¹ Clay, J. S.,‘Pindar's Twelfth Pythian: reed and bronze’, AJPh 113 (1992), 519–25, at 520.Google Scholar

² Kohnken A., ‘Two notes on Pindar’, BICS 25 (1978), 92–6, at 92, believes that Tp‘nov avoev refers to a cry for help, Perseus’ third and crucial cry for help to Athena, when he is trying to defend himself against Medusa's sisters.

³ C. Segal, ‘Perseus and the Gorgon: Pindar Pythian 12.9–12 reconsidered’, AJPh 116 (1995), 7–17, at 7. The word in brackets is not in Segal's translation; the omission of it or of an equivalent was surely an oversighCrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ Clay (n. 1), pp. 522–3, maintains that Perseus' victory cry does not occur until after he gets to Seriphos, i.e. significantly after the Gorgons' lament. She does not explicitly state when and where Athena invents the art of playing the aulos. But her theory entails that this too does not occur until after Perseus' return to Seriphos. By Clay's theory, then, the sounds that Athena produces simultaneously on the flute she herself never hears simultaneously. Segal holds that Perseus' victory cry occurs when and where he kills Medusa. I am not sure that there is any such shout, but if there is, I am sure that Segal is right about when and where it occursGoogle Scholar

⁵ Some, I suspect, would hold that it does not even suggest it. If they are right and if therefore the dual structure of the aulosis irrelevant, then SiairXegaio'carries the meaning which Boeckh gives it: artificiosis nexibus flexibusque componens.See A. Boeckh, Pindari opera quae supersuntvol. II, part 2 (Leipzig, 1821), p. 544.Google Scholar

⁶ Clay (n. 1), p. 523. Her italics

⁷ Besides Hdt 4.67.2, cited below, the only passage (to my knowledge in which certainly means ‘interweave’ is from the love letters by the fifth-century A.D. rhetorician Aristaenetus 1.25). The verb does not occur in Homeric epic or the extantworks of Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Thucydides, Lysias, Xenophon, Isocrates, Demosthenes, or Isaeus.

⁸ Some follow Maas in reading in place ofwhich would entail that the prayer is for only the victor. But the additional dative iv hardly makes the passage any easier; cf. C. Carey, A Commentary on Five Odes of Pindar (Salem, NH, 1981), p. 176.

⁹ In the citation from Aristophanes to be essentially the same as that in the other passages where its object is a word denoting a period of time.

¹⁰ This is in fact the most common usage of See Carey (n. 8), p. 176.

¹¹ Taylor, Cf. A. E., A Commentary on Plato's Timaeus (Oxford, 1928), pp. 174–5: ’The complete domination of the cosmic soul over “its” body... is expressed by saying that the soul is everywhere inwoven into the texture of the body... If we tried to take the imagery au pied de la lettre, we should have to suppose that the before its body existedGoogle Scholar

¹² Martin captures this sense in translatingof the aulos counterpoints the joyful achievement with the resounding dirge of the Gorgons.'

¹³ Segal (n. 3), p. 14. The word in brackets is not found in Segal's text, but I suspect was accidentally omitted. Cf. Clay (n. 1), p. 523: ‘At the moment of victory, when the goddess has rescued her favourite from his toils

¹⁴ (18) means simply ‘when’, not also ‘since’, as A. Kohnken, Die Funktion des Mythos bei Pindar (Berlin, 1971), p. 141, holds

¹⁵ (10) refers to the Gorgons' grief, not Perseus' troubles, as Kohnkenmaintains. See Kohnken (ibid., p. 131; and ‘Perseus’ Kampf und Athenes Erfindung Bemerkungen zu Pindar, Pythien 12)', Hermes 104 (1976), 257–65.

¹⁶ The explanations ofVOIMOS found in the scholia and in Plutarch, De Musica, ch. 7, may all be inaccurate, but there can be no doubt that the phrase refers to something familiar to Pindar's contemporaries

¹⁷ C. Segal, ‘The gorgon and the nightingale: the voice of female lament and Pindar's Twelfth Pythian Ode', in L. C. Dunn and N. A. Jones (edd.), Embodied Voices: The Representation of Female Vocality in Western Culture (Cambridge, 1994), pp. 17–34, argues that Pythian 12 also creates links between the old and the new in a different way—by linking the beautiful, ‘non-maternal, virginal, sister-figure’ (p. 20) Athena to the ugly, ‘Evil-Mother’ (p. 20) Medusa: ‘In the logic of the myth, Athena...acquires Medusa's attributes and transforms her monstrous maternity into a safer form’ (p. 26). As I see it, the ‘logic’ by which Medusa is transformed into Athena is the logic not ‘of the myth’ or of Pindar's poem but of Segal's own structuralist thought.

¹⁸ Clay(n. l), p.521

¹⁹ L. Dissen, Pindari Carmina Part II (Gotha, 1847), p.

²⁰ U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Pindaros (Berlin, 1922), p. 146: ‘Schon ware es nicht, wenn Perseus "den dritten Teil der Schwestern erledigte", denn dann miiBte er das Ganze gewollt haben....Nun beachte man, daB fiopos [sic] und fioipa nicht ohne Bedacht nebeneinander stehen werden. Der seltsame Ausdruck "der dritte Teil der Schwestern" ist eben deshalb gewahlt, und sobald man die Worte nur richtig verbindet, ergibt sich das Trefflichste, "er brachte den dritten Teil der Schwestern as fioipa fur Seriphos".’

²¹ Kohnken (n. 2), p. 92, makes this point in defending his idea that rpirov is adverbial. Segal (n. 3), p. 11, argues to the contrary: ‘A synecdoche of this kind is not difficult or uncommon in Pindar, particularly as the head in early Greek literature often stands for the person (see LSJ s.v. KtaXri 1.2) and in Medusa's case particularly is closely identified with her whole figure.’ I think that the synecdoche is not impossible, but still counts against any interpretation which makes fiepos an object of ayutv

²² Cf. Kohnken (n. 2), p. 92: ‘syntax and effect of theclause is impaired by μ⋯ρος being entangled with the preceding part of the sentence’.

²³ Despite Kohnken (ibid.), the syntax is easier if fuepos in strict grammatical terms is part of only the main clause.

²⁴ W. Schadewaldt, Der Aufbau des Pindarischen Epinikion (Halle, 1928), p. 308, n. 1.

²⁵ Segal (n. 3), p. 10, n. 6. Segal also refers us to Il. 8.160, 15.321, 18.217, 21.328, but these passages are no more useful than those cited by Schadewaldt. Clay cites no passages at all.

²⁶ The addressee is in no case severely wounded or down, rip in the first two passages refers to Diomedes, who in the second passage has been merely struck but not wounded, rrj in the third passage refers to Aphrodite, who has merely been nicked on the write

²⁷ The three passages under discussion, and Il. 3.81, 4.508, 784, 6.66, 110, 8.160, 172, 227

²⁸ I take Poseidon's shout in Il. 14.147 to be of this type. It is more of a battle cry than a victory shout.

²⁹ Wilamowitz (n. 18), p. 146: ‘Sehen wir nun avaev, Perseus rief. Was rief er? Leuchtet nicht ein, daB er rief "Jetzt bekommen die Seriphier in einem Drittel der Gorgonen ihre ixotpa." Mit anderen Worten, ayoiv ist ayeiv.’ It is often said that Wilamowitz wished to emend aywv to ayeiv; cf. Segal (n. 3), p. 8; R. W. B. Burton, Pindar's Pythian Odes: Essays in Interpretation (Oxford, 1962), p. 28; D. E. Gerber, Emendations in Pindar 1513–1972 (Amsterdam, 1976), p. 96. If I understand Wilamowitz correctly, he merely wished to treat the participle as if it were an infinitive—but on what philological principle he does not say.