Thomas W. Allen, E. E. Sikes, Commentary on the Homeric Hymns

HYMN TO PAN

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A. LUDWICH, “der Homerische Hymnus auf Pan,” Rheinischer Museum p. 547-558, 1887. R. PEPPMÜLLER, Philologus xlviii. p. 1-19, 1889. PRELLER-ROBERT i.^{2} p. 738 f. W. ROSCHER, “die Sagen von der Geburt des Pan,” Philologus, 1894. W. ROSCHER and K. WERNICKE, art. “Pan” in Roscher's Lex. (with literature to 1902).

Subject and style.—The hymn to Pan, with its keen appreciation of Nature and its sympathy with the free open-air life of the field and mountain, has a freshness and charm peculiarly attractive to a modern reader. The poem, though a hymn in form, is an idyll in spirit—a picture, or rather a series of pictures, with landscapes of snowy peaks and rocky ways, and meadows where the crocus and fragrant hyacinth are intermingled with the grass. In all the scenes Pan is the central figure, alone, or with his attendant nymphs: Pan the hunter, roaming over the snowy hills, or among the thick bushes, or along the gentle streams; Pan the musician, making sweet melody beside the dark fountain in the dusk, or joining in the dance of Oread nymphs. Nowhere, perhaps, in Greek literature has the love of the country found clearer expression than in this hymn, which challenges comparison with the chorus to Pan in the Helena,¹ or with the seventh idyll of Theocritus. “ Eur. Itis assuredly”—to quote a fine critic—“the voice of no small poet which breathes through this lovely hymn.”²

Date of the hymn.—It is to be regretted that so interesting a poem cannot be dated with any certainty. On one point, however, scholars are substantially agreed—that the hymn is one of the latest in the collection, and that it could hardly have been composed before the age of Pindar at the earliest. The evidence of mythology, if not conclusive, strongly supports this consensus of opinion. It is true that Pan is one of the oldest creations of Greek folklore, being (as Mannhardt has shewn) the representative in Greece of the numerous wood-spirits who appear in a semi-caprine form.³ But the old Arcadian woodspirit and shepherd-god had no place in the “higher mythology” of Homer and Hesiod, and scarcely won any recognition in literature before the Persian wars. Until that period he was probably ignored by cultivated Greeks (outside Arcadia), and hence Herodotus was led to infer that Pan was one of the most recent of Hellenic deities (ii. 145). In Pindar he is a mere attendant of the “Μεγάλη Μήτηρ” ( Pyth.iii. 77, fr. 6. 1 “Ματρὸς μεγάλας ὀπαδέ”). The first reference to the god is quoted from Epimenides, who called Pan and Arcas the twin-sons of Zeus and Callisto (schol. on Theocr. i. 3, schol. on Rhes. 36). It is difficult to believe that a hymn which shews so developed a conception of Pan's nature and of his place in the Greek mythological system could have been the product of the seventh or early sixth century, in which all other literature passes over the god in silence. Pan is equally neglected in Greek art until the beginning of the fifth century (Roscher Lex. 1407).

On the other hand, the hymn does not appear to be Alexandrine, as various critics have suggested.⁴ Forms such as “τίση” (2), “τόθι” (25), “Ἑρμείην” (28), “ὤν” (32), “χέρα” (40) are instanced by Gemoll as “late”; they are of course foreign to the oldest epic, but there is little or nothing in the language which cannot be paralleled in the genuinely ancient hymns. Usages such as “νύμφη” for “daughter” (34), “τιθήνη” “mother” (38), are also unknown in Homer; but there is no reason to see in them a mark of Alexandrine affectation. There are a large number of “ἅπαξ λεγόμενα” (“φιλόκροτος 2, χοροήθης 3, ἀγλαέθειρος, ἀνακέκλομαι 5, αὐχμήεις 6, μηλοσκόπος 11, λιγύμολπος 19, τερατωπός” 36); all these, however, are simple and straightforward, and may well belong to an early stage of the language. The hymn reads like the product of a good period (perhaps the fifth century), and Ludwich is probably correct in refusing to see any traces of Alexandrine workmanship.

Place of composition.—The hymn treats of an Arcadian god, and mentions his birth on Cyllene; but the cult of Pan became the common property of the Greeks from the beginning of the fifth century, or a little earlier, so that there is no internal evidence of locality. Baumeister and Wilamowitz (aus Kydathen p. 224) suggest an Athenian origin; all that can be said in favour of this theory is the fact that Pan became a favourite at Athens after the battle of Marathon, when his cult, if known before to the Athenians, was first officially organised.⁵

The further suggestion of Baumeister, that the hymn served as a proem to Homeric recitations at the Panathenaea, is mere guess-work. It may be sufficient to remark that, if the hymn is Athenian, it could not have been composed at a time when the memory of the Persian defeat was fresh. There is no mention of the familiar part which the god played in the war, or of the “panic” which he caused at Marathon. His character in the hymn is entirely pacific; he is a hunter, but no warrior.⁶

Integrity of the hymn.—The unity of the poem is sufficiently obvious, although the motif does not lie in a single episode, as in the hymns to Demeter, to the Delian and Pythian Apollo, and to Aphrodite (see II. App. p. 311); and there is no question of interpolated lines. An attempt to disintegrate the hymn was made by Groddeck, who divided it into two parts, the first (1-27) relating to Pan and the Nymphs, the second (28-47) describing the birth of the god. Groddeck thought that the narrative languished in the latter half; to this Ilgen rightly replied that the comparative failure of interest is due to the subject, not to a different composer. Further, Groddeck argued that the birth of Pan should have been described at the beginning; he did not realise that the birth was the subject of the nymph's song, and that the Homeric hymns afford two exact parallels to the order of the narrative. In h. Herm. 59 Hermes sings of his own birth, and in h. Art. (xxvii) an account of Artemis at the chase is followed by a mention of the song describing the birth of Apollo and Artemis, while the goddess herself, like Pan, directs the chorus.

Peppmüller divides the hymn into “nomic” parts: “ἀρχά” (1-7), “κατατροπά” (8-26), “ὀμφαλός” (27-47), “ἐπίλογος” (48-49).

ἀμφί: cf. on vii. 1. Ἑρμείαο φίλον Γόνον: the genealogies vary; Roscher (die Sagen etc.) gives a complete list. For Hermes as the father cf. Herod.ii. 145, Lucian dial. deor. 22, Anth. Plan. iv. 229 and elsewhere. Hermes and Pan were both shepherdgods (“νόμιοι”) in Arcadia, and were both worshipped on Cyllene, so that their connexion, no doubt, originated in Arcadia.

[2] αἰΓιπόδηΝ: this form is preserved in 37, and should be restored here, although Ilgen and Baumeister retain “αἰγοπόδην” in this place, charging the inconsistency on the hymn-writer rather than on the scribe.

Numerous epithets allude to the goatfooted Pan (“Αἰγίπαν”): e.g. Simon. fr. 33 “τραγόπουν”, Herod.ii. 46“τραγοσκελέα”, Arist. Ran. 230 “κεροβάταν”, Theocr. Ep. xiii. 6 “αἰγιβάταν”, Orph. h. xi. 5 “αἰγομελές”, Dion. xxiii. 151 “αἰγείοις πόδεσσι”, Anth. Pal. vi. 35. 1 “αἰγώνυχι”; for “αἰγιπόδης” cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 57. 3, ix. 330. 2.

δικέρωτα: l.c. “αἰγοπρόσωπον”, Lucian l.c. “κερασφόρος”, Anth. Pal. ix. 142 “δικέρων”, ib. vi. 32 “δικραίρῳ”, Dion. xiv. 72 “Πανὲς κερααλκέες”, xvi. 187 “ὑψίκερως”, etc.

[3] ἄμυδις: not in Homer. χοροήθεσι: the form may stand; Schmidt's “χορογήθεσι” would itself be “ἅπαξ λεγ.”, although supported by “δαφνογήθης, λυρογήθης” (Ludwich). For the sense Gemoll compares Orph. h. xxiv. 2 “χοροπαίγμονες”, of the Nereids.

[4] αἰΓίλιπος: the derivation is still obscure. In A. J. P. xvi. p. 261 the latter part of the word is connected with “λε-λιμ-μένος”, i.e. “loved by goats.” Prellwitz s.v. maintains the ancient etymology (“λείπω”). The construction has been doubted; “στείβουσι” might be intrans., the order being “στείβουσι κατὰ κάρηνα αἰγ. πέτρης”. Some join “κατά” to the verb, which would thus be trans., cf. O. C. 467 “καταστείψας πέδον”. But as “κατ᾽ αἰγίλιπος πέτρης” is a Homeric formula (Il. 9.15 “, Π” 4), the prep. is here also to be taken with the genitive, so that “στείβουσι” is trans., “tread on the peaks.” For the direct obj. acc. cf. Apoll. Arg. 3.835 “στεῖβε πέδον” (wrongly explained by L. and S. as a cogn. acc.).

[5] Νόμιον: of Pan, Anth. Pal. vi. 96. 6. There was a temple of Pan under this title on the “Νόμια ὄρη”, near Lycosura, Paus.viii. 38. 11.

ἀΓλαέθειρον, “bright-haired,” does not seem a very appropriate epithet; but the first part of the compound probably means “thick” or “long,” for which Preller compares “ἀγλαόκαρπος” “with rich fruit.”

[6] αὐχμήενθ̓, “shaggy,” “unkempt”; “αὐχμηρός, αὐχμωδής, αὐχμηροκόμης” are similarly used.

“ὃς Πάντα λόφον κτλ.”: the goat-god was naturally at home on the rocky mountains of Arcadia, the chief of which (Lycaeus, Cyllene, Maenalus, Parthenion) were sacred to him. So O. T. 1100 “ὀρεσσιβάτᾳ Πανί”, Aj.595“ὦ Πὰν ἁλίπλαγκτε Κυλλανίας χιονοκτύπου”

“πετραίας ἀπὸ δειράδος φάνηθ̓”, Anth. Pal. vi. 32. 3 “Πανὶ φιλοσκοπέλῳ”, ib. 106. 5 “Πὰν βουνῖτα”. See Roscher (Lex. 1383), who thinks that the connexion with the mountains arose from Pan's character as a hunter and also as a shepherd; Arcadians drove their flocks up the mountains as spring approached. In any case, the god of a country like Arcadia must have haunted the mountains.
Νιφόεντα: so Aj. l.c., Castorion in Athen. x. 455 A “σὲ τὸν βολαῖς νιφοκτύποις δυσχείμερον”

“ναίονθ᾽ ἕδραν, θηρονόμε Πάν, χθόν᾽ Ἀρκάδων”
“κλήσω”.

[9] ἐφελκόμενος: this is certainly sound, and is rightly explained by Gemoll “attracted by,” comparing Thuc.i. 42. 4.“μηδ᾽ . . . τούτῳ ἐφέλκεσθε”. Add the Homeric “αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐφέλκεται ἄνδρα σίδηρος” (Od. 16.294 “, τ” 13), which is hardly less metaphorical; so often in the Anthology (Anth. Pal. vii. 707. 8 “πρός τ᾽ αὐδὴν ἑλκόμενος μεγάλην”, xii. 87. 6 “ἐφελκόμεθα”, xv. 37. 38 “ἕλκομαι”, Anth. Plan. iv. 136 and 139 “ἀντιμεθελκόμενον”, 140, 286, all exx. of the mind); cf. also Lith. 332 “ἐφέλκεται” (middle) and Plat. Soph.265 Hence E. we need not give a physical sense to the verb, with Matthiae, i.e. “drawn by,” “floating on,” for which cf. Dicaearch.i. 29“καὶ γὰρ ὁ Εὔριπος δισσὸν ἔχων τὸν εἴσπλουν ἐφέλκεται τὸν ἔμπορον εἰς τὴν πόλιν”. Baumeister's “ἐφεζόμενος” would not have been corrupted to “ἐφελκόμενος”, and “ῥείθροισιν” cannot be used for “ὄχθῃσιν”, even in late Greek (see Peppmüller p. 6).

For Pan's association with rivers see Roscher (Lex. 1384 f.), who derives the idea from the watering of the flocks in Arcadian streams, comparing Theocr. iv. 24, Verg. Ecl. iii. 96.

[11] μηλοσκόπον: Gemoll's correction of the accent is rightly adopted by Roscher; “μηλόσκοπον” could only mean “watched by sheep.” The reference is, of course, to a “σκοπιά” or peak, from which shepherds watch their flocks on the mountain-slopes.

[12] ἀργινόεντα: not for “νιφόεντα” (6), but “bright” in the clear air of Greece; the word is applied to towns in Il. 2.647, 656.

[13] διήλασε: intrans., like “διοιχνεῖ” (10).

[14] ὀΞέα δερκόμενος: cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 16. 1, ib. 109. 9 “Πὰν ὦ σκοπιῆτα”, ib. 107. 1 “ὑλησκοπῳ”, Orph. h. xi. 9 “εὔσκοπε, θηρητήρ”; for Pan “ἀποσκοπῶν” cf. Ital.xiii. 340, and see Roscher die Sagen p. 161, Lex. 1401. So Artemis is “θηροσκόπος” xxvii. 11.

τότε: here and in 19 preferable to “τοτέ”, but in 22 an oxytone accent seems required, with the meaning “anon.”

οἶον: the simplest correction of “οἷον”; qualifies “ἕσπερος”, “only at evening,” when the sport is over, tum demum. For “οἶον” = “μόνον” cf. Theog. 29 “γαστέρες οἶον”, Aesch. Ag.136(glossed “μόνον”), and it has been so taken in Il. 9.355; often later, e.g. Theocr. xxv. 199, Apoll. Arg. ii. 634 etc.

Of the conjectures, none are graphically possible except Hermann's “οἶος”, “alone”; but Pan is attended by the nymphs; cf. 19.

[15] ἄγρης: a certain correction of “ἄκρης”; cf.

“ἀπ᾽ ἄγρας
τανίκα κεκμακὼς ἀμπαύεται
”

Theocr. i. 16

of Pan; id. xxv. 87 “ἐκ βοτάνης ἀνιόντα” of sheep; Apoll. Arg. ii. 938 “ἄγρηθεν ὅτ᾽ οὐρανὸν εἰσαναβαίνῃ” (Artemis); id. iii. 69 “θήρης ἐξανιών” (Jason). For Pan as a hunter cf. Hesych. “Ἀγρεύς: ὁ Πὰν παρὰ Ἀθηναίοις”, E. M. 34, 38, so “ἀγρότας” Anth. Pal. vi. 13. 1 and 188. 3, “ἀγρονόμος” ib. 154. 1, “εὔθηρος” ib. 185. 4, “θηρονόμος” Castorion ap. Athen. x. 454 F, “θηρητήρ” Orph. h. xi. 9. Cf. also imag. ii. 11, Arrian cyneg. 35. 3, Paus.viii. 42. 3, Calpurn. 10. 3 f. Hunting was the natural occupation of the semi-bestial Pan or the Centaurs; moreover Pan's chief worshippers, the Arcadians, were themselves great hunters. The images of Pan were beaten with squills by Arcadian boys when the chase was unsuccessful, Theocr. vii. 107. See further Roscher die Sagen p. 154 f., Lex. 1387.

δονάκων ὕπο=“δόναξι”; see on xxi. 1. For Pan's connexion with the “σῦριγξ” see Roscher Lex. 1402. The pipes were used by herdsmen in Homeric times; cf. Il. 18.525.

μοῦσαν ἀθύρων: the editors quote Apoll. Arg. 4.948 “μολπὴν ἀθύρειν”.

[16] Νήδυμον: for the form see on h. Herm. 241.

[17] ἔαρος Πολυανθέος: apparently a gen. of time, “in flowery spring,” but parallels for an epithet used in this construction are hard to find. Baumeister compares Scut. 153 “Σειρίου ἀζαλέοιο”, explained as temporal by Göttling; but Flach denies this. Examples such as Il. 11.691 “ τῶν προτέρων ἐτέων” are different, as “τῶν προτέρων” defines the time more closely (like “τοῦ ἐπιγιγνομένου χειμῶνος” etc.), and is not a mere epithet. Edgar and Lang construe with “ἐν πετάλοισι” “the leaves of spring,” but this is very doubtful Greek; the adj. “εἰαρινοῖς” would be required as in Il. 2.89, Theog. 279, Op.75, Cypria fr. ii. 2 etc. Köchly marks a lacuna after “ἔαρος”, supplying “πολιοῦ νέον ἱσταμένοιο”

“ὕλης ἑζομένη”. We should perhaps expect “ὥρῃ”, as in Mimnerm. fr. 1 “πολυανθέος ὥρῃ εἴαρος”, Hes. Op.584“θέρεος καματωδέος ὥρῃ”, but Peppmüller's supplement after 17 “ὥρῃ ὄπα προιεῖσα” gives an impossible order of words, with “ἐν πετάλοισι” intervening.

[18] ἀχέει: the nearest conjecture to the text, in which the repetition “ἐπιπροχέουσα χέει” can hardly be tolerated. There is, however, some doubt as to the existence of “ἀχέειν”; see on h. Dem. 478. Ruhnken's “ἰαχεῖ” (better “ἰάχει”) is also possible; cf. Anth. Pal. vii. 201. 2 “ἁδεῖαν μέλπων ἐκπροχέεις ἰαχάν” (of a cicala). Gemoll's “ἠχέει” is equally good; the rest of the conjectures are violent.

[19] σφιν: the use as dat. sing. is not Homeric, and has been denied for any Greek; but the present passage cannot be otherwise explained. The dat. sing. is probable, if not certain, in Aesch. Pers.759, O. C. 1490, where Jebb thinks it “unsafe to deny that poetry sometimes admitted the use.” See Brugmann Grundriss ii. p. 822. Pind. Pyth.ix. 116, h. xxx.9 are uncertain.

For Pan and the nymphs see Roscher Lex. 1390 f. (literature), 1420 f. (art).

[20] Πυκνά: usually altered to “πύκα”, but the correption is supported by Hes. Op.567“ἀκρο^κνέφαιος”, fr. 138 “ὦ τέκνον— Ζεὺς ἐτέκνωσε πατήρ”, Theocr. xx. 126 “ἄλλῃ δὲ στόμα τύψε πυκνοὶ δ᾽ ἀράβησαν ὀδόντες”, Quintus vii. 15 “πυκνὰ μήδεα ἤδῃ”; so “τε?́χνας” Empedocl. 185, and other exx. in J. H. S. xviii. 30. Cf. Eberhard Metr. Beob. i. p. 31.

μελανύδρῳ: only with “κρήνη” (Il. 9.14 “, Π 3, 160, Φ 257, υ” 158), of the dark colour of deep water.

[22] χορῶν requires no alteration; the plural is justified by xxvii. 18 (of Artemis), the genitive by h. Herm. 226 “αἰνὰ μὲν ἔνθεν ὁδοῖο, τὰ δ᾽ αἰνότερ᾽ ἔνθεν ὁδοῖο”, and 357 “ὁδοῦ τὸ μὲν ἔνθα τὸ δ᾽ ἔνθα”. Both sets of adverbs follow “ἕρπων. θορών”, like most of Köchly's emendations, is needless: the aor. part. is inappropriate, and the verb is too violent even for Pan's ungainly motion.

For Pan as a dancer cf. Pind. fr. 99 “χορευτὴν τελεώτατον θεῶν”, Aesch. Pers.448“ὁ φιλόχορος Πάν”, Soph. Aj.696“ὦ θεῶν χοροποἴ ἄναξ”, scolium ap. Athen. xv. 694 D “ὦ Πὰν Ἀρκαδίας μεδέων κλεέννας”

“ὀρχηστά”, Orph. h. xi. 9 “σύγχορε νυμφῶν”, Anth. Pal. vi. 32. 2 “εὐσκάρθμῳ”, imag. ii. 11 and 12.

[28] οἷόν θ̓, “and for example”; Baumeister compares the formula “ἢ οἵη”, which gave a title to the Hesiodean Catalogue of Women.

ἙρμείηΝ: so “Ἑρμείῃ” 36, but “Ἑρμείας” 40. The hymn-writer may well have used the forms indifferently; cf. “Ἑρμείαο” 1.

[29] ἔνΝεπον, following “ὑμνεῦσιν”, must have the force of an aorist; cf. “διέδραμεν, διήλασε” 12, 13, following “διοιχνεῖ” 10. For the imperf. instead of the indefinite aor. see h. Apoll. 5.

[30] Πολυπίδακα, μητέρα μήλων: cf. h. Aphr. 68. For the flocks of Arcadia cf. Bacchyl.xi. 95“Ἀρκαδίαν μηλοτρόφον”, Theocr. xxii. 157 “εὔμηλος”, h. Herm. 2 “πολυμήλου”.

[31] ΚυλληΝίου, “as god of Cyllene.” For the genitive, after “οἱ”, see on h. Dem. 37. The accusative “Κυλλήνιον” is possible, but much weaker, and is a natural alteration of the unfamiliar genitive.

For Hermes “Κυλλήνιος” see on h. Herm. 8, and for the same title of Pan cf. Soph. Aj.695; his cult at Cyllene is attested by Anth. Pal. vi. 96. 3.

[32] ὤν: see on h. Apoll. 330. ψαφαρότριχα: the x family, as Gemoll observes, has preserved the strict Ionic form “ψαφερο-”, which is used by Hippocrates according to L. and

[33] θάλε, “waxed,” i.e. became inflamed. The word is frequently applied to the strength of disease in tragedy (see L. and S. ); it is used, as here, of love in verses quoted by Plutarch quaest. conv. 761 B “σὺν γὰρ ἀνδρείᾳ καὶ ὁ λυσιμελης Ἔρως ἐνὶ Χαλκιδέων θάλλει πόλεσιν”, Plat. Symp. 203E “θάλλει καὶ ζῇ” (of Eros personified). Ruhnken's “λάθε” has been generally accepted from its false look of palaeographical probability (Ilgen's “λαβών” for “βαλών” is the only clear case of anagrammatismus in the hymns); but neither “λάθε” nor “ἔλε” is an improvement on the text; the other conjectures are impossible.

ἐΠελθών, “attacking,” more forcible than “ὑπελθών”; Gemoll compares Soph. fr. 607 “ἔρως ἄνδρας ἐπέρχεται”.

[34] Νύμφῃ: not elsewhere, apparently, for “daughter”; Roscher's explanation, “bride” (die Sagen p. 368), is hardly possible; the reference is to Dryope, who was the daughter of Dryops, son of Arcas ( Ant. Lib.xxii, cf. Verg. Aen.x. 551). The conjectures “Δρυόπης, Δρυόπῃ” are unlikely. An oak-spirit is appropriate as the mother of Pan, whom the Arcadians called “τὸν τῆς ὕλης κύριον”, Macrob. Sat.i. 22; so Cheiron is the son of Philyra, the lime-nymph ( Theog. 1001), and Pholos, another centaur, is the son of Melia, the ash (see Mannhardt A. W. F. p. 48). Roscher, however, thinks that the genealogy is due to the settlement of the Dryopes in the neighbourhood of Cyllene (see Immerwahr p. 136 f.), so that the legend may be local and Cyllenian.

[35] ἐκ δ᾽ ἐτέλεσσε: the subject is almost certainly Hermes (not Dryope, as Ludwich understands), “he brought the marriage to pass.” Cf. Od. 4.7 “ τοῖσιν δὲ θεοὶ γάμον ἐξετέλειον”, and Od. 20.74 “ τέλος θαλεροῖο γαμοῖο”; cf. h. Dem. 79. The change of subject in “τέκε” presents no difficulty.

ἐΝ μεγάροισιν: Roscher thinks the expression unsuitable to a nymph. But “μέγαρον” is applied to the cave in which the nymph Maia dwells, h. Herm. 146.

[36] ἄφαρ, “from his birth.” Baumeister compares Od. 4.85 “ Λιβύην, ὅθι τ᾽ ἄρνες ἄφαρ κεραοὶ τελέθουσιν”. Add, for later Greek,

“εὐθύ σε μήτηρ
γείνατ᾽ ἀοσσητῆρα
”

Callim. h. Apoll. 103

.

[38] τιθήνΗ, “mother”; for this rare meaning only Colluth. 372 is adduced by Baumeister and Gemoll (add id. 84, 87, 99, 174). But the use may also be defended by “τροφός”=“μήτηρ” in Soph. Aj.849, “τὴν θρέψασαν” for mother-land, in Leocr. § 47. Köchly's “παῖδ᾽ ἀτίθηνον” (after Maneth. iv. 368) is out of the question. Peppmüller thinks that “τιθήνη” is used advisedly to suggest that Dryope in her terror neglected a mother's duty of “nursing” her child.

[40] εἰς χέρα θῆκε: a rather curious expression for “took in his arms.”

[43] The hare is a symbol of Pan, e.g. on coins of Rhegium and Messana (Head Hist. Num. p. 93 and 134). On a coin of the latter city Pan is seated upon a rock caressing a hare (dated by Head 420-396 B.C.). Pan has also the “λαγωβόλον”, Roscher Lex. 1386.

[46] On the close connexion of Pan and Dionysus cf. Anth. Pal. vi. 154 (a dedication to Pan, Bacchus, and the Nymphs), ib. 315 “Πᾶνα φίλον Βρομίοιο”, scolium ap. Athen. (quoted on 22) “Βρομίαις ὀπαδὲ νύμφαις”, Lucian dial. deor. 22. 3 “ὁ Διόνυσος οὐδὲν ἐμοῦ ἄνευ ποιεῖν δύναται, ἀλλὰ ἑταῖρον καὶ θιασώτην πεποίηταί με καὶ ἡγοῦμαι αὐτῷ τοῦ χοροῦ”, Dion. xliii. 10 “Πὰν ἐμός” (of Dionysus), v. ap. Euseb. P. E. v. 6 “χρυσόκερως βλοσυροῖο Διωνύσου θεράπων Πάν” and often. Pan and Dionysus were both “vegetation-spirits,” according to Frazer (G. B. ii. p. 291, etc.); but as Dionysus was not a primitive Arcadian god like Pan, the connexion must have been a later development, due to the wild and orgiastic nature of the Dionysiac cult, which attracted such woodland deities as Pan and the Satyrs.

Περίαλλα: only here in the Homeric poems; once in Pind. Pyth.xi. 8.

[47] The derivation from “πᾶς” is given by Plato Crat.408 The Orphic B. identification of Pan with the “κόσμος” (“τὸ πᾶν”) must have been caused by this etymology (Orph. h. xi. 1 “κόσμοιο τὸ σύμπαν”), although the Egyptian god Mendes no doubt aided the conception (Roscher Pan als Allgott p. 56). In a similar spirit Hesiod explains Pandora “ὅτι πάντες . . . δῶρον ἐδώρησαν” ( Op.80). Another tradition made Pan the son of Hermes and Penelope, which may be due to the same etymology (Doric “Πανελόπα”, Mannhardt W. F. K. p. 128); the ancients disagreed whether this Penelope was a nymph or the wife of Odysseus (see Roscher die Sagen p. 368, Lex. 1405). The schol. on Theocr. i. 3 combines the connexion with Penelope and the derivation from “πᾶς”: “υἱὸν Πηνελόπης καὶ πάντων τῶν μνηστήρων, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο λέγεσθαι καὶ Πᾶνα”. The true etymology is generally assumed to be for “Πάων”, from [root ]pa, cf. “πάομαι, ποιμήν”, pasco, Pales etc.; the termination is Arcadian, cf. “Ἀλκμάν, Ἑρμάν, Ποσοιδάν” in that dialect (Roscher Lex. 1405).

[48] ἵλαμαι: so xxi. 5, “ἵληθι” xx. 8, xxiii. 4. For the verb used in taking leave of a deity cf. Theocr. xv. 143, Apoll. Arg. 4.1773, Archer-Hind on Phaed.95A. The alternative “λίσομαι” is taken by Veitch Greek Verbs s. v. as a future; however, we have the variant “λίτομαι λίσομαι” in Anth. Pal. v. 164. “λίτομαι” occurs in xvi. 5.