Emergent Genre: Innovation and Experimentation in the Victory Odes of Pindar and Bacchylides By Christopher J Waldo A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classics in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Leslie Kurke Professor Mark Griffith Professor James Porter Professor Mario Telò Spring 2019 @ Christopher J Waldo May 2019 Abstract Emergent Genre: Innovation and Experimentation in the Victory Odes of Pindar and Bacchylides by Christopher J Waldo Doctor of Philosophy in Classics University of California, Berkeley Professor Leslie Kurke, Chair This dissertation argues that the victory ode was a genre characterized by formal innovation and experimentation. While much scholarship over the last half century has stressed the existence of rhetorical continuities between the victory ode and other genres of Greek poetry, I emphasize the ways in which these poems set themselves apart. The victory ode came into being late in the life of archaic Greek poetry, and there may have been initial uncertainty on the part of both poets and their patrons as to the generic expectations of these commissions. Examining the surviving victory odes of Pindar and Bacchylides, I explore the innovative and experimental formal approaches employed by the poets to meet the demands of an emergent genre. The first chapter discusses the victory ode’s presentation of itself as transgressive. Pindar and Bacchylides often bring their mythological accounts to a close with statements marking them as inappropriate. I contend that these moments, rather than representing genuine confessions of transgression, serve to define the boundaries of the genre. Starting with Pythian 4, I argue that Pindar evokes the opposed images of a highway and a shortcut to modulate between the distinct narrative approaches of hexameter epic and symposiastic song. Moving to Pythian 11, I assert that Pindar’s voicing of various tragic speakers throughout the mythological account belies his use of a metonymic crossroads to construe the narrative as an unfortunate deviation in the direction of tragedy. I conclude with Nemean 3, suggesting that the presentation of Herakles’ travels as a digression overlooks the hero’s entanglement in the rhetoric of this individual victory ode and the genre as a whole. The second chapter examines the effect of direct speech delivered in the voice of a hero or god. I argue that the poets encode interpretive approaches in these passages. Beginning with the exchange between Herakles and Meleager from Bacchylides 5, I suggest that Herakles’ tearful reaction to Meleager’s narrative models an embodied affective response that is meant to be reproduced by the audience, which realizes that Deianeira eventually kills Herakles in the mythological tradition. Moving to Pythian 9, I contend that Chiron’s response to Apollo, which ignores the surface meaning of Apollo’s address, hits instead upon its latent significance, modeling an interpretive mode that the audience might apply in turn to the victory ode. 1 The third chapter explores the open ending, that is, the phenomenon of victory odes terminating within the mythological narration without returning to the voice of the poet. Beginning with Olympian 4, I demonstrate that by devoting the lone epode to an account of Erginos’ mythological victory in the race in armor, Pindar upends all expectations about how a victory ode should close. Turning to Nemean 1, I assert that he calibrates the metrical structures of the victory ode to counterbalance the disorientation caused by the open ending, which imagines Herakles’ immortal existence on Olympos. I finish with Nemean 10, contending that the poem, which is obsessed with endings, ultimately subverts the very notion of closure by concluding with the promise of speech. The fourth chapter looks at the cases in which multiple victory odes were commissioned to celebrate the same victory. I argue that, in addition to functioning on their own, these poems should be thought of as forming larger composites. Beginning with Pythian 4 and Pythian 5, I assert that Pindar presents the charioteer Karrhotos in Pythian 5 as a model for the exile Damophilos in Pythian 4. Moving to Nemean 5 and Bacchylides 13, I demonstrate that Pindar and Bacchylides construct between the two poems a multigenerational comparative framework equating Pytheas’ family with the Aiakidai. Concluding with Olympian 1 and Bacchylides 5, I scrutinize the close verbal likenesses between Pindar’s poem and a brief passage from Bacchylides 5, contending that the effect of Bacchylides’ allusion is to reproduce Olympian 1 in miniature. 2 DEDICATION For my mother, who told me to pursue my passions i TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 1 Dedication i Table of Contents ii Acknowledgments iii Introduction 1 Chapter One Break-off Formulas of Spatial Transgression 10 Pythian 4 12 Pythian 11 25 Nemean 3 32 Chapter Two 38 Direct Speech in the Mythological Narration Bacchylides 5 40 Pythian 9 58 Chapter Three The Open Ending 73 Olympian 4 76 Nemean 1 79 Nemean 10 90 Chapter Four Interlocking Victory Odes 103 Pythian 4 and Pythian 5 107 Nemean 5 and Bacchylides 13 116 Olympian 1 and Bacchylides 5 126 Bibliography 132 ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Before commencing this study of genre, I would like to acknowledge the formal expectations of that in which I am writing by recognizing the various teachers, colleagues, friends, and family members whose support has made this dissertation possible. First and foremost, I am immensely grateful to the members of my committee, who have all demonstrated remarkable generosity and care in their regard for my work. Mark Griffith has fostered me as both a scholar and a person throughout my time at UC Berkeley, and his invaluable feedback has pointed me in a number of useful directions and prevented many mistakes. Jim Porter has always displayed a prescient understanding of the directions in which my thinking was heading, pushing me to explore the boldest and most sophisticated extensions of my arguments. I have also benefited from the boundless enthusiasm and infectious energy of Mario Telò, whose keen eye for clarity of expression has helped me in structuring several of these chapters. Lastly, I am forever indebted to Leslie Kurke, who lavished her tireless support and thoughtful mentorship upon me these past seven years. She has taught me what it means to be a scholar, and the completion of this project would be unimaginable without the benefit of her astute guidance. Secondly, I would like to thank my undergraduate advisors in the Classics department at the University of Vermont. Angeline Chiu has been a precious resource, reading through several of my seminar papers and dissertation chapters. I have been the fortunate recipient of her sage advice throughout this process. John Franklin was the professor who introduced me to Pindar, and his eager encouragement of my fascination with one of the hardest authors in Greek literature has culminated in this dissertation. I do not believe that I would have become a classicist without the two of them and their wonderful colleagues in Vermont. Thirdly, I would like to express my gratitude to the many friends who have contributed to the development of my research. I am especially beholden to Michael Hardin, Claire Healy, Marissa Henry, Alex Kilman, Priya Kothari, Virginia Lewis, Rachel Lim, Cecily Manson, Kelly Nguyen, Joanna Oh, Sarah Olsen, Talia Prussin, Esther Ramer, Emma Remsberg, Jonas Sese, Ashley Simone, and Andrew Wein. Finally, I thank my parents for their unending love and belief in me. iii Introduction The Roman writer Marcus Tullius Cicero relates a remarkable anecdote about the archaic Greek poet Simonides and the Thessalian nobleman Scopas. In De Oratore, he describes Simonides’ role in the circumstances surrounding Scopas’ death: Dicunt enim, cum cenaret Crannone in Thessalia Simonides apud Scopam fortunatum hominem et nobilem cecinissetque id carmen, quod in eum scripsisset, in quo multa ornandi causa poetarum more in Castorem scripta et Pollucem fuissent, nimis illum sordide Simonidi dixisse se dimidium eius ei, quod pactus esset, pro illo carmine daturum; reliquum a suis Tyndaridis, quos aeque laudasset, peteret, si ei videretur. Paulo post esse ferunt nuntiatum Simonidi, ut prodiret; iuvenis stare ad ianuam duo quosdam, qui eum magno opere evocarent; surrexisse illum, prodisse, vidisse neminem: hoc interim spatio conclave illud, ubi epularetur Scopas, concidisse; ea ruina ipsum cum cognatis oppressum suis interisse: quos cum humare vellent sui neque possent obtritos internoscere ullo modo, Simonides dicitur ex eo, quod meminisset quo eorum loco quisque cubuisset, demonstrator unius cuiusque sepeliendi fuisse; hac tum re admonitus invenisse fertur ordinem esse maxime, qui memoriae lumen adferret. For they say that, when Simonides was dining in Crannon in Thessaly with Scopas, a man of prosperity and renown, and he had sung the song that he had written for him, in which for the sake of ornamentation in the manner of poets many things had been written aBout Castor and Pollux, that man had very meanly said that he would give him half of the promised fee for that poem, and that he might seek the rest from his Tyndaridai, whom he had praised equally, if it seemed fit to him. They say that a little while later it was reported to Simonides that he should go outside, since two young men were standing at the door, who were urgently calling for him. He stood up, went outside, and saw no one. In the meantime the hall where Scopas was dining collapsed. Crushed in the disaster, he and his relatives perished. When their friends and family members wanted to bury them and were unable to recognize the crushed corpses in any way, Simonides, because he had remembered the positions in which each of them had sat, is said to have made identifications for burying them.