SHOWING PRAISE IN GREEK CHORAL LYRIC AND BEYOND · 544 ALEXANDER NIKOLAEV 3 Transmitted via Ath....

American Journal of Philology 133 (2012) 543572 2012 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

SHOWING PRAISE IN GREEK CHORAL LYRIC AND BEYOND

ALEXANDER NIKOLAEV

u

For Gregory Nagy on his seventieth birthday

Abstract. In this article I examine several passages in Greek choral lyric where the verb is construed with a direct object meaning song or hymn and show that this usage finds an exact parallel in the Rigveda, where the cognate root dis ;- is likewise employed with song (of praise) as its object. Greek , , etc., to show forth song (of praise), is thus argued to be an archaism of the melic poetry that goes back to the Indo-European poetic language. The use of Latin d \co\ of reciting verse (d \cere carmen) or singing praise (d \cere laude\s) in Augustan poets may continue the same inherited phraseology. Finally, based on these results I argue that the long problematic epithet contains the root of (and not of ) and should be interpreted as famous,

well worth singing of, well worth praising (in song).

1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS ARTICLE is to offer an interpretation for several poorly understood passages in Greek choral lyric by examining them in the comparative context of Indo-European poetics. This is rarely done for lyric poetry (as opposed to archaic epic), simply because these texts are not as old, but this method is a priori worthwhile: according to a widely held belief, the traditions of Greek lyric preserve metrical structures of higher antiquity than the epic hexameter1 and one would therefore expect to find comparable poetic archaisms in these traditions. In fact, as this article will seek to show, there are still cases in the study of Greek literature where Karl Lehrs sixth commandment for classi-cal philologists, thou shalt not grab around for Sanskrit roots, can be violated with profit.2

The crux in question is a peculiar use of the verb to show, found in the following passages.

1 See, e.g., Nagy 1974; Berg 1978.2 Lehrs 1902: Du sollst nicht Sanskritwurzeln klauben.

544 ALEXANDER NIKOLAEV

3 Transmitted via Ath. 13.601a, where cod. A has ; the word order adopted in modern editions was first suggested by Wilamowitz who sought to eliminate

a sequence of six heavy syllables and restore a catalectic iambic trimeter.4 Loeb translations have been used here and below, where available. Otherwise,

translators are noted.5 Cf. Archil. 1.2: (and skilled in the lovely gift

of the Muses); Hes. Th. 103: (for quickly the gifts of the goddesses have turned it (scil. ) aside); Sol. 13.51 West: (and another man is taught the gifts of the Olympian Muses) etc.; see Nnlist 1998, 327. It should be noted, however, that to my knowledge we do not find

the gift of the Muses used of a song composed or performed.6 An unlikely interpretation on the fragment is offered by Ritok 1983, 37, according

to whom Megalostrata played the role of the poets personal muse and as such contributed

to his creative process.7 E.g., Aloni 1994, 88, n. 120 (trans.: insegn). For this use of , cf. h. Cer.

47577, . . . (showed them her ritual service and taught her mysteries to all). On the pedagogical function of chore\gos and/or the poet, see Calame 2001, 22144.

8 E.g., Marzullo 1964, who argues that Alcman specifically refers to Megalostrata as

an esecutrice and not as a fellow poet (followed by Janni 1965, 110, n. 38).9 Either Archytas of Tarentum, the famous Pythagorean philosopher, or Archytas of

Mytilene, a musician known from D. S. 8.83.

1.1. Alcman 59 (b) 3 Davies (= 149 Calame):

3

The yellow haired Megalostrata, blessed among girls, (Campbell: displayed) this gift of the sweet Muses4

Megalostrata, only known from this fragment, was in all likelihood the chore \gos in a partheneion from which these verses are quoted by Ath-enaeus (13.601a). Since the expression is a usual kenning for music, song, or poetry,5 we have to ask ourselves what exactly means in the present context.6 One possibility would be to interpret these lines as reflecting the pedagogical function of the lyric chorus: Megalostrata could be both leading the procession and instructing the younger members of the chorus, such that she could show or reveal to the choreuts the gift of the Muses.7 Another way to understand the fragment would be to assume that the verb was chosen in order to emphasize Megalostratas role as a performer or presenter, different from that of the poet.8 But Archytas9, the source of

545SHOWING PRAISE IN GREEK CHORAL LYRIC

10 Fr. 25 Wehrli: Athenaeus quotes (or paraphrases) Archytas from Chamaeleons

biography of Alcman ( ). The peripatetic Chamaeleon seems to have had a keen interest in anecdotes about the poets private lives, and there are reasons to believe

that in his writings he invented some of the biographical details based on his analysis of

the poets own work; see Podlecki 1969, 12024; Momigliano 1971, 80.11 / (at the command of

the Cyprian, Eros once again pours sweetly down and warms my heart, Janni 1965, 10710).12 For arguments against Calames emendation, see Davies 1986 and Maehler 1997,

317, n. 1.

Athenaeus for this passage, explicitly says that Megalostrata was a poet (and apparently an excellent conversationalist, namely, a master of the spoken word) (13.600f):

,

He also says that he ( = Alcman) fell in passionate love with Megalostrata who was a poetess capable of attracting lovers by her conversation

It is not immediately clear how much trust we should vest in this testimony. On the one hand, the idea of Alcmans fatal attraction to Megalostrata is almost certainly either Archytas or Chamaeleons10 own invention based on a misinterpretation of Alcm. 59 (a) Davies (= 148 Calame) as a statement of personal involvement on the part of the poet himself.11 But on the other hand, it is far from clear why in the first place Archytas would need to fabricate a story that Megalostrata, one of Alcmans many lovers according to his presentation, was a poet.

The possibility thus remains open that Megalostrata was described by Alcman as a fellow poet who performed together with the chorus (Sap-pho comes to mind). But even if should refer to her performance (and not composition) of poetry and music, this would still be a highly peculiar use of the verb ; and yet, there are parallels, including in Alcman himself.

1.2. Alcman 4 fr. 1.48 Davies (= 57 Calame):

] [ [ [ .[.] [.].[

] Lobel, ] Page; [ dub. Lobel, Calame P. xy 2388 fr.1 : Lobel : Calame12


13 LSJ cites Aesch. Eum. 569 as the prima facie evidence for the meaning sound,

but might here just as well be translated song (of the trumpet): ( | . . . (Let the Tyrrhenian trumpet send forth its loud song to the crowd!). Likewise, in Eur. fr. 627 Kannicht, (oracular) verses is the most likely meaning ( | ).

14 It has been argued that the missing subject of are Alcmans precedessors, certain , and the verb means revealed (in the sense of , see above, n. 7); see Davies 1986; Segal 1985, 185; Bagordo 2000, 194. This idea is based on a restoration of Terpanders name in line 6 ([), first proposed by Lobel 1957, 23, in the editio prima and later approved by Treu 1964, 120; indeed, Terpander was credited with the invention of the barbitos, the citharoedic nomos and with many other musical innovations. The plural would seem to require a mention of at least one other famous citharode likewise qualifiable as a and there is no shortage of possible candidates, for instance, Thaletas or Xenodamus (the first to compose paeans and hyporchemata, [Plut.] De mus. 1134bc), Clonas or Polymnestos (the inventors of the aulodic nomos, [Plut.] De mus. 1132cd), or Xenocritus (the inventor of the Locrian mode, sch. Pi. Ol. 10 Drachmann). Yet, two reasons render Lobels restoration (and with it Davies ingenious argument) unlikely: first, assuming the meter of the verse is iambic ( [), the syllable following [ must have been light (which is why Lobels [ was declined in PMG); note that the metrical structure of the remainder of this long verse, which under LobelDavies theory must have mentioned a second poets name, remains wholly unclear (even though some hypothetical supplements, e.g., (or: ) hypercatalectic iambic trimeter?would restore the iambic rhythm). Second, and perhaps more importantly, it is unclear why Alcman, who floruit in the last decades of the seventh century (West 1965), would use the language reserved for the gods or mythical figures from the dim past (such

and wonderful soft utterances they (Campbell: revealed) new to men . . . delight . . . intricate

Lobels tentative reading ] [ in l. 4 looks extremely compelling and together with (l. 8) makes it virtually certain that means here not soft sounds, but rather soft songs.13 Parallels for the use of () cited by Calame (1983, 42324) lend additional support to this interpretation; compare especially Pi. N. 9.4849:

victory increases with new bloom to the accompaniment of gentle song

It seems certain that Alcmans passage contained some discussion of poetic production; once again, the verb refers to what a poet (or poets) do with songs.14


as the wizards of Ida in a fragment from Phoronis 1.57 cited by Davies: ) for poets who must have been active in his own lifetime: Terpander, it is true, was older (he

was victorious at the Carnea in 676/673 B.C.E.) and so probably was Clonas, but other early

lyricists mentioned above are said to have belonged into the generation after Terpander.

To sum up, there is little to recommend the supplement [ and with it the theory that the verb in Alcm. 4 fr. 1 refers to ; instead, one could restore a form of the adjective , potentially construed with above (cf. Sa. 160: ), or of the verb .

15 Farnell 1930, 230; Thummer 196869, vol. 2, 137.16 This problem was noticed by Radt 1972, 198: bezieht Thummer

auf prophetisches Lob an der Wiege, was schon durch ausgeschlossen ist.17 Dissen 1821, 547; Wilamowitz-Moellendorff 1922, 199200; Carey 1981, 200.18 Cf. P. 3.113 ( , wise craftsmen of verses), I. 5.28 (where the

poet is called ) or the much discussed O. 2.8688, where the poet is praised as a wise man who understands many things intuitively ( ) and con-trasted with those who have merely learned (). See Untersteiner 1956, 11314, for ample parallels (a propos of Xen. 1.12).

19 Taccone 1934, 287: laudarono; Lattimore 1976, 157: published; Privitera 1982,

133: mostrarono; Burnett 2005, 116: the songs men still sing about the deeds of the son.

1.3. This peculiar use of the verb recurs in Pindar (Pi. I. 8.47, SnellMaehler):

And the voices of the wise (Race: made known, Farnell: revealed) the youthful excellence of Achilles to those who had been unaware of it

One tradition of interpreting this passage has been to assume a refer-ence to a prophecy made by certain sages soon after Achilles birth about his future excellence and concerning the fact that Troy could not be taken without him.15 (The use of in this case would not be surprising.) But this interpretation is unlikely; describing someone who expects to receive a prophecy as ignorant () about the content of the forthcoming message would be strange, to say the least.16 Rather, as was seen already by Dissen, we find here the familiar topos of Achilles preserved through the medium of song.17 Pindars are poets of earlier times (as elsewhere in Pindar),18 and refers to their audience. The question is what activity exactly is described by . Did the poets merely demonstrate Achilles valor or did they praise it in song?19 One way of interpreting the passage would be to assume that


20 As elsewhere in Pindar, e.g., O. 7.89; 8.6; N. 10.2, even though in these pas-sages refers to athletic achievements.

21 Snells classic account of the fragments (1946 [1953]) is now superseded by

DAlessio 2005 and 2009, who has convincingly argued that the hymn was addressed to

Apollo rather than Zeus.22 Aristides testimony is backed up by Plutarch who quotes the Pindaric fragment

twice: once in a discussion of harmony (Mor. 1030A) and another time in order to compare

the Sibyls passionless utterances to the purity of Apollos right music (Mor. 397A).23 Mommsen 1846, 192. Mommsens translation is based on Boeckhs edition in

which our fragment had already been joined with fr. 29 S.M. where the mention is made

of Cadmus wedding; Boeckh 1821, 563, translates Deum audivit Cadmus musicam rectam

proponentem.24 Fontenrose 1978, 359.

stands here metonymically for fame ( ).20 But even without endorsing this solution we can see that the verb is, once again, applied to poetic activity.

1.4. The second Pindaric passage we will examine comes from the poem formerly known as Hymn to Zeus,21 which opened Pindars Alexandrian edition (fr. 2935 SnellMaehler). The current orthodoxy is that this hymn contained one (or several) embedded theocosmogoni-cal songs, delivered by Apollo and the Muses at the wedding of Cadmus and Harmonia. Our primary interest here is fragment 32 that may have preceded the song-within-the-song; the primary source for the fragment is Aelius Aristides (Aristid. Or. 3.620 LenzBehr):22

but even in the Hymns when Pindar narrates the sufferings and change befalling men throughout time, he says that Cadmus heard Apollo correct music

We know from other fragments assigned to the hymn on the grounds of content and meter that Apollo and the Muses sang about Themis and her union with Zeus (fr. 30), Leto and the birth of Apollo (fr. 33 cd), birth of Athena (fr. 34), and the release of the Titans (fr. 35). This rich program would hardly leave the god any time to instruct Cadmus in the art of music, which is the reason why Mommsens translation of here as lehren lacks conviction.23 Unlikely, too, is Fontenroses suggestion that the fragment contains a reference to the oracle Cadmus received at Delphi.24 Even supposing that in this hymn Pindar told a portion of the


25 in Aristides text was translated as perform by Behr 1986, 266. As to , Hardie 2000, 30, may well be right in comparing Apolline with pillars that rose from the earth to support Delos and provide stable ground for the birth of Apollo (fr. 33d.5); according to Hardie, here conveys the idea of stability and harmony that overcomes chaos.

26 A grammarian quotes the first line of the fragment to illustrate what he calls a cretic

meter (Analecta Gramm. Keil 7.21); the second and third line scan as

(with a resolved cretic in the second foot: first paeon) and , respectively.

Cadmean saga and that our fragment belongs to this part of the poem, the choice of the word would remain wholly unclear. As to more neutral translations such as Cadmus heard Apollo giving a display of correct music (Hardie 2000), making a display of (Slater 1969), or giving a specimen of (LSJ), their chief drawback, in my opinion, is that they focalize as if Apollo was using the occasion of the wed-ding to promulgate the correctness of his art, while the real focus of the fragment is on ; Cadmus was listening to Apollo (and the Muses) singing the theogony.25

The argument just offered is tainted by the fact that we are deal-ing with a text almost exclusively transmitted in quotations, and much depends on the correctness of the attribution of our fragment to this text and the details of its placement in the poem. Time will show if the reconstruction of Pindars first hymn by Boeckh, Snell, DAlessio, and others is correct, but if it is, we get another example of (-) mean-ing to perform, to sing poetry.

1.5. The next passage illustrating the use of that we are interested in comes from Bacchylides (Bacch. fr. 15 Maehler):

, -

4 suppl. Blass

This is no time for sitting still or tarrying,but we must go to the richly-built temple of Itonia of the golden aegis and (Campbell: display; Jebb: show forth) a delicate (song / dance)

The critical final iambus is missing from the passage as quoted by Dion. Hal. Comp. 25.26 Even though alone would not be totally


27 Blass 1899, 166, n. 15.28 Athen. 14.30 (3,393.8 Kaibel); Analecta Gramm. as above. 29 On Philodamus and his poem, see Rainer 1975; Kppel 1992, 20784; Furley and

Bremer 2001, vol. 1, 12128; vol. 2, 5384.30 Text and translation follow Furley and Bremer 2001, vol. 1, 122; vol. 2, 55.31 The supplement is due to Weil 1895, the first editor of the poem.

awkward as the object of the verb, the supplement will still likely have to be governed by the verb, and Blass conjecture 27 is very attractive. We know from other sources that cite the beginning of this poem that it was a hyporcheme,28 i.e., a dance-song ( in Proclus definition; see Procl. Chr. 320b33). This is the reason why Jebbs (1905, 459) and Borthwicks (1970, 32427) concerns about the use of to describe the movement of male dancers are unfounded: the adjective applies here not only to dance, but also to song and music, where it is entirely appropriate (cf. Anacr. 28.2; Stesich. 35.2).

The theme of the poem appears to be a ritual performance at Athenas altar, possibly accompanying a sacrifice. Despite the lacuna at the end, this passage constitutes perhaps the most important piece of evidence for a very special use of in choral lyric where the agent of the verb is a singer (or, rather, a group of performers) and the object is a song.

1.6. The final text to which we now turn is the paean to Dionysus composed by Philodamus of Scarphea and recorded on an inscription found at Delphi on the sixth temple of Apollo; the inscription is dated to 340/339 B.C.E. by a subscription naming Etymondas as archon.29 This text has an interesting purpose: it legitimizes a religious innovation, namely, the introduction of year-round Dionysiac worship in Delphi, within an Apolline context and in Apolline terms. Lines 11014 form a part of Apollos command to the Amphictyones:30

( . . .)[]31 - , -[] [] .

The god commands to (FurleyBremer: present) this hymn for his brother to the family of gods,


32 Kppel 1992 translates zeigen on 221, but later writes soll . . . dieses Lied gezeigt (= aufgefhrt) werden (253).

33 Other examples of , used in the meaning praise, sing (a hymn) are either much later (e.g., [] from a hymn to Tyche (P. Berol. 9734, l. 3; 3d cent. C.E.), noted by Gonda 1929, 25) or too uncertain to use for our purposes (e.g., the beginning of an epigram from the temple of Magna Mater in Phaistos with its interesting and possibly archaic, but obscure use of : / (2d cent. B.C.E.; IC 1.23.3 = OF 568); the recent translation performs [a marvel] by example (Tzifopoulos 2011, 180) lacks conviction. It is also unclear to me at the moment whether the interpretation of the much-discussed passage Theog. 76972 ( , , ) is affected by my arguments; see the discussion and references in Ford 1985; Woodbury 1991; Bagordo 2000.

Finally, one more Greek text needs to be mentioned here, namely, the proem of Herodotus Histories with its vexing . Without treating this problem in any detail, let it suffice to mention here just one point of view which makes the Herodotean usage directly relevant for our purposes: according to Nagy 1990, 21724, who sees the Histories as the product of conventions in an oral tradition of prose, Herodotus is seeking to achieve the same objective as an epic poet, namely, to confer a lasting fame, ; under this theory the term , interpreted as denoting a public performance that proclaims the glorious deeds of the past (cf. . . . in the proem), can be compared to the use of (-) studied in the present article. But this observation merely signals a possibility; on , see also Bakker 2002, Thomas 1993, and Zambrini 2007 with other, sometimes very different views.

on the occasion of the annual feast of hospitality and to make a public sacrifice on the occasion of the panhellenic supplications of blessed Hellas

Weil (1895, 407) suggested that the phrase . . . meant saluer le dieu par une hymne (~ ). This solution is not very satisfactory, both for reasons of syntax and sense. A straightforward translation, sing this hymn or perform this hymn, appears much more appealing, especially in view of the passages discussed above.32 It is important to emphasize that while adapting a new poetic form for praising Dionysus (paean instead of a dithyramb), Philodamus is using traditional formulaic elements firmly embedded in the former genre. We can therefore safely assume that goes back to the traditional stock of melic vocabulary and is quite possibly just as old as in Alcman.

1.7. We can now take stock: in six passages from Alcman, Pindar, Bacchylides, and Philodamus, we find an unexpected use of the verb construed with a direct object meaning song, music, song of praise (, , , (= ), , ).33 To my knowledge, despite sharing this common property, these


34 The use of choral lyric as a cover term for all pieces discussed in the present article

is hardly objectionable: while Alcman 4 fr. 1 is ambiguous in respect to the action indicated by the verb, a choral performance is very likely in the case of Alcman

59(b)3, Bacch. fr. 15 (where we have a plural participle ) and Philodamus. Pindars can obviously refer to different genres, most likely to epic, but at the same time there is no problem in assuming that the poet, whose own

epinicians and paeans were in all likelihood performed by small companies of singers (see,

e.g., Carey 1991), used a terminus technicus of the choral lyric to describe the proclamation

of Achilles valor. 35 For instance, it could be argued that this use of can be seen as a perfor-

mative effect, a gesture of enactment into discourse (Calame 2004, 415), not unexpected

in choral lyric poetry which often seeks to connect the poem with the hic et nunc of its

performance by a group of dancers; but, at least in my opinion, there is a huge difference

between using pronouns and adverbs in order to refer to the location in space and time

as well as the participants in a verbal act (well studied in recent work on deixis in choral

lyric) and a lexically encoded notion of showing thathypotheticallyis supposed to

merge the text of the poem with its reenactment in performance.

passages have never been studied in conjunction with one another, which is all the more surprising seeing as they all belong to a single genre, the choral lyric.34 As we have seen, different solutions have been offered for individual passages, but most are ultimately not compelling for various reasons. Other approaches can be taken, and in the end, with a fair amount of good will, these passages could perhaps be interpreted starting with some of the more familiar meanings of (e.g., to display, to show, to reveal).35 But there is an alternative: we can adopt a unitary translation for the forms of in all the passages, namely, to sing (a song), assuming that this peculiar use is a lexical archaism from the distant past preserved in choral lyric.

2. While this hypothesis may initially seem to defy belief, it appears to be strongly supported by comparative data: in Vedic Sankrit the cognate verbal root dis;- (which normally means show, point out) is likewise found construed with nouns meaning song of praise, as can be illustrated by the following three stanzas:

RV 5.43.9:

pr tvyaso nmaktim tursya ahm pu\sn ut va \yr adiksiya\ ra\dhasa\ codita\ra \ mat \na\m ya\ va\jasya dravinoda\ ut tmn //

I dis;-ed (aor.; Geldner: habe bestimmt; Renou: jai ordonn) this homage to mightiest, victorious Pusan and to Vayu,who by their generosity inspire hymns / thoughts, and of themselves are givers of reward


36 Literally: to Rudra together with those eager ones.37 The last passage, featuring a participle made from the intensive stem ddis;-, is

particularly difficult, and the translation given above differs from the standard one by

Geldner (die immer wieder auf dich hinweisen). A few notes on the proposed transla-

tion will be in order. First, pa tva\ asthiran (have come unto thee) is unproblematic, cf. RV pa tva\ imasi, pa tva\ yantu. As an alternative, pa tva\ can be construed either with gro ddis;at \h (showing hymns forth to you) or both with the verb and the participle apo koinou: the sisters, who constantly show hymns forth to you, have come to you).

Second, the presence of Vayu, god of wind, in the passage from a hymn, the main addressee

of which is Agni, is not surprising: Vayu is the first god to taste any oblation as its smoke

rises up in the air. Third, ja \myah (those of kin, sisters), just as in RV 1.23.6, refers to the waters which appear in the next verse. Last, the reader should be warned that haviskr;tah (oblation-bearer) is problematic under any interpretation: in the translation above the

form is analyzed as gen. sg. construed with grah (hymns), but it could also be a genitive

construed with the ja \myah (sisters), a nominative plural agreeing with ja \myah or an accusative plural agreeing with grah. I would like to thank Stephanie Jamison for a very

helpful discussion of this passage.38 It is interesting to note that in Indo-Iranian poetic language, the root *dai c;- is also

used in the meaning to offer reward / remuneration (to a poet). For the Rigveda, cf. the

following stanzas praising the generosity of the poets patron (da \nastutis): RV 5.36.6ab, y rhitau va\jnau va\jn \va\n . . . dista ([S:rutratha] who, rich in gifts, granted me two victorious red horses); RV 10.93.15, [maghvatsu] dh \n nv tra saptatm ca sapt ca sady didista ta \nvah / sady didista pa\rthyh sady didista ma \yavh ([generous patrons:] seven

RV 10.92.9:

stmam vo ady rudra\ya s ;kvase ksaydv \ra \ya nmasa\ didistanaybhih s ;ivh svva\m evaya\vabhir divh ssakti svyas;a\ nka\mabhih //

Today you should dis ;- (imper.; Geldner: zeiget; Renou: assignez) with reverence your song of praise to skillful Rudra, the ruler of men,and to those eager ones36 together with whom the auspicious one, self-bright, providing protection, comes down from the sky, to them, the devoted ones

RV 8.102.13 (= KS 40.14.149.20):

pa tva\ ja \myo gro ddis ;at \r haviskr ;tah va\yr n \ke asthiran //

The sisters, who constantly dis ;- the hymns of him who prepares the oblation in front of Vayu, have come to you37

On the strength of these examples we may conclude that in the Rigveda dis ;- is one of the roots referring to the symbiotic relationship (West 2007, 30) between laudandus and laudator; it encoded the offering of praise (in form of a song) by a poet to a god on behalf of his patron.38


and seventy horses Tanva granted on the same day, Parthya granted on the same day and

Mayava granted on the same day). In fact, out of thirteen occurrences of uncompounded

dis- in the Rigveda, eleven can or must be translated either as to sing (a hymn), as in the examples above in the main text, or as to grant (reward for a hymn). For Avestan, cf. Vd.

9.44 (= A. 3.712): disiia\t ahma\i naire auuat mid m (the following reward shall be allot-ted to this man); see Hintze 2000, 325. This meaning of Indo-Iranian *dai c;- is probably a result of independent semantic development which can be envisaged in different ways: e.g.,

Renou 1967, 99, derives the meaning donner from assigner qqun une chose favour-

able, while according to Hintze 2000, 238, this meaning originated in the vocabulary of

chariot racing (the prize was displayed before the competition). But regardless of the exact

details of semantic development in this case, the fact remains that in Indo-Iranian poetics,

the root *dai c ;- apparently came to denote both aspects of the reciprocal gift-exchange-based relationship between the poet-sacrificer and his patron, on which see Watkins 1995,

6884; Hintze 2004.39 Avestan dae\saiia-, pass. disiia- normally means to point out, show, appoint, but

in the Bahra \m Yat (arguably one of the most ancient parts of the Younger Avesta), the

form fradae \saiio\i (2sg. opt. pres.) is constructed with ma r m (poetic formula, formulated meditation); the reference is to the magical formula to be used as a weapon against demons,

the ritual for which finds a close parallel in the Vedic manual on magic (Kaus;ika Su\tra 2.57; see Sadovski 2009) (Yt. 14.46): zarautra / ae \t m mar m ma \ fradae \saiio\i (Yt. 4.9: fradaxaiio\, see Insler 1962) / ainiiat / pire va\ pura\i / bra \re va\ hao \.za\ta \i / a\rauuana\i va\ ra \iiaone / ae \tae \ca te\ va\co\ / yo\i / ura a\s d r zra a\s / ura a\s viia \xaine a\s / ura a\s v r rane a\s / ura a\s bae\aziia a\s / . . . uzg r pt mcit sna m apaa apa.xvanuuain ti // (O Zarathustra, do not dis- this mantra other than to father (for transmission) to son, or

to brother (for transmission) to sibling, or to priest (for transmission) to ra\iiauuan-. And these words of yours, which were strong and solid, were strong and eloquent, were strong

and obstruction-smashing, were strong and healing, they drive off even a raised weapon.)

The standard translation of fradae\saiio\i here is teach, and it is certainly not unthinkable for the passage. However, one cannot fail to notice that the verbs usually construed with

ma ra- are verbs of speaking: vac-, speak (Y. 31.6+); framru\-, speak forth (Yt. 4.4+); dr jaiia-, recite (Yt. 4.4+); p r s-, ask, recite (Vd. 9.2). It is therefore not out of the

question that the juncture mar m fradae\saiia- originally meant something like pronounce a formula. Still, this interpretation must necessarily remain conjectural.

40 It is not discussed by Schmitt 1967, Matasovic ; 1996, or West 2007; dis ;- is missing from Schleraths (1985) list of verbs that belong to the semantic group singen, preisen,

rufen, verknden.41 For *gwerh2- (> gr-) as an inherited term denoting song of praise; cf. the formula

*gwr h2- *dheh1-o- (to make praise) in Vedic gras dha\-, Avestan garo\ da \-, but also Proto-Celtic *bardo-, Middle Irish bard; see Campanile 197073.

This usage of the verb dis ;- in the Rigveda, possibly shared by Avestan,39 has not been noticed before, as far as I can tell.40

Vedic dis;- construed with a noun meaning song of praise (stmam / nmaktim / grah)41 corresponds rather neatly to Greek / , and it appears very likely that these two poetic figures share a common origin. The notion of praise is less evident in the Greek passages discussed above, but the difference in genre does not preclude the identi-


42 On the diachronic continuity between the inherited hymnic tradition and different

genres of Greek choral poetry, see recently Trmpy 2004; Bremer 2008. I would like to

thank the anonymous referee for raising this matter.43 That an archaism of poetic language should be preserved in the choral lyric but be

absent from epic poetry should not surprise us; cf. West 2007, 37, on Pindar and Bachylides:

these two fifth-century exponents of the Dorian tradition of choral song were heirs to a

repertory of Indo-European or at least Graeco-Aryan imagery that is hardly visible in the

Ionian epic and Lesbian lyric traditions. On Indo-European echoes in Pindar, see further

Benveniste 1945, 512; Watkins 1995, 8184, 53739; 2002; on Alcman, see Barnes 2011.44 Eichner 198890, 198, et passim; for a more optimistic assessment, see Watkins

1995, 12634, who argues for the preservation of an Indo-European tradition in the South

Picene texts.

fication in a diachronic perspective. The only assumption that needs to be made is that the precursor of the root -, used in Indo-European (and hence Vedic) hymnic poetry with the meaning to show forth praise (for the gods), became employable in Greek with a somewhat wider array of terms (not necessarily related to praise) and spread to such choral genres as partheneia and hyporchemata.42

A clinching argument in favor of viewing the correspondence between Vedic dis ;- (stmam, etc.) and Greek (, etc.), as based on common inheritance and not on a typological coincidence or independent development, is the unusual meaning of the verb in both traditions. Such synchronically inexplicable meaning is the hallmark of inherited phraseology. The Vedic and Greek passages discussed above may appear striking if these texts are studied in isolation, but things start to make sense once the connection is made between the two traditions, and the problematic junctures are analyzed not as products of the poets own creative thought, but as fossilized expressions going back to an ancient poetic tradition to which both Vedic r sis and Greek aoidoi were heirs. We have thus reconstructed an element of Indo-European poetic diction.43

3. Having established a peculiar poetic use of the root *dei k ;- in Indo-European on the basis of Greek and Indo-Iranian material, we can now take a look at Roman poetry. This part of the agenda may appear surprising, since Italic is notoriously known as the wrong branch to explore in the search of vestiges of Indo-European poetry; the influence of Greek literature on Latin poetry was ubiquitous, and even South Picene epigraphic poems have been denied continuity with the Indo-European poetic tradition.44

However, in this particular case the situation is different: d \co\ and most other continuants of the root *dei k;- in Latin and other Italic lan-guages have the meaning to speak, to talk, to sing; therefore, if we are


to find Latin d \c- / dc- used with song or hymn as a direct object and we want to regard the expression as a calque from Greek, it will have to be based on a Hellenic model featuring a verb of speaking / singing, but there is nothing like , /- , /- uel sim. in Greek. At the same time, as we have seen, there are reasons to believe that the root *dei k ; was already employed in Indo-European poetic language with such direct objects as song or hymn, and therefore such use of d \c- in Latin, still hypothetical at this point, would have to be viewed as a lexical archaism directly continuing the same inherited poetic figure Show (*dei k;) Song that is reflected in Vedic Sanskrit (adiksi stmam ) and Greek ( ).

3.1. To begin with the most obvious cognate of Greek in Latin, we should note that the verb d \co\ is not quite synonymous with loquor (to speak, to talk), while d \co\ can also be used in a neutral sense and replace loquor, the converse never happens, and the speakers were aware of the difference, as the following passage from Cicero makes clear (Cic. Orat. 32):

quamquam aliud videtur oratio esse aliud disputatio, nec idem loqui esse quod dicere, ac tamen utrumque in disserendo est: disputandi ratio et loquendi dialecticorum sit, oratorum autem dicendi et ornandi.

Although a speech is one thing and a debate another, and disputing is not the same as speaking, and yet both are concerned with discoursedebate and dispute are the function of the logicians; the orators function is to speak ornately.

Rather, d \co\ belongs to the solemn language of poetry and oratory where it becomes closely allied with cano\; for instance, these two verbs are both used by Catullus of a wedding song in one and the same poem (Catul. 62.45, 910):

iam veniet virgo, iam dicetur hymenaeus. Hymen o Hymenaee, Hymen ades o Hymenaee! [. . .]non temere exsiluere: canent quod vincere par est. Hymen o Hymenaee, Hymen ades o Hymenaee!

now will come the bride, now will be sung the Hymenaeus. Hymen O Hymenaeus, Hymen come O Hymenaeus!nor without intent have they leapt forth; what they will sing, it is our task to surpass. Hymen O Hymenaeus, Hymen come O Hymenaeus!


45 It was noted by ErnoutMeillet 1959 (s.v. d \co\); see also Newman 1965, 8689; Habinek 2005, 7583.

46 Horaces use of d \co\ has been studied by Jahn 1867, 41920, who cites several additional passages.

This aspect of the semantics of d \cere has been noticed before, but not its implications.45 It becomes particularly important for the line of reason-ing pursued in the present chapter, as we find that d \co\ is in fact found in the meaning celebrate in song or poetry (OLD 7b). Consider the following selection of passages:

Virg. G. 2.9596:

purpureae preciaeque, et quo te carmine dicamRhaetica? nec cellis ideo contende Falernis

The purple and the precian? and you, Rhaetichow shall I sing you?yet even so, vie not with Falernian vaults!

Hor. Carm. 4.9.1921:

non pugnavit ingensIdomeneus Sthenelusve solusdicenda Musis proelia

Great Idomeneus and Sthenelus were not the only men to fight battles that the Muses should extol46

Prop. 1.7.12:

Dum tibi Cadmeae dicuntur, Pontice, Thebaearmaque fraternae tristia militiae

Ponticus, while you sing of Cadmean Thebes,and the bitter warfare of fraternal strife

Ov. Ars am. 1.20810:

O desint animis ne mea verba tuis!Tergaque Parthorum Romanaque pectora dicamtelaque, ab averso quae iacit hostis equo.

Grant that my song be not unworthy of the prowess that it celebrates!I will sing of the Parthian turning to flee, and of the Roman facing the arrows aimed at him by the flying foe.


Even more significant is the fact that d \cere is also often used of reciting or performing verse, as in the example from Catullus cited above (62.4: dicetur hymenaeus):

Virg. Ecl. 6.45:

pastorem, Tityre, pinguispascere oportet ovis, deductum dicere carmen

Tityrus, a shepherd should pasture fat sheep,but sing a slender song

Virg. Ecl. 10.23:

pauca meo Gallo, sed quae legat ipsa Lycoris,carmina sunt dicenda: neget quis carmina Gallo?

A few verses I must sing for my Gallus, yet suchas Lycoris herself may read! Who would refuse verses to Gallus?

Hor. Carm. saec. 58:

quo Sibyllini monuere versus virgines lectas puerosque castosdis, quibus septem placuere colles, dicere carmen

when the words of the Sybil have commanded a choir of chosen virgins and chaste young boys to chant a hymn to the gods who are gladdened by the seven hills

Hor. Carm. 4.12.910:

dicunt in tenero gramine pinguium custodes ovium carmina fistula

they are singing as they lie on the yielding grass keeping their fattening sheep and playing their pipes

The expression dicere carmen in the examples above, strikingly remi-niscent of the Greek and Vedic versions of the inherited formula Show (*dei k;-) Song, can be complemented by d \cere laude\s, found in religious, hymnic contexts:


Tib. 1.3.3132:

bisque die resoluta comas tibi dicere laudesinsignis turba debeat in Pharia

and chant your praises twice a day, with loosened hair,pre-eminent among the Pharian throng

Virg. Ecl. 6.67:

namque super tibi erunt qui dicere laudes, Vare, tuas cupiant et tristia condere bella

since there are more than enough who desire to singyour praises, Varus, and write about grim war

Hor. Carm. Saec. 7476:

spem bonam certamque domum reporto,doctus et Phoebi chorus et Dianaedicere laudes

such is the good and certain hope I carry homeas chorus trained to sing the praises of Phoebus and Diana

In view of the Greek and Sanskrit parallels in sections 1 and 2 above it becomes entirely plausible to suppose that these uses of d \cere actually continue something very old, and I think they do. However, proving that this is indeed the case will be a daunting task, since a meaning such as to celebrate in song would be easily deducible from the meaning to speak, which has to be postulated for Proto-Italic in any event. In order to become truly compelling, any such argument based on Latin will in addition have to appeal to material that is more or less isolated, thus with a chance of preserving something old.

3.2. With this in mind, we may turn our attention to the verb (-)dca\re which, of course, goes back to the same root as d \cere. The verb normally means to dedicate, but in early Latin it still has the meaning to praise (Lucil. 1080 (Marx)):

sicubi ad auris fama tuam pugnam claram adlata dicasset(claram cdd. : praeclaram Marx : clarans Warmington)

wheresoever rumor that was brought to my ears praised your splendid fight


47 On the profession, see Schneider 1953; Hinard 1976; Rauh 1989. Cf. Rauh 1989,

452: they summoned the Roman senate and assemblies to meetings; they called for

silence at the beginning of these meetings; they read aloud legislation to be voted upon at

assemblies; they called the order of centuries and tribes to vote; they announced the results

and brought these meetings to a close. In a more dreaded aspect, they might also expel

foreigners from the city, or summon defendants to appear before magisterial tribunals and

keep order at the same. . . . praecones appear to have performed other tasks for a fee: they

silenced the audience at the beginning of performances in the theater and expelled slaves

from the same, they called out in the streets for lost persons or property, they announced

the demise of prominent citizens.48 The verb praedico\ shows the effect of recomposition, while in the case of the noun

praeco \ the Romans were apparently less concerned about maintaining synchronic links to the base verb d \cere.

49 Indo-European (directional) *pro and (locatival) *preh2i, respectively; on Latin

prae and Sanskrit pra, see Garca Ramn 1997.

The stem formation of the verb dca\re is hard to explain unless one assumes that the verb was secondarily extracted from compounds such as praedica\re and indeed, the latter verb has the right meaning to praise, to extol (Ter. Eun. 56566):

Quid ego eius tibi nunc faciem praedicem aut laudem Antipho,Cum ipsum me noris quam elegans formarum spectator siem?

Why now should I extol or commend her beauty to you, Antipho, since you yourself know how nice a judge of beauty I am?

An interesting feature of praedca \re is that it is the only Latin verb of speaking compounded with prae- where the prefix has a locative and not a temporal meaning (viz. recite in front of someone, not precede someone in reciting a poem, etc.). Francis (1973, 38, n. 84) rightly observes that this feature (that separates praedca \re from praefar \ or praeloqu \) is likely to be old. We will thus do well by looking closer at praedca\re in search of other signs of antiquity, including an inherited usage.

The verb praedica \re in all probability belongs together with the so-called a\-intensives of the type occupa \re ( capere), consterna \re ( sternere) and, just as these verbs, is ultimately based on a prepositional compound *prae-dic- (*prai -dik-). This nominal stem, in fact, lives on in the word praeco\, -o\nis crier, herald, auctioneer.47 This time the relevant usage is not attested until Classical Latin, but the word itself must be quite old: praeco\ goes back to *prai -dik-o\n- with a syncope of the medial short vowel that guarantees a certain antiquity of this compound.48 Since Italic *prai - and Sanskrit pra go back to the same etymon,49 the reconstructed


50 The low status of praeco\nes is clear from Cic. Sest. 57, where Cicero is indignant at the fact that the king of Cyprus should be placed at the mercy of a public crier (praeconi

publico subiceretur) and Mart. 6.8 where praetors, tribunes, lawyers and poets are passed

over as potential grooms in favor of a praeco \.51 Six years later these words are echoed in a letter from Lucceius: ut mihi non solum

praeconium, quod, cum in Sigeum venisset, Alexander ab Homero Achilli tributum esse dixit

. . . videatur (Fam. 5.12.7).52 Ov. Pont. 4.8.45 (carmina vestrarum peragunt praeconia laudum); Tr. 1.6.3536

(quantumcumque tamen praeconia nostra valebunt / carminibus vives tempus in omne meis;

to his wife); Tr. 2.65 (invenies vestri praeconia nominis illic; to Augustus); Tr. 4.9.19 (nostra

per inmensas ibunt praeconia gentes); Ov. Met. 12.773 (praeconia rebus Herculis); Ars 3.535

(nos facimus placitae late praeconia formae); Her. 17.207 (non ita contemno volucris prae-

conia famae); [Tib.] 3.7.178 (non ego sum satis ad tantae praeconia laudis), etc. It is hard

to exclude that this usage of praeco\nium is independent of Cicero (in which case these examples would add to the argument put forth in the main text below), but the unmarked

assumption would be that the Augustan poets simply perpetuated Ciceronian coinage.53 Claudius Aelianus inscribed these verses on a double herm of Homer and Menander

he placed in his garden (IG 14.1188).

nominal *prai -dik- becomes comparable to Vedic Sanskrit pr-dis;- sing (praise) in section 2 above.

The duties of praeco\nes have been well studied and we know that this was essentially a job of low social esteem.50 Moreover, thanks to such aspects of their job as selling debtors property or officiating at funerals, praeco\nes in the Roman world enjoyed a somewhat nefarious reputation. It is therefore surprising to see Cicero applying this word to Homer, as he relates the words spoken by Alexander at Achilles tomb in Sigeum: O fortunate adulescens, qui tuae virtutis Homerum praeconem inveneris (Fortunate youth, to have found Homer as a herald of your valor, Arch. 24; no source is known for the quotation).51 The Ciceronian use of praeco\ has apparently caught on: in Augustan poets, the derivative prae co\nium (that otherwise usually means auctioneers cry) is often used with reference to the publicity and fame provided by poetry.52

Now praeco\ virtu\tis in Cicero is in all likelihood directly dependent on a Greek source, namely an epigram by Antipater of Sidon praising Homer as (9.1 GowPage = Anth. Pal. 7.6.1). This text may have been widely known in Rome;53 Cicero read Antipater and spoke highly of him (Orat. 3.194; Fat. 2), and since Cicero was generally taken to Greek models, the possibility of a calque is very high. Nonetheless, we should not forget that Latin praeco\ was not an equivalent of Greek for all intents and purposes. For instance, while reworking a passage from Polybius where, after the battle of Cynoscephalae, the herald declares the freedom of Greek states that once were under Macedonian domination


54 praeco cum tubicine, ut mos est, in mediam aream, unde sollemni carmine ludicrum

indici solet, processit (Liv. 18.46.4). The Romans may have expected a term like circi nuntius

(AE (1971) 44).55 This formulation does not necessarily imply a written tradition. My own understand-

ing of the processes involved in the survival of inherited lore of this kind comes very close

to the following formulation by Bakhtin: Cultural and literary traditions (including the

most ancient) are preserved and continue to live not in the individual subjective memory

of a single individual and not in some form of collective psyche, but rather in the objec-

tive forms that culture itself assumes (including the forms of language and spoken speech),

and in this sense they are inter-subjective and inter-individual (and consequently social);

from here they enter literary works, sometimes almost completely bypassing the subjective

individual memory of their creators (1981 [1975], 249, n. 17).

(Polyb. 33.32.4), Livy uses praeco\ to render but feels the need to explain for his Roman audience the Greek practice of commencing the games with a traditional formula pronounced by the herald () from the center of the arena.54 The question, therefore, remains: what made Cicero, with his extremely sensitive ear for language, identify the praeconis vox garrula (Apul. Fl. 9) with a vehicle of praise? A simple answer would be his creative genius. But given that in the first century B.C.E. the word was not synchronically analyzable as a derivative of d \cere / dica \re, and given that the meaning song of praise does not seem to be compatible with the profession of praeco\ crier as it was known in Ciceros times, the possibility has to be considered seriously that the reason Cicero felt comfortable using the word praeco\ in such a high-poetic context is that he was in fact familiar with an archaic tradition in which the word was used in such a way.55

To sum up the results gained in this section: (1) in view of the Greek-Indo-Iranian deployment of the reflexes of *dei k;-, the striking use of Latin d \co\ in the meaning celebrate in song, as well as such puzzling constructions as d \cere laude\s and d \cere carmen, have now become easily explainable as inherited archaisms; (2) the usage of praedica \re (with its archaic meaning of prae), decompositional dica \re, and the noun praeco\ (< *prai -dik-o \n-) allows reconstructing a pre-Latin juncture *prai -dik- + Praise (laudem, etc.), more or less directly comparable to Vedic pr-dis;- (nmaktim , etc.).

4. The reconstruction of a poetic figure Show (*dei k;-) + Song (of praise) is now supported by evidence coming from three traditions: Greek, Indo-Iranian, and Italic. This result does not invalidate the common wisdom concerning the meaning of the root *dei k;-: the poetic figure in question must have belonged to the poetic register of the protolanguage


56 In the formulation of Tichy 1979: to bring something that one sees oneself to the

optical notice of another through verbal or nonverbal means.57 See above n. 38.58 On this exempli gratia reconstruction, see above n. 41.59 Cf. also Vedic bha \s-, Greek light.60 Cf. Indo-Iranian *kai t- perceive, see, know, appear vs. citr- resplendent, ket-

brightness, ray of light, or Greek to see that cannot be separated from IE *leuk- (whatever solution is adopted for Arcadian /-, problematic as ever). See Roesler 1997.

61 See Klingenschmitt 1982, 11213, and recently Garca Ramn 2006. 62 A stem - not extended by *-i e/o- and thus directly comparable to Armenian

banam, may lurk behind Homeric ; see Tichy 1983, 32628.63 See Nnlist 1998, 16365.

(the Dik ;ter-sprache, so to speak), while in everyday spoken language the root was used in its familiar meaning to show, to point out.56

How did this poetic phraseology originate? At the end of the day it is impossible to tell, and we can only engage in speculation. One way of deriving the poetic meaning of *dei k ;- from the colloquial to show, to point out would be along the lines of directing or assigning a song of praise to a deity, perhaps as a part of a reciprocal relationship between poet-sacrificer and his patron or a deity (do ut des).57 But there is another potentially promising approach: *dei k ;- *gwr h2m to show forth (viz., sing, perform) a song of praise58 could have originally meant something like to reveal a song of praise.

A parallel to this scenario can be seen in the Indo-European root *bheh2- that meant to shine (Vedic bha\ ti, Greek Hsch.)59 but also to be visible, to appear with a common semantic shift.60 Its present stem with a nasal infix *bh-n-h2- would be expected to take on a transitive meaning make visible, reveal which is indeed found in Arme-nian banam open.61 The same stem *bh-n-h2- is continued by Greek act. bring to light, mid. to appear (*bhnh2-i e/o-);62 importantly, is used of singing (revealing) a song, as the following examples make clear:63

Od. 8.499:

, ,

So he said, and, inspired by the god, Demodocus began and sang the song

Emped. B 131.34 DK:

, ,


64 Cf. further Pi. O. 13.9798, /

(as for their victories at the Isthmos and Nemea, in a brief word I shall reveal their

sum); Bacch. 13.22324, (but Maehlers supplement is not beyond

doubt); Aesch. Eum. 569, . Vollgraff 1925, 126, n. 2, has

already compared Bacchylides use of to in Alcm. 59(b), albeit with hesitation

(, aussi, se prend peut tre dans le mme sens). 65 In other passages, bhnati means (solemnly) speak, declare (e.g., RV 4.18.7ab

asmai nivdo bhananta . . . a\pah, the waters speak eulogies to him), and this is the mean-ing of the verb in the later language.

66 The comparison between *dei k;- and *bheh2- appears particularly intriguing in the light of the Germanic reflexes of the latter root: Old English bannan to summon,

Old High German bannan to order. If Germanic *banna- developed a meaning to

speak solemnly from to reveal, to make visible (< *bhh2-nu -), it is not unreasonable

to assume that the root *dei k;- could similarly develop a meaning to speak based on an earlier meaning to reveal (perhaps limited to the poetic register). This would explain

nicely the semantics not only of Latin d \cere and its Italic cognates, but also of Germanic *teihan (to accuse), Phrygian (cursed), and Hittite tekri- (slander), as I

am planning to argue elsewhere. 67 Some uncertainties about the root *bheh2- remain, including the unexpected root

present *bheh2- (to speak; Greek , Armenian bam, Latin fa\ri, and Sanskrit bha \s-), but space limitations prevent a discussion of these problems here.

Stand by me, Calliope, in my prayer, as I reveal a worthy account of the blessed gods

The idea of performance as revelation, encoded by and its deriva-tives,64 is not limited to Archaic Greece: the Vedic counterpart of the Greek verb is bhnati (*bh-n-h2-e/o-) which in the oldest texts similarly means to sing a song [of praise],65 (RV 6.11.3):

dhnya \ cid dh tv dhisn a\ vsti pr deva\; jnma gr nat yjadhyai /vpistho ngirasa \m yd dha vpro mdhu chand bhnati rebh ista //

For even the enriching Dhisana wishes to sacrifice in thee to the kin of gods for the singer,when the most inspired sage of Angirases, the poet, sings a sweet song searching [for the gods]

This correspondence between the two traditions shows that the verbal stem *bh-n(e)-h2- (to reveal) could be used in Indo-European poetic language with objects such as song, just as *dei k ;- in the examples stud-ied above.66 The parallel between *bheh2- and *dei k;- adds plausibility to the proposed semantic interpretation of the formula *dei k;- *gwr h2m as grounded in the notion of revelation.67


5. After this detour in Sanskrit, Latin, and Indo-European, we can now return to Greek and revisit a longstanding problem in the epic lan-guage, namely, the epithet . Here are the attestations:

Il. 11.248:

When Kon, among men, saw this

Il. 14.320:

who bore Perseus, among all heroes

Od. 8.382+ (6x):

, ,

King Alcinoos, among hosts of men

Od. 11.540:

,

exulting over what I had said about his son (i.e. Neoptolemus) being

Hes. Th. 385:

and she gave birth to Kratos and Bia, children

Hes. Th. 532:

in this way, he respectfully honored his son (i.e. Heracles)

Hes. Th. 543:

,

Son of Iapetus, among all rulers!

Hes. fr. 196 MW ( = 154 Most):

[ ] []

. . . among all heroes


68 Discussed by Watkins 1976, 438 (= 1994, 238).69 On the intensifying prefix -, see Willi 1999.70 See the discussion and references in Vine 1998, 2021 (I would like to thank Brent

Vine for a very useful discussion of this word).71 See Schulze 1892, 242. To my knowledge only four scholars in the modern era have

opted for a comparison with *dei k;-: (1) Sittl 1880, 52, argued that the epithet (much-shown) originally referred to people pointing at a celebrity with their fingers;

(2) somewhat similarly, Thieme 1938, 162, interpreted as wer verdient dass man

ihn dem Fremden zeigt; he notoriously argued for translating - not as an intensifying

prefix, but as stranger (connecting the word to Vedic ar-), a point of view that has been

widely and deservedly criticized; (3) Tichy 1979, 175, likewise assigned to a

meaning sehr zeigenswert, which fails to persuade: why would an illustrious hero (or a

deity) be qualified as someone worthy of being put on displayand what sort of display

is intended? (4) finally, Forssman 1978, 20, argued that beside the well-known meaning to

show, the root *dei k;- also had a meaning to greet (, , etc.), which according to him is found in (sehr gegrsst). This solution is not particularly

compelling from the semantic point of view, but more importantly, it is not assured that the

Greek verbal forms with the meaning greet belong to the root *dei k;- at all: the prevailing opinion on , , etc. connects these forms to the root *dek;- (receive, accept), whence receive [a guest] and greet.

72 Such a meaning would be entirely expectable in an *-eto- derivative; compare

Vines 1998 remarks on the meaning of (): celebrated (well worth hearing

about); (): much wished-for (well worth being asked for); Vedic dars ;at-: good to look at (worthy of being seen).

The metrical distribution alone suggests that we are likely dealing with an archaic element of the epic diction: the word is mostly located after the hephthemimeral caesura and the verse-final sequence / -o / matches the general profile of frequent Homeric for-mulae SUPERLATIVEGEN.PL.#68

Both the formal similarity to the root of and the meaning very renowned, very famous 69 have been clear to scholars ever since the beginning of Homeric studies; the problem has been the apparent incompatibility of this meaning with the usual set of meanings assumed for .70 Therefore, Schulzes suggestion to view as a metrically lengthened form of * (sehr gegrsst: to , receive kindly; Latin decus, dignity) has won wide acceptance.71 (It does not seem to have been noticed that the Doric proper name , found in epichoric prose inscriptions (12x), effectively speaks against an explanation based on metrical lengthening.)

Now, the observations on the poetic use of the verbal root *dei k;-made in this article allow for a simple solution for this old conundrum: () (famous) goes back to *dei k;-eto- which had the meaning well worth singing of, well worth praising (in song).72


73 It is my pleasure to thank Stephanie Jamison, Jay Jasanoff, Gregory Nagy, Martin

Peters, Jeremy Rau, Brent Vine, Martin West, and the audiences at Harvard, Oxford, and

UCLA for much useful discussion, as well as AJPs anonymous referees for their detailed

remarks. I would also like to gratefully acknowledge the financial support from the Research

Council of the President of the Russian Federation (grant nr. -389.2011.6).

6. In conclusion I would like to emphasize that the proposed com-parison between in Greek choral lyric, d \cere carmen in Latin, and adiks i stmam in Vedic Sanskrit is not an exercise in mechanically pushing back to the level of the protolanguage anything that looks similar in Greek, Latin, and Sanskrit, certainly not purposive on its own. Rather, this article aspires to offer a more modest and at the same time more focused result, namely a novel way of understanding the Greek texts at hand. It is hoped that the comparative data elucidate the Greek passages in section 1 regardless of whether the further arguments concerning the root *dei k;- offered in section 4 hold water. To return to where this article began, there are still cases in the study of archaic Greek poetry where a violation of Karl Lehrs sixth commandment for classical philologists is worth ones while.73

HARVARD UNIVERSITY

e-mail: [email protected]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbreviations of journals from Lannee philologique, plus MSS =

Mnchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft

Aloni, Antonio. 1994. Lirici Greci. Alcmane e Stesicoro, in appendice Simonide, Elegia per la battaglia di Platea. Milan: Mondadori.

Bagordo, Andreas. 2000. Teognide 769772 e il lessico metaletterario arcaico. SemRom 3:183203.

Bakhtin, Mikhail Mikhailovic =. 1981. Forms of Time and of the Chronotope in the Novel: Notes toward a Historical Poetics. In The Dialogic Imagination, trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist, 84258. Austin: University of Texas Press. (Trans. of: . . In , 234407. Moscow: Fiction Publishing, 1975).

Bakker, Egbert. 2002. The Making of History: Herodotus Historie \s Apodexis. In Brills Companion to Herodotus, ed. Egbert J. Bakker, Irene J. F. de Jong, and Hans van Wees, 332. Leiden: Brill.


Barnes, Timothy. 2011. Alcmanica. Paper Presented at the 30th East Coast Indo-European Conference at Harvard University.

Behr, Charles Allison. 1986. The Complete Works of P. Aelius Aristides. Vol. 1: Orations IXVI. Leiden: Brill.

Benveniste, Emile. 1945. La doctrine mdicale des Indo-Europens. RHR 130:512.

Berg, Nils. 1978. Parergon metricum: der Ursprung des griechischen Hexameters. MSS 37:1136.

Blass, Friedrich. 1899. Bacchylidis carmina cum fragmentis. 2d ed. Leipzig: Teubner.Boeckh, August. 1821. Pindari opera quae supersunt. Vol. 2. Leipzig: Weigel.Borthwick, E. Kerr. 1970. P. Oxy. 2738: Athena and the Pyrrhic Dance. Hermes

98:31831.Bremer, Jan Maarten. 2008. Traces of the Hymn in the Epinikion. Mnemosyne

61:117.Burnett, Anne Pippin. 2005. Pindars Songs for Young Athletes of Aigina. Oxford:

Oxford University Press. Calame, Claude. 1983. Alcman. Rome: Edizioni dell Ateneo.. 2001. Choruses of Young Women in Ancient Greece: Their Morphology,

Religious Role, and Social Functions, rev. ed. Trans. Derek Collins and Janice Orion. Lanham, Md.: Rowman and Littlefield.

. 2004. Deictic Ambiguity and Auto-Referentiality: Some Examples from Greek Poetics. Arethusa 37:41543.

Campanile, Enrico. 19701973. Ltymologie du celtique *bard(h)os. Ogam: Tradition Celtique 2225:23536.

Carey, Christopher. 1981. A Commentary on Five Odes of Pindar: Pythian 2, Pythian 9, Nemean 1, Nemean 7, Isthmian 8. New York: Arno Press.

. 1991. The Victory Ode in Performance. CPh 86:192200.DAlessio, Giovan Battista. 2005. Il primo Inno di Pindaro. In Lirica e Teatro in

Grecia. Il testo e la sua ricezione, ed. Simonetta Grandolini, 11349. Naples: Edizioni scientifiche italiane.

. 2009. Re-Constructing Pindars First Hymn: The Theban Theogony and the Birth of Apollo. In Apolline Politics and Poetics: International Sym-posium, Delphi 411 July 2003, ed. Lucia Athanassaki, Richard P. Martin et al., 12847. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture.

Davies, Malcolm. 1986. The Motif of the in Alcman. ZPE 65:2527.

Dissen, Ludolph Georg. 1821. Explicationes ad Isthmia. In Pindari opera quae supersunt, ed. August Boeckh. Vol. 2, 481548. Leipzig: Weigel.

Eichner, Heiner. 19881990. Ein Heldendenkmal der Sabiner mit trochischem Epigramm eines pikenischen Plautus des fnften Jahrhunderts v. Chr. Die Sprache 34:198206.

Ernout, Alfred, and Antoine Meillet. 1959. Dictionnaire tymologique de la langue latine. Histoire des mots. 4th ed. Paris: Klincksieck.

Farnell, Lewis Richard. 1930. The Works of Pindar. Vol. 2: Critical Commentary. London: MacMillan.


Fontenrose, Joseph Eddy. 1978. The Delphic Oracle, Its Responses and Operations, with a Catalogue of Responses. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Ford, Andrew. 1985. The Seal of Theognis: The Politics of Authorship in Archaic Greece. In Theognis of Megara: Poetry and the Polis, ed. Thomas J. Figueira and Gregory Nagy, 8295. Baltimore, Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Forssman, Bernhard. 1978. Homerisch und Verwandtes. Die Sprache 24:324.

Francis, Eric D. 1973. Particularum quarundam varietas: prae and pro. YCS 23:160.

Furley, William, and Jan Maarten Bremer. 2001. Greek Hymns: Selected Cult Songs from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Period. 2 vols. Tbingen: Mohr Siebeck.

Garca Ramn, Jos Luis. 1997. Lat. prae, gr. , - und Verwandtes: idg. *pr h2- und *pr- vorn daneben, vor gegenber *pro(h1) vor(n), vorwrts. In Sound Law and Analogy: Papers in Honor of Robert S. P. Beekes on the Occasion of His 60th Birthday, ed. Alexander Lubotsky, 4772. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

. 2006. Expresin del estado y tipos de lexema en griego homrico. In Word Classes and Related Topics in Ancient Greek: Proceedings of the Conference on Greek Syntax and Word Classes (Madrid, 1821 June 2003), ed. Emilio Crespo et al., 193217. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.

Geldner, Karl Friedrich. 19511957. Der Rig-Veda: aus dem Sanskrit ins Deutsche bersetzt und mit einem laufenden Kommentar versehen. Harvard Oriental Series 3336. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Gonda, Jan. 1929. . Semantische Studie over den Indo-Germanische Wortel DEIK-. Amsterdam: H.J. Paris.

Habinek, Thomas. 2005. The World of Roman Song: From Ritualized Speech to Social Order. Baltimore, Md.: John Hopkins University Press.

Hardie, Alex. 2000. Pindars Theban Cosmogony (the First Hymn). BICS 44:1940.

Hinard, Franois. 1976. Remarques sur les praecones et le praeconium dans la Rome de la fin de la Rpublique. Latomus 35:73046.

Hintze, Almut. 2000. Lohn im Indoiranischen: eine semantische Studie des Rigveda und Avesta. Wiesbaden: Reichelt.

. 2004. Do ut des: Patterns of exchange in Zoroastrianism. JAS 14:2745.Insler, Stanley. 1962. Avestan daxs-. Indogermanische Forschungen 67:5368.Jahn, Otto. 1867. Wie wurden die Oden des Horatius vorgetragen? Hermes

2:41833.Janni, Pietro. 1965. La cultura di Sparta arcaica. Ricerche. Vol. 1. Rome: Edizioni

dell Ateneo.Jebb, Richard Claverhouse. 1905. Bacchylides: The Poems and Fragments. Cam-

bridge: Cambridge University Press.Kppel, Lutz. 1992. Paian, Studien zur Geschichte einer Gattung. Berlin: de Gruyter.Klingenschmitt, Gert. 1982. Das altarmenische Verbum. Wiesbaden: Reichert.Lattimore, Richmond. 1976. The Odes of Pindar. 2d ed. Chicago, Ill.: University

of Chicago Press.


Lehrs, Karl. 1902. Zehngebote fr klassische Philologen. In Kleine Schriften, ed. Arthur Ludwich, 476. Knigsberg: Hartung.

Lobel, Edgar. 1957. The Oxyrhynchus Papyri 24. London: Egypt Exploration Fund.Maehler, Herwig. 1997. Die Lieder des Bakchylides. Vol. 2: Die Dithyramben und

Fragmente. Leiden: Brill.Marzullo, Benedetto. 1964. Alcman fr. 59 P. Helikon 4:297302.Matasovic ;, Ranko. 1996. A Theory of Textual Reconstruction in Indo-European

Linguistics. Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Momigliano, Arnaldo. 1971. The Development of Greek Biography. Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Press. Mommsen, Tycho. 1846. Des Pindaros Werke in die Versmaasse des Originals

uebersetzt. Leipzig: Fleischer.Nagy, Gregory. 1974. Comparative Studies in Greek and Indic Meter. Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University Press.. 1990. Pindars Homer: The Lyric Possession of an Epic Past. Baltimore,

Md.: Johns Hopkins University Press.Newman, John Kevin. 1965. De verbis canere et dicere eorumque apud poetas

latinos ab Ennio usque ad aetatem Augusti usu. Latinitas 13:86106.Nnlist, Rene. 1998. Poetologische Bildersprache in der frhgriechischen Dichtung.

Stuttgart: Teubner.Podlecki, Anthony J. 1969. The Peripatetics as Literary Critics. Phoenix 23:11437.Privitera, G. Aurelio. 1982. Pindaro. Le Istmiche. Milan: Fondazione Lorenzo Valla.Radt, Stefan L. 1972. Review of Thummer 19681969. Mnemosyne 25:194200.Rainer, Brian Lee. 1975. Philodamus Paean to Dionysus: A Literary Expression

of Delphic Propaganda. Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois.Rauh, Nicholas. 1989. Auctioneers and the Roman Economy. Historia 38:45171.Renou, Louis. 1967. tudes vdiques et pa\ninennes. Vol. 16. Paris: Boccard.Ritok, Zsigmond. 1983. Zu zwei Alkman-Fragmenten (PMG 30 und 59b).

Eirene 20:3338.Roesler, Ulrike. 1997. Licht und Leuchten im Rgveda: Untersuchungen zum Wort-

feld des Leuchtens und zur Bedeutung des Lichts. Swisttal: Indica et Tibetica.Sadovski, Velizar. 2009. Ritual Formulae and Ritual Pragmatics in Veda and

Avesta. Die Sprache 48 (= *h2nr: Festschrift fr Heiner Eichner, ed. Robert Nedoma and David Stifter):15666.

Schlerath, Bernfried. 1985. Beobachtungen zum Wortfeld singen, preisen, rufen, verknden im Rigveda. MSS 44:191214.

Schmitt, Rdiger. 1967. Dichtung und Dichtersprache in indogermanischer Zeit. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz.

Schneider, Karl. 1953. praeco. RE 22:119399.Schulze, Wilhelm. 1892. Quaestiones epicae. Gtersloh: Bertelsmann.Segal, Charles. 1985. Archaic Choral Lyric. In The Cambridge History of Clas-

sical Literature, ed. P. E. Easterling and E. J. Kenney, 165201. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sittl, Carl. 1880. Die Gebrden der Griechen und Rmer. Leipzig: Teubner.


Slater, William J. 1969. Lexicon to Pindar. Berlin: de Gruyter.Snell, Bruno. 1946. Pindars Hymnus auf Zeus. A&A 2:8092 (trans. as Pin-

dars Hymn to Zeus. In The Discovery of the Mind: The Greek Origins of European Thought. Trans. Thomas G. Rosenmeyer, 7189. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1953).

Taccone, Angelo. 1934. LIsthmia VIII di Pindaro. Il Mondo Classico 4:28589.Thieme, Paul. 1938. Der Fremdling im Rgveda: eine Studie ber die Bedeutung

der Worte ari, arya, aryaman und a\rya. Leipzig: Brockhaus. Thomas, Richard. 1993. Performance and Written Publication in Herodotus

and the Sophistic Generation. In Vermittlung und Tradierung von Wissen in der griechischen Kultur, ed. Wolfgang Kullmann and Jochen Althoff, 22544. Tbingen: Narr.

Thummer, Erich. 19681969. Pindar. Die Isthmischen Gedichte. Bd. 12. Heidel-berg: Winter.

Tichy, Eva. 1979. Semantische Studien zu idg. 1. *deik- zeigen und 2. *deik- werfen. MSS 38:171228.

. 1983. Onomatopoetische Verbalbildungen des Griechischen. Vienna: Verlag der sterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.

Treu, Max. 1964. Review of Denys Page, Poetae Melici Graeci. GGA 216:11420.Trmpy, Catherine. 2004. Wohlklingende Feste: Neues zu Pindars erster Pyth-

ischen Ode. In Studia humanitatis ac litterarum trifolio Heidelbergensi dedicata: Festschrift fr Eckhard Christmann, Wilfried Edelmaier und Rudolf Kettemann, ed. Angela Hornung et al., 34358. Bern: Lang.

Tzifopoulos, Yannis Z. 2011. Center, Periphery, or Peripheral Center: A Cretan Connection for the Gold Lamellae of Crete. In The Orphic Gold Tablets and Greek Religion: Further Along the Path, ed. Radcliffe G. Edmonds, 165200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Untersteiner, Mario. 1956. Senofane. Testimonianze e frammenti. Florence: La Nuova Italia.

Vine, Brent. 1998. Aeolic and Deverbative *-to- in Greek and Indo- European. Innsbruck: Institut fr Sprachwissenschaft der Universitt Innsbruck.

Vollgraff, Wilhelm. 1925. Le pan delphique Dionysos. BCH 49:10442.von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich. 1922. Pindaros. Berlin: Weidmann.Watkins, Calvert. 1976. Syntax and Metrics in the Dipylon Vase Inscription. In

Studies in Greek, Italic, and Indo-European Linguistics Offered to Leonard R. Palmer, ed. Anna Morpurgo Davies and Wolfgang Meid, 43141. Inns-bruck: Institut fr Sprachwissenschaft der Universitt Innsbruck (= Selected Writings, ed. Lisi Oliver, Vol. 1, 23141. Innsbruck: Institut fr Sprachwis-senschaft der Universitt Innsbruck, 1994).

. 1995. How to Kill a Dragon: Aspects of Indo-European Poetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

. 2002. Pindars Rigveda. JAOS 122:43235.Weil, Henri. 1895. Un pan delphique Dionysos. BCH 19:393418.


West, Martin Litchfield. 1965. Alcmanica. CQ 15:188202. . 2007. Indo-European Poetry and Myth. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Willi, Andreas. 1999. Zur Verwendung und Etymologie von griechisch -.

Historische Sprachforschung 112:86100.Woodbury, Leonard E. 1991. Poetry and Publication: Theognis 769772. In Col-

lected Writings of Leonard E. Woodbury, ed. Christopher G. Brown et al., 48390. Atlanta, Ga.: Scholars Press.

Zambrini, Andrea. 2007. . In Lexicon historiographicum Graecum et Latinum, ed. C armine Ampolo and Ugo Fantasia. Fasc. 2: , 6573. Pisa: Edizioni della Normale.

SHOWING PRAISE IN GREEK CHORAL LYRIC AND BEYOND · 544 ALEXANDER NIKOLAEV 3 Transmitted via Ath....

Documents

Transcript of SHOWING PRAISE IN GREEK CHORAL LYRIC AND BEYOND · 544 ALEXANDER NIKOLAEV 3 Transmitted via Ath....