Journal | Lexis
Journal issue | Num. 42 (n.s.) – Giugno 2024 – Fasc. 1
Research Article | Pind. Nem. 11.11: Ἀρκεσίλαν or Ἁγησίλαν? Considerations Around a varia lectio
Pind. Nem. 11.11: Ἀρκεσίλαν or Ἁγησίλαν? Considerations Around a varia lectio
Abstract
This article focuses on the varia lectio Ἀγησίλαν provided by cod. B instead of Ἀρκεσίλαν, for Pind. Nem. 11.11. Ἀγησίλαν is usually rejected as unmetrical (Henry) or corrected into Ἁγεσίλαν (Maas), but the comparison with other Pindaric proper names – such as Ἁγησίας, Ἁγησίδαμος and Ἁγησίμαχος – suggests that we print Ἁγησίλαν (Schroeder). This form would provide a metrical responsion between hemm and cho cr which is attested also in Aristoph. Vesp. 274 Æ 282. By adopting Ἁγησίλαν, we should infer that the father of Aristagoras of Tenedos, the young laudandus of Nem. 11, was named Agesilaos: if so, we could not exclude that Aristagoras’ brother was Theoxenus, the other ‘son of Agesilaos’ (υἱὸν Ἁγησίλα) praised in Pind. fr. 123 Maehl., as Schneider first suggested.
Submitted: Dec. 10, 2022 | Accepted: Nov. 24, 2023 | Published July 3, 2024 | Language: it
Keywords Κατ’ ἐνόπλιον-epitriti • Textual criticism • Free metrical responsions • Theoxenus of Tenedos • Aristagoras of Tenedos
Copyright © 2024 Marco Recchia. This is an open-access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction is permitted, provided that the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. The license allows for commercial use. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
Permalink http://doi.org/10.30687/Lexis/2724-1564/2024/01/003
