1 Ring-Composition and Ring-Compositions
In this section, I draw attention to a structural device in Pindarâs ode, namely: ring-composition.1 Ring-composition (or circular structure) is a scheme2 underlying passages of several ancient and modern literary texts.3 A ring (or circle) is a âframing deviceâ (Douglas 2007:1): a central section is enclosed by an element and its repetition at a later part of the text, the element and repetition forming a ring. It is clear that the concept lying at the basis of ring-composition responds to universal needs belonging to all the possible audiences or recipients of a text/verbal message. Beginning and concluding a speech or a narrative with analogous concepts contributes to providing definiteness and unity to its narration. Furthermore, it adds to the cohesion of a discourse. Despite the fact that ring-compositions may be recognized as such on the basis of one standard feature, i.e. the ring, and may thus appear to the modern reader as relatively simple, circular structures entail considerable freedom and, potentially, great complexity.
The basic means allowing an audience to recognize the ringâs âextremitiesâ is the employment of reiterations and cross-references. However, repetitions may be organized in various ways. The standard pattern consists of replicating an element or a set of elements, like entire verses or lines, at the beginning and at the end of a section. As a result, a basic circular structure is shaped as AâBâA1. However, the poet/narrator may also operate with âcross-referencesâ, a term I employ here as a hypernym for ânon-identical repetitionsâ, namely:
-
allusions: an element, such as a word or a collocation, located at the beginning of the (poetic) discourse, is reprised by a similar element, i.e. a synonymous word or collocation occurring at the end of the ring;
-
complementary traits: a word or a collocation occurring in the beginning of a ring is reprised by a complementary element, i.e. an antonym, or a complementary word/collocation, which occurs in the end of the ring.
A poet can also combine different circles within one poem and/or section. One possibility consists of forming chains of repetitions/cross-references, i.e. structures that may be exemplified as
AâBâCâB1âC1âXâC2âB2âC3âB3âA1
Alternatively, rings can be layered. In these cases, a central element is nested between more concentric circles. This pattern, which is also defined as âchiasticâ, may be described as
AâBâ(C)âXâ(C1)âB1âA1
It has long been pointed out that Pindar makes abundant use of ring-composition and patterned repetitions at different levels.4 The recognition and the description of such devices cast light on factors that conditioned the authorâs word-choice. Depending on the standpoint from which they are considered, repetitions are both a mnemonic device and an interpretative clue. According to Mezger (1880:33â41) and Gildersleeve (1885: lâli), recurring words âwere all intended as cues to aid the memory of the chorus and to guide the thoughts of the hearers. It is a mnemonic device, but more than a mnemonic device, for it lets us into the poetâs construction of his own poem, and settles forever the disputed meanings of the odesâ. Indeed, in some fortunate cases, reference to patterns of internal repetitions provides us with âmissing linksâ for understanding how the beginning of a composition joins with its end.5
2 Inherited Rings: Pindar and the Rigveda
A âcomparative lookâ at Pindaric ring-compositions may enrich our understanding of any inherited compositional tools that lived on in the corpus of the choral lyric poet. Comparative analysis shows that Pindaric ring-compositions resemble those attested in other Indo-European traditions.6 In particular, the comparison between ring-compositions attested in Pindarâs odes and in the Rigveda shows that not only are circular structures recognizable as an Indo-European phenomenon, but they are also built into two cognate traditions that use the same words in relation to the same themes.
In previous studies,7 I pointed out a series of striking similarities between the repetitions attested in the incipit and âexcipitâ of Nemean Three (1â13, 76â84) and RVÂ 10.144, a hymn to Indra, which centres on the Soma ritual. The two poetic compositions make use of
-
the theme of inebriating drink: in Nemen Three poetry is compared to a
Ïόμ᾽ á¼Î¿á½·Î´Î¹Î¼Î¿Î½ âa drink to sing onâ, whereas the Vedic hymn builds a ring-composition with the repetitions of the term Ãnduḥ, the âimmortal (ámartÃya, 1a) drop [sc. of Soma]â (stt. 1, 6); -
the phraseology âpoetic craftsmanâ, cf. N. 3.4â5
μελιγαÏá½»Ïν ÏέκÏÎ¿Î½ÎµÏ Îºá½½Î¼Ïν âbuilders of honey-sounding revelsâ, RV 10.144.2ab, (cf. d) kÄÌviya rÌ¥bhúḥ âa craftsman in poetic artâ;8 -
the image of the âdrinkâs foamâ, cf. N. 3.78
κιÏναμένα δ᾽ á¼ÎµÏÏá¾½ á¼Î¼Ïá½³Ïει â[this mixture of honey], which stirred foam crownsâ, cf. RV 10.144.2c Å«rdhvákrÌ¥Åanam mádam âexhilarating drink with pearls on the top [i.e. foam]â; -
the image of the bird of prey that âcomes from afar, carrying its prey in its clawsâ, cf. N. 3.80â81
αἰεÏá½¹Ï ||á½Ï á¼Î»Î±Î²ÎµÎ½ αἶÏα ,Ïηλόθε μεÏÎ±Î¼Î±Î¹á½¹Î¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï Î´Î±Ïοινὸν á¼Î³Ïαν ÏοÏίν âthe eagle, which suddenly seizes, as it searches from afar, the bloodied prey in its talonsâ, RV 10.144.5a yáṠte ÅyenáŠcÄÌrum avrÌ¥kám padÄÌ ÄÌbharat âwhom the falcon brought here for you with his talonâ. While in the Rigveda Soma is identified with the falconâs prey, Pindarâs text does not allow an immediate identification âpoetryâ/âpoetic drinkâ : âfalconâs preyâ. However, the analysis of internal repetitions between the beginning and the ending of Nemean Three suggests that the search for the âdrink to sing onâ correlates with the eagleâs search for prey. The expressionÏέθεν á½Ïα μαιόμενοι â(men) who seek your (i.e. of the Muse) voiceâ (5) correlates withÏηλόθε μεÏÎ±Î¼Î±Î¹á½¹Î¼ÎµÎ½Î¿Ï â(the eagle) searches it from afarâ (81).
The identification of this parallel invites us to look for other parallels for Pindaric ring-compositions in the Rigveda. As the present study will make clear, Pythian Twelve and the proposed Vedic comparandum, RVÂ 10.67, offer a further example of ring-compositions that resemble each other and contain repetitions of analogous concepts/terms.
3 Ring-Composition in Pythian Twelve
An in-depth comparative structural analysis is provided in chapter 8, section 2, chapter 9, sections 5â6, but for the moment I shall still focus on Pythian Twelve. It is good to start by presenting the âdistributionâ of the rhetorical and narrative material within the Pythian, as has been sketched by Mezger (1880:201â202):9
Figure 1
Structure of Pythian Twelve, according to Mezger 1880:201. Unabbreviated: 6 (
The beginning (
The ode displays a variety of lexical, semantic, and phraseological repetitions.11 Lexical repetitions consist of reiterations of the same word or the same lexeme within the ode. For instance, the pair
Among non-lexical repetitions I distinguish between the semantic and the phraseological. Semantic repetitions consist of parallel expressions denoting the same being or object in different ways, by means of synonyms: take, for instance, the pair
Phraseological repetitions are matches between analogous phraseological structures in which the same notions are expressed by means of synonyms. For example, the structure of both
Table 1
Pythian Twelve, lexical repetitions
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
:: |
|
Table 2
Pythian Twelve, semantic repetitions
|
[mortal (men)] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[immortalâ¯s/godâ¯s] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[Athenaâs invention] |
|
:: |
|
||
|
[goddess Athena] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[headâ¯s] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[toil/effort] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[Perseus] |
|
:: |
|
:: |
|
|
[Medusa] |
|
:: |
|
Table 3
Pythian Twelve, phraseological repetitions
|
[placeâgoddessesgen.] |
|
:: |
|
|
[to inhabitâplaceacc.] |
|
:: |
|
|
[who on/in placeâwatergen.] |
|
:: |
|
|
[good°fame/glory] |
|
:: |
|
|
[lamentâgorgonâ¯sgen.] |
⨠|
:: |
|
|
[goddessâcreateâ¯sâsongacc.] |
|
:: |
|
4 Schematic Representation
The entire set of repetitions may be summed up as in SCHEME 3.15 The repetitions evidenced in each section allow us to identify three main rings (SCHEME 4).16
5 Descriptive Analysis
The three main rings are layered and correspond to different sections of the ode. The first ring (1â4 :: 26â28) is created by lexical and semantic repetitions found in the first and the fourth strophe, i.e. in the incipit and transition/âexcipitâ section of the ode. A second ring (6â10 :: 19â23) may be identified between the end of the second strophe and the end of the third. It comprises the first âmythological frameâ concerning Athenaâs invention. A third ring of the ode (11 :: 17â18) opens and closes with references to Perseusâ
Rings are further interlocked by a variety of additional repetitions. Most lexemes, concepts, and phrasemes are repeated once, but some occur twice or more. Some hint at significant associations or oppositions. Terms for [immortal godâ¯s] and [mortalâ¯s/mortal men] are joined together in a quantifier designating [all (intelligent) beings] at 4 (cf. chapter 5, section 2 ad loc.). At 22 and 28â30 different terms for [god], in the singular (:
Another group of reiterated lexemes is strongly connected with the myth of Pythian Twelve, which concerns the creation of the tune of many heads. More specifically, repetitions of the terms for [headâ¯s] (
Further lexical and semantic repetitions, namely: those of substantives meaning âtoil/effortâ (
The repetitions of derivatives of IE *smer- âto divide, distributeâ link the theme of the âthe allotment of fateâ (
Milestone Pindaric commentaries, such as those by Mezger (1880), Young (1964, 1970), and Privitera (20014), emphasize the importance of circular structures for the interpretation of the Pindaric odes.
On the notion of Ringkomposition cf. Fränkel 1924 and van Otterlo 1944.
For typological comparisons between Greek ring-compositions and those of other traditions cf. Parks 1988 (Homer and Beowulf) and Reece 1995 (Odyssey 17â22 and the Serbo-Croatian tradition). For studies on ring-composition within other traditions than Greek cf. e.g. Lord 1991 on the Anglo-Saxon tradition; Foley 1983 and Lord 1986 on South Slavic epics; Niles 1979 on Old French epics; Fox 1977 on Austronesian, Rotinese and Indonesian traditions; Douglas 2007 on Old Testament; Okpewho 1979:196â197 and Mulokozi 2002:120 on African epics; Prior 2002:97â114 on Kyrgyz epics.
Cf. Lauer 1959:71â77 on chiastic structures in P. 10, N. 1, P. 8; Sulzer 1961 on different types of chiasms in Pindarâs odes; Greengard 1980:23â25 on Pindarâs ring-composition and chiastic structures in Pythian Twelve. Watkins 2002b further discusses cases in which syntactic constituents of the Pindaric verses are deployed in chiastic patterns.
See e.g. Young 1968:62 on the lexical repetition of the term
On ring-composition as an IE inherited compositional tool cf. ForteâSmith 2014, Forte 2016. On ways of ring-composition (wheel/omphalos-structures and riddles) in Vedic poetry cf. Jamison 2004, 2006.
Massetti 2019:163â168, (forthc./b).
Here and everywhere in the book, the provided Rigvedic translations are quoted verbatim or adapted from JamisonâBrereton 2014.
For an analysis of the âways of speakingâ in the ode cf. Wells 2010:314. Accordingly, 1â27 comprise the eukhesthai (broadest way of speech) section, while 28â32 the gnôma. Within the eukhesthai section, Wells isolates 6â27 which comprise the mythological part (i.e. âa mythological framework of events which do not share the same framework of interaction between speech subject and addresseeâ, p. 113) and 17â18 as âlyricâ (speech characterized as self-reflecting).
Cf. chapter 5, section 2.
On sound- and word-repetitions in the Pindaric odes cf. Schürch 1971, who however does not provide a complete analysis of Pythian Twelve.
Some of these repetitions have been identified by NewmanâNewman 1984:87â90.
The expression
The compounds may count in principle as synonyms and thus constitute a semantic repetition; however, I propose a factitive meaning for
Lexical repetitions = black, semantic repetitions = blue, phraseological repetitions = red.
1st ring = black, 2nd ring = red, 3rd ring = blue.
Cf. Nierhaus 1936:17 who highlights that
I thank John Perchard, who kindly pointed out this pattern of distribution to me.