Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T15:41:55.806Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Pindarica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Extract

There is no established agreement concerning the meaning of πτυχαῖς. The scholiasts give three alternatives: (1) ταῖς ποισεσιν πε διαιρεῖται εἰς στροϕς κα ντιστρΦους κα πῳδς. To the same effect, but more comprehensively, Boeckh interprets: artificiosi flexus numerorum harmoniae saltationis. Similarly Donaldson, Paley, Fennell, and Mezger apply the expression to the artistic turns of poetry; and Gildersleeve's sinuous songs is explained to mean the same thing. Myers translated sounding labyrinths of song, which Sandys modified to sounding bouts of song; but I am not sure that I understand their metaphors. (2) Embroidery of song is apparently a suggestion of the scholiast, since he remarks that πτυχαῖς is suitably (οἰκεως) attached to δαιδαλωσμεν and ποικλλειν—ὥσπερ π κατασκευσματος. But we look in vain for a justification of πτυχα so employed. (3) Then comes the counsel of despair ὕμνων πτυχαῖς: τοῖς ὕμνοις κατ περΦρασιν, for which it is perhaps unnecessary to refer to Rutherford's Annotation, p. 250. I cannot think that anyone is really satisfied with such explanations, although there are no open notes of dissent. There must be some objection which I do not see to the rendering ‘glorious pages of minstrelsy,’ and yet πτυχ is well established in that connexion: Aesch. Suppl. 947 οὐδ' ν ββλων πτυχαῖς κατεσΦραγισμνα where Schuetz rightly finds a reference to charta papyracea )( πνακες. Everyone remembers Gray's ‘Knowledge … her ample page rich with the spoils of time did ne'er unroll.’

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1924

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 151 note 1 He quotes a ridiculous instance from schol. Av. 17, μποτε οὐν κατ πεϕρασιν εἴρηκε ‘θαρρελεδου κολοιν’ ν ἴσῳ τῷ θαρρελεδην ὅς στι κολοιώδης.

page 155 note 1 They are not contrasted but co-ordinated in π 248 and 253.

page 155 note 2 For the personification and deification of καιρς cf. Pausan. V. 14. 9.

page 156 note 1 Gildersleeve's explanation adopted by Sandys.