No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2015
The relevance of Pindaric myth to its literary and historical context is a problem presented by many of Pindar's odes. In the case of Pythian 4 it is the plea for the return of Damophilus that has proved difficult to relate to the myth of the Argonautic expedition – so much so, that some scholars have denied that any connection exists between the myth and this part of the ode. Those who seek to establish a correlation between the myth and the plea have, for the most part, considered parallels between the relationship, circumstances, and character traits of Jason and Pelias and those of Arcesilas and Damophilus. The limitations, however, of looking for exact correspondence are generally acknowledged. Carey in particular postulates that Pindar ‘simply presents in the myth a number of themes, any or all of which may be applied to the situation in Cyrene’. It is the contention of this article that the theme of hospitality, as it develops in the myth, is central to understanding the relevance of the myth to the plea for Damophilus.
All translations are my own.
1 See Carey, C., A Commentary on Five Odes of Pindar. Pythian 2, Pythian 9, Nemean 1, Nemean 7, Isthmian 8 (New York, 1981), 7Google Scholar: ‘The problem of unity which dogs Pindaric criticism, resolves itself ultimately into the problem of the relationship between the myth and the rest of the ode.’
2 von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U., Pindaros (Berlin, 1922), 384Google Scholar; Farnell, L. R., The Works of Pindar (London, 1930), i.114Google Scholar; Stoneman, R. (ed.), Pindar. The Odes and Selected Fragments, trans. Conway, G. S. and Stoneman, R. (London, 1997), 124Google Scholar.
3 See, e.g., Burton, R. W. B., Pindar's Pythian Odes (Oxford, 1962), 168, 173Google Scholar; Robbins, E., ‘Jason and Chiron: The Myth of Pindar's Fourth Pythian’, Phoenix 29.3 (1975), 205–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Carey, C., ‘The Epilogue of Pindar's Fourth Pythian’, Maia 32 (1980), 143–52Google Scholar; Stoneman (n. 2), 124; Schubert, P., ‘La Seconde Entrevue de Pélias et Jason Dans la 4ePythique de Pindare: Essai d'Interprétation’, AC 73 (2004), 15–24Google Scholar. Robbins, at 207, n. 10, Carey, at 144, and Schubert, at 23, offer brief reviews of earlier discussions and further references.
4 Carey (n. 3), 144; see also Carey (n. 1), 8: ‘Pindar allows myths to speak for themselves’.
5 On the implication of ‘help’ in the construction παρά c.dat. with ἵστημι, see Braswell, B. K., A Commentary on the Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar (Berlin and New York, 1988), 59Google Scholar.
6 Braswell (n. 5), 59, 60.
7 On the relationship of Pindar and his clients as a relationship of xenia and its impact on the poet's work and his aristocratic audience, see Kurke, L., The Traffic of Praise. Pindar and the Poetics of Social Economy (Ithaca, NY, and London, 1991), 135–59Google Scholar.
8 See Benveniste, E., Le vocabulaire des Institutions Indo-européennes (Paris, 1969), i.335, 340–1, 344Google Scholar.
9 Segal, C., Pindar's Mythmaking. The Fourth Pythian Ode (Princeton, NJ, 1986), 32, 44, 111, 181Google Scholar; Calame, C., Myth and History in Ancient Greece. The Symbolic Creation of a Colony (Princeton, NJ, 2003), 46, 53, 80Google Scholar.
10 On the theme of nostos in the ode, see Burton (n. 3), 173; Robbins (n. 3), 206; Carey (n. 3), 144; Segal (n. 9), 89.
11 On the importance of the pictorial aspect of the ode, see Méautis, G., Pindare le Dorien (Paris, 1962), 225, 232Google Scholar; Robbins (n. 3), 208.
12 Braswell (n. 5), 112.
13 Pointed out by Carey (n. 3), 143, 152.
14 Braswell (n. 5), 96, 160.
15 Ibid., 92–3, 96.
16 Gould, J., ‘Hiketeia’, JHS 93 (1973), 87–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar. αἰδοῖος is used with reference to the arrival at Od. 8.544, 9.270, and 19.316, and to the host at 19.191. It is used together with ϕίλος in the phrase ϕίλος τε αἰδοῖός τε to refer to visitors at Od. 5.88, 8.22, and 19.254. See also Benveniste (n. 8), 340; Braswell (n. 5), 107.
17 Braswell (n. 5), 109. For the rigidity of the custom, see Reece, S., The Stranger's Welcome (Ann Arbor, MI, 1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
18 At Hymn. Hom. Cer. 200, the goddess initially refuses to eat out of grief, but later abandons this attitude.
19 ἐπέτοσσε (‘met with’) suggests a chance encounter; cf. ἐπῆλθεν (‘came suddenly upon’) at line 28; see Braswell (n. 5), 98, 106. Note the emphatic τουτάκι (‘at that time’) at the beginning of line 28.
20 Reece (n. 17), 10, 34–5; cf. Od. 15.69–74.
21 On the importance of the convention, see Braswell (n. 5), 114.
22 Reece (n. 17), 20.
23 On the multiple significance of the pressing of hands, see Braswell (n. 5), 116.
24 The typical elements of a hospitality scene are conveniently summarized in Reece (n. 17), 6–7.
25 See above, n. 3. Robbins (n. 3), 208, particularly stresses the prominence of the scene.
26 See Reece (n. 17), 6, 13.
27 Ibid., 13.
28 Ibid., 6, 13.
29 Od. 5.146, 13.148, 14.283–4, of the wrath of xenios Zeus; cf. Hymn. Hom. Ven. 290 and Il. 18.216 of Thetis' advice. At Il. 22.332 Achilles uses the verb to express what Hector's attitude against him should have been. Achilles pronounces these words just after he has delivered a fatal wound to Hector and his rage makes him something more (or less) than human.
30 Braswell (n. 5), 182; Reece (n. 17), 19, 47, 200; cf. Od. 7.199–206, 17.484–7.
31 Cf. Richardson, N. J. (ed.), The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford, 1974), 208Google Scholar.
32 A host approaches a visitor quickly in Homeric scenes of hospitality: Reece (n. 17), 19. Here we have a reversal of the Homeric pattern, where the host first catches sight of the visitor and then hurries to meet him.
33 See Robbins (n. 3), 209, n. 12. For the view that Pelias is insulting see, e.g., Burton (n. 3), 155–6; Gildersleeve, B. L., Pindar. The Olympian and Pythian Odes (Amsterdam, 1965 [1890]), 291Google Scholar; Méautis (n. 11), 233–35; Carey (n. 3), 149, n. 39; Segal (n. 9), 34, n. 4. For the view that Pelias is not insulting, see, e.g., P. Shorey, ‘On Pindar Pyth. IV. 96 ff’, CPh 25.3 (1930). 280–1; Braswell (n. 5), 189–92.
34 See Od. 1.170–73, 7.238, 10.325, 14.187, 15.263–4, 19.105, 24.298; cf. 3.68–74, 8.548–51, 9.252–5, 9.355.
35 Od.1.174, 15.263–4, 8.548.
36 For the importance of sequence in the succession of type scenes that comprise a hospitality scene and the manner of request of a stranger's identity, see Reece (n. 17), 5, 8, 25–26, 63; for a Homeric articulation of the principle, see, e.g., Od. 3.69–70.
37 For Polyphemus as a paradigm of perverted hospitality, see Reece (n. 17), 11, 26, 123–43.
38 Ibid., 6, 17.
39 Ibid., 17.
40 At Il. 9.193 it is used of Achilles, who plays on a lyre and sings and does not notice Ajax and Odysseus who come to stand before him; when he does notice them he springs from his seat with the lyre still in his hand. At Il. 11.777 it is again used of Achilles, who, together with Patroclus, is absorbed in cutting up the flesh of a heifer during a sacrifice at the house of Peleus at Phthia and does not notice Nestor and Odysseus standing in the doorway; as soon as Achilles notices the visitors he springs to his feet and stops his activity, giving priority to the arrivals. At Od. 16.12 it is used of Eumaeus, who has been busy mixing wine when Telemachus enters his hut; Eumaeus actually drops the bowls he was using.
41 Il. 11.545, 16.806, 23.101; Od. 21.122, 23.93, 24.441.
42 Cf. 96–7: κλέπτων δὲ θυμῷ δεῖμα (‘hiding his fear in his heart’).
43 Reece (n. 17), 27.
44 On the genealogy of Jason and Pelias, see Schubert (n. 3), 20.
45 Reece (n. 17), 191.
46 On the transformation of Jason from youth to man from the first encounter with Pelias to the second one, see Schubert (n. 3), 18, 22.
47 Cf. Eurypylus' ϕίλια ἔπεα (‘friendly words’) at 29.
48 On feasting a number of days before embarking on expeditions, see Braswell (n. 5), 214.
49 See ibid., 231; Segal (n. 9), 32.
50 For the notion that scenes in the ode propose models of behaviour to Arcesilas, see Robbins (n. 3), 208–9. If it is the case that Damophilus is related to Arcesilas (Braswell [n. 5], 3, n. 7), the parallel of the historical situation with the mythical hospitality scenes discussed here is stronger, because the encounters are between kin.
51 Carey (n. 3), 146, 147, offers an important insight into the impact of the historical situation on Pindar's exceptional depiction of Jason and his selection of mythic episodes.
52 For the language of supplication and the attitudes involved, see Corlu, A., Recherches Sur les Mots Relatifs à l' Idée de Prière, d'Homère aux Tragiques (Paris, 1966), 307–13Google Scholar, also 320–2.
53 See Méautis (n. 11), 249.
54 See Corlu (n. 52), 303–4, 305; also Braswell (n. 5), 392.
55 Οn the parallelism between suppliant and stranger, see Gould (n. 16), 90–4; on supplication as a sub-type scene in hospitality scenes, see Reece (n. 17), 6, 16–17.
56 Reece (n. 17), 17.
57 Ibid., 21.
58 On the force of mythical paradigms, see Carey (n. 3) 150.
59 Corlu (n. 52), 298.
60 Gildersleeve (n. 33), 278; Méautis (n. 11), 250; Carey (n. 3), 148, 152; Braswell (n. 5), 5, 360.
61 Carey (n. 3), 148.
62 See Braswell (n. 5), 360, who assumes that the recall of Damophilus, agreed beforehand, was announced after the completion of the ode. Calame (n. 9), 53, envisages the ode as performed beside the fountain of Apollo at Cyrene, at the banquet mentioned in 294.
63 For the notion of rapidity in the ode, see Méautis (n. 11), 226, 237, 238, 239, 245; for immediate action as a heroic attitude, see Braswell (n. 5), 112–13. See also Segal (n. 9), 31–2.
64 See Braswell (n. 5), 5.
65 Reece (n. 17), 28–9.