Lesser and Anonymous Fragments of Greek Lyric Poetry: A Commentary 9780198860501, 0198860501

Citation preview

LESSER

AND ANONYMOUS FRAGMENTS OF GREEK LYRIC POETRY

See pages 293-4. (From Carl Robert,

Bild und Lied (1881) p.82.)

Lesser and Anonymous Fragments of Greek Lyric Poetry: A Commentary EDITED

BY

MALCOLM

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

DAVIES

OXFORD UNIVERSITY

PRESS

Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DB

United Kingdom 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. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries € Malcolm Davies 2021 The moral rights of the author have been asserted First Edition published in 2021 Impression: 2

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, by licence 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 work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Control Number: 2020946424 ISBN 978-0-19-886050- 1

Printed and bound in Great Britain by Clays Ltd, Elcograf S.p.A. Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website referenced in this work.

Preface Tucked away at the back of editions or anthologies, the lyric poems, commented on in this, and re-edited in the accompanying volume, have generally suffered

neglect, for reasons with which one can partly sympathise. They are sometimes anonymous, almost invariably fragmentary, often textually corrupt and lacunose, and frequently so brief as apparently to defy interpretation. Yet they

include such unusual works as fragments of Telesilla and Praxilla, two of the very few female poets of antiquity other than Sappho. They also include part of a victory ode by Euripides; the only lyric poem we know Aristotle to have composed; and a lengthy versified account of the menu of a banquet. Also, what

may be the oldest Greek hymn, or indeed poem, to survive from ancient Greece. They embrace a dazzlingly wide range of what we may call sub-genres: Dithyramb, Paean, Scolia, hymns, and prayers; and they throw various light on Greek history, religion, and culture. Some of them originated in the interval between the deaths of Sophocles and Euripides and the rise of Hellenistic poetry, a period about whose literature we still know frustratingly little. Until relatively recently, hardly any concerted work had been published on any of them in English since Herbert Weir Smyth's meritorious but now antiquated

commentary, Greek Melic Poets of 1900 (‘the most erudite and scholarly contribution that America has yet made to the exegesis of Greek poetry, as B.L. Gildersleeve assured Smyth: Letters (ed. W. W. Briggs, p.235)). But research has

now finally started to explore these pieces, and with the help of this I have brought to completion the commentary that follows. Housman once identified ‘diffidence and flexibility’ as the keynotes to editing a certain non-fragmentary Latin poet (CR 34 (1920)122 = Classical Papers 3.1007) and, given that we regu-

larly know so little—if anything!—of a given fragment's author and style, the same qualities seem called for in handling our authors. Praxilla 754, for instance, seems to me a perfect specimen of the type of composition where secure conclusions are impossible for the reasons cited.

Having thus embarked on self-exculpation, let me next address what may be regarded as sins of commission or omission. The present volume contains commentaries on fragments included in Pages PMG even when it is likely that they

do not represent the lyric genre. The reader will meet the most obvious instance near the beginning, with Pratinas' fascinating fr.708, long suspected to be, and now almost universally accepted as, from the chorus of a satyr-play. This con-

sideration did not seem to me to exclude discussion of its fascinating content. I have also commented on those citational fragments overlooked by PMG but to which other scholars drew attention; and on those fragments in SLG not too

vi

Preface

exiguous for comment. In addition, I have also supplied commentaries as appropriate on the ancient testimonia to the life and art of our poets, which will be included in the accompanying volume of texts, with the same numeration as Campbell's Loeb edition. Recent research has increasingly revealed what one might describe as ‘interaction’ between testimonia and fragments: precisely because recorded traditions about a poet's life all too often transpire to contain simplistic biographical inferences from his works, testimonia may conceal valuable details regarding the latter. An even more recent development seeks to interpret these testimonia under the rubric ‘reception, as revealing not reliable biographical data, but ancient interpretations of the poets’ work. Here too I have tried to provide suitable comment. On the other hand, I have written nothing about perhaps the most significant area in later Greek lyric, Timotheus Persae and his other fragments. After Horderns detailed commentary, it seemed misdirection of time and effort to

engage in what would inevitably involve much duplication. A similar consideration will explain if not excuse the lack of a more substantial set of Prolegomena introducing the more important poets and in particular dealing with that difficult but highly significant issue, definition of the sub-genres, Dithyramb, Paean, and the like. Again, recent research has produced much illumination on this matter, which really needs to be assessed and exploited, rather than repeated. What is now required and what is herewith supplied is detailed commen-

taries on the fragments providing a basis upon which further research may proceed. Returning finally to the dazzlingly wide range of sub-genres' outlined in the

first paragraph above, I confess that I have sometimes been inclined to wonder whether co-authorship by a committee of experts in different fields would not have produced a better result. However, I have done my best and here it is. Several colleagues have helped me with specific individual problems, and this

help is gratefully acknowledged ad locc. At a more general level, Mark de Kreij read through and variously improved a relatively early draft, and, at a much later stage of proceedings, Gauthier Liberman and an anonymous reader drew attention to several recent relevant studies, which I had overlooked. It is precisely because the wide range just mentioned will presumably attract an equally wide range of readers wishing to consult only parts of this book,that

I have deliberately erred in the direction of repeating full citations of all but the most frequently mentioned secondary literature. To a bibliography of the latter the reader is now invited to turn.

M.D.

Contents Abbreviations and General Bibliography List of Poets and Poems Commentaries I Lesser Greek Lyric Fragments Assigned to Known Authors II Carmina Popularia: ‘Popular’ Poetry, Largely Fragmentary, in Lyric Metres III Carmina Convivalia: Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia IV

Fragmenta Adespota: Anonymous Lyric Fragments, Including those Preserved on Papyri, Lapidary Inscriptions and on Vases

Addenda Index Rerum Index Nominum Index Verborum

xiii

Abbreviations and General Bibliography EDITIONS, COMMENTARIES, CITED BY AUTHOR'S

AND TRANSLATIONS NAME ALONE

Of Greek Lyric poems commented on in this volume Th. Bergk, Poetae Lyrici Graeci (1st edn. 1863, 4th edn.1882,

Bergk

repr. 1924)

Campbell Campbell*

D.A. Campbell, Greek Lyric Poetry (London 1967, repr. 1972) D.A. Campbell, Greek Lyric: the new school of poetry and anonymous songs and hymns [vol.5 of Loeb Greek Lyric (1993)]

Edmonds

Lyra Graeca [vol.3 of superseded Loeb (1927)]

Farnell

G.S. Farnell, Greek Lyric Poetry (London 1891)

Hartung

J.A. Hartung, Die gr. Lyriker: Skolien- Lohn- und Preisdichter (Leipzig 1857)

Page

D.L. Page, Poetae Melici Graeci (Oxford 1962)

Smyth

W.S. Smyth, Greek Melic Poets (London 1900)

Note also West* = M.L. West, CR 45 (1995) 11-13 [review of Campbell*]

Abreviations of editions of other fragmentary poems Lloyd-Jones and Parsons, Supplementum Hellenisticum (Berlin 1983) = SH Lloyd-Jones, Supplementum Supplementi Hellenistici (Berlin 2005) = SSH Powell, CA Collectanea Alexandrina (Oxford 1925) = CA

Other fragmentarily preserved authors are cited from the editions listed in A Canon of Greek Authors and Works, ed. L. Berkowitz and K.A. Squiter, 3rd edn. (Oxford 1999: see esp. pp.lv-lvii). Note that early epic fragments are cited from my Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (Góttingen 1988), Stesichorean from

Davies and Finglass (Cambridge 2014), and Euripidean from Kannicht's two

volume edition (Góttingen 2004). For fragmentarily preserved inscriptional epigrams, note P. A. Hansen, Carmina Epigraphica Graeca saec. VIII-V Chr.N. (Berlin 1983) = CEG 1.

Other Greek authors are generally cited from the editions listed in Berkowitz and Squiter.

X

Abbreviations and General Bibliography MONOGRAPHS

CITED

BY ABBREVIATED

TITLE

Monographs specifically devoted to Greek Lyric Bowra, GLP?

Greek Lyric Poetry? (Oxford 1961)

Schneidewin, Beitráge Wilamowitz, Textg. SS NOTE

^ Beitráge zur Kritik der Poetae Lyrici Graeci ed. Bergk (Góttingen 1844) Textgeschichte der Griechische Lyrik (Berlin 1900) Sappho und Simonides (Berlin 1913)

For a bibliography of recent monographs

on ‘sub-genres’ such as

Dithyramb or Paean see p.xi below.

Monographs of more general application D. Fehling

Wiederholungsfiguren und ihre Gebrauch bei den Griechen vor Gorgias (Berlin 1969)

W.D. Furley and

Greek Hymns (Tübingen 2001), vols. ! and 2

J.M. Bremer

E. Norden

Agnostos Theos: Formgeschichtliche Religiose Untersuchungen (Leipzig/ Berlin 1912) = AT

S. Pulleyn

Prayer in Greek Religion (Oxford 1997) = Prayer

W.H. Race

The Classical Priamel from Homer to Boethius Mnemos. Suppl. 74 (1982) = Priamel

W. Schmidt M.S. Silk

Geschichte der gr. Literatur I. 1 (Munich 1934) = GGL Interaction Interaction in Poetic Imagery (Cambridge 1974) = Interaction

M.L. West

Greek Metre (Oxford 1984)

- GM

Ancient Greek Music (Oxford 1987) Wilamowitz

2 AGM

Griechische Verskunst (Berlin 1920) = GV

NOTE: The above bibliographies are deliberately general and minimalistic. Longer and more specialised bibliographies are to be found at the start of each section devoted to an author; and thereafter within that section at the start of each individual fragment. Also at the start of the larger sections devoted to ‘popular’ poetry and to scolia and the sections dealing with lyric fragments preserved as graffiti on vases; and as lapidary inscriptions. For other abbreviated works, e.g. ‘LSJ, see the lists of ‘Abbreviations of Frequently Cited Works’ in my The Theban Epics (2014), The Aethiopis (2016), and The Cypria (2019). Note also R. Fowler, Early Greek Mythography vol.2

Abbreviations and General Bibliography

xi

(Oxford 2013) = EGM. Furthermore, EM = Enzyklopddie des Márchens (Berlin 1976-2015). Greek authors are generally referred to as in Berkowitz and Squiter as cited above and in LS], frequently expanded for clarity; journals, as in LAnnée Philologique, again are sometimes expanded for clarity. Metrical abbreviations are as in West, Greek Metre (Oxford 1984).

SOURCES

OF

THE

CITATIONAL

FRAGMENTS

It is often important, if one is to evaluate variant readings and conjectures, to know something of the aims and the textual tradition of the authors who quote our fragments. Davies and Finglass in Stesichorus: the Poems (Cambridge 2014)

supplied such information in a separate section within our introduction (pp.73 ff.). Since the present volumes range of quoting authors is, for obvious reasons, much wider, with a correspondingly wider range of subject-matter and of potential readers, I decided it would be more convenient to supply such information at the start of the commentaries on each fragment ad loc. in the first instance, with cross-references thereafter. Easily the source of the largest number of citational fragments is (as it was for Stesichorus) Athenaeus (see the Intro. to scolia 884-917). In this connection, note that the abbreviation ‘Meineke’ refers to

August Meinekes conjectures on the lyric fragments cited by that author and published as Analecta Critica ad Athenaei Deipnosophistas (Leipzig 1867). It is also important, when possible, to identify ‘the sources of the sources, e.g. when Athenaeus quotes Heraclides of Pontus for a fr. of Lasus (702) or Pratinas

(712).

'SUB-

GENRES'

Since there are a number of relatively recent excellent monographs on these, I herewith confine myself to listing them. I have drawn upon them in my commentaries on the relevant passages to show how given phrases reflect the style

of e.g. the Dithyramb, even in cases (e.g. Philoxenus fr.836) where the poem commented on does not formally belong to that category.

Dithyramb B. Zimmermann, Dithyrambos: Geschichte einer Gattung (Góttingen 1991).

There is a useful English summary of the findings of this book in German by the author himselfin OCD?’ s.v.

xii

Abbreviations and General Bibliography

Note also:

A, D’Angour,

‘How the Dithyramb Got its Shape, CQ 47 (1997) 331-51 and the various contributions to

Dithyramb in Context (edd. B. Kowalzig and P. Wilson, Oxford 2014).

Paean Two excellent studies here:

L. Kappel

Paian: Studien zur Geschichte einer Gattung (Berlin 1992).

I. Rutherford

Pindar’s Paeans: a reading of the fragments with a survey of the genre (Oxford 2001).

Other sub-genres less frequently mentioned by ancient authors receive their bibliographies in commentaries on the relevant fragments. Such is the case with prosodion (Eumelus fr.696, Promus fr.767, etc.) and hyporchema (Pratinas fr.708), for instance.

Many of the works commented on in this volume have been conventionally grouped together under the apparently convenient rubric "Ihe New Music’ For a recent critique of this term and a consideration of how accurate and useful it really is, see P. LeVen, The Many-Headed Muse (Cambridge 2014), with my review in CR 65 (2015) 20-2.

Testimonia

Herewith a general point about one particular mode of chronological indica-

tion, found in several of the biographical testimonia: for the usual meaning of such vb.s as γέγονε, ἤκμαζε, and the like, see the bibliography by W.G. Arnott in

Alexis: the Fragments (Cambridge 1996) p.4. The normal sense is floruit, though misuse as ἐγεννήθε sometimes occurs with the first verb.

List of Poets and Poems EUMELUS Prosodion to Delos TERPANDER XANTHUS APOLLODORUS

LASUS Hymn to Demeter at Hermione Dithyrambs Centaurs Incerti Loci

TYNNICHUS PRATINAS CYDIAS MYRTIS TELESILLA

TIMOCREON LAMPROCLES SOPHOCLES Paean

DIAGORAS ION OF CHIOS Dithyrambs Encomium to Scythiades Incerti Loci

PRAXILLA Hymn to Adonis Dithyramb (Achilles) Paroinia Incerti Loci

EURIPIDES Epinikion for Alcibiades

MELANIPPIDES Danaides Marsyas Persephone Incerti Loci

PRONOMUS Prosodion to Delphi

List of Poets and Poems

xiv

LICYMNIUS Dithyramb

ARISTOTLE Poem in Honour of Hermias LYCOPHRONIDES

84 84 85 87 87 88 88 88 89 95 96 99 101 105 105 106 106 112 113 113 113 113 116 116 144 145 145 145 145 146 146 156

FOLK SONGS THE SWALLOW SONG

165 166

Incerti Loci

CINESIAS Asclepius Incerti Loci

TIMOTHEUS TELESTES Argo

Asclepius

Dithyramb (Hymenaeus) Incerti Loci

ARIPHRON THE TWO PHILOXENI: A WARNING PHILOXENUS OF CYTHERA Genealogy of the Aeacids Cyclops or Galateia Komastes Mysoi

Syrus Hymenaeus Incerti Loci

PHILOXENUS OF LEUCAS Deipnon

POLYIDUS CLEOMENES Meleager

OENIADES Cyclops

SCOLIA Harmodius The Song of Hybrias the Cretan

ANONYMOUS FRAGMENTS PRESERVED ON PAPYRI LAPIDARY INSCRIPTIONS INSCRIPTIONS ON VASES CITATIONAL FRAGMENTS

215 227 243 261 271 291 297

J

Lesser Greek Lyric Fragments Assigned to Known Authors

EUMELUS

Prosodion to Delos 696

Bibliography: Bowra, CQ 13 (1963) 145-53 = On Greek Margins pp.46-58 (with reference to earlier literature in n.2), G.B. D’Alessio in R. Hunter and I. Rutherford (edd.), Wandering Poets in Ancient Greek Culture (Cambridge 2009) pp.140-4, K. Tausend, Historia 61 (2012) 66-77.

The apparent facts about Eumelus' chronology and Corinthian background, are compendiously set out by West, JHS 122 (2002) 109 = Hellenica 1.353. ‘According to Pausanias (2.1.1), he was the son of Amphilytus and a member of the famous Bacchiad family that ruled Corinth up to the time of Cypselus. He was credited with the authorship of a Prosodion, a processional song,...and in Pausanias' opinion [νομέζεται: "it is common opinion": Bowra, p.147 = p.50] this was his only genuine work. It is supposed to have been composed in the time of the Messenian king Phintas, in the generation before the First Messenian War. That should mean sometime in the mid-eighth century. It is in harmony

with this, that Eumelus is said to have overlapped with Archias, his fellowBacchiad who founded Syracuse around 734. Eusebius’ Chronicle offers similar dating. For other datings that have been suggested see D'Alessio p.143 n.20 and Tausend pp.66 ff. Bowras attempt to discredit the synchronism with Phintas, and to deduce that the poem was composed during the First Messenian War, has been doubted. It 'is on dangerous ground in inferring from the past tense [in v.1: see ad

loc.] that "song can no longer be practiced at Ithome’, and hence rejecting

Pausanias attribution to the reign of Phintas...: perhaps Pausanias found Phintas mentioned in the text' (N. Dunbar, CR 13 (1973) 201). It seriously colours his

interpretation of our two lines, as we shall see.

It is naturally important to try to be sure about the date of what may be our earliest fr. of Greek lyric assigned to a specified author (so inter al. C. Pavese, Tl piu antico frammento di lirica corale greca, Filologia e forme letterarie (Della Corte Festschrift (1987)) 53-7 = Opuscula Selecta pp.203-7). A further complication, however, is added by the reasoned scepticism of D'Alessio regarding our [τς authenticity. Noting the absence of objects of Peloponnesian provenance from the (eighth-century) Geometric period on Delos, he asks (p.140), with reference to that period, ‘what sort of Messenian community would have been

involved in ...hiring a foreign poet, training a chorus, and financing a theoria at à considerable distance?’ He further raises the issue of how the poem would have

4

Lesser Greek Lyric Fragments Assigned to Known Authors

been preserved, until written down. (Bowra p.148 = p.51 speculated, following

Wilamowitz, Textg. p.38, that it was ‘inscribed after performance and preserved, possibly at Delos: West p.110 = p. 354 speculated that ‘the song was preserved orally as an anthem of independence down to the fourth century’) D’Alessio concludes that the verses may well have been ““forged” in the fifth century by the Messenian refugees resident in Naupactus under Athenian protection; or even as late as a period after the refoundation of Messene, when 'the city was in need of constructing not only its walls but also an historical, musical and poetic tradition: In favour of the former dating, he cites such potentially ‘archaising’ features as the metre and the Aeolic form Μοῖσα. Tausend pp.73 and 76 ff. independently proposes a fourth-century dating, coinciding with the latter of D' Alessio's two dates.

The notion of some redating, must therefore be taken very seriously indeed. Metre: dactylic hexameter + dactylic pentameter.

We should note the consistency in the mode of alluding to the prosodion between each of Pausanias' references to it: 4.33.2 rots ἔπεσι... τῶι προσοδίωι τῶι ἐς Δῆλον, 4.4.1 aloua προσοδίον és τὸν θεόν....ἔπη raUra, 5.19.10 προσοδίου... ὃ ἐποίησεν ἐς Δ΄ ἢλον. For the use of the noun αἶσμα and the construction with εἰς followed by the name of the place of performance cf. Pausanias’ reference to

Pronomus prosodion fr.767. For ἔπη of metres other than epic hexameters see Bowra p.145 = p.47.

1. τῶι... Ἰθωμάται: for the cult of Zeus Ἰθωμάτας on Mt. Ithome in Messene

and the yearly festival associated with it, see Cook, Zeus ILii p.890 n.6. The present epithet is very rare, recurring only in the Delphic oracleS response at Paus. 4.12.7 = Parke-Wormell No.365.1. καταθύμιος.. «Μοῖσα: Bowra p.151 = pp.54 f.

interprets as ‘Zeus had the Muse “in his mind’, i.e. he cared greatly for her, citing e.g. Theognis 617, 1086, 1238 (cf. Vetta on the last). For the adj. with this meaning, in effect ‘pleasing’ see further Bulloch on Callim. Hymn Pallas 33 (‘a liter-

ary word, perhaps of poetic status outside Ionic prose until the first century

AD’). For such pleasing of a deity as essential to Greek religion see e.g. Furley and Bremmer 2.62. ἔπλετο: Smyth takes this as an aorist ‘became’ and to possess a present tense (cf. LSJ s.v. B 3). This is disputed by Bowra p.151 = p.54,

preferring a reference to past time. For the possibility that the vb. here conveys the notion of a deity's 'immanence, see Wagman as cited on 936.199 (p.140).

Μοῖσα: for the Aeolic form, see Braswell on Pind. Pyth. 4.3(a). 2. ἁ καθαρά: the word's application to a Muse is not easy to parallel. Bowra p.151 = p.56, rightly taking the definite article as indicative of a reference to a permanent quality, interprets it as polemic against 'impious acts committed by the Messenians' (cf. Antiochus of Syracuse FGrHist 555 F9) which supposedly started the relevant war. But note that, in third-person references to a deity's typical activity expressed by means of a predicative or attributive ptcple, the phrase normally has no definite article (see 1034 n.). Its anomalous presence here may confirm scepticism (see Intro.) as to the fr's authenticity. Bergk's ingenious idea

Terpander of haplography xa@apa cf. 892.1 and my remarks in Eikasmos 25 (2015) p.77 n.1; and note that'8é is sometimes omitted by exceptors

Scolia

239

or scribes at the beginning of citations’: Arnott on Alexis fr.191.1 KA.‘Attic Greek much preferred 5s to ais’: R. Renehan, Studies in GreekTexts (Hypomnemata 43 (1976)) p.87. ἔχει... ἔχω:

for the vb.s specialised meaning here, ‘have sexu-

ally,as wife/lover’ see Sens on Asclep.AP 5.158 (= iv) 3-4, Cameron, Callimachus and his Critics p.392 n.32. ἔραται.... ἔραμαι: compare Braswell on the same vb.

at Pind. Pyth. 4.92 (f):‘the very choice of the vb. suggests by implication sexual desire, even though it is used in a metaphorical sense with an infinitive’ (he cites exx.).

905 Bibliography: Fabbro pp.179-82. A different type of παρρησία (see on 900-2) is here illustrated. These verses exemplify the phenomenon of εἰκάζειν (Hesychius s.v: τὸ λέγειν ὅμοιος ef τῶιδε᾽), common in ‘popular’ discourse, esp. at symposia: a paradoxical or mildly perplexing comparison of two seemingly dissimilar entities is immediately followed by an explanation in asyndeton, as a riddle is followed by its solution. Fraenkel, Plautinisches im Plautus = Ital.Tr. pp.169 ff. = Engl. Tr. pp.113

ff. and 408 ff. amassed a large number of examples, esp. from New Comedy and its Roman adaptations, e.g. Antiphanes fr.250 KA ‘our old age is like wine: when there's only a little left, it gets bitter;or Plaut. Cist. 80‘a hetaera is very like a prosperous city: she can't obtain her ends without many men. For further

examples and discussion, see Fraenkel on Aesch. Ag. 1629 ff. (the reverse pattern: x is not like, the opposite of, y), G. Monaco, Paragoni burleschi degli antichi (Palermo 1963), Dunbar on Ar. Áv. 804-6. Also, Arnott on Alexis fr.46 KA (Intro., with p.160 n.1). And F. Hobden, PCPS 50 (2004) 131 f., J. Hesk,

Cambridge Classical Journal 53 (2007) 130 ff. (sympotic contexts). Cf., in asyndetic English,‘a woman, a dog and a walnut tree:/The more you beat them, the better they be, and Dr. Johnson's'a woman preaching is like a dog's walking on

his hinder legs: it is not well done, but you are surprised to see it done at all. Two Shakespearian instances: Like flies to wanton boys are we to the gods:/ They kill us for their sport (King Lear IV i 36-7), and His delights/ Were dolphin-like: they showed his back/ Above the element he lived in (Antony and Cleopatra V ii 88-90). For similar comparisons in a sympotic (and erotic) context, see e.g. Theogn. 1266-70 παῖς re καὶ ἵππος ὁμοῖον ἔχει νόον (a rather laboured explanation follows) and ib. 1249-52: ‘boy, you resemble a horse, since when you're

full of barley you come back to my stable; where, however, the all-important asyndeton is missing. Likewise in an instance possibly drawn from 'real life, Plut. Vit. Phoc. 23.2 (a retort by Phocion ‘in the assembly’): ‘your speeches are

like cypress trees: for they are towering and stately but bear no fruit, where the γάρ may in some sense be a later addition. For riddles at symposia, see Philox.

836 (e) ad fin., and D. Yatromanolakis, Sappho in the Making: the Early Reception (2007) pp.300 ff. Cf. M.Wecowski, The Rise of the Greek Aristocratic Banquet

240

Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia

(Oxford 2014) p.51 n.117, R.T. Neer, Style and Politics in Athenian Vase-Painting

(Cambridge 2002) Index s.v., esp. p.13. 1-2. On Greek bath-houses in general, see Diggle on Theophr. Char. 27.14. For more recent research, see Sanitas per Aquam (edd. R. Kreiner and W. Letzner: Leuven/Paris 2012), and Greek Baths and Bathing Culture: New Discoveries and Approaches edd. S.K. Lucore and M. Trumper: Leuven/Paris 2013). A background link between sex and baths/bathing has been alleged by M.P. Kilmer, Greek Erotica (London

1993)

pp.81-97, and

in the time of

Shakespeare and Ben Jonson, a ‘hot house, i.e. a bath-house, certainly also

served as a brothel: see Measure for Measure II. i. 65, etc. 1. BaAavess: for the likelihood that this figure took an active part in the relevant process, e.g. pouring the water, see Diggle on Theophr. Char. 9.8. That he ‘was not held in repute’ (cf. Diggle), perhaps ‘victim of the comic convention which regards all retailers and providers of services malevolently' (Dover on

Ar. Ran. 710), may be relevant to the following comparison. ἐμπεδέως: the word could signify 'always' (as e.g. Campbell*), a meaning at home in such generalisations (see Praxilla 750 n.). More probably, it emphasises the alleged resemblance (‘very much like’), as do the μάλιστα or ὁμοιότατος which are idiomatic in such comparisons (see Fraenkel as cited above; cf. Soph. Tr. 699 n.). 2. πυέλωι: ‘bath tub’: see LSJ s.v. V2, Olson on Ar. Pax 843, Biles and Olson on Vesp. 140-1. E. Wüst, Philol. 77 (1921) 37 states that the pieces humour resides

in the ambiguity of this word (like εὐθύς in 892.3), but, though the word can also mean 'trough (LSJ s.v. V.1), I can see no ambiguity here. τ΄ ἀγαθὸν τὸν re κακόν: the two entities usually very strictly differentiated in scolia and paraenesis (see Praxilla 749 n.) here receive the same treatment. λόει: the switch from

v.1’s pl. to singular conveys the total assimilation of the two individuals compared, as in the εἰκών at Theogn.1267 παῖς τε καὶ ἵππος ὁμοῖον ἔχει νόον. Cf.

Kühner-Gerth 1.79 f. For the vb’s form, see Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. 1.682. For the actual mechanics of pouring the bath-house water from a ladle, see Arnott on Antiphanes fr.26 KA (Alexis comm. p.815).

906 = fr. adesp. eleg. 6 W = Page, FGE XCVIII Bibliography: V. Ehrenberg, WS 69 (1956) 67 f., Fabbro pp.182-5, Page, Further Greek Epigrams (Cambridge 1981) p.403. For Cedon and his attack on the Pisistratids (he is otherwise unknown), see P.J. Rhodes’ commentary on the Aristotelian passage which cites these lines.

The lines are difficult to parallel. Page rightly approves Bowra's rejection (GLP? p.383) of the idea (Mittelhaus in RE 11.110) that Cedon was present when the

verses were composed extemporarily. He concludes: ‘that the epigram is a trib-

ute to a man no longer alive is self-evident? He accepts,‘it is a fair guess that, as Cedons attempt certainly failed, he was killed at the time; thus Bowra, while

Scolia

241

keeping open the possibility that Cedon ‘may have died from some other cause in the interval' between the attempt and the overthrow here implicitly celebrated. Ehrenberg p.67 n.24 rightly warns that Arist. 467. 20.5 ἔτι δὲ πρότερον τῶν Ἀλκμεωνιδῶν ήδων ἐπέθετο τοῖς τυράννοις means Cedons attack on the tyrants predated that of the Alcmeonids (see 907 Intro.). It does not mean, as he

stresses, that Cedon was an Alcmeonid. There is no analogy in our scolia for the presupposed motif of a toast to a named deceased (‘to absent friends’): contrast 907. For toasts and toasting at symposia see Hobden's General Index s.v. and

917 (b) 2 n. Perhaps, as in 917(b), the imagery of drink-pouring is equivalent to the actual composition of the verses themselves, though this hypothesis too

lacks a parallel for the actual naming. 1. ἔγχει: for the identical imper.vb. at the start of a line, see Callim. AP 21.51. = epigr. 29 1, Meleager AP 5.136.1 = HE 4222, Argentarius AP 5.110.1 = GP 1333. For instructions more generally to the wine-pourer in lyric and epigram, see Braswell on Pind. Nem. 9.50, Nisbet and Hubbard on Hor.Odes 1.38 (p.421)

and 2.11.18. Also Hutchinson in The Cup of Song pp.254 and 269. Cf. 917(b) ] n. For this vb. in a sympotic context, see further Theogn. 487, Anacreontea. 20.4 W. καί: for Cedon too’ (whether, see above, absent or present),as well as

the rest of us. διάκονε: for this figure see Seaford on Eur. Cycl. 31, J. Pouilloux, Recherches Thassiens 1 (1954) pp.408 f. μηδ᾽ ἐπιλήθου: English says dont forget to pour, Greek prefers ‘pour and don't forget to. For the pattern of emphasis achieved by positive followed by negative statement, see HHAp. 1 μνήσομαι οὐδὲ λάθωμαι, Davies on Soph. Tr. 225 £.,, Stevens on Eur. Andr. 96, Fehling,

Wiederholungsfiguren pp.272-3, West, Indo-European Poetry and Myth p.105. Compare Socrates dying words apropos the cock for Asclepius (Plato Phaed. 118a): ἀποδότε καὶ μὴ ἀμελήσατε.

2. εἰ χρή: ‘since it is proper. The first word means ποῖ ‘if’ but ἐπεί (Antiphanes fr.189.2 KA, LSJ s.v. VI). For the vb. with a stronger sense in a sympotic gnome urging what should be done, see, for instance, 891.1, 892.3, adesp. eleg. 27.3 W =

lyr.adesp. 21 (CA p.192) 3 = Page FGE 1616. For the negative version, see 913.1. For the use of χρή rather than δεῖ in such ‘subjective’ wishes, see Harder on Eur. Cresph. fr.67.3, Mastronarde on Med. 61 ('a softened sense, occasionally found

in tragedy’). ἀγαθοῖς ἀνδράσιν: see 907.3 n. 907

Bibliography: Fabbro pp.185-91 In a manner that Xenophanes (cf.1.19-20 W) and Anacreon (cf. fr. eleg. 2.1-2 W) would have deplored (see 902.2 n.), strife here is made a symposium topic. These verses contain, not surprisingly given their content, features rem-

iniscent of encomia for dead warriors. The notes below therefore cite parallels from epitaphs and Hyperides' Epitaphios Logos.

242

Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia

1. αἰαὶ the same exclamation opens the epitaph for a young man that is Simonides AP 7.515.1 = FGE 986. For other epitaphs that open with an exclamation, see Sens on Asclep. AP 13.23 (= xxxiii) 1. It is not ascertainable whether the word is

part of the rare construction (for which see Reed on Bion Adonis 28) whereby it can govern an exclamatory accusative. It is more certifiably an instance of the construction whereby an exclamation is followed by a form of οἵος, as exemplified by Fraenkel, Studien zur Textgesch.

und

Textkrit. (Jachmann

Festschr.,

1959) p.15 = Kl. Beitr. 1.433 f. Δειψύδριον: ‘a district on the southern flank of Mt. Parnes, where, in the period after the murder of Hipparchus...the exiled

Alcmaeonidae . . . were besieged by the forces of the tyrant Hippias. After a hard fight they were forced to retreat' (Henderson on Ar. Lys. 667-9). Cf. Hdt.

5.62, Arist. 487. 19.3. For an interesting suggestion from an unexpected source see C.S, Lewis in Seventeenth Century Studies presented to Sir H. Grierson (Oxford 1938) = Selected Literary Criticism p.122 and n.*: "Ihe superficial sim-

plicity here is obvious; the deeper ambiguity becomes evident when we ask whether Leipsydrion is an object of detestation or of nostalgic affection: But see next n. προδωσέταιρον: elsewhere only at Dio Cass. 58.14.5. Betrayal of hetairoi is the worst accusation imaginable in the sympotic context: see 908.1. For the words formation see Dover, The Evolution of Greek Prose Style p.112 n.30.

2. οἵους ἄνδρας ἀπώλεσας: an instance of what Barrett, on Eur. Hipp. 877-80 and in Collected Papers p.246 (this latter with reference to Bacch. 13.46), calls the ‘causal use of exclamatory οἷος" citing inter al. Od. 18.73 and 1]. 8.450. See further Friis Johnsen and Whittle on Aesch. Suppl. 105. For a parallel from an epitaph,

see

CEG

1.5.1

f. (Attica

c.446

BC?)

τλέμονες,

Ποῖον

aydva

μάχες

τελέσαντες ἀέλπ[το)] φσυχὰς δαιμονίος ὀλέσοτ᾽ ἐμ πολέμοι. So here: ‘what a betrayal, since you caused the deaths of such brave men: 2-4. οἵους... οἵων: cf. Archil. fr.23.13W οἷος elu’... οἵων ἄπο, Soph. Aj. 557 οἷος ἐξ οἵου "rpá$ms, with Finglass ad loc., on the ‘heritability of greatness’ thus implied, for which see also Nisbet and Hubbard on Hor. Odes 2.4.20. For ana-

logues to the rhetorical variation of otos, see B. Gygli-Wyss, Das nominale Polyptoton im álteren Griechisch (Góttingen 1966) p.93 and n.2. 3. ἀγαθούς re καὶ εὐπατρίδας: if right, a variation on the set phrase καλοὶ κἀγαθοΐ, for which see Telesilla 725 n. For the former word here, cf. ἄνδρες ἀγαθοί at Hyperides 1.8 f., X. 20 f., XIL6 and ἀνδραγαθία ib. X.28, XIII.44, and for the latter, ib. IV.1 ff. ὡς πολλῶν ἀγαθῶν αἴτιοι γεγενήνται τῆι πατρίδι. Cf. J. Gerlach, ANHP AT'A00Z (Diss. Munich 1932) and on the ‘general as

well as specialised meanings’ of εὐπατρίδαι, see Arnott on Alexis fr.94.2-3 KA, N.G.L. Hammond, JHS 81 (1961) 78 = Studies in Greek History p.108. This alleged variation would explain the apparently ‘tautological’ nature of the phrase complained of by R.Y. Tyrrell (teacher of Oscar Wilde at Trinity College,

Dublin and later co-signatory of a petition requesting his early release from

Scolia

243

jail) in his review of Farnell's GLP: Hermathena 8 (1892) 120. He also, less disputably, objected to the hiatus in our v. and therefore conjectured κἀξ

εὐπατρίδαν: for corruption caused by scribal omission of vowels synezesis see Aristotle 842.9 n. Note esp. κἀκ for καί conjectured by Naber (prob. Diggle, Euripidea p.490) and at Alexis fr.153.3 (prob. Arnott ad loc.). The extent to which we should tolerate ‘lax’

in crasis or at Eur. IA 41 by Richards versification

(West, GM p.59 n.75) in these scolia is admittedly difficult to decide, but Tyrrell

may well have been right. 4, The importance in political poetry of abiding by the standards of bravery set by fathers is stressed by Hyperides II. 11 f. τὸ μὴ καταισχῦναι τὰς τῶν προγόνων

ἀρετάς, Alcaeus fr.6.13 f. Cf. Dunbar on Ar. Av. 1451-2, Dover, Greek Popular Morality p.302. o? τότ᾽: the existence of a variant reading ΟΠΟΤ for OITOT signifies nothing. Still, it may be worth suggesting the emendation οἱ mór(«). For there is evidence of an ‘inscriptional ποτε in epitaphs and poetry conveying the flavour of epitaphs. In these passages, the word looks forward, as it were, to future generations who will read how ‘once upon a time x died gloriously. And it is notable that the word is often accompanied, as in the present case, by a vb. thus indicating or implying death. See e.g. Peek's Griechische Grabgedichte 36 ὅς ποτ᾽ ἀριστεύων ἐν προμάχοισι πέσεν, and in general D.C. Young, HSCP 87 (1983) 36-9.

908 For the sympotic stress on the need for honesty in personal relations, see 889.4 n. Cf. Theogn. 851 f. (‘a curse on him who wants to deceive his hetairos’), 415 ff.

on the importance (and difficulty) of finding an hetairos who is πιστός, 529 f. (‘I have never betrayed a friend’). A positive version of the advice here given is Phocylides 10 W χρή τοι τὸν ἑταῖρον ἑταίρωι φροντίζειν.

2. €v τε βροτοῖς ἔν τε θεοῖσιν: i.e. ‘among

all intelligent beings. See West, Indo-

European Poetry and Myth p.100 on this variety of ‘Polar Expression. ἐν βροτοῖς: equivalent to ‘before the tribunal of humanity’: see Dodds on Eur. Ba. 877-81.

The Song of Hybrias the Cretan 909 Bibliography: Bowra, GLP pp.398 ff., D.L. Page, PCPS 11 (1965) 62 ff.,R.F. Willetts, Glotta 51 (1973) 64-6, M.M. Austin and P. Vidal-Naquet, Economic and Social

History of Ancient Greece: an Introduction (London 1977) p.262 n.1, G. Tedeschi, Quaderni di Filologia Classica Univ. Trieste 5 (1986) 55-9 = OINHPA TEYXH:

Studi Triestini di Poesia Conviviale (1991) pp.119-26, and pp. 173 ff.

244

Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia

Reitzenstein p.13 took this piece to have been inserted by Athenaeus into the

pre-existing collection.We would seem to be confronted by that rarity a scolion that is not anonymous, though cf. Timocr. 727, 731, and note with Wilamowitz, GV pp.499 f. that there is evidence of an identification of the piece with a

marching song. Hesychius s.v. ἰβυκτήρ (Wilam.: (8y«7r-) has the entry ἔστι (Wilam.: ὁ) παρὰ Κρησὶν Ἴβριον ἐμβατήριον ποιησάμενος ὅπερ ὁ ἄιδων οὕτω καλεῖται, whence one might infer that the singers were called ἰβυκτῆρες after Ἴβριος , composer of the song. But noting that the name implies ἐβίζω or more

accurately ἰβύζω, one might interpret the name in the light of Hesych. s.v. ἰβύτινες τὸ βοάν. Was the name

“JBpros, then, the original

form

of 'YBpías?

Wilamowitz suggested the original date of the piece to be fourth century Bc, while supposing it continued to be sung on Crete in the third and second centuries. See the reservations of Radermacher, Glotta

16 (1927)

136. Tedeschi

seeks to save the scolion identification by appealing to the principle, increas-

ingly popular as a possibility (see Aristotle 842 Intro.), of reperformance in a different context, in this case moving from the battlefields or the communal banquets of Crete to an independent symposium. On the various attempts made to identify and date Hybrias, see Tedeschi p.123.

Willetts p.64 comments that the lines would seem ‘to be a true reflection of Cretan life in the long hey-day of the Cretan aristocracies, perhaps dating to the sixth century BC, or even earlier ... The scanty traces of Cretan dialect...are sufficient reminder that the poem suffered change in the transmission from its Cretan home to the common stock of Greek lyric" Compare Austin and Vidal-Naquet p.261:'In Aristotle's view, Crete is characterised by the fact that, as in Egypt, farmers and warriors form two social categories which are radically distinct (Politics 7.1329b2). That is exactly the ideology

of our scolion.

Willetts p.65 quotes J.D. Pendelbury, The Archaology of Crete p.329 as having compared with our lines the Pentozales dance as‘a modern Cretan equivalent. That song too exhibits repetition, of a half verse, if not the full repetition of Hybrias 2 = 7.

Metre: ‘quite unique, according to Maas, RE IX 1. 32. 61. He has just described the poem as ‘ein kraftstrotzendes, echt kretisch-dorisches Kriegerlied in zwei Strophen, die anfangs genau respondieren (anderthalb Verse wórtlich), spater

kaum mehr. See further Tedeschi p.122 and p.177. Hermanns corrections in vv.6,8, and 10, were advanced in Elementa Doctrinae Metricae (Leipzig 1813) p.294.

1-2. Theopening two lines list the poet's peculiar and sole form of wealth.It is with these weapons that he carries out the tasks listed in the following two lines.

A parallel is drawn between the warrior's weapons and the tools of the peasant, but it is a deceptive one, for the warrior does not need to work the land and he

is in fact the master of the peasant' (Austin and Vidal-Naquet).

Scolia

245

1. ἐστί μοι πλοῦτος: My form, my idea, of wealth is..’ For this idiom, whereby wealth is redefined, cf. Eur. TrGF V.i F137 τῶν yap πλούτων ὅδ᾽ ἄριστος, | γενναῖον

λέχος εὑρεῖν, Peek GV 2015 εὐφροσύνη, πόθος, οἶνος, ὕπνος, [ταῦτ᾿ ἔστι βροτοῖσι

πλοῦτος. Note also the topos (cf. Pasquali, SIFC 3 (1923/5) 335 ff. = Scritti Filologici 1.394 ff.) whereby a wife or mother regards her husband or sons as her greatest wealth or adornment (Xen. Cyr. 6.4.2 f. ἦν καὶ rots ἄλλοις φάνηις οἷός περ ἐμοὶ δοκεῖς εἶναι, μέγιστος κόσμος ἔσηι, Plut. Phoc. 19 ἐμοὶ κόσμος ἐστίν,

Val. Max. 4.5 (Cornelia, mother of the Gracchi) haec...ornamenta sunt mea).

Such passages are the progenitors of the idiom's apogee at Verg. Aen. 6.691 hae tibi erunt artes (i.e. regere imperio populos...pacisque imponere morem). For

the more general principle of answering the question ‘what is the best thing, see on 890.

2. λαισήιον: this type of shield is mentioned at Il. 5.453 = 12. 426, and is said by Hdt.7.91 to have been carried by Cilicians in Xerxes army. See Hainsworth on

the second Iliadic passage. Wilamowitz, GV p.498 suggested deleting the def. article before this word. πρόβλημα χρωτός: for the first noun used tion offered by a shield, see e.g. 856.3 ἴτυν προβάλεσθαι. For the here, and in the same phrase at v.7 as meaning ‘body; see Friis Whittle on Aesch. Suppl. 790. For the phrase, Willetts pp.65 f.

of the protecsecond noun Johansen and further com-

pares, from Gortyn, a second-century Bc verse inscription ‘of little literary merit’ comprising a dedication by a Cretan called Pyroos. Its third verses runs: ebpe δ᾽ ἄρα πρόβλημα χροὸς Kai τεῦχος ὀΐστων, whence Willetts deduces (p.66)

‘a Cretan fixed metaphor. 3-5. A list of servile tasks—ploughing, reaping, wine treading—which the poet no longer performs, cast in the form of a tricolon crescendo. 4. ἡδύς can be used of wine (‘pleasant to the taste’) see Arnott on Alexis fr.46.9

KA. Martin West, Studies in Greek Elegy and Iambus p.142 stated without argument that wine is‘a metaphor for the vaginal secretion here, as he took it to be at Hipponax fr.57 W, in a context, as here, of treading grapes, and perhaps fr.48 W, Ar. Plut. 1084-5, and Plutarch de tuenda san. 125a. Certainly, δόρυ and ξίφος (v.1) can bear phallic meanings: see J. Henderson, The Maculate Muse? pp.120 §47 and 122 § 50; Adams, The Latin Sexual Vocabulary (London 1982) pp.145-9 on words

like ‘hit’ and ‘strike, Lloyd-Jones, SIFC

12 (1994)

140 = Further

Academic Papers p.126). As well, some words for digging, ploughing, and gathering crops (v.3) can refer to sexual intercourse (Henderson pp.167 f., Adams p.154 on ‘plough’ and General Index s.v ‘agricultural imagery’). And for ‘sauce’

and other liquids used of ‘secreta muliebria see Henderson p.145. But the Hipponactean passages are too uncertain in meaning, and there is no exact parallel for οἶνος on West's interpretation, which also leaves the mention of a

hide-shield unexplained. (That πατέω (v.4) is used of avian intercourse—see Bain in Owls to Athens (Dover Festschrift) pp.299 ff.—is unlikely to be relevant.)

246

Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia

See for further arguments in favour of double-entendres of the same class (without reference to West) Lapis pp.114 f. 5. μνοῖας: Crete’s ‘public’ slaves. Sosicrates FGrHist 461 F4, Page p.64 n.1. 6. δέ: a clear case of this particles use equivalent to γάρ: see 903.2 n. rot...μὴ τολμῶντ᾽ κτλι: Hermanns correction, referring to those who do not dare to take up arms, i.e. v.5's public slaves, forbidden to bear arms (Arist. Pol. 1264.21

ff., 1297.27 f.). 8. γόνυ πεπτηῶτες: for the construction, Page p.62 cites Eur. Jon 1280 βωμὸν ἔπτηξεν (see Martin ad loc.). 8-9. Hermann’s correction of ἐμόν to ἁμόν is very likely, after which Page's dud

is paleographically plausible (a beautiful instance of haplography). 9. «vvéorr: Bergks supplement is essential if we are to have a humorous

allusion to the Persian custom of proskynesis or ritual obeisance. On this, see E. Hall, Inventing the Barbarian (Oxford 1989) pp.96 f. and General Index s.v., Pulleyn, Prayer pp.192 £, Garvies commentary on Aeschylus’ Persae General

Index s.v.‘Prostration, A.B. Bosworth on Arrian 4.9.9- 10.4 and Alexander and the East (Oxford 1996) pp.109-12. The paradosis is defended by R.F. Willetts, Cretan Cults and Festivals (London 1962) pp.320 f. He cites Homeric passages, esp. Od. 16.15, where Eumaeus kisses his master Odysseus. But the following reference to the Great King (see ad loc.) strongly suggests we should see a (witty) reference to a Persian custom here too, while bearing in mind Gow's warning that ‘the cravens who truckle to Hybrias...do so not worshipping him but merely "calling him master and great king" (JHS 48 (1928) 135). δεσπόταν: «ἐμὲ δεσπόταν» Crusius

ingenious supplement (Hiller-Crusius, Anthologia Lyrica* (Leipzig 1913) p.LXII) presupposes an easy haplography. For the oriental formula ‘king of kings’ or ‘lord of lords, see Garvie on Aesch. Pers. 666, Friis Johansen and Whittle on Aesch.

Suppl. 524, Hall as cited p.95 and General Index s.v., West, Hellenica 2.184. 10. μέγαν βασιλῆα: continues the joke. For the honorific title ‘King of Kings’ on the Behistun inscription and elsewhere see Garvie on Aesch. Pers. 24. Willetts (as cited 9 n.) p.321 objects that the term is only 'used by Greek writers of the

Persian king after the Persian War, but we do not know the date of our poem (see Tedeschi p.124:

ὁ opportuno

di lasciare il problema

ancora

aperto).

However, I share Willett's scepticism (p.320) ‘about the idea of a returned mercenary declaring his intention, in a lyric manifesto, of applying Asiatic methods to Crete: The joke about Persian customs in no way implies, what even the normally sceptical Page accepts (p.62), that its author himself had served either

for or against the king of Persia. $wvéovres: calling me “lord of lords” and “great king”: For the idiom ‘adapting the content of the cry to the construction of the sentence, see Fraenkel on Aesch. Ag. 48 ff., Diggle, Euripidea p.437.

Scolia

247

910

On Pythermus of Teos, see Liberman in The Cup of Song p.57 n.70. With

the sentiment

here expressed, cf. Soph. fr.354.2 f. κἄστι πρὸς τὰ

χρημάταϊθνητοῖσι τἄλλα δεύτερα and Eur. Phoen. 439 χρημάτ᾽ ἄνθρώποις τιμιώτατα with Pearson on the former passage and Mastronade on the lat-

ter. For a collection (with further bibliography) of passages which ruefully accept the all-importance of money in human affairs (cf. Stobaeus 4.3.1 ἔπαινος πλούτου) see Bühler, Zenobii Athoi Proverbia vol.5 p.538. See e.g. Theogn. 718 πλοῦτος πλείστην πᾶσιν ἔχει δύναμιν. Cf. 912 (b). On ancient

Greek attitudes to wealth more generally, see the article by Tedeschi cited in 890.3 n. For &po plus impfct. as used to express rueful enlightenment, see Timocreon 729.2 n. For the idiom when it involves, as here, ἦν, see Arnott

on Alexis fr.129.18 KA. A particularly close parallel involving recognition of wealth's power is Theogn. 699 f. πλήθει δ᾽ ἀνθρώπων: ἀρετὴ μία γίνεται

ἡδείπλουτεῖν τῶν δ᾽ ἄλλων οὐδὲν ap ἦν ὄφελος. See Addenda. 911

Metre: Phalacean hendecasyllables. ‘Page... may have thought that the following line was invented by Philocleon. If this is true it is also true of v.1226, and consequently [this fr.] must be suppressed. Conversely, both lines could belong to a pre-existing scolion, but this seems less plausible: Liberman in The Cup of Song p.53 n.52. The abrupt opening, with its locative dative and temporal reference, suggests the style of popular’ poetry. Cf. the flavour of the start of wedding songs conveyed by Bacch. 20.1 Σπάρται ποτ’ἐν e[Ópvxópe or Theocr. Id. 18.1 ἔν tox’ ἄρα Σπάρται. Cf. Ar. Av. 1731 Ἥραι ποτ᾽ Ὀλυμπίαι. Compare the words emerging from a rhapsode's mouth on the vase that is ARV ? 185.15 (cf. Boardman, Antike Kunst 19 (1976) 11, D. Sider, Hesperia 79 (2010) p.549 n.31 ad fin.) ὧδε ποτ’ ἐν (Fv? Schulze,

GGA (1896) 23 = Ki. Schr. p.701, but see the passages just cited) Τιρύνθι. From English ballads compare such openings as “The King sits in Dunfermline town’ (Sir Patrick Spens), ‘There were two sisters sat in a bower’ (Binnorie), ‘There

lived a wife at Usher's Well} etc. The present instance, of course, consists of a formally negative statement, but the continuation presumably ran something

like ‘(there was never yet in all Athens a man) as brave or patriotic as x’ (McDowell on Ar. Vesp. 1225). For declarations in praise poetry of the laudandus’ uniqueness, see Euripides 755.3n. éyevr’: for the contracted form restored by Bentley (see Burges, 'Emendationes

Ineditae in Aristophanem;

Classical

Journal 134 (1816) 336-44) cf. Pind. Pyth. 3.87, 6.28, Biles and Olson on Wasps 1226-7, Bulloch on Callim. Hymn Pallas 59. Ἀθήναις: for the ‘poetic locative

dative' see Biles and Olson as cited.

248

Scolia: Drinking Songs Performed at Symposia

912 On the scolia cited in Aristophanes’ Wasps, see in particular E. Wüst, Philol. 77 (1921) 26 f£, Hobden pp. 140 ff. and Biles and Olson’s commentary ad locc.

(a) Metre: Aeolic ‘hagesichorean with expansion in the second line’: see West, GM

p.30.

On the need for honesty in personal relations as stressed in scolia, see 889.4 n. For the proverbial cunning and deceitfulness of the fox, see Biles and Olson on Ar. Vesp. 1241-2, C.S. Kohler, Das Tierleben im Sprichwort der Griechen und Romer (Leipzig 1881, repr. 1967) pp.55 ff., Lloyd-Jones on Semonides 7.11 W (Females of the Species p.67). With the view stated here contrast the cynical pragmatism of Theognis 213-16, 1071 ff, which advises adapting character to suit the company. For a speculative linking of the vb. to the Athenian deme Alopeke (see Timocr. 727.2 n.) and a consequent attempt at dating the scolion, cf. D.M. Lewis, Historia 12 (1963) 23 = Selected Papers in Greek and Near Eastern

History p.79.

(b) The scolia ‘here say that Cleitagora was a Thessalian poetess’ and those on Lys.

1237 ‘that she was a Laconian poetess, but these may be just guesses, and nothing else is known about her or the song’: Macdowell on Wasps 1245-7. See further Biles and Olson’s more recent commentary on the same passage, concluding that ‘it is more likely she was a famous courtesan. Metre: dodrans -~~-~. Tyrwhitt's emendation of βίαν to βίον ([money and] ‘livelihood’:‘a hendiadys suggesting opulent comfort’ as Biles and Olson on Wasps 1245-7 put it) gains

some support from the numerous proverb-like passages in which χρήματα ΟΥ̓ another word for money is said to be necessary for human existence. See Bühler, Zenobii Athoi Proverbia vol.5 p.538, citing inter al. Hes. Op. 686 χρήματα yàp ψυχὴ πέλεται δειλοῖσι βροτοῖσι, and Timocl. fr.37.1 KA τἀργύριόν ἐστιν αἷμα καὶ ψυχὴ βροτοῖς.

913 = Ameipsias fr.21.3-4 KA The comic fr. reproduces these verses presumably in response to its two preceding verses, which address a plurality of individuals and bid one sing to the

accompaniment of another's aulos-playing (see Kassel and Austin ad loc.). Compare the citing of a scolion in 911-12. With the (relatively little) evidence

at our disposal, we may venture the suggestion that it is typical of the scolioncategory to generalise regarding human behaviour (θνητός: 890.1) about what

Scolia

249

is desirable (χρή: cf. 891.1 n., 892.3, 906.2), contrasting what should be done

with what should not (cf. 892.4, 908.1). 1. οὐχρὴ πόλλ᾽ ἔχειν θνητὸν ἄνθρωπον: rejection of wealth as a negative foil, in order to emphasise by contrast the desired goal, is a common rhetorical topos, esp. in the Priamel (see 988.1 n.). For οὐ χρή as introducing advice in gnomic

poetry, see e.g. adesp. gnom. 3.1 W. Por the present context of the theme ‘enjoy yourself, life is short, compare particularly Peek GV 2015 εὐφροσύνη, πόθος, οἶνος, ὕπν[ος, ἱταῦτ᾽ ἐστὶ βροτοῖσι] πλοῦτος (wealth not so much rejected as redefined: see 909.1 f. n.). For θνητὸν ἄνθρωπον as a set-phrase, see Diggle,

Studies on the Text of Euripides p.114. ἄνθρωπον «ὄντ᾽»: Pages supplement, presupposing haplography, is attractive, since one would welcome the slight emphasis thus added (cf. Philetaer. fr.7.1 KA rí8et...0vra θνητόν....ποιεῖν;) to

the underlying theme 'enjoy yourself (for life is short/ tomorrow we die' see

next n.). For more explicit instances of part of that theme, see W. Ameling, ZPE 60 (1985) 41 (enjoy yourself for the day/for today’). Note esp. Peek GV 1905, whose statement ‘enjoy yourselves while you can’ is addressed to θνητοί, The supplement was part of Meineke's conjecture οὐ χρεὼν... ἄνθρωπον «ὄντ᾽» in the editio minor of his edition of the comic frr., while Page in PMG suggested ...