Selections from Pindar
1984; Classical Association of Canada; Volume: 38; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês
10.2307/1088284
ISSN1929-4883
AutoresDavid Campbell, G. M. Kirkwood, Pindar,
Tópico(s)Lexicography and Language Studies
ResumoThis book aims to fill a major gap. There was an obvious need for an English-language Pindar commentary for students which could take account of recent work. Gildersleeve, still available, is excellent, but Pindaric criticism has changed much in recent years. Farnell is good but scrappy, Fennell sensible but unimaginative, Bury imaginative but often wild, and all are out of print. K. begins with a brief introduction to Pindar's life and poetry, including a basic guide to Pindar's dialect and metres, all of great value for the beginner. The only section I found unsatisfactory was that on unity (pp. 24 ff.), which is brief and indecisive, consisting mostly of an historical survey. The student needs more guidance, particularly on myth. The selection of texts is appealing, though for teaching purposes the controversial P. 2 and N. 7 should have been replaced by more illuminating odes. One is surprised to find fr. 94 a (decidedly not a maiden-song) included, while the more interesting 94b (which is a maiden-song) is omitted. The text is based on the Teubner text of Snell-Maehler, but K. departs from S.-M. freely, often to produce a better text. Changes for the better are: 0. 1. 113 ev aAAoLaL with V, 0. 2. 54 dypore:pav (without obelus; cf. P. 8. 35, P. 10. 11, N. 6. 14), 97 OeAwv with MSS, 0. 6. 12 ev L cf. 0. 7. 63, P. 9. 6a; sheep and grain are staples, apples are not), 0. 1. 89 a TEKE with MSS contra metrum (and against the metrical schema, p. 44), 104 avSpa with Furtwangler (difficult after 4evov; 0. 2. 93 suggests e.g. ,fiAAov tSpLv ', Bergk), 0. 2. 36 TOrTrov ... .A3CoL, (Ti.. . (with this punctuation oAwou is otiose after eZqfpova), N. 7. 68 av Epel with MSS (avepet S.-M.; av plus fut. would be unique in P.; 'proclaim' is a natural verb in an epinician), I. 6. 61 TpELs, r' 'Ia6Oiov, ras (',... (rpEis ar' 'IaOIov6 S.-M.; N. 5. 41 mentions two Isthmian victories of Euthymenes and the present win makes three). In general K. is more independent in the epinicians; in the fragments his changes usually amount to the omission of the more fragmentary passages to produce a more readable text. The commentary attains the right level for the student unfamiliar with P. No prior knowledge of dialects other than Attic is assumed, and unfamiliar forms are usually glossed. There are helpful notes on mythic names and incidents. K. is fully conversant with recent trends in Pindaric criticism, and succeeds in presenting the rhetorical aspects of Pindar's poetry in an intelligible manner without excessive use of jargon. There are many places where K. offers a better understanding than is available elsewhere. At 0. 2. 95 he disposes of Bundy's misleading interpretation (but he should note that /Errea is gnomic aorist; P. is not saying that the present company includes tadpyot avSpes), likewise at 0. 11. 7-10. The note on P. 2. 56 is clear, concise and convincing, as are the notes on P. 9. 91,93-6, and N. 1. 26-32. The note on N. 7. 102-4 is refreshingly independent. 5
Referência(s)