Pind. fr. 321 Sn.-Maehl. delendum
abstract
Thanks to a re-edition of the main lexicographical source that transmits Pindar, fr. 321 Sn.-Maehl., i.e. Etym. Gen. AB s.v. δαῦλος, which offers the reading τετείχισται instead of the vulgate τετείχηται, this paper cautiously argues for a full deletion of that fragment from the corpus of the Pindaric fragments, and suggests, as already surmised by various scholars, that the correct reference be to Pind. Pyth. 6.9 or Isthm. 5.44, both of which present the form τετείχισται. Therefore, if this suggestion is accepted, the ‘former’ Pindaric fragment numbered as 321 should be added as a further testimonium for one or both of these lines from the aforementioned Pindaric odes.
Keywords: Etymologica • Pindar • Fragmentary poetry • Critical editions • Lexicography