Sophai Prapides: Poet and Patron in Pindar, Olympian 11.7–10

Echos du Monde Classique/Classical Views xxxvm, n.s. 13, 1994, 15-22 SOPHAI PRAPIDES: POET AND PATRON INPINDAR, OLYMPIAN 11.7-10 THOMAS K. HUBBARD The Eleventh Olympian, the shorter of Pindar's two odes for the 476 boxing victory of Hagesidamus of Western Locris, was the subject of exhaustive treaunent in the first volume of E.L. Bundy's inf1uential Studia Pindarica. But a central passage in the ode's antistrophe, leading up to the climactic naming of the victor, seems not to have been well understood either by Bundy or by previous commentators. To give a sense of the surrounding context, I quote the first fifteen lines of the poem: WEonv avBpWTTCxs aVEIJ-UlV OTE nAElOTa xp~mS" Eonv 8' ovpavLUlv u8aTUlv, OIJ-~PLUlV naL8Ulv vE¢EAaS" El 8E ouv nov~ TLS' EV npaooOL, IJ-EALyapUES' VIJ-VOL tKJTEPWV apxa AOyUlV TEAAETaL Kal. mOTav O~)KLOV IJ-EyaAaLS' apETaLS'· ate6vTj!OS' 8' alvo,S"qAu~mOV,LKaLS' OUTOS' ayKELTal. Ta IJ-EV alJ-ETEpa yAwooa nOllJ-alVELV EeEAEL, EK {kov 8' av~p oo¢aLS' avBEL npanLocomv OIJ-OlUlS'. taeL vvv, ' ApXEaTpaTou nal, TEOS, 'AYT]Ol8aIJ-E, nUYlJ-aXLaS' EVEKEV KOOIJ-OV Enl. oTE¢av~ XPuoEaS' fAaLaS' a8UIJ-EA~ KEAa8~oUl, Z€¢UPLUlV AOKpWV yEvEav aAEyUlv. The traditional view of vv.8-1O, following the scholia, has most recently been reaffirmed by Kirkwood, who paraphrases the lines thus: "I (IlEv) am eager to bestow praise, but (BE) it is only by virtue of divine will that poets can have this ability, even as (OIlO(w5') only thus can a man achieve athletic success."l There 1 G. Kirkwood, Selections from Pindar (Chico 1982) 113, following SO.11.10a,b,c (Drachmann). Among previous commentators construing the passage in a similar way are e.G. Heyne, Pindari Cam/ina et Fragmenta (Oxford 1807) I, 129; A. Boeckh, Pindari Opera quae supersunt (Leipzig 1821) 11:2, 196-97; L. Dissen, Pindari Cannina quae supersunt (Gotha 1830) II, 124; B.L. Gildersleeve, Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian Odes (New York 1885) 223; G. Fraccaroli, Le Odi di Pindaro (Verona 1894) 309; W. Christ, Pindan Carmina prolegomenis et commenlariis instructa (Leipzig 1896) 91; U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Pindaros (Berlin 1922) 217; II. Gundert, Pindar und sein Dichlerberuf (Frankfurt a.M. 1935) 62; G. van N. Viljoen, Pindaros se tiende en elfcle Olympiese odes (diss. Leiden 1955) 18; II. Praenkel, Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy tr. M. lIadas & J. Willis (Oxford 1975) 437-38; L. Lehnus, Pindaro: Olimpiche (Milan 1981) 182. A variation on this view is suggested by L.R. Parnell, The Works of Pindar (London 1930) II, 77, who says that OIJ-OLUlS' matches the poet's accomplishment to his wish, expressed in the previous line; but oo¢aLS' clv0EL npanL8Eomv does not seem any 15 16 THOMAS K. HUBBARD are serious problems, however, in construing O~OlWS' to compare the poet's godassisted ability with the athlete's, since the athlete of this ode has not yet been mentioned, nor has any connection been made between athletics and divine assistance: the only allusions to athletics so far have been the very general condition Ei. 8E auv nov41 TlS' Eli npciaaOl (vA) and the general class of 'OAu~mOVlKaLS' (v.7), neither of which seem pointed enough to explain the cryptic O~OlWS'. Carey maneuvers around this problem by rendering 0llOlWS' here and in P.9.78 more generally "as in all else'? but this usage is without solid parallels: 6~o(wS' and o~wS' typically reflect a focussed comparison of two specified things, as in 0.8.56 (Melesias' Nemean victory and Alcimedon's Olympic), P.8.6 (doing and suffering), P.8.83 (the return of the defeated and of the victorious), P.9.40 (among gods and among men). Bundy approaches these lines in an altogether different way, rather unhelpfully terming them a "summary foil (lines 7-9) capped by a gnomic crescendo (line to)", but proceeding to explain ci.8ovl1TOS' alvoS' as abundant praise (not "praise beyond envy"), the Tel ~EV ... clause as the poet's assertion that he wishes to engage this theme of limitless praise for Olympic victors, with EK 8EOU 8' ... acting as...