Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:25:14.314Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pindar, Nemean 1.24 – Smoke Without Fire

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Paul Waring
Paul Waring
Affiliation:
Trinity College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This line has long been a crux in the interpretation of Pindar, and there is still no consensus on its syntax or meaning. The conclusions reached by Stefan Radt (Mnem. n.s 19 (1966), 148–74) and Richard Stoneman (Quad. Urb. 31 (1979), 65–70) in the most recent studies of the problem are in all respects at variance. The cardinal difficulty of0 the line is the sense of , which must be elucidated before one can attempt to disentangle the syntax. I believe that previous commentators have overlooked or misapplied crucial parallel passages because of their preconceptions about the nature of the metaphor here.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 32 , Issue 2 , December 1982 , pp. 270 - 277
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1982

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

1 Pindaros (Berlin, 1922), p. 255.Google Scholar

2 ‘Eracle nella prima Nemea’, GIFC n.s. (3) 24 (1972), 40 and n. 27.

3 ‘The Rookie: A reading of Pindar, Nemean One’, CSC A 2 (1969), 233.

4 Polinnia (Messina/Firenze, 1966), p. 316 n. 3.

5 He accidentally says (p. 68) extinguish praise.

6 The closest these words approach to being interchangeable appears to be B399 , where we would say ‘lit fires’.

7 The attribution is not certain. Bacchylides is also a possibility.

8 Bowra (Penguin Classics, 1969).

9 Lexicon to Pindar (Berlin, 1969) s.v.ὒδωρ.Google Scholar

10 A good example of the distinction at Sem. 7. 5W .

11 cf. Hesychius , LSJ s.v. and Suppl. So Hudson-Williams, who compares the French expression ‘laver la tête á quelqu‘un’ and interprets the first couplet as ‘mud won't stick’. Van Groningen denies this, seeing the words as simply referring to a test. What is the point of this outlandish metaphor if not the pun on ?

12 Dr Da we compares ‘utterly’ and suggests the sense ‘from head to toe’ here.

13 This may be the point of P. 2. 76 . So also H. M. Lee, Hermes 106 (1978), 279–81.

14 I think means ‘walk in glory’ rather like quoted above, with a strengthened form of βαίυειυ. See, however, S. Radt, Pindars zweiter und sechster Paian, p. 41.

15 I believe N. 7. 63 is an exact parallel.

16 Hyp. Dem. Mid. 511. 4, A.P. 14. 11. 4.

17 ad loc. (Saumur 1620).

18 For such a construction cf. Ω 400, Aesch. Eum. 930, Eur. Tro. 282.

19 There is no reason to believe that it could be used impersonally.

20 ad loc. (Wittenberg. 1616).

21 See n. 15. The interpretation of H. Fränkel is syntactically identical with this.

22 Nor is the specific force of λέλογχε clear. Note ‘nactus est’ in the translation.

23 I should like to thank Dr R. D. Dawe of Trinity for his helpful criticism of this paper.