Mary Anastasi, University of California, Los Angeles
This paper argues that the myth of Ajax’s suicide in Isthmian 4 provides a commentary on the nuances of wisdom (sophia), a fundamental yet obscure motif throughout Pindar’s oeuvre (Gladigow 1965: 39). I suggest that Pindar renders the two heroes Ajax and Odysseus as archetypes of corresponding kinds of wisdom. Odysseus represents a dangerous wisdom associated with the deceptive power of eloquence, while Ajax represents wisdom and skill arising from true virtue. Pindar never names Odysseus, despite the central role he plays in Ajax’s death. Instead, I argue that Odysseus exercises an invisible yet potent presence in the poem manifested in its recurrent interest in cleverness and inventive skill, traits associated with Odysseus.
The relatives of the victor, Melissus, complicate the laudator's task: they were “wretched Medizers who fought on the wrong side at Plataea,” yet also brave warriors who died in battle (McNeal 1978: 141). Ajax seems a fitting parallel, as his own kleos oscillates between brilliance and obscurity, a motif of the ode (Kurke and Neer 2019: 106; Spelman 2018: 48). However, Pindar does not dwell upon this disgrace, instead emphasizing Ajax’s virtue (aretan) and the glory Homer secures for him (4.36-37). Conversely, Odysseus is an unspoken but antagonistic presence; immediately preceding the Ajax story, Pindar says that “the skill of lesser men sometimes overwhelms the better man” (4.34-35), referring not only to the dynamics of competition, but also to the unfair advantage that eloquence gives Odysseus.
While the ode has the potential to be read as political allegory (Kowalzig 2006; Mullen 1973), Isthmian 4 also shows the ways in which mythological paradigms should or should not be taken as straightforward models for the laudandus.Ultimately, Pindar portrays Melissus as a recuperated version of both Ajax and Odysseus, fashioning Melissus himself as an archetype who embodies the best of both heroes: a contemporary-day hero. Melissus both aligns with an Odyssean identity and evades it. His foxlike mētis (4.65) and short yet sturdy stature (4.68-69) recall Odysseus, but he is also a fox who “wards off the swoop of the eagle” (4.66); if Odysseus is foxlike in his intelligence, the ending scene of the Odyssey also makes him eagle-like, when he prepares to swoop upon the suitors’ families (Od. 24.537-538). Either way, any affiliation with Odysseus ultimately reflects back on Pindar: in the final line, Pindar describes himself as “dripping pleasing grace” on Melissus (4.74), a phrase that is reminiscent of Athena’s role in the Odyssey, when she helps Odysseus appear more imposing (Od. 6.233, 8.18; cf. 2.12, 17.60).
This analysis demonstrates that, by using Ajax and Odysseus as archetypal figures, Pindar teaches his audience to see through deceptive skill and discern what constitutes true wisdom, and therefore virtue. Considering Isthmian 4’s religious context (Krummen 2014: 41-116; Segal 1981), this didactic and moral impact is fitting. Regardless of the laudandus’s heroic analogue(s), one thing remains clear: Pindar’s mythological examples endow his own poetic persona with a certain immortal luster.