Pindar's Celedones have raised much controversy over the years. Their identity still remains uncertain, although there have been many attempts from scholars to specify whether the term refers to mythical creatures comparable to the Sirens of Homer or to elaborate life-like statues adorning the gable of a long-lost Delphic temple.Footnote ¹ In this paper, I wish to argue for a metaphorical reading of the Celedones in Pindar's Paean 8 that resides in the poetic (re-)signification of proper names and how they are put into narrative(s). Drawing intratextual evidence from Olympian 1 and intertextual evidence from early Greek epic, I contend that the Celedones, richly semanticized as they are, become the means by which Pindar deals with the rigours of the song-making process, as he strives to introduce an ambivalent take on the choral praise of Apollo at Delphi, one that rests on the paradox of song exquisiteness and its negative consequences.

In doing so, I come to grips with the alliterative power of early Greek poetry in order to pin down and analyse semantic relations between narratives, which establish connections intrinsic for the production of meaning.Footnote ² The methodology I use to read the two Pindaric passages rests on two interpretative tools: on the one hand, I fertilize the governing principle of intratextuality, which is to look ‘at the text[s] from different directions (backwards as well as forwards), […] contracting and expanding its boundaries both within the opus and outside it’,Footnote ³ and to examine formal ways in which textual ‘bits need to be read in the light of other bits’ so as to redeem the ‘bittiness of literature, its uncomfortable squareness-in-round-(w)holeness’.Footnote ⁴ This microscopic approach to intratexts, which I take to be parts of different texts (not one!) stemming from the same author, here from Pindar, may advance a deeper understanding of the main reasons that compel a certain author, here Pindar, to cluster words of specified semantic and/or phonetic value the way he does within different places in his œuvre, and what the contextual circumstances are that underlie the clustering. This leads me to the second methodological tool: the (re-)significative potency of proper names, their capacity to produce certain meaning, and the way they are put into narrative,Footnote ⁵ their narrativization. Taking my cue from a stance toward ancient etymology that forges an integrative contextual reading of the semantics of individual words,Footnote ⁶ and by using the Celedones as a case in point, I demonstrate that word semasiology is a product of an inductive view on the way signification works. Signification is commensurate with both internal and external parameters, with the immanent semantics of a word based on its grammatical constitution and its relation to the primary signification stratum (etymon), following an emic approach, as well as with the mouldable semantics of a word liable to its non-structural phonetic likeness to other words and the constitution of narrative settings in which it is accommodated (paretymon), following an etic approach. Texts that contain specific names or single words orchestrate their semantic interplay, the way in which their meanings fall back on, interact, or even compete with other meanings that can be retrieved by recourse to cognate or comparable narrative environments within earlier or contemporary texts. Keeping this in mind, I turn to Pindar's Celedones.

Ian Rutherford has ingeniously suggested that the Celedones sway between a literal and a metaphorical sense of Pindar's concern with the production of poetry. He views the Celedones on the one hand as remnants of an obscure mythology attached to Delphi and on the other as exponents of the choral dynamics inherent in the songs linked with Apollo's most celebrated cult site.Footnote ⁷ Thus, the Celedones serve the purpose of employing mythology as a lens for the pragmatic aspects of choral poetry and, on a further level, of projecting a self-referential viewpoint on the pertinence of the sort of Delphic song they produce. Let me take a close look at the lines in question (Pind. Pae. 8.68–79):

Although the Celedones’ singing capacity appears extraordinary, the impact it had on the visitors of the temple was catastrophic: the majestic song not only kept them away from their families, but also caused them to perish. It is worth noting that, whereas the Celedon song is tagged twice as ‘honey-sweet’ (75 γλυκείας ὀπός; 78–9 μελίφρονι αὐδᾷ), it still has a disastrous effect on Apollo's temple,Footnote ⁸ which is declared to be a ‘most holy one’ (74 ἱερώτατον). The sons of Cronus, apparently Zeus and Poseidon judging from the mode of their intervention, are responsible for sinking the Celedones along with the temple down deep into the earth. Timothy Power has convincingly argued that, even though this mythical incident belongs to the remote Delphic past, the Celedones make up a ‘cyberchorus’ with the potential of taxing a premature form of the theoric institution for which Delphi had a major reputation. In his own words, ‘Pindar's celedonic “cyberchorus” represent a problematically literal elaboration of the conceit […] but also one that is nonetheless wholly exemplary: the perdurable construction of their golden bodies, and indeed their voices, memorably iconicizes the super-occasional potential of choral performance. […] The “monumental” identity of these standing choruses logically invites “monumental” objective figuration, the fantasy that their members are eternal objects come to daedalic life in song and dance.’Footnote ⁹ In spite of their monumentality, the function of the Celedones entails a paradox: the negative paradigm of the Celedones is a means to the end of extolling the tradition of song with which Apollo's prime cult site had been connected. The main quality of derangement assigned to the celedonic song adds to the extraordinary character of Delphi as site of exceptional choral performance as such, although the consequences of this super-song was often at the cost of Delphic celebrants. To rephrase my point: the Celedones are a symbol of Delphic prowess in song, notwithstanding its controversial impact on their cultic listeners and the Celedones’ own detriment.

Given the paradox of a reputed Delphic past that the Celedones appear to embody, I contend that Pindar introduces a wordplay, which reflects the ambivalent semantics of the Celedon song: the paratactic ordering of ἄειδον and Κηληδόνες (71) captures the semantic proximity of ἀείδω and κελαδέω, both of which denote the act of singing. Given that ἀείδω is in no need of further explication as far as its relation to song performance is concerned, κελαδέω is denotative of the nuclear sense of sound creation ‘to sound, to shout’ and of the extended meaning of song production ‘to sing, to celebrate’.Footnote ¹⁰ What is more, the particular context of the Celedones’ eradication by the sons of Cronus due to the dangerous repercussions of their song encourages the double apprehension of κελαδέω, but it does not fail to suggest the seismic effect of a building's collapse as encapsulated, for instance, in the Gigantic figure of Ἐγκέλαδος. Considering that the Celedones buried deep into the earth, it is all the more striking that Enceladus was a Giant buried under Sicily by Athena during the Gigantomachy.Footnote ¹¹ Callimachus suggests an association between Sicily and the burial ground of Enceladus, which he names as ‘island of three mountaintops’ (Aet. fr. 1.35–6 Pf. αὖθι τὸ δ’ ἐκδύοιμι, τό μοι βάρος ὅσσον ἔπεστι | τριγλώχινι ὀλοῷ νῆσος ἐπ’ Ἐγκελάδῳ).Footnote ¹² Interestingly, Athena is the goddess who endowed the Celedones with their enchanting voice (81–3)Footnote ¹³ and thus appears to have a special relation with figures personifying sound such as Enceladus and song such as the Celedones. The etymological (and semasiological) link of Enceladus with κελαδέω/κέλαδος is made explicit in Eustathius’ attempt to explain the stock epithet κελαδεινή attributed to Artemis in early Greek epic:

In Eustathius’ second take, the epithet κελαδεινήFootnote ¹⁴ is glossed as reference either to the terrible shafts that Artemis carries in her hunting escapades, or to the killing of Enceladus, who tried to rape her, or to the sounds the goddess makes while hunting. What is most significant for my argument is the etymological and semantic relation of Enceladus to the semasiological cluster κελαδέω/κέλαδος ‘[create] roaring sound’, which is openly acknowledged by Eustathius. Against this backdrop, the paretymology of Κηληδόνες from κελαδέω may well refer to the roaring sound raised by their downfall and, by a sort of synecdoche, to the terrible consequences of their enchanting song, which is in fact what Pindar lays emphasis on.

With respect to methodology, my reading of the Celedones in Paean 8 thus far is one that shows how the clustering of ἄειδον and Κηληδόνες suggests a paretymology of the Celedones from κελαδέω and ἀείδω/ᾄδω, thus drawing attention to their ability ‘to produce sound’ and consequently also ‘to sing, to praise’ Apollo at Delphi. This understanding of the Celedones is partly conditioned by the phonetic likeness of the stem κηληδ- to the stem κελαδ- and partly by the concatenated semantic relation of the stem κελαδ- to the stem ἀ(ει)δ-. Both paretyma of the Celedones put forward their conceptualization as choral formation with connotations of turmoil, drawing on the way they are overpowered by the sons of Cronus (the κηληδ-/κελαδ- connection), and with a distinct aptitude for praise ensuing from song (the κελαδ-/ἀ[ει]δ- connection), judging from the resonance of their Delphic song. The signification process attached to the Celedones has a double effect in so far as it produces two competing meanings, one thematizing utter failure and another referring to gifted performance.Footnote ¹⁵ The paradigm of the Celedones showcases the (re-)negotiable character of signification in texts as early as Paean 8. What is more, a convoluted signification process such as the one linked with the Celedones is not just a matter of context but one of intratext as well. In what follows, I peer into Olympian 1 in order to designate the connotations of praise with which κελαδέω is imbued in Pindar, the more so since it is contextualized with ὕμνος, and add credence to the κελαδ-/ἀ(ει)δ- connection of Paean 8. Olympian 1 not only shelters an allomorph of this connection, but also exploits notions familiar from the contextualization of the Celedones in Paean 8 such as the descent from Cronus and holiness. My analysis is set to examine how comparable patterns of paretymologizing as represented by the κελαδ-/ἀ(ει)δ- connection are clustered around specific notional bits within micro-narratives that advance the sense of intratextuality.

Olympian 1 is an important text to look at for putting forth an explanation that seeks to do justice to the semantic contextualization of the Celedones in Paean 8 and to use it as a case in point for Pindar's stance toward song-making. Olympian 1 furnishes a narrative environment that foregrounds κελαδέω in a hymnic context in which several semantic cues familiar from Paean 8 are rearranged in a way useful for gaining insight into the Celedones’ paretymological affinity with κελαδέω. This text follows a different course of argument as it starts with a priamel that justifies the uncontested superiority of water (Ol. 1.1 ἄριστον μὲν ὕδωρ), which stands alone on top in a three-set of further accentuated entries such as gold and agonistic games.Footnote ¹⁶ In Paean 8, gold is the material of which the Celedones are made (Ol. 8.70 χρύσεαι δ’ ἓξ ὑπὲρ αἰετοῦ); thus, the passage in Paean 8 can be read against the ideal of a choral formation in which aesthetic pomp rather than refinement brings about devastation, which involves not only the chorus itself but its audience just as well. Fully in line with the priamel in Olympian 1, Paean 8 is also fond of the triangulation pattern in so far as the golden Celedones feature next to walls and columns of bronzeFootnote ¹⁷ (Pae. 8.68–9 χάλκεοι μὲν τοῖχοι χάλκ[εαί | θ’ ὑπὸ κίονες ἕστασαν). Just as the triangulation pattern in Paean 8 segues into the Celedones’ superb song (ἄειδον Κηληδόνες), the priamel in Olympian 1 ends up stressing how a song set to honour Hieron is well attuned to the singled-out element of the priamel, the Olympic Games (ὕμνος … κελαδεῖν) (Pind. Ol. 1.9–14):

Olympian 1 engineers sympotic imagery according to which a song in praise of Zeus is to be presented in the residence of the Sicilian tyrant Hieron. Apart from the fact that Zeus, contrary to his role as destroyer of the Celedones’ malicious song, is recipient of a pure form of recitation as represented by a homology rendering descent from Cronus (Pae. 8.72 Κρόνου παῖδες ~ Ol. 1.11 Κρόνου παῖδ’),Footnote ¹⁸ the person who offers music to the god is not a gold-made creature but a poetic ‘I’, the historical person Pindar. κελαδεῖν is encompassed by the dynamics of commensality within the context of a blessed personalized host (Ol. 1.12 Ἱέρων)Footnote ¹⁹ rather than a depersonalized artefact (Pae. 8.74 ἱερώτατον), and so destabilizes the negative connotations of the ‘golden’ Κηληδόνες: the elusive holiness of Hieron, as ingrained both in his very name and in his blessed home, proves more effective when compared to the explicitness with which the holiness of celedonic song has been cast aside by the sons of Cronus. Further, the Sicilian background of Hieron encourages a comparison with Enceladus whom Athena has buried under Sicily. Whereas Hieron's residence is replete with the sound of a hymn invested with wisdom, the deranging quality of the Celedones’ song is equivalent to the arrogance of a Giant whose defeat resonates with moral collapse. From this point of view, it is crucial that the -κελ- stem recurs in Olympian 1 for setting up a notional frame based on both intra- and extra-narrative features: the intra-narrative occasion of song performance at the blessed home of Hieron draws on both musical (Ol. 1.10 κελαδεῖν) and geographical (Ol. 1.14 Σικελίᾳ) determinants that exploit the -κελ- stem, whereas the extra-narrative occasion of song performance at Olympia makes use of the -κελ- stem in a way that designates the sort of athletic competition Pindar's song is set to celebrate (κέλητι on the poem's heading).Footnote ²⁰ The recurring -κελ- stem may well be an indication of the implicit manner in which Pindar manipulates the context dealing with the Enceladus-like Celedones in Paean 8 and comes up with a bowdlerized Sicilian context of hymnic praise hinging on blessed Hieron. The amount of similarities certainly points in this direction.

The semantic framework that I have set up for Paean 8 and Olympian 1 can be further substantiated by etymologizing Κηληδόνες from κῆλα ‘shafts, projectiles’.Footnote ²¹ A third stratum of signification regarding the Celedones brings intertextuality into playFootnote ²² and casts aside the merits of intratextuality, which have been subservient to my effort to cull the two rival meanings of Κηληδόνες related to sound and song. This etymology offers an insight into the relation of the Pindaric Celedones to the diction of archaic epic as well as into the extent to which this diction affects contextual nuances in Paean 8. The intervention of the sons of Cronus in the way in which the Delphic temple hosting the Celedones tumbles is reflected in the exclusive connection of κῆλα with Zeus and Apollo in archaic epic. In Homer, the term is used to designate the deadly arrows of Apollo against the Greek army (Hom. Il. 1.53 ἐννῆμαρ μὲν ἀνὰ στρατὸν ᾤχετο κῆλα θεοῖο; 1.382–4 οἳ δέ νυ λαοὶ | θνῇσκον ἐπασσύτεροι, τὰ δ’ ἐπῴχετο κῆλα θεοῖο | πάντῃ ἀνὰ στρατὸν εὐρὺν Ἀχαιῶν) as well as the projectiles of nature, snowflakes and winds, that come from Zeus (Hom. Il. 12.278–80 τῶν δ’, ὥς τε νιφάδες χιόνος πίπτωσι θαμειαὶ | ἤματι χειμερίῳ, ὅτε τ’ ὤρετο μητίετα घεὺς | νιφέμεν ἀνθρώποισι πιφαυσκόμενος τὰ ἃ κῆλα). In Hesiod, κῆλα subsumes the tokens of Zeus's superior power (winds, thunder, lightning and thunderbolt) in his triumph over the Titans (Hes. Theog. 706–9 σὺν δ’ ἄνεμοι ἔνοσίν τε κονίην τ’ ἐσφαράγιζον | βροντήν τε στεροπήν τε καὶ αἰθαλόεντα κεραυνόν, | κῆλα Διὸς μεγάλοιο, φέρον δ’ ἰαχήν τ’ ἐνοπήν τε | ἐς μέσον ἀμφοτέρων). These instances show that κῆλα are the means by which the power of these gods manifests itself, and, on these grounds, they associate Zeus with Apollo through the fact that these deities command the distribution of κῆλα.Footnote ²³ The passage from the Theogony is particularly enlightening because it shows how Zeus reveals himself, among other things, by dint of lightning (Theog. 707 κεραυνόν ~ Pae. 8.73 κεραυνῷ). Both the acoustic and the visual effects of Zeus's revelation in the Theogony help conceptualize the débâcle of the Celedones that Zeus has triggered in Paean 8: the paretymologizing of Κηληδόνες from κῆλα and ἀ-είδω (< ἀ-ηδών ‘nightingale’), which renders them singers of shafts,Footnote ²⁴ bears the Hesiodic connotations of divine retribution, on the one hand, while it also evokes the link of celedonic song with calamity as suggested by Pindar, on the other.Footnote ²⁵ The Pindaric context is contingent upon the Homeric and Hesiodic discourse over the character of divine affliction because it helps Pindar's readers identify one unnamed son of Cronus with Zeus as distributor of κῆλα and also recall Apollo's Iliadic image as ruthless distributor of κῆλα. This interpretation not only points to a third etymological possibility for grasping the name of the Celedones, but also bears out that intratexts are not infrequently in harmony with intertexts, to the upper end of recovering extra signification layers ingrained in a narrative context and of broadening interpretative perspectives.

As it turns out, Paean 8 reworks the insights of archaic epic into the sweeping impact of the divine power of Zeus and Apollo,Footnote ²⁶ and seeks to make a statement on the control Zeus has over unacceptable forms of song making. However, this is a two-way street. Paean 8 also engages in dialogue with Olympian 1, which demonstrates that Zeus patronizes songs that exert a beneficial influence on mankind.Footnote ²⁷ The Sicilian Hieron and the kind of song he sponsors in honour of Zeus emerge as an affirmative peer of the Celedones whose divine-sanctioned elimination resides in their seductive potential and subsequent failure to stand for a choral song pertinent to Apollo's cult in Delphi.

All in all, I have argued that the signification of Pindar's Celedones in Paean 8 depends on intratextual and intertextual evidence, next to the double take on onomastics it ventures within its own narrative setting. Paean 8 forges a paretymological connection of Κηληδόνες with ἀείδω, in the obvious way of parataxis, and κελαδέω, in the implicit fashion of synecdoche. As intratext I have pointed out Olympian 1, which endorses the semantic affinity of κελαδέω with praise in a context that has much in common with the respective context in Paean 8. Selected intertexts from the Iliad and the Theogony are suggestive of a paretymologizing from κῆλα and ἀείδω, thus making the two germane Pindaric attributes of the Celedones, divine-sanctioned catastrophe and exceptional song, all the more redeemable by aid of external evidence. My reading of the (re-)significative potential of the Celedones allows us to treat them as metatextual token receptive to external nuances right next to the internal ones, in an attempt to enrich not just its meaningFootnote ²⁸ but also its generic identity with reference to song: a paeanic (?) performance at Delphi condemned by the sons of Cronus is a compliment for Pindar's paeanic performance at Delphi.