Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of North Texas, Dec., 2007. / Title from title page display. Includes bibliographical references.

This thesis examines the work of Pindar from a political, ideological, and economic perspective. It is based on the premise that the society in which Pindar lived and the society he presents in the odes are not examples of fully embedded economies, and that elements of a market economy have an impact on both the society and the odes' ideology. A thorough analysis of the economics of Isthmian 2 shows that gift economy coexists with market economy. My thesis focuses on the odes dedicated to the Sicilian tyrants, Hieron of Syracuse and Theron of Akragas. The odes dedicated to Hieron have a different ideology, propaganda and economy in comparison with those composed for Theron. Hieron is presented as an almighty king whose values do not derive from inherited excellence (phya), but from his wealth. By analysing the reciprocal relationships in the mythological exempla, I argue that the poet reveals Hieron to be prone to market behaviour and suggests the dangers involved in pursuing obscene profit and in applying market logic to politics. In the case of Theron, Pindar treats him according to traditional aristocratic values. Theron is the most prominent person of an aristocratic family and closely follows the laws of the gift economy. He is a man whose values are inherited and his exceptional phya justifies his tyranny. A brief comparison of the concept of phya in the Aeginetan odes illustrates the different way the concept is applied in the case of a tyrant. In conclusion, Pindar is a poet who knows the wishes of his patrons and how to promote their propaganda, but he also lives in a society which functions not only under the laws of a fully embedded economy, but also under those of a market economy, and the logic of the latter has influenced his poetry. An ideological examination of his work uncovers the traces of this influence.

No description available.

This professes to be a poetic commentary to the Nemean odes of Pindar. It argues for a re-evaluation of this poet's epinikia as poetry and has taken as its principal focus the stuff that is critically ignored or devalued. Much that Pindar writes is difficult in that it is at once dense and dynamic, obedient to the strictures of a genre and yet never ruled by them. He invites commentary and scholars have for the most part centred their considerable efforts on decoding genius. There is as much literature on the poet and his relatively inaccessible work as there is an absence of poetic appreciation of it. The desire for a system of language, a master decoder of metaphor, imagery and thought processes, and the desire to find unity of thought, for Grundgedanken , for correspondences, structural parallels and polarities is the engine that drives the philologist reading these odes. But Pindar defies system.

This commentary to Pindar's Nemean 6 was inspired as much by the absence of recent modern criticism as by the presence of those venerable works on the Nemean odes by Fennell, Bury and Farnell. I determined to examine these commentaries in particular since they are basic to any critical approach. I next determined to include more contemporary criticism which was either directed to the Nemean 6 in particular, or was generally applicable. I was guided in my selection of points of interest as much by personal curiosity as by a sense of their poetic, thematic, structural, syntactical, or textual importance. In the interest of private safety as well as sanity, I have avoided any analysis of metre, except where it has been utterly unavoidable.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1940. / Vita. Published also without thesis note. Biographical foot-notes.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Princeton University, 1916. / "Bibliographical list": p. 158-165.

Texte remanié de: Diss.--Philosophische Fakultät--Freiburg i. Br.--Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, 1983. / Bibliogr. p. 225-230. Index.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Columbia University, 1940. / Vita. Published also without thesis note. Biographical foot-notes.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Princeton University, 1916. / "Bibliographical list": p. 158-165.