Homer’s Iliad: Book XIV Homer’s Iliad 9783110569995, 9783110568868

Citation preview

Homer’s Iliad The Basel Commentary

Homer’s Iliad The Basel Commentary

Editors Anton Bierl and Joachim Latacz Managing Editor Magdalene Stoevesandt General Editor of the English Edition S. Douglas Olson

Homer’s Iliad The Basel Commentary Edited by Anton Bierl and Joachim Latacz

Book XIV By Martha Krieter-Spiro Translated by Benjamin W. Millis and Sara Strack and edited by S. Douglas Olson

The publication of Homer’s Iliad: The Basel Commentary has been made possible by the kind financial support from the following organizations: Stavros Niarchos Foundation Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft (FAG), Basel L. & Th. La Roche Stiftung, Basel

ISBN 978-3-11-056886-8 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-056999-5 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-056940-7 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2018 Walter de Gruyter Inc., Boston/Berlin Typesetting: Dörlemann Satz GmbH & Co. KG, Lemförde Printing and binding: Hubert & Co. GmbH & Co. KG, Göttingen ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

Table of Contents Preface  VII Preface to the English Edition  IX Notes for the Reader (including list of abbreviations)  XI 24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language (R)  1 Overview of the Action in Book 14  9 Commentary  11 Appendix topographica: the encampment of ships and the battlefield, by Joachim Latacz  251 Bibliographic Abbreviations  269

Preface Book 14 of the Iliad was the focus of particular interest already at an early date: the story of the cunning seduction of the father of the gods by his own wife offered the audience entertainment and a welcome reprieve after three Books of battle descriptions (Books 11–13). The depiction of the gods in this Book was the subject of intense debate already in antiquity. More recently, questions concerning the influence of Near Eastern ideas have increasingly come to the fore. Finally, the consultation of the leaders in the initial section of the Book has received particu­ lar attention, as has the final section with its crescendo painting a vivid image of the increasing Achaian pressure on the Trojans. This commentary is meant to contribute to the understanding of this intrigu­ ing Book. It follows on from the previously published volumes of the Basel Com­ mentary and was written in accord with their structure and aims as laid out in the preface to Book 1. In order to allow each user to draw his or her own conclusions, the commentary, where required, outlines the relevant questions and issues in as much detail as necessary, offers a judgment on the matter, and provides bi­bli­ ography for various directions in research, include those here rejected. Topics discussed in other volumes are in general referenced only briefly. This commentary could not have been completed without the generous support of the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der wissenschaft­ lichen Forschung, the Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft Basel, the Max Geld­ ner-Stiftung Basel, the Frey-Clavel-Stiftung Basel and the Hamburger Stiftung zur Förderung von Wissenschaft und Kultur, as well as the University of Basel. I accord­ ingly acknowledge deep gratitude to all the institutions mentioned. My continued involvement with the Basel Commentary is owed to my teach­ ers, Prof. Dr. Joachim Latacz and Prof. Dr. Anton Bierl. By their keen interest and numerous suggestions, both contributed decisively to the solution of many ques­ tions, for which I am exceedingly grateful. Professor Latacz also enriched the commentary by contributing a topographic appendix (see below p.  251  ff.), for which I thank him sincerely. A very special acknowledgement is due my colleagues, Dr.  Marina Coray, Dr. Magdalene Stoevesandt, Dr. Claude Brügger and Dr. Katharina Wesselmann. They never left me in the lurch when I came to Basel and once again needed help, and they saved me from many errors. My gratitude to them is immense. Special thanks for numerous suggestions are also due Dr.  Rudolf Führer, Prof. Dr.  Fritz Graf, Prof. Dr.  Martin A. Guggisberg, Prof. Dr.  Irene J.F. de Jong, lic. phil. Sebastiaan R. van der Mije, Prof. Dr. René Nünlist, Prof. Dr. Jürgen von Ungern-Sternberg, Prof. Dr. Martin L. West and Prof. Dr. Rudolf Wachter. I am also indebted to lic. phil. Christoph Schneider of the Universitätsbibliothek Basel, the

VIII 

 Iliad 14

staff at the Zentralbibliothek Zürich, and to Serena Pirrotta and Katharina Legutke at Walter de Gruyter. I would also like to thank the directors of the Institute for Classical Philology at Zurich for the privileges I have enjoyed there as a visitor for nearly 20 years. Finally, thanks are due to my family – my parents, husband, and children. Their interest in my work and their patience and understanding made this com­ mentary possible in the first place; in particular, I am grateful to my husband for his selfless activity in the background. My parents have always generously supported my philological interests, but beyond that, my late father supported interest in ancient studies generally. This commentary is thus dedicated, as a small token of gratitude, to my mother and to the memory of my father; may it contribute to enjoying Homer in the way they do. Zurich, June 2015

Martha Krieter-Spiro

Preface to the English Edition This is the slightly revised translation of the German commentary from 2015. Besides correcting some mistakes, I took into account literature that has appeared after the original publication. This English edition would not have been possible without the gener­ ous support of the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, the Freiwillige Akademische Gesellschaft (FAG) and the L. & Th. La Roche Stiftung as well as the publisher Walter de Gruyter, to all of whom I owe extraordinary gratitude. Many thanks are due as well to the two directors of the Homer Commentary, Prof. Dr. Anton Bierl and Prof. Dr. Joachim Latacz, for initiating and supporting the translation project with considerable effort. I feel especially indebted to the translators, Dr.  Ben­ jamin Millis and Dr. Sara Strack, as well as to Prof. Dr. Douglas Olson, general editor of the English edition, for their thorough work. Once again they managed to translate a commentary teeming with special terms, and even to contribute corrections of errors. I am very grateful for their patience; they never ceased to respond to my concerns. For their readiness to answer my questions I am obliged to my colleagues Dr. Katharina Wesselmann and Dr. Magdalene Stoevesandt. To all, as Hera does in this rhapsody of the Iliad (line 235), I extend my lasting grat­ itude. Zurich, August 2017

Martha Krieter-Spiro

Notes for the Reader 1. In the commentary, four levels of explanation are distinguished graphically: a) The most important explanations for users of all audiences are set in regular type. Knowledge of Greek is not required here; Greek words are given in transliteration (exception: lemmata from LfgrE, see COM 41 [1]). b) More detailed explanations of the Greek text are set in medium type. These sections correspond to a standard philological commentary. c) Specific information on particular sub-fields of Homeric scholarship is set in small type. d) The ‘elementary section’, designed to facilitate an initial approach to the text especially for school and university students, appears beneath a dividing line at the foot of the page. The elementary section discusses Homeric word forms in particu­ lar, as well as prosody and meter. It is based on the ‘24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language’, to which reference is made with the abbreviation ‘R’. Particularly frequent phenomena (e.  g. the lack of an augment) are not noted throughout but are instead recalled ca. every 50 verses. — Information relating to Homeric vocabulary is largely omitted; for this, the reader is referred to the specialized dictionaries of Cunliffe and Autenrieth/Kaegi. Complex issues are addressed in the elementary section as well as the main commentary; they are briefly summarized in the elementary section and discussed in greater detail in the main commentary. Such passages are marked in the elementary section with an arrow (↑). In con­ trast, references of the type ‘cf. 73n.’ in the elementary section refer to notes within the elementary section itself, never to the main commen­ tary. 2. The chapters of the Prolegomena volume are cited by the following abbrevia­ tions: CG/CH Cast of characters in the Iliad: Gods/Human Beings COM Introduction: Commenting on Homer FOR Formulaity and Orality G Grammar of Homeric Greek HT History of the text M Homeric Meter (including prosody) MYC Homeric-Mycenaean Word Index NTHS New Trends in Homeric Schorlarship

XII 

 Iliad 14

xxxP

Superscript ‘P’ following a term refers to the definitions of terms in ‘Homeric Poetics in Keywords’. STR Structure of the Iliad In addition: R refers to the ‘24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language’ in the present commentary (below, pp. 1  ff.). 3. Textual criticism The commentary is based on the Teubner text of M.L. West. In some pas­ sages, the commentators favor decisions differing from that edition. In these cases, both versions of the lemma are provided; West’s text is shown first in square brackets, followed by the version favored in the commentary. 4. English lemmata The English lemmata in the commentary are taken from the translation of R. Lattimore. In places where the commentators favor a different rendering, both versions are of the lemma are provided; the rendering of Lattimore is shown first in square brackets, followed by the version favored in the com­ mentary. 5. Quotations of non-English secondary literature Quotations from secondary literature originally written in German, French or Italian are given in English translation; in such cases, the bibliographic ref­ erence is followed by the notation ‘transl.’ In the case of terms that are espe­ cially important or open to misinterpretation, the original is given in square brackets. 6. Formulaic language On the model of ‘Ameis-Hentze(-Cauer)’, repeated verses and verse-halves are usually noted (on this, cf. COM 30). Other formulaic elements (verse beginning and verse end formulae in particular) are only highlighted to the extent necessary to convey an overall impression of the formulaic character of Homeric language.

7. Type-scenesP For each type-scene, the commentary provides at the appropriate place an ‘ideal version’ by compiling a cumulative, numbered list of all characteristic elements of the scene that occur in the Iliad and/or Odyssey; the numbers of the elements actually realized in the passage in question are printed in bold. Each subsequent occurrence refers back to this primary treatment and uses numbering and bold print in accord with the same principle.



Notes for the Reader 

 XIII

8. Abbreviations

(a) Bibliographic abbreviations Bibliographic abbreviations are listed below, pp. 269  ff.



(b) Primary literature (on the editions used, see below pp. 272  ff.) Aesch. Aeschylus (Pers. = Persians; test. = testimonium) Apoll. Rhod. Apollonius Rhodius Archil. Archilochus Aristoph. Aristophanes (Av. = Aves [Birds]) Aristot. Aristotle (HA = Historia animalium [History of Animals]; Metaph. = Metaphysics) Chrest. Chrestomathia (Proclus’ summary of the content of the ‘Epic Cycle’) Cypr. Cypria (in the ‚Epic Cycle’) Eur. Euripides (El. = Electra; Hipp. = Hippolytus) Eust. Eustathius Hdt. Herodotus Hes. Hesiod (Op. = Opera [Works and Days]; Th. = Theogony) ‘Hes.’ Works ascribed to Hesiod (Sc. = Scutum [Shield of Herakles]; fr. = fragment) h.Hom. A collective term for the Homeric Hymns  h.Ap., Individual Homeric Hymns: to Apollo,  h.Bacch., – to Bacchus/Dionysus  h.Cer., – to Ceres/Demeter, – to Mercury/Hermes and  h.Merc., – to Venus/Aphrodite  h.Ven. Hyginus (Fab. = Fabulae) Hyg. Iliad Il. Il. parv. Ilias parva [Little Iliad] (in the ‚Epic Cycle’) Iliou Persis [Sack of Troy] (in the ‚Epic Cycle’) Il. Pers. Odyssey Od. Paus. Pausanias Pindar (Ol. = Olympian Odes; Pyth. = Pythian Odes [victory Pind. poems]) Plat. Plato (Apol. = Apology; Crat. = Cratylus; Gorg. = Gorgias; Leg. = Leges [Laws]; Menex. = Menexenus; Rep. = De re publica [Republic]) Work ascribed to Plato (Min. = Minos) ‘Plat.’ Proclus (see above under Chrest.) Procl.

XIV 

 Iliad 14

‘Ps.-Apollod.’ schol. schol. A (etc.) Soph. Theb. Vit. = Epigr.

‘Pseudo-Apollodorus’ (without additional specification: Bibliotheca [Library]) scholion, scholia scholion in manuscript A (etc.) Sophocles (OC = Oedipus Coloneus [Oedipus at Colonus]) Thebaïs (in the ‚Epic Cycle’) Vita Homeri Herodotea

(c) Other abbreviations (Commonly used abbreviations, as well as those listed under 2 above, are not included here.) * reconstructed form < developed from > developed into | marks verse beginning or end ↑ in the elementary section, refers to the relevant lemma in the main commentary † locus desperatus a/b after a verse number  indicates the 1st/2nd verse half a/b after a verse number  indicates additional verses listed solely in the app. crit. A 1, B 1 (etc.) indicate caesura in the hexameter (cf. M 6) app. crit. apparatus criticus (West edition) fr. fragment (frr. = fragments) Gr. Greek IE Indo-European imper. imperative impf. imperfect inf. infinitive instr. instrumental ms., mss. manuscript, manuscripts n. note Place name PN 1 ‘77n.’ refers to the commentary on verse 77 in the present volume, whereas 1.162n. refers to the commentary on verse 162 of Book 1. – ‘In 19.126 (see ad loc.)’ and ‘cf. 24.229  ff. (see ad locc.)’ refer primarily to the relevant passages in the Homeric text, secondarily to one or more ­commentary entries relating to those passages. (In the first example, the commentary entry may be found under 19.126–127; in the second, relevant information can be found under 24.229–234 and 24.229–231.)



Notes for the Reader 

sc. scilicet (i.  e. ‘supply’ or ‘namely’) subjunc. subjunctive sub voce, sub vocibus s.  v., s.vv. verse beginning VB VE verse end VH verse half v.l. varia lectio (i.  e. ‘variant reading’) voc. vocative

 XV

24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language (R) The following compilation of the characteristics of Homeric language emphasizes its deviations from Attic grammar. Linguistic notes are included only exceptionally (but can be found in the ‘Grammar of Homeric language’ [G] in the Prolego­ mena volume; references to the relevant paragraphs of that chapter are here shown in the right margin). R1   1.1   1.2   1.3

Homeric language is an artificial language, characterized by: meter (which can result in a variety of remodellings); the technique of oral poetry (frequently repeated content is rendered in formulae, often with metrically different variants); different dialects: Ionic is the basic dialect; interspersed are forms from other dialects, particularly Aeolic (so-called Aeolicisms), that often provide variants according to 1.1 and 1.2.

G 3 3 2

Phonology, metric, prosody R2

Sound change of ᾱ > η: In the Ionic dialect, old ᾱ has changed to η; in non-Attic Ionic (i.  e. also in Homer), this occurs also after ε, ι, ρ (1.30: πάτρης). When ᾱ is nonetheless found in Homer, it is generally: ‘late’, i.  e. it developed after the Ionic-Attic sound change (1.3: ψυχάς); or adopted from the Aeolic poetic tradition (1.1: θεά).

5–8

R3

Vowel shortening: Long vowels (esp. η) before another vowel (esp. ο/ω/α) in medial position are frequently shortened, although not consistently (e.  g. gen. pl. βασιλήων rather than the metrically impossible four-syllable -έων; the related phenomenon of quantitative metathesis [lengthening of a second short vowel] often does not occur [e.  g. gen. sing. βασιλῆος rather than -έως]).

39  f.

R4

Digamma (ϝ): The Ionic dialect of Homer no longer used the phoneme /w/ (like Engl. will). It is, however, attested in Mycenaean, as well as in some dialects still in the alphabetic period (Mycenaean ko-wa /korwā/, Corinthian ϙόρϝα); in part deducible etymologically (e.  g. Homeric κούρη – with compensatory lengthening after the disappearance of the digamma – in contrast to Attic κόρη).

  2.1   2.2

  4.1

  4.2

19

27

2 

  4.3   4.4   4.5   4.6 R5   5.1

  5.2

  5.3

  5.4   5.5

  5.6   5.7

 Iliad 14

In Addition, digamma can often be deduced in Homer on the basis of the meter; thus in the case of hiatus (see R 5) without elision (1.7: Ἀτρεΐδης τε (ϝ)άναξ); hiatus without shortening of a long vowel at word end (1.321: τώ (ϝ)οι, cf. R 5.5); a single consonant ‘making position’ (1.70: ὃς (ϝ)είδη). Occasionally, digamma is no longer taken into account (1.21: υἱὸν ἑκηβόλον, originally ϝεκ-). Hiatus: The clash of a vocalic word end with a vocalic word beginning (hiatus ‘gaping’) is avoided through: elision: short vowels and -αι in endings of the middle voice are elided (1.14: στέμματ’ ἔχων; 1.117: βούλομ’ ἐγώ; 5.33: μάρνασθ’ ὁπποτέροισι), occasionally also -οι in μοι/σοι (1.170; hiatus that results from elision is left unchanged (1.2: ἄλγε’ ἔθηκεν); ny ephelkystikon (movable ny): only after a short vowel (ε and ι), esp. dat. pl. -σι(ν); 3rd sing. impf./aor./perf. -ε(ν); 3rd sing. and pl. -σι(ν); the modal particle κε(ν); the suffix -φι(ν), cf. R 11.4; the suffix -θε(ν), cf. R 15.1; ny ephelkystikon also provides metrically convenient variants; contraction across word boundaries (noted as crasis: τἄλλα, χἡμεῖς). – Hiatus is admissible predominantly in the case of: loss of digamma (cf. R 4.3); so-called correption: a long vowel/diphthong at word end is shortened (1.17: Ἀτρεΐδαι τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἐϋκνήμιδες; 1.15 [with synizesis: R 7]: χρυσέῳ  ͜ ἀνὰ σκήπτρῳ); metrical caesura or more generally a semantic break; after words ending in -ι and ‘small words’ such as πρό and ὅ.

22 21 24 26

30/ 37

33

31

34 35

36 37

R6

Vocalic contraction (e.  g. following the loss of intervocalic /w/ [digamma], /s/ or /j/) is frequently not carried out in Homeric Greek (1.74: κέλεαι [2nd sing. mid., instead of Attic -ῃ]; 1.103: μένεος [gen. sing., instead of -ους]).

43– 45

R7

Synizesis: Occasionally, two vowels are to be read as a single syllable, especially in the case of quantitative metathesis (1.1: Πηληϊάδεω:  ͜ R 3) but also in the gen. pl. -έων. (Synizesis is indicated by a sublinear curved line connecting the affected vowels, 1.18: θεοί.)  ͜

46



24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language (R) 

R8

Diectasis: Contracted forms (e.  g. ὁρῶντες) may be ‘stretched (ὁρόωντες); the metrically necessary prosodic shape of older uncontracted forms (*ὁράοντες, ⏖–⏑) is thus artificially reconstructed. Similarly, the aor. inf. -εῖν is written -έειν (rather than the older *-έεν).

R9

Change in consonant quantity creates metrically convenient variants (which usually derive originally from different dialects: R 1.3): τόσ(σ)ος, ποσ(σ)ί, Ὀδυσ(σ)εύς, ἔσ(σ)εσθαι, τελέσ(σ)αι; Ἀχιλ(λ) εύς; ὅπ(π)ως, etc. Variation at word beginning creates similar flexibility in π(τ) όλεμος, π(τ)όλις.

  9.1   9.2 R 10

 10.1  10.2

Adaptation to the meter: Three (or more) short syllables in a row, or a single short between two longs (both metrically impossible), are avoided by: metrical lengthening (ᾱ᾽θάνατος, δῑογενής, οὔρεα rather than ὄρεα; μένεα πνείοντες rather than πνέ-); changes in word formation (πολεμήϊος rather than πολέμιος; ἱππιοχαίτης rather than ἱππο-).

 3

48

17 18 49  f.

Morphology Homeric Greek declines in ways that sometimes vary from Attic forms or represent additional forms: R 11  11.1

 11.2

 11.3

Especially noteworthy in the case of nouns are: 1st declension: gen. pl. -ᾱ῾ων (1.604: Μουσάων) and -έων (1.273: βουλέων); dat. pl. -ῃσι (2.788: θύρῃσι) and -ῃς (1.238: παλάμῃς); gen. sing. masc. -ᾱο (1.203: Ἀτρεΐδαο) and -εω (1.1: Πηληϊάδεω); 2nd declension: gen. sing. -οιο (1.19: Πριάμοιο); dat. pl. -οισι (1.179: ἑτάροισι); 3rd declension: gen. sing. of i-stems: -ιος (2.811: πόλιος) and -ηος (16.395: πόληος); gen./dat./acc. sing. of ēu-stems: -ῆος, -ῆϊ, -ῆα (1.1: Ἀχιλῆος; 1.9: βασιλῆϊ; 1.23: ἱερῆα);

68

69

70– 76

4 

 11.4 R 12  12.1

 12.2  12.3

 12.4  12.5

R 13

R 14  14.1

 Iliad 14

dat. pl. -εσσι in the case of s-stems and other consonant stems (1.235: ὄρεσσι); gen./dat. sing./pl. in -φι (1.38: ἶφι; 4.452: ὄρεσφι); often metrically convenient variants (e.  g. βίηφι beside βίῃ). Varying stem formation (and thus declension) appears in the following nouns among others: νηῦς: gen. sing. νηός, νεός, dat. νηΐ, acc. νῆα, νέα; nom. pl. νῆες, νέες, gen. νηῶν, νεῶν, dat. νηυσί, νήεσσι, νέεσσι, acc. νῆας, νέας. πολύς, πολύ (u-stem) and πολλός, πολλή, πολλόν (o/ā-stem) are both fully declined. υἱός: gen. sing. υἱέος, υἷος, dat. υἱέϊ, υἱεῖ, υἷϊ, acc. υἱόν, υἱέα, υἷα; nom. pl. υἱέες, υἱεῖς, υἷες, gen. υἱῶν, dat. υἱάσι, υἱοῖσι, acc. υἱέας, υἷας. Ἄρης: gen. Ἄρηος, Ἄρεος, dat. Ἄρηϊ, Ἄρεϊ, Ἄρῃ, acc. Ἄρηα, Ἄρην, voc. Ἆρες, Ἄρες. Similarly complex declensions occur in the case of γόνυ (gen. γούνατος beside γουνός, nom./acc. pl. γούνατα beside γοῦνα), δόρυ (δούρατος, -τι etc. beside δουρός, -ί etc.); Ζεύς (Διός, Διΐ, Δία beside Ζηνός, Ζηνί, Ζῆν/Ζῆνα). Among other unusual comparative forms note: χερείων, χειρότερος, χερειότερος (beside χείρων); ἀρείων (beside ἀμείνων). Some omparatives and superlatives are formed from nouns, e.  g. βασιλεύτερος, βασιλεύτατος. Varying pronoun forms: Personal pronoun: 1st sing. gen. ἐμεῖο, ἐμέο, μεο, ἐμέθεν (very rare: μοι, e.  g. 1.37) 2nd sing. gen. σεῖο, σέο, σεο, σέθεν; dat. τοι 3rd sing. gen. εἷο, ἕο, ἕθεν, ἑθεν; dat. οἷ, ἑοῖ, οἱ; acc. ἕ, ἑέ, ἑ, μιν nom. ἄμμες; gen. ἡμέων, ἡμείων; dat. ἧμιν, ἄμμι; acc. 1st pl. ἡμέας, ἄμμε 2nd pl. nom. ὔμμες; gen. ὑμέων, ὑμείων; dat. ὔμμι; acc. ὑμέας, ὔμμε 3rd pl. gen. σφείων, σφεων; dat. σφισι, σφι; acc. σφέας, σφε, σφεας, σφας 1st dual nom./acc. νώ, νῶϊ; gen./dat. νῶϊν 2nd dual nom./acc. σφώ, σφῶϊ; gen./dat. σφῶϊν 3rd dual nom./acc. σφωε; gen./dat. σφωϊν

66

77

57 53

53 53/ 77

79

81



 14.2

 14.3

 14.4

 14.5

R 15

 15.1  15.2  15.3 R 16  16.1

 16.2

 16.3

24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language (R) 

 5

Interrogative/indefinite pronoun: gen. sing. τέο/τεο; dat. sing. τεῳ; gen. pl. τέων; correspondingly ὅττεο, ὅτεῳ etc. Anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (= ‘article’, cf. R 17): the same endings as nouns (R 11.1–2); nom. pl. masc./fem. often with an initial τ (τοί, ταί). Possessive pronoun: 1st pl. ᾱ῾μός 2nd sing./pl. τεός ῡ῾μός 3rd sing./pl. ἑός, ὅς σφός Relative pronoun: The anaphoric demonstrative pronoun frequently functions as a relative pronoun (14.3).

84

Adverbial forms straddle the border between morphology (cases) and word formation. They can form metrically convenient variants to the true cases: ‘genitive’: -θεν (whence?, see also R 14.1), e.  g. κλισίηθεν (1.391); ‘dative’: -θι (where?), e.  g. οἴκοθι (8.513); ‘accusative’: -δε (whither?), e.  g. ἀγορήνδε (1.54).

66

For verbs, the following points deserve particular attention: Augment: frequently absent (which can lead to assimilation, e.  g. ἔμβαλε rather than ἐνέβαλε, κάλλιπον rather than κατέλιπον, cf. R 20.1); used to fit the meter. Personal endings: 2nd sing. -σθα (1.554: ἐθέλῃσθα) 1st pl. mid. -μεσθα beside -μεθα (1.140: μεταφρασόμεσθα) 3rd pl. mid. (predominantly perf.) -ᾰται/-ᾰτο beside -νται/-ντο (1.239: εἰρύαται) 3rd pl. -ν (with preceding short vowel) beside -σαν (with corresponding long vowel), esp. aor. pass. -θεν beside -θησαν (1.57: ἤγερθεν) The difference from Attic forms frequently lies merely in the omission of contraction (cf. R 6) between verbal stem and ending. Subjunctive: frequently with a short vowel in the case of athematic stems (ἴομεν from εἶμι, εἴδομεν from οἶδα); formed like the fut. ind. in the case of σ-aorists (1.80: χώσεται). – In the 3rd sing. subjunc., the ending -ησι(ν) (1.408: ἐθέλησιν) is found beside -ῃ.

83

82

83

85

86/ 93

89

6 

 Iliad 14

 16.4

 16.5  16.6

Infinitive: Aeolic -μεν(αι) (predominantly athematic verbs) beside Ionic -ναι (e.  g. ἔμ(μ)εν and ἔμ(μ)εναι beside εἶναι); Aeolic -ῆναι beside Ionic -εῖν (2.107: φορῆναι); thematic -έμεν(αι) (1.547: ἀκουέμεν; Od. 11.380: ἀκουέμεναι); thematic aor. -έειν (2.393: φυγέειν; 15.289: θανέειν). Forms with -σκ- stand for repeated action in the past (1.490: πωλέσκετο). Especially noteworthy as variant forms of εἰμί are: pres. ind.: 2nd sing. ἐσσι, 1st pl. εἰμεν, 3rd pl. ἔασι(ν); impf.: 1st sing. ἦα, 3rd sing. ἦεν and ἔην, 3rd pl. ἔσαν (cf. 16.1); fut.: 3rd sing. ἔσ(σ)εται; part. ἐών, -όντος; for the inf., 16.4.

87

60 90

Syntax R 17

ὅ, ἥ, τό (on the declension, R 14.3) is rarely a ‘pure article’ and instead generally has an older anaphoric demonstrative function.

R 18  18.1

Number: The dual is relatively common; forms of the dual and the plural can be freely combined. The plural is sometimes used simply for metrical convenience (1.45: τόξα).

 18.2 R 19  19.1

 19.2

R 20  20.1

Use of the cases: Accusative of respect is especially common (among other instances in the so-called σχῆμα καθ’ ὅλον καὶ κατὰ μέρος: two accusatives indicate respectively the whole and the part of something, 1.362: τί δέ σε φρένας ἵκετο πένθος;). Indications of origin, place or direction sometimes occur with no preposition (1.359: ἀνέδυ … ἁλός; 1.45: τόξ᾿ ὤμοισιν ἔχων; 1.322: ἔρχεσθον κλισίην). Prepositions: show a greater diversity of forms: ἄν (= ἀνά; with apocope, frequently with assimilation: ἂμ πεδίον, 5.87; cf. R 16.1); ἐς (= εἰς); εἰν, ἐνί, εἰνί (= ἐν); κάτ (= κατά; see on ἀνά); πάρ, παραί (= παρά); προτί, ποτί (= πρός); ξύν (= σύν); ὑπαί (= ὑπό);

99

97

97

59

24 Rules Relating to Homeric Language (R) 

 7

 20.2

are more independent in use and position (1) with regard to nouns (i.  e. are used in a more adverbial manner), frequently also placed after them as ‘postpositions’ in so-called anastrophe (and thus often with an acute accent on the first syllable: e.  g. ᾧ ἔπι, 1.162); (2) with regard to verbs (i.  e. not necessarily connected to the relevant verb as a preverb, so-called tmesis: ἐπὶ μῦθον ἔτελλε, 1.25); this produces metrically convenient variants.

98

R 21  21.1

Use of the moods: The moods and the modal particle (κε/κεν = ἄν) follow rules that are less strict than those described in grammars of Attic Greek. The functions of the subjunctive and the future cannot always be sharply distinguished.

100

Characteristic Homeric conjunctions are: conditional: αἰ (= εἰ); temporal: εἷος/εἵως (= ἕως) ‘while’, ἦμος ‘when’, εὖτε ‘when’, ὄφρα ‘while, until’; causal: ὅ τι, ὅ; comparative: ἠΰτε ‘like’; final: ὄφρα.

101

R 23

Alternation of voice: In the case of some verbs, the act. and mid. forms are used as convenient metrical variants with no discernible difference in meaning, e.  g. φάτο/ἔφη, ὀΐω/ὀΐομαι.

100

R 24

Particles are sometimes used in ways that differ from later usage: ἄρα, ἄρ, ῥα, ῥ’: signals or suggests that something is evident, roughly ‘therefore, naturally, as is well known’; probably often used mainly for metrical reasons (especially ῥ’ to avoid hiatus, cf. R 5). ἀτάρ, αὐτάρ (metrical variants, etymologically distinct but used interchangeably in Homer with no distinction in meaning): ‘but, still’; sometimes adversative (1.127: σὺ μὲν … αὐτὰρ Ἀχαιοί), sometimes progressive (1.51: αὐτὰρ ἔπειτα), rarely apodotic (like δέ, see below). apodotic δέ: δέ can introduce a main clause (apodosis) after a preceding dependent clause (protasis) (e.  g. 1.58). Occasionally ἀλλά (e.  g. 1.82), αὐτάρ (e.  g. 3.290, cf. 1.133), and καί (e.  g. 1.494) are used apodotically as well.

101



 21.2 R 22  22.1  22.2  22.3  22.4  22.5

 24.1

 24.2

 24.3

8   24.4

 24.5  24.6

 24.7

 24.8  24.9  24.10

 24.11  24.12

 24.13

 Iliad 14

ἦ: ‘really, actually’; almost exclusively in direct speech. – Weakened in the compounds ἤτοι (e.  g. 1.68), ἠμὲν … ἠδέ ‘on the one hand … on the other hand’ and ἠδέ ‘and’. κε(ν): = ἄν (cf. R 21.1). μέν: used not only to introduce an antithesis (with a subsequent δέ) but also commonly in its original, purely emphatic sense (≈ μήν, μάν; e.  g. 1.216). μήν, μάν: emphatic; when standing alone, almost always in negative sentences (e.  g. 4.512) or with imperatives (e.  g. 1.302); otherwise it strengthens other particles, esp. ἦ and καί (e.  g. 2.370, 19.45). οὐδέ/μηδέ: these connectives can occur after affirmative clauses, not only after negative ones as in Attic. οὖν: almost always in conjunction with temporal ἐπεί or ὡς, ‘(when) therefore’ (e.  g. 1.57). περ: stresses the preceding word; specifically concessive, esp. with participles (1.586: κηδομένη περ ‘although saddened’); intensive (1.260: ἀρείοσι ἠέ περ ὑμῖν ‘with even better men than you’); limitative-contrasting (1.353: τιμήν περ ‘at least honor’). ‘epic τε’: occurs in generalizing statements (e.  g. 1.86, 1.218), esp. common in the ‘as’ part of similes (e.  g. 2.90). τοι: ethical dat. of the 2nd pers. personal pronoun fossilized as a particle (and often not clearly distinguishable from it); appeals to the special attention of the addressee, roughly ‘imagine, I tell you’. τοιγάρ: ‘so then’ (to be distinguished from τοι ≈ σοι; the initial element belongs to the demonstrative stem το-, cf. τώ ‘therefore’); in Homer, it always introduces the answer to a request (e.  g. 1.76).

Overview of the Action in Book 14 1–152



1–26



27–40



41–134



135–152

Consultation of the Achaians and their revitalization by Poseidon Nestor recognizes the danger the Greeks face and provides information concerning the current state of battle to the wounded leaders Agamemnon, Odysseus and Diomedes, who – alarmed by the noise of battle – approach from their ships, which have been hauled up onto the beach. The leaders consult with each other and return to the battle raging further inland in order to spur on fighters who are hanging back. Poseidon encourages the Greeks and initiates their push against the Trojans. Startled by the surging battle noise, Nestor emerges from his hut to assess the situation. It appears him as extremely dangerous for the Greeks, and he accordingly ponders whether to return to battle or to approach Agamemnon. In the end, he sets out to meet with Agamemnon. Nestor meets with the wounded leaders Agamemnon, Odysseus, and Diomedes. Their geographical distance from the events of the battle is explained via the location of the individual ships and of the fleet as a whole. The leaders consult regarding possible ways out of the crisis; they ultimately follow Diomedes’ advice to return to the battlefield and spur on the others. Poseidon revitalizes Agamemnon with a speech and the Achaians with a mighty battle-cry.

153–353 Deception of Zeus by Hera (Diós apátē) When Hera becomes aware of Poseidon’s efforts, she decides to distract Zeus from his control of the events of battle in order to aid the Achaians. She makes herself beautiful, and manages to seduce her husband and lull him into a deep sleep with the help of Aphrodite, goddesss of love, and Hypnos, god of sleep (whom she tricks and wins over, respectively). 153–186 Hera’s motivation and her decision to help Poseidon; Hera beautifies herself. 187–224 Hera asks Aphrodite for her love-band and receives it. 225–291 Hera bribes Hypnos to cause Zeus to fall into a deep sleep. 292–353 Hera tempts her husband into having intercourse with her. Zeus sleeps.

10 

 Iliad 14

354–522 The Trojans are forced back (Palíōxis) Poseidon learns that Zeus is asleep and now aids the Achaians to a greater extent and (in contrast to 136) openly. He orders an exchange of weapons between the lesser and greater warriors and leads the Achaian army, thus strengthened, into battle. The two armies meet. Hektor is badly wounded by Aias and must be carried off the battlefield. The Achaians gradually prevail in massed battle, and the Trojans flee in panic while suffering heavy losses. 354–401 Support by Poseidon; the armies clash. 402–439 A duel between Aias and Hektor: Hektor attacks Aias but misses, and Aias in turn wounds him so badly with a stone that Hektor loses consciousness and must be carried to safety behind the battle lines. 440–505 Five individual confrontations show the Achaians gaining the upper hand. 506–522 The particularly gruesome killing of a compatriot triggers the panicked flight of the Trojans. They are pursued by the Achaians, who kill many of them.

Commentary Book 14 continues the portrayal of the events of Day 26 of the action of the epic, corresponding to Day 3 of the battle (STR 21 Fig. 1). After a confrontation with Agamemnon, Achilleus withdrew from battle, while his mother Thetis wrested from Zeus a promise that he would allow the Achaians to be forced all the way back to their ships by the Trojans (1.12b–2.47). Eventually, the Trojans managed to cross the ditch and the wall in front of the encampment of ships (Books 8–12). Against this background, a retardationP that extends across Books 13 and 14 is inserted into the narrative: Poseidon, a member of the pro-Achaian party among the gods, exploits Zeus’ distraction to secretly support the Achaians. The Achaians offer resistance, but are increasingly under pressure (Book 13). Book 14 shows their response: the leaders, incapable of fighting, anxiously consult regarding future tactics and are eventually spurred on by Poseidon (1–152). At that point, Hera, who has always supported the Achaians, decides to deceive Zeus and distract him from the battle action entirely; she successfully executes her plan (153–353). While Zeus is asleep, Poseidon can aid the Achaians openly, and he does so to such a degree that Hektor is rendered incapable of fighting and the Trojans finally retreat across the wall and the ditch (354–522; in Book 15, these Achaian successes are undone once more; on the overall course of the battle, Latacz 1977, 103  f.). The focus of the narrative is thus on Hera’s ‘deception of Zeus’ (the basis for the references to the Book as the Diós apátē already in antiquity), around which the framing story – set among human beings – is structured (ring-compositionP). The following lemmata in the commentary provide an overview of the action in Book 14 (see also the Overview above at p. 9  f.): 1–152n., 153–353n., 354–522n., 354-401n.; on the chronology specifically: 1–152n., 147–152n., 354–401n., 402– 439n. Individual details: • on individual characters: gods: Aphrodite 170–186n., 187–223n., 198b–199n., 214n.; Athene 178–179n.; Hephaistos 167n., 168n., 231–291n., 231n., 238n., 239–240n., 257n., 327n., 338n.; Hera 153–353n., 153n., 155–156n., 157–158n., 170–186n., 187–223n., 202–203n., 222–223n., 225–230n., 231–291n., 249–261n., 267–268n., 292–353n., 295–296n., 301–311n., 304–306n., 313–328n., 327n., 330–340n., 347–351n.; Hypnos 231–291n., 231n., 259–261n., 264–266n., 353n., 354–356n.; Okeanos 200n., 201n., 203b–204n., 205n., 246n., 271n.; Poseidon 135–152n., 135n., 136n., 139–146n., 155–156n., 354–401n., 363–377n., 385– 387n., 386n., 390–391n., 510n.; Zeus 53b–54n., 65–81n., 85b–87n., 153–353n., 203b–204n., 249–261n., 256–261n., 257n., 292–353n., 293n., 313–328n., 347– 351n., 352–15.4n., 353n., 386n., 390–391n., 414n., 522n.; on Herakles: 249– 261n., 255n., 323n.; on human beings: Achilleus 42–51n., 139–146n., 141n.,

12 

 Iliad 14

363–377n., 440–505n.; Agamemnon 42–51n., 65–81n., 103–108n., 105n., 113– 125n., 134n., 139–146n., 153–353n., Aias 402–439n., 404–406n., 440–505n., 509n.; Diomedes 29n., 108n., 110–132n., 113–125n., 120n., 133n.; Hektor 42–51n., 363–377n., 390–391n., 402–439n., 402n., 406n., 408n., 413n.; Nestor 1n., 9–12n., 13–15n., 20–24a n., 52–63n., 110–132n.; Odysseus 29n., 65–81n., 83–102n., 85b–87n., 103–108n. • on the relationships of the gods to one another (conflicts, etc.) 135–152n., 153–353n., 256–261n., 257n., 274n., 386n. • on Near Eastern parallels (selected) 135n., 153–353n., 169n., 170–186n., 181n., 201n., 203b–204n., 214n., 216–217n., 256–261n., 259–261n., 279n., 321n., 322n., 347–351n., 384n. • on the motif of revenge 440–505n., 470–475n., 479–485n., 484b–485n., 493–500n.; on the ships and the encampment 4n., 30–36n., appendix, 42–51n., 51n., 53a n.; on the wall 13–15n., 15n., 31–32n., 52–63n.; on genealogy 113–125n., 470–475n.; on comic elements 153–353n., 187–223n., 231–291n., 274n., 292–353n., 313–328n., 330–340n., 347–351n., 353n.; on the exchange of weapons 9–12n., 370–377n. • on type-scenesP and themesP (in alphabetical order): ‘A throws a missile at B but misses his target; B wounds A’ 402–420n., arrival and visitation scenes 188–210n., change of location of a deity 225–230n., 281–285n., considering two options 20–24a n., contemplating the optimal approach 159–166n., delivery of a message 354–356n., dressing 170–186n., oath 271–280n., prayer 188– 210n., 233–241n., seduction 153–353n. • on catalogues 313–328n., 511–522n., on similesP and comparisonsP: 16–22n., 20–24a n., 147–152n., 185n., 290n., 386n., 394–401n., 394–395n., 396–397n., 398–399n., 413n., 414–417n., 415b–417n., 499n. 1–152 Nestor recognizes the danger the Greeks face and provides information con­ cerning the current state of battle to the wounded leaders Agamemnon, Odysseus and Diomedes, who – alarmed by the noise of battle – approach from their ships, which have been hauled up onto the beach. The leaders consult with each other and return to the battle raging further inland in order to spur on fighters who are hanging back. Poseidon encourages the Greeks and initiates their push against the Trojans. 1–152 Books 12 and 13 laid out how the Trojans overran the wall surrounding the encampment of ships and advanced, while the Achaians (15n.) defended the ships in intense combat. At the end of Book 13 (13.833  f.), the Trojans begin a new offensive, but the Achaians stand firm (13.835  f.). At this moment of enormous tension, the narrator interrupts his portrayal of the battle (similar in-

Commentary 

 13

terruptions at critical junctures occur at 15.746/16.1 and 18.1  ff.; Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 91). – The beginning of Book 14 links to both Book 11 and Book 13: in Book 11, the narrator offered an account of how Machaon was wounded and removed to the safety of his hut by Nestor, who subsequently fed him (11.504–520, 11.597  f., 11.618–643; the care of the wounded Eurypylos, depicted at 11.806–848, is similarly picked up again at 15.390–404: Reichel 1994, 207). In addition, in Book 11 the leaders Agamemnon, Diomedes and Odysseus were injured and withdrew to their huts in the encampment of ships (11.251–253, 11.267–283, 11.369–400, 11.434–438, 11.487  f.). At this point, these four leading individuals return to view, while the two strands of the narrative – events in the Greek camp and on the battlefield – are gradually merged. The increased intensity of battle cries, which triggers Nestor’s meeting with the other leaders, is a reference to the threatening cries at the end of the previous Book (13.834– 837). Nestor’s information regarding events on the battlefield (8–15) serves as the basis for the leaders’ consultation (Wilamowitz 1916, 231). The situation by the ships – depicted from the point of view of Nestor (4n., 13–15n., 52–63n.) and the narrator (24b–26n.), respectively – now appears threatening enough to them to require a decision. The story thus presupposes the events laid out in Book 13; the chronology of Whitman/Scodel 1981 (followed by Janko, p. 149 and on 1–152; Stanley 1993, 153  f.) is different: they maintain the conventional view that in Homer concurrent events are narrated as consecutive in accord with the ‘continuity of time’ principleP. Given that the Achaian situation in the battle is much more dramatic at the beginning of Book 14 than at the end of Book 13, the same principle should be posited here: the shouting Nestor hears and is alarmed by should correspond chronologically to the clamor, mentioned at 12.471, that follows after the Trojans overrun the wall. The consultation by the leaders and Poseidon’s help (1–152), like Hera’s deception of Zeus and Poseidon’s increased support for the Achaians (153–522, nn.), should be understood as coincident with the fighting described between 12.470 and 13.837. The chro­no­ logical breaks would then be repeatedly marked by battle cries. But the narrator offers no hint of such contemporaneity (Leaf, Introd. on 14, Rengakos 1995, 26  f. n. 78), and there are repeated linguistic and contextual links to Book 13 (1n.: the increased noise of battle; 42–51n.: Agamemnon’s concern caused by the Achaians’ defeatist attitude, cf. Poseidon’s remarks at 13.108  ff.; 60n: reference to the enormous battle din at 13.837; 135–152n.: Poseidon’s intervention as a continuation of his earlier support; later 153–156n.: Hera’s response; 425–426n.: mention of the Trojans protecting Hektor): Rengakos 1995, 26–28; Danek 1999, 76–80. For the objection that the situation at the end of Book 13 is insufficiently dramatic to justify Nestor’s concern at the beginning of Book 14,

14 

 Iliad 14

see 13–15n.; for battle cries as a chronological signal, see 147–152n., 354–401n., 393n. – The seriousness of the Achaian situation is further underlined by reminders of Achilleus’ withdrawal from battle after the failed embassy (Book 9), which grow increasingly urgent the closer the Trojans come (Michel 1971, 45 n. 123; Schwinge 1991, 503 with n. 50; cf. STR 22[1] with Fig. 2): after 13.108  ff. and the general references at 12.10, 13.324, 13.347–350, 13.746  f., Agamemnon’s fears (42–51n.) and Poseidon’s fierce criticism of Achilleus’ conduct (135–152n.) illustrate the Achaians’ need for divine help; the reinforcement of them by Poseidon (135–152) and Hera’s indirect intervention are prepared for in this way (153–353; 135–152n., 147–152n.; Janko). 1–26 Startled by the surging battle noise, Nestor emerges from his hut to assess the situation. It appears him as extremely dangerous for the Greeks, and he accordingly ponders whether to return to battle or to approach Agamemnon. In the end, he sets out to meet with Agamemnon. 1 Nestor: the oldest warrior in the field before Troy (CH 3). — failed not to hear: The state of drinking (pínonta pres.: the duration is left open) is displaced by a state of perception (élathen ingressive aor.). This initiates the temporal alignment and thus the merging of the two strands of the action, ‘events in the Achaian camp’ and ‘battlefield’ (1–152n.): Danek 1999, 78–80. — outcry: The Greeks and Trojans clashed violently, as terrifying cries from both sides made clear (13.834–837); their extraordinary volume reached even Nestor. The noise serves not only as the transition to a scene in a different location, Nestor’s hut (after the description of the battle by the ships at the end of Book 13), but as a motivation for Nestor’s trip to investigate what he has heard and consequently for the meeting between the leaders (27  ff.) (in a similar manner, the first laments for the dead Hektor at 22.405  ff. provide a transition to the scene in Andromache’s house): Krapp 1964, 341  f. — though: Although Nestor was away from the battlefield, he was nevertheless paying constant attention to the noise (which had increased: 4; schol. T).

Νέστορα: on the formation of the name Νέστωρ, a short form like Μέντωρ, and its sense ‘he who successfully brings the men of war home’, 1.247b n.; MYC s.  v. νέομαι; Frame 2009, 36–38. — ἰαχή: generally means ‘shouting, noise’; in the Iliad usually, as here, ‘cries of battle’, e.  g. during an attack 15.384, 17.266, during flight 12.144, 16.366; here it picks up ἠχή 13.834, 837, ἰαχεῖν 13.834, 835, cf. βοή 14.4 (LfgrE). — περ ἔμπης: 5× Il., 3× Od. combined at VE; ἔμπης, ‘although, nevertheless, yet’, intensifies περ and thus lends even more emphasis to πίνοντα (Bäumlein 1861, 117  f.; LfgrE s.  v. 567.10  ff.).

1 ἔλαθεν (ϝ)ιαχή: on the prosody, R 4.5. — περ: concessive (R 24.10).

Commentary 

 15

2–3 son of Asklepios | … Machaon: leads a Thessalian contingent (2.729–733) and serves as a physician (2.732, 4.193–219, 11.512–515, 11.833): 2.732n.; CH 5; LfgrE. 2 ἔπεα πτερόεντα προσηύδα: a speech introduction formulaP: 55× Il., 52× Od., 3× Hes., 7× h.Hom.; on the sense of πτερόεντα (‘feathered’, i.  e. as unerring as an arrow) and on προσηύδα (in which πρ- does not ‘make position’), see 1.201n.; LfgrE s.  v. πτερόεις. 3 ≈ 4.14, 14.61, Od. 17.274; 2nd VH = 2.252, Od. 17.78; cf. Il. 20.115  f. (φράζεσθον … | …, ὅπως ἔσται τάδε ἔργα). — δῖε: an ornamental generic epithetP (1.7n.). — ὅπως ἔσται: a final and an indirect question simultaneously; the fut. ind. underlines the realization in the future (Chantr. 2.284, 297, with reference to 1.61 [see ad loc.], 1.294, etc.; LfgrE s.  v. φράζω 1008.33  ff.).

4 ≈ 13.123; 1st VH ≈ 16.127. — ships: After the Trojan advance described in Book 12, the battle no longer takes place in the plain before Troy – where Nestor left the army – but in the encampment of ships (AH).

μέζων: ‘more loudly’: quantity frequently denotes intensity (1.35n., 3.155n.); on the short-vowel form, West 1998, XX. — δή: emphatic, with a comparative as at 9.202 (Denniston 205). — θαλερῶν αἰζηῶν: αἰζηός ‘(young) man’ (2.660n.) is combined formulaically at VE with θαλερός ‘flourishing, bursting with strength’ (likewise in the gen. at 10.259; in the nom. with τ(ε) at 3.26, 11.414, in the acc. at 17.282): LfgrE s.  v. θαλερός.

5 ≈ Od. 20.136. — wine: The fact that Nestor and Machaon had not previously been drinking wine, but instead a mixed beverage (11.641  f.), is insignficant; perhaps deliberate variation (Reichel 1994, 207 with n. 7; cf. LfgrE s.  v. πίνω 1252.28  ff.).

αἴθοπα: ‘bright, sparkling, glowing like embers’; forms a VE formula in combination with οἶνον (24.641n.).

6–7 In the Iliad, baths serve to cleanse warriors of sweat, dust and blood (10.572– 576, 22.442–444, 23.39–41); in the Odyssey, they are used in particular to wash and refresh guests when they arrive (described in a type-sceneP: Od. 3.464  ff., 4.47  ff., 8.454  ff., 10.358  ff., 10.449  ff., 17.85  ff.; other passages: Od. 1.309  ff., 5.264, 8.248  f.): Laser 1983, 138–148; on the narrative function of the bath, Grethlein 2007. Like Hekamede here, elsewhere as well it is women who prepare the bath and assist with the washing (servants, Il. 22.442–444, Od. 4.49 = 17.88, ≈ 8.454; 19.317, 20.297  f., 23.154, 24.366, but also the lady of the house, Od.

2 ἔπεα: on the uncontracted form, R 6. 3 φράζεο: on the uncontracted form, R 6. — τάδε (ϝ)έργα: on the prosody, R 4.3; likewise αἴθοπα (ϝ)οῖνον in 5 and τάχα (ϝ)είσομαι in 8. 4 μέζων: = μείζων (↑). — νηυσί: on the form, R 12.1; cf. R 2.

16 

 Iliad 14

4.252, 5.264, 10.360–364, 10.449  f., or other members of the family, Od. 3.464  f.): Wickert-Micknat 1982, 57; Laser 1983, 142  f.

θερμὰ λοετρὰ … | θερμήνῃ καὶ λούσῃ: a figura etymologica; cf. 16.670 and similarly Od. 24.301 (Fehling 1969, 166).

6 2nd VH = 11.624. — Hekamede: The daughter of Arsinoös; she was carried off by Achilleus during the capture of Tenedos and allotted to Nestor as a gift of honor (11.624–627): LfgrE. Captive women provide labor for their new masters (1.13n). Hekamede earlier served Nestor and Machaon (11.624, 11.628–641); this is picked up here by the explicit mention of the name (Reichel 1994, 207); she is now supposed to wash dried blood off of Machaon (7).

θερμά: predicative to θερμήνῃ with a resultative-proleptic function (7); likewise ­ omen χαρίεντ(α) 1.39 (see ad loc.): Chantr. 2.9. — ἐϋπλόκαμος: a generic epithetP of w (6.379–380n.). — Ἑκαμήδη: a fitting name for Nestor’s maid-servant; according to Wilamowitz 1916, 199 and Schadewaldt (1938) 1966, 59, it was invented by the poet of the Iliad on the basis of the name of the sorceress Ἀγαμήδη (11.740). -μηδ- frequently occurs as a component of names of women well-versed in healing and sorcery (e.  g. Μήδεια): Mühlestein 1969, 70  f.

7 ≈ 13.640, 18.345, 23.41; 2nd VH = 7.425. — βρότον: Except at Od. 24.189, βρότος is linked with αἱματόεις in a VE formula (see iterata); the meaning must be something like ‘dried blood’ or ‘bloody crust, scab’ (LfgrE). 8 ἐλθὼν τάχα εἴσομαι ἐς περιωπήν: ἐλθὼν is to be taken with ἐς περιωπήν (AH); similarly Od. 10.146 ἀνήϊον ἐς περιωπήν (Faesi). εἴσομαι (from οἶδα) is formulaicallly connected with τάχα, as at Od. 2.40 and 16.246 (with σάφα in the same position in the verse at Il. 7.226; Hoekstra 1965, 56 n. 4). περιωπή, related to ὦπα (3.158n.), means ‘elevated spot from which one can observe, vantage point’ (LfgrE).

9–12 The exchange of shields, long considered meaningless, refers to Nestor’s role and serves as an initially casual introduction to the motif ‘exchange of arms’ (cf. seedP). It is assumed that Nestor has given his own gilded shield (8.192  f.) to his son Thrasymedes, since his shield provides better protection than that of his son does (the loan of Thrasymedes’ shield to Diomedes at 10.255–257 may be a later attempt by the poet responsible for the Doloneia to explicate the present passage). In contrast to other arming scenes, Nestor’s arming naturally lacks an aristeia, nor is it complete (Nestor takes only shield 6 εἰς ὅ: ‘until’. — κε: = ἄν (R 24.5). — λοετρὰ ἐϋπλόκαμος: on the hiatus, R 5.6; on the uncontracted form λοετρά (rather than λουτρά, cf. λούσῃ in the following verse), R 6. — ἐϋπλόκαμος (ϝ)εκαμήδη: on the prosody, R 4.5. 7 λούσῃ ἄπο: on the so-called tmesis and the accent of ἄπο, R 20.2; on the so-called correption, R 5.5. 8 αὐτάρ: ‘but’ (adversative: R 24.2). — ἐγών (before a vowel): = ἐγώ. — ἐς: = εἰς (R 20.1).

Commentary 

 17

and lance; similarly 15.478–482 of Teukros: only shield, helmet and lance; on arming scenes in general, 3.328–338n.). The exchange of shields thus illustrates Nestor’s defensive posture: the elderly hero can only support his compatriots with advice (2.601n.); he did the same toward Patroklos with his exhortation to fight and to borrow Achilleus’ weapons (11.798), as again now in the consultation with Agamemnon, Odysseus and Diomedes that follows. The principle applied here is that the lesser warrior should fight with inferior weapons (cf. the exchange of arms in Book 6: Diomedes outclasses Glaukos); later, this is explicitly recommended to the Greeks by Poseidon (370–382). The exchange of shields thus prepares for the exchange of weapons among the Greeks themselves, which will lead to success, as well as for the violation of the principle – Patroklos’ borrowing of Achilleus’ armor, which ends catastrophically, since he is not the equal of his friend (16.278–283n.; on the entire scene, Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 120; Danek 1988, 207; 1999, 80–82; Stanley 1993, 157; Reichel 1994, 287  f.; on the relationship with 10.255–257, also West 2011, on 9–11; on pre-Homeric and contemporary models for shields with gold fittings, see e.  g. 1 Kings 10:16  f. and cf. Borchhardt 1977, 49  f.). 9–11 σάκος  … |  … |  … ἀσπίδα: on the two shield types and on the terms σάκος and ἀσπίς, used largely synonymously, 2.388–389n., 3.335n. — ἑοῖο |  … ἱπποδάμοιο |  … ἑοῖο: a formulaically conditioned homoioteleuton (AH; Janko; cf. 9n., 10n., 11n.). 9 τετυγμένον: The participle of τεύχω refers to weapons only here in early epic, but is similarly used in reference to shields at 12.105 τυκτῇσι βόεσσι (LfgrE s.  v. τεύχω 434.47  f. and s.  v. τυκτός). Like the Mycenaean neuter part. te-tu-ko-wo-a, used for wheels or garments, it can be understood either ‘made/manufactured’ in the sense of a completed task or ‘well made/crafted’ (neutral sense: Vivante 1982, 119  f.; Janko on 9–12; LfgrE s.  v. τεύχω 433.61  ff.; 434.47  f.; ‘well made’: schol. T; Willcock; on the Mycenaean: DMic. s.  v. te-tu-ko-wo-a). — υἷος ἑοῖο: a VE formula (also at 18.138, as vv.ll. at 15.138, 24.422, 24.550), cf. 18.71n. on the prosodic variant παιδὸς ἑοῖο.

10 1st VH ≈ 24.554. — Thrasymedes: Nestor’s son is one of the seven leaders of the guard (9.80  ff., 10.57  f.); he fights together with his brother Antilochos (16.317–325, 17.377–383) and leads the Pylians after the latter’s departure (17.705); together with Odysseus, his brother and others, he conveys Agamemnon’s gifts to Achilleus (19.238  ff.); in the Odyssey, Telemachos meets him in Nestor’s house (Od. 3.39, 3.414, 3.442, 3.448): LfgrE.

9 υἷος: on the declension, R 12.3. — ἑοῖο: possessive pronoun of the 3rd person (R 14.4); on the declension, R 11.2 (likewise ἱπποδάμοιο in the following verse). 10 κλισίῃ: on the -ῃ after -ι-, R 2.

18 

 Iliad 14

ἱπποδάμοιο: a generic epithetP of heroes and of the Trojans as a group (2.23n., 2.230n. with bibliography; on archaeological evidence regarding horse rearing in Troy, see also Uerpmann 2006, 284). Of Thrasymedes only here, probably by analogy with the frequent Διομήδεος ἱπποδάμοιο at VE (7× Il., 1× Od.): Parry (1928) 1971, 186. Thrasymedes is also given the metrically equivalent epithet ἀντίθεος (16.321, Od. 3.414); on the coexistence of the two epithets, 16.321n. with bibliography.

11 in bronze: i.  e. the metal fittings on the shield made from hide or leather (Borchhardt 1977, 2; Snodgrass [1967] 1984, 47, 63  f.).

παμφαῖνον: reduplicated φαίνω, but the prefix παμ- that results from the reduplication may have been understood secondarily as the neuter of πᾶς (2.458n.). — πατρὸς ἑοῖο: a VE formula (4× Il., 1× Od., 1× Hes., 1× h.Ap.).

12 = 10.135, 15.482, Od. 1.99, 15.551, 20.127, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 135; 1st VH = Il. 3.338, Od. 17.4; ≈ Il. 11.43, 16.139 (see ad loc.), Od. 22.125. — ἀκαχμένον: an epithet of uncertain origin (Frisk) used formulaically; it means literally ‘fitted with a point’ and is almost always used of lances in the phrase ἀκαχμένον ὀξέϊ χαλκῷ ‘with a point of sharp bronze’ (see iterata; cf. κεκορυθμένα χαλκῷ 3.18n.). At 12.444, 17.412, 21.72, it is used without the (instrumental) dat. and probably means simply ‘sharp’, as in its use as an epithet of an axe and a sword at Od. 5.235, 22.80 (LfgrE). A connection of χαλκός and ἔγχος with a term indicating the point of a lance is also found on the Linear B tablet Jn 829 (ka-ko, e-ke-si and a3-ka-sa-ma /aiksma/ [αἰχμή]), suggesting that the formula was coined early on (Hiller 1999, 290). — ὀξέϊ χαλκῷ: a VE formula (25× Il., 11× Od., 1× ‘Hes.’); χαλκός here denotes the bronze lance-head, which were likely not widespread at first and thus retained a certain value in the Late Bronze Age (Hiller loc. cit. 291; LfgrE s.  v. χαλκός 1125.33  ff.).

13–15 Of the three rare cases of a comprehensive description of mass fighting (on which, 3.15–37n.) in which an imbalance between Trojans and Greeks is mentioned (here at 13.701–722 and 17.354–365), this is the only passage where the Greeks are on the defensive: they are hard pressed by the Trojans near their ships and must withstand increasing pressure (14  f., 57–60 retrospectively). This depiction by the narrator for a Greek audience is due to the fact that events are narrated from Nestor’s point of view (see below), as well as the fact that this serves as a trigger for the consultation of the leaders (Stoevesandt 2004, 101  f.). 13–15 thus do not represent a panoramic scene from above (on which, 3.1–14n.) but instead, as at 23.362–381, an account of an impression from below (Richardson 1990, 231 n. 27; see also 13n. on Nestor’s position). Only after Nestor’s reaction to his impression has been described (16–24) is the depiction of the situation picked up again in the more neutral narrator-textP (24b–26). It has been objected that the imbalance between the fighting parties

11 παμφαῖνον(ν)· ὅ: on the prosody, M 4.6 (note also the caesura). — ὅ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17). – ἔχ(ε): on the unaugmented form, R 16.1. — ἑοῖο: 9n.

Commentary 

 19

evident here is not equivalent to the situation prevailing at the end of Book 13 (13.835  f.: although the Greeks are on the defensive there too, they are holding up; there is a certain balance); the conclusion is that the description picks up from the battle action at the end of Book 12 (Hektor breaks the gates open, the Trojans overrun the wall and charge forward) in the context of reprising what had been narrated earlier (1–152n.): AH on 14; Whitman/Scodel 1981, 4. But the contradiction is not so substantial (the Trojans have been advancing since 13.795); also, in contrast to 13.835  f., the situation here is recounted from Nestor’s viewpoint (secondary focalizationP), that of a shaken man who has been sitting in his hut and has not observed the entire battle for the wall built as a result of his advice (7.336–343) (on the confusing situation, 14n.); to him, the Achaians appear to be falling into an alarming and shameful (13n.) defensive position (Michel 1971, 59 n. 217; Rengakos 1995, 27; Danek 1999, 83; Jones; Clay 2011, 78  f.). 13 Nestor had meant to gain a quick (8 tácha) overview from a vantage point with a view across the wall to the battlefield in the plain (8). But since the Trojans have overrun the wall, he is immediately (13 tácha) confronted by skirmishes in the encampment of ships (Leaf; Janko on 8) and is thus able to convey his impressions at once (55–60; 1–152n.).

στῆ  … εἴσιδεν: The same sequence, approaching-perceiving, with the same words and in the same position in the verse, occurs at Od. 13.197; Od. 24.493 is very similar (Bechert 1964, 294  f.). εἴσιδεν is ‘resultative: «to a spot while consciously searching», follows an emotion or decision’, as at 153 and 158 (LfgrE s.  v. ἰδεῖν 1129.7  ff. [transl.]). — ἔργον ἀεικές: a VE formula, also at Od. 3.265, 11.429, 15.236, 23.222; at VB in 19.133. ἀεικές is ‘unseemly, shameful’, in secondary focalizationP as commonly elsewhere (1.97n.; de Jong [1987] 2004, 141).

14 = 15.7. — The order of the details likely follows that in which Nestor perceives them: he first sees the warriors in distress, then their pursuers, who turn out to be Trojans, followed by the damaged Achaian wall (15): Clay 2011, 77.

ὀρινομένους: of fighting individuals: ‘move in a chaotic manner’, as at 59, 15.7, 11.521, 11.525, etc., frequently in the context of a mass flight (Kurz 1966, 143; LfgrE s.  v. ὀρίνω 771.65  ff.); in this sense always as a participle dependent on a verb of perception (here εἴσιδεν [13]) and/or in direct speech; also at 4.332 in secondary focalizationP (Kurz loc. cit.). In the active with the sense ‘agitate’ with θυμός as the object: 2.142n., 3.395n. — κλονέοντας: κλονέω is a causative active of mid. κλονέομαι ‘agglomerate, crowd together’ (e.  g. at 14.59 in a similar situation: Ἀχαιοὶ κλονέονται); it thus means ‘crowd someone in, shake someone up’, frequently in the military sense ‘rout’, as here, some-

13 στῆ … εἴσιδεν: on the unaugmented aorist, R 16.1.

20 

 Iliad 14

times in reference to mass slaughter or a disorderly flight, cf. 59  f. (ἐπιμίξ), also 5.93  f., 5.96, 18.7 (see ad loc.), 21.528, 21.554, 22.188: LfgrE.

15 2nd VH ≈ 15.361. — Achaians: a Homeric term denoting the Greeks (1.2n.; Latacz [2001] 2010, 374–378; [2011] 2014, 485–492; Steiner 2011, 271  f., 277). — overthrown: Sarpedon had torn down the parapet (12.397–399), while Hektor had burst open a gate (12.445–462, 13.124, 13.679). In addition, at at least one other location the Trojans could climb across the wall (12.469, 13.50, 13.87, 13.737). It is later related that Apollo tears down the wall (15.361–366). The present passage has thus been understood as contradicting the latter statement. This has been explained by suggesting that the situation Nestor faces is equivalent to that at the end of Book 12 (cf. 1–152n., 13–15n.) and, since the narrator now picks up from that situation, that he narrates the actions of the human Hektor and the god Apollo twice, although he considers them one (Whitman/ Scodel 1981, 9  f.; Janko on 13–15 and p. 226  f.). But already in antiquity reference was made to the more likely explanation, that the present passage merely states that what had fallen was the parapet (schol. bT), i.  e. only part of the wall (AH; Faesi; Janko loc. cit.), while a slight exaggeration is easily accepted, given that the passage portrays Nestor’s fright (secondary focalization, 13–15n.): Faesi; Janko loc. cit.

Τρῶας ὑπερθύμους: an inflectible VB formula in the Iliad (2× voc., 3× nom.; additionally 1× Τρῶας μὲν ὑπ. after caesura A 4). On the sense of ὑπέρθυμος, 2.746n. — ἐρέριπτο: As with κατερήριπεν (55), the formation is disputed. Both forms are from a perfect stem of ἐρείπω ‘pull/throw/knock down’ and in context probably denote the same thing (the destruction of the wall); cf. 12.258 ἔρειπον ἐπάλξις, 15.361 ἔρειπε δὲ τεῖχος Ἀχαιῶν: Hackstein 2002, 156  f. (see below). — τεῖχος Ἀχαιῶν: a VE formula (also at 12.64, 12.223, 12.261, 12.438, 15.361, 16.558).



An attempt at a linguistic explanation of the reduplicated forms (κατερήριπεν perfect, representing a state, ‘has collapsed’, ἐρέριπτο preterite, mid.-pass. ‘had been brought down’) and of the vowel quantities can be found in Hackstein loc. cit. 156  f., with earlier scholarship.

16–22 The elemental force of the sea serves to illustrate the movements and clashes of armies in battle in numerous similesP elsewhere in the Iliad. The visual aspects – the movement of the waves, the power of the surf, the storm-ridden sea, the color of the water – as well as acoustic – the roaring of the water – and tactile aspects – wind, spray, and seaweed – graphically illustrate the motifs ‘the wind drives against the sea, a storm begins (and threatens a ship)’, ‘the waves break against the coast’. It is usually an advancing army (4.422–428; for additional examples, see below), rarely an individual warrior (here and at

15 ἐρέριπτο: 3rd-person sing. plpf. mid.-pass. ind. of ἐρείπω (↑), ‘had been brought down’.

Commentary 

 21

15.623–629), that is compared to the sea; the wind frequently corresponds to an individual leader (especially Hektor) who urges on the army and carries it along with him or who intervenes in the battle (4.275–282, 7.4–7, 11.297  f., 11.305–309); an army is occasionally represented by a ship (15.381–384, 15.623–629), a storm cloud (4.275–282) or a rock in the surf (15.618–622). The atmosphere described in the similes also calls to mind mental aspects, explicitly so here and at 9.4–8 (storms reflect the Achaians’ desperation), as also at 2.144–149: enthusiasm [see ad loc. and 2.142–154n.], 15.627–629: extreme terror (cf. also 16.33–35: Patroklos compares Achilleus’ pitilessness to the sea). The aim of the present comparison in illustrating Nestor’s internal experience, his indecisiveness, is further underscored by the personification of the sea (esp. 17 ‘foresees’, probably also 16 ‘surged’ [elsewhere always in reference to mental states, see ad loc.]). Nestor’s interior is seething, as the sea surges in expectation of heavy gusts of wind; he needs the longed-for favorable wind from Zeus (19), i.  e. the right decision (Zeus is perhaps mentioned with dramatic ironyP since the god, bound by the promise he gave to Thetis, is actually unable to aid the Greeks). Wind sent by Zeus is also mentioned in a passage that should still be to the fore in the audience’s mind: at 13.795–801, Hektor and Paris advance like whirlwinds from Zeus (796), spurring on the army. The two similes may thus be causally linked (Nestor is concerned about the military superiority of the Trojans; at the same time, there is no linguistic support for concluding that the present simile likewise primarily reflects the battle situation and is meant only secondarily to illustrate Nestor’s comprehensive view of the undecided state of affairs after his initial impression of catastrophe and difficult decision [thus Danek 1999, 84–86]). Bibliography: Fränkel 1921, 301–305; Lesky 1947, 165–171; Scott 1974, 62–66, 100; Moulton 1977, 23  f.; Leinieks 1986, 12–15; Janko on 16–19. On Homer’s naturalism in the present simile, Becker 1937, 171 n. 55 (contra Fränkel loc. cit. 304: the ground-swell of the sea is not devoid of direction, but merely of an obvious one). 16 ὡς δ᾿ ὅτε: a frequent introduction to similes (2.147–148n.). — πορφύρῃ: The word is attested elsewhere in early epic only in reference to the human heart in the VE formula πολλὰ δέ οἱ/μοι κραδίη πόρφυρε μένοντι/κιόντι at 21.551/Od. 4.427 = 4.572 = 10.309, where it should mean ‘surge, undulate’. In later periods (e.  g. Theocritus 5.125), it is also found with the sense ‘turn red’ (LSJ). The word formation is disputed (an intensive with reduplication from φύρω ‘wet, moisten’, later ‘mix, blend’ [Frisk; Giannakis 1997, 274]? or an onomatopoetic formation similar to μορμύρω ‘bubble, murmur’ [Tichy 1983, 285]?), and the basic meaning of the verb and the adjective πορφύρεος, poten16 πορφύρῃ: prospective subjunc. (iterative), which can occur in Homer without a modal particle (R 21.1).

22 

 Iliad 14

tially derived from it (1.482n.), is somewhat unclear; possibly e.  g. ‘undulate/undulating with an iridescence or a dark gleam’ (Tichy loc. cit. 282, 285; similarly LfgrE s.  v. πορφύρεος 1468.58  ff.). The two words, as well as πoρφύρα purpura ‘purple snail, (royal) purple color’, which is only attested in post-Homeric texts, likely exerted semantic influence on each other already in the Homeric period (on which in detail, Tichy 1983, 280–288; LfgrE loc. cit. 1467.64  ff.). The reference here is probably in the first instance to the aspect of movement (‘surged, undulated, swayed’) (AH; LfgrE), but a connotation of color (‘surged darkly’: schol. A; Vivante 1982, 122), perhaps also in a metaphorical sense (‘sinister, gloomy’: Janko on 16–19; similarly Kelly 2007, 36), is also possible. — πέλαγος μέγα: πέλαγος is attested only here in the Iliad; elsewhere in early epic in total 10×, including 2× with μέγα at Od. 3.321, 3.179. The word, which is comparatively rare in comparison with ἅλς, θάλασσα and πόντος, denotes the ‘expanse of the sea’ (related to Latin planus), here specifically the ‘surface surging back and forth’ (LfgrE). — κύματι κωφῷ: κύματι is collective: ‘swell, movement of waves’ (LfgrE s.  v. 1587.32  ff.). Like the further description αὔτως, οὐδ᾿ ἄρα τε προκυλίνδεται οὐδ᾿ ἑτέρωσε (18), κωφῷ (basic meaning ‘blunt, dull’) likely refers to the movement of the waves and means ‘feeble, weak’ (AH; Autenrieth/Kaegi s.  v. κωφός; Thomas 1891, 48–52) or even ‘indecisive, deaf’ (LfgrE) – a metaphorical characterization of the sea – rather than representing their sound (schol. D; Faesi: ‘dull’; Becker 1937, 170 n. 52: ‘mute’). 17 ≈ 15.620. — ὀσσόμενον: The verb, elsewhere connected exclusively with animate subjects, here contains both the receptive sense ‘foresee’ (the sea is personified: Faesi; Fränkel 1921, 304; LfgrE) and the productive sense ‘suggest, forecast’ (Leaf; Becker 1937, 170  f. with n. 53). Elsewhere it is used of the expectation of something negative (cf. κάκ᾿ ὀσσόμενος 1.105n.; Di Benedetto 1987, 273). — λιγέων ἀνέμων λαιψηρὰ κέλευθα: λιγύς ‘shrill, piercing’ (1.248n.) is used elsewhere to characterize howling winds (19.5n.); in addition to the iteratum, cf. 13.334, Od. 3.289 with the same verse position. κέλευθα, here used metaphorically like κελεύθους at 3.406, together with ἀνέμων forms a phrase in the same verse position at 15.620, Od. 10.20; similarly Od. 5.383 ἀνέμων κελεύθους (AH). λαιψηρός means ‘swift, rapid’; on the characteristic swiftness of winds, see CG 37 and cf. 19.415n. as well as Hes. Th. 379 Βορέην τ᾿ αἰψηροκέλευθον (Troxler 1964, 123  f.). λαιψηρά is probably an example of enallage, resulting in a parallelism with emphatic effect (the word sequence epithet – noun occurs twice). On parallelisms in descriptions of natural forces in general, 19.267n. 18 αὔτως: represents a subsequent clarification of πορφύρῃ (16) and is explicated by the following οὐδ᾿ ἄρα τε προκυλίνδεται οὐδ᾿ ἑτέρωσε (AH): ‘«just like that» (i.  e. with no specific direction)’: LfgrE s.  v. 1683.69  f. — τε: generalizing τε after οὐδέ also at Od. 2.182, 11.123; with ἄρα also in the simile at Il. 15.274 (Denniston 529; Ruijgh 710). The unnecessary reading τι in one papyrus likely results from a desire to replace a τε that was considered pointless; reading τῇ as a complement of ἑτέρωσε, as in AH, is also unnecessary 18 οὐδ(έ): occurs in Homer also after affirmative clauses (Attic: καὶ οὐ). — τε: on the ‘epic τε’, R 24.11.

Commentary 

 23

(Ruijgh loc. cit.). — προκυλίνδεται: ‘constantly rolls onward’ in a specific direction (LfgrE s.  v. κυλίνδω). — ἑτέρωσε: ‘to the other side, back’, here probably: ‘backwards’, sc. κυλίνδεται, in contrast to προ-κυλίνδεται (Faesi).

19 the wind: In his function as weather god (CG 24), Zeus sends winds good for sailing (1.479n.).

πρίν: occurs in Homer with an inf., or an acc.-inf. in the case of a new subject, even after a negative main clause (1.97–100n., 2.355n.). — κεκριμένον: ‘«decisive», with set direction’ (AH [transl.]), cf. Hes. Op. 670 εὐκρινέες τ᾿ αὖραι (on which, West: ‘well-defined’); a positive connotation (in the sense ‘excellent’), as at Od. 13.182, 16.248, 24.107, is rather implausible (LfgrE s.  v. οὖρος 878.61  f.).

20–24a Like ‘if-not’-situationsP (2.155–156n.), type-scenesP weighing two options (1.188b–194n., 16.646b–655n. with bibliography) serve to suggest alternatives to the narrative actually realized (Arend 1933, 106); the elements here are (1) Nestor ponders (20–21a) whether to (2) join the Greeks who are fighting (action A: 21b) or (3) visit Agamemnon (action B: 22). (4) He decides on the latter course (action B, which is usually preferred in such scenes, 23–24a). Element (5), divine influence, is absent, as is always the case for decisions that close with the formulaic verse ‘And in the division of his heart this way seemed best to him’ (23) (Arend loc. cit. 110  f.). For Greek kérdion ‘more advantageous, better’ suggests a calculation of benefits (in combination with phronéonti ‘when he was considering, reflecting’) that is less in need of divine support than a decision influenced by strong emotions, as at 1.188  ff. (Arend 1933, loc. cit.). In addition, the simile underscores Nestor’s complete autonomy in decision-making: he reaches a determination and makes a choice, as does Zeus when he sends a particular (kekriménon ‘decisive’) wind (19) (Plamböck 1959, 109–111, contra Snell (1944) 1960, 103 [‘one alternative is recognized as the more advantageous procedure. … [T]his has little to do with … an internal struggle’]; cf. 1.188–222n. on the autonomy of Homeric human beings; Latacz [1984] 1994, 88–90). The illustration of the decision via a simile is unusual; more often, the significance of a decision is emphasized via a monologue (11.404–410, 17.91–105, 21.553–570, 22.99–130; Fenik 1968, 67  f.; Janko on 16–19). At the same sime, short similes illustrate great worry (but do not entail decisions: Janko loc. cit.) in a similar manner at Od. 4.791–793, 19.518–529, 20.25–30, whereas the beginning of Book 9 has a similar sequence of ‘portrayal of the mood among the Achaians (9.1–3, ≈ 14.13–15 and 20–24), simile (9.4–8, ≈ 14.16–19; on further similarities, 16–22n.)’, which is followed, as here, by a consultation of the Achaian leaders (9.9–79, ≈ 14.41–133), including an address by a despondent

19 καταβήμεναι: on the form, R 16.4.

24 

 Iliad 14

Agamemnon (9.13–28, ≈ 14.42–51 and 64–81) and a reply by Diomedes (9.31–49, ≈ 14.109–132): Di Benedetto 1987, 272  f. The present extended passage marks the significance of Nestor’s decision. Represented elsewhere as the ideal counselor (1.247b–252n.), he realizes that escape from grave danger must be sought collectively (61  f.). His initiative prompts the leaders to reach a decision (128–134) that ultimately leads to strengthening the Greek forces, with aid from Poseidon (354–522, signifying a resumption of his aid as portrayed in Book 13): Kelly 2007, 194 (similarly Arend 1933, 109 on circumspect decisions). 20 A variation of the formulaic verse ἕως ὃ ταῦθ᾿ ὥρμαινε κατὰ φρένα καὶ κατὰ θυμόν attested 4× Il., 3× Od.: 1.193n.; Jahn 1987, 284. — ὥρμαινε: picked up by φρονέοντι (23); in total 6× Il., 4× Od. in connection with κατὰ θυμόν, which is interchangeable with κατὰ φρένα (Jahn loc. cit.; cf. 1.24n.). — δαϊζόμενος: δαΐζω (related to δαίομαι) used concretely means ‘disjoint violently’ (e.  g. meat: Od. 14.434: ἕπταχα; of a violent death: Il. 19.203 [see ad loc.]), used metaphorically in the mid.-pass. ‘be torn apart’ by worries and fears at Il. 9.8 = 15.629 ἐδαΐζετο θυμός, in each case after a simile with the motif ‘wind above the sea’ as here, with ἦτορ at Od. 13.320; here in the decision-making scene, the participle thus means ‘split, divided’ (LfgrE; Clarke 1999, 102 n. 108). 21 2nd VH ≈ 24.295, 24.313. — διχθάδι(α): an adverb from διχθάδιος ‘twofold, dual’ (elsewhere only at 9.411). In other deliberation scenes, ambivalence is expressed via διάνδιχα (1.189, 8.167, 13.455), δίχα (Od. 16.73, 19.524, 22.333) or διχθά (16.435): LfgrE s.  v. δίχα, διχθά; 1.188b–194n. — ἴοι: an opt. form with thematic vowel, as in later periods (G 91; Schw. 1.674), which exists alongside ἰείη at 19.209 (see ad loc.). — Δαναῶν ταχυπώλων: an inflectible VE formula (1× nom., 9× gen.). The epithet, a possessive compound, is probably meant to stress particularly skillful use of the two-horse war chariot (24.295n.). 22 ≈ 2.254, 10.3, Od. 3.156, 14.497; 2nd VH = Il. 2.243, 11.187, 11.202, Od. 4.532; ≈ Il. 2.772, 4.413, 7.230, 19.35, 24.654. — Ἀτρεΐδην: on the use of the patronymic, 1.1n.; on Agamemnon’s designation as a son of Atreus, 1.7n.; on the personal name Ἀτρεύς, 3.36–37n. — Ἀγαμέμνονα ποιμένα λαῶν: an inflectible VE formula (2.243n.); on the expression ποιμένι/-α λαῶν as a title with Near Eastern parallels, see 1.263n.; Haubold 2000, 17–20; West 2007, 421 (IE parallels). 23 = 13.458, 16.652, Od. 15.204, 18.93, 22.338, 24.239; ≈ Od. 5.474, 6.145, 10.153; VE ≈ Od. 2.320, 14.355. With one exception (Od. 15.204), the formulaic verse is employed in cases with only one option; for several alternatives, use is made of e.  g. ἥδε δέ οἱ κατὰ θυμὸν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή (2.5, 14.161, etc.; Pelliccia 1995, 130 with n. 40; 2.3–7n.). As is usual, no reason is given for the choice (16.652n.). — δοάσσατο: means ‘appear, seem’; an isolated aor. form, attested only in the present formula and in the subjunc. 21–22 διχθάδι᾿, ἤ: on the hiatus, R 5.1. — ἢ … ἦε: ‘whether … or’. — μεθ᾿ … μετ᾿: = μετά (+ acc. of direction), ‘into the middle of …, to’. 23 δέ (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.3. — οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1). — δοάσσατο: ‘appeared’, unaugmented (R 16.1) 3rd pers. sing. preterite of a defective verb.

Commentary 

 25

δοάσσεται at 23.339; related to δῆλος and perhaps to the isolated impf. δέατο ‘appeared’ (Od. 6.242): LfgrE. — κέρδιον: ‘more advantageous, better’ (3.41n.).

24a 1st VH ≈ 2.18, 13.459. 24b–26 The portrayal of the battle situation (‘comprehensive mass fighting at close quarters’: Latacz 1977, 187–193; Janko on 20–26) functions as a ‘covering’ sceneP for the background story ‘Nestor visiting Agamemnon’ (AH, Anh. 54  f.); at the same time, the narrator highlights – especially via acoustic aspects that emphasize the ferocity of the fighting in the immediate vicinity of the encampment of ships (Wille 2001, 43; Janko loc. cit.) – the dangerous situation in which the Greeks find themselves, accounting for the desperate mood and the need for a decision in the discussion that follows (briefly Nicolai 1973, 54; cf. Danek 1999, 85, although he connects the description with the preceding simile [16–22n.]; on such brief portrayals of a battle situation serving to account for measures taken in general, Kelly 2007, 107  f.). On the difference in the portrayal of the battle in 13–15, see ad loc. 24b 2nd VH = 9.530, 11.337, 17.413. — ἐνάριζον: ‘kill’ (the original meaning ‘take off armor’ has faded: 6.20n.); durative background action (Faesi [transl.]: ‘but meanwhile the bloodbath and fray continued always unabated’). 25–26 σφι … | νυσσομένων: In the context of close combat with lances (ἔγχεσιν), νύσσω means ‘thrust (> stab)’; it is also connected with ξίφεσιν both here and in the iterata (see 26n.) (LfgrE; Latacz 1977, 193; but cf. the variant at Od. 24.527 with τύπτω). νυσσομένων is mainly interpreted as a reciprocal mid. (‘are stabbing at each other’); in this case, the gen. should be understood as an appositive and a subsequent expansion of the dat., as at 3.300  f. σφ(ι) … | αὐτῶν καὶ τεκέων (see ad loc.; AH; Janko on 20–26). Since Greek makes only very limited use of the reciprocal middle, the form here is better taken as passive (in detail, van der Mije 2004, 198–200): what is portrayed is the noise emitted by armor when it is struck by swords and lances (literally ‘when they are struck with swords …’; cf. 16.637n.). 25 λάκε: For the root *leh2k- only an ancient pair of forms are attested in early epic: the thematic aor. stem λακε/ο- (also at 13.616, 20.277, Hes. Th. 694), and the perf. stem λέληκ(Il. 22.141, Od. 12.85, Hes. Op. 207, h.Merc. 145): Frisk; LIV s.  v. *leh2k- (p. 402); Kölligan 2007, 487 (the impf. ἐπελήκεον at Od. 8.379 is a new formation on the basis of the perf. stem: Nussbaum 1987). The verb almost always characterizes sounds in a negative fashion (‘make noise’); the perf. stem is used of animate subjects – birds at 22.141, Hes. Op. 207, dogs at h.Merc. 145 – the aor. stem of inanimate objects (perhaps transferred from animals) – here as at 20.277 in the sense ‘screech, grate’ as metal meets metal (Krapp

24 οἵ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17), referring to the Greeks and Trojans on the battle­ field. 25 σφι: = αὐτοῖς (R 14.1).

26 

 Iliad 14

1964, 192; LfgrE s.  v. ληκέω, λάκε). — χαλκὸς ἀτειρής: an inflectible formula (nom. at VE also at 5.292, 7.247, acc. in verse middle at 19.233, 20.108); χαλκός here represents the bronze armor (περὶ χροΐ), as at 4.420, 12.151, etc. (LfgrE s.  v. χαλκός 1125.3  ff.); ἀτειρής means ‘indestructible’ (3.60n.: literally ‘unable to be worn away’; LfgrE). 26 = 16.637; ≈ 13.147, 15.278, 17.731. — ἀμφιγύοισιν: an epithet of ἔγχος, almost always formulaic at VE (in addition to the iterata also 15.712, Od. 16.474, 24.527). The sense was obscure already in antiquity (schol. bT ad loc.); the word is probably a possessive compound and means ‘have a curve on both sides, be bent on both sides’ (related to γυῖα, γύαλον); in this case, it likely characterizes lances with curved, leaf-shaped heads such as have been found at Mycenae (LfgrE; Trümpy 1950, 59; Höckmann 1980, 296  f. with fig. 76 e and f; additional fig. in Karo 1930–1933, pl. XCVIf.).

27–40 Nestor meets with the wounded leaders Agamemnon, Odysseus, and Dio­ medes. Their geographical distance from the events of the battle is explained via the location of the individual ships and of the fleet as a whole. 27 kings: The title basiléus designates both local/regional leaders and the members of a governing body such as that formed by the leaders of the individual Greek contingents before Troy (1.9n.).

Νέστορι …̣ ξύμβληντο: picked up in ὃ δὲ ξύμβλητο γεραιός | Νέστωρ (39  f.); the two verses form a ring around the section concerning the encampment of shops (Stanley 1993, 156; there is also an inner ring at 28/37: van Otterlo 1948, 37  f.; cf. ring-compositionP). — διοτρεφέες βασιλῆες: an inflectible VE formulaP (in total 8× Il., 4× Od., 2× Hes., 1× h.Bacch.; see 1.176n.). On the notion that βασιλῆες enjoy particular divine protection and on Near Eastern parallels, 1.278–279n.

28–29 wounded: Agamemnon’s arm was pierced by a lance (11.251–253), Diomedes was hit in the foot by an arrow (11.375–378), and Odysseus suffered a thrust from a lance into the outer layers of his abdominal tissue (11.434–438). The removal of the best warriors from the battle, together with the absence of Achilleus and Patroklos, resulted in a weakening of the Greek army; Thetis’ plea and Zeus’ plan thus began to come to fruition (11.191–194, 11.206–209). The repeated reference to these injuries (63, 128–130, 379  f., 16.23–26, 19.47–53) calls this crisis to mind; here, the reference represents the basis for the subsequent

26 ἀμφιγύοισιν: on the declension, R 11.2. 27 ξύμβληντο: root aor. of συμβάλλω (mid. with dat.: ‘meet with someone, run into someone’); ξύμ- = σύμ- (R 20.1). — διοτρεφέες: on the uncontracted form, R 6. — βασιλῆες: on the declension, R 11.3, R 3. 28 πάρ᾿: παρά (R 20.1). — νηῶν: on the declension, R 12.1, R 3. — βεβλήατο: = ἐβέβληντο (R 16.1–2). 29 Ὀδυσεύς: on the single -σ-, R 9.1.

Commentary 

 27

consultation, but also the contrasting background to the susequent strengthening of the army by Poseidon (and indirectly by Hera): Postlethwaite 2000, 185; on the respective passages, Reichel 1994, 202  f. — came back along the ships: I.  e. they came from their own ships, beached inside the curve of the bay on the beach in the middle of the encampment of ships (30–36n.; AH), up to the edge of the encampment of ships, toward the wall and thus close to the battle, so as to gain an overview (37n.), while Nestor meant to visit the wounded Agamemnon near his ship (24, he was aware of the injury: 11.661). — Tydeus’ | son: Diomedes (CH 3; on the common replacement of the personal name by a patronymic, 1.1n.; West 2007, 81); he temporarily replaced the absent Achilleus as a fighter (6.96–101n.). — Odysseus: like Diomedes, a member of the innermost leadership circle; characterized by his strategic thinking (CH 3).

βεβλήατο: like βεβλημένον at 63, this really applies only to Diomedes, since he was hit by a missile; cf. 128 (with n.), 379 οὐτάμενοι, 11.660  f. = 16.25  f. βέβληται … Διομήδης, | οὔτασται δ᾿ Ὀδυσεὺς  … ἠδ᾿ Ἀγαμέμνων (schol. AbT; Trümpy 1950, 107, 257 n. 287; Reichel 1994, 203; on the sense of βάλλω, see also 424n.). — χαλκῷ: The physical material of the valuable heads here (as often) stands pars pro toto for the offensive weapons, lances and an arrow (LfgrE s.  v. 1122.16  ff. and 1128.29  f.; cf. 25n.). — Τυδεΐδης Ὀδυσεύς τε καὶ Ἀτρεΐδης Ἀγαμέμνων: a verse constructed in accord with the law of increasing parts, with the third part expanded via an epithetP (1.145n.; West 2007, 117  f.).

29 = 380. 30–36 The panoramic view across the encampment of ships glides from the beach, where the ships of the aforementioned leaders – Agamemnon, Odysseus and Diomedes – are beached (30–31a), to the spot furthest inland, the location of the ships that had been subsequently dragged up onto the beach (31b–32, with n.), in order to encompass the entire bay where the ships have been set in rows in a semi-circle due to lack of space (33–36; schol. A on 35: as a spectator stands of a theater; 1.12b n.). On the localization of the encampment of ships, see the appendix. – Prior to the present passage, the position of individual ships had only been reported briefly (e.  g. at 8.222  f., 11.5–9). The static description here is unusual, in that the poet normally provides topographic markers when describing the movements of a character in a given space (e.  g. Hektor’s walk through Troy in Book 6, Hera’s journey at 225–230, with n.). The precise description of the location of the Achaian fleet here on the one hand (1) explains the specific events: the fact that the leaders only belatedly hear how the Trojans entered the encampment of ships across the distant wall (37; explained in a causal chain: the leaders ascend [28]; reason: the position of their ships below [30–32a] and that of the wall, where the fighting is taking place, above [32b]; reason for this arrangement: the width of the beach [33  f.]; thus: the arrangement of the fleet in tiers [35a] across the entire bay [35b–36];

28 

 Iliad 14

consequently: the leaders hear the noise only late, during their walk [37  f.]). In this way, the description of the location also (2) allows an understanding of Agamemnon’s plan for escape (the ships further inland are not to be dragged into the water before nightfall: 75–79). At the same time, (3) it provides the framework for the battle in the immediate vicinity of the ships further inland that follows (15.384  ff., cf. 15.653–657) and leads to Patroklos’ intervention in the fighting (15.390  ff., 16.1  ff.). Once again, the passage calls to mind the acute, straitened circumstances the Achaians face, while simultaneously putting it in perspective: it also recalls the beginning of the war (analepsisP), the landing of so many ships (which of necessity had to be pulled up onto the beach in rows) and crews, and thus the Achaians’ fundamental superiority (Janko on 14.27–40; Danek 1999, 86–88; Clay 2011, 42  f.). 30 1st VH = 17.403. — ships: those of the leaders Diomedes, Odysseus, and Agamemnon; 9.43  f. also indicates that Agamemnon’s ship is placed close to the sea (Diomedes addressing Agamemnon: ‘next to the water are standing your ships’; schol. bT).

γάρ ῥ(α): Although the reading with two particles is not absolutely necessary metrically (since simple γάρ is lengthened before a vowel at 2.39, etc. [see ad loc.]), it is better attested for the present passage (West, app.crit. and 1998, XXX); ῥ(α) may signal something obvious and serves as an appeal to the audience’s knowledge of the disposition of the fleet. — εἰρύατο νῆες: The υ is lengthened, as in εἰρυ̃́ αται at 75 and at 15.654 (but εἰρυ̃́ ατ(αι) at 1.239, 4.248, Od. 6.265, h.Cer. 152, εἰρυ̃́ ατο Il. 22.303), by analogy with other perfect forms in which the υ precedes a consonant, as in εἴρῡτο at Od. 22.90 and εἰρυ̃́ μεναι at Il. 13.682 (Leaf).

31–32 1st VH of 31 = 1.350, 13.682. — defenses: This is meant purely descriptively and as such can be reconciled with the chronology given elsewhere – the construction of the wall is much later than the landing in the Troad, having namely been erected in the 10th year of the war (7.433–441; Leaf; differently AH on 32).

θίν᾿ ἔφ᾿ ἁλὸς πολιῆς: θίς means ‘beach’ and is used in a manner similar to αἰγιαλός (34) and ἠϊών (36) (1.34n., 2.92n.); ἅλς denotes the sea at the coast. In Homer, the epithet πολιός, probably coined to describe the color of coastal surf, is only used formulaically (1.350n.). — τὰς … πρώτας …, αὐτὰρ … ἐπὶ πρύμνῃσιν: What πρῶτος refers to and

30 πολλόν: Adv., ‘far’; on the declension, R 12.2. — ῥ(α): = ἄρα (R 24.1). — ἀπάνευθε: compound preposition (base: ἄνευ) with gen., ‘away, distant from’. — εἰρύατο: 3rd pers. pl. plpf. pass. of (ϝ)ερύω ‘pull’ (< *ἐ-ϝε-ϝρύατο; on the ending, R 16.2). 31 θίν᾿ ἔφ᾿: = ἐπὶ θῖνα (R 20.2). — πεδίονδε: on the form, R 15.3. 32 εἴρυσαν: aor. of (ϝ)ερύω ‘pull’; < *ἐ-ϝέρυσαν. — αὐτάρ: adversative (R 24.2; ↑). — πρύμνῃσιν: on the declension, R 11.1.

Commentary 

 29

what is meant by πρύμνῃσιν has been debated since antiquity. There are two possibilities: (1) γάρ at 31 introduces an explanation for the position of the leaders’ ships, and πρώτας refers to these and is thus to be taken as a predicate to the anaphoric τάς; in this case, αὐτάρ is an adversative that changes the topic to the ships further inland: ‘these as the first/foremost …, but … by the outermost’. πρῶτος then refers to the ships appearing in front for someone observing the situation from the sea, i.  e. those that had been pulled onto land first, and corresponds to νῆες ὅσαι πρῶται εἰρύαται ἄγχι θαλάσσης at 75 (ancient commentators schol. bT on 31  f., and AH, Faesi, Leaf). Subsequent ships were then placed to the side and behind, further inland (32b–36). (2) According to ­others (the grammatician Heracleon in schol. bT on 31  f.; Winter 1956, 107  f.; Janko; Clay 2011, 80 n. 98), τάς is to be taken as the article with πρώτας sc. ναῦς, while αὐτάρ is progressive; ‘the first (ships) …, and … by the sterns’. In this case, πρώτας designates the ships that were first to land, like that of Protesilaos (2.698n.), and which were thus dragged the furthest inland (πεδίονδε in contrast to the localization of the leaders’ ships via θίν᾿ ἔφ᾿ ἁλὸς πολιῆς); it was here that the Trojans overran the wall (13.681–684). These ships are localized in a similar manner via ὅσαι πρῶται εἰρύατο at 15.654, with the simple πρωτέων at 15.656. But interpretation (2) is opposed by (a) γάρ, which must explain what precedes (Leaf), and by the fact that the leaders’ ships should have been among the first (πρῶτας) to arrive. As a result, πρῶτος here and at 15.654, 15.656 must be used for the purpose of localization (‘at the very front’) in relation to the narrator’s changing vantage point (LfgrE s.  v. πρῶτος 1595.58; 1598.63  ff.). In addition, (b) πεδίον may draw a contrast not with the beach but simply with the sea, as at 16.749 (diver simile) and Od. 9.66 (cf. LfgrE s.  v. πεδίον 1087.10  ff.). ἐπὶ πρύμνῃσιν causes problems for both interpretations. The etymology and meaning of πρυμνός are not clear (related to πρό? Frisk; LfgrE). As an adjective accented at the end, it seems to be used for localization, like ἄκρος or μέσος, with the sense ‘at the thick end, the wide base of something’ (5.292, 13.532, 16.314), in combination with νηῦς ‘aft’ at 7.383, 15.704, 15.435, Od. 2.417, etc., particularly in the phrases ἐπὶ πρυμνῇσι νέεσσι(ν) (VE, 51n.) and νηυσὶν ἔπι πρυμνῇσι(ν) (12.403, 13.762, 15.248). As a noun with the accent shifted, it appears to mean ‘stern’ at 1.409, 8.475, 15.716, 18.76, etc. (LfgrE; on the accent, Kurt 1979, 108  f.; West 1998, XXI). Here it is transmitted largely as proparoxytone in accord with a substantival use. In any case, particular reference to the ships’ ‘sterns’ (interpretation 2) would make no sense (Leaf); at the same time, the word must refer to the outermost row (interpretation 1). Although this sense of πρυμνός is unattested, it is possible: since the ships are lying with their prows facing the beach, ‘sterns’ may here be a term for the front of the entire fleet, as seen from land, in the vicinity of which the wall was built (suggestion by West). In reference to the ships of the leaders (πρώτας), the sterns of those near the wall form the opposing outer edge of the encampment when seen as a unit (which would also work well with the above-mentioned sense ‘at the thick end of something). In sum, interpretation (1) makes more sense.

30 

 Iliad 14

33 οὐδὲ γὰρ οὐδ(έ): a doubled, intensified negation with a particle interposed, as at 2.703, 5.22, 6.130, etc. (Chantr. 2.337  f.); the first οὐδέ establishes the connection with the previous sentence and negates the entire statement (corresponding to a negative version of the common καὶ γάρ), the second refers to εὐρύς περ ἐών and is an intensifier, as in Latin ne … quidem (AH; Willcock). — ἐδυνήσατο: sigmatic aor. from a long-vowel root beside the athematic pres. δύναμαι like e.  g. ἔστησα in relation to ἵστημι (Risch 247); likewise at 5.621, 13.510, 13.607, 13.647, 14.423, Od. 17.303. — πάσας: like ἁπάσης in 35, placed emphatically at VE before an integral enjambmentP. 34 χαδέειν: a thematic aorist, as at 4.24, 8.461, 11.462, from the pres. χανδάνω (with a nasal that is part of the root syllable: 23.742, Od. 17.344; Schw. 1.699; Risch 272); it means ‘contain’, of spaces also at Od. 18.17 (LfgrE s.  v. χανδάνω). — λαοί: ‘servicemen’ (24.1n.). 35 τώ: ‘thus, therefore, for that reason’ (Schw. 2.579); a demonstrative adv. with an old ablative or instrumental ending (Schw. 2.579); on the accent, West 1998, XXII; others prefer a circumflex, e.  g. Führer/Schmidt 2001, 20 n. 111. — προκρόσσας: an adj. related to κρόσσαι (12.258 and 12.444), ‘cantilevered beams, battlements’ (?); πρ. is not attested elsewhere in Homeric epic; as at Hdt. 7.188.1, which mentions a mooring eight rows deep, it must mean ‘in rows, staggered’; here predicative and resultative in reference to the ships (LfgrE) and, because of the terrain that rises from the sea, with the meaning ‘in ranks, in stepped rows’ (AH). 36 στόμα: here ‘mouth, estuary’, ‘bay’, similarly of a harbor at Od. 10.90; of river estuaries at Il. 12.24 and Od. 5.441 (LfgrE s.  v. στόμα 230.2  ff.). — μακρόν: ‘elongated, extended, wide open, wide-ranging’, like the common use for limbs (Od. 10.215; ‘Hes.’ Sc. 266; cf. πτολέμοιο μέγα στόμα 10.8; LfgrE s.  v. μακρός 15.25  ff.; the πολλόν of Zenodotus and others is thus to be rejected). — συνεέργαθον: from συνεέργω ‘enclose, border’ with a locality as the subject, like e.  g. the simplex at 2.617, 2.845, 24.544 (LfgrE s.  v. (ἐ)έργω 404.76  ff.). As at 5.147, 11.437, 21.599 and Od. 21.221, the present stem ἐεργ- is expanded by -αθ-, in a manner analogous to the formation of μετεκίαθον/ε from ἔκιεν (5× Il., 1× Od.; Schw. 1.703 with n. 6; Chantr. 1.328). The lexical aspect of such formations is disputed (Chantr. loc. cit.; Risch 278; cf. 2.304n. on ἠγερέθοντο). 37 2nd VH ≈ 1.492, 6.328, 16.63, h.Hom. 11.3; cf. 14.96. — leaning: because of their injuries (28n.), like Odysseus and Diomedes in the military assembly later (19.49n.).

ὄψ᾿ ἀϊόντες: Although this reading of Zenodotus, transmitted in schol. A, is not re­ presented in the manuscripts (see app.crit.), it fits with the preceding causal chain explaining why the leaders had not heard the battle noises until recently (30–36n.; cf. τώ at VB). ὀψείοντες ‘wanting to see, since they wanted to see’, the reading of Aristarchus and the manuscripts (AH, Leaf; Janko), does not provide a logical connection, is se-

33 οὐδέ: connective οὐδέ/μηδέ is found in Homer also after affirmative clauses (R 24.8). — περ: concessive R 24.10. — ἐών: ὤν (R 16.6). 34 νῆας: on the declension, R 12.1. — χαδέειν: on the form, R 16.4, R 8. 35 ῥα: = ἄρα (R 24.1).

Commentary 

 31

mantically and syntactically at odds with the genitives ἀϋτῆς καὶ πολέμοιο, and would re­present the sole desiderative form in Homeric epic (discussion in Leaf, who nevertheless reads ὀψείοντες; West 2001, 225  f.; both also on the alternative readings ὀψὰ ἰόντες and οὐ ψαύοντες that cannot be justified linguistically or in terms of content). — ἀϋτῆς καὶ πολέμοιο: on πόλεμος meaning ‘fighting, fight’, 2.453n.; LfgrE s.  v. 1335.41  ff.; on the redundancy and the hysteron proteron of the expression as a whole, 1.492n.

38 ≈ Od. 24.420; cf. Od. 16.361; 1st VH ≈ Il. 19.49, Od. 10.170. 39 1st VH = 9.703, 17.22, Od. 5.191; ≈ Il. 9.637, 14.316, 18.113, 19.66, Od. 21.87. — sorrowful: probably because the battle noise (37) leads them to suspect the crisis of which Agamemnon speaks at 42  ff., and because they are forced to remain inactive due to their injuries.

θυμὸς ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν: As the seat of psychological functions (fundamental: 1.24n.), the θυμός is often located within the chest, i.  e. in the central body-cavity (316, 19.66, etc.; cf. 1.189n.). — ξύμβλητο: 27n.

40 ≈ 9.8, 13.808, 15.629, Od. 2.90. — This verse is problematic due to (1) the repetition of θυμὸς/ν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν immediately after 39; (2) the unparalleled use of the personal name (Νέστωρ) after ὁ γεραιός; (3) Ἀχαιῶν which, although formulaic (see above on the iterata), does not fit as the sole designation of only three leaders; and (4) the transitive use of πτήσσω in the sense ‘cause to be dejected, bend’ (LfgrE s.  v. πτῆξαι), which is not otherwise attested until Soph. OC 1466 (ἔπταξα θυμόν). Aristarchus’ athetesis thus appears justified. Bibliography: scholia ad loc. with Erbse’s app. crit. and test.; Leaf; Janko, including discussion of additional attempts at emendation; Hackstein 1992, 147  f. (on linguistic aspects only); West 2001, 226; LfgrE loc. cit.

41–134 The leaders consult regarding possible ways out of the crisis; they ulti­ mately follow Diomedes’ advice to return to the battlefield and spur on the others. In 1-40, the narrator outlined the dangerous situation for the Achaians via primary and secondary focalizationP (1–152n., 4n., 13–15n., 24b–26n.) and elucidated their overall physical and mental weakness via the example of the wounded leaders (28n., 38n.). In the dialogue that follows, he has the leaders assess the situation, especially with regard to who among men and gods is responsible for the situation (frequently in the first part of their speeches), and then recommend a strategy for overcoming the crisis (except in the first and fourth speeches). The six speeches (by Agamemnon – Nestor – Agamemnon – Odysseus – Agamemnon – Diomedes) are linked not only by similar internal 38 κίον: ‘went’, 3rd pers. pl. preterite of a defective verb. — σφι: = αὐτοῖς (R 14.1). 39 ἐνί: = ἐν (R 20.1). — στήθεσσιν: on the declension, R 11.3. — ὃ δὲ … γεραιός: γεραιός is in apposition to the demonstrative, forward-looking pronoun ὅ (R 17); ‘but he, the old man’. — ξύμβλητο: 27n.; sc. σφι.

32 

 Iliad 14

structures, but via external symmetry and parallelism: in the first two pairs, both speeches are of approximately the same length (42–51/53–63: 10 and 11 verses; 65–81/83–102: 17 and 20 verses); the penultimate speech is the shortest (104–108: 5 verses), while the last is the longest (110–132: 23 verses). As the supreme commander, Agamemnon initiates the dialogue (42–51) and responds to each speech (after the sixth, he implements the suggestion: 133n., 134n.). The dialogue develops arguments and counter-arguments toward a consensus (133  f.): Agamemnon’s plan is rejected (fourth speech, 83–102) and Diomedes’ suggestion is adopted, probably not least because he creates a counterweight to Hektor’s menacing superiority via his pride in his own might (also demonstrated in battle) and lineage (42–51n., first speech). Bibliography on the structure: schol. AT on 129–131; Lohmann 1970, 138–141; Janko on 42–132; Danek 1990, 13, 17. The sequence ‘(1) Agamemnon’s defeatist speech, (2) reply, (3) counsel that moves the debate forward’ also corresponds to that in Books 2 and 9 (2.336–368n., 9.9–113). Agamemnon’s defeatism does not prevail in any of these situations. A crisis of leadership is thus overcome here as well (cf. Frazer 1985, 1, who nevertheless considers the resolution complete only with Poseidon’s intervention; Reichel 1994, 201; Schofield [1986] 2001, 249  f.). The dialogue indicates a range of possible reactions to an extreme military situation (Schofield loc. cit. 249), in which none of the leaders is willing to undertake another attempt to convince Achilleus to change his mind (the mood is similar to that after the embassy in Book 9, although Achilleus has at least remained before Troy); this favors Patroklos’ intervention (Janko on 1–152). The fact that Diomedes’ suggestion offers no real way out of the crisis reveals its extent; the actual turn of events is brought about by Poseidon’s intervention and Hera’s subterfuge (135–152n.; AH, Anh. Einl. p. 58; Erbse 1986, 110; Danek 1990, 25  f., 28). 41 ≈ Od. 14.439; 2nd VH = 1.130, 1.285, 2.369, 4.188, 4.356, 7.405, 10.42. — καί: The function of the particle in the present speech introduction formula has been variously explained (24.485n.). — φωνήσας προσέφη: The participle with προσέφη is part of the structure of a typical speech introduction formulaP (with noun-epithet formula): 24.55n.  — κρείων Ἀγαμέμνων: a VE formula; κρείων ‘ruling, commanding’ (1.102n.).

42–51 After the address to Nestor and the introductory question concerning his absence from the battlefield (42  f.), Agamemnon’s words are structured as a ring-compositionP: the center, 46  f., is taken up by an account of Hektor’s threat to burn the ships. This is encircled by a frame of two rings, in which Agamemnon voices his concerns (a similar structure, comprising a recollection of remarks already made at the center, is found in the speeches at 2.23– 34, 5.815–824, 18.6–14), with literal repetitions emphasizing the structure:

Commentary 

 33

inner ring (45–48a): localization of the threat (speech before the Trojans: en Trṓess’ agoréuōn ‘speaking among the Trojans’ – agóreue ‘spoke’) – outer ring (44/48b): fulfillment of Hektor’s words: fear (telései ‘will accomplish’) and certainty (teleítai ‘will be accomplished’): Lohmann 1970, 79  f. with n. 18). As transmitted, this section of the speech, structured as a ring-composition, is followed by three verses (49–51) voicing concern regarding Achaian morale. – The narrator uses the core of the speech – Hektor’s threat to burn the ships and kill all Achaians – to recall two of the Trojan hero’s speeches from the previous day (25th day of the action, see STR 21, Fig.1): the battle paraenesis at 8.173–183 (see esp. the iteratum 8.182 ≈ 14.47, and cf. 15.702) and the speech in the evening at the Trojan assembly at 8.497–541 (Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 107, 121; Reichel 1994, 93, 169). In fact, Agamemnon (like Odysseus at 9.240  ff.) could not have heard these speeches, although an audience merely listening to the story will scarcely have noticed this, especially given that Agamemnon’s assumptions are obvious in and of themselves (see paralepsisP; Reichel 1994, 96  f. with bibliography). The burning of the ships would fulfil Achilleus’ wish (on the fact that the narrator, to build suspense, leaves it open whether and to what extent the Greeks are put even more on the defensive by the intervention of Patroklos, see Rengakos 1999, 325–327); the fire would spell destruction for the ships’ crews, just as the burning of Troy or of other póleis would for their citizens (Graz 1965, 223). Concern for the ships – the sole guarantee for a return home – thus runs as a leitmotif throughout the epic (51n.). Agamemnon’s helplessness and weakness in the face of the present danger is revealed in his respectful address to his foremost adviser in his anxious question, as well as in his plaintive suspicions. His position as the basileús called ánax, i.  e. as supreme commander but with no absolute authority (1.7n., 1.9n., 1.150n.), precarious in any case, has worsened signficantly in the tenth year of the war after the argument with Achilleus and the resulting military failures. Social tensions run high, and even Nestor has criticized Agamemon openly (already suggested at 2.80  f.: seedP: 2.80–82n., 9.108–111, 19.86a n.; Ulf 1990, 91  ff.). The assumption is that 49–51 are a pre-Alexandrian expansion added to support the non-Homeric 40; they should thus be athetized (AH, Anh. Einl. p. 56, followed by Leaf on 49  f.; West 2001, 12 with n. 28, 226  f.). Agamemnon’s (unfounded) fears regarding the dependability of the remaining Achaians in the face of the refusal of Achilleus and his followers to fight are natural (as is illustrated by Poseidon’s paraenesis directed to the young warriors; 13.108–114; 1.327n.; Schadewaldt loc. cit. 122  f.; Reichel loc. cit. 115–117 with n. 19). But they do not fit with Nestor’s speech, in which he confirms Agamemnon’s words straightaway (53) while later stating that the Achaians are fighting ceaselessly (57  f.); similarly, no response by Nestor to a possible vote of no confidence in Agamemnon can be discerned (differently Faesi on 43 and 49  f., Lohmann loc. cit.;

34 

 Iliad 14

Janko on 42–52). It would also be remarkable if Agamemnon, who had only just heard the noise (37), spoke as if he knew that the fighting had reached the outermost ships (51).

42 = 10.87, 10.555, 11.511, Od. 3.79, 3.202; 1st VH = Od. 3.247; 2nd VH = Il. 9.673, 10.544, Od. 12.184. The whole-verse apostrophe stresses the significance of the addressee for the speaker (1.36n., 3.182n.). — son of Neleus: Nestor’s father Neleus was the founder of Pylos (LfgrE s.  v. Νηλεύς 360.57  ff.).

Νηληϊάδη: a patronymic formed on the basis of the variant Νηλήϊος (on which, 2.20n.) as an expansion of the metrically unusable *Νηληΐδης (Risch 148; Willcock); on the formation and use of patronymics, 1.1n. — μέγα κῦδος Ἀχαιῶν: κῦδος denotes a person’s elevation, his superiority and authority, including military ‘superiority, preponderance’ (3.373n.); the address likely means something like ‘great pride’, ‘the Achaians’ asset’. Since it is used only of the strategically minded Odysseus (9.673, 10.544, Od. 12.184) and the highly competent Nestor, it may focus predominantly on the addressee’s intelligence (LfgrE s.  v. κῦδος 1575.55  ff.; cf. 1.122n.).

43 ≈ 6.254. — Agamemnon’s question serves only to remind the audience that he and the other two leaders are unaware of events, since they were forced to leave the battle after sustaining their injuries (11.267  ff., 11.396fff., 11.487  f.; AH; West 2001, 226); the narrator thus does not have Nestor outline explicitly why he is in the encampment of ships, as the audience is already aware of this (schol. bT; West loc. cit.).

τίπτε: = τί ποτε, ‘what then, why?’; here likely signals concern, as at 6.254, 13.250, 15.90 (LfgrE s.  v. 537.16, 539.11  ff.). — φθεισήνορα: a distinctive epithetP of πόλεμος (5× Il., 1× each Hes./‘Hes.’; as here, usually in the acc., between B 1 and C 2) and a prosodic variant of φθεισίμβροτος: Bader 1969, 28. Word formation: the initial element is from φθίνω/ ἔφθεισα, the final element from ἀνήρ with an o gradation, thus: ‘wrecking men’ (Bader loc. cit.; Risch 63  f.). On additional compounds in -ήνωρ, and on the differentiation from those in -ανδρος, LfgrE s.  v. φθισήνωρ; 2.276n.; on the spelling with -ει-, West 1998, XXXVI. — ἀφικάνεις: with perf. sense, like ἱκάνετον at 9.197, ἱκάνω at 13.449, etc.; cf. 6.254: LfgrE s.  v. ἱκάνω 1172.21  f.; ΑΗ.

44 1st VH = 22.455; ≈ Od. 5.300. — δείδω μὴ δή: The full-grade perf. form δείδω, transmitted in all manuscripts, is always found at VB (on the formation from *δέδϝοια, 19.24n.), while the reading of Aristophanes of Byzantium – the zero-grade perf. form δείδια (see app.crit.) – is attested at VB only at 21.536 (Chantr. 1.425; Janko on 43–48, both with reference to the same situation in the tradition at Od. 5.473). δή intensifies the negative and thus Agamemnon’s fear; μὴ δή at 16.81, Od. 18.10 is similarly emphatic (Denniston 223). — ὄβριμος Ἕκτωρ: a VE formulaP, also at 8.473, 10.200, 11.347. ὄβριμος, meaning ‘great, big, massive’, is used as an epithet especially of ἔγχος (3.357n.); in reference to

44 τελέσῃ (ϝ)έπος: on the prosody, R 4.4.

Commentary 

 35

characters, in the Iliad in addition to the present passage 3× of Hektor, 6× of Ares, 1× of Achilleus, in post-Homeric literature 1× each of Orion, the Hundred-handers, and the Bronze Race (19.408n.). Neither metrical arguments nor a particular relationship to Ares serves to explain why Hektor, among all warriors, receives this epithet so frequently (LfgrE s.  v. ὄβριμος 485.38  ff.); the contexts of the passages – Hektor appears as an extremely menacing opponent of the Greeks, always in the period after Achilleus’ withdrawal from battle – and their focalization (3× in character languageP, of which 2× with an Achaian speaker, as here, 1× in narrator-text in secondary focalizationP) suggest that an inherited epithet is perhaps being used in a manner sensitive to context to illustrate Hektor’s threatening size, power and dynamism. 45 1st VH ≈ 8.150; 2nd VH = 8.148. — ὡς: Since what follows (46  f.) examines in detail the content of Hektor’s threat, this reading, transmitted in the majority of manuscripts, is preferable to the ὅς attested in Aristophanes (see app.crit.; AH, Anh. ad loc.; Janko on 43–48 also refers to ὥς ποτ᾿ ἀπειλήσει at 8.150). On such variants in the transmission, 24.388n. — ποτ(ε): technically refers to the previous day (cf. 42–51n. and the temporal markers at 8.530, 8.535, 8.538, 9.240): schol. T on 45; Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 121  f.). The indeterminate marker is likely used because Agamemnon cannot in fact speak of Hektor’s threats as if he had heard them personally (West 2011, 289).

46 2nd VH ≈ 3.313, 21.561, 24.330. 47 ≈ 8.182. — πρὶν … ἐνιπρῆσαι, κτεῖναι δέ: on the inf., 19n. — νῆας … καὶ αὐτούς: ‘the ships … and their crews’ as at 56, 7.338, 7.437, 8.182, 11.666/668, etc. (24.499n.; LfgrE s.  v. αὐτός 1654.54  ff.). — ἐνιπρῆσαι: ‘to light’ (on the verb’s range of meaning, 2.415n.); as frequently elsewhere (another 11× Il.), in connection with threats to the ships by Hektor and the Trojans: LfgrE s.  v. πρήθω 1533.57  f.

48 = 2.330, Od. 18.271; ≈ 8.570, 13.178 (a typical speech capping formula: Führer 1967, 2); 2nd VH ≈ Od. 2.176, 5.302. 49–51 These verses are probably interpolated: 42–51n. 49 ≈ 1.17, 11.149, 23.272, 23.658; VB = 15.185, 18.324, 23.103. — strong-greaved: on the realia, 1.17n.

ὦ πόποι: This expression of surprise and displeasure (1.254n.) is used here, as occasionally elsewhere (13.99, 17.171, Od. 13.209, h.Merc. 309), not at the beginning of a speech (LfgrE s.  v. (ὢ) πόποι 1457.29  ff.) but to introduce a new thought – Agamemnon’s concern regarding the reliability of the fellowship at large. — ἐϋκνήμιδες Ἀχαιοί: an inflectible VE formula (3.86n.).

46–47 πρὶν … πρίν: the first πρίν is an adverb, the second a conjunction: ‘earlier … before’. 47 ἐνιπρῆσαι: aor. of ἐνιπρήθω (by-form of ἐμπίμπρημι). On ἐνί- = ἐν-, R 20.1. 48 κεῖνος: = ἐκεῖνος. — τώς: = οὕτως. 49 ἦ ῥα: ‘certainly’ (R 24.1, R 24.4).

36 

 Iliad 14

50 ἐν θυμῷ βάλλονται ἐμοὶ χόλον: The seat of emotion is here denoted by ἐν θυμῷ (another 3× Il., 1× Od., 2× Hes. at VB); βάλλω is also used elsewhere in this regard with μετὰ/ἐνὶ φρεσίν (LfgrE s.  v. βάλλω: 29.26  ff.; on the interchangeability of terms from the semantic field ‘soul–spirit’, see 1.24n.). ἐμβάλλεσθαι can be used as a middle equivalent of ἐμβάλλω ‘instill thoughts, feelings’ (3.39, Od. 2.79 etc.; cf. 19.88n.), in the sense ‘get something into one’s head, take to heart, have something in mind’ (1.297 [with n.], 15.566, 23.313, Od. 12.218, cf. 9.435), ‘imagine’ (10.447, 20.196; LfgrE loc. cit.); here, in combination with χόλον it means ‘cherish anger’ (AH; an Egyptian parallel for the meta­ phorical use of βάλλειν in West on Hes. Op. 27). ἐμοί is a dat. of disadvantage (1.282– 283a n.; AH). On the differentiation of χόλος ‘(quick) temper’ from μῆνις and κότος, 1.81–82n. and 1.1n.; on the frequent localization of χόλος in the θυμός, Jahn 1987, 196.

51 ≈ 15.722; 2nd VH = 13.333, 19.135. — vessels: The theme – the battle for the ships (19.135n.) – emphasizes Agamemnon’s desperation since, as a result of Achilleus’ withdrawal from battle, the Achaians are literally standing with their backs to the wall (of the ships).

οὐκ ἐθέλουσι μάχεσθαι: ἐθέλω used together with μάχεσθαι forms a formulaic expression (also at VB as here: 15.722; at VE: 4.224, 6.141; separated within the verse: 3.67, 8.210, 17.98, 20.87  f., Od. 13.341): Higbie 1990, 171. In the Iliad, οὐκ ἐθέλω ‘be unready, unwilling’ is often connected with verbs of fighting (cf. 6.522–523a n.): 9.356, 9.436 and 9.674 in reference to Achilleus’ boycott of battle, 13.109, as here in reference to other Achaians (except the Myrmidons) also abstaining from battle in solidarity (as the speaker understands the situation). — ἐπὶ πρυμνῇσι νέεσσιν: a VE formula (19.135n.). On the meaning and accent of πρυμνῇσι, 31–32n.

52–63 Nestor’s speech confirms Agamemnon’s suspicion (44–48) that the situation is dire, at first in general (53  f.), then in reference to the wall (55  f.) and the battle (57–60); his description of the situation is followed by his advice (61–63). The report regarding the wall precedes the description of the battle (Nestor’s perception follows a reverse sequence: 14  f.): it is stressed e.  g. that the wall did not provide the desired protection for the ships (55–56n.; 56 emphatically at VB: árrēkton, ‘could not be torn down’). Achilleus had predicted its uselessness (9.349–352); after the failure of the embassy (Book 9) and the wounding of many leaders (Book 11), Agamemnon is faced with a further setback, a complete catastrophe: Clay 2011, 77; on the role of the wall overall, Tsagalis 2012, 103–105. The description of the consequences – the Trojans have reached the outermost ships (57: epí nēusí stressed as a contrast to the space before the wall: AH), the fighting is extremely intense (58b–60: chaos and noise) – underlines the feeling of great danger, which stands in a relationship of dramatic

50 περ: strengthens ὥς (R 24.10). 51 νέεσσιν: on the declension, R 12.1.

Commentary 

 37

ironyP to the overall plan of the work: Zeus is bound by his promise to have the Trojans push the Achaians back to the sterns of their ships, but he will not let them perish (1.558  f., 8.177  ff., 8.475, 9.348  ff., 12.3  ff.; Thornton 1984, 157–159; de Jong [1987] 2004, 151; Latacz (1995) 2014, 332–334; Grethlein 2006, 240). As in other crises (cf. 2.362–368n.), Nestor is prepared here as well to safeguard the common good with strategic advice (61–63; Roisman 2005, 21). 52 = 4.317, 8.151, 9.162, 10.102, 10.128, 10.143, 11.655, Od. 3.102, 3.210, 3.253. — τὸν δ᾿ ἠμείβετ᾿ ἔπειτα: used as a speech introduction formulaP for a response speech (with τόν/τήν, in total 47× Il., 24× Od., 2× h.Ven.), like the formulae τοῖς ἄρα / τοῖσι δὲ μύθων ἦρχε, τοῖσι δὲ καὶ / τοῖς δ᾿ αὖτις μετέειπε, τὸν δ᾿ αὖτε πρoσέειπε – likewise connected with Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ – which are used exclusively, however, at the beginning of a dialogue or consultation (cf. 1.121n. with bibliography). — Γερήνιος ἱππότα Νέστωρ: a VE formula (21× Il., 10× Od., 1× Hes.). On the origin and meaning of Γερήνιος (probably an adj. related to Gerenia or Gerenos, the name of a Messenian town), 2.336n.; Frame 2009, 12 n. 6; ἱππότα (approximately ‘knight who fights from a chariot’) is an epithet of heroes of the older generation. The nom. ending -ᾰ is likely adopted from the voc. (2.336n.; Frame 2009, 15  f. with n. 15).

53a all these things: Agamemnon’s fears (44–48), caused by Hektor’s statements about the future, which have now become reality: Faesi. Although the ships are not yet on fire, the critical catastrophe – that the Trojans have managed to enter the walled area of the encampment of ships – has come to pass (55–60).

ἦ δή: strongly affirmative (1.518n.). — ἑτοῖμα: The basic meaning is ‘present’, here ‘real(ized), actual’; together with τετεύχαται, it functions as an affirmation of 48 τελεῖται; similarly of facts, Od. 8.384 ἠδ᾿ ἄρ᾿ ἑτοῖμα τέτυκτο: AH; LfgrE.

53b–54 Nestor indicates ‘the limits that are set on the power of the father of the gods. But at the same time, he reveals via his phrasing the force of the influence that Zeus has over the fate of mortals. This influence is much greater than that of other deities’ (Erbse 1986, 223 [transl.]; cf. CG 24; on the relationship between deity and fate, 16.433–438n.). For the audience, however, who are reminded via the mention of Achilleus at 50 of who is helping realize Hektor’s plans of attack (Zeus, 52–63n.), Nestor’s words are filled with dramatic ironyP (Janko on 53–63; Postlethwaite 2000, 186). The notion of a change in the

52 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17). — ἱππότα: nom. sing. of an a-declension noun in -ᾰ (↑). 53 ἦ: ‘truly’ (R 24.4; ↑). — τετεύχαται, οὐδέ: on the so-called correption, R 5.5. — τετεύχαται: 3rd pers. pl. perf. pass. of τεύχω (on the ending, R 16.2); in Homer, a neut. pl. subject can have a predicate that is sing. or pl. — οὐδέ: connective οὐδέ/μηδέ occurs in Homer also after affirmative clauses (R 24.8). — κεν: = ἄν (R 24.5).

38 

 Iliad 14

situation may also prepare for the attempt by Hera and Poseidon to have the Trojans driven back by the Achaians (153–353n.).

53b οὐδέ κεν ἄλλως: a formulaic VE, also at Od. 8.176, 20.211, 24.107.

54 1st VH = 1.354, 12.68, 16.121, Od. 5.4, 23.331, Hes. Th. 601 (cf. 568), Op. 8, ‘Hes.’ fr. 204.97 M.-W., h.Merc. 329. — A typical four-word verse with a clause in enjambment and a personal name (on such verses in general, 1.75n., 16.125–126n. with bibliography). Together with 59 (see ad loc.), it lends particular weight to the speech. — ὑψιβρεμέτης: ‘thundering on high’, an epithetP of Zeus the weather god (1.354n.; 414–415a n.). — παρατεκτήναιτο: metaphorical from the realm of carpentry: ‘change something via carpentry, make something differently’ (LfgrE s.  v. τεκταίνομαι; Müller 1974, 31), probably in the sense ‘undo, make undone’ (AH).

55–56 wall: analepsisP of the building of the wall in Book 7, with literal echoes of 7.338, 437: Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 124; cf. 12.5–8. 55 μὲν γὰρ δή: likewise at 11.825, 16.23, Od. 6.242 at VB; μέν marks a contrast to δ(έ) at 57, γάρ justifies 53  f. — τεῖχος: in emphatic initial position (Ammann 1922, 33). — κατερήριπεν: 15n. — ἐπέπιθμεν: an athematic zero-grade plpf. of intransitive πείθομαι (2.341n.). 56 = 68; ≈ 7.338, 7.437. — ἄρρηκτον: ‘cannot be torn down, solid’, related to ῥήγνυμι; repeatedly of walls, see the iterata and 21.447, Od. 10.4; cf. Il. 12.90 τεῖχος ῥηξάμενοι, 12.198 τεῖχός τε ῥήξειν, 12.257 ῥήγνυσθαι μέγα τεῖχος, etc.; on the stability of walls, cf. also 16.212 τοῖχον … ἀράρῃ πυκινοῖσι λίθοισιν (LfgrE). The v.l. ἄρρατος with non-Ionic α (schol. T) ‘hard’ is not attested until Plat. Rep. 535C and Crat. 407d (Leaf; Janko on 53–56). — νηῶν τε καὶ αὐτῶν: 47n.

57 1st VH ≈ 13.84, 16.201 (see ad loc.), 16.547, 21.135. — fast: the most common epithet of ships (1.12n.).

μάχην … ἔχουσιν: Expressions with an action noun as the object of ἔχω are often equivalent in meaning to a verbal statement, here μάχονται; likewise at 10.515, 13.10, 14.135 οὐδ᾿ ἀλαοσκοπιὴν εἶχ(ε), Od. 24.515/‘Hes.’ Sc. 241/251 δῆριν ἔχουσι/ἔχοντες/ἔχον, Il. 19.133 ἔργον … ἔχοντα, etc. (LfgrE s.  v. ἔχω 844.47  ff.). — ἀλίαστον: ‘inescapable, something one cannot avoid, cannot escape’ (2.797n., 16.295–296n.).

58 νωλεμές: at the end of the sentence in emphatic enjambment; likewise the metrical variant νωλεμέως at 13.3, 13.780, Od. 20.24 (LfgrE; on the – uncertain – etymology, 19.232n.). — οὐδ᾿ ἂν ἔτι γνοίης: as at 5.85 (but there in narrator-text) and like the expression φαίης/ἴδοις + κε/ἄν (see 3.220n. with a collection of examples) in the past

55 κατερήριπεν: ‘is destroyed’ (cf. 15n.). — ᾧ ἐπέπιθμεν: on the bridging of hiatus by non-syllabic ι (hoy epépithmen), M 12.2. — ἐπέπιθμεν: intransitive plpf. of πείθω (↑). 56–57 νηῶν … νηυσί: on the declension, R 12.1. — θοῇσι: on the declension, R 11.1. 57 οἵ: demonstrative (R 17); the Achaian warriors are meant. 58 νωλεμές: adv. — περ: stresses the preceding μάλα, ‘even if especially …’ (R 24.10).

Commentary 

 39

potential, an address directed to a secondary narrateeP (‘you should have been able to recognize’), here as witness of a situation that is very (μάλα περ) hard to assess in detail; 16.638  f. (see ad loc.) οὐδ᾿ ἂν ἔτι φράδμων περ ἀνὴρ Σαρπηδόνα δῖον | ἔγνω (sc. in the melee: de Jong [1987] 2004, 57  f.) is comparable. — σκοπιάζων: related to σκοπός ‘scout’, ‘spy’; here ‘look intently’ (LfgrE). 59 A typical four-word verse with an independent clause (54n.). — ὀρινόμενοι κλονέονται: 14n. 60 2.VH ≈ 2.153, 8.192, 8.509, 12.338, Od. 9.20, 15.329, 17.565, h.Ap. 442. — ἐπιμίξ: ‘mixed up, muddled’, in reference to a ‘confused situation in battle’, as also at 11.525, 21.16 (LfgrE). — ἀϋτὴ δ᾿ οὐρανὸν ἵκει: The metaphor denotes shouting that transcends the human scale (2.153n.); here perhaps with reference to the similar phrase at 13.837, ἠχὴ … ἵκετ᾿ αἰθέρα καὶ Διὸς ἀυγάς (1–152n.; Rengakos 1995, 27). 61 = 4.14; ≈ 14.3, Od. 17.274, 23.117; 2nd VH = Il. 2.252, 20.116 (with φράζεσθον at 115), Od. 17.78. — ἡμεῖς δέ: an abrupt transition from the description of the situation to the conclusion. — ὅπως ἔσται: 3n.

62 wit: nóos here means ‘thinking, intellect’ (24.354n.; Clarke 1999, 124  f.; cf. also 23.604, Od. 3.128, 19.479, 20.20  f.). ‘The physical capacity of the Achaian heroes has come to naught, hence Nestor’s appeal must aim at their intellectu­ al facilities, which in these circumstances are alone still able to bring about a turn in military fortunes’ (Jahn 1987, 83 [transl.]). — we: In what follows (63), Nestor justifies his advice with the fact that no one can fight when wounded (63n.), while diplomatically including himself in the ‘we’, since he too is no longer able to participate in battle for physical reasons (due to old age) (Faesi; on Nestor’s age, 2.601n.).

ῥέξει: ῥέζω ‘do, act’, here ‘cause, bring about, effect’ (Faesi; LfgrE s.  v. ῥέζω 11.28  f.). Forms of ῥέζω (found here in most of the manuscripts) and of ἔρδω (a side-tradition, see app.crit.) appear together as variants elsewhere at e.  g. 9.535 (West 1967, 259); the readings ἔρξοι/ἔρξει are probably influenced by ἔργα in the preceding verse (Bader 1965,  9).  — οὐκ  … κελεύω: The negative and the verb form a conceptual unit, as at 6.444, 24.297, etc. (Schw. 2.593  f.): ‘advise against’ (AH).

63 when he is wounded: 28n.

δύμεναι (+acc.): here ‘to throw oneself into’ (6.185n.). — ἐστί: the full verb; on the accentuation in accord with the position of the word, 6.267n.

59 ὁπποτέρωθεν: on the suffix -θεν, R 15.1. — κλονέονται: on the uncontracted form, R 6. 60 ὥς: = οὕτως, ‘thus, to this extent’. 61 τάδε (ϝ)έργα: on the prosody, R 4.3. 62 ἄμμε: = ἡμᾶς (R 14.1). 63 δύμεναι: on the form, R 16.4. — βεβλημένον: as acc. subject sc. τινα (‘one’). — ἐστί: ‘it is possible’ (↑).

40 

 Iliad 14

64 = 9.114, 10.64, 10.119, 19.184. — A speech introduction formulaP (3.58n.) — lord of men: On the meaning of this (originally probably Mycenaean) title, 1.7n.

προσέειπεν: προς-έϝειπεν is a reduplicated thematic aor. derived from dissimilated *-e-ṷe-ṷqṷ- (Schw. 1.745; Rix [1976] 1992, 216). — ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ἀγαμέμνων: an inflectible VE formula (1.172n.).

65–81 Agamemnon’s speech is structured in a manner comparable to Nestor’s earlier words (parallel formP): after having described the situation again (65–73 repeat 53–60 with word-for-word echoes, esp. 68 =  56), the supreme commander draws his conclusions (74–81, corresponding to 61–63) and, like Nestor, underpins them at the end with a seemingly apologetic gnome (81, corresponding to 63). At the same time, the sequence within the description of the situation is inverted in a chiastic manner, with Agamemnon ending up speaking about Zeus’ will (69–73) via reference to the battle at the ships (65) and the condition of the wall (66–68) (Nestor: Zeus’ will 53  f., wall 55  f., battle at the ships 57–60). This directs the focus to responsibility for the precarious situation (on the structure of the speech, AH on 65; Lohmann 1970, 139  f.; Danek 1990, 14). — The notion that the gods are responsible for success (or lack thereof) in battle (69) is common in Homeric epic (5.185–187, 5.603–606, 8.140–144, 13.225–227, 15.488–493, 16.119–121 [see ad loc.], 17.629–647, 20.98, etc.; Fenik 1968, 188; Frazer 1985, 3); cf. the tendency of characters to ascribe divine motivation to such events when no originator is apparent (19.273b–274n.; cf. Jörgensen’s principleP). The concept of a deity with authority over both victory and defeat, granting them at will (71–73), is normal as well (16.689–690n.). But here divine responsibility is stressed even more strongly: the dire straits of the Achaians are actually ‘welcome’ to Zeus (69 phílon, as at 7.31  f. the gods delight in destroying the city), and Agamemnon thinks he knows that Zeus would grant success in battle to the Trojans as if they were gods (72  f., with n.) – exactly what Hektor desires (13.825–829). There is a discrepancy between the speaker’s firm conviction (71  f. eídea, oída ‘I knew, I know’) that he knows Zeus’ attitude, which he already invoked earlier (69 = 2.116, 9.23), and reality – Agamemnon’s responsibility for Achilleus’ withdrawal from battle and Zeus’ actual plan, the Diós boulē (1.5n.; dramatic ironyP; on divine responsibility, 19.273b–274n.). Similarly, the idea of retreat in the face of enemies acting with divine support is not unusual in and of itself (16.119–122a n.) and seems reasonable and natural in a desperate situation (cf. Hektor’s fears at 8.510  f.; Albracht [1895] 2005, part II, 120; Robert 1901, 127; on the motif ‘advice to withdraw’ in general, 18.255n.). But the supreme commander does not come 64 προσέειπεν: = προσεῖπεν.

Commentary 

 41

up with a sophisticated plan for flight, nor with a real strategy for resistance; instead, he considers a retreat that can only end in catastrophe for his men (99–102; 83–102n.). Agamemnon’s suggestion thus illustrates his strategic incompetence (Taplin 1990, 74: ‘this is perhaps his lowest point of cowardice and incompetence’). Nestor’s warning (62a) was futile. On this account, the present, second suggestion of retreat is met with violent criticism – as was the first (9.26  ff.) – here by Odysseus (83–102n.). That the narrator also wishes to illustrate the difference in thinking between the two leaders, Agamemnon and Odysseus, cannot be excluded: the same basic idea, ‘retreat during the night’, that was hatched by Agamemnon as a disastrous plan in the context of a crisis, ultimately turns in Odysseus’ hands into a superior move by the winners of the war: the Achaians’ feigned departure for home – in reality the journey ends in Tenedos – followed by the entry of the wooden horse into the city and its capture (Od. 8.500  f., Ilias Parva, Proclus’ summary Chrest. § 5 West; Kullmann 1960, 229; Postlethwaite 2000, 186).

Ancient scholars (schol. D; schol. bT on 75–81; Eust. 967.43  ff.; also considered by Faesi on 69) speculated that, as in Book 2 (Diapeira), Agamemnon’s suggestion should be not be understood as a serious suggestion but as a test of the other leaders. But any indication in this direction is lacking (cf. 2.73– 75n.; Janko on 65–81), while the military situation here differs greatly from that of Book 2.

65 ≈ 12.403, 13.762, 15.248; 2nd VH ≈ 8.475, 15.385. — since now …: Nestor’s depressing news is turned into a declaration and made the logical basis for the suggestion that follows (75–79).

πρυμνῇσι: on the meaning and accent, 32n., 51n.

66 ditch: Agamemnon expands on Nestor’s description of the situation (55  f.), unnecessarily worsening the report, and emphatically points to ruined hopes once again (Thornton 1984, 159).

οὐκ ἔχραισμε: χραισμέω means ‘serve as defence, protect’, here absolute, as at 1.242 (see ad loc.), 21.316, etc. (LfgrE). — τετυγμένον: ‘in emphatic position: «strongly built» is almost concessive’ (AH [transl.]).

67 ᾗ: This reading, attested in all manuscripts, makes formal reference only to τάφρος; the wall and ditch are nevertheless treated as a single unit, as is demonstrated by what follows (67  f.; in addition, 68 repeats Nestor’s statement at 56, there in reference to the wall). Aristarchus’ οἷς (schol. A, T, adopted by AH and Leaf) is thus unnecessary

65 νηυσὶν ἔπι: = ἐπὶ νηυσί (R 20.2). 66 οὐδέ τι: ‘and in no way’ (τι is acc. of respect [R 19.1], thus originally ‘and not in any regard’). 67 ᾗ ἔπι: on the hiatus, R 5.7; = ἐφ᾿ ᾗ (R 20.2). — Δαναοί, (ϝ)έλποντο: on the prosody, R 4.4. — ἔλποντο: on the unaugmented form, R 16.1.

42 

 Iliad 14

(Janko on 67–70). — πόλλ᾿ ἔπαθον: during construction (7.436–442, esp. 7.442). — ἔλποντο δὲ θυμῷ: paratactic (AH); Od. 3.275 ἔλπετο θυμῷ, 3.319 ἔλποιτό γε θυμῷ are similar, and are likewise at VE. On the θυμός as the seat of mental impulses, 1.24n.

68 = 56 (see ad loc.). 69 = 2.116, 9.23; ≈ 13.226: always in reference to apparently hopeless situations. The line is uttered 3× by Agamemnon as an expression of resignation, while Idomeneus at 13.225  ff. – like Odysseus and Diomedes here – is determined to continue fighting, despite the adverse circumstances. – 2nd VH ≈ 1.564 (Zeus on himself; see ad loc.).

οὕτω: pointing backward, as in the iterata at 2.116 and 9.23 (Janko on 67–70). — που … μέλλει: μέλλει + inf. means ‘everything points toward, indicates/it is highly likely that’, που ‘I think so, probably’ (2.116n.). — ὑπερμενέϊ: ‘having μένος, physical and mental energy, in excess’; an epithet of Zeus (2.116n.). On the long -ι of the dat. sing. ending, 2.116n. — φίλον εἶναι: ‘is beloved’, φίλος ‘dear’ serving here as a designation of divine inclination, even capriciousness (similarly at 1.564 [see ad loc.], 4.17, Od. 1.82, etc.): Landfester 1966, 106  f.

70 = 12.70, 13.227 (νωνύμνους ἀπολέσθαι ἀπ᾿ Ἄργεος ἐνθάδ᾿ Ἀχαιούς). The verse, which is missing from the best manuscripts (see app.crit.), is probably a concordance interpolation from 13.227; it was presumably meant to explain οὕτω in 69, but the latter refers backward (see ad loc.; AH on 69; Janko on 67–70; West 2001, 13 with n. 31). 71–72 εἴδεα μὲν γάρ, ὅτε …, | οἶδα δὲ νῦν, [ὅτε] ὅτι: εἴδεα: likewise εἴδε᾿ at 8.366, Attic ᾔδη; the uncontracted ending of the 1st pers. sing. plpf. in -εα with expanding ε occurs also in ἐτεθήπεα (Od. 6.166), πεποίθεα (Od. 4.434, 8.181) and ἠνώγεα (Od. 9.44, 10.263, 17.55): Schw. 1.778; Chantr. 1.438. Anaphora of a verb (usually the predicate, in connection with μὲν … δέ) with a change of tense is rare; parallels: 6.192  f. (δίδου/δῶκε), 21.372  f. (ἀποπαύσομαι/παυέσθω), Od. 18.67  f. (φαῖνε/φάνεν), Hes. Th. 212 (τέκε/ἔτικτε): Fehling 1969, 193, 213. After εἴδεα and οἶδα used absolutely, ὅτε follows in 71 as an expression of a generally known fact, as often after verbs of knowing or remembering (e.  g. at Od. 16.424: K.-G. 2.368  f.). In 72, on the other hand, νῦν is to followed by the better attested ὅτι (rather than ὅτε), since νῦν does not require a temporal complement, while the ὅτι sentence better reflects the subjective view of the speaker (AH Anh.). 71 πρόφρων: ‘inclined toward’; as elsewhere, predicative in relation to a verb with the meaning ‘help, succor, assist’ (e.  g. 1.77 ἀρήξειν, 10.290 παρέστης, Od. 13.391 ἐπαρήγοις); the opposite is κακὰ/ὀλοὰ φρονέων. Very often of deities, as here (LfgrE s.  v. 1579.30  ff.). On the basic meaning and the nuances of the word, 1.77n.

68 = 56. 69 ὑπερμενέϊ: on the prosody, ↑. 71 εἴδεα: 1st pers. sing. plpf. of the perf. οἶδα; on the unaugmented form, R 16.1. — Δαναοῖσιν: on the declension, R 11.2.

Commentary 

 43

72–73 The idea of lending kýdos, supernatural power and presence (42n.), to one party while binding (i.  e. paralyzing) its opponents appears to have its origin in magic (Benveniste 1969, 66  f.; Detienne/Vernant 1974, 85 with n. 85); similarly metaphorical at 2.111 (see ad loc.), Od. 4.380 ‘who among the immortals binds me and has hindered my journey’ (Leaf). — these people: the Trojans.

τοὺς μέν … | … ἡμέτερον δέ μένος: The possessive pronoun comprises the antithesis of τούς. — μακάρεσσι θεοῖσιν: a VE formulaP (in total 4× Il., 3× Od., 8× ‘Hes.’, 1× h.Hom.). μάκαρ, predominantly an epithet of gods, probably means in essence ‘living safely and carefree’ (1.339n.). — κυδάνει: denominative of κῦδος (Risch 271), also at 20.42, elsewhere κυδαίνω; ‘furnish with supernatural strength, lend success’, to give conspicuous success in battle, similar to κῦδος διδόναι 13.303, 18.456, etc., ἐγγυαλίζειν 15.491 (LfgrE). — μένος καὶ χεῖρας: μένος here means approximately ‘aggressive energy’ (1.103n.); frequently connected with χείρ in hendiadys (6.502n.).

74 = 2.139, 9.26, 9.704, 12.75, 14.370, 15.294, 18.297, Od. 13.179; ≈ Od. 12.213, h.Ap. 486. After analysis of the situation, the formulaic verse introduces a demand that is occasionally (as here) contradicted (2.139n.). 75 ≈ 15.654. — νῆες: nom. rather than the acc. νῆας: so-called inverse attraction (K.-G. 2.413; the antecedent is attracted to the case of the relative pronoun, as at 10.416, 14.371 and perhaps 6.396 [see ad loc.]; differently Havers 1926, 249, cf. 251: ‘an isolated emphatic nominative’ [transl.]); ‘more idiomatic than the variant νῆας’ (Janko on 75–77; so too Leaf). The emphasis in the nominative that provides a frame is thought to be a phenomenon drawn from colloquial language (K.-G. 2.414) or a characteristic of oral narration (Bakker 1997, 100–108). — πρῶται: ‘as the first approaching from the sea, the leaders, the foremost’ (from the direction of the sea): 31–32n., predicative and proleptic (Schw. 2.181). 76 2nd VH = 1.141, Od. 8.34; ≈ 2.152, Od. 3.153, 4.577, 5.261, 11.2. — ἕλκωμεν … ἐρύσσομεν: ‘haul down along the landing ditches’ (durative) … ‘haul into the sea’ (resultative; AH; Willcock; on the landing ditches, the ‘keel channels’: 2.153n.). The two verbs have a suppletive relationship: the aor. of ἐρύω stands in for the unattested aor. of ἕλκω (cf. the variants in the 2nd VH at 2.152/Od. 3.153 ἑλκέμεν/ἕλκομεν εἰς ἅλα δῖαν; Kölligan 2007, 130). — πάσας: ‘all these’; ἁπάσας at 79 thus refers to all Achaian ships (without exception) (Faesi; Leaf; LfgrE s.  v. ἅπας 994.36  ff., 996.56  ff.). — εἰς ἅλα δῖαν: a VE formula (1.141n.); on the formularity of δῖος, see FOR 40 n. 4 and 59 n. 25. The sense of δῖος

72 μακάρεσσι: on the declension, R 11.3. 74 ἄγεθ᾿ (ἄγετε): originally imper. of ἄγω; fossilized as a particle that lends weight to orders: ‘come!’ — ἐγὼ (ϝ)είπω: on the prosody, R 4.4. 75 πρῶται (ϝ)ειρύαται: on the prosody, R 4.4. — εἰρύαται: on the ending, R 16.2. 76 δὲ (ϝ)ερύσσομεν: on the prosody, R 4.3. — ἐρύσσομεν: short-vowel aor. subjunc. (R 16.3), likewise ὁρμίσσομεν in 77; on the -σσ-, R 9.1.

44 

 Iliad 14

is generally obscure (cf. 1.141n.; LfgrE s.  v. 313.23; DELG: ‘affiliated with heaven/Zeus, shining, gleaming’; see also Janko on 75–77). 77 ὕψι: related to ὕπ-ο with a locative (or analogous) -ι as in ἦρι, ἄρτι, ἄντι (Frisk); ‘above’, here ‘high’, i.  e. above the stone anchors in the water below the prow, similarly ὑψοῦ at Od. 4.785, 8.55: LfgrE; 1.436n. — ἐπ᾿ εὐνάων: ‘at the stone anchors’ (to secure the ships, 1.436n.). — ὁρμίσσομεν: related to ὅρμος ‘landing, beaching point’ (1.435n.), literally ‘let the ship run onto the ὅρμος’, i.  e. row onto the beach during landing or, as here, haul them from the land into the water (and secure them to the land). In the end, the ship is moored in such a way that the stern is set on the beach, the prow in the water (LfgrE; Kurt 1979, 194 with n. 28). — εἰς ὅ κεν ἔλθῃ: = 21.231, Hes. Op. 630 (likewise at VE). 78 2nd VH to 79 Τρῶες: = 11.799  f., 16.41  f., 18.199  f. — ἀβρότη: attested only here, beside νὺξ … ἄμβροτος (Od. 11.330), ἀμβροσίην διὰ νύκτα (Il. 2.57), νύκτα δι᾿ ἀμβροσίην (10.41, 10.142, 24.363, Od. 9.404, 15.8, always at VB), ἀμβροσίη νύξ (Od. 4.429, 4.574, 7.283, always at VE) and νὺξ … | ἀμβροσίη (Il. 18.267  f., in a comparable situation). A by-form of ἄμβροτος, which is usually understood as ‘divine gift’ or ‘containing/giving vitality’ in reference to the night, like the derivative ἀμβρόσιος (2.57n.). ἀβρότη may be a replacement for the metrically impossible ἀμβρότη (Schmitt 1967, 765; Thieme 1968, 125 with n. 25; Hainsworth 1968, 62), but the short initial vowel might instead depend on a pre-Mycenaean formula *νὺξ ἀμr̥ τα (Wackernagel [1914] 1953, 1170 n. 1; West 1988, 156; Janko on 78–79; Ruijgh 1995, 89; cf. G 15 on r̥ > ρο). — ἢν … ἀπόσχωνται: either prospective, as an expression of a (confident) expectation (AH), or with a final sense as at 1.420 (see ad loc.), ‘in the hope they would let off’. — καί: probably ‘also’; to be connected with τῇ (AH). — τῇ: referring to νύξ (AH; Willcock) or adverbial ‘then’ (Janko on 78–79). 79 ἔπειτα: ‘«then», ἢν ἀπόσχωνται’ (AH). — ἐρυσαίμεθα: The potential may well suggest that Agamemnon himself does not really believe in the success of his plan: he expects a Trojan attack even at night that might force the Achaians to abandon the remaining ships (Janko on 78–79; Danek 1999, 87 n. 37). — ἁπάσας: 76n. on πάσας.

80–81 As is often the case, the speech concludes with a statement that at least resembles a gnome (1.218n.; Ahrens 1947, 38) and suggests measures (80) that will hopefully succeed (81): AH. These measures are thus characterized as reasonable, while the war is reduced to a general ‘evil’ (reiterated kakón; schol. bT on 80; Pagani 2008, 371). But in heroic society, it is actual consequences that count, rather than mitigating circumstances (Cairns 1993, 74  f.; cf. 65–81n.

77 εὐνάων: on the declension, R 11.1. — εἰς ὅ κεν: ‘until’ (κεν = ἄν: R 24.5). 78 ἀβρότη, ἤν: on the hiatus, R 5.6. — τῇ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3) referring to νύξ, in which case this is a locative dat. without preposition (R 19.2); or adverbial (↑). — πολέμοιο: on the declension, R 11.2. 79 κεν (ϝ)ερυσαίμεθα: on the prosody, R 4.5. On the alternation act. (76 ἐρύσσομεν) – mid. ἐρυσαίμεθα, R 23; sc. εἰς ἅλα (cf. 76). — νῆας: on the declension, R 12.1.

Commentary 

 45

and Odysseus’ subsequent criticism); the interjection ‘not even at night’ reveals the speaker’s awareness that a clandestine departure by night does not match heroic standards in any way.

φυγέειν … | … φεύγων προφύγῃ: φυγέειν is ingressive ‘to take flight’, φεύγων ‘via flight’, προφύγῃ resultative ‘escape’ (AH on 80 and 81; similarly Leaf). The partial recurrence (paronomasia) of an etymologically similar verb stem in a participle that lends more emphasis to the expression as a whole is primarily attested in post-Homeric literature (Fehling 1969, 265; Schw. 2.388, 699  f.).

80 οὐ  … τις νέμεσις: ‘there is no outrage’, i.  e. ‘one cannot be outraged in any way’ (3.156n.). — ἀνὰ νύκτα: ‘during the night’; temporal ἀνά is attested only here in Homeric epic (K.-G. 1.474). 81 ὅς: = εἴ τις; the demonstrative is to be supplied mentally (‘for this one who’); likewise at Od. 15.72, Hes. Op. 327 (Leaf; cf. 19.235n.). — ἁλώῃ: 3rd pers. sing. aor. act. subjunc. of the athematic asigmatic root aor. ἁλῶναι ‘get into a hopeless situation, get killed, get caught’ (Attic with expanded present ἁλίσκομαι; Schw. 1.359, 741); in (implied) contrast to ‘escape’, as here, also at 11.405, Od. 14.183, 15.300, 18.265 (LfgrE s.  v. ἁλῶναι).

82 = 4.349, Od. 8.165, 18.14, 22.60, 22.320; ≈ 18.337, 19.70, 22.34; 1st VH (with slight variations) 17× Il., 9× Od. — The glance, always mentioned in speech introduction formulaeP, expresses consternation at a violation of social norms; at 5.251, 12.230, 18.284, as here, regarding a course of action that is shameful in the view of the speaker (1.148n., 2.245n.; Cairns 2003, 42). — resourceful: a standard epithet of Odysseus, who is characterized by his ability to think strategically: 3.200n.

ὑπόδρα: on the word formation, 1.148n.

83–102 Odysseus’ speech is comprised of three topics: (a) Agamemnon’s plan, (b) a critique of that plan, (c) Agamemnon’s obligation as supreme commander, with each topic given in three sections: 1) 83–87: intimation of declining the plan (a, 83), cursing of the addressee (b, 84a), his position (c, 84b–87); 2) 88–95: the plan to abandon the conquest of Troy (a’, 88  f.), a warning regarding the likely reaction by the others (b’, 90–91a), his responsibility (c’, 91b–94, with an intensification: a man who is reasonable, a leader with as many followers as Agamemnon! Eust. 968.14  ff.; Janko on 91–94);

80 φυγέειν: on the form, R 16.4, R 8. 81 βέλτερον: sc. ἐστι. — ἠέ: = ἤ. — ἠὲ (ϝ)αλώῃ: on the prosody, R 4.3; likewise ὑπόδρα (ϝ)ιδών and σε (ϝ)έπος in 82  f. 82 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3).

46 

 Iliad 14

3) 95–102: the plan to haul the ships out to sea during battle (a’’, 96–97a), framed by criticism: the army will perish this way (b’’, 95 and 97b–102a), address: due to you, the supreme commander (c’’, 102b) (Lohmann 1970, 95–97). At the same time, a shift from the emotional to the concrete and rational is observable: within the topic ‘plan’ (a) from the abandonment of the conquest of the city (on the significance of which, 2.12n.) to the launching of the ships; within the topic ‘criticism’ (b) from general invective to references to criticism by others, with an effective omission of possible moral arguments, in order to lend more weight to the speaker’s rational objection; while the topic ‘obligations of the supreme commander’ (c) culminates in the sarcastic address ‘lord of men’ after two extensively argued sections treating Agamemnon’s position and responsibilities (Lohmann loc. cit.; Hohendahl-Zoetelief 1980, 43  f.). Nowhere else does Odysseus criticize Agamemnon as harshly as he does here (Reichel 1994, 215), but he does so within a small circle of leaders (Faesi on 90). He primarily attacks Agamemnon’s strategic abilities in the context of a terrible military situation (52–63n.; on the criticism of phrénes, the reasoning faculty, 6.352n.), rather than his moral qualities (he does not accuse him of e.  g. cowardice at this point; Janko on 83–102; Jones on 82–102). His dangerous and defeatist plan could lead to a general refusal to follow his lead and thus completely undermine his position of leadership, precarious as it is (1.150n.) (90–94; Lohmann loc. cit. 97; Ulf 1990, 42, 89; cf. Kemper 1993, 16  f.). The supreme commander is not allowed to lay the responsibility at the feet of Zeus (Danek 1990, 21) or set aside the heroic norm that the war, given by Zeus, must not be suspended (85b–87n.); however arduous, the war is an inescapable fate (Erbse 1986, 221  f.; Hellmann 2000, 11; 85b–87n.), and to return home after great losses, nullifying all efforts up to this point, is extremely shameful (cf. 2.160/176  ff.: 2.115n.). In this regard, the speech matches the characterization of Odysseus elsewhere: he has internalized the heroic norm (4.360  f., 11.403–413) despite the laborious life it entails (85–87n.); his harsh criticism notwithstanding, he remains loyal to Agamemnon (cf. in contrast Achilleus’ resistance in Book 1 and Diomedes’ criticism at 9.32–49) and by means of his cleverness identifies actual strategic needs (at 2.188  ff. he prevents the army from a rash retreat, at 19.155–183 he ensures that the men eat before battle; he later manages to conquer Troy and return to Ithaca): Lohmann 1970, 97 n. 50; Janko on 83–102; Kullmann (1968) 2001, 393  f.; Willcock on 100. This skill and agility, on display at all times, is also reflected in the flowing style of Odysseus’ speech, with its numerous subclauses (in contrast to Agamemnon’s breathless style at 14.65–81: Martin 1989, 103; Montiglio 2000, 46 n. 1; cf. 3.221–222n.).

Commentary 

 47

83 = 4.350; ≈ Od. 1.64, 3.230, 5.22, 19.492, 21.168, 23.70. — The formulaic verse, always used at the beginning of speeches, expresses a rebuke: the speaker signals to the addressee that his words had better been left unsaid (LfgrE s.  v. ἕρκος 707.16  ff.). Cf. 330n.

Ἀτρεΐδη: in the Iliad 23× at speech beginning; an address with a simple patronymic, without personal name and/or epithet, is not disrespectful (1.59n.). — ἕρκος ὀδόντων: ‘fence of teeth’ (on the basic meaning of ἕρκος, ‘enclosure’, 1.283b–284n.); a VE formula (see iterata; also at 9.409, Od. 10.328): LfgrE s.  v. ἕρκος 707.16  ff.

84 οὐλόμεν(ε): related to ὄλλυμι, an aor. mid. part. used adjectivally, ‘accursed!, damned!’ (likewise in the voc. at Od. 17.484); initial syllable with metrical lengthening (1.2n.; LfgrE). — ἀεικελίου: formed like ἀεικής from an α-privative and the stem εἰκ- (Risch 122; on the word formation in detail, Blanc 2012, 54–63); in the Odyssey of objects and abstracts, meaning ‘unseemly’, metaphorically of the army only here, ‘unworthy, inferior’ (LfgrE). On the notion of the correspondence between a bad leader and his followers, cf. 1.231n., 1.293n. — ἄλλου: sc. ‘than we are’.

85b–87 Nestor, Diomedes (though young) and Odysseus have already fought prior to the Troy campaign (van Wees 1992, 168). The idea that Zeus is encouraging the Trojan War, and thus the suffering and death of many warriors, appears to be traditional (11.53–55, Od. 8.81  f., ‘Hes.’ fr. 204.118  f. M.-W.; cf. the portrayal of the race of heroes as warriors at Thebes and Troy at Hes. Op. 156– 165; Scodel 1982, 47  f.); similarly of the divine will at Joshua 11:20 (West 1997, 382). On Kullmann’s view ([1956] 1992, 36  f. with n. 3) that the present passage represents a clear reference to the myth, discernible in the Cypria, that Zeus let the war erupt because of overpopulation on earth, see 1.5n. As here, the war (pólemos) is often assigned negative epithets and is equivalent to pónos ‘labor/trouble’: Trümpy 1950, 149; a negative view of the war also at schol. D on 4.509; a list of all negative epithets relating to war in de Jong (1987) 2004, 231–233. Cf. Odysseus’ epithets polýtlās, tlēmōn, talasíphrōn, ‘(much) enduring’ with his reference to the burdensome heroic life (Faesi on 85). 85 VE = Od. 16.422. — σημαίνειν: ‘command’, only here with a gen. as after other denominative verbs e.  g. κρατεῖν, ἄρχειν; elsewhere with the dat. (e.  g. 1.289, 1.296, 2.805): LfgrE s.  v. 107.9  f. — ἀνασσέμεν: ‘have the high command’ (cf. 1.287–289n.); here with a dat. of (dis)advantage (ἄμμιν): ‘be the supreme commander for us’ (LfgrE s.  v. 794.73  ff.).

83 σε … ἕρκος: acc. of the whole and the part (R 19.1). 84 αἴθ(ε) = εἴθε. — ὤφελλες + inf.: ‘you should …’. — στρατοῦ ἄλλου: on the correption, R 5.5. 85 ἄμμιν: = ἡμῖν (R 14.1). — ἀνασσέμεν: on the form, R 16.4. — ἄρα: ‘indeed’ (R 24.1).

48 

 Iliad 14

86 ἐκ νεότητος  … ἐς γῆρας: a polar expressionP: one’s whole life (Fehling 1969, 275; similarly at 2.789 [see ad loc.] ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες). — τολυπεύειν: metaphorical ‘carry out, experience’ (24.7n.). 87 1st VH ≈ Hes. Op. 229. — ὄφρα: temporal (‘until’), expressing an attitude commensurate with Odysseus’ brave decision to fight at 11.408  ff., not final (‘so that’); this would exonerate Agamemnon and cynically lay the responsibility at Zeus’ door (AH; Janko on 85–87). — φθιόμεσθα: Derived from the root aorist*gwhÞei̯-/*gwhÞi-, the forms ἔφθιτ(ο) (18.100, etc.), the subjunc. as here and at 20.173 φθίεται, the opt. φθῖτ(ο) (Od. 11.330), the part. φθίμενος (Il. 3.322, etc.) and the inf. κατα-φθίσθαι (Od. 2.183, etc.) are attested in Homeric epic. Forms of the secondary extension of the stem, φθίνω (Od. 5.161, etc.), also occur already in early epic: Harđarson 1993, 187  f. 88 2nd VH ≈ 2.12, 2.29, 2.66, Od. 4.246. — οὕτω δή: introduces a reluctant question (2.158n.): ‘so really?’ — εὐρυάγυιαν: an ornamental epithetP of larger cities (2.12n.). The 2nd VH combines formulaic Τρώων πόλιν (another 3× Il., 2× Od., in each case after caesura B 1) and πόλιν εὐρυάγυιαν (see iterata; Janko 88–90), similarly 2.12  f., 2.29  f., 2.66  f. πόλιν εὐρυάγυιαν | Τρώων. 89 ὀϊζύομεν: here passive, ‘suffer’; pres., not impf. (LfgrE; on the act. meaning, 3.408n.). 90 ≈ Od. 14.493; 1st VH = Od. 19.486. — σίγα: The imper. is probably influenced by an adverb *σῖγα ‘quiet’, thus present ‘fall silent, cease talking’ despite the ingressive sense (Schw. 2.257 n. 1; [1923] 1983, 483; Kölligan 2007, 513); cf. modern Greek σιγά ‘calmly!, slowly!’. — τίς τ(ε): -τε like -que in Latin quisque; likewise at 3.12 (see ad loc.; AH; Chantr. 2.340; Denniston 533  f.). 91 ἀνήρ γε: ‘no man of the kind’ (that is described in the relative clauses that follow): LfgrE s.  v. ἀνήρ 856.50  ff., 857.3  ff. — διὰ στόμα  … ἄγοιτο: ‘let go through his mouth’ (AH), ‘would say [such a thing]’; cf. 2.250 ἀνὰ στόμ᾿ ἔχων (with n.). — πάμπαν: ‘at all’ (LfgrE s.  v. 952.54). 92 = Od. 8.240. — ἐπίσταιτο: an assimilation of mood to the superordinate relative clause; correction to the subjunc. ἐπίστηται (as attested in one ms.) is thus unnecessary (Leaf; Chantr. 2.248). — ᾗσι: The initial syllable, originally σϝ-, here ‘makes position’ (cf. Latin suus: G 22 and 82). — ἄρτια βάζειν: ἄρτιος, probably related to ἀραρίσκω, is attested only in the neut. acc. pl.; in addition to this passage and Od. 8.240, also at 5.326 = Od. 19.248 (ἄρτια εἴδη). The word means ‘right, fitting’, i.  e. ‘appropriate’ when someone uses his mind (φρεσί) to correctly appraise his interlocutor without offending him;

86 ἐς: = εἰς (R 20.1). 87 φθιόμεσθα (ϝ)έκαστος: on the prosody, R 4.3. — φθιόμεσθα: short-vowel subjunc. (R 16.3); on the ending, R 16.2. 88 μέμονας: perf. with pres. sense, ‘strive (energetically), feel an urge’. 89 καλλείψειν: = καταλείψειν (R 20.1). — εἵνεκ(α): on the metrical lengthening, R 10.1. 91 κεν: = ἄν (R 24.5). 92 ἐπίσταιτο (σϝ)ῇσι: on the prosody, ↑. — ᾗσι: = possessive pronoun of the 3rd person (R 14.4).

Commentary 

 49

Agamemon is thus indirectly accused of having made a suggestion (to spinelessly retreat) that is unworthy of the army’s strength and mental condition (LfgrE s.  v. ἄρτι(ος) 1361.78  ff.; Calame 1977, 217  f.). βάζω, attested elsewhere in the Iliad only another 3×, is onomatopoetic: ‘talk’; always used in direct speech. The verb is frequently at VE in combination with an internal acc., as here: also πεπνυμένα βάζεις Il. 9.58, Od. 4.206; ἀνεμώλια βάζεις/βάζειν Il. 4.355/Od. 4.837 = 11.464; νήπια βάζεις Od. 4.32, ὀνείδεα βάζεις 17.461, μεταμώνια βάζεις 18.332 = 392; ἀπατήλια βάζει 14.127, 157; κέρτομα βάζειν Hes. Op. 788: LfgrE s.  v. βάζω. 93 2nd VH = 12.229; ≈ 1.79. — σκηπτοῦχος: < *σκηπτροῦχος; means ‘scepter-bearing’, of the right of high officials to carry a scepter as a symbol of their rank (1.14–15n., 1.234n., 2.101–108n.); here used pregnantly of a supreme royal commander in the sense ‘able to issue commands’, with the meaning forcefully substantiated by Odysseus via πειθοίατο and ἀνάσσεις (LfgrE). — οἱ: replaces the relative pronoun ᾧ, as at 1.79 (see ad loc.; AH), thus continuing the relative clause introduced by ὅς (92) via an anaphoric demonstrative connection.

94 2nd VH ≈ 4.61 (athetized by West), 18.366, 19.122, 23.471, Od. 7.23. 95 = 17.173. The verse was already athetized as a concordance interpolation by Aristophanes of Byzantium and Aristarchus (schol.) and later by AH and Leaf, since νῦν δέ here does not mark a contrast between ‘then’ and ‘now’ – in contrast to the parallel passage 17.171–173 (Glaukos’ criticism of Hektor). But the expression frequently serves to mark a contrast between a wish and reality (e.  g. 1.354 [see ad loc.]; Od. 1.219, 234, 241); here: ‘a man with your responsibilities should not make such a remark! But now < you have made it, and > I fault you for it’ (Lührs 1992, 206; cf. Janko). — σε(ο): Zenodotos’ σε should probably be understood as σε(ο) (West 1998, XXII; on σευ, the reading otherwise transmitted in all mss., see G 45 n. 25), since this would be a harsh hiatus (Leaf; an acc. of the whole and the part with ὄνομαι is also attested nowhere else: Rosén [1967] 1984, 98). — ὠνοσάμην: ὄνομαι is related to ὄνομα (Beekes) and means ‘assign a name, despise, reprimand’ (cf. English ‘call someone names’), usually in direct speech, as here; here with an acc. object (φρένας): LfgrE. Although the speaker is still performing the action, the constative aorist allows it to appear as something completed and distant, lending greater civility and restraint to the remark. In addition to the iteratum, this socalled ‘tragic aorist’ of performative verbs is mostly found in tragedy (e.  g. Eur. AnDr. 866 ἐπῄνεσα; Lloyd 1999, 41. 45; Rijksbaron [1984] 2002, 29). — οἷον ἔειπες: a relative clause with a completive and causal function (Chantr. 2.289: similarly at 2.320 [see ad loc.]); it stands in for an acc. of respect (Monteil 1963, 192).

93 καί (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.4. — οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1). — πειθοίατο: = πείθοιντο (R 16.2). 94 τοσσοίδ᾿ ὅσσοισιν: on the -σσ-, R 9.1. — ὅσσοισιν … Ἀργείοισιν: on the declension, R 11.2. — μετά (+ dat.): ‘under’. 95 σε᾿ ὠνοσάμην: on the hiatus, R 5.1. — σε(ο): = σου (R 14.1). — ἔ(ϝ)ειπες: = εἶπες.

50 

 Iliad 14

96 ὃς κέλεαι: = 12.235, 18.286, likewise as a relative clause with a causal connotation in a negative sense (Janko on 96–100). — πολέμοιο συνεσταότος καὶ ἀϋτῆς: on the redundancy, 37n.; on the gen. absolute, still rare in Homeric epic, Chantr. 2.323  f. συνεσταότος only here in reference to πολέμοιο, literally ‘that has been placed together’, i.  e. ‘after the close combat clashes have begun’ (LfgrE s.  v. ἵστημι 1245.31  f.), and thus ‘«while close combat is still ongoing» [transl.]’ (cf. 24–26; Latacz 1977, 179); cf. ἵστατο νεῖκος (13.333), φύλοπις αἰνὴ ἕστηκε (18.171  f.), σύναγον κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην (14.448 = 16.764) (LfgrE s.  v. ἀϋτή 1596.55  ff.).

97–98 97 to caesura C 2 = 9.683, 14.106. — glory: an ironic final clause, as at 2.359 (see ad loc.), that highlights the plan’s paradoxicality in a reproachful manner. Trōsí (“to the Trojans”) in the next verse is used emphatically at VB in contrast to hēmīn d(é) (“but for us”) in 99.

νῆας ἐϋσσέλμους: an inflectible VB formula (2.613n.); on the meaning of the epithet (sometimes understood ‘with good rowing seats’, sometimes ‘with good decks’), 2.170n. — ὄφρ᾿ ἔτι μάλλον: a VE formula (2× Il., 2× Od.); on the accent of μάλλον, see West 1998, XX. — εὐκτά: The neut. pl. of εὐκτός, a verbal adjective of εὔχομαι – cf. φυκτά (Od. 8.299), ἀνεκτά (Od.  20.223) – serves as an abstract noun (cf. 16.128 φυκτά); the Homeric hapaxP probably means ‘opportunities on which to pride oneself, causes for triumph’ (AH; LfgrE s.  v. (ἐπ)εύχομαι 823.1  f.; cf. Reynen 1983, 180  f.). In that case, the statement is comparable to 11.290 ἵν᾿ ὑπέρτερον εὖχος ἄρησθε. But ‘welcome, as desired’, the only meaning for εὐκτός attested in post-Homeric literature, is also possible (Corlu 1966, 219 [transl.]: ‘which is the object of the Trojans’ wishes’; Willcock; LfgrE s.  v. εὐκτός). — ἐπικρατέουσι: ‘have the upper hand, be superior’ (LfgrE s.  v. κρατέω). — περ ἔμπης: ‘already, anyway’ (AH; Schw. 2.582).

99 αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος: an inflectible VE formulaP (13× Il., 10× Od.), after caesura A 3, as here, also at Od. 1.37. αἰπύς, ‘abrupt, sudden’, belongs to character languageP (6.57n.). — ἡμῖν δ᾿  … ἐπιρρέπῃ: ‘and  … descends for us’: the image is based on a balance pan sinking with doom – here with αἰπύς perhaps dramatically ‘swinging, dipping’ – as at 8.72, 22.209–213 (schol. D; AH; Janko on 96–100; Clarke 1999, 28, 256 n. 55). 100 σχήσουσιν πόλεμον: σχήσουσιν ‘endure’ (AH; Faesi; cf. 24.670n.); πόλεμος is ‘battle’ (6.203n.), as commonly elsewhere. — νηῶν ἅλαδ᾿ ἑλκομενάων: cf. 97; on the gen. absolute, 96n.

101 The distraction would be fatal, since it would lead to retreat; on the dangers it involves, cf. 6.80–83, 8.94  f., 8.512 (Fenik 1968, 31). 96 κέλεαι … συνεσταότος: on the uncontracted forms, R 6. 97 ἅλαδ(ε): on the form, R 15.3. — ἑλκέμεν: on the form, R 16.4. 98 περ: gives the part. ἐπικρατέουσι a concessive connotation (R 24.10); here also intensified by ἔμπης (↑). 99 ἡμῖν: dat. of disadvantage. 101 ἀποπαπτανέουσιν: uncontracted fut. form (R 6).

Commentary 



 51

ἀποπαπτανέουσιν: The reading of e.  g. Plato and the scholia; related to παπταίνω, ‘scout, peer searchingly’, i.  e. the Achaians will look away from the battle and toward the ships, thinking of flight; cf. 507 (with n.; schol. D; Faesi; Janko; LfgrE s.  v. παπταίνω 971.32  ff.; on the etymology, Kölligan 2007, 268  f.). ἀποπτανέουσιν, the reading of the manuscripts, arose from haplography (Janko on 101–102). — ἐρωήσουσι  … χάρμης: χάρμη denotes eagerness or lust for battle, ἐρωέω with a gen. means ‘cease, slacken, stop’ (2.179n., 19.169–170n.; cf. FOR 23). The present passage thus refers to a distraction from fighting, the opposite of μνήσασθαι χάρμης (‘keep belligerence in mind’: 19.147– 148n.): Latacz 1966, 34.

102 κε  … δηλήσεται: δηλήσεται ‘will bring ruin’ (LfgrE), fut. (AH; Willcock: with κε: ‘in that case’) or short-vowel subjunc. (Chantr. 2.212, 225). — ὄρχαμε λαῶν: a generic epithetP of Greek leaders; VE formula (19.288–290a n.; FOR 23); on the etymology of ὄρχαμος, 2.837n.

103–108 Agamemnon admits to being affected by Odysseus’ speech (104  f.) and accepts his objections (105  f.), since he knows that Odysseus is not only fundamentally loyal (cf. 4.359–363, where Agamemnon similarly backs down) but a good strategist (van Wees 1992, 114); what is more, Odysseus has not directly accused him of cowardice (83–102n.): this gives Agamemnon room to distance himself from his plan (Jones on 82–102). At the same time, his characteristic bafflement and weakness as a leader become apparent nonetheless in his request for ideas even from younger warriors, who are not normally consulted, thus encouraging Diomedes (107  f.): Montiglio 2000, 108; Schofield (1986) 2001, 249. 103 = 1.172 (see ad loc.), 10.86. A speech introduction formula as a variant of 64 (Friedrich 2007, 76). On the VE formula ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ἀγαμέμνων, 1.172n.; on the phrase ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν, 1.7n. 104 μάλα πως: πως reinforces μάλα (AH). — με καθίκεο θυμὸν ἐνιπῇ: the sole example of (καθ-)ικέσθαι and ἱκάνω in a metaphorical sense (‘hit, strike’, as at Od. 1.342 με  … καθίκετο πένθος or Il. 24.708 πάντας … ἵκετο πένθος: see ad loc.) with an animate subject; it is probably to be understood as a variant of *ἐνιπή με καθίκετο θυμόν, perhaps as a stylistic innovation that puts the focus on Odysseus as the originator (Létoublon 1985, 159  f.); cf. 1.582 σὺ τόν γ᾿ ἐπέεσσι καθάπτεσθαι μαλακοῖσι (with n.; LfgrE s.  v. ἱκάνω 1181.43  ff.). κατα- may contain the sense ‘from top to bottom, deeply’ (Schw. 2.475; Létoublon loc. cit. 148), cf. English ‘dress someone down’.

103 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3, R 17). — ἔπειτα (ϝ)άναξ: on the prosody, R 4.3. 104 ὦ Ὀδυσεῦ: on the hiatus, R 5.7. — Ὀδυσεῦ: on the single -σ-, R 9.1. — με … θυμόν: acc. of the whole and the part (R 19.1). — καθίκεο: on the uncontracted form, R 6.

52 

 Iliad 14

106 to caesura C 2 = 9.683, 14.97 (see ad loc.). — against their will: This indulgence, which stands in striking contrast to the severity and rigidity shown to Achilleus in Book 1, points to Agamemnon’s lack of sovereignty.

υἷας Ἀχαιῶν: an inflectible VE formula (1.162n., where also on the origin of the periphrastic denominationP).

107 Now: ‘since you reject my advice’ (AH [transl.]). Agamemnon does not address individual points in Odysseus’ criticism and thus brushes aside any further discussion (which would be awkward for him) regarding his order. — let someone speak: The reply follows at 110. — better: Agamemnon is a leader who rarely, if ever, has the best ideas.

εἴη ὃς … ἐνίσποι: two cupitives, as at 17.640 εἴη δ᾿ ὅς τις … ἀπαγγείλειε (Schw. 2.323).

108 A ‘young man or old’ probably means two individuals, the old Nestor and especially the young Diomedes (9.57), who has not spoken so far, but who in Book 9 responded to Agamemnon’s speech at a crucial moment and was complemented by Nestor (9.31  ff.): Andersen 1978, 139.

ἢ νέος ἠὲ παλαιός: a polar expressionP that encompasses the whole, similar to the VE formulae νέοι/νέαι ἠδὲ παλαιοί/παλαιαί (Od. 1.395, 8.58/2.293, 4.720) and ἠμὲν νέοι ἠδὲ γέροντες (2.789n.). — ἐμοὶ … ἀσμένῳ εἴη: ἄσμενος is an isolated old participle, perhaps a σ-aorist; it means ‘glad’ (perhaps originally ‘relieved’, related to νέομαι ‘escape unscathed, return home’) and is attested elsewhere only in the formulae at VE in 20.350 φύγεν ἄσμενος ἐκ θανάτοιο and at VB in Od. 9.63, 9.566, 10.134 ἄσμενοι ἐκ θανάτοιο (LfgrE; DELG with suppl.). The adjective is used here as a predicate with the dat., like other participles expressing an emotion or a wish, e.  g. 7.7 Τρώεσσιν ἐελδομένοισι φανήτην, 12.374 ἐπειγομένοισι δ᾿ ἵκοντο, Od. 3.227  f. ἐμοί γε | ἐλπομένῳ τὰ γένοιτ᾿, 21.115  f. οὔ κέ μοι ἀχνυμένῳ τάδε δώματα πότνια μήτηρ | λείποι (common especially in the Odyssey and later: Chantr. 2.74, 326; LfgrE). In this way, the baffled Agamemnon indicates that a brilliant idea to escape the catastrophic situation would be extremely welcome and desirable for him (forcefully emphasized with ἐμοί) (LfgrE).

109 = 10.219; ≈ 7.399, 9.31, 9.696, 10.241. — τοῖσι δὲ καὶ μετέειπε: a VB formula (8× Il., 8× Od.); on the form μετέειπε, cf. 64n.; on καί, 41n. — βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης: a VE formu-

105 ἀργαλέῃ· ἀτάρ: on the hiatus, R 5.6. — ἀργαλέῃ: on the -ῃ after -ε-, R 2. — ἀτάρ: = αὐτάρ (R 24.2). — μέν: emphatic (≈ μήν: R 24.6). — ἐγών: = ἐγώ. — ἀ(ϝ)έκοντας: = ἄκοντας. — ἄνωγα: perf. with pres. meaning, ‘I order’. 106 νῆας: = ναῦς (R 12.1). — ἅλαδ(ε): ‘to the sea’ (R 15.3). — ἑλκέμεν: on the form, R 16.4. — υἷας: on the declension, R 12.3. 107 εἴη: full verb (↑). — ἐνίσποι: aor. of ἐν(ν)έπω ‘communicate, speak’. 108 ἠέ: = ἤ. — κεν: = ἄν (R 24.5). — ἀσμένῳ εἴη: on the so-called correption, R 5.5. 109 τοῖσι: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17); on the declension, R 11.2. — μετέ(ϝ)ειπε: = μετεῖπε. — βοήν: acc. of respect (R 19.1).

Commentary 

 53

la (21× Il.); the generic epithetP βοὴν ἀγαθὸς, ‘good regarding the (loud) cry’, elsewhere used predominantly of Menelaos, probably refers in the first instance to the clearly audible command-voices of leaders (2.408n.); the sense ‘responding well to a cry for help, effectively bringing help’ is also possible (cf. βοήθοος ‘coming to help [after a cry]’): suggestion by West.

110–132 Diomedes’ advice is delivered in three parts (I: 110–112, II: 113–127, III: 128–132). The first two parts are connected in a ring-compositionP: the plea to recognize advice even from one of the youngest men (110–112, 127) frames the references to noble parentage and achievements in battle (113  f., 126) and, in the center, Diomedes’ genealogy (115–125, subdivided into 115–118: his ancestors in Aitolia, 119–125: Tydeus in Argos). The actual advice follows the twopart introduction in three steps: a return to the battlefield (128), restraint from direct intervention in the fighting (129  f.), and instead a paraenesis to the other warriors (131  f.): Lohmann 1970, 93. With the reference to his age, Diomedes picks up on Agamemnon’s claim to be open to advice from both young and old (108 néos ‘young’ – 112 neṓtatos ‘youngest’; catchword-techniqueP). This remark is made in a crisis; in other circumstances, younger individuals are not regarded with as much confidence due to their lack of experience and perceived excessive impulsiveness (1.259n., 3.108–110n.). Although Diomedes and Achilleus rank among Agamemnon’s so-called ‘council of the elders’ because of their outstanding performance in battle (2.53n., cf. also 6.87n.; Ulf 1990, 66  f.), they are nevertheless expected to restrain themselves because of their youth, and Diomedes’ struggle for recognition here is thus not merely superficial rhetoric (Barck 1976, 87; Querbach 1976, 63  f.; Andersen 1978, 140). At 4.370  ff., Diomedes was unfairly accused of cowardice by Agamemnon, who also called him inferior to his father Tydeus. On that occasion, Diomedes kept a respectful silence before excelling on the battlefield (depicted particularly in the aristeia in Book 5) and vigorously attacking Agamemnon in Book 9 (9.32–49; Ulf 1990, 112; Reichel 1994, 221). At 9.53  ff., Nestor responded diplomatically by not simply commending his speech, but also criticising it mildly on account of Diomedes’ youth. But Nestor’s suggestion did not produce a solution, as Diomedes noted at 9.696  ff. The experienced elderly leader was unsuccessful in both his suggestion to send an embassy to Achilleus and his advice to build a wall, and was forced to give up (61  f.; Eust. 970.10  ff.; Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 126; Reichel loc. cit. 222  f.). The present passage likely alludes to these earlier appearances of Diomedes (with literal echoes: 112n.; 126–127n.; Janko on 110–112). Diomedes now tactfully (winning sympathy precisely for that reason) refrains from confronting Agamemnon with his own achievements (Janko on 110–132), pointing instead to his ancestry (on the function of the genealogy, 113–125n., 120n.). In

54 

 Iliad 14

this way, he prevails (133): as at 9.710  f., it is again he who has concrete advice ‘with youthful confidence’ (Erbse 1986, 110 [transl.]; Bassett [1938] 2003, 217; Erbse 2005, 6): on the basis of Nestor’s recommendation not to fight when wounded (62  f.), he establishes, as someone personally affected, that the leaders should at least lend courage to the others. – This is Diomedes’ final speech in the Iliad; harmoniously (and almost reflecting aspects of developmental psychology), it rounds off the characterization of a young man who, like Telemachos in the Odyssey, must step out of his father’s shadow (Andersen 1978, 141; Reichel loc. cit. 223  f. with n. 7): in contrast to the similarly youthful Achilleus, he did not withdraw in anger when challenged by Agamemnon, but proved his worth in battle (19.48n.; Reichel loc. cit.) and learned from Nestor to deliver his advice in a measured and tactful manner (Martin 1989, 24  f.). He is thus depicted here as successful (Alden 2000, 166  f.) and full of pride in his ancestry (Reichel loc. cit.; on the interpretation of the genealogy as a paradigmatic statement, 120n.). 110 ἐγγὺς ἀνήρ: The same nominal clause appears at 20.425 (Achilleus of Hektor); here a response to 107  f. νῦν δ᾿εἴη ὃς τῆσδέ γ᾿ ἀμείνονα μῆτιν ἐνίσποι, | ἢ νέος ἠὲ παλαιός, like Od. 2.40 οὐχ ἑκὰς οὗτος ἀνήρ responding to 28  f. νῦν δὲ τίς ὧδ᾿ ἤγειρε; … | ἠὲ νέων ἀνδρῶν ἢ οἳ προγενέστεροί εἰσιν (Lentini 2006, 61 n. 3). — ματεύσομεν: a Homeric ha­ paxP, ‘seek, search’; the word perhaps carries the connotation ‘(search) in vain, unsuccessfullly’ (LfgrE) and is related to ματάω (on which, 16.474n.): Meier-Brügger 1989b, 43 n. 5. 110b–111 αἴ κ᾿ ἐθέλητε | πείθεσθαι: = Hes. Th. 164  f. – ἐθέλητε is ‘are prepared’ (AH; on the semantic field of ἐθέλω, see 1.112n.). 111 κότῳ ἀγάσησθε: ‘are indignant in your anger’ (AH). κότος, here a dat. of means, is ‘ire, smoldering anger’ (1.81–82n.), here probably ‘rising anger’ (cf. κοτέω at 4.168, 23.391; LfgrE; Cairns 2003, 30). On ἄγαμαι ‘be reluctant’, 3.181n. The negative command with μή + aor. subjunc. is rare in Homeric epic (24.568n.). 112 γενεῆφι νεώτατος: similarly at 9.58 ὁπλότατος γενεῆφιν (the v.l. γ. νεώτερος is probably a concordance interpolation from 21.439: Janko on 14.110–112).

113–125 In order to further support his advice and lend weight to his words, Diomedes presents his genealogy – a narative type common elsewhere both in speeches in the midst of battle as a means of threatening one’s opponent and after a triumph (6.152–211n.). It is comparatively long; on this account, 110 αἴ: = εἴ. — κ(ε): ἄν (R 24.5). 111 μή τι: ‘not at all’ (originally ‘not in any regard’, R 19.1). — κότῳ ἀγάσησθε (ϝ)έκαστος: on the hiatus (twice), R 5.6 and R 4.3. 112 οὕνεκα: crasis for οὗ ἕνεκα (R 5.3), ‘on account of the fact that’. — γενεῆφι: on the declension, R 11.4.

Commentary 

 55

it has been regarded as unnecessary (Leaf on 114; Csajkas 2002, 93–95) and inappropriate in light of the Achaians’ critical situation and the fact that the leaders naturally know Diomedes and his ancestry (Csajkas loc. cit.). But the reminder of the genealogy and the qualites of his ancestors – in addition to the reference to his own military achievements (126) – is of central significance for a heroic individual’s self-assurance and self-representation (Greindl 1938, 126; Lohmann 1970 140  f.; Ulf 1990, 113  f.; Lévy 1995, 182; Higbie 1995, 100; Stoevesandt 2004, 329). Nor is the genealogy merely a catalogue (only 117 shows stylistic similarities: Priess 1977, 190). Its focus is on Tydeus, with the portrayal of his fate complementing events described in Books 4 and 5 (114n.; Andersen 1978, 141). Points casting an unfavorable light on Tydeus are either left unmentioned (e.  g. the atrocity committed before Thebes, which may have been known already in the Homeric period: Theb. fr. 9 West; Janko on 114) or are merely alluded to and interpreted favorably (a murder of a relative or a similar cause for exile: 120n.; Paduano/Mirto on 103–152; Danek 1990, 23; on omissions in other genealogies, 6.152–211n.); an appeal is made to the memories of the addressees (114, 125; Hebel 1970, 62). After Odysseus’ criticism of Agamemnon’s will to fight, Tydeus, one of the Seven against Thebes, is probably also portrayed as a role model (similarly Paduano/Mirto loc. cit.); when Diomedes casts himself as a worthy successor, this should also be understood as a response to Agamemnon’s criticism at 4.370–400 to the effect that Diomedes lagged far behind his father in accomplishments in battle (110– 132n.). 113 ≈ Od. 21.335; 2nd VH = Od. 14.204; ≈ 17.373, h.Ap. 470. — excellent: As at 21.109, Od. 4.611, 21.334  f. and h.Cer. 214, where reference is likewise made to ancestry, in elite ideology the social aspect (the ‘noble’ family; 114  ff.) is a natural precondition for proving oneself on an economic and military plane: Tydeus is wealthy (121–124a) and excels in battle (124b–125): LfgrE s.  v. ἀγαθός 22.39  ff., 25.27  ff.; Lévy 1995, 180; but cf. 2.201–202n.

πατρὸς δ(έ): ‘an antithesis to the accusation of excessive youth serving to give a reason that his claim be heard’ (AH [transl.]). — εὔχομαι εἶναι: an inflectible VE formula (in total 14× Il., 18× Od., 3× h.Hom.); εὔχομαι ‘(proudly) say of oneself’, here, as elsewhere, of one’s ancestry (6.211n.).

114 2nd VH ≈ 6.464, Hes. Op. 121, 140, 156. — The verse was athetized by Zenodotus and omitted by Aristophanes of Byzantium (schol. AT), probably

113 γένος: acc. of respect (R 19.1). 114 Θήβῃσι: on the declension, R 11.1; locative dat. without preposition (R 19.2). — κατὰ  … κάλυψεν: so-called tmesis (R 20.2); on the unaugmented form, R 16.1. — γαῖα: = γῆ.

56 

 Iliad 14

because Attic tradition maintained that Tydeus was buried at Eleusis (Aesch. test. on Eleusinioi, p. 175 Radt, although Paus. 9.18.2 says that his tomb could be seen in Thebes). A number of modern scholars (including Faesi; Leaf; Danek 1990, 24 n. 35) likewise consider the verse an interpolation, especially since Tydeus is not mentioned until 119  ff. But after the announcement at 113, and as an introduction to the genealogy, the famous name, for this reason not mentioned in 119, makes sense (AH, Anh. on 114–132; Janko), and the reference to the grave mound (probably regarded as known by the speaker) underlines the truth of the following statements and the fame, connected to the type of burial, of the deceased ancestor (Aly 1939, 1707; Hebel 1970, 62; on hero cult in general, 6.419a n.). — Tydeus: on his genealogy and his links with Argos (115  ff.), see 117n., 119n., 120n., 121n., CH 6. Elsewhere in the Iliad (4.372  ff., 5.800  ff., 6.222  f., 10.285  ff.), Tydeus is listed among the ‘Seven against Thebes’ (LfgrE s.  v. 667.54  ff.; 6.223–224n.); the war of Argos against Thebes was initiated by Polyneikes, an exile in Argos like Tydeus (120n.), against his brother Eteokles, and was led by Tydeus’ father-in-law Adrestos (121n.). Tydeus is thus one of the older heroes linking the Trojan War with other myths. The Theban War, knowledge of which is probably assumed, is mentioned in the Iliad only in connection with Tydeus, and is in turn conditioned by Diomedes’ special position in the epic (Priess 1977, 121; Janko on 114; general bibliography on allusions to myths from cycles other than the Trojan one at 24.27–30n.). The ‘cyclic’ epic Thebaid, probably later in date, may have concluded with the burial of the heroes outside Thebes: Janko on 114 (on this epic in general, BNP s.  v. Thebais).

Τυδέος: on the short-vowel gen. (-έος rather than -ῆος), 6.96n. — ὃν … χυτὴ κατὰ γαῖα κάλυψεν: as in similar half-verses (see above), a paraphrase for the death of a significant individual (LfgrE s.  v. γαῖα 110.60  ff.; Sourvinou-Inwood 1995, 125), since χυτὴ γαῖα, ‘piled-up earth’, refers to a grave mound (6.464n.). On the mound’s function for preserving the fame of the deceased, 6.419a n. The aor. κάλυψεν is better attested than the reading καλύπτει (van der Valk 1964, 168 n. 369).

115–117 In contrast to 11.59  f. (Antenor’s three sons), suspense is created by supplying the sons’ names only in the second verse after their mention (Higbie 1990, 45). 115 ≈ 20.231, Od. 8.118; 2nd VH = Hes. Th. 263. — three: This typical numberP, which expresses a complete plurality, is frequent in designations of kinship, e.  g. 6.196 (Bellerophon’s children), 11.59, 20.231, Od. 8.118 (sons of Antenor/ Tros/Alkinoos), Il. 19.293 (Briseis’ brothers), 9.144 (Agamemnon’s daughters); cf. 15.187 (the three brothers Zeus, Hades, Poseidon): Blom 1936, 13  f., 19. The motif of the three brothers is universal; parallels in Usener 1903, 6–9.

Commentary 



 57

Πορθεῖ: Diomedes’ grandfather Portheus is also mentioned at ‘Hes.’ frr. 10(a).50, 26.5/8 and 259(a) M.-W. as the father of various sons, although he is there called Πορθάων/ Παρθάων; the formation of the name is obscure and it may have been formed from an ethnic (LfgrE; v. Kamptz 331; some scholars read the Mycenaean name po-te-u as Πορθεύς [formed from πέρθω, i.  e. ‘destroyer’]: DMic. s.  v. po-te-u). The contracted ending (< ε + ι) corresponds to other short-vowel forms of personal names in -εύς (G 76; 114n., 24.61n.). The dat. in place of the more common gen. with ἐκγίγνομαι (AH) appears to derive from an amalgamation of two popular expressions, εἰμί + dat. and ἐκγίγνομαι + gen.; cf. the iterata and Od. 8.419, ‘Hes.’ fr. 26.5  f. M.-W. (LfgrE s.  v. γίγνομαι 154.30  ff.; Janko on 115–120; according to Hoekstra 1981, 79, the verse is derived from a prototype *Πορθῆος τρέες υἷϝες ἀμύμονες ἐξεγένοντο or *Πορθῆϝι τρέες υἷϝες ἐνὶ μεγάροισι γένοντο). — ἀμύμονες: a generic epithetP (1.92n.). On the uncertain meaning, 6.22–23n. (conventional translation: ‘blameless’).

116 ≈ 13.217. — Pleuron  … Kalydon: major towns in Aitolia, here linked by a (fortuitous) rhyme; Pleuron possibly, and Kalydon certainly, was inhabited already in the Mycenaean period; in myth, these cities were the setting for the Kalydonian boar hunt and the battle between the Aitolians and the Kouretes (9.530  ff.). After Oineus and his sons, Kalydon was ruled by Thoas (2.639n., 2.640n.; LfgrE s.vv.).

αἰπεινῇ: A generic epithet of towns meaning ‘rising steeply’ and thus well-fortified (6.34–35n.).

117 1st VH ≈ 15.188; 2nd VH ≈ 16.33. — The verse is constructed in accord with the ‘law of increasing parts’; here with names, the third expanded by an epithetP (29n.) and explicitly characterized as the third (trítatos) (a Celtic and a Germanic parallel in West 2007, 118). The youngest of the sons is emphasized, as with Nestor in regard to his brothers at 11.692  f. (cf. 11.684: Göbel 1935, 19, also on the number three in the context of siblings in general; on the motif of the youngest brother, West on Hes. Th. 454–458), once more calling to mind the young Diomedes’ demand for respect reflecting his prowess in battle (110– 112; Janko on 115–120). Elsewhere, Oineus’ brothers are mentioned together with him only at ‘Hes.’ fr. 10(a).52–54 M.-W.; according to schol. A, bT on 2.212, Agrios is Thersites’ father (LfgrE s.  v. Τῡδεύς 669.30  ff.; s.  v. Ἄγριος). Oineus, perhaps originally a god of wine (2.641n.), was the ruler of Kalydon and father of Meleagros, and triggered the Kalydonian boar hunt (9.533  ff., 9.543, 9.581); on his connections with Asia Minor and Bellerophontes, 6.216n. He was the father of Tydeus by another woman (Hes. frr. 10(a).55 and 12 M.-W.): LfgrE s.  v. Οἰνεύς.

ἱππότα: 52n.

117 ἠδέ: ‘and’ (R 24.4). — τρίτατος: = τρίτος. — ἱππότα (ϝ)οινεύς: on the hiatus, R 4.3. — ἱππότα: 52n.

58 

 Iliad 14

118 1st VH = Od. 19.180; 2nd VH ≈ Od. 4.629, 21.187, 22.244. — πατρὸς ἐμοῖο πατήρ: an intensifying repetition of words, here to denote the grandfather, as at Od. 19.180; similarly μήτηρ … μητρός at Od. 19.416, πάτηρ καὶ πάτερος πάτηρ at Alcaeus fr. 130b.5 Voigt (Gygli-Wyss 1966, 23, with numerous post-Homeric examples; Fehling 1969, 229  f.). The possessive pronoun ἐμοῖο, read by Aristarchus and the majority of the mss., is to be preferred to the v.l. with the personal pronoun ἐμεῖο, since it expresses the possessive relationship more clearly (Matthaios 1999, 488 with n. 273; similarly 24.486 [see ad loc.]). — ἀρετῇ δ᾿ ἦν ἔξοχος αὐτῶν: probably especially in reference to physical (military) ability, perhaps also intellectual ability (Michna 1994, 204; 2.188n.). The reading ἄλλων may have arisen from proximity to ἄλλοι in 120 (Janko on 115–120) and from the VE formula ἔξοχος/ἔξοχον ἄλλων (6× Il., 3× Od., 2× ‘Hes.’, 1× h.Hom.).

119 1st VH ≈ Od. 4.508. — stayed: in Kalydon (see below). — was driven: here in contrast to Oineus remaining; the wandering (possibly also a metaphor for insanity: Padel 1995, 112) in exile is probably a consequence forced on him for a murder within the family: in accord with a tradition attested only in post-Homeric literature, Tydeus pleaded that Oineus remain in Kalydon and in the process killed either his cousins or uncle (Hes. fr. 10(a).55–57 M.-W., Alcmeonis fr. 4 West, schol. D on 119, schol. bT on 120) or his brother (Pherecydes FGrHist 3 F 122b = fr. 122a Fowler): LfgrE s.  v. πλάζω 1275.43  ff.; LfgrE s.  v. Οἰνεύς; Andersen 1978, 141; 1982, 11  f.; Janko on 115–120). On the common motif ‘exile after a murder’, which presupposes blood feuds, 24.480–484n.

νάσθη: aor. mid.-pass. of ναίω (< nas-i̯-o): ‘settled’; cf. the causal aor. ἀπενάσσατο at 2.629 (LfgrE s.  v. ναίω 298.8  ff.; Chantr. 1.405).

120 ≈ Od. 9.262. — Argos: The reference is to the southern Argolid, the later realm of Tydeus’ son Diomedes (2.108n., 2.559–568n.). — immortals: The ­charactersP frequently invoke the gods when they do not know the causes of an event (65–81n.; parallels for the connection of Zeus with other gods in other IE texts in West 2007, 477). But here one should rather imagine that both Diomedes and his counterparts (125) know the reasons; whether the poet of the Iliad could assume that his audience was familiar with the traditional dynastic troubles or even with the murder of a kinsman, or whether he invented Tydeus’ exile ad hoc, is unclear (cf. above); the statement regarding the gods perhaps stresses Diomedes’ aim to portray his father’s fate as divinely ordained in order to make the son likewise appear to be protected by the gods, lending force to his advice in this dangerous situation (Nünlist 2009, 633; similarly Janko on 115–120 with reference to Od. 16.64; further discussion of 118 ἐμοῖο: on the declension, R 11.2. 119 ὅ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3, R 17). — αὐτόθι: ‘there, on the spot’ (R 15.2). 120 πλαγχθείς: aor. pass. part. of πλάζω ‘turn aside’: ‘after a period of migration/wandering’.

Commentary 

 59

the passage in Andersen 1978, 141; 1982, 11; Nünlist loc. cit.; Danek 1990, 23–25).

που: 69n. — καὶ θεοὶ ἄλλοι: a VE formula (also at 20.149, 20.194, Od. 9.479, 23.352); on variants, see 16.443n.

121 Adrestos: Adrestos was the ruler first of Sikyon, then of Argos (2.572n., Theb. fr. 4 West), and the leader of the campaign against Thebes (Theb. fr. 11 West). The name of his daughter is not given, since her only function is to provide a link between the men (the women at 6.192, 9.584, 13.430 are similarly anonymous: Priess 1977, 158); elsewhere she is called Deïpyle (‘Ps.-Apollod.’ 1.76; 3.59). Diomedes married another of Adrestos’ daughters (i.  e. his own aunt: 5.412–415): Priess 1977, 124; BNP s.  v. Deipyle. — established: In special circumstances, a son-in-law might live in the vicinity of his wife’s family (6.249– 250n.); elsewhere as well exiles are offered marriage, land and an honorable position (6.192  ff. Bellerophontes, 9.482–484 Phoinix; cf. Od. 7.311–314): AH on 122; Scheid-Tissinier 1994, 233 with n. 32.

θυγατρῶν: ‘one of the daughters’; a partitive gen. is frequently used in place of an acc. when only part of the object is affected by the action, thus e.  g. 9.214, Od. 1.140. 9.225 (Schw. 2.102). — ναῖε: a typical position at the beginning of the sentence, indicating the topic (like a cue), of verbs such as ναίω, τίκτω and γαμέω that indicate the circumstances of someone’s life; similarly with ναίω at e.  g. 6.34, 13.172, 23.299 (Ammann 1922, 17. 46).

122–124a In Homeric society, agriculture represents almost the only means of livelihood (Richter 1968, 5), and the regional autarchy of an estate (óikos) is everywhere striven for by the practice of mixed farming. Tydeus’ property consists of arable land (listed first, since it is of prime importance), orchards and vineyards, and livestock, similar to 6.195, 9.579  f., 12.313  f., 20.185, Od. 7.112– 132, 13.242–247, 19.111–113, 24.245–247 (Richter 1968, 93, 98; LfgrE s.  v. ἄρουρα 1336.38  ff.; this probably corresponds to the situation in the Mycenaean period: Ventris/Chadwick [1956] 1973, 267; Kerschensteiner 1970, 52–57; Janko on 122–125). Like all basilēes, Tydeus thus owned a piece of land, a témenos; whether this was awarded by the community or by Adrestos is unclear; the case of Bellerophontes gaining possession of his (6.194n.) is similar. Tydeus’ wealth consists of both plenty of good land, as is assumed for wealthy individuals at 5.612  f., 11.67–69, Od. 14.211, and many flocks, as is the case for Odysseus (Od. 14.100–108): Donlan 1997, 654  f.; Schulz 1981, 79. 122 ἀφνειὸν βιότοιο: an inflectible VB formula (nom. at 5.544, 6.14); ἀφνειός ‘wealthy’ of individuals, also of a house as the ‘center of one’s personal life and possessions’ at

122 δέ (ϝ)οι: on the hiatus, R 4.3; οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1); likewise in 124.

60 

 Iliad 14

Od. 1.232, 1.393, 17.420, 19.76 (LfgrE s.  v. ἀφνειός 1712.59  f. [transl.]). The gen. is partitive (Schw. 2.111); βίοτος, related to βίος, here means ‘livelihood, wealth’ (LfgrE), as generally in early epic. 122b–123 ἄρουραι | πυροφόροι: ἄρουρα ‘arable land’, πυροφόρος from πυρός ‘wheat’ (the most valuable grain) and φέρω, ‘bearing, bringing forth wheat’, likewise with ἄρουρα at 12.314; cf. 11.68  f. ἄρουρα | πυρῶν; the affluence is stressed by the enjambment (LfgrE s.vv. ἄρουρα 1336.16, πυροφόρος; Richter 1968, 93, 110  f.). 123 φυτῶν … ὄρχατοι: ὄρχατος is related to ὄρχος ‘row’ of vines: ‘garden set out in rows’; φυτόν, ‘plant’; what is meant is a plantation of vines alternating with olive trees, fruit trees and vegetable beds (LfgrE s.vv.; schol. D; Richter 1968, 96). — ἀμφίς: ‘all around’ (Willcock; Richter 1968, 96).

124–125a with the spear: ‘spear’ may be used by metonymy for general military prowess: ‘in war’ (16.195n.).

πρόβατ(α): literally ‘that which runs forward’, ‘(property) that moves by itself’, i.  e. ‘livestock’ (not merely sheep, as in classical Attic; cf. Hes. Op. 558: the winter months are χαλεπὸς προβάτοις, χαλεπὸς δ᾿ ἀνθρώποις, i.  e. ‘hard on men and livestock’): LfgrE; Richter 1968, 53  f. — ἔσκε: a variant of ἦν (3.180n.; Chantr. 1.321). — κέκαστο: 3rd pers. sing. plpf. from perf. κεκάσθαι (secondarily from which comes the pres. καίνυμαι, ‘distinguish oneself, excel’), with an instrumental dat., here ἐγχείῃ in 125 (in emphatic enjambed position: LfgrE s.  v. καίνυμαι, κεκάσθαι), similarly at 2.530, 13.431, Od. 24.509, etc. (LfgrE loc. cit.). — πάντας Ἀχαιούς: an inflectible VE formula (in total, nom. 5× Il., 4× Od., acc. 9× Il., 6× Od.).

125 heard: Similar to the invocation of the Muses by the poet (508n.), in an oral society speakers refer to hearsay as a way of assessing the importance of a person or event; likewise at 20.214; cf. 9.527  f. (de Jong [1987] 2004, 161  f.). But here there is also an actual reference to Agamemnon’s statement to Diomedes that he only knows Tydeus from stories (4.374  f.).

μέλλετ(ε): ‘it is very likely that you, you should’ (69n.); likewise at Od. 4.94 with ἀκουέμεν, which is to be understood with a perfect sense (‘have heard, be aware of’: AH; Leaf with reference to Il. 10.160, 24.543, Od. 1.298; in general, Schw. 2.274). — εἰ ἐτεόν περ: a variant of the formula εἰ (δ᾿) ἐτεόν (in total, VB 4× Il., 7× Od.; VE 5× Il., 2× Od.; in verse middle, 1× Od., 1× h.Hom.). ἐτεός means ‘true’ (as well as ‘real, actual’: 2.300n.; LfgrE); here it is predicative and adverbial, like the synonymous ἐτήτυμον at 18.128 ναὶ δὴ ταῦτά γε, τέκνον, ἐτήτυμον (see ad loc.). Aristarchus’ reading εἰ is followed by all scholars (Leaf, AH, Willcock, West) with the exception of van der Valk (1964, 609) and Janko (on 122–125), who prefer ὡς as transmitted in the manuscripts; although

123 ἔσαν: on the unaugmented form, R 16.1. 125 ἐγχείῃ: on -ῃ rather than -ᾳ after -ι-, R 2. — ἀκουέμεν: inf. (R 16.4). — καὶ … περ: stresses ἐτεόν (R 24.10).

Commentary 

 61

ὡς is common after ἀκούω, εἰ (as an introduction to an indirect question, ‘whether’, or conditional, ‘if at all, if’) is formulaic and more modest (Lange 1872, 553–555; Janko loc. cit.).

126–127 2nd VH of 126 ≈ 8.153; 1st VH of 127 ≈ 9.62. — base: regarding not only ancestry but also military achievement; like 113 agathóu, ‘noble’ (Hoffmann 1914, 82).

τώ: 35n. — οὐκ ἂν  … ἀτιμήσαιτε: On the potential as an ‘oblique (but sometimes objectively more assertive) form of an expression of desire, plea, request’, Schw. 2.329 [transl.]; Chantr. 2.221; with the same VB τὼ οὐκ ἄν also 2.250, Od. 22.325 (with Fernández-Galiano ad loc.). — γένος: ‘emphasized by γέ with reference to 113; at least you cannot use an accusation of base origins to ignore my advice’ (AH [transl.]). — κακὸν καὶ ἀνάλκιδα: an emphatic synonym doubling; likewise at 8.153 (see above on the iterata; also in reference to Diomedes), similarly κακὸν καὶ ἄναλκιν at Od. 3.375 and ἀπτόλεμος καὶ ἄναλκις at Il. 2.201 (see ad loc.), 9.35, with the words separated at 9.41. — φάντες: as at 1.187 (see ad loc.), 2.37, 3.44, etc., φημί can mean ‘say’ as well as ‘think, believe’ (LfgrE s.  v. 896.48  ff.). — πεφασμένον: from φαίνω; perf. pass. of the root φαν- expanded by a nasal only here in Homer; the -σ- possibly generalized from the 2nd pers. pl. πέφασθε < *πέ-φαν-σθε (Leaf; Schw. 1.773; LIV s.  v. 1. bheh2 [p. 68  f.]); ‘set forth’, cf. 18.295 νοήματα φαῖν(ε) (AH). — εὖ: ‘aptly’, in the sense ‘to the good’, as at 11.788, Od. 3.357 (LfgrE s.  v. ἐΰ, εὖ 765.19  ff.).

128 wounded: 28n. The focus turns to the wounded leaders alone (i.  e. minus Nestor), who will later join the fighting (379  f.; West 2011, ad loc.).

δεῦτε: the pl. of the exhortative particle δεῦρο (originally a locative adverb ‘hither’), as at 7.350, 13.481, Od. 8.11, etc.; as at 7.350, Hes. Op. 2 and like ἄγε, ἄγετε, the word is used with the aim of triggering an action, but without necessarily causing motion toward the speaker (LfgrE; Janko on 127–128). — οὐτάμενοι: οὐτάω is elsewhere usually used with the sense ‘thrust, pierce; wound (from close by)’ (6.64n.); here generally ‘wound’ (LfgrE s.  v. οὐτά(ζ)ω 884.3  ff.; cf. 28).

129 ἐχώμεθα δηϊοτῆτος: ἔχεσθαι with gen. ‘keep away from’, as at 3.84, Od. 4.422, etc. (AH; Leaf). Archaic δηϊοτής means ‘battle’ (3.20n.).

130 wound: Epic does not generally portray injured warriors as unable to feel pain (van Wees 1996, 7; that a hero suffers from a wound ennobles him: 16.510–511n.); at the same time, Trojan heroes, in contrast to their Achaian

126 τὼ οὐκ: on the hiatus, R 5.6. — γένος: 113n. 127 ἐῢ (ϝ)είπω: on the hiatus, R 5.4. 128 ἴομεν … ἐνήσομεν (131): short-vowel subjunc. (R 16.3). — πόλεμόνδε: ‘to the fighting’ (R 15.3). — περ: concessive (R 24.10). — ἀνάγκῃ: ‘of necessity’. 130 βελέων: on the uncontracted form, R 6. — ἐφ᾿ (ϝ)έλκεϊ (ϝ)έλκος: on the hiatus (twice), R 4.6 and 5.4.

62 

 Iliad 14

counterparts, are no longer actively involved in combat after an injury, as is suggested here by Diomedes (Neal 2006, 80).

ἐκ βελέων: ἐκ ‘outside’, i.  e. ‘out of range of’ as at 11.163, 16.668, etc. (schol. A; AH on 129  f.; Chantr. 2.99). — ἐφ᾿ ἕλκεϊ ἕλκος: ἐπί ‘… upon …, … on top of …’, as at 24.231 (Fritz 2005, 135); a similar polyptoton expressing accumulation, commonly with ἐπί with the dat., is also found at 16.111, 19.290b n. (see ad loc.), Od. 7.120, Hes. Op. 361, 382, 644 (Gygli-Wyss 1966, 75; Fehling 1969, 226). — ἄρηται: the thematic aor. of ἄρνυμαι ‘obtain’; frequently with objects such as κῦδος (3.373n.), κλέος or μισθός; here ‘an ironic adaptation’ (injuries rather than fame or reward: LfgrE s.  v. ἄρνυμαι 1331.73  ff. [transl.]).

131 1st VH ≈ Od. 14.461; 2nd VH from caesura C 2 on = 12.346, 12.359, 13.101, 17.720, 20.123, Od. 17.171, 24.508, h.Hom. 20.3; ≈ Il. 17.587, 23.480, 23.782, 24.201. — to drive them on: In addition to fighting, motivating others is the most important task of a leader (cf. the frequent epithet boēn agathós ‘good regarding the (loud) cry’ 109n.; Krapp 1964, 87 with n. 3). Cautious individuals, who have remained to the rear as reserves, are sent forward as prómachoi, fighters at the front (3.16–17n.) (Latacz 1977, 149; cf. the death threats against potential shirkers in a speech in less critical circumstances at 2.391–393 [see ad loc.]).

ἐνήσομεν: from ἐνίημι ‘send in’ (sc. δηϊοτῆτι; cf. 10.89: AH); the lectio facilior ἀνήσομεν is superfluous after ὀτρύνοντες (Janko on 130–132). — οἳ τὸ πάρος περ: a variable VE formula (with inflected ὅς another 9× Il., 2× Od., h.Hom. 20.3; with ὡς 5× Il., 4× Od., 2× Hes., h.Ap. 345; simple πάρος περ at Od. 20.7; after caesura A 3 with ὡς 2× Od.).

132 2nd VH ≈ 15.672. — θυμῷ ἦρα φέροντες: ἦρα ‘favor, kindness’, formulaically linked with inflectible φέρω and constructed with the dat. (LfgrE s.  v. ἦρα; 1.572n.). θυμός here means ‘inclination’, ‘lack of willpower’; the expression as a whole thus means ‘giving in to their own natural instincts’; cf. 9.598 εἴξας ᾧ θυμῷ, Od. 5.126 ᾧ θυμῷ εἴξασα (LfgrE s.  v. θυμός 1082.43  ff.), Il. 24.42  f. βίῃ καὶ ἀγήνορι θυμῷ | εἴξας (with n.) and Tyrtaios fr. 10.18 West φιλοψυχεῖτ(ε) (Clarke 1999, 298). — ἀφεστᾶσ(ι): The perf. is used beside the pres. with τὸ πάρος (always in speeches) to portray a situation that has always been thus in the past and remains so in the time of the speaker (‘who repeatedly/always kept themselves to the side’): LfgrE s.  v. πάρος 987.6  ff.; 991.7.

133 = 7.379, 9.79, 14.378, 15.300, 23.54, 23.738, Od. 3.477, 15.220, 22.178, 23.141, h.Ap. 502; ≈ Od. 6.247, 20.157; 2nd VH = Hes. Th. 474. — Diomedes’ sole bit of advice

131 περ: stresses τὸ πάρος (R 24.10). 132 θυμῷ (ϝ)ῆρα: on the hiatus, R 4.4. — οὐδέ: connective οὐδέ/μηδέ is found in Homer also after affirmative clauses (R 24.8); likewise in 135. 133 ἔφαθ᾿: impf. of φημί; mid. without a recognizable difference in meaning from the act. (R 23). — οἳ … τοῦ: anaphoric demonstrative pronouns (R 14.3, R 17).

Commentary 

 63

(110–132n.), like many exhortations elsewhere, is followed by no further discussion (1.345n.; cf. 1.54n. on the sequence of events in the military assembly); the young man also prevails at 9.710  f. (Ruzé 1997, 57  f.).

μάλα … κλύον: μάλα is intensive: ‘heard very well’.

134 1st VH ≈ 5.592, 14.384, 18.516, h.Ap. 514. — lord of men: 64n. Agamemnon once more assumes his responsibilities as a leader and, after encouragement by Poseidon, goes on to draw up the army again together with Diomedes and Odysseus, and to carry out an exchange of arms (379–381): Paduano/Mirto on 103–152; Lossau 1989, 398  f.

βὰν δ᾿ ἴμεν: ‘they strode out in order to walk’; the variable formula signals the beginning of a motion as a means of structuring the course of action (19.241n.). — ἄρά σφιν: on the accent, West 1998, XVIII. — ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ἀγαμέμνων: an inflectible VE formula (1.172n.).

135–152 Poseidon revitalizes Agamemnon with a speech and the Achaians with a mighty battle-cry. 135–152 The continuation at 354  ff. of the intervention of the ‘earth-shaker’ Poseidon (135n.) leads to the climax of his actions in the Iliad on behalf of the Achaians. Piqued by the non-payment of the wage promised him by Priam’s father Laomedon, Poseidon, along with Hera and Athene, sides with the Greeks from the start (24.25–26n., 15.212–217). When Zeus grants Thetis’ wish that the Greeks be temporarily defeated, in order that Agamemnon might realize how indispensable his best warrior, Achilleus, is (1.493–530), and when he has the Trojans advance after explicitly prohibiting divine interventions (Diós boulē, 1.5n., 8.1  ff.), Poseidon does not at first dare defy him out of respect (aidōs, 1.23n.) for his older, more powerful brother (8.208–211; on the ages of the gods, 13.354  f., 15.181  f., 15.187  f.; in order that Poseidon can appear in the role of the younger, rival brother, the poet of the Iliad appears to have chosen a genealogical constellation different from the one transmitted by Hesiod at Th. 453–457; LfgrE s.  v. Ποσειδᾱ῾ων 1472.13  ff.; Michel 1971, 53  f.; Schäfer 1990, 76  f.; LIMC s.  v. Poseidon, 1994, 448). Only after Zeus averts his eyes from the battle (13.1–9) – reassured by the successes of the Trojans, who have already broken through the gate in the wall that surrounds the ships – does Poseidon dare, albeit clandestinely (13.357) and not in divine guise, to intervene at certain points and to encourage individual Achaian leaders and groups (13.10–837; for a summary

134 βάν: = ἔβησαν (R 16.2). — ἴμεν: final-consecutive inf.; on the form, R 16.4. — σφιν: = αὐτοῖς (R 14.1).

64 

 Iliad 14

of Poseidon’s resistance to the Diós boulē, 13.345–360; Michel 1971, 63). The Achaians manage to withstand the Trojan onslaught (13.126–329), but a dogged wrangling develops afterwards (13.330–837; on the entire sequence in detail, Michel loc. cit. 58–66; on the retardingP effect, 153–353n.). The consultation scene that follows at 14.1–134 shows the extent to which the Achaians have been thrown on the defensive and their leaders plunged into crisis (41–134n.). Diomedes’ reasonable plan to encourage those who remain behind the front lines cannot easily be executed successfully, given the injuries and anxious mood of the courageous leaders; Poseidon thus first revitalizes Agamemnon, since he is the supreme commander, and then virtually takes over his leadership duties (Frazer 1985, 1). The scene thus also introduces the Achaian return from defence to the formation of a front, and the forcing back of the Trojans, the palíōxis, under Poseidon’s influence (139–146n., 354–401n.); this is continued by the structurally equivalent section of Book 14’s ring-composition (see Introduction, p. 11 above; motifs in common: paraenesis addressed to Agamemnon/all the Achaians at 138–146 / 363–377, recollection of Achilleus’ abstention from battle at 139–142 / 366–369, the god leads the battle at 147–152 / 383–387; Stanley 1993, 156  f.), only to be voided once more by Zeus in Book 15 (15.262  ff.). The poet’s gaze thus shifts away from individual leaders (mentioned again only at 379: Faesi on 135) toward a panoramic view across the plain including all the warriors (mentioned in general terms at 151  f.), transitioning to the description of an additional divine measure – Hera’s subterfuge – and thus leading from the human to the divine plane (147–152n., 41–134n.; on panoramic views in general, Latacz 1977, 96–115; de Jong/Nünlist 2004, 69  f., 78  f.). Personal intervention by a god is normal (1.43–52n.); similarly common is the notion that gods monitor human events and even seek out suitable observation points for the purpose: for Poseidon, the island of Samothrace (13.10–16); for Hera, Olympos (14.154); for Zeus, Mount Ida (14.157  f.): Kullmann 1956, 83  f.; Griffin 1980, 179–204. The appearance of the god is accordingly narrated in accord with the ‘«action-perception-reaction» pattern’ (134–136: procession of the leaders – observation of the god – his journey; on the ‘pattern’, 24.696– 709n.; de Jong [1987] 2004, 107; cf. 19.340n. on the change of scene). The formula at 135 always introduces a divine intervention (Willcock on 13.10); the oxymoron (the watch kept by a blind man: 135n.) is comparable to the formula ‘if he/she (divinity) had not paid close attention’, although the latter formula is employed in ‘if-not’-situationsP that pose a much greater danger for the heroes (de Jong [1987] 2004, 70; cf. 3.373–382n.). Bibliography on Poseidon’s role in the Iliad and in Book 14 in particular: Michel 1971, 24–66; LfgrE s.  v. Ποσειδᾱ῾ων 1476.45–1479.12; Schäfer 1990, 74–104; Erbse 1986, 102–115.

Commentary 

 65

135 ≈ Hes. Th. 466; to caesura C 1 = 13.10, Od. 8.285; ≈ Il. 10.515. — shaker of the earth: one of Poseidon’s epithets (CG 23), expressing his power as ruler over the depths of the earth and over earthquakes (at 20.57–60, he shakes the earth; at 13.17–19, the earth trembles beneath his feet; an earthquake-like destruction of the lower courses of the wall at 12.27–29; clefts in a rock at Od. 4.506  f.). Poseidon’s epithets and functions in the Iliad point to the elemental strength of the second oldest and second most powerful god after Zeus (as does the comparison at 2.479, see ad loc.). In cult, he appears predominantly as the master of the waters of the depths, springs, subterranean rivers and deep sea, from which he rises in his chariot at the beginning of his significant action on behalf of the Achaians (13.21–31) and to which he returns (15.218  f., 15.222  f.; 14.392n.). In contrast, aside from his epithets and his function as the cause of earthquakes (see above), Poseidon is characterized in Homeric epic almost exclusively as god of the sea; he represents the division of the spheres of influence among the three divine brothers: Zeus received the heavens, Poseidon the sea, Hades the underworld (15.190–192). This fits with his role, since in the Iliad he is on an even footing with his brother when attempting to stop, with Hera’s assistance, the realization of the Diós boulē (153–353n.), while in the Odyssey he sides against Odysseus (e.  g. Od. 5.282–381). – The various manifestations of the god in cult and epic, as well as his rivalry with Zeus in epic, have been explained in terms of the history of religion as (1) the amalgamation of an IE divinity and an Aegean one into a major god who was reduced to merely a sea god during the Ionic migration via rivalry with Zeus (Wilamowitz 1931, 335–337; 1932, 144; Schachermeyr 1950, 109–173; Pötscher 1990, 33–37), (2) the translation of Near Eastern divine names such as ‘Lord of the earth’ together with the introduction of relevant cults (Palmer 1961, 127–130), or (3) the adoption of a pre-Greek, Aegean divinity as the ruler of land and sea (Simon 1980, 68). But others have argued that the cultic and the narrative functions in epic must be kept separate, and have characterized the god, who is mentioned already in the Mycenaean tablets, as a lord of the depths via a synthesis of individual traits comparable to Near Eastern gods such as the Sumerian Enki, the ‘Lord of Below’ (like Poseidon, Enki is lord of the water below ground that causes earthquakes when it moves: suggestion by Graf; Burkert [1977] 1985, 138  f., quote from p. 139; a synthesis also in Nilsson [1940] 1967, 450  f.; CG 23). Bibliography on the cult of Poseidon in Homeric and pre-Homeric times and on the relationship between depictions in cult and epic: LfgrE s.  v. Ποσειδᾱ῾ων 1473.47  ff.; 1474.36  ff. (overview; examples); CG 23; Schachermeyr loc. cit. 13–51, 109–173; Burkert loc. cit. 136–139; Simon loc. cit. 66–90; Erbse 1986, 102–115.

66 

 Iliad 14

οὐδ᾿ ἀλαοσκοπιὴν εἶχε: ἀλαοσκοπιή is a compound of ἀλαός ‘blind’ (at Od. 8.195, 10.493, 12.267) and σκοπιή ‘lookout’; as here, it occurs in the iterata in the main transmission (followed by Leaf on 10.515 and by West) only as an object of εἶχε in the present formula, meaning ‘he kept no blindman’s watch’ (West on Hes. Th. 466; cf. compounds such as θεο-προπίη ‘disclosure of divine will’; on this, Risch 116). Probably because of the unusual stress on the final syllable and the rare formation (cf. Leaf loc. cit.; Hainsworth on Od. 8.285), an original separation into two parts was posited already in antiquity; Zenodotos read ἀλαὸν σκοπιήν (defended by Wackernagel [1891] 1953, 1588, with reference to the analogous disappearance of ν in compounds like συσκευάζειν ‘wise’) is thus employed to emphasize the tremendous power that has overcome so acute a mind (Eust. 987.17; Janko; 2.55n.; cf. 14.164b–165n. on φρεσὶ πευκαλίμῃσιν and 216–217n. on πύκα φρονεόντων). But φρένες may refer more to the location of emotions; if so, πυκινάς is proleptic: sensory preception is shuttered; cf. 17.83 Ἕκτορα δ᾿ αἰνὸν ἄχος πύκασε φρένας and the proleptic use of μέλαιναι with φρένες at 1.103 [with n.]): LfgrE s.  v. πυκινός 1633.25  ff. 295–296 1st VH of 295 = Od. 10.462; ≈ 9.447; 2nd VH of 295 ≈ 2.232, Od. 8.271, 19.266, Hes. Th. 306; 2nd VH of 296 ≈ Hes. Th. 469. — The hint at the premarital liaison of Zeus and Hera was notorious in antiquity (Callimachus fr. 75.4, with app. in Pfeiffer; Theocritus 15.64 quotes an adage: πάντα γυναῖκες ἴσαντι, καὶ ὡς Ζεὺς ἀγάγεθ᾿ Ἥραν [on which, see Gow 1950, 283]; Sotades fr. 16 Powell; Burkert [1982] 2003, 109 with n. 51); premarital rites on Naxos and Paros are linked to this story (Callimachus fr. 75.4 Pfeiffer; schol. bT on 14.296; Burkert [1977] 1985, 401 n. 35; Pötscher 1987, 143  ff. n. 327). But it was noted already in antiquity that this assignation without the knowledge of the parents Kronos and Rhea does not match the statement that Zeus deposed Kronos when Hera was still a small child (202–204n.; schol. bT on 14.296; Burkert [1982] 2003, 109 with n. 51; Janko on 295–296; Gantz 1993, 57). It is thus likely that the poet of the Iliad invented the motif (Janko on 203–204 and 295–296; Gantz 1993, 58; West 2011, 294 [ad loc.]), perhaps transferring it from a different myth (e.  g. Zeus’ secret coupling with Mētis, daughter of Okeanos and Tethys, a couple mentioned at 201 and 302 [Hes. Th. 886  f.], a story probably connected with those surrounding Hephaistos’ conception, birth and exile, and with the sea storm unleashed by Hera against Herakles, which the previous scene repeatedly hints at: Janko on 295–296; 231–291n.; 249–261n.; it is more likely that local rites and customs developed on the basis of the myth as told in the Iliad [thus schol. bTon 14.296] than the other way around [thus Nilsson [1940] 1967, 430  f.; Pötscher 1987, 145 n. 327]). The motif of the clandestine premarital liaison between the two deities is a juicy detail (6.24n.), similar to stories of human affairs, that highlights Zeus’ reawakened desire and matches Hera’s surreptitious approach to exploiting it (Reucher 1983, 283; Janko loc. cit.; Burkert [1982] 2003, 109; Paduano/Mirto on 263–311; Scodel 2002, 145).

οἷον ὅτε: ‘«like», then «when»’ (AH [transl.]); the desired union is compared to the first one, as at 3.443  ff. (Kloss 1994, 172). — πρώτιστον: a better attested reading than the variant πρῶτόν περ, which is found after οἷον ὅτε only at 9.447 (app. crit.; Janko); on the accumulation of suffixes, 1.105n. — ἐμισγέσθην φιλότητι: on φιλότης ‘love’ in the sense ‘sexual intercourse’, 3.441n.; on the combination with μείγνυμι, 3.445n. The dual form of ἐμισγέσθην emphasizes Zeus’ desire (Chantr. 2.26). — λήθοντε: modal with φοιτῶντε (AH).

295 ἐμισγέσθην: 3rd pers. dual impf. mid. of μίσγω = μείγνυμι (R 18.1). 296 φοιτῶντε … λήθοντε: nom. dual part. — τοκῆας: on the inflection, R 11.3.

146 

 Iliad 14

297 1st VH ≈ 23.582, 24.286, Od. 15.150, 16.166, h.Cer. 63, h.Ven. 81 (στῆ δ(έ) at VB in total 50× Il., 18× Od., 2× h.Hom.); 2nd VH (speech introduction formulaP): 17× Il., 2×  Od., 2× h.Ven. — stood before her: Meeting someone who arrives is a typical greeting gesture preceding an address (9.185  ff., 11.645  f., 11.777  f., 15.185  ff.): Arend 1933, 34; Kirk on 5.170; on the type-sceneP ‘visit’, 24.477– 478n. At the same time, Zeus’ movement, caused by his desire (294n.), makes clear that he leaves his seat, from which he had kept an eye on adherence to his plan (8.51  f., 8.206  f., 13.7–9), and that he thus ‘meets’ Hera’s intention of distracting him (Kurz 1966, 51, 85 n. 21).

ἐκ τ᾿ ὀνόμαζεν: originally ‘addressed by name’, weakened to ‘and addressed’ (6.253n.).

298–299 Zeus notes a contradiction between Hera’s evident purposefulness and the absence of her wagon (AH). Why the goddess failed to use a chariot for her journey from Olympos to Gargaros, unlike in other changes in location (as recounted at 5.720  ff.; cf. Zeus’ journey at 8.41  ff.) is not explained (West 2011, 294 [ad loc.]), and the issue is deliberately avoided. Zeus’ question reveals his lust (294): he does not see through Hera’s subterfuge, hoping that he himself is her destination and that she did not bring a chariot to travel further; he thus approaches (297) in order to seduce her (schol. bT on 298; Janko on 294 and 298–299; Paduano/Mirto on 263–311). Zeus’ question may also convey mistrust, since his wife previously defied his orders and used her chariot to travel to the battlefield (8.371  ff.); this would fit with the repeated reminders of discord among the gods (153–353n.): Kelly 2007, 137. 298 2nd VH ≈ 309. — πῇ μεμαυῖα: similar questions regarding destination at 7.24 (Apollo to Athene: τίπτε … μεμαυῖα), 8.413 (Iris to Hera and Athene: πῇ μέματον), 13.307 (πῇ … μέμονας). — τόδ᾿ ἱκάνεις: an inflectible VE formula (also at 309, 24.172, Od. 1.409, 10.75, 19.407). τόδε is an acc. of destination (Janko on 298–299) or an internal acc. (AH): 24.172n. 299 ≈ 5.192 (ἐπιβαίην). — ἵπποι δ(έ): δέ is adversative (‘[and] still’): AH; a rare example of a concrete subject in first position when it is a connecting theme before a negated verb (‘horses? are they not there’), as at 13.659 (Ammann 1922, 33 [transl.]). — κ᾿ ἐπιβαίης: The modal particle is attested in all mss., is omitted in such final relative clauses only very rarely (Chantr. 2.249), and is also used in the iteratum at 5.192; the omission of the

297 ἐκ … ὀνόμαζεν: = ἐξονόμαζεν (R 20.2). 298 μεμαυῖα: part of μέμονα ‘strive, be eager, have an urge’. — Οὐλύμπου: initial syllable metrically lengthened (R 10.1); likewise in 309. — τόδ(ε): ‘(to) here’, or ‘this ⟨path⟩, ⟨on⟩ this ⟨errand⟩’ (↑). 299 παρέασι: = πάρεισι (R 16.6). — καὶ ἅρματα: on the so-called correption, R 5.5. — τῶν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun functioning as a relative pronoun (R 14.5). — κ(ε): = ἄν (R 24.5).

Commentary 

 147

particle by Zenodotus and Aristophanes of Byzantium is based on a less common usage (Janko on 298–299).

300 = 329, 19.106; ≈ 197 (τὴν …). — with false lying purpose: In her dialogue with Zeus, both of Hera’s speeches are introduced with the formulaic do­ lo-phronéousa, signalling her deceptions (the ostensible reasons for her journey and her detour to the present location, at 329 feigned reluctance vis-à-vis a sexual encounter). The formula reflects the subject of the Diós apátē (153–353), as well as the relationship of the couple, which has grown discordant, in contrast to the portrayal of marital unity (homo-phrosynē) e.  g. between Odysseus and Penelope in the Odyssey (O’Brien 1998, 179; Beck 2005, 132).

δολοφρονέουσα: 197n. — προσηύδα: 2n. — πότνια Ἥρη: 159n.

301–311 Zeus’ question and determination (298  f.) and Hera’s response are arranged in a ring-compositionP, with the question (298) answered at 309–311 (with catch-word techniqueP: ‘you come down here from Olympos’, ‘I have come down here from Olympos’), and Zeus’ remark regarding the horses (299) picked up at 307  f.; at the ring’s center, Hera explains the (supposed) destination of her journey (301–306): Lohmann 1970, 146  f. Here the narrator has Hera repeat some of the words she employed in her request for Aphrodite’s breastband (302–304, 304–306, see ad loc.; on other such repetitions of speeches by one character to different addressees, 2.371/373  f. n., 18.56–62n., 19.65–66n.). In both cases, the bogus story serves as a ruse, a fact underlined by the identical speech introduction formulaeP (300n.; Nickau 1977, 94  f.). The story is nevertheless tailored to the addressee: here the focus is on Zeus’ question, which is answered at the very beginning of the speech (301  ff.; in contrast, at 200  ff. the same words serve to substantiate the plea: Eust. 987.40  ff.; Nickau loc. cit. 94), whereas in regard to the goddess of love, Hera’s obligations are foregrounded, and the circumstances of Hera’s adoption by Okeanos and Tethys (203  f.), familiar to the father of the gods, are here omitted (de Jong [1987] 2004, 190  f.; cf. 18.441n.), while the stated goal, the reunification of the couple, picks up on Zeus’ feelings of desire (304–306, with n.). At the same time, the reference to the couple’s gratitude (208–210) is here no longer relevant and is omitted (Hebel 1970, 143; verses 306a–c = 208–210, transmitted in a papyrus, are a concordance interpolation: Apthorp 1995, 174–176). But Hera’s ruse goes above and beyond the fabricated reasons for her journey; she also cleverly uses Zeus’ query about her arrival on Ida without a chariot to appear as the respectful devout wife anxious not to anger her husband – information likely to increase 300 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17). — δολοφρονέουσα: on the uncontracted form, R 6. — πότνια Ἥρη: 159n.

148 

 Iliad 14

his ardor even further (294) and give him a sense of being himself the se­du­ cer (schol. T on 299; schol. bT on 309; Janko on 298–299; Sowa 1984, 83; cf. 298–299n.). Hera thus seduces her husband directly by use of the breast-band and indirectly via her supposedly honorable intentions (Paduano/Mirto on 263–311). 301 ≈ 200. — ends: perhaps a ‘variant (ironic) repetition of Zeus’ adynaton-like threat’ to Hera at 8.478 that he is pursuing his plan without heeding her even if she, so to speak, stands on her head (LfgrE s.  v. Τηθύς [transl.]).

ἔρχομαι: ‘I am on my way’, as at 11.839, 13.256 (AH; Létoublon 1985, 68); on the contrast with εἶμι (200/304), 200n.

302–303 = 201–202 (see ad loc.). 304–306 = 205–207 (see ad loc.). Zenodotus and Aristarchus, who also elsewhere tend to athetize iterata (19.388–391n.; Janko 1992, Introd. 23 n. 17), athetized these verses on the ground that they are suitable only for Hera’s plea, addressed to Aphrodite, for the latter’s breast-band, whereas here they are unnecessary and Hera runs the risk of Zeus setting out with her to visit Okeanos and Tethys (schol. A) or of dampening his desire (referred to unfavorably in schol. b, T). But Hera’s suggestive statement of her supposed goal, the couple’s reunion, is a ‘subtle play on the truth’ (Nickau 1977, 96 n. 35 [transl.]) designed to increase Zeus’ desire for her even more (thus already schol. b, T); she provides, as it were, the cues (‘for a long time’ 305, ‘bed of love’ 306, rancor 306, ‘for your sake’, emphasized, 309 – Zeus’ response: ‘but … us’ 314, ‘love-making’ 314, ‘never’ 315): Leaf on 301–303; Janko on 300–306; Nickau loc. cit. Stating the aim of the journey can also serve to forestall a possible later reproach by the father of the gods that Hera came only to seduce him (schol. b; Lührs 1992, 233), and the ‘innocuous’ goal magnifies the effect of her supposedly careful, respectful behavior toward her husband (309–311; Janko loc. cit.). Finally, athetesis of the verses would destroy the overall structure of the dialogue (292–353n.; Janko loc. cit.). 307 Ida: 157n.

πρυμνωρείῃ: a Homeric hapaxP; a compound from πρυμνός ‘at the base’ (31–32n.; also at Eur. El. 445 in reference to mountains) and ὄρος with the suffix -ι̯α, like other geographic terms, e.  g. the synonym ὑπώρεια (20.218); ‘at the lowest part, at the foot of the mountain’; the opposite is denoted by ἄκρος and κορυφή (157, 292, 332, 352, 15.5): LfgrE; Risch 137; Kurt 1979, 110. — πολυπίδακος Ἴδης: 157n.

301 γαίης: on the -η- after -ι-, R 2. 302–306 = 201–207 (see ad locc.).

Commentary 

 149

308 2nd VH = Od. 20.98, h.Cer. 43. — horses: referring to the team of horses and the chariot, cf. 3.113n., 16.367b–368n. (horse and battle chariot).

ἐπὶ τραφερήν τε καὶ ὑγρήν: τραφερός is an adj. related to τρέφω in the sense ‘let solidify, curdle’ (as at 5.903, of cheese-making); attested only in the present formula (see iterata) as a nominalized feminine like ὑγρή in the polar expressionP: ‘across the solid and the liquid’, i.  e. land and sea; ἠμὲν ἐφ᾿ ὑγρήν | ἠδ᾿ ἐπ᾿ ἀπείρονα γαῖαν at 24.341  f. (see ad loc.), Od. 1.97  f., 5.45  f. is similar: LfgrE s.  v.; Leaf.

309 2nd VH ≈ 298. — νῦν δέ: a return to Zeus’ question (on the reference of νῦν to the current situation, Schw. 2.571). — τόδ᾿ ἱκάνω: 298n. 310 μετέπειτα: expanded on in the conditional clause that follows (AH); the word, only another 4× Od., is much rarer than μετόπισθε, which was preferred by Zenodotus and Aristophanes of Byzantium (schol. A, T), but the latter is poorly attested (see app.crit.) and perhaps arose under the influence of passages with a similar context, such as 1.82, Od. 5.147 (Janko on 310–312). 311 2nd VH = 7.422, Od. 11.13, 19.434. — οἴχωμαι: ‘«will have gone»; since Hera does not actually go σιωπῇ, one expects εἴ with opt. rather than αἴ κε with subjunc.; the entire thought is presented as if Hera were in the process of consideration at that moment’ (AH [transl.]). — βαθυρρόου Ὠκεανοῖο: βαθύρροος, related to ῥέω, ‘with deep waters’, an epithet of major streams like the circular Okeanos (almost always in the genitive, in the present VE formula, see iterata; in addition, Ὠ. β. before caesura C 2 at h.Merc. 185); the variant βαθυρρείτης at 21.195, Hes. Th. 265. 312 = 1.560, 5.764, 8.469, 14.341, 22.182, 24.64, Od. 1.63, 5.21, 24.477; ≈ (τὸν …) Il. 20.19, Od. 12.384, 13.139, 13.153, a speech introduction formulaP (1.58n. with bibliography; Beck 2005, 284  f.). — νεφεληγερέτα: 293n.

313–328 Zeus’ speech starts with a request (313  f.), followed by details regarding his strong desire (315  f., éros), which in turn are followed by the so-called ‘cata­ logue of women’ (317–327), and closes with a renewed reference to his lust (328, éramai ‘I desire’). The insertion of catalogue-like lists within a framework is common (e.  g. 5.381–409, 7.234–243, 11.656–665; cf. 16.70  ff., as here with an accumulation of negatives [16.64–82n.]): Lohmann 1970, 53 n. 93, 147. The cata­ logueP is structured in accord with the traditional principle whereby different mythical events of a certain type – here Zeus’ trysts with divine and human

309 σε᾿ εἵνεκα: on the hiatus, R 5.1; σέ(ο) = σοῦ (R 14.1); εἵνεκα: initial syllable metrically lengthened (R 10.1). 310 χολώσεαι: = χολώσῃ; on the uncontracted form, R 6. — αἴ κε: = ἐάν (R 22.1, R 24.5). — σιωπῇ: ‘without telling you’. 311 Ὠκεανοῖο: on the inflection, R 11.2. 312 τήν: on the anaphoric demonstrative pronoun, R 17. — νεφεληγερέτα: 293n. 313 κεῖσε: = ἐκεῖσε.

150 

 Iliad 14

women – are collated and arranged (West 1997, 384); women are frequently the subject of epic catalogues (as at Od. 5.118–128, Hes. Th. 886–923, 938–944; ‘Hes.’ fr. 1–245 M.-W.; Janko; on a Near Eastern parallel, West loc. cit.; Sanskrit catalogues in West 2007, 314). At the same time, the traditional material was employed in an innovative manner by the poet of the Iliad: the ever greater reduction in length of the individual segments (sons are no longer mentioned from 326 on, in 323 several women are mentioned), typical of catalogues (e.  g. 16.173–197: West 2011, 114; de Jong on Od. 11.225–330), creates the impression of an urgent sensation that increasingly overwhelms (cf. 316) the father of the gods (for this reason, he is unable to wait for Hera’s return from Okeanos). The urgency is further underlined via an ascending structure: five mortal women arranged in accord with the prominence of their sons fathered by Zeus (Peirithoos, Perseus, Minos and Rhadamanthys, Herakles, the god Dionysos) are followed by ever briefer mention of two goddesses with divine offspring; the ultimate spot is occupied by Hera herself and is set off linguistically (after caesura C 2): 2.741n.; Eust. 988.34  ff.; Hebel 1970, 133; Janko; Gaertner 2001, 302; Perceau 2002, 95  f., 242 n. 58; a comparison with the systematic catalogue of mortal women followed by goddesses at Hes. Th. 886–923, 938–944 in Priess 1977, 47; Janko. On the possible cultic background of individual myths, 317n., 321n., 322n., 323n. — Beginning in antiquity, some scholars have athetized the catalogue (among them Aristarchus, Aristophanes of Byzantium [schol. A on 317], AH, Faesi, Bolling 1944, 139) on the ground that it does not suit the situation, i.  e. Zeus’ courting of Hera, and is merely a learned interpolation. Against this must be set the elaborate structure of the speech as a whole (see above) and the overall dialogue (292–353n.), as well as the various functions of the catalogue which the structure brings out. Zeus’ recollection of previous ­unions finds a parallel in an analogous situation with Paris’ words at 3.442– 446 and perhaps represents a typical element of seduction scenes (Faulkner on h.Ven. 143–154); its function of reminding the counterpart and the speaker of his own prowess allows it to be understood as a quasi-equivalent of references to one’s genealogy in speeches of challenge before battles (Kelly 2007, 424  f.). While the enumeration of Zeus’ conquests appears as a burlesque insult directed at the spouse, it seems at the same time to be the self-depiction of a god in the grip of erotic desire (Sammons 2010, 65  f.). The intensification leading to the point at the end, as well as the length of the speech, underline the comic contrast between the status of the sky god and the indirect dominance of Hera, who so recently played the role of the deferential wife (301–311n.), between Zeus as a superficially flattering, courting suitor and Hera’s victim, controlled by his passions, between his frank recollection of innumerable affairs, which sometimes led to terrible bouts of jealousy on the part of his wife

Commentary 

 151

(323n., 327n.), and the fact that Hera, close to achieving the seduction, cannot now jeopardize it with a rash response (cf. 330–340n.; in detail, Sammons loc. cit. 67–73). At the same time, the catalogue is not overly elaborate: via the form of a priamel (see below), the effect of Hera’s overall, carefully prepared appearance (159–291) and her absolute, eternal supremacy among all women, divine and human, are in the end emphasized, as was already stressed by Aphrodite (212  f.) and as can be gleaned from the epic as a whole (153–353n.; 1.518–527n., 1.546n., 1.611, 4.59–61, 5.892  f., 8.407  f., 16.432, 18.364–366). Consequently, and in contrast to other catalogues (e.  g. Od. 11.235–327), the individual affairs are merely listed, with no account of the particulars, e.  g. Zeus’ metamorphosis in his seduction of Europa. Bibliography: Erbse 1986, 214; Janko; Lateiner 1995, 42; Paduano/Mirto on 312–353; Alden 2000, 8, 45–47; Minchin 2001, 95; Jones on 313–328.

The statement at 315  f. is explained in a priamel (as at e.  g. 6.450–455 [see ad loc.], 9.378– 391) that picks up the temporal (oὐ πώ ποτε) and quantitative (ὧδε) elements in a negative enumeration (οὐδ᾿ ὁπότ᾿/ὅτε, ‘not even when’, anaphoric) and reaffirms it in a conclusion (νῦν, ὥς): Race 1982, 29, 36. At 317–325, the negated temporal clause is followed in each case by a relative clause (prefaced with anaphoric ἣ τέκε; at 323  ff., the scheme is varied via the chiastic arrangement Semele-Alkmene, Herakles-Dionysos), leaving only the listing of the three abbreviated segments (326  f., οὐδ᾿ ὅτε … οὐδ᾿ ὁπότε … οὐδέ, ‘not when … nor … nor’): Eust. 988.34  ff.; Fehling 1969, 315; loc. cit. 213 on variation in general; Perceau 2002, 95. Only a temporal clause contains an anaphoric verb (317; ἔραμαι in 328 picks up only this and ἔρος at 315), as if the speaker were avoiding repetition out of consideration for the addressee (Eust. 988.38; Janko).

313 VE = Od. 12.126. — ἐστί: full verb, ‘is possible’; on the accent, 6.267n. — καὶ ὕστερον: ‘also later on’ (AH). 314 ≈ 3.441; 2nd VH = Od. 8.292, cf. Il. 24.636. — φιλότητι: on the sense ‘love, love-making’, 3.441n. — τραπείομεν: aor. pass. (with mid. sense) of τέρπω (3.441n.).

315 1st VH = 3.442. — never before: Exaggeration and generalization as a rhetorical device, as at 1.106 (see ad loc.), 1.541, 3.60 (see ad loc.), 19.290 (Kullmann 1992, 230).

ὧδε: picked up by ὥς in 328. — ἔρος: 294n. — γυναικός: pregnant: ‘mortal woman’ (likewise at 24.58, see ad loc.), like ἀνδρῶν ‘mortal men’ at 342 (schol. T).

314 νῶϊ: nom. dual of the 1st pers. personal pronoun (R 14.1). — ἄγε: originally imper. of ἄγω; fossilized as a particle that adds emphasis to requests: ‘come on!’. — τραπείομεν: 1st pers. pl. aor. pass. subjunc. of τέρπω (R 16.3; ↑). — εὐνηθέντε: masc. nom. dual of the aor. pass. (with mid. sense) part. of εὐνάω. 315–316 μ(ε) … | θυμόν: acc. of the whole and the part (R 19.1). — ἐνί: = ἐν (R 20.1). — στήθεσσι: on the inflection, R 11.3. — ἐδάμασσεν: on the -σσ-, R 9.1.

152 

 Iliad 14

316 1st VH = 9.637, 18.113, 19.66, Od. 21.87; ≈ Il. 9.703, 14.39, 17.22, Od. 5.191. — melted about: an image of Eros similar to that of sleep (164b–165n., 253; cf. 2.19n. and 294 ‘enveloped’). — submission: Eros is a powerful, primal urge (353, Hes. Th. 122; cf. 198b–199n.).

θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσι: 39n. — περιπροχυθείς: a hapaxP related to χέω; a verbal compound with multiple prefixes like διεξίμεναι 6.393, ἀποπροελών Od. 17.457, etc. (Schw. 2.428–430).

317 ‘Wife of Ixion’ is a periphrastic denominationP for Dia (schol. T; BNP s.  v. Dia), likely with comic intent: ‘his phrasing makes [Zeus] sound like an adulterer’ (Janko on 317–318). Ixion, king of the Thessalian Lapithai, supposedly attempted to seduce Hera (Pind. Pyth. 2.21–48, where also on his punishment as an eternal penitent, lashed to a wheel), perhaps as revenge for the seduction of his wife Dia by Zeus (who had taken the shape of a horse, Eust. 101.1–3). The name Dia, a ‘female equivalent’ of Zeus ( Βορέεω > Βορέω: G 45 and 68); it is also found elsewhere in early epic, e.  g. 23.692, Hes. Th. 870 (Chantr. 1.65; Hoekstra 1965, 32). The modification of the formula may explain the hiatus Βορέω (< Βορέα(ο)) ἀλεγεινῇ.

396–397 Fire in similesP and comparisonsP often illustrates the destructive potential and aggressiveness of both armies and individual warriors (the ‘heated’ fight itself is like a fire: 18.1n., 17.737). In most cases, emphasis is unsurprisingly on the optical aspect of fire (compared to the gleam of armor or of eyes: 1.104n., 2.455–458, likewise of an army on the move [see ad loc.], 18.154n. with bibliography, 19.375–380a n.; reference to an approaching crowd, as here, but with no explicit mention of gleaming: 2.780, 13.39  f.). But sometimes the sound of burning wood is the focus, here ‘the roar and crackling of a forest fire’ (Krapp 1964, 183 [transl.]; 397n.), at 22.410  f. the crackle of burning house

394 βοάᾳ: on the form, R 8. 395 ποντόθεν: ‘from the sea’; on the form, R 15.1. — Βορέω ἀλεγεινῇ: on the hiatus, ↑. 397 οὔρεος: initial syllable metrically lengthened (R 10.1). — τ(ε): on the ‘epic τε’ here and at 399, R 24.11. — καιέμεν: final-consecutive inf.; on the form, R 16.4.

Commentary 

 185

beams, at 23.216 that of a pyre: Mugler 1963, 104  f.; Krapp loc. cit.; a Biblical parallel in West 1997, 384. 396 πυρὸς … αἰθομένοιο: the VE formula πυρὸς αἰθομένοιο (18.1n.), here as at 6.182, Od.  11.220 with words intervening (Janko on 394–399). — †ποτί: πέλει, attested only once in the indirect transmission and adopted by AH, would fit very well, but it is impossible to understand why all manuscripts and four papyri would have replaced it with the problematic ποτί or ποθί (Allen 1931, 23). ποθι ‘somewhere’ makes no sense after γε (Allen loc. cit.), and ποτί ‘additionally’ (Allen loc. cit.; Chantr. 2.131 n. 2) and πότι = πρόσεστι (Janko) are even less appropriate (West 2001, 228).

397 1st VH = 3.34, 16.634, 16.766, Hes. Th. 860, Op. 510, h.Merc. 287; ≈ Il. 2.456, 11.87, Hes. Th. 865. — hills: A forest fire is likewise located on the hill slope at 20.490  f., at 2.456 on a mountain top, at 15.605  f. in the mountains generally (at 11.155–157 the mountains are probably implicit as the scene of the simile): 2.456n. with bibliography.

ὤρετο: a thematic aor. (also at 12.279, 22.102) as a metrical variant beside athematic ὦρτο (7.162, Od. 3.176 etc.), derived from the secondarily formed subjunc. ὄρηται (Od. 16.98, 16.116, 20.267) and opt. ὄροιτο (Od. 14.522): Rix (1965) 2001, 29 n. 13; cautiously, Chantr. 1.97, 392.

398–399 In similes, the (often blustery) wind commonly brings out the noise and intensity of an onslaught or attack, as here, as well as the energy and motivation of the warriors (Scott 1974, 154; Leinieks 1986, 14; Janko on 394–399, all with examples). For the most part, reference is to storms at sea (on the motif ‘wind and waves’, 16–22n., 394–395n.), but occasionally also to a storm on land, as here (12.132–134; with a very similar image, likewise in the forested mountains, 16.765–769; also 13.334–336, 17.53–58, 17.739, 21.346  f.); alternatively, only the sky comes into view (5.522–526, 16.364  f.; indeterminate at 12.40, 12.375, 13.39, 20.51). — oaks: These trees have always been considered especially strong and robust: at 12.132–136, they are mentioned in a simile describing Achaian warriors (Aceti 2008, 119 n. 274 and 277).

δρυσὶν ὑψικόμοισιν: an inflectible formula (likewise at VE at Od. 9.186, 12.357, before caesura B 2 at Od. 14.328, 19.297, before caesura C 1 at Il. 23.118, Hes. Op. 509, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 376); ὑψίκομος, from κόμη ‘hair’ in a metaphorical sense, ‘foliage’, means ‘lofty and leafy, leafy on high’, and has the metrical variant ὑψικάρηνος (Il. 12.132, h.Ven. 264): LfgrE. — ὅς τε μάλιστα: μάλιστα reinforces μέγα, cf. μάλιστα beside a superlative at 2.56  f. (with n.), 2.220, etc. What the superlative refers to is unclear; a comparison with the previously mentioned sea or fire (AH) would diminish its effectiveness, nor is a particular wind singled out (West 2001, 228). μάλιστα μέγα perhaps means ‘especially

399 ἠπύει: ‘roars’.

186 

 Iliad 14

noisy’, and εὖτε μάλιστα μέγα βρέμεται is to be understood ‘when he howls with particular force’; in that case, the temporal clause would correspond to the expansions in the two preceding similes (395 participial construction, 397 temporal clause, see 394–401n.): West loc. cit. — βρέμεται: of the wind, as at 15.627: ‘roars, howls’ (2.210n.; LfgrE). — χαλεπαίνων: here, as at Od. 5.485, of storms; with βρέμεται ‘rages, storms’ (LfgrE; cf. 256 [with n.]; see also 394–401n. on personifications).

400–402 These verses pick up 390–393, forming a ring encircling the similes (Janko on 392–401). 400 1st VH ≈ 10.418. — ἔπλετο: ‘had risen’, cf. 3.3 κλαγγὴ … πέλει (Waanders 2000, 262). 401 1st VH ≈ 16.566; 2nd VH = 16.430, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 412, 436; ≈ Il. 15.726. — δεινόν: ‘terrible’, of the psychological effect of war cries also at 16.566, similarly at 11.10 of Eris (Wille 2001, 72 n. 470; on δεινός of sounds in general, Kaimio 1977, 60; on the effects of noise in battle, see also 393n.). — ἀϋσάντων: 147n.

402–439 A duel between Aias and Hektor: Hektor attacks Aias but misses, and Aias in turn wounds Hektor so badly with a stone that Hektor loses consciousness and must be carried to safety behind the battle lines. 402–439 After Achilleus withdraws from battle, Aias becomes Hektor’s main opponent, since he is the second strongest Achaian (CH 3) (Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 69  f.; Stoevesandt 2004, 209). Their confrontations commence with the formal duel at 7.66–312, in which the Trojan leader is beaten; he subsequently avoids Aias (11.542), but his self-confidence is boosted by his victories in the battle around the ships to such an extent that he responds with provocative words (13.824–832; Aias had already attempted to attack Hektor earlier, at 13.191, but without success) to Aias’ challenge and the omen signalling his defeat (13.821  f.). But the expected duel does not take place; with Poseidon’s help, the Achaians regroup, exchange weapons and set out. Now, after the clash of the armies, the course of the battle is depicted by a representative duel that portrays its climax (3.15–37n.; e.  g. 13.361 is similar; Düntzer 1872, 129  f.; Winter 1956, 123). That the confrontation between the two opponents at the end of Book 13 breaks off has been considered unusual and to be explained by the genesis of the poem (an insertion from 1–401; for the analytic point of view, Leaf, Introd. on 14, 63  f.; Fenik 1968, 156; Mueller [1984] 2009, 179; West 2011, 287, on 13.809–837) or by the poet’s narrative technique of depicting simultaneous events consecutively (the events at 1–401 should actually be considered coincident with those depicted up to 13.837: 1–152n.; Janko on 14.1–152 and

401 δεινόν: adverbial acc. (↑).

Commentary 

 187

14.402–522). For criticism of this hypothesis, 1–152n.; on the Homeric treatment of simultaneous events generally, de Jong 2007, 30  f. A different explanation is possible, since there is a parallel for the interruption: at 20.155, the battle of the gods is abandoned in a similar manner, only to be picked up again at 21.383 (Janko on 402–522). The break at the end of Book 13 created suspense (Janko loc. cit.); after the ‘renewal of battle’ (Danek 1999, 86 n. 34 [transl.]), the series of confrontations between the two opponents now terminates in a decisive, climactic fight (the multiple encounters between Hektor and Achilleus before the decisive confrontation in Books 20 to 22 are similar; Schadewaldt [1938] 1966, 70; Rengakos 1995, 28; cf. the delayed response of Deïphobos to a challenge by Idomeneus at 13.445–459/13.516  f.). Hektor’s inferiority to Aias, further underlined by the discrepancy vis-à-vis his words at 13.824–832, becomes obvious once more (Winter 1956, 174; Mueller loc. cit. 46). The duel, the wounding of the hero, his evacuation and his condition after he is wounded are described in such great detail as to reveal both his valor (time and again, Hektor meets Aias in relentless combat; Stoevesandt 2004, 214) and his vulnerability; the latter presages his death at the hands of Achilleus, for whose sake he must be ‘spared’ here to suit the overarching plan of the poem (STR 22) (on the death motif, 408n., 410–422nn., 433n., 437–439n., 438–439n.; Broccia 1967, 80  f.; de Romilly 1997, 40; Neal 2006, 81, 118, 121  f.). Aias’ victory in the duel is also aided by the reversal in circumstances (Zeus’ inattentiveness; 153–353n.; Michel 1971, 61) and thus represents a dramatic climax to Poseidon’s attempt to repel the Trojans who, deprived of their leader, ultimately turn in flight (507; Kelly 2007, 194). After Zeus has awoken and revitalized Hektor, the latter ultimately sets fire to a ship and kills Patroklos, but is defeated again by Aias in the battle for Patroklos’ body (15.415, 16.114  ff., 17.123  ff.). 402–420 The sequence of battle follows the themeP ‘A hurls a missile at B, but misses his target; B wounds A’ (schol. bT on 14.402; Fenik 1968, 11). In accord with its significance (402–439n.), the battle as a whole is depicted in great detail (404–406n.), with a simile (414–417n.) and reference to Hektor’s emotions (406) (Niens 1987, 168). 402 ≈ 13.502, 16.284 (to caesura C 2; both passages concern duels); cf. 17.304. — First: Greek prōtos (and acc. prōton) always indicates the beginning of a description of a particular phase of battle (Latacz 1977, 103  f.; de Jong [1987] 2004, 51, with a collection of examples n. 26 p. 259; cf. 509n.); here it indicates the renewed battle after the formation of the frontline and the advance (383– 401), the duel between Aias and Hektor (402–439), with Hektor highlighted as 402 ἀκόντισε: on the unaugmented form, R 16.1.

188 

 Iliad 14

the aggressor. In 4 of 22 examples, acc. prōton denotes the first victim (11.420, 12.191, 16.399; in the nom. at 17.597); in the remaining passages, as here, the nom. refers to the – usually successful – initial aggressor in the new phase of the fight being narrated (with Aias: 6.5, 12.378, 13.809). It remains exceptional that the hero thus introduced suffers defeat (otherwise only Ares in the battle of gods at 21.391  ff.; at 13.502 the attacker Aineias, admittedly unsuccessful, remains unwounded). The prōtos formula thus heightens suspense here by initially arousing an expectation that Hektor will be victorious; the disappointment of this expectation in turn (as with Ares at 21.391  ff.) underscores his mistaken assessment of the risk, which was already on display in the challenge he delivered to Aias at 13.824–832 (on Hektor’s exaggerated sense of his own abilities, cf. schol. bT on 14.402). — spear: the weapon most often used in Homeric battle scenes (statistics in Stoevesandt 2004, 112  f.; see also FOR 44a).

Αἴαντος … φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρ: Since Aias is the greatest Achaian warrior who is not yet wounded, Hektor challenged him (13.824–832) and now begins his attack. Aias’ name is placed emphatically at the beginning of the verse, since he has not been mentioned for some time, while the name of the just-mentioned attacker (390) stands at verse end; on the unusual position of the genitive as an objective case in the case of a personal name with ἀκόντισε (cf. 8.118, 13.516, 14.461, 15.429: no personal names; iterata: nom. at VB), Düntzer 1872, 129; Faesi; Bakker 2005, 13, comparing 17.304, where δουρὶ φαεινῷ occurs at VE after ἀκόντισε. On the formulaic VE φαίδιμος Ἕκτωρ, 388n.

403 τέτραπτο πρὸς ἰθύν: Aias had turned his shielded back to Hektor, but has now turned to face him, a stance to be expected in the narrative of the successful Achaian resistance to the Trojans (Niens 1987, 168 n. 2). ἡ ἰθύς means ‘straight direction’ (6.79n.); the Achaian thus faces the Trojan ‘straight on’. This reading, found in several papyri, has a parallel in ἀν᾿ ἰθύν ‘straight on against the current’ at 21.303 (West, app. crit.), whereas in the vulgate πρὸς ἰθύ οἱ (neuter of the adjective ἰθύς), the position of the dative of the enclitic οἱ relative to the preverb πρός would be unusual (Leaf; Chantr. 2.132; differently Janko on 402–408, although he lists no parallels with an enclitic). — οὐδ᾿ ἀφάμαρτεν: before this phrase sc. καὶ βάλε, together with which it forms a rhetorical polar expressionP at 11.350, 13.160, 21.591, 22.290, where it denotes, as here, an ineffectual hit, i.  e. the weapon glances off the armor (404–406n.; Janko on 402–408; Kelly 2007, 155 n. 1; general bibliography on this expression, 3.59n.). The negative statement, stressed by its position at VE, also indicates that this is not one of those spear throws that misses its target but kills another man (ἀκόντισε, as in 402, combined with positive ἁμαρτάνω at e.  g. 4.490  f., 8.118  f., 13.516/518; without ἁμαρτάνω at 14.461, etc.; Kelly loc. cit. 155).

403 ἔγχει, ἐπεί: on the so-called correption, R 5.5. — οὐδ(έ): occurs also after affirmative clauses in Homer (R 24.8).

Commentary 

 189

404–406 The place where Hektor’s spear hits Aias is described in great detail (Friedrich [1956] 2003, 30; cf. the detail with which some injuries are depicted: 6.9–11n.): it is in front, on the warrior’s chest, across which the straps for carrying his sword and shield are stretched and – this point is to be understood – cross, as they pass over the right and left shoulders (2.388–389n., 2.45n., 18.479–480n.; Lorimer 1950, 182; Niens 1987, 168 with n. 2; Janko on 402–408). The audience is probably supposed to imagine Aias as bare-chested, perhaps in an undergarment but certainly without a corslet, with the long shield which is his characteristic protective armor (18.193n.) strapped to his back – the depiction on a Mycenaean dagger of a warrior attacking during a lion hunt is similar, as is the way the great warrior Aias is portrayed elsewhere in the Iliad (cf. 11.545: Aias throws the shield onto his back and turns to flee; no corslet is mentioned anywhere): Lorimer loc. cit.; on the shields, 2.388–389n.; Snodgrass (1967) 1984, 17 fig. 3, 21–26; on the absence of a corslet, already schol. bT on 406. There is no secure evidence for the use of corslets anywhere in Greece prior to 1450 B.C., which has led to the conclusion that this type of armor was unnecessary, since the long shields provided sufficient protection. Metal chest armor, similar to that common much earlier in the Near East, is attested from later stages of the Mycenaean period (Trümpy 1950, 32; Snodgrass loc. cit. 20  f., 32–35, 38; Catling 1977, 83–87; Buchholz 2010, 222  f.). The detailed description of the location of the hit corresponds to the significance of the two warriors and the confrontation between them (402–439n., 406n., cf. 412n.) and stresses the force and thus the quality of Hektor’s shot: only two superimposed straps can protect Aias from injury, whereas in the case of Sarpedon at 12.401  ff. one strap offered sufficient resistance (West 2011, 296, on 403; the myth concerning Aias’ invulnerability is not adduced by the narrator here as an explanation; it may be post-Homeric: Janko on 402–408; cf. 16.793–804n. on Patroklos); at the same time, the resistance of the straps indicates that Hektor’s throw was too weak after all, thus probably forecasting his defeat and the depiction of the successful pushback against the Trojans (Niens 1987, 168). 404 ≈ 12.401. — τῇ … τετάσθην: specifies the location of the hit for the καὶ βάλε that is to be supplied (403n.): Faesi. — τελαμῶνε: The possibility that this is an echo of Aias’ epithet Τελαμώνιος has been raised (Janko on 409–412; Whallon 1969, 11, 65  f., stresses the conection between Τελαμώνιος and τελαμών; on the epithet, 409n.); that the narrator was aiming for this wordplay in his choice of location for the hit etc. cannot be excluded (404–406n.). 404 τῇ: ‘on the spot where’ (demonstrative of πῇ, here relative: R 14.5). — ῥα: = ἄρα (R 24.1), likewise in 407. — δύω τελαμῶνε: nom. dual (R 18.1). — στήθεσσι: on the inflection, R 11.3. — τετάσθην: ‘stretched, were stretched’: 3rd pers. dual plpf. mid.-pass. of τείνω.

190 

 Iliad 14

405 silver nails: The silver nails fasten the hilt plates to the blade and consist of a stronger metal with the nail heads coated with silver. Swords with silver nails have been found in burials of Mycenaean date (15th cent.) as well as from the 7th century (Cyprus). Bibliography: 2.45n.; Foltiny 1980, 237 (with fig. 46 a, b), 268  f. and pl. XXIIIe; Karageorghis 1967, 38, 43 with pl. XLV no. 95; KilianDirlmeier 1993.

σάκεος: a general term for a shield (3.335n.). — φασγάνου ἀργυροήλου: ἀργυρόηλος ‘(studded) with silver nails’ is an epithet used with terms for ‘sword’ (always at VE): with φάσγανον also at 23.807 (acc.) and with the metrical variant ξίφος 7× Il., 4× Od. (2.45n. with bibliography; 1.190n.). Since on the one hand the dactylic φάσγανον appears to derive from the general Mycenaean term for ‘sword’ pa-ka-na /phasgana/ (MYC s.  v. φάσγανον), attested in the post-Homeric period only in poetry (LSJ s.  v.), and ἀργυρόηλον may also be very old with Mycenaean roots, and since on the other hand swords with silver nails are so far absent from finds between the 15th and the 7th centuries B.C. (see above), the φάσγανον ἀργυρόηλον might be an old, inherited forrmula for a type of sword that had long been obsolete already in the Homeric period (the gen. in -ου, here with correption, would be a more recent formation: Janko on 402–408; on post-Mycenaean -ου generally, Rix [1976] 1992, 138  f.): 2.45n.; LfgrE s.  v. ἀργυρόηλος with bibliography; Kirk on 2.45; Latacz (1985) 1996, 50  f.; with skepticism, Karageorghis 1967, 267  f. (the five examples found in Cyprus could indicate continuity and the famil­ iarity of the poet with such swords).

406 after caesura C 2 = 22.291. — in anger: Anger as the response of an attacker to a missed shot (the opponent has not been hit at all or hit only ineffectually) is emphasized also at 13.165 (Meriones), 16.616 (Aineias) and, in reference to Hektor, as here, 22.291. In each case, the irritation is based both on the fact that the shot fell only a bit short of being a good, decisive hit on the opponent (here at 403, cf. 407) and on the loss of a spear (the second one is mentioned here at 419, whereas Hektor must realize at 22.291  ff. that he has no more; on being armed with two spears, 3.18n.). In accord with the significance of Hektor for Troy (402–439n.), his anger also signals an awareness of the consequences that could follow a missed shot. The Trojan leader managed to break into the encampment of ships (Books 12–14) but has now squandered the opportunity of killing Aias, the best among the Achaians involved in the battle (after Achilleus, the second best of all Achaians), who has time and again proven

405 ὅ … ὅ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 17). — σάκεος(ς), ὅ: on the prosody, M 4.6 (note also the caesura); on the uncontracted ending of σάκεος, R 6. 406 τώ (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.4. — τώ: nom. dual of ὅ, with an anaphoric demonstrative function (R 17). — οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1), likewise 407. — ῥυσάσθην: 3rd pers. dual aor. mid. of ἔρυμαι (↑). — χώσατο: ingressive.

Commentary 

 191

stronger (7.268  ff., 13.190  ff., as also later: 17.715  ff.) despite being unprotected; Hektor has instead provoked Aias by the attack (schol. b and T on 406). While the unsuccessful attacker in the two passages in Books 13 and 16 manages to escape unscathed, the retreating Hektor turns into a target for his opponent: Aias nearly kills him (408  ff.). Bibliography: LfgrE s.  v. χώομαι 1293.25  ff.; Fenik 1968, 125; Paduano/Mirto on 402–448; Kelly 2007, 322 n. 1; on the relationship to 22.291  ff., the depiction of Hektor’s death, see 402–439n.

ῥυσάσθην: 3rd pers. dual aor. mid. of ῥύομαι (thematic, with zero-grade root *u̯ r-u-e/o-) and ἔρυμαι (athematic, with full grade in the root: *u̯ er-u-) ‘protect, preserve’; bibliography on the diversity of forms of this verb, 24.499n.; LIV s.  v. *u̯ er- (p. 684  f.). — τέρενα χρόα: a noun-epithet formula, always in the acc. and after caesura B 1 (also at 4.237, 13.553, Hes. Th. 5, Op. 522). χρώς means ‘skin, body’ (14.163–164a n.). τέρην ‘delicate’ (3.142n.) is used in the Iliad as an epithet of χρώς in the sense ‘vulnerable’, of being endangered during battle (especially by missiles) as here, also at 13.553, λευκός at 11.573, 15.316 is similar, as are probably also λειριόεις at 13.830 and ἁπαλός of the neck at 3.371 (see ad loc.): LfgrE; Janko on 402–408 and 13.830–832. — χώσατο: In contrast to χολοῦσθαι, χώομαι frequently denotes the anger of a characterP at his own reputation-damaging error, as here with the ineffectual shot (see above) or – as in the case of Agamemnon – at the momentous disparaging of his own best warrior (1.244): Cairns 2003, 29  f.; on reputation, 1.159–160n.

407 = 22.292; 2nd VH ≈ Hes. Th. 182; after caesura C 2 = Il. 5.18, 11.376, 16.480. — βέλος ὠκύ: a formulaic expression, in various positions in the verse: after A 4 (5 × Il.), after C 1 (1× Il.), at VE (1× Il., 1× Od.); cf. the similar sounding ὀξὺ βέλος after A 3 (2× Od.). — ἐτώσιον: ‘ineffectual, unsuccessful’ (18.104n.), probably originally with an initial ϝ that would here bridge the hiatus after ὠκύ (DELG s.  v. ἐτός; hiatus in the caesura is nonetheless possible). — ἔκφυγε χειρός: a VE formula (see iterata), always in combination with a term for ‘futile’ (ἅλιος, ἐτώσιος), in the Iliad only of missiles.

408 = 3.32, 11.585, 13.566, 13.596, 13.648, 16.817, ≈ 13.165, 13.533. The forrmulaic verse denotes the return of a warrior to the safety of his military unit (409, 13.567, 13.650 apiónta/-os ‘departing’) after exposing himself during an attack (on the exception at 3.32, see ad loc.; for general discussion of the frontline fighters, the prómachoi, who leap forward during the massed missile-fighting, 3.16–17n.). Retreat is a tactic of prόmachos-fighting and is considered a sensible decision: 11.189, 11.354, 16.656  f., cf. 22.137  ff. (Latacz 1977, 131  f.; Kirk on 3.32; Pagani 2008, 395): it occurs after an unsuccessful attack (frequently also after the loss of the warrior’s spear, as here; 402–439n., 11.585, 13.165  f., 13.532  f., 13.564–566, 13.647  f.; on the peculiar context at 16.817, see ad loc.) and/or an

407 ὅττι: = ὅτι (R 9.1). — ῥα (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.3. — ἐτώσιον: predicative. 408 ἑτάρων: = ἑταίρων.

192 

 Iliad 14

injury (11.584  f., 13.595  f.), when the risk of continuing the fight would become excessive (the expression kḗr aleéinōn ‘trying to avoid death’ indicates great danger: Neal 2006, 101). The formula thus suggests the predominance of the warrior’s opponents: if he is not wounded (as here), he is usually fatally attacked during his retreat (13.566/573  ff., 13.648/654, 16.818  ff./855), which is thus to be expected here as well and so heightens the suspense for the audience (402–439n.; on 3.32, see ad loc.; notably, an abbreviated formula is used during Meriones’ successful retreat at 13.165, 13.533). In accord with the tendency in the Iliad to characterize the Trojans as the less powerful fighters, more Trojans than Achaians are depicted retreating, either via the present formulaic verse (also at 3.32, 13.566, 13.596, 13.648  ff.) or with other words (e.  g. 11.446  ff., 16.813, 17.129  ff.; cf. 17.30  ff.; 16.308n.). That Hektor of all people must repeatedly retreat and seek shelter among the army (here, at 11.189, 11.354, 16.656  f., cf. 22.137  ff.) reflects the exposed position of the leader as the most powerful Trojan warrior, as well as his closeness to his army (which he only loses in Book 22). On the formula, LfgrE s.  v. χάζομαι 1989.4  ff.; Fenik 1968, 140; on Hektor specifically, in brief, Strasburger 1954, 103; Rinon 2008, 102.

ἔθνος: ‘massed army, masses’ (3.32n.). — κῆρ(α): ‘(fate of) death’: 2.301–302n. — ἀλεείνων: conative, with an implication of finality (3.32n.). Verbs with the stem ἀλ-εϝ-/ ἀλ-υ ‘avoid, escape’ are unsurprisingly often combined with κῆρα (also 1× with θάνατον), e.  g. in the formula ἀλεύατο κῆρα μέλαιναν (3.360 = 7.254 = 11.360 = 14.462, see ad loc.) or in expressions with inflected ἀλύσκω (4× Il., 8× Od.), whereby 15.287 – the conclusion that Hektor escaped death after fainting: ἐξαῦτις ἀνέστη κῆρας ἀλύξας – functions as an echo of the present passage, as well as 1× with ἀλυσκάνω (Od. 22.330): examples in LfgrE s.vv. ἀλεείνω, ἀλέομαι, ἀλύσκω, ἀλυσκάνω.

409 1st VH to caesura A 4 = 5.36, 8.125, 8.317, Od. 9.398, 14.420, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 332, 424; ≈  Il. 1.440, 18.389, Od. 7.275, 15.367, 15.478 (τὴν μ. ἔ.), Il. 11.323 (τοὺς μ. ἔ.), 11.229 (τὰς μ. ἔ.); cf. Il. 24.719 (with n.). — 2nd VH = 11× Il.; from caesura C 1 onward 9× Il. (see below). — ἀπιόντα: In Homeric epic, ἀπιέναι is used almost exclusively as a participle, most often to denote a retreat (as here, also at 13.567 and 13.650 after the formula used at 408 [see ad loc.]). The verb can imply a pivot by the warrior, who turns his back to his opponent (13.650  ff.), or walking backwards (13.566  ff.); the latter is indicated here by the wound to the chest (412), as well as by the fact that Hektor’s shield lands on him after he falls (419): schol. bT on 409; AH; Saunders 1999, 354  f. with n. 30. — μέγας Τελαμώνιος Αἴας: a VE formula. μέγας is a generic epithetP of warriors (2.653n.; Bissinger 1966, 17, who also points to tree similes, cf. 414n.); on Aias’ height, probably based on traditional notions of superhumanly tall heroes, 3.229n. Τελαμώνιος is used almost exclusively as an epithet of Aias (in addition to the VE formula, another 13× Il. after caesura B 1,

409 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3 and R 17); object of βεβλήκειν (412).

Commentary 

 193

4× Il. after caesura C 1; only 3× of Aias’ half-brother Teukros; on its use as an epithet, Aitchison 1964, 134; Anselmi 1998, 89–110). The word is formed with the affiliative suffix -ιος and is in origin likely an appellative that was later perceived as a patronymic, from which the name Τελαμών was derived as a designation for Aias’ father (8.283, 13.177, 17.293, 17.284, Od. 11.553, ‘Hes.’ fr. 250 M.-W.): LfgrE s.  v. Τελαμών with bibliography; Eust. 995.15; cf. 6.5n.; on the age of the myths surrounding Telamon, Wilamowitz 1884, 246; Aitchison 1965, 135; Anselmi loc. cit. 112  f.; Willcock 2004, 54. The appellative is generally derived from τλῆναι ‘carry’ and understood ‘carrier, bearer’ (related to τελαμών, with the nomen agentis suffix -μών: Frisk s.  v.; Risch 53), albeit variously interpreted: (1) ‘shield-bearer, carrying a shield’ (Aias would be named for his characteristic long shield with the shield strap that here saves his life; Eust. 995.15; Aitchison loc. cit. 135; Whallon 1969, 11; Anselmi 1998, 114  f.) or (2) ‘bearer (of the skies), pillar’, similar to the name Atlas, which is likewise formed from τλῆναι, a designation that matches Aias’ enormous height (Von der Mühll [1930] 1976, 465  f., von Kamptz 257  f.; as a hypothesis in LfgrE, Frisk, Beekes s.  v. τελαμών; cf. the name Tantalos, perhaps from the same root).

410–411 2nd VH of 410 ≈ 15.391, 15.685; 411 to caesura C 2 ≈ 13.579; to A 3 ≈ 13.617. — rock: The formula used at 408 for a retreating warrior is elsewhere followed by a spear throw (Paduano/Mirto on 402–448); the rock is here potentially a particularly dangerous weapon and indicates Aias’ strength, which he has already demonstrated once against Hektor (7.268  ff., 15.11; Neal 2006, 25; on the intensification, 402–439n.; the strongest warriors in particular use stones as weapons: 16.411n.; on fighting with rocks, which usually cause injury or death, in general, 3.80n.). The injury caused by the rock incapacitates the Trojan leader, who nearly dies (412  ff.). The motif ‘rock’ thus designates the forcing back of the Trojans from the encampment of ships (354–522n.) as much as their successful breach of it under Hektor’s leadership (12.445  ff.: Hektor knocks down the gate); the proximity of the battle to the endangered ships, the position of which was described at 14.30  ff., is recalled by the origin of the rock as a ship support (410  f.; Stanley 1993, 155; West 2011, 296).

χερμαδίῳ, τά … ἔχματα … | … ἐκυλίνδετο, τῶν ἓν ἀείρας: The plural τά in the parenthesis (with predicative ἔχματα) picks up the generic concept contained in χερμαδίῳ and corresponds to οἷα, like ἅ at Od. 12.97; cf. Od. 13.223 (AH; K.-G. 1.55). Bibliography on the constructio ad sensum in general, 16.281n.; it is probably to be understood as a characteristic of spoken language (cf. 75n.). τῶν ἓν ἀείρας continues the sentence already begun (anacoluthon) and makes reference to τά in the parenthesis via τῶν; a variant of

410 τά: with the function of a relative pronoun (R 14.5); on the plural, ↑. — πολλά: predicative, ‘in great number’. — θοάων: on the inflection, R 11.1. — ἔχματα: predicative appositive to τά, ‘as supports’. — νηῶν: = νεῶν (R 12.1). 411 πάρ: = παρά (R 20.1). — ἀείρας: = ἄρας.

194 

 Iliad 14

formulaic τῶν ἕν᾿ ἀειραμένη at VB in 293, Od. 15.106. — θοάων: the most common epithetP of ships (1.12b n.). — ἔχματα: The neuter /ekhma/ ‘table support’, already attested in Mycenaean, is related to ἔχω and must generally mean ‘support’ (Risch 49; DMic s.  v. e-ka-ma-te-qe; at 12.260 of bastions, at 13.139 of a rock), here used to prop up ships, a task achieved with beams, ἕρματα, as well as rocks (1.486n.; LfgrE; rocks as ship supports: Hes. Op. 624–626).

412 Hektor is wounded in the breast, below the clavicle, as he retreats backward behind his raised shield (Saunders 1999, 354  f.). As in the case of Hektor’s shot, the detailed description of the location of the hit highlights by how little Aias missed his target (here Hektor’s neck); this, together with the specification of the power behind the throw at 413  ff., makes Aias’ hit appear to be an achievement, even if it does not kill the enemy (Friedrich [1956] 2003, 30; similarly Winter 1956, 123; cf. 404–406n.). The mention of the neck, injuries to which are most often fatal (5.657, 7.12, 20.455, etc.), perhaps anticipates Hektor’s death by Achilleus’ shot through his throat (22.324  ff.; prolepsisP; Neal 2006, 121  f.) via an intensification vis-à-vis the injury to the neck sustained in the formal duel against Aias (7.262; on injuries to the neck, see the table in Stoevesandt 2004, 388  ff.).

βεβλήκειν: The plpf. is frequently used with a pregnant sense, also at e.  g. 4.492, 5.66, Od. 22.258, when the result is to be portrayed as already known: ‘he had already hit’ (Schw. 2.288). The reading with ny ephelkystikon avoids hiatus (West 1998, XXVI; app. crit.). — ὑπὲρ ἄντυγος: on the (leather) shield rim, see 6.117–118n. — ἀγχόθι: with the same sense as ἀγχοῦ, ‘near’; here a preposition with the gen. (LfgrE s.  v. ἄγχι 106.8  ff.).

413 1st VH ≈ 11.147. — like a top: The effect of the throw, due to the weight of the stone, is emphasized by the sequence of individual movements on the victim’s part, and is illustrated by a comparisonP (413) and then a simileP (414–417) (Faesi on 415; Scott 1974, 41). Struck by the rock (412), Hektor spins around in a circle and staggers (413), presumably dizzy, like a top driven by a hand or whip that just ‘before falling over [makes] a lurching movement’ (Erbse [2000] 2003, 142 n. 15 [transl.]; similarly Kurz 1966, 25); after this, the warrior falls like a tree (414–417n.). – The top is a toy attested already in ancient Egypt; a late Geometric example shows grooves for a whip cord (Laser 1987, 98  f. with fig. 38d). – Movements are often illustrated by similes (also e.  g. 11.546, 12.385  f., 15.679  ff.: Coffey 1957, 119; Scott 1974, 82), and elsewhere the force of a missile or kick can similarly set something spinning, e.  g. the torso of the slain Hippolochos (11.147, with similar wording in the 1st VH), a decapitated head

412 δειρῆς: on the -η- after -ρ-, R 2. 413 στρόμβον … ὥς: = ὡς στρόμβον. — περὶ … ἔδραμε: on the so-called tmesis, R 20.2.

Commentary 

 195

(13.204, likewise with comparison to a toy, in this case a ball) or Patroklos’ eyes (16.792, see ad loc.). The reference here is thus probably not to a rotary movement performed by the rock (Kurz loc. cit. 25 n. 32; more guardedly Janko: ‘a spinning stone seems more natural, but the order of events favours applying the image to Hektor’; differently schol. bT; Fränkel 1921, 56); the image of the staggering Hektor instead underlines the impotence of the victim and contributes – along with the preceding motifs ‘ineffectiveness of the shot’ and ‘retreat’ (406n., 408n.), a rock as a weapon and a hit close to the neck (412n., cf. 410–411n. on the rock), and the description of the fall that follows (414–417n.) – to the impression that the hero’s death is imminent (Faesi: cf. 11.354, where Hektor must support himself on the ground after Diomedes’ shot to his helmet, and then faints).

στρόμβον: ‘top’, related to στρέφω (LfgrE). — ἔσσευε: causative: ‘set into (a spinning) motion’ (LfgrE s.  v. σεύομαι, ἔσσευα 99.2). — περὶ δ᾿ ἔδραμε: paratactic, as a result of the spinning motion, with a change of subject (to Hektor): ‘ran around, made a circle while running’, like a top, hence ‘staggered all around’ (LfgrE s.  v. δραμεῖν; AH; Faesi; Kurz 1966, 25).

414–417 After the comparison of Hektor’s first reaction, his reeling, to a spinning top (413n.), the significance of the subsequent fall of the Trojan leader (418–420) is illustrated via a tree simileP with more static elements (Paduano/ Mirto on 402–448). Trees being cut down are frequently used in similes and once in a comparisonP for falling warriors who, as here, have been wounded in the chest or the head and have thus lost consciousness (436  ff.; 16.482–486n.; Aceti 2008, 119 n. 274). The present tree simile thus demonstrates the severity of the injury and reinforces the audience’s expectation that Aias’ attack will turn out to be fatal (cf. 402–439n., 406n., 408n., 410–411n., 412n., 413n., 419–420n., 421n., 422n.; Krischer 1971, 73; Janko; Neal 2006, 118). Individual motifs bring out the drama of the passage, in which the best of the Trojans is eliminated from battle: the oak, which is the strongest of the trees (414– 415a n.), the lightning bolt produced by the supreme god (414–415a n.), and the tremendous fear experienced by an observer (415b–417n.). 414–415a oak: Among the mighty trees that illustrate the strength and size of the heroes (16.482–486n.), the oak, mentioned only here, is the hardest and thus most difficult to cut down (Krischer 1971, 73; Janko loc. cit.); it embodies resistance, as in the simile about the onslaught of the two armies (398–399n.), which is probably referenced here (Janko loc. cit.), and it corresponds to the

414 ὅθ’: ὅτε + subjunc. occurs in Homer also without a modal particle (R 21.1). — ἐξερίπῃ: 3rd pers. sing. aor. subjunc. of ἐξερείπω (↑).

196 

 Iliad 14

mightiest of the Trojans warriors (Elliger 1975, 94). The fact that Zeus strikes an oak, which is in fact especially susceptible to being struck by lightning, corresponds with the connection between IE weather-gods with oaks (West 2007, 240 with n. 9, 242, 248; Nagy [1974] 1990, 195–197) and will not have been perceived as a paradox (similarly Erbse [2000] 2003, 144, contra Janko loc. cit.). — Zeus: A tree is also split by Zeus’ lightning at ‘Hes.’ Sc. 421  f. Elsewhere in early epic, the lightning bolt is Zeus’ weapon against insubordinate gods (8.405/419, 15.117, 21.198, Hes. Th. 690  ff., 846  ff.) as well as human beings (8.133, Od. 5.128, 24.539, h.Ven. 288, in particular on Odysseus’ ship: Od. 5.131  f., 7.249/12.387, 12.416/14.306, 23.330  f.); cf. 386n. On Zeus as god of thunderstorms, CG 24; IE and Near Eastern parallels in West 1997, 115; 2007, 168, 238–251. On the inherited epithet ‘father’, 3.276n. – Zeus’ thunderbolt as the cause of a tree falling represents an intensification compared to the human axes that fell trees in other similes (4.482–487, 13.178–180, 13.389–391 = 16.482–484): the god’s terrifying weapon exposes the frightful power of Aias’ throw (Krischer 1971, 73; two Sanskrit parallels for comparing slain warriors to trees struck by lightning in West 2007, 495). This effect, further stressed by the variant details (414–417n.), makes it unlikely that this is an ironic reference to the sky god’s passivity, i.  e. his sleep, which first enables Aias’ victory (Erbse [2000] 2003, 144 with n. 20, contra Janko on 414–417: these associations would be distracting), although it might recall the terrible effects of Poseidon’s lightning-like sword (386n.; Whitman 1958, 136).

ὑπὸ πληγῆς: ὑπό means ‘under the influence of’ (Schw. 2.528; cf. 16.384n.). The reading πληγῆς in several manuscripts and papyri (app.crit.) matches Zeus’ indirect influence via the lightning (as at 15.117 Διὸς πληγέντι κεραυνῷ and Hes. Th. 855, 857) better than ῥιπῆς ‘impetus’ does (West 2001, 228  f.; differently Janko on 414–417). — ἐξερίπῃ: In the thematic aor., (ἐξ)ερείπω is intransitive and means ‘fall from, out of’, commonly of falling, almost always by mortally wounded warriors (16.310–311n.; on the position in the verse, 16.319n.); in a tree simile also at 13.389, of trees also at 21.243/246, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 421 (see above): LfgrE s.  v. ἐρείπω; cf. 15n. — πρόρριζος: from ῥίζα ‘root’ and πρόwith the inherited sense ‘away (from)’ like Latin pro-fundus ‘groundless’ (Wackernagel [1924] 2009, 698): ‘uprooted’; likewise in a simile, at VB, predicative and proleptic with a verb of falling and with a similar sounding VE (ὁρμῇ; on which, FOR 25) at 11.157 (LfgrE; AH); here in emphatic enjambment. The uprooted tree contrasts with the firmly rooted oaks, defying all opposition, as an image for staunch warriors at 12.132–134.

415b–417 As in other similes (e.  g. 4.275, 8.559, 21.346  f.), the response of an onlooker (416) to the natural event defines the mood (Severyns 1948, 161; Erbse [2000] 2003, 143); here, his being violently startled by a lightning strike resembles the shock at the fall of the Trojan leader (Friedrich 1982, 123; Erbse [2000] 2003, 143; cf. additional motifs in tree similes that increase pathos:

Commentary 

 197

16.482–486n., 17.53  ff., 18.56  f.: Mueller [1984] 2009, 106). The terror is further underlined by elements of the image: the oak stood close by (417) and is uprooted completely (415), and the stench of sulphur is overpowering (415b n.), while the recollection of Zeus, personified in the dangerous flash of lightning, frames the simile in the manner of a ring-composition (414, 417); Janko on 414–417; Elliger 1975, 94. The terror is so great that the strike deprives the onlooker of confidence (416; schol. A): this is the only reference to the Trojans’ possible mood at the wounding and fall of Hektor (Winter 1956, 123; Scott 1974, 70  f.; Friedrich 1982, 123); cf. the effect of a (lethal) injury on the surroundings in the narrative, e.  g. at 16.290, 16.508  f. (see ad loc.) and 16.548–553 (see ad loc.): Kurz 1966, 23. 415b sulphur: In Homeric epic, lightning is linked with the smell of sulphur, but the sharp smell is actually due to ozone; mentioned as the result of a lightning strike also at 8.135 and on Odysseus’ ship at Od. 12.417/14.307 (LfgrE s.  v. θέειον; Lilja 1972, 199; on sulphur in general, 16.228n. with bibliography).

δεινὴ … ὀδμή: δεινή is emphatic after caesura A 4; similar sounding phrasing etc. at 2.41 (see ad loc.).

416 αὐτῆς: As the simple anaphoric pronoun of the 3rd person in oblique cases, αὐτός is still rare in early epic: 1.4n. — περ: strengthens the negative, as at Od. 8.212 (Denniston 482; Bakker 1988, 278). — θράσος: The subject of ἔχει (‘fills’), the word means ‘courage’, like θάρσος, which is the only form attested elsewhere in the Iliad (6.126n.); on the variation between ρα/αρ, G 15. Only Attic prose differentiates between θάρσος ‘courage’ and θράσος ‘foolhardiness, brazenness’ (West on Hes. Op. 319; LSJ s.  v. θράσος). — ὅς κεν ἴδηται: likewise at VE at 17.93, 17.100, 18.467. On the syntactic embedding in detail, Bechert 1964, 102  f. 417 2nd VH ≈ 21.198; Διὸς μ. only at 5.907, 17.409, Od. 4.27, 11.255, 11.268, 16.403, Hes. Op. 4. — χαλεπός: ‘bad, dangerous’, as at 21.335 of a storm (LfgrE s.  v. χαλεπός 1104.37  ff.; AH), in secondary focalizationP (perspective of an onlooker; Janko on 414–417). — δέ: frequently causal (1.10n.; K.-G. 2.275), here after χαλεπός, as often in such inserted explanations; the particle serves as a metrical variant for γάρ (e.  g. 5.391, 19.80; Race 2000, 221 n. 34). — Διὸς μεγάλοιο κεραυνός: picks up πληγῆς πατρὸς Διός from 414 and again recalls Zeus’ power. κεραυνός ‘thunderbolt’ is perhaps originally the name of an IE weather-god whose function was assumed by Zeus (LfgrE; West 2007, 243  f. with bibliography).

415 γίνεται: = γίγνεται; full verb, δεινή is attributive with ὀδμή. 416 τόν: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3 and R 17); object of ἔχει, anticipates ὅς. — κεν: = ἄν (R 24.5). — ἴδηται: mid. with no discernible difference in meaning from the act. (R 23). 417 ἐών: = ὤν (R 16.6). — μεγάλοιο: on the inflection, R 11.2.

198 

 Iliad 14

418 ≈ 4.482; ‘Hes.’ Sc. 365; 2nd VH ≈ 5.583, 5.588, 13.617, 16.741. — Falling motion generally (16.310–311), as well as dust, are frequent in connection with human beings who collapse to the earth fatally wounded (16.289–290n.); like his staggering (413n.), this suggests Hektor’s death (Neal 2006, 118; cf. 414–417n.).

ἔπεσ᾿ … ἐν κονίῃσιν: Inflected πίπτω (and compounds) are frequently combined with the expression ἐν κονίῃσι(ν) in a formulaic manner (6.453n., 16.289n.). — ὦκα: This is the reading of the main tradition; it is preferable to Aristarchus’ ὠκύ, which does not fit with μένος and is not attested as an adverb (Janko on 418–420). — μένος: means ‘energy’; in combination with the gen. Ἕκτορος the word is often used (16.189n.) as a paraphrasis for the personal name, but here it is probably not purely formulaic, instead carrying the implication that Hektor loses consciousness as he falls (Böhme 1929, 86; Chadwick 1996, 192).

419–420 The fall of weapons and armor nearly reprises Hektor’s stumbling and underlines the impact of the stone. Letting go of the spear, the fall of the armor and its reverberation are characteristic of descriptions of warriors struck by a fatal blow (see iterata) and again suggest that Hektor will die (Kurz 1966, 28). 419 2nd VH ≈ 13.543. — fall … from his hand: Mortally wounded individuals (unsurprisingly) let something go in a similar manner at e.  g. 17.298  f. (the foot of the dead Patroklos) and Od. 22.83  f. (a sword): LfgrE s.  v. βάλλω 28.7  f. — spear: his second one, which he has not yet thrown (406n.; AH).

ἔκβαλεν: ἐκβάλλω, here with gen. χειρός, means ‘let fall’, as (of tears) at Od. 17.490, 19.362 (LfgrE s.  v. βάλλω 27.71  ff.). — ἑάφθη: only here and in the half-verse iteratum; its origin and meaning were a matter of dispute already in antiquity; usually understood ‘fell down’ (Meister 1921, 110 with n. 2; Janko on 13.541–543; as a hypothesis in LfgrE s.  v. ἀφθῆναι).

ἑάφθη: Generally explained as a zero-grade aor. from the root *sengu̯ -, from which may be formed ἰάπτω ‘throw down’ and English ‘sink’: ‘fell down’ (Meister 1921, 110 with n. 2; as a hypothesis in DELG loc. cit.; LIV loc. cit.). A new attempt by Meier-Brügger 1989a, 91–93, 95  f. n. 1–7, with doxography (following him, LfgrE s.  v. ὀμφή; DELG Suppl. s.  v. ἐάφθη; as a possibility in LIV s.  v. *sengu̯ h [p. 532]): zero-grade aor. pass. *ἔμφω < *sénku̯ ho, English sing, ‘was made to ring’ (of the shield and helmet clanging during the fall).

420 1st VH = 13.544; from caesura A 3 onward = 12.396, 13.181, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 423; 2nd VH = 6.504; ≈ 4.226, 10.322, 10.393, h.Ven. 13. The verse is absent from Venetus A, among other manuscripts, as well as from a number of papyri (app.crit.), and might be based on a concordance interpolation from 13.544 and 12.396/13.181; it is accordingly athetized by West and Janko (on 418–420). The loud, reverberating sound of the collapsing warri-

418 κονίῃσιν: on the inflection, R 11.1. 420 δέ (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.3. — οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1). — τεύχεα: on the uncontracted form, R 6.

Commentary 

 199

or’s armor (elsewhere after a fatal hit), a common motif, is further highlighted via the formula ἀράβησε δὲ τεύχε᾿ ἐπ᾿ αὐτῷ (10× Il., 1× Od.): LfgrE s.  v. ἀραβέω. — ἀμφὶ … οἱ: ‘surrounding him’ (Fritz 2005, 96); ἀμφί with verbs of sound denotes ‘frequently a reverberation’, here the booming noise (LfgrE s.  v. ἀραβέω 1164.66  ff. [transl.]). — βράχε: 3rd pers. sing. aor. of a defective verb meaning ‘thundered, crashed’; on the onomatopoetic aor., 19.13n. — τεύχεα ποικίλα χαλκῷ: a VE formula (see above). τεύχεα, always in the pl., means ‘armor’ (3.29n.), ποικίλα χαλκῷ ‘elaborately embellished with bronze’, i.  e. with bronze fittings (6.504n.).

421–439 In accord with the significance of the events, Hektor’s recovery and condition are described vividly and at length (Friedrich 1982, 123; Niens 1987, 170). It is normal to rescue the wounded, protect them and arrange for their evacuation by supporting or carrying them to a chariot (Fenik 1968, 113, 145; van Wees 1996, 16, 64 n. 42; Stoevesandt 2004, 232, with appendix 4; Kelly 2007, 296  f.; on corresponding passages in Sanskrit literature, West 2007, 486). For their leader, the Trojans show particular care, ‘solidarity and discipline’ (Stoevesandt loc. cit. 232 [transl.]). At the same time, it is clear that by modern standards only modest relief was generally possible, with water (435  f.; 11.829  f.) and fresh air having to suffice (Tzavella-Evjen 1983, 186; Salazar 2000, 138  f.; the water motif picks up Machaon’s treatment at 6  f.: Stanley 1993, 155; medical assistance: 4.190  ff., 13.213, cf. 11.514  f.). The evacuation of Hektor from the battlefield underlines his defeat and hints at worse to come (22.136  ff.; seedP; Rinon 2008, 102  f.); the helplessness of the leader, who must be carried, matches the state of other wounded Trojans (Sarpedon: 5.663  ff.; Deïphobos: 13.533  ff.) and contrasts with that of wounded Achaians – Agamemnon (11.264  ff.), Diomedes (11.397  ff., cf. 5.111  ff.), Odysseus (11.487  ff.), Machaon (11.517  f.) and Eurypylos (11.592  ff.), who haul themselves to the wagon (Teukros at 8.334 is the only Achaean to be carried; Neal 2006, 99).

The enjambments (423, 424, 430) and the sentences running over the VE (425  f., 427  ff.) perhaps depict the panic that follows the collapse of the Trojan leader.

421 to caesura C 2 ≈ Od. 10.323; 1st VH ≈ 4.506, 5.343, 17.213, 17.317, 18.160, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 451; 2nd VH ≈ Il. 22.369. — Screaming aloud: Believing Hektor dead (422n.), the Achaians burst into cries of triumph, like warriors who have killed their opponent and are pulling the corpse toward themselves (4.506, 17.316 in the formulaic verse). They rush toward the scene, as later after the actual death of Hektor (22.369; Neal 2006, 118), and a fight arises as over a corpse (422n.; Niens 1987, 170). The shrill cries of the Achaians contrast with the clanging of

421 μέγα (ϝ)ι(ϝ)άχοντες: on the prosody, ↑. — μέγα: adv. — υἷες Ἀχαιῶν: in apposition to the demonstrative anticipatory pronoun οἵ (R 17). — υἷες: on the inflection, R 12.3.

200 

 Iliad 14

Hektor’s weapons (418–420, see ad locc.) and continue the acoustic signals that underscore the significance of his fall, like that of a slain individual, of his fainting and his recovery (followed up by moaning sounds at 432, heavy breathing at 15.10 [perhaps also at 436, see ad loc.], and finally Hektor’s weakened voice at 15.246  ff.): Krapp 1964, 80, 270, 304, 335.

μέγα ἰάχοντες: Initial digamma frequently prevents hiatus and may on occasion lengthen the preceding syllable (here in μέγα, elsewhere also in σμερδαλέα; with ἰάχω preceding also 18.160 [see ad loc.], etc.): Willcock. On the expression μέγα/μεγάλα + ἰάχω and its variants, 18.158b–160n.; on μέγα, 4n., 147n. and on ἰάχω, 148–149n. — υἷες Ἀχαιῶν: 106n.

422 2nd VH ≈ 12.44. — hope: The narrator has the audience share in the characters’ expectation that Hektor has died (subsequently said explicitly by Thoas, 15.286–289) and that his armor can be removed, thus heightening the suspense; the situation is clarified only at 423  f. with a negative, and even more plainly at 432 (see ad loc.): Krapp 1964, 304; de Jong (1987) 2004, 65, 261 n. 54; on the heightening of suspense, already schol. bT on 14.424; cf. Hektor’s own assessment, 15.251  f.; on the despoiling and the enormous value of looted armor, 6.28n. and 16.500n.

ἐλπόμενοι: of a mistaken assumption also at 3.112 (see ad loc.). — ἐρύεσθαι: probably a fut. inf. without intervocalic σ, as at 22.67 (Chantr. 1.451  f.). — θαμειάς: predicative, ‘in close succession’, and emphatic before αἰχμάς in enjambment, as at 12.44 (Higbie 1990, 56); on the word formation, 19.383n.

423 ποιμένα λαῶν: sc. Hektor; on the formula, see 22n. 424 οὐτάσαι: ‘hit from close quarters and injure’ (128n.), contrasting with βαλεῖν, as in the VE formula βεβλημένοι οὐτάμενοί τε (4× Il.), etc. (Trümpy 1950, 92; Latacz 1977, 205). — πρίν: points backwards at what was just said: ‘before’ (AH). — περίβησαν: περιβαίνω usually means ‘stand protectively over or around’ a wounded or dead person, thus of Patroklos’ corpse at 17.6, 80, 137, 286 and of the injured Teukros at 8.331 and Hypsenor at 13.420 (LfgrE s.  v. βαίνω 19.72  ff.; cf. 16.321 στὰς πρόσθεν [with n.]). — ἄριστοι: ‘the best’, i.  e. the elite (3.250n.).

425–426 In accord with Hektor’s importance, the Trojan and allied elite are listed by name, as during the recovery of Sarpedon’s corpse at 16.535  f. (see ad loc.) (similarly schol. bT on 424; Lossau 1989, 394). The five individuals named correspond roughly to the leaders of the five sections of the army mentioned during the attack on the wall surrounding the ships at 12.84–107, although Paris

422 ἐλπόμενοι (ϝ)ερύεσθαι: on the prosody, R 4.4. — ἐλπόμενοι: = ἐλπίζοντες. 423 τις(ς) ἐδυνήσατο: on the prosody, M 4.6 (note also the caesura). 424 πρίν: adv.

Commentary 

 201

and several others are missing, including Helenos (13.593  ff.) and Deïphobos (13.527  ff.), both of whom are wounded, and the heroes Asios and Alkathoos, who were killed by Idomeneus (13.396  ff., 13.427  ff.). The diminished number of great warriors protecting their injured leader thus clearly shows the extent of the Trojan losses (Sheppard 1922, 144; Paduano/Mirto on 402–448; Janko; Aceti 2008, 87; West 2011, 296). 425 ≈ 16.535; 2nd VH from caesura C 1 ≈ 11.59, 13.490, 15.340, 21.579; cf. 21.545. — The verse is constructed in accord with the law of increasing parts (29n.). — Aineias … Poulydamas … Agenor: Trojan lieutenants (16.535–536n.).

δῖος: 3n.

426 ≈ 2.876. — Sarpedon: on the Lykian leader, 2.876n., 16.419–683n. — Glaukos: the second leader after Sarpedon (2.867n., 6.119n., 16.492n.). 12.387–391 tells how he is wounded on the arm by Teukros during the attack on the wall, and how he then leaps back and retreats within the army. Given that subsequently, while in pain, he pleads with Apollo to heal his wound so that he can rescue Sarpedon’s corpse (16.508–526), it seems odd that his injury is left unmentioned here and that Glaukos is listed among the leaders protecting Hektor. Negligence on part of the poet is one possibility (Janko on 425  f.; Aceti 2008, 88 with n. 192), as is a later insertion (Leaf; West 2011, 64, 296; suggestion that it be athetized: see app.crit. and AH Anh.). But the dying Sarpedon asking Glaukos to keep his body from being stripped (16.491  ff.) presupposes that the latter has remained present on the battlefield, probably to spur on the others as the wounded Achaian leaders did (128–131, 130n., cf. 379  f.). The wound on his bare right arm (12.389) that prevents the Lykian from handling his spear (16.520) is not severe enough to stop him from holding his shield, just like the others, over Hektor with his left arm (Willcock; Reichel 1994, 261 n. 8; the circumstances are thus not the same as during the death of Sarpedon, in contrast to the assertion of Aceti loc. cit.).

ἀμύμων: a common generic epithetP of individuals (1.92n.); conventionally translated ‘blameless’, but probably with the sense ‘excellent’ (6.22–23n.).

427–428 of the rest: ‘the common warriors’ (AH [transl.]), stressing that all the Trojans work together to protect their leader (421–439n.). — shields: The wounded and slain are usually protected with shields, e.  g. at 4.113, 5.297/300, 8.272, 8.330  f., 17.7, 17.132 (Kelly 2007, 396; Shear 2000, 30, 175 n. 21). 427 τῶν τ᾿ ἄλλων: Zenodotus’ τ(ε) corresponds to the additive function better than the δ(έ) of the main tradition does (West, app.crit. and 2001, 229). — ἀκήδεσεν: ἀκηδέω,

427 τίς (ϝ)ε᾿ ἀκήδεσεν: on the prosody, R 4.5 and R. 5.2; ἑ(ο) = αὐτοῦ (R 14.1).

202 

 Iliad 14

elsewhere only at 23.70: a denominative related to ἀκηδής ‘without care, carefree’ (24.417n.): ‘neglect, not take care’; the aor. in -εσ- corresponds to that of other, similar denominatives, such as αἰδέομαι, ἀκέομαι and τελέω (LfgrE; Risch 308). 428 ἀσπίδας εὐκύκλους: likewise at VB at 5.453 and 12.426 (the latter verse athetized by West), after caesura A 3 at 13.715, transmitted as a v.l. in the gen. sing. at 5.797. The epithet εὔκυκλος means ‘equipped with good κύκλος/κύκλοι’, i.  e. with precious circular layers like Agamemnon’s shield at 11.32  ff., or else of the whole, ‘well-rounded’, cf. πάντοσ᾿ ἐΐση (3.347n.; LfgrE s.  v.; on the term κύκλος, Borchhardt 1977, 3; on the various types of shield, 2.388–389n.; on shield-layers, 6.117–118n., 18.481n.). — σχέθον: σχεθ- serves as the aorist stem for the present stem ἴσχω, with a sense of specification (1.219, likewise of protection by shields, 4.113): Chantr. 1.329; on the suffix -εθ-, see also G 60; 2.303–304n.; 18.211n. 429b–432 = 13.535b–538. The verses in Book 13 describe the retrieval of Deïphobos, Hektor’s favorite brother; they perhaps fit slightly better in Book 13, where the wounded Trojan climbs onto the chariot by himself and returns to the city, rather than being carried and subsequently driven to the river (429/13.535 ἵκεθ᾿, 432/13.538 προτὶ ἄστυ), and since he has not fainted, so that his groaning is more readily imagined (432/13.538 βαρέα στενάχοντα): Faesi; West 2011, 296. The narrative there perhaps foreshadows the present scene (Lossau 1989, 395). 429 1st VH to caesura C 2 ≈ 17.718. — ἐκ πόνου: on ‘battle’ as ‘labor’, 1.162n., 2.401n., 6.77n.; here spatially (ἐκ πόνου corresponds to ὄπισθε μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο at 430): LfgrE s.  v. πόνος 1447.19  ff. 430 2nd VH = 7.232, 11.255, 13.536, 15.160, 15.176. — ὠκέας: an epithetP of horses, in enjambment also at 13.536, elsewhere in a VE formula (3.263n., where also on its origin in IE poetic language). — μάχης ἠδὲ πτολέμοιο: a VE formula (see above); on the synonym doubling, 1.492n.

431–432 = 13.537  f. — chariot: War chariots also serve to transport the wounded (2.384n.), e.  g. to bring Agamemnon (11.273  f.), Diomedes (11.399  f.), Odysseus (11.487  f.) and Deïphobos (iterata) from the battlefield to the safety of the encampment of ships or Troy (Hellmann 2000, 144). — groaning: Heroes groan with pain, as here, or in exhaustion, grief or anger (LfgrE s.  v. στενάχω), usually expressed formulaically and thus treated as a ‘rather secondary motif’ (Stoevesandt 2004, 123 [transl.]), but it is notable that only a few who are not 428 αὐτοῦ: gen. dependent on πάροιθεν (427), ‘before him’. 429 ἀείραντες: = ἄραντες. — ὄφρ(α): ‘until’ (R 22.2). — ἵκεθ᾿: 3rd pers. sing. aor. mid. of ἱκάνω ‘reach’. 430 οἵ (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.4. — οἱ: = αὐτῷ (R 14.1). — ὄπισθε: here a preposition with gen. — ἠδέ: ‘and’ (R 24.4). — πτολέμοιο: on the word beginning, R 9.2; on the inflection, R 11.2. 431 ἅρματα: on the plural, R 18.2. 432 οἵ: the horses (429). — προτὶ (ϝ)άστυ: on the prosody, R 5.4. — προτί: = πρός (R 20.1).

Commentary 

 203

mortally wounded groan (also Teukros at 8.334 and Deïphobos in the parallel passage), probably a sign of weakness (Salazar 2000, 151  f.; Neal 2006, 65  f.). Here, the groaning is the first sign of life from the Trojan leader (Janko on 427–432; Neal loc. cit. 118).

καὶ ἅρματα ποικίλ᾿ ἔχοντες: ποικίλος ‘elaborately decorated, colorful’ is an epithetP of chariots, also in the iteratum and the VE formulae ἐς ἅρματα ποικίλα βάντες 5.239 / ἀνά θ᾿ ἅ. ποικίλ᾿ ἔβαινον Od. 3.492, 15.145, 15.190 / καὶ ἅ. ποικίλα χαλκῷ Il. 4.226, 10.322, 10.393, h.Ven. 13. As illustrated by the last mentioned formula, ποικίλος often indicates bronze fittings, but when χαλκῷ is absent, it is conceivable that the reference is to the sheen of ivory or different types of wood (Plath 1994, 182) or to painting (West 2007, 470, who points out that Mycenaean tablets often record the color of chariots, which may have aided in identifying them during battle). — φέρον βαρέα στενάχοντα: an inflectible formula at VE (also in the iteratum and at 8.334, 13.423, Od. 4.516, 5.420, 23.317; abbreviated at Od. 10.76) and after caesura A 2 (1.364n.). The adv. βαρέα ‘heavy, deep’ probably implies ‘dejected’ (LfgrE; Kaimio 1977, 41).

433–434 = 21.1  f., 24.692  f. 433 crossing place: The ford of the Xanthos (= Skamandros) is a topographic fixed point in the Trojan plain (2.793n. with bibliography; 6.4n. with bibliography; Herzhoff 2011, 232, 243 n. 110; Clay 2011, 103 with n. 25). The mention probably does not imply a crossing, since the ford forms part of the border between the safe and the dangerous zones, which explains its role outside the battle scenes proper (24.351n. with bibliography; West 2011, 25); here, it may also be a metaphor for Hektor’s condition between life and death (Neal 2006, 118; on the Skamandros as a border station, see also 24.328n.; Herrero de Jáuregui 2011, 44 with n. 21; on this type of motif generally, NTHS 46). On the problematic topography of the Trojan plain, see Appendix (p. 251  ff.).

ἷξον: a thematic s-aorist (6.172n.), developed by analogy with ἷξε (Leumann [1953] 1959, 240  f.; Roth [1970–1974] 1990, 80). — ἐϋρρεῖος ποταμοῖο: a VE formula (see iterata at 433–434n.; also 6.508, 15.265). The gen. form of the river epithet ἐϋρρεής (ἐΰρροος of the Skamandros also at 7.329; LfgrE) is contracted from ἐϋρρεέος (Werner 1948, 43  f.).

434 = 21.2, 24.693 (see ad loc.); ≈ 2.741. — Xanthos: another name for the river Skamandros (6.4n.). — whose father was Zeus: The river’s divine origin (like that of all rivers: 201n.) is further demonstrated by its power as a tutelary deity of the Trojan land (6.402–403n.) against Achilleus in Book 21 (cf. 21.184  ff., 21.223, 21.380): Priess 1977, 84.

433 ἷξον: 3rd pers. pl. aor. act. of ἵκω ‘reach’ (↑). 434 ἀθάνατος: initial syllable metrically lengthened (R 10.1).

204 

 Iliad 14

δινήεντος: ‘rich in eddies’, a generic epithetP of important rivers, especially in Asia Minor (2.877n.), in total 8× of the Xanthos/Skamandros (21.332 Ξάνθον δινήεντα at VB); on the system of formulae with reference to the Skamandros, Richardson on 21.1–2. — τέκετο: As in most cases, the aor. mid. denotes the male act of begetting (6.154–155n.).

435–6 1st VH of 436 ≈ 5.697; 2nd VH of 436 ≈ Od. 9.146, 19.476. — water: The fact that the Trojan Hektor is revived by water from the Skamandros, and that the parentage of the river is mentioned explicitly (434), may be the result of his special relationship with the river as the protector of the Troad (434n.) and son of Zeus (cf. 15.12 and 15.242, where Zeus revives Hektor; on Hektor’s relationship with Zeus, cf. 22.168  ff.); Zeus’ son Sarpedon is brought to his tree, the oak, in a similar manner (5.692  f.): Schrade 1952, 66 with n.; Neal 2006, 254. When subsequently returning to battle after being revived by Zeus, Hektor is likened to a rushing horse that frequently bathes in the stream (15.265): Neal 2006, 118.

ἐξ ἵππων: The pl. and dual of ἵππος are often used in Homer in the sense ‘(horse-drawn) chariot’ (6.232n.). — χεῦαν: root aor. of χέω (3.10n.). — ἀμπνύθη: The etymology and meaning of ἀμπνύθη are a matter of dispute. The form is generally considered a middle zero-grade aorist in -θη- with metrical lengthening, related to ἀναπνέω ‘take a breath’ (after exertion, e.  g. at 16.42, 19.227, 22.222). For the middle, the development of a special sense ‘regain consciousness’ is assumed on the basis of the use of ἀμπνύθη at 5.697 (wounding of Sarpedon) and the middle root aor. ἄμπνυτο at 11.359 (Hektor’s injury) and 22.475 (Andromache’s faint) (LfgrE s.  v. πνέω 1301.8  ff. with bibliography; Clarke 1999, 139  f.). But given the difference in meaning between the active and the middle, a root πνῡ- ‘be conscious, be in possession of one’s wits’ has been hypothesized, with the form ἀμπνύθη ‘regained consciousness’ etc. linked to πεπνυμένος (Schulze 1892, 322  f., Leaf on 5.697, Harđarson 1993, 194  f., and LIV s.vv. *pneu̯ - [p. 489] and *pneu̯ H- [p. 489]): for discussion of the etymology, cf. 24.377n. with bibliography on πεπνυμένος. Based on the parallels, both theses regarding the etymology of the form assume that an awakening from unconsciousness is also meant in the present passage. Objections have been raised to this on the ground that such a state does not fit with Hektor’s groaning (432; Saunders 1999, 355  f.; thus also West 2011, 296, see 429b–432n.), which is nevertheless medically possible when a person is only mildly unconscious. In any case, the reference is clearly to a return from a greater or lesser degree of stupor rather than to the mere drawing of breath (Saunders loc. cit. 356: ‘he started to make sense again’) before the hero faints once more (438–439n.). – ἀμπνύνθη, transmitted by the majority of manu­ scripts, developed by analogy with forms such as ἐκλίνθη (app.crit.; Chantr. 1.404; cf. 3.78n. on ἱδρύθησαν). — ἀνέδρακεν: a hapaxP; aor. of ἀναδέρκομαι ‘open one’s eyes’

435–436 μιν: = αὐτόν (R 14.1). — πέλασαν: from πελάζω (+ dat.) ‘bring someone closer to something’, here ‘lower down to’. — κὰδ … χεῦαν: κάδ = κατά (R 20.1); on the so-called tmesis, R 20.2. — δέ (ϝ)οι: on the prosody, R 4.3. — ὀφθαλμοῖσιν: on the inflection, R 11.2.

Commentary 

 205

(post-Homeric: ἀναβλέπω); the sense is reinforced via the instrumental ὀφθαλμοῖσιν (LfgrE s.  v. δέρκομαι; Friedrich [1956] 2003, 29).

437–439 Whereas the narrator has wounded Achaians make speeches or treat their wounds, thus stressing their valor, he only depicts Trojan heroes – Aineias, Sarpedon and Hektor – in an unconscious state, showing their vulnerability and helplessness (for examples, 421–439n., 438–439n.; likewise, only those gods who support the Trojans, Ares and Aphrodite, are shown injured). Hektor, without whom Troy cannot stand (15.68–71; an accordingly detailed description: principle of elaborate narrationP), is in a particularly bad way (worse than Sarpedon and Aineias, who recover more quickly, 5.447  f. and 5.697  f.). That he is close to death is stressed (438–439n.); in this way, the motif ‘dying hero’ is continued (Broccia 1967, 80–82). The hero thus appears to be between life and death before reappearing at 15.9–11, where he is revived by Zeus, who had been asleep in the meantime (242; Neal 2006, 84, 87, 118  f., 125  f.; Reinhardt 1961, 208  f. [transl.], on the correspondence between 14.346– 353 and 432–439: ‘a higher sort of irony’). 437 2nd VH ≈ 5.798, 16.667. — knee: ‘the first sign of life returns’ (Kurz 1966, 58 [transl.]).

ἑζόμενος δ᾿ἐπὶ γοῦνα: ‘sitting up on his knees’, i.  e. he raises himself from a prone position and, by supporting himself on his hands, manages to kneel, a position for which no Greek term is attested (schol. D: διαναστὰς ἐπὶ γόνατα; LfgrE s.  v. ἕζομαι 408.75  ff.; Kurz 1966, 58). — κελαινεφὲς αἷμ(α): on the noun-epithet formula and the meaning ‘dark’ of κελαινεφές, 16.667–668n. — ἀπέμεσσεν: ἐμέω means ‘vomit, regurgitate’, Latin vomere, of spitting up blood after an injury likewise of Hektor at 15.11, similarly 23.697 αἷμα παχὺ πτύοντα (LfgrE s.  v. ἐμέω). The reading ἀπέμασσεν ‘wiped away’ by Zenodotus and in several manuscripts is probably based on a desire to avoid an excessively graphic description of a wounded leader (cf. schol. bT on 437), although this is contradicted by the vividness of the narrative (see above) and the repetition at 15.11 (Janko on 436–437).

438–439 blood: This indicates an injury to the thorax, causing bruising and bleeding of the lung, together with the possibility of fractured ribs. The blood is then coughed out through the mouth (haemoptysis): Saunders 1999, 355. The invisible internal injury after being hit by a stone, which occurs elsewhere only rarely and in cases with fatal consequences, points to the severe pain experienced by the Trojan leader, as well as his significance within the narrative (cf. 15.60  f.; Neal 2006, 120  f.; Sanskrit, Old Irish and Hebrew parallels for the portrayal of such injuries to major heroes in West 2007, 489; pain felt by an in-

437 ἑζόμενος: = καθεζόμενος. — γοῦνα: = γόνατα (R 12.5). 438–439 αὖτις: = αὖθις. — κὰδ … ἐκάλυψε: cf. 435–436n. — δέ (ϝ)οι: 435–436n. — ὄσσε: 236n.

206 

 Iliad 14

jured person is also discussed elsewhere: Agamemnon 11.268–272, Diomedes 11.398: van Wees 1996, 7); on the death motif, 412n. — night: Like darkness, night enveloping the eyes is used elsewhere as a metaphor for fainting, which here passes into lengthy unconsciousness (5.319 of Aineias, 11.356 of Hektor, 22.466 of Andromache; Saunders 1999, 356, with medical causes for the unconsciousness that also results from Hektor moving); at the same time, the night represents death (16.503n.; Bremer 1976, 42), which is perhaps presaged here (Lossau 1989, 395; Leuzzi 2008, 286; cf. Morrison 1992, 125 n. 2). ‘To envelop’ (and ‘to pour around’: 316n.) is frequently used in expressions describing an alteration in consciousness: 2.19n., 16.316n.

πλῆτο: The opposite of causative πέλασαν in 435: root aor. of πελα-, πλη-, πιλν- ‘approach, reach’ (LIV s.  v. *pelh2- [p. 470  f.]); the combination of the stem with χθονί with the sense ‘fall to the ground, hit the ground’ (here with ἐξοπίσω) also occurs at 23.368 (of a chariot) and ‘Hes.’ fr. 309 M.-W., and in a similar manner with (ἐπ᾿) οὔδεϊ at 468 (of a stricken warrior) and 19.92  f. (see ad loc.; there also for the dat. of direction): LfgrE s.  v. πελάζω 1122.18  ff.; Harđarson 1993, 181. — κὰδ δέ οἱ ὄσσε | νὺξ ἐκάλυψε μέλαινα: The clause represents a combination of various formulaic elements: (1)  νύξ with the epithetP μέλαινα (in total 10× Il., 3× Od., 4× Hes., 3× h.Merc.; cf. 24.366n.), (2) the formulaic combination of νύξ and καλύπτω (ἀμφὶ δὲ ὄσσε κελαινὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν 5.310, 11.356; τὸν/τὴν δὲ κατ᾿ ὀφθαλμῶν ἐρεβεννὴ νὺξ ἐκάλυψεν 5.659, 13.580, 22.466; elsewhere also at 10.201, 13.425), (3) the formula τὸν δὲ σκότος ὄσσ᾿ ἐκάλυψεν (519; 6.11n.), and (4) the VE formula τὼ δὲ οἱ ὄσσε (19.365–366n.): Higbie 1990, 164; 2005, 133–136, on the formula system as a whole. The reading κάδ, found in a majority of manuscripts, is supported by the similar κατὰ δὲ σκότος ὄσσ᾿ ἐκάλυψεν at 16.325, whereas Aristarchus’ τὼ δέ οἱ ὄσσε probably attempts to avoid the apocope (in κάδ), as at 16.106 (Janko on 438–439). — βέλος: ‘missile’, i.  e. the stone (410; like Od. 9.495, etc.): LfgrE s.  v. βέλος 51.48  ff. The stone used as a missile is the subject because it is regarded as continuing to act as the first actual cause (ἐδάμνα impf.: ‘held fast’; AH); likewise βέλος with δάμνημι/ δαμάω at 5.106, 5.278, similarly at Od. 22.246 (Schw. 2.65; Carlsson 1912, 79; Ammann 1922, 32  f.). — δ(έ): explicative: ‘the effect of the stone throw [is] so strong as to make Hektor … fall to the ground again’ (von der Mühll 1952, 225 [transl.]). — θυμόν: here physical (the missile weakens Hektor’s life force, preventing him from arising and, even more so, from fighting), cf. νέον δ᾿ ἐσαγείρατο θυμόν at 15.240 during Hektor’s recovery; likewise during the unconsciousness of Menelaos at 4.152, of Sarpedon at 5.698, and of Andromache at 22.475 (LfgrE s.  v. θυμός 1080.48  ff.; Böhme 1929, 98; Sullivan 1995, 55).

440–505 Five individual confrontations show the Achaians gaining the upper hand. ‘Once the greatest of the Trojan heroes has been eliminated, the gradual increase of Achaian superiority, and the diminishing of Trojan strength, becomes evident via the killing’ (Winter 1956, 124 [transl.]; emphasis original).

Commentary 

 207

The audience is faced with the enthralling question of how long the Trojans will manage to endure without Hektor (Janko on 402–522n.), and the Trojan retreat, the palíōxis, gets underway (353–522n.). Individual duels are used as proxies for massed battle, as is illustrated by references to the mass of warriors at 440, 448, 458, 475, 486, 506 (Winter loc. cit.). Massed close combat as here and at 15.474–545, 17.343–369 involves the prómachoi, the fighters in the first row (3.16–17n.), initially fighting ‘head to head with thrusts and blows’, while those behind become increasingly involved in the melee because of evasive moves and stray shots (with the killing of unintended targets), as well as attempts at revenge (Latacz 1977, 206–209 [transl.]; quotation from p.  209). The poet depicts a chain of battle in which individual Achaians and Trojans each kill an opponent in turn, all trying to avenge the previous killing (Fenik 1968, 10; ‘chain-reaction killings’: Janko on 402–522 and 440–441), as at 4.457–538, 5.533–589, 12.378–396, 13.170–205, 13.361–672, 15.419–591, 16.569– 632, 17.274–351 (Stoevesandt 2004, 100 n. 343; on the so-called replacement killings, 459–464n.). – Here a symmetrical chain of fighting comprised of five deaths is constructed: as in other such chains, the Achaian victories, described in greater detail than those of the opposing party (Janko on 402–522), represent the frame and the core, corresponding to the greater number of victims on the Trojan side, and thus prepare for the move toward flight (Friedrich [1956] 2003, 18  f.; Stoevesandt loc. cit. 99  f.). (1), a sort of introductory account (Aias, son of Oïleus, kills Satnios, 440–448), is followed by two parallel killing scenes: (2) Polydamas kills Prothoënor (449–458) and (3) Aias, son of Telamon, kills Archelochos (459–475) – to which correspond the killings of (4) Promachos by Akamas (476–486) and (5) Ilioneus by Peneleos (487–505). The two pairs of scenes are linked by a replacement killing in each pair (3rd and 5th killing; Janko on 475–478) and via participation of the two sons of Antenor, Archelochos and Akamas (463–464n.), as well as Aias’ action in the center that elicits Akamas’ revenge (the emphasis on Aias corresponds to his role throughout the entire third day of battle, 402–439n.). All these killings, except the first, are linked with speeches of triumph (454–457, 470–474, 479–485, 501–505; 454–457n.; a similar series at 13.374–13.630); the formulaic verses concluding them (458, 475, 486, see ad locc.) contribute to the structure (Krapp 1964, 317; likewise the repetitions after the speeches of mourning in Book 24 [24.746n.]; refrain compositionP). The type of injury (in the groin, shoulder, nape of the neck, head and specifically the eye) varies, and the particularly savage killing and the taunting in the central scene (459–475) is intensified even further via the atrocious act of Peneleos that results in the flight of the Trojans (on the structure of the sequence of scenes, Friedrich loc. cit. 14, 18  f.). The Achaians are thus shown to prevail by employing all means at their disposal

208 

 Iliad 14

(493–500n.). The descriptions of gruesome wounds, almost always affecting Trojans and frequently accompanied by nasty derision by the victors (Mueller [1984] 2009, 83; Stoevesandt loc. cit. 118), thus serve to demonstrate the heroes’ power in an ‘aesthetic of the horrible’ (Latacz [1998] 2014, 179 [transl.]; Stoevesandt loc. cit. 122; similarly van Wees 1996, 39). These are especially common in Books 13 and 14; in combination with the motif of revenge, which is of great importance here (Polydamas avenges the death of Satnios, 449; Aias avenges the death of a fighter who stood close by, 459  f.; Akamas avenges his brother Archelochos, 483–485; Peneleos avenges a Boiotian compatriot, 487  f.; 459–464n., 470–475n., 479–485n., 493–500n.), these scenes likely point to the increasing brutality of the fighting until a climax is reached with the entry of Patroklos into the battle, his raging on the battlefield and his horrible death, which will be followed by Achilleus’ revenge (Book 16; Mueller loc. cit. 81, 83, 89  f., 99).

The repeated use of οὐτάω at 443, 446  f. (with ἐγγύθεν ἐλθών), 476, 489, 493, meaning ‘injure at close quarters’ (128n.), points to the depiction of massed close combat (Visser 1987, 63 with n. 98). βάλε at 450, ἀκόντισε at 461 and ἔβαλεν at 465 refer to throws from close range, as in the descriptions of close combat at 17.347 στῆ δὲ μάλ᾿ ἐγγὺς ἰών, καὶ ἀκόντισε and 15.540  f. (Latacz 1977, 180, 182, 207, 209 with n. 102).

440 1st VH ≈ 16.419. — saw: The verb of perception introduces a change in scene, as frequently elsewhere (16.419n.), and once again (cf. 402–439n., 410–411n., 414–417n., 421–439n., 425–426n.) underscores Hektor’s significance to the Trojans: his wounding and removal from the fight encourage the Achaians to attack their opponents with renewed vigor, as at 11.284  ff. where Hektor begins an offensive after Agamemnon is wounded (440–507n.; Eust. 996.49  f.; Neal 2006, 109); the Trojans, whose reaction is left unmentioned, are thrown on the defensive until the Achaians observe the return of Hektor, who has recovered in the meantime, and must now retreat themselves (15.279  ff.; Winter 1956, 124  f.; Latacz 1977, 103  f.; Neal loc. cit.).

νόσφι κιόντα: The VE formula appears to fit better at Od. 8.286 (Hephaistos departs) and Il. 11.284, where Agamemnon, wounded less severely than Hektor and not unconscious, departs for the encampment of ships (AH; Janko on 440–441; cf. 429, 432). But since Hektor’s departure from the battlefield, rather than his actual condition, is crucial for his opponents’ perception, a correction to the less well attested reading ἐόντα is as unnecessary here as at 11.284 (West app.crit.).

440 κιόντα: acc. sing. aor. part. of a defective verb with the meaning ‘go’.

Commentary 

 209

441 = 8.252 (a bird omen encourages the Achaians); ≈ 15.380 (the Trojans consider an omen auspicious); 2nd VH from caesura C 1 onward = 4.222; ≈ 15.477, 17.103, 17.161, 19.148, Od. 22.73. — μάλλον: 97–98n. — μνήσαντο δὲ χάρμης: an inflectible VE formula (see above; with the words separated at 13.721  f., cf. 19.153n.). On the common combination of μιμνήσκομαι ‘turn one’s thoughts/attention toward, think of’ and its opposite λήθομαι ‘forget’ with χάρμης ‘eagerness in battle, belligerence’ or ἀλκῆς, see 6.265n. and 19.147– 148n.

442–448 A scene that follows the ABC-schemeP: 442  f. (section A) anticipate in a summary the event portrayed in greater detail in 446–448 (section C), while 444  f. (section B, see ad loc.) contain a look back at the victim’s life, the socalled ‘obituary’. As is frequently the case, sections A and C are formally linked as a ring-composition by the picking up of a keyword (443/447 oútase ‘thrust’, the same verb at 489/493) (on the scheme, 6.12–19n.; 16.287–290a n., both with bibliography; on the linking, 6.9n.; van Otterlo 1948, 42; Visser 1987, 56). 442 1st VH ≈ 7.162, 8.256, 23.288, Od. 1.113, 8.197, 9.449, 14.220, 17.31, 17.328; 2nd VH = 2.527, 13.66, 17.256, 23.473, 23.488, 23.754; ≈ 13.701, 14.520. — far before them all: 402n. — Aias: The so-called ‘Lesser Aias’, the Locrian leader, usually appears together with his namesake the son of Telamon (402–439n.), who outmatches him, and is mentioned as a fighter especially in Books 12–18, earlier at 13.701  ff. and later at 520 (see ad loc.) in the context of the Trojan flight. He is portrayed ambivalently (520n.); here, his eagerness to fight is highlighted positively by naming him as the first attacker (CH 3; 2.527n., 16.330n.); on his swiftness, 520n.

πρώτιστος: on the emphatic accumulation of suffixes, 295–296n. — Ὀϊλῆος ταχὺς Αἴας: a VE formula (see iterata); Ὀϊλῆος ταχὺς υἱός is a variant when Αἴας occurs in the 1st VH (13.701, 14.520). This serves as a metrical lengthening of the name Aias, as does the patronymic Ὀϊλιάδης attested in 12.365, 13.203, 13.712, 14.446, 16.330, 23.759 (2.527n.). The name of Aias’ father is transmitted as both ᾿Οϊλεύς (always thus in Homeric epic) and Ἰλεύς (‘Hes.’ fr. 235.1 M.-W.; Il. Pers., Procl. Chrest. 3 p. 146 West; Stesichorus, Pindar, inscriptions); on this and the form Ὀϊλῆος, 2.527n. with bibliography.

443 ≈ 5.336, 11.421. — spear: 402n.

Σάτνιον: The name, unattested historically, probably represents an abbreviated (from Σατνιοείσιος) derivation from the name of the river Σατνιόεις, located in the Troad, which is also mentioned at 6.34 and 21.87; a Trojan ally, mentioned only here, he is supposed to have been born on the river’s banks as the son of a nymph (444  f.; on the location of the river, 6.34–35n.; on the name of the river, LfgrE s.  v. Σατνιόεις; Neumann

441 θόρον: aor. of θρῴσκω. 442 Ὀϊλῆος: sc. υἱός (↑); on the inflection, R 11.3. 443 δουρί: on the form, R 12.5.

210 

 Iliad 14

1999, 276  f.; on the personal name, von Kamptz 302; decidedly in favor of the derivation, but without abbreviation, Neumann loc. cit. 277 with n. 17). Derivations from river names with the denominative -ιο also occur in the names Σιμοείσιος (4.474, from Σιμόεις 21.307) and Σκαμάνδριος (5.49, 6.402 [see ad loc.]; von Kamptz 116; Scherer 1976, 33). — οὔτασε δουρὶ … ὀξυόεντι: A combination of formulaic οὔτασε δουρί (12×, including 476, at VE [16.597n.]; 5.336, 11.421 and 16.317 with the words separated between verse middle and verse end) and ἔγχεϊ ὀξυόεντι (6× Il., 1× Od., 1× ’Hes.’ at VE; 16.309 in verse middle): Higbie 1990, 174; on the combination of verbs of killing/wounding with the unnecessary δουρί / ἔγχεϊ, Bakker/Fabbricotti 1991 (see also FOR 44a). In Homer, ὀξυόεις ‘sharp’ probably serves merely as a metrical variant of ὀξύς (cf. 5.336, 11.421 οὔτασε(ν) … ὀξέϊ δουρί), but likely originally had another meaning, ‘from beech wood’ (16.309n.; Frisk; Beekes s.  v. ὀξύα). — μετάλμενος: ἄλμενος is the part. of the athematic aor. of ἅλλομαι (3.29n.); μετάλμενος means ‘when he had leapt after’ (AH; this would match his swiftness, 442n.) or ‘after he jumped on (him)’ (LfgrE s.  v. ἅλλομαι 547.9  f.: like ἐπάλμενος).

444–445 The ‘obituary’ (442–447a n.) of Satnios with the characteristic motif ‘birth in rural surroundings’, in pathetic contrast to the narrative of his death. For parallels and bibliography, see on 6.21–28, where the obituary appears to be linked to the present passage by a number of associations (the name of one of the victims, Pedasos, is connected with the above-mentioned river Satnioeis at 6.34  f., 6.22  ff. likewise names a water nymph and a shepherd as parents): Kirk on 6.21–22.

Ἠνοπίδην … | Ἤνοπι: on the repetition, 2.628n.

444 Enops’ son: on the meaning of the name Enops, mentioned in 445, and additional attestations of it, 16.401n. — nymph: Nymphs are goddesses of specific bodies of water or other localities (CG 36) and accordingly dwell in these locations (24.616n.); in the genealogy of the son of a nymph, precise information about his orgin thus follows (444  f.; likewise at 20.390–392, cf. 2.865): Strasburger 1954, 23. Descent from a goddess lends particular importance to a character; in the same manner, Aisepos and Pedasos (6.21  f., see ad loc.), as well as Iphition, are highlighted as sons of spring or river nymphs (20.382–385): Merz 1953, 61. The idyllic circumstances of their fathering fit with other Trojan obituaries, which contain fewer heroic elements than those of the Achaians (Stoevesandt 2004, 130  f.). The motif ‘a goddess has intercourse with a shepherd under the open sky’ is mostly connected with Asia Minor, as here, and specifically with Mt. Ida; it is unclear whether this has to do with local Trojan mythology or whether the connection derives from the fact that these birth stories were originally variations of the myth of Kybele’s coupling 444 ἄρα (ν)νύμφη: on the prosody, M 4.6.

Commentary 

 211

with a human being (Priess 1977, 82; Larson 2001, 23, 194; on the connection of the Iliad with myths outside the Trojan myth cycle in general, NTHS 45; cf. the motif ‘while herding, a young man encounters a divinity during his rite de passage outside the normal human world’ at e.  g. Hes. Th. 22  ff., I Samuel 16:11 and Amos 7:14  f. [suggestion by von Ungern-Sternberg]).

Ἠνοπίδην, ὅν: The patronymic in progressive enjambmentP facilitates the connection with the relative clause that follows (6.13n., with bibliography). — ἄρα: seems to appeal to the audience’s familiarity with the story of Satnios’ birth, although the particle may merely suggest acquaintance, emphasizing the story, since Enops is probably not a traditional character; similarly, ἄρα at Od. 14.449 probably lends an air of familiarity to the purchase of the swineherd Mesaulios by Eumaios (Grimm 1962, 30  f.). — νηΐς: gives greater specification to νύμφη: ‘naiad, spring/river nymph’ (6.22–23n.). — ἀμύμων: 426n.

445 2nd VH ≈ 3.187, 4.475, Od. 6.97, ‘Hes.’ fr. 343.12 M.-W. — herds: Members of the elite practiced agriculture and also acted as herdsmen. But wealthy farmers might also hire someone or use slaves as herdsmen, as Odysseus does with the swineherd Eumaios (Richter 1968, 35  f.). Young men herding animals are mentioned elsewhere in early epic: 5.313, h.Ven. 76  ff. (Anchises), 15.547  f. (Melanippos), 11.106 (two sons of Priam, cf. Paris, 24.29n.), Od. 13.222 (Athene appears as such a young man), although it is not always clear whether they were hired (Haubold 2000, 18) or are tending their own family’s flock (cf. Apollo serving Laomedon, mentioned at Il.  21.448; on the old Near Eastern myth of the young prince working as a herdsman, Larson 2001, 83).

παρ᾿ ὄχθας Σατνιόεντος: παρ᾿ ὄχθας/ὄχθῃσιν is often linked formulaically with ποταμοῖο or a river name in the gen. (at VE: see iterata; with a preceding gen. 4× Il., 1× ‘Hes.’; cf. Od. 9.132; at VB Il. 11.499, with the words separated at 6.34).

446 ≈ 5.72; from caesura B 1 onward = 11.396, ≈ Od. 17.71.

Ὀϊλιάδης: 442n. — δουρικλυτός: a generic epithetP of several heroes between caesurae B 1 and C 2, in each case placed after the name (16.26n.), possibly used with reference to the context (443). — ἐγγύθεν ἐλθών: a VE formula (24.360n.).

447b–448 over him: i.  e. over his body (cf. 16.764). As in other battles over a corpse, e.  g. 5.297  ff., 15.544  ff., whether the party of the successful warrior succeeds in spoiling the slain enemy is left unstated, since the focus shifts immediately to the next attack, here on Prothoënor (Stoevesandt 2004, 229 with n. 671; on battles over a corpse and on spoliation, 422n.; 16.496n.). 447 ≈ 6.64; 1st VH = 517. — οὔτασε κὰλ λαπάρην: κάλ as a form of κατά with apocope and assimilation with the initial sound of the subsequent word, as in the compound

447 κάλ: = κατά (R 20.1; ↑).

212 

 Iliad 14

καλλείψειν (89), is old and probably of Aeolian origin, like other such forms (Schw. 1.407); οὖτα κατά, the reading of several papyri, is thus probably based on an unnecessary coordination with 6.64 (West, app.crit.; van der Valk 1964, 179; Janko on 442– 448; cf. 438–439n. on κάδ). λαπάρη means ‘loin, flank’; on additional terms localizing injuries in the abdominal area, 16.318n. — ἀνετράπετ(ο): with the meaning ‘collapsed onto his back’, as at 6.64 (Kurz 1966, 22). — ἀμφὶ δ᾿ ἄρ᾿ αὐτῷ: at VE also at 3.362 (with αὐτῇ); at VB, 5.299, 17.4. 448 = 2.40; 16.764 (the latter is likewise of a battle over a corpse). — Τρῶες καὶ Δαναοί: an inflectible VB formula (nom./gen./dat.; examples: iterata and 3.417, 8.431, Od. 8.82). — σύναγον: 148–149n. — κρατερὴν ὑσμίνην: an inflectible formula for ‘a battle conducted forcefully, powerfully’ (2.40n., 16.447n.). ὑσμίνη is here used like μάχη ‘battle’; on the basic meaning ‘fray’ and the designation for a melee, 16.306n., 18.243n.

449 Poulydamas: 425n. He makes an appearance only on this, the third day of battle in the Iliad; his participation by killing someone is also noted at 15.339, 15.518, 17.600 (on his overall role, CH 9; 16.535–536n., 18.249–253n.).

τῷ δ᾿ ἐπὶ  … ἦλθεν ἀμύντωρ: ἐπί is a preverb with ἦλθεν, ‘approached, drew near’, which frequently introduces new characters in battle scenes, rendering a more complicated explanation unnecessary (Kurz 1966, 122; cf. the brevity in the specification of wounds at 450). It is here combined with the dative of advantage τῷ and, placed formulaically at VE, is construed, as at 13.384 and 15.540, with predicative ἀμύντωρ, a nomen agentis related to ἀμύνω, ‘defender, averter’ (cf. ἐπίκουρος in a corresponding manner at 21.431), here for the benefit of a slain warrior, as at 13.384 (thus ἀμύνω of averting spoliation at 13.464, of Patroklos’ body at 17.273, 17.563): LfgrE s.  v. ἐλθεῖν 539.45  ff.; 545.23  ff., 32  f., 40  ff.; s.  v. ἀμύντωρ). — ἐγχεσπάλος: ‘wielding a spear’ (also 2.131, 15.605), here, as Prothoënor is being injured (451), probably with reference to the context, like δουρικλυτός above (Friedrich 2007, 107; cf. 18.249n.); on the accent, 2.131n.

450 2nd VH from caesura C 2 onward = 5.46, 5.98, 11.507, 16.343 (see ad loc.), 22.133, Od. 17.462, 17.504, 18.95, 19.452. — Panthoös: Polydamas and his brothers Euphorbos (16.808) and Hyperenor (516, 17.23  f.) are sons of Panthoös, who is a member of the Trojan council of elders (3.146n.; CH 9). — struck: one of the comparatively rare Trojan successes with a spear in close combat (Stoevesandt 2004, 113). — right shoulder: less well protected by the shield and thus frequently injured, usually leading to death (16.289–290n. with bibliography). — Prothoënor: one of the Boiotian leaders (2.495), probably invented by the narrator for the Catalogue of Ships (2.495n.; Kullmann 1960, 70). His relatively limited significance is here expressed, for example, by the fact that he is individualized only via his father’s name (451, cf. 444  f.), although his

450 Προθοήνορα δεξιὸν ὦμον: acc. of the whole and the part (R 19.1).

Commentary 

 213

death is not described with excessive brevity (2.494–759n. [p. 147]). Boiotian warriors, mentioned as a collective at 13.685, have an increased presence in what follows (476 Promachos, see ad loc., 487, etc. Peneleos, see ad loc., 15.329 Arkesilaos, 15.340 Klonios, 17.605 Leïtos); on the tendency of the poet of the Iliad to group characters by their origin, Marks 2012, 103; on the size of the Boiotian contingent and its role, 2.494–510n.; Shear 2000, 92, 217 n. 139.

Προθοήνορα: the speaking name of a character who has likely been invented (see above): it means ‘storm ahead of the men’; the formation of the compound is probably analogous with words of the type φυγοπτόλεμος [rather than φυγε-]): Sommer 1948, 173; von Kamptz 67. The name is not attested historically, but may have an abbreviated parallel in the Mycenaean to-wa-no (possibly *Θοϝάνωρ) (DMic. s.  v.; LfgrE).

451–452 451 ≈ 13.519; 452 = 13.520; from caesura A 2 onward = 11.425, 13.508, 17.315. — Areïlykos: The name is used elsewhere only for a Trojan mentioned at 16.308; on the formation (it means ‘a wolf thanks to Ares’ or ‘a wolf in battle’), 16.308n.; on names used multiple times, 16.345n. — shoulder: A weapon piercing the body is usually fatal (452; in the iteratum and at 15.342, it pierces the shoulder in the same way; at e.  g. 517 the flank): 16.309n.

ὄβριμον ἔγχος: a VE formula (also at 498); the epithet means ‘strong, mighty’ (3.357n.). — ἐν κονίῃσι πεσών: an inflectible formulaic expression (6.453n.). On the description of the fall, 418n. — ἕλε γαῖαν ἀγοστῷ: The origin and meaning of ἀγοστός were obscure already in antiquity (schol. ad loc.; LfgrE s.  v. ἀγοστῷ; Frisk). The word is only used in the Iliad in the present formula and by Hellenistic poets (where it means ‘flat of the hand, elbow, arm’: LSJ). The formula apparently describes the gesture of a dying individual. In accord with other formulae signaling the moment of death, like ὀδὰξ λάζεσθαι/ἑλεῖν γαῖαν/οὖδας (2.418n.; cf. 5.75, perhaps formed according to the present formula), the poet of the Iliad appears to have taken ἑλεῖν to mean ‘grasp, seize’ and ἀγοστῷ, ‘with the hand (bent to grasp, tensed)’; the notion of a dying individual touching the earth with his hand would then be the same as in the expression ὃ κεῖτο … κόνιος δεδραγμένος ‘clawed at the dust’ (16.486n.): LfgrE loc. cit.

453 ≈ 13.413, 13.445, 14.478; all introducing speeches of triumph (6.66n.). — ἔκπαγλον: adverbial, with a faded but still perceptible original meaning (‘terrible’ in the sense of ‘intimidating’; cf. 2.222b–223n.). — ἐπηύξατο: picked up by εὐξαμένοιο at 458; on the meaning ‘proudly state of oneself’, 1.91n., 2.160n. — μακρὸν ἀΰσας: a VE formula (6.66n.); on the meaning of ἀΰω, 147n.

451–452 δι(α) … | ἔσχεν: ‘penetrated’ (on the so-called tmesis, R 20.2). 453 Πουλυδάμας: on the metrical lengthening of the initial syllable, R 10.1. — μακρὸν ἀΰσας: ‘widely audible’, i.  e. ‘shouting loudly’.

214 

 Iliad 14

454–457 After the wounding or killing of an opponent, speeches of triumph are made to boost self-confidence or intimidate the opposing party, and are directed at the opponent or his fellow warriors (Patzer 1996, 174  f.; Stoevesandt 2004, 306  f.; on speeches of triumph in general, Kyriakou 2001, 271–277). Here the speech of triumph is part of a series of such speeches in which every speaker tries to outdo the previous one (470–474, 479–485, 501–505) with rhetorical-psychological warfare similar to that at 13.374–454 (Janko on 449–453); once again the Achaians extert the greater amount of psychological pressure and ultimately put the Trojans to flight (506  ff.; Stoevesandt loc. cit. 317; the procedure, as part of the fight, is agonistic and reinforces the impression of the death for those who hear the words). The speech is quite sarcastic (‘receiving’ the weapon into the body at 456, its use as a crutch on the walk to Hades at 457; schol. bT on 457), as are other speeches of triumph (on the part of the Trojans also 16.617 [see ad loc.]: the opponent as a dancer; on the Achaian side, 13.374  ff.: mocking the groom, 13.415  ff.: the slain warrior as a companion of another dead individual, 16.742  ff.: comparison to a diver; cf. 17.27  f.). On such invective denigrating the opponent, along with curses and other snubs, see 6.123–143n.; Stoevesandt loc. cit. 324  f.; de Jong on 22.286. 454–455 in a vain cast: These ‘reports of success’ are only found in Trojan speeches of triumph (Pandaros at 5.103 and 284, Paris at 11.380, similarly Akamas at 482  f.), i.  e. those by the party that is ultimately defeated: ‘It appears as though the poet is trying to reinforce the impression, already created via his «camera management», that to the Trojans – and only to them – hits represent good fortune worth remarking on’ (Stoevesandt 2004, 329 [transl.], with reference to the Trojans having killed fewer Achaians than vice versa). — Panthoös’ … son: 450n. The use of one’s own name (= tertiary focalizationP) is an emphatic expression of self-confidence; it is found e.  g. in Hektor’s speech of triumph at 16.833 (see the collection of examples at 1.240n., and cf. 16.496n.).

οὐ μὰν αὖτ(ε): = 13.414. αὖτ(ε) means ‘once more’, as at 469; the reference is to ven­ geance for the killing of Satnios and the wounding of Hektor by Aias (AH; Janko on 454–457). — οἴω: frequently serves to tone down a statement (‘…, I believe’); here a sarcastic understatement, as also at 456 and in the speech of triumph at 5.350 (Kelly 2007, 363); on this and on the act./mid. variants of the form, which are probably used only for metrical purposes, see 1.59n. — μεγαθύμου: ‘in high spirits’, a generic epithetP of heroes (1.123n.), here with much self-confidence (Corlu 1966, 49). It is often used, as here, before caesura C 2 with a patronymic following (16.286n.).

454 μάν: strengthens the negative statement (R 24.7). — οἴω: = οἴομαι/οἶμαι; act. with no discernible difference in meaning from the mid. (R 23). — Πανθοΐδαο: on the inflection, R 11.1.

Commentary 

 215

455 1st VH = 23.843, Hes. Th. 692; ≈ Od. 5.454. — χειρὸς ἄπο στιβαρῇς: χείρ is combined formulaically with στιβαρός at VB (see iterata), VE (Il. 12.397, 23.711, Od. 4.506, 8.84, 8.189, 18.335, Hes. Th. 715) and verse middle (Il. 13.505, 15.126, 16.615, 23.686, Od. 12.174, Hes. Th. 675). στιβαρός as an epithet of hands means ‘muscular, strong, powerful’, both here and in the iterata dynamically in reference to a throw; likewise παχύς with χείρ at Il. 21.590, Od. 20.299 (LfgrE s.  v. στιβαρός); cf. 13.410 οὐδ᾿ ἅλιόν ῥα βαρείης χειρὸς ἀφῆκεν. — πηδῆσαι: on the rhetorical ‘anthropomorphization’ of weapons (the movements of the warrior are transferred to his weapon), 16.75n.; likewise ἅλλομαι of a missile at 4.125 (Allan 2003, 230), in combination with ἅλιον also in the formula ἅλιον βέλος ἔκφυγε χειρός 5.18, 11.376, 16.480 (see ad loc.; abbreviated at 11.380): Janko on 402–408. 456 κόμισε χροΐ: ‘received into his body’, apparently a crude expression from the language of warriors ‘paraphrasing passive endurance … like the stowing of booty” (LfgrE s.  v. κομίζω 1480.56  f. [transl.]), in the act. (without χροΐ) also at 463, in the mid. at 22.286.

457 2nd VH from caesura C 1 onward = 3.322, 7.131, 11.263, 24.246, Od. 9.524, 11.150, 11.627, 23.252, h.Ven. 154; from caesura C 2 onward = Il. 6.284, 6.422, 22.425, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 151, Theb. fr. 3.4 West. — [Death] Hades: The ‘House of Hades’ is a common expression for describing death (3.322n., 6.19n.); the same idea for the transition from life to death is seen at 13.414–416 (Levy 1948, 420  f.). On the common English and German form of the name ‘Hades’ (in contrast to Homeric ‘Aḯdes’), see 1.3n., on the mythological background, CG 14.

αὐτῷ: emphatic in initial position: ‘on that very one’ (Leaf). — σκηπτόμενον: related to σκῆπτρον, attested only in the mid. part., as also at Od. 17.203, 17.338, 24.158. Cf. the use of spears as crutches at 38 (Janko on 454–457). — Ἄϊδος: on the form, the initial syllable and the etymology, 3.322n.

458 = 13.417, 14.486. — A speech capping formulaP; marks the transition toward events triggered by the speech (459  ff.), here from the same impulse as at 1.188 (similarly 2.142, see ad loc.). áchos denotes a sudden psychological pain (frequently at the death of a comrade, as here) combined with feelings of helplessness (2.169–171n.); here the sentiment is triggered by the speech of triumph made by Polydamas (euxaménoio), who reinforces his opponents’ realization of their defeat via his arrogant, mocking attitude (Anastassiou 1973, 56).

455 χειρὸς ἄπο: = ἀπὸ χειρός (R 20.2). — ἅλιον: predicative, ‘futile’. 456 μιν: = αὐτόν (R 14.1), in reference to τις Ἀργείων. — ὀΐω: = οἴω (454n.). 457 αὐτῷ: refers to the spear. — κατίμεν: on the form, R 16.4. — εἴσω (postpositive): ≈ εἰς (cf. R 20.1–2). 458 ἔφατ(ο): impf. of φημί; mid. with no discernible difference in meaning from the act. (R 23).

216 

 Iliad 14

ἄχος γένετ(ο): an expression in verse middle, followed by ὀρίνω (459), as at 14.486  f., etc. (16.508n.). 475 Τρῶας δ᾿ ἄχος ἔλλαβε θυμόν after a defeat is similar. — εὐξαμένοιο: cf. 453n.; a causal objective gen. or gen. absolute without a subject, which is to be supplied from context (e.  g. 5.667, 15.191 can be understood in the same way; on this in general, Schw. 2.400  f.).

459–464 A killing frequently produces compassion, grief or anger on the part of the victim’s companions (458  f.). All the slain fighter’s comrades, not only his kinsmen, thus share in the responsibility of avenging him (also at 14.486  ff.; 16.398n.; Cantarella 1979, 226; Lendon 2000, 1–11; Stoevesandt 2004, 233 with bibliography), a task that is assumed, usually successfully, by a single representative warrior (460n.; Wilson 2002, 32). The common motif of revenge thus represents the narrative hinge of numerous descriptions of individual battles (458n., 440–507n.). In most such cases, it is not the perpetrator who is killed but another random opponent, because the avenger aimed poorly (4.489  ff., 15.429  ff., 17.608  ff.) or the perpetrator (like Polydamas at 462  f.) dodges the shot (Fenik 1968, 127  f.). This motif, the so-called ‘substitute killing’ (16.611–612n.), thus enables the poet on the one hand to portray a hero as acting successfully, while on the other hand ‘sparing’ him, since he is not (yet) allowed to die, according to the plotline (Bannert 1988, 30; Stoevesandt 2004, 233  f.). In the present passage, Polydamas’ death would put a premature end to his important role as a warning voice (18.249  ff.; West 2011, 297), which is probably why he is saved by the substitute killing, something usually limited to heroes of the first rank, such as the Trojans Hektor, Aineias and Sarpedon (Lossau 1991, 8 with n. 14; see also 463–464n., 470–475n.). 459 ≈ 13.418, 14.487, 17.123; VB ≈ 1.16, 1.375, Od. 13.37, 17.500, 21.277. The formulaic verse frequently introduces a scene of vengance, as do τὸν/τὼ δὲ πεσόντ᾿ ἐλέησεν + name (5.561, 5.610, 17.346, 17.352) and τοῦ δέ + name + μάλα θυμὸν ἀποκταμένοιο χολώθη (4.494, 13.660 [16.320n.]) (459–464n.): Stoevesandt 2004, 233 n. 688. — Αἴαντι: The dat. ending -ι is occasionally long elsewhere in Homeric epic, frequently before a caesura, as here (24.119n.). But the length of the ending, which has a parallel in the Mycenaean dative ending in -ei, need not have been secondary in Aias’ name (also at 15.674, 17.123), since it fits with the probable antiquity of the character, as indicated by his tower shield (404–406n.), his enormous size (3.229n.) and the formula, used exclusively of him, ἕρκος Ἀχαιῶν (1.283b–284n.): Wathelet 1962, 13; West (1988) 2011, 48  f. — δαΐφρονι: a generic epithetP; probably originally meaning ‘clever’, but subsequently associated with δαΐ ‘in battle’ and interpreted ‘brave in battle’ (6.161–162n.), here potentially with reference to the context: Aias is the one to respond (Snell 1978, 60). — θυμὸν ὄρινεν: θυμὸν ὀριν- is an inflectible VE formula (8× Il., 3× Od., 1× ‘Hes.’). ὀρίνω, originally ‘set

459 ὄρινεν: on the unaugmented form, R 16.1.

Commentary 

 217

into motion, stir up’, here of the triggering of emotions (anger, need for revenge) by the speech, as in the formulaic verse ὡς φάτο, τοῖσι/τῷ/τῇ δὲ/δ᾿ ἄρα θυμὸν ἐνὶ στήθεσσιν ὄρινεν (2.142n.); (ἐπ)ευξάμενος is to be supplied as the subject of ὄρινεν (AH; 458n.).

460 closest: This reason, together with the explanation at 464 of why Archelochos is the one who is hit, frame the killing scene and lend it greater weight (Nicolai 1973, 55). Aias acts as the representative of all Achaians affected by Prothoënor’s death (458; Anastassiou 1973, 56), although the narrator’s explanation is unusual (on this in general, 16.255–256n., with bibliography): the usual reason a particular hero avenges a slain warrior is a personal connection, be it friendship or kinship (459–464n.); but often no reason is given at all (e.  g. 13.203, 13.581; see West 2011, 297).

τῷ Τελαμωνιάδῃ: Τελαμωνιάδης is a variant of Τελαμώνιος (on the word formation, Risch 148; on Τελαμώνιος, 409n.). On τῷ: the name Aias is used with and without the article. Whether the adnominal ὁ/ἡ/τό with an attribute has a function greater than that of an article is disputed; the phrase Αἴας Τελαμωνιάδης / Τελαμώνιος occurs also without ὁ (16.358n.). Here τῷ in combination with the patronymic probably serves to differentiate him clearly from the ‘lesser Aias’, who appears at 442 (see ad loc.).

461 ≈ 13.516; 2nd VH = 12× Il. (of which 9× in Books 13–17), also ≈ 16.399. — returning: 408n.

ἀκόντισε: 403n. — δουρὶ φαεινῷ: a VE formula, common in Books 13–17, usually with a verb of aiming; on the variants, 16.284n. with examples and bibliography.

462 2nd VH = 3.360, 7.254, 11.360; on the variants, 408n. — ἀλεύατο: on the form, 3.360n. Whereas ἀλέομαι/ἀλεύομαι means ‘evade a threat’ (here Aias’ spear) on a single occasion, ἀλεείνω is used duratively in the sense ‘ward off danger, not let it come close’ (408n.): LfgrE s.  v. ἀλύσκω 585.20  ff. — κῆρα μέλαιναν: a VE formula (2.859n.); on κήρ meaning ‘(fate of) death’, 2.301–302n.; on the epithet μέλας, which is based on the notion of a black cloud lowering onto the consciousness of the dying individual, 2.834n.

463–464 1st VH of 463 = Od. 19.451. — to one side: Paris at 3.360 steps to the side as well; on the various techniques employed to avoid being hit, 16.611–612n. – Polydamas manages once again to evade a missile (15.520), thereby increasing his significance in a substitute killing scene – he is a second-rank warrior (Lossau 1991, 8 n. 14; cf. 459–464n., 470–475n.). Elsewhere, it is usually Achaians rather than Trojans whose deft evasive actions are recounted by the 460 τοῦ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3 and R 17); dependent on ἄγχι ‘near to’. 461 καρπαλίμως: to be connected with ἀκόντισε. — δουρί: on the form, R 12.5. 462 Πουλυδάμας: initial syllable metrically lengthened (R 10.1), likewise in 469. 464 τῷ: anaphoric demonstrative pronoun (R 14.3 and R 17); dat. of disadvantage dependent on βούλευσαν (‘for him’ in the sense ‘against him’). — ῥα: = ἄρα (R 24.1).

218 

 Iliad 14

narrator in substitute killing scenes (Stoevesandt 2004, 164). — Archelochos: mentioned only in the catalogue of Trojans (2.823) and, beside his brother Akamas (476), as a leader of the Trojan Dardanians during the attack on the encampment of ships (12.100) (2.823n., where also on his speaking name). — Antenor: a member of the Trojan council of elders; father of numerous sons (CH 9). — since: on the comment by the narrator, 460n. — destruction: The pathetic statement that Aias strikes Archelochos in place of Polydamas, his actual target, highlights the sparing of Polydamas as unusual (Paduano/Mirto on 449–485; Janko on 461–464; further indications of Polydamas’ importance, see above, 470–475n.). Although death is set by fate (16.433–438n.), the gods can have a hand in bringing it about and are thus frequently (as also at e.  g. 16.693 [see ad loc.], 18.115  f., Od. 16.446  f.) named in place of fate (the designation theoí ‘gods’ might be used here with a comprehensive sense: Jörgensen 1904, 365): Gruppe 1906, 991  f.; Ehnmark 1935, 79; Erbse 1986, 286.

λικριφὶς ἀΐξας: likewise in 1st VH at Od. 19.451; cf. the similar VB ἀντίος/πρόσσω/ δεξιὸς/ὀρθὸς (ἀν)αΐξας Il. 15.694, Od. 22.90/Il. 17.734/24.320/Od. 21.119. λικριφίς means ‘(veering off) diagonally, to the side’ and is used elsewhere in Homer only in the halfverse iteratum, in both cases with the assonance -ικ (LfgrE). The word has been connected with λέχριος ‘oblique, aslant, crooked’ attested in the Classical period (DELG s.  v. λέχριος; doubts expressed in Beekes s.  v. λέχριος) on the assumption that the word was formed with the old, originally instrumental suffix -φι with the addition of -ς (cf. the similarly adverbial νόσφι, σφι and ἄχρις, ἀμφίς; Schw. 1.551; Risch 356, 362; on the accent, likely inherited, Wackernagel [1914] 1953, 1128  f.). The formula is thus probably very old (Hoekstra 1981, 28 with n. 80). — κόμισεν: 456n. — βούλευσαν: on the meaning ‘decide and set in motion’, 2.114n.

465–468 A realistic interpretation appears possible even if the portrayal of the wounding unsurprisingly leaves some issues open and presents several problems. But it is physically impossible for a spear – in contrast to a sword (14.496  ff. [see ad loc.], 16.339n.) – to penetrate the thick tissue of the human neck to such an extent (465  f.) as to decapitate the victim (Saunders loc. cit. 357  f.). The description has thus been judged ‘pretend realism’ (Friedrich [1956] 2003, 19  f. [transl.]; similarly Janko on 465–469) caused by the adoption of a formula used in connection with sword blows (466n.) or by the poet’s attempt to stress the superior strength of the Achaian in the attack (see below; van Wees 1996, 39; Neal 2006, 24; both with parallels for powerfully thrown, deeply penetrating missiles, as at 14.517  f. [see ad loc.], 20.413–420, 20.472–474, 20.481–483). Since decapitation has been assumed as the consequence, the results of the strike described at 467  f. have been understood as indicating that the severed head falls down first, followed by the rest of the body hitting the ground. But more likely a realistic killing is described (albeit without final

Commentary 

 219

clarity as to specifically which muscles and tendons have been hit: Saunders loc. cit. 358) and the reference is to a single, swift ‘process of falling’ (clarified linguistically via the encirclement of the description as a whole by toú at VB in 467 and pesóntos at VE in 468, ‘of the … falling’) ‘alluded to by the sequence of body parts hitting the ground’: […] ‘Because of the hit, the head loses its natural hold […], bends forward’, sending the entire body off balance and making it fall so that the slain man ‘hits the ground head first’ (with the face, including the mouth and nose, toward the earth; this specification precludes both a somersault [considered by earlier commentators; on this, cf. Friedrich loc. cit. and Janko loc. cit.] and decapitation): Kurz 1966, 26  f. [transl.]; likewise Saunders loc. cit.; as a hypothesis, already Leaf on 467 and Friedrich loc. cit. The killing thus described may represent a variant of the motif of receiving a wound on the nape of the neck, which makes the head hang downward (499n., 16.339  ff., see ad loc.: Saunders loc. cit.), thereby offering variation within the sequence of killing scenes as a whole (440–505n.; on variatio in this type of passage, 16.306–357n.). On the one hand, the detailed description offers an audience familiar with battle a certain aesthetic pleasure, in combination with the satisfaction that once again (as almost always) the type of injury sustained by a Trojan illustrates the tremendous power and force of an attack perpetrated by an Achaian hero (see above); on the other hand, the vivid portrayal is part of a series of increasingly gruesome killings that underscore the growing brutality of the war (440–507n.). 465 1st VH ≈ 15.433; 1st VH to caesura A 4 = 4.459, 6.9; ≈ 13.651, 15.445, 16.586, 21.591 (καί ῥ᾿ ἔβαλε). — neck: The idea appears to be that Aias accidentally hits Archelochos from behind as the latter is running away (461n.): Laser 1983, 11; Saunders 1999, 358.

συνεοχμῷ: ‘connection, joint’ (LfgrE), a hapaxP related to συνέχω, either a metrical variant with prothetic vowel ε related to *συνοχμός (cf. ἐν ξυνοχῇσιν ὁδοῦ ‘where paths join’ at 23.330, as well as the later ὄχμος ‘fort’; Frisk [1941] 1966, 329  f.; the hypothesis is favored by Risch 1956, 73; considered by Chantr. 1.183) or related to a perfect *συνέοχα (Schw. 1.492; Holt 1939, 193; as a hypothesis in Risch 46). The exact spot of the joint between head and neck where a spear might get beneath the back of the head, causing it to fall forward, cannot be determined (Saunders 1999, 358).

466 2nd VH = 10.456, ‘Hes.’ Sc. 419. — νείατον ἀστράγαλον: ἀστράγαλος is a formation related to ὀστ-έον ‘bone’, as a r-stem (like ὄστρ-ακον) with a -γ- extension (*ostṛ-g-) and

465 ῥ(α): = ἄρα (R 24.1). — καὶ αὐχένος: on the so-called correption, R 5.5. 466 ἀστράγαλον(ν), ἀπό: on the prosody, M 4.6. — ἀπὸ … κέρσε: on the so-called tmesis, R 20.2. — ἄμφω … τένοντε: acc. dual (R 18.1).

220 

 Iliad 14

the inherited suffix -αλ- that also occurs in other designations of body parts (ὀμφαλός, Latin umbilicus, English ‘nav-el’, γύαλον ‘hollow, curve’, originally of the hand, applied to armor: Risch 108); the initial α- is perhaps to be explained via assimilation (Frisk; differently Beekes 1969, 51). The word, meaning ‘cervical vertebra’, is also used at Od. 10.560, 11.65 (of Elpenor, who falls from the roof); it is synonymous with σφονδύλιον at Il. 20.483 (LfgrE). νείατος initially means ‘the lowest’, then ‘the outermost’ (on the word formation, 2.824n.); here it must designate the final, outermost cervical vertebra, i.  e. here the topmost vertebra at the join with the head (LfgrE s.  v. νείατος; Laser 1983, 6  f.). — κέρσε: from κείρω, ‘sever’. The aor. forms with retained -σ- are more common (7× Il., 2× ‘Hes.’) than those with compensatory lengthening (κείρασθαι and ἀπεκείρατο, 2× Il., 1× Od.); the former are archaisms, formed from the root *(s)ker- (cf. LIV s.  v. [p. 556  f.]; Risch 249; Risch [1956] 1981, 126  f., 132), whereas the forms with compensatory lengthening are analogous to the present (cf. DELG s.  v. κείρω; Szemerényi in Forbes 1958, 269; Ruijgh [1986] 1996, 392). — τένοντε: τένων, technically the aor. part. of τείνω, means ‘tendon, band, muscle’ (16.587n.; LfgrE); here the dual perhaps denotes ‘the two fascia of the neck muscles’ (Laser 1968, 11 [transl.]; likewise Saunders 1999, 358) that are not protected by the helmet, as is also demonstrated by the injuries at 15.451 and 20.481  f. (Lorimer 1950, 242). 467–468 1st VH of 467 ≈ 4.507. – The dactyls in 467 probably reflect the fast toppling over of the body and the impact of the head on the ground, whereas the spondees in 468 may be meant to illustrate the somewhat slower movement of the legs (Janko on 465–469 points out the onomatopoeic effect, albeit within the framework of his idea that head and body fall to the ground separately, 465–468n.). — προτέρη: ‘in reference to the main term κεφαλή’, but logically also to its individual parts, the στόμα and ῥῖνες (AH [transl.]). — στόμα τε ῥῖνές τε: an inflectible formula, at VE in the acc. also at 23.395, 23.777, similarly ἀνὰ στόμα καὶ κατὰ ῥῖνας 16.349, at VB Od. 5.456. The plural ῥῖνες ‘nostrils’ is used for the nose as a whole. — πλῆντ(o): 438n. 469 2nd VH = 12.88; ≈ 11.57, 13.790. — αὖτ(ε): in a sense of revenge, as at 454 (see ad loc.); here also as a response to the speech of triumph at 454–457 (AH). — ἐγέγωνεν: The perf. stem is attested, but the corresponding pres. forms are not (Chantr. 1.426; traditionally connected to γιγνώσκω: Schw. 1.770; Risch 345; a new etymological suggestion in Hackstein 2002, 187–193: related to Tocharic A ken- ‘call’); the stem means ‘make oneself heard’, with a dative in a speech introduction formula here and at 23.425, as well as 6× formulaically in the Iliad ‘call out to’ (LfgrE). The (optionally) augmented perf. form (as here, also 24.703 [see ad loc.], Od. 8.305; of other stems, δείδιε at 18.34, 24.358, ἐπενήνοθε 2.219, etc.) is an older form or the 3rd pers. sing. plpf. act. (Schw. 1.777). — ἀμύμονι: 426n.

467 προτέρη: on the -η after -ρ-, R 2. — τε (ῥ)ρῖνες: on the prosody, M 4.6. 468 περ: emphasizes the preceding word (R 24.10). — γοῦνα: on the form, R 12.5.

Commentary 

 221

470–475 In the second of the series of triumph speeches, the satisfaction and sarcasm in response to Polydamas’ words are heightened further (454–457n.): while Polydamas vaguely designates the opponent who has been killed as ‘one of the Achaians’ (456 tis Acháiōn), Aias stresses with enormous satisfaction the status of his victim, which is fundamentally determined by his descent from one of Troy’s leading families. The genealogy motif (6.152–211n.) thus serves to depict the slain Trojan as the ‘equal’ of the Boiotian Prothoënor (Paduano/ Mirto on 449–485; Stoevesandt 2004, 329–331). Actual compensation is important for vengeance (483–485n.; also in civilian life: 18.498, see ad loc.), not merely numerically but also with regard to the social rank of the individuals who have been killed, their timḗ (1.11n.); this is also evident at 13.446  f. (three victims for one slain warrior) and particularly at 17.538  f., where the killing of a second-rank warrior is deemed insufficient (LfgrE s.  v. ἄξιος; Fenik 1968, 135; Wilson 2002, 155). The genealogy motif thus brings Aias’ success to the fore and drives home the loss to the opposing party even more forcefully (475). The fact that the shot was not actually aimed at Archelochos is made to seem irrelevant (what is important is the revenge effected: 459–464n.), although the honor of the spared Polydamas is now elevated via the emphasis on the elevated rank of Aias’ (substitute) victim (as well as his own performance in combat, 463–464n.; Lossau 1991, 8 n. 14, 17). The speaker’s ‘grim satisfaction’, provoked by the previous speaker (459  f., see ad loc.; Nickau 1977, 159), is all the more powerful since the query at 471  f., the feigned insecurity (471–474) and the request to confirm the victim’s identity (470) superficially highlight the victim’s rank but actually stress the successful killing (Winter 1956, 125; Janko on 470–474); in addition, the reference to the disfigured head hitting the ground first enhances the irony (474): West 2001, 229. The sarcasm, aggravated in comparison to Polydamas’ scorn at 454–457, is prepared for by means of the information regarding the victim’s name and ancestry provided by the narrator at 463  f. and emphasized again in his commentary (475a; this type of additional information after speeches is rare): schol. bT on 14.475; de Jong (1987) 2004, 89, 205; Stoevesandt 2004, 316. On the narrative convention that the opponents are acquainted with one another, 6.123–143n. with bibliography; van Wees 1996, 31, 70 n. 84; it is left to the audience to imagine reasons irrelevant to the narrative – e.  g. earlier encounters in battle, information conveyed by captives, desertions, embassies – as the basis for Aias’ knowledge (Cauer [1895] 1909, 395  f.; Bassett [1938] 2003, 130; on relevant speculation in the scholia, Nünlist 2009, 125).

222 

 Iliad 14

470 2nd VH = Od. 3.101, 4.331; ≈ Od. 4.314, 22.166; from caesura C 1 onward = Od. 12.112, 23.35; ≈ 3.327, 11.148. — φράζεο: ‘beware!’, as at 18.254, 24.354 (LfgrE s.  v. φράζω 1010.50  ff.).  — Πουλυδάμα: This vocative form of the consonant stem name with a 1st-declension ending is the reading transmitted by all manuscripts, and also occurs at 12.231, 13.751, 18.285 (West 1998, XXXIVf.). — νημερτὲς ἐνίσπες: an inflectible VE formula, a variant of νημερτὲς ἔειπες (3.204n.). ἐνίσπες is the 2nd pers. sing. imper. of the zero-grade root aor. in the compound ἐνι-σπ- related to ἐνέπω ‘say, tell’ (on the verb, 2.484n.; on the preverb, also G 59). The archaic verb is used for messages of particular importance, e.  g. in the invocation of the Muses (508n.) or, as here, in combination with forms of νημερτής in demands to tell the truth or in affirmations (LfgrE s.  v. ἐνέπω; for examples, see iterata). νημερτές ‘aptly’ (on the word formation, 1.514n., 6.376n.) is thus used in the sense ‘exactly as it is’, i.  e. ‘truthfully’; Polydamas is asked to truthfully admit the following (Luther, 1935, 41; LfgrE s.  v. νημερτής 364.4  ff.). ἐνίσπες: The imperative in -ς of uncertain origin is attested already in the Iliad for athematic aor. stems (e.  g. 1.338 in δός), whereas among thematic forms it occurs only in ἐνίσπες (Attic and in inscriptions in σχές and compounds and for a number of other verbs): Schw. 1.800. The accent is recessive, as with monosyllabic oxytone stems in compounds (e.  g. Attic ἐπίσχες): Schw. 1.390; Chantr. 1.467. The tradition frequently vacillates (as here, also e.  g. 11.186, Od. 3.101, 3.247) between ἐνίσπες and ἔνισπε (app.crit.), but the latter form, probably perceived as a present tense, is metrically necessary only at Od. 4.642, h.Cer. 71 (Chantr. loc. cit.).

471–472a ≈ 13.446  f. — Προθοήνορος ἀντὶ πεφάσθαι | ἄξιος: ἄξιος ‘balancing something out, equal’ is here construed with the inf. (‘is this man perhaps not worth it?’), likewise but impersonal at 13.446  f.; 11.514  f. ἰητρὸς … ἀντάξιος | … ἐκτάμνειν … τ᾿ … πάσσειν is similar. ἀντί ‘in compensation’ illustrates the notion of ‘reckoning against’ contained in ἄξιος (LfgrE s.  v. ἄξιος [transl.; quotation at 972.54] and ἀντάξιος). πεφάσθαι is perf. pass. of θείνω and means ‘have been killed, lie there dead’ (24.254n.).

472b mean: The victim proved himself in battle (LfgrE s.  v. κακός 1283.34  ff.; 1284.12  ff.), as is expected of a leader from an illustrious family (this of course means in the first instance the male members of the family). His appearance – good physical prerequisites for fighting – is perhaps already implied here (and not only in the following verses) (thus Ulf 1990, 28; cf. speculation about ancestry on the basis of appearance at Od. 4.64, 6.187, etc., with polyptoton, as here, at Od. 17.217; see also 126–127n.).

470 φράζεο: on the uncontracted form, R 6. 471 Προθοήνορος ἀντί: = ἀντὶ Προθοήνορος (R 20.2). 472 μέν: ≈ μήν (R 24.6). — κακῶν ἔξ: = ἐκ κακῶν (R 20.2). 473 κασίγνητος(ς) Ἀντήνορος: on the prosody, M 4.6. — ἱπποδάμοιο: on the inflection, R 11.2. 474 κεφαλήν: acc. of respect (R 19.1). — ἄγχιστα (ϝ)ε(ϝ)ῴκει: on the prosody, R 4.3. — ἄγχιστα: adv.

Commentary 



 223

οὐ μέν: substantiates the rhetorical question with an emphatic negation (AH: ‘indeed not’). — κακὸς … κακῶν ἔξ: The polyptoton is part of a group of repetitions in which the first and second word are linked by combining a personal with a possessive pronoun (e.  g. at 24.542), or polyptota via a possessive gen. combined with τε/καί, as in the VE formula Πρίαμος Πριάμοιό τε παῖδες 1.255 (with n.), or formed as here with a preposition and οὐδέ (which combination corresponds to that of the frequent synonym doubling with repetition of the negative [2.447n., 19.346n.]). In most of these cases, as in the present passage, the preposition expresses the ancestry, and thus implicitly the heredity of an attribute, as also e.  g. at Archil. fr. 23.13 West and Hdt. 4.3.4 (Fehling 1969, 218; Gygli-Wyss 1966, 92). Polyptoton with κακός is very common in Homeric epic, with a notion of the essential sameness of men, as here, also at Od. 17.217, or as an expression of continuous, accumulated misfortune (19.290b n., 16.111n.). The polyptoton recalls a proverbial ‘conventional wisdom’, cf. Plat. Menex. 237a: ἀγαθοὶ δὲ ἐγένοντο διὰ τὸ φῦναι ἐξ ἀγαθῶν (Gygli-Wyss loc. cit. [transl.]).

473 2nd VH = 6.299. A four-word verse with a personal name (16.125–126n.). — ἱπποδάμοιο: 10n.

474 from caesura C 1 onward = 2.58; ≈ Od. 6.152, 13.80. — him: Antenor.

κεφαλήν: The reading κεφαλήν is transmitted only by a single papyrus, whereas all manuscripts and two papyri read γενεήν. A reference to the head is supported by the parallel at Od. 1.208  f. αἰνῶς μὲν κεφαλήν τε καὶ ὄμματα καλὰ ἔοικας | κείνῳ and the importance of the head in the description of the wounding of Archelochos and his collapse forward (465–468n.): West 2001, 229. At the same time, the weight of the transmission clearly favors γενεήν. In this case, the word, meaning ‘family, lineage, ancestry’, must be interpreted ‘familial resemblance’, a specific meaning not otherwise attested but favored by most scholars (e.  g. Faesi, Janko on 470–474; doubts in AH; Leaf; rejected by West loc. cit.; cf. LfgrE s.  v. γενεή 128.43  ff. [transl.]: either ‘contamination of «he resembles him» and «he has the look of being from his family»; or «regarding his ancestry, as evident from his appearance, he most closely resembles him»”). Aristophanes of Byzantium read φυήν in a similar sense recalling verses such as 2.58 (φυήν τ᾿ ἄγχιστα ἐῴκει) (app.crit.). The possibility that the easily understood reading κεφαλήν is based on a conjecture designed to eliminate the problems with γενεήν (Janko loc. cit.) and that γενεήν is accordingly to be defended as the lectio difficilior (thus Cauer [1895] 1909, 32) cannot be entirely excluded. — ἄγχιστα: ‘the next, the closest’ (2.58n.). — ἐῴκει: plpf. of ἔοικα ‘be the same’ with an imperfect sense: ‘(when he was still alive I thought that) he resembled’ (Faesi; Leaf).

ἐῴκει: The formation of the plpf. form is unclear (either with reduplication and without augment: