Notes on the Orphic Hymns Author(s): M. L. West Source: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 18, No.

2 (Nov., 1968), pp. 288-296 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/638072 Accessed: 16/01/2009 14:02
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Classical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org

NOTES

ON THE ORPHIC

HYMNS

The 'Prooemium' EACH of the Orphic Hymns is headed in the manuscripts by the name of the deity to which it is addressed, and in most cases a specification of the kind of scripts by a poem in which Orpheus addresses Musaeus and teaches him a prayer to a multitude of gods; he says this is much the best prayer for a OvrThe word OvrlrroXAI is used both at the beginning and at the end of this rroAir]. is found in It not the hymns, which regularly refer to the proceedings poem. Musaeus differs both in composition and in sequence from those addressed in the hymns, and it has long been suspected that the poem to Musaeus was not composed by the author of the hymns.2 The absence of heading to the first hymn suggests that the contiguity of the prefatorypoem and the hymns was less close originally than it is now, in other words, that the combination may be due to an accident of the transmission. This hypothesis receives some support from one of the referencesto the hymns in Johannes Diaconus Galenus, who is the only writer who cites them at all. In three places in his allegorical exegesis to Hesiod's Theogony, pp. 328 and 330 Flach, he cites passages from the hymns. In the second and third places he simply gives 'Orpheus' as the source, but in the first place he says 'Opoevs ev
rols Ovtplots dpapcoaau avyypaylLa se rovro 'Opqa'Ko'v. Clearly he found at the

incense to be used: thus 2 HlpoOvpalas. Ovlt'apla' acrvpaKa. 7 atarpwv. Ovlta'ac' dpco/uara.' Only the first hymn lacks a heading. It is preceded in the manu-

at which they are recited as rTEAEror reAEral. The list of gods in the poem to

beginning of the collection he was using: 'Opqe'ws, and nearby, Ovrtga(for Ovrcblaia)' apociaara. And his manuscript began as early as ours do, for one of the verses he quotes is the first line of the first hymn. He seems therefore to
have read the heading which our manuscripts lack: 'EKa'arJs. Ovpla/a adpc)tiara.3 What is more important, he read it as the beginning of a work, with the label 'OpqE'cs. If the poem to Musaeus was present, it was as a separate

Orphic poem.
I These originated as memoranda of things to have ready. Cf. 53 tA/isterovs.

including TptoSirts', new meanings to suit. Cf. Plut. defac. lun. 937F rpLo0rits gartV (v
er7T TroV EA'r,vr]) a,Laa uL7JKOS 7TAa-rosg E7r>EpofePOLvrKat fdaOos; &aOLaKOV Kal Cornut. 34

The senseless heading of 3, NvKro', Ovt,lapla ). $aAovs,must be corrected to Ovtaiaj, ( aaAov's.There is another omission in the 2 C. Petersen, Phil. 27 (I868), 389; O. Kern, Hermes75 (1940), 20-5. 3 Quandt, OrpheiHymni p. 3* n. 2, suggests that he found the hymn bearing the title ZEAh'vrls, because he quotes the first verse as evidence that Orpheus identified Hecate with the moon. But it is hard to see the author or anyone later giving the hymn to Selene, and I would prefer to suppose that Diaconus read the moon into TrpLOSETLV epavThe Stoics had identified Artemis with V7'v. the moon, and given to her various epithets,
heading of 85, OvdliaLa' ( ) ,zLEr, /r7KoWvos.

'rrr)vAXfivov. Kat a7rreve yaAa. OvfJlala ?rradwa

p. 72. 13 Lang; GDK (= Heitsch, Griechische der rimischen Kaiserzeit) 59. Dichterfragmente 1o. 24-6. In view of the minuscule corruption that he presupposes in Hes. Th. 358, Diaconus cannot be earlier than the ninth century; and Mr. N. G. Wilson tells me that the Greek seems to him to belong to the middle Byzantine period. The only ground for an earlier dating was the inference from Diaconus' epilogue that he had a son studying at Athens. Mr. Wilson points out, however, that the passage is probably no more than a compliment to the son on his mastery of Atticist prose.

NOTES

ON THE ORPHIC

HYMNS

289

The list of Orpheus' works in the Suda includes one called Ov7rTroX0AKv. Kern, Hermes 52 (I917), 150, argued that this title referred to our collection of

hymns. He observed that in cod. Laur. 32. 45 (Quandt's d) the hand that added the headings in red ink had written 0&r7T6b in the margin beside hymn i. I, i.e. where we divide the at the precisely hymns from the poem to Musaeus. place His claim that this was the best manuscript of the hymns was not borne out by Quandt's investigation of the tradition, which reduced it to one among many witnesses to the archetype reading. But its low place in Quandt's stemma is deceptive. In 49. I and heading, it alone of the 6 manuscripts preserves the correct form 'Irrra, which looks impossible from the stemma; and in 56. 2 its is closer to the correct rroOetvaLs than the TrvELvalS of the other 6 TrvOetvais manuscripts. So there is no reasonwhy it should not have inherited an ancient marginal note which other manuscriptsomitted as meaningless. If the marginal note has any significance,2it surely points not to O9v7TroX'Kdv being the title of the hymns but to its being the title of the poem to Musaeus. The title would at the beginning and naturally be derived from the references to a Ovr7roAtlr end of the poem.3
Thyepol. I-2 MdavOae8 Movcait
EVX7V,

O AvriTroAtrv rTEpLa'JvrJv,

07 Trot 7rpo !EpE?aTpr EcarvW aTraaecOV.

Editions since Hermann read TrEpgE'LUv]-qv as one word, earlier ones read 7rep[ aE/v'7v. If it is read as one word, we must translate, 'Learn, Musaeus, the (rule as of) solemn sacrifice, the prayer which is of all prayers the best'. OvrrToAi-q direct object of pdavOaveseems possible, but the apposition with EvX37 is awkward. It is better to revert to TEpt' 0E/VI7V, or to write 'c cEV.7v, and translate, 'Learn the prayer for the solemn sacrifice'. In the last line of the poem the gods invoked are asked to come 1rvVE OvvrTro,ALrv ? Lpriv orTov37Vr' ErM aEcLV)7V.
Hymn I. 6
Orjpopopov, a'cOaUov,

J7rpo6cuaXov 'Elos E

Xovaav. to the Artemis-

6O'p6ppotpov, like ravpoiro'Aov in 7 and ovpeatcotorcv

in 8, belongs

the significance of which I cannot see, personality of Hecate, and a'WcoTrov, should be emended to Ev'Wcarov. Confusion of a and ev is frequent, because of their similar appearance in early minuscule.
3. 8-I I UT^reAIs', xOovta 8' ov pavia 7raAtv a'rr , EyKVKA[a 7TraKTetpa 8t'yLCLatLV 'EpOOOLTOLTS, 37 ()aoS EK7TE/IJ7TES V7TO VEpTEpc TCAt bEVyECS KCpat

Etl Atr]v' 8Etvr) 'yap avayK7r]7TavTa

KpaTVVEL.

Night is here described as she chases the bright half of the sky round the world. The word 7raiKTEtpa strikes a discordant note; there is nothing playful
in the scene, cf. &etv3) yap advyKr
I Cf. Quandt, pp. 27* ff.

Tardvra Kparv'vEt.An agent noun from a verb

of motion is really wanted to go with &tooytartv. I suggest 7rAayKretLpa. Cf. 6. I

Pfeiffer, Callimachusii. lxxxiv) the heading was simply 'Ope ws rrpos Movaagov, to which According to Quandt, p. 44* n. i, the scribe simply took the word from Ov-qTroAM'v one or two later copies added 1vLvoL or in the text. He does not suggest why he rzeArat. The earnest message etrvX6s- Xp, should have written it in the margin. that follows it is not meant to be said ETrape 3 In the archetype of the manuscripts by Orpheus but was written in a copy given as a present. Aunts write similarly in Bibles. (twelfth-thirteenth century, according to
2

29o

M. L. WEST 7. 8
?EponrAayKTro;

aWOeporAayKTov,

IG xii (5) 739. 29 (of the zodiac) arpam7nrov

7TAayKr?e[pav.

4. 9

KXvO'Er'aywv 40 1,v o'jav LpvTr1veo?dvrrT. veoQav-rw. Assimilation of

The word must be passive, not active: veoav-ros, endings.

6.
I

-II

f3acve yeyrOtbS dAAa /caKap 1ToAv`tyrLT 7roAXvdrope,

Es

reAerrJv aytav TroAvTroLKtAov opytocdvraLs.

I do not know in what sense the -EAETr' could be 7roAvTrolKlAo', but it is an apcomRead 7roAvwrotKtAos, for cf. TroAvharope. propriate adjective Protogonos;
paring for the general expression ayvaL. Assimilation of endings. 0o. 6-7 AAd oAoLre OeacliLvrats 76. I I hh 7roAvroltKLAo

AaTE, pe (Aardpe, evoKaeKre, Evvvxla, TroAXTre, aiWo9ov dcarpaydcAoLcT ElAiUaovaca. 7T0&Wv L'Xvos

Physis is addressed.

is eLvEOKaOEKTr

meaningless ('hard to be repressed' LSJ, as

if BeWvocould = 8va-). W. Theiler has proposed 8eLvoKaOCEKrL (Phil. 94 (1941), - ra aELvd KaTEXovca Kat Travovaa, and sc. Quandt in the second impres250),

sion of his edition (I955, p. 84) bids us put this in the text. I find it an odd attribute of Physis, and cannot believe that the idea would have been expressed in a compound of such a unique form; nor does it bear any relationship to the adjacent epithets. The correct word must be i&VoKaOEKTr, sc. D ?1v7 avveXel KaTexoIeLv7]. Cf. 22 aevdac aTpoXaAiyy7 0oov p'vJa &8vevovaa; 4. 4, 6. 7, 8. 7. 7. 4,
12. 3 (Heracles) aloXAo'opqe
adclo's

Xpovov Trdraeptdal8t

re Ivqpwvt an improve-

Hermann

writes

Te Kal e'qOpwov (so Abel, but with eVkpov);

ment metrically and grammatically, but dl&og and ev'pcov are rather dissimilar epithets to be so closely coupled, and one expects Xpovov Tarrep to follow the
caesura. The latter consideration is also against Theiler's
adl'e

-reAeakpcov,

nor

is there reason to suspect e1'pwv, a frequent epithet in the hymns. It is, however, usually disyllabic (in thirteen out of fifteen other occurrences), and so in
my conjecture: e;cpwv aloAd/xopre xpo'vov Trdrep adlt8 Zev. Cf. 8. I3 dJ0aAr)s Zev; 28.3 init. ,roidAoov/Ac. eV'aptov datavre Xpovov ,rdrep ddvare 12. 9-I2
RpwOTOyovots orTp/as o0 7Tepl Kparl qtoperE
cS3EK'

avrocv7yS, aKd.clas, 1al'rs fAXdJrr1pacepprrTov, boAlrw, pLeyaAcovv tvaiwv,

?)W Kal VVKTa ie'atvav, dr' a

dvroAXiv

a'xpt $vaujZv adAa

tE'p7TroV.

Van Lennep made two false conjectures in verse Io, which have imposed on he wrote foAtmtv,/oAts being used of lightning subsequent editors. For 4oAiacv in the Septuagint. But apart from the fact that the poet elsewhere constructs with the accusative (19. 2, 20. 3), qoAicnv is highly appropriate, (d)arpadrrwo and unlikely to be the product of corruption. In verse 9 Heracles is addressed
as Time
(FaLrS

fAadT-r.a = Kronos,

as I3. 6). In the Orphic

theogony

of

Hieronymus and Hellanicus, and probably also in the Rhapsodies, ChronosHeracles was described as a serpent; and the shining Protogonos, who appeared from the egg made by Chronos, also had a large serpent 'on his
head' (fr. 54). Each of the three words 7TpwroyOvoi
arpdaS

alludes to oAoXtcnv

NOTES

ON THE ORPHIC

HYMNS

291

that narrative. (The verb a7rorrpaTrrco is used of Protogonosin fr. 86. 4.) The
in verse 12, as Eisler remarked. Time-serpent is further suggested by Step7rwv For vaov Lennep wrote Hatcov, comparing verse 14 eAOe iPaKap, vovaowv 0EhAKrptLa Tarvra KOP(ILOV. Cf. also 8. 12 (to the Sun) Kap'rttE IHatdv, Nonn. D. ovvr baTros. But the poet elsewhere says 40. 407 (to Heracles) i're av Uiati7wcv IHatdv, not IIat6v (8. 2, I I. I I, 34. I, 52. I I, 67. I); and Paeon is out of place

in the astronomical context of verse io. We must read yeyaAoXvvpze Aloav.For

the hiatus at this place in the verse, following a vocative in -e, cf. I I. 4 av'vOpove
"Qpats. 14. 8 V bEbv8oLV, a E, epa, Avrtrpd, dpXwyeveOAe.

and Abel writes AvvrptaS.But Avr7nptas is the irregular In 36. 7 we have Avur-Tp'a, form. If we are going to level-and there is a good deal to be said for itis preferable. The other form might have arisen from a variant Avr'7ptoS, Avrqpt'a
cf. 15. 12 croT?jposg. 1-2 7, Tnve ZEV t7roAXvtLE,u Zev aBiOLTE)
ILapTvptav TLOeEJEcr0aLAvmTplov

TO LfES 37ye 7Tpoaevwv.

The family h, and another manuscript 1, give groAV-rilre, which scans. h,

which Keydell showed to representa recension by George Gemistus, known as Plethon,I preservessome genuine readings lost in other sources,but apparently
is probably a conjecture. The poet elsewhere only in one poem.2 TroAvTLTt1re and what is uses 7roAvprt,e missing is as likely to be a word as a syllable. (29. 3), Pierson's 7roAvr1qe (,rdrep) therefore deserves to be exhumed. Cf. 1. I Zev 7rarep, 83. I 'QKEaVOV KaAo 7rarep' d)0Orov; Proc. H. 6. 3 = 15 xap' "Iave
ao0Tre.

7rporadrop Ze

i8.

I2-I4

os 7TOTe TraFSa AtrTrepos Ei!3ovA', ayvo7roAov ta'droa7ra8r&av 8,d T4oVTov AXel/uWvosvvtqevcras Vtr AT0tos oryayes davrpov. reTp)cpot,s 7TrTrotav

Following Sanctamandus, editors write adroa7raitqv.A change of one letter, does not but, it may be thought, not a very natural corruption. d7roc7raS&oS occur elsewhere (-tov as a noun, of a bunch of grapes, Philip AP 6. 102. 2). a Kal Perhaps a superior correction is vv'UevcraS (indicative) AEp65vos daroa7rac St 'rTo'TOV KTA. Papyrologists know how similar HN and KAI may look in an ancient book-hand. Cf. Nonn. D. 34. 346 f. (Bassarids) &twKco'pevat E mCr0p?|
au'TEos eVTOS tKavov aTrocrTraaes '0d aos

vAs.

19 title

? Kepavv[ov zAls

' Kepavvov

Jtos cett.

The first is proved right by the content of the hymn, in which Zeus is the addressee and the Kepavvo' his instrument, and by the parallelism of 20 Alos
The Zevs vTrdAle Zef. Aacrpavralov and I5. 9 daTcpavrate fpovrate KepavwLe Kepavvo's invented by Usener has no place here.3 I GGA 1942, 77 ff. He did not entirely ness to the family ({. Cf. pp. 8i f. of the convince von Blumenthal, Gnomon second impression. Of h's other good read19 (1943), I45ings, some probably are conjectures (7. 2, 5, 2 I9 KLpvas, 8. 3, 32. i, 66. 3), others are shared with + 34. 7 Bpay, I4 SESopKars,
24 e'rwvviL+7qv. The hypothesis

that these are

conjectures (Quandt) can only be based on the preconceived belief that 'IF' is the sole source of the extant manuscripts. The same must be said of Quandt's persistent unfairU

(32. 15, 46. 4, 86. 3, 4). 3 Rh. Mus. 60 (I905), i ff. = Kl. Schr. iv. 471 ff. 0tio KepavvoG in IG v (2) 288 is genitive of Atos Kepavvos.

292

M. L. WEST
TraJLuaKcpeo)v3pavov OeLatLs Opov-rata Trtva'acov, c 7Travv?EEAots XAEyE'0ovcaav avaltwv, aTrepOTrflv vdCqaaL Aatiarras, o',upovs, Tpra7rr7cjpas KpaTrpovs 7r Kepavvovs es tpo0tovgs A0oyEpovs, PEAEEactLKaAv7rraWv pdaAAwv
7Tap4AEfKTOvs

9. 3-7

KpaTEpovs

cptKWAeas- oflptLIoOvLiovs.

In verse 4, Zeus kindles his lightning not, surely, from 'cloud-covered streams',
Like many but TrvevLaau 7ravvec;e'AoLs. wind in the clouds or the earth: vulsed') others in antiquity, the author of the ('con-

hymns regards thunder, lightning, and earthquakes as caused by internal

21. 5 (veAc;a))
7TvevxaaLv avrlarraacro 7Traayecurat, 23. 5-6 (Nereus) 7st8potda8rv KEVOLUarV e'AavvoJlevas padOpov, 7jvLKa TTvotaL | Ev !IVXVtoLs

os

KAOVEELS AJrov6S epOV ad7rOKAelots.

In line 6 read es xOovlov,, i.e. the Titans or Giants. (The two are not clearly distinguished in imperial times.) The poet is following the common allegorical use of myth. The Titanomachy represents the thunderstorm, and conversely thunderstorms are Titanomachies.I There are some clear echoes of Hesiod's
Titanomachy in this passage:
a

6 ,

rr 7Tp 15 iuapliatpel L E 7Tpa 698 f. ocaae S' atlepS

8e Kepavvos acvat^ ciapayel . . . avyr7 fLapplatpovora Kepavvov

Th. 716 Kara 3' EaKlaaav eXEEUrcf I TtTrjvaS, Th. 693 ea/capayLTe,
reE aTepOTrrjS re.
OEpto's

My

will correspond to 697 (rots XOovtovs (0Aoyepotvs) o' aWE'pa 8fav rLcavev. TTijrvaS XOovIovs, AXo'e 24. 1-2

S'a5te7re

Cavrpr))

KaAvKo7r8rese, ayvat, vv'L'latL, Nrqpe'os EvaALov ta pa'yiat, v'Oa, xpOraIyiove, vypoKeAEvOo.

Hermann wrote ppltKtat (E2I)flvOtat, which Abel modified to (ptLKaA at pv0'La. E. Maass then attempted to justify arpady (e) cla by reference to the pct'payt[TLES vv'cuat on Cithaeron (Turk, RE iiiA. I759), a suggestion that Quandt finds of the Theiler, p. 252, contributes crapay7LSaL. The significance interesting;

name of the Boeotian cave-nymphs is obscure, and it is audacious to transfer it to the Nereids on the strength of an unmetrical manuscript reading. I propose daJ)daSta. Poseidon daqaA~Etos (dJaJ'Atos in hexameters, Opp. H. 5. 680) is well known. The epithet originally belonged to him as earth-shaker (cf. Ar. Ach. 682, Xen. Hell. 4. 7. 4, Opp. loc. cit.), but as in time he became more and more the god of the sea, it was also interpreted as belonging to him as protector of ships (Paus. 2. I. 9 with Frazer). So App. BC 5. 98, Philostr. Vit. Ap. 4. 9, Heliod. 6. 7, sch. Ar. loc. cit. The Nereids have the same function (Sappho 5, A.R. 4. 842 if.; linked with Poseidon, Melicertes, Leucothea and Zephyrus, Philodemus AP 6. 349), and may have the same epithet. It goes well next to /v'Otat.
24. 7 Eschenbach vop68oJULOt aKtpTrrTal wrote
ViOpoppo'io,

Atcraaolevot7TrepKv^i[a. considering. The poet is

and -Spo'!ot is worth

fond of adjectives in -pdo'/os-. The first element, however, must in any case be
Vypo-, as in v7ypoKEAvOoS 22. 6, al., Vypo7ropos 5I. 2. The same corruption has occurred at 21. 3 V5poKEKev`oV , where Hermann's correction is proved right by

the five other occurrences of the word in the hymns.

I Cf. already II. 2. 781 f. See in general the instructive article of R. Keydell, 'Mythendeutung in den Dionysiaka des

Nonnos' in Gedenkschrift fur Georg Rohde, Tiibingen, I96 , I05-14.

NOTES ON THE ORPHIC HYMNS

34. 6-7 'rofopeAE[ve, tfovaayeTa, XOpO7roL, EK7/goAE, BpayXLe KaltZSivLVE, teKadcpye, Aoia, adyve.

293

Hermann wrote tovaayETrr. It does not, however, seem very likely that the poet scanned iuovaay-. (He has ayera KOt)WVin 52. 7.) In the next line Hermann has EKacEpyoS, while von Blumenthal, p. 144 n. 2, retains EKacpye with the final syllable lengthened from Aoeta; but the poet has such lengthenings only in arsis (at least fourteen times: Quandt p. 40* no. 6). The simplest solution of both problems is perhaps !ovcrayE .. . Kaepyera. Neither of these forms is found, but this may have led to the confusion: a marginal correction of one may have been wrongly applied to the other. 35. 3 (Leto)
EVITrKVOV Zr]VOS yovICYv

oWAvaAalovaora.

Quandt adopts the Aldine conjecture Aaxovra, with a reference to 17. 7, which and no support for is nothing but an instance of the corruption of AaX-to AafBAaXovaa here. Aafov-irais all right; cf. Aesch. Ch. 127 f. Kal Fatav avr7rv, q ra
7Tavra rTKCerat

r' avSOtsraTV8e KViLaAaCLadvet, Hipp. Prorrh. 2. 24 (ix. 54 L.) Ev yacrpl AapC.aveLv,Machon 50, 52 Gow. I cannot, however, construe Zr-vos (with either verb), for ot&scannot here

I Opacrad

mean 'offspring', qualified as it is by yOvwtos,1 and in 44. 8 BaKXOv yovp,17v Bacchus is the child born, not the father. Read (EKK)Zrqvod. EVrTKVOShas 8iUva, the second syllable short in 40. 13, the only other place in the hymns where it is used.
38. 15- 7 dvOpWrroaTvL 7VIK av op,alavr)Te XoAov'OJeVOt 7?S Kal a'rovs Kal KC77/LaTa e LEyas 7rovTros oflaOvvr7s. 7T,rL17TAaCvr, arrTovaXELr
oAAv'vTvre pfloTov

Wiel, TrAadrovreHermann. I prefer with Theiler, p. 256, to assume rTtL7rrpdaves a lacuna after i6. He offers ({raLiTrA70eis, XwpElTr ya&palepa rrvotf? drArcoT), where the first word is chosen to make the omission mechanically simple, and has no other attraction. I suspect that the poet may have been thinking of Hes.
Th. 879-80 E'py' epara qOQetpovatL KOVLO Te davOporra)v,I 7t7rLrAEtruaa Xaaycyeov Kac apyaAe'ov KoAoarvprov, and suggest 7eS Kal avrovs ( eLpovres . . . KoAoavpTOv)

I TL7rLrTAavTE7S.
EXOLSa'yaOots TreAeoUVg'r' adeAoLS.

42. IIEvIevievovaU

Theiler changed reAEovor' to reXer7s, probably rightly; the participial ending Maas made the further change to will have been a repetition from E1V3LEVEOVu'. . . OAovs, comparing 7. I2, 43. I , 79. I2. The dative is to be kept, ayaOov ...
cf. 31. 6, 51. 17. 43- 10-I I
EI7TEI7beviOUS TeAEras oaltas veoOlvaTros, XAE0T7
EVKCap7OVs KacpWv yeveaELs E7rayovo'ac afLE/Pbs.

In io, the manuscripts'

the other editors follow him. But the noun should be veoucvurTrs, -aLs, not
veoSaCtLC8rs. veotUvaros: cf. veo-roAXrrTS, In I, KatpCov yevEa'Ets is meaningless; read evKaCpovs Kap7rTv, or evKaptrOV(:
KatLpc .

veotLVarovs

is changed

by Hermann

to veoLV'UTrots, and

The phrase yovlta d8's may have originated in Euripides, for he is the most

likely common source for Isyllus (53 Powell)) and the Orphic hymn.

294

M. L. WEST

44. 7-9

ava TrpLrrEplas copas,

7v7lKaaov BaKxov yovtlLrfv (c)Lva TEAXatL a 'yva. EVmEpov Te Tparrecav LOE'VT(7jpL'

Semele is addressed. The oddity of aov BaKXov was noticed by Platt, who prothat is strange. Read cool,'when in your honour they celebrate the labour that bore Bacchus'.
46. I
AlKVtrv

posed BaKXat (J. Phil. 26 (I899),

228). But it is the orovrather than the BoKXov

alOvvUaovETr' evXatLTratarS KLKA7raKOJ.

But see 27. 2, 72. I, and the papyrus Quandt, p. 87, is converted to E7revXats. him the on latter hymn quoted by passage (= GDK 59. 13. 27).
50. 7 52. 9

Xap,ta PporoFs,

E7raOLE, KaAAdLOEepE. LXAaAvrTov, eTraopLE, KovpE &arcLTwp.

7TVpLeyyEs', prf,]tXOw, r

epithet of Dionysus is otherwise known, and Quandt prudently refrains from decision between the variants. There is a Zeus 2tptos- in Thessaly, but it would be unsafe to assume that this has any relevance. Theiler, p. 253, conreferring to RE v. 2233 f., xii. 767.' jectures EAad(p)tE,

In 52. 9 the

f manuscripts

have T&raLe, as do all manuscripts in 50. 7. No such

The clue to the correctform and significanceof the epithet may lie in a parchment document from Avroman in Kurdistan, dating from the first century B.C.2 It is a record of sale of a vineyard, the seller having some obligation of continued maintenance: eav Se Kal ' FaadKrYs ot'yWop7aj rv alTreXovrK Kal

the duplicate copy B 26). means is not clear,3 but it is something that a vine Exactly what E'raaos? ought to be, and fails to be if it is neglected. Dionysus 7craqos-may be derived from this. If e'Traoshas a short alpha (which is likely but cannot be proved), is a metrical lengthening. E7Ta'dt
52. 2-3
WVVKTEfp EvfovUAev,

roavro TroL7rn avr7jv e,raaov, arTOTrEvvverT) l.rTEOV

(A 25, almost the same in

iLrpoTpe4rs, ALKVtra, t,rvpiTroAEKal TeAETedpa, iLtTp,r]opE,OvpTaotvaKTca.

Hermann; but it is more likely to be the first part of the compound rrvpTrrvoe that is corrupt, Trvpt-having come in from rrvpglarope above. Read Ovq77rode, which goes well with EArTadpXa.
54. 2-3

0X' ZLAr77VJV

apiLTE,

TETL[LEVE 7Traa OEOFat

Kal Ovr7TOMac3pOTocLLVEC r TpLETr7pLLv dopaiL.

emr: read ev. Cf. 51. I8 daErTpdoLotaEtvevpats, 53. 7, 566.5 Ev() KVKAadaL c'ppacs, v Ecpats. 32. 14, etc.; often in Nonnus, also Musaeus 279 TeAEcro-lyacALOLL 56. 4 why. Hermann
Kovprq Kal KoVpE tav

Oa'Aosalev ASwvv. r7TcaoLvt OaAos (cf. 36. I I), Wiel tracn (LaEs-)

# has KopEfor KoVpE. Quandt assumes this to be right, but does not explain
writes
(KOpE) rraal (KaAov)

None of these accounts for av. Read BdAos, Theiler (p. 251) jpLrTraAXvOaAE-.
I Elaphrios was an epithet of Zeus in Crete and Cnidos, Elaphia of Artemis in various places. 2 Edited by E. H. Minns, JHSxxxv (915), 28 ff. 3 Minns discusses it on p. 55.

NOTES
KoVp'] Kal KoVpE,Zvplas cV 7raatv.

ON THE

ORPHIC

HYMNS

295

Odaos.CYPIAC was read as CYHAC, and made into

57. 5-9

os 7rapaITepouqov?s Lepov Bo&ov dLLTToAveLs,

alvopkopoLs ivXatls Tro/7ros Kara yaFav vTrapXwv
aS

KaTcalyet

oTTOTav Juop7]7 XpovoS EctaalKCrrat.L

EVepC paSlOs tOeAywv vr7voSoCTtpa

Kal 7crda v V rvovTas E'YELpELs.

Travra

The parallelism with eyelpEts requires E0Xyets.Cf.. .24. (24. 3 f.) ELE?TOOE pacpSov, .~ i' dv8pCv o'ptLtara OAyel
Kal v7vcoovTas EyeLpeL. For vrvo8o(retpa 7ravra the Aldine rvoTV8rts

Lv

8' avre has V7Tvo8wTEp taravra

Tovs EOeAEt,
7L8 v7Tvo8CTt

343 f.

Od. 5. 47 f.

(-8&uTp Dinner); J. M. Gesnerus, Hermann, and Abel

ravra.

does not occur, though the poet (alone of Greeks) does have other

vtrvoSoredp. The poet compounds in -s6Orts (/LO-, oAplo-, xapL-). Read ardvO' uses v7rvoSorELpa in 3. 7, and several other compounds in -8'reLpa (Kap7ro-, oA/o-, opOo-, wavro-, 7rAov-ro-).

64. 3-5 (Nomos)

VUEWcsTor /E'/3aLov aKAtves ao-raortaorov aelt TrpovrTa VOpOltalV, olaLv avoOe (pE>pwvpie'yav ovpavov av'Tos oevet.

in the last line is unintelligible. Theiler, who was apparently the first to bepcov see this, suggested flpv'ov (p. 254). Quandt in the reprinted edition, p. 87, takes the view that the first half of the line has intruded from another place. I would
suggest &(op6iv. Cf. 6i.
avTp)
ovX

2,

62. 3, 69. I5, 70. 4.

69. 3-5 (Erinyes) VVKTepLatL,vkXta,

oortatsc fovuat

' V7TOKEVOEcV otKl ouaaK

ev rlepoevTt ] EVEpoEV'T ryos 7rapa 2vTos

pporcov

V/o)p lEpOV
v&op,

7ET?roT7levat

atlt.

. . . tva AXVcov at ' El Atvrjs 1 is protected by 59. 2-5 (Moirai) rTre7TroTqe/Evat l'KLEpp Al Tapp /kV)X EVAlGOov v8aSp .. . p7yvvTra ev avrpov, j vaLov,aU Tre7roTr7a,Oe yafav. Exactly the same picture of goddesses flying forth ftpoTrv E7r arTelpova

In line 5 Quandt adopts the

KEKOTr/EVat

proposed by Gerlach in I797.

from a cave with a stream to visit mankind. The dative flovAatrt is inelegant, but acceptable in this poet.
69. 10-I3
olvre yap eAiov Taxtvalt bAo'yes ov'e creAr7vr'S TE Kal Epyacrt'ov Opaav'T7TOS Kal uof7rS apET77 r ' is evXapL r')ov re 8iov Atirapis 'TEpLKaLLAAEoS Vlp4OvXCo)plts eyeLpe evbpoavvas plOrTOO.

of the passage based on the part played by the Erinyes in controlling the sun in Heraclitus B 94.' I think I was basically right, but it now appears to me that the problem is simplifiedif we retain aper'T in i i instead of adopting the reading
of 4, dpcrrjs. The aotsw dapeTr) is intellectual excellence, much like the Tra'aqs 7ratSel7Rsaperq of 76. 4. In 63. I I (to Dikaiosyne) ev aol yap uo.obs dpcris- reAos eaOAovIKaveL, we shall read aotx4'S aperrT with Conr. Gesnerus, not aooilr' apeT qs with Hermann. The aper? epyacr4ov Opaav'rr~osis the excellence attained in bodily labour; cf. 78. I 2 (Dawn) 7rdvrayap cpyadluqov ftiorov Ovryrolac
I I see that this fragment was adduced by Theiler, p. 257, whose treatment of the passage is nevertheless violent. It is no. 52 in M. Marcovich's new edition.

In Phil. o6 (I962), I2I, I restored evxapirov, and attempted an interpretation

296
7Top a'4S,

M. L. WEST with 6 pyawv 'y '4-pa, &'ov ITp'7ToAE OV 7TOLcTLV.To the alternative

ways of mental and physical activity is now added a third kind of life, simple enjoyment of the pleasuresof youth. All three ways may lead to happiness, but not without the supervision of the Erinyes who punish all excess. For the idea
cf. 63-. 1. 8o. 6
JKtVES

pr A4trrOvC e m XuoS o

EAoto.

When I condemned the verse (Phil. io6 (i962), i22) I had not observed that it is in fact omitted in the b manuscripts (Quandt p. i2*).
87. 3-4?
oaso yap viTvoS /vy^gjjS OpatEt Ka't oa&(zTO& oAKO'V, EKVV5 q 9YEWSg KEKpaT77f9EVa aPVlf SEva /La.

ubv s is Platt's correction of OVX'4v. KEKpaT?7-Evais presumably thought to mean 'overcome', but the proleptic use of the perfect passive participle is very suspect. The poet surely wrote KEKPOT-q1t4va, the bonds welded by nature. M. L. WEST College,Oxford University