Show Less
Restricted access

Two Studies on Pindar


Edited By Arlette Neumann-Hartmann

The late Bruce Karl Braswell worked on Pindar for decades. Besides many smaller contributions, his research resulted in fundamental commentaries on Pythian Four (1988), Nemean One (1992), and Nemean Nine (1998), and his last monograph, dedicated to Didymos of Alexandria and his ancient commentary on Pindar (2013). Two substantial, self-contained manuscript fragments were found in his papers after his death. Their originality and innovative methodological approach justify their posthumous publication.
Part I of the present volume contains the fragment of Braswell’s planned study, A Contribution to the History of Pindaric Scholarship. Using the example of Nemean Nine, Braswell traces the history of Pindar interpretation from Antiquity to the end of the 16 th century. The source texts for his exegesis appear as an appendix to the study.
Part II contains the completed fragment of A Commentary on Pindar Nemean Ten. Alongside the original text and translation of the first two triads of this ode, this section includes a detailed verse-by-verse commentary and the text and translation of the relevant scholia. The commentary on the first triad is supplemented by an extensive appendix on the Argive legends and monuments reported by Pausanias. In brief introductions, the editor recounts the origins of the manuscripts and their preparation for print.
Show Summary Details
Restricted access

20. The commentarii Aretii (1587)


20.The commentarii Aretii (1587)

The appearance of a new commentary on Pindar by the Bernese theologian Benedictus Aretius (Benedikt Marti)466 some four years after that of Portus reflects the continuing interest in the poet in Protestant Switzerland. Whereas Portus’ commentary was little more than a series of glosses interspersed with short explanations, Aretius guides the reader through the text step by step. He prefaces the Ninth Nemean with a brief introduction in which he explains that Chromios was a friend of Hieron who appointed him ἐπίτροπος, i.e. praefectus.467 After he won the chariot race in the Pythian games in Sikyon, he was called Aetnaeus because he was then living in Aitna. He won with the chariot, although he was not present, ut adnotat Scholiastes.468 Aretius then remarks that the ode does not have the usual triadic form used for odes written for victories in the major games, but is composed of twelve cola (δυωδεκάδες), a form sometimes employed for odes written for victories in other games. ← 113 | 114 →

    1For his first readers Pindar will have been his own interpreter; v. Pfeiffer (1968) 1–15. On authors as their own interpreter; v. further Richardson (1985), esp. 399, and Wilson (1980), esp. 110. On the transition from performance to the earliest texts for readers v. Irigoin (1952) 5–28.

    2The manuscripts are conveniently listed in tabular form by Mommsen (1864) xii–xxi. The only codices veteres originally containing scholia on all the odes (now with...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.