as a whole, I have two worries about seeing the 420 games in his way. First, Lichas' flogging and the narrowly averted Spartan disruption of the games were anything but normal and peaceful, and the presence of troops on 'red alert', so to speak, shows that we are dealing not just with trivial local disputes but potential superpower conflict. The second worry is about isolating book 5. Let us move back to book 4, where there is still plenty of wartime narrative to come: hostilities in the north continued up to the climax of the fight for Amphipolis early in book 5. It is precisely there that Thucydides describes, in explicit language, the Skionaians greeting Brasidas 'like an athlete' (above, p. 46). The fourth possible view is that our two chapters are indeed meant as narrative relief from different kinds of history in the rest of book 5; but relief of a special kind. Festivals were an inversion of normality in that hostilities were suspended and people enjoyed themselves in aggressive displacement activities rather than actual fighting. The argument might go that this is carnival,13 a word which suggests the 11 13

12 Hornblower 2000C. Rood 1998: 107. For games as carnival see Blake 1996: 46-53; Golden 1998: 168 andn. 21.

Why does Thucydides treat this episode sojully?

277

literary theories of Mikhail Bakhtin as applied to Rabelais and Dostoyevsky.14 In favour of this idea we may recall that for Bakhtin one main feature of carnival is crowning and uncrowning of a temporary king; in Thucydides the crowning of the charioteer, i.e. the surrogate Lichas, then the humiliation of Lichas himself corresponds to crowning and its opposite. Suitably enough Thucydides even inverts the order of the two events because he describes Lichas' flogging out of sequence, before the crowning which he saves up for a Pindaric closure: by that I mean that mention of crowning of the victor often brings a victory ode to a close. We will not go wrong if we treat these chapters as, among other things, a conscious splash of unusual narrative colour in an otherwise uneventful year. But that is not at all the same as saying that it was an assertion of normality. Thucydides here as elsewhere mentions Olympic games when something unusual happens; so in book 3 (ch. 8) he describes the games of 428, when Dorieus was victor, precisely because they were turned into an anti-Athenian occasion with denunciatory speeches by Athenian allies like the Mytileneans (above, p. 61). So the fourth view is an explanation in terms of Bakhtin and carnival. Fifth, there is the view that Thucydides was enjoying himself in these chapters. His attention to athletics here may be unusual, but he was happy to write the incident up because he was interested in and aware of the continuing political importance of athletic success, in fact his world intersects with Pindar's. Thucydides normally kept athletics out of sight, but not always, and he thought this episode important enough to justify indulging his interest. His handling and organization of the episode is brilliant; here if anywhere he shows himself the prose Pindar ('not unlike Pindar as a master of the literary art' as he has been called).151 favour this view; that is, I here draw on my Part I and suggest that Thucydides was more 'Pindaric' than is usually admitted. The Lichas episode is one of several passages in Thucydides which recognize the importance of athletic success, a phenomenon he knew was not confined to 'the past'; the most famous is Alkibiades' boast about his Olympic victories, which we have encountered several times already (above pp. 58, 250, 258). But I agree with Rood that the rich Lichas detail is there for a purpose or more than one purpose because we must not forget the war of 400. Sixth, it is surely very likely that Thucydides was present in person at 14 15

Bakhtin 1968. Young 1968: 120 n. 18. See above, 73 n. 66 and below, Ch. 12 p. 354.

278


these games of 420 and that helps to explain the detail and immediacy of his coverage:16 he knew from personal experience that everybody was afraid of a Spartan attack. In his exile he surely spent much time in the Peloponnese17 and I cannot believe that he would voluntarily have missed an event like the first peacetime Olympic games after the end of the Ten-Year or Archidamian War. Let us now turn to those games.

Lichas son of Arkesilas I start, as one ought, with introductions: how does Thucydides introduce the central character, and what can we say about him? Lichas forms a good bridge from the Pindaric individuals whom we looked at in Gh. 5. He is not actually named until the penultimate paragraph of ch. 50, and there is an oddity about the naming because he is there called Lichas son of Arkesilas, the Spartan.18 It is the patronymic (father's name) I want to stress. It has in fact been delayed: readers have already met Lichas, twenty chapters earlier, in a diplomatic context, where he was not given his patronymic (5. 22. 2). So why does Thucydides save it for now? The oddity can be paralleled (i. 79. 2 etc., contrast 2. 19. i: Archidamos), but I suggest that the name Arkesilas is specially appropriate because of the athletic context of 49-50. A Pindaric aspect comes in here: Pindar often addresses adult as well as boy victors not as X but as son of Y, where it is certain or likely that the father too was a great athlete, thus Theaios of Argos in Nemean 10 is addressed as 'son of Oulias' (line 24); and odes like that and Olympian 13 elaborate on the victories of the victor's ancestors; 0.13 says thatThessalos, the carefully named father of Xenophon of Korinth, had himself won a running event at Olympia (line 35, 'the foot-racing glory of his father Thessalos is dedicated by the streams of the Alpheos', 19 Outside the pages of Pindar, we recall that the 'Damonon inscription' from 16

Clark 1999; see above, p. 53 n. 7. Chambers 2000. Alberti's text rightly prints the genitive in the form ApKeai\ov which is the form quoted by Photius; the manuscripts have ApKeai\dov. Th. gives the correct Doric form of the name, contrast Herodotus' Ionic form UpKemXetos (4. 1598".). For the delay in naming Lichas himself in the immediate context cf. 0. 12 (Ergoteles, named in the penultimate line), with Silk in Hornblower and Morgan (forthcoming). But contrast P. 9. 3 (Telesikrates). 19 See also Young 1971:19, on/. 7: 'recognition of the victor's distinguished relatives is itself a convention of the genre.' 17

18

Lichas son ofArkesilas

279

fifth-century Sparta records not only the victories of Damonon himself but also those of his son Enymakratidas (above, pp. 236 f). Pindar as we saw has no certain victory ode for a Spartan victor though there were plenty of available Spartan equestrian victors. The most famous was, precisely, Lichas' father Arkesilas: fc victories were a byword. Plutarch quotes a poem by an Athenian Kritias which shows that the 'victories ofArkesilas' were proverbial (Plut. Kim. 10. 6). Like many Pindaric victors, Lichas came from a family of such victors and by the patronymic Arkesilas Thucydides reminds us of the fact. Lichas, in fact, belongs to what Wade-Gery20 called the 'international aristocracy', and whatever we think of 'aristocracy' the word 'international' is right: Lichas was famous for his hospitality to strangers at Spartan festivals (Xen. Mem. i. 2. 61, Plut. Kim. 10. 5). We can trace some of Lichas' contacts by means of prosopography, the study of individuals, their names, careers and connections. He was proxenos (diplomatic representative) for Argos, as Thucydides tells us elsewhere (5. 76. 3). And his family may have had proxeny or marriage ties with the royal house of Kyrene, in which the names Battos and Arkesilas alternated; this Kyrene connection was suggested in 1977 by the late D. M. Lewis.21 Such suggestions can now, thanks to the ongoing Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, be tested scientifically, and this one holds up well because we can check statistically the distribution of the names Lichas and Arkesilas: they are very much at home in both Sparta and Kyrene, a colony of a Spartan colony (Thera), though not quite confined to those two cities.22 This brings us right into Pindar's world because two of Pindar's finest odes, Pythians 4 and 5, were written for Arkesilas king of Kyrene. Then there is the island of Thasos in the north Aegean. In 1983 a new Lichas(-es) son ofArkesilas turned up on an inscription as an official at Thasos in 397 Be. 23 This caused great excitement because of its possible implications for Thucydides' composition date. The point is that Thucydides refers in book 8 to Lichas' death 'at a later date', varepov. If we stretch 'later' to cover fourteen 20

Wade-Gery 1958: 246. Lewis 1977: 33 n. 44. Fraser 1972: 2. 308 n. 379 discusses the elephant-hunter Lichas of Akarnania and one or two other bearers of the name not yet included in LGPN. His statement that Lichas is 'not a very uncommon name' is true of the hellemstic period, but not of the archaic and classical. Note that the 'Tarentine' Lichas of Petronius (Salyricon looff.), adduced by Fraser, is proof rather than disproof of the contention in my text about Lichas as a Spartan name, because Tarentum was Sparta's best-known colony: 'Lacedaemomum Tarentum'. For such onomastic accuracy in Greek writers of fiction see Crawford 2000. 23 Pouilloux and Salviat 1983; SEG-j-j. 702. 21

22

a8o

5.49-50.4, the Olympic Games 0/420 BC

years, and identify the Thasos official with the Thucydidean athletediplomat, then it follows that Thucydides was writing after 397. Some scholars reject the identification;24 but even if we are sceptical about precise identity, it would be perverse to deny that the two men called Lichas son of Arkesilas, both unusual names, were related, and it is the family's international connections, not only those of Lichas the individual, which I am interested in: this is what medievalists call 'floating kindreds', cases where we can be confident of some relationship but not of exact identity or relationship.25 That leads to my last, most neglected Lichas, whom I have discussed more fully elsewhere.26 He is listed in the 1994 'Athens and Attica' volume ofLGPNsiS Lichas son of Samieus; the evidence is an inscribed Athenian 'kalos-vase' or 'beautiful-young-man-vase'. It is a white pot of a type called lekythos by the Achilles Painter and is in the British Museum. In fact there are now two such pots because a new, more legible one turned up recently on the Rome art-market and was published in iggy. 27 The inscriptions go AIXAZ KAAOZ 2AMI02 (or HAMIQH; the letter could be an omicron or an omega) which on the usual view means 'Lichas beautiful son of Samieus'. But this view is not very polite to the Achilles Painter because it implies he did not know ancient Greek very well: the genitive of Samieus ought to be Uaîeus not UaîMs or Uaîos; Uaîos could be a patronymic only if it were the genitive of Udîs which is however a name unattested anywhere (for the hypothetical form cf. Wavîos at Pindar 0. 4. 10, the genitive of faults). But I think that Bosanquet, who published the British Museum vase in :8g6,28 was right to think that Lichas/Liches is not an Athenian. The Lexicon of Greek Personal Names enables me to say this confidently; there are no other Athenians called either Lichas/Liches or Samieus—in other words I disagree with the editors of the Lexicon for assigning them to Athens at all. Bosanquet attractively suggested that the Lichas of the vase was not Athenian but a Spartan who moved in wealthy Athenian circles in the mid-fifth century BC. (This suggestion requires that the penultimate letter be read as an omicron not an omega.) If so he may be related to Thucydides' Lichas; and perhaps also to a prominent sixth-century Liches in Herodotus (i. 67-8). So: we have Lichas' family linked to Argos, Kyrene, Thasos, Athens, and even maybe Samos if as /suggest 'Samios' on the vase is not a 24 26 28

Gartledge 1984. See Hornblower 2002^. Bosanquet 1896.

25 27

Hornblower 200oa: 1311". Hornblower 2002^: 247 pi. i.

Lichas son ofArkesilas

2 81

patronymic but nevertheless indicates links with Samos, an island with close links with Sparta;29 Herodotus mentions a Spartan called Samios for just this friendly reason (3. 55). One might compare the ostraka cast against 'Kallias the Mede', a way of characterizing the Athenian Kallias as pro-Persian (and thus a traitor).30 To call Lichas a 'Samian' might then be an affectionate (rather than, as in an ostracism, hostile) way of alluding to the Samian connection; in fact a sort of nickname.31 Against this suggestion, it can be urged that in kalos vases which have three elements, 'x kalos y', the y element is usually a patronymic. On the other hand the onomastic arguments against the existence of the names Samis or Samieus are strong. If I am right that Uaîos is a nominative and means 'the Samian' there is an obvious alternative possibility, which is that Lichas might have been an actual Samian. I accept that this cannot be ruled out. There are three considerations against this: 1. There is no other example of the name from Samos (see LGPJVi), just as there is none from Athens, with the exception of the doubtful case we are concerned with. In Sparta by contrast there are (according to LGPN^Jwe, not counting Lichas kalos whom I wish to see as a Spartan in disguise. But the Thasian Liches (above) is a warning that inscriptions can surprise us at any time. So this argument is, obviously, not decisive. 2. If Lichas were a Samian we might have expected his name to have the Ionic form Liches like the Thasian (Aixys ApKeaiAeojs) who turned up in 1983. This argument is admittedly not totally compelling because there is a Parian called Lichas in LGPNi, and Paros is an Ionian island; and there is a hellenistic Lichas from Ionian Miletus.32 3. The Samian theory is vulnerable to the same objection as is my own Spartan theory, namely that in that position in the formula the word ought to be a patronymic not an ethnic. However (obviously) I do not myself want this objection to be valid.

29 30 31 32

Gartledge 1982, not however discussing Lichas kalos Samios. Vanderpool 1973: 2351".; Lewis 1984: 605. I owe this way of putting it to Herwig Maehler. Fraser 1972: 308 n. 370 (not yet inLGPjVbecause it has not reached Asia Minor).

282


Analysis of Th. 5. 49-50. 4. 4 I move on to the architecture of the Lichas chapters. Thucydides starts 'the Olympic games happened that summer, in which Androsthenes the Arkadian won the pankration for the first time'. Old-fashioned 'analysts' pounced on 'first time' for its implication that Androsthenes won on a later occasion, so that this must have been written no earlier than 416. True, but the mention of Androsthenes is significant for its own sake. He is not a Dorieus or a Lichas, a man with a famous military or diplomatic career. Androsthenes may just be there because Thucydides is interested in the athletic fact: we do not need Gomme's idea that he had'seen a[n official] list of some kind'; at any rate I would rather think that the inspiration here was a poetic list like the roll-call of mythical victors in Pindar's Olympian 10, whose ultimate precursor is the funeral games for Patroklos in Homer, Iliad 23. Androsthenes is also a sort of date; and since the Olympic games fell in late summer, it is a way of preparing us for the end of the campaigning year which duly ends at 50. 5 and which began back in ch. 4O.33 It is Thucydides' habit to include assortments of varied material at the end of a campaigning year, so for instance Year Nine (and with it book 4) ends with a cluster of unrelated items, including the accidental burning down of the temple of Hera at Argos (4. 133). So to describe the Olympic games of 420 where he does would fit his frequent practice with non-military episodes. As we have seen, Lichas himself is long postponed. After Androsthenes comes the most important single event, the exclusion of the Spartans from the games, eipxOrjaav (line 3). Then follows the detailed account of the quarrel which led to the exclusion. Then (50. 2) we get the exclusion again, et'pyovro. This is ring-composition of a kind familiar from, though not mechanically implemented by, Pindar.34 By that I mean that the narrative returns to its starting point. So in Pythian 4 Pindar jumps straight to Medea's prophecy of how Euphamos will take the clod of earth from Poseidon; then he backtracks. As Kirkwood puts it in his introduction to this ode,35' [a] s he often does (0. i and P. 2 33

Gomme, HCT4. 64. In this section I disregard 50. 5, but see below, p. 285 n. 43. Illig 1932; Race 1997:21 f.; Hamilton 1974:67 n. i, 71 n. 49 and 112 f. for some qualifications (ring composition not universal in Pindar; in any case as he says it may take various forms— verbal, thematic, formal). See below, p. 315. 35 Kirkwood 1982: 162. 34

Analysis of Th. 5.49-50.4.4

283

are good examples), so in this poem Pindar excerpts a key moment in the story and puts it dramatically out of context, at the beginning', then works his way back to the same event in a more logical way. Similarly in Olympian 7, there are not really two showers of gold on the island of Rhodes, there is one shower but two mentions of it, joined by a ring.36 The Thucydidean ring means his Lichas chapters are a 'developed picture' in the terminology invented by Carolyn Dewald in her important Berkeley dissertation on the organization of Thucydides' History.37 She divides his narrative into simple picture units, developed picture units, list units, extended narrative units, and complex units. From the Sicilian books on, Thucydides' organization becomes more complicatedly interwoven and no longer analysable in such units; but book 5 she thinks intermediate. In 'developed' picture units like the Lichas chapters first and last sentences focus on a single event, but in the body of the unit 'one or two elements in the picture are chosen for emphasis'. She remarks of our chapters: 'the narrative pace has slowed down to pause at this moment, and the reader, like the spectators at Olympia, draws breath in suspense.' After the second mention of the exclusion, Thucydides' narrative gathers pace and excitement, and Lichas' flogging is described; we have seen that this and the crowning are mentioned out of sequence with each other; in real time the order was crowning-flogging, but in narrative time, that is the order in which we read or hear the events, the order is flogging-crowning. The introduction of a cause or motive makes this seem natural, not the simple 'first he did some crowning then he was flogged' but the more sophisticated 'he was flogged because he had done some illicit crowning'. But Thucydides ends the story tantalizingly. In particular he does not tell us how the episode ended; for instance, did the Spartans pay up (as I think they did)?38 Although Thucydides' account is so full and rich, there is still much more we would like to know. For instance, how often did people try to enter games under another city's colours like Lichas? An exact ancientparallel is hard to find; closest is Dorieus the Rhodian, already mentioned; as we have seen (p. 140) he was proclaimed as coming from Thurii in Italy where he went for a while, another athletic stasis-exile; we also hear of a Kretan Sotades who took cash from Ephesus to call himself Ephesian and was exiled from Krete as punishment. And we hear of people having their victories proclaimed in the name of someone else 36

Willcock 1995: 122.

37

Dewald 1975.

38

Hornblower 2000C.

284

5- 49-50.4, the Olympic Games 0/420 BC

(Pindar Pythian 6 may be an example), even someone from a different city. Astylos of Kroton (for whom see above Ch. 5 p. 187) got into trouble back home for ingratiating himself with Hiero by proclaiming himself as a Syracusan; and Herodotus says that the Spartan king Demaratos honoured his fellow-Spartans by proclaiming his Olympic chariot victory in their collective name not his.39 Then we ask, whose idea was the Boiotian fiction, Lichas or the Elean organizers? Again, how common was flogging of competitors at the games? The evidence was recently collected and discussed; there is plenty of it; a late writer says Alkibiades was flogged at Olympia for hubris in boasting that he came from the best city of Greece.40 Finally, why did the Spartans not stir themselves on behalf of Lichas at the time, instead bottling it up for twenty years until 400? Different Spartans no doubt had different motives, but on the whole they were pious people who 'valued the things of the gods more than the things of men' (Hdt. 5. 63), and some of them would have felt qualms about smashing into a festival when under a ban. Others may just have been nervous of setting off a war. Others again may have disliked and disapproved of their fellowcountryman Lichas and thought he had got too big for his boots. So, we can confidently say that there were tensions within the Spartan elite. Most likely all three motives were operative. This brings us to the last sentence. It begins 'the Spartans made no move', literally 'stayed quiet', rjavxaaav. Despite the absence of explicit negative, this is what narratologists call 'presentation by negation',41 which is a focusing device, a way of drawing attention to what did not happen. It is an implied negative, saying in effect they did not, as people feared, or they did not, as you might expect, make a move. Negative expressions in Pindar have something of the same function. Thus it has been well said that the close of Isthmian 8 ('he has not suppressed in a hole a youth without experience of noble deeds', line 70) is a way of saying that the young man achieved glory, but Pindar does this by stressing that and how things could have been different.42 39

Paus. 6. 18. 6 (Sotades) and 13. i (Astylos); Hdt. 6. 70. 3 (Demaratos). Crowther and Frass 1998: 60 citing Hermogenes On Invention 2. 4. 22-4.1 am grateful to Gordon Howie for drawing my attention to this article and sending me a copy. 41 Below, p. 348. 42 Race 1986: 17; for other examples Race 1983, and cf. Kohnken 1976 for the related Pindaric feature, litotes ( a Thucydidean favourite too, as in the generalization at 2. 34. 6, the Funeral Speech at Athens is delivered by someone thought to be not unintelligent, p,rj a^vvzTos. Actually this is the highest possible intellectual praise, and on the occasion there described the speaker is Pericles, see below Gh. 9 p. 311). 40

Analysis of Th. 5.49-50.4.4

285

Then (to return to Thucydides), we get the statement 'so the festival passed off for the Greeks', 77 eopr?) avrois OVTOJ SirjA9ev. In Homer, this sort of thing is called appositive summary.43 A famous example is the end of the Iliad, 'so they occupied themselves with the funeral of Hector tamer of horses', d>s of y' djuîWov rdov "EWopos iVTroSdjuoio. Such an 'appositive summary' is in fact a closural device44 and may be a way of flagging a scene switch. Thucydides makes brilliant use of these appositive summaries, sometimes cross-referring and comparing episodes, in Homeric style: 'so close did Mytilene come to danger' in book 3, and 'so close did Syracuse come to danger' in book 7, trapa Toaovrov both times (3. 49. 4; 7. 2. 4). Similarly Pindar deliberately closes Olympian 3 as he had opened Olympian i, with a priamel comparing Olympic victory to the excellences of water and gold (0. 3. 42, cf. 0. i. iff; below, p. 355). Finally I examine some verbal detail, starting with -n-a-yKpariov, 'pankration' (49. i). It is only one Thucydidean hapax of many in these two chapters; by a hapax I mean a word used only once, ancient Greek hapax; English has no single word for 'once and only once'. Others are KaTaSiKaôjucu, pajBSovxoi, rjvioxos, 'fining', 'umpires', 'charioteer'. We must not over-interpret these; once Thucydides had decided to cover an event of this sort in detail, specialist vocabulary was inevitable. So, KaTaSiKaL,u>/KaraSiKaôâi frequently occurs in legal inscriptions; to take just one example with a religious tinge (like the present passage of Thucydides), it is used of some religious offenders condemned to death at fourth-century BG Ephesus.45 The most intriguing hapax is a-ywviais in the final paragraph, 'competingness'. The Greek (lines 38-9) is Kara TTJV OVK lôvaiav rrjs a-ywviaews; to give the flavour in English we would need to say something as awkward as 'according to the non-admissibility46 of his competingness'. I have used a non-existent English word 'competingness' for dycovicns- because as June Allison has shown47 it is not found again 43 44 45

46

Richardson 1990: 31—5- Gf. too 50. 5, homeward dispersal, with Iliad o,^.. 1—2. For closure see Fowler 1989; Roberts, Dunn, and Fowler 1997. SEG^6. ion lines 1—2, oi-n-poriyopoi imep rrjs deov /<are[Si-] | Ka.aa.VTo etc.

For expressions of the otVeôuaiatype, cf. 3. 95. 2, oia.Tr)$A€VKdoo$Trjv ovTrepirei-îaiv, 'because he had not blockaded Leukas'. Euripides likes them too, see Hipp.i 96, KOVK aTrooeiîv TCOV VTTO yaias, 'non-revelation of the things beneath the earth', with Halleran 1995: 167, n. on the passage, citing Dodds 1960: 134 on ov TraA^? VTTO., 'proving you no wrestler' [lit. 'by not wrestling'] at Ba. 455, where, oddly enough, the thought is again athletic, as at Th. 5.50.4. 47 See below Gh. 12 p. 370 n. 67.

286


before Procopius, a thousand years later; computerized thesauruses now enable us to say this sort of thing confidently. (It is registered by Julius Pollux in the second century AD, but explicitly as a Thucydidean word: 3. 151, 0.770 Se dycovos ovoâra dya>viais Trapd ©ovKvSiSrj.) That is, it is not just unique in Thucydides but unique in classical Greek, not just a Thucydidean hapaxbut an absolute hapax. It is easy to see what it must mean, because the root dycov means competition, but it is in fact a daring new coinage, appropriate for this unique situation; like Pindar with his audacious new compound words all over the place, Thucydides is a great linguistic innovator (see further below Gh. 12 p. 369^). The alternative is that, like KaraSiKaôâi, d-ywviais is official correct athletic terminology and evidence of the accuracy of Thucydides the sports journalist, like that metaphorical word O.KOVITI, 'without dust' (p. 48). So too the unusual locative case in the expression OIKOI 9veiv, 'to sacrifice at home', may be correct archaic religious terminology; OIKOI seems to be a poetic word before Thucydides, found several times in Pindar.48 But I prefer to think that with agonists Thucydides is consciously stretching the limits of language to suit this violent distortion of normality. New formations in -sis are much in vogue at this period, not just in Euripides (above, p. 285 n. 46) but also in the later plays of Sophocles.49 Like Pindar usually,50 Thucydides does not describe the actual victory, so things near their climax with the crowning of the charioteer; the word for crowning (dveS-rjae), is not a Thucydidean or any other sort of hapax; it is the visual image which is striking. It recalls the intoxicating moment when that Pindaric honour-seeker Brasidas was crowned 'like an athlete'(4. 121. i; and many passages in Pindar, like JV". n. 28, where Aristagoras of Tenedos 'binds his hair in gleaming wreaths', the verb is precisely avS-âaêvos; or the crowning andpkyllobolia, leaf-throwing, at the end of Pythian 9). One of my aims has been to show that Pindar can help with the elucidation of one unusually rich and detailed section of Thucydidean narrative. I must now try to show that the techniques of comparison can be applied more generally and widely. 48 Horn.//. 1.113; Pi. P. 4. 43 (above, p. 108), JV. 5.45, etc. There is an intriguing epigraphic attestation at Syll? 1259, Athens, opening of a private letter preserved on a lead plaque, 'Mnesippos sends greetings to those at home, OIKOI . (Said to be early 4th cent.) The word is not in Herodotus; after Th. it is found in Xenophon and Plato. 49 Long 1968, esp. ch. 3. 50 Dornseiff 1921: 115. See further below, p. 342 n. 43.

8

Statements of Method; Causation

Introduction In 1964, G. M. Bowra memorably began his book on Pindar with the statement 'no Greek poet says as much as Pindar about his art'.' Thirty years later Chris Carey replied that this was right as a claim about the uniqueness of Pindar's extensive reflection on the activity in which he is engaged, but that Bowra was wrong to detect in such reflections an insight into Pindar's art. 'In fact, what we are offered is illusion. When we press Pindar's statements, they are frequently uninformative. We could have divined even without the aid of 0. 6 irdt. that Pindar habitually seeks an arresting opening' and so on.2 Carey goes on to say that we do not need P. 10. 53f. and P. n. 41 ff to tell us that epinikians contain different elements which must be balanced and combined successfully, and that some statements are positively misleading, like N. 4. 33 which implies the existence of some sort of reôs or rule governing Pindar's composition. Perhaps for reasons of this sort Russell and Winterbottom, in their 1972 collection of texts on ancient literary criticism, gave only three short passages from Pindar; and although they cited Bowra's opening chapter they themselves put the matter differently and more cautiously: Pindar, they said, 'speaks now and then, in his own person, about the making and purpose of poetry'.3 The three passages which Russell and Winterbottom selected will be a good way in to Pindar's methodology, though they do not by any means exhaust the evidence for it. The third in their order is a fragment (150 Snell-Maehler, 137 Bowra), quoted by Eustathius in his commentary on the opening of Homer's Iliad, with its command to the 'goddess' or Muse to sing of the wrath of Achilles, ^rjviv aetSe, 9ed: 'and Pindar says "give me an oracle, Muse, and I shall be your prophet" ', KO.I UivSapos . . . Ae'yer fjLavreveo, Moiaa, Trpo(f>aT€vaa> S' e-yaj. The next fragment (151 Snell-Maehler) is however also relevant: Eustathius says 'Pindar reverses Homer's order in his "the Muse urged 1

Bowra 1964: i.

2

Carey 1995: 99.

3

Russell and Winterbottom 1972: 3 f.

288

Statements of Method; Causation

me", that is, incited me, for he did not incite the Muse but she him', ov [Eustathius gives the familiar form Movaa] dvaTTfiaev. That is, Pindar affects to be the servant of the Muses rather than their master like the commanding Homer; this is perhaps the sort of thing Carey has in mind when he says that Pindar pretends to be more naive than he is, giving the impression that we are being given 'access to the creative act itself, whereas he is really presenting his patrons with a complex artefact requiring lengthy rehearsal.4 But there is yet more to be said. 'Complex' is certainly the right word for Pindar's relation to the Muses. We shall see (below, p. 341 that in JV. 5 he seems deliberately to elide the distinction between what the Muses sang at the wedding of Thetis and Peleus, and what the poet himself is singing. Russell and Winterbottom's first passage is polemical, the contrast drawn in Olympian 2 between the wise man and the chattering crows:

I have many swift arrows under my arm in their quiver that speak to those who understand, but for the whole subject, they need interpreters. Wise is he who knows many things by nature, whereas learners who are boisterous and long-winded are like a pair of crows that cry in vain against the divine bird of Zeus. (0.2. 83-8)

It is an old question, just how specifically polemical this is; the guess that the two 'crows' are Bacchylides and Simonides goes back to the scholiast.5 But some animal fable may lie behind it.6 We can agree that Pindar had no particular rivals in mind, and still not want to go all the way with Lefkowitz who seems to want to deny any reference to competitors, or indeed any self-reference at all.7 The strong claim to inbred as opposed to learned excellence is in a way the same claim as 4 6

Carey 1995: 99. Kirkwood 1982: 76; Race 1997: i. 73 n. 3.

5 7

Drachmann 1903—27: 2. 99, 157^. Lefkowitz 1981: 57.

Introduction

289

the claim (above) to be in direct communication with the Muse, which implies that you do not need human teachers. It is in this sense that the bard Phemios in the Odyssey can claim to be avroSiSaKTos, 'selftaught', while in the same breath asserting that 'the god planted all kinds of songs [ot'âs, lit. 'paths'] in my heart', (Od. 22. 347).8 It almost goes without saying that Pindar here conceals his own 'craftsmanship and painstaking care'; the quotation is from Fraenkel's discussion of Horace's 'Pindargedicht' (Odes 4. 2, 'Pindarum quisquis studet aemulari'), the poem in which Horace tells lullus Antonius that imitating Pindar is out of the question for him. Horace, in his famous comparison of Pindar's poetry to a mountain torrent ('monte decurrens velut amnis'),9 'moving in measures that know no law' ('numerisque fertur lege solutis'), takes this concealment further. It is 'as though the Roman poet were carried away by his admiration of a phenomenon in which there seems to act a force of nature rather than the mind of a man . . . for Horace's immediate purpose it was all-important to widen as much as possible the gulf by which 6 TroAAa elSws ua is separated from the na96vT€s'. Fraenkel does not even bother to give the Greek reference here, which is to precisely the extract of Olympian 2 with which we began this paragraph and this discussion.10 Horace's claim that Pindar's poetry 'knows no law' is in fact as unreliable in its way as Pindar's own opposite claim that he is the servant of a reOôs or rule of composition (above). The second passage cited by Russell and Winterbottom is a selection from the famous or notorious complaint in the 'Neoptolemos' ode (Nemean 7, written for Sogenes of Aigina), about the excessive literary magnification of Odysseus' exploits and sufferings. I follow their selection:

8

Kirk 1985: 51. See Fraenkel 1957: 22411. 2 for the interesting possibility that the river/poem comparison goes back to none other than Pindar himself: 0. 10. 9-10, vvv slKTTAevaai, the section begins. Then Thucydides subdivides. The older men, he says, hoped for conquest or at any rate avoidance of failure with so large an armament; the mass of the ordinary soldiers hoped for money [lit. silver] and a permanent source of pay (the frank acknowledgement of the booty motive is unusual).23 In between there is the group with which we are concerned, 'those in the prime of their youth who had a yearning for distant sights and spectacles', TOLS 8' €v rfj rj\iKiq TTJS re aTrovarjs 776601 oj/iecos KO.I 9ea>pias. Discussion has tended to fasten on the third of the groups, which is ambiguously described and thus problematic (see n. 23); but for our purposes it is surely of great significance that it is only the second or central group, the men in their prime, who are given a romantic motive. It is placed between two prosaic motives, territorial conquest (no. i) and financial enrichment (no. 3). The centrally-placed young men in the flower of their youth are an elite; they are, so to speak, Thucydides' Argonauts (with Thucydides' ot eV TjAiKia compare Pindar's aAi|iv . . . avv aAAois at P. 4. 187.). Now let us consider Pindar's Argonauts and their Tr69os:

And Hera enkindled in these demigods that all-persuasive, sweet longing for the ship Argo. (P. 4. 184-5)

Here the Argo is present not distant; but it is a signifier for the journey and the distant places to which it will take the heroes, so that Tr69os 22

Richardson 1993: 86. The meaning of the Greek o &<E TTO\V$ o/LttAos /cat OTpaTitoTrjs is disputed; it could refer to two separate groups, the mass of the people staying at home, and the ordinary soldiers; or it could refer to one group only, the mass of the ordinary soldiers. 23

Preparation; ritual preliminaries; trumpets

335

is appropriate; the parallel with Thucydides is close, but as with the thunder-clap after Jason's libation (above) the mention of Hera represents an explicitly divine involvement which Thucydides omits. The third and last passage is from Nikias' first speech, warning the Athenians against the Sicilian venture. In strongly poetic language he warns them not to be Svaepwras TU>V O.-TTOVTWV, 'disastrously in love with what is absent' (6.13. i). The expression belongs to an important and well-studied category of Greek literary utterances, namely those expressive of an opposition between the 'near and the far' and of the advisability of keeping to what is close at hand.24 Many are from Pindar, but other authors from Hesiod to Lysias feature in David Young's list of authors. So the content alone does not justify us in assuming a direct relationship between Thucydides and Pindar. The case for such a relationship rests on the close similarity to one particular Pindaric phrase, but this time it is not from Pythian 4 but from Pythian 3, where Koronis is said to be 'in love with what is absent', ripa.ro TU>V arreovruiv:'15 Gornford went so far as to call Thucydides' Svaepwras TU>V arrovruiv a quotation from this phrase of Pindar.26 But Pythian 4 does contain the thought if not the exact words: the arrows of Artemis, which shot down Tityos the attempted rapist of Leto, warns a person 'to desire to attain loves within his power', opa TLS TO.V ev Svvara) (f>iXoTa.TU>v emi/taveiv eparai (line 92). The word Sucre/scores'27 is a poetic word. It is used by the Nurse in Euripides' Hippolytus (line 193). Unfortunately the passage is difficult and its authenticity has been doubted. The context seems at first to be the 'near and far' theme. A few lines earlier the speaker has in good Pindaric manner criticized her mistress Phaidra's state of mind because 'what is present does not please you but you prefer what is absent', ovSe a' dpeaKei TO rrapov, TO S' arrov (f>i\T€pov r/yfj (lines 184— 5). But her argument then veers away and she comments sententiously (lines 193-5):

24 Young 1968: 1 1 6— 20, appendix i on 'the themes of the near and the far' with a valuable collection of poetic and prose passages. See above, p. 73. 25 Line 20. Dover cites the passage in his n. on TCOV d-rrovTcov., attributing it to 'Gomme, ms.' Dover himself precedes this with the remark that 'the word [aTroi'TOJi'] has more emotional associations for the Greeks than for us' HC7 \. 238. 26 27 Gornford 1907: 206. Not commented on by Dover.

336

Narrative we seem to be disastrously in love with whatever shines on earth, through inexperience of another life.

Here the disastrous passion is for what is present rather than for what is absent. So we cannot after all regard the Euripides passage (from a play produced in 428) as a compelling model for the Thucydidean combination of'disastrous love' and 'desire for the absent'.28 Itremains true and important that the word Sucre/scores' is most unusual in prose. I conclude with a general point about this very visual section about the launching of the expedition. The preparation against Sicily was, Thucydides enigmatically observes, a display of power to the other Greeks rather than a paraskeue against enemies (6. 31. 4). The puzzle here29 is to know why a display of power should somehow be thought inconsistent with the possession of power; after all the army assembled atNemeafe. 60. 3) both looked fine (KaXXiarov) and was fine, just as for Pindar an athlete's achievements usually match his beauty (see above, p. 304 on N. 3. 19, but for an exception see /. 4. 49-50, Melissos of Thebes; cf. below, Conclusion p. 374). I suggest that Thucydides' thought here will not really stand up to logical analysis and that he is stretching plausibility so as to hint at the awful fate to come.

Agon and agonisma: struggle and prize30 After the preparations comes the struggle or dycov proper, though there is a sense in which the rhetorical contest31 between Alkibiades and Nikias precedes the warlike preliminaries. We have seen (p. 50) that 28 Barrett 1964: 196-7 inclined to think that the lines in question should be deleted; Halleran 1995: 167 is happier with them: 'exasperated thoughts on the paradoxes of life, sentiments which flow easily from her frustrations at dealing with the toil of taking care of the intractable Ph[aidra]'. 29 Kallet 2001:54-7 for agood discussion. She points to i. i o. 2 (you would reach misleading conclusions about Athens and Sparta if you looked at the physical evidence alone). This is illuminating but it is still not quite clear to me that similar reasoning is appropriate to a fleet. 'Ship-shape' implies something about quality as well as appearance. See also Jordan 2000. 30 For athletic metaphors in Th. see Williams 1992: 242. Williams 242ff. discusses the common use in Th. of aâAAw, literally and originally 'trip', to express failure. See above, p. 50. 31 For this sort of agon in tragedy see Lloyd 1993. That sort of agon is metaphorical or verbal struggle. But tragedy, like Thucydides in my view, was influenced by the literal and physical language of athletic struggle found in epinikian poetry. A good example is the cluster of athletic images in the first stasimon of Sophocles' Trachinwi (lines 497—530). See Easterhng 1982: I33f, bringing out well both the similarities with and differences from epinikian odes. For adXXa> in Euripides see below n. 69.

Agon and agonisma: struggk and prize

337

fighting and athletic competition are closely related in Greek thought. To claim that the language of contest or struggle, dycov,32 is confined to, or even unusually prominent in, books 6 and 7 of Thucydides would be an exaggeration. The final chapter (2. 46) of the Periclean Funeral Oration contains three athletic metaphors in quick succession (areffiavov, d-ywvwv, d9Xa), an accumulation all the more striking in view of Thucydides' extraordinary silence about the games which were in reality part of the ritual complex of which the epitaphios logos was another part.33 Again, Kleon's speech about the Mytileneans contrasts judges and contestants (Kpirai, d-yajviarai, 3. 37. 4), a metaphor certainly taken from the games; and he goes on to speak of the prizes conferred by the city on others in contests, although she herself bears the dangers (dya>va>v TO. juev d9\a erepois SiSwaiv, avrrj Se TOVS KivSvvovs dvaepei: 38. 3, cf. d-ywviaairo at 38. 2); this, says Kleon, is bad stewardship of the contests (KO.KOIS d-ywvoOerovvTes, 38. 4). See also below, pp. 351 f for the language of defeat. This is the language of agonistic competition (cf. 3. 49. i, agon, anchomala, with 7. 71. 4), although Thucydides juxtaposes to it a different sort of spectacle, namely a sophistic performance (croi/iiCTTttJv Oearais, 38.7, his only mention of sophists anywhere). But Kleon's mention of'dangers' suggests the physical risks of the race-course or the wrestling-floor, rather than verbal displays and contests. The same negative conclusion can be arrived at by the use of some crude statistics.34 The basic noun dycov occurs 52 times in the eight books of Thucydides, and 14 of these occurrences are in books 6 and 7—approximately the one-quarter we should expect of any reasonably common word. The related verb dycovi£oju.cu, 'I struggle or compete' occurs 22 times in all, and 5 times, again roughly a quarter, in books 6 and 7. Finally, dycovtaâ occurs 7 times, of which 3 are in book 7 (none in book 6). The meaning of this noun seems to be somewhere between a contest and a prize for a contest (at Hdt. 8. 76. 2 the plural rd ITT' /IpTejuiCTio) dycovtCTâra means in effect 'the fighting at Artemision'; but at Th. 8. 12. 4 the meaning of KM /u/ij /lyiSos TO dycovtaâ TOVTO •yevea9ai is certainly something like 'and not let Agis get the credit'; at 32 Pollux (3. 151) has a fine collection of words formed from dyo>i< but he misses aycwiap-os altogether, and forgets that ayuiviafia is Thucydidean as well as Platonic, while nevertheless correctly registering that dyowiaij is Thucydidean (below, p. 370 n. 67). He had no computer or CD-ROM. See also above, p. 285 for ayaiviais, coined for another special occasion, this time a literally athletic one. 33 34 Hornblower 1991: 315, and 1992: 171. I have used Schrader 1998.

338

Narrative

i. 22. 4 the meaning is different again, 'that with which one contends, a declamation': LSJ). I return later to the exact nuance of the meaning of the book 7 passages. In what sense, then, can it be claimed that the vocabulary of the Sicilian books is specially agonistic? I believe that a more detailed look at some clusterings in one particular section will after all justify the claim. The section is the second half of book 7 (49-87), which relates the climax of the expedition. All three of the book 7 instances of dycovtaâ just mentioned are from this section, and all three are preceded by KaXov (56. 2, 59. 2,35 86. 2). Connor has shown that the first two instances of what he calls 'the wondrous victory prize' form part of a scheme of ring composition in chs. 50-71.36 The pattern as set out by Connor goes: initial naval battle (50-54) Athenian discouragement (55) initial statement of Syracusan plan (56): close harbour, win battle the wondrous victory prize, 56. 2, KaXov . . . dyowajua catalogue of allies (57-58) the wondrous victory prize, 59. 2, KaXov dyowajua new statement of Syracusan plan: capture whole army, 59. 2 harbour closed, 59. 3 Athenian discouragement, 60 second naval battle, 60.3-71.

The initial prize is the defeat of the army (capture is merely implied), the revised and more ambitious plan is explicitly its capture in its entirety. The referent of the 'prize' thus shifts between the first occurrence and the second, from which it is separated by the catalogue of allies. The third occurrence of KaXov dycovtaâ is from near the very end of the book (86. 2): Gylippos the Spartan commander thought that it would be a fine prize if, on top of everything else (em rots aAAots), he could have taken the enemy generals Nikias and Demosthenes back with him to Sparta. The referent here is similar to the second occur35 At least on the readings adopted, surely rightly, by the OCT. Actually, at 59. 2 all manuscripts except one (Vaticanus) have KaXov dyoW, which is preferred by Hude and by Smith in the Loeb edn. But as Classen—Steup say, the cross-reference to 56. 2 is beyond doubt and this speaks strongly for Vaticanus' ayajviap-a, though there is a risk of circularity about this sort of argument. 36 Connor 1984: appendix 9 on 'ring composition in 7. 50-71'. See above p. 315 n. 30: this section differs from the main Ch. 9 excursuses in not being primarily 'antiquarian', but resembles them in forming part of a ring. (Note however that the rich colonial material in 7. 57-8, which has a delaying function, does take us back to the distant past).


339

rence: the army as prize, the army's leaders as prize. But this third occurrence is a small analepsis because we have just been told that Nikias and Demosthenes have in fact, against Gylippos' wishes, been killed (aTTeaa£av, an abrupt and violent word used elsewhere in Thucydides only of Alkidas'brutal slaughter of some prisoners, 3. 32. i). The sentence about the KO.\OV dycovtaâ is added as an explanation of Gylippos' reluctance. If we now look at the occurrences of the simple form dycov in this section, there is a noticeable clustering in this same section (the climactic part of book 7). Nikias in his speech of encouragement, and 'the [Syracusan] generals and Gylippos' in theirs, both talk of the impending dycov, and they do so in very similar language: 'the impending contest involves us all, and each one of us, just as much as the enemy, will be fighting for life and country', o juev dycov o jueAAcov oôtcos KOIVOS aTraaiv earai Trepi re aa>Tr]pias KO.I TrarpiSos fKaaroLS oi>x rjoaov r/ TOIS TToAe^tots. So far Nikias (61. i); and he goes straight on (61. 2) to repeat the dycov idea, warning against the demoralization which affects the inexperienced 'when they fail [lit. 'trip up', originally a wrestling metaphor, pp. 50, 351] in the first contests', eV TOIS Trpwrois dyoJCTi a(/>aAevTes. The generals and Gylippos begin their speech by saying that you Syracusans and allies know, or if not we will prove to you, that fcaAd rd Trpoepyaaêva KO.I inrep KaXaiv TOIV jueAAovTOJV o dycov ecTTcu, 'your achievements so far have been glorious and the contest will be for glorious rewards'. Note the chime between uVep KO.\U>V ru>v jueAAovTcov o dycov here and Nikias' o juev dycov o jueAAcov. That is, they pick up Nikias at the beginning of their speech. But they will also pick up themselves at the end of it (see below on KaAos 6 dycov at 68. 3). Nikias similarly returns to the dycov theme near the end of his speech, ware ev evl rcoSe inrep dôrepcov dycovt KaOearcoTes, 'the fate of both you and them [the Athenians at home] rests on the outcome of this single contest' (64. 2). One use of dycov in particular deserves more extended comment. Shortly after the first occurrence of KO.\OV dycovtaâ, Thucydides himself says (56. 3) 'the struggle was a worthy one', KM rjv Se d|tos o dycov, not only because (as he has just said) the Syracusans would be liberating the Greeks but because of the impressive forces of allies ranged on both sides. Despite the indicative mood of rjv, 'it was', the focalization in the rest of the sentence continues to be largely Syracusan (as aiaiv and a(f>€T€pav TTO\LV, 'themselves' and 'their city' at lines 12 and 14 make clear): Thucydides means that the Syracusans thought that the

34-Q

Narrative

struggle was a worthy one, just as they thought the prize of victory would be a fine one. That is, the two expressions KO.\OV dycovtaâ and d|ios o dycov go closely together. Here I return briefly to a problem I postponed earlier, the meaning of dycovtaâ. In all three book 7 passages the meaning is close to 'prize', but in the first two at any rate, there is also present the idea that the imminent struggle itself, as well as its outcome, is glorious; this idea is I suggest enhanced by the juxtaposition we have just noticed between KO.\OV dycovtaâ and d|to? o dycov at 56. 2-3. Since d|tos o dycov represents Syracusan focalization, it is natural for 'the [Syracusan] generals and Gylippos' (65. 3) to echo those three words in the solemn peroration of their speech of encouragement: 'the prize/contest will be a noble one', they say, in a fine, terse closure to the elaborate penultimate sentence of the whole speech: KaAos 6 dycov (68. 3). But as we have already noted, these three short words also close the ring of the speech which began with tmep KO.\U>V TU>V jueAAovTcov o dycov (66. l) So far we have treated the important and mainly Syracusanfocalized chapter 56, and the speeches at 61-4 (Nikias) and 66-8 (the generals and Gylippos) as interconnecting units, all marked by urgent uses of the dycov theme. But in fact ch. 56 and the speeches are separated by the two chapters (57-8) which contain the catalogue of the allies on each side, and we must examine the transition from ch. 56 to the catalogue. The final sentence and paragraph of that chapter (56. 4), a sentence which serves to introduce the catalogue of allies,' is an interesting o o piece of narrative technique, because it is a return to Thucydides' own voice, achieved by a carefully managed shift of focalizing gear. The sentence runs e'Ovrj yap TrXeiara Srj em jui'av TTO\LV Tavrrjv £vvij\9e, -rj\r\v •ye . . ., 'for the number of peoples gathered together in front of this one city was the largest ever assembled, except...' [that the combined allies of the Athenians and Spartans came to an even larger total]. The word ydp, 'for', explains and amplifies what has gone before (i.e. the Syracusan-focalized reflections on the forces assembled), but it also effects a transition to purely author-focalized material (the catalogue). In this respect it perhaps resembles the equally hard-working ydp in an important chapter of book 2, a ydp which moves us from Pericles' financial encouragement to what may be Thucydides' gloss on that encouragement (2. 13. 3, rd ydp -n-Xeiara . . .). It certainly resembles the ydp which effects another important transition, that from the statement of the motives of the 'foreigners and the rest of the crowd' who


341

came to see the spectacle or 9ea of the fleet about to sail from Peiraieus, to the detailed authorial description of that spectacle (6. 31. i, discussed below, p. 346). In the book 7 passage, the shift fromCTeYepavTroAiv in para. 3 to TTO\LV TavT-rjv in para. 4, 'their city' to 'that city', makes the change of focalizer clearer than it is in the Pericles passage in book 2.37 Modern punctuation helps here: the Penguin translation starts a new paragraph with the final sentence of ch. 56 and continues (no new paragraph) with the catalogue of allies. The technique can usefully be compared to that of Pindar and Bacchylides, as elucidated by Carey and Pfeijffer. In Nemean 5, whose central myth is the story of Peleus and Hippolyta, the narrative of the myth begins with a description of the 'fairest chorus of the Muses', Moiadv 6 KaAAiCTTo? x°P°s> (h'116 23) and of Apollo, and tells how 'after a prelude to Zeus, they first sang of august Thetis and Peleus', at Se TTpajTiarov juev vfjtvrjaav A LOS dpÔjU-evat ae/jtvav @€TIV /TÂea 9' (lines 25-6). But the 'first' is never followed up by a 'second' or 'next', and the effect is to merge the secondary narrator, the chorus of the Muses, with the primary narrator Pindar.38 By line 41 the real-life athletic achievements of the victor Pytheas' uncle are certainly being praised—but by the Muses, or by Pindar? Somethingsimilar happens in Bacchylides 3 lines 9-10, 'the immense crowd shouted. Ah, thrice-fortunate the man' etc., where Carey notes that 'only modern printing methods can distinguish whether lines 10-12 are a statement by the poet or a cry by the crowd at Delphi . . . the result is an indeterminacy in the authority for the statement'.39 We may also compare Isthmian 8 where as we saw in an earlier chapter (p. 320), the authorial report of Themis' speech turns into direct speech by Themis (line 35a) without any kind of indicator along the lines of 'she said'. Modern inverted commas ('quote marks') help the reader but they risk making this transition seem less artful than it really is. My conclusion is that the statistical distribution of 'agonistic' vocabulary masks the real concentration, in the climax of the book 7 narrative, of the closely related notions of contest or struggle (dycov) and prize (dycovtaâ). And counting of single words does not bring out the 37

In the rest of 2. 13 (paras. 5—9), Th. continues to sprinkle words for 'saying' and 'encouraging' (TTpoaerWei, ^4>J]> eBdpavve, aTrâiv^), but also to sprinkle parentheses using yap. I find it hard to say what exactly is 'Pericles' and what is Thucydides. At least we can say that the device ('Pericles encouraged them') enables Thucydides to set out financial detail which serves his authorial purpose very well. Gf. above, pp. 32of. 38 Pfeijffer 1999: 72 and 142; cf. already Mullen 1982: 149, 159. For a related phenomenon 39 see above, Gh. 10 p. 320. Carey 1999: 20.

342

Narrative

insistence here, and here only in Thucydides, of the KO.\OV dycovtaâ motif. Finally, there is one statistic we have not yet noticed. The word dyajviCTjuos' occurs once only in Thucydides—or anywhere else. It is used in the great narrative of the final sea-battle (chs. 70-1): 'there was much counter-invention and competition between the steersmen', (yo. 3, where dvTiTexvrjais is also unparalleled until imitated by Dionysios of Halikarnassos: AR 14. 10). The same battle description contains a powerful use of the simple dycov, 'insufferable struggle and conflict of mind', aAaarov dycova KO.I ^varamv TTJS yva>fji,rjs (71. l).40

The fined sea-battle (7.70—71); the Great Harbour as

grandstand The final sea-battle, from which the passages just cited derive, has been more often admired and imitated41 than analysed.421 shall argue that it is modelled in part on an athletic or equestrian dycov of the kind Pindar celebrates without (for the most part) describing in detail. This absence of detailed specification needs a word.43 It makes the Pindaric victory 'a paradigm for human achievement in general', as Chris Carey puts it, citing a famous passage of Aristotle (Poetics i45ia36-7) about the difference between poetry which concerns itself with the universal, and history which concerns itself with the particular.44 In fact by this criterion Thucydides is something of a poet because he too is a great generalizer and 'universalizer'. This is true even of his battle descriptions: sometimes detail is supplied paradigmatically, like that provided for the first Athenian-Syracusan land-clash in book 6 (6. 69, cf. p. 333 for the pre-battle sacrifices mentioned here only in the entire work though they must be assumed to have been usual). The message appears to be 40

Reading the poetic a\aarov for the MSS TTO\VV TOV] see Dover. Pol. i. 44 with Walbank 1957: 109; Sail. BJ6o. 3 with Paul 1984: 161. 42 But for good remarks see now Kallet 2001: i6^f. Dion. Hal. On Time. 27 is classic. 43 This absence has often been noted, from DornseifTig2i: 115 through to Game-Ross 1985:14, Carey 1995: 91 andPfeijffer 1999:579. Norwood 1945: 29 (cf. 88) lists what he regards as the only four exceptions (0. 9. giff; 0. 10. 72f; P. 5. 49ff; N- 7- 72f). Disconcertingly, Pfeijffer makes the same point but cites two different exceptions, namely P. 8. 81-7 and 0. 8. 67-9. It is thought that Bacchylides was happier to give such details, though again just two instances can be cited, admittedly from a smaller surviving total of victory odes (5. 37—49, 927—39, see Pfeijffer, as above). See above, p. 286. 44 Carey 1995: gif. 41

The final sea-battle (7.70-71)

343

'I am not going to tell you this sort of thing every time: please bear it in mind and assume it elsewhere'. (Note the revealing words at 6. 69. i, OVT' ev ravrj] rfj fj-dxy ovre Iv THIS aAAcus, 'neither in this battle nor in the others.' Cf. 7. 36. 6.) In another and very Pindaric way the Thucydidean battle accounts are unspecific: they include very few single-combat descriptions, although on one view of hoplite or heavy-armed infantry warfare these were a feature of fighting even between massed hoplite armies.45 There is much more of this sort of thing in the Alexanderhistorians, and in Hieronymus (see Diod. 18. 30 for the duel between Eumenes of Gardia and Neoptolemos in 321 BC). In Thucydides we have the Homeric presentation of the wounding of Brasidas (4.12) and the death of Lamachos, isolated after crossing a ditch and getting cut off (6. 101). There is not much else. It is even possible that Thucydides deliberately suppressed the story, found in Plutarch (Mkias 18. 3), that Lamachos was killed after a duel with a Syracusan called Kallikrates. Like Eteokles and Polyneikes in Euripides' Phoenician Women (1419-24), each killed the other. To return to the final sea-battle, I shall argue in particular that Thucydides borrows the audience reactions from the world of athletic and equestrian competition. One of the most famous features of Thucydides' account of this battle is the effect on the Athenian spectators and supporters of the fluctuating fortunes of their side; this description takes up most of the entire second chapter (71). A key word is fiorj, shouting (oAuûpjuoJ re aâ |U,era ôrjs e^pcovTO, lit. 'they made use of wailing and shouting', 71. 3 line 20, cf. 71. 4 line 28 cAw/wpô? jBori, part of the daringly asyndetic sentence which continues viKwvres KparovjêvoL and which I discuss below, p. 362; for jBori see also 70. 7). Another key word in this chapter is 9ea, 'spectacle' (71.3, the 9ea was Si' oAiyou, 'close in front of them'). Now spectators are hardly a normal adjunct of a sea-battle, for an obvious reason namely distance from land. If we ask, what sort of occasions invite descriptions of spectatorreactions, there are I think three answers, all relevant to Thucydides' account. The third will occupy us in particular, the great harbour as sporting grandstand. The first is the reixooKo-n-ia or 'watching from the walls' of a besieged city. The book of the Iliad which has taken its name from the word reixooKOTTia is Iliad3, but this is a static and tranquil description of the Greek heroes put into the mouth of Helen. More directly comparable 45

Gawkwell 1978: ch. 10.

344

Narrative

is the reaction inside Troy to the death of Hector outside the city: his father Priam groans (diju.co£ev) and his people shriek and groan with him (KOJKVTCO T' et'ôvro KO.I oljj,wyfi Kara aarv, Iliad 22. 408—9); SO in Thucydides the final rout of the Athenians in the great harbour of Syracuse is greeted by groaning and wailing, oijucoyg re KM CTTOVOJ (71. 6, where the combination of nouns recalls another Homeric line, Iliad 24. 696, oijucoyg re arovaxfj re). 46 Homer explicitly compares the effect inside Troy of Hector's death and the degradation of his corpse to the consternation that would be caused by the burning of the city (Iliad 22. 410-11), an event which we know does indeed lie in store for Troy; and Thucydides equally explicitly compares the retreat of the defeated army to the refugees from a city sacked after a siege, ovSev -yap aAAo r/ TToAei eKTreTroAtopfCTjêVg eqiKeaav inroêvyovarj (7. 75. 5). The model for Thucydides here may be some lost epic Ilioupersis or account of the sack of Troy,47 such as surely provided the model for Virgil in Aemid 2. Another relevant model is the genre of ritual laments for the fall of cities, classically studied by Margaret Alexiou.48 Thucydides, characteristically, does not provide plangent detail but I suggest that he was well aware of this genre. The second influence is theatrical performance: we know from Herodotus that a Greek audience might identify strongly and physically with the sufferings they saw on stage (Hdt. 6. 21. 2, tears in the theatre of Athens at Phrynichus' play about the fall of Miletos). There maybe some trace of this sort of identification in Thucydides' narrative about the battle spectators, which to that extent will be meta-literary, although drama—tragedy or comedy—is nowhere mentioned as such in Thucydides, unlike Herodotus who mentions Aeschylus (2. 156) as well as Phrynichus and his play (above). But all this iaa>s aAAo) jueAâei; at any rate I cannot explore it further here.49 The third influence, and the one most relevant to the argument of the present chapter and the present book, is spectatorship at athletic and

46

See Allison 1997*: 5038". Thucydides 7. 75 is not discussed in Anderson 1997 though this monograph on the 'fall of Troy' theme in early Greek poetry and art takes in the Trojan Women of Euripides (415 EG). Pindar gets in mainly for Neoptolemos' slaughter of Priam at the altar in Pawn 6 (p. 80, cf. 94-7 for some other passages). 48 Alexiou 2002 [1974] ch. 5, adducing (from the 5th cent. EC) Aesch. Pers. 249-52 and E. Tro. 511—14. 49 Larmour 1999 argues for a link between drama and athletics; this would mean that my second and third influence are intimately connected. 47

The final sea-battle (7. 70-71)

345

50

equestrian contests. Emotionally involved and noisy spectator reaction of this sort has a long literary history. In the games for Patroklos in Iliad 23, things get heated early on between two spectators, Idomeneus of Krete, and Aias son of Oileus who tells Idomeneus that his eyes are not as young as they were, so he had better shut up about whose horses are in the lead in the chariot race; Idomeneus replies with an indignant offer of a wager, at which point Achilles intervenes to calm them down (lines 450-98). Then in the wrestling event, the distress (or boredom?) of the 'well-greaved Achaians' (aviator evKv/miSas .Mâiou?, line 721) leads Telamonian Aias to suggest to Odysseus that one or the other try a throw. And in the fight in armour between Telamonian Aias and Diomedes, the Achaians become so alarmed for Aias that they beg the two to stop the fight and share the prize (lines 822-3): KCU rore ST) p' Alavri TrepiSelaav-res ^x at0 ' OVS e/ceAefcrav de$Ata io' d

Finally, 'the crowd looked on and wondered' at the marksmanship of Meriones (line 1 Aaoi &' av Or/evvro re Od

Naturally, there is spectatorship and excited spectator reaction in Pindar and Bacchylides too, and the inevitable shouting (j3od in Doric), just as in Thucydides. In Pindar's Olympian 9, the wrestler Epharmostos ofOpous a77Tom Saîdaaat? Btr/p^TO KVK\OV ocrcra /3oa. subdued the men without falling once, and passed through the ring [of spectators] to such great shouting.

(0- 9- 93-4) 50 For remarks on spectator involvement in this sea-battle, in the context of a discussion of the 'gaze' in Polybius, see Davidson 1991: 24, though I protest at his dismissive conclusion that the Th. passage is a 'snapshot on which little in the plot depends. The whole episode could easily have been omitted'. In a sporting contest the support or hostility of a crowd notoriously affects the morale and thus performance of the players, and if this was true of the sea-battle too, then it is directly relevant to 'the plot'. And in fact Th. is explicit that the fighting was near, 81' oAtyou, to the spectators, and he remarks at para. 5 that the experiences of those onboard the ships paralleled those of the spectators, TrapaTrXr/aia ... €-naa-ôv. Surely there is a suggestion here that the influence was two-way, spectators affecting the action as well as the action affecting the spectators. As for Davidson's final comment ('could easily have been omitted'), so savage a criterion of plot-relevance, generally applied, would leave some sad gaps in the world's great literature. On spectatorship in 7. 70—1 see also Walker : 993 : 355 f -

346

Narrative

Again, in the primordial Olympic games narrated in Olympian 10, Nikeus cast his stone beyond all the others

and his fellow soldiers [avp.fj.axia, 'body of friends', LSJ] let fly a great cheer.

(0. io. 72-3)

Bacchylides tells how the javelin-throw of the pentathlete Automedes of Phleious 'aroused the shout of the people', jSoav oirpwe Aacov (9. 35; cf. Hiero's 'victory which brings new applause', veoKporov VIKO.V, 5. 48-9). Surely agonistic spectatorship, whether literary in inspiration or observed from life, was a very natural model for Thucydides when describing perhaps the greatest single 9ea in his History. His use, then, of the word 9ea in this climactic battle scene points us to the world of Pindar. It also points us back within Thucydides' own narrative, because it is used on just one other occasion in the two Sicilian books, and there too it is applied to a naval spectacle, namely the Athenian fleet at its moment of glory before it set sail. 'The foreigners and the rest of the people came to see the spectacle, drawn to a remarkable and incredible undertaking. For this paraskem', etc., . . . (6. 31. i). We have seen (pp. 340f.) that here too, as in the formula introducing the catalogue of allies (7. 56. 4), a short piece of secondary focalization is used as the transition to a substantial section of primary focalization, the crucial link again being effected by yap. In book 6 the transition is to the long authorial account of the fleet in its financial and visual aspects, and to the brilliant snapshot of the pre-voyage sacrifice. This raises the issue, to which we shall now turn, of the architecture of books 6 and 7 and of the responsions which bind the beginning of the narrative to its end.

The responsion between the beginning and end of the expedition In this section I avoid speaking of 'ring-composition'; because that term is inappropriate except in the broadest sense. That the composition of Pindar's odes is often ring-formed is an insight which goes back

Beginning and end of the expedition

347

to Illig's influential monograph of seventy years ago, and we can now add that it may be connected with the dance figures of the poems.51 The epic archetype of literary ring-composition is Achilles' story of Niobe told to Priam in Iliad 24 (601-19): 'let us take thought for supper (ju,v77CTa>ju.e0a Soptrov, line 601) because Niobe also took thought for food (€j^vj]aaro airov, line 602), although she had lost twelve children, slain by Apollo and Artemis [story developed], nevertheless she took thought for food (airov ^v-âaro, line 613), so let us too, old man, take thought for food' (KM va>i êSfaêOa, Sie yepcue, airov, lines 618-619). Illigo showed that there is often a concentric arrangement in Pindaric o rings, and that a gnomic utterance often forms a 'still centre' of this circle, as at Pythian 3. 2iff. 52 To put that another way, there is often an inward movement towards this central point and an outward movement away from it.53 The relentlessly linear wartime narrative of Thucydides is normally remote from this sort of handling, though it is clearly detectable in the excursuses, such as the Archaeology and the material about Kylon, Pausanias and Themistokles in book i, or the Peisistratid excursus in book 6.54 But in one very simple sense the end of the Sicilian narrative does resemble a ring, in that its end resumes its beginning by a studied repetition of language.55 We have noticed one detail already (p. 346), the recurrence of 9ea, 'spectacle', applied to a fleet near the beginning and near the end of the whole Sicilian narrative. And Kallet56 has noticed some other correspondences, such as the 'repetition of the rare word ajuiAAa, "contest" or "race"' (7. 71. 3 line 24, cf. 6. 32. 2, the race to Aigina and 31. 3, where d^MrjOev is the emphatic final word of an enormously long sentence). One might argue about the degree of intentionality of such correspondences, but there is surely no arguing about the very explicit indications of reversal in the highly charged chapter (75) recording the 51

Illig 1932: 55—67; cf. the helpful English summary at Race 1997: i- 2 of, with a good list of examples. Mullen 1982: 116, I3if intriguingly links Pindaric ring-composition to dance pattern. (At 247 n. 10 he attributes the notion that 'ring composition may be a dance figure as well as a narrative technique' to an unpublished paper by Norman Austin.) 52 Illig 1932: 59 and6i. 53 Carey 1981: 33, discussing the Ixion myth in P. 2. 54 See above, Gh. 9, pp. 309 and 312. See also Gh. 9 p. 315 n. 30 for ring composition in some quasi-excursuses in the narrative. 55 For Pindar's way of returning to his starting-point see Dornseiff 1921: 125. 56 Kallet 2001: 165.

348

Narrative

emotions of the defeated Athenians as they set off on the final landjourney. The chapter begins (75. 2) dvrl êydXrjs eArn'Sos, 'instead of high hopes', where 'instead of helps to identify what is surely an allusion to the hopeful optimism of 6. 24. 3, eueAmSes ovres aoj9rjaea9ai. There is an even more explicit cross-reference to come, near the end of the same chapter (75. 7): 'instead of the prayers and paians with which they set out', 'instead of the prayers and paians with which they set out, they were now departing with the opposite—in fact, with curses'.57 Short of a prosaic crossreferencing flag like 'as I have mentioned earlier' (as in the Herodotean formulae at Th. 5. i or 6. 94. i), the resumption of the embarkation narrative (6. 32. 1-2) could not be clearer—not just 'with which they set out', and 'instead of, but the repetition from 6. 32. 1-2 of the words evxds (cf. avveTrrjvxovTo), and Traiaviaavres.53 Prayers are very rare indeed in Thucydides—just these two passages and one in book 8 (70. i).59 Paians are not much commoner: the noun rraiav is found only in the present passage (7. 75), though the related noun Traiaviaôs is another Thucydidean hapax found not far away in book 7 (44. 6). There are half a dozen instances of the verb Traiaviôj apart from the book 6 passage to which, as we have seen, 7. 75 undoubtedly alludes. As for 'instead of, avri, I have discussed this elsewhere and hope to have shown that it is the rhetorically most powerful form of what narratologists call 'presentation through negation'.60 The range runs from 'not so much x as y' or 'y rather than x' (the weakest and most tentative expressions) right through to the present formulation which conjures up the diametrical opposite. This gloomy negation, at the end of Thucydides' Sicilian narrative, of its euphoric beginning, is not quite Pindaric; it could be made to seem more like a conventional ring if it could be established that there is after all implied pessimism in the opening narrative. There is in fact some reason to think this: the 57 For the meaning of this unusual and very strong word see my forthcoming commentary; 'words of ominous import' (LSJ) is perhaps too weak. The closest analogue for that sense is Hdt. 3. 124. 2 with Alan Griffiths' commentary, which he has shown me in draft. For eVicompounds in religious contexts see Parker 1983: 348 and Rutherford 2001:71. 58 Note also that oAoûp^toj, 'lamentation', used twice in 7. 71 as we have seen (above) was also used in the brilliant section (6. 30—2) describing the emotions of those who watched the embarcation of the fleet: they felt hope for conquest but they also uttered 6Xovpfj.oi because of the possibility that they might not see their loved ones again. 59 Pulleyn 1996: 176. 60 Hornblower 199^- 226, n. on TOU$ 8' a-vrl TOV TT\£OV ^x€iv 7rpoCT/opd, is Thucydides' own retrospective expression for the failed expedition (8. 96. i), and the noun in the plural is used twice in rapid succession in Nikias' speech to the defeated Athenians, referring to their sufferings (ch. 77. i and 3). Thucydides knows all about glorious nostoi as we have seen when noting his account of the welcoming of Brasidas by the people of Skione (4. 121. i, cf. p. 46). But in the Sicilian narrative he is more concerned with the return of the defeated67 than with that of the victors, and this is an important difference between Thucydides and Pindar.68 I end this section with a glance at Thucydides' favourite expression for failure (see already p. 50 above). It is as interestingly athletic as is his language for struggle and prizes. The key word is adXXoâi, the passive form of afidXXoj, which literally means 'I trip someone up in wrestling', 'I make him fall'. It is a common word in Herodotus and in Greek tragedy, and a natural word to use, by extension, in military contexts (e.g. E. Ph. 1419), and of life's failures generally.69 Pindar uses afidXXoj metaphorically, for instance in Pythian 8, 'force brings down even the proud boaster in the end', ev xpovqj (line 15). His simplest use is in Olympian 2, Achilles 'laid low Hektor', "EWopa afidXe (line 81). But as we have seen (above, n. 43), he does not go into much detail about wrestling or other events, and the absence of literally tripping is not surprising, nor does it mean the literal sense ofafidXXoj is ever forgotten. Thucydides uses this word of the Sicilian disaster long before his actual narrative has got to the year 415: in the post-mortem assessment 67 68 69

For the idea of an unhappy return, a &vavoaros . . . voaros see E. Tw. 75. A point I owe to Rikke Mattebjerg-Jensen. Knox 1979: 224f. for the frequent and significant repetitions of aaAAea< in Eur. Hipp.

352

Narrative

of Pericles, evidently written after the end of the whole war, he says 'they fell/tripped up/came to grief in Sicily' (2. 65. 12). Then in the similarly proleptic assessment of Alkibiades early in book 6, he says that by entrusting affairs to men inferior to but less alarming than Alkibiades, the Athenians 'caused the city to fall', ea7)Xav TTJV TTO\LV (6. 15. 4). Again, we are told in connection with the Sicilian expeditionary force that the older men thought so large an armament would not trip up, Swa/jtiv (6. 24. 3). But the resonances of the word are not exhausted by the positive form. We must also include a word whose literal meaning is 'not liable to fall', namely d-a(f>aX^s and the cognate noun d-crdAeia, 'security against stumbling or falling', as Liddell and Scott give the primary and literal meaning. These words became standard and normal Greek for 'safe' and 'safety' respectively, and therefore very common and familiar. But Thucydides in one curious passage shows that he remembers the literal sense of the noun, when he says the Plataian escapers kept one foot unshod for dcrdAeia against the mud (3.22; for this 'monosandalism' see above, p. 87). It is this passage which Liddell and Scott give as their first entry, with the literal sense given above ('security against stumbling'). Now the very highly finished chapter (6. 24) which describes the emotions of the various groups of Athenians, including the young men who feel Tr69os or yearning for far horizons and the old men who think a large force 'will not trip or stumble', ovSev av a(/>aXeiaav (above), begins by telling us that Nikias thought his steep demands would either deter the Athenians altogether or else guarantee a safe expedition, OVTWS da(/>aAa>s eWAeuacu (24. i). A few lines later (para. 2), Thucydides says Nikias thought he had given good advice and that there would now be plenty of dcrdAeia. I suggest that all three words actually suggest their opposite, stumbling and tripping, and that there are really three instances of 'not tripping' in a very few lines:

The end of book 7 as false closure; book 8. i Closure of book 7, discussed above, is not quite the same as closure of the Sicilian expedition. The first chapter of book 8 is also part of the Sicilian narrative; it describes the reaction to the news and the way the Athenians bounced back. The chapter is tied in to the preced-

The end of book 7 asfalse closure; book 8.1

353 70

ing book by a very deliberate back-reference or analepsis. Before the final sea-battle, Nikias had told the Athenians that there are no other ships like these back home in the Athenian shipyards, ovre vavs ev TOIS vewaoiKois aAAas Quotas raiaSe (7. 64. i) and this is picked up with verbal closeness at the beginning of book 8 ev TOIS vewaoiKois ixavds, 8. i. 2. Note also the repetition of rjXiKia in both passages). Thucydides' withdrawal from the pseudo-closure of 7. 87. 6 is taken even further by the end of book 8. There we are told, very surprisingly if we read the passage straight after the end of book 7, that the fall of Euboia caused greater consternation, eWA-îs-, than any before it, even the Sicilian disaster (17 eV rrj HiKeXia £vfj,(/>opa), great though that had seemed at the time', KcuVep êyaA-^ rare S6£aaa elvai (8. 96. i).71 The historian's perspective, unlike that of the poet, is subject to constant revision under pressure of events. 70 71

So correctly Luschnat 1942: 92. See however Rood 1998: 278 n. 82.

12

Thucydides and Pindar: A Stylistic Comparison

In this book I have sought to bring into relation with each other two authors, a prose historian and a poet, normally kept well apart in modern literary studies. There are one or two exceptions: Mary Lefkowitz, as we have seen (p. 321) compared Pindar to Thucydides, but only in a very general sort of way. Dornseiff noted in passing1 that Thucydides, like Pindar, was an example of Dionysios of Halikarnassos' 'austere arrangement', for which see below. But regrettably Dornseiff, whose book remains the classic account of Pindar's style,2 tended to cite only tragic and epic parallels, although Thucydides often cries out for mention. Conversely, the best modern discussions of the main stylistic characteristics of Thucydides are to be found scattered through Denniston's fifty-year-old book on Greek prose style,3 in which Pindar could not reasonably be expected to feature. Actually Denniston does occasionally glance at poetry, for instance in his section on 'epanadiplosis' or simple doubling of a word, where he gives six examples from Euripides and two from Sophocles;4 but Pindar is hardly glanced at anywhere except for the remark that 'Tucker says that Pindar affected parechesis [alliteration] mir'.5 In his recent book Aristophanes and the Definition of Comedy, Michael

1

Dornseiff 1921: 86. For D. Young see above, p. 73 n. 66. Pfeijffer 1999: 22—54 (fr°m the general introduction, section on 'Pindar's style') is also useful and has up-to-date bibliography. See also Race 1990. 3 Denniston 1952. Other valuable works on the style of Thucydides are Lamb 1914, a largely forgotten book, andj. H. Fmley 1967: 55—117. 4 Denniston 1952: 90, cf p. 98 for Homer or 4if for Sappho and even Lucretius. 5 Denniston 1952:126. For an example of this see JV. 5. 21 KcuTrfpavnovroioTTciXXovr'' alerol with Pfeijffer 1999: 131, or (the same letters) P. i. 23-4 with Race 1997: i. 28 (Race however says that Pindar is generally 'much more sparing than Aeschylus or Lucretius in the use of alliteration'). With this compare perhaps the alliteration in /3 and TT at Th. 6. 9. i (Nikias) which Dover adloc. calls 'the most striking alliteration in Thucydides'. For alliteration see Silk 1974: 173-91, 224-8, esp. 224for alliteration as characteristic ofpopular genres like proverbs and oracles; that is interesting in view of the oracular diction of Nikias' speech thereabouts, notably the use of ap-eivov, 'better', at line 15; see my forthcoming commentary. 2

Thiuydides and Pindar Compared

355

6

Silk explictly separates Thucydides and Pindar, by placing each in one of two 'broadly distinct groups of composition'. Thucydides is ranged alongside Homer, Menander and the philosophical treatises of Aristotle as dominated by a principle of processive, systematic, organic unity; on the other side stands Pindar along with Hesiod, Herodotus, prose romancers and Aristophanes, those whose works are liable to be organized according to principles of association and dissociation. This is characteristically illuminating; I would only say that if we cut up Thucydides into different component elements we may find ourselves placing the excursuses in a different and more Pindarically-organized category from the routine narrative (above, pp. 308 and 315). And even elsewhere, discursive Pindaric features, such as the priamel orparatactic comparison, are not entirely absent from Thucydides. Sthenelaidas (i. 86. 3) says that others have large amounts of money and ships and horses, but we have good allies. This is probably the only priamel in Thucydides.7 (For Pindar see above, p. 285.) It is a curious fact that Dionysios of Halikarnassos, in his letter to Gnaeus Pompeius (ch. 3), regarded Thucydides' narrative as an organizational mess ('obscure and hard to follow', daafirjs KM SvaTrapaKoAovOrjTos), what with events left unfinished, ^îreXeis, and so on, so that we wander confused, TrXavwêOa.3 By contrast Herodotus, from his Lydian logos on, never once breaks the continuity of his narrative, ov SieWacre TTJV Si-rj-yrjaiv. But I concede that to contrast the confusion of Thucydides with the inexorable onward march of Herodotus was an eccentric critical position. More informally, my professional friends and colleagues have tended to react with surprise and scepticism at the idea of a book about Thucydides and Pindar. It was not always so; ancient literary critics were much more open to the idea that there might be a similarity or even a direct connection between these two writers. I shall approach my attempt at a comparison or avyKpiais between Pindar and Thucydides via these ancient critics, to whom (it should never be forgotten) much more Greek literature was available than is available to us. And that includes Pindar and Bacchylides, neither of whom we have complete except for their victory odes, more or less. So we 6

Silk 2000: 267. For priamel, a focusing device, see Bundy 1986: 4-10 on 0. n. iff., Race 19820 and Gerber 1982: 3—7. For priamel in earlier writers see Sappho Fi6 and Homer Ilwd 13. 636ff. with Janko 1992: 125. For the Thucydidean example see Schmid 1964: 62. Gf. OCD3, 8 'priamel'. Gf. also ch. 9 ofDionysios' essay On Thucydides. 7

356

Thucydides and Pindar Compared

should be particularly careful how we quarrel with [Longinus] On the Sublime (33. 5) when he says that Bacchylides9 is an 'impeccable, uniformly beautiful writer in the polished manner', whereas Pindar10 'sets the world on fire with his vehemence', (This judgement incidentally justifies me in saying rather more about Pindar than about Bacchylides in the present chapter.) It is another thing to quarrel with ancient judgements about Thucydides, who survives complete. In the following discussion I shall try to confine myself to those stylistic features which ancient critics believed were shared by Pindar and Thucydides but not shared by other writers, or shared by very few. I call this the 'exceptionalist' criterion. Thus I shall not spend much time considering abstraction (and personification), although it is an interesting topic and there is plenty of it in both my authors;12 but equally there is plenty of it in, for instance, Sophocles and Demosthenes as well. (But I shall talk about abstraction a little when considering Thucydides' neologisms: below, p. 370). Again, both Pindar and Thucydides are rich in gnomic generalization; but so is tragedy, especially in the a-ywves or debates.13 Nor should I make too much of, for instance, the rhetorical device by which a specific arithmetical statement is combined with a modest or pseudo-modest protestation of ignorance which has the effect of enhancing the believability of the precise statement. The device is used by Pindar (0. 13. 45-6, the impossibility of enumerating all the athletic victories of the family of Xenophon of Korinth follows some very precise detail on just that subject) and also by Thucydides (3. 87. 3). But it is also used by Herodotus with good pathetic effect (7. 170. 3, massacre of Tarentines); and the ultimate model is Homeric (Mad 2. 9

Along with Ion of Chios. Along with Sophocles. Note in any case that Donald Russell is not afraid to say of [Longinus] that his 'implication that Bacchylides is a good second-rate poet is borne out by the judgement of most modern critics since the discovery of the papyri': Russell 1964:159. Gf. also Garne-Ross 1985: 21: when you commissioned an ode from Bacchylides you 'probably got more or less what you expected', whereas those 'more enterprising people who engaged Pindar's services did so knowing full well that there was no telling what to expect'. Burnett 1985: 3 presumably has [Longinus] in mind when she says that after the discovery of the papyri 'the lukewarm judgments of certain ancient critics were revived', but if [Longinus] was as Russell thinks an author of the ist cent. AD, he was in a position to know all of Bacchylides first hand, as well as Pindar, as we do not. 12 See Denmston 1952: 23—40, with plentiful references to Th. Gf. above, pp. g6f. 13 Finley 1967: nof. 10 11


357

488ff., the preamble to the Catalogue of Ships). I shall apply a similar 'exceptionalist' criterion when investigating features not covered at all by ancient literary critics, such as deliberate 'polyinterpretability' (for this see below, p. 367). Thucydides' biographer Marcellinus says of his subject that he was an 'imitator of Homer in his arrangement, and of Pindar in his natural grandeur and elevation of style', rov xapaKTrjpos (Marc. 35). We do not need to take that confident 'imitator' too seriously; this is a regular ancient way of expressing stylistic or other similarity. The comparisons however do deserve to be taken seriously, not least because they appear to be in dialogue with one of the great names of ancient literary criticism, namely Dionysios of Halikarnassos. Marcellinus' aim in the stylistic as opposed to purely biographical sections of his Life ofTTwcydideswas to defend Thucydides against the strictures of Dionysios,14 to whom I now turn. Dionysios in his Second Letter to Ammaios (ch. 2) commented that Thucydides 'aspired to introduce into historical writing an individual kind of style which was neither absolute prose nor wholly verse, but a mixture containing elements of both', eicrayayeiv.15 This offers us Thucydides the prose poet; but elsewhere Dionysios goes even further and offers us in effect Thucydides the prose Pindar. The key discussion is in his treatise 'On the arrangement of words', or 'On literary composition', Trepl avvOeaews ovo^draiv, which has been called Dionysios' 'most original, and least rhetorical, work'.16 Here he expounds the three styles: the 'austere style', in Greek avaT-rjpd dpfj,ovia, the smooth or polished style (yXafivpd) and the well14 So Russell 1981: 197 (who proceeds to give at 197-8 a tr. of the relevant section of MarceMinus, who was not included in Russell and Winterbottom 1972. I have borrowed from this). 15 Marcelhnus' not very penetrating reply to this—which up to a point he agrees with—is to say that Thucydides did not write in verse. ('It is because of his elevation that Thucydides often uses poetical expressions and some metaphors. Indeed some have gone so far as to declare that the manner of his writing throughout the work is poetical, not rhetorical. That it is not poetry is obvious from the fact that it is not in metre',

16 Russell 1981:53. For a good annotated tr. see Usher 1985 (LoebDionysiusofHahcamassus., Critical Essays vol. 2).

358


mixed, evKparos, style. Specially distinguished among exponents of the 'austere style', says Dionysios, are Antimachos of Kolophon and Empedokles the scientist in epic, Pindar in lyric, Aeschylus in tragedy, Thucydides in history, and Antiphon in oratory (ch. 22). But this soon narrows down to just one poet, Pindar, and one prose writer, Thucydides ('for these two are the best, Kpariaroi, writers in the austere style of composition'), who are the only authors whom Dionysios subjects to detailed analysis.17 He chooses as his examples a dithyramb of Pindar (Fy5 Snell-Maehler) and the opening page of Thucydides (i. i. i—i. 2. 2).18 Elsewhere Dionysios quotes a paian and an enkomion of Pindar,19 but nothing else by him, though he does mention Pindar's Partheneia in passing. This means that he nowhere shows us in detail how he would go about analysing one of the epinikian odes, a genre which seems not to have appealed to Dionysios (it may be that, despite the central myths and the incidental generalizations, and despite the popularity of agonistic festivals in the Roman East of Dionysios' own day,20 these poems seemed too parochially rooted in time and place). The only analysis of any part of a Pindaric epinikian poem which we have from antiquity is from a conversation of Favorinus reported by Aulus Gellius (17. 10), who compared in detail Pindar's account of the eruption of Mt Etna (P. i. 2 iff.) to Virgil's (Aemid^. syoff.), much to the disadvantage of the latter.21 What does Dionysios mean by the 'austere arrangement'? The best modern exposition is by Dornseiff, who calls it 'harte Fiigung'.22 Diony17

See also ch. 39 of his essay On Demosthenes (Pindar and Thucydides again bracketed together, along with Aeschylus, as exponents of the 'austere arrangement'). There are other scattered remarks elsewhere in Dionysios' literary treatises. 18 Dionysios' analysis contains valuable points, for instance in the recapitulation at the end of ch. 22 of the 'features of the unadorned and austere style', xapaKTi]piKa TTJS a.Ko[ju{i£VTov re Kal avariipas . . . dpp,ovias, but his detailed discussion of the two passages is largely (too largely for my taste, I have to admit) taken up with comments about the effect of, for instance, juxtaposing the letters v and A, or the impossibility of combining a and i. 19 Pawn 9= Ai Rutherford, F52k (he compares this to Plato, Phaedrus}', Fi2i, the enkomion to Alexander of Macedon. Both are in the essay On Demosthenes, chs. 7 and 26, which also contains (ch. 39) the mention of the Partheneia. In ch. 14 of the irepl avv8eaetos ovofidruiv, when discussing the letter sigma, he quotes the beginning of Fyob, Dithyramb 2. Dionysios is fond of using Pindar to make general, non-literary, points (see below) but he does not draw on the epmikians for this purpose either. 20 Van Nijf 2001. 21 Russell and Winterbottom 1972: 55of. 22 Dornseiff 1921: 85—96. He borrowed the term 'harte Ftigung' from a 1910 Munich dissertation by Norbert von Hellmgrath on 'Die Pindartibertragungen Holderhns': Dornseiff 86 n. 2.

Thucyaides and Pindar Compared

359

sios puts it in terms of building blocks, perhaps influenced at some level of consciousness by a famous opening metaphor of Pindar's own:

Let us set up golden columns to support the strong-walled porch of our abode and construct, as it were, a splendid palace. (0. 6.1-3)

Dionysios says the 'austere style' admits 'harsh and dissonant collocations, like blocks of natural stone laid together in building, with their sides not cut square or polished smooth, but remaining unworked and rough-hewn',

It avoids periods, except accidentally It 'uses a variety of figures and few connectives, lacks articles, and oiten neglects grammatical sequence ,

It is 'not at all florid, but magnanimous, outspoken, unadorned: its beauty consists in its patina of antiquity, 22). This is all very visual: by the end of the chapter the metaphor has ceased to be a building and has become the patina on a bronze statue.23 We think perhaps of the opening of another Pindaric ode, Merman 5. 1-2:

I am not a sculptor, so as to fashion stationary statues that stand on their same base. Here the analogy is ostensibly denied rather than (as in 0. 6) asserted, but in a cunning way which only serves to call to mind the subject of the denial: Olympia and Delphi were full of statues of athletes such as 23 Dionysios was pleased with this comparison, which he uses again about Pindar in the essay On Demosthenes, ch. 39.

360


Pindar celebrates. If so, Pindaric metaphors are being used to elucidate Pindar; we recall that Horace may have gone precisely to Pindar for his comparison of Pindar's poetry to a mountain torrent (above, p. 289 and n. 9). Dionysios himself certainly took from Pindar the priamel about satiety with which he rebukes Thucydides for his stylistic relentlessness (above, p. 272), and once, rather pretentiously, he quotes Pindar merely to express his own perplexity on an academic point.24 We begin to see more or less what Dionysios is driving at. Dornseiff took him to be saying that 'the individual word is the unit of organization', 'das einzelne Wort ist die taktische Einheit'.25 Nouns are the important words here. In this general connection Dornseiff lists colourless verbs such as ojuiAaJ, 9i-yydva>, ('associate with' or encounter; 'touch') used by Pindar in expressions where the real work is being done by the noun.26 Dornseiff gives a couple of parallel passages from tragedy but here as elsewhere (cf. above) he could profitably have drawn on Thucydides as well; note for instance oAoûpôJ re aâ êra jBorjs e'xpcovTo, lit. 'they made use of wailing and shouting' (Th. 7. 71. 3 line 20), or— from the Lichas passage already analysed in ch. 7 above — Seos § J eyeW-ro, 'fear broke out', literally 'fear developed/came into existence' (5. 50. 4).27 It is certainly true that in both Thucydides and Pindar harmonious word order and balanced sentence structure are less important than, or even sacrificed to, the content and the thought, and that nouns are sometimes worked very hard indeed. Absence of connectives and particles, one of the features associated by Dionysios with the austere style, is occasionally taken by both authors to extremes. Asyndeton is used by Pindar in a number of definable contexts. One is where the sentence is a vehicle for a short gnomic utterance or injunction, thus

do not seek to become Zeus; you have all there is, if a share of those blessings should come to you. Mortal things befit mortals. 24 Trepi auv&eae(j)$ 6vop,a.T(j}v ch. 21 quotes F2I3, 8iâ p.oi voas drpeKeiav ^LTT^LV, 'my mind is too divided to utter truth'. I do not know why Snell-Maehler do not in their apparatus cite Dionysios as one of the sources for this fragment. 25 Dornseiff 1921: 87, cf 86, 'bei der avari^pa app,ovia . . . ist das Wort die taktische Einheit'. 26 27 DornseifTig2i: 94ff. Allison 19970: 124;'fear broke out'is her rendering.


36 1

(/. 5. 14-16, cf. 'search at home', oiKo9ev ^dreve, at JV". 3. 31, where the thought is the familiar Pindaric 'stick to the near and don't try for what is distant'.28) The ultimate literary model or influence here may, I suggest, be the staccato manner of the epigraphically-preserved 'Delphic Precepts' long known to have been put up at Miletopolis in northern Asia Minor, and now (since 1968) sensationally attested at Ai Khanoum in northern Afghanistan in an inscription from the early hellenistic period. From Miletopolis (Syll.3 1268) we have a long list beginning 'help your friends', (/>i]Aois j3o^9ei. The shorter Afghan list, all that survives for certain of the 147 precepts originally put up by Klearchos of Soli, runs 'as a child be well-behaved, | in youth be self-controlled, | in middle life be just, | when you are old give good counsel, at death feel no sorrow', nais &v Koafj,ios yivov,

ov\os, Another recognized type of Pindaric asyndeton is in 'break-off' formulae, as: 'but cast that story away from me, my mouth!', O.TTO juoi Aoyov | TOVTOV, aroâ, pii/tov (0. 9. 35-6), cf. 'my heart, to what alien headland are you turning aside my ship's course?', Ovê, riva -n-pos dAAoSttTrav aKpav e/jtov TT\OOV 7rapaêt'|3eat; (JV. 3. 26—y).30 Another use of asyndeton is 'eyco-asyndeton' as we might call it— namely that which is used to introduce 'methodological' statements, statements by Pindar about 'his own poetic conduct', as 'I send you this [gift of honey mixed with milk, a drink of song] ', eyco roSe rot | TT€J^TTU> (N. 3. 76).31 Deliberately powerful and 'defamiliarizing'32 asyndeton is different, and naturally much rarer. We have noticed examples from each 28

Pfeijffer 1999: 311. For 'near and far' see above, p. 73. Robert 1969-90: 5. 510-51; Pouilloux 1971: no. 37. Robert 1969-90: 5. 510-51 = Robert 1973; Pouilloux 1971: no. 37. This long group of moral and prudential precepts, not to be confused with the 'famous five' inscribed at Delphi ('know thyself, 'nothing to excess' etc.), are also preserved in Stobaios (3. 125 Wachsmuth-Hense) and were surely known in some form to Pindar. 30 Pfeijffer 1999: 303, giving other examples; cf. also 353 for 'fresh start' asyndeton. 31 Pfeijffer 1999: 399. 32 For this notion see above, p. 91, citing Silk. 29

362


author already, in earlier chapters. The last epode of Pindar's last poem, Pythian 8, opens with an extraordinary asyndetic33 sequence (lines 95-6):

creatures of a day! What is someone? What is no one? A dream of a shadow, is man.

The gnomic or generalizing character of the sentiments here makes it a cousin of the first category considered above, but it is more shockingly telegraphic. We have already (pp. 91-3) noticed Michael Silk's essay 'Pindar meets Plato', which compares this, in both manner and matter, to a passage from the myth which closes Plato's Republic. But it invites comparison, at one level, with some emotional moments in Thucydides also, as I shall now try to show. In the long and energetic narrative chapter describing the final seabattle at Syracuse we find the following piece of 'splendid and lucid incoherence', as Dover well described it in his school edition of book y:34

(7. 71. 4; cf. above, pp. 337, 343). and in the same Athenian army one could hear, so long as they were fighting the sea-battle on equal terms, every kind of cry at the same time, wailing, shouting, 'we are winning', 'we are beaten', and all the varied sorts of cry that a great army in great danger would be compelled to utter.

This is an example of what Denniston35 called 'half asyndeton', that is asyndeton at the comma, between words and clauses, as opposed to the much rarer 'full asyndeton' at the colon or full stop. The context is admittedly unusual: we are almost at the climax of the battle and thus the entire expedition; the hinge of the military narrative comes just two lines later, with the single laconic word erpei/iav, 'they routed them' (71. 5 line 3). But the audacious elimination of connectives is 33 Oddly enough Pfeijffer, to whom I am indebted for some of the other and more routine categories of Pindaric asyndeton noted above, does not, in his commentary on P. 8, remark on this very arresting one. 34 Dover 1965: 60, sadly not carried over into the big 1970 commentary. 35 Denniston 1952: 99.


363

a good if extreme illustration of Dionysios' point (itself asyndetically expressed) about 'austere stylists' as short on connectives and articles, oAiyoawSeCTiuos, avap9pos; and it is worth insisting that this is from narrative not speech (see below for this point: many of Denniston's oddities or remarkable instances come from speeches). It would however be wrong to claim that this is anything but abnormal even in 'austere' Thucydides. Denniston says of asyndeton that 'Thucydides affords hardly a single instance', though he duly cites the example just discussed, whose stylistic importance is unmistakeable.36 Other, 'stylistically unimportant', categories of half asyndeton in Thucydides include lists without copulatives (2. 9. 2 Me-yaprjs, BOUMTOI, /loKpoi'etc.).37 Full asyndeton is hardly Thucydidean; but there is one good example, and a tellingly positioned one. Very soon after the sea-battle example just noted, there is full asyndeton in Nikias' final speech of all, that which closes with the famous and poetically resonant sentence beginning civSpes -yap TroAis, 'men make up a city' (7. 77. 7).38 The asyndeton39 comes at the beginning of the speech, h 'even in the present situation, Athenians and allies, you should have hope—men have been saved from even worse than this—and not. . .' etc. (7. 77. i). Denniston correctly notes that this asyndeton is 'in parenthesis'; but note first, that such punctuation is no more than a modern way of coping with disjointed thought, and second, that sentence-complexity is characteristic of the hesitant Thucydidean Nikias.40 Although Denniston is right about the basic rarity of asyndeton in Thucydides, it is surely not chance that the two examples we have discussed are found in close proximity to each other, that is to say at the climax of one of the greatest and most poetically resonant narratives in classical Greek prose, a section full ofhapax 36

Denniston 1952: 99, 103. Denniston 1952: 100, who however also notes the copulatives at 3. 101.2: 'I-irveas Kal MeaaaTTLous Kal Tpiraieas etc. 38 On this see Groally 1994: 168 and the poetic passages there cited. 39 For which see Denniston 1952: 114. Note (with Denniston himself at 114 and again at 122) that there are textual problems about his other example, 3. 37. 2, where Alberti now follows those who like Denniston and the OGT prefer to read of before OVK e£ &v, thus softening the asyndeton. 40 Tompkms 1972. See also Kohl 1977: 3of. and n. i on the way Nikias at 6. 10—n swings from Greece to Sicily and back again, pendulum-style; he cites H. Frankel for a comparison with the fluctuating thought of Pi. P. 10. 22-31. 37

364


legomena and solemn vocabulary not normally found in prose.41 This is Thucydides the prose poet, or the prose Pindar. Avoidance of periods is another 'austere' feature, and a sub-form of the 'variety' or -n-oiKiXia which Pindar and Thucydides have in common. Pindar is fond of binary but non-balancing expressions; lists have been collected by Dornseiff and now Pfeijffer, who calls this feature 'inconcinnitas'.42 In earlier chapters of this book we have already encountered, in different connexions, two illustrative passages. A simple variation (one expression a substantive, the other constructed with a verb)43 is from Adrastos' short speech in Olympian 6. 16-17 (for this speech cf. above, p. 319)

I dearly miss the eye of my army, good both as a seer and at fighting with the spear.

A more elaborate example is from the 'medical ode' Pythian 3 — the passage where Pindar lists the various treatments applied by Asklepios (lines 51-3, on which see above, p. 6y).44 The variety of the treatments is reflected in the variety of the ways in which they are described. Pindar, Pfeijffer suggests, does this sort of thing for two reasons: so as to give an air of spurious spontaneity—not a feature which is relevant to Thucydides —but also as part of a strategy of unpredictability, 'by making high demands upon the concentration of his audience, heightening of [sic] its attentiveness and its active involvement in the performance'.45 This second motive, if rightly identified, does seem more relevant to Thucydides, who certainly avoided symmetrical antithesis on occasion, even varying the construction so as to do so.46 A good example comes from the truculent Spartan Sthenelaidas' 41 See my forthcoming commentary for the full argument, but meanwhile note, just from two chapters, 75- 4,, avrifioXiav and €7Ti6€iaojj,a)v, 75. 5 /co-Tiêta, 75- 6 KOIX^LOLV, 76 yeycoviGKcov and alcopovj^cu. 42 Dornseiff 1921: 102-12, esp. I03ff; Pultney 1987; PfeijfTer 1999: 5if. 43 Dornseiffi04. 44 Pfeijffer 1999: 51; Dornseiff 104 cites also the preceding line 50, rj Sfpivco-nvpl-n^pSo^voL &£p,as rj x£ip,a)vi, 'or with bodies racked by summer fever or by winter' where 'summer' is an 45 adjective but 'winter' is a noun. Pfeijffer 1999: 52. 46 Denniston 1952: 73 f., citing these examples and also i. 84. 2 and 4. 59. 2. See also his p. 73, citing three more speech-passages, 2. 43. 3, 3. 40. i and 6. 92. 3; on the last three see also his p. 13, calling them 'forced antitheses', passages where 'the form controls the content, not the content the form'.


365

'laconic' speech in book i, 'do not you permit the Athenians to become too great, and let us not betray our allies', where there is a dislocating switch from the second person plural to the first person plural (i. 86. 5); or, from the Melian Dialogue, ov TO €TTLKa\€aa.j^€vu>v, o.\\' TJv . . ., [what inspires confidence is] 'not the goodwill of those who call on them for help, but if. . .' etc. (5. 109). As we have noticed, these and Denniston's other examples are all from Thucydidean speeches (rather than from narrative or excursuses), where it goes without saying that linguistic and structural strain is often generated by the rhetorical milieu. The phenomenon just considered is an aspect of what Dionysios calls 'neglect of grammatical sequence'. Another is eccentric word order, 'hyperbaton'. This is a feature of both Thucydides and Pindar (often), but it is not a strongly Thucydidean habit.47 Where he does use hyperbaton, it can be a device for flagging an unusual phenomenon by means of unusual word-order (this is an example of what literary theorists call 'stylistic enactment'). Thus Dover comments as follows about Thucydides' important, but historically and textually controversial, reference to the Egestaian appeal to an Athenian alliance made not with themselves but with the people of Leontini (6. 6. 2): 'Thucydides comments implicitly on the unusualness of this procedure by disrupting the complex TTJV yevojueV^v ^v^âxiav in order to juxtapose AeovTivwv and ot Eyearatot.' 48 But not all Thucydidean hyperbaton can be so satisfactorily explained (see n. 48 on 4. 135. i). Sometimes Thucydides avoids a particular word order precisely in order to stop himself from being what Pindar always is, namely metrical. Intentional or unintentional metricality in prose writers is an intriguing topic; I have discussed it, with some Thucydidean examples, 47 See Denniston 1952: 53f., citing i. 69. i for the separation of airaoTepavvres from eAeuêptas. 48 Dover HCT^. 221. The Greek sentence runs There is a good discussion of the translation of the sentence at Chambers, Gallucci and Spanos 1990: 58-60 (appendix I), cf 51. They mention but do not endorse the drastic solution (Classen and others) of deleting Atovrivatv. Note their useful footnote (51 n. 32) on hyperbaton in Thucydides, instancing 4. 135. I where however no obvious 'stylistic enactment' seems to be involved except that I suppose you could say that a winter attack was an unexpected thing to try. For other passages where the subject of the sentence is inserted in away that does mild violence to the expected word order cf. 3. 90. 4 and the other passages there cited by Classen-Steup.

366

Thucydides and Pindar Compared 49

elsewhere. Both Herodotus and (to a lesser extent) Thucydides come close to metricality, for instance in their use of Homeric lines and phrases; but equally they seem deliberately to break the metre up either by altering the word order or by choice of word, so as to avoid too-perfect metricality. Where Thucydides does permit himself full metricality, as in the iambic line at the end of the tragic Sicily narrative (see above, p. 351), it is only at moments of high emotion.50 Pindar too borrows Homeric expressions. This is a huge topic and only a couple of examples can be given. Context is all-important here. The most obviously epic poem in Pindar is the Argonautic mini-epic Pythian 4, and its Homeric borrowings are palpable at the level of detail, as well as at the grand level of epic scope of theme. Thus (to give only a single instance) Pindar's -ndî âKei re, 'in breadth and length' (line 245, in the course of the comparison of the dragon to a pentekonter) is clearly and directly related to roaaov erjv fjLrJKOs, roaaov Trdxos elaopdaa9ai, 'so huge was it in breadth and length to look on' (Od. 9. 324, another sinister passage, describing the olive stake of the Kyklops). As Charles Segal notes in a good discussion, 'this combination occurs only here in both Pindar and Homer'.51 Again, in a solemnpoem like Fi37 (whether it is from a dirge or, as Lavecchia now thinks possible, the Herakles dithyramb, see above, p. 90), Pindar's language is naturally that of the Homeric Hymn to Demeter with its strong eschatological flavour: Pindar says oAjSios Sans ISwv and so on, 'blessed is he who sees [the mysteries]'. With this compare oXj3ios, os rdS' cnranrev eTTixOoviwv dv9pw7TOjv, 'happy among the men on earth is he who has seen these mysteries' (Horn. Hymn Dem. 480). The frequency or infrequency of Homeric phraseology in Pindar is also to some extent a function of the metre of a given poem or passage, and this is an obvious difference from Thucydides. Both Pindar and Bacchylides naturally take over or adapt Homerisms more readily when they are using dactylo-epitrite metre.52 A simple example is KO.KO. fipoveojv, 'wishing them harm' (at P. 8. 82; cf. Homer Iliad 16. 783 etc.).53 This is not far away from ordinary speech, but some of the more complicated and dignified epicisms in Pindar may have the aim of 'widening the gap that sets off Pindar's language from everyday 49

Hornblower 1994^: 66—9. Hornblower 19940: 69; Lamb 1914: 266; Dover 1997: 169. A perfect, sombre iambic trimeter, which implicitly likens tragic events to tragic myth in drama. 51 Segal 1986: 7 n. 7. But he does not notice that the combination is also found in the dedication by Kleombrotos of Sybaris (p. 26 n. 89): see Dubois 2002: 27. 52 5S A point I owe to Alan Griffiths. PfeijfTer 1999: 583. 50


367

speech', as Pfeijffer puts it about adjectives like SevdpKeiov, derived from personal names.54 A rather different and very intriguing sort of feature is what Pfeijffer calls 'polyinterpretability', cases where Pindar 'leaves the door open for multiple reference'. 55 This is, perhaps, an aspect or function of the general difficulty (not the same thing as complexity) which Dionysios and others, right down to university students in our day, have felt to be a defining and deterring characteristic of the Greek of both Thucydides and Pindar. We have discussed the particular phenomenon in an earlier chapter (pp. 80 f. on Pindar's Adfipos and Thucydides' eXevdepws) where we saw that, for Pindar as for Thucydides, ambiguity or instability of meaning may be deliberate, and may indicate a wish not to be pinned down politically. But is this actually confined to Thucydides and Pindar? Not quite, because Alan Sommerstein has convincingly identified a good example in the Eumnides of Aeschylus of 458/7 BG, a play produced very soon after the 'Ephialtic reforms' at Athens in the late 4608 which reduced the power of the ancient court of the Areopagus.56 Aeschylus' politics in this play are controversial, and so indeed is the more basic question whether it is a political play at all (I think it is).57 Athena, speaking of the Areopagus court, uses the words darojv 6fios, 'fear of the citizens' (line 691). But is the genitive here subjective ('fear felt by the citizens' for the Areopagus court)? Or is it objective ('the Areopagites will be constrained by 'fear of the citizens' i.e. 'the people', which would be 'a democrat's warning to the council not to act beyond its competence')? Sommerstein convincingly concludes that Aeschylus here perpetrates 'an ambiguity which is surely deliberate . . . Thus the "radical" and the "reactionary" can both interpret Athena's words in a manner they will find congenial'.581 am aware (to anticipate an obvious objection) that these are not the only couple of ambiguous words in Greek tragedy, and in particular that many choral lyrics in tragedy are hardly transparent. But it is not easy to find many such strong claimants to the status of deliberate ambiguity. 54

Pfeijffer 1999: 499, commenting on P. 8. 19. Pfeijffer 1999: 2$f. See esp. his p. 156, discussing 'her steep words stimulated his feeling [said about Hippolyta and her scandalous attempt to seduce Peleus]', roio §' opyav KVLÔV aiTTeivol Aoyot: N. 5. 32, where 'feeling' could mean anger, or sexual desire, or a bit of both'. Gf also the many references to 'polyinterpretability' in Pfeijffer's index at p. 718. The same phenomenon was identified by Norwood 1945: 63, though he did not call it 'polyinterpretability' but 'purposely ambiguous language' (his example was P. 4. 90ff.). 56 Hornblower 2002^: 23—6, giving ancient and modern references. 57 Macleod 1983: 22f. and other refs. at Hornblower 2002^: 325 n. 22 and 316 f. n. 10. 58 The two quotations are from Sommerstein 1989: 215 and 216 respectively. 55

368


From the historical and political point of view, I am suggesting that our three authors are reacting similarly to profound, tormenting or even positively dangerous issues. Thus it is noticeable that some of the worst interpretative cruxes in Thucydides occur in the course of his rare authorial statements about politics. One example is the important personal political preference embedded in his judgment on the Constitution of the 5,000 of 411 BG, that is, the regime intermediate between the oligarchic Terror and the restored democracy. That judgement takes up one short paragraph (8. 97. 2) which is a pin-cushion of problems of interpretation and translation, and which attracted no fewer than eight pages of commentary from Andrewes.59 Another is the meaning of a sentence (from the Kerkyraian stasis section) which is very important for the establishment of Thucydides' own moralposition, but whose sense is exasperatingly elusive: TO evr)9es, ov TO -yevvaiov rrXeiOTOv jueYexei (3. 83. i). Is simplicity an ingredient of noble character or the other way round?60 Scholars and commentators (myself included) have, in their eagerness to solve problems such as these, failed to notice that the very existence of a problem can sometimes be a sort of problem: why did Thucydides, in this crucial area, not make his meaning clear? Herodotus does not detain his commentators in quite this way. 'Political equality', he says authorially and without equivocation, 'is a good thing': lo-rj-yopir) . . . earl XP1?^0- orrovSaiov (5. 78). The ancient scholia on Pindar and Thucydides, edited by Drachmann and Hude respectively, are valuable and often-cited, but we do not hear much of scholia on Herodotus.61 From the literary point of view, we should not forget that although Pindar and Thucydides were on Dionysios' view the 'best' exponents of the 'austere arrangement', nevertheless 'Aeschylus in tragedy' also 59 Andrewes, HCT 1981: 331—9; Hornblower 1987: :6of. and n. 26; Leppin 1999: 180— 3. The ambiguities are radical: is Thucydides referring (by ev iroXi.Tevaa.vTes) to form of constitution, or to political behaviour? and does rov rrpuiTov xpovov mean merely 'in thefirst phase of the existence of the regime of the 5000' (as on Andrewes's view), or should we (as I have argued we should) give 'in my time', e-ni ye ep.ov , its proper weight? In which case the scope of the approving reference will be much wider, 'for the first time ever in my life-time' i.e. he is saying that under this regime Athens was managed better even than under that of Pericles. For the present purpose the solution is less important than the existence and seriousness of the uncertainty. 60 Hornblower 1987: i86f. n. 100 and 1991: 487, following Nussbaum 1986: 507^ n. 24. against Gomme. But again, I want to stress the unclarity and difficulty, rather than to argue for one view rather than another. 61 FGrHtst6Qj Dionysos of Miletos F2 is a rare example of a useful item in a Herodotean scholiast.


369

exemplified 'austerity' on Dionysios' categorization (above, p. 358). It is therefore not too surprising to find him behaving like the other two on occasion. A further manifestation of difficulty is verbal innovativeness. This is an area where dogmatism is particularly inappropriate because of the loss of so much Greek literature. Homer is full of nonce-words but that does not mean he coined them. The difficulty of new words in Thucydides62 and Pindar is not so much 'what do they mean?' (sometimes the meaning of Homeric words for physical objects is simply lost and we rely on guesses by scholiasts). Rather, the problem is to know what precise nuance is intended by for instance dycovtcnsfp. 285 above and see further below): the root here is evidently dycov, 'contest' so the general sense is not in doubt, but in the lengthened form something extra is presumably being conveyed by the suffix and we need to determine exactly what. Dionysios (Second ktter to Ammaios, 3) complains about 'recondite and archaic' words in Thucydides, including the Homeric Trepiamj). He then lists five words he calls TToirjTiKti, which Stephen Usher63 translates 'coined' (that is, 'made' or 'manufactured' words). But LSJ gives no such meaning in its entry under TTOI-TJTIKOS, which is there said to mean 'poetic' and is certainly used in that sense elsewhere by Dionysios, for instance in the opening chapter of 'On the arrangement of words': 'the poetical quality, which falls so pleasantly from the tongue and is so sweet to the ear'. Moreover LSJ in other entries takes Dionysios, in the present passage of the letter to Ammaios, to mean 'poetical'; see for instance the entry KtuXv^j), which is one of Dionysios' five ('a poetical word in Th., cf. D. H. Amm. 2. 3').64 The other four are TrpeajBevais, KarajSo^, axOrjSwv and SiKaiwais. Of the five words, axOrjSwv is definitely poetical, occurring as it does in a play of Aeschylus (Prometheus Bound line a6)65 whose authenticity is irrelevant for our purposes if it is conceded to date from the 4408 or 4308.66 The other four words are not attested in extant pre-Thucydidean poetry but are not metrically impossible. By contrast the Aeschylean or 'Aeschylean' attestation 62

For Thucydides see Denniston 1952: 19. Usher 1985: 411 (from Loeb Dionjisius ofHalicarnassus Critical Essays, vol. 2). Gf. the entry under irpeaflevai.;, which cites only Th. i. 73 and the imitative Gassius Dio 42. 46 and then says 'poet. ace. to D. H. Amm. 2. 3'. 65 There is nothing relevant in Mark Griffith's commentary (Griffith 1983: 88). 66 Griffith 1983: 33. 63

64

370


of axOrjSwv shows that Thucydides did not in fact 'coin' that word, though it would be unreasonable to assume that Dionysios had a copy of LSJ or a CD-ROM of TLG at his elbow and was in a position to check this. I think we should keep to the traditional rendering of TTOI-TJTIKOV in Dionysios' letter to Ammaios ('poetic'), in which case we have no convenient ancient list of Thucydidean neologisms. We do have a partial modern list, usefully drawn up by June Allison, who has collected the 'hapax kgomena in -is, -sis and -mos', distinguishing between various categories, such as hapax kgomena in Thucydides, and other types, such as absolute hapax (or virtually hapax) kgomena, or hapax kgomena of which Thucydides is the first attested user. Her thesis is that Thucydides created a new language, above all a language of abstract nouns, to enable him to talk about concepts. (This is a self-conscious operation and we therefore glanced at it in Chapter 9 on methodology.) This on her view was not just a general programme but one designed to deal with particular problems of specification. Of the expression Kara. TTJV OVK lôvaiav rrjs a-ywviaews, an absolute hapax kgomenon discussed above, p. 285, she remarks that 'the two abstract nouns are abbreviations that leave no hints, but sum up the picture quickly so the reader progresses to the main thrust of the narrative . . . Thucydides uses agonists as an abbreviation for the entire process of entering the games' (words in -ens tend to suggest process, those in -ôs suggest product).67 (See further Gh. 7 pp. 285f. for technical athletic language in Th. 5. 49-50. 4). Pindar's new coinages68 may at first sight seem very different from those of Thucydides: he is not trying to construct a vehicle for conceptual thought of a philosophical sort. But many Thucydidean and Pindaric coinages have this feature in common: they make possible extreme concision and compression. The first word of Olympian 2 is a famous neologism, dva|iopju,iyyes'—a daring new word whose 67 Allison 19970: 123-6, esp. -pas words as tending to convey a product sense; cf. also her pp. 126-31, arguing that 'artistic considerations' (rather than any real difference of meaning) sometimes determine the choice of words in-at? rather than in -p,6s. As for 'artistic considerations' I am not quite convinced that Thucydides would (as Allison suggests on p. 127, where she wonders why Th. chose to coin the word agonismos at 7. 70. 3 rather than using agonists again as at 5. 50) have thought it necessary to avoid 'the rough homoioteleuton agomsis would have caused with antitechnests . 68 Rose 1992: I74f- gives some allegedly new compounds from P. 10, the focus of his chapter, but not all these deserve to be included. Thus Aayeraj, 'leader of the people' at line 31 is also found at Sophocles F22iRadt, line 12, AayeVfa], and though the word apiaropaxos 'best fighter', may not be found elsewhere as an adjective, the personal name Apiarop,axos is very common: there are 82 in LGPN^R (Central Greece) alone, including one (no. 11) from the 5th-cent. Thespian casualty list discussed above, pp. 44 f., IGj. 1888 line a, 7.


371 69

meaning is not in dispute, '[hymns, u'juvoi] which rule the lyre'. Like Thucydides' dywriais, the new form enables Pindar to pack a lot into a short space or a single word or both. In Greek the full relative clause involving cfroppiyyes would not only be clumsy and wordy but would prevent Pindar from starting with the arresting word and thought, because in that case the most obvious construction would be with an opening v^voi followed by the relative pronoun. Much of this could be summarized by saying that both authors, Thucydides (especially his speeches) and Pindar (everywhere), write difficult Greek. In his essay On Thucydides, Dionysios interestingly turns this into a political criticism. By confining himself to a small minority of educated readers, he says, Thucydides was 'limiting the work to a very few men exactly as in cities of an oligarchic or tyrannical government', oAiycov TTO.VTO.TTO.OIV avdpanraiv OVTOJ Troiovvres, aiOTrep ev rais oAiyapôujue'vcus' r/ TVpavvovêvais TroXeai (ch. 51).70 Accessibility is democratic, and is desirable even under autocracy, or any rate under the autocracy of a 'civilis princeps'.71 It was really for this reason, according to Fraenkel, that Horace refused to praise Augustus with a Pindaric ode (above, p. 289): not—as he pretends—because he lacked the virtuosity or because Pindar was too difficult for Horace to imitate, butbecause Pindar and Pindaric-style poetry was difficultfor Horace's readers and hearers to understand:' [j]ust as devotion to Augustus was not the privilege of any individual, but was felt by thousands of ordinary citizens, so the language in which that devotion was voiced should be one that seemed to come from the heart of the common man.'72 So are we back with Thucydides and Pindar the 'fascists' (above, p. 78), or with authors who in the terminology of Michel Foucault 69 Kirkwood 1982: 66 calls it a 'a-n-a^, perhaps created by Pindar for this occasion'. He must mean a Pindaric hapax because the word occurs, as a virtually certain restoration, at Bacchylides 4. 6, d[va.£i.6p] piyyos. This poem was written for a victory by Hiero of Syracuse in 470, six years after the occasion for which Pindar wrote 0. 2 for Theron of Akragas. Maehler 1982:72 n. 209 is very cautious about the obviously likely possibility that Bacchylides picked the word up from Pindar. For new coinages in Bacchylides himself see Lefkowitz 1976: 69, 74, 128 etc.; Goldhill I9 8 3 : 79f70 Tr. by Pritchett (whose commentary regrettably says nothing at all about this sentence). By contrast with Dionysios, Marcellinus (para. 35) was perfectly happy to live with a Thucydides who was deliberately difficult so as to confine access to 'the wisest', oi \LO-V

71 72

OO(j)OL.

See Wallace-Hadrill 1982. Fraenkel 1957: 439f. Note also Richardson 1985: 397.

372


speak a 'discourse of power'? From the Marxist point of view the difficulty of Pindar's poetry is precisely what explains its attraction for the elite whose power Pindar was buttressing (above, pp. 84^). As Peter Rose puts it about Pindaric style, 'the power of this language is the real validation of Pindar's claim to bestow something unique on the victor and his class', though Rose goes on to say that Pindar simultaneously negates the discourse controlled by the ordinary members of the ruling class.731 take that last point to mean that Pindar's language was too difficult even for his elite patrons let alone for ordinary folk. This has some force but even on its own terms this type of explanation is too restricted. In the case of Pindar there is, we have suggested, an extra important element: his praise poetry was not just part of a vertical assertion on class lines; it was often a horizontal one. In colonial or 'marginal' areas, Greek victory poems were part of the assertive language of hellenism, a way for elites to define their identity against non-Greek neighbours (above, p. 156). The more difficult and thus exclusivist the Greek language used, the stronger the assertion. We should not however forget the original context envisaged. Not all Pindar's patrons were ruthless individuals and oligarchs determined to hold on to power; community participation was envisaged for many of his poems. In particular, William Mullen, in his pioneering book on Pindar and dance, made the excellent point twenty years ago that the dance patterns surely helped (by introducing an element of predictability) to mitigate the difficulty of poetry which later seemed 'profoundly obscure'.74 To be sure, this dance-element had presumably been lost by the time Plato read Pindar; and no one can pretend that Pindar's language with its neologisms and virtuoso hyperbaton can ever have been easy. But we must be careful not to impose our own notions of difficulty on what was still, even in the fourth century, a partly oral culture. Politically, Pindar's poetry is a continuum, as we have seen (pp. 262 f.). Crude formulae are not likely to do justice to all of it—or indeed to all the component elements of Thucydides' History.75 O

O

'

O

73

O

O

O

Rose 1992: 176. See above, p. 85 for reservations about Rose's general position. Mullen 1982: 8. Gf. Thomas 1992: 118—19 f°r a slmllar point: 'the written text [she is discussing choral lyric like that of Pindar, Bacchyhdes and Alkman] recorded only an element of the total performance'. See Gh. i p. 36. 75 Thus the special difficulty of his speeches was surely in part a reaction against the simplicity and story-telling manner of Herodotus' speeches (above, p. 307). 74

Conclusion

In this book I have tried to do two things. In the second part, an intertextual inquiry,1 I have argued that the ancient literary critics were right to see stylistic similarities between Pindar and Thucydides. That Thucydides knew Pindar personally cannot be proved, and without a specific mention of Pindar in Thucydides' text I cannot even claim certainty for the proposition that he was aware of Pindar's poetry. The same strict argument could however be used in support of his ignorance of Herodotus, an eccentric and I would say untenable minority position. I have placed Pindar's poetry, especially but not only his epinikian odes, side by side with Thucydides' History in the hope of illuminating aspects of the latter. This has been done many times over for tragedy and epic, but not for epinikian poetry. And yet the important and pervasive aspect of contemporary Greek life which is described and celebrated by epinikian poetry features directly if occasionally in Thucydides' history, in a way that the literal world described by Sophocles or Homer does not. It is therefore reasonable to suppose that the same competitive language and concepts should feature in both Pindar and Thucydides, and so they do. The military commander Brasidas, we recall, is crowned and welcomed at Skione 'like an athlete': Thucydides 4. 121.i.2 Conversely, Pindar tells us that the family of the pankratiast Melissos of Thebes, victorious at the Isthmian games, had also 'found favour with bronze Ares' i.e. were good fighters: Isthmian 4. 15. Thematic overlap of this sort might be expected to lead to similarity of literary and linguistic presentation, and I have argued that it does. This leads me to my other and related aim, the aim of my Part I, which was to show that the world evoked by the brief but eloquent comparison about Brasidas just quoted constantly lurks beneath and is presupposed by Thucydides. If he chooses not to give it more explicit coverage that is, we may conjecture, because success at the games 1

See above, Gh. 6 p. 269.

2

Above, Gh. i p. 46.

374

Conclusion

was in large part seen as a religious matter and he usually prefers to keep the religious dimension out of sight.3 Usually but by no means always, and he is capable of changing his standard priorities dramatically in the middle of routine military and diplomatic narrative. To this Thucydidean -n-oiKiXia or thematic variety, and it must be said straightforward Thucydidean awareness that history sometimes imposes reversal of normal priorities by putting festivals centre-stage, we owe some notable departures from the normal military manner. I think most obviously of the long chapter about the Athenian revival of the Delian festival in book 3 (ch. 104) and those two detailed chapters which describe the \hepanegyris or Olympic games and festival of 420 BG, and which formed the subject of our Chapter 7. The very recent equestrian successes in 416 of which Alkibiades is made to boast (6. 16) did not belong to some vanished world, but to a world of annual, biennial, and quadrennial panegyreis in which Thucydides gathered his information, and without which we might not have had his History at all. He learnt his facts OVK IK TOV Traparvxavros, 'not from chance informants', as he tells us (i. 22. 2). The negative presentation there is not so much a hit at Herodotus' methods as a vehicle for a strong positive affirmation about the quality of his sources, which include of course himself, as he goes on to say superbly. Such understatements are characteristic of him. Pindar would have understood and sympathized.4 But the oral sources he alludes to surely included both the people who attended, such as himself and Pindar, and those like Dorieus of Rhodes (p. 134) who actually won victories at those festivals. They were sources not only for facts but for values, of a sort which I have argued Thucydides shared with the epinikian poets who were, along with Herodotus, his immediate predecessors in the celebration of what all Greeks (not just the victors or the poets and historians) reckoned the finest human achievements: see the first sentence of this book. The informants and main participants were select, but the values were very widely shared: it was the community of Skione as a whole which welcomed the victorious Brasidas, and it was the Thebans at large who joined in the all-night festival for Melissos, although he 'was not granted the build of an Orion'.5 That apology for paltry, OVOTOS, physique reminds us that Pindar's people were not all beautiful demigods in the literal sense. They could how3

Hornblower 1992. For litotes and other negatively-expressed positives in both authors see p. 284 n. 42. 5 For the local festival evoked towards the end of/. 4 see above, p. 164. citing Krummen, For Melissos' unimpressive physical physique see lines 49-50 of the poem; cf. above, p. 336. 4

Conclusion

375

ever achieve immortality by athletic glory or patriotic death, or very occasionally and splendidly by both, like the two panhellenic victors of Thespiai who were commemorated as such in the mass grave for the 101 men of that city who fell at the Thucydidean battle of Delion in 424.1 think6 that Thucydides knew exactly what he meant when he spoke, in a hapax-word, of Thespiai losing its anthos or 'flower' in that battle. The meaning I argued for was essentially a Pindaric meaning, although Pindar had been dead for twenty years when that battle was fought and for perhaps forty years when Thucydides looked for a word to describe its casualties. 6

Above, p. 45. For hapax-words see p. 370.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Mote: individual contributions to AR, CAH^ and OCD3 are not usually separately listed in this bibliography. ADSHEAD, K. (1986), Politics of the Archaic Peloponnese: the Transitionfrom Archaic to Classical Politics (Richmond, UK). ALBERT:, G. (2000), ThucydidisHistoriaeLibri F-F///(Rome). ALCOCK, S. E., and R. OSBORNE (eds.) (1994), Placing the Gods: Sanctuaries and Sacred Space in Ancient Greece (Oxford). ALEXIOU, M. (2002), The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition, 2nd edn. revised by D. Yatromanolakis and P. Roilos; ist edn., 1974 (Lanham, Md.). ALLAN, W. S. (2000), The Andromache and Euripidean Tragedy (Oxford). ALLISON, J. W. (19793), 'Thucydides and nOAYUPArMOZYNH', AJAR 4: IO-22.

(i979*), 'Additional Note', 47î#4: :5?f(1989), Power and Preparedness in Thucydides (Baltimore). (19973), Word and Concept in Thucydides (Atlanta). (1997^), 'Homeric Allusions at the Close of Thucydides' Sicilian Narrative',47Pn8: 499-516. (2001), 'Axiosis, the New Arete: a Periclean Metaphor for Friendship', CQ 5i:53-64-

ALONSO-NUNEZ, A. (2000), DieArchdologien des Thukydides (Konstanz). ALTY,J. M. (1982), 'Dorians andlonians', JHSioz: 1-14. AMANDRY, P. (1952), 'Observations surles monuments de 1'Heraion d'Argos'. Hesperia 21: 222-74. (1980), 'Surles concours Argiens', in EtudesArgiennes. BCHSupp. 6: 21153ANDERSON, M.J. (1997), The Fall of Troy in Early Greek Poetry and Art (Oxford). ANDREWES, A. (1936/7), 'Athens and Aegina, 510-480 BC', BSA 37:1-7. (1952), 'Sparta and Arcadia in the Early Fifth Century', Phoenix 6: 1-5. (1957), 'The Patraiof Kamiros', BSA 52: 30-7. (1961), 'Thucydides and the Persians', Historia 10: 1-18. (1970), see Abbreviations under HCT. (1978), 'The Opposition to Pericles', JHS98: 1-8. (1981), see Abbreviations under HCT and D. M. Lewis, (1957), 'Notes on the Peace of Nicias', JHSjj: 177-80. ANTONACCIO, C. (2001), 'Ethnicity and Colonization', in Malkin 2001: 113-57. ATHANASSAKI, L. (2003), 'Transformations of Colonial Disruption into Narrative Continuity in Pindar's Epinician odes', HSCP101: 93-128.

Bibliography

377

AUSTIN, M. M. (1994), 'Society and Economy', in D. M. Lewis, J. Boardman, S. Hornblower and M. Ostwald (eds.), CAH^ vol. 6: The Fourth Century BC' (Cambridge) 527-64. AVERY, H. C. (1973), 'Themes in Thucydides' Account of the Sicilian Expedition', Hermes 101: 1-13. BADIAN, E. (1982), 'Greeks and Macedonians', in B. Barr-Sharrar and E. N. Borza (eds.), Studies in the History qfArtio (Washington, DC), 33-51. (1994), 'Herodotus and Alexander I of Macedon: A Study in Some Subtle Silences', in Hornblower 1994: 107-30. (1999), 'The Road to Acanthus', in Mellor and Tritle 1999: 3-35. BAGHIN, G. (1991), 'Falaride, Pentatlo e la fondazione di Agrigento', Hesperia, 2: Studi sulla Grecitd di Occidente 7-17. BAKHTIN, M. (1968), Rabelais and his World, tr. H. Iswolsky, (Bloomington). (1981), The Dialogic Imagination, ed. M. Holquist (Austin, Tex.). BAL, M. (1985), Narratology (Toronto). BARLOW, S. (iQ&6), Euripides, Trojan Women (Warminster). BARRETT, W. S. (1954), 'Bacchylides, Asine and Apollo Pythaieus', Hermes 82: 421-44. (1964), Euripides Hippolytus (Oxford). (1973), 'Pindar's Twelfth Olympian and the Fall of the Deinomenids', JHSgy. 23-35. (1978), 'The Oligaithidai and their Victories', in Dawe et al. 1978: 1-20.

BARRON, J. P. (1966), The Silver Coins qfSamos (London). (1969), 'Ibycus: to Polycrates', BIGS 16: 119-49. (1980), 'Bakchylides, Theseus and a Woolly Cloak', BICSsj: i—8. (1984), 'Ibycus: Gorgias and Other Poems', BICSy.: 13-24. (1988), 'The Liberation of Greece', inj. Boardman, N. G. L. Hammond, D. M. Lewis, and M. Ostwald (eds.), CAH^ vol. 4: Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean (Cambridge). BAUSLAUGH, R. A. (1979), 'The Text of Thucydides IV. 8. 6 and the South Channel at Pylos', JHSgg: i—6. BELL, M. (1995), 'The Motya Charioteer and Pindar's Isthmian 2', Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, 1-30. BELOCH, K. J. (1913-27), Griechische Geschichte"2, 4 vols. in 8 (Strassburg and Berlin). BERGEMANN,J. (1991), 'Pindar: Das Bildnis eines konservativen Dichters',AM 106: 157-89. BETANT, E. (1843-7), Lexicon Thucydideum, 2 vols. (Geneva). BIERL, A. F. (1994), 'Apollo in Greek Tragedy: Orestes and the God of Initiation', inj. Solomon (ed.), Apollo (Tucson), 81-96. BLAKE, A. (1996), The Body Language: The Meaning of Modem Sport (London). BLEICKEN, J. (1979), 'Zur Entstehung der Verfassungstypologie im 5 Jahr-

378

Bibliography

hundert v. Chr. (Monarchic, Aristokratie, Demokratie),', Historia 27, 148172 [= Gesammelte Schnften i, Stuttgart 1998: 68-92]. BOARDMAN,J. and C. E. VAPHOPOULOU-RICHARDSON (eds.) (1986), Chios:A Conference at theHomereion in Chios 1984 (Oxford). BOEDEKER, D. and K. RAAFLAUB (eds.), (1998) Democracy, Empire, and the Arts in Fifth-Century Athens (Cambridge, Mass.). BOEDEKER, D. and D. SIDER (eds.) (2001), The New Simonides: Contexts of Praise and Desire (New York and Oxford). BOHRINGER, F. (1979), 'Cultes d'athletes en grece antique', REA 81: 5-18. BOMER, F. (1963), 'Gedanken tiber die Gestalt des Apollon und die Geschichte dergriechischenFrommigkeit', J 4fA«na«Mm4i: 275-303. BONACASA, N. and A. BUTTITA (eds.) (1988), La statua marmorea diMozia BONIFAZI, A. (2001), Mescohre un cratere di canti: programmatwa dellapoesia epinicia in Pindaro (Turinj. BOSANOJJET, R. C. (1896), 'On a Group ofEarly Attic Lekythoi',J://5'i6:164-8. BOSWORTH, A. B. (1980), A Historical Commentary on Arrian's History of Alexander (Oxford). (1993), 'The Humanitarian Aspect of the Melian Dialogue', JHS 113: 30-44. BOULAY,J. du (1974), Portrait of a Greek Mountain Village (Oxford). BOWRA, C. M. (1953), 'The Daughters of Asopos', Problems in Greek Poetry (Oxford), 54-65. (1961), Greek lyric Poetry (Oxford). (1964), Pindar (Oxford). (1970), 'Euripides' Epinician for Alcibiades', On Greek Margins (Oxford), 134-48 [orig. Historia Q, 1960: 68-79]. BRADEEN, D. (1974), The Athenian Agora, vol. 17: Inscriptions. The Funerary Monuments (Princeton). BRASWELL,B. K. (1988), .4 Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar (Berlin). (1992), .4 Commentary on Pindar Nemean On«(Fribourg). (1998), A Commentary on Pindar Nemean Nine (Berlin and New York). BRENNE, S. (1994), 'Ostraka and the Process of Ostrakophoria', in W. D. E. Coulson, O. Palagia, and others, The Archaeology of Athens and Attica under the Democracy (Oxford), 13-24. BRESSON, A. (1979), Mythe et contradiction (Paris). BROCK, R. (2000), 'Sickness in the Body Politic: Medical Imagery in the Greek Polls', in V. M. Hope and E. Marshall (eds.), Death and Disease in the Ancient City, 24-34. and S. HODKINSON (eds.) (2000), Alternatives to Athens: Varieties of Political Organisation and Community in Ancient Greece (Oxford). BRODERSEN, K. (1990), 'Zur Datierung der ersten Pythien', ^PE8z: 25-31. BRUGNONE, A. (1997), 'Legge di Himera sulla ridistribuzione della terra', PP 52: 262-305.

Bibliography

379

BRUN, P. (1989), 'L'lle de Keos et ses cites au IVe siecle av. J.-C.', ^PE 76: 121-138. BRUNT, P. A. (1976-83), Arrian: History of Alexander and Indica, Loeb edn. 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass.). BUCK, R.J. (IQJQ), A History ofBoeotia (Edmonton). (1990), 'Boiotians in the Peloponnesian War', in A. Schachter (ed.), Essays in the Topography, History and Culture ofBoiotia. Teiresias suppl. 3: 4-55. BUGH, G. (1988), The Horsemen of Athens (Princeton). BUNDY, E. (1986 [1962]), Studia Pindarica (Berkeley). BURKERT, W. (1979), Structure and History in Greek Mythology andRitual (Berkeley). (1983), Homo Necans (Berkeley). (1985), Greek Religion (Oxford). (1995), 'Greek Poleis and Civic Cults: Some Further Thoughts', in M. H. Hansen and K. Raaflaub (eds.), Studies in the Ancient Greek Palis. Historia Einzelschrift Q$: 201-10. BURNETT, A. P. (1985), The Art ofBacchylides (Cambridge, Mass.). (1998), Revenge in Attic and Later Tragedy (Berkeley). BURTON, R. W. B. (1962), Pindar's Pythian Odes (Oxford). (1980), The Chorus in Sophocles' Tragedies (Oxford). BuRY,J. B. (1890) TheNemean Odes of Pindar (London). (1892), The Isthmian Odes of Pindar (London). BUXTON , R. (ed.), (2000), Oxford Readings in Greek Religion (Oxford). CALAME, C. (1990), 'Narrating the Foundation of a City: the Symbolic Birth of Gyrene', in Edmunds 1990: 275-341. (2003), Myth and History in Ancient Greece: The Symbolic Creation of a Colony (Princeton). CAMERON, A. (1976), Circus Factions (Oxford). (1995), Callimachus and his Critics (Princeton). CAMPBELL, D. A. (1991), Greek Lyric III: Stesichoms, Ibycus, Simonides and Others, Loeb edn. (Cambridge, Mass.). (1992), Greek Lyric IV:Bacchylides, Corinna and Others, Loeb (as above). CAMPBELL, J. K. (1964), Honour, Family and Patronage: A Study of Institutions and Moral Values in a Greek Mountain Community (Oxford). CANFORA, L. (1970), Tucidide continuato (Padua). CAREY, C. (1981), .4 Commentary on Five Odes of Pindar: Pythian 2, Pythian f), Nemean i, Nemean7, Isthmian 8 (Salem). (1983), review ofMaehler 1982, JHS103: 165-6. (19893), 'Prosopographica Pindarica', CQjyy. 1-9. (ig8gi), 'The Performance of the Victory Ode', AJP no: 545-65. (igSgc), 'Two Transitions in Pindar', CQj^y. 287-95. (iggi), 'The Victory Ode in Performance: the Case for the Chorus', CP 86: 192-200. ( I 995)j 'Pindar and the Victory Ode', in L. Ayres (ed.), The Passionate Intel-

380

Bibliography

led: Essays on the Transformation of Classical Traditions Presented to Professor I. G. fey (New Brunswick and London), 85-103. (iggg), 'Ethos and Pathos in Bacchylides', in I. L. Pfeijffer and S. R. Slings (eds.), One Hundred Years of Bacchylides. Proceedings of a Colbquium Held at the Vrije UniversiteitAmsterdam on ij October iggj (Amsterdam), 17-29. (2001), 'Poesia pubblica in performance' in M. Cannata Fera and G. B. D'Alessio (eds.), Iliricigreci:forme della communwazwne e storio deltesto (Messina), 11-26.

CARNE-ROSS, D. S. (1985), Pindar (New Haven). CARTER, L. B. (1986), The Quiet Athenian (Oxford). CARTLEDGE, P. A. (1982), 'Sparta and Samos: a Special Relationship?', CQj^z'. 243-65(1984), 'A New Lease of Life for Lichas son of Arkesilas', LCMy. 98-102. CATLING, R. W. (2002), in W. Cavanagh et al., Lakonia Survey vol. i. CAWKWELL, G. L. (1978), Philip ofMacedon (London). (1997), Thucydides andthePebponnesian War(London). CHAMBERS, M. (2000), 'Wilamowitz on Thucydides', in W. M. Calder III and others (eds.), Wilamowitzin Gra/Kfa/fl^Hildesheim), 504-23. CHAMBERS, M., R. GALLUCCI, and P. SPANOS (1990), 'Athens' Alliance with Egesta in the Year of Antiphon', ^TE 83: 38-63. CHAMOUX, F. (1953), Cyrene sous la monarchic des Battiades (Paris). CLAIRMONT, C. (1983), Patrws Nomos: Public Burial in Athens during the Fifth and Fourth Centuries BC(Oxford). CLARK, M. (1999), 'Thucydides in Olympia', in Mellor and Tritle 1999: 115— 34COARELLI, F. and M. TORELLI (1987), Sicilia (Rome and Bari). COHN-HAFT, L. (1956), The Public Physicians of Ancient Greece (Northampton, Mass.). COLE, T. (1992), Pindar's Feasts or the Music of Power (Rome). COLLARD, C. (1991), Euripides Hecuba (Warminster). COLVIN, S. (1999), Dialect in Aristophanes and the Politics of Language in Ancient Greek Literature (Oxford). CONDOLEON, N. M. (1949), 'Inscriptions de Chios', Rev. Phil. 23: 5-16. CONNOR, W. R. (1971), The New Politwians of Fifth-century Athens (1984), Thucydides (Princeton). CONTE, G. B. (1986), The Rhetoric of Imitation: Genre and Poetic Memory in Virgil and Other Latin Poets (Ithaca, NY). CORCELLA, A. (1984/5), "E/W?", Annali della Facoltd di Lettere e Filosofia a Bari 27/8: 41-100. CORDANO, F. (1992), Le tesserepubbliche dal tempio diAtena a Camarina (Rome). CoRNFORD,F. M. (1907), ThucydidesMythistorifus (London). COURTILS, J. des (1992), 'L'architecture et 1'histoire d'Argos dans la premiere moitie du Ve siecle', in Pierart 1992: 211-53.

Bibliography

381

CRAIK, E. M. (1988), Euripides, Phoenician Women (Warminster). CRAWFORD, M. (2000), 'Mirabilia and Personal Names', in Hornblower and Matthews 2000:145-8. CROALLY, N. T. (1994), Euripidean Polemic: the Trojan Women and the Function of Tragedy (Cambridge). CROISET, A. (1880), LaPoesie dePindare et les bis du fyrismegrec (Paris). GROTTY, K. (1982), Song and Action: the Victory Odes of Pindar (Baltimore and London). CROWTHER, N. and M. FRASS (1998), 'flogging as a Punishment in the Ancient Games', Nikephoros n. 51-82. CURRIE, B. (2002), 'Euthymos of Locri: A Case Study in Heroization in the Classical Period', JHS122. 24-44. (2003), 'ReviewofEkroth',J//5i23: 238-41. CURTY, O. (1994), 'La notion de la parente entre cites chez Thucydide', MH 5i:i93-7(1995), Les Parentes legendaires entre cites grecques: catalogue raisonne des inscriptions contenant le terme ZYFFENEIA et analyse critique (Geneva). DAVIDSON, J. (1991), 'The Gaze in Polybius' Histories', JRS8i: 10-24. DAVIES,J. K. (1971), Athenian PropertiedFamilies 600-300 BC (Oxford). (1981), Wealth and the Power of Wealth in Classical Athens (Salem, NH). (:993)> Democracy and Classical Greece, 2nd edn. (London). (1997), 'The Moral Dimension of Pythian Apollo', in A. Lloyd (ed.), What is a God? Studies in the Nature of Greek Divinity (London), 43-64. (2000), 'A Wholly Non-Aristotelian Universe: the Molossians as Ethnos, State and Monarchy', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 234-58. DAWE, R.D., J. DIGGLE and P. E. EASTERLING (eds.) (1978), Dionysiaca: Mine Studies in Greek Poetry by Former Pupils Presented to Sir Denis Page on his Seventieth Birthday (Cambridge). DEBNAR, P. (2001), Speaking the Same Language: Speech and Audience in Thucydides' Spartan Speeches (Ann Arbor). DEMAND, N. (1982), Thebes in the Fifth Century: Heracles Resurgent (London). DENNISTON,J. D. (1952), Greek Prose Style (Oxford). DEROW, P. S. (1995) 'Herodotus Readings', Classics Ireland1?', 29-51. DEROW, P. and R. PARKER (eds.) (2003), Herodotus and his World (Oxford). DETIENNE, M. and J.-P. VERNANT (1978), Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and Society (London). DEVEREUX, G. (1973), 'The Self-blinding of Oedipus in Sophokles' Oidipous Tyrannas'JHSgy, 36-49. DEWALD, C. (1975), TAXIS: the Organization of Thucydides' History Books ii-viii (Diss. Berkeley) [see also Dewald 2004]. (1997), 'Wanton Kings, Pickled Heroes, and Gnomic Founding Fathers: Strategies of Meaning at the End of Herodotus' Histories', in Roberts, Dunn, and Fowler 1997: 62-82.

382

Bibliography

DEWALD, C. (2004 forthcoming), Thucydides' War Narrative (Berkeley) [see Dewald 1975]. DICKIE, M. W. (1984), 'Hesychia and Hybris in Pindar', in D. E. Gerber (ed.), Greek Poetry and Philosophy. Studies in Honor ofL. Woodbury (Chico, Calif.), 83109. DODDS, E. R. (1959), Plato: Gorgias (Oxford). - (1960), Euripides Bacchae , and edn. (Oxford). DORNSEIFF, F. (iQ2i),Pindars Stil (Berlin). DOUGHERTY, C. (19933), The Poetics of Colonization: from City to Text in Archaic Greece (New York and Oxford).

- (1993^), 'It's Murder to Found a Colony', in Dougherty and Kurke 1993: 178-98. - (1994), 'Archaic Greek Foundation Poetry: Questions of Genre and

Occasion', JHSu^.: 35-46. and L. KURKE (eds.) (1993), Cultural Poetics in Archaic Greece: Cult, Performance, Politics (Cambridge). (2001), The Raft of Odysseus (Oxford). DOUGLAS, M. (1970), Natural Symbols (London). - (1990), Foreword to Mauss 1990. - (2003), 'The Go-away Goat', in R. Rendtorffand R. A. Kugler(eds.), The Book of Leviticus: Composition and Reception (Leiden), 121-41. DOVER, K.J. (1965), Thucydides Book VII (Oxford). - (1968), Aristophanes Clouds (Oxford). - (1970), (1981), see Abbreviations under HCT. - (1971), Theocritus: Select Poems (London). - (1974), Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle (Oxford). - (1986), 'Ion of Chios: His Place in the History of Greek Literature', in Boardman and Vaphopoulou-Richardson 1986: 27-37 [rePr- in Dover 1988: 1-12]. - (1988), The Greeks and their Legacy (Oxford). - (1994), Marginal Comment (London). -(1997) , The Evolution of Greek Prose Style (Oxford) . DRACHMANN, A. B. (1903-27), Scholia vetera in Pindari carmina, 3 vols. (Leipzig). DREHER, M. (1989), 'Zu IG IF 404, dem athenischen Volksbeschluss (iber die Eigenstaatlichkeit derkeischen Poleis', in G. Thtir (ed.), Symposion 1985, Akten des VI. Internationalen Kolloquiums der Gesellschaftfur Griechische undHellenistische Rechtsgeschichte (Vienna) 263-81. - (l995)?Hegemon und Symmachie: Untersuchungen zum zweiten athenischen Seebund (Berlin). DUBOIS, L. (1989), Inscriptions grecques dialectales de Sieilie (Rome). - (2000), Hippolytus and Lysippos: Remarks on some Compounds in 7-77770-, -177770?', in Hornblower and Matthews 2000: 41-52. - (2002), Inscriptions grecques dialectales de Grande Grece, 2.

Bibliography

383

DUCHEMIN, J. (i955), Pindare poete et prophete (Paris). DUCREY (1968), Le Traitement des prisonniers deguerre dans la Grece antique des origines a la conquete romaine (Paris). DUNBABIN, T. J. (1948), The Western Greeks (Oxford). DUNBAR, N. (IQQ$), Aristophanes Birds (Oxford). DuRRBACH, F. (1921-22), Choix descriptions deDebs (Paris). EASTERLING, P. E. (ed.), (1982), Sophocles Trachiniae (Cambridge). (1985), 'Anachronism in Greek Tragedy', JHS105: i—10. EBERT, J. (1972), Griechuche Epigramme auf Sieger an gymnuchen undhippischenAgonen (Leipzig). EDMUNDS, L. (1975), 'Thucydides' Ethics as Reflected in the Description of Stasis (3. 82-83)', HSCP-jg: 73-92. (1984), 'Thucydides on Monosandalism (3. 22. 2),', GRBM 10 = Sterling Dow Studies, 71-5. (ed.) (1990), Approaches to Greek Myth (Baltimore). EDWARDS, M. W. (1991), The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 5: Books 17-20 (Cambridge). EHRENBERG, V. E. (1938), Alexander and the Greeks (London). (1947), 'Polypragmosyne: a Study in Greek Polities', JHS 67: 46-67. FEARN, D. (2003), 'Mapping Phleious: politics and myth-making in Bacchylides 9', CQ,53: 347-67. FIGUEIRA, T. (1981), Aegina: Society andPolities (Salem, NH). (1988), 'The Chronology of the Conflict Between Athens and Aigina in Herodotus Book 6', QUCCzZ: 48-89. (1991), Athens and Aegina in the Age of Imperial Colonization (Baltimore). FINLEY,J. H. (1955), Pindar and Aeschylus (Cambridge, Mass.). (1967), Three Essays on Thucydides (Cambridge, Mass.). FINLEY, M. I. (1968), 'Silver Tongue', in Aspects of Antiquity (London), 38-43. (1978), The World of Odysseus (London). and H. W. PLEKET (1976), The Olympic Games (London). FLENSTED-JENSEN, P. (ed.) (20003), Further Studies in the Ancient Greek Palis, Historia Einylschrift 138. (2000^), 'The Chalkidic Peninsula and its Regions', in Flensted-Jensen 2000: 121-31. , T. H. NIELSEN, and L. RUBINSTEIN (eds.) (2000), Palis andPolities: Studies in Ancient Greek History Presented to Mogens Herman Hansen on his Sixtieth Birthday (Copenhagen). FONTENROSE, J. (1968), 'The Hero as Athlete', CSCA i: 73-104. (1981), Orion: the Myth of the Hunter and the Huntress (Berkeley). FORREST, W. G. (19603), 'The Tribal Organization of Chios', _B&455:172-89. (igGoi), 'Themistocles and Argos', CQîo: 221-41. (1966), 'Some Inscriptions of Chios', BSA 61: 197-204. (1981), A History of Sparta 550-152 BC, repr. of 1968 edn. (London).

384

Bibliography

FORSTER, E. S. (1912), Isocrates Cyprian Orations:Evagoms, adNicoclem, Nicocles out Cyprii (Oxford). FOWLER, D. (1989), 'First Thoughts on Closure: Problems and Prospects', MD 22: 75-122. FRAENKEL, E. (1950), Aeschylus Agamemnon, 3 vols. (Oxford). (1957) Horace (Oxford). FRASER, P. M. (1951), 'An Inscription from Euesperides', Bulletin, societe royale d'archeologie d'Alexandrie 39:132-43. (1972), Ptolemaic Alexandria, 3 vols. (Oxford). (1996), Cities of Alexander the Great (Oxford). (2003), 'Agathon and Kassandra (IGix. i 2 4.1750)', JHS123: 26-40. and G. E. BEAN (1954), The Rhodian Peraea and Islands (Oxford). and E. MATTHEWS (1987-2000), Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, 4 vols. so far (Oxford). See also Abbreviations under LGPM. FRAZER, J. G. (1898), Pausanias' Description of Greece, 6 vols. (London). FREEMAN, E. A. (1891), History of Sicily from the Earliest Times, vol. 2 (Oxford). FREEMAN, K. (1926), The Work and Life of Solon (Cardiff). GABRIELSEN, V. (1994), Financing the Athenian Fleet: Pub lie Taxation and Social Relations (Baltimore). (2000), 'The Synoikized Polis of Rhodes', in Flensted-Jensen et al. 2000: 177-205. GALLIS, K. (1988), 'The Games in Ancient Larisa: An Example of Provincial Olympic Games', in W. T. Rashke (ed.), The Archaeology of the Ancient Olympics: The Olympics and Other Festivals in Antiquity, (Madison, Wis.), 216-35. GANTZ, T. (1993), Early Greek Myth: a Guide to Literary and Artistic Sources, 2 vols. (Baltimore). GARDINER, E. N. (1910), Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals (London). (IQÔ), Athletics of the Ancient World (Oxford). CASPAR, C. (1900), Essai de la chronologic pindarique (Brussels). GEBHARD, E. R. (2002), 'The Beginnings of Panhellenic Games at the Isthmus', in Kyrieleis 20023, 221-137. GEHRKE, H.-J. (1985), Stasis: Untersuchungen ?ji den inneren Kriegen in dengriechischen Staaten des$. und^.Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Munich). GELDER, H. van (1900), Geschichte der alien Rhodier^The Hague). GERBER, D. (ed.), (1982), Pindar's Olympian One: A Commentary (Toronto). - (ed.) (1997), .4 Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets (Leiden). - (1999), 'Pindar, Nemean 6: A Commentary', HSCPgg: 33-91. - (2002) , A Commentary on Pindar Olympian Mine, Hermes Einzelschrift 87 (Stuttgart). GIGANTE, G. E. V. (1974/5), 'Per Pindaro narratore: in margine alia IV Pitica', Annali della Facoltd diLettere, Mapoli 17: 27-41. GILDERSLEEVE, B. L. (1899), Pindar, the Olympian and Pythian Odes (New York). GOLDEN, M. (1998), Sport and Society in Ancient Greece (Cambridge).

Bibliography

385

GOLDHILL, S. (1983), 'Narrative Structure in Bacchylides 5', Eranos 81: 65-81. (1991), The Poet's Voice: Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature (Cambridge). GOMME, A. W., A. ANDREWES and K. J. DOVER (1945-81), see Abbreviations under HCT. GOUKOWSKY, P. (1978), Essai sur les engines du mythe d'Alexandre (336-270 av. J.-C.), i: les originespolitiques (Nancy). GOULD, J. (1989), Herodotus (London). GRAF, F. (ig8^),NordionischeKulte (Rome). GRAHAM A. J. (1983), Colony and Mother City in Ancient Greece, and edn. (Chicago). (1991), '"Adopted Teians": a Passage in the New Inscription of Public Imprecations from Teos', JHS in: 176-8. (1992), 'Abdera and Teos', JHSus: 44-73. GRAZIOSI, B. (2002), Inventing Homer: The Early Reception of Epic (Cambridge). GRENFELL, B. P. and A. S. HUNT (1899), 'CCXXII. List of Olympian Victors', The Oxyrhynchus Papyri 2: 85-94. GRIBBLE, D. (iQQQ),Alcibiades and Athens: a Study in Literary Presentation (Oxford). GRIFFIN, J. (1986), 'Homeric Words and Speakers', JHSio6: 36-57. GRIFFITH, M. (1978), 'Aeschylus, Sicily and Prometheus', in Dawe et al. 1978: I0 5-39(1983), Aeschylus Prometheus Bound (Cambridge). GRIFFITHS, A. (1986), '"What Leaf-fringed Legend?" A Cup by the Sotades Painter', JHS 106: 58-70. (1989), 'Was Kleomenes Mad?' in Powell 1989:51-78. GRONINGEN, B. A. van (ig6o),Pindare au banquet. Lesfragments des scolies edites avec un commentaire critique et explicatif (Leiden). GZELLA, S. (1971), 'Problem of the Fee in Greek Choral Lyric', Eos ^Q: 189202.

(1981), 'Pindar and Aegina', Eos 69: 5-19. HABICHT, C. (1996), 'Prosopographica: Kyrene', Libyan Studies 27: 7-8. (1998), Pausanias' Guide to Ancient Greece, reprint of 1985 edn. (Berkeley). HAILLET, J. (zooi),Diodore de Sicile, Bibliothequehutorique livrexi(Paris). HAINSWORTH, B. (1993), The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 5: Books 9-12 (Cambridge). HALL, E. (1989), Inventingthe Barbarian: GreekSelf-definitionthroughTragedy (Oxford). HALL, J. (1995), 'How Argive was the "Argive" Heraion? The Political and Cultic Geography of the Argive Plain, 900-400 BC', AJA 99:577-613. (1997), Ethnic Identity in Greek Antiquity (Cambridge). HALLERAN, M. (1995), Euripides Hippolytus (Warminster) . HALLIDAY, W. R. (1928), The Greek Questions of Plutarch withaMew Translation and Commentary (Oxford). HALLIWELL, S. (2002), 'Thucydides, Pericles and Tragedy', Dioniso NS i: 62-

77-

386

Bibliography

HAMILTON, R. (1974), Epinikion: General Form in the Odes of Pindar (Paris). (1989), 'Alkman and the Athenian Arkteia', Hesperia 58: 449-72. (1990), The Pindaric Dithyramb', HSCPgy. 211-22. HAMMOND, N. G. L. (1952), 'The Arrangement of the Thought in the Proem and in Other Parts of Thucydides', CQ_2: 127-41. (1967), Epirus: the Geography, the Ancient Remains, the History, and the Topography ofEpirus and Adjacent Areas (Oxford). HANSEN, M. H. (ed.) (1997), The Palis as an Urban Centre and as a Political Community, Acts of the Copenhagen Palis Centre 4 (Copenhagen). (1999), The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes, 2nd edn. (Oxford). HANSON, V. D. (1989), The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece (New York). HARRIS, H. A. (1964), Greek Athletes and Athletics (London). (1972), Sport in Greece and Rome (London). HARRISON, T. (2000), Divinity and History: the Religion of Herodotus (Oxford). HARVEY, F. D. (1985), 'Women in Thucydides', Arethusa 18: 67-90. HEATH, M. (1988), 'Receiving the K&JJ.OS: Context and performance ofEpinician',.47.Piog: 180-195. and M. LEFKOWITZ (1991), 'Epinician Performance', CP86:173-91. HEDREEN, G. (1991), 'The Cult of Achilles on the Euxine', Hesperia 60: 313—

3°HENRICHS, A. (1995), 'Why Should I Dance? Choral Self-referentiality in Greek Tragedy',Arwn 3: 56-111. HENRY, M. (1988), Menander's Courtesans and the Greek Comic Tradition (Berlin). HENRY, W. B. (2001), Review ofPfeijffer 1999, CRy. 7-9. HERMAN, G. (1987), Ritualized Friendship andthe Greek City (Cambridge). HEUBECK, A. (1989), Commentary on Homer Odyssey books ix-xii, in A. Heubeck and A. Hoekstra, A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. 2: Books ix-xvi (Oxford). HICKS, E. L. (1882), A Manual of'Greek Historical Inscriptions (Oxford). HIGBIE, C. (2003), The Lindian Chronicle and the Greek Creation of their Past (Oxford). HILL, G. F. (1940), .4 History of Cyprus, vol. i (Cambridge). HILLER VON GAERTRINGEN, FR. (1931), 'Rhodes' , RE Suppbd. 5, cols. 731840. HOBSBAWM, E. and T. RANGER (eds.) (1983), The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge). HODKINSON, S. (1989), 'Marriage, Inheritance and Demography: Perspectives upon the Success and Decline of Classical Sparta', in Powell 1989: 79-121. (2000), Property and Wealth in Classical Sparta (London). HOLLOWAY, R. R. (1991), The Archaeology of Ancient Sicily (London). HOLZHAUSER,J. (2004), 'Pindar und die Orphik: zu Fr. 133 S/M', Hermes, 132: 20-36.

Bibliography

387

HONLE, A. (1968), Olympia in der Politik der griechischm Staatenwelt von 776 bis zum Ende des^.Jahrhunderts (Diss. Tubingen). HOPE SIMPSON, R. and J. F. LAZENBY (1970), The Catalogue of Ships in Homer's Iliad (Oxford). HORDEN, P. and N. PURCELL (2000), The Corrupting Sea: A Study of Mediterranean History (Oxford). HORDERN,J. H. (2002), The Fragments of Timotheus of Miletus (Oxford). HORNBLOWER, J. (1981), Hieronymus ofCardia (Oxford). HORNBLOWER, S. (19823), Mausolus (Oxford). i), 'Thucydides, Festival, and the Ephesia Ephesia (iii. (iii. 104),', 104),', (1982b), 'Thucydides, the Panionian Panionian Festival, Historiaqr. 241-5. (1987), Thucydides (London) [reissued with addenda 1994]. (1991), Commentary on Thucydides, vol. i: Books I-III (Oxford). (1992), 'The Religious Dimension to the Peloponnesian War, Or, What Thucydides Does Not Tell Us', HSCPgq.: 169-97. (ed.) (19943), Greek Historiography (Oxford). (1994^), 'Narratology and Narrative Technique in Thucydides', in Hornblower 19943: 131-66. (1995), 'The Fourth-Century and Hellenistic Reception of Thucydides',

JHS115:47-68. (1996), Commentary on Thucydides, vol. 2: Books IV-V. 24 (Oxford). (1997), 'Thucydides and "Chalkidic"Torone (IV. 110.1),', OJAi6: 177-86. (20003), 'Personal Names and the Study of the Ancient Greek Historians', in Hornblower and Matthews 2000: 129-43. (2000^), 'Sticks, Stones and Spartans: The Sociology of Spartan Violence', in H. van Wees (ed.), War and Violence in Ancient Greece (London), 57-82. (2oooc), 'Thucydides, Xenophon and Lichas: Were the Spartans Excluded from the Olympic Games from 420-400 BC?' Phoenix $6: 212-25. (20003"), 'The Old Oligarch (Pseudo-Xenophon's Athenaion Politeid), and Thucydides. A Fourth-century Date for the Old Oligarch?', in FlenstedJensen, Nielsen, and Rubinstein 2000: 363-84. - (2001), 'Epic and Epiphanies: Herodotus and the "New Simonides" ', in Boedeker and Sider 2001: 135-47. - (20023), The Greek World 479-323 BC, ycA edn. (London). - (2002*), 'AIXAZKAAOZZAMIOZ', Chiron^: 237-46. - (2003), 'Panionios of Chios and Hermotimos of Pedasa (Hdt. 8. 104106)', in Derow and Parker 2003: 37-57. - andE. MATTHEWS (eds.) (2000), Greek Personal Monies: their Value as Evidence (Oxford). - and C. MORGAN (eds.) (forthcoming) Pindar, Festivals, Patrons andEpinikian Poetry. How, W. W. and J. WELLS (1912), Commentary on Herodotus, 2 vols. (Oxford).

388

Bibliography

HOWATSON, M. C. (ed.) (1989), The Oxford Companion to Classical Literature, new edn. (Oxford). HOWIE, J. G. (1998), 'Thucydides and Pindar: the Archaeology and Nemean /, Papers of the Leeds Latin Seminar 10: 75-130 [revised version of Klio 66 (1984), 502-32]. (forthcoming), 'The aristeia of Brasidas: Thucydides' Presentation of Events at Pylos and Amphipolis'. HUBBARD, T. K. (1985), The Pindaric Mind: a Study of Logical Structure in Early Greek Poetry (Leiden). (1986), 'Pegasus' Bridle and the Poetics of Pindar's Olympian Thirteen', HSCPgo: 27-48. (1990), 'Envy and the Invisible Roar: Pindar, Pythian n. 30', GRBS 31: 348-51(1991), 'Theban Nationalism and Poetic Apology in Pindar, Pythian 9, 76-96', Rh. Mm. 34: 22-38. (1992), 'Remaking Myth and Rewriting History: Cult Tradition in Pindar's NinthNemearf, HSCPSq.: 77-111. (2001), 'Pindar and Athens after the Persian Wars', in D. Papenfuss and V. M. Strocka (eds.), Gab es das Griechische Wunder? Griechenlandzwischen dem Ende des 6. undderMitte des^.Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Mainz) 387-97. HUMBLE, N. (2002), 'Sophrosyne Revisited: Was it Ever a Spartan Virtue?' in A. Powell and S. Hodkinson (eds.), Sparta Beyond the Mirage (London), 85-109. HUNTER, L. W. and S. A. Handford (1927), Aeneas on Siegecraft (Oxford). HUNTER, V. (1973), Thucydides the Artful Reporter (Toronto). HUTCHINSON, G. O. (2001), Greek Lyric Poetry: A Commentary on Selected Larger Pieces (Oxford). HUXLEY, G. L. (1962), Early Sparta (London). (:975)> Pindar's Vision of the Past (Belfast). (1984), 'Teos in Pindar', in GRBMio [= Sterling Dow Studies'], 149-52. ILLIG, L. (1932), ûr Form der pindarischen Erzdhlung: Interpretationen und Untersuchungen (Berlin). IMMERWAHR, H. (1966), Form and Thought in Herodotus (Cleveland). INSTONE, S.J. (1989), 'Pindar's Enigmatic Second Nemean', BIGS 36:109-16. (1993), 'Myth and History in Pindar', review of Cole 1992, CR 43: 233!!. (1996), Pindar: Selected Odes, Edited with an Introduction, Translation and Commentary (Warminster). IRIGOIN, J. (1952), Histoire du texte dePindare (Paris). JACOBY, F. (1913), 'Herodotos', AESuppl. 2, cols. 205-520. JAEGER, W. (iQ^.j),Paideia: the Ideals of Greek Culture, 3 vols. (Oxford). JAMESON, M. H., C. N. RUNNELS, and T. H. VAN ANDEL (1994), A Greek Countryside: the Southern Argo lid from Prehistory to the Present Day (Stanford, Calif). JANKO, R. (1984), ' Forgetfulness in the Golden Tablets of Memory', G*CL34: 89-100.

Bibliography

389

(1992), The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. 4: Books 13-16 (Cambridge). JEBB, R. C. (1906), Sophocles, the Plays and Fragments Part III: The Antigone (Cambridge). JEFFERY, L. H. (1976), Archaic Greece: the City-States c. 700-500 BC(London). JEFFERY, L. H., rev. A. W.Johnston: see Abbreviations under LSAG2. JOHNSON, D. M. (2001), 'Herodotus' Storytelling Speeches: Socles (5. 92), and Leotychides (6. 86)', Classical Journal 97: 1-26. JONES, A. H. M. (1967), Sparta (Oxford). JONES, C. P. (1999), Kinship Diplomacy in the Ancient World (Cambridge, Mass.). JONG, I. de (1987), Narrators and Focaliyrs: The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad (Amsterdam). JORDAN, B. (2000), 'The Sicilian Expedition was a Potemkin fleet' CQ$o: 6.3-79KALLET, L. (1998), 'Accounting for Culture in Fifth-century Athens', in Boedeker and Raaflaub 1998: 43-58. (1999), 'The Diseased Body Politic, Athenian Public Finance, and the Massacre atMykalessos (Thucydides 7. 27-29)', AJPizo: 223-44. (2001), Money and the Corrosion of Power in Thucydides: the Sicilian Expedition and its Aftermath (Berkeley). KELLY, T. (1976), A History ofArgos to 500 BC (Minneapolis). KIRCHNER, J. (1901-1903), ProsopographiaAttica, 2 vols. (Berlin). KIRK, G. S. (1985), The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. i: Books 1-4 (Cambridge). KIRKWOOD, G. (1982), Selectionsfrom Pindar (Chico, Calif.). KNOEPFLER, D. (2000), 'Oropodoros: Anthroponymy, Geography, History', in Hornblower and Matthews 2000: 81-98. KNOX, B. (1979), Word and Action: Essays on the Ancient Theater (Baltimore and London). KOHL, W. (1977), Die Redetrias vor der siîlischen Expedition (Thukydides 6. 9-23), (Meisenheim am Glan). KOHNKEN, A. (1971), Die Funktion des Mythos bei Pindar: Interpretationen ?ji sechs Pindargedichten (Berlin). (1976), 'Gebrauch und Funktion des Litotes bei Pindar', Glotta^: 62-7. KOWALZIG, B. (forthcoming), Singing for the Gods. KRAAY, C. M. (1976), Archaic and Classical Greek Coins (London). KRAFT, K. (1971), Der 'rationale'Alexander (Kallmunz (iber Regensburg). KRITZAS, C. (1992), 'Aspects de la vie politique et economique d'Argos au Ve siecle avantj.- C.' in Pierart 1992: 231-40. KRUMMEN, E. (iQQo),PjirsosHymnon:FestlicheGegenwartundmythKch-rituelle Tradition ah Voraussetzung einer Pindarinterpretation (Isthmie 4, Pythie 5, Olympic i und 3), (Berlin). KURKE, L. (1991), The Traffic in Praise: Pindar and the Poetics of Social Economy (Ithaca, NY, and London). (1993), 'The Economy of Kudos', in Dougherty and Kurke 1993:131-63.

39 o

Bibliography

KURKE, L. (1998), Coins,Bodies, Games and Gold. The Politics of Meaning in Archaic Greece (Princeton). KYRIELEIS, H. (ed.) (20020), Olympia 1875-2000: is^Jahre deutsche Ausgrabungm (Mainz). (2002^), 'Zu den Anfangen des Heiligtums von Olympia', in Kyrieleis 20020, 213-20. LAIDLAW, W. (1933), A History ofDelos (Oxford). LAMB, W. (1914), Clio Enthroned (Cambridge). LANE Fox, R. (1980), The Search/or Alexander (London). LARMOUR, D. H. J. (1999), Stage and Stadium. Drama and Athletics in Ancient Greece (Hildesheim). LARONDE, A. (1987), Gyrene et la Libyehellenistique (funs). LARSEN, J. A. O. (1968), Greek Federal States (Oxford). LATEINER, D. (1989), The Historical Method of Herodotus (Toronto). LATTIMORE, R. (1962), Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs (Urbana, 111.). LAVECCHIA, S. (2000), Pindari dithyramb orumfragmenta (Rome and Pisa). LEFEVRE, P. (1998), L'AmphwtioniepyUo-delphique: histoire et institutions (Paris). LEFKOWITZ, M. (1976), The Victory Ode (Park Ridge, NJ). (1981), The Lives of the Greek Poets (London). (1991), First-person Fictions: Pindar's Poetic T (Oxford). LEHNUS, L. (1989), Pindaro Olympiche (Milan). LEPPIN, H. (1999), Thukydides unddie Verfassung der Palis: ein Beitrag zurpolitischen Ideengeschichte des^.Jahrhunderts v. Chr. (Berlin). LEVI, P. (1971), Pausanias' Guide to Greece, 2 vols. (Harmondsworth). LEWIS, D. M. (1977), Sparta and Persia (Leiden). (1984), 'Postscript 1984', in reissue of A. R. Burn, Persia and the Greeks (London, 1984), 587-609. (1990), 'The Synedrion of the Boeotian Alliance', Teiresias Suppl. 3: 71-

3(1992), 'Mainland Greece, 479-451 B. C.', in D. M. Lewis, J. Boardman, J. K. Davies, and M. Ostwald (eds.), CAH\ vol 5: The Fifth Century B.C., (Cambridge), 96-120. (1997), Selected Papers, ed. P. J. Rhodes (Cambridge). LIGHTFOOT, J. (1999), Parthenius ofNicaea: the Poetical Fragments and the EpomKci

nadrjâra (Oxford). LINTOTT, A. W. (1982), Violence, Civil Strife and Revolution in the Classical City (London). - (2000), 'Aristotle and the Mixed Constitution', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 152-66. LLOYD, G. E. R. (1966), Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought (Cambridge). LLOYD, M. (1993), The Agon in Euripides (Oxford). LLOYD-JONES, H. (1983), [originally 1971] The Justice of £eus (Berkeley).

Bibliography

391

(1990), Greek Epic, Lyric and Tragedy: the Academic Papers of Sir Hugh LloydJones (Oxford). LOBEL, E. (1961), Oxyrhynchus Papyri 26. LOMAS, K. (2000), 'The Polls in Italy: Ethnicity, Colonization, and Citizenship in the Western Mediterranean', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 167-85. LONG, A. A. (1968), Language and Thought in Sophocles: A Study of Abstract Nouns and Poetic Technique (London). LORAUX, N. (1985), 'La cite, 1'historien, les femmes', Pallas32: 7-39. (1993), (tr. C. Levine), The Children of Athena: Athenian Ideas about Citizenship and the Division between the Sexes (Princeton). Low, P. (2002), 'Cavalry Identity and Democratic Ideology in Early FourthCentury Athens', PCPhS 48:102-22. LURAGHI, N. (1997), 'Un mantis eleo nella Siracusa di lerone: Agesia di Siracusa, lamide di Stinfalo', Klio 79: 69-86. LUSCHNAT, O. (1942), Die Feldherrnreden im Geschichtswerk des Thukydides, Philologus Suppl. 34. MA, J. (2000), 'Fighting Poleis of the Hellenistic World', in van Wees 2000: 337-76MACAN,R. W. (1895), Herodotus Books IV-VI, vol. i (London). (1908), Herodotus Books VII—VIII—IX, vol. i (London). McKECHNiE, P. (1989), Outsiders in the Greek Cities in the Fourth Century BC (London). MACLEOD, C. W. (1983), Collected Essays (Oxford). MACLACHLAN,B. (1993), The Age oj'Grace. Charis in Early GreekPoetry (Princeton). MADER, W. (iQQo),DiePsaumK-OdenPindars (0.4. undO. 5): ein Kommentar (Innsbruck). MAEHLER, H. (iQ82),DieLiederdesBakchylides. i. Die Siegesiieder, 2 vols. (Leiden). (1997), DieLieder des Bakchylides. 2. Die Dithyramb en undFragmente (Leiden). MAIER, F.-G. (1994), 'Cyprus and Phoenicia' in D. M. Lewis, J. Boardman, S. Hornblower and M. Ostwald (eds.), CAR"1, vol. 6: The Fourth Century EC (Cambridge), 297-336. MALKIN, I. (1994), Myth and Territory in the Spartan Mediterranean (Cambridge). (1998) The Returns of Odysseus: Colonization and Ethnicity (Berkeley). (ed.) (2001), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity (Cambridge, Mass.). (2003),' "Tradition" in Herodotus: the Foundation of Gyrene', in Derow and Parker 2003: 153-170. MANN, C. (2001), Athlet und Palis im archaischen und friihklassuchen Griechenland (Gottingen). MARTIN, R. (1981), Tacitus (London). MASSON, O. (1990), 'Quelques anthroponymes rares chez Thucydide', Onomastica Graeca Selecta (Paris), 321-30. MASTRONARDE, D. (1994), Euripides, Phoenissae (Cambridge). MAURER, K. (1995), Interpolation in Thucydides (Leiden).

392

Bibliography

MAUSS, M. (1921), 'Une forme ancienne de contrat chez les Thraces' AEG34: 388^,7. (1990), The Gift: the Form and Reasonfor Exchange in Archaic Societies, tr. W. D. Halls with foreword by Mary Douglas (London). MAYER, R. (2003), 'A Lost Allusion Recovered: Tacitus, Histories 3. 37. i and Homer, Iliad IQ. 301-2', CQ$y. 313-15. MEIGGS, R. (1972), The Athenian Empire (Oxford). and A. ANDREWES (1951), Sources for Greek History Between the Persian and Peloponnesian Wars, 2nd edn. (Oxford). and D. LEWIS (1969),: see Abbreviations under ML. MELLOR, R. and L. TRITLE (eds.) (1999), Text and Tradition: Studies in Greek History and Historiography in Honor of Mortimer Chambers (Claremont, Calif). MERANTE, V. (1967), 'Pentatlo e la fondazione di Lipari', Kokalos 13: 88-104. MERKELBACH, R. and M. L. West (1967), Fragmenta Hesiodea (Oxford). MESS, A. VON (1901), 'Der Typhonmythus bei Aischylos', Rh. Mus. 56: 167-74. MEULI, K. (1941), 'Die Ursprung der Olympischen Spiele', DieAntike 17: 189— 208 = Ges. Schriftenz. 881-906. (1975), 'Griechische Opferbrauche', Gesammelte Schriften 2 (Basel), 9071018, orig. 1946. MILLAR, F. G. B. (1987), 'Polybius Between Greece and Rome', in J. T. A. Koumoulides (ed.), Greek Connexions: Essays on Culture and Diplomacy (South Bend), 1-18 . MILLER, S. (1990), Nemea: a Guide to the Site and Museum (Berkeley). (2000), 'Naked Democracy', in Flensted-Jensen, Nielsen, and Rubinstein 2000: 277- 196. (2002), 'The Shrine of Opheltes and the Earliest Stadium at Nemea', in Kyrieleis 2002*2: 239-250. MILLETT, P. (1998), 'The Rhetoric of Reciprocity in Classical Athens', in C. Gill, N. Postlethwaite and R. Seaford (eds.), Reciprocity in Ancient Greece (Oxford), 227-53. MITCHELL, B. (2000), 'Gyrene: Typical or Atypical?', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 82-102. MITCHELL, L. G. (1997), Greeks Bearing Gifts: the Public Use of Private Relationships in the Greek World, 435-323 BC (Cambridge). MOLYNEUX, J. H. (1992), Simonides, a Historical Study (Wauconda, 111.). MOMIGLIANO, A. (1975), 'Note sulla storia di Rodi, I, Atene Lindia e 1'unita di Rodi', Quinto Contribute alia storia degli studi classici e del mondo antico (Rome), 511-14. MORETTI, L. (1953), Iscrizioni agonistiehegreche (Rome). (1957), Olympionikai, i vincitorinegli antiehi agoniofympici (Rome). (1970), 'Supplemento al catalogo degli Olympionikai', Klio 52:55-60. (1987), 'Nuovo supplemento al catalogo degli Olympionikai', Miscellanea greca e romana 12: 67-91.

Bibliography

393

MORGAN, C . (i ggo) , Athletes and Oracles: the Transformation of Delphi and Olympia in the Eighth Century BC (Cambridge). - (1999), Cultural Subzones in Early Iron Age and Archaic Arkadia', in Nielsen and Roy 1999: 382-456. - (2002), 'The Origins of the Isthmian Festival: Points of Comparison and Contrast', in Kyrieleis 2002*2: 251-71. - (2003) , Early Greek States Beyond the Palis (London) . MORRISSEY, E. J. (1978), 'Victors in the Prytaneion Decree (/Gi 2 77)', GRBS 19: 121-5. MOSSHAMMER, A. A. (1982), 'The Date of the First Pythiad- Again', GRBS 23: 15–30. MOSSMAN,J. (1995), Wild Justice: A Study of Euripides' Hecuba (Oxford). MOST, G. (1985), The Measures of Praise: Structure and Function in Pindar's Second Pythian and Seventh Nemean Odes (Gottingen). MOUSTAKA, A. (1997), 'TPIKKAAQN A0AA', in K. A. Sheedy and Ch. Papageorgiadou-Barnis (eds.), Numismatic Archaeology, Archaeological Numismatics. Proceedings of an International Conference held to Honour Dr. M. Oeconomides in Athens 1995, (Oxford), 86-95. MULLEN, W. (1982), Choreia: Pindar and Dance (Princeton). MtiLLER, C. (1839), Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum, vol. 3 (Paris). MURRAY, O. (1986), 'Greek Historians', in J. Boardman, J. Griffin and O. Murray (eds.), The Oxford History of the Classical World (Oxford), 186-203. - (1997), 'Rationality and the Greek City: the Evidence from Kamarina', in Hansen 1997: 493-504. NAGY, G. (1990), Pindar's Homer Baltimore). NEER, R. T. (2002), Style and Politics in Athenian Vase-painting: the Craft of Democracy, ca. 530-460 BC (Cambridge). NENCI, G. (1994) , Erodoto: Le Storie Libra V: La Rivolta della Ionia (Milan) . NIELSEN, T. H. (2000), 'Epiknemidian, Hypoknemidian, and Opountian Lokrians. Reflections on the Political Organisation of East Lokris in the Classical Period', in Flensted-Jensen 20003: 91-120. - (forthcoming), 'East Lokris', in M. H. Hansen and T. H. Nielsen, Inventory ofPoleis (Oxford). See above, Preface and Acknowledgements. NIELSEN, T. H. and J. ROY (eds.) (1999) , Defining Ancient Arkadia. Acts of the CopenhagenPolu Centre 6 (Copenhagen). NIESE, B. (1907), 'Herodot-Studien, besonders zur Spartanischen Geschichte', Hermes 42: 419-40. NIJF, O . VAN (2001) , 'Local Heroes: Athletics, Festivals and Elite Self-fashioning in the Roman East', in S. Goldhill (ed.), Being Greek Under Rome: Cultural Identity, the Second Sophistic and the Development of Empire (Oxford), 306-34. NILSSON, M. ( 1906), Griechische Feste von religioser Bedeutung (Leipzig). NISETICH, F. J. (1988), 'Immortality in Akragas', CP83: 1-19. NOCK, A. D. (1933), Conversion (Oxford).

394

Bibliography

NORTH, H. (1966), Sophrosyne (Ithaca, NY). NORWOOD, G. (1945), Pindar (Berkeley). NUSSBAUM, M. (1986), The Fragility of Goodness (Cambridge). OSBORNE, R. (19933), 'Competitive Festivals at Athens: a Contextfor Dramatic Festivals at Athens', in A. Sommerstein and others (eds.), Tragedy, Comedy and the Palis (Bari), 21-38. (1993^), 'Women and Sacrifice in Classical Greece', G*CL43: 392~4°5 [reprinted in Buxton 2000: 294-313]. (1994), 'Archaeology, the Salaminioi, and the Politics of Sacred Space in Archaic Attica', in S. E. Alcock and R. Osborne 1994: 143-60. (1996), Greece in the Making 1200-479 BC (London). (1998), 'Early Greek Colonization', in N. Fisher and H. van Wees (eds.), Archaic Greece: New Approaches and New Evidence (London), 251-69. (1999), 'Archaeology and the Athenian Empire', TAPA 129: 319-32. OSBORNE, R. and S. HORNBLOWER (eds.) (1994), Ritual, Finance, Polities:Athenian Democratic Accounts Presented to David Lewis (Oxford). OSTWALD, M. (1965), 'Pindar, Momos and Heracles', HSCP&y. 109-38 . (1969), Momos andthe Beginnings of the Athenian Democracy (Oxford). PAGE, D. L. (1953), Corinna (London). (1981), Further Greek Epigrams (Cambridge). PARKE, H. W. (1967), The Oracks ofêus (Oxford). PARKER, R. (1983), Miasma: PollutionandPuri/KationinEarlyGreekReligion (Oxford). (1987), 'Myths of Early Athens', inj. Bremmer (ed.), Interpretations of Greek Mythology, (London), 187-214. (1989), 'Spartan Religion', in Powell 1989: 142-72. (1994), 'Athenian Religion Abroad', in Osborne and Hornblower 1994: 339-46(1995), 'Early Orphism', in A. Powell (ed.), The Greek World, (London), 483-510. (1996), Athenian Religion: A History (Oxford). (1997), Cleomenes on the Acropolis, Inaugural Lecture (Oxford). (2000), Theophoric names and the Study of Greek Religion', in Hornblower and Matthews 2000: 53-79. PARRY, A. (1981), Logos and Ergon in Thucydides (New York). (1989), The Language of Achilles and Other Papers (Oxford). PARSONS,P.J. (1992),'3965: Simonides,Elegies', TheOxyrhynchusPapyri59:4-50. PAUL, G. M. (1984), A Historical Commentary on Sallust's Bellumjugurthinum (Liverpool). PAVESE, C. (1967), 'The New Heracles Poem of Pindar', HSCPjs: 47-88. FELLING, C. (2002), 'Speech and Action: Herodotus' Debate on the Constitutions', PCPhS 48: 123-58. PEMBROKE, S. G. (1970) 'Locres et Tarente: le role des femmes dans la fondation de deux colonies grecques', Annaks 25: 1240-70.

Bibliography

395

PERLMAN, P. (1989), 'The Calendrical Position of the Nemean Games', Athenaeum 77:57-90. (2000), City and Sanctuary in Ancient Greece: the Theorodokia in the Peloponnese (Gottingen). PERYSINAKIS, I. N. (1990), 'The Athlete as Warrior: Pindar's P. 9. 97-103 and P-I0- 55-59', BIGSyj: 43-9. PFEIJFFER, I. L. (19953), 'Pindar's Eighth Pythian: the Relevance of the Historical Setting', Hermes 123: 156-65. (1995^), 'The Date of Pindar's FifthNemean and Bacchylides' Thirteenth Ode', G*CL45: 318-32.

(1999), Three Aeginetan Odes of Pindar: A Commentary onNemean V, Nemean III and Pythian VIII (Leiden). PICCIRILLI, L. (1993), and others, Plutarco: Le vite diNicia e di Crasso (Verona). PIERART, M. (ed.) (1992), PolydipsionArgos, BCHSuppl. 22 (Paris). (2003), 'The Common Oracle of the Milesians and the Argives (Hdt. 6. 19 and 77)', in Derow and Parker 2003: 275-96. POLIAKOFF, M. B. (1987), Combat Sports in the Ancient World: Competition, Violence and Culture (New Haven). POLIGNAC, F. de (1995), Cults, Territory and the Origins of the Greek City-State (Chicago). POLINSKAYA, I. (2002), 'A New Inscribed Funerary Monument from Aigina', Hesperia 71: 399-413. POPPER, K. (1945), The Open Society and Its Enemies, vol.i: The Spell of Plato (London). PORALLA, P. (1913), Prosopographie der Lakedaimonier bis auf die êit Alexanders des Grossen (Diss. Breslau). POUILLOUX,J. (iQji),Nouveau choix d'inscriptionsgrecques (Paris). (1994), 'Theogenes de Thasos . . . quarante ans apres' BCH 118: 199— 206.

and F. SALVIAT, 'Lichas, Lacedemonien, archonte a Thasos et le livre VIII de Thucydide', CRAIiQ&y. 376-403. POWELL, A. (ed.) (1989), Classical Sparta: the Techniques behind her Success (London). PREAUX, C. (1978), Le Monde hellenistique, 2 vols. (Paris). PRELLER, L. (1838), Polemonisperiegetaefragmenta (Leipzig). (1894-1921), GriechischeMythologie, 4th edn., rev. C. Robert (Berlin). PRICE, J.J. (2001), Thucydides and Internal War (Cambridge). PRICE, M. (1974), Coins of the Macedonians (London). PRITCHETT, W. K. (1971-90), The Greek State at War, 5 vols. (Berkeley). (1975), Dionysius qfHalicarnassus: On Thucydides (Berkeley). (1995), Thucydides' Pentekontaetia and Other Essays (Amsterdam). PRIVITERA, G. (1988), 'Pindaro, Mem. Ill 1-5, e 1'acqua di Egina', QUCC 29: 63-70.

3g6

Bibliography

PULLEYN, S. (1996), Prayer in Greek Religion (Oxford). PULTNEY, J. W. (1987), 'Non-concinnity in Pindar', AJP108: i—8. RAAFLAUB, K. (1985), Die EntdeckungderFreiheit. Vestigia 37 (Munich). RACE, W. H. (19820), The ClassicalPriamelfrom Homer to Boethius (Leiden). (igSai), 'How Greek Poems Begin', TCSsg, 1982:13-38. (1983), Expressions and Pindaric TrowaAiV, TAPA113: 113: 9595(1983),'Negative 'Negative Expressions and Pindaric , TAPA 122.

(1986), Pindar (Boston, Mass.). (1987), 'Pindaric Encomium and Isokrates' Evagoras', TAPA 117: 121-55. (1990), Style and Rhetoric in Pindar's Odes (Atlanta). (1997), Pindar, 2 vols., Loeb edn. (Cambridge, Mass.). RADICKE, J. (1995), Die Rede des Demosthenes fur die Freiheit der Rhodier (Stuttgart and Leipzig). RAWLINGS III, H. R. (1981), The Structure of Thucydides'History (Princeton). RAWSON, E. (1969), The Spartan Tradition in European Thought (Oxford). REDFIELD, J. R. (2003), The Locrian Maidens: Love and Death in Greek Italy (Princeton). REHM , A. (1914), Milet III: Das Delphinion (B erlin). RENGAKOS, A. (2000), 'Zu Bakchylides' Erzahltechnik', in A. Bagordo and B. Zimmermann (eds.), Bakchylides 100 Jahre nach seiner Wiederentdeckung, (Munich), 101-12. RHODES, P. J. (1986), 'Political Activity in Classical Athens', JHS106:132-44. (1988), Thucydides Hutory //(Warminster). (1994), Thucydides History ///(Warminster). (2000), 'Oligarchs in Athens', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 119-36. RICHARDSON, N.J. (1974), The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford). (1985) 'Pindar and Later Literary Criticism in Antiquity', Papers of the Liverpool Latin Seminary. 383-401. (1993), The Iliad: A Commentary Vol. VI, Books 21-24 (Cambridge). RICHARDSON, S. (1990), The Homeric Narrator (Nashville). RINGWOOD ARNOLD, I. C. (1927), Agonistic Features of Local Greek Festivals Chiefly from InscriptionalEvidence (Diss. Columbia). ROBERT, L. (1969-90), OperaMinora Selecta, 7 vols. (Amsterdam). (1973), 'Les inscriptions', in P. Bernard (ed.), Fouilles d'AiKhanoum i (Paris), 207-37. -(1987), Documents d'Asie Mineure (Paris). ROBERTS, D. H., F. M. DUNN, and D. FOWLER (eds.) (1997), Classical Closure (Princeton). ROBBINS, E. (1997), 'Public Poetry', in Gerber 2000: 223-87. ROESCH, P. (1965), Thespies et la confederation beotienne (Paris). ROOD, T. (1998), Thucydides: Narrative and Explanation (Oxford). ROSE, P. W. (1982), 'Towards a Dialectical Hermeneutic of Pindar's Pythian X',#«&w 9:47-73.

Bibliography

397

(1992), Sons of the Gods, Children of Earth: Ideobgy and Literary Form in Ancient Greece (Ithaca, NY, and London). ROSENMEYER, T. G. (1969), The Green Cabinet: Theocritus and the European Pastoral Lyric (Berkeley). ROY, J. (1999), 'The Economies of Arkadia', in Nielsen and Roy 1999: 321— 81. RUBINCAM, C. A. (2001), 'The Topography of Pylos and Sphakteria and Thucydides' Measurements of Distance', JHSizr. 77-90. RuDHARDT, J. (2002), Themis (Paris). RUSSELL, D. A. (1964), 'Longinus' On the Sublime (Oxford). (1981), Criticism in Antiquity (London). and M. WINTERBOTTOM (eds.) (1972), Ancient Literary Criticism: the Pincipal Texts in Mew Translations (Oxford). RUSTEN, J. S. (1986), 'Structure, Style and Sense in Interpreting Thucydides: the Soldier's Choice (Thuc. 2. 42. 4),', HSCPgo: 49-76. (1989), Thucydides, the Peloponnesian WarBookll (Cambridge). RUTHERFORD, I. (1997), 'Odes and Ends: Closure in Greek Lyric' in Roberts, Dunn, and Fowler 1997: 43-61. (2001), Pindar's Paeans: A Reading of the Fragments with a Survey of the Genre (Oxford). and J. IRVINE (1988), 'The Race in the Athenian Oschophoria and an Oschophoricon in Pindar', ^PE"j2\ 43-51. RUTHERFORD, R. B. (1994), 'Learning from History: Categories and CaseHistories', in Osborne and Hornblower 1994: 53-68. (1995), TheArt of Plato (London). RUTISHAUSER, B. (2001), 'Island Strategies: the Case of Tenedos', REA 103: 197-204. RUTTER, N. K. (1989), Thucydides Viand VILA Companion to the Penguin Translation (Bristol). (20003), 'Coin Types and Identity: Greek Cities in Sicily', in C. Smith and J. Serrati (eds.), Sicily from Aeneas to Augustus: New Approaches in Archaeology and History (Edinburgh), 73-83. (2000^), 'Syracusan Democracy: 'Most Like the Athenian'?', in Brock and Hodkinson 2000: 137-51. SAGE, M. M. (1996), Warfare in Ancient Greece: a Sourcebook (London). STE CROIX, G. E. M. de (1972), The Origins of the Peloponnesian War (London). (1981), The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World (London). (forthcoming 2004), Athenian Democratic Origins and Other Essays in Early Greek History, ed. R. Parker, D. Harvey and P. Cartledge (Oxford). SALMON, J. (1984), Wealthy Corinth: a History of the City to 338 BC (Oxford). SALMON, P. (1978), Etude sur la Confederation beotienne (447/6-386), (Brussels). SANCHEZ, P. (2001), L'Amphictwnie des Pyles et de Delphes: recherches sur son role hutorique, des engines au lie siecle de notre ere, Historia Einzelschrift 148 (Stuttgart).

39 8

Bibliography

SANDGREN, F. (1972), 'Die Funktion der Reden in Pindars Pythia IV, Eranos 70: 12—22.

SANSONE, D. (1988), Greek Athletics andthe Origins of Sport (Berkeley and London). SCANLON, T. (2002), Eros and Greek Athletics (New York and Oxford). SCHACHTER, A. (1981- 1994), The Cults ofBoiotia, 4 vols. (London). SCHACHTER, A. (1994), 'The Politics of Dedication: Two Athenian Dedications at the Sanctuary of Apollo Ptoieus in Boeotia', in Osborne and Hornblower 1994: 291-306. SCHADEWALDT, W. (1928), Die Aufbau des pindamchen Epinikion (Halle an der Salle). (1929), Die Geschichtschreibungdes Thukydides (Berlin). SCRAPS, D. (1977), 'The Woman Least Mentioned: Etiquette and Women's Names', CQj2j: 323-30. SCHMID, U. (1964), Die Priamel der Werte im Griechischen. Von Homer bis Paulus (Wiesbaden). SCHMIDT, D. (1999), 'An Unusual Victory List from Keos: 7GXII, 5, 608 and the Dating of Bakchylides', J//5ng: 67-85 . SCHRADER, C. (1998), Concordantia Thucydidea, 4 vols. (Hildesheim). SCHROEDER, O. (1922), PindarsPythien (Leipzig). SCHWARTZ, E. (1887-91), Scholia in Euripidem, 2 vols. (Berlin). (1959), Griechuche Geschichtschreiber (Leipzig). SCOTT-KILVERT, I. (1960), Plutarch: the Rise and Fall of Athens: Mine Greek lives by Plutarch (Harmondsworth). SCULLION, S. (2003), 'Euripides and Macedon, or the Silence of the Frogs', CQ^ 53: 389-4°°SEAGER, R. (1967), 'Alcibiades and the Charge of Aiming at Tyranny', Historia 16: 6-18. SEGAL, C. (1985), 'Messages to the Underworld: An Aspect of Poetic Immortalization in Pindar', AJP106:199-212. (1986), Pindar'sMythmaking: the Fourth Pythian Ode (Princeton). (1989),' Choral Lyric in the Fifth Century', in P. E. Easterling and B. M. W. Knox (eds.), The Cambridge History of Classical Literature, vol. i: Greek Literature (Cambridge) [orig. edn. 1985 with different pagination], 181-203 . (1995), 'Spectator and Listener', in J.-P. Vernant (ed.), The Greeks (Chicago and London), 184-217. SHAPIRO, H. A. (1998), 'Autochthony and the Visual Arts in Fifth-century Athens', in Boedeker and Raaflaub 1998: 127-51. SHERWIN-WHITE, S. M. (1978), Ancient Cos: an Historical Study from the Dorian Conquest to the Imperial Period (Gottingen). SHIPLEY, D. R. (1997), Plutarch's Life ofAgesilaos: Response to Sources in the Presentation of Character (Oxford). SHIPLEY, G. (1986), A History of Samos 800-18y BC (Oxford). (2000), The Greek World after Alexander (London).

Bibliography

399

SILK, M. (1974), Interaction in Poetic Imagery (Cambridge). (2000), Aristophanes and the Definition of Comedy (Oxford). (2001), 'Pindar Meets Plato: Theory, Language, Value and the Classics', in S. J. Harrison (ed.), Texts, Ideas and the Classics: Scholarship, Theory and Classical Literature, (Oxford), 26-45. SLATER, W. J. (1969), Lexicon to Pindar (Berlin). SMARCZYK, B. (1990) Untersuchungen zjir Religionspolitik undpolitischen Propaganda Athens im delis ch-attischen Seebund (Munich). SMITH, C. F. (1900), 'Traces of Epic Usage in Thucydides', TAPA 31: 6981. SMITH, R. R. R. (1990), 'Late Roman Philosopher Portraits from Aphrodisias', JRS 80:127-55. SOMMERSTEIN, A. (1982), Aristophmes Clouds (Warminster). (iQ&8), Aristophanes Knights (Warminster). (1989), Aeschylus Eumenides (Cambridge). SPENCE, I. (1993), The Cavalry of Classical Greece (Oxford). STADTER, P. A. (1989), .4 Commentary on Plutarch's Pericles (Chapel Hill, NC). STAFFORD, E. (2000), Worshipping Virtues: Personification and the Divine in Ancient Greece (London). STAHL, H.-P. (2002), 'Literarisches Detail und historischer Krisenpunkt im Geschichtswerk des Thukydides: die Sizilische Expedition', Rh. Mm. 145: 68-107. (2003), Thucydides:Man's Place in History (London). STAHLIN, F. (iQ2^),Dashellenische Thessalien (Stuttgart). STEINER, D. (1986), The Crown of Song: Metaphor in Pindar (London). (1993), 'Pindar's Oggetti Parlanti', HSCPQ$: 159-80. (2001), 'Slander's Bite: Memean 7. 102-5 anc lthe Language of Invective',

JHS 121:154-8. STROUD, R. (1994), 'Thucydides and Corinth', Chiron 24: 267-302. SUSEMIHL, F. (1891-2), Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur in der Akxandrineryit (Leipzig). SWEET, W. (1987), Sport and Recreation in Ancient Greece (Oxford). SYME, R. (1958), Tacitus (Oxford). (1962), 'Thucydides', PEA 48: 39-56. [= Roman Papers 6 (1991) 72-87.] TAPLIN, O. (1992), Homeric Soundings (Oxford). TAUSEND, K. (1992), Amphiktyonie und Symmachie, Historia Einylschrift 73 (Stuttgart). THEUNISSEN, M. (2002), Pindar: Menschenlos und Wende derêit(MunicK). THOMAS, R. (1989), Oral Tradition and Written Record in Classical Athens (Cambridge). (1992), Literacy and Orality in Ancient Greece (Cambridge). (1995), 'The Place of the Poet in Archaic Society', in A. Powell (ed.), The Greek World (London), 105-29.

400

Bibliography

THOMAS, R. (2000), Herodotus in Context (Cambridge). (2003), 'Epideixis and Written Publication in the Late Fifth and Early Fourth Centuries', in H. Yunis (ed.), Written Texts and the Rise of Literate Culture in Ancient Greece (Cambridge), 162-88. THUMMER, E. (1957),DieReligiositdtPindars (Innsbruck). TOD, M. N. and A. J. B. WACE (1906), A Catalogue of the Sparta Museum (Oxford). TOMLINSON, R. A. (1972), Argos and the Argolid (London). TOMPKINS, D. P. (1972), 'Stylistic Characterization in Thucydides; Nicias and Alcibiades', YCSzz: 181-214. TOOHEY, P. (1987), 'Shades of Meaning in Pindar, Pythian 8. 95-7', QUCC 26: 73-87. TREVETT, J. (1990), 'History in [Demosthenes] 59', (7(^407-20. TUPLIN, C. J. (1985), 'Imperial Tyranny: Some Reflections on a Classical Greek Political Metaphor', in P. Cartledge and F. D. Harvey (eds.), CRUX: Essays Presented to G. E. M. de Ste Croix on his j^th Birthday (Exeter), 348-75. USHER, S. (1985), Dionysius of Haliearnassus Critical Essays, Loeb edn., vol. 2 (Cambridge, Mass.). VANDERPOOL, E. (1973), 'Ostracism at Athens', Semple Lectures, Second Series (Cincinnati), 217-70. VERDENIUS, W. J. (1987), Commentaries on Pindar, vol. i: Olympian Odes3, 7,12,14 (Leiden). VERSNEL, H. (1985-6), 'Apollo and Mars One Hundred Years after Roscher', Visible Religion 4-5: 134-72. (1990), 'What's Sauce for the Goose is Sauce for the Gander: Myth and Ritual, Old and New', in Edmunds 1990: 23-90 [Rev. version in Versnel, Transition and Reversal in Myth and Ritual (Leiden, 1993), 15-88]. VIDAL-NAOJJET, P. (1986), The Black Hunter (Baltimore). WADE-GERY, H. T. (1958), Essays in Greek History (Oxford). (10,66), 'The "Rhianos-Hypothesis"', in E. Badian (ed.), Ancient Society and Institutions: Studies Presented to V. Ehrenberg on his j^th Birthday (Oxford), 289-302. WALBANK, F. W. (1957-79), Commentary onPolybius, 3 vols. (Oxford). WALBANK, M. (1978), Athenian Proxenies of the Fifth Century BC (Toronto and Sarasota). WALKER, A. D. (1993), 'Enargeia and the Spectator in Greek Historiography', TAPA 123: 353-77 WALLACE-HADRILL, A. F. (1982), 'Civilis Princeps: Between Citizen and King', JAS72: 32-48. WALTER, U. (1993), An derPalis teilhaben. Bilrgerstaat und ûgehorigkeit im archaischen Griechenland, HistoriaEinzelschriften 82. WANKEL, H. (1976), Demosthenes Rede fur Ktesiphon fiber den Kranz (Heidelberg). WEES, H. van (ed.) (2000), War and Violence in Ancient Greece (London).

Bibliography

401

WEIDEN, M. J. H. van der (1991), The Dithyrambs of Pindar; Introduction, Text and Commentary (Amsterdam). WEST, M. L. (1966), Hesiod. Theogony (Oxford). (1978), Hesiod, Works and Days, Edited with Prolegomena and Commentary (Oxford). (1983), The Orphic Poems (Oxford). (1985), 'Ion of Chios', BIGS 32: 71-8. (1997), The East Face of Helicon: West Asiatic Elements in Greek Poetry and Myth (Oxford). WEST, S. (2003), 'The Aftermath of Plataean Perjury', CQsy. 438-47. WESTLAKE, H. D. (1969), Essays on the Greek Historians and Greek History (Manchester). WHITEHEAD, D. (1983), 'Competitive Outlay and Community Profit:philotimia in Classical Athens', Classica etMedievalia 34: 55-74. (1990), Aineias the Tactician: How to Survive under a Siege (Oxford). WIEDEMANN, T. E.J. (1983),' 2?Aax«TTOv . . . ev TOIS apo€oi K\eos'- Thucydides, Women and the Limits of Rational Analysis', Greece and Rome 30: 163-70. WILAMOWITZ[-MOELLENDORFF], U. VON (1886), Isyllos vonEpidauros (Berlin). (1909), Euripides, Herakles (Berlin). (1922), Pindaros (Berlin). WILLCOCK, M. M. (1995), Pindar, Victory Odes: Olympians 2, 7 and n, Nemean 4, Isthmians3, 4 and*/ (Cambridge). WILLEMSEN, F. and S. Brenne (1991), 'Verzeichnis der Kerameikos-Ostraka', AMio6:147-56. WILLIAMS, B. (1993), Shame and Necessity (Berkeley). WILLIAMS, F. (1978), Callimachus Hymn to Apollo: a Commentary (Oxford). WILLIAMS, R. A. G. (1992), The Literary Affinities of Thucydides (Ph.D. Thesis, London). WILSON, P. (2000), The Athenian Institution of the Khoregia (Cambridge). (2002), 'Review of Lavecchia 2000', BMCR 2002.04.24. \VwT:ERSGHEim,]l.(iQ38),Aigim:eineUntersmhmguberseineGesellschqftundWirtschqftl^Diss. Cologne). WOODMAN, A. J. (1995), 'Praecipuum munus annalium: The Construction, Convention and Context of Tacitus, Annals 3. 65. i',MH$2: 111-26. - and R. H. MARTIN (1996), The Annals of Tacitus Book 3 (Cambridge). WORLEY, L. (1994), Hippos: the cavalry of Classical Greece (Boulder Colorado). YOUNG, D. C. (1968), Three Odes of Pindar: a Literary Study of Pythian n, Pythian^, and Olympian 7 (Leiden). - (1970), 'Pindaric Criticism', in W. M. Calder andj. Stern (eds.), Pindaros und Bakchylides (Darmstadt), 1-95. - (1971), Pindar Isthmian j:Myth andExempla (Leiden). - (1985), The Olympic Myth of Greek Amateur Athletics (Chicago). ZACHARIA, K. (2001), 'The Rock of the Nightingale: Sophocles' Tereus and

4O2

Bibliography

Kinship Diplomacy', in F. Budelmann and P. Michelakis (eds.), Homer, Tragedy and Beyond: Essays in Honour of P. E.Easterling (London), 91-112. (2003), Converging Truths: Euripides'Ion and the Athenian Quest for Self-Definition (Leiden). ZEILHOFER, G. (1958), Sparta, Delphoi und die Amphiktyonen im 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr. (Diss. Erlangen). ZIMMERMANN, B. (1988), 'Pindar, Dithyrambus III, 3 (Fragment 700 Snell— Maehler)',^P£72:22. - (iQQ2),Dithyrambos. Geschichte einer Gattung(Gdttingen). ZUNTZ, G. (1955), The Political Plays of Euripides (Manchester). - (1971), Persephone (Oxford).

INDEX LOGORUM

ANDROTION (FgrHist 324)

AELIAN

Far. Hist. 9-2

F. 46

54

ANECDOTA GRAECA (ed. Bekker)

AESCHYLUS

Agamemnon i46ff. 197 449-74 848-50

136 nn. 28 and

29, : 37

i. 132

332 44 n. 179 163 n. 127 68 n. 43

190 n. 236

ANTIOCHOS OF SYRACUSE (FgrHist 555)

Frag, ii

303

APOLLODOROS

Eumenides 691 8

59

367 f

77 -

1.4.3 3.7.5-6

1470.68 106

Persians 59 249-52

44 n. 179 344 n. 48

Frag. 3I2W

817

22

ARISTODEMOS (FgrHist 383)

Prometheus Bound 26

369

35°ff831 F. ssoRadt

ARCHILOCHOS

F. 9 I0

4 n - 73 176 n. 183 97

AINEIAS TACTICUS

17. i

g n. 18

AISCHINES I. 64

50

AKESANDROS (FgrHist 469) F. 3

170 n. 156

19

253

ARISTOPHANES

Birds 1320-2

56 n. 18,

1765

61 n.12 19 n. 61

Clouds 36

1640. 130

46 f. 63ff.

2600.519 260 n. 519

70 124 134

260 n. 519 260 n. 519 164

Wasps I2ogff.

35

404

Index Loconan

ARISTOTLE

Nicomachean Ethics ii34big n6i a i5f. Poetics 1451^36-7 Politics 1287*5-8 I2gib25 Rhetoric 1365*31 F. 560-4 Rose 617 611 no. 26

48 64 342

143 322 167 n. 144 42 and n. 168 121 n. 123

ARRIAN

Anabasis i. g. 10 i. ii. 6 4.4.1 6.3. i 6- ig-5

332 g n. 18 332 n. 18 332 n. 18

Indike 18. ii 20. 10

332 n. 18 332 n. 18

180

ATHENAIOS

573f-

18

AULUS GELLIUS

Attic Nights

17. 10

358

BACCHYLIDES -5I~5 I. 78-80

326 326

i. ii3f. 1.123

121

I

157

I. 138-40

121

1.160-1 1.176-7

257

2.18

73

3-iff-

iag igg n. 26g

3-3-4

34

3-9-10 3.11-12 3- : 7-2i 3- 23-4 3-37-47 3-58 3-58-9 3-73 3-75-6 3.78-84

34i 84

3-9°ff 3-93 4-3 4.6 5- 11 5-37-9 5- 43-4 5- 48-9 5- 76-84 5- 86-92 5- 94-154 5.160-8 5-172-5 5-i9 J -4 6.1-16 g. 18 9-27-39 9-35 9-5 1 9- 54-5 10.18 io. 30-5 10. 46-7 10. 49-51 11.77 11. 104-5 ii. 113-17

34

34 326 34 3i8f. andn. 8 75

72,75 326 2g6 n. 33 3i9

295 371 n. 6g 2og

342 n. 43 49 346 325f325f325f325f325f326 129 72 n. 60 342 n. 43 346 116 118 258 : 3 258

257

105 326 120 n. 120

Index Locorum ii. 115—end "• 123-5 13. 44ff. :

3-95

:

3-175-8 13.182-9 13.199-209

13. 200 13. 224 13. 228-31 14 14. 8-11 14.14-16 14. 20 146. 1-2

148.5-6 146. 7-9

146. 9-10 17.17

146.20-24 146.52-66 146. 74-80 146.18.1-60 20 24 27 F.4 F. 2ob

119 295 295 n. 29 215 296 n. 33 227 227 229 216 n. 352

296 n. 33 : 3 295 227 174 :

73 : 73 172 172 16,142 n. 47 326 326 326

254 n - 495, 319; 326

F. 2OC

235 n- 4l8 326 326 124-8,204 181 187 n. 222

F. 22

124-8

F.47

199 n. 269

CASSIUS DID 42.46

369 n. 64

CICERO

adAtt. 7- 2O. 2

405

DEMETRIUS OF PHALERON (FgrHist 228)

Testimonium 6b

64 and n. 28

DEMOSTHENES I

5'3l 18.200

5° 50

: 9- 77 59- 98

5° 24

DIAGORAS OF MELOS

F. 738PMG

28

DIODORUS OF SICILY

4.23 4- 37-1 4- 79

nof. 125 n - :43 : 6 9

4. 80. 4

196 n. 258

5- 9- 2-3 11.4.7 11.20-3

103 167 n. 143 193

11.38.7 ii. 48. i

194 n -251 144 n. 55

11.48.8 11. 49. i

85 187

11.49.3

195 and n. 258, 201n. 279

11.49.4 11.50

:

11.53.1 11.65

204 n. 302 204

93 224 and n. 378

11-74

222

12-9-5

3°4

12.75.5-6

126,206

12. 77. i 13. 34. i

186 201 n. 277

13-3 8 -5 I 3-45-1

:

:

:

3-75

35,:39 135; :39

32,135,139; 220

8.16.2

83 83

de div. i-75

13. 81-4 13. 82. 7 13.90.4

196 n. 262,197 200 n. 277 197

225

14- 37- 6

275

406

Index Locomm

DIODORUS OF SICILY (cont.): 14. 109 16. g 16. 62. 3 16. go 17. 109. i 18.8.3 18.30 :

9-25

F. 101 Kinkel

196 158 n. 108

EPHOROS (FgrHist 70)

ERATOSTHENES (FgrHist 241)

343 308 andn. 6

F. 14 F. 44

19. 64. i

266 :

F. 138

F. 366 Kock/ 398 K/A

Antiquitates Romanae 14. 10 342

Andromache 19-20

272,308,355

On Demosthenes

On Oratory vii. 5

358 n - :9 SS8 n. ig 358 nn. 17 and : 9> 359 n - 23

417-20

2OI

455

285 n. 46

Hecuba 573-4

7,20

184-5

!93ff-

n

355 - 8 342 n. 42 371

196

Second Letter to Ammaios

Ion

2

357

3

6

621-32 1582

39

DIONYSIOS OF MILETOS (FgrHist

687)

368 n. 61

321 44 n - :79 68 n. 43 335 73,335f- and n. 28 285 n. 46 59 16

Iphigeneia inAulis :

F. 2

171

Hippolytos

357-6°

On Thucydides

9 27 51

56

Bacchai

Herakles 702 876 542

63 n. 24

On the Arrangement of Words 14 SS8 n. ig 22

9, 20 19

EURIPIDES

Letter to Gnaeus Pompeius

7 26 39

168 n. 149

EUPOLIS

99 132

DIONYSIOS OF HALIKARNASSOS

3

61 n. 12

184 266 266

20. 7. 2 2O. 8l. 2

EPICHARMOS

28

499

204

Phoenician Women EMPEDOKLES (DK 31) AlI2

2OO

494-505 893

3170.2 70 n. 52

Index Locorum 1419 i4:9-24

Trojan Women 220-1,223 511-14 F. 496 Nauck2 PMG 755

35i 343 n :

57 - 9 3440.48 120 49,58,258 0.510

EUSTATHIUS

Comm. On Homer Iliad 2. 852 236 n. 422 GORGON (FgrHistî^j F. 18

issf.

HELLANIKOS (FgrHist 4)

F. 81 F. 82

162 119

3- 53- 4 3-55 3. 60. i 3-72 3.76.2 3. 80-2 3. 80. 6 3. 121. 2

3-124- 2 3-127-1 S-^-S 3-139-3 3.146. i 4.1.1 4. 78. i

4-147-3 4-149-1 4.158. 6

4- !59ff4- : 79-3 5-22 5.28

HELLENICA OXYRHYNCHIA

(ed. Chambers) 18.2 ig. 3

136 160,162 n. 122

HERMOGENES

On Invention

2. 4. 22-4

284 n. 40

HERODOTUS

1-5-3-4

3°6 n -55

1.6.2 i. 67-8 1. 67. 5 1.72.3 2.10

34 280, 314 no 181,300 106

2-57 2. 67. 2

: 6

2-156 3- 38

344 57,65

7 203 n. 291

5-30-1 5-36-1 5- 37- 2 5- 39-49 5.41.2 5-42 5-43 5- 44-1 5- 44- 2 5- 44-5 5- 4 6 -1 5- 4 6 -2 5-47 5.48

5-63 5-7 1 5-78 5- 79ff-

407 68, 300 281

328 n. 6 317 n. 2 70 n. 54 79, 318 n. 6 301 299 348 n - 57 7° n - : 5 : 6g n. 51 no n. 84 49 n. 202 44 193 n. 244 299 24of. 350 n. 65 278 n. 18 in

14,273 n. i 301 n. 47, 306 n. 55 301n. 47 302 301 108-13

53 no 112 no

3°4 184, 299 112, 303 n. 50 3°5 10, no, 141 and n. 44, 303 109 and n. 82, 302 284

10 andn. 22, 256 368 118, 209

Index Locomm

408 HERODOTUS (cont.):

5.81.2 5-92

218 n. 361, 227

6. 21

3°7 301 n. 47 10,220.73,23 306 n. 55

6. 21. 2

344

6. 22-5 6. 23 6. 27 6. 27.2 6. 35-6

21

5- 97-3 5- I 0 2

6-43-3 6-49 6.50 0

6-5 -3 6.58.1 6.70.3

I87 154

350 n. 65 10 n. 22 302 221

222, 235

23

107 n. 78 10 n. 22, 284 n

39 6- 73- 2 6. 85-94.: 6.86 6. 88-9 6.88 6. gi 6.98.2 6.103.2 6. 122

6.125.3 6.127.2

6.127.3 6.127.4 6.131 7-3 7- 44-5 7.117 :

7- 37- 3 7- : 43-1 7.144 7- : 45 7-:52-3 7-153-8

227 227

307 221 22O 221

306 n. 55 10 n. 22 10 n. 22 10 n. 22 306 n. 55 10 n. 22

7-153 7-153- 2 7-154- 2 7- : 5 6 7-!56-3 7.158.2

7- : 59 7-165-7° 7-165 7.166 7.170 7.170.3 7.196 8.1.2 8.17 8.26 8.30.2 8-34 8.46 8. 46. 2 8-47 8.50.2

8.6o/3 8.62 8.76.2 8. go. 2 8.92

8-93

igg n. 26g 1340.20 l6

5 n. 135 187 81 3030.50

3H 187

187,193 187 157 355 171 222

14^259,303

3 l6o, 222

:6of. 222 121

8 n. 17,10, 302 :6of. 50 n. 207 120 337 50 n. 207 2ig 2ig

8-93-1 8.122 8.140

222

9-IO

9- :6

iog, s°3 :6if.

109 n. 83

g. 28. 6

l6o, 222

331 3°4 327 76 221n. 370 187 291 187

9-3° 9-33 9-33-5 9-69 9-78 9-85 9-92

160

44 248

222, 225

180

184

184 n. 213 165,222

2ig

226 22O

Index Locorum HESIOD

13.636-9 :

Theogony 860

1040.71

Works and Days nff94-101 227,240 598 6l 5 F. :48M/W F. i48a F -2i5

76n.82 71 79 n. go : 49 : 49 i5of. 147 n. 68 1700.156

3- 741-4 3-742 16.225-7 16.783 I7 . 439 18.219 18.326 19.262 19-301-2 21.388 :

22.408-9 23. 257-897

HIPPOKRATES

33. 362-70

Epidemics i. n

23.450-98 23.822-3 23.881 24. i 24.63 24.249 2 4 . 3 o6f. 24.601-19 24.696

70

HOMER Ilwd : 8

- 4 1.113 : : - 55 i. 492 2.488 2.511-16 2.570 2- 653-70 2.655-6 2.683-5 2.783 3.189 5.63 6. i46f. 6.402 9.189 9.381 9.443 11.504 11.514-15

ff.

3igf2860.48 1710.159 40 356 f. 161 56 106 and n. 75 2200.367 1710.159 1040.71 770.85 3010.47 322 144 n. 55 18 161 85,3170.2 3010.47 67

Odyssey 2.73 5-355 8. 100-249 9-254 9-324 10-505 ii-301,303-4 11-54° 12-7° i3-3 8ff i5-i47 ff 15-258 22.347

11.698-702

9

HOMERIC HYMNS

13-484

44

To Demeter 480-2

409 272,355 n. 7 297 2970.37 332 366 400.159 333 n. 21 167,313 298 2g8f. 333f. and nn . 2I _ 2 344 g, 200, 282 258

345 345 345 285 n. 43 97 178 332 347 344

56 3i9 9 n - l8 56 366 400-159 920.21 910-17 34,33i aod o. 15 3320.17 3320.17 3320.17 289

90,366

4io

Index Locorum

2

7G2 2 404 765.1.5 765.1.213

289

765. i. 1120 767.1888

HORACE

Art of Poetry

185-7

93

Odes 4.2

122 n. 130 236 n. 466 100 n. 54, 236 and n. 425, 278!". 237 n. 426 45, 37° n. 68, cf. 51

IBYKOS

Si66

21,118 n. 117, 2

8220 8221 S : 33 ^323

37

22 22, 248

22

204 no. 2

155 n. 24 151 andn. 81

CEG 302 372 380

349 and n. 474 48 n. 196, 49 186

Chiron 32 (2002) 247 plate i

280 n. 27

Ebert 1972 no. 12 no. ig no. 20

208 n. 319 208 n. 319 192 n. 241

Hesperia 22 : ( 953) 25°f71 (2002) 3994:3 7Gi3 3 8 7Gi384 7Gi3i 3 i 7G18164 7Gi3 2 6o. 9 7Gi3823

258 221 andn. 369 223 n. 374 261 256 70 n. 52 162 andn. 120 8n. 17

164 n. 131 178 and n. igo 172 n. 166 171 n. 162 46,12gf. and n. 2

69 n. 50

INSCRIPTIONS

BSA 55 (1960), 180 61 (1966), 197—

767. 3068 7Gg. i 2 4. 1750 7Gg. 2. 517 7Gg. 2. 582 IG 12.5. 608

7Gi2 suppl.,p.ii5 no. 235 129 I.Lindos 2, see Lindian anagraphe 16 220 and nn. 367-8

IvO 39 160 266

:

4° 100 186

Inscriptions grecques diakctaks de Sicilie 7,11,14 195 andn. 253 J77S 16(1896) 164-8 LSAG* 185 and 447, Peloponnese no. 5ib 185, ig6f., Peloponnese no. 52 201, Peloponnese no. 43 319

439E 456

280 n. 28

237 n. 426

236 n. 425, cf. 100 n. 54 247 116 andn. 106 2I and n 7 - 357 26 n. 89

Index Locorum Lindian anagraphe (FgrHist^z, Higbie 2003)

Fi BXVII C28

:

119,132 n. 7 34 n - 20

0(3)

132 n. ii

ML 4

178

5

n6f. and n. 107

20

166 n. 141,167

27

222

33

222 n. 373

41 42

:

57 8g

:

95

225,238

Milet III (1914) no. 122

152 n. 82

57 157

39 115 n. 101

Parian Marble (FgrHist 239) para. 52 104 n. 74 PouUloux, Nouveaii choix 37 361 and n. 29 Rev. Phil. 23 (1949) 5~l6

:

49> : 55

Rhodes and Osborne, see underTod Robert, Fouilles d'AiKhanoum i (1973) 207-37 361 and n. 29 SEG

19. 569 26.1137 26. 1306 28.1476 29.86 29.384 29.652

411 152 n. 84 217 and n. 357 137 n. 30 44 156 247 13

3 0 -52

13

3 : -9 8 5

Il n

5 -99>l37n-

3° 33. 702

279 and n. 23

34- 82 36.1011

44 285 n. 45

39- 73

122 n. 130

4I-778-95 42. 846

191 igi and n. 240

46. 84

250 and n. 475

Syll* 30 36 82

no 1057 i25g 1268

8n. 17 811.17,13,48 8 n. 17,13 andn. 36, :39 220 and nn. 367-8 129 n. i 286 n. 48 361

Tod [nos. in P. J. Rhodes and R. Osborne, Greek Historical Inscriptions 404—323 BC(Oxford, 2003), are given in square brackets after Tod nos.]

2.170 g. i ii. 244 ii. 330 ii. 12233

247 6g n. 51 130 13 192 n. 241,193 n.

6

318

21

8 n.17

11.1227 14.530 18.772

I0

4 [7]

45

I2O

238

log [n]

156

245 49 and n. 198,

142 [39] 147 [44]

122 n. 129 172

cf. 48 n. 196

160(57]

H3 n-5 1

:

143 n- 5° 42

122 n. 131 2461".

75 [72] 187 [80]

412

Index Loconan

INSCRIPTIONS

[LONGINUS]

Tod(cont.): 194 195 [93]

On the Sublime

156 n. 99 116 andn. 107

Tod and Wace 1906 no. 440 100 n. 54, 236 n. 425 Walbank, M., Athenian Proxenies (1978) 73 162 andn. 123 ^PEiyz (2000) 143-4

n :

9 - 54

147 239

ISOKRATES

2. 43 and 48 4.43 9.12-20 g. 20 9- 47 15.166

356 andn. n

LUCIAN

Philapseudes 18-19

204

LYCOPHRON

Alexandra 2-3

328 n. 6

LYSIAS l6

ION OF CHIOS (FgrHist 397) F.i F. 27 West

33.5

66 207 66 156 : 6 5 57 n. 20, 66

2. 2

63 n. 24

MARCELLINUS, LIFE OF THUCYDIDES

24 35 41 43

53 n. 6 39,357,371 357 n - :5 102

OLD OLIGARCH, see Ps.-XENOPHON OXYRHYNCHUS HISTORIAN, see HELLENICA OXYRHYNCHIA PAPYRI

Hellenica Oxyrhynchia, see separate entry KALLIMACHOS

P.Berol. 957iv

Aitia III F75 70-1

121 n. 123

65-7

121 and n. 126

Hymn to Apollo (Hymn 2)

245

Suppl. Hell 254-69

100

P.Oxy 222 (=FgrHist 415)

KRITIAS (DK 88)

Ai3

81

2438

145 n. 62 41, 45 n. 184, 129,144 and n. 55, :58 n. 107,163,167 n. 146,192, 202 n. 286, 204 nn. 301 and 303, 205 nn. 305-6, 23°, 235 n. 418, 248 n. 468 52 n. i

Index Locorum 2445 f-31 2447 f. 19 2735

146 n. 67 146 n. 67 118 n.117

PARTHENIOS

Erot. 20

:

49

PAUSANIAS 2.5.2

2. 36. 4-5

3-3-1 3- 6- 2 3.8.1

3-9-!2 3-n-5 3- : 5-1 4.7.8 4.8.11 4. 24. 3 5.22.6 5- 27-1 5- 27- 7 5. 67.6 6. 2. i 6. 2. 4 6.2.5 6. 4. ii 6.6.1 6.6.2 6.7 6. 7.1-2

6.7-3

118 125 168 n. 150

109 n. 83 100,237 i6g 1840. 213 100 112, 3°5 n -53 112,3050.53 :

37 118 n.115,182 186 186 114 235 183

8.22.2 8. 24. 8-10

183 106

9-2-5 9-34-6

194 161 161 :6 i 182 8 n. 17 238

9-35-!-7 9-36-5 10. 7. 7 10. g. 2 10. g. 7-10 PETRONIUS Satyricon loff.

:

35 : 35 !3!

F. la andc

T5d T5c

F. 14-16

253 and

F- 75

nn. 485, 487, 488 : 5

PINDAR 0.

I. iff.

i37f48,135 n. 25,

6. g. i

: 39f208 n. 3ig

i. 75

187 42,142 n. 47 208 n. 3ig 2840. 3g 183

83 83 n. 108

PHILOCHOROS (FgrHist 328)

6.7.4

205 n. 305 49

171 n. 161

PHILISTOS (FgrHist 556)

i. 28 i. 28-g

6-9-3 6.ii.4 6.13. i 6.13.8 6.14.12 6.18.6 8.10.5

27g n. 22

PHEREKYDES (FgrHist 3)

77 n. 85 77 n. 85, ig2 and n. 241 183

4!3

!• 75-85 i. 82-3 i. 86 1. go-5 2. i 2.6

2- 9

3,285,310

2g6 n. 32 88 andn. 10, 317 n.4 320

325 330 320 8 37°f- and n- 6g 215 :

99

Index Locorum

414 PINDAR, 0. (cont.) 2.53-6 2.70-2 2.81

256f. 89 351

8.54-9 8.55 8.58 8.67-9

252 231 50 342 n. 43

2.83-8 2.85

288f. 311

8.68-9 8.69

35° 318

2. 86 2.93 3.2 3. 41 3.42 4.6-7 4.10 4.16 4.21 4.24-7

81 nn. 96 and 97 104 197 89 n. 12 285,310 104 280 62 296 n. 32 318,325

8. 76-8 8.77-84 8.81 8. 85 9.5 g. 10 9. 11-12 9.14 9.15-16 9.20

6 318 6 68 n. 40 98,1670.146 98 1670.146 168 98, :6gf. 166 n. 140

5.8 5. 12

188 igof.

9-35-6 g. 41

361 g8

6-iff6.4-6

3 2 ,95> 287, 359 184

9-43 9-43-6

98 3!3f-

6.6 6.16

27 318

9-63-4 g. 70

3:3 g8

6.16-17 6-62-3 6.74-6 6.78 6.88

3 I 9 f -,325,3 6 4 325 251 g8 183

g-? 6 9- 8 3 g. 88f. g. giff. g. g7

98 3:3 2540.4gi 3420.43 68

6. gi 6. g2 6.152 7.1-6

241 n. 443 185 1640.134 3if.

g. gg g. 112 10. g-io 10.13

254 n. 4gi 168 28g n. g 170

7. 13-14 7. i8-ig

132 133

10.24f. 10.51

10 n. 21 114

7. igff. 7.28-g

1320.7 105

10.72 f. 10.91—3

3420.43,346 6 n. 10

7.32-4 7.52-7

105 105

n. iff. 12. i

355 n -7 77,83

7.77-80 7.87

IO

5f1330.14,134

12.3 i2.5-6a

196 n. 261 71

7- 93 8.1-2 8.42-6

:

36 3 325

12.15 12.15-16 12.16

158 306 77

8-53-64

53 and n. 3, 231

12.18

2780.18

Index Locorum

56

3. 21 ff.

3-7 13.17-23 13. 22-3

i6g n. 154, 242 61 n. 17 203 n. 291 242, 265 n. 536

:

264

3-3° 3- 36-7 3- 4°-2 3-5° 3- 5:-3 3.64

13-4 13.6 :

3-33 : 3-35 13.41 :

3- 45-6 : 3- 67-9 13.io7ff. 14.4 14.

2O-I

14. 21-4

203, 278 203 SS6 325 : 3 161

6, 88 n. 10, gi 318

3-65 3- 7°-! 3-73 3- 77ff 3-79 3-85 3- H4-I5 4. 11-12

P.

1.1-4 i. i5ff. i.aiff. i. 23-4 1.27

358

354 n- 5 104 n. 71

4- 13-56 4. 20 4-32 4- 36-49 4-43 4. 60

:

117

4- 62. 3

-59 i. 60 i. 65 i. 69-71 i. 76-8 i-79 1.86 i. 92-4 1. 94-8 :

-95

2. if. 2.15-16 2. 18-19 2. 21 2.

52-6

2-54 2. 62 2.

67-8

360.134 104

57 n- :9 241 64 22,50,52 193

63f. 94 65

64f. 50 n. 208,51 157 98 3°9

291 n. 17 291 n. 17 214 2140.348

2. 86-8

255, 3°9 n- I0 79 ff-

2. 96

270

3- 20

60, 73, 335

2. 8l-2

4-75 4. 82-3

4- 87-92 4. goff. 4-92 4- 95-6 4. g7-ioo 4. io2-ig 4.104 4. 138-55 4.156

4- 156-67 4.158 4.170 4. i84f. 4. i85f. 4.187 4. 193 ff. 4. 197—8 4. 216

4'5 347 3170.4 3°6 326

364 n. 44 67,7^364 74 60 n. 6 255, 309 n. 10 67f. 102 n. 59

146 n. 67 64 93 58 326

in n. 88 298 n. 39 107-13 2860.48 112 n. go 94 n. 26, 348 n. 60

87 29> 87 n. 5 326

367 335 87 326 3180.5,326 3i7 326 323 326

44 34 4°, 334f330 andn. 13 6 n 9 - 5°, 334 4°,332f-,349 333 156

416

Index Loconan 8- 95ff-

PINDAR, P. (cont.)

4. 221

6g n. 50

4- 229-31

326

4-233

6g n. 50

4.245

366

4.250

4. 270-2

6g n. 50 63 n. 24 6g, cf. 40, 70

4.281

245

5.28

298 n. 39 342 n. 43 216 n. 352

4. 262

5. 49 ff. 5- 56-7 5.60 5- 6 7 5. 72-6 5-75 5- 79-8° 5- 96-!93 5.114

5- "5 5- "9 6.1 6.6

116

169 n. 154 241 f. 112 245

6 n. 10 n

99 - 53 100 n. 55 3170.4 214 n. 345 : 99 219

6.63 7.10 7. i6f.

3:4

7-19

250,318

8.1

56 n. 18, 61, 2 32f. 2 32f.

8. 8-13 8.15 8. 19 8. 35-8 8.36 8- 44-55 8-55 8.70 8. 78 ff.

8-79 8. 81-7 8.82 8. 83-7 8.85

2r)2

35i 367 208 n. 318 208 n. 319 326 204 340.124 :

3 254 n- 491 342 n. 43, 350 366 258 35°

75>9 l f f ->23i and

n. 401, 362 8. 98-9 8. 100 9-3 9-5 9. i8ff 9. 30-6

9- 39-65 9- 43-5 9- 76-9 9- 105 g. 121 10. 1-2 10. 5-6 10. 13 10. 13-14 10. 22-31

10.31 i°-53 f 10. 69-71 10. 70

11.7 ii. 16 11.22-5

11.25 ii. 25-8 11.30 11.32 "•39 ii.4iff.

224,233 47 2780.18 170 101 326 326 IOI

294 :

7 7 i72f., 241 173 n. 172 170 174 :

363 n. 40 370 n. 68 287 : 73 80 102 n. 59 241 296-300 146 n. 67 99>297-300 163 241 214 287

12. 1-3

59 : 99

12. 14

322

"•53

jV.

1. 1-4 1. 13-14

185 104

i. i6f. 1.18

51

1. 19-22 1.26 1.27-8

295 35 n -129 3170.4

75

Index Locorum

1.50 2.8

2.17 3- 2 3- 3—4 3.18 3- :9 3- 26-7 3-29 3- 30-1 3- 40-1 3.46-8 3-55 3.76 4-i-S 4.12 4. 18-19 4-33 4- 33-4 4-35 4.46

99, 243 252 n. 482 227 215 148 68f. 3°4, S36 361

96 361 75 157 68 361 68 215 264 287

4-49 4- 50-1 4- 5i-3 4- 54-6 4.70

294 211 n. 332 66 48 ijof. 177 171 214

4- 7!-2 4.78 4.88

294 : 7 264

4-93 5- iff-

53, 252 34, 213 and 0.341,216

5-8 5-9 5- H-i6 5-19 5-2i 5-23 5-32 5-38 5- 4°-! 5-4 1

5.46

5- 48-9 5-49 6. 30 6. 32 6- 47-55 6.50 6. 5off.

6-53 6. 64-7 6.65 7. ii— 16 7. 14-16 7. 20-4 7.22 7-23 7- 24-7 7- 52-3 7.61

7- 72f7- 102-5 8.18 8.24 8. 37-9 8- 49-50 8- 50-3 9-2 9-i5 9-29 9.48

417

228 252 211 2I

3f214 n. 349 63 n. 24

35i 47 56 i77f. 53,252 28gf.

93 290 29° 296 29° 272

43 342 n. 43 291 n. 17 157 n. 100 3170.4 94f. 68 n. 41 18 57 n- :9 72 and n. 63 242

10.5

35 205 27, 206

n

- 353, 359f58 n. 24

10. 16-19 10. ig

47 127

213, 226f.

IO. 22

229

10. 24 10.25 10. 41-2 10. 42 10. 43ff. 10. 49-50 10.52 10. 60

: 3 278

227

354 n. 5 341 367 n. 55 97 n- 4° 75 341

IO. 2

27, :93 228 264 : 3 206 206, 22g, 241

297 n. 34

4i 8

Index Locorum

PINDAR, JV. (cont.)

5.53

10.75-90 10.76-7 10.76-9 10.76-88 10.80-8 10.89-90 ii. if. 11.22-3

205 107 326 324,326 326 324!". 96,143 154 n-9 1

6.16 6.42-9 6.52-4 6.62-3 6.69 6.70 7-14-15 7-27

11.28

286

8.g-IO

11.34 n.45f.,48

241 72

8.17-18 8.27-47 8

1.23 1.26 1.34 1. 36-8 2. ii 2.19 2.36ff. 3-3 4. 1-2 4.2f.

i42f159 1000.55,237 n. 425 1140.95 1140.95 165 165 326 3:4 197 2550.499 291 n. 17 63 n. 24

- 3:-5a 8.353-45 8.58 8.61-2 8.63-4 8.70 Frags (S-M) 2 and 3 4 6c 23 29 36 43-!-5 5ib, c, d 523

4. 4 4- :5

228 373

52b, see under Paian 2

4.17 4.34-5

1650.135 76

52k

4- 49-50 4.61-8

336> 374 n - 5 1020.59,164.

52q

/. 1.3-4 i. 8 1.15

5.14-16 5.22 5-39-42 5.44 5.48-50 5- 48 5.50

cf- 374 n. 5 200,36of. 242 47 223 aod 0.377 224f. 213,223 aod o. 377 50 o. 207

52g

225

219 326 326 2080.318 57f. 216 n. 352 24of. 5°,74 223f.

118 I01

32°, 341 326,341 47 47 26 4 284

142 2070.315 252ff. 142 n. 47 1640.134 176 326 164 n. 134 164 n. 134

1640.134 1640.134,358 n :

57 59 60 70 7oa 7ob 700 7od

-9 96 176 176 176 1640.134 105,204,264 102 o. 59,164 n. 134 78,202 146

4:9

Index Locorum

71-4 1

7

72 73 74 75 76 83 94a g4b. ii

g4b. 66, 71 94C 95 io4b

log

no 118-28

"9 I2O 121 122

123

124a-b 126

i2g : 33 : 37 1403 150

151 i68b. 1-7 i6g i6ga

:

52 n. i 164 n. 134 164 n. 134 164 n. 134 164 n. 134 242 f. 360 n. 24 72 and n. 61 76 2g8 n. 3g 2g8 n. 3g 164 n. 134 249, 3:4 and n. 26 147

!45-56 145 and n. 145, 152 145 and n. 63, 148!"., 151 n. 78 I47f., 151 n. 78 I4gf. 358 24, 56, 57 n - 20, 164, 248 164 n. 134 164 n. 134 102 andn. 59, 159, 164 n. 134

93 94 : 95 ig8a ig8b : 99 213 214 215 228 245 24gb 253

99 n - 53 164 n. 134 102 n. 59 102 n. 59, 164 n. 134 56 56 n. 18, 62,76, 77 n. 83, 78 n. 89 60, 164 n. 134 152 18 196 n. 262 180 180, 358 n. ig 18 n.58, 56, 99 n. 51, 156, 203, 242 54 n. 9, H3 197 64 n. 29 8g n. 12 8g n. 12 gof., 251, 366 107, 116 287 28-jf. 326 65!". and n. 33 105

264 Frags. (Bowra) 147 264 147 27ga Dithyrambs, see underFrags. yoa, job,

:

7i-4, 137 Paian i (Di Rutherford) :6g n. 154, 242 10 2 (D2 Rutherford) 154 3-4 103 25f. ii5f. 28-31 181 6 1-2 181 70 326 4 (D4 Rutherford) 61 n. 16, i5g 8 46 22—3 68f. 26

73-5

116 33 121 35f326 40-57 121 43ff5 (D5 Rutherford) i4ff. 6 (D6 Rutherford) 177 109 123-6 177, 207, 254 215 131

42 o

Index Loconan

PINDAR, Paians (cont.) 7 (Dy Rutherford) 125 n. 142 g (Ai Rutherford) : 5 77, 358 n - :9 12 (Gi Rutherford) 142 n. 47 14 (83 Rutherford) 3 78 18 (87 Rutherford) 10 146 n. 67, 204 20 (Si Rutherford) : 4-!5 243 PLATO

65

Hippias Major 28sd

238

Laws 8o2a

66 n. 33

47

Alexander 4.8 34

28 8 n. 17

Anstdd.es 20.4

194

AZTOOB 279

242

Lysander 12.i

:

5

343

Pmcfa 28. 5

200, 256

Solon

186 n. 218

Timoleon 8 39

igg n. 268 4

l8

350 205

p. 49 Preller

8

236 n. 422

POLLUX, JULIUS 286,3370.32

POLYBIUS

1.44 3.6 4.31.5-6

342 n. 41 2980.39 62

8.33

ng

g. 27. 7-8 12. 4d. 5 12. 5. 6 12. 23 20. 5. 8

196 n. 262 185 g8 n. 47,168 n. 151 63 n. 23 165 n. 136

PROCLUS Chrestomathia 32oa 3-6

253 n. 4go

Ps.-XENOPHON ATH.POL. (OLD OLIGARCH}

Lycurgm 21.3

-3

225

POLEMON

97 - 3 giff. 92

PLUTARCH

10.5,6

l8

3.151 n

Symposium 22ic

Nikias 3-5

Moralia 24if 2g6e-f

Gorgias 484,488

Republic 383a 6i7d-e 62id

18.i

2.14

217 and n. 358

RHIANOS OF BENE (FgrHist

225

F. 30

265)

171 n. 162

Index Locorum SIMONIDES

SALLUST

Bellum lugurthinum 60-3

F. 506 342 n. 41

SAPPHO

F. 16

355 n. 7

SCHOLIA (ANCIENT COMMENTARIES, ABBREV. 27) ON AISCHINES 273.189

1900.236

SCHOLIA ON EURIPIDES

ZHippolytus 231

236 n. 422

SCHOLIA ON PINDAR; see Drachmann in Bibliography

179 n. 191

6.6

184

6. 74 2. 49 8 9- 89 g. 112 12. i 13

179 n. 191 42 n. 168 248 254 n. 491 :68f. andn. 152 194 and n. 252 152

£ P.

27 JV. hypothesis c, d 4.50 5. i 5-5° 7 7. 6^ff. 178

F

-5°7

251 n. 480 15 264 171 nn. 160,161 216 n. 353 219 42 f. and n. igi

24, 26,252 23, 208

F. 511-4 F -5 : 3

24

F-549

241 n. 442

187

FGE XVIIIa XXIII.2

XXX XXXi

L AP 16. 23

23 :6g n. 154 208 142 141

142

SOLON

F. 4.17

£0. 1.97

7. :8a 8.78ff.

4.21

68 n. 43

SOPHOCLES

Ajax 3 6af. Antigone 615-8 Ekctra 701 ff.

68 n. 44 71 265

Trachiniai 497-53° F. 22iRadt 837 Testimonium 2R

33611. 31, cf. 57 n. ig 370 n. 68 9° 293 n - 23

STESICHOROS

839, PMGF

F. 216

241 n. 442

STOBAIOS

277. 1

166

2 intro.

42 n. 168

3-!25

361n. 2g

422

Index Loconan

STRABO

5. 2. 5, 2220 6. i. 7, 2590 6.1.15,2640 7. 7.10,3280 8-3-3°,355 9.5.6,4310

c

ng 168 n. 149 120 n. ng 176 9 171

i. 9. i

2980.38,316 andn. 32

1.9.4

292 315,3360.29 292

I. IO. 2

1.10. 3

1.12.4 !-!3 I I

SUDA

s 624 Adler

254 n. 493

TACITUS

- 3-5 1.13.6 1.14.3 1.17 1.18. i I. 21. I

Annals

I. 22. I

3-65 4-33

95 79

61

94

I. 22. 2 I. 22. 4

i. 23. 6

Histories

3- 37-1

I. 22. 1-2

299 n. 42 1.25.4

TELESILLA

F. jigPMG

I. 29. 2

125

I. 67. 2

i-73

THEOTIMOS (FgrHist 470)

1.74 1.79.2 1.80.1 1.84.2

F. i

1.86.5

THEOKRITOS 22.I35-2II

2970.34

245 f.

1.86.3

I2O

3:5 56 187 221n. 370 65,77,188 82, 242

94, 292 294 3i7 374 33,88,93^,338

124, 298 n. 38, 3160.32 114 203 223

369 n. 64 50 n. 207 278

60 n. 7 3640.46

355 and n. 7 364f.

358

1.100. 3

15,116,316 15,127, 292 181

I. 1-20

315

1.105.2

222

I. 1-23

294

1.2.5

3:4

!• 3- 2

3:5f-

i-S-3 1.4 1.5.2 1.6.5 i. 8 i. 8-15 i. 8. 2-3

292 316 56 10,11411.95,315 10, 315 ii 316

1.108. 2 1.108. 3 1.108. 4 1.112.5 1.113 1.118.3 1.122.3 1.126 1.126. 2-138 1.126. 3

!-95-!

THUCYDIDES I. I. 1-2. I

1.97.2

263

62,160,169 222 231,264 162

97 590.4,84,261 256 3iif. 188 n. 223

Index Locorum

423 8g n. ii

2. 60. 2

79 n - 9°

I-I32.5 LI38.3

23, 237 54 n - 9 3H

2. 60-5

1.139.4

85,311

2.62.3

I. 140-4

3H

2. 63. 2

311 322 322

1. 140. 2

233 and 0.417,

2.64.3

84, 322 f.

234 217

2.65.4

60 n. 8 46 363 88 n. 10 3°9 320, 340

2.65.7

82 82 76 80 352 183

341 320 310 309 ff.

2.97. 1,2

I. 132. 2

J-HS-S 2.8.1

2.8.4 2. 9. 2

2.II.9 2. 13. 2

2.I3.3 2.5-9

2.I3.9

2.60.5

2- 65. 5-9

2. 65. 8

2.65.12 2. 67. I

2.7I.I

:

2-97

310 181, 300 180,188, 275

2. IOO 2. IOO. 2

94

3-8 3-8.1 3.12.1

2.27

3H 310 278 251 f. 218

Q 22. 2

65 I0 ff 5 H3 277 J 34> !39,328 61 87,352

2. 27. I

223

3-32-1

339

3-37-2 3-37-4 3- 38- 2 3-38-3 3- 38- 4

322,3630.39

2.14

2. 14-16 2. 15. 2 2. 16-17 2. ig. I 2. ig.2

2.29

2. 29. I

2- 29. 3 2.29.5

2. 34. 6 2. 34. 8 6

2- 35-4

2. 36. I

2.42.3 2.42.4

310 182 181, 310 182 2840. 42,311 3H 8g n. ii 1170.113,314

257 74, 88 n. 10, 257

2. IO2 3- 2. 2

O 08 33°- 7-7 3- 4°-1 3- 4°- 2 3- 45-5 3- 45-6 3- 49-1 3- 49- 4

2. 44. 4

322 74 23,3640.46 76

2. 46. I

74 n -73,337

2. 47.4

68

2- 47- 3-54- 5 2-53-1 2-53-4

67, 271 260

3-52-3 3- 53-67 3-62.5 3- 64- 3 3.68.3 3.70.4

88 n. 10

o Qo—O 3°2 3

2. 43. I 2. 4 3 . 2

2-43-3

337 337 337 337 337 3640. 46

255 71 f. 69 337 285 no, 166 308 62 118, 209 124 114, 301 n. 46 271

/ra 12,315,348 : 97 48,184, 200, 260 126 3i3 234 261 294 278 261 40 12, 33f., 61 126, 206 3:5 282 127 236 n. 422 127 3, 269, 273-86, 328,370 134,183, 282, 285 a8af. 205, 270, 274, 278 282 andn. 33,

285 n. 43 124-8, cf. 298 n. 38 244 12 12,336

68

299f54 n. g, 126

Index Locorum 5- 74- 3 5- 75- 2 5.76.1 5-76-3 5-77 5-79 5. 80. 2 5-8o-3

5- I 0 9 5.116.4 6. i.i 6.2-5 6. 2. I

6. 2. 3 6. 2. 2

6.3.1 6. 3. 2

6.3-3 6. 4. 2

6.4.3

6.4.4 6. 4. 5-6 6.4.6 6.5. i 6- 5- 2-3 6-5-3 6.6.1 6.6.2 6.8.2 6. g. i 6-9-3 6. 9-23 6. lo-n

25g and n. 515

218

6. 12. 2

244 244 279 274 274 14, 117, 206 gn. 18,48 n. 194, 298

6. 13. i 6. 13. 2 6. 14

335 60,73

6-15 6.15.4 6.16

259 261,352

6.16. i 6.16.2 6. 16.3 6. 16.5 6. 17. 2 6.18.2 6.18.4 6.18.6 6. ig. i 6. 20. i

88 n. 10

n

5- 82-3 5- 84- 2 5-87 5-89 5- I 0 3 5.104

425

-39 274 61

73 73 72 I2lf. 365

329 andn. 10 349 313 104, 116

3H 114,314 184 186 188 185, i87f. ng n. 118, 1340. 20,314 196, I99,3:4

6. 21. I

6. 23. 2 6.24 6- 24. 3 6. 24-6 6. 30-2 6.31. i :

6-3 -3 6.31.4

6. 32. i 6. 32. 2 6- 38- 2-3

I87

6. 38-40 6.41.4

194

6.46

l89

6.50.1

187!"., igo 117, 2g8

6-53-2 6-53-3

IOI > 3 0 4,365 and n. 48

6- 54-9

21

349 354 n- 5 300 324 363 n- 4°

6. 54. i 6. 54. 1-12 6. 54. 2 6. 54. 2-3 6. 56. i

70 and n. 53

n,46,57,2596i,374 258 250

117 n. in 2OI

117 n. 113 321 7° n. 53 300 300

51 330 n. 10 334, 352 73, 348, 352 33° 330, 348 n. 58

34:,346 300, 347 S36, 349 331,348 S32, 347165 79 321 n. 14 348 H1, 259 3°9 3°9 272, 301 n. 46, 308 301 n. 46 3°9 255 54 n- 9 3°9

Index Locorum

426

THUCYDIDES (cont.): 6. 60. 2 300 n. 45 6.61.6 141, 259 6.62.2 27, 192, 193 n. 244 6. 67. 2 5i 6. 69. i 343 6. 69. 2 333, 342

6.70.3 6. 87. 3

5i 61

6.88.7

103 n. 67

6. 89. 4 6. 92. 3 6. 94. i 6. 104. 2 7.2.4

255

7- 2O. 2 7. 27. 1-29. I

7. 27-8

3640. 46 i87f.,348

7.58.1 7.58.2 7-59-2 7-59-3 7. 60 7- 60. 3-71 7. 61-4 7. 61. 1-2 7. 64. i 7. 64. 2

7- 65- 2 7- 65- 3 7. 66-8 7. 66. i

isgf-

7- 67- 1 7.68.3

315 n- 3° 69 n- 47

7- 7°-i 7-70-3 7.70.7 7.71.1

285 218

7. 29. 4 7-33-2 7-33-4 7.36.2 7.36.6 7. 44. 6 7- 49-87 7- 50-4 7- 50-71 7.50.2

310

7-55 7- 55- 2 7-56 7.56.2

338

197

120, 189 2OI

343 328 338 338

S38 n. 36 ii4f. and n. 101,243 155 338

338 and n. 35, 34°

7-56.3 7.56.4 7-57-8

339f34°f315 n- 3°, S38 and n. 36

7-57-2 7-57-4 7-57-6 7- 57- ii

218

7-71-3 7.71.4 7-71-5 7.71.6 7-75 7- 75- 2 7- 75- 4 7- 75- 5

7- 75- 6 7- 75- 7 7-76 7- 77- 1 7- 77- 2 7- 77- 3 7- 77- 7 7.80 7-84 7.86 7. 87. 6

15, 121

132 n. 7 139

8. i.i 8.1.2

6i,i97 193 n- 244 338 338 338

338 34° 339 353 339 270 34° 34° 34° 72 3391342-6 342, 37° n - 67 343 342 343, 347 337,343,3 6 2f. 362 344 347ff347f364 n. 41 344 and n. 47, 364 n. 41 364 n. 41 348 364 n. 41 351,363 72 35i r-

3D3 106

8g n. 12 3i5 n - 3°, 338f35°f-,353, cf. 366 82 353

Index Locorum 8- 9- 3 8.10 8.12.4 8. 24. 4-5

:

8.108. 4

55 n. 94 ii 337 82,155f. and n-94 : 35 275 n. 9 275 n. 9 135 220 n. 367 300 255 275 n. 9 236 n. 422 82 83 83 218 348 95 275 n. g 275 n. 9 302 122 35^353 : 55 70 n. 53, 368 and n -59 10, 315

FGE 3°7f-

23

8

- 35 8- 39 8. 43 8.44 8. 44. 2 8. 47. 2 8. 48.6 8. 52 8. 61. 2 8. 64. 4 8. 68. i 8. 68. 4 8.69.3 8. 70. i 8-73 8. 84 8. 87 8. 89. 3 8.95 8-9 6 - 1 8- 96- 5 8. 97. 2

427

VIRGIL

Aeneid 2.250-804 3- 57°ff-

344 SS8

XENOMEDES (FgrHist 442) F. i

Testimonium i

121 f. and n. 123 122 n. 128

XENOPHON

Agesilaos 6-3 9.6

49 100

Anabasis S-J-S1 4- 7-13

183 183

8. 25-8

9 n. 18

Hellenica 1.2. I

I34

5- :9 2. 2. 3 2.9 2.21-3 3.3.11 4- 3 6. 4. 30

135 n - 2 5> : 3 6 > : 39 299 n. 42 218 275 184 332 174, 265f.

TIMAIOS (FgrHist 566)

7.3.1

183

F. 21 F. 52

Memorabilia i. 2. 61

279

312 120

GENERAL INDEX (Compiled by Doughs Matthews]

Abas, King of Argos 204 Abdera 103,115,137 n., 154,181-2 abstractions: personified 96 Achaia Phthiotis 171 Achaians: banned from Herakleia inTrachis 21; Homeric and Peloponnesian 119; in Metapontion 201 Acharnai 94, 227, 251-2 Achelous, river 106 Achilles: and Pausanias the Spartan regent 22; Aiginetans' devotion to 34, 47,170, 233; longing for battle 40 n.; Brasidas compared with 47-8; Apollo kills 97; mother named 98; birth 101; and Thessaly 170-1; sons found Aiakidai dynasty 176; and death of Aias 290; friendship with Patroklos 313; calms down Aias and Idomeneus 345; tells story of Niobe 347; Pindar describes laying low Hektor 351 Adeimantos 203 Adrastos 18,318-20,364 Aeneias 'the Tactician' 78,183 Aeolians 155 Aeschylus: on battle of Plataia 22; on Apollo 97; on kinship 101; on paian 332; Herodotus on 344; alliteration 354 n.; Dionysios on 358; vocabulary 369; Eumenides 77, 367; Oresteia 163 n.; Prometheus Bound 104 n., 369

afterlife 89-91,94,96 Agamemnon 64, 241, 296, 298, 314, 3 l6 >33 2 Agariste (Kleisthenes' daughter) 44 Agasikles of Thebes 102 Agathokleadai 173-4 Agathokles 199 Agathon (Homeric) 178 Agathon of Zakynthos 178 Agesandridas of Korinth 202 Agesilaos, Spartan king 49,100, 2

3 8 > 247, 332

Agesipolis, Spartan king 238 Agetoros of Tenedos 140 Agis, Spartan king 68, 299 agonistic festivals 12-13 AiKhanoum, Afghanistan 361 Aiakidai 176,179 n., 211 n., 225, 291 Aiakos 47, 233, 294 Aianteia 169 Aias, son of Oileus ('Ajax the lesser') 168-9, 211 n., 345 Aigeidai 240-1 Aigina, Aiginetans: games 13, 23; founded by Rhodes 15, 132, 206 n.; relations and conflicts with Athens 27, 211, 217, 221-3, 227, 229-34, 249, 254; and Achilles 34, 47,170, 233; communities divided 35; Pindar's victory poems for 61, 66,153,169, 176-7, 207-19, 221, 223, 228, 230-5, 247, 254, 262, 314 n.; names 131; games victors 142, 174, 210, 217; relations with

General Index Thebes 148,178-80, 208-9; and tyranny 210; temple of Aphaia 211; Salamis triumph 213, 302; sea-power and commerce 213-15, 226-7; hospitality 214-16; prosperity and cosmopolitanism 216-17; as island 217; expulsion (431) 218, 223-4; prosopography and politics 218-25,231-4, 262; victors unmentioned by Thucydides 218; in Persian Wars 221-2, 226, 234, 302; and Aiakidai 225, 291 Aigina, daughter of Asopos 118-19, 209 Aigina, mother of Menoitios 313 Aigospotamoi, battle of (405) 137, 225, 238, 299 n. Aineias (Aeneias or Aineas) of Stymphalos 182-4 Aiolos 120 Aischines 190 n. Aitna, see Katane Ajax, son of Telamon ('the Greater Ajax') 20,169, 254, 290-1 Akanthos 46, 304 Akmatidas of Sparta 49 Akragas (now Agrigento): Pindar's patrons from 52 n.; founding 104, 318; as colony 132,189, 196-8; sketch of 196 n. Akrai 189 Akraiphia 161 Akrokorinth 202 Aktor 313 Aleuadai 173-4 Alexander the Great 40 n., 180, 266, 273"., 332,334,358n. Alexander, son of Amyntas 18 n., 180-1 Alexander-historians 343 Alexidamos 189

429

Alexiou, Margaret 344 Alkaios 197 n., 249 Alkibiades: on Olympic games (416) n; at Leophron's festival 22 n.; Euripides writes epinikian ode for 28, 49,56, 85; claims command of Sicilian expedition after chariot victory 46; in Thucydides' history 57, 277; victories 57-8; on successes glorifying ancestors 88 n.; on claiming kinship with high-achievers 117 n.; on causing envy by lavish expenditure 250; Megakles related to 250; aristocratic status 255-6, 303; boasts of successes and prizes 258-9, 374; suspected of aspiring to tyranny 261,309; flogged 284; and overthrow of democracy in Athens 300; rhetoric and debating 322, 324, 334, 336; and defeat in Sicily 352 Alkidas 339 Alkidimas of Aigina 217 Alkimedon of Aigina 6, 68 n., 230, 35° Alkinoos, Phaiakan king 114 Alkmaion, son of Amphiaraos 106 Alkmaionidai 249-50,312 Alkman of Sparta 102, 372 n. Alkmene 99, 242 Alkmeonides, son of Alkmeon 249 Allison June 285,293,370 Alpheios 148,185 AltyJ.M. 145,154 ambition 76 Ammon oracle (Libya) 176 Amphiaraos 319 Amphipolis 48,185, 260, 276 Amyklai 240-1 Amyntas 180

43°

General Index

Anaxilas, tyrant of Rhegion 25,187, i88n. Andaisistrota 99 n. Andokides 300 n. Andrewes, A. 83,139,261,368 Andros 15 Androsthenes of Mainalos (the Arkadian) 134,183,186, 282 Androtion 137 Angelia, daughter of Hermes 318 Antichares of Eicon no Antilochos, son of Nestor 311 Antimachos of Kolophon 358 Antiochus of Syracuse 303 Antiphemos of Rhodes 134 n., 185 Antiphon 83, 358 Aphaia 211 Aphrodisias, Karia 54-5 Aphrodite 156 Apollo: the healer (Paian) 69; Pythian 96-7,101,124,125, 127-8; and Chiron 101, 325; and colonization 116; Didymeus n6;Ptoieus 125 n., 249; Lykeios 127; and Kyrene 170, 245; kills Neoptolemos 177; Delphinios 225; demands Aiginetan aristeia 225; Karneios 245; Homeric Hymn to 312; Kroisos criticizes 318— 19; slays Niobe's children 347 Apollodorus 106 Archelaos, king of Macedon 14, 65, 180,188, 275 Archias of Korinth 184-5 Archidamian War 278 Archidamus, king of Sparta 60 Archilochos 19-20, 22 Arethusa 148 Argeios of Keos 121,129-30 Argolid: victors from 114 Argonauts 34, 40,107,111-12, 243, 33°-!, 334, 35°

Argos, Argives: and control of Nemean games 12,125, 205, 264-5; and Aiginetan games 13; metropolis of Rhodes 15, 132, 206 n.; and Egypt 27; failure to keep records 42; epigraphic discoveries 44; colonizing 103, 206; territorial annexation 124-5; ancl Hera temple 125—8, 282; Thirty Years Peace with Sparta 126; and Krete 157; as Greek city 193; games victors 204-5; Pindar writes on 204; and Sparta 206; and Perseus 225; Hera games 237; medism 291 Aristagoras of Miletus 109,301-2 Aristagoras of Tenedos 18, 96,143, !54> : 7 2 > 286 Aristeus, son of Adeimantos 203 Aristeus, son of Pellichos 203 aristocrats 255 Aristodemos of Thebes 253 Aristogeiton 54 n., 255, 309 Aristokleidas 68 n. Aristomenes of Aigina 254 n. Aristomenes the Messenian 138 Aristomenes, son of Xenarkes 220i, 230-2 Aristophanes 56, 248,355; Birds 74 n.; Clouds 164, 260; Wasps 35 Aristoteles of Larisa 96,172-3 Aristotle: list of Pythian victors 42; on Homer 64; Opountian Constitution 167; on poetry and history 342; unity in 355 Aristouchos, son of Aristomenes 221 Arkadia: victors from 114,182-3; and Syracuse 262 Arkesilas III, king of Kyrene 244 Arkesilas IV, king of Kyrene 40, 64,

General Index °9> 99 n., 129, 240, 243-5, 247, 279,323 Arkesilas, father of Lichas 236, 238, 278-9 Arrian 332 Artachaies 304 Artaphernes 302 Artaxerxes 306 n. Artemis 150,335,347 Artemision, battle of (480) 220, 222, 3°3> 337 Asia Minor: victors from 144 Asine 124-5,127—8 Asklepieia 258 Asklepios 67-8, 364 Asopichos of Orchomenos 6,159— 61,163,166 Asopodoros 165-6 Asopodoros of Timandros 165 Asopolaos the Plataian 166 Asopos, daughters of 116,118,148, 178,182, 209 Aspendos 44 Astyanax, son of Hektor 144 n. Astylos of Kroton 26,187, 252, 284 Athamas, son of Oinopion 155 Athanodoros of Tenedos 143 n. Athena: Lindia 132; Skiras 253; on 'fear of the citizens' 367 Athenagoras 79 Athenaios 18, 24 Athens, Athenians: in wartime Olympic games n; Panathenaia (games) 13-14, 258; and Delian festival 14-16; colonies 15; kinship with Ionia 15-16, 316; praised by Thucydides and Pindar 24; Peisistratid tyranny 25; Thucydides' bias towards 33; Thucydides' exile from 33, 36; in battle of Delion 44; cavalry 51, 251; defeated by Syracusan

431

cavalry (415-413) 51; as 'tyrant city' 59, 84, 210; imperialism 61, 64; and Sicilian expedition 73-4,101,103 n., 106,197, 295, 33°, 334-5,34°> 342; Oschophoria festival 79, 2534, 262; democracy in 82,248, 255-6, 258-62; Metapontine alliance with 120; Euboian revolt from 122; territorial expansion 125; Dorieus and I 35-7, I 39, I 425 and coup of 394 136; relations with Thourioi 139; and Tenedos 143; tribute paid to 143; victory odes for 154, 247-8, 250-4, 260, 262; Tribute Lists 162; relations and conflicts with Aigina 211,217,221-3,227, 229-34, 249, 254; and Kyrene 243; dominance 247; Ephialtic reforms 248, 367; patronage in 249; wealth in 257-8; athletics in 261; war with Sparta 273, 294; overthrown (411) 300; and Ionian Revolt 301; autochthony 314; physical remains 315; final defeat in Sicily 347-9, 351-2; Constitution of the 5,000 (411) 368 athletes: and oikists 26-7, 48; and function of epinikian ode 28-9 athletics: as democratic leveller 252 athletics (Greek): prestige in 4; origins 5-8; honours and rewards 20-1; colonial 27-8; related to fighting 337; and spectators 344-5; see also games; Olympic games Augustus Caesar 371 autochthony 249, 313-14 Autodikos 226

432

General Index

Automedes of Phleious 118,182, 346 Bacchiads 246 Bacchylides: on Athenians at Delos 14-16; victory odes 18, 23, 25,

37> 39> 57 > 79> 96> I2I> I29> l8l> 182,187; audience 30, 34, 36; myth in 44; on Hope 71-2; on yearning for out-of-reach 73; on ephemerality 75; political views 78—9, 83—4; religious views 88; and colonial myths 103,123; writes for Sicilians 105; and colonial kinship 116; on daughters of Asopos 118; on Metapontion 119; on founding of Koressos 121; on Keos 123; and Argive control of sanctuaries 124,127; known to Thucydides 127-8; names victors 129; odes for Keians !42> :595 little mention of east Greece 144-5; ancl lonians 155; on Knossos 157; on Thessaly 1703; on Syracusan tyrants 187; writes on Metapontion 189; on Argos 204; on Aiginetans 208-10, 214-15, 217, 219, 221, 223, 227; on Menandros 229; cites no Spartan dedicatee 235; on Petraian games 237; on wealth 257-8; intertextuality with Thucydides and Pindar 269-71; and Pindar's polemic 288; moralizing 295; lacks scruples 296; on Kroisos of Lydia 308; narrative structure and technique 317-18, 327-8, 341; speeches and dialogue in 318-19,321,324-6,341; metaphor in 322; on spectators 345; style 356,366

Bakhtin, Mikhail 277,301 Barrett, W. S. 83,124-5,128> :94> 196 Barren,John 18-19, 2I> 248 Bassidai 213, 214 n. Battos, Battiads 107,112-13, 243-4, 2 79 Berenike 28,100 Betant, E. 270 Boiotia: in battle of Delion 44,159; internal dissensions 62; helps Megara 117; Pindar's poems on 159-62,164-5; political status :6o;mythin 209; Pindar's origins in 215 Boiotos 120 Bosanquet, R. C. 280 Bowra, C. M. 22, 38,118,147-8, _ 287 boxing 16 boys: as victors 29,163,173, 204 Brasidas: garlanded in reception at Skione 7, 46-8, 200, 235, 256,276,286, 351,373-4; compared with Achilles 47-8; Thucydides praises 83,323; as athlete-oikist 103,184; as founder of Syracuse 184-5; cult 260; wounded 343 Brauron, east Attica 102 Briseis 298-9 Brock, Roger 70 Bromios/Dionysos festival 102 n. bronze (metal) 64 Bundy, Elroy 28, 38-9,166,179, 223,242 Burkert, Walter 7 Burnett, A. P. 296 Burton, R. W. B. 38,71 Bury, J. B. 227 Byron, George Gordon, 6th Baron 2 93 Byzantion 206

General Index Caesar,Julius 79, 83 Calame, Claude 103 Cambyses, Persian king 65 Carey, Chris 30, 35, 40,131,179, 214, 245, 287-8, 290, 341-2 carnival 277 Carthaginians 193,195 Casaubon, Isaac 183 Catling, Richard 109 cavalry 51 Cawkwell, George 82 Chaironeia 162 Chalkidike 7, 46 and n. 189; see also Akanthos; Skione Chamoux, F. 247 Champions, Battle of the (archaic) 127

Chares of Lindos 132 chariot races 16,51,163,174,190, 1 97, 205, 235-6, 238, 249, 251, 260

Charybdis 104 Cheimon 204 Chersonese 133 Chios: oligarchy in 82; Pindar and 145-8,150-4, 209; as Homer's birthplace 146-8, 150; and Orion myth 146-50; Dionysos and 151-2; Aeolian connections 155; Thucydides on 155-6; see also Ion of Chios Chiron 101, 325 Chromios of Aitna 35,51,187,190, 262,312

Chrysis (priestess) 126 Cicero 83 Cirrha 172 citizenship 139-41,186 civic festivals, see festivals closure (narrative) 328,329, 349-51; see also false closure coins: celebrate cavalry 51 Cole, Thomas 223

433

colonies: and myth and legend 103-7, US-16,119-22, 313-14; and kinship 115-16; and annexation of adjacent territories 123-5 Condoleon, N. M. 149,155 Connor, W. R. 38,338 constitutions (political) 79-80, 368 Conte, Gian Biagio 269 Cornford, F. M. 50,331,335 Grotty, Kevin 92, 253 cults, see festivals; hero-cults; also particular cults (e.g. Graces; Hesychia; Muses) Cyclades: colonized by Athens 15-16 Cyprus 156-7 Cyrenaica 119,244,305 Cyrus, Persian king 65 Damaina 99 n. Damonon 236-7, 279; inscriptions 12

Damophilos 40-1, 69, 245,323 dance and dancing 32 n., 36, 347 and n., 372 Dandis 204 Darius the Great, Persian king 44, 221, 306 n.

Darius the guardsman no n. Davies, J. K. 96 death, patriotic 74 Debnar, Paula 145,154 Deinomenid rulers (Sicily) 65 Dekeleia 315 n. Delian League 116 Delion, battle of (424) 44-5,51,123, 159-60,162, 323; casualty list 305,375 Delos: games/festival (Delia) 10,14-16, 276, 312, 374; in Bacchylides 34; as free port under Romans 132;

434

Delos: games/festival (Delia) (cont.): Pindar's poems on 142-3, 154; purification 312, 315 Delphi: oracle at n, 87; as site of Pythian games 11,175, 231, 264-5; amphiktiony 12, 231, 264; events 17; in Bacchylides 34; inscriptions and monuments 48,139, 238, 243; endorses colonizations no, 113; Chians perform in 154; and Thessaly 174-5; as shrine 176; and Herodotus on Aiginetans 226; and Second Sacred War 231; control of games 265; statues 359 Delphic Precepts 361 Demand, N. 102 Demaratus, Spartan king 273 n., 284 Demeter 199,202,366 Demetrius of Phaleron 64 Demosthenes 48,50, 338-9, 356, 358 n.; Against Neaira 24 Denniston, J. D. 354, 362-3, 365 Denomenid rulers 65 Desire: personified 71 de Ste Croix, G. E. M. 212, 215 Deukalion 168, 313, 315-16 Devereux, George 147 Dewald, Caroline 283 Dexithea 121 Diagoras of Melos 28 Diagoras of Rhodes 16,29,131-4 Diagoras of Sparta 137 Diagoreioi (or Eratidai) 131,138-9 Dickens, Charles: David Copperfield 325

Didymos 13,166 Dindorf, G. 136 Diodorus 28, in, 186,195,199, 304 Diodotus 71 Dionysios of Halikarnassos: on

'severe arrangement' 5, 354, 358-60, 362, 368-9; on Thucydides' narrative style 272, 355, 357-8,360; on Thucydides' excurses 308, 310, 312; imitates Thucydides 342; on neglect of grammatical sequence 365; on polyinterpretability 367; on obscure words in Thucydides 369-7! Dionysios I, tyrant of Syracuse 28, 65,98 Dionysos: and Chios 151-2; and Demeter cult 202 Dioskouroi, the 21,204-6,225-6, 238, 241, 297 n. dithyrambs 90-1,145,151-3, 366 Dodds,E. R. 65 Dodona: Zeus oracle at n; Pindar and 175; as shrine 176; dedication at 178 Dorian Kyrene, 5««Kyrene Dorians: and lonians 154-5; in Sicily 195-6; Pindar's preference for patrons from 201; invasions 240-1,314 Dorieus the Rhodian (pankratiast): athletic victories n, 48,134, !36,139-40, 277, 283, 374; life and background 131, : 34-9, :59, 3°45 Pindar on 135; executed by Spartans 137-8, 140, 303 n., 304; exiled 137 n.; citizenship 139-42,186, 283; name 304 Dorieus the Spartan: Sicilian expedition of 10, 303; and founding of Libya 107-10, 112-13; as claimant to Spartan kingship 109—11, 303 n.; and colonies in Sicily 110-11,209; Herodotus on 110,304,306;

General Index and Kroton-Sybaris quarrel 299, 302-3; and Ionian Revolt 302

Doristomphoi igi Dornseiff, F. 72,106, 242, 354, 358, 360,364 Dougherty, Carol 103, 227 Douglas, Mary 31 Dover, Kenneth 117,140,145,164, 189, 270, 362, 365 Drachmann, A. B. 368 Dromeus of Mantinea 49 Dryopians 125 n. Duchemin,J. 224 Dunbabin, T. J. 120 earthquakes 121,123,162 EbertJ. 208 Echo 318 Edmunds, Lowell 87-8 Edwards, M.W. 298 Egesta 101,141 n., 195,303-4, 349 Eleans 114 Eleusis: mysteries go, 251; games 254 n. Elis 9-10,140, 273, 275 Elymians 195 Emmenidai 191,197, 208 Empedokles: on athletic successes 6, igg-2oi; style 358; Katharmoi igg-2oo Empedokles, son of Exainetos (grandfather of above) 200 Enimakritidas 237 Enna :8g Entella ig5 Entimos of Krete 185 Enymakratidas 27g Epharmostos of Opous 2g, g7,167, 254"., 345

ephebes 29, 87-8, 252-4 ephemerality 75, g2 Ephesia 14

435

Ephesus 285 Ephorus 126 Epidamnos 167 Epidauros, Epidaurians 124 epideictic orators 63 n. epinikian odes: celebrate Olympic victories 3-4; origins 17-18, 26; functions 26,28-30; audience and performance 35, 23g; narrative 328 Epitimadas 204 Epizephyrian Lokri, see Lokri (Italian or Epizephyrian) equestrian events 2g-3o Eratidai, see Diagoreioi Eratosthenes 7, g, ig-2i Erechtheid 222 n. Erechtheus 314 Eretria (Euboian) 44 Erginos 318 Ergoteles of Sicilian Him era: boasts of victory over metropolitan Greeks 27; origins and stasis 77,140,144 n., 157-8,185, igi-6, 201, 306; celebratory ode paid for 84 Erichthonios 24g, 314 Erinyes 232 Eryx no-ii Essen, M. 270 Etna, Mount 104,358 Etruscans ig5 Eualkides of Eretria 10, 23 Euboia: colonized by Athens 15; and settlement of Naxos ng; andKeos 122; revolt from Athens 122; fall of 353 euergetism igi n. Euesperides (modern Benghazi) 114, n9,245-7 Eumenes of Cardia 308,343 Eumenides 232 eunomia 82, g6, :6g

436

General Index

Euphamos (Argonaut) 107-8, in-12, 282 Euphemos the Athenian 61,191, 246 n. Euphemos of Kyrene 245-6 Euphronof Sikyon 184 Eupolis 56-7 Euripides: Thucydides writes epigram on 24-5; writes epinikian ode 28,49,56, 58, 85; poetic technique 54; alludes to Pindar's odes 57; on Greek-barbarian opposition 65; and myth 66; political views 79; Alkmaion story in 106; on Alkibiades 258 n., 259 n.; style 285 n.; language 286; word and deed in 317; Andromache 171, iyy;Hekabe 7, 20; Herakleidai 117 n.; Hippolytus 335-6; Ion 16,59, 96,117 n.; Melanippe Desmotis 120 Eurotas (of Galaisos) 119 Euryanax, son of Dorieus log, 303 n. Euryleon 100 n., 112, 305 Euryleonis ioon.,3O5 Eurypylos (Triton) 107 Eurytion, son of Potamodoros 162 Eustathius 236 n., 287-8 Euthymos of Epizephyrian Lokri 26,189 Euxantios,kingofKeos 121 Evagoras 156 Exainetos of Akragas 200 Exainetos (father and son) 200 excellence: inherited 75 exile 77; see also stasis false closure 327, 329, 352-3; see also closure (narrative) Favorinus 358 federal sanctuaries 134 females, see women

festivals: and origins of games 5-i6;Delian 10,15,312,374; agonistic 12-13; Leophron's 22 n.; Pindar on civic 35; Bromios/Dionysos 102 n.; women and 102 n.; all-night Herakleian at Thebes 164; as social gatherings 207; for Apollo at Karneios 245; and domestic Attic cults and elites 253—61; and inter—city rivalry 263; see also games; Olympic games; Oschophoria Figueira, T. 212, 215, 230 Finley, J. H. 91 Finley, Moses: The World of Odysseus S0-1! 33 Flamininus, Titus Quinctius 266 focalization 320 foil 39, 309 Fontenrose,J. 149 Forrest, W. G. (George) 79,151 Foucault, Michel 371 Fraenkel, E. 289, 371 Fraser, P. M. 246 games: prizes and rewards 8-9; funerary 9; events 16-17; names of victors 129-30; prizes 258; see also athletics Gardiner, E. N. 17 Caspar, C. 163 Gela, Sicily 60-1,132,159,185, 188 n., 196, 314; peace conference (424) 191 Gelder, H. van 137 Gellius, Aulus 358 Gelon, Sicilian tyrant 81,187-8,

19°, msos

gift-exchange (ritual) 30-2 Gildersleeve, B. L. 97, 232 Glaukos of Euboian Karystos 190, 3°7

General Index Gnaeus Pompeius 355 gold 3, 40, 242, 283, 285, 331 Golden, Mark 239 Goldhill, S. 317,325 Gomme, A. W. 56,87,282 Gomme, A. W., A. Andrewes, and K. J. Dover 38 Gorgon (historian) 133 Gortyn law-code (Krete) 157 Gould,John 307 Graces (Charites) 161 Graf, Fritz: Mordionische Kulte 151 Graham, A. J. 115 Greece: constitutional forms 79-80; eastern 144-5, :53~6; and overseas settlement 185 Grenfell, B. P. and A. S. Hunt 41-3 Griffiths, Alan 150,153 Gylippos, son of Kleandridas 140, 338-40 Hagesias 77,103,182-5, 3°4 Hagesidamos of Epizephyrian Lokri 47, l69, l89 Hagnon of Athens 48 n. Hagnon, oikist of Amphipolis 184, 260-1

Hall,Jonathan 126-7 Hamilton, Richard 102,145-6 Hansen, Mogens Herman 160 hapax 285-6, 313,370, 371 n., 375 Harmodios 54 n. Harpokration 314 Harrison, T. 304 Hector: death 344, 351 Hegies 184 n. Hekataios of Miletos 181 Helen, wife of Menelaos 314, 316, 343 Helios 132,134,161 Hellanikos 119, 127, 162, 292 Hellen, son of Deukalion 316 Heloros 189

437

Henrichs, Albert 39 Hephaistos 105 Hera: games (Heraia or Hekatombaia) 13, 37, 204, 237; attack on Apollo 97; Argive temple (Heraion) 125-7, 282; attempted rape by Ixion 153; Parthenia 183; and Argonauts 334-5, 349 Herakleia (Lucania) 303 Herakleia (Sicily) 111,303 Herakleia in Trachis 14, 21, 235-6, 264 Herakleidai in Herakles: Pindar on stealing cattle of Geryoneus 65-6; dithyramb on initiation after descent to Hades 90-1, 366; mother protects from serpent in cot 99, 243; attack on Paros 107 n.; conquest in Sicily no; story known to Dorieus the Spartan in; founds Olympic games 114; festival for sons at Thebes 164; lion emblem 236; games at Marathon 254 n.; dialogue with Meleager 317, 3:9,325 Hermokrates of Syracuse 60-1,191 hero-cults 8,48 and n., 189, 260, 304; see also oikists Herodotos (games victor) 163,165 Herodotos of Thebes 165 Herodotus: on Tritantaichmes 3; on Olympic victors 10; on Greekness of Macedonian king 14; on battle of Plataia 22; on Simonides' epinikian poetry 23; and Thucydides' panhellenism 33 n.; metaphors 44; mentions Pindar 57; on Greek-barbarian opposition 65; on healing in Kroton 69;

43«

General Index

Herodotus: (cont.): on Themistokles as 'new man' 76; on women 79; moral purpose in historywriting 95; on kinship 101, 209; on colonization of north Africa 107-13; on Dorieus the Spartan no, 304,306; and myth 119; on Philippos ofKroton 141; on Smyrna 154; on Boiotians 160-2; on Asopodoros of Timandros 165; on Macedonian descent from Argos 206; on Aiginetans 208, 218-21, 225-6, 262; on Aigeidai 241; relation to Pindar 271; cites Liches 280; on Samios of Sparta 281; on Homer 291; and Thucydides' History 292; methodology 293, 374; and causation 299-300; and contingency 301-3; on Ionian Revolt 301-2; refusal to adjudicate 301; story-telling speeches 307; on Spartan claim to be home of Agamemnon 314; word and deed in 317; narrative technique 327, 348; on Xerxes 331-2; vocabulary 333,351; on theatre audiences 344; compositional structure 355; style 356, 365; on democracy 368; 'Debate on the Constitutions' 79 Hesiod: Isokrates recommends 66; personifies Hope 71; on Typhon 104 n.; on Orion myth 147,149-50; on Apollo and Kyrene 170; on near and far 335; compositional structure 355; Astronomy 149;

Catalogue of Women 149; Works

andDqys 30, 71,149 Hestia 96 hesychia 60-4, 96, 232 Hesychidai 232 Hesychos 232 Hetoimaridas debate 224 Hieron, tyrant of Syracuse 25,34-5, 57, 67-8, 80, 84, 98,129,187-8, 214, 284, 325,346, 371 n. Hieronymus of Cardia 266,308, 343 Himera 159,185,192-5, 201; massacre at 85; battle of (480) 196 n. Hipparchos 54 n. hipparchs 172 Hippias 10 Hippokleas (boy runner) 173 Hippokleas of Thessaly 171-3 Hippokrates of Athens 90-1,250-1, 323 Hippokrates, Sicilian tyrant 187-8, 190 Hippolyta 341, 367 n. Hipponion, south Italy 174 Hodkinson, Stephen 239, 305 Homer: influence 4; no mention of Olympic games 9-10; narrative study of 38; Thucydides imitates 39, 357; onpothos 40 n.; metaphors 44; Thucydides' knowledge of poetry 56, 64; and hesychia 64; on good leader 85; on Apollo 97; on Rhodian foundation-myth 106; on Phaiakans 114; birthplace on Chios 146-8,150; intertextuality with Pindar and Thucydides 271; appositive summary 285; invokes Muse 286; Thucydides on authority

General Index of 292; subject selectivity 293; exaggerations in 296; and causation 297-9; w°rd and deed in 317; speeches in 318-21, 323; use of simile 322; on trumpets 333; on Hector's death 344; games in 345; unity in 355; style 356-7, 366; nonce-words 369; literal descriptions 373; Iliad 9-10, 18,40 n., 200, 276, 285, 297—8, 332, 343-5, 356; Odyssey 2899l,3^332 Homeric Hymns 292,312,366 homosexuality: in Pindar and Thucydides 54 n. 9 Hope: personification of 71-2 hoplites 51; race (in armour) 17 Horace 289,293,360,371 Horden, Peregrine and Nicholas Pure ell 217 How,W.W. and J. Wells 219 Howie, J. Gordon 39 Hubbard, Thomas 211-12,215 Hude, C. 368 Hutchinson, Gregory: Greek Lyric Poetry 145,319 Huxley, George 113 Hyblon, kingofMegara 314 hybris 232 Hyginus 147-8 Hymn to Demeter (Homeric) go Hyperbios of Syracuse 186 Hyperboreans 170 Hypoknemidian Lokri, see Lokri (Opountian or Hypoknemidian) Hypsipyle 318 Hyrieus, Orion's father 147-8 lalysos 132-3 lamidai 183-6,208,241,304 Ibykos of Rhegion 21-2, 25, 27, 235,

439 237, 248

Idomeneus of Krete 345 'if.. . not' constructions 302, 306 lias (trainer) 47 Illig,L. 327,346-7 immortality 89, 91-2 Instone, S. J. 16 lolaos 114 n., 225 Ion of Chios 147,155, 239 Ion of Samos 238 Ionia, lonians: kinship with Athens 15-16,316; banned from Herakleia in Trachis 21; conquered by Persia 116; material power 145; Pindar's alleged antipathy to 153-5; epigraphy 195; in Sicily 201; Thucydides on 'theoria' 312 Ionian Revolt 109,301-2,306,349 loulis, Keos 46,129 n. Iphigeneia 99 Isokrates: on Pindar's rewards for praising Athens 57 n.; 'Kyprian orations' 63, 66; on kingship 65-6; on Pindar 66; on Philip II of Macedon 85; praises Evagoras 156 Isthmian games: founded 12; Pindar writes on 36-7; records of victors 43,129, 240; crown 264; Greek freedom proclaimed at 266 Isthmionikos of Athens 103, 261 Isyllos of Epidauros 241 Italy: Greek colonization of 120; southern 187 Itys 310 lulis 122 lullus Antonius 289 Ixion 153, 311 Jacoby, F. 43,136,138-9, 253 Jameson, Michael 124

44-Q

General Index

Janko, Richard 332 Jason 29, 40, 87-8, in, 113, 243, 331-2, 335

Jason of Pherai 173,265 Jebb,R.C. 71 Jeffery,L. H. 116 Jones, C. P. 309 Jong, I. de 327 Julius Pollux 286 Kadmeians 18 Kadmos 299 Kallet, Lisa 261,347,349 Kallias the Athenian ('the Mede') 22, 248, 281 Kallias (lamid) of Elis 110,184,299, .3°4~5 Kallias, son of Didymion 211 Kallikles 65 Kallimachos 28,100,122-3, 245 Kallisthenes 42 Kamarina 61, 86,188-92,197 Kamiros 132 Karneadas 244-5 Karneades 130, 244-5 Karneades of Kyrene 244 Karneios 244-5 Karrotos, son of Alexibios 245-6 Karthaia 122 Kasmene 189 Kasmylos, son of Euagoros 142 Kassander 266 Kassandra 169,178, 296 Kastor 114 n., 205,324; see also Dioskouroi, the Katane (Aitna, now Catania) 187-8 201

katasterismos 146-7,149-51 Kelees 305 Keos: colonization 15; Bacchylides' origins in 37; wine 68; foundation legend 120-3; games victors 129,142,159;

pays tribute to Athens 143; as Kretan foundation 159 Kerkyra (modern Corfu) 77, 94,114, 117,178, 230, 306 n., 314,368 kings: celebrated in odes 30; nature of in Pindar 65-6, 83; elected i09-10 kinship: between cities 43; and colonies 115-17 Kinyras 156 Kirkwood, G. 158,282,294 Kleades, son of Autodikos 226 Kleandros of Aigina 264 Klearchos of Soli 361 Kleinias 259, 303 Kleisthenes of Athens 248, 301 Kleisthenes of Sikyon 25,44,86, 11

3>191

Kleodamos (father of Asopichos) 6 Kleombrotos, son of Dexilaos of Sybaris 26 n. Kleomenes I, Spartan king 23,10910, 222,

227,

235,

299,

302-3

Kleon of Athens 143,261,322,337 Kleon of Sikyon 238 Kleonai 205, 264 Kleonymidai 228 Kleoptolemos of Thessaly 13,172, 174, 227 Klytaimestra 99, 296, 298, 300 Knemis 166 Knossos 144 n., 157,185, 206 Kokalos, king of Kamikos 196 Konon the Athenian 137 Kore 202 Koressos (now Koressia) 121-2 Korinna 102,118 Korinth: controls Isthmian games 12, 264-5; Kypselid tyranny 25; and founding and colonization of Syracuse 27,103, 189, 202; fails to keep records 42; as 'wealthy'

General Index 56; and civic unrest andKerkyrans 114,117; craftsmanship 203; Pindar writes on 204; sacred prostitution in 242; on Athenian tyranny 261; naval innovation 315 Koroneia, battle of (446) 162,222 Koronis, mother of Asklepios 73, 96, 99,335 Kos 258 Kreousa 96 Krete: colonies 132,155,159, 209, 314; victors from 157-9, 208; and Akragas 196; Karneades name in 244; and Sotades 283 Kretheus, son of Oinopion 155 Krios of Aigina ('the Ram') 23, 208 n., 218-20, 222, 235, 302 Krison of Himera 192 Kritias of Athens 81,279 Kroisos, Lydian king 34, 64-5, 83, 94, 3° 8 >3 l8 Kronos 114 Kroton: games victors 10, 26; medicine in 69; Dorieus the Spartan aids no, 302; enmity and conflict with Sybaris 141, 2 99> 3 O2 > 3°5> 3°6 n -5 Astylos and 187; democratic athletics in 252; Philippos exiled from 303; Kalliasjoins 304 Kurke, Leslie 50, 235, 304 Kyklopes 104-5, :I4> 3^6 Kylon of Athens 10,25,256,311-12, 347 Kyniska, Spartan princess 100, 237-8, 247

Kypselid tyranny (Korinth) 25 Kypselos 307 Kyrene: Pindar's patrons from 52 n.; medicine in 69; and colonization of Libya 108-9,

441

243; founding 111-13,241; Lindiansin 119; as colony 132, 241; participation in games 156; and Thessaly 170; Pindar on 238, 240-1, 243-7; names 244-5; ancl Apollo Karneios cult 245; rulers 263; in Sophocles' Electra 265; Lichas' connection with 279; name Paraibatas in 305 Kyrene (nymph) 101,170 Kytenion 44 Lachon of Keos 129 Ladas 204 Laidlaw, W. 14 Laistrygonians 104,114 Laius (or Lasus; oracle) no Lamachos 343 Lampon, son of KJeonikos 219 Lampon, son of Pytheas 34, 213, 219-20,226,235 Larisa 173 Lavecchia, S. go, 145-6,152, 366 leaf-throwing 7 Lefkowitz, Mary 241,288,321,354 Leiro, Pdaughter of Oinopion 149 Leon of Sparta 103,235-6 Leontini, Sicily 22, 27,187 Leophron 22 n. Leotychidas 307 Leppin, H. 82 Lesbos: Mesa sanctuary 134; victors from 144 Leto 335 Leuke (island) 48 Levi, Peter 237 Lewis, D. M. 122,162,202,231-2, 279 Lexicon of Greek Personal Names (ed. P. M. Fraser and E. Matthews) 129-31, 203, 279-80 andpassim libations 40, 332-3, 335

General Index

442

Libya: colonization 107-13, 243 Lichas of Akarnania 279 n. Lichas of Paros 281 Lichas of Petronius 279 n. Lichas, son of Samieus 280 Lichas (Spartan): in Thucydides' History 3-5, 36-7, 275-80, 282-3, 328-9, 360; status in Sparta 137, 279; citizenship 140; victories 236-8; patronymic (Arkesilas) and family 243, 247, 278-81; career and reputation 263; flogged 273,275-7,283-4 Liddell, H. and R. Scott 352 Lightfoot,Jane 149 Likymnios 105 Likymnios of Chios 152 Lindos, Lindians 119,132-4,217, 220

Liparion, son of Liparion 129-30 litotes 284 n., 311 Livadi (Agia Eirene) 121 Lloyd-Jones, H. 61, 89,179-80,194 Lobel, E. 146 Lokri (Italian or Epizephyrian) 98, 168-9, l89 Lokri (Opountian or Hypoknemidian) 97-8,120, 166-9,313

Lomas, Kathryn 141 Longinus: On the Sublime 356 Loraux, Nicole 313 Lucian: Philopseudes 204 Lucretius 354 n. Lykortas the Syracusan 186 Lysander of Sparta 110,137,218, 225, 243 Lysias 335 Macedonia: royal tombs (Vergina) 13-14; kinship with Argos 14; and Argive descent 117, 206;

royal house 180-1 Macleod, C. W. 78 Maehler, H. 147-8, 257 Magna Graecia 103 Makelo 121 Malamphyllon, Mount 181 Malkin, Irad 103 Marathon: delegations to Delos 15; Heraklean games 254 n. Marcellinus: Life of Thucydides 39, 357, 371 n Mardonius, Persian general 3,180, 219, 226,302 n. Masson, Olivier 174 matriliny 98 Matthews, Elaine 130-1 Mauss, Marcel: The Gift 30-3 Medea 69 n., 99,107, 293 medicine 67-71 medism 62, 64,160,166 Megakles, son of Hippokrates 211, 248 n., 250-2, 256, 260, 265 Megakles the younger 251, 260 Megara 117,168,188, 206-7, 228, 240,314 Megara Hyblaia 196 n. Meidias of Aigina 207 n., 210 n. Melampous, son of Amythaon 124 Melanippe 120 Meleager 317,319,325 Melesias 17,53, 230, 231 n., 252 Melian Dialogue 324 Melissos 163-4,336,373~4 Melos, Melians 72,121-2,329 Memnon 350 Menalkes of Opous 29,167 Menander 355 Menandros of Athens 211,228-9, 252

Menekrates, Ozolian Lokrian 178 Menelaos 314 Menoitios 98, 313-14 Meriones 345

General Index Merkelbach, R. and M. L. West 150 Merope, ?daughter of Oinopion 147,149 messages to the underworld 91 n., 318

Messapians 157 Messene, see Zankle Messenia 182 metaphors and figures of speech 44, 48-50, 214,321-3, 337, 351, 360 Metapontion, southern Italy 119, 120,189, 201 miasma 107 n. Michell, Barbara 244 Midas of Akragas 17,154,199 Midea 114 Miletopolis, Asia Minor 361 Miletos 116,144,151, 302, 306 n.,

344 Millar, Fergus 62 Miller, Stephen 26, 252 Milo 304 Mindaros the Spartan 135 Minoa (later Herakleia Minoa) 305 Minos 121,196, 316 Minyas, mythical king 161 Mnemosyne 290 Molossians 176-80 moralizing 95, 295 Moretti, L. 144,203,211 Morgan, Catherine 35, 203, 263 Morgantina 191 Most, Glenn 38,179, 290 Motya (nowMozia) 193,197-8 Mullen, William 372 Murray, Oswyn 191-2 Muses 98,160, 287-9, 290,341 music: contests 17 Mycenae 105 Mykale, battle of (479) 244 Mykalessos 310 Mykenai 204 Myletidai 195

443

myths: in Pindar 39-40,44, 97, 103,271,307,312-13,318; inThucydides 97,103,161, 308-11, 316; colonial 103, 113-14, ng—21; as way of denying historical claims 113; of possession 123-4; at Thebes 161,163; Orchomenos and 161 Mytilene 61,143,277,337 Nagy, Gregory 209—10, 291 names (personal) 129-31,244,279 narrative, narratology 273-86, 306 and n., 327-53 Naukratis, Egypt 217, 220 Naupaktians 121 Naxos (Aegean) 119,152 Naxos (Sicily) ng Neapolis (Pmodern Nabeul) 115 n., 246 negation: presentation by 284,350 n. Nemea 336 Nemean games: Argos and 12,125, 205, 264-5; founded 12; rival control of 12, 264-6; Pindar writes on 36-7,154, 228; records of victors 129,182,187, 207, 252; fighting at 274 Neoptolemos 171,175—8,289,343 Nero, Roman emperor 266 Nestor 120 New Academy, Athens 244 New Simonides 22, 24 Nikanor 266 Nikeus 346 Nikias: reforms in Athens 15; on Athenian cavalry weakness in Sicily 51; in Thucydides' quote from Pindar 64; first speech criticizing Athenians' ambitions in Sicily 73, 324, 335> 352; peace of (421) 206, 234, 273;

444

General Index

Nikias (cont.):

attacks horse-breeding and extravagance 259; second speech at Athens 330 n.; debate with Alkibiades 334, 336; Gylippos hopes to capture 338; killed 339; addresses defeated Athenians 351; style 363 Nikodoros of Mantinea 28 Nikodromos, son of Knoithos 220i, 227, 229-30 Nikokles (boxer) 47 Nikomachos 197 Niobe 347 nomos (convention) 66 Norwood, G. 96 Nurse 335 Nymphodoros, son of Pythes 182 Oath (personified) 307 Odrysia 310 Odysseus 289-90, 296, 345 Oedipus 147 oikists: and athletes 26-7, 48, 235, 304; Pindar writes on 103, 184-5; manly qualities T-io;see also hero-cults Oineidai 258 Oinomaos 320, 330 Oinophyta, battle of (457) 169,263 Oinopion 147,149-51,153,155 Olbia, Olbians 116-17 Oligaithidai 203 oligarchy 81-2 Olympia: as site of games 3; Zeus oracle at n; in Bacchylides 34; inscriptions 48-9; Thucydides present at games held at 53, 273,328; Thessaly and 174; statues 359 Olympic games: achievement of victory 3; prizes and rewards

3-4; origins 10-11,114; absent from Thucydides' narrative (432) n, 328; Spartans excluded (420) 11,273-6,282; events 17; women contestants 100; list of victors 129; boys' contests 163; and inter-city rivalry 263; exiles decree 266; Thucydides describes (420) 273-5, S2^; see also Lichas (Spartan) Opous (Opus) 97-8,131,166-70, 189,263,313,314

Opous, son of Protogeneia 313 oracles, see Delphi; Dodona; Olympia Orchomenos 131,160-3, :66 Orestes 241, 314 Orion: myth 146-53 Oroites 299 Orphism 89-91,150,174 Ortygia 185-6 Osborne, Robin 119-20,210-11,235 Oschophoria (Athenian) 79, 210, 253-4

Oschophorikon 29, 253 n., 262 ostracism, ostrakon 250-1, 261 Oulias 278 Oxyrhynchus papyri 41-2,146,154 Ozolians 168 Paestum 174 Page,D. L. 24,118 Pagondas of Thebes 62,159,165, 323 Paian, paians, see Apollo; Pindar; Thucydides Pamphaes 206 Panathenaia games (Athens) 13-14, 258 panhellenic games 3; origins 11-12, "3 Panionia games 14

General Index pankration (event) 16,134,163-4,

445

347 Pausanias, the traveller: on Dorieus the Rhodian 13, 48,134-5, 137-40; on lack of Korinthian and Argive records 42; on Ergoteles 77 n.; on Kyniska's victory in Olympics 100; on Alkmaion story 106; on Minyas' tomb 161; on Thrasyboulos 183; and Ergoteles 192; on Aigina and Lampon 213, 235; on Spartans

performance 33-6, 239, 245 n.; see also symposia Periander 307 Pericles: Funeral Oration 74-5, 88 n., 8g n., 257, 284 n., 3 : 4,322, 337; Thucydides' assessment of 80, 85; and Athenian democracy 82,143, 257; on Athenian dominance 84; reception after coercion of Samos 200, 256; Thoukydides opposes 230; on pursuit of wealth 260; in Thucydides' Theseus excursus 309-12, 315; speeches in Thucydides 320, 322-3; and Sicilian Expedition 340-1,352 Persephone 51 n., igg Perseus 170, 225, 322 Persia, Persians: defeat at Plataia 22,194, 244; in Thucydides 65; conquest of Ionia 116; and medized Greeks 160; Aiginetans and 221-2, 226, 234; and Ionian Revolt 301 Petraian games (Thessaly) 13,174,

235,237-9 Peisirhodos 135,140 Peisistratids (Athens) 25, 83,188 n., 301 n., 308-9, 347 Peithagoras 305 Peleus 97,101, 223-4, 229, 233, 288, 34 1 >3 6 7 n Pelias 87,323 Pelinna, Thessaly 174 Pellichos 203-4 Peloponnese, the: games victors 182 Peloponnesian War, First 33, 36-7, 175, 205, 223, 264 Pelops 330 pentathlon 16-17 Pentathlos of Lipara 103 Perdikkas,kingofMacedon 14,117

237 Pfeijffer, Ilja 40, 80-1, 223, 227-9, 232–3, 341,364,367 Phaiakia, Phaiakians 114,314 Phaiax 197 Phaidra 335 Phalaris of Akragas 64-5, 83, 94-5 Phaleron 253 Phanosthenes 136 Phayllos of Kroton 8 n., 10,187 n., 303 Pheidippides, son of Strepsiades 260 n. Pheidon of Argos 113,265 Phemios 289 Pherekydes 171 Pherias of Aigina 208

285

Panormos (now Palermo) 193,195 Pantares of Gela 26 n. Pantheides, see Argeios ofKeos Paraibates 305 Parmenides of Kamarina 190 Parry, Adam 80 Parsons, P. J. 22 Parthenios 149 Patroklos, son of Menoitios 40 n., 168, 200, 282, 298, 313-14, 345 Pausanias, Spartan regent 22-4,54 ".,219,237-8,311-12,316,

General Index

446

Philip II, king of Macedon: competes in games 28; Isokrates writes on 85 Philippos of Kroton: as Olympic victor i o; citizenship 141; exile, death, and heroization 303-4; provides ship 303 Philistos 83 Philomela 310 Phleious 118,168,182, 206 Phoenicians: Sicilian settlements 1

93,195,3°3

Phoinix 85,317 n. 2 Phokos, Phokians 160, 222, 229, 231 Phokylides 66 Phormio 323 Phormis of Arkadian Mainalos 140, 186 Phrikias 172 Phrynichus 211 n., 344 Phthia, Thessaly 170-1 Phylakides of Aigina 57, 219, 223-4 phyllobolia 20-1

physis (nature) 66 Pindar: epinikian odes 3-4, : 7-18, 25,36,39-40,163, 187, 286, 342; proposed personal acquaintance with Thucydides 4,52-4, 373; style 5> 356> 36°-5> 3675 on leaf-throwing 7; on origins of games 7,113; on local games and agonistic festivals 12-14; on prizes for games victors 13-14; on Athenians and Delia 16; on chariot races 16; on pentathlon 17; on tenella 20; on athlete-oikist connection 27; celebrates autocrats and kings 30; and ritual giving 30-3; on Argonauts 34, 40, 330-2, 334; audience 34-6, 371-2; background 36;

compared with Thucydides 36-7,5°, 59-6°, 354-72, 373; modern studies of 38-9; myth in 39-40,44,97-8, ^03,113-14, 30^,312-13,316; Thucydides imitates 39, 357; politics and history in 40, 43,78-85, 371-2; and dates 41-3,104; and Achilles 47-8; language 49-50; on battles of Salamis andPlataia 50; on cavalry superiority 51; portraits 54-5; Thucydides' knowledge of poetry 56-7, 94; on Athens 59, 248, 250-4, 262; first-person statements and self-examination 59, 240-1, 286, 291, 293, 296; on monarchs and tyrants 59, 63; Thucydides' allusion to 60, 269-70, 272; on kingship 65, 83; on Herakles 66; medical interests 67-70; personifies Hope 71-2; on yearning for out-of-reach 73; on death and honour 74; on ephemerality 75; deplores ambition 76; on inborn skills 76; on stasis 76-7, 262; religious views 88-93, 9^5 on divine power 97; women in 98-9; genealogies and kinship 101; sense of humour 101; and colonial myth 103-7,115-16; on colonization of north Africa 111-13; paians :I 5> 142,154,159, 312; on kinship diplomacy 116-17,17&> ancl Argive Heraion 127; names victors 130; praises Rhodes 132-3; lexicon and vocabulary : 33, :46, 333-4; on Dorieus the Rhodian 135; on Kasmylos 142; on Keian victors 142,159;

General Index association with Tenedos 143; little mention of east Greece 144-5, :53J allusions to Chios : 45~8,150-3; dithyrambs 145,151-4; anti-Ionianism 153-5; on Boiotians 159-62, 164; prosopography 159; on Lokri 169; on Thessaly 170-3; association with Delphi 175; on Molossians 176-7; and Macedonian royal house 180; on Syracuse 187; on Sicily and southern Italy 189; on Theron and Emmenidai 197, 199; favours Dorian patrons 201; on Aiginetans 207-35, 254, 262; maritime imagery 214; Boiotian origins 215; and Sparta 235, 238-43; and Kyrene 243-4; ancl patronage 249, 265, 372; attitude to money 256; on inter-polis rivalry at games 265; knowledge of Thucydides' work 269; names victors by patronymics 278; odes for Arkesilas of Kyrene 279; ring-composition 282-3, 346, 349; narrative technique 285, 3l8, 327-9, 332-3,34^ 348; invokes Muse 287-9; literary art 287-9; polemic in 288, 292; methodology 293-4, 296; moralizing 295-7; ancl causation 296-8, 300; on contingency 306; writes for Chromios of Aitna 312; writes forDelos 312; on Athenian authochthony 3i4;onOpous 314; polarity of word and deed in 317; speeches and dialogue in 318-19,321,323-6; metaphor in 322, 351,360; on

447

preparation of athletes 330-1; on spectators 345; closural themes 349-51 ;Dionysios on 358-9; neologisms 369-71 Pisa 163 Plataia: escapees from siege (428/7) 87-8,352; annexed by Sparta 124; alliance with Athenians 160; as Boiotian 161; Aiginetans at 222, 226 Plataia, battle of (479) 22, 50, 62, 160—i, 165, 194, 244 Plato: quotes from Pindar 57; on kingship 65; on afterlife 91-3; reads Pindar 372; Gorgias 65-6; Hippias Major 238, 243; Phaedo 14; Phaedrus 358 n.;

Republic 57, 72,91, 362 Pleistoanax, Spartan king 312 Plutarch 53, 242, 279, 343; Life of Nikias 15 Poiessa (now Pisses) 122 polemic 288, 292 Polignac, F. de 123 Polybius 62-4, 79,119,186, 292, 298 n., 318 Polydeukes 205, 324-5; see also Dioskouroi, the Polykrates, tyrant of Samos 21,25, 2 99 Polykritos, son of Krios 219 n. Polykritos (younger and elder) 219, 220

Polynikos 45,160, 219 Polyxena (Hekabe's daughter) 20 Popper, Sir Karl: The Open Society and its Enemies 93 Porphyrion 232 Poseidon 101,121,123,223-4,238, 264,282,320,330,332 pathos 40, 334 potlatch 30, 33,101 Poulydamas 297

448

General Index

Praxiteles 186 prayers 331,348 Priam 332, 344,347 priamel 285, 355 Pritchett, W. K. 225, 258 Procopius 286 Proion, the 161 Prokne 310 Protogeneia 313 proxenos (proxenoi) 179-80,182, 220 Psalychiadai 219 Psaumis of Kamarina 58, 62, 86, 190—2 Pseudo-Eratosthenes 150 Ptoiodoros 203 Ptoios 125 n. Ptolemy of Egypt 132 Ptolemy Philadelphos 64 Pushkin, Alexander: Eugene Onegin 293 Pylians 120 Pyrrha 168, 313 Pyrrhus 176-7 Pytheas of Aigina 211,219,223 Pytheas, son of Ischenoos 219 n., 220 Pythian games: Aristotle and Kallisthenes on 8 n.; founded n; held at Delphi n, 175; Thucydides mentions 12; musical contests 17; Pindar writes on 36,37, 217; victors listed by Aristotle 42; Thessalian victories at 172-3 Race, William H. 13, 42,145,153, 232, 246 rape 146,149,153 Rawlings, Hunter 255 RedfieldJ.R. 98 religion 4, 5-16, 87-97; see a^° herocults; and particular gods, heroes, and festivals

Report 318 Rheksanor Arkhagetas Prokles 116 Rhianos 138 Rhodes: founded from Argos 15, 132, 206 n.; and founding of Aigina 15,132, 206 n.; foundation myth 106,132; colonies 132,159, 209, 314; Colossus of (Helios statue) 132; status and prosperity 132-4, 137; synoikized 136, 220; Dorieus and 139-40; Pindar and Bacchylides on 144, 247; Karneades name in 244; shower of gold 283 Richardson, Nicholas go ring-composition 282-3, 315, 328, 338, 346-7,349 Robbins, E. 233 Robert, Louis 100 Rood, Tim 276-7; Thucydides: Narrative and Explanation 327 Rose, Peter W. 17,25,75,84,372 ruler-cult 48 n. Russell, D. A. and M. Winterbottom 287-9 Rusten, Jeffrey 74, 257 Rutherford, Ian 15, 68,77-8,175-6 sacrifice 7-8, 48 n., 265, 286, 332-4 Salaminioi 254 Salamis, battle of (480): Phayllos at 10,77; Pindar on 5°! Aiginetans at 213, 219, 222, 224-6, 302; as Persian defeat 244

Salamis (on Cyprus) 157 Samios of Sparta 281 Samos 21,144,200,280-1,300,322 sanctuaries 10-16,134 sandals: worn singly 87-8, 117 Sappho ig7n.,354n. Sardis: Eualkides killed at 10

General Index Schrader, C. 270 Second Sacred War (4503) 231, 264 Segal, Charles 6, 38, 97, 248, 366 Selinus 101,141 n., 196 n., 304, 305 Semnai 232 Shakespeare, William: KingLear 147; Macbeth 269 Sicilian Expedition (415): Thucydides on 15,51,114-15, 121, 294-5,3:5, 329-31, 333-4, 336, 339, 35°, 352; Alkibiades claims command of 46; final sea-battle and Athenian defeat 50,342-4,346, 348-9,351-3; and Athenian ambitions 73, 197; causes 101; outcome 106; begins 273; Athenian speeches on 324, 334-5; departure 330-1

Sicily: compared with Argonauts 40; tyrants in 77, 84,187-8, 263; colonization 103 n., 104, 109-10,112,114,120,189-90, 201, 209; participation in games 156-7; victors from 190-9; hospitality in 214; Trojan refugees in 314 Sikans 114, 313 Sikyon 183-5,237,262 Silk, Michael 28,44,57,92, 93,158, 362; Aristophanes and the Definition of Comedy 354-5 Simonides: poem on Eualkides 10; writes epinikian odes 22-7, 37,187, 203; influence on Pindar 34; on Kasmylos 142; dithyrambs 152; on Krios 218; Delphi epigram 237; on Agamemnon and Orestes 241; on Sparta 243; and Pindar's polemic 288 Siris 120 Sitalkes,Thracianking 181,310

449

Skamandrios (or Skamandros) of Lesbos 144 Skione 7, 46-8, 235, 276, 314, 351, 374 Skira 253-4 skolia (drinking-songs) 35 and n. Skylax of Myndos 302 Slater, W. J. 133,146,179; Lexicon to Pindar 270 Smith, R. R. R. 54, 322 Smyrna 154 Snell, B. andH. Maehler 146-7, 176, 217 Sogenes of Aigina 179, 289 Sokles of Korinth 307 Sokrates: on kingship 65 Soloeis (now Solunto) 193 Sommerstein, Alan 367 Sophocles: personifies Hope 71-2; on afterlife go; denies making sense of human life 93; Alkmaion story in 106; language 286; on the chorus 2g3 n.; on Tereus 310; poetic technique 354; abstraction in 356; literal descriptions 373; Electra 265; Oedipus at Kolonos 117 n.; Trachiniai 57 n., 336 n. Sostratos of Aigina 212, 216 Sotades (Kretan) 283 Sotades Painter, the 150 Sounion 254 Sparta: excluded from 420 Olympic games n, 273-6, 282; founds Herakleia in Trachis 14, 264; operations in Thrace 46; as oligarchy 82; colonial settlements 109—11,113,121, 168, 243, 246; annexes Plataia 124; Thirty Years Peace with Argos 126; executes Dorieus the Rhodian 137-8; and Chians 155;

45°

General Index

Sparta (cont.): victories unmentioned in 5th century 158, 239-40; and Argos 206; Dioskouroi and 206, 225; Hetoimaridas debate 224; recognizes Athenian empire 234; Pindar and 235, 238-43; victors celebrated 235; poetry in 236-8, 243; internal tensions 263; war with Athens 273, 294; recalls Pleistoanax 312-13; physical remains 315; and Sicilian Expedition 33840; war with Elis 475 spectators 344-6 Sphakteria 218 Stahl, Hans-Peter 301 stasis 76-8,94, 221, 230, 250, 262, 271,306, 368 Steiner, Deborah 214, 322 Stephanus of Byzantium 148 Stesichoros 22,195, 241 Sthenelaidas 355, 364 Stobaios 62 story-telling 307-8 Strabo 9-10, 20,147,176 Strepsiadas 164 Strepsiadas (uncle of Strepsiadas) 74 Strepsiades 43,164, 260 Strepsippidas 164 Stymphalos 35,182-5, :86 n., 208 Sybaris no, 115,141, 299, 302, 305, 306 n. Syloson no n. Syme, Ronald 81,94,311 symposia, sympotic performance 32, 35, 239, 249 synoikism 134,136 Syracuse: Ibykos celebrates victors 22; founded 27,103, 184-6, 202; Pindar praises 51; Pindar's patrons from 52 n.; and Athenian imperialism 61;

Ionian characteristics 155; oikists 184-5; citizenship 185-6, 262; tyranny in 187; as colony and metropolis 189-90; horses and equestrianism 189; and struggle 339-40; see also Sicilian Expedition; Sicily Tacitus 94-5 Tanagra 160 Tantalos, son of Patrokles 218 Taplin, O. 9-10 Taras 139 Tarquinii, Etruria 217 Taurosthenes (wrestler) 54 Teisandros of Naxos 142 n. Telamon 229, 233 Telchines (wizards) 121-2 Telesikrates of Kyrene 17,130, 245 Telesilla of Argos 125,127-8 Telys, ruler of Sybaris 141, 303-4 Tenedos 132,143-4, :54> :68, 215, 247, 263 tenella 19, 21 Tenos 15 Teos (Ionian) 115,137 n., 181 Teres, father of Sitalkes 310 Tereus 153, 310-11 Teukros, son of Telamon 66,157 Thasos 279-81 Theagenes of Megara :88n.,3i2 Theagenes (or Theogenes) of Thasos 13,48,64,157,200 Theaios of Argos: as games victor 13, 27,127-8,193, 204, 228, 264-5, 278

Thearion of Aigina 43,179-80 Thebe, daughter of Asopos 118-19, 208, 240

Thebes, Egypt 176 Thebes (Phthiotic, Thessaly) 164 Thebes, Thebans (Boiotia): Polybius censures 62; and stasis 76;

General Index besieges Plataia (428/7) 87; feminist religion at 102; denounces Athenian injustice 118; settlers on Tenedos 143, 154; Pindar on 145-6,148,

!52,i59-6i,i63,165,178; andAigina 148,178-80, 208-9; dithyramb's supposed invention at 152-3; mythology 161,163; victory poems 163; defeats Sparta (371) 225; and lolaos 225; and Melissos' victory 374 Themis 101,169,320,341 Themistios 219, 229 Themistokles 75-6,120,311-12, 347 Theognetos of Aigina 208 Theognis 66 Theokritos 297 n. theoria 312 Theotimos 245-6 Theoxenos of Tenedos 143 Thera of Kyrene 111-12,116,240-1, 243,246,279,299 Theron of Akragas: Pindar and Bacchylides' odes for 25,129, 150,187,197, 371 n.; retains power 85; and Orphism 89,199; and foundation of Akragas 104; brings settlers to Himera 159,195; as member of Emmenidai family 191; helps defeat Carthaginians at Himera 193; as just man 215 Thersandros of Orchomenos 161-2 Thesaurus Lingua Graecae 270

Theseus 309-11,315-16 Thespiai (Boiotian) 44-6,51,160-1, 164,168, 375 Thesprotia 176 Thessalos 203, 278, 305 Thessaly, Thessalians 160,170-3, 214, 222

451

Thetis 97,101,170-1, 223, 288, 320 Thirty Years Peace (Argos-Sparta) 126, 223, 231, 233 Thorax 173 Thoukydides, son of Melesias 53, 230, 261 Thrace: Spartan operations in 46; Greek settlements 181; Thucydides on 310 Thrasyboulos, son of Aineias 183-4 Thrasyboulos, son of Xenokrates : 94,:97 Thrasydaios of Thebes 214 Thrasydaios, tyrant of Himera 163-4, :94 Thrasys (Emmenid) 191-2 Thucydides: and Lichas affair 4, 37, 275-80, 282-3, 328-9, 360; proposed personal acquaintance with Pindar 4,52-4, 3735 style 5, 358, 360, 363-7; on Brasidas 7, 46-7; on Olympic victors 10; registers Olympic games n; and other games 12,14-15; on Sicilian Expedition 15,51, H5, !2i, 294-5, 315, 329-31, 333-4, 336-8, 35°; on honours for athletes 20; alludes to Simonidean epigram 23-4; epigram on Euripides 24-5; Athenian bias 33; exile 33, 36, 61; history of Peloponnesian War 33, 36-9; universality 33; compared with Pindar 36-7,5°, 59-6o, 354-72,373; modern commentaries on 379; odes 37; wealth 37,53; and narrative technique 43,283, 285,308,310,327-9,332-3, 339, 340-1, 346-7; metaphors and figurative usage 44-5, 48-50, 321-2, 3375

452

General Index

Thucydides (cont.): on athletics and athletes 46-7, 50, 374; family background 53; present at games held at Olympia and other festivals 53, 273> 328; portraits 55; knowledge of Pindar's poems 56-8, 94,119, 312; first-person statements 59; allusions to Pindar 60, 269-70, 272; on autocratic power 65; on plague 67-8; and medicine 69-70; personifies Hope 71-2; speeches in 74-5,317-18, 320-4; on inborn intelligence 75-6; on ambition 76; on greed as evil 76; political views 78-9, 82-3, 85,368; on Pericles 80, 257; religious views 88-9, 91, 93,97; avoids moralizing 95; little mention of women 98-9,101-2, 304; lacks sense of humour 101; supposed daughter 102; myth in 103,161,308-10,315; Thracian origins 103,181; on Alkmaion story 106; on colonization 107,119,121-2; on founders of colonies 114; on kinship diplomacy 116-17, 119,121, 209; onKeos 122-3; on Argive control of Apollo sanctuary 124,127-8; on Argive territorial expansion 126; names victors 131; on Dorieus the Rhodian 134-5, 139, 277; on Homer's Chian birthplace 147; appreciation of Chios 151,155; prosopography 159,165,174; on Thrace 181-2; on Syracuse and Sicily 186-9,19I~2> :94> 201-2; on Korinth 202-3; on

Macedonian descent from Argos 206; Aigina mentioned by 218; on Kerkyra 230; on Sparta 235; on Karneios 244; and north African settlements 246; on Acharnai 251-2; on Aristogeiton 255; attitude to money 256, 260; and Alkibiades' speech 259; and citizenship 262; and intercity politics 265; lexicon and vocabulary 270-1, 286, 293, 333-4, 339, 369; describes Olympic Games of 420 273-4, 276-80; literary style 277, 285-6; self-consciousness and methodology 291-6, 299-300,320; on Homer's authority 292; selectivity 293-5; causation in 298-300; on marriage disputes 304; story-telling speeches 307-8; excursuses in 308-16,347,355; on tyranny 309; on early Sicily 314; word and deed polarity in 317; dialogue in 323-4; on contest and struggle 336-9, 342; on final sea-battle in Sicilian Expedition (Syracuse Great Harbour) and Athenian defeat 342-4, 346,348, 351; on spectators 345-6; paians 348; prayers little mentioned by 348; closural themes 349-53; composition and organization 355; neologisms 369-71; audience 371; Archaeology 3!5-16, 347 Thummer, E. 96 Thurea 218 Thurii, south Italy 135-40, 283, 303-4 Timagoras of Tegea 183

General Index Timaios 120 Timasarchos of Aigina 17, 264 Timodemos of Acharnai 149, 251-2, 254

Timoleon of Korinth 184, 202 Timosthenes 230 n. Timotheos 152 Tiryns 105 Tisamenos (lamid) 184 Tisimeneis (Pythian victor) 45,51, 160 n. Tityos 335 Tlepolemos 105,116 Torylaos 174 n. Torymbas of Thessaly 174 Tritantaichmes 3 Tritonian lake in Troizen 124 n. Trojan Wars: and lack of games 20 Troy 344 Tylissos 157, 206 Tyndareos 316 Typhon (monster) 104 Typhos 232 tyrants, tyranny: in Athens 25,59, 84, 210; Pindar on 59, 63, 83-4, 210; as constitutional form 83; Aigina and 210; Thucydides on 309 Tyrtaios: Eunomia 242 Usher, Stephen 369 Vergina (Macedonia) 13 Vidal-Naquet, P. 87-8 Vidal-Naquet, P. and P. Leveque 87 Virgil 344, 358 volcanoes 104-5 Wade-Gery, H. T. 53, 61,138, 230-1, 248, 261, 279 Walbank, Michael 62,98,162

453

Weiden, M. J. H. van der 146,149, 202

West, Martin 19, 307 Wilamowitz[-Moellendorff], U. von 38,241

Willcock, Malcolm 89,91,312 Williams, Bernard: Shame and Necessity 93

Williams, Richard 39,50 Wilson, Peter 202 women: as games victors 17, 99—100, 305; in Pindar 32,98-9, 101,304; little mentioned by Thucydides 98-9,101-2, 304; Lokrian 98; status 98; in festivals 102 n.; in Greek religion 102; Hesiod's catalogue of 149; and Opountians 167 wrestling 16 Xanthos 44 Xenokrates of Akragas 42,187,197 Xenomedes of Keos 122-3 Xenophon: and games victors 49-50; on kings 65; political views 79; moral purpose in history-writing 95; on Kyniska's horse-racing 100; doubts on authenticity 134; on Dorieus the Rhodian 135-6, 139-40; onjason of Pherai 173, 265; on Aiginetans 218; and Korinthian games 264; on Elis-Sparta war of 400 275; and Thucydides' account of 420 Olympic Games 275; on grief 299 n.; speech in 318; on sacrifice and libations 332; Anabasis 183 Xenophon of Korinth 18, 203, 242, 265, 356 Xerxes 306 n., 331-2, 349

454

General Index

Young, David 59, 242, 263, 335 Zankle (/afcrMessene, Sicily) 21, 138,194 Zeus: oracles n; prayers to 40; and hesychia 64; Pindar invokes 83, 233; and personified abstractions 96; Thucydides invokes 97; rivalry with

Poseidon over Thetis 101,2234,320; and destruction of Keos 121,123; sanctuary on Mount Atabyrion, Rhodes 134; altar at Pisa 184; Eleutherios ('liberator') 193-4; dialogue with Polydeukes 205, 324; Themis warns 320 Zimmermann, Bernhard 150, 202

Thucydides and Pindar: Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry

Thucydides and Pindar: Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry

Poetry and Narrative in Performance

Pindar

Thucydides

Thucydides and the Philosophical Origins of History

Thucydides and Internal War

The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation

Thucydides and the Peloponnesian War

The Odes of Pindar

Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Writings from the Ancient World)

Thucydides and Internal War

Thucydides, Pericles, and Periclean Imperialism

Irony and the Poetry of the First World War

The Poetry of Physics and the Physics of Poetry

Poetry and the Gods

Women, Crusading and the Holy Land in Historical Narrative

Thucydides and the Ancient Simplicity: The Limits of Political Realism

Bit World. Poetry

Hobbes's Thucydides

The Politics and Poetics of Journalistic Narrative

Bit World [poetry]

Lexicon to Pindar

Literature and the Narrative Self

Poetry of Healing and Abuse

Intertextuality and the Reading of Roman Poetry

Thucydides - History of the Peloponnesian War

Theocritus and the Archaeology of Greek Poetry

Poetry and Language Writing: Objective and Surreal (LUP - Poetry and)

Modernism, Narrative and Humanism

Narrative and Media

Thucydides and Pindar: Historical Narrative and the World of Epinikian Poetry