PAEANS BY SIMONIDES'
IAN C. RUTHERFORD
writerof PaeansSimonideshas not beenmuchcelebratedin
AStheamodem
era. Until quite recently one could not point to a single word of Simonides which was known to come from a Paean. Not
that this inhibited speculation. On the basis of the Suda and a scholion
on AristophanesWasps2some nineteenth-centuryeditors of Simonides
were brave enough to include a category of Paeans in their editions,
assigning to it fragments that seemed to relate to the cult of Apollo.3
The situation was transformedin 1959 when Lobel published papyrus
fragments of lyric poetry with Doric dialectical features belonging
to genres which included Epinikia and Paeans (= P.Oxy. 2430).4
Simonidean authorshipfor these was suspected from the start and the
suspicion turned out to be justified.5 The fragments were reedited by
' I wish to thank R. A. Coles and J. Rea for allowing me to examine
P.Oxy. 2430 in
the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford at several times in 1988-1989. I would also like to
acknowledge the encouragementof Albert Henrichs, Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones and Christiane Sourvinou-Inwood.
2 Suda, s.
Opfivot, yric)ta, •Fntyp6gttaTa,1Mat&ve;
raLi payepZat Ical
Itgovi'rl&"
&XXa, scholion to line 1411 of Aristophanes' Wasps (see W. J. W. Koster and
D. Holwerda,Scholia in AristophanemII.1 [Groningen1978] 222), which gives them in a
Icaai ihxa.
slightly differentorder: Opfivot,nat&veg, yric0tta, •itypi~attaTa, tpayCGiat
The fact that cpaye8fat are included hardly inspires confidence in the reliability of this
list. A thirdsource is Ps. Plutarch,De Musica 1136e (= Aristoxenus,fr. 82 W).
3 For example, F. G. Schneidewin,Simonidis Cei CarminumReliquiae (Braunschweig
1835) 50 ff., postulated a category of paeans, and he was followed by T. Bergk, Poetae
Lyrici Graeci (Leipzig 1882) 3.398, but there was no category of paeans in the edition of
E. Diehl, Anthologia Lyrica2,5 (Leipzig 1925).
4 OxyrhynchusPapyri, XXV (1959) 45 ff.
5 The original grounds for suspicion of Simonidean authorshipwere (1) an overlap
between fr. 79(c)2 and a fragmentof Simonides known from anothersource (see Lobel
[above, n. 4], 69); H. Lloyd-Jones, CR N.S.11 (1961) 18; and (2) the Doric coloration of
the dialect (on the dialect, see M. N6thiger, Die Sprache des Stesichorus und des Ibycus
[Ziirich 1971], 25, 46, 61, 91, 98); in addition (3) over twenty years later Lobel supplied
corroborativeevidence of Simonideanauthorship,demonstratinga degree of overlap with
170
lan C. Rutherford
Page in Poetae Melici Graeci (1962), and some of the largerones were
included by Werner in his edition of Simonides and Bacchylides
(1969).6 In view of this considerableincrease in the available data, the
time has come for a reappraisalof Simonides' engagement with the
paean, taking into account the new papyrusfragmentsas well as fragments that reach us by manuscripttransmission,and exploring the complex questions of genre and religion which arise in the course of studying these texts.
This paper therefore sets out to do two things. One is to refine
Page's edition of the fragmentsof P.Oxy.2430 in PMG. Page's ingenious supplements recorded in his apparatusconstitute a considerable
advance over the editio princeps, but his edition is flawed by the fact
that he made no systematic attempt to distinguish the fragments of
P.Oxy. 2430 by genre, but presentedthem all together under the headKAI IAIAN(UN AIHOIHAMATA,following the
ing: EIIINIKI(ON
enumerationof the editio princeps. This seems unnecessarilycautious
when many of the fragmentscan be assigned confidently to one of the
genres and others tentatively assigned. Accordingly, the major task of
this paperis simply to distinguishthe fragmentsof P.Oxy.2430 which I
believe should be assigned to the paean genre, and to offer a new edition of them. Sixteen fragmentsthat I believe may come from the book
of Paeans are presented in section A), accompanied by a revision of
Page's apparatus incorporating some new conjectural supplements.
The fragments are numberedAl), A2) and so on, and the criterionof
orderwithin the group is the degree of confidence I have in the generic
assignation. A question mark,as in A16?), is meant to indicate that the
assignationis extremely tentative. A few other fragmentsof Simonides
which are otherwise unclaimed by a genre look as if they might come
from Paeans also, and I have collected these together in a second section, numberingthem B 1), B2) and so on.
The second thing that I have tried to do is to offer an interpretative
commentary on the fragments, focussing particularlyon questions of
genre. Discussions of three general topics have been reserved for
anotherpapyrus(E. Lobel, "Simonides,"P. Turner(Papyri Greek and Egyptian edited by
various hands in honour of E. G. Turneron the occasion of his seventiethbirthday[London 1981] 21 ff.), pointing to coincidences between a fragment of P.Oxy. 2623 and
Simonides, PMG 520.1-3, and between fragmentsof P.Oxy.2623 and P.Oxy.2430.
6 D. L. Page, Poetae Melici Graeci (Oxford 1962) 248 ff.; O. Werner, Simonides
BakchylidesGedichte(Munich 1969) 13 ff.
PaeansbySimonides
171
appendices at the end. They are (1) the relation between the contents
of P.Oxy. 2430 and the Hellenistic edition of Simonides; (2) some
thoughts on the category of Simonidean poems that bore the title
Aatati' or Aataicol (PMG 539); and (3) some reflections on metre.
Attempting to interpret material as fragmentary as this inevitably
requires one to speculate beyond what the data strictly warrants,and I
am conscious that some may criticise me for over-speculating, but I
hope that at least some of my suggestions prove to be correct.
A) Fragmentsof P.Oxy. 2430 that can be assigned to the book of
Paeans.
A1-2) (PMG 519 fr. 35; 11a Werner)
(a)
(b)
(d)
Ep. .
.
oi
Vra[0
]
n]&pvr~0oo[.
] pow[
] .ot; "Anokhov
]ot''AO&va;
[
Fv]0d6'EsEVEsi
1,ppEvi
] RE.. [
5
]a
]06vo[
(c)
[
]a(tov oUiR&peRtt
xdptv[
cap'.
x]6vovIRoRigtvoRg[v ].ov
]av 6pt86p6gov
"AprEtptv
nap]OEvticdv Kai oE, ava
iKca
i tEvot voarXv
d yavoaotv[ .[E].E4a
] Esipagov&d (PPEVb;
6opp60o[U
•
10
] 'Av~piot; eis HG0M
[
]gota[i']ooviKEXaiE
[
&lPt.
(f)
].......v
[
lav
5
.]
schol.(=fr. (e) inter(b) et (d), opp. (d) 1-3, ]. a[ I]ot &/xto. [I ]ovr il zou[ ]1i
.[
AijXov[
schol. (f)]eo.ut.o
4 ]tov 'AOrjvayovnap[
172
lan C. Rutherford
2 iJLaq]i'8otqWernerfort. ~ir]8otq vel 8b]8otq5 fort. Inav]alitnov apEtIt
vel UnbL
1 &dk6
v.1 xapetrt 7 6pei8pogov 1l 8 forticat
Werner12 a[ilatov vel
ai', diva4 9 ]MXyotq
i v.1.KEla&4.
'[p]oaovE -aSE
Al) (PMG 519 fr. 35[i])
Two things point towardthis being from a paean. The first is the title
of the next poem. Such titles representinferences on the part of Hellenistic editors about the performersand intended location of the first
performance,and it is likely that they are generally reliable. The form
of this title ("performersin dative plural+ eig + religious centre")is the
same one that we find in the papyriof Pindar'sPaeans, and this would
in itself be a strong indication that the poem was a Paean, were it not
for the fact that we cannot rule out the possibility that titles of the same
form were given to poems of other genres also.7 However, the very fact
that the destination specified is Delphi suggests that the poem was a
paean, for it is seems likely that any poem performedat Delphi would
have been a paean. Since poems of similar genre seem to have been
classed together, if the Andrian poem was regarded as a paean, the
Parnespoem will have been one also.
The other strong indicationthat the poem is a paean is the fact that
Apollo and Artemis are the focus of attention in the fragment, since
these deities are specially associated with thatgenre.8
It might be objected that most paeans have a regular refrain at the
end of every triad, and therefore end with a refrain, whereas there
seems to be no refrain at the end of A1).9 In fact, it is possible that it
7 There appearsto be no complete discussion of such titles. See I. C. Rutherford,"Pindar on the Birth of Apollo," CQ 38 (1988) 65, n. 4; E. Lobel, OxyrhynchusPapyri, XXVI
(1961) 29. More generally, see E. G. Turner,Greek Manuscriptsof the Ancient World2,
revised by Peter Parsons (Oxford 1987) 13-14; B. K. Braswell, A Commentaryon the
Fourth Pythian Ode of Pindar (Berlin 988) 55-56, E. Nachmanson, Der griechische
Buchtitel (G6teborg 1941) 36-49.
8 For the association between the paean and Apollo, see, e.g., Pindar,fr. 128c (= Thr.
III) 1-2 ; A. Fairbanks,A Study of the Greek Paean (Cornell 1900) 25 ff.; L. Deubner,
"Paian,"NJKA 22 (1919) 402 ff. (= Kleine Schriften zur klassischen Altertumskunde
[Kinigstein/ts. 1982] 240 ff.) arguing that the association with Apollo is comparatively
recent.
9 Hellenistic editors were divided on the question of whethera refrainis a prerequisite
for the paean, as one can see from P.Oxy.2368 (SH 136 = Callimachusfr. 293), on which
see W. Luppe, "Dithyrambosoder Paian?-zu Bakchylides Carm. 23 Sn./M.," ZPE 69
[1987], 9 ff., suggesting that it has to do not with the refrain, but with anothergeneric
feature-the secondary narrative-and L. Kiippel and R. Kannicht, "Noch einmal zur
PaeansbySimonides
173
does end with a refrain, since it seems likely that when the chorus say
that they are making a sacred utterance in line 10 (i•'evot agreeing
in line 6), they are talking about a paean-cry, such
with
'3Uno•t•ivogtev
as i rnattivor il ir or something similar. Particularlysuggestive in
this context is eu"pajgovin line 10, for there seems to be an association
between the word eii•prltjogand its cognates and the paean-refrain.'0
This paean-crymay well have been quoted in the text, most likely at
the end of line 10. The alternativewould be that it ran over into the
startof line 11,"1 though it is a point against this that the only other title
surviving in a fragmentof P.Oxy. 2430 has an empty line above it also,
which suggests that in this papyrus an empty line was regularly left
between the end of one poem and the title of the next.12
So much for genre. Let us turn now to the question of the place of
performance. In default of other evidence the probabilitymust be that
it was either Delphi or Delos. On the basis of fr. 35(e) (cited in the
apparatusabove) Lobel tentatively suggested that this was a Delian
paean.13 However, this is a dangerous assumption when we cannot be
sure of the sense, and when it is unclear even whether the fragment
refers to this poem. I believe that other factors point to Delphi.
The reference to Mt. Parnes in line 1 suggests that the poem was
written to be sung by Athenians. The existence of an Athenian cult of
Apollo on Mt. Parnes seems to be indicated by a 4th-centuryinscription set up by the Athenian guild of the Eikadeis.14The reference to
Frage 'Dithyrambosoder Paian?' im BakchylideskommentarP.Oxy. 23.2368," ZPE 73
(1988) 19 ff., arguingagainst this thesis. The majorityof Paeans by Pindarseem to have
had a refrain (Pa. II, IV, V, quasi-refrainin Pa. I, Pa. VI), but some may not (e.g., Pa.
VIII, the penultimatetriad of which did not end with a refrain, though there may have
been a quasi-refrainat the very end).
10For example, at Aesch. Pers. 389 ff., Ag. 1247 ff., fr. 350 line 4, Ar. Eq. 1316 ff.,
Eur.IT. 1403 ff., IA. 1467 ff., MacedoniusLyr. 3 ff.
11Both possibilities are representedin the irregularcolometryof the refrainin SLG 460
(P.Oxy.2625, fr. 1) line 13, line 15 etc.
12See fr. 120(b).
13Lobel (above, n. 4) 56; see A. J. Podlecki, The
Early Greek Poets and their Times
(Vancouver 1984) 188-189.
14IG II 609 (r~i iEp~pto
'An6AXovootoi Flapviloolao), referredto by J. Wiener,RE
s.v. Parnes, the relevance of which to the present fragment was pointed out by LloydJones, (above, n. 5) 18. The best discussion of the inscription is still E. Ziebarth,Das
griechische Vereinswesen (Leipzig 1896) 182. Podlecki (above, n. 13) suggests that
6pEtip6Iiov used of Artemis in line 7 should be taken in association with Parnes,which
174
lan C. Rutherford
Athena in line 3 is consistent with that, although Athena's presence
could be explained by her associations with Delphic cult or with Delian
mythology.15Supportfor an Athenian context might also be thoughtto
be found in fr. 35(f), although (again) this could refer to a different
poem.
Let us look a little more closely at the reference to Mt. Parnes in
line 1. One possibility is that it is there simply to pinpoint Athens as
the place of origin of the chorus. The Ceian chorus who are the speaking subjectsof PindarPa. IV praise Ceos, and in particularCarthaea,in
the opening triad of their poem, and it is easy to imagine that this sort
of self-identificationwas quite common in Paeans. There is an objection to this hypothesis, however, in the fact that the expression "under"
or "fromMt. Parnes"is not an obvious way to specify Athens. Another
possibility is that the chorus are summoningApollo (who is mentioned
in line 2) from Mt. Parnes, after the mannerof a cletic hymn, or looking forwardto an epiphany by him from there or recalling one. However, there would be an objection here also insofar as although there
was a cult of Apollo on Mt. Parnes, it does not seem to have been a
particularlyimportantone.
A thirdpossibility is that we have a reference to the appearanceof a
sacred sign over Mt. Parnes. Such signs are associated particularly
with the sacred embassy known as the Pythais, which we know that the
Athenians occasionally sent to Delphi. In his definitive study of the
subject Axel Boethius showed that this probably happened in Thargelion.16Until the late Hellenistic period it does not seem to have been
sent at regular intervals, but only in those years in which observers
sighted lightning over a place on Mt. Parnes called Harma.17The
observers watched for lightning for three months every year, for three
days and nights each month, observing from the temple of Zeus Astrapaius,18but it lightened over Mt. Parnes so rarely that
o•avSt' "Aptoamight indicate that Artemis was worshippedon Mt. Parnes also, but I suspect that the
applicationof the epithet is more general.
15See Rutherford(above, n. 7) 72.
16A. Boethius, Die Pytha's: Studienzur Geschichteder VerbindungenzwischenAthen
undDelphi (Uppsala 1918) 20 ff.
17See Strabo9.2.11; Eustathiuson II. 2.499; Boethius (above, n. 16) 1 ff.
18sStrabo (above, n. 17): &ort 8' caxtiiov Ti TEyE&t tExa ro)G110(otu iKai toi
(Boethius [above, n. 16]).
'OXkhglnton
PaeansbySimonides
175
to; &aorpayrnbecame a proverb for an extremely rare event.19 We
should perhapsconnect this with the cult of Zeus on Mt. Parnes.20Most
of our evidence relates to enactmentsof the Pythais in the 4th century
or later,21but Boethius made out a case for its going back to the 5th
century.22Sacred signs from Mt. Parnes may conceivably have played
a part in other festivals as well, but we have no direct evidence for
this.23
If Al) is to be connected with the Pythais, there will be two possible
scenarios for performance. One possibility is that the chorus are on the
way to Delphi or have already arrived. They may say either (looking
when you sent a sign,
toward the past): "we started this OEmopla
or
"we
will
come again when you
toward
the
future):
Apollo," (looking
send a sign, Apollo/may you send the sign again."The otherpossibility
is that the poem was performed at the temple of Zeus Astrapaios in
Athens while the watchers were waiting for the lightning. In that case
in line 6 would be the labor of waiting.24
tn]6vov
One 1irtogi•gvogLe[v
factor that may be of assistance in deciding between these alternatives is the time of year the festival took place. Boethius arguedthat
19Boethius (above, n. 16) 1 ff., Plutarch,
Quaest. conviv. 679C, Zenobius A I 37
(= E. Miller, Melanges de littirature grecque [Paris 1868] 353).
20See the appendix in Boethius (above, n. 16) 160-161. For the cult of Zeus on Mt.
Parnes,see M. K. Langdon,A Sanctuaryof Zeus on Mt. Hymetius,Hesperia: Supplement
XVI (1976) 100-101; E. Mastrokostas,"'EicK
Tov vaoracpaCvto3 Bcoj toz?oAt6; qni
co
7o0 ai n. X.," ASAA61 (1983) 339 ff.
Koptpiifi;
'AXapatporpa
efij
rfiq1apvln0oo.
21For enactments in the 4th century, see Boethius (above, n. 16) 2.13 ff., for the 2nd
century, see id. 4.52 ff. The paean of Limenius was performedin connection with the
Pythais in 128/7 (id. 85 ff.), and a paeanby an anonymousAthenianin the same year (id.
87ff.).
22Boethius (above, n. 16) 10 ff. The main evidence for this is a fragment of Attic
comedy (CAF 49 [3.408 Kock]) cited by Hesychius (A 7903): &oapidmyt
8th
H~Kv6q"
a&vtito St' "Apgaroq,presumably referringto Pericles, which Boethius takes as evidence that the proverb: iTav &t'"ApClartog
was
in
current
the
time
of
Pericles.
&oaprl,
23For example, according to a fragment of Philochorus' Tetrapolis (328 FGrH 75),
referringto events taking place in the Pythion at Oenoe: 6tav & aoriiFt y•Vljtat nrapav oi' ipo~t;
8t&6j'gVEaFv
ywvoug. The
&roaT Xo-atv
tilv OEpilav oi KctoT
d6•been taken to be
here
have
sometimes
from
but
this could not
Parnes,
lightning
oarjgEa
have been visible from Oenoe. Boethius (above, n. 16) 38 ff. is sceptical about any
attemptto connect the events describedby Philochoruswith the AthenianPythais.
24 For the idea of sacred labor compare Pindar Pa. VIIb.1.21-22: t'goi 't To To[v
. v] 606vaT[o]v n6vov, EuripidesIon 128 ff., particularly134-135:
e-qpd•io-g
;
i6vo'
B]t.I01K
85&
Ig0ox0E6V
o0K&'TOKadLAo.
176
IanC. Rutherford
it took place in Thargelion,but line 5 of the fragmentseems to say that
spring has not yet passed (presumablyimplying that it is late spring).
This is a problemfor the hypothesis that the poem is performedon the
way to or at Delphi, but not for the hypothesis that it was performedat
Athens, since the observance of the lightning will have taken place in
the spring.
A2) (PMG 519 fr. 35[ii])
The title indicatesthat an ancient scholarthoughtthat this paean was
performedby Andriansat Delphi, and in default of other evidence we
must assume that his assumptionwas justified. We know that there was
a regularOEwpiafrom Andros to Delphi, because an inscriptioncontaining regulationspertainingto it was discovered in the last century.25
This is interesting, because we know from other sources that paeans
were sometimes performedin connection with the sending of 8OEpoL.26
The inscriptionlists many officials who took partin the Eowpla,including an aulos-player,27but it makes no reference to a chorus. This does
not prove that the poem was not performedin association with the regular 0Eopla mentionedin the inscription,though it would have to have
been in a year when the Andrianswanted to make a greaterimpression
than usual.28Unfortunately,the inscriptiondoes not provide any clues
about what festival or festivals the 0Eopla was associated.29
In the opening line someone seems to be described as singing
i
E;) something auspicious (a[ilotov).30 The sense
(KEXI6E8or KEX
25See F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrees des cites grecques, suppl. (Paris 1962) n. 38
(= 71 ff.), G. Rougemont, "Les Th6ories d' Andros A Delphes," BCH Suppl. IV (1977)
47 ff.
26I hope to discuss this more
fully elsewhere.
27Loc. cit. line 10.
28For Apollo and Andros, see Th. Sauciuc, Andros: Untersuchungenzur Geschichte
und Topographie der Insel (Vienna 1914) 114-115: Two other indications of contact
between Andros and Delphi are a referenceto a Pythion in an Andrianinscriptioncited
by Sauciuc on 126 (now, I understand,in the museum at Palaiopoli), and a statue of the
founderof their city dedicatedto the Andriansat Delphi mentionedby Pausanias(10.13,
4).
29I1cannot understandwhy S. Fogelmark,Studies in Pindar with Particular Reference
to Paean VI and Nemean VII (Lund 1972) 132 says that the AndrianPaean was connected with the Delphic Theoxenia.
30For the idea of an
utterance,cf. Pindar Pyth. 4.197-198: ppovx& al'aOtov
I
ati•log
The phrasea[•]atov IEXahEEiperhapshas much the same force as EO(PTijIEt.
For
(pw•O•a.
PaeansbySimonides
177
would be easier if we had the imperative (icEX6Et), but that seems to
be ruled out by the accent. If &g(pt[is the preposition, it could introduce either a specificationof the locality of the performance,31or alternatively a specification of the subject of the poem.32Who makes the
request is unclear, as is to whom it is directed. It might, I suppose, be a
sort of self address by the chorus. An alternativeis that the chorus is
asking the Muse(s) to sing. It cannot be a case of the poet asking the
chorus to sing if the rule that the chorus is the speaking subject in paeans holds.33
A3) (PMG 519 fr. 55; 11c Werner)
(a)
]tzwat A6itov [
]oa KdicXtoaov
ui6v iI[[
Aakiov
]?acE,
O6Uyar[pe;
5
] o Cv
[
Eioa4Ei~"
]vt'.cvZ8Ey'p 1tK•a[(b)
da 'A[ . . .
raltatot'
' ]ap
].gcE
S[
6ikqlnowvia
y[Xaurc](Ont
po
]aci6oVre;
10
O
.
o.
] . onog
•t Evo[
]E(pEpov]
.
4 e.g.
1
veri sim 1-2 [t~rEq, IavO]oaa Wemer i i[v Wemer 3 fort. 6OoXl%]~ztE,
tn]oXtciWemer 6
Wemer
fort.
7
fort.
'A] scripsi
yvwptq],
JCzap
A&na[pdig
&n' "A[v6poto
&•'
8
9
sscr.
vel Xpuao]ont
sscr
y [Xawc]
Wntt
(dr•aovrz]E *a(q') ]otq
this association, cf. Achilles Tatius 2.32.2.4:
]atq
iyv Icrti ioXA•A ti; eX7,
OEO;q
tottczvtai6o;
Evpito-vte;ati'oaov
different
is Ap.
Slightly
Tv itXoivy~vFo0a(t.
KcrXo~vteq,
ao•tip(xq
Rhod.Argon.4.295-296:roaotv&k
E
(
v I oritov, K(Xi
0-E& pczq•Anqudth
itdVTEg
j0TX
i
ivtE
t
eiv&'
otjov.
per7ji•trA•tv
6vo
3' A good parallel forthis wouldperhapsbe PindarPa. 11.97ff.: A&XLo]v
&v'
__
i TEfllap[vao]oafrtq Ir~xtpatg LnnXlxaigOc& A[EXpi]CvIXtnap•JRUKEq EGoStov
itoig6EVyat
vot
Xop6vItax6]xos(a
tYxUiva9i? ITp6n]ovKEXai[Eov]tt
32 Cf. Pindar Pyth.
2.15-16:
n[acp]O.
xa.jlidq]
mEiXasovrt Jg~v &gpti Ktvipav InoXhic
pKtq&at
Kvipitov.
33For bibliography,see Rutherford(above, n. 7) 67 and n. 8.
178
IanC. Rutherford
The accusatives in lines 1-2 must refer to Apollo and suggest that he is
the object of a verb. This may be representedby ]aa at the startof line
2, which could be the end of a feminine participle, though there are
many other possibilities.34At the end of line 2 i1l[ ... is most likely a
small refrain, written at the end of the line rather than as a separate
line.35There is an outside possibility that the refrain was larger, and
that the whole of lines 1-2 were part of it. Small or large, it probably
marks the end of the stanza, and I have tentatively inserted a
paragraphus.
After this, the chorus call on the "daughtersof the Delian maidens"
These are
(line 3), perhaps calling on them to cry out
(6,Xok?]arE).
the
well-known
Deliades.36
The
words
presumably
o~v EIajEE; in line
4 seem to refer to them, and we should probablysupply a word meanin
ing "mind"or "attitude." Since the masculine participle]aei•6OVtES
line 8 seems to refer to the members of the chorus (compare Al), 9),
the chorus and the Deliades are not the same. The passage is therefore
a descriptionof the Deliades, comparableto those in lines 157 ff. of the
Homeric Hymn to Apollo, in Euripides Heracles, 617 ff. and CallimachusHymnto Delos, 296 ff.
The words kv ~aeEya&pSica[ in line 5 may be a reference to the
place of performance,presumablya cult center of Apollo. It seems to
be described as just in some sense, which makes us think of Pindar's
description of Aegina: Sictat6rtot; v&'og (Pyth. 8.22).37 In the next
line rXkata•Xot'&ar''A[ could perhapsspecify the home of the chorus.
The place in question was probably an island, since the epithet
rta(iako makes best sense of an island,38and its name began with the
34Lobel (above n. 4) 61 suggested that ]aoamight be the end of a feminine participle.
Werner (above, n. 6) suggested ivao[oa, which is attractive. An alternativewould be
the end of firstperson singularaorist, perhapswith the sense of "havepraised,"for example, ai'vrl[oa (cf. Pindar,01. 10.100).
35See n. 11 for a parallel. Werner's suggestion (above, n. 6): iri[v ("voice") looks
unlikely.
36Hy. Hom. Ap. 157; Eur.Her. 617 (with Bond's note); P. Bruneau,Recherchessur les
cultes de D9los a' 1' dpoque hellenistique et 'd 1' poque imperiale, Bibliothbquede 1'
Ecole frangaised' Athbneset de Rome, 217 (1970) 215 ff.
37 See E. Kienzle, Der Lobpreis von Stddtenund Ldndernin der ilteren griechischen
Dichtung (Basel 1936) 76 ff.
38 The word is a hapax, though there are many similar epithets, collected by Kienzle
(above, n. 37) 20 ff.
PaeansbySimonides
179
letter 'A. The two obvious candidateswould, I suppose, be Andros and
Aegina.
If the former is right, there would be a strong temptationto connect
A3) with A2). However, there is a major difficulty for this interpretation in the reference to the Deliades, for while we cannot rule out the
possibility that they would have been mentioned in a Delphian poem,
they obviously make more sense in a Delian poem. Comparisonof the
meter of the two fragments (see Appendix C) is one approach that
might in theory shed some light on the hypothesis that A2) and A3)
come from the same poem, but we would need more than one line of
A2) to be able to reach a conclusion on this question.
In line 7 there may be a reference to the onset of spring (compare
Al), line 5). If so, the context is presumably the spring festival of
Apollo on Delos.39 In line 8 the chorus may have mentioned Athena
(y[Xa]t]icOrt),if Lobel is right in his assessment of the position of (b).
In the context of Delos one thinks of Athena Pronoia.40
We would expect the sort of reference to the here and now that we
have found in lines 3 ff. to come either in the introductionof the poem
or in the conclusion, that is anywhere but in the middle, which one
assumes would have been occupied by the myth. To use Richard
Hamilton's convenient terminology, we would expect it to come in the
X or the Z section, but not in the y.41 I think it may be worth advancing
the suggestion that this fragment represents the end of the Y section
(lines 1-2) and the largerpart of the concluding Z section (lines 3-10),
with the refrainmarkingthe transitionfrom one to the other. There is
no exact parallel for this, but one could compare the refrain-likedevice
at the end of the second triad of Pa. VI (lines 121-122), which comes
at the point of transitionfrom the myth of Neoptolemus to the here and
now and the theme "praiseof Aegina," which then leads into a second
myth.42
39For the date of the Delphic Theoxenia, see F. Pfister,RE s.v. 2257; for the date of the
spring festival of Apollo at Delos, see Bruneau(above, n. 36) 1.4, 65 ff.
40 For AthenaPronoia,see Rutherford(above, n. 7) 71, and n. 41.
41 R. Hamilton,Epinikion(The Hague 1974).
42 I hope to discuss this more elsewhere.
180
Ian C. Rutherford
A4) (PMG 519 fr. 32; 11 Werner)
]vto Kapwv
[
.4himov.
t8e0pa IclaXv
Ag]cpi
FoTaoav[xop6v
ij1
]XeiptCivag* y7p ai6o[at
5
]^
k]
E
] . Uo;&Oav[iT]a;
.ipivov
.[6]~VEq8 aiCKE
au. [.. ] W..
l.]k0• gtot
schol.marg.
ovo . [ I] . a oa evonr[I .
sup.]oaparoicridya0[ In]apOiicav
schol.marg.dext.inf.]otoEoa.
I]. Xp[.
KXaOonkXtogji~ov[.
[I]etotoo[
1 &cpqiCo]vro
2 post 9pt,Po sscr. pi, in fin XhXo;
Werner, in fin fort KeyrXplot
Werner,Xop6v scripsi aioi^[at v.1. ai6og[qc ]X vel ]8, fort vl9]861o; 6 KicX]^0vel
a]UOt. ] : vel y angulus sinister, Mot(p') Werner,&o[9iv]o; Werner
We are presented with the following elements: valiant Carians, something happening around a river, birth-pangs, somebody crying out,
something immortal, a prayer. Since other fragments in this papyrus
come from Paeans, the interpretationthat suggests itself (as Lobel
saw)43is that this is from an episode in the story of the birthof Apollo
and Artemis. The birth-pangs are particularly characteristic of the
myth."
We can connect this with a fairly widespread traditionthat Apollo
and Artemis were born in Asia Minor. According to Strabo (14.1.20)
and Tacitus (Ann. 3.61) they were born at Ortygianear Ephesus by the
river Cenchrius,and a traditionthat the birth took place at Ephesus is
also indicatedby the existence of a religious society of the Kouretes at
Ephesus in imperial times.45There was also a traditionthat they were
43Lobel (above, n. 4) 54; Lloyd-Jones(above, n. 5) 18.
44For example, the word Fp]d3puvovcan be paralleled in CallimachusHymn 4.202,
with W. H. Mineur,Callimachus:Hymn to Delos, Introductionand Commentary(Leiden
1984 [MnemosyneSupplementum83]) 185, also in Euripides IT 1227-1228: ei' nt ...
Zrcot; papIverat.
45See Strabo 14.1.20 (r6re 6&iai tr6r^OvKoupijrcovApxeiov ovdyEt ougn6aota
cKai
O~aoi'a);cf. J. Poerner,De Curetibuset Corybantibus(Diss. Halle 1913)
trva Juo)rtlK&;
284 ff.; C. Picard, Ephese et Claros (Paris 1922), 423 ff.; S. Luria, "Kureten,Molpen,
Aisymneten,"Acta AntiquaAcademiae ScientiarumHungaricae, XI (1963) 31 ff.; most
recently Dieter Knibbe, Der Staatsmarkt:Die Inschriften des Prytaneions: Die Kureteninschriftenund sonstige Religidse Texte = Forschungen in Ephesos, IX.I.1 (Vienna
1981) 70 ff. ("Ursprung,Begriff und Wesen der ephesischenKureten"),a referencewhich
I owe to Prof. Guy Rogers.
PaeansbySimonides
181
born furthersouth at Araxa in the Xanthus valley,46and with this we
may associate interpretationsthat make 6mKtogor buioyEVijg mean
"bornin Lycia."47
Deciding between Ephesus and Araxa is not easy. Both are close to
a river (Ephesus has the Cenchrius, Araxa has the Xanthus). In 1961
Lloyd-Jones pointed out that Strabo's narrative suited the scholion
located in the margin immediately above the fragment, since Strabo
specifically mentions that while the birth was taking place local
Kouretes clashed their weapons on nearby Mt. Solmissus to distract
attention.48This seems to decide it in favor of Ephesus, and I would
should perhapsbe restoredat the
suggest that the river-nameKEyXpio11
end of line 1 on the model of the epic formula in which the expression
PEEpa is preceded by the name of the river in the genitive.49The
&g0(pi
end of line 2 may have contained a reference to how the Kouretes distracted attentionfrom the birth. If they were like other Kouretes they
will have danced while they brandishedtheir weapons, so I suggest the
supplementicak6v oCaoav [Xop6v).50
However, I doubt whetherSimonides had Apollo as well as Artemis
46 O. Benndorf,Reisen in Lykienund Karien
(Vienna 1884) 75 ff., citing an inscription
which talks about the birth of the deities; also J. Laager,Geburt und Kindheitdes Gottes
in der griechischenMythologie (Winterthur1957) 70-71.
47 Schol. II. 4.101, ed. E. Maas; Laager(above, n. 46) 72.
48 Strabo 14.1.20; Lloyd-Jones(above, n. 5).
49 The phrase&ag]qip'epa is Homeric, and in some of the instances of it the name of
the river occurs in the genitive (11.2.461, 533, 7.135, Od. 3.292), and since the name does
not follow in this instance, and since one would expect a specific name to have been mentioned, it seems likely that it occurredbefore and in the genitive in this case also. One
suspects imitation of 'rn' 'Ivchrotookepot; (an expression not exactly paralleled elsewhere) from the descriptionof Leto giving birthon Delos at hy. Hom. Ap., 17.
50 For Xopfv as the object of a form of 'oarllt see e.g. Herodotus 3.48; Pindar Pyth.
9.114; Bacchylides 10, 112, for Xop6~ with icaX6d,see PindarNem. 5.24 (6 icXXiatoro
Xop6q),Hom. II. 16.180 (Xop(^aic•7•) and the epithet KaxkiXopo; (particularlyat Eur.
Her. 690:
alkiXopov). The first referenceto the
ercxnatiay6vov
6eiXEooooaot 3 M.-W.:
Kouretes asAatroo;
dancers seems to be Hesiod,
... Koupfirz re Oeoi (ptxofr. 123,
For
the
dance
of
the
Cretan Kouretes, see Calapotropaic
cnatyove; 6pXrlotiipe;.
limachus, Hymn to Zeus, 51 ff.; for the dance of Kouretes in general, see K. Latte, De
saltationibus graecis capita quinque (Giessen 1913) 37 ff. Werner(above, n. 6) suggests
that after KaXkv o"traaav in line 2 we supply [RXo;, but ot6pvugt is the verb one
expects with V4xo;. It seems worth mentioning one furtherpossible point of contact
between the cult of Artemis at Ephesus and P.Oxy. 2430: Strabo mentions a statue of
Leto with a ocfijxpov in her hands, and we may compare PMG 519 fr. 60(b) 1.4:
Xt]cnap6o'al[po].
182
lan C. Rutherford
born in Ephesus, because the traditionthat Apollo was born on Delos is
extremely well-rooted in the 5th century (A3), lines 1-2 may be evidence that Simonides put it there). Artemis, on the other hand, though
she was well established at Delos, had an even closer connection with
Ephesus.51I thereforeincline to the view that Simonides set the birthof
Artemis in Ephesus, and then had Leto go on to Delos to give birth to
Apollo.52If so, Simonides' account of the birthof Apollo differed from
the one followed by Pindar, who placed the birth of both deities in
Delos.53
The details of the birthremainobscure. As I suggested above, lines
1-2 seem to specify the location of the birth and to describe the distracting activity of the Kouretes. After this in lines 3-4 come Leto's
birth-pangs,followed apparentlyby someone shouting (aUoE--line 4)
and the prayer made by someone, presumably to hasten the delivery
The main problem is what to
(line 6, apparentlyintroducedby iKCE).54
make of ] . uog &Oav6tag in line 5. From the point of view of sense,
"mouth"or "voice" is what one wants, but from the palaeographical
point of view, the best available supplementis vrl]?Uog;(suggested by
Lobel in the editio princeps).55This suggests thateither the shout or the
prayer-or both-come from within the womb and therefore from
51 That Artemis alone was born in
Ephesus may be implied in Dittenberger,SIG3 867:
tjr
Fv [tfj]
rpoq~^
p xi
Tfigi8oc Oeoi r^;i 'E?p[e'ai]q. See Laager (above,
ff. and 71, n. 2.
n. 46) 71i~•p'q
52A remoterpossibility which I mention only to reject is that Simonides had neither
god born in Asia Minor, and that Leto merely stopped there on her journey to Delos (cf.
Myth.Vat. 2.17; Laager[above, n. 46] 72).
53For Pindar's account see Rutherford(above, n. 7). For traditionsabout the birth of
Apollo and Artemis see RE 2, 21-22. The reason why the accounts vary is unclear.
Laager(above, n. 46) 79 n. 1 suggested that the story of both deities being born on Delos
was promulgatedby Athens, but see Rutherford,72, n. 47.
54For the expression, cf. Al), 9, where, however, the verb is middle. Here the verb
was presumablycombined with a noun meaning"voice"at the startof line 5. LSJ cite one
passage-Plutarch, de sollertia animalium 973d-in which ice• seems to mean "utter"
without an object with the sense "voice," but it is unlikely that there was no object here.
Werner's ingenious emendationMoi(p)' for tot in line 6 would supply a subject for the
verb, but is ratherrisqu6 considering the state of the text. Cf. also Hdt. 4. 135. 3: oi Be
a
ovot ... oivro 8?• tlXov
ti; qcovif (R. Renehan, GreekLexicographical
i'•Wav
to Liddell-Scott-Jones
Notes: A Critical Supplement
InoXk,
[Gbttingen1975 (Hypomnemata45)]
110).
55 So Werner(above, n. 6). The letter before vo; must be a or 8 or X, so yit]puo; is
ruled out.
PaeansbySimonides
183
Apollo. One thinks at once of the prophecy that Apollo makes while
still in the womb at Callimachus,Hymn to Delos, 162 ff., and one feels
a not wholly responsible urge to wonder whether Apollo's prayer in
A4) might have been Callimachus'model.
A5) (PMG 519 fr. 41; 11lbWerner)
(a)
'Ap]•-t•u66gte
]6v,E t6(ov[3a0•.[
(b)
cv]ac &di6iaaoodhXo[.
]ev oi'ip At I| 'Oav[
5
at 8[
o]a'atra Kro4[pat];"
2 tb o]6v r~ Werner
1 a.[nlrXoKropo-Werner,etiam 3a0p[ possis
3 naao4-5
num
valde
incertum
est
vel
et
recte
coniuncta
sint
(a)
(b)
odaou
naooadk6qpv
Lobel saw that the likeliest interpretationof lines 4-5 is that Apollo
gives musical signals (a]C&paa)56to the Charitesor Muses (ico'[pat];)
who then dance (as in lines 188 ff. of the Pythian part of the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo). The previous line probablydescribes him hanging up
his bow from a peg (as in the opening of the Delian partof the Homeric
Hymn to Apollo)57 or taking down his lyre from a peg (as Lobel
thought). Since the Homeric Hymn to Apollo was probably an
extremely well known text in the 5th century B.C.,its influence should
probablybe assumed here.58The idea that the Muses sing more loudly
when they see Apollo is attributedto Simonides by Himerius (PMG
578 = B2 below), and there is a chance that this could refer to A5).
56 Cf. Pythian 1.3:
neiOovorat &dotioi
'
odao-at.
atT aooe Kai
pipve acxpaiALt
tepntKep-PavCp, ifi'a it6v t' kdx
Kai
o
a
e
aa
yPooYv
XAitooe(papTzprlv,•
&n' i•p0(iovSpj (pov
keXopoa tro |
oarexpegao
idova
Eoto Inraood
XpioEoi.
Xo' KIc
uIpb6
azTpb6
58 For the influence of the Homeric Hymn in the 5th century, see Rutherford(above,
n. 7) 65 ff. Tilman Krischerhas recently detected the influence of the very passages of
the Homeric Hymn mentioned here (lines 5 ff., lines 188 ff.) in PindarPyth. 1 ("Pindars
erste pythische Ode und ihre Vorlage,"Hermes 113 [1985], 491 ff.).
57 5-9: Arlt oi8l'
6'
Ian C. Rutherford
184
A6) (PMG 519 fr. 61)
(a)
(b)
out' vEVe0Ev
aixg[,[&
]oupav[
]"
]__ atav.
5
]80&[.'A]r6XXova"[
.
.
[
]evo [
]. cano[
6 fort. <i]va? 116[o~etov vel sim.
(a)-(b) intervallumincertum
In line 2 the thought might have been something like: "(Apollo, who
are neither unmusical) nor far from the battle." In line 3 rtattv is the
Doric form of the name of the god and of the genre, contrastingwith
the Attic ratdhvand the epic-ionic nratijov (found in A7) below).59 It
could well markthe end of a refrain,in which case line 4 will probably
have been the first line of a strophe (not the first line of a poem,
because there is no room for a title).
A7) (PMG 519 fr. 78 col.i)
]
]O]Ld[ov
10
]Ica•ait• Ev
]iVtvot; iIl iji
59On these forms see J. Wackemagel, Glotta 14 (1925) 61 ff. (= Kleine Schriften,
809 ff.)
PaeansbySimonides
1 schol. marg. dext. schol.
(ptiav
3po.['-]
5 fort rptn]6'aaotv
'Anok[Xov
6 fort O]]gi•Tcov
185
6 marg. dext. schol. av(rtitoi) St&
9-10 fort
ica•a
iFiv I•ai
vel sim.
This is shown to come from a paean by nat•iov in line 4 and by iIl i•i
in line 10. The ionic and epic form of ratrjov contrastswith the Doric
form
that Simonides uses in A6), 2. Not enough survives for us
rtatav on whether
to speculate
they are genuine alternativesor whether there
is a semantic difference. Pindar also uses both forms, ratiav being
used either of the god or of the genre and nat•iov only of the genre.6?
In A7), 4 7atulov is not likely to be part of a refrainbecause the name
of the genre is mentioned comparatively rarely in refrains.61On the
other hand the exclamationiIl fii may indicate a refrain,since it occurs
in refrainselsewhere.62
A8) (PMG 519 fr. 70)
]av ; A Xov]
']iovwat[
60aHativ of god: Pyth. 4.270; Pa. 11.23, 71 (there is a certain ambiguity here, however); IV.31; VI.182; or the genre: Pa. 11.4; V.47; VIIb.4; natiov of the genre: Pa.
VI.121, 127; "Pa. XVIIb."25;fr. 140b, 7.
61The only case is Pa. VI. 121. In the refrainin Pa. II
might be meant to suggest
tat'v
both deity and poem.
62For example, PindarPa. IV.31: it i•, i• Ha[tav, Bacchylidesfr. 60.37 (last line):
t5
i~ ij; FragmentumErythraeumPaeanis in Apollinem
(J. U. Powell, Collectanea Alexandrina [Oxford 1928] 140) 11: iNiiii, 15: i6 itH)atov. At Pindar,Pa. 1.4: i]i~i should
probablynot be considereda refrain. At SLG 453, 2: naI~iova it~1
it[ could be part of a
refrain. Callimachususes itl iN in his Hymn to Apollo (25, 80, 97, 103), and it is usually
said that he made the breathingrough to suggest an etymological connection with
i'7l•t
(see F. William Callimachus' Hymn to Apollo: A Commentary[Oxford 1978] 85 [on
is
used
also
as
an
1.103]). itl fri
expression of woe (Aesch. Supp. 114, Pers. 1004) and of
joy (Ar. Ach. 1206-1207).
IanC. Rutherford
186
A9) (PMG 519 fr. 47)
]0 E;. [
2 5r' ;qAak[ov Page
The references to Delos suggest that these two scraps come from paeans.
A10) (PMG 519 fr. 37)
]. ot0ty aXt[
]v itopbAa'[ov
5
] Xat;6ptip6po[
.
][
]e.v[
2 fort &t[4t, 4 ] .: , vel fort p
The crucial piece of evidence here is the epithet 6pi6pogo[, which
could well refer to Artemis, as in line 7 of fr. 35 (= A1).63This makes
it likely that there is a reference to Delos in line 3. If motion to Delos
is implied, this may have to do with a foreign chorus visiting Delos (cf.
A3)).
63
The papyrusreadinghere:6ptSp6opo[is probablyright, as opposed to opet8p6pLo[in
fr. 35a line 7 (above). On the spelling see most recently A. Dyck, "New Light on Greek
Authors from GrammaticalTexts," MH 43 (1989) 3-4, also E. Fraenkel,Zu den V6geln
des Aristophanes, in Studien zur Textgeschichte und Textkritik: Festschrift fiir
G. Jachmann (Cologne 1959) 13, referredto by Lloyd-Jones (above, n. 5). It is interesting that we find anotheroccurrenceof this rare epithet in a paean-in PindarPa. VII.6
(6ptSp6jiov), thoughthere we cannotbe sure whetherit is used of Artemisor the chorus.
PaeansbySimonides
187
Al l) (PMG 519 fr. 23)
[v
86]?',"Arnoko
]. Iatx6t[
.]v, TETrl.[
2 8]5', supplevi
The reference to Apollo suggests that this may be anotherfragmentof a
paean. The chorus are perhapsasking Apollo to accept their song, as in
the concluding lines of PindarPa. VI, or their arrival, as at the end of
PindarPa. V.64
A12) (PMG 519 fr. 9 col. ii)
ZEu;to.[
.
nt 6E-a.[
5
vo;-.AFp. [
(ot .o v'E.[
yovaxa[
10
col. i. 7-8 schol:
aaa. [
I]ve[ ] ]. atoot
]X.tv
3 postE,hast.vert.pespauloinfralin.desc. [ : 8 velfort.p angulus
sin. 4 AEXp(O[
10 . [ :v possis
possis
The only sure thing is again the reference to Apollo (line 5). If
AE.•po[
64Pa. VI 181-183: Moto&v I 8']
noXMtL, Hlativ, Si|4'] ivv6ogov
)
K
gv6inapo3oov.[t]
E naaiGE
EIEVEi
0[aXi]av, Pa. V.44 ff.: Aar6o; va
&ao0E v6(p OEppinovra
gt~rE-pov
Pvo; &yadcy o;
•
IoV
LEXtyadpoi"
*nat
KE•aFEVV
6•9pt.
188
IanC. Rutherford
in line 4 were right, it would indicate that this is a Delphic paean.
Another relevant detail may be preserved in the scholion that survives
from the first column. The traces of a scholion to the first line suggest
]h?rtv, and one attractivesupplementwill be iicaraI]XE?qv (or
Fca••rl-
the feminineof i'cara•IeXrlv
previously
(icKtrl9•X4rlv),
attested
once only in a Neoplatonisttext.65It
would presumablyhave to
I3•]?.xtv),
be an epithet for Artemis.
A13) (PMG 519 fr. 25, col. ii)
O[,qPalot;
.
Col. i opp. ii 1 schol. ] o
.
Xij[]
n?IJY.nv]
] . Oat, opp. 2 asteriscus,opp. 3 schol. 'An6]XkXvt
]iKa,-
3 0[rlatiot; tituliinitiumesseconieci.
The basis for positing that this comes from a paean is the first line of
the scholion belonging to the previous column (col. i): 'An6]Xkhovt.An
asterisk shows that the surviving section of col. ii representsthe end of
one poem and the beginning of another. Elsewhere in P.Oxy. 2430 the
titles of poems were written in the column, so we would expect the
same convention to be followed here. The position of the asterix and
coronis suggests that 1.2 is the first line of the new poem, but the position of the paragraphusis incompatible with that. If the paragraphus
comes between the title of the new poem and its first line, then 1.3 will
be the first line of the new poem, but if it comes between the end of the
old poem and the title of the new one, then 1.4 would be the first line.
The latteris perhapsmore likely, in which case 0[ will be the firstletter
of the title. The firstword of the title will have been an ethnic adjective
in the dative plural, such as 'Av6piot; in the title of A2). The most
likely supplement by far is 0[lpIalot;, since we know that Pindar
wrote several paeans for the Thebans, and it would not be surprisingif
Simonides had done the same.66But there are, of course, many other
possibilities.
65Ps. Iamblichus,TheologoumenaArithmeticae49.11, ed. De Falco.
66PindarPa. VII, IX,
possibly also Pa. I.
189
PaeansbySimonides
A14?) (PMG 519 fr. 12)
.
2 ]8 veri sim.
?F
a
CI)P.
3 ]oqp [ Lobel dubitanter,i.e.
[yia
]Op•
To anyone familiar with the myth of the birthof Apollo Saxa in line 2
will suggest the etymology of the name "Delos" as "the island that is
clear." PindarPa. VIIb.47 ff. shows that this etymology goes back as
far as the 5th century.67Lobel, who must have seen this, suggested the
readingo'6pt in line 3, presumablythinkingof 'Optty[yia,which Pindar
uses as an alternative name for Delos.68 Unfortunately, this is little
more than a guess because virtually nothing of line 3 survives except
for the r.
A15?) (PMG 519 fr. 84)
]omO. [
&p]l]p6tav[
]iiiv
5
]Iy it..r[
avip. [
]&d6ei86vrtva o[
]; E60EtpOpa
K. [
]eretpav. [
10
] ava?
6[
"A.n[okov
XpI]ooo6Ra&
]Rev'RiVWV
[
]van.r[
]vawp..[
] [] [
.
67See Rutherford(above, n. 7) 69.
68PindarPa. VIIb.48.
]. too[
190
IanC. Rutherford
1 Xp]ogl•( Lobel, fort. ot]ogjiy vel Bp]ogjiip
6. [ : a vel X parsextremasin.
Lobel suggested that the first line might conceal the name of Chromius
for whose victory at the Sicyonian Pythia Pindarcomposed
(Xp]ogitp),
Nem. 9. He comparedthe fact that the name Sicyon is mentionedinfr.
115 and in a scholion to fr. 117. This would be consistent with the
reference to Apollo in lines 8-9,69 for we would expect Apollo to be
mentioned in the context of these games. This hypothesis would entail
that Chromiuscommissioned two poems for the same victory, which is
not implausible.70However, Lobel's hypothesis is a long shot, especially since other supplements are possible in line 1, for example
aor]ogit or perhapsBp]oti•(p,an epithet of Dionysus, who would not be
out of place in a paean.71
The reference to Apollo would be compatible with this being
anotherfragmentfrom a paean. In that case the epitheteO)Etpa (line
6) could well refer to either Artemis or Leto, perhapsmore likely Leto,
since epithets connoting aspects of hair are quite often applied to Leto
in classical poetry, but never to Artemis.72
69
This is guaranteedby the epithet Xpu]ooK6ga; (line 9), which is regularlyused of
Apollo in 5th-century lyric. See M. Silk, Interaction in Poetic Imagery (Cambridge
1974) 159 ff.
70There would be a parallel in Pindar,Nem. 5 and Bacchylides, 13, both apparently
writtenfor the same victory of Pytheas of Aegina in the pancrationat Nemea, perhapsin
483 B.C. (see H. Maehler,Die Lieder des Bakchylides,I [Leiden 1982 (MnemosyneSupplementum62)], zweiter Teil, 250 ff.).
71One thinks in particularof PhilodamusScarpheus'Paean to Dionysus of 338 B.C.(in
line 3 of which the epithet B]p6jito; actually occurs). I would argue that the existence of
this poem points to a traditionof paean-singingin honor of Dionysus at Delphi, and that
it should not be explained as a symptom of Hellenistic religious syncretism (as has been
suggested in the most recent study of the poem by A. Stewart,"Dionysus at Delphi: The
Pediments of the Sixth Temple of Apollo and Religious Reform in the Age of Alexander,"in Macedonia and Greece in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Times, edd.
Beryl Barr-Sharrarand Eugene N. Borza [Studies in the History of Art, vol. 10], Washington 1982, 205 ff.)
72Leto is describedas 7ii~oog1o at HomerII. 1.36 and several othertimes in Homerand
at Hy.
at Hy. Hornm.
in the Homer hymns, as
1.101, as
XpiooXk6,cagto;
aX•Utt6Kclago;
of the
other
occurrence
The
at
and
as
2.27,
only
ktnapocx6caLog; Pindar,fr. 33c1.
Homrn.
a
of
is
in
line
Anacreon
literature
in
418).
(PMG
epithetE?0&Etpa classical
Paeans by Simonides
191
A16?) (PMG 519 fr. 22)
][
H]hivetoi[
5
2 ]o~, sscr.]oo[ (v.1.iao6xrtov)
3 ] . : potiusa quamt
The RiverPeneiuscouldhave been mentionedin a Paean by Simonides. Apollowas supposedto havepurifiedhimselfthereafterhe killed
theDelphicdragon,andtheritualof theDelphicSepterioninvolvedthe
of thiseventby a youngmanwhobathedin thePeneius.73
reenactment
It is easy to see thatthe mythof the ritualcouldhavebeenmentioned
in a Delphicpaean,andin fact thereseemsto havebeena referenceto
one of them in one of Pindar'sPaeans.74Anotherway the Peneius
couldhave come up is in the courseof a narrationof the mythof the
birthof Apollo: in Callimachus'Hymnto Delos Letoasksthe Peneius
if she can give birthin his locality(lines 109ff.), and he reluctantly
declines(lines 122ff.), pointingoutthatthegods will destroyhimif he
does.75Mightthisfragmentperhapscomefroma descriptionof a similarsceneby Simonidesin whichLetopromisedthePeneiushonor(line
4) andfamein song(line5)?
On the myth and ritual of the Septerion,see Plut. de def. or. 417c-418d; q.gr. 293c;
Ephorus FGH 70F311 (= Strabo 9.3.12) 422); Theopompus FGH 115F80 (= Ael. VH
3.1); W. Burkert, Homo Necans, tr. P. Bing (Berkeley 1983) 127-130; H. Jeanmaire,
Couroi et Courites (Lille 1939) 387-411; M. Blech, Studienzum Kranz bei den Griechen
(Berlin 1982) 224 ff.
74Pa. X, lines 3 ff., with scholion, cited in B. Snell and H. Maehler,Pindarus, Pars II,
Hermes
Fragmenta et Indices, 48; B. Snell, "Identificationenvon Pindarbruckstiicken,"
73 (1938) 439; Erika Simon, OpferndeGotter (Berlin 1953) 3 ff. I hope to discuss this
furtherelsewhere.
75 On the backgroundto the Peneius episode in the Hymn to Delos see Mineur (above,
n. 44) 133-134.
73
192
lan C.Rutherford
B) Fragmentsfrom sources other than P.Oxy. 2430 that can be tentatively assigned to the book of Paeans
B 1) According to an epistle of Ps. Julian dealing with the significance
of the number one hundred (PMG 573 = Sim. fr. 68) Simonides
to Apollo and derived it from the fact that
applied the epithet"EKaTro;
in his attackon Python.76
used
one
hundred
arrows
Apollo
&pp
•EhXtuiconpb;
toiv 'An6Xowvo;Eipniav
a
ou
iat vaeKEp avr'
rtvbq
avro~ tijv
Rly ovvgiav icooafioat 8t6rt iov
iepo
yvpiop•agao;
t
eXtpcTaaro,
luc0iva, tyv 6p•Kcovra,P~ aotvhartbv ; cprlotyv
ai g•v aovairyv Etcatov 7 lH60tov XaipEtv cpoaayopeu6gEVov, otov 6Xoc•,ripov rtv6b
;xovugia;
oaLugo6o,opoopovoug1Evov.
&8
Epa.
Itglovi&,i
IKEt
ZV
KETaov npoGEtnovrt
(The lyric poet Simonides uses the epithet Hekatos as an expression of praise for Apollo and honours him with this in preference
to any other divine epithet of Apollo's because, he says, he used
one hundredarrows to kill the dragon Python and derives greater
pleasure from being called Hekatos than Pythios, as if being
addressedby the symbol of a complete epithet.)
What goes back to Simonides seems to be the etymology of 'Ecaro;
fromEAarovand the idea that in virtueof the etymology Apollo prefers
the epithet "Ehcaro;to -i6Oto;. The last clause which seems to be an
attemptto explain Apollo's preference for the epithet 'EKazca on the
groundsthat in virtue of the etymology it is a complete epithetprobably
goes back to the authorof the Epistle whose general thesis is that the
numberone hundredis a symbol of perfection.
The same passage is mentionedin two other sources. Tzetzes gives
the same etymology and adds the detail that the dragon that Apollo
killed was threatening Leto.77 He also gives the dragon a different
name: AeFXpivrlv,which we know otherwise only from Hellenistic
Ps. Julian.,Ep. 24.395D, 1.511 Hertlein(= p. 236 Bidez-Cumont).
tc8
77 Tzetz. in Hom. II. 117.17 HermannKacxr
8&
vijriiv 1j utOKoF o•icaTo; aailEarrl'
6t' Fxarbv pehXovA&veix obv
81t
6Xo;o6
LAeh•pvrlv8pidovtaVrv Airit'
'An6,owv
Ptar6jtevov.
76
PaeansbySimonides
193
poetry.78Finally, Eustathiuson Homer Iliad 1.75 uses the same information about the Simonides poem to gloss the epithet
EKicaart•EXraO.79
He thinks that the use of the epithet in the Iliad is dignified,
whereas
Simonides' etymology is both undignified, insofar as a god ought to
have been able to kill the dragon with one shot, and he prefers the traditional etymology from ric&;.He adds that the idea that Apollo killed
Pytho with many arrows would have been better conveyed by saying
that he has many arrows, or (as Pindar does) calling him E6ptxpapErpa;.80
The derivation of "Ehcaro;from Kart6vis an ingenious etymology
that has attractedsome modem scholars,81and it was no doubt meant to
be taken seriously. Etymologizationof divine names related to Apollo
can be paralleled in archaic and classical Greek literature,of course.
One thinks immediately of the etymology of the epithet l6Oito; in the
78
in Callimachus Aetia fr. 88 and in
Ap. Rhod. 2.706; the feminine form
AEXg06vrv
Leandriosor Maiandriosof Miletus, FGH 491/2 F4. A scholion to Apollonius Rhodius
loc. cit., which transmitsthe other sources, also reportsthat there was a masculine and a
feminine form of the name, depending on the sex of the dragon. Pfeiffer argued that
Apollonius Rhodius drew on Callimachus Aetia ("Die neuen AIHFTHEIEzur Kallimachosgedichten",SBAW [1934] 10), but if Simonides used the name earlier, the situation would be complicated. On the name see also J. Fontenrose,Python (Berkeley, 1959)
14-15 and n. 4.
79Eustathius52.10 ff. (= 1.84.11 ff. van der Valk):"OtnoX 6otoLo'zi irotrllt
o
Efrvoi
0VTOi
Oi
yap
aELv0v,
Et'ot0V
CObyTvOntrL
Cja. xo
'Ojipot
kazrlPFEXk•rlV
pETE'
tv •Ot;
V
Einrot6vorv(oEtv
'An6XoWva t OEEo0iat trv Ett(ovi6rlV, c';Kvcatbv
wVEiX 6
v
HMOoi6pi~pcovTa, &6ov0v t
yCp
0o
apET6 01piov* o0
vv
vElp&pocat
'An6,XXwo0
t,1 to6oro- tn
,fi
c
&XX'6 iCKaPeXCMC ToLto;6o,
x6n"cia pa•6vrta
oixouVvi'taKr
6O
,XdVat.
OEV13CmyOv.Tio6To
6; FCaOev
to?oVTO;. 6t i KCai
i86t"Tli;
6
at6O;,
y7p
KC•Epyo;
to3
&ir6
Fa; iai BxaOEv
VOV
OUr
icK
CMv
Eipyo)v. 66o
k~iCn36Xo;
oivv
~ryntppdayiTov
To•3
i
t; VrPr
X•dyEat,&CrC
08 _io ~iCaOev
XrlP e;Et'
lv 'Ando6Xova
a"trleK
EX•a••cz
EcniEv
6) iKCCTOV
0Xt 0 ;ino' EcatrovPEcX&v,
ia'tXXov o )th; EilrEiV T06OV,
ROU&
ijYOUV
'
~xovota
CPrl. 86to Iai tv8apo;
1
arotv iyEt.
Epvpaptpapv
at Pyth. 9.26, Pa. VI.I111,fr. 148, and it occurs nowhere else
80 Pindaruses this epithet
in Greek literature. Ovid says that Apollo shot Python with one thousand arrows (Met.
1.443). See Th. Schreiber,Apollo Pythoktonos(Leipzig 1879) 3, n. 10.
81 See Chantraine,Dictionnaire &tymologiquede la langue grecque, 328, Jessen, RE
14.2800-2802. J. Wackernagel,IF 45 (1927) 314 ff. (= Kl. Schr. 2.1254 ff.) suggested
that it meant:"with 100 victims." Chantrainedisagrees on the grounds (1) that we would
expect E~caTOt-,and (2) comparable forms, such as mlr36Xo;, have initial digamma.
That an association between
; and the idea of icatr6vhad been made in the
tXkarzPeXrjt
time of Homer may be suggested
by the fact that in II. 23.872-873 Meriones vows a KCato Apollo
•6ogijL
tFik•arlX•iT;.
194
lan C. Rutherford
Homeric Hymn to Pythian Apollo.82 Another example would be the
epithetAogia;, which seems to have been etymologized to mean something like "devious"as early as the 5th century.83The name 'Anoi6ov
is itself etymologized to mean "destroyer"in 5th-centurytexts.84The
and Apollo's epithet ii'"iov
etymologization of the paean cry itl
natarv
from i'rllt (icat) may be as old as Pindar,85and the derivationof Afiog;
from the adjective fikXog
certainlyis.86
It would be interesting to know whether, besides explaining why
Apollo liked the epithet'"Ecarog,Simonides also gives a specific reason
for his disliking the epithet lIOtog. He could have given at least two
reasons. He might have said that Apollo disliked it because it was
derived from the name of the dragon,Python. Alternatively(following
the Hy. Hornm.
Ap. 368 ff.) he might have said thathe disliked it because
it was connected with the idea of the dragon rotting (60om). The
second seems to me the likelier of the two. For one thing, the association between the epithet and the word lu0&oseems a rathergood reason
for disapprovalby a god associated with purification,whereas it is not
so obvious why Apollo would have not wanted to be addressedby an
epithet that recalled the name of his victim. Secondly, it is by no
means clear that Simonides knew the name "Python." We have seen
that accordingto Tzetzes the name he used was Delphyne, and there is
no evidence for the use of the name Python until Ephorus.87
To speculate a little further,I would suggest that there are two ways
in which this piece of creative etymology could have fitted into the
structure of the poem. One possibility is that Simonides used the
epithet "EcKaroearly on in the poem, perhaps in the first lines,88 and
82Hy. Hom. Ap. 368 ff.
83See Carol Dougherty-Glenn,"Apollo, Ktisis and Pindar:LiteraryRepresentationsof
ArchaicCity Foundations" (Diss. Princeton,1988) ch. 3.
84For example, at Aesch. Ag. 1080-1082. and at Eur.Phaethon 224-226.
85The crucial passages are Pa. VII(c)c.3, Pa. VI.121-122. See most recently
K. Strunck,"FriiheVokalverinderungenin der griechischenLiteratur,"Glotta 38 (1959)
74 ff. I hope to publish on this etymology elsewhere.
86Pa. VIIb.47 ff.
87See T. W. Allen, W. R. Halliday and E. E. Sykes, The Homeric Hymns (Oxford
1936) 246. Fontenrose(above, n. 78) 15, n. 5 suggests that the name Python was probably in use before this point and that Simonides probablyused it, but it seems to me that
thereis room to doubtthis.
88 In that case there is a possibility that the opening line of the Paean survives, for the
second of two anonymous fragments of lyric poetry in cretic-paeonic rhythm cited by
Aristotle in the Rhetoric (PMG 950(b)), perhaps the first line of a paean, addresses
PaeansbySimonides
195
then went on to say that this epithet was particularly pleasing to
Apollo,89 and, to back that up, proceeded to describe the conflict
between Apollo and Python. The general structurewould be similar to
a Callimachean Aition, or the Helen Ode in the Agamemnon (lines
681 ff.). Alternatively,the aetiology may have emerged from the story,
perhaps as the culminating point, rather as in the Homeric Hymn to
Apollo the origin of the name
(= Delphi) is given at the culminauA•0c
tion of the story of the conflict between Apollo and the dragon (see
above).
Our sources say nothing about the genre of the Simonides poem.
We would be in a betterposition to make a guess aboutthis if we knew
whether the etymology and the mention of the slaying of Python that
explained it were the main themes in the poem in which they occurred
or only formed part of a poem with a different major theme. In the
former case, the poem would probablybe a paean, as Schneidewin suggested,90 because it is difficult to imagine what other genre a poem
dominatedby an account of the destructionof Python by Apollo could
possibly belong to. On the other hand, a reference to the etymology of
the epithet may only have formed a subsection of a poem from a different genre; for example it could have come in the proem to an
Epinikion.91I incline to the view that the poem was a paean, because
mentioning the epithet, referring to the fight between Apollo and
Python and explaining why Apollo prefers the epithet "Eicao; to the
epithet n6l0to; seems too much materialfor a subsection of a poem.
Apollo as Xp-oeoic6iia "EhcarentacAitg, and there must be a chance that this should be
connected with this fragmentof Simonides (cf. Bergk [above, n. 3] 398).
89That an epithet should be pleasing to a god is a prime concernof Greeks poets. The
locus classicus of this topos (or of this family of topoi) is perhapsAesch. Ag. 160-161:
Cf. E. Fraenkel, Aeschylus
Ze;0, 6ant; ror' xr ei r68' azirS
Cec•rivp.
pi)•ov
E. Norden, Agnostos Theos (Leipzig, 1956)
Agamemnon (Oxford,vv,
1950) 2.99 ff., citing
144 ff.
90 Schneidewin
(above, n. 3) 51.
91 It is
suggestive, for example, that the epithet hcaxaroadog; occurs in the opening of
the Epinikion in honor of the sons of Aiatios (PMG 511 (a), line 6), although what survives of the following lines makes it highly unlikely that this developed into an aetiology
of the epithet.
196
IanC. Rutherford
B2) PMG 578 (Himer. Or. 62.54, 226 Colonna), according to which
the Muses sing more loudly when they see Apollo leading the
dance.
rEpi MoZoAV
REpiKEIVO;q
8t&
8~1' Kai Ltto.Gvi68l
rERi0ojat
tL01
V ai
Mot GoOvavl~ivrIae. proi yTxp8Jiro0
to• o•ro icEIvo;q'EiTE
aat xope ouatl Kai p(Pov •aCi tait OeaiSAv(6ai
EdvatKai
va tfi; Xopeia;
CpoiaGaiotv. inrEt8&v
&8 i'6oNot -rv 'Anc6XQok
o; •-eF~IRhovi Irp6-TepovTO Cio
1iyeia0at a6pX0,evov, r6TOre
jti
vacat i?6v trva ravapi6viotv iaa0' 'EXtKcJvo;
KirtouaRitVtv.
I have suggested above that Himeriusmight possibly refer to lines 5 ff.
of A5) (= fr. 41). As often in the case of Himerius'citationsfrom lyric
poetry, it all looks ratherconventional,and it is exceedingly difficult to
determine which elements if any might have been incorporatedfrom
the Simonideanoriginal.92
B3?) PMG 577 (= Plut. Pyth. orac. 17.402C-D)93
v'apro;,
vrai0a inepi-'rv
Moiu0avy'&p EbviEphvy
i
avatvoiv -to T6
00ev EXp9Xvro
rtp6;q e T'x;q
kotp&; (Kai Trx;x'pvtpa;) {0Sart
Tozrop,
)q0•tCovi;rl"
oprlt
(a)
'v0a XEpviF3eootav
aplerat [-e] Mota&v
ivep0ev &yvbv 680p
KaKXXt•XLoDv
pov a 0t; 6' ttgaovi8rl
pttpP8t 8' 1EptEpy6TE
q ,lv KhEt'O7tPOOEt(b) &yv&v nRio~aonroov
XEpvipov, prloi,
c0,olitoarov
[dpat6v -r ~aortv]dXpto6'r?FRXov
tE1G;c8qtlCaPpoofiov1CJ(Ov
Wpavv6vS orplEi3EtV
oi~i 6p06i oiv Ei'8o~o; irioeixGEu
-oi; X-rvyb;{S6wp-oito Ka92
This passage is discussed by G. Cuffari, I riferimentipoetici di Imerio (Palermo
1983) 82 ff., who suggests that one reason for thinking that the word ~ipo^6taotv is not
from the Simonides poem is that it also occurs in Himerius Or. 31.7. Perhaps ravapgL6vto;is a rareenough word for us to suspect that it might come from the poem.
93 I follow the most recent text, which is that of R. Flaceliere, Plutarque: Oeuvres
Morales, VI, Dialogues Pythiques(Paris 1974).
PaeansbySimonides
197
X60at rtepIIvact. -rxa &8 Mo016a; i6pz6avto nap~6po; -rfi;
iiavtluc
aiK ,p Aaica;&
nap' , v&ja icai'6 tij; Ff;i
aaaoi
iEP6v,ij; 2&yeata-6 pav-reiovyevFo0at, (6t&)tilv Ev tpotI; Kcai
ROxacnXprqGaW8av.
The question of why oracles are no longer delivered in verse comes up
when the party being shown round Delphi have reached the shrine of
Ge below the polygonal wall south of the temple.94 The speaker
Boethus points out that the locale is relevant to the question, since by
the shrineof Ge is a fountainwhere the streamfrom the Cassotis on the
high ground to the North of the temple resurfaces,95and here there
used to be (iv) a shrinededicatedto the Muses.
To support this, he cites two fragments of Simonides, referring to
the Muses as having control of sacred water (xipvty) at Delphi. The
second fragmentis seriously corrupt,and there is little hope that a convincing restoration will ever be made. Plutarch does not specify
whether both fragments are from the same poem, but the fact that the
idea expressed in each is so similar perhaps suggests that they are not,
since we would not expect such repetition within a single poem. Nor
does he say anything about the genre, but a reference to a detail of
Delphic cult could well have been made in a paean.
These fragmentsseem to be the only 5th-centuryevidence for a cult
of the Muses at Delphi. Elsewhere Plutarch reports that the Muses
were known at Delphi under the names
'Yratrli, MEarl and Nirrl,
names that clearly correspondto notes on some sort of musical scale.96
The same names written in 4th-centuryscript survive on a fragmentof
rock from Argos, and Kritzas has connected this with the Delphi cult,
suggesting that it had undergone dissemination as far as Argos.97
Although the Muses seem to have been representedon the East pediment of the 4th-centurytemple,98and perhapson the East pediment of
the Alcmaeonid temple also,99 I hesitate to use this as independent
94On the position, see R. Flaceliere, Plutarque: sur les oracles de la Pythie (Paris
1937) 65 ff.
95On the sense of avacvolr, see J. Pouilloux, "La Fontaine Cassotis," in Enigmes a'
Delphes ed. J. Pouilloux and G. Roux (Paris 1963) 82 and 92, n. 2
96 Quaest. conviv., 9.14 (744c, 745b). P. Boyanc6, "Sur Les Oracles de La Pythie,"
REA40 (1938) 314, connects this with the Pythagoreandoctrineof the xerpaicr6;.
97 C. Kritzas, "MusesDelphiquesAArgos,"BCH Suppl. VI (1980) 195 ff.
98Pausanias, 10.19.4; for recent bibliography,see Kritzas(above, n. 97) 200, n. 14.
99 See Kritzas (above, n. 97) 208, nn. 89 and 91. There is a chance that these were the
198
Ian C. Rutherford
evidence for a cult of the Muses at Delphi.
It strikes one at once that the fragments of Simonides that Plutarch
cites do not really justify the conclusion he draws from them. His conclusion is that the Muses were given a tutelatoryposition beside the
temple of Apollo because the oracles were in verse, and this association
between the stream of the Cassotis and prophecy can be paralleled in
contemporarysources.1' But in the fragments of Simonides that survive the Muses have the much more limited role of presiding over
XFpvtV,and there is no reference to verse oracles.'0' The fact that
Simonides does not connect the Muses with poetry is very striking,and
it probablyindicates that in his day their primaryassociation was with
XFpvtV.
If Plutarchhas misrepresentedthe function of the Muses, it is worth
asking whether he might have also made a mistake about the precise
locale that Simonides was referring to. It is clear from the dialogue
that there is no clear evidence for a shrine of the Muses on the South
side of the terrace. Boethus merely asserts that there used to be a
shrine of the Muses at this spot. The fact that Eudoxus (presumably
Eudoxus of Cnidus)'02was able to assert that the fountain on the terrace to the south of the temple was a tributaryof the Styx suggests that
there was no stronglink with the cult of the Muses in his time either. It
has been suggested that there was anothershrine of the Muses near the
fountain Castalia, and that Simonides might have been referring to
that.103There is no evidence for a cult of the Muses here, though worship of Ge among other deities seems to go back at least as early as the
5th century.1'4Castalia also seems attractivebecause it seems to have
which sang enchantingmelodies from the pedimentof the third
model for the KrlkX186ve;
of the mythical temples according to Pindar Pa. VIII.68 ff. See Kritzas (above, n. 97)
209, nn. 91 and 93.
100Propheticpowers are ascribed to the stream also by Pausanias 10.24.7: Trairtr;rif;
- ;
r6 6op Icai v ra & ^r6 o aEo r&;
yTj;
xi~a
KaaoooxtSo;80EoOa rEicar&
X-yo-o'
wovaica;
iroteiv.
jtavxtica;
101On XipvtW
and its functions, see L. Ziehen in RE s.v. Opfer, 601; P. Stengel, Opferbrduche bei den Griechen (Leipzig 1910) 34 ff.; S. Eitrem, Opferritusund Voropferder
Griechen und Rimer (Kristiania 1915) 78 ff. R. Ginouves, BaXavewuxt'i: recherches
sur le bain dans l'antiquite'grecque (Paris 1962) 311 ff.
102The identificationwith Eudoxusof Cnidus is made by Flacelire (above, n. 94) 166.
103P. Corssen, JDAI (Arch. Anz.), 43 (1928) 215 ff., referredto by Flacelibre (above,
n. 94).
104The evidence consists in statue bases from the 5th century: see P. de la Coste-
PaeansbySimonides
199
been used as a source for water for sacred purposes (which could well
have included use as Xgpvty),1'5though of course this argumentonly
works if we assume that the Delphians drew XFpvty from one source
alone and not from several. I doubt whether furthersupportcould be
found in the well-known association between Castalia and poetic
inspiration in Hellenistic and Roman poetry, though of course if it
turnedout that there was indeed a shrine of the Muses at Castaliain the
age of Simonides, this association would be illuminated.'"
B4?) PMG 570 (Strabo 15.1.57)
6C-W(vXtiteC av
Crepi
8'YRIEPPOP(Ov
Tx' a'T~xX'YEI(MeyaaOvrlI;)
icai HltvS&pqicai &Xkot;gw0oX6yot;
XIRtvi6rl
The implication of which is that Simonides mentioned the "thousand
year Hyperboreans." This reference clearly could have come from a
paean, one that described Apollo's journey to the Hyperboreans,
perhaps along the same lines as it was described by Alcaeus in his
Hymn to Apollo.107
B5?) Some Victory Paeans (PMG 532, 536 et al.)
One form of paean was the victory paean.108Now we have data to
the effect that Simonides wrote several poems in celebration of victories. The Suda reports that there were poems on the sea battles off
Messeli&e and R. Flaceliere, "Un statue de la terreA Delphes," BCH 54 (1930) 283 ff.;
P. Amandry,La mantiqueApolliniennea' Delphes (Paris 1950) 208, n. 3. Such evidence
should not, of course, be taken to indicate that Delphi was owned by Ge and other
goddesses before Apollo took over (see C. Sourvinou-Inwood,"Myth as History: The
Previous Owners of the Delphic Oracle," in J. Bremmer, ed. Interpretationsof Greek
Mythology [London 1987] 215 ff.).
105 See Heliodorus, Aithiopika 2.26: ... Kaorahiav a x7ri'v,
fv 87 ical Ireptppavxrj"
ptov notluodCaiv... EuripidesIon 144 ff.: Xpoicov 8' Cic ex•ov P~o
rayaiv,
yaxa;
8vat ... See v. Geisau, RE s.v. Kastalia, 2338.
i d&rtoXrexe•ovrat
KaokXia;G
106
Beginning with Theocritus,Idyll 7.148; Virgil, Georgics 3.293; Culex 17.
107PLF 1 (c) = Himerius Or. 14.10-11
(= 48.10-11 Colonna).
108See Fairbanks (above, n. 8), 56 ff., A. von Blumenthal, RE s.v. Paian, 2438,
Deubner(above, n. 8), 385 ff. I am encouragedby the fact that the survivingfragmentsof
the Hellenistic edition of Pindar's Paeans contain one poem (Pa. II) which is at least in
parta victory paean.
200
lan C. Rutherford
Artemisium and off Salamis, the former in elegaics and the latter in
lyric metre (PMG 532, 536).109 The number of Simonidean poems
commemoratinggreat battles of the Persian War would be raised to
three if Peter Parsons is right in his conjecturethat some elegiac fragments of Simonides should be interpretedas coming from a poem commemoratingthe Greek victory at Plataea.110If any poem that celebrated
a victory could be regarded as a paean, then any of the above three
could have been grouped in the book of Paeans. Reasonable doubts
could be raised about the possibility that the two elegiac poems could
have been classed as paeans, since all the paeans we know are in lyric
metres and we have no indicationthat it was possible to write a paean
in stichic metre.11"It would remainpossible that the poem on the battle
of Salamis was a paean. There is a complication, however: citations
from the poem on the battle of Artemisiumare incompatiblewith elegiac metre. This has suggested to some that either the metrical designations in the Suda-entry somehow managed to get themselves
reversed, so that it was the Salamis poem that was in elegiacs and the
Artemisiumpoem that was in lyric, or that both poems were in lyric.112
If either or both poems was in lyric metres, then either or both could
have been a victory-paean.113
109 Suidas s.v.
Itg•Cavirlg.
110 owe
my knowledge of this hypothesis to a class given by Prof. Parsonson the subI
ject in Oxford in the MichaelmasTerm of 1987. The papyruscontainingthe referenceto
Plataearemainsunpublished.
111One usually associates paeans with lyric metre. One might, I suppose, consider as
"non-lyric paeans" the Spartan paeans in stichic paroemiacs: the Spartan paean to
Lysander (PMG 867) and the Spartan Paean to Eurus (PMG 858), also the Spartan
marchingsong (PMG 856), if that is a paean.
112Bergk (above, n. 3) 423-425; Page (above, n. 6) 276 ff.; A. Podlecki, "Simonides
480," Historia 17 (1968) 267 ff.; idem (above, n. 13) 192 ff.; A. Barigazzi,"Nuovi frammenti delle elegie di Simonide,"MH 20 (1963) 67, actually assigns some elegaic fragments to the poem on the battle of Salamis. Accordingto c. 3 of the Vita Sophoclis a victory paeanwas performedafter the battle of Salamis and Sophocles performedin it:
itex&
'Xpa; yul v; &Xlilv dv cXaklgivtva ulaXicav 'A0rlva'ov nepi xpirnatov "ivwv lExa&
6
x ov
d fipev [sc. 0o'poKchfi).
Comparealso the
~intvtKcov
tlgivo; roit•xatavi(?oo-t
account of (non-formal)victory-paeansafter Salamis in TimotheusPersae, 196 ff.; C. M.
Bowra, GreekLyric Poetry2(Oxford 1961) 342 ff.
I13Bowra, (above, n. 112) 342 ff., speculated that the poem on the battle at Salamis,
which he believed was in lyric metre, was performedat the Panathenaea.The argumentis
that Himerius(47.12) afterparaphrasinga poem of Simonides in which the Greekscall on
Boreas (which Bowra thinks must be the Salamis poem) immediatelygoes on to mention
a poem in which the Athenianscall on the wind to hasten the progressof the Panathenaic
PaeansbySimonides
201
Appendix A: the relationbetween the contents of P.Oxy.
2430 and the Hellenistic edition of
Simonides
My startingpoint is the assumptionthat in the Hellenistic edition of
Simonides poems from a single genre would have occupied either a
single book-roll or a whole number of book rolls, as seems to have
been the case in the Hellenistic editions of Pindarand Bacchylides, and
that in general poems from different genres would not have found a
place in the same book-roll.114This assumption could be challenged.
For example, it could be argued that if the length of book-rolls was
relatively inflexible (in the area of 1300-1900 lines), strict correspondence between genre and book-roll would have been impossible to
maintain in every case. Thus, if there were too few Paeans by
Simonides to make up a whole book-roll-say about 800 lines in
all-and about enough Epinikia to occupy one book-roll and a halfsay 2400 lines in all-a resourcefulHellenistic editor might have combined the Paeans and Epinikia into two book-rolls each of about 1600
lines, one containing only Epinikia and the other containing the
remainderof the Epinikia and the Paeans. However, the need for this
sort of arrangementonly would have arisen if the length of book-rolls
was relatively inflexible, and I think it is more likely that it was
sufficiently flexible to rule out for the most part the need to include
poems of more than one genre in the same book-roll.
In that case P.Oxy. 2430 contains materialthat was divided between
two book-rolls (at least) in the Hellenistic edition.115This could have
chariot. He infers that Simonides must have called upon the wind to hasten the Panathenaic chariotin his poem. If we believe this poem was a paean,we will be temptedto connect this hypothesis with the testimony of the Greek novelist Heliodorus (Aethiopica
1.10.1; cf. J. D. Mikalson, "Erechtheusand the Panathenaea,"AJP [97] 1976, 151.) to the
effect that paeans were performedat the Panathenaea.
114For the arrangementof Pindar's poems, see J. Irigoin, Histoire de Texte de Pindare
(Paris 1952) 43-44, R. Pfeiffer, A History of Classical Scholarship (Oxford 1968)
183-184; for the arrangementof Bacchylides' poems, see Maehler (above, n. 70), erster
Teil, 36. We are disadvantagedby the lack of a thorough study of how ancient editors
divided works between book-rolls.
115 Perhapsmore than two, since the following considerationsuggests that
P.Oxy. 2430
might have included at least two book-rolls of Simonidean Epinikia. We know that the
primaryprincipleof organizationin the Hellenistic edition of Simonides Epinikia was by
event. This is inferredfrom the fact that citations of SimonideanEpinikia tend to specify
202
lan C. Rutherford
come about in two ways. On the one hand, fragmentsof P.Oxy. 2430
may representnot one papyrus-rollbut two written in the same hand.
Alternatively, it may have been a single papyrus-rollbut a very large
one, taking in the contents of several of the (presumably) shorter
papyrus-rollsof the Hellenistic edition. Exactly the same two alternatives arise in the case of P.Oxy. 2442, a papyrus that contained fragments of Pindar'spoems belonging to four or five genres.116
An interestinglight is shed on this problem by P.Oxy. 2623 (= SLG
S319-386), which Lobel has demonstratedoverlaps with P.Oxy. 2430
to some extent.117There is some reason to believe that the composition
of the two papyri was not identical: P.Oxy. 2623 clearly contained
Epinikia, but there are no indications that it contained Paeans, nor
poems of any other genre. There might appear to be an exception to
this statementin PMG 520
6X yov jiv icprod . ...), which
(d&vpcitov
is conventionally grouped with the Threnoi and which we now know
was included in P.Oxy.2623. However, the subjectmatterof this poem
would not be out of place in an Epinikion. A possible solution is this:
P.Oxy.2430 was a large roll or two small ones containingboth Epinikia
and Paeans, whereas P.Oxy. 2623 was a small roll containing just
Epinikia.
the event (e.g. ItXtovi8riqEv Hevrtiaotg): see H. Maehler,Bacchylides (Leipzig 1970)
viii. See also B. Gentili, "Studi su Simonide, 1: Nuovi Frammenti Papiracei [P.Oxy.
2431]", RCCM 2 [1960] 113 ff. The point of referringto SimonideanEpinikia by event
was probablyto pin down the book-roll where the poem referredto could be found, so
there was probablymore thanone book-roll of Epinikiaby Simonides. We can see that at
least two events were representedin P.Oxy.2430: the horse-race,to judge from the title in
line 3 of fr. 120[b]: icArl7]t 'AOlvai(ot X[ (if that is the correct supplement),and the foot
race (line 2 of fr. 92:
orti8tov TEoonatc[ ; line 3 offr. 96: oar]8t66vTEIvt~K[;
ncoTtavtov
fr. 99, line 2: aoa]Stov yvagc[tr- [See Lobel (above, n. 4) 45, n. 1]). Now, the horse-race
and the foot-race were both majorevents, so if there were several book-rolls of Epinikia
by Simonides, these may well have been in separatebooks.
116Lobel (above, n. 7) 31.
117See n. 5 above.
PaeansbySimonides
203
Appendix B: "Delian Poems" and the arrangementof
Simonides' Paeans
There may be a clue to the arrangementof Simonides' Paeans in a
passage of Strabo (15.3.2 = PMG 539):
&XyEati M'RvowvnEpi 1raxov Tfi;q
I-upa; napx BaTawpivat&8
'V
p
(;j Ei'pIKE
86v XoRaVi6v,
l•t~wViG1;S MitVOvt 8t&UvpdlOa "tv
AaXtlaKOv.
Haaxov: nakrX6vF, Ba8&v: pavv&v MORZ (transposuit Page), Bak&v Letronn.,
B'autov Schneidewin,
Aid. unde Aataicdov Xylander,
6
,aXttaicov
Ar7•,c•ov:
Allatio
de
cod.
teste
Leone
Vatican.
Symeonum
scriptis diatribe,p. 211-2,
Atot•uaid-v
0 6
v ... zTovArlhtaoicvSchneidewin, v MiEvM'tvovt &Oupiaipp atl'iio
ici1
Atotg
gtvovt tppiat~pyiciat Aa•iov Ev8' Eptiaicdv Schmidt.
Commentators have found the last few words of this passage
sufficiently difficult to suggest some quite radical solutions.118However, these are unnecessary since the obvious interpretationis perfectly
adequate: Straboknows of a Dithyrambby Simonides called Memnon
as belonging to a group of "Delian"poems. The manuscriptsseem to
transmitztv
but the Doric form rtv AAatac'v, conjectured
ArlktaK•cv
by Xylander on the basis of the reading 6aXtXtaKc&vreported in the
Aldine edition, cannot be ruled out: it may be that the dialect of the
title was chosen to reflect the dialect of the poems.119
118 Schneidewin
(above, n. 3) 52-53 conjecturedthat corruptionmight conceal a reference to Semos of Delos (iv Mptvovt Ste0p4'gd iccat'i o' o'Alto
6 A o v ... TiOvArltaG.
M.
in
Diatribe
Schmidt,
idov);
Dithyrambum(Leipzig, 1845) 131 ff., suggested a
referenceto a work by the Hellenistic historianDelion (... iv Mtvovt &6t0p6ijgpotKcal
'v 8' Eptaicov). Bergk (above, n. 3) 399 comments that the referenceought to
Aaki0ov
be
to Delion's AitOtontuc (FGH 666).
119We seem to have an example of a title used in its dialectical form in the FEpoia of
Corinna. This form was used by Corinnaherself (PMG 655.2) but also by late authors
who want to refer to these poems (see Anton.Lib.25 [= PMG 656] and Heph. Ench. 16.3
[56.22 Consbr.]. In both cases YEpota is the transmittedform: see D. L. Clayman, "The
Meaning of Corinna's FEpoia," CQ 28 [1978] 396-397). The fact that late sources use
the form probably indicates that it was used as the title in a standardedition. Another
parallel might be no668tov (for npooa6tov) in a Delphic inscription,SIG3 450.4 (no068tov in the title of Limenius' Paean to Apollo [Powell (above, n. 62) 149] is only a conjecture, as far as I can see).
204
lan C. Rutherford
By 8t6'paglpo; ancient critics usually denote either a type of poem
in honor of Dionysus or a type of narrativepoem, not necessarily mentioning Dionysus.120The first type of dithyrambcan presumably be
ruled out here: we know of no traditionof singing hymns to Dionysus
at Delos (unlike at Delphil21),and there is no reason to suppose that the
Memnon was connected with Dionysus thematically.122It is more
likely that we are dealing with a narrativepoem performed at Delos.
One thinks of Bacchylides' so-called Dithyramb 17 (the 'HtOEoO),
which is mostly a narrativeand seems to have been intendedfor performance at Delos.123The true genre of this poem is uncertain-the last
lines have suggested to some that it is at least as likely to be a paean as
a dithyramb,but what mattersfor our purposes is that the Hellenistic
editors classed it as a Dithyramb.124
But what sort of category were rtCv ArlXtaXc^v/AaXtaiXc1Kv? They
could either have been (i) a subset of Simonidean dithyrambs(oi Arlor (ii) an independentgroupof poems by Simonides
,talcot•/AaLtacoL)
included at least one dithyramb,the Memnon (tx ArljktaKd6/Aathat
There is also a thirdpossibility (iii), that they were not a subhtaKcQd).
set of Simonideanpoems at all, but a cache of sacred poems at Delos,
This (roughly
some of them anonymous (tx Al•SktaicdQ/AaktaKd6).
120For the first type see,
e.g. Archilochus 120W, Aeschylusfr. 355, Pindar,01. 13.18,
for
the
narrative
Plato, Leg 700f;
dithyramb,see Plato Rep. 394c; Ps. Plut, de Mus. 1134e;
scholia in Dionysium Thracem,ed. A. Hilgard(Leipzig 1901) 451, 21, and see A. E. Harvey, "The Classificationof Greek Lyric Poetry,"CQ 5 (1955) 173. On the dithyrambin
general, see A. W. Pickard-Cambridge,Dithyramb, Tragedy, Comedy2 (revised by
T. B. L. Webster [Oxford 1962]) ch. 1; H. Sch6newolf, Der jungattische Dithyrambos:
Wesen, Wirkung, Gegenwirkung (Giessen 1938); F. Longoni, "Nota sulla storia del
ditirambo,"Acme 29 (1976) 305 ff., a'propos of the importantP.Berol. 9571.
121See note 71.
122Schmidt (above, n. 118) 132 suggested that it might have been connected with a
myth mentionedby Servius on Vergil, Aeneid 1.489 accordingto which Memnon came to
Troy because Priamgave Tithonusa golden vine, so that Memnon's death was in a sense
due to Dionysus, but this a long shot (see Pickard-Cambridge[above n. 120] 16-17).
123Bacchylides 17, lines 128 ff.: i•?lEEOt ' •trEvI~VOt naticvt•acv part•^kf. I
AdttE,
Xopoita K1'icovI(ppiva iavOEiC 3icnaE OEd6inognov
F`a0Xv tiav. Maehlerimplies that
the
the
subtitle:
when
he
in
this indicates performance Delphi
poem
gives
KEIOIXEIl
AHAON. Cf. also A. P. Burnett,TheArt of Bacchylides (Harvard1985) 15 and 22.
124 Note the word natadvtiav in line 129 cited in the previous note. The poem is taken
as a paean by R. Merkelbach,"PdionischeStrophenbei Pindarund Bakchylides,"ZPE 12
(1973) 45 ff.; also by Burnett(above, n. 123). Cf. P.Oxy. 2368, above (n. 9) for Hellenistic confusion between paeansand dithyrambs.
205
PaeansbySimonides
speaking) was Wilamowitz's position.125
If (ii) were right, the category of rtxAqrltawa/AaXtarxxcmight have
included paeans also. And then it would be possible that the fragments
relating to Delos in P.Oxy. 2430 actually came from this. We can not
rule this out, though the odds must be against such a strange arrangement, and the fact that there are fragmentsof both Delian and De!phian
paeans in P.Oxy. 2430 is a point against it. The existence of a collection of lyric poems relatingto Delos drawnfrom the works of a number
of different poets (iii) cannot be ruled out either, but it would be odd if
Strabo mentioned it here. What one expects is a specification of the
place of the poem within the works of Simonides.
It follows that (i) is the likeliest: oi Aataroil/A1ktarKo
were a subset of SimonideanDithyrambs.126The most obvious rationalethat may
have lain behind this classificationis that it was intendedto class Dithyrambs according to place of performance,rather as Pindaric Epinikia
are distinguished by the place of the contest (though not Simonidean
Epinikia). What other places of performance may have been
representedin sufficient quantityto create a whole category of Dithyrambs is difficult to say with certainty. However, we know that
Simonides wrote Dithyrambs for the Panathenaea,so perhaps Athens
will have been one locality.127
Now, if this was the principle that applied in the SimonideanDithyrambs, and if the Hellenistic scholar who edited Simonides poems was
consistent in his editorial practice, we would expect him to have
arrangedthe Paeans of Simonides in the same way. The only evidence
from P.Oxy. 2430 that bears on the arrangementis fr. 35 (Al) and A2)
above). In this a poem with the title: 'Av8piot Ei; nufi was preceded
•
by another poem which I have suggested above was probably performed by Athenians at Delphi in connection with the Pythais. This is
not much to go on, but it would be consistent with an arrangementin
terms of the alphabetical order of the nationality of the performers
within a largerframeworkof organizationby places of performers.128
125 Die
Textgeschichtder griechischenLyriker(Berlin, 1900) 38 ff.; see Harvey (above,
n. 120) 174.
126See
Bowra, (above, n. 112) 318 ff.
127R. Meiggs, The Athenian Empire (Oxford
1972) 273; Bowra (above, n. 112), referto
the
attributed
to
Simonides'
victories, 79 Diehl (above, n. 3).
ring
epigram
128As for the relative orderof
and
Delian Paeans, it would most likely depenDelphian
dent on alphabeticalorder, but this would in turn depend on whether the Delphian ones
were called "IuOutKoi,"which would follow Ar71taXKo,
or
which could
"AE(ptKo•',"
206
IanC. Rutherford
In the Hellenistic edition of Pindar's Paeans neither nationality of
the performersnor place of performanceseems to have been involved
in the methodology of organization.129
This might be thoughtto undermine the hypothesis that they were the principles used in the organization of Simonides' Paeans. But in fact it is unsafe to assume that the
same principles would have been followed by different editors dealing
with different poets. After all, the primaryprinciple of organization
used in the Hellenistic edition of Simonides' Epinikia (type of event)
seems to have been quite differentfrom the primaryprincipleof organization we find in Hellenistic editions of the Epinikia of Pindar and
Bacchylides.130
Appendix C: Metre
Some of the fragments of P.Oxy. 2430 are large enough for us to
form an idea of their metre. Two fragmentsare particularlyinteresting
because they show signs of cretic-paeonicethos. The firstis A4):131
-]u---u-[
-]5u?u?uSI-
u] u -
5
?[
-
I-u
-
- I- u-
].?u-u[u[]--u
]-
?-?[?]?.
Much is uncertain, but lines 3-4 where there are comparatively few
ambiguitieswe seem to see cretics (I have markedthe feet). Since the
metre of the poem was not pure cretic-paeonic (lines 1 and 5 show
that), it will be best to think of lines 3-4 as representingan area of
eitherprecede or follow Arlktaoco(,since the scope of the alphabeticalorderwas probably
confined to the first letter: cf. L. Daly, Contributionsto a History of Alphabetizationin
Antiquity(Brussels 1967 [Coll. Latomus 90]) 29, J. Rusten, "Dicaearchusand the Tales
from Euripides,"GRBS23 (1982) 363.
129 I hope to discuss this elsewhere.
130See n. 115.
131Werner(above, n. 6) includes speculativemetricalschemes for Al) and A3-5) (there
seem to be errorsin his analyses of Al), 10 and A4), 1. He does not attemptto speculate
on metricalethos.
Paeans by Simonides
207
cretic coloration against an undeterminedbackground.132The second
fragmentis A2):
u I-u-
-
I?
Here again cretic-paeonic is a definite possibility. These indications of
cretic-paeonic ethos are of the greatest interest. One would expect
many early paeans to show signs of cretic-paeonic metre, because the
only plausible etymology for the rhythmical term nauitv-for which
Aristotle provides the earliest evidence-is that this form of rhythm
was regardedas peculiar to paeans.133However, if we look aroundfor
paeans from the classical period in predominantlycretic-paeonicmetre,
the evidence is disappointing. The only reasonablycertain candidateis
Bacchylides 17, which I take to be a paean, even though it was
classified as a Dithyramb by Hellenistic editors.134One might tentatively add the two non-consecutive lines of lyric poetry invoking
Apollo cited by Aristotle in his discussion of paeonic rhythm in prose
which look as if they might come from some lost classical paean or
paeans in cretic-paeonic metre.135From the Hellenistic period we have
132To speculate a little
further,the overall metre of the passage could well have been
the lyric iambic that Martin West has masterfully isolated ("Iambicin Simonides, Bacchylides and Pindar,"ZPE 37 [1980], 137 ff., GreekMetre [Oxford 1982] 68 ff.). On this
analysis line 1 would represent via ia, while the "cretic" element in lines 3-4 would
representvia via. The double short in line 5 is a problemfor this interpretation,but D and
even d are sometimes admitted.
133Aristotle, Rhet. 3.8.4-6 (1409a). The association with the rhythmical term
"LcpPrtC6o;"seems to support this, at least in so far as Apollo's cult was sometimes
regardedas being Cretanin origin, and in the HomericHymn to Apollo the paean is introduced to Delphi from Crete. Cf. also CratinusTrophoniusfr. 237 and the line of popular
lyric, PMG 967. See also Harvey (above, n. 120) 173, n. 2. On cretic-paeonicmetre in
general, see W. J. W. Koster, Traite de Mitrique Grecque (Leiden 1953) 257 ff., citing
Hephaestion, flpi tratcovticoi (42.23 Consbr.) for the informationthat whole poems of
Bacchylides were written in cretic rhythm, with fr. 15S. S.-M.; and D. Korzeniewski,
GriechischeMetrik(Darmstadt1968) 111-112, 191.
134For the metre of Bacchylides 17 see Merkelbach (above, n. 124), West (above,
n. 132), taking it as basically syncopatediambic, and R. Fiihrer,"Beitraigezur Metrikund
Textkritikder griechischerLyriker:IIa. Text und Kolometrie von Bakchylides' 'Hi0Eot
(c.17), NAWG(1976) 167 ff.
135PMG 950(a): Aaxoyevi; EitrEA-XOav( ), and (b):
'gKaTE
rtai AtO;.
XptaEoK•O6a
See note 88 above for the suggestion that the second of these
might be from Simonides'
Paeans (as Bergk [above, n. 3] 398 believed).
208
IanC. Rutherford
two Delphic paeans transmittedon stone in stichic cretic, but this does
not prove that earlier Delphic paeans would have been in the same
metre.136If we broaden the search to include paeans with a creticpaeonic element, we can include the surviving fragmentof PindarPa.
I, some of the lines of which seem to have a cretic coloration.137
Overall, however, cretic-paeonic metre is not prominenteither in the
surviving fragmentsof Paeans from the 5th century. The evidence of
A4) is valuable because it seems to point to what one would suspect on
other grounds anyway--that the more fragments of paeans from the
5th centurycome to light, the more traces we will find of cretic-paeonic
metre and cretic coloration.
We can form some idea about the metre of three other fragments.
These show no sign of cretic-paeonic,and in fact it is not easy to assign
them to any metricaltype. The first is Al). Metricalanalysis is particularly difficult in this case because at three points in the fragment an
apparenthiatus could be interpretedin various ways,138but the likeliest
scheme is this:
[u-
]--uu-u
x
]?-u
5
-]u-u-u?[
]-u
-
- u?[]-
?[
]uuuu-u?[
8-9
10
-]uu-]--u
u-u-
uu -- uuuuu-uu-?
u ?u u u-u-
[
Line 1 contains a D colon, line 4 seems to be an iambic or trochaic
136The text of these two paeans is in Powell (above, n. 62) 141 ff. (the anonymous
Delphic paean)and 149 ff. (the paeanof Limenius).
137There are cretic elements in lines 1, 2, 5, 8, 9 according to the analysis in Snell
Maehler(above, n. 74) 16.
138The three papyrusreadings that cause difficulties are: a) line 4: tlrpevtt
~ xapand b)
militates
which
in
of
both
line 8: aE,
against
digamma
perhaps
implied
&vv ~1ca[E-,
hiatus, and c) line 9: idgEvot vontav, where the last syllable is presumably subject to
correption(for such correptionin lyric, cf. Bacch. 17, 96:
&vtCYXcav).
kintti-ygEVOt
PaeansbySimonides
209
sequence, lines 6, 9 and 10 contain sequences of three or more brevia,
which suggests reolutionof some sort.
Next there is A3):
]u-uu?[
]u--u-
u
-
]u-u-
5
]--u-u-[
u]?-uu-u?[
u]-u--u-[
]u--u-u
]-u[
[][
]-uuu?[
10 ]uu-[
No clear picture emerges, but the absence of cretic coloration may
count against the hypothesis thrown up earlier that A3) and A4) come
from the same poem.
Finally, there is A5):
-]uu-uu?[
]-u-u-X
u]-uu-u?[
]u--uu
5
[-uu-
]-uu-[-
At a guess, I would suggest dactylo-epitrite(i.e. line 1: D; line 2: e x;
line 3: u D (?); line 4: e / D; line 5: d - ). That paeans could be cast in
this metre is shown by the examples of PindarPa. V and Bacchylides
fr. 4 (a paean). Even if the metre of A5) is not dactylo-epitrite,it is different enough in quality from that of A4) to make it unlikely that both
fragmentscome from the same poem.