τὸν Ὀλυμπιονίκαν ἀνάγνωτέ μοι…πόθι φρενός ἐμᾶς γέγραπται. Pind., Ol., 10. 1-3 Is it a relative clause or a question introduced by πόθι ?
Editors of Pindar seem to punctuate it as a relative clause, but LSJ takes it as a question, and provides no instance of the use of ποθι as a relative.
It makes sense both ways. “Read his name where it’s written in my mind [o Muses]” vs. "Read his name. Where is it written in my mind? I forgot to pay the debt of a song I owe him . . "
The genitive εμας φρενος seems to me more natural with interrogative, rather than relative, ποθι. The question would be consistent with his “admission” that he forgot to write the poem when he should have. (Of course, he probably didn’t forget – he was waiting for the money.)
Wouldn’t it be ὅθι or ἔνθα or οὗ if it were relative?
But what do I know? The editors had and have a far better feeling for Pindar than I.
Take your pick.
i think its a question, rendering it with a rel clause would be too free a translation…
For what it’s worth (not very much), I read it as an indirect question. I see Slater does too. Most often it would be direct, as with other such interrogatives (pote etc.), at least in Pindar and earlier poetry, but not here I think. But I haven’t checked the commentators, and of course I could be wrong.
Could ἀνάγνωτέ mean “remind”, rather than “read”? Or perhaps both? According to LSJ, this would be the first instance of ἀναγιγνώσκω meaning “read.” Slater: “read out”. Indirect question makes sense here, and that would be consistent with the editors and translators, I guess.
“Read out” seems right to me, but does it matter? Isn’t the only question whether πόθι is to be taken as a direct or an indirect question (as after e.g. Tell me)? It can’t be a relative.