The Interpretation of Order: A Study in the Poetics of Homeric Repetition 0198140770, 9780198140771

This is an exciting and original study of the poetic significance of formal repetition in Homer. The author argues that

487 50 4MB

English Pages 190 [202] Year 1994

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD PDF FILE

Recommend Papers

The Interpretation of Order: A Study in the Poetics of Homeric Repetition
 0198140770, 9780198140771

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

OXFORD CLASSICAL MONOGRAPHS Published under the supervision of a Committee of the Faculty of Literae Humaniores in the University of Oxford

OXFORD CLASSICAL

MONOGRAPHS

The aim of the Oxford Classical Monographs series (which replaces the Oxford Classical and Philosophical Monographs) is to publish outstanding revised theses on Greek and Latin literature, ancient history, and ancient philosophy examined by the faculty board of Literae Humaniores.

The Interpretation of Order A Study in the Poetics of Homeric Repetition

Ahuvia Kahane

CLARENDON

PRESS · OXFORD 1 994

Oxford Uniwrsity Press, Walton Strttt, Oxford ox2 6DP Oxford New York Toronto De/J,i Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi KMaJaLMmp,u Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town Melbollrne Auckland Madrid and associated companies in Berlin lbadan Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford Uniwrsity Press Publislwd in the United States by Oxford Uniwrsity Press Inc., New York 0 Ahuvia Kahane 1994

All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press. Within the UK. exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair dealing for the purpose of research or private sllldy, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1()88. or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of the licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms and in other countries shouldbe sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press. at the address above British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data The interpretation of order: a study in the poetics of Homeric repetition/ Ahuvia Kahane. (Oxford classical monographs) Revision of the author's thesis ( Ph. D. )-Oxford Includes bibliographical references (p.) and indexes. r. Homer-Technique. 2. Repetition ( Rhetoric) 3. Greek language5. Rhetoric, Metrics and rhythmics. 4. Epic poetry-Technique. Ancient. I. Title. ll Series. PA42o6.R47K34 1993 88J.01---dc20 93-10384 ISBN o-19-IJ/4077--0 Typeset by Se/wood Systems, Midsomer Norton Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by Biddies Ltd .• Guildford and King's Lynn

TO MY PARENTS

PREFACE

IF one were to write in verse about Homeric secondary literature, the Iliad might provide a good source of similes on the subject of battle; the Odyssey might in the same way offer something about how different parties can be so close and yet so far apart. Viewed from such an angle, the present study is a peace-offering of sorts, an attempt to effect a reunion of technical and literary readings of Homer, allowing both to survive, indeed allowing for oµoq>QOOU'Vfl to prevail. In the course of writing this book (which started life as an Oxford D.Phil. dissertation) I have benefited from many learned, wrathfree comments and from the generous assistance of numerous scholars and friends, among them Don Fowler, Rosalind Thomas, Andrew Laird, Sander Goldberg, two anonymous TAP A referees, Michael Silk, Geoffrey Kirk, Haim Rosen, John Glucker, David Patterson (from OCPHS), Susan Hockey and Lou Burnard (from OU Computing Service), John Was (who copy-edited the text), and Jennifer Wagstaff and Hilary O'Shea (from OUP). This brief list belies a multitude of detailed individual contributions. I would like to express my very special thanks to Jasper Griffin, who has followed this work closely from its beginning, and who has over the years made extensive and invaluable comments, and has offered constant encouragement. Where thanks are due I must also make a bimuxov offering to my father and mother, not only for their standard contribution to anything a son might have done, but also for the very many hours spent reading Homer and other works aloud to me in my early childhood. Finally, I wish to thank my wife Georgina, who stood beside me throughout the making of this book with patience, friendship, and love. A.K. Oxford, 1993

CONTENTS

List of Tables Metrical Notation

Introduction

X

Xl I

1.

Patterns and Verse-Making Technique

2.

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

17

3. Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

43

4. Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

80

5

5. Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

114

Conclusion

142

APPENDICES

I. Collated Localization Data II. Position and Reference of Theme-Words

144

146

III. Localization of Proper-Name Vocatives

149

IV. Approaches to Apostrophe

153

V. Localization of Proper-Name Nominatives

156

Bibliography

167

Index Locorum

177

General Index

183

LIST OF TABLES

I. II. III. IV.

Position of Word-Ends (Absolute Figures) Frequency of Word-End by Position (Rank Order) Frequency of Sense-Pause Frequency of Sense-Pause by Position (Rank Order)

See also Appendices 1-111,V.

21

23 27 28

METRICAL

NOTATION

Positions in the hexameter are indicated throughout according to what is now the standard system: I

Ii

2

J

J½ 4

5

5½ 6

7

7½ 8

9



10

U U

U U

U U

U U

U U

2

4

6

8

10

II

12

X

See O'Neill 1942: 113 (and Higbie 1990: 15 for critical comments).

Introduction

Precisons notre pensee par une metaphore. Dans l'orchestre du Monde, ii y a des instruments qui se taisent souvent, mais ii est faux de dire qu'il y a toujours un instrument qui joue. Le Monde est regle sur une mesure musicale imposee par la cadence des instants. Si nous pouvions entendre tous les instants de la realite, nous comprendrions que ce n'est pas la croche qui est faite avec des morceaux de blanche, mais bien la blanche qui repetela croche. C'est de cette repetition que nait l'impression de continuite. (Gaston Bachelard, L 'Intuition de /'instant, Paris, 1932, 46)

1.1 This book discusses metrical shape, position, and caesura

in Homer, and often it counts examples and compares frequencies, but it is essentially a literary interpretation, not a technical analysis; it studies the repetition of metrical, grammatical, syntactic, and lexical units in the Iliad and Odyssey, and accepts not a few of the tenets of formulaic composition, but it is not a book about formulae. Rather, in this study an attempt is made to understand how particular formal aspects of Homer (i.e. those to do with form) relate to poetic themes such as disguise and recognition, to the heroic ideal, and to gods and mortals and the difference between them in the epics. It examines speech and character, narrative role, point of view, and the poet's voice, and it also considers literary devices such as emphasis, irony, ambivalence, and foreshadowing. 1.2 The text of Homer displays a remarkable degree of formal order: scenes, verses, words, and groups of words are repeated, metrical shapes regularly appear in particular metrical positions in the verse, sound sequences are repeated, etc. When we think of Homeric repetition, especially the repetition of units smaller than

~-•---__,....,... ..-..,.-- • •c..-.---------

2

Introduction

a single verse,1 we naturally think of formulae, and of technical verse-making functions. Despite a wide variety of definitions, all theories assume that Homeric formulae are units which facilitate the production of the verse. But, as I shall argue, there are in Homer varieties of formal repetition which do not fit existing definitions of the formula. These repetitions do not require us to abandon our ideas about the technical functions of formulae. Rather, they seem to coexist alongside formulae, and they might even be the by-product off ormulaic composition; hence no attempt is made in this study to redefine the formula. What I shall try to show is that some of these repetitions perform non-technical, literary functions. 2.1 When discussing repetition in Homer it is often both necessary and convenient to present the facts in figures. For example, it is often simplest to describe metrical shape and/or positioning in in pos. 5, 37.6% (/1.), 48.6% (Od.) abbreviated terms (e.g. '-uu... '), which may also create the reassuring, although possibly wearisome, imP.,ressionof 'hard fact'. By extending our figures into regions which lie to the right of the decimal point ('The average frequency of so-and-so is 57.32% .. .') and by using statistical formulae we can further enhance the impression of objectivity and 'scientific' truth. But even numerical data and scientific truths require interpretation, as any statistician will insist, and as has been elaborately argued by Thomas Kuhn (and even earlier, by Gaston Bachelard and others). Homeric formal order stands out very clearly, but it too needs to be interpreted, and interpretation is by definition bound to our more subjective human perspectives. Assuming that repetitions have certain technical functions is one type of interpretation (embodied in formulaic analysis), but there are some hard facts which require strictly literary interpretations. I shall provide detailed, extensive examples of this in subsequent chapters, but for the moment let us consider one elementary case. Achilleus is mentioned by name (excluding patronymics, 'son of .. .' expressions, etc.) 367 times in the Iliad. By contrast Bienor, one of Agamemnon's victims, is mentioned only once in the poem ( 11. 92). Of course, Achilleus is the central figure in the Iliad while Bienor is at best a minor Iliadic character. The frequency data are ' Repetition of larger thematic units, such as 'typical scenes', is not discussed in this study.

Introduction

3

the simplest, most natural reflection of the different roles played by Achilleus and Bienor in the epic. This in itself is trivial, but the point is that here we find a link between numeric data and 'literary' matters. It is impossible to suggest, for example, that the greater frequency of the forms 'Axv..(11.)w~ (in the various cases) compared with the form BtflVOOQ(in the accusative, as it happens) is merely the result of verse-making requirements and 'metrical convenience'. Once we have recognized this, we can extend our enquiry to more interesting areas. How, for example, should we interpret the fact that a particular lexical entry appears in one particular position in the verse in, let us say, 90 per cent of its attestations, despite the fact that it appears in several totally different formulae, and despite the fact that its abstract metrical shape appears in a different position in the verse in, say, 95 per cent of the total attestations? 2 Such discrepancies are often most clearly described in numerical terms, but they can in principle, and, as I shall argue at length, sometimes do in practice, have a 'literary' rather than 'technical' significance. In order to understand this meaning we must adopt a hybrid approach, examining individual entries and contexts as well as abstract shapes and numerical data. 2.2 Whatever literary messages the poet wished to convey, and no matter how well presented these were in his song, he was still obliged to produce hexameter verse, that is, to produce particular, recognized sequences of long and short syllables. This means that no matter how far we choose to take our literary interpretations of formal order in Homer, we can never disregard the technical aspects of our text. It is, in my opinion, sometimes possible to link formal features of the texts to specific literary values, but the process is never simple, and it is almost always laborious. One of the difficulties of this task is that despite rules and tendencies, Homeric versemaking technique is very flexible. Formulaic flexibility (as discussed by Hainsworth, Hoekstra, and others) is one aspect of this, prosodic flexibility another (for example, G. P. Shipp notes that there is a large number of 'metrical irregularities' in words of address placed initially in the verse3). In other words, when it so pleased the poet, he was quite capable of bending the rules. The 'bending of rules' is something that in itself can be represented in numerical form, 2

In other words, our particular lexical entry displays a highly unusual localization tendency. 3 Shipp 1972: 40. Cf. Tsopanakis 1983: 250-3.

Introduction

4

but here too we shall consider whether irregularity has literary significance. 2.3 Apart from practical difficulties, the flexibility of Homeric diction poses the following general problem: how to discuss formal phenomena in sufficient detail on the one hand, and with sufficient scope on the other. The search for a solution has determined the structure of this book. Following the first chapter, which explains why some repetitions are neither formulaic nor incompatible with formulae, the study is arranged as follows: Chapter 2 presents a broad perspective on the relationship between the verse's metrical structure and its sense-structure, and applies the findings to a literary interpretation of a small section of text. A brief methodological section opens Chapter 3, followed by detailed case-studies of the localization of special lexico-grammatical entries-the words 'man', 'wrath', and 'return'. The perspective is widened in Chapter 4, which considers a whole semantico-grammatical category, the proper-name vocative. Here we find a more general phenomenon than the one described in Chapter 3, but, for reasons which will be explained later, the number of variations is still relatively small. Building on the results of Chapters 2-4, we progress in Chapter 5 to a yet more complex and varied category, that of the propername nominative. This category is, of course, an essential buildingblock of formulae. Here it is impossible to present a fully detailed discussion (there are thousands of proper-name nominatives in the Iliad and the Odyssey), but it is hoped that by then our methods will have been developed enough to establish a point. The book starts off, then, with general observations, proceeds to a detailed but narrow analysis, and gradually works its way back to a wider perspective. Naturally, this approach is a compromise. But, as Milman Parry himself suggested, 'We are faced with the analysis of a technique which, because the bard knew it without being aware that he knew it, because it was dependent on his memory of an infinite number of details, was able to attain a degree of development which we shall never be in a position perfectly to understand.' 4 We must accept this imperfection if we are ever to walk in the footsteps of the polytropic singer of tales. 4

MHV20.

I

Patterns and Verse-Making Technique

It bas been claimed that 'at a deeper level, all literary criticism of the Homeric poems must be radically altered by the ParryLord hypothesis', and even that a new 'oral poetics' must come into existence before we can, without absurdity, presume to tackle the poems at all. But the production of a new 'poetics' has proved difficult, and some recent writing on formulaic utterances bas contributed less to our aesthetic understanding than might have been hoped. (Jasper Griffin, Homer on Life and Death, Oxford, 1980, xiii-xiv)

1 From the early 196os there has been a steady stream of modifications, revisions, and surveys of the oral-formulaic theory. 1 The object of this chapter is to present neither a revision nor another survey of the literature, but instead to discuss our claim that certain formal repetitions, whatever their precise definition, fall outside the boundaries of what is currently, and by a broad consensus, defined as a formula. The phenomena investigated in this book can, I suggest, be the product of an oral/traditional composition, but their existence does not preclude the possibility of literate composition. It is unlikely that they can be used as an argument either for or against orality and/or traditionality, except when making the very broadest points, and they neither contradict nor require us to modify our notions of Homeric formula or formulaic technique. 2.1 Chapter 2 of this study examines the relations between the • Recent revisions: e.g. Visser 1987, 1988; Bakker 1988: 151-9s; Bakker and Fabricotti 1991. Surveys: e.g. Holoka 1973, 1979, 1990 (a three-part bibliographical survey); Edwards 1986, 1988 (a two-part bibliographical survey); Foley 1985, 1988.

Patterns and Verse-Making Technique

6

hexameter's system of metrical pauses and its system of sensepauses. Formulaic diction is, of course, intimately related to both, but to ask whether formulae ultimately preceded pauses, or vice versa, is not necessary for our purposes.2 Whatever causal relationships exist in Homer between sense-structure and metrical structures, it is obvious that at some point they became individually distinguishable, and they they could therefore-and this is the crucial point-interact, rather than work in a fully overlapping, 'transparent' mode. Consider the sequence - u u - u u - (pronounced e.g. 'dum-da-da dum-da-da dum'). It is not made up of words, it is not a formula, and anyone with minimal experience of the hexameter will identify it as a metrical sequence which runs from the beginning of the verse to a particular point (the penthemimeral caesura) in the middle of the verse. It is one of several standard metrical 'slots' into which standard sense-units (formulae, units ... ) may be which have an 'essential idea', e.g. -covb' an:aµEi.f36f.&£Vo~ inserted. The boundaries of this metrical colon, and of all other cola, are not defined by the beginnings and ends of formulae. Rather, the hexameter's metrical scheme is determined by the boundaries of words.3 It is the case that the beginnings/ends of formulae always coincide with word-boundaries, but it is certainly not the case that the beginnings/ends of words always coincide with the boundaries of formulae. Here we have a potential point of interaction. It is one aspect of repetition which does not contradict formulaic composition, but which certainly goes beyond it.4 In Homer metre and sense coincide frequently, but not inevitably.5 The obvious example of non-coincidence is enjambment, but there are many other cases where complex relations occur. Every hearer/reader of Homer (or indeed of other hexameter poems) is bound to pick up and learn to identify the hexameter's rhythm (the 'dum-da-da .. .' sequence). If we accept this rhythm as a general, regular pattern, and if we further accept that there is an overall, harmonious correlation between metre and sense in Homer, then if See, however, West 1988; Hoekstra 1981. With some important exceptions that relate to appositives, phonostyles, etc. See Ch. 2 below. 4 Higbie 1990 is perhaps the most advanced work on the relations between metrical and syntactic/formulaic units. It is clear that she is aware of a literary aspect of these relations (see e.g. 1990: 31, 39, 72), but her main efforts are directed at a technical understanding of verse structure. 5 See Ch. 2 for details. 2

3

Patterns and Verse-Making Technique

7

and when the harmonious correlation is broken we have at least a potentially significant device, a variety of '1:EUywv e; i\QY£~ 6vbQa xataxta; (3) tTjA,Eba:n:l>s,

32)

( Od. 15. 224)

All readers of Homer who are familiar with formulaic theory and with the concepts of flexibility and formulaic modification will identify the connection between examples (2), avbQa xa'taX'tEtvat, and (3), avl)Qa xa'tax'ta-2.For type - (long monosyllable) there is a difference of 38 attestations in position 9; for type - u there is a difference of 48 attestations in position 9½; for type - u u there is a difference of 87 attestations in position 10. 14 Analysis of the statistics raises important questions which this study has no room to discuss: for example, why does a difference show up in the Iliad but not the Odyssey? 15 See again Ingalls 1970: 5. 16 er. Bassett 19190. There is a difficulty in our earliest extant source, Aristides Quintilianus. Meibom 1652 and many others have tried to emend. er., however, Winnington-Ingram 1963: xxiv: 'in primo potissimum libro claudicat ... quidvis cum hie scripsisse crediderim.'

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

II. Frequency of Word-End by Position ( Rank Order)

TABLE

Rank I

23

2

3

4

5

6 7

8

9 10 II

12 13 14 15 16

Diad

0. P.

3 8

S½ 8 9½ 2 3 S½ 2 5

5 7 I I½ 9 3½ 10 7 9½ I 10 I½ 9 6

4 4

6

6 4

3½ 7½II 3½II 7½

7½ II 3½ 7½ II

Odyssey

0.

S½ 3

P.

8

3

8

2 S½ 2

9½ 5 7 I 10 I½ 4 5 7 9½ I I½ 10 9

9 6

hemimeres' (a modern term). 17 Let us, however, put aside for the moment normative notions of what constitutes a pause, and adopt the simpler criterion of frequency. Using what is today a common definition, we may say that a metrical pause, or caesura, is 'a place in the verse where a word-end occurs more than casually' (and a bridge is 'a place in the verse where word-end is avoided'). 18 The metrical scheme we are about to devise is therefore no radical departure from tradition or convention. It does, however, differ in one important aspect. Conventional metrical schemes ultimately make a finite (and arguably arbitrary) decision on what 'more than casually' means, and state which positions are caesurae and which are not. But the statistics clearly indicate a finely graded scale of · frequencies. This does not allow us to mark a dichotomy between pause and non-pause. In other words, we have no obvious 'objective' way of deciding what 'more than casually' means in numerical terms. 2.S We now arrive at the linchpin of our conception of the metrical scheme. Our objective is to describe a functional reality (rather than a theoretical construct). Hence, no attempt is made here to challenge or reformulate existing definitions of the caesura. We shall say that a word-end can appear at each and every position in the hexameter, but that it is highly expected in some positions '7

Porter, beginning from the most frequent positions according to his data (8, 3, and 5½)but then relying on criteria which went beyond matters of frequency, constructed a revised scheme of metrical pauses (Porter 1951: 10-13). This scheme differs from the traditional one, particularly with regard to position 9 (which Porter considered a pause), and has drawn heavy criticism (Kirk 1966: 81; Barnes 1986: 129; Edwards 1966: 117 n. 3; Ingalls 1970: 4-7). 11 West 19820: 192. Cf. Maas 1962: 33. For bridges see Devine and Stephens 1984 (as well as West 19820: 192; Maas 1962: 33-4 and his appendix 1, pp. 93 ff.).

24

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

(e.g. in 8, 3, and 5½)and highly unexpected in others (e.g. 1½, 11). The metrical structure of each verse would therefore function as an aggregate of expectations which are either met or ignored. This aggregate may be regarded as an elaborate 1tC1Qci3tQooboxl.av device.19 We cannot, and must not, try to present it as a 'scientific' reality, but since we do possess a relative hierarchy of expectations ('highly expected', 'highly unexpected') we can attempt an interpretation. 2.6 Let us examine a few of our relative parameters. Three positions come out as having the highest frequency in all four samples shown in Table II: 3, 5½and 8. These are obviously the positions where a word-end is most highly expected. Next come positions 2, 5, 7, and 9½.Now, if we look at Porter's data, we find that positions 2, 5, and 7 appear in the same order (fourth, fifth, and sixth most frequent respectively) and show a higher frequency than position 9½in both the Iliad and the Odyssey. O'Neill's statistics, on the other hand, put position 9½fourth and fifth in order of frequency for the Iliad and Odyssey respectively. We must remember that the immediate object of Porter's analysis was the system of metrical pauses, while O'Neill directed his attention specifically at localization. Although both studies produce highly similar figures, O'Neill's may nevertheless incorporate a small (but possibly significant) bias peculiar to localization. This may prompt us to examine position 9½more cautiously than other positions with a frequent word-end. For example, in Section 2.3 above we have already seen-from a different perspective-that positioning within the last colon of the verse may have some -special significance, something to be pursued further in Chapters 4 and 5. In those chapters we consider the importance of the names of the protagonists of the two poems, Achilleus and Odysseus, and particularly the double-consonant forms 'AxLll£u~ and 'Obuaaeu~, which are almost always placed at the end of the verse. These and other important names have the metrical shape u - - , that is, they generate a word-end at position 9½.The pattern they follow may help to explain O'Neill's figures for word-end at this position. 20 Cf. Porter 1951: 8, who speaks of 'a pattern of expectancy'. - are found at the end of the verse in 92.1 per cent of the cases in the Iliad and in 92.9 per cent of the cases in the Odyssey (O'Neill 1942: 143, table 10). Groups of words that occupy the metrical shape u - - at the end of the verse normally comprise a single metrical word. u - -1 is extremely rare: using Porter's data (extrapolating from tables 22, 23, and 24 in Porter 1951: 62-3), we found only one such example. In the first five books '9

'° O'Neill's tables show that words shaped u -

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

25

Below we shall see that position 9½is also unusual among positions with a more frequent word-end in that it only rarely coincides with a sense-pause. Putting 9½aside, we find then that the most important pauses are and 11 appear in all four sets of 3, 5½,8, 2, 5, and 7.21 Positions 1½ is data as those with the lowest frequency of word-end. Position 1½ conventionally known as Hermann's Bridge. Position 11 has no name; its low frequency of word-end simply indicates that a monosyllabic word is only infrequently placed at the end of the verse. This tendency creates a particular expectation on the part of the audience/reader, which can then be manipulated, for example when the name Zeu~ appears at verse-end. We shall discuss this point in later chapters. Of the remaining positions, 1 displays the next highest word-end frequency in all four samples. This can probably be explained by the hexameter's tendency to place appositives such as pronouns, negatives, etc. (usually monosyllabic or disyllabic) at the beginning of the verse (e.g. II. 1. 6, 8, 22, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 32, 33). A similar which, along with position argument may also apply to position 1½, 22 10, ranks next in order in our samples. We might consider the higher word-end frequency (within the group as a whole) of position 10 in terms of the sequence - x I, which commonly belong to one of the Iliad there are three examples-I. 271, 2. 833, 5. 516--all forming part of a sequence of appositives. Of the shape u - -1 there are significantly more examples, 56 per 1,000 verses according to Porter's data (the number is derived from deducting the one example of u - - 1 from a total of 57 verses that have u in position 10). This sequence again contains appositives and is either a metrical word or part of a still larger metrical word: either there is no metrical word-end at 9½or the sequence u - -1 belongs to one metrical word. See examples at e.g. //. 1. 85, 86, 115, 118, 133, 140, 154 (?), 158 (?), 174, 181, 185 (?), 186. There are 6 examples per 1,000 verses of u - -1 according to Porter's data, but these too constitute either one metrical word or even a part of a metrical word. See e.g. //. I. 128, 167, 177, 487. Thus, word-end at position 9½ can be argued to be a distinct feature of localization. Further below we shall see that there are virtually no sense-pauses to be found at this position . ., Commonly described as follows (see further n. 33 below): -uu

-

uu-

Al A2

u

u-

81 82

uu

c,

-uu-x

C2

" The statistics for position 1½ reflect 'Wackemageliche Wortstellung' (Wackemagel 1892). Ruijgh has examined and confirmed Wackemagel's conclusions in a paper delivered in 1988, but as far as I am aware this is not yet available in print; see Bakker 1990: 12.

26

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

word:z3 - - is a shape into which many nouns and many verb-forms can fit, and its significance will be noted in later chapters. Here we shall merely suggest that the higher frequency of word-end in position 10 is probably closely linked to a tendency to place words shaped - - at the end of the verse.Z-4 From this point and until we reach those positions with the lowest word-end frequency, positions 1½and 1 1, the statistics do not present a clear order of preference. What we have, then, are three broad categories, one with 'more than casual' word-end frequency, another with 'casual' word-end frequency, and finally one with 'very few' word-ends: (1) positions with 'more than casual' word-end frequency (where a word-end appears, roughly, in over 45 per cent of the verses): 2, 3, 5, 5½,7, 8, and perhaps 9½; (2) other positions (except those in (3) following), where a wordend occurs 'casually', and in which no obvious tendency can be observed; (3) positions with a 'very low' word-end frequency (in which a word-end appears in about 5 per cent of the verses): 1½,11. The boundaries between the categories are not absolute, but the hierarchy of the positions is. Thus, we obtain a system closely resembling conventional colometric schemes, but free from their conceptual rigidity. This, we suggest, is the hexameter's functional metrical grid. It is a rhythmic reality which we can now try to set against a scheme of sense-divisions in the verse. 3.1 The parsing of sense-units, i.e. the attempt to quantify sense, depends on our concepts of word, clause, and sentence, and may reflect differences of language, culture, and personality.zs However, this barrier of subjectivity presents less of a problem than may at e.g.//. 1. 5, 10, 16, 24, 33, 36, 50, 55, 63, 90, 91, 96,98. It is interesting to note that there are 'clusters' of characteristic usages. In all the examples above the sequence - -1 belongs to one word that is also a complete metrical word. er. the low word-end frequency at position 11. By contrast see //. 1. 174, 181, 186, 190, 193, 199, 208, where the metrical type - -1 is preceded by an appositive. The sequence - -1 is very rare, and is normally composed of appositives (in a sequence of three or four, where a new sentence begins mid-verse). In the first five books of the Iliad there are only five examples of - -1: 1. 271, 394, 2. 833, 4. 229, 5. 516. See also comments above on position 9½. ,. The shape is the second most versatile (after - ) in terms of positioning in the hexameter, but over 41 per cent of the words thus shaped are found in positions 11-12. er. O'Neill 1942: 141, table 6. ' 5 See Bakker 1990: 1 n. 3. '

3

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

27

first appear. As we shall see, there is considerable agreement among individual (theoretically 'subjective') attempts to quantify sense in Homer. Furthermore, this study has already declared its literarycritical orientation. The parsing of sense in Homer, so long as it is achieved by a consistent application of principles, whatever these may be, may thus be regarded as a reading, as an interpretation, of Homer-and it is as such that it concerns us. 3.2 M. L. West in Greek Metre presents statistics for 'sensepauses', claiming that sense-pauses are 'practically confined' to certain positions for which he provides data, and which are quoted in Table III. 26 West does not indicate the source of his figures, nor does he elaborate on the principles by which data were gathered; but this does not invalidate his data as a 'reading'. The statistics for punctuation-marks provided by W. Hartel (quoted in Porter 1951) and by A. Ludwich's lnterpunktionen (quoted in Frankel 196o)27 offer us two further readings of Homeric sense-pauses. Punctuation-marks are, after all, a formalized representation of breaks in meaning (although German punctuation may differ in detail from e.g. British English conventions). Finally, two further TABLE

Pos.

I



2

w.

0.6 1.2 2.0 0.4 1.6

2.0 3.4 2.0 2.6 3.S

6.0 11.S 12.0 10.2 14.S

H. L. IS IC

3

III. Frequency of Sense-Pause(%) 3½ 4

7.0 13.9 o.s 0.1 12.0 IS.8 0.3 12.2 0.2 0.2

s 12.0 22.7 20.0 28.7 24.1

S½ 6

7

9.0 3.0 17.8 0.0 6.2 7.0 19.0 17.0 2.7 17.7 S.S



8

9

11.0 22.0 22.0 22.2 0.1 20.9 0.2

9½ 10

II

12

-

63.0

Key: W. = West; H. = Hartel; L. = Ludwich; IS = Higbie's Internal Sentence Boundary; IC = Higbie's Internal Clause Boundary; - indicates that no data arc provided for the position.

readings have recently been presented by C. Higbie. These were made using the same text, and by the same 'reader' (Higbie), but according to different criteria: the first studied sentence-boundary, 26

West 19820: 36. A decimal point has been added to all West's figures in Table III (e.g. West's 7 is given as 7.0). 27 Porter 1951: 23; Frllnkel 1900: 105. Hartel's sample: Iliad 1, 3, 4, 10, Odyssey 1, 2, 6 (Hartel's format has been altered to correspond to Ludwich's). Ludwich's sample: Iliad 1, 24, Odyssey 1. Cf. also comments in Ingalls 1970: 6.

28

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

the second clause-boundary. 28 All five readings are given in Table III. Each of the five sets of data in Table III has its own bias, or rather set of biases, relating to the definition of a sense-unit, the choice of material for analysis, textual and orthographic conventions, and possibly even personal preference. This bias is reflected in variations for the absolute figures. However, all five follow the same pattern of rising and falling frequencies. This is best shown in a rank-order table (Table IV, similar to Table II above). IV. Frequency of Sense-Pause by Position• (Rank Order)

TABLE

Rank

I

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

w.

5 5 8 5 5

8 8 5 8 8

5½ 5½ 5½ 5½ 5½

3 2 2 3 3 = 2

7 7 7 7 7

I½ I½ I½ = I½ I½

I I I I I

H. L. IS IC

3 2

2

3

9

10



4

3½ 9 3½ = 9

II



Key: See Table III; = indicates identical frequencies. • Since there are some positions which never exhibit sense-break according to the five readings recorded here, ranking is given only to 11 places.

The similarity of ranking between five different sets of data, all quantifying 'sense' but each according to slightly different principles, is even greater than that observed when comparing ranks for the metrical data. Apart from one interchange for positions 8 and 5 in Ludwich's data, one interchange for positions 2 and 3 in Higbie's second set (IC), and a few other minor differences, all follow the same general pattern of rising and falling frequencies. As in the case of the metrical data, we are not here specifically interested in the details of the comparison, nor in particular aspects of bias.29 What we are concerned with is the general implication of the similarities observed. Again this can easily be summed up: Methods of sense-analysis in the Homeric hexameter may be based on different principles, thus producing different absolute figures, but they are all reflections, at different levels, of more or less the same structural 8

Higbie 1990: 131-2, 138--9, tables 4.3 and 4.10 (rounded to single decimal point). Higbie's data are for all 24 books of the Iliad. '9 Cf. e.g. variation between different books of the Iliad in Higbie's data (1990: I 31-2, I 38--g). '

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

29

pattern. To use a scientific metaphor: we can set the sensitivity of

our detectors at different levels, but the pattern detected remains the same. 4.1 We now possess both a metrical scheme and a sense-scheme. These must be superimposed and compared. The basic relations between the two are well known: 'There is no requirement that syntactic segments should coincide with metrical segments, but they often do so, and there is a strong tendency to avoid serious clashes between verbal and metrical phrasing. 30 Looking at the rank tables for both metrical and sense-data, we can get a more accurate picture of what this means. 2, and The most distinct metrical pauses, at positions 3, 8, 5, s½, 7, which correspond to the conventional system of metrical pauses, are also the most distinct positions at which sense-pauses occur. In and 11, where metrical pauses a broadly similar way, at positions 1½ occur least often, there are no sense-pauses recorded in the data collated above. Looking at absolute frequencies, we find that roughly one in every two word-ends (i.e. one in every two metrical pauses) also functions as a sense-pause.31 This means that, as a very broad rule, two words can usually be expected to form one sense-unit in the Homeric hexameter. Of all the positions, the one that stands out as having the most obvious disparity between the metrical data and the sense-data is In our metrical analysis we have already seen that this position 9½. position displays some unusual features. We now see that despite a relatively high frequency of word-ends, virtually no sense-pauses are found at this position. Previously we attributed this position's anomaly to localization. We can now add that the tendency to localize words shaped v - - ( v - x ) at the end of the verse does not involve beginning a new sense-unit with this word. Hence this aspect of the statistics is likely to be even more uniquely a matter of localization. We are thus provided with yet another hint concerning 30

West 1982a: 25. The basic similarity also emerges in Ingalls 1970, where Frlinkel's and Porter's data are compared. 3 ' e.g. position 1, about 4 per cent word-ends, 2 per cent sense-pauses. This is a point which may have far-reaching implications for the cognition-process of pauses. In Gestalt terms the distinction between 'sense-pause' and 'no sense-pause' would be both clearest and have the widest possible application if the proportion of the two classes was 1 : 1, which, as we see, is more or less the case.

30

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

verse-terminal diction, about which more will be said in the last two chapters of this book. 4.2 We have discovered that the localization of metrical shapes and the system of metrical pauses in Homer are two aspects of more or less the same metrical regularity. We have also confirmed that the system of sense-pauses in Homer closely overlaps the metrical scheme. The logical conclusion from our investigations so far is that the localization of metrical shapes overlaps the system of sense-pauses in Homer. This means that in the Homeric hexameter metrical shape and localization must have some sort of 'meaning', or rather (less crudely) that there must be some significant relationship between shape and localization and sense. This may sound surprising or even strange at first. However, if we consider such commonly localized verb-forms as µaxEo8aL(/I. 1. 8), l.xto8aL (/I. 1. 19), l>ixEo8aL (/I. 1. 20), etc., or the proper names of the shape u - - , most noticeably those of the epic protagonists 'ObuooEi,~ and 'AxLiJ..E\l~, which are highly localized at the end of the verse, then we realize that the general concurrence of shape and position and at least some categories of sense is familiar to every hearer/reader of Homer.32 4.3 There remains the question of cola. Is the verse basically divided into two or four cola? According to sense or according to metre? Friinkel, with a strong bias towards cola as units of sense, thought 'Jeder Hexameter gliedert sich in vier Kola, und die Kolenfugen liegen an je einer A-, B- und C-Stelle'.33 Friinkel included positions I and 1½ as A alternatives, but these are not accepted by most scholars today. 34 Others have argued that many verses do not fall into four cola, and that often there is no exact correspondence between metre and sense.35 Sometimes the fourcolon structure has been taken as essentially metrical.36 To date,

µ Parry's definition of the formula (MHV 13, 272) also establishes a systematic relationship between 'essential idea' and 'regular metrical circumstances'. But, as has been suggested already, the repetitions discussed in the present study arc not 'formulae'. 33 Frllnkel 196o: 111. A1 = pos. 1; A2 = pos. i!; A3 = pos. 2; A4 = pos. 3; 81 = pos. 5; 82 = pos. 5½;C I = pos. 7; C2 = pos. 8. 34 See Porter 1951: 11; Kirk 1966: 80; Beck 1972: 215; Beckes 1972: 4; Barnes 1986: 129. Cf. also Rossi 1965; Ingalls 1970. 3s Kirk 1966: 84ff.; Dale 1957: 30-1. 36 Notably by Porter; see 1951: 17.

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

31

however, no conclusive arguments have been brought against the four-colon theory. 37 But now we might ask why, having identified two parallel systems of division, we need to insist on a fixed number of cola in the verse. Indeed, what is to prevent us from suggesting that there are general abstract patterns, but a .flexible application, and interplay between metre and sense? Thus, a verse may have a strong medial division and, say, two weaker subdivisions. Perhaps in some verses there are even more subdivisions. As we 'increase the sensitivity of our detectors' we shall add more pauses (but ultimately no more than there are word-ends in the verse). The additional pauses will simply be weaker and weaker, both in terms of rhythm and in terms of sense, and their relative strength or weakness will be determined by the rank-order pattern. Apart from anything else, such an approach can mediate between a metrical attitude to inner metrics and a sense-related attitude. Frankel himself suggests something similar in his Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy: 'Verse and content no longer ran parallel, like two bands, but were combined with complete plasticity, and the result was the formulation of a new and flexible power to express what was to be communicated. ' 38 And Kirk is also aware of this mechanism: The cola are not therefore units of meaning, although they tend to comprise organic word-groups; they are not units of composition exactly (since the singer does not compose by marshalling first the first colon, then the second, and so on), although they are very much bound up with the act of composition and reproduction; still less are they reflections of shorter archaic verse-forms. Rather they are a reflection of sentence-articulation as predisposed by a permanent rhythmic pattern-perhaps little more than that. 39

At this point the matter of phonostyles resurfaces (see above, Section 2. 1). 'The pronunciation and phrasing of Homeric verses cannot be accurately reconstructed, mainly because of uncertainties over the effects of tonic accent, elision and correption, and musical accompaniment.' 40 We may now suggest that such phonostyles 37 Re-evaluated (and affirmed) more recently by Barnes 1986. 31 Frllnkel 1975: 31-2. 39 Kirk 1985: 19. 40 Kirk 1985: 20.

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

32

correspond to different levels of sensitivity to metrical and sensepauses: a rapid reading would ignore all but the most prominent pauses, a slower reading (possibly accompanied by the plucking of a stringed musical instrument) allows us to emphasiz.e and make use of a more elaborate scheme. The notion of 1t:rta,

in which 158, with its heavy internal punctuation, hammers home the four colon-divisions; or, to express it differently, divides the constituent wordgroup of the sentence into rigidly rhythmic units. That is the dramatic staccato effect, which might become oppressive if it lasted for more than a single verse.4 '

As Kirk himself points out, the exact criteria by which these passages are analysed may be disputed. But consider line I 57 again. 4

'

Kirk 1985: 21-2.

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

33 There can be no doubt that the most important break in this verse is at position 5½.Here we find the coincidence of a 'highly expected' metrical pause and the strongest sense-pause in the verse, separating parallel half-verses each containing a noun, a conjunction, and a corresponding attribute. The next (and final) level of analysis involves breaking each half-verse into two units (te is a postpositive and hence not preceded by word-end), the first containing the noun and the second the attribute. The subdivision is at positions 3 and 8, where again a metrical pause is 'highly expected'. Thus Kirk's description-'wonderfully flowing'-may be regarded as an evocative description summarizing the effect of a verse that conforms to metrical expectation, comprises four units of roughly equal metrical 'size', is structured as a parallelism A-B-A-B, displays a harmony of metrical and sense-structure, and hence provides a concrete reflection of its contents. Moving on to lines 158 and 159, we find that they too are segmented at metrically expected positions (both have pauses at positions 2, 5½,and 8), which still correspond to sense-units, but the formal structuring of sense is far less elegant, the units enclosed in each colon are far more diverse, more appositives are used, and enjambment plays a far more prominent role. Retaining metrical and syntactic regularity but abandoning smooth rhetorical and syntactic grouping is exactly the kind of shift needed to generate what Kirk rightly describes as 'a dramatic staccato effect' on the verge of being 'oppressive'. 5.2 The above offers us our first practical glimpse of how a reading of formal structures in Homer can contribute to our understanding of literary aspects of the text. In the remainder of this chapter we shall discuss in detail some more examples. However, localization will not be discussed in detail: its effects are far more complex and will be scrutinized in later chapters. Let us consider a few verses from book 5 of the Odyssey, where the poem's main narrative ('What happened to Odysseus') begins (5. 1-2): 'Hwi; 6' Iix AfXE(J)V I m1e' 6.yauoil I TL8wvoto l'>Qvt,8', I?tv' 6.8ava't0Wl. I cj>oo>i; I?cpEQOt. I~ jJQototoLV.

Odyssey 5 begins with the rising of dawn, using not the common expression ~µo~b 'lQLytvewcpavtJ Q°'>ooox-ruk~'Hw~ but an almost

34

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

unique phrase ..P In the verses printed above the metrical pauses have been marked according to the abstract definition regardless of sense-structures and regardless of the number of cola (except that appositive links were considered). In line I the first colon contains the subject of the sentence, a noun in the nominative; the second colon contains an adverbial phrase made up of a preposition and its case; the third colon contains an adverbial phrase made up of a preposition and its case, though the declined form is an adjective; the last colon contains the inflected noun governed by the preposition in the preceding This division presents no strong clash of colon: 1-2-5-8-u. metre and sense, although two points require further comment: ( 1) ayauoi'i and Tt8rovoto, a proper name and its attributive adjective, are placed according to this division in different cola; (2) there is no verb in the line-in other words, the larger metrical unit (the verse) does not correspond with the larger sense-/syntactic unit (the sentence). The separation of noun and adjective is not harsh. It may even be that it was used to emphasize ayauoo. After all, the noble exmortal Tithonos, comfortably lying in bed next to his divine spouse, offers a poignant contrast to the wretched Odysseus.43 It is true that the shape of Tt8wvoto, - - - - , is highly localized at the end of the verse,44 making a word-end at poi,:ition8 likely to begin with. But it is unreasonable to assume that this verse, opening as it does such an important part of the Odyssey, and being a highly unconventional way of describing dawn, is there by coincidence, or that the poet allowed technicalities to determine the structure of his most important verses. Indeed, everything about this verse and others that follow it suggests the contrary. The lack of a verb in this verse cannot be ascribed to technical difficulties. The most common verse describing dawn in Homer

The verse occurs only once elsewhere (//. 11. 1). Sec Bowra 1962: 30; Austin 1975: 67-8; Nagy 1979: 197; Macleod 1982: 47-8; Sacks 1987: 20-1 and n. 56. 43 The adjective may be interpreted as nominalized in apposition to the proper name, and hence as a more independent syntactic unit. Such a reading would further enhance Tithonos' noble standing: we might translate 'from her bed next to the noble one, Tithonos'. For nominalization and appositional word-order see Rosen 1967: 77-84, 'Relevanz der appositionellen Anordnung'. 44 O'Neill 1942: 147, table 23. 42

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

35

incorporates a verb:45 ~µoc;b T)QLY£V£w q>a'VT! ••• (20 times in the Odyssey). Why, then, is the verb left out in this case? One possible reason is that this allows an effective framing of the verse by the names of a goddess and an ex-mortal at the beginning and the end of a verse respectively. In this verse the couple are still peacefully slumbering (note the slow spondaic end), while the sudden act of rising is deferred to the next verse. This description, coming at the beginning of the story of an impossible liaison between divine Kalypso and mortal Odysseus (whom Kalypso would have made immortal), is a device that underlines a central theme in book 5. Dawn is about to rise, but the day to come is no ordinary day. It will witness an agitated speech by Athene, which will alter all events to follow. But at the beginning of book 5 we are still in the quiet of the night, and Dawn is just rising from her lover's bed .. The other goddess/mortal couple, Kalypso and Odysseus, must also be asleep (although, presumably, l'tClQ' oux t8eMOvt8e:i..ouon). The absence of the verb makes a small but important contribution to the description. In line I the framing of the verse by the two proper names and the lack of a verb contribute to a 'static', harmonious effect, a fitting counterpoint to the drama soon to unfold. The verse's static quality is embodied in the well-formed structure and the distribution of the sense-units and metrical units in the verse. Certainly not every line in Homer offers itself equally well to analysis in such terms, but many do, such as the following verses. In 5. 2 we find a strong pause in sense after OQvu8',separating the main clause from the final clause. But, as we have seen, 1½is a position where a metrical pause is relatively infrequent, i.e. less expected, and where sense-pauses are even less common. Now, most word-ends in position 1½appear either within a sequence of appositives (where there is no sense-pause) or, as is the case here, as part of an enjambment (where a strong sense-pause exists). This requires little proof since it is usually difficult to squeeze semantically or syntactically complete expressions into the short sequence - u. Enjambment, by definition, relies on a lack of agreement between 45 Cf. Kirk 1985: 119-20 on II. 2. 48--9: 'Homer has a number of different expressions for the onset of dawn, and it is interesting that they have not been reduced to a compact formular system.' If dawn-formulae are not used systematically (following the general sense of MHV 155), the usage at Od. 5. 1 may be assumed to be context-sensitive.

36

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

the sentence and the verse as a metrical unit. Allowing a strong sense-pause at the less-expected position 1½further enhances the disharmonious effect.46 The first 'highly expected' metrical pause of the line is at position s½,well into the verse. If we choose to pause at position 1½we are acting contrary to metrical expectations. (If we choose not to pause at position 1½,we are acting contrary to the natural sense-parsing of the sentence. Either way, the harmony of metre and sense is broken.) The next metrical pause in line 5. 2 is in position 7. Here again harmony is broken. By following the metrical pattern and allowing a pause at this position we are separating two closely related words. (which Sense, syntax, and sound combine to unite~ and cj>EQOL 47 in later Greek appear as a single word in cjxoocj>oQoc;). The next and last stop is at position 8. It causes no particular difficulties on its own. But since the pauses at positions 7 and 8 are conventionally considered as alternatives, and since in this verse the pause in position 8 is clearly the stronger of the two, the presence of a pause at position 8 forces us to reconsider our attitude to the one at position 7. The question is better phrased thus: How do we reconcile the presence of pause at both position 7 and position 8 with the four-colon theory (which sees them as mutually 46

On enjambment see most recently Higbie 1990. It is not my object here to discuss enjambment as such, nor to enter the long-standing debate about technical/literary functions of the phenomenon. One might suggest, however, that scholars may have sometimes overlooked enjambment's literary functions because they were searching for a single overall effect, where in fact the device can be used to create an infinite variety of effects. Bassett 1926 argued against the emphatic function of the run-over word (for run-over finite verbs specifically cf. pp. I 19-22), but he himself suggested a variety of other 'special effects', none of which is strictly technical; his notion of emphasis is clearly too narrow. The aesthetic significance of the enjambment of a 'colourless verb', such as fj,.v8£Vin Od. 4. 121 (see Bassett 1926: 120), should not be discounted. Indeed, the absence of the colourless verb enables the preceding verse to shine all the more brilliantly: tx 6' 'EA.rnJ8aA.Ciµow8vci>l>e0\; ~ Enjambment is a complex syndrome involving two verses and at least two words (the last of the first verse and the first of the second verse); cf. also Edwards 1966: 122-54 and Tsagarakis 1982. Higbie 1990 does not discuss literary functions explicitly, but she sometimes comments on literary function in individual verses (e.g. 1990: JI, 39, 72, 93, 99, 107, I I I). 47 The word ~ regularly appears in position 8, which it occupies here, but on at least three occasions (//. 6. 6; 23. 226: Od. 19. 64) it does so in different combinations and indeed different constructions, which might indicate that the word was relatively free from predetermined formulaic usage.

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

37

exclusive alternatives)? As has been suggested, this can be done by adopting a flexible attitude. Most previous scholars of Homeric metrics have regarded their investigations as a search for facts. I propose that this is an error, in principle because facts are meaningless without theory, and in practice because rigid metrical schemes place unnecessary limitations on our understanding of the hexameter. Homeric metre, like Homeric words, can only be interpreted. In music the question of phrasing is very much determined by the performer/interpreter. A musical score, no matter how detailed, is a potential which can be realized in a variety of different ways. This does not imply total anarchy in musical performances, any more than in Homer. It means that 'textual' facts require a performing-medium before they can become a poetic reality. According to our principles, pauses at both position 7 and position 8 have been allowed in line 5. 2. A word-end is 'highly expected' in both positions. At a basic level, or perhaps during an 'allegro' recitation, it may well be that only the more expected of these two options (position 8) will be vocalized, in which case colon-division of the verse would be n-5½-8-11. 11-5½-7-8-11 would merely be a refinement of the basic scheme, at a slightly more detailed level, perhaps during a 'semi-allegro' recitation. The pause at position 7 will have been ignored at one level, but will nevertheless be present as a phonetic and interpretative potential. The scheme 11-1½-5½-7-8-g would be an even more detailed reading. Line 5. 2 then, is a practical example of a flexible scheme and of the notion of phonostyles.48 Consider the literary consequence of our analysis. No matter how we choose to realize the potentials embedded in line 5. 2, it simply will not conform to the elegant standards of correspondence between metre and sense displayed in the preceding line. If we choose to put in the pauses shown, we get a discrepancy between sense and metre. If we choose to preserve the harmony between pauses and sense, we are forced either to place pauses at less expected positions, or to ignore them at highly expected positions, or both. If we decide to accept the most highly expected metrical pauses in 5. 2, we get a very unevenly divided verse (in comparison, for 411Cf.

also Od. 5. 4 (below).

38

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

example, with the preceding one). It begins with a very long colon containing words that belong to different sense-units, followed by two of the very shortest cola possible that are very closely related in sense and sound. This creates a 'dynamic' effect, which stands in contrast to the 'static' effect of the previous verse. Although it is not explicitly described in words, we may assume (because of our general knowledge of the world) that night immediately precedes the rise of dawn, and hence also the beginning of the Odyssey's main sequence of events. Book 5's first word is, rather aptly, 'H~, the dawn that breaks the night. Lines 5. 1-2 not only tell of this important transition, they also show it through the transition from 'static' to 'dynamic': an evenly divided, harmonious line is followed by a line with uneven cola which both force together unexpected words (first colon) and separate closely adhering words (second and third cola). Consider the next verses in book 5 (3-4): ol be 9Eoi.I 9u)xovbE I xa9i.l;avov, I h b' 6QQv, although it is one of the more common epithets in the Iliad, never appears in positions 4-7 except at I. 7. The placement of such a

common expression in an irregular position at such a prominent point in the poem is not likely to be a matter of chance. ss The traditional names of pauses, such as 'penthemimeres', 'hephthemimeres', 'bucolic caesura', etc., are clearly grammarians' terms.

42

Metrical Units and Sense-Units

audience of the Homeric poems, though equally ignorant of modem methods of analysis, were no less 'professional' in their capacity as audience than was the poet in his own capacity. The members of the Homeric audience were probably well accustomed to recitations. They were conditioned to identify (to 'feel') what for us may at first glance seem fine or even insignificant variations of rhythm and sense. We need only think of musical audiences today to get a fair glimpse of how sensitive a trained ear can be to the smallest of variations, and how significant these can be.56 In this chapter we have first described metrical and sense-patterns, then shown how these interact. The kinds of interpretation suggested in Section 5 are not, of course, invariably applicable to every line in Homer. Other forces, among them technical necessity, can and do affect the verse. And even the Poet sometimes nods. We are not suggesting that each and every metrical phenomenon in Homer has a 'meaning', but that the interplay of metre and sense-units is a regular, valuable, flexible aspect of the making of Homeric verse. 56 There

have been recent attempts to deny the reality of internal pauses in the hexameter: Daitz 1991; Wyatt 1992 (a response to Daitz 1991); Daitz 1992 (a response to Wyatt 1992). The arguments are highly thought-provoking, but the authors do not actually confront the detailed factual realities of the hexameter.

3 Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

MilV1.v li£1h£:~TftoOot.bt.Qv 't£ mollµov~ aAE"fELVO 't£ xuµa'ta ,u:!Qwv .••

The allusion to I. 1 is obvious. The verses form a prooemium to the second part of the Odyssey, in which Odysseus begins his innere Heimkehr ..,, The reference of avbQa obtained from the immediate context by anaphora (cf. 13. 73) is to 'Odysseus'. But reference is also made to Odysseus through pattern deixis, since avl>Qa is accusative and verse-initial. This is a much more powerful reference, which places the word avbQa and the name of Odysseus in the perspective of the poem as a whole, and of its two major sections. In 10. 73-4 Odysseus tells of his unfortunate return to Aiolos' island. The angry Aiolos will not help Odysseus a second time: O'OYflQµoL 8£tw,;fotl xoµi.1;£µ£V o{,b' Qffl>Jtq1Jt£LV 49 avbQa 'tOV ~ xe 8eolol.vcmtx8Tj'tmµaxciQ£omv.

Here the basic denotation of avl>Qais 'man in general', 'any man'. The immediate verbal context supplies us with a reference to Odysseus. Ten verses earlier (line 64) he is addressed in his own name, 'ObuaEii, in surprised but sympathetic tones, by members of Aiolos' household. But once Aiolos learns the disgracer ul facts, he speaks of the Odyssey's 'stratagem of deferral, building a controlled identifying description' prior to the disclosure of Odysseus' name. 47 Different opinions on the matter of traditionality/originality may result in slightly different answers to the question of how exactly a pattern is 'set'. I submit, however, that the way the pattern operates in our text remains unaltered. The actual name of Odysseus is withheld until line 21. Although mil>Qarefers to a particular person, it is not linked to any previous word in the text (because there is no previous word). 41 Schadewaldt 1958: 23. Fenilc 1974: 162 says: 'There is a mysterious, haunting beauty in the hero's sleep on the Phaeacian boat as he is transported home to Ithaca.' The 'haunting' part of the beauty is the result of echoes from other passages in the Odyssey. Fenilc rightly suggests that this is a transformation of the motif of sleep, but the reference to Od. 1. 1 is at least as strong. This is a good example of how a single passage can resound with multiple echoes. 49 Von der Milhll (Teubner) adopts the papyrus reading tl! in 10. 74. This might have suited the present interpretation slightly better, but the vulgate reading, given in van Thiel (Olms) and Allen (OCT) and accepted by Ruijgh (1971: 429), is XE.

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

61

speaks only of an 6v6Qa;he does not use the name 'Odysseus'. The tension between the basic denotation 'man' and the contextual reference 'Odysseus' underlines Aiolos' point of view: a guest-friend that has become an unwelcome, nameless stranger. Pattern deixis gives us the wider perspective of the epic as a whole: the hero of • the Odyssey who was close to 'regaining his former identity' but is • once more reduced to the state of a wanderer without a name. 50 In 8. 138-g a Phaiacian prince, Laodamas, admits that there is nothing worse than the sea to a man:

ovyciQtyyt 'tl cp11µ& xaxoi. µaxeoem 6vbQa ytoovia oonOQ')l.&£VOV.

Again the basic denotation is 'any man'. The immediate verbal context provides a reference to the beggar, and/or to Odysseus. This example most clearly shows how context reference (anaphoric in this case) is dependent on points of view, and may change with regard to the different states of knowledge of different characters. To the suitors avbQa has the reference of 'the stranger/beggar' (cf. 18. 38 o;EtvOl;,41, 49); this is the limit of their knowledge. Odysseus, despite the fact that he is hiding his true identity, is making a reference to himself. We the audience/readers know it because the poet mentions Odysseus' name in the preceding verse introducing the speech ( 18. 51).56 And the pattern deixis in 18. 53 is to Odysseus. This unambiguous reference allows the poet to put in Odysseus' mouth words that express his true identity (intelligible, however, only to the poet and the audience themselves) even as he hides it. The poet's manner, like that of Odysseus himself, is polytropic. A few lines later Antinoos rebukes Iros (lines 7~81, with 81 repeating part of 18. 53): VVVµ£VµiJt' et~, jJc:>uyal:I!, µiJteY£VOIO 55

If we consider e.g. Od 2. 244-51 (esp. 245), reference could also be to Odysseus (as in examples of category I above). This may be a case of anaphora (which can span larger sections of text), or a more complex type of reference. Language involves long referential chains (cf. e.g. Kripke's notion of (referential) chains of communication:Kripke 1980). But whatever the precise nature of the link to 2. 24451, it is not made through the use of the pattern, i.e. this is not a case of pattern deixis. 56 Because of the different possibilities for anaphoric reference, some examples can be placed either in category I or in category 2.

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns et bi) 'toOtovYE'tQOl&U~ xal.belllw~al~, 6vbQa yEQO'V'l:a, 6vnt\Qt)µhov.

Here again we see the poet manipulating his characters like marionettes. He makes Antinoos utter the ironic words, the true meaning of which (as revealed by the pattern deixis) remains hidden from the suitor. Iros, and indeed not only Iros, has much to fear from this old 'man'. There is (perhaps surprisingly) only one example that presents a difficulty to pattern interpretation. In 22. 31-2 the poet reports the thoughts of the suitors, who are baffled by the killing of Antinoos: civiK>, ml. ¾jcj>aaavoox l8Uovta 6vbQa xa'tax't£tvar 'to 6£ vipool oox htOTJ(Jav...

tox£v ham~

The immediate verbal context provides the referent 'Antinoos' both for the audience and for the suitors (cf. 22. 8, 22, 21r-30). 57 In other words, everyone thought that the beggar unintentionally killed Antinoos. Furthermore, a reading of line 32 with reference (whether by verbal context or by deixis) to the beggar/Odysseus is clearly ruled out. It would be nonsense to translate: 'for they thought that he had unintentionally killed the beggar/Odysseus'. But perhaps an audience could have understood the following: • ... for they thought that [it was] without intention [that] the man [i.e. Odysseus] had killed ...

This translation cannot be accepted as such (xa'tax'tetvm always takes an object; cf. also the formula livbQa xa'tax'ta~). It may, however, work for one brief moment-just long enough to create the desired effect. The text, especially in an oral performance, is linear: up to position 1½, or even s½,we could regard livbQa as a subject accusative, expecting the object later in the verse. For the duration of one or two words avbQa would correspond to the (a subject accusative). Of course, reference participial oux !8iA.OV'ta to Odysseus by immediate verbal context is still impossible, given what we know of the situation. But pattern deixis, since it is not dependent on the immediate context, will nevertheless have flashed before our eyes a reference to Odysseus. We are thus given the poet's brief, ironic aside on the true identity of Antinoos' killer. If we insist that a temporary 'misinterpretation' of the grammar 57

The suitors are in this case NF,[F 1 ].

66

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

is impossible, we have a more complex case: a clash between pattern deixis and grammar and a possible exception (the only exception) to a pattern reading. 58 3. Examples in the third category involve neither pattern deixis nor reference to Odysseus, and may hence be dealt with very briefly. Here we find accusative avbQa in positions other than verseinitial (i.e. with no pattern deixis) and with reference through the immediate verbal context (by anaphora) to a character other than Odysseus, or else with no specific contextual reference and only the basic denotation (2. 188; 3. 24; 4. 693; 8. 216; 9. 429, 494; 10. 173, 547; 12. 207; 14. 380; 15. 224, 272; 16. 294; 19. 13; 22. 22; 24. 441). The elided avbQ', the accusative form civeQ(l,and civi)Q in grammatical cases other than the accusative (which, of course, have no pattern deixis) may also be included in this group whenever their (verbal-context) reference is to characters other than Odysseus, and regardless of their position in the verse. It is nevertheless important to note that in this category the immediate verbal-context reference is normally identical from all points of view (i.e. those of the narrator, the audience, and the characters in the plot). Thus, for example, at 2. 188 the suitor Eurymachos makes an angry reply to Halitherses, an old friend of Odysseus, warning him not to incite a younger man. The words 'younger man' refer to Telemachos from all points of view: at xe 'Vl!W'tl!QOV liv6Qa 1taµEvo; ...

The point is that complex ambiguities of reference are usually reserved for the Odyssey's central polytropic character, Odysseus in his many guises. 4. Examples in the fourth category have no pattern deixis, but their immediate verbal contexts offer at least an apparent reference to Odysseus. This category includes examples of non-verse-initial accusative avbQa, examples of civeQain any position, and attestations of civi)Qin grammatical cases other than the accusative (and hence lacking one or more of the pattern-markers and having no pattern deixis), but only where context reference is to Odysseus. As suggested above (Section 3.2.3, category 4), these examples This passage is also unusual in its use of ~ by the poet (it is normally part of the diction of speaking characters), and in that here a 'chorus' offers a 'general verdict', where normally one voice speaks for all. See Griffin 1986b: 45. 58

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns do not present a methodological difficulty. Even so, there are in the Odyssey only four occurrences of livbQa which belong in this category, two of which can also be interpreted otherwise. As in the case of µfjvu;, while theoretically permissible, these 'exceptions' to the pattern are, in practice, very few. In 3. 231 Athene (as Mentor) rebukes Telemachos for his lack of faith. The gods, she says, are powerful: QEia 9e~ y' t9eMOV xat nyJ,eev livbQa oa1.oom.

Reference here may implicitly be to Odysseus (we understand it from the context), but the basic denotation of livbQa suits the context much better. The point of the argument is that a god can save any man. If we accept this then 3. 231 is a borderline case, lying between categories 3 and 4. In 5. 129 Kalypso remonstrates with the gods: wi; t,•

avvOv µoi. liyao9e, 9Eol, flQ'tovlivbQa :n:aoetvaL.

Reference to Odysseus may be implicit in this verse, but the point of Kalypso's words is that the gods resent any mortal living with a goddess. This too may thus be a borderline case. A few lines earlier Hermes arrives on Kalypso's island bearing a grim message (5. 105): cj>TJol. 'tot. avbQa :n:Q{)dVOL 6\ttlQOJ'tO'tOV lilloJv.

Here the reference by context is to Odysseus (although we should note that he is not actually named). In 19. 209 Penelope is weeping: XMIIOOOTJQatci>µe9a xavte~ VOO'tOV, oo~fA.9nm· Ilooe!Mwv 6e ...

The word voO"tov, emphasized by the enjambment and a strong 66

Cf. Scott 1936: 6: 'Athene never came to the help of Odysseus or of his family until she secured the assent of 2.eus in Book 1, only when 2.eus had said "Let us all plan the return of Odysseus", did she dare to act, but when he had said that, Athene dominates the rest of the poem.• 67 For the significance of whole-verse vocative expressions cf. Ch. 4.

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

71

68marks the conclusion of Zeus' sense/metrical pause at position 1½, speech, the end of the Odyssey's 'programmatic' comments, 69 and the beginning of the main narrative of the Odyssey. The conclusion of Zeus' speech, and particularly the words IJµe~ ot6e :rteQL4>Qat;µe8a xavtes, functions on two very different levels, that of the text and that of the story. 70 Faced with a 'silent' written copy of the Odyssey, one may easily indulge in the story's narrative illusion, forget that the text is delivered by a narrator, and that Homeric poetry is designed to be delivered by a poet to an audience (as indeed is described in the Odyssey itself). 7' Oral presentation adds an auditory aspect to the spatio-temporal illusion: the poet/narrator pretends to be Zeus speaking to the gods. At the same time oral presentation makes it impossible for both the poet/narrator and his audience to ignore totally their own spatiotemporal circumstances, i.e. the fact that a physical poet is acting as a narrator and is actually addressing his audience in 'real time'. At the level of the story 'Zeus' is encouraging the gods to think about the return of Odysseus. 72 Simultaneously, at the level of text, both within the fictional situation of the narration and in the reality of the performance, a poet/narrator, in his own identity (i.e. not pretending to be Zeus), addresses his own audience (rather than the 'assembly of the gods'). At this level the words IJµe~ may be paraphrased as 'I, the poet/narrator, and you, my audience', otbe can be paraphrased as 'who are sitting here, in the hall, gathered for the purpose of listening to an epic poem', and :rt£Qtcj>Qat;µe8a xavtes I v00tov may be paraphrased as 'let us all tum our minds to the theme of the poem which I am about to recite, and which you are about to hear, i.e. to the return [of Odysseus]'. Unless we are to claim that the circumstances of Homeric performances (whether assumed or real) have absolutely no effect on Homeric poetry (and this is an absurdity), we must take a performanceoriented interpretation into account. According to this interpretation the reference of all.' liye8' IJµe~ ot6e :rt£Qtcj>Qat;µe8a xcivtes I 61

Both the following lines display enjambment (Poseidon will have to abandon 1 78 &vxo>,qy ••• he won't be able to resist all 1 79 ci8avimov ... ), so that three nouns in enjambment close this decisive speech by Zeus, thereby emphasizing both the nouns and 2.eus' determination. 69 Cf. Dodds 1951: 32. 10 For the terms cf. de Jong 1987: 31-2. 7 ' As noted before, narrator and poet are not identical, but both are NF,. 7' 2.eus is N F ,.

72

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

vomov is deictic, because it refers to the situation of the performance and exists only within that situation's spatiaVtemporaVpersonal parameters. At this point vomoc; takes on 'thematic' significance. The Homeric narrator is elsewhere known to make appeals to his own audience.73 But the strongest support for the above reading comes from examining the usage of the verb XEQLCPQat;µ£8a. The middle form n£QLCPQcit;oµaL (in the sense of reputo) is quite rare, and yet in two out of three other extant hexameter attestations we find a second-person form used by the narrator to introduce the subject of his following verses.74 The two examples appear in Nikandros of Kolophon's Theriaca, a late literary composition (2nd century BC). Nikandros was either imitating a usage which he understood or else interpreting his Homeric source, but both his examples are unambiguous: 75 fo8).'I" b' 'A1,u43i.ou !x~ ~t£o

~av.

(I.

541)

fQ'Yabt 'tlXaivtao 1t£Quj,Qat1XO cj>ai.ayyoc;. ( I. 7 IS)

Indeed, in the second example we even have something of a verseinitial accusative 'theme-word'. Following Od. 1. 76--7 all attestations of verse-initial accusative vomov in the Odyssey may be interpreted as having pattern deixis with a reference to the poem's thematic 'return of Odysseus'.76 After Zeus has spoken, Athene, realizing that he is well disposed towards Odysseus, sheds some of her verbal caution. She becomes much more direct, and declares that Hermes should convey the gods' decision to Kalypso ( 1. 87 = 5. 3 I): VOO'tOV

'Ob\iooftoc;'taA.amcj>Qovoc;, 00.

These last three examples refer to Telemachos' quest for his father. Odysseus, though not marked by name, is identified in the immediate verbal context. In 5. 153 Kalypso, having heard Hermes' message, walks down to the shore, where she finds Odysseus: v6otov obuQOµevq,,t:n:etouxht fjvbave vitµcj>T).

The return is, of course, his own. Context reference is obvious, but it is achieved not through anaphora, nor by a simple description. There is no explicit word in the immediate verbal context that specifies the reference of vOO't~. It is by a more complex process (the precise definition of which need not concern us here) of inference that we arrive at the right reference. But while the context gives us 'Odysseus' return' as a concrete component of the situation, pattern deixis offers us the thematic, epic perspective. Line 6. 14 is identical to 8. 9. Athene is planning a return for

Odysseus: v6otov '06uooflt µEyaAfftOQLµT)'tL()(J)(J(l.

At 10. 540 Kirke tells Odysseus that in the underworld he should ask Teiresias to tell him the way home: 78 n These examples, and perhaps also those beginning v6otov 'Obuoofl()(;/flt ... + epithet (1. 87 = 5. 31; 6. 14 = 8. 9), may be regarded as formulaic, or as formulaic modifications. The content of the total of 15 verses with verse-initial accusative v6otov which refer to Odysseus is hardly similar enough to allow us to group them in any way within a Parryan 'essential idea', unless that idea was simply 'return'. The expressions containing v6atov all essentially occupy the first half of the verse, reaching up to the BI caesura (position 5) in 12 cases and up to 82 (position 5½)in the three remaining cases. As a Parryan 'system', this group of examples would display not only very low 'economy' but also poor 'extent'. We might ultimately claim that it hardly matters if these are, in fact, formulaic. A pattern could have been generated alongside a formulaic system, or perhaps even as a byproduct of formulaic usage. 71 The four examples in category 2 below are virtually identical to this one.

.Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

74

vocnc,v e·.~ bi '""'c,v~ lx8v{,ena At

11. 100

...

Teiresias says: vocnc,v6'tf!OL f&Wtibta. q,mblf.l••Obuocml ...

When Eumaios speaks in I 4. 366 of the return of his master, initial positioning is used:

vocnc,v ~ &vax't~,

6 -r·fix8noffllol. 8eotol..

When Penelope addresses Telemachos in 17. 1o6 she asks him about the return of his father:

vocnc,v ooO mn~ oo+a~.

d xoo &xouoo!;.

Finally, in 23. 253 Odysseus tells his wife about his future trial, of which Teiresias told him when he descended into the underworld, v6atc,v haleowi.v &I;~

lib.qwi airt(p.

This, of course, explicitly refers to the return of both Odysseus and his companions. But note the emphasized position of tib·fµoi. am(p (occupying the final adonean colon of the verse), and the fact that the story is being told by Odysseus himself. The wider context is here also of great importance. It is at this point in the narrative that Odysseus' journey home has ended. Whatever other meaning may be joined to this instance of v6ot~. the focus must surely be on the return of Odysseus.19 In each of the examples above the context reference provides us with a specific return as a concrete component of the situation, while pattern deixis provides the wider epic perspective. This referential device is, as in the previous patterns, exclusive to the narrator and to his audience. The aspect of exclusivity is manipulated with particular dexterity in the examples of the next category. 2. In the second category we find examples with pattern deixis, but with reference through the immediate verbal context to a character other than Odysseus. In the whole of the Odyssey (and the Iliad for that matter) there are only four examples which belong in this group: Od. 4. 381, 390, 424, 470. The verses are identical (except for a change of person in the verb):80 79 Cf. 1. 5, mentioned above,where vocn~ is clearly linked more closely to the companions and is not in initial position. '° First person: 381, 470; second person: 390, 424. These changes would qualify as examples of fonnulaic 'flexibility'.

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

75

VOOT.ov 8', ~ bd TU1Vtov f)zuooµru /em lx8\J6tvta.

As we have seen in the previous section, the phrase is actually used once with contextual reference to Odysseus, at 10. 540 (4. 389-90 = 10. 539-40). But here we find four examples that appear within less than a hundred verses and are part of the narrative of Menelaos, telling of his own return. Fourfold repetition must surely indicate that the use of vootov in these cases (with their contextual reference to a person other than Odysseus) is neither arbitrary nor careless. We must therefore explain the function of the deictic pattern reference to Odysseus in these examples. In the fourth book of the Odyssey Telemachos, accompanied by Peisistratos, arrives at the palace of Menelaos, seeking news of his father's return. Overwhelmed by the splendour of the palace, the two young men resort to cautious and diplomatic discourse.81 The nostalgic Menelaos speaks of bis deep feeling for Odysseus (without yet knowing who the guests are. 104ff.). Eventually Menelaos, Helen, Telemachos, and Peisistratos all shed soothing tears (183 ff.). But this only puts aside the real object of the visit, Telemachos' quest for information. Brief words are spoken about Odysseus by Helen and Menelaos, and all retire for the night. On the second day Telemachos is far less patient. He retains a highly formal tone (4. 316) but asks for concrete information about bis father (31631).82 Oddly enough, he does not utter the word which bas been repeatedly mentioned as the object of his quest, vootoi;, the return of bis father. (As we have seen, Athene does the same in her first speech of book 1.) Menelaos now tells a long story about the terrible olfactory tribulations he himself has had to suffer and about his own vootoi;, saying very little indeed about Odysseus (except for 555-60; cf. Telemachos' reply at 594-608).83 An important element in this scene is the tension between the explicit and the implicit, between what Menelaos says about his own return and what Telemachos would like to hear about the return of Odysseus. This element is emphasized by the discrepancy between the verbalcontext reference and pattern deixis. At the level of the story the •• On their addressesto Menelaossee Ch. 4. " See again Ch. 4 for an interpretation of the address. 13 The similarities between the stories of Menelaos and Odysseus are well known. S. R. West in Heubeck, West, and Hainsworth 11)88:53-4 speaks of the returns of all the major heroes as 'an ordered whole consisting of comparable, related destinies' (cf. ibid. 192). See Powell 1970 for the interweaving of story-patterns.

Accusative Theme-Word Patterns

speaker, Menelaos, is talking about his own return. However, every time the narrator as Menelaos utters the word vOO'tov,we, the audience, also hear a deictic reference to Odysseus' return. 114Thus again we find the fictional characters manipulated, having words put in their mouth which far exceed their understanding and which provide the poet and his audience with, as it were, their own private language.85 3. In the third category, as before, are all the examples which lack one or more of the pattern-markers, and where the immediate verbal context provides a reference to a character other than Odysseus. This category includes examples of all grammatical cases, and reflects the fact that vom:o~ in the Odyssey has wider, more universal implications. We shall briefly look at a few (non-initial, non-deictic) accusative examples.86 The example of 1. 5 has already been discussed above. Another instance is 1. 326: f\a't' axouOVtE;·6 b' 'Axm6>vv6o'tE ...

In 3. 132-3 it is the Argives' return that is spoken of: xal 'totl! bTjZl!u; >..uyQOv h'Lcj,QEmµiJbno v6o'tAno6' airtl>;.

These words conclude Penelope's speech. We might again note the .•. ro>.nostructure.95 enjambment, but more interesting is the roA.£0£ The rhetorical parallelism requires that each of the two clauses of 23. 68 open with a verb. This is probably the main reason for the 'irregular' positioning of vOO'tovin this verse. 4 In this chapter we have seen a device by which keywords in the narrative are provided with what is today regarded as an essential poetic property: polysemy. This device relies on three elements, each with different narrative properties. First there is the and VOO't~.Then there basic denotation of the words µ~, li'VTIQ, is the mechanism of reference specification by the immediate verbal context. Finally, we have seen pattern deixis providing in each case an unchanging, context-free 'thematic' reference, and an overall epic perspective: the Iliadic Wrath, the Odyssean Man, and that Man's Return. In the case of 1-'ftvt.vpolysemy provided us with detailed relations between wrath as a universal theme, the various particular wraths in the Iliad, and the wrath of Achilleus. In the case of o.vbQw is determined largely by context). Different appellatives can have the same individual as their referent (e.g. 'swineherd' and 'Eumaios'), but in principle they must not be assumed to have the same denomination or sense.3 Thus, during the early stages of their conflict Achilles and Agamemnon frequently avoid the use of PNVs, employing nominal and adjectival appellatives in their addresses to each other (e.g. II. 1. 149, 173, 225, but see also 1. 131).4 In books 19 and 23 of the Odyssey Odysseus (or the narrator through Odysseus) regularly addresses Penelope as yi,vaL.5 Also in the Odyssey, we find that only the members of Odysseus' immediate family and the narrator address Eumaios by his proper name, while other characters, usually hostile to Eumaios, either avoid a vocative altogether or address him by his more common appellation, ou~a (e.g. Melantheus at Od. 17. 219). Last but not least, PNVs are the most important element of apostrophes by the poet to his characters. Out of 34 such apostrophes, all but 3 ( 1 to Achilleus as IlriA!~ utt 6 are made using the PNV. and possibly 2 to Apollo as fj(E Cl>ol:pE) Neither patronymics nor the interjection roare used in these apostrophes; other vocative elements (pronouns, epithets) are frequently left out. Uncovering the precise denominative value of the PNV in contradistinction to other vocative categories is an important matter, but one which requires a different and larger study than the present. I shall restrict my investigation to the PNVs themselves. 3.1 In Homer there is a tendency to place PNVs in verse-initial 3

In virtually all languages different types of vocatives are used to mark social and personal relations between the speaker and the addressee, as in •yes, Prime Minister', 'Yes, Margaret', and 'Yes, dear' (see further Lyons 1977 and Levinson 1983, cited in n. 1 above). Various partially overlapping tenns are used to describe the effect of different words with identical referents (this is not a phenomenon special to the vocative). The term 'denomination' was introduced into Homeric studies by I. J. F. de Jong (1987: 103-5), who provides ample evidence of its importance. Hard Parryists may object to the concept of denomination, but see W. M. Sale's critique of the Parryan 'essential idea' (1989: 345). 4 On passages where vocatives of any sort are entirely avoided see Bassett 19:w; Scott 1903. s This is perhaps more of a poetic device due to the ambivalent denotation of yi,vaL (woman/wife). 6 For brief further comments on Achilleus see Sect. 5.5 below.~ is used 32 times (in all grammatical cases) as an epithet, and only 9 times (in all cases) as a proper name. See Chantraine 1968-80, s.v.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

83

position. 7 An alternative localization is at the end of the verse, while internal positioning is far less common than might be expected. The data are arranged in Appendix III. A total of 101 different PNV forms (counting elided and nonelided PNVs separately) are used in all 551 times to address 89 different characters in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Of the total attestations, 281 occurrences of 69 PNV forms (amounting to 50.10 per cent), belonging to 63 characters, are verse-initial. This includes forms naturally suitable for initial positioning, but also many whose metrical shape is adapted by lengthening, shortening, elision, etc.8 'Initial positioning' here includes the use of verse-initial rofollowed by the PNV, which is probably a metrical device but one which, as we shall see, is not invariably used.9 By comparison, the expected frequency of verse-initial positioning, disregarding all grammatical, semantic, and stylistic restrictions, and all differences in metrical shape, would be 14.52 per cent. 10 There are 103 attestations of 13 PNV forms belonging to 13 characters which are verse-terminal. This constitutes 18.69 per cent of the total attestations. The undifferentiated average is again 14.52 per cent. 11 Finally, 167 attestations of 39 PNV forms belonging to 35 characters are verseinternal and constitute 30.31 per cent of the total attestations, 7

Noted in Tsopanakis 1983: 251 (but without statistics). Lepre 1979: 35-61 (eh. 4, see esp. p. 37) suggests that PNVs and other appellatives are usually l(.lC3liu-.din the initial colon of the verse. However, she treats patronymics as proper names, omits discussion of formulaic attestations of vocatives (cf. her n. 50, pp. 35-6), and provides only minimal statistics. Lepre uses colometric terminology ('initial colon'), but pays insufficient attention to the complexities of colometric analysis, e.g. the need to consider metrical vs. sense-pauses, or the effects of verse-initial appositives, which sometimes precede PNVs, on colon structure and caesura (see recently Barnes 1986; Higbie 1990). Verse-initial localization of the PNV seems to tally with tendencies observed in Vedic (see DelbrOck 1888: 34). 1 A detailed presentation of the metrical alterations in the vocative appears in Tsopanakis 1983: 250--3. Cf. Shipp 1972: 40, who suggests that a large number of 'metrical irregularities' can be found in words of address placed initially. 9 See Lepre 1979: 70--1. As Lepre notes, mmay nevertheless have some weaker semantic function which restricts its use. However, even ifwe exclude all attestations of verse-initial m+ PNV (24 occurrences), we are still left with a high verse-initial localization figure: 46.64 per cent. '° Figvres were .obtained by collating the data in O'Neill 1942: 138-50. O'Neill obviously did not count 'non-syllabic' particles (elided 6', 't', I'', y', etc.). Such elided monosyllables, if considered as 'words', would further increase the difference. They account for about 7.85 per cent of the total words in Homer and are always verseinternal (this figure was obtained by running a count program on a processed TLG text). '' Since of course every verse has one initial and one terminal word.

84

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

compared with a figure of 70.95 per cent for the undifferentiated average. 3.2 The above statistics require an explanation. In our attempts to interpret PNV positioning we can largely disregard the role of syntactic structure, since the vocative is an optional syntactic unit and is in itself largely free from formal restrictions ofposition/wordorder. 12 The semantics and stylistics of PNV usage are another matter altogether, and we shall have to consider them carefully at the right moment. Metrical shape has an obvious effect on position, and is discussed in detail below. But the localization of PNVs as a set cannot be interpreted as a metrical phenomenon, because the PNV is not a metrical category: PNVs come in virtually all shapes and sizes. It can hardly be metrically convenient to place restrictions on the localization of many different PNVs, which have many different metrical shapes and frequently require adaptation by lengthening, shortening, etc. Vocative expressions incorporating PNVs can contain other vocative elements, they can vary in length, and can sometimes even occupy a whole verse. However the PNV's position is not generally affected by the total clause-length. 13 Non-initial positioning occasionally coincides with enjambment (e.g. II. 23. 587-8), but cases of a verse-initial PNV combined with strong enjambment can also be found (e.g. II. 23. 492-3; cf. also 24. 741-2),' 4 and again, verse-internal PNVs are by no means exclusive to verses free from enjambment. Position in the speech does not seem to effect the PNV's position in the verse. Most PNVs appear in the first line of a speech; where a PNV appears later than that, we find that its line marks a change in subject or a change of addressee. 15 There are a few cases where the PNV appears in the first line of a speech and is then repeated later within the same speech. This is notable, for example, in the

" See SchW)'ffl'-Debrunner 1950: 59-6. ' 3 This may easily be seen by glancing at the entries Alav, Alma, -Sxroe, 'Axi),(A)dl,'06ua(o)dl, etc. in the concordance. ' 4 In such cases the PNV does not occupy first place in the sentence, and may carry special emphasis. See Edwards 1991: 42-4 (and E.'s n. 54, p. 43); 66 on 17. 37 (where E. comments on 24 742). '' See Lepre 1979: 39-42, and in notes below.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

85

use of Achilleus' PNV and seems to be a means of emphasizing the speaker's urgency.' 6 Finally, many formulae can be found among the PNV examples. Formulaic usage can help to explain the position of the PNVs of individual characters (e.g. Agamemnon, Athene, Apollo), but it cannot explain the similar position of different entries (expressing different 'essential ideas', or rather having totally different referents) of greatly varying metrical shapes, which share only their grammatical category and case, and are used in different formulae. 3.2.1 Having ruled out overall syntactic, metrical, and formulaic approaches to the pattern, 17 we must consider whether PNV position is in any way correlated to semantic values. The key to the semantics of PNV positioning in Homer lies, I propose, where we and the original audience of Homer might most expect to find it, in PNV usage for Achilleus and Odysseus. 3.2.2 Consider the suitability for initial positioning. Probably all but seven or eight PNV forms in Homer are in principle suitable for verse-initial positioning. 18 As has already been pointed out, over half the total attestations are verse-initial. These are divided among 6g PNV forms and 63 characters (each with at least one verseinitial attestation). / shall label verse-initial PNV positioning as the 'default mode' and posit that in this position PNVs primarily draw the addressee's attention and that they are semantically 'neutral'. '9 There are, by comparison, 42 PNV forms suitable for terminal positioning. 20 However, of these only 13 forms, belonging to 13 characters in just under a fifth of the total attestations, are actually 16

e.g. Phoinix to Achilleus, //. 9. 434, 485, 494, 496, 513; Patroldos to Achilleus,

R. 23. 6(), 8o, 83; Odysseus to Achilleus, Od II. 478, 482, 486; Agamemnon to Achilleus, 0d. 24. 36, 72, 76, 94. See also Andromache to Hektor, //. 22. 477, 486. A repeated PNV is also found in some addresses to Zeus, e.g. //. 8. 236, 242. 17

Emphasis must be placed on the word 'overall'. Syntax, metre, formulae, and other elements do of course affect the structure of verses, as we shall see further below. 18 No precise number can be given because there are different 'levels of suitability', which depend on the type of modification required (none, elision, lengthening, shortening, use of initial ,use of an alternative form, etc.). 19 In principle this raises the question of how to treat enjambcd (i.e. non-sentenceinitial) verse-initial PNVs, which may have a spcciali7.cd function. Limitations of space preclude discussion of this matter, which requires separate, detailed investigation. JO Here a figure can be quoted, since, apart from the liberty of the anceps, no alterations in PNV shape are found.

86

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

used verse-tenninally (at least once). Terminal positioning thus defines a relatively small group.

Various types of characters are among the 13 addressed terminally. However, those who are by far the most frequently and hence the most distinctly addressed in this manner are the two epic protagonists, Odysseus (30 times) and Acbilleus (22 times)-in other words, the characters who are the focus of the Homeric poems. Together they account for almost half of all verse-terminal attestations (49.52 per cent). For the remaining characters there is a large drop in the frequency of verse-terminal PNV: Agamemnon (12), Apollo (10), Menelaos (7), and, dropping still further, Penelope (4), Hera (4), Zeus (3), Euryltleia (3), Athene (2), Melaotheus (1), Eteoneus ( 1), K.alchas ( 1). 21 Although Acbilleus and Odysseus both have alternative single-consonant forms, unsuitable for terminal positioning, all attestations of their double-consonant PNV forms, apart from one example of •ot,uood), are verse-terminal. Note that the single-consonant PNV forms •Axwil and ·06uori are metrically identical, like the double-consonant forms ·Axllldl and •Oln,ood). 22 The fact that the PNVs of Acbilleus and Odysseus (and some of the other characters in this group) are so often and so distinctly locali7.Cdat the end of the verse is probably related to the usage of their nominative fonns, which is also very frequent in terminal position (terminal nominative positioning is discussed at length in the next chapter). Furthermore, the PNVs of Odysseus and Achilleus are simply not suitable for initial positioning, except by the use of d'>;this is discussed further below in Section 4.8. However, it is vital to remember that the present study is concerned mainly with reception, not with historical causes. No matter how simple the causes of certain phenomena, they can still have functions and effects (in fact, simplicity of cause can only help the argument), and it is these functions and effects that we are attempting to uncover.23 3.2.3 At this point we may formulate the core of our interpretative hypothesis: the unchallenged predominance of Achilleus and 21

The proportion of verse-terminal attestations is not related to total PNV frequency for each form: Zetl, for example, is the most frequent form at 51 instances. but is terminal on only 3 occasions. E~ appearsa total of 3 times, and all are terminal. " Agamemnon, Menelaos, Penelope, and all other characters in this group, except Athene and Apollo, do not have alternative PNV fonns. • 3 On this point see further below, Ch. 5, Sect. 1.1.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

87

Odysseus as the epic's central characters and the unparalleled (absolute) frequency of terminal positioning for their double-consonant PNV forms, supported by the protagonists' identical PNV shapes (a matter I shall discuss further), combine to create a PNV pattern which generates a reference either directly to the protagonists or to a 'protagonistic state'. I shall label this the 'epicprotagonist pattern'.2-4Put simply: terminal PNV position frequently coincides, and is thus to be associated, with an address to the epic protagonists. It is essential to note that the verse-tenninal pattern is all the more distinct because it is directly opposed, in both concrete and conceptual terms, to the more common verse-initial default PNV mode. 3.2.4 There are 11 characters other than Odysseus and Achilleus who are addressed by verse-terminal PNVs. In what follows I shall argue that such verse-terminal addresses, by virtue of the pattern, are uttered as if to one of the epic protagonists. The verse-terminal PNV evokes a pattern reference to the protagonists. This referential value clashes with the PNV's 'normal' referential value (i.e. with the reference to the person named by the PNV), generating thematic analogies, ambivalence, irony, and other effects in much the same way as multiple referential values generated such effects in category 2 of Sections 3.2.3, 3.3.3, and 3.4.4 in the previous chapter. 25 I shall further argue that the default PNV mode (i.e. verse-initial positioning) is used either to underline a broad thematic contrast between groups of Homeric characters and the protagonists Achilleus and/or Odysseus, or indeed to create marked antitheses between particular characters and Achilleus and/or Odysseus. 26 3.2.S Last, but not least, we must consider the function of verse-internal PNV positioning. For most characters this occurs only once or twice. In such cases I shall attempt to show that positioning is the result of various aspects of metre, diction, or rhetorical structure. Nevertheless, in a few cases, e.g. those of Achilleus and Odysseus, Diomedes, and, most significantly, the Such pattern references may be a complex deictic device. I am not aware of any linguistic discussion of similar phenomena. The term 'deixis' is therefore not used in this chapter. 25 i.e. in examples where pattern deixis was to the thematic Wrath, Man, or Return, but where a different reference was provided in the immediate verbal context. 26 Broadly assuming that pattern reference in the Iliad is to Achilleus and in the Odyssey to Odysseus. 34

88

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

three main apostrophized characters, Menelaos, Patroklos, and Eumaios, we find an unusually high (absolute) frequency of verseinterval PNV s. This is a reflection of the fact that such characters are subject to special and more systematic circumstances, which, I shall argue, cannot be separated from their essential narrative roles. 3.3 Our final general remark concerns the matter of point of view. All PNVs are uttered by the Homeric narrator. 27 But in all but the apostrophic PNVs the narrator utters the vocative as he 'imitates' the voice of one of his characters. These characters, whatever their 'natural' manner of speech, are de facto speakers of epic hexameter language, of which PNV diction is a part. We must therefore ask whose 'voice' we hear in the diction of PNVs, and at what narrative level PNV patterns function. Hexameter verse is the Homeric narrator's proprietary mode of expression. If this narrator were to describe an identical story in prose, hendecasyllables, or iambics, he would automatically cease to be a Homeric narrator. Homeric characters, on the other hand, are not defined by metre. Odysseus, Ajax, Agamemnon, and other heroes and heroines appear in tragedy, where they speak in tragic metre. This metre does not, as such, effect their characterization (although epic vocabulary, dialectal forms, etc. are used as characterization devices in tragedy). PNV diction must thus be attributed primarily to the narrator, not to any of his speaking characters. In the previous chapter we saw that the theme-word pattern existed exclusively at the level of the narrator and his audience. 28 Theme-word patterns rely for their effect on familiarity with the poems themselves and their prooemia. It would be absurd to assume that Homer's characters possess such familiarity. By contrast, there is no a priori reason to exclude PNV patterns from the diction of the epic characters 'themselves'. The fictional epic characters are, within their fictional conventions, familiar with heroic epic (e.g. with the song of Demodokos). 'Conscious' use of PNV patterns by epic characters implies an explicit 'consciousness' of epic diction, but this is not impossible. In some cases such usage-if we accept it--w~ )Jyy~ 37

Nevertheless, a significant interpretation might be considered. In line 85 Achilleus urges Kalchas to speak out, swearing to protect the prophet so long as he, Achilleus, is alive (see line 87; line 86 is the first line of the oath, arguably the most important element of the speech). Kalchas is addressed in a mode which is otherwise most typical of addresses to Achilleus, because at this moment he is, by virtue of the oath, the temporary possessor of 'Achillean' powers. At Od. 4. 31 Eteoneus, a servant, is addressed by a terminal PNV. The proper name is unsuitable for initial positioning on its own, but could have been adapted by the use [email protected], or otherwise used internally. If terminal positioning is semantically significant it provides us with a reference to the Odyssey's protagonist. The line is part of Menelaos' mocking rebuke to Eteoneus, who has spoken vitma, like a child ('You've not been such a fool, Eteoneus, 1 in the past .. .'). Addressing this man who 'speaks foolishly, like a child' in the manner befitting an address to the Odyssey's epic protagonist, the man best known for his extraordinary way with words (cf. e.g. Od 13. 297-8), may be a method of enhancing the mockery of the word (both at the level of NF, (narrator's comment) and NF, (characteri7.ation of Menelaos); for the reality behind Menelaos' gestures of hospitality see Griffin 1986a: 4).

31 13. 228 is not speech-initial, but appears as the speaker's ideas take a new turn. 39 Cf. Wackemagel 1892.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

93

on one of his lesser characters, a small measure of special attention. 40 As we shall see, internal positioning is common for the PNVs of apostropbiz.ed characters, indeed almost the rule in apostrophe itself. Note that the PNV forms of both Agelaos and Melanippos are suitable for terminal position (like the PNVs of Agamemnon and Menelaos, for example), but are not so used.41 Last in this group is the goatherd Melanthios, and his PNVs MeMiv81£and Md.av8£il.42 Neither form is suitable for initial positioning, but the latter is used terminally (Od. 21. 176): li.YQt!Lbi), m:lQ xfjov

bi IA£YOQOLOL, Mdav8dl.

Here the arrogant suitor Antinoos, indignant at Leodes' admission of failure to draw the great bow (cf. 21. 167-73), orders the goatherd to kindle a great fire, so that the suitors may anoint and thus soften the weapon. Again, terminal usage of this PNV, occurring only once as it does, may be an 'exception' to the pattern. However, if we choose to accept the significance of verse-terminal PNV position, we find that the pattern adds sharpness to Antinoos' indignation, and irony to the situation as a whole. Antinoos addresses the slave Melanthios in that mode which befits an address to the master of the bow himself-the man who can, and indeed soon will, accomplish the feat of drawing the bow, with dire consequences for Antinoos and Melanthios. 43 4.4 There are 6 individuals who are addressed three times each by a PNV, all minor or secondary characters in the narrative. In this group 10 attestations are initial (55.55 per cent, slightly above average). The PNVs of three characters, Glaukos, Eurynome, and the horse Xanthos, are entirely localized at verse-initial position. Priamos has an elided and an unelided PNV form, both unsuitable for either initial (except with )or terminal positioning. In all attestations of both forms (//. 24. 171, 563, 669) a verb precedes the PNV-a feature we have already seen. More interesting are the PNVs of Eurypylos and Eurykleia. Eurypylos plays a small but significant role in the events leading to 411 Sec

Janko 1992: 291 on 582-5. Edwards 1991: 264 on 19. 238-40, pointing to three verse-terminal accusative attestations of Melanippos' name, claims it is a 'regular line-filler'. 41 On these variant forms see von Kamptz 1982: 2o8. 43 The irony is, in my opinion, sharper if we assume no significance at NF, level, i.e. if Antinoos is oblivious to the ambivalence of his diction. 4

'

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

94

Patroldos' death in the Iliad. It is the conversation with this wounded hero that 'triggers' Patroldos' fateful decision in the closing verses of book I I, and it is to Eurypylos that Patroldos first reveals his intentions in book 15. Eurypylos is addressed three times with the (elided) PNV Eueum,A.', suitable for initial position. 44 This form is used twice internally, both times preceded by verbs (the first by all' as well) and followed by the highly unusual (vocative)~: cW.'6"f2 J&OI. 't6l>eelm, &otQt~~ ~ 't'

lie' m.'t{U)£~ n ~.

E~m,k'

f')oo>c;(I I. 819)

EuQi,m,k' f')oo>c;;(I 1. 838)

The first verse is a variation of a very common 'doublet' command, cW.'6ye J&OI. 't6l>eelm xal. ci"tQW~ xa'tci>4ov, 45

used when making a request for truthful and precise information (much needed by the surprised and grieved Patroldos). The second PNV address, foil owing closely on the first and possibly influenced by it, 46 appears in a type of AB--AB parallelism which contains two very short sentences-'How can this be, what shall we do, Eurypylos?'-an unusual feature which overrides the default pattern and is no doubt designed to reflect Patroklos' urgent reaction. In the third address to Eurypylos (//. 15. 399) the PNV occupies the default position. Euryldeia's PNV is suitable for both initial and terminal positioning, but is actually used terminally in all three attestations. Usage of this PNV may very well have been influenced by the general tendency towards terminal localization for this less frequent, long metrical shape47 and by usage of the metrically identical but much more frequent nominative form. 41 However, the discrepancy between Eurykleia's minor role in the narrative and the verse44

The unelided form is unsuitable for use in the hexameter, unless the final syllable is lcngthcnc:d by position, u at e.g. 0d. 8. 382 1 'AAXLvoe XQdoY. 4 ' e.g. 10. 384. For doublets sec O'Nolan 1978: 27. 46 Cf. Hainsworth 1976 and the notion of 'phruc clusters'. 47 O'Neill 1942: 14&-7,tables 21, 23; also p. 151, table 29. Since no general data on the percentage of lengthenings/shortcnings within the verse exist, no reliable ovcrall localiz.ation figure can be quoted (McDonough 1966 and Visser 1987: 33743 do not, unfortunately, solve this problem). 41 The nominative occurs 13 times, of which 12 arc terminal cf. the PNVs of Athene and Hera. Cf. also the names of Arctc and Helen, where the nominative is less frequent and thus less likely to have affected vocative usage. Masculine nouns do not seem similarly affected (cf. Kalchu, Hektor, Nestor, etc.). For nominative usage sec Ch. S below.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

95

terminal mode of address, which alludes to the Odyssey's protagonist, may have interpretative value. Eurykleia is instrumental in bringing about Odysseus' recognition. Each of the PNV addresses to her immediately precedes an important scene further establishing Odysseus' identity: that of the scar, that of the bow, and that of the bedstead. At 19. 357 Penelope orders Eurykleia to wash Odysseus' feet. At 21. 381, as Odysseus is about to shoot his arrow through the axes, Eumaios tells the nurse to lock the doors of the hall. At 23. 177 Penelope orders her to move Odysseus' bedstead, the one he has fashioned himself, to the porch. We have noted above that PNV diction is to be regarded primarily as an aspect of the narrator's diction. Terminal positioning of Eurykleia's PNV at the three crucial junctures of recognition allows the narrator, 'using his own voice' in that code which he shares with the reader/audience, to evoke the object of these recognitions, the name of Odysseus. This act is nevertheless embedded in a larger system of echoes. Consider, for example, Penelope's words at 19. 357-9: li>J...' 6.yev0v avcn:aoo, ffl!Ql.cl>eo>v E-iiQi,xuia, vl.'ljlV ooto 6.vaxt~ l>t,L'flA'X(l. xal. m>u 'ObuooriJ; f\btJ 't01006• lcn:i1W&x;'tot.6ooe'te xe'l'Qa;..•

Regardless of PNV patterns, the name-epithet :n:EQl.cj>Qrov EuQUXA ew establishes a link between the nurse and her mistress: the epithet :n:eQl.cj>Qrov is most commonly used in (nominative) name49 Indeed, Eurykleia's epithet formulae with the name IlTJVeA6:n:ew. impending recognition is a 'toned-down', 'less dangerous' prelude to the more important recognition by Penelope. PNV patterning functions at a different level: according to our interpretation, Eurykleia's terminal PNV is used in the 'epic protagonist' pattern (discrepancy between Eurykleia's status and the meaning of the verse-terminal pattern makes it all the more noticeable). This implies that as Penelope speaks of the stranger, the poet allows the name of Odysseus to resound in the background. These resonances are followed in the next verse by more. obvious referential ironies (all of which must be attributed to the narrator, and which rely on The poet was clearly determined to use this epithet with the vocative Eue.ot.ye, f.lWIAl,6v£, 't£LX£OUU.ft'ta (//. 5. JI = 455)

The PNV etn is not suitable for initial positioning except following ro,and is used verse-internally, twice following a verb (once a command, once a question) and twice following tme. 53 "" A similar device is used at 23. 177. Cf. the preceding verses 175-6, and the following verse. '' What sets the PNV pattern apart from other literary devices is that it functions at the level of text, rather than story, i.e. it is the 'least fictional' of literary devices. Using the PNV pattern, the poet says something like 'Penelope is talking about the stranger, but in fact you (i.e. the audience/readers) should keep in mind the protagonist of this poem.' " On Ares (-v/v-) cf. Wyatt 1969:88. 53 Sec If. 18. 385, 42,i; 24. 88, 104. Both 'rime, 8m and •m 8m, 'rime create an awkward and rare phonetic sequence. Sec Zcnodotos on If. 2. 314, where he read uul;ovtQI;.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

97

The PNVs of Mentor and Hephaistos can in principle be used either initially or terminally, but are actually verse-initial in all 5 attestations of each PNV. Poseidon plays an important role in the Odyssey, but his actions are mostly 'behind the scenes'. The epic form of his PNV, unsuitable for either initial or terminal positioning, is used verse-internally. This PNV was, we assume, too important to have been omitted just because it did not suit the default PNV pattern. 4.6 There are 4 characters who are addressed six times by a PNV. In the case of Idomeneus, 5 instances are verse-initial. The single verse-internal occurrence (II. 23. 493) appears in an address to Idomeneus and Aias collectively. The PNV TIQL is suitable for both initial and terminal positioning. It is usedtwice at the beginning and never at the end of the verse. There are 4 verse-internal attestations, all following the same command (3aox' t8t . . . (II. 8. 399; 11. 186; 15. 158;24. 144),a formula which is always verse-initial and is 'followed by specific instructions to pass on a message'.54 The average frequency of PNV addresses per character is about 6 (strictly 6.19) and, very broadly speaking, the greater the number of PNV addresses, the more important the character/role. This can be seen in the cases of the two remaining characters addressed 6 times by a PNV, Diomedes and Penelope. Diomedes is a great hero. Furthermore, in the Iliad he commands sympathy, is perhaps a little vulnerable,55 and has yet to obtain full social status. As Willcock puts it, he 'has the qualities of the ideal junior commander'. 56 More significantly, although Diomedes is given his own aristeia, he plays no integral role in the central plotstructures of the Iliad: 'the quarrel' at story/text level and 'the abduction of Helen and the fall of Troy' at fabula level. Diomedes is a warrior stripped of 'protagonistic' significance. Terminal PNV positioning is possible (cf. the shapes of the names Agamemnon and Menelaos), but, according to our interpretation, would have offers a versegenerated an inappropriate reference. *ib~LOµT)6£c; initial option, but the combination is never used in any position (compare ti>M£'Vilat!,which does occur, although never in verse54

Kirk 1990: 330. Cf. //. 2. 8, to Oneiros; 24. 336, to Hennes. Like Menelaos, Diomedes is wounded by Pandaros' arrow. Diomedes is addressed thrice as ~ xexCIQl,Ollhf; 8\11&41, a formula otherwise only used of Patroltlos and Peisistratos. 56Willcoclt 1978-84: i. 229 on 4. 401-21. 55

98

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

initial position). No attestation of &Ll>µT)&;s is preceded by a verb of command (but see Il. 5. 124), none appears with initial&• or wnE,and none appears in a collective address. The PNV is preceded in 3 examples by a patronymic(//. 5. 243, 826, 10. 234), and in the remaining 2 by I otrtoS'tOI. (//. 10. 341, 477). Usage for Diomedes' PNV is thus somewhat more varied than the tendencies previously encountered. Here we have our first hint that internal position, which reflects less common constructions of address (given the PNV's metrical properties), is somehow associated with characters that have what Block-speaking of the main apostrophized characters, Menelaos, Patroklos, and Eumaios----calls 'characteristic traits of vulnerability, loyalty, and a vague but poetically essential weakness'. 57 Penelope's PNV is suitable for both initial and terminal positioning, but is used at the end of the verse in 4 out of 6 attestations. As in the case ofEurykleia, the shape's general focalintion tendency and nominative localintion patterns may have affected the vocative. 58 However, Penelope is Odysseus' wife, the heroine of the Odyssey, equal in cunning and artifice to the epic protagonist himself. Her 4 terminal PNV s all appear in the elaborate wholeverse address formula: 59 xoilQ111XOQUJW, ~ Il~.

60

The diction creates a very desirable reference and hence analogy. After all, Penelope is not just Odysseus' formal spouse, she is also his counterpart in cunning, self-control, and perseverance. PNV usage thus mirrors an important Odyssean theme: the affinity between Odysseus and his wife. Penelope's 2 internal PNVs appear following an initial verb (4. 804, a rhetorical question; 23. 5, a command). 4. 7 The suitors Eurymachos and Antinoos are addressed 8 and 9 times (respectively) by PNVs, all of which are verse-initial. These forms are unsuitable for terminal position. Indeed, all the suitors but one have PNVs (and also noininative proper names, for which 57 Block 19lb: 16. 51 O'Neill 1942: 147-8, tables 22, 2,1; see also p. 151, table 29. Nominative n~ occurs 52 times, of which 51 are terminal. " Odysseus' terminal PNV similarly appears 15 times in a whole-verse address in the Odyssey. 6o I 6. 435, I 8. 245, 285, 21. 321.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

99

see Chapter 5) which are unsuitable for use in the verse-terminal epic-protagonist pattern. The exception is Leodes, who is portrayed a little more favourably (cf. Od. 21. 144-7). His PNV is used only once, in initial position, but is nevertheless suitable for terminal position. This (unrealized) positioning potential may suggest that character features are in some distant way reflected even at the level of metrical shape. We may compare Agamemnon, Diomedes, and Menelaos, as well as Achilleus and Odysseus. This notion, which is too complex to be developed here (and which cannot simply be taken at face value), may be a further reflection of the general agreement between metrical shape and sense-structure which I argued for in Chapter 2. The Phaiacian king Alkinoos is addressed 8 times by both an elided and a non-elided PNV form. The name is unsuitable for terminal positioning, and all 8 attestations are verse-initial; Nestor is addressed 9 times by a PNV, always verse-initial; Antilochos is addressed I o times by a PNV, again in both elided and non-elided forms, which are always verse-initial; Aineias is likewise addressed 10 times, always verse-initially, and the two Aiantes, who share a single PNV form, are singly addressed a total of 1 1 times by a PNV, which is always verse-initial. High frequency combined with strict conformity to the default mode in these PNVs helps emphasize polarities (along several axes) between the epic protagonists and a wide range of characters: between 'ordinary heroes' and Achilleus, for example, or between the suitors and Odysseus. The distinctions seem clearest when we consider pairs such as Achilleus and Hektor, Odysseus and Telemachos (Achilleus and Agamemnon are a more complex case, discussed further below). Hektor is a great hero, who plays a major role in the Iliad. Although his PNV is suitable for either initial or terminal position, it is never used terminally, and in 32 out of a total of 35 cases (91 per cent) it is used verse-initially, contrary to purely metrical options and to statistical probability. 61 The proposed interpretation offers an overall explanation: Hektor is consistently addressed by the default PNV mode. Terminal PNV position marks the epic protagonist, and is avoided in the case of Hektor in order to underline 6

' Again, because of the possibility of lengthening no precise locafu:ation figure can be given for this shape. But neither - u nor - - is localiz.edmore than 27.8 per cent initially (O'Neill 1942: 140-1, tables 5, 6; cf. also p. 151, table 29).

100

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

his adversarial role. Of Hektor's 3 non-initial PNVs 1 (//. 6. 77) is found in a collective address, and 1 (//. 22. 486) follows a verseinitial verb. The third (II. 16. 844) follows f\bTJ vOv, which we might indeed expect at the beginning of the verse/sentence. Telemachos' PNV (elided 26 times, unelided 4 times) is unsuitable for terminal positioning; it is found in initial position, rather than internally, in 27 out of 30 attestations (90 per cent). Telemachos is not Odysseus' adversary, but he can be viewed as a 'non-Odysseus', or rather as a 'not-yet-Odysseus'-a character whose narrative role is defined precisely by his present lack of Odyssean powers. 62 Of Telemachos' 3 non-initial PNVs, 2 (16. 23 = 17. 41) follow a verseinitial verb, and 1 (4. 312) appears in the context I "M'tt ... OE ••• fryaye (for which see above, Sections 4.2.1 and 4.5, on Polyphemos, Hennes, etc.). 4.8 Having discussed these contrastive characters, we must take another brief look at the PNV usage of the epic protagonists themselves. The names of Achilleus and Odysseus have identical metrical shapes (including initial vowel and terminal consonant), as well as identical variations (single-/double-consonant fonns). 63 Both have a localiz.ed verse-terminal double-consonant fonn, and single-consonant fonns which are unsuitable for initial position except following ID. No other character in Homer shares the protagonists' two-form similarity. Of the double-consonant PNV forms for Odysseus and Achilleus only 1 (Od. 23. 209) is not verseterminal:

µ11 µoi.,

'06\,ooeil,

oxi,tE,J, btel -ia1C£Q6Ua µiwcna ...

This single exception may be the result of metrical or structural considerations, and is probably affected by the negative content of the sentence and the need to use a negative particle. However, perhaps even here we may consider some pattern significance. Line 209 occurs at the single most important moment of recognition in the Odyssey, as Penelope finally accepts Odysseus' proof of identity. Penelope reacts with intense agitation (205-8), and at least the first part of her speech (209-17) is highly personal. We may argue that here Odysseus is not the hero of this or that adventure-tale, i.e. the •• Cf. Od. 16. 88--9 and discussion in Ch. 3, Sect. 3.3.3, category 2. ,, Cf. the vocative patronymics of the two heroes, which have different metrical

shapes.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

101

Odyssean protagonist, but rather the private man for whom Penelope has been waiting and suffering all those years. Viewed from this perspective, use of terminal PNV positioning 64 would be out of place. PNV usage for Achilleus and Odysseus marks the verse-terminal pattern. However, being the epic's central characters, both heroes are addressed by many different speakers in a wide range of situations. Such variety by definition requires greater variety of collocation and positioning, which accounts for the use of alternative forms. As already argued in category 4 of Sections 3.2.3, 3.3.3, and 3.4.4 of Chapter 3, this does not present a methodological problem. Nevertheless, familiar structures which override the default pattern are predominant. For 'AXIMU in a total of 13 attestations there are 5 cases of initial d'>,3 of initial l&ll.' (for which see on 96av above, Section 4.3), 1 following 'tfme (for which see on Polyphemos above), and the remaining 4 follow a verb. Similarly, for 'ObuaeO in a total of 16 attestations there are 4 cases of initial d'>,3 of initial l&ll.', 1 following 'tl.cj>8',and 8 following an initial 65 verb. One example follows the less familiar ooxttL. 4.9 Agamemnon's PNV is attested 13 times, 12 of which are verse-terminal; 10 of these appear in whole-verse vocative expressions, described by W. Whallon as 'the full reverential title': 66 'A'tQetbTj xu&ote, 6v~ &~

'AyTJ'YI! 81!6;1:eoa; lieool.amq,.

5.2.3 Of Menelaos' PNVs, 23 (76.7 per cent) are verse-internal. The frequent ooMmMI£ (//. 4. 169, 189, 6. 55, 10. 43; 17. 238, 716; Od. 4. 26, 561) would have allowed initial positioning, but the combination never appears at the beginning of a verse. 82 Among the internal examples there are no collective addresses, no preceding li>JJ:J. or tune, and only 4 examples preceded by a verb(//. 7. 109, 17. 652; Od. 4. 138, 15. 167).What we do find preceding the internal at8ev, MmMI£ (//. 4. 127), PNV are such expressions as I oolle (//. 4. 146), I vOv µtv bi), MewMI£(//. 17. 34), 12 I totol. tot, MeveMI£ 1

A. Parry 1972: 17: Menelaos 'has more :r.ealthan true valour'. II. 6. 55 and 17. 238 begin mmovmMMAae, forming a much longer expression. See Lepre 1979: 46. '

12

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

107

different expressions in all. These examples are varied, but capable of explanation: they may, for example, be related to the usage of enclitics. The point, however, is that the large number of verseinternal examples render Menelaos' PNV diction unusual compared with most PNVs. 83 At the same time this usage is comparable to the frequent internal positioning of the PNVs of a few select characters, primarily Diomedes', the single-consonant PNVs of the protagonists, and, as we shall see, the PNV s of the other two main apostrophized characters, Eumaios and Patroldos. 84 Menelaos is a brave, sympathetic, but slightly vulnerable hero. 85 He is often addressed in both poems. However, in a remarkable number of addresses to him the PNV occurs neither at the beginning of the verse, in the default position, nor at the end, in the 'protagonist' position. In other words, addresses to Menelaos are in general neither neutral nor heroic. The most notable examples of Menelaos' verse-internal PNVs are those found in apostrophe. None of the 7 direct PNV addresses by the narrator to Menelaos 86 is verse-initial, or part of a collective address, or preceded by a verse-initial verb or by wne or c\llci. It is now accepted that Homeric apostrophes are not, for the most part, metrical-phenomena, and that they are a mark of the narrator's sympathy (see Appendix IV for a summary of arguments). I now propose that verse-internal PNV positioning, being neither neutral nor protagonistic, is the mode of PNV usage by which 'special attention' to the addressee is revealed. Indeed, the various circumstances overriding the default tendency (rhetorical constructions, enclitics, verbs in dependent moods, etc.) in individual verses are-to a greater or lesser extent-linguistic reflections of some kind of 'special attitude'. In the case of apostrophe this 'special attitude' is equal to the narrator's sympathetic tone. Consider a few examples. When the narrator says(//. 4. 127): 13

Menelaos' internal PNVs would strike us as unusual even if we insisted that the cause of this was the PNV's metrical shape. 14 Athene also has a high proportion of internal PNVs, but this occurs, as we have seen in Sect. 4.10 above, under special circumstances, in a collective address to three divinities. 85 See e.g. II. 11. 463 and Willcock 1978-84: i. 304: 'Menelaos is lightweight as a fighter, but a sympathetic and conscientious man. It is characteristic that he should be the one to hear Odysseus' shout, and that he tries to do something about it.' For general surveys of Menelaos see Schmidt 1931 ('Menelaos' in RE) and von Giesau 1969 ('Menelaos' in KP). 16 //. 4. 127, 146, 7. 104, 13. 6o3, 17. 679, 702, 23. 6oo.

108

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

0'66£at8ev, MM.Ml£, 8roi. µctxa.QESuMOovto, he speaks with sympathy for Menelaos, who has been wounded, not by his opponent in the duel, Alexandros, but by Pandaros' treacherous arrow. 87 Another example appears a few lines later, within the magnificent simile of the stained ivory. The narrator makes a second appeal (4. 146): 'tor.ol.'tOI.,ME'Yilae, µuiv&rJvalpau µT)Q()l

Events surrounding these verses, Menelaos' character, the apostrophe, and, finally, the tone of the address as embodied in PNV diction, work in harmony to express sympathy. In book 7 the context is again a duel. Hektor proposes single combat, but the Achaians do not respond. Finally Menelaos stands up. The narrator says (104-5): b8a

xe'tOI.,ME'Yilae, cj,aV'lljW,'tow 't£A2'll"n')

"Extoeoc; h mlA.Of1tl(JI.V, bw ffl>A\Icj)to'tl!QO(; ¥¥•

Once again PNV diction is used in conjunction with several elements to produce an emotional statement. II. 13. 6o3 is the only verse where MeveA.a£ appears in positions 1½-3½. It is also the only example where the vocative appears in a run-over verse (601-3): Il£loa~ 6' tai,; Mevdaou xu6a).4Loto f)te. 'tOY6' dye µofea xaxti 8avirtow 'tiloo&;, ool., ME'Yilae,l,aµ~ h alvft6'Jlmfl'n.

Line 6o3's aof. corresponds to the sentence-initial (but not verseinitial) -cov in the previous verse. aol and -cov here underline important thematic contrasts. They are the linguistic element that in this particular case has affected PNV diction. In each of these examples, and in the remaining apostrophic occurrences of Menelaos' PNVs, we may explain the PNV's positioning by considering the complex combination of forces (e.g. the pressure of enclitics), but this in no way prevents us from hearing the tone, which is neither neutral nor 'protagonistic', but rather sympathetic. This interpretation may be applied not only to Menelaos' PNV, 17

It is in harmony with the general character of Menelaos that he should suffer misfortunes through no fault of his own.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

109

but also, as I have already suggested, to that of Diomedes. It also applies to Achilleus and Odysseus. The protagonists are frequently addressed by their own protagonistic pattern, the terminal PNV. But being protagonists, they are also obviously objects of the poet's sympathy, and this is reflected by the high frequency of internal usage in their single-consonant PNV forms. What we must now see is whether PNV usage for Patroldos and Eumaios also agrees with this interpretation. 5.3 Patroklos' PNV is highly adaptable. It appears in 5 different metrical shapes-more than any other PNV-of which 4 are suitable for initial positioning and 3 for terminal positioning. 18 And yet, in a total of 25 examples Patroldos is never addressed by a verseterminal PNV and only 4 times verse-initially, leaving 21 verseinternal examples (84 per cent). None of the verse-internal examples appears in a collective address. Initial lill'/a>JJ,,, -dJtte, preceding verbs, and other familiar structures do appear in at least 9 (perhaps more) of the internal PNV s,19 but less familiar structures such as I ~ btl Kef\et6vn,Ila'tQOX££S,I h8' 6Qa 'tOL,Ilet'tQOXA.£, and others 90 occur in 8 examples. This is not extraordinary in itself, but again it indicates that, compared with the PNVs of most other characters in Homer, PNV addresses to Patroldos are neither neutral nor 'protagonistic', but rather regularly appear in more varied conditions. Apollo addresses Patroldos once using a verse-internal PNV, but this follows the familiar verse-initial verb: xateo,6LY£V£s Ila'tQC>XA.££~ (//. 16. 707). Hektor addresses Patroldos once with a verse-internal 11

nc'.rtoox).' - - , pos. 1-2, once (16. 830); nMQOXAI! - u u, pos. 1-2 ( + wholeverse vocative expression), once (19. 287); nMQOXAI! - -u, pos. 4-5½,4 times (16. II, 8o, 787, 18. 333); (l>) nMQOXAI! (-)- -u, pos. (3) 4-5½,twice (23. 19 = 179); nMQOXAI! (Mq,llr) --u(u-uu), pos. 4-5½ (6-8), once (11. 611); nMQOXAI! ---, pos. 3-5, --uu, once (24. 592); nmeowi; ---, pos. 1-3, twice (16. 693,859); nm~ pos. 5-7, twice (16. 7, 754); (&.oyms) nm~, (-uu-)--uu, pos. (3-5) 6-8, 4 times (I. 337, 11. 823, 16. 49, 707); (&.oyms) n~ (lmwxilev81!)(-uu-) --uu(-uux), pos. (3-5) 6-8 (1r12), once (16. 126); n~ (~) --uu(-uux), pos. 6-8 (1r12), twice (16. 584, 839); nmQl>xAus (limeo) --uu(x), pos. 8-10 (11-12), 4 times (16. 20, 744, 812, 843). The above list of forms may be regarded as a formular system in the Parryan sense. We have a group of expressions, all with the 'essential idea' of 'evoking Patroldos by name'. This 'system' would have (following Parry) considerable 'length' or 'extent' and, in fact, excellent 'thrift' or 'economy'. 19 The structures seem more complex than usual, and are more difficult to classify. See, however, 1 l,ll'/liila ... II. 1. 337, 11. 611, 16. 8o; VB II. 16. 7, 126, 707, 839, 23. 19, 179. 90 II. II. 823, 16. II, 49, 584, 754, 787, 18. 333, 24. 592.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

110

PNV, in a remarkable verse which we shall presently discuss. However, the remaining 19 verse-internal addresses are, significantly, all made by two speakers: Achilleus and the narrator. Achilleus addresses his companion by name 11 times, always with the PNV in internal position. At least in some instances wordpositioning seems to be governed by less common and far more complex factors, even (for example) when a familiar "tUt"tE structure occurs. Consider //. 16. 7- 11: -dJn£ &MXQUOOL, n~.

I

A

~ XOVQl1

11- B ----l I- C ---I

v,µd.fl, f\ 8' 6f.LCI µtriQL8£000' cmlio8m irvo>yEL, davoO iurtot&evTJ, xal."' iooul'ffll'Yxatequxu, 6aXQOOEooa lit f&LV ~XE'te' dvtl.~w: 111 ~. IlatQOXAE, "!QEV xa"ci MXQUOV E~u;. I- C -U- B -; ---A

----i''

We may compare such addresses made by Achilleus, in which both default PNV positioning and the verse-terminal pattern reference are avoided, with Hektor's use of Patroklos' PNV. On 2 occasions Hektor uses the default verse-initial pattern (16. 830, 859). In the 1 remaining example Hektor uses a verse-internal PNV (16. 839):

I''! I'°' "Qiv lmn, IlatQC»W£t;~8£

...

However, at this point the victorious Hektor, standing over Patroklos, is mockingly imitating the words of Achilleus (cf. 837-8), and altering his diction accordingly. 92 Like Achilleus, the narrator addresses Patroklos by verse-internal PNVs. 93 All the apostrophic examples are verse-internal except .for one verse-initial occurrence, II. 16. 692-3: h8a uva~ov. uva6' ~ata"ov ~at;, IlmQXMLt;, ME6" CJ£ Eh!ol.8civa"6v& xiw!ooav;

In this verse the apostrophe begins, rather unusually, in the line 9'

Lines 7 and 11 correspond, as do 8 and 10, enclosing line 9. Within lines 7 and 11 the chiasmus ABC-CBA is found. For ring composition cf. Thalmann •98,4;van Groningen 1958; Hainsworth 1976. 92 I see nothing to prevent this from being Hektor's (i.e. NF,) diction, but the narrator, because of his strong link with hexameter language, is ever present as NF,[NFJ, manipulating bis characters. 93 For links between the poet's diction and Acbilleus' see rcoently Martin 1989: 193 and his n. 77.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Vocative

111

preceding the PNV, 94 so that in terms of the sentence it is in fact 'internal'. We should note also that these verses are adapted from a different type of 'unmasked' utterance by the narrator, which uses a verse-initial nominative, not a vocative (e.g. //. 5. 703-4): 95 h8a 'riva ~ov, 'riva 6' ootAUJA.Tftl,\; 'Obuooeil\;, and n6ba\; roxu\; These formulae are commonly found at the end of the verse, and they most often end with a proper-name or common-noun nominative. Terminal positioning can, of course, be technically advantageous. If we fill the first half of the verse with a predicate, it is convenient to have a wide range of grammatical subjects, each of which can fill the second half of the line and complete the verse.3 Consider, however, the following: Nominative names are a frequently attested category in Homer; and frequent use of the verse-terminal formulae results in a poem that rings, time and time again, with the same prominent 'bell'. 4 Parry investigated the versemaking reasons for such structuring, but he did not ask 'What possible effects do these repetitions have?' There was, of course, little need for him to do so because, whatever the answer, it does not interfere with the workings of the system as a technical device. Parry's studies do, however, emphasize that verse-terminal PNNs are a prominent feature of epic. It is precisely such features that we require as the keys to a pattern interpretation. Our observations in the previous chapter on the function of verse-terminal PNVs further support the idea that there is something 'typically epic' about the end of the verse, particularly when occupied by a proper • MHV 15ft'. 3 This is a paraphrase of Parry, MHV 10. 4 The end of a uni_tof utterance (e.g. a clause, sentence, verse) is one of its most prominent places (consider:e.g. the Latin clausulae).

116

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

name. From this point we may proceed to ask neglected questions. 2.1 The basic markers of a pattern must be both simple and prominent. Numerical data may help underline the argument, but by definition literary patterns affect our literary, not our 'statistical', sensibilities.Taking our cue from Parry's choice of subject, consider what are arguably two of the best-known Homeric verses:5

'tov6' ~ ffQC>Oi+t) m>Ailf.&~'Obuacm'.1; (or Achilleus, etc.)6 and: ~ 6' ~yhe&a

cjK.MJ ~,m,).oc;

'H!;...

These lines are highly 'typical' epic methods of introducing speech and of describing time respectively, and the PNN in terminal position is one of their most important elements. The fame of these verses is not proof of poetic function, but it further supports the notion of a distinct link-a link that would be noticed by an audience-between terminal position and PNNs. 2.2.1 This link is also suggested by the usage of the PNNs of the most important and most frequently mentioned Homeric characters. The data for the 20 most frequent PNNs (18 characters) are arranged in Appendix V, Table I. The double-consonant PNN forms of Achilleus and Odysseus are highly localized at the end of the verse. The single-consonant alternatives are, of course, unsuitable for terminal positioning, but as has been pointed out several times before, in a system with marked (e.g. terminal) and unmarked elements (i.e. those in other positions) the unmarked set usually has a wider semantic range. This means that while we are suggesting a specific link between terminal position and PNN usage for important characters, these characters can also be mentioned in other positions in the verse. Achilleus and Odysseus are important characters, and flexibility in their PNN usage is essential (below we shall see some of the circumstances that override terminal positioning). In much the same ' The first lines of the Iliad and the Odyssey are other contenders for the title 'best-known Homeric verse'. Some of their significance has already been discussed. and ol'VOfflln6vtov are famous as images rather than Such formulae as ma ff'fEQOEVta as parts of a whole verse, although these formulae too may generate, or be part of, specific patterns. 6 The phrase 'tOV6' ~ XQC>Ot4>11 + NAME-l!Pmmr (cf. MHV 15) 'fu individuata ben presto anche dagli antichi come uno degli ingrcdienti piu specifici della ripetitivita omerica' (Fantuzzi 1988: 58).

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

I 17

way Athene's shorter PNN form 'A8ifv,J, is terminally localized, and again the alternative non-terminal form 'A&r)Valriprovides the flexibility needed for this important character. 7 Finally, Apollo's name is also very highly localized in verse-terminal position. These four characters may be considered as an epic or heroic 'core' (two mortal heroes, two divinities). In the previous chapter some thematic links between Achilleus and Apollo, Odysseus and Athene were noted, and how these are reflected in vocative usage. Similar links are reflected by nominative usage. The four PNNs 'Axtlleil;, 'Oooaaw;, 'AmJllwv, and 'A8ifv,Jare highly localized at the end of the verse, and have virtually identical metrical shapes. However, as we can see from Appendix V, Table I, the PNNs of several other frequently mentioned and important Homeric characters are also very highly localized at the end of the verse: Agamemnon, Penelope, Diomedes, and (albeit to a slightly lesser degree) Menelaos. I suggest therefore that if terminal PNN positioning is used as a marker, its 'meaning' is more general than that of (for example) the PNV pattern. 2.2.2 The localization of the shorter PNN forms of Achilleus, Odysseus, and Athene, as well as those of Apollo, Agamemnon, Diomedes, and Penelope, is about 93-8 per cent terminal. The figure for Menelaos is somewhat lower, but still high at about 75 per cent. These figures broadly resemble the localization tendency of the abstract metrical shapes v - - , v v - - , and - v v - - (92- I oo per cent),8 and it may at first appear that we are dealing with a purely metrical matter. However, abstract localization data cannot explain the similarity of metrical shape between related characters, unless it is accepted that there is some general link between metrical shape and semantic value, as indeed was argued from a different perspective in Chapter 2. 9 Furthermore, as we shall see (in Section 3.2), the overall localization tendency of all PNNs in six sampled books of the Iliad and Odyssey is much higher than the expected average undifferentiated figure. Considering the overall tendency, it makes little difference whether PNNs are, to begin with, limited 7

The overall localization of Odysseus' PNNs (both forms) is 72.7 per cent, of Achilleus' (both forms) 77.9 per cent, of Athene's (both forms) 76.0 per cent. This leaves them very frequently mentioned and very highly localiwi at the end of the verse. 8 'ONeill 1942: 142, table 10; 145, table 16; 148, table 24. 9 Cf. also the discussion of 'Axa.wUll.avaCM. in Sect. 4.2 below.

118

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

to particular metrical shapes that are 'normally' localized at the end of the verse (as the above examples of central characters seem to indicate), or whether high overall frequency of terminal PNNs is the result of uncommon locali:zation (as evidence for a wider variety of characters and forms, assessed in Section 3.3 below, seems to suggest). The effect remains identical. 2.2.3 Terminal PNN locali:zat•onis probably related to formulaic usage, although it is difficult to say exactly to what degree. On the one hand, nominative patterns are clearly most evident in wellknown formulae. Also, as already argued at length, metre, localization, and sense-units are all aspects of a single whole. There is no reason to assume that formulae are an isolated element of this whole. On the other band, in such verses from the Iliad as: 'tft 6exa'tft b' &'YOQiivbe ,caUoocno M.OV'AxillEuc; ( 1. 54) uxvov

qwv,yeveft µkvUJUO't~

lonv 'AxillEuc; ( 11. 786)

c'.&ll'6 µevoot m i:QUt6A.Q>.

The narrator (the poet who knows many tales), assuming the voice of Kalypso, names three female characters. Each is the protagonist in a tale of divine-mortal liaison which is parallel to that of the central narrative of book 5. Hence each is significant as a 'heroine'. 26 The whole point of a mythological reference is the mentioning of 'famous precedents', whose PNNs cannot therefore be chosen at will. Two of these are suitable for terminal positioning, and are so used. Artemis' PNN is adapted as well as possible to the terminal pattern: along with its epithet, it appears in the terminal colon. We shall see elsewhere such adaptations of otherwise intractable PNN forms. The PNN Ucjn,Q~ is attested once in book 5 (line 295), in a list of the four winds (Euros, Notos, and Zephyros in 295, with Boreas listed in 296): ai,v 6' EuQ6s,:e N6i:o; ,:' woov ZecpuQ6s,:e 6uootis xai. BOQetJS a18Qt)'Yl!Vhti6vt,J1; as adjectival; von der Muehll takes it as a proper name. Cf. LfgrE, s.v.; West 1978: 368. Occurrences in Odyssey 5: 49, 75, 94. 145, 148.

128

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

more rounded characteri2:ation (and is allowed to speak at length). Consider briefly Hermes' two PNN attestations in Odyssey 5. appears as the narrator concludes a simile (51The terminal ·EQµfl~ 3) and returns to his narrative (54):

Usage thus accords him the momentary status which is rightly his in the limited narrative sphere of Odyssey 5. Line 196 contains the second attestation of Hermes' PNN in this book (194-7): ~ ~ omf.oc; yMICjnJoov 8eO£ ~ xa1 lm)o,

h8a xaettn' lm 8Qovou!v8ev lmv ooocn' bwry~;

In the Odyssey Poseidon is Odysseus' greatest enemy, but his attempts to harm Odysseus are made mainly from 'behind the scenes'. It is only lesser enemies that Odysseus confronts face to face. There are strong traditional and technical factors that determine Poseidon's PNN usage, but these do have an effect. A PNN unsuitable for use within the conventional patterns of usage puts Poseidon at one degree of removal from the familiar core of Odyssean narrative. This removal, along with the specific emphasis on his frightful deeds, achieved by the use of (frequently terminal) epithets, contribute to his characterization as a dark and somewhat 'external' force. 4.3 lno and Eos may be considered next. They are two of the more important female characters who surround Odysseus in this book (along with Athene, Amphitrite, Artemis, Demeter, K.alypso, and Penelope).42 lno is twice mentioned with her PNN, and both attestations are verse-terminal. The first of these is also followed by the PNN Ae-uxo8£f1 (333-4):

'tov6~ t6ev Kci6µov 9uyat11Q,xaUl.aq,v~ 'Ivw, Aroxo9bJ, fl '1:QLV µevh)V PeQVU8', tv' ci8avci'tOW1. ~ cj>EQOt. ~6£ f'eotolm. 43

See Hainsworth in Heubcck, West, and Hainsworth 1988: 282 on 5. 333-4 for a brief discussion. On the name see von Kamptz 1982. 44 The elaborate literary structures embedded in the 'veil' motif are discussed in detail in Nagler 1974: 44ff. 45 Cf. above, Sect. 4.1, and Ch. 2, Sect. 5.2. For Eos and Orion cf. also h. Ven. 218-38; Mimnennus fr. 4 West. 46 Austin 1975: 67.

132

Patterns of the Proper-NameNominative

In Chapter 2 (Section 5.2) we saw how the balance between proper names in the first verse, transfer of the verb to the foilowing verse, and the relation between metre and sense underlined the opposition goddess-mortal and the transition from tranquillity to action and book 5's central motif. These are the special context-specific conditions that override the PNN pattern. 4.4 The remaining names to be considered are those of the most important characters in the narrative of book 5: Athene (PNN 5 times), Zeus (7 times), and finally Kalypso (12 times) and Odysseus (14 times). The general tendencies of the PNNs of Athene and Zeus have already been described above, but a few detailed comments may here be added. 47 Consider the first attestation in book 5, where Athene's non-terminal PNN form is used (5-6): totm 6' 'A9Trvaf.T1 liye xit6ea 1r.6ll' 'Ooo~ l'VTtaaµmJ.1,LeM y6{Jol tv h &iltwm vu~

...

Line 5 resembles another formula used with various important PNNs (including Athene's) in terminal position (Od. 3. 330):48 totm 6t xal 1'£'tUL7r.E 8eciyM1uxlo1r.i,s 'A9itvri •..

But this convenient formula is not used at the beginningof book 5. Here the poet clearly arranged. the verse so as to end with the all-important xtib£a n.oU' 'Ob"ooflsafter which follows the enjambed NµVT)0L£oaoa 8uwbea xal AOi,oaoa.

Kalypso dresses Odysseus for the big moment. In order to appreci'' that that fact

There are many aspects of 23-4 that merit separate study, including the fact Zeus' authoritative statement is put in the shape of a rhetorical question, and Zeus is here pretending that all has already been decided by Athene, while in everything bangs on his word. 52 5. 78, 85, I 16, l8o, 202, 242, 246, 258, 276, 9. 29. 3 ' 5. 263, 321, 372, 7. 245, 254, 26o, 12. 448. "' O'Neill 1942: 142, table 10. As usual, this figure can only provide us with a rough estimate, because of O'Ncill's functional principles.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

135

ate the function of the pattern we must consider Kalypso's two other terminal PNN s, which appear some verses later: £1:µa'tayciQ•Q• lpciQ\lve,'ta ol n6Qe&a KaA.v,jlv. This he does only to a limited extent. The only verse-terminal PNN + epithet comwhich occurs just 5 bination for Telemachos is T'}liµax~ ~. times in the Odyssey.'YlThe poet uses a variety of periphrastic expressions, all verse-terminal, to refer to Telemachos in the nominative: •~~ ~ "~ appears 8 times, ~ "~ •~ 8£tow 6 times, and leQTI ~ T'lA£PC1XOIO also 6 times. However, these phrases cannot be assumed to function in the same way as PNNs. 60 Whatever we make of them, it is obvious (unless we assume the audience/reader to be totally indifferent to the way in which a unfruitful assumption) that Telecharacter is mentioned-an machos' PNN usage is indeed 'different'. By far the most common verse in which Telemachos' PNN appears is the speech-introductory formula: T.ov/nrv6' mi T,y.q.aax~ ,wm,~

avriov tJ(ioo,

which occurs 43 times. This is twice varied (1. 367, 15. 502) as: T.ot.m 6t T1Jlil'OX~~ liQx£T.o11u8wv,

and once (22. 461) as: T.ot.m 6t T1Jliiwx~

,wm,~

liQx' ciyooEileLv.

These account for a total of 46 attestations of Telemachos' PNN. Now, speech-introductions are not only the most typical and familiar kind of epic verse, they are also the most typical examples of the PNN pattern. Furthermore, of all the individual terminal PNNs that appear in speech-introductory formulae, that of Odysseus is the most common and best known (particularly where the SI

Cf. Telemachos in Iliad-.2. 260, 4. 354.

"

I.

113, 3. 343, 14. 173; 17. 328, 391.

Each contains three words (this may affect localization considerably), they are formulaic, and they cannot be shortened or stretched (while presumably a single lncaliud PNN is not formulaic and can stand on its own, regardless of whether it is or is not used in larger, formulaic constructions), and they possess denotations and hence possibly a denomination etc. (the words 'beloved son' may be thematically •ignificant, and underline particular aspects of a situation). To understand how they function we would also have to consider how periphrasic expressions referring to other characters function, both specifically and as a set (I. J. F. de Jong is now preparing a paper on denomination in Horner, discussing, among other words, ~). 6o

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

137

Odyssey is concerned). Thus, not only do Telemachos' most

common PNNs contrast with the pattern in general, but they stand in sharpest contrast to the most typical of PNNs, in the most typical of PNN pattern verses, and that PNN belongs to the character who is Telemachos' most obvious thematic antithesis. The pattern meaning of Telemachos' speech-introductory formulae underlines his 'non-Odysseus' status and contrasts it with that of Odysseus himself. This 'meaning' is also embedded in the actual words of Telemachos' speech-introductory formulae. Apart from the PNN, the central lexical element in these is the word 1WMJµ£V01;, which 'denotes one who observes the courtesies of life, especially in speech'. More significantly, the participial adjective 1WMJµ£V01; 'is seldom used of the great heroes ... but is a regular description of youthful or subordinate characters'. 61 Thus the most common speech-introductory verse used with Telemachos' PNN helps identify him as 'youthful' and 'subordinate', i.e. it underlines the most important aspects of his narrative role. These verses are an element of attributive discourse,62 a particular form of introduction corresponding to particular circumstances, which functions as a characterizing device. Other elements typical of Telemachos' speech-introductions assist in characterization. The phrase avtl.ov 11uban,used 43 times in Telemachos' speech-introductory verses, is used with the PNNs of many other characters. However, in all cases except that of Telemachos it is attested no more than once or twice per character;63 this makes the formula even more typical of Telemachos. When the speech of characters other than Telemachos is introduced by avtl.ov f!Uba, the epithet 1WMJµev01;, which designates a general property, is never present except in a single example, introducing a speech of Laertes (24. 375). However, in the Odyssey almost all of these other characters possess personal links with Telemachos: Eurymachos, one of the leaders of the suitors and Telemachos' 61

Hainsworth in Hcubeck, West, and Hainsworth 1988: 372-3 on 8. 388, where it is applied unusually (and somewhat ironically according to Hainsworth) to Odysseus. 62 For the term applied to Homer sec de Jong 1987: 195-208. 63 Iliatf. 17 times, 9 characters; Odyssey: 13 times, 8 characters. Characters thus mentioned arc: (Iliad) Aincias, (Aincias), Antenor, Antilochos, Eurypylos, Mcriones, Sarpedon; (Odyssey) Eurymachos, (Zeus), Laertcs, Lcokritos, Nausikaa, Mcrioncs, Sarpedon. The names in brackets arc the subject of the formula but do not appear in the verse itself.

138

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

chief detractor (1. 399, 2. 177); Leokritos (2. 242), who mocks Telemachos (2. 256) and is later killed by him (22. 294); Peisistratos, Telemachos' companion (4. 155, 15. 48); Peiraios, the trusted friend whom Telemachos asks to look after the 'stranger' ( 15. 544); Noe.non, who supplies the ship for Telemachos' journey (4. 648). The only possible exceptions are z.eus, who is the subject of an civtl.ovf1{',6aphrase once (5. 28) but whose PNN nevertheless does not appear in the verse itself, and Nausikaa, whose PNN is used once (6. 186) with this formula. 64 Telemachos' PNN diction is thus part of a complex system of axes which help position him on the map of Odyssean characters. 5.2 The PNN of Patroklos is suitable for terminal positioning. Although such placement would have created a heavy spondaic line, it may at first seem slightly surprising that this PNN is never once so positioned in all 44 examples (43 in the //iad). 65 Also, it seems that the poet has made no great effort to adapt the nominative form to his most common pattern. 66 Patroldos' PNN, since it is not used terminally, fails to appear in a wide range of common epic formulae, notably the speechFurthermore, there are altogether introductory 'tov6' cbtaµe..p6p£Yoc;. very few speech-introductory formulae containing this PNN, and those few all contain unique, rather than commonly recurring, phrases (e.g. 9. 658, 11. 647, 16. 268: see further below). Now, in a poem with about 45 per cent of the verses in oratio recta67 speech is not just a matter of convention. It is also an important element of characterization. Thus de Jong, pointing out that the Iliad reveals fewer subtle variations in speech-introductions than the Odyssey, 64 However, there may be a general link between Nausikaa and Telemachos. Nausikaa herself is a young person portrayed in the process of growing up. Her story, like Telemachos', has aspects of a Bildungsroman. 6$ Spondaic PNNs in terminal position are rare (cf. bibliography in Tsopanakis 1983:6o n. 14), but not unattested. See e.g. '1TJlifTilein Od 5. 125 (discussed earlier), and in II. 5. 500. According to O'Neill (1942: 144, table 14), 7.1 per cent (Iliad) and 11.3 per cent (Odyssey) of the words shaped --- are positioned terminally. Of those so positioned, 50.0 per cent (Iliad) and 35.3 per cent ( Odyssey) have a naturally short final syllable (O'Neill 1942: 151, table 29). 66 Some integration of Patroldos' PNN diction into the general framework is achieved by usage of the phrase Mevo1.tlou~ "~ (8 times), which is always terminal. There is no point in speculating on what possible alternatives the poet had. Consider, however, that Patroldos' PNV has the largest number of different forms (and metrical shapes) of all PNVs and is very flexible in terms of positioning. 67 Griffin 1986b:37, quoting Schmid-Stahlin, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur, i (Munich, 1929), 92.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

139

suggests that 'in the majority of cases the speaker is referred to by his name or patronymic, often accompanied by an epithet'. The typical example (quoted by de Jong) is 'tov b' an:aµe..p6µ£V~. 'The combination proper name-epithet', she adds, is one of the most formalized parts of the Homeric diction. But the somewhat solemn announcement of the speaker should also, I think, be seen in the light of the encomiastic nature of the Iliad ... to be a 'speaker of words' and an 'accomplisher of deeds' . . . is the heroic ideal and accordingly the NF, [the· primary narrator] celebrates the words of his characters as much as their martial feats. 158

Apply this to the case of Patroklos. He has too much sympathy for his fellow men to conform to a narrow heroic ideal. His speech is not introduced in the 'normal' heroic manner, and he himself is not, I suggest, a 'heroic speaker'. This is borne out by the content of the only repeated PNN formula employed for Patroklos (//. 1. 345, 9. 205, I I. 616): 6>«'to,IlatQ01W>(;6e cpl.Mp bte:Jt£L8e8'haiQq,.

The narrator, who often addresses Patroklos directly in apostrophe, nevertheless often denies him the privilege of speech. In addition to the three 'silent' reactions just mentioned, Patroklos is often described as making no reply. When he does speak, his actual words are often not given. Finally, he is several times addressed after his death (whether or not he is able to 'hear' the address). We be ot o~ tva~ lto'to ou.onfl (9. 190); Patroklos find: Ilat't~ responding silently to Achilleus' request (9. 219-20); Patroklos giving orders to the maids, with no direct speech quoted (9. 658); Patroklos, moved by Nestor's speech, making no reply and rushing to Achilleus' ships ( 11. 804); Patroklos arming after Achilleus' words, with no verbal reply quoted (16. 130);Patroklos summoning his horses and charioteer, with no speech quoted (16. 684); IlCl'tQOXM>e; 'tl! -ielxeo;iq.upeµ.cix0Vfo 8ociwvfx-io8L'YTJ6)v, i6cl>o' r, y' M xAwtnayamrvoeo;E-6Qttffl.lM>IO ~6 'tl! xal. 'tO'Vheou Abyou;,btL6' nxeI kuyQ{p cj,aQµ.a.x' axt;'tl!, q>µo>~ev 't 6Q. WL'ta xal. o'.l'1:WTfYl!'tO l''lQOO xeom xa-iwtQfJV2aa',l>M>f.Ll!Vo; 6' bo; tJiioo ••. 0

0

It would be folly to assume that the metrical properties of Patroklos' PNN have structured this speech-introduction, just as it is wrong to assume that metrical properties have prevented the poet from assigning direct speech to the son of Menoitios. The poet can and 69 Cf. also de Jong in Bremmer, de Jong. and K.alJf1987: 117 and 120 n. 23.

Patterns of the Proper-Name Nominative

141

does (albeit infrequently) use the periphrastic 'son of Menoitios' expression in speech-introductory verses (e.g. 11. 6o5), the 'winged words' formula in a separate verse (following the PNN in a previous verse, e.g. 11. 814-15), and so on. Patroklos, like Telemachos, performs a contrastive narrative role. He is as close as the epic will ever approach to describing an anti-hero. This is reflected by PNN diction, which also provides the poet with a means of weaving detailed, implicit comments about the subject into his narrative. 6 Virtually each and every detail of the patterns mentioned in this chapter could be further explored. Individual contexts, characters, scenes, and sections of text, occurrences of characters mentioned only once or twice in the catalogues, the catalogues themselves, and the significance of proper names in relation to other appellations need to be studied, as do verses containing two PNNs (is there an order of importance? Consider II. 1. 7) or three ('lists'). The literary role of enjambment, not as a single tool but as a complex set of 'functions' (some of which can certainly be technical), may be investigated in relation to patterns, as may the significance of narrative/speech divisions within patterning technique. What this chapter has proposed, however, is the existence of a main road, a mainstream pattern with a significant element of variation. This pattern is used to mark and characterize a whole range of characters, and it also underlines important relationships between them: between Odysseus and Telemachos, Achilleus and Hektor, Achilleus and Agamemnon, Agamemnon and Menelaos, Achilleus and Patroklos, and many others. It complements the PNV pattern and its effects, and helps paint a detailed picture of the Homeric cast.

Conclusion

The idea that metre and positioning are semantically significant elements of Homeric hexameter poetry should not really surprise us. We know, for example, that various proper names in Homer are lexically meaningful, and at least in some cases they have been invented or selected according to the needs of the text.' There is no a priori reason why similar attention to meaning should not extend to metrical shape and to general usage. It is certainly not a new idea to suggest that 'the bard regards his poetic phrase as indistinguishable from poetic substance', 2 or that 'metre is diachronically generated by formula, rather than vice versa'.3 Such opinions are well suited to accommodate the possibility of a meaningful relation between metrical form and sense. We assume that whatever the precise relations between oral and literate in the Iliad and the Odyssey, the oral element played a significant role in the production, and even more certainly in the delivery and reception, of the poem. The public at large heard rather than read Homer.4 Now, an oral reference, for example to a horse, requires the production of sound, e.g. the phonetic sequence [hip] [pos]. The phonetic sequence is contemporaneous with and physically inseparable from the 'contents', including all semantic and poetic functions. This unity is stronger in oral utterances than it is in written texts.5 The basic units of an oral utterance are concrete • e.g. Kalypso, 'the concealer'. Even major names, which were most likely handed down by tradition, have been 'etymologiud', notably the (fictive) etymology for 'Odysseus' at 0d. 4. 110. See von Kamptz 1982:25ff.; Rank 1951: 130-5; MOhlstein

1969. • Rosenmeyer 1965: 297. 3 Nagy 1990:29. 4 An excellent overview on the relation of production and poetics is now available in Taplin 1992 (22, 28-30, 35-45, etc.). 5 Cf. Havelock 1982:7-8. It is, for example, possible to transcribe the Greek text of Homer using Devanagari, Hebrew, Arabic, or, for that matter, roman characters (as is actually done in TLG Beta code, to produce a machine-readable text). Provided that the phonetic (i.e. 'oral') value of the characters is known, the change of form

Conclusion

143

syllables, while those of writing are vowels and consonants, which are abstractions. 6 Thus, in an oral performance of Homer a word's 'formal' characteristics, including its metrical and localization features, can be 'interpreted'. Over the course of this book some practical examples of the relationship between form and meaning in Homer have been discussed. The main object of our investigation has been to expose diction which is capable of generating thematically significant ambiguities and shades of meaning. Such aspects of meaning have sometimes been regarded as exclusive to 'literate' poetry-poetry which is designed to be read and contemplated at the reader's own pace, under circumstances that permit free movement through the text, forwards, backwards, and in leaps. A literary text, it might seem, is conducive to scrutiny of the finest details of diction. By comparison orally presented poems exist in 'real time'. The pace, direction,and sequenceof any particular performance is fixed. The member of the audience who pauses to reflect on the meaning of words will fail to keep up with the recitation, and lose the narrative thread altogether. What this study has tried to show is that, assuming a professional bard and a properly accustomed audience (a widely accepted assumption, even within the otherwise fierce oral/literate debate), the Homeric poems (whatever their precise mode of production) can generate complex ambiguities without forcing the audience to abandon the narrative's progress. Let us rephrase this by means of a metaphor: the Iliad and the Odyssey are grand orchestral pieces which resound with many 'silent echoes', poetic wholes that transcend specific verses, but which nevertheless interact with individual contexts to produce a rich polyphony. would not affect the 'contents'. For an introduction to the general problems of orality vs. literacy see Goody 1987;Ong 1982; Finnegan 1977. 6 In the 'real world' it is impossible to utter vowels and consonants separately (cf. Havelock 1982: 67-9).

Collated Localization Dataa TablePosition I A. IUad 1 2 412 3 4 5 -

6 7 8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26

r,

28

-

-

-

-

-

TOTAL 412



2

3

123 -

123 89

-

-

211

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

334

88

-

136 -

70 -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-



4

5



6

-

92

116

105

-

42 82 95

-

245

47

-

-

145

-

51 37

-

-

84

73 -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

506

635

-

-

54

-

-

6

-

ll

109

26

-

-

1 2

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

1

8 4 -

-

181

-

-

1

-

75

204

-

-

-

25 15

-

-

95

-

-

-

30 25

-

-

-

-

-

1 257

7 481

2 620

-

4

-

-

-

26

28

89

-

-

-

-

71

-

41

-

-

-

8

244

59 65

72



-

-

-

-

60 90

-

-

8 4

-

54

7

90 -

-

-

-

5

-

-

234

1 4

4 2 -

-

-

-

2

-

-

-

122 2 2

-

10

ll

12

Total

-

90 -

68 -

-

-

813 1265

52

-

139

-

1

-

-

-

-

36

264

25

-

-

-

-

-

-

36

-

-

9 18

66

-

-

5 37 47

-

-

-

31 36

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

2 479 41

-

617

7 308

9

-

-

96

3

38

-

4

-

-

-

2

-

80

9



7

-

-

-

-

16

-

-

-

-

65 180

9

-

-

-

-

20 -

ll

-

26 1 3 509

-

-

-

-

-

148

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

12

13

-

-

-

-

27 73

3 -

-

3 267 39 1000 6

642 266

m

95

433

4

21

-

-

-

-

7

-

-

465 735

1 265 5 -

4

-

-

-

-

-

-

39

470 128 119 167 170 173 154 58 67 60 S3 45

40 28 73

9 31 1 31 6920

Table Position 1 1½

2

3



4

65

37 98 105

5



6

-

109

102

7



8

9

22

27

-

50

127



10

11

12

65

-

-

12

45

Total

B. Odylsey

1

-

2 3

380

4 5 6

-

7

8 9 10 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

21 22

-

-

-

88

-

212 -

-

-

-

89 84

-

144

-

114 -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

121

-

-

-

268

-

107

-

56

33

-

-

76 66

-

-

-

-

59

-

24 7

-

6 4

5

-

5

-

-

-

-

-

25 26

r,

28

-

-

-

TOTAL 380

-

-

300

-

-

-

-

552

606

-

89 83

-

-

-

-

147

299

-

-

86 85

48

86

-

-

-

-

-

7 1

478

-

-

-

9

-

-

28 12

-

-

-

-

5

-

-

-

-

65

-

70

-

12 1

50

229

-

5

-

-

36

23

24

-

41

24

-

-

-

69

3 630

-

-

-

217

-

56 -

-

157

-

- 57 97 - -

-

241

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

18 -

93

5

28 128

-

5

-

1

-

-

-

-

- - 1 -

452

-

33

-

-

-

41 48

-

-

-

-

590

91

-

-

-

-

-

261

28 26

-

-

3

9 16

-

43 39 1

-

-

2 291

-

-

-

445

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

7 15 -

-

29 11

-

524

-

-

62 45

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

17

106

-

-

-

81

-

-

2

-

19 27

-

-

-

-

-

-

7

5

1 17 9 - 107

-

-

-

-

297

-

-

m

1244 492 406

761 713 244 337

85 479 134 158 136 151 177 107 tiO

76 79

51

r,

56

56

-

-

7 'JAY1 45 1•

;::: ~

~

~

~

8 :::~· ~

....

s· ::s ~ s

40 28

26 1 -

g

6 36 12 29 6851

• O'Neill 1942: 138-SO. tables 1-28. O'Neill's table 29 (1>. 151). discussinRnatural quantities in 1>0Sition12. mav be iRDorcd here. Each word has

-

.i:,. V,

APPENDIX

II

Position and Reference of Theme-Words

TABLEI. Position and Context-Reference of µfjvt.( Case

Wrath of

Total

%

BeginniDf position ll I 5 9

Achilleus Apollo Zeus

4

44.4

3 2

33.3 22.2 100.0

3b 3b

A. Diad Acc.

TOTAL % of total

9

100.0

I

2 6 66.6

1 I I.I

2

22.2

Nom.

Zeus godc godsc TOTAL % of total

I I I 3

I

33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0

I I 2 66.6

100.0

1

33.3

B. Odyssey Acc.

Zeus

3

75.0

Zeus

I

25.0 100.0

3

Gen.

TOTAL % of total

4

100.0

• Percentages are provided for comparison. b Pattern deixis is to the wrath of Achilleus. c No further referential specification.

I

1 25.0

3

75.0

Position and &ference of Theme-Words

147

T ABLB II. Position and Cont~xt-kference of IJ.~

Character

Total

%

1

Beginning position 2 3 s 9

11

A. otywy

Odysseus (hirnt!elf)

u mortal u guest u beggar u Ithacan ua man uhusband

3 2 1 2 1 1 1

TOTAL

11

A man/anyman Telemacbos Polyphemos Husband Antinoos

13 4 1 1 2

TOTAL % of total

B. 1W A man/any man Husband Agamemnon Hektor Achilleus Diornedes Moulios

Relative of Eriopis Agelaos Akarnas Bienor

Deike>On Echepolos Epikles Eurysthalioo Herakles/Eurystheus

Jmbrios Laogonos Sarpedon TOTAL % of total

32 100.0 21 1 6 4 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 52 100.0

9.4 6.3 3.1 6.3 3.1 3.1 3.1 3U

40.S 12.S 3.1 3.1 6.3 100.0

3b 1

1

1" lb Jb

I

t•

t• 1

7.7 5.8

1

1 I

1

2 10

3

Jb 1• II" I 34.4 3.1

40.4 1.9 11.S 3.9 3.9 3.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 100.0

1

Jb lb lb

1

2 6.3 2

1 13 12.S 40.6

.. 6

12

2 2 1 1

I 3.1

1 1 2 1

4' 1 2 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

..7.7

I 1.9

..7.7

12 21 23.0 40.4

10 19.2

• Percentqes are provided for COIDJllll'UOII. 1bia table docs not rdlcct the full complexity of ambiguities,which depends on point of view and difl'crent states of lmowlcct,eof difl'crent dwllcters. See the detailed clilcuaaionof the eumples. - Pattern dews is to Od)'IKUI. • Shaped--. • Pattern dews could be to Odyueus but the eumple (22. 32) preacnta special difficulties(see Cb. 3, Sect. 3.3.3, category 2). • Two eumpla (2.24, 61) may alao refer to any man.

Appendix II TABLEIll. Return of

Position and Context-Referenceof WJOTO'tl' Total

%

1

2

llt,giooiog position 4 5 6 8

A. TIµ' IlQOtt' fl»LM>l-ne

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1

A'lf&OOOX" 'Eimpoe 'Hill.'

AT)'tot A~ Ilav&!Qe

1 1

1

'Am

A'inoA.ux" A~

1 1

1

1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

I

1 1 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

I

I

I

1 I

1 1 I

1 1 1 I

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

I

1 I

I

I I

I

I

1

1 1 1 I

1 1 I I I I

Appendix III

150

Name

lliad

Total Ini Int Ter Tot Ini Int Ter Tot

Odyuey

Ini Int Ter Tot

1

"EL

1

•Aavaot

1 2 2

Boe~ E~~

··Bet&~ •·EQpe~

1 1

Not~ Ilooa6ci(l)'Y

2 2

•'IV •A~

1

'H~

1

•'Afhrval.'I •'A&frvri

Kw.u,pw •'o&uoori~ •'o&uori~ TOTAL 10 Total terminal PNNs: 44.4%.

9

3 25

1 1 1

1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2

2

2 1

3

4

2 6

Zei,~

Tot

2

3

3

1

7

3

12

11

11 3

28

63

Tables II-VII give the locaJimtion of PNNs in indmduaJ boob. PNNs have been arranged initially according to the total number of attestations. then according to position, alphabetically within each resulting group. In a few cues PNNs have been grouped together on an ad hoe basis, to empbasi7.e their interdependence, in tenm of positioning, in the text (e.g. where three PNNs appear together in the suneverae: MmO>Q,~~.and•~ in 0d. 17; TuQcb,'AA,q.l'ipq,and M1JX'fivrl in 0d. 2; N'IQl,'10£, and IlOAVxtO>Q in 0d. 17). An asterisk (*) indicates an alternative PNN form. Non-terminal positioning is divided into initial and internal positioning, but no aeparate systematic significance is claimed for either.

,aaxe>£,

Appendix V

158

TABLE III. ~ Localization of PNN1 in Odyuey 2

Name

lni

lnt

Tcr

Tot

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

1 1

1 1 1

'H~

1 1

1 1

~

2

2 2

1

3

4

4

1

1 1 1

Aly6~ E6Quµax~ A'l(OXQ'~

IlELQ TuQ

1

"A).xµiJvtl MuxiJvtl E~

Mmme Ze(,~

2 1

1

••Axawf. •'.Aqydol.

1

"AxauxL• 'j\~

1

•"A8TJvaf.'1 •"A&IJv'I

1

•"()6uoorl,~ •"()6uaei,~

2 3

5 TOTAL 9 Total t.erminalPNNs: 46.5%.

8

Tf1A£1.UlX~

9

22

7

r,

• Positioning probably by analogy with the maac:uline.

1 9

9 3 13 58

Localizationof Proper-NameNominatives

159

TABLE IV. The Localization of PNNs in Odyssey 17

Name

Ini

BO~

1

E-6QVVOt&'I

1 1

j\~

·~

,~

1

1 1 1

1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1

Ni)QL~ nol.mme Mlvmc;

E-6~ 'H~ 1

1 2

'AOiJv'I *'Axau>L

Tot 1 1 1 1 1 1

1

Mmme

~ Ile~

Ter

1 1 1 1

8roxl:6~ Mt&av T~

4»-li~

Int

2 2 2

2

2

*Md.averi~ •M~ Mml.a~

2 1

2

2 1 1 2 3

Ze-6~

6

1

7

•'Aeyetot.

'AvtlVOOma.a T')liµax~

6

•'06uacm'.,~ •'06uori~ TOTAL

8

6

12 Total terminal PNNs: 41.3%.

10

11 16

1

14

15

42

38

92

s

s

16o T ABLBV. '17wLocalization of PNNs In Diad 2 A plus sign and a number(+ n) on the right of a PNN in section A indicates that the PNN ia also mentioned n times in the Catalogue, and registered in Section B. Excluded are exempt.:&where attributive f.mction ia evident (e.g. "Aexa,~ ~ 2.611; ffho'I ... 'Ol.mtt2.617), and periphrastic expressions with a non-nominative PN (e.g. Dv~ AaOIOV xfle2.851).

Name

Ini

lnt

Ter

Tot

A. 2. 1-2. 492 ( includingintroductionto catalogue) 1 "A~ •"A'1,}ll:6(' 1 1 E~ 1 E~ 1 ~ 1 1 'Hebe; IWo,j, 1 1 T~

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

~ "Oaaa

1 1

·~

1 1

~~ KaAx~

1 2 1

Not~ Necmoe

1

"H~

"OooaoB'Uc; 3

2 2 2

1

3 3 3

4

4

"Aycq.&tf&VO>V

7

7

Zeuc;

9 2 1 2

9 4

10

11

18

38

TOTAL

2

13

Total terminal PNNs: SS.I%.

+2 +1

+2 +2

4

"A&#JvTI

•".AQyef.oL •"AxmoL •Aavaol

+2

2 2 2 2

1 2 1 1

"Omeoc;

"HQTI

1

Cat

2 69

+1 +2 +1 +1 +2

Localizationof Proper-NameNominati,es Name

Ini

lnt

B. Catalopes l. 494-877 (including 751-815) 11 1 j\~ 1 i\6et)m~ 1 "ALW~ "AA.'l(JLOV 1 1 "Af.'Cl,q&ax~ 1 ~ 1 j\~ 1 j\~ 1 1 "Aexiloxoc; 1 "A~ 1 "A~ 1 "Aarooxea.a "Amu6xt) 1 1 na~ rouwuc; 1 1 ~ "'EU,pec;" 1 "E'Yl.ityl!c; 1 1 "EVVOf,IO«; 1 "Emmeocl« 1 "Enun~ E'6Q'6CXM>c; 1 E'6Q'6m,A.Oc; 1 EOcjnpoc; 1 8aAJiioc; 1 86ac; 1 "l6Aµevoc; 1 1 ~ 1 Aeovteuc; 1 AT)boc; 1 M~ Me&ov 1 Meo8).T)c; 1 1 MTJQLOVT)c; 1 Mueµabovec;" 1 Muemvoc; "061.oc; 1 navOOQc; 1 Ilelqooc; 1

-~

Ter

161

Tot 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Appendix V

162

Name

lni

n~ n~ n~ Ilol.u;u~ nu~

I

~ ~

I I I I I

"YQl&lvq

~ ~ ~ ~ ~(0.) ~

1 1

I I I I I I 1 1 I I I I .I I I I

"Ayampo>Q "A8qvq "A+eo6''111 ~

"&aoL

Zric;

1mro6cq&ela Maxawv Mwci~ ~

Mewa&uc;

n~ IlOA\Jm>l~ 4>1JA.ric;

"Axcitwc; ~

I

i\moc;

I I

·~oc;t

E~µflM)c; 1~c; .lmro8ooc;

"Oln,aaric;

Ter

1 1 1 1 1 1 I I

~

Ilvea'XII~ 'PiplJ ~

lnt

I

2 I 2 1 1 2 1 2

Tot 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

Localization of Proper-Name Nominatives Name IlQ68ooc; IlQOYteolla~ TQ6>es

Ini

1

1

•AyapeµVV ALOJ.Lit&Js N«O't'f)S Ni,eeus TI.tproA.£~

1 3

2

2

1

MoOam

1

1

••Axmot"

1 1 1

2 2 2

2 2

2 2 3 3 3

1

3

2

2

1

1

TIQLS AT.as(T.)

•·Axllleus ••AXIMUS TOTAL 23 Total tc;rminal PNNs: 26.4%.

Tot 2 2 2

1 1 1

°'EX'tO>Q

•·AQyd'ol.

Ter

2 2

·A,ro">J.Jov Neatroe

lot

163

3 3

3 3

2

2 2

34

129

2

72

• Acbilleus is also mentioned by the doubl«:onsonant PNN, but only in the catalogue. SecSect. B. b This section includes 10 PNNs in 761--81S, 6 terminal, 4 internal: Eiiµ~ (int.), ·A,ro'lwuv (ter.), Ala; (T.; ter.), ·Axlllei,~ (int.), ~~ (ter., 3 times),'Axawl. (ter.), "ExtWQ (int.), TQ(i)e~(int.). • King of Sikyon. • Leader from Adresteia. • Epeian leader. r Leader from Kos. • Maionian leader. b In 2. 684, we find the Myrmidons named "EllytVE~ and 'Axawl. in what may be a misunderstanding. SecKirk 198S: 229. i Leader from Pbokis. ; Leader of the Halimnes. t K.arian leader.

Appendix V

164

TABLE VI. Localizationof PNNs in Iliad 9

Name

-~

Ini

i\QUlll,I; i\111 Ainopi&ov

I I

~

I I I I I

-~

A1;1al

I I I

~

"Nd,llorv

I I I I I

°Ee'vuc; "'HQ'I

"Hroc;

Ill!QOl!4>'MLa Aao6lx,f TQ6>ec;

XQuoo8qu.c;8

I I 2

"Ex-tO>Q

Mwayeoc; Olvric;

I 2 I

I I I

6LOf'iJ&rlc;

Ic!M,civaooa•

Kouefttec;

2

I

Alac; (T.) 4»1~

I

2

Tot

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

E-6QuP«fllc; Ucpuooc; 8hu;

Al-iw>.oL

Ter

I I

~8Tpai'I

71~

Int

I I I I I 2 2 2 2

I I I

2 2 2

2 2

2 2

3

3

I I

4 4

NtmO>Q

I

3

4

Il,y.ric;

I

4

s

Localizationof Proper-NameNominatives Name

Ini

Int

s

'06uooris

Ila~

4

2

'Axw.ot Zeus

Ter

3

'Ayaµiµvwv 'Axalleus TOTAL 24 Total terminalPNNs: 53.5%.

165 Tot

s 6

7

7

3

8

8

8

1

10

11

23

54

IOI

2

• 9. 145 = 287. Chrysotbcrnis, Laodikc,and Ipbia11aS11in a single verse.

TABLEVII. The Localizationof PNNs in Iliad 11 Name 'i\ vncpas

Ini

Aetµoc; ~

ucin,eos 1

8eavoo

1 1

'Iboµem,s

KePQLOVTJS Kwofls KOO>V

MLVv'it~ Ilo&wlqi.os ~

Xef.Qrov EIML81Jl.at.

"'HQTI

Tot 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1 1

rOQY(i>

•1,uroM>Xas

Ter

1

"Beu;

'Hcos

Int

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

1 1

Appendix V

166

Name 'I~ MEVOlnoc;

M~ Il,y.ri~

Ini

Int 2 1

1

N,y.ri~ ·~~

1 1

2 2

2 2

2 2 3

3

Tieu;

3 3

Maxa(l)'V 2

'Eaa.ol

Ntmwe *'AOiJvTI *'A8"vai'l

2 2

4 4

3

3 2

s

s

2

Awµ~

3 3 4

2 2 2

Tot 2 2

2

'A1r,6)J.my

n~

Tcr

E-6Qi,m,~

2

4

A~(f.)

4

1

2

7

z,;c,~ ••otn,aaei,~

4

3

2 4

9 4

9

9 1

10

11

•·oouon,~

s

*"Axlllri~ •'Axwi,~

1

'Ayaµiµo,v

1

TQG)e~

9

*'Axru.ol. *'Aeyl!tol.

1

"EX'tll>Q

8

TOTAL

38

Total terminal PNNs: 44.4%. • Excluding 11. 543, omitted in MSS.

6

s

12

3

11

11 1

2

3

13

46

67

151

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALu!N, T. W. (1912-19), Homeri Opera (vol. v, 1912; vol. iii', 1917; vol. iv', 1919; Oxford). --and MONRO,D. B. (1920), Homeri Opera3 (vols. i-ii; Oxford). -ffALLIDAY, W. R., and Sucm, E. E. (1936), The Homeric Hymns3 (Oxford). ALu!N,W. S. (1973), Accent and Rhythm (Cambridge). AllMsn.oNG,J. I. (1958), 'The Arming Motif in the Iliad', American Journal of Philology, 79: 337-54. AUSTIN,N. (1975), Archery at the Dark of the Moon: Poetic Problems in Homer's Odyssey (Berkeley). BACHl!LAllD, G. (1932), L'Intuition de /'instant (Paris). BAlll!ll, E. (1988), Linguistics and Formulas in Homer: Sca/arity and the Description of the Particle per (Amsterdam). --(1990), 'Homeric Discourse and Enjambement: A Cognitive Approach', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 120: 1-21. -and FABlllcorn, F. (1991), 'Peripheral and Nuclear Semantics in Homeric Diction: The Case of Dative Expressions for "Spear"', Mnemosyne, 44: 63-84. BALTES,M. (1983), 'Zu Eigenart und Funktion von Gleichnissen im 16. Buch der Dias', Antike und Abend/and, 26: 36-48. BARNl!S,H. R. (1986), 'The Colometric Structure of the Homeric Hexameter', Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 28: 125-50. BASSETT, S. E. (19190), 'The Theory of Homeric Caesura according to the Extant Remains of Ancient Doctrine', American Journal of Philology, 40: 343-72. --(1919b), 'Versus Tetracolos', Classical Philology, 14: 216-33. --(1923), 'The Proems of the Iliad and Odyssey', American Joumal of Philology, 44: 339-48. --(1926), 'The So-Called Emphatic Position of the Runover Word in the Homeric Hexameter', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 57: I 16-48. --(1934), 'The Omission of the Vocative in Homeric Speeches', American Journal of Philology, 55: 140-52. --(1938), ThePoetry of Homer (Berkeley). BECK,R. (1972), 'A Principle of Composition in Homeric Verse', Phoenix, 26: 213-31.

168 lhmFIMI

Bibliography R. S. P. (1972), 'On the Structure of the Greek Hexameter', G/otta,

50: 1-10. BEHAoHEL,0. (1909), 'Beziehungenzwischen Umfang und Reibenfolge von Satzgliedern', lndogermanischeForschungen,25: 110-42. Bmcu!R,I. (1863), 'Oberden Anfang der Odyssee', in Homerische B/4tter (2 vols., 1863-72), i. 99-107 (Bonn). BmloK, T. (1872--94), GriechischeLiteraturgeschichte(4 vols; Berlin). BLOCK,E. (1982), 'The Narrator Speaks: Apostrophe in Homer and Vergil', Transactionsof the American PhilologicalAssociation, 112: 7-22. --(1986), 'Narrative Judgement and Audience Responsein Homer and Vergil', Arethusa, 19: 155--69. BoARDMAN, J., and VAPHOPOULOU-RICHAIIDSON, c. E. (1986), ed. Chios: A Conferenceat the Homereion in Chios, 1984 (Oxford). BoWRA,c. M. (1962), 'Style', in w~ and Stubbings 1962: 26-37. Blu!MMmt, J., DE JONG, I. J. F., and KAI.FF,J. (1987), ed. Homer: Beyond Oral Poetry (Amsterdam). CALHOUN,G. M. (1933), 'Homeric Repetitions', University of California Publications in ClassicalPhilology, 12: 1-25. CHANnwNE,P. (1942-53), Grammaire homerique (2 vols; Paris). --(1968-80), Dictionnaireetymologique de la langue grecque (Paris). CLAY,J. S. (1983), The Wrath of Athena: Gods and Men in the Odyssey (Princeton). CoMBRIE, B. (1976), Aspect: An Introduction to the Study of Verbal Aspect and Related Problems (Cambridge). CRANE,G. (1988), Calypso: Backgrounds and Conventions of the Odyssey (Athenlum, Beitrlge zur klassischen Philologie, 191; Frankfurt). CRuoNOLA,A. (1971), Scholia in Nicandri Theriaca (Milan). CRYSTAL,D. (1991), A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics3 (Cambridge). CULLER,J. (1977), 'Apostrophe', Diacritics, 7: 59--69. DAITz, S. G. (1991), 'On Reading Homer Aloud: To Pause or Not to Pause', American Journal of Philology, 112: 149--6. --(1992), response to Wyatt 1992 (response to Daitz 1991), Bryn Mawr Classical Review (electronic version), 3.1.16. DALE,A. M. (1957), 'Greek Metric 1936-1957', Lustrum, 2: 5-51. DAvm, M. (1988), Epicorum GraecorumFragmenta (GOttingen). l>m.BROCIC, B. (1888), JndogermanischeSyntax (Halle; repr. Dannstadt 1976). Dl!vINE,A. M., and STEPHENS, L. (1978), 'The GreekAppositives: Towards a Linguistically Adequate Definition of Caesura and Bridge', Classical Philology, 73: 314-28. --(1984), Language and Metre: Resolution, Porson's Bridge and their Prosodic Basis (American Philological Association American Classical Studies, 12; Chico, Calif.).

Bibliography DINooRF,W. (1856), Scholia Graecain Homeri Odysseam, (2 vols.; Oxford). Dooos, E. R. (1951), The Greeks and the l"ationa/ (Berkeley). DoVER,K. J. (196o), Greek Word Order (Cambridge). DuCROT, 0., and TOOOROV, T. (1972), Dictionnaire encyclopedique des sciences du /angage (Paris). [frans.: Encyclopaedic Dictionary of the Sciences of Language, trans. C. Porter (Baltimore, 1979).] DuNN,F., and CoLB,T. (1992), ed. Beginningsin ClassicalLiterature (Yale Classical Studies, 29). EDWARDS, M. W. (1966), 'Some Features of Homeric Craftsmanship', Transactionsof the American PhilologicalAssociation, 97: 115-79. 'Homeric Speech Introductions', Harvard Studies in Classical --(1970), Philology, 74: 1-36. 'Homer and Oral Tradition: The Formula, Part I', Oral --(1986), Tradition, 1: 171-230. -(1987), Homer, Poet of the Iliad (Baltimore and London). --(1988), 'Homer and Oral Tradition: The Formula, Part II', Oral Tradition, 3: I 1-60. --(1991), The Iliad: A Commentary, generaled. G. S. Kirk, vol. v, bks. 17-20 (Cambridge). ERBSB,H. (1969---88),Scholia Graeca in Homeri 1/iadem (vol. i, 1969; vol. ii, 1971; vol. iii, 1973; vol. iv, 197s; vol. v, 1977; vol. vi, 1983; vol. vii, 1988; Berlin). --(1986), Untersuchungenzur Funktion der GiJtter im homerischenEpos (Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte, 24; Berlin). FANTUZZI, M. (1988), Ricerche su Apol/onio Rodio: Diacronie de/la dizione epica (Rome). FENDC,B. C. (1968), Typical Battle Scenes in the Iliad: Studies in the Na"ative Technique of Homeric Battle Descriptions (Hermes Ein7.elschriften, 21; Wiesbaden). --(1974), Studies in the Odyssey (Hermes Ein7.Clschriften, 30; Wiesbaden). --(1977), review of Nagler 1974, Classical Philology, 72: 6o-5. --(1978), 'Stylization and Variety: Four Monologues in the Iliad', in B. Fenik (ed.), Homer: Tradition and Invention, 68-9o(Leiden). FINKELBERG, M. (1987), 'Homer's View of the Epic Narrative: Some Formulaic Evidence', ClassicalPhilology, 82: 135-8. FINNEGAN,R. (1977), Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance and Social Context (Cambridge). FOLEY,J.M. (1985), Oral Formulaic Theory and Research: An Introduction and Annotated Bibliography(repr. New York, 1986). --(1988) The Theory of Oral Composition: History and Methodology (Bloomington and Indianapolis). --(1991), Immanent Art: From Structure to Meaning in Traditional Oral Epic (Bloomington).

I 70

Bibliography

FORSYTHE, N. (1979), 'The Allurement Scene: A Typical Pattern in Greek Oral Epic', California Studies in ClassicalAntiquity, 12: 107-20. FoWLl!ll, D. P. F. (1990), 'Deviant Focalisation in Virgil's Aeneid', Proceedingsof the Cambridge PhilologicalSociety, NS 33: 42-63. F'RANDL,H. (196),Wege und FormenfrilhgriechischenDenkenr(Munich). -(1975), F.arly Greek Poetry and Philosophy, trans. M. Hadas and J. Willis (Oxford). F'RJsit,H. (1946), "M~", Eranos,44=28-40. --(196-70), Griechisches etymologisches W"rterbuch (2 vols.; Heidelberg). FR0NTISJ-Ducaoux, F. (1986), Le Cithare d'Achille (Rome). GmouNo, A. (1891-5), Index Homericus (1891, with appendix, 1895; Leipzig). GJESAU, H. VON (1969), 'Menelaos', in Der kleine Pmdy, iii. 1207-9. GoLDIDLL,S. (1991), The Poets Voice (Cambridge). GoooY, J. R. (1987), The Interface between the Oral and the Wrillen (Cambridge). Gow, A. S. F., and ScHOLFIELD, A. F. (1953), Nicander of Colophon: The Poems and Poetical Fragments (Cambridge). GRIFFIN,J. (1976), 'Homeric Pathosand Objectivity', Classical Quarterly, NS 26: 161-87. --(1980), Homer on Life and Death (Oxford). --(1986a), 'Heroic and Unheroic Ideas in Homer', in Boardman and Vapbopoulou-Ricbardson 1986: 3-13. --(1986b), 'Homeric Words and Speakers', Journal of Hellenic Studies, 106: 3~57. GRILLO,A. (1988), Trafilologia e narratologia(Rome). GR0NINGl!N,B. A. vAN ( 1946), 'The Proems of the Iliad and the Odyssey', Mededeelingen der Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen,Afd Le11erkunde,NS 9'8: 279-94. --(1958), La Composition Lilleraire archafque: Procedes et realisations (Verhandelingen der Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afd. Letterkunde, NS 65'2; Amsterdam). GROTJAHN,R. (1981), ed. Hexameter Studies (Quantitative Linguistics, I 1; Bochum). J. B. (1964), 'Structure and Content in Epic Formulae: The HAINSW0RTII, Question of the Unique Expression', Classical Quarterly, NS 14: 155-64. --(1968), The Flexibility of the Homeric Formula (Oxford). --(1969), Homer (Greece and Rome New Surveys in the Classics, 3; Oxford). -(1976), 'Phrase Ousters in Homer', in A. Morpurgo Davies and W .. Meid (ed.), Studies in Greek, Italic and lndb-EuropeanLinguistics Offered to Leonard R. Palmer on the Occasionof his Seventieth Birthday, June 5, 1976, 83-6 (Vienna).

Bibliography

171

HALL, E. (1989), In-venting the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy (Oxford). HAVELOCK,E. A. (1982), TheLiterate Re-volution in Greece and its Cultural Consequences (Princeton). IIEUBECK, A., and HOl!ICSTRA, A. (1989), A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. ii, bks. 9-15 (Oxford). --West, S. R., and HAINswoam, J.B. (1988), A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. i, bks. 1-8 (Oxford). --et al. (1981-5), Omero: Odissea. (vol. i, 1981; vol. ii, 1982; vol. iii, 1983; vol. iv, 198,J; vol. v, 1985). HIGBm,C. ( 1990), Measure and Music: Enjambement and Sentence Structure in the Iliad (Oxford). HOl!ICSTRA, A. (1964), Homeric Modifications of Formulaic Prototypes: Studies in the De-velopment of Greek Epic Diction (Amsterdam). --(1981), Epic Verse before Homer: Three Studies (Amsterdam). HowKA, J. P. (1973), 'Homeric Originality: A Survey', Classical World, 66: 257-93. --(1979), 'Homeric Studies 1971-1977', Classical World, 73: 65-150. -(1984), '"Looking Darkly" (u~ loo>v):Reflections on Status and Decorum', Transactions of the AmericanPhilological Association, I I 3: 1-16. --(1990), 'Homer Studies 1978-1983', part 1, Classical World, 83: 393461; part D, ibid., 84: 89-156. INGALLS,W. (1970), 'The Structure of the Homeric Hexameter: A Review', Phoenix, 24: 1-12. IRMscHER, J. (1950), Giitterzorn bei Homer (Leipzig). JAHN, T. (1987), Zum Wortfeld 'See/e-Geist' in tier Sprache Homers (Zetemata, 86; Munich). JAKOBSON, R. (1932), 'Zur Struktur des russichen Verbums', in Charisteria G. Mathesio, 74-84 (Prague). JANKo, R. (1992), The Iliad: A Commentary, general ed. G. S. Kirk, vol. iv, bks. 13-16 (Cambridge). JoB, V. (1981), 'Annotated Bibliography on the Statistical Study of Hexameter Verse', in Grotjahn 1981: 226-62. JONG, I. J. F. DE (1987), Narrators and Focalizers: ThePresentation of the Story in the Iliad (Amsterdam). KAHANE,A. (1992), 'The First Word of the Odyssey', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 112: II 5-32. --(1993), review of Fantozzi 1988, Classical Re-view, 43: 19-20. KAMPrz, H. VON(1982), Homerische Personennamen (GOttingen). KERN, 0. (1922), Orphicorum Fragmenta (Berlin). KIPARSICY,P. (1976), 'Oral Poetry: Some Linguistic and Typological Considerations', in Shannon and Stolz 1976: 73-106 (and discussion pp. 107-25). Knuc, G. S. (1962), The Songs of Homer (Cambridge).

I 72

Bibliography

Knuc, G. S. (1966), 'Studies in SomeTechnical Aspects of Homeric Style', Yale Classical Studies, 20: 76- I 51. The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. i, bks. 1-4 (Cambridge). -(1985), -(1990), The Iliad· A Commentary, vol. ii, bks. s-8 (Cambridge). KluPKE,S. (1980), Naming and Necessity, rev. cdn. (Oxford). KUHN,T., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions\ (Chicago, 1970). Ll!Nz, A. (1980), Das ProiJm des frllhen griechischen Epos: Ein Beitrag zum poetischen Selbstverstllndnis (Habclts Disscrtationsdr., Reihe ldass. Pbilol., 31; Bonn). Ll!PR.E, M. Z. (1979), L'interiezione vocativale nei poemi omerici(Rome). LIMNsoN, S. C. (1983), Pragmatics (Cambridge). LfgrE: see Snell and Mette (1955- ). LoRD,A. B. (1900), The Singer of Tales (Cambridge, Mass.). -(1968), 'Homer as Oral Poet', Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 71: 1-46. -(1986), 'Perspectives on Recent Work on the Oral Traditional Formula', Oral Tradition, 1: 467-503. LYONS,J. (1977), Semantics (1 vols.; London). Mus, P. (1961), Greek Metre, trans. P. H. J. Lloyd-Jones (Oxford). McDoNOUOH, J. T., Jr. (1966), The Structural Metrics of the Iliad (diss. Columbia University). MACU!OD,C. W. (1981), The Iliad, Book XXIV (Cambridge). MARTIN,R. (1989), The Language of Heroes (Ithaca, NY). MATTHEWS, V. J. (1980), 'Metrical Reasons for Apostrophe in Homer', Liverpool Classical Monthly, 5'5: 93➔• Ml!moM, M. (1651), Aristidis Quintiliani De Musica Libri Tres (Antiquae Musicae Auctores Septem, ii. 1-16~ Amsterdam). ME'ITE,H. J. (1956), 'Die Struktur des Altesten daktylischen Hexameters', Glotta, 35: 1-17. MHV: see M. Parry 1971. MINTON,W. W. (1900), 'Homer's Invocation of the Muses: Traditional Patterns', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 91: 191309. --(1965), 'The Fallacy of the Structural Formula', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 96: 141-53. MOULTON,C. (1977), Similes in the Homeric Poems (G~ttingen). --(1981), 'The Speech of Glaukos in Iliad 17', Hermes, 109: 1-8. MUELLNER, L. C. (1976), The Meaning of Homeric d)xoµai through its Formulas (Innsbruck). MOm..L,P. VON DER (1961), Homeri Odyssea 3 (Stuttgart). MOHLsTmN,H. (1969), 'Redende Personennamen bci Homer', Studi micenei ed egeo-anatolici, 9: 67➔4• NAGLER,M. N. (1974), Spontaneity and Tradition: A Study in the Oral Art of Homer (Berkeley).

Bibliography

173

NAGY,G. (1976), 'Formula and Metre', in Shannon and Stolz 1976: 239-

60. --(1979), The Best of the Achaians: Concepts of the Hero in Archaic Greek Poetry (Baltimore and London). Greek Mythology and Poetics (Ithaca, NY). --(1990), NoroPOULOS,J. A. (1962), 'The Homeric Hymns as Oral Poetry: A Study of the Post-Homeric Oral Tradition', American Journal of Philology, 83: 337-68. OLSON,S. D. (1989), 'The Stories of Helen and Menelaos (Odyssey 4. 24089) and the Return of Odysseus', American Journal of Philology, 110: 387-94. O'NEILL, E., Jr. (1942), 'The Localization of Metrical Word-Types in the Greek Hexameter', Yale Classical Studies, 8: 105-78. ONG,W. J. (1982), Orality and Literacy: The Technologising of the Word (London). O'NOLAN,K. (1978), 'Doublets in the Odyssey', Classical Quarterly, NS28: 23-37. PACKARD,D. W. (1976), 'Metrical and Grammatical Patterns in the Greek Hexameter', in A. Jones and R. F. Churchhouse (ed.), The Computer in Literary and Linguistic Studies: Proceedings of the Third International Symposium, 85-91 (Cardiff). --and Meyers, T. (1974), A Bibliography of Homeric Scholarship: Preliminary Edition 1930-1970 (Malibu). PAGE,D. L. (1955), The Homeric Odyssey (Oxford). PARRY,A. (1956), 'The Language of Achilles', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 87: 1-7. --(1966), 'Have We Homer's Iliad?', Yale Classical Studies, 20: 177216. --(1972), 'Language and Characterization in Homer', Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, 76: 1-22. PARRY, M. (1971), The Making of Homeric Verse: The Collected Papers of Milman Parry, ed. A. Parry (Oxford) [MHJ/]. PEDRICK,V. (1992), 'The Muse Corrects: The Opening of the Odyssey', in F. Dunn and T. Cole (ed.), Beginnings in Classical Literature, 39-62 (Yale Classical Studies, 29). Pmw:>oITo, J. (1990), Man in the Middle Voice: Name and Narration in the Odyssey (Princeton, NJ). PoRTER,H. N. (1951), 'The Early Greek Hexameter', Yale Classical Studies, 12: 3-63. PoWELL,B. B. ( 1970), 'Narrative Patterns in the Homeric Tale of Menelaos', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 101: 419-31. PRINCE,G. (1987), A Dictionary of Narratology (Univ. of Nebraska Press; repr. London, 1988). Pucci, P. (1982), 'The Proem of the Odyssey', Arethusa, 15: 39-62.

174

Bibliography

PuCCI, P. (1987), OdysseusPolytropos: lntertextual Readings in the Odyssey (Ithaca, NY). R.Aam.,R. J. (1990), 'Apollo as a Model for Achilleus in the Rimi', American Journal of Philology, 111: 429-40. RANK,L. P. (1951), Etymologiseeringbij Homerus (Assen). REDFIELD, J. (1979), 'The Proem of the Iliad-. Homer's Art', Classical Philology, 74: 95-110. RICHAilDSON, N. J. (1974), The Homeric Hymn to Demeter (Oxford). RICHARDSON, S. (1990), The Homeric Narrator (Nashville). RlscH, E. (1974), Wortbildungder homerischenSprache2(Berlin). ROBINS, R. H. ( 198o), GeneralLinguistics:An Introductory Survey3(London). ROMBO, A. (1985), R proemio epico antico (Rome). ROSEN,H. B. (1967), Strukturalgrammatische Beitrllge zum Verstllndnis Homers (Amsterdam). ROSENMEYER, T. G. (1965), 'The Formula in Early Greek Poetry', Arion, 4: 295-311. ROSSI,L. E. (1965), 'Estensione e valore del 'colon' nell'esametro omerico', Studi urbinati, 39: 239-73. Ruuoe, C. J. (1971), Ardour de ft epique (Amsterdam). Russo, J. A. (1963), 'A Closer Look at Homeric Formulas', Transactions of the American PhilologicalAssociation, 94: 235-47. --(1966), 'The Structural Formula in Homer', Yale Classical Studies, 20: 219-40. --(1976), 'Is "Oral" or "Aural" Composition the Cause of Homer's Formulaic Style?', in Shannon and Stolz 1976: 31-71. --FERNANDEZ-GALIANO, M., and IIEuBEcK, A. (1992), A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. iii, bks. 17-24 (Oxford). ' LSACKS, R. (1987), The Traditional Phrase in Homer (Leiden). SALB,W. M. (1989), 'The Trojans, Statistics, and Milman Parry', Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 30: 341-409. ScHADEWALDT, W. (1958), 'Der Prolog der Odyssee', Harvard Studies in ClassicalPhilology, 63: 15-32. ScmuoT, J. (1931), 'Menelaos', in RE xv. 808-29. ScHMIEL,R. (1984), 'Metrically Interchangeable Formulae and Phrase Clusters in Homer', Liverpool ClassicalMonthly, 9: 34-8. ScHwYZER,E. (1931), 'Drei griecbische W6rter', Rheinisches Museum, 80: 209-17. GriechischeGrammatik, vol. i (Munich). --(1939), --and DEBRUNNER, A. (1950), GriechischeGrammatik, vol. ii (Munich). --and GEOilOACAS, D. J. (1953), GriechischeGrammatik, Index (Munich). ScoTI, J. A. (1903), 'The Vocative in Homer and Hesiod', American Journal of Philology, 24: 192-6. -(1936), 'The First Book of the Odyssey', Transactionsof the American Philology Association, 67: 1-6.

Bibliography Scuu.Y, S. (1984), 'The Language of Achilles: The~

175

Formulas', Transactionsof tire American PhilologicalAssociation, 114: 11-27. SEARLE,J. R., and VANDERVEKEN, D. (1985), The Foundations of 11/ocutionary Logic (Cambridge). SBGAL,C. P. (1968), 'The Embassy and the Duals of lliad 9. 182-192', Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies, 9: 101-14. SBVERYNS, A. (1963), Reclrerclressur la Chrestomathie de Proclos, iv. I.A Vita Homeri et /es sommaires du cycle (Paris). SHANNON, R. S., and STOLZ,B. A. (1976), ed. Oral Literature and tire Formula (Ann Arbor, Mich.). SIDPP,G. P. (1972), Studies in tire I.Anguageof Homer (Cambridge). SHIVE,D. (1987), Naming Achilles (Oxford). SNBLL,B., and MEITB, H. J. (1955- ), ed. Lexicon des frahgriechischen Epos (GOttingen) [Lfgr.EJ. STALLBAUM, J. G. (1825-8), Etutathii Commentarii ad Homeri Odysseam (vol. i, Odyssey, 1825; Index, 1828; Leipzig). TAPLIN,0. (1992), Homeric Soundings: The Shapingof tire Iliad (Oxford). THALMANN, W. G. (1984), Conventionsof Form and Thought in Early Greek Epic Poetry (Baltimore). Tmm., H. VAN (1991), Homeri Odyssea (Hildesheim). TltUBETZKOY, N. S. (1939), Grundzilgetier Phonologie (fravaux du cercle linguistique de Prague, 7; Prague). TSAGAIWCIS, 0. (1982), Form and Content in Homer (Hermes Einzelschriften, 46; Wiesbaden). TSOPANAKJS, A. G. (1983), Homeric Researclres(Saloniki). VAN DERVALK, M. H. A. (1971-87), Eustathii Commentarii ad Homeri lliadem (vol. i, 1971; vol. ii, 1976; vol. iii, 1979; vol. iv, 1987; Leiden). VISSER, E. (1987), Homerisclre Versifikationstechni/c(Frankfurt). --(1988), 'Formulae or Single Words? Towards a New Theory on Homeric Verse-Making', WQrzburgerJahrbacher, NS 14: 21-37. VIVANTE, P. (1975), 'On Homer's Winged Words', Classical Quarterly, NS 25: 1-12. -(1980), 'Men's Epithets in Homer: An Essay in Poetic Syntax', Glotta, 58: 157-72. TheEpitlrets in Homer: A Study in Poetic Value (New Haven -(1982a), and London). -(1982h), 'The Syntax of Homeric Epithets of Wine', Glotta, 6o: 13-23. WACE,A. J.B., and STUBBINGS, F. H. (1962), ed. A Companion to Homer (London). J. (1892), 'Ober ein Gesetz cler indogermanischen WortWACKERNAGEL, stellung', lndogermanische Forschungen, 1: 333-436, rcpr. in Kleine Schriften, i (GOttingen, 1955), 1-104. WALCOT, P. (1961), 'The Composition of the Works and Days', REG 34: 1-19.

Bibliography WALCOTI',P. (1976), review of Nagler 1974, Greece and Rome, 23: 195. WATEJNS, c. (1977), 'Apropos de f'flw;', Bulletin de la SociJte Linguistique, 72: 187--209. WEBBEll, A. (1989), 'The Hero Speaks bis Name: Formula and Variation in the Pbaiacian Episode of the Odyssey', Transactions of the American Philological Association, 119: I- 13. WENDl!L,TH. (1929), GuprtJchsanrede im griechischen Epos und Drama tier Bh2tezeit (Stuttgart). WEST,M. L. (1978), Hesiod: Works and Days (Oxford). -(1982a), Greek Metre (Oxford). 'Three Topics in Greek Metre', Clanical Quarterly, NS 32: -(1982"), 281-97. -(1988), 'The Rise of the Greek Epic', Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1o8: 151-72. WHALLON,W. (1961), 'The Homeric Epithets', Yale Clanical Studies, 17: 97-142. -(1966), 'The Shield of Ajax', Yale Clanical Studies, 19: 5-36. -(1969), Formula, Character and Context: Studies in Homeric, Old English and Old Testament Poetry (Washington). WD.LCOCIC., M. M. (1977), review of Nagler 1974, Classical Rel'iew, 91: 265-6. -(1978-84), The Iliad of Homer (2 vols.; London). WINNINGTON-INoRAM, R. P. (1963), ed. Aristides Quintilianus (Leipzig). WYATI, W. F., Jr. (1969), Metrical Lengthening in Homer (Rome). -(1992), response to Daitz 1991, Bryn Mawr Clanical Review (electronic version), 2.7.9. YAMAGATA, N. (1989), 'The Apostrophe in Homer as Part of the Oral Technique', Bulletin of the Institute of Clanical Studies, 36: 91-103.

Software/Electronic Texts CDU (HP IBYCUS), TLG text. OCP (Digital VAX), processed TLG text. SEARCH (ICL 2988), processed TLG text. SEARCHER (PC), TLG text.

INDEX LOCORUM

Theme-words, PNV s, PNN s, and other phenomena discussedin this book are in all attested thousands of times in the Iliad and Odyssey. For many entries only selected examples ·are quoted, and sometimes no specific book/verse references are given (e.g. the localization of the PNVs of Eurymachos and Antinoos, pp. 98-9: no references quoted; -iov6' ~ ... no references quoted). Verses not mentioned by book/line reference in the text/notes (but to which the analysis is relevant) are not listed in this index. Where required, the reader should look up the General Index under the relevant entry (e.g. Eurymachos, PNV of; 'tOV6' ~) and consult a concordance or text-retrieval system for a complete list of relevant examples. Book/line references followed by 'etc.' indicate that the line is commonly repeated elsewhere either in the Iliad or in the Odyssey or in both works. Homer, Iliad I. I-7: 4(>-1 I. 1-2: SO I. I: 52, S I. 5: 26 1. 6: 2s I. 7: 141 I. 8: 25, 30 I. 10: 26 I. 16: 26 I. 19: 30 I. 20: 30 I. 22: 25 I. 24=25, 26 I. 26: 25 I. 28: 25 r. 29: 2s I. 32: 25 I. 33: 25, 26 I. 36: 26 I. 50: 26 I. 54=118 I. 55: 26 I. 58: 132 1. 63: 26 I. 74=IOI I. 75: 54 I. 85-7: 92

I. 85: 25 I. 86: 2S, 91-2 I. 90: 26 I. 91: 26 I. 96:26 I. 98:26 I. 115: 25 I. 118: 25 1. 128: 2s I. 131: 82 I. 133: 25 I. l40: 25 I. 149: 82 I. 152-3: 56 I. 154: 25 I. I 56--9:32-3 I. 158: 2S I. 167: 2S I. 173: 82 I. 174: 2S, 26 I. 177: 2S I. 181: 2S, 26 I. 185: 25 I. 186: 2S, 26 I. 190:26 I. 193: 26 I. 199: 26 I. 208: 26

225: 82 I. 271: 25, 26 I. 337: 109 I. 345: 139 I. 387: SI I. 394=26 1. 400: 12S I. 487: 25 I. 508: 104 I.

2. 1-483: 123 8: 33, 97 2. 24: 147 2. 48-9: 34, 35 2. 61: 147 2. 155: 69 2. 251: 69 2. 26o: 136 2. 314: 96 2. 333-5: 126 2. 371: 102 2. 372: 102-3 2. 394: 26 2. 434, etc.: I I, 101-2 2. 484-760: 122-3 2. 611: 163 2. 617: 163 2. 684: 163 2.

Index Locorwn

178 Homer, lliad (cont.) 2. 761-815: 123, 163 2. 816-77: 122-3 2. 833: 25, 26 2. 851: 163 3. 96: 132 3. 455: 132 4- 127: 1o6-7, 107-8, 154, 155 4. 146: 1o6-7, Io8 4- 169: 104-5, 1o6 4- 189: 1o6 4- 223: 72 4- 229: 26 4- 288: 102 4- 340: 90 4- 354: 136 4- 401: SS 4- 401-21: 97 5. 31: 9, 90, 96 s. :w:ss--6 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5.

117: 102 124: 98 174: 57 177-8: 57 243: 98 444: 54-5 455: 9, 90, 96 138 516: 25, 26 703-4= 111 826: 98

soo:

6.6: 36 6. 55: 1o6 6. 77: 100 6. 164: 91 6. 166: 51 6. 360: 90-1 7. 7. 7. 7.

104-5: 1o8 104: 107 109: 105, 1o6 132: 102

8. 8. 8. 8.

185: 89--90 236: 85 242: 85 399: 97

9. g6: 101-2 9. 145: 165

9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9. 9.

163: 101-2 190: 139 205: 139 219--20: 139 225: IOI 287: 165 346: IOI 413: 69 4:W: 69, 85 485: 85 494: 85 496: 85, IOI 513: 85, IOI 517: 57-8 622: 69 658: 138, 139 673: IOI 677: 101-2 697: 101-2

JO. 43: 1o6 JO. 85: 90 10. 103: 101-2 10. 2)4: 98 10. 280: 102 10. 341: 98 10. 384, etc.: 94 10. 477: 98 10. 509: 69 10. 525: 49 10. 544: IOI I: 34 92: 2 II. 186: 97 II. 430: IOI 11. 463: 107 II. 543: 156, 166 II. 605: 141 II. 606-7: 140 II. 6o6: IOI II. 611: 109 II. 616: 139 11. 647: 138 II. 648-54: 140 II. 656 ff.: 140 II. 786: 118 I I. 804:139 I I. 814-15: 141 II. 816-21: 140 I I. 819: 93-4 II. 823 ff.: 140 I I. 823: I09 II. II.

I I. 838-41: 140 838: 93-4

II·

13. 222: 92 13. 228: 92 13. 601-3: 1o8 13. 603: 107, 154, 155 13. 623-5: 56 14- 43: 90 14- 104: IOI 14- 264--6: 104 14- 366: I 18 14- 470: 96 15. 90: 90 15. 158: 97 15. 221: 103 15· 365: 10 3 15. 390-8: 140-1 I 5· 399--404=140 15. 399: 94 15. 553: 92 15. 582: 92-3 16. 7-11: 110 16. 7: 90, 109 16. 11: 109 16. 20: 109, 112, 154, 155 16. 21-45: 140 16. 21: JOI 16. 49 ff.: 140 16. 49: 109 16. So: 109 16. 82: 69 16. 97-100: 102 16. 97: 102 16. 126: 109 16. 130: 139 16. 168: I 18 16. 198: 118 16. 241: 104 16. 268: 138 16. 269--74: 140 16. 584: 109 16. 627-31: 140 16. 667: 103 16. 684: 139 16. 692-3: 110-11 16. 693: 109 16. 707: 109 16. 710: 139 16. 711: 54-5

Index Locorum 16. 721: 90 16. 744=109, I 12, 154 16. 745-50: 140 16. 754: 109 16. 878: 109, 154 16. 812: 109 16. 830: I09, I 10 16. 837-8: I 10 16. 837: 118 16. 839: 109, I 10 16. 843: 109, 112, 154 16. 844-54: 140 16. 844: 100 16. 855-7: 139 16. 858 ff.: 139 16. 859: I09, I 10 17. 34: 106-7 17. 238: 106 17. 588: 106 17. 652: 106 17. 669:96 17. 679: 107 17. 702: 107 17. 716: 106 18. 292: 104 18. 333: 109, 139 18. 385: 96 18. 424: 96 19. 28: 52 19. 34=52 19. 35: 51, 52 19. 36: 52 19. 75: 53 19. 146: 101-2 19. 199: 101-2 19. 216: IOI 19· 238-40: 93 19. 287 ff.: I 39 19. 287: 109 20. 2: 112 20. 72: 127 20. 152: 103 21. 74: IOI 21. 214=IOI 21. 369: 90 21. 436: 103 21. 448: 103 22. 8: 55 22. 21: 55

22. 477: 85 22. 486:85, 100 23. 19: 109 23. 69-92: 140 23. 69: 85 23. 8o: 85 23. 83: 85 23. 93 ff.: 139 23. 179 ff.: 139 23. 179: 109 23. 226: 36 23. 492-3: 84 23. 493: 97 23. 543: IOI 23. 587-8: 84 23. 588: 105 23. 6oo: 107 24. 88: 96 24. 104: 96 24. 144: 97 24- 11 1: 93 24. 297: 58 24. 336: 97 24· 503: IOI 24. 563: 93 24. 592 ff.: 139 24. 592: 109 24· 661: IOI 24- 669:93 24- 741-2: 84 24- 742: 84 Odyssey

I: 7, 13, 45-6, 58-60 1-2: 50 1. 5: 69, 74, 76 I. 13: 70 I. 14: 134 I. 21: 60 I. 45: 70 I. 48 ff.: 70 I. 62: 104 I. 76-7: 70-2 I. 77-9: 71 I. 87: 72, 73 I. 94: 72-3, 78 I. 113: 136 I. 225: 90 I. 230, etc.: 136 I. 282: 78 I. 287: 77, 78 I. I.

179 I. 326: 76 367: 136 I. 399: 137-8 I.

2. 66: 56-7 2. 177: 137-8 2. 188: 66 2. 215: 73 2. 216: 78 2. 218: 77, 78 2. 220: 125 2. 242: 138 2. 244-51: 64 2. 250: 78 2. 256: 138 2. 264: 73 2. 360: 73 3. 16: 78 3. 24=66, 106 3. 75: 63 3. 80-5: 63 3. 121: 63 3. 124-5: 62-3 3. 125: 62 3. 126: 63 3. I 30--98:68 3. 132-3: 76 3. 132: 76 3. 135: 51, 57 3. 139: 76 3. 141: 76 3. 142: 77 3. 160: 76 3. 231: 67 3. 254-312: 68 3. 330: 132 3. 343: 136 3. 413-14: 125

4 21: 36 4 26: 106 4. 31: 91-2 4. 104 ff.: 75 4 110: 142 4 121: 36 4 138: 106 4 155: 138 4 156: 106 4. 172: 76, 148 4. 183 ff.: 75 4 196: 78 4. 291: 106 4. 312: 90, 100

18o Odyuey (co,rt.)

4- 316-31: 75 4- 316: 1o6 4- 341: 102 4- 351-586: 68 4- 381: 74-6 4- 389-9o: 75 4- 390: 74-6 4- 424=74-6 4- 470: 74-6 4- 555-60=1s.105 4- 555: 105 4- 5s6: 105 4- 561: 105, Jo6 4- 562: 78 4- 51)4-608:75 4- 608: 121 4- 648:138 4- 693: 66 4- 707-10: 78 4- 714=77, 78 4- 804:98 5. 1-2: 3)-8, 131-2 5· 3-4: 38-40, 133 5. 4=132 5. s-6: 132 5. 21: 132 5. 23-4=133-4 5. 24=133 5. 28: 138 5. 31: 72, 73 5. 39: 133 5. 49: 127 5. 51-3: 128 5. 54=127, 128 5. 6,4:125 5. 75: 127 5. 78: 134 5. 85: 134 5. 87: 90, 96 5. 93: 128 5. 94: 127 5. 99: 132 5. 105:67 5. I 16: 134 5. 121-7: 124 5. 121: 131 5. 125: 138 5. 128: 132 5. 129:67 5. 132: 132 5. 135-6: 128

Index Locorum 5. 145: 127 5. 146:56-7 5. 148: 127 5. 153:73 5. 167: 135 5. 171: 133 5. 180: 134 5. 194-7: 128-9 5. 196: 128-9 5. 199: 129 5. 202: 134 5. 203-13: 128 5. 214=133 5. 228: 131 5. 229: 133 5· 239: 125 5· 242: 134 5. 246: 134 5. 251: 133 5. 258: 143 5. 262-4=I 34-5 5. 263: 134 5. 269: 133 5. 276: 134 5. 282: 130 5. 295-6: I 24-5 5. 295: 127 5. 296: 127 5. 304: 132 5. 3o6: 126 5. 308: 78 5. 310: 125 5. 311: 126 5. 321: 134, 135 5. 328: 127 5. 331: 127 5. 332: 127 5. 333-4=13~1 5· 33Cr-40:I 30 5. 339: 129 5. 354: 133 5. 366: 129 5. 370: 133 5. 372: 134, 135 5. 375: 130 5. 382: 132 5. 387: 133 5. 390: 131 5. 409: 132 5. 41er-23:125-6 5. 423: 129 5. 427: 132 5. 436: 133

5. 437: 132 5. 461: 131 5. 481: 133 5. 486:133 5. 491: 132, 133 6. 14=73 6. 27: 63 6. 66: 63 6. 76-T-128 6. 13~2: 17-18 6. J~J: 63 6. 180:63 6. 181:62 6. 186: 138 6. 244=63 6. 2n: 63 7. 6o: 79 7. 115-16: 125 7. 245: 134 7. 254=134 7. 26o: 134 7. 311: 102 8. 9: 73 8. 11-17: 125 8. 92: 61 8. 133:61 8. 138-9: 61-2 8. 144=61 8. 145ff'.:61-2 8. 216: 66 8. 309: 46-7 8. 339: 103 8. 382: 94, I II 8. 388: 137 8. 401: Ill 9. 2: Ill 9. 19: 61 9. 24=121, 125 9. 29: 134 9. 37: n 9. 403: 90 9. 429: 66 9. 494=66 9. 517: IOI 10. 15: 76 10. 64:6o, IOI 10. 73-4=•1 JO. 173:66 10. 330: 45-6

Index Locorum 10. 378: IOI 10. 384, etc.: 94 JO. 540: 73-4, 75 10. 547: 66 10. 539-40: 75 II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II. II.

100: 74 166: 79 196: 77 197: 78 202: II 363: IOI 372: 78 38g: 78 397: 101-2 444: IOI 478: 85, IOI 481: 79 482: 85 486:85 561: 78

12. 97: 125 12. 184: IOI 12. 207: 66 12. 279: IOI 12. 342: 78 12. 419: 76 12. 448: 134 13. 4= IOI 13. 73: 6o 13. 89--91: 6o 13. 132: 77 13. 297-8: 92 13. 379: 77 14- 55: II I 14- 61: 77-8 14- 165: 111 14- 173: 136 14- 274: 78 14- 283-4= 56 14- 309: 76, 148 14- 360: I II 14- 366: 74 14- 38o: 66 14- 401: 153 1,4.440: 11I 14- 442: Ill 14- 462: I 11 14- 507: 111 15- 3: 77 15. 48: 138

15. 64; 106 15. 69: Ill 15. 87: 106 15. II I: 76 15. 167-8: 106 15. 167: 106 15. 224: 7, 66 15. 272: 66 15. 307: 111 15. 325: II 1-12 15. 341: II I 15. 381: Ill 15. 486: 111 15. 502: 136 15. 544: 138 16. 8: Ill 16. 23: 100 16. 29: 47 16. 6o: III 16. 69: 111 16. 88--9: 63-4, 100 16. 8g: 62 16. 135: 111 16. 156: 153 16. 294= 66 16. 435: g8 16. 461: 111 16. 464:III 17. 41: 100 17. 68: 125 17. 106: 74 17. 132: 102 17. 219: 82 17. 264= 111 17. 272: Ill 17. 306: II I 17. 311: Ill 17. 328: 136 17. 38o: Ill 17. 391: 136 17. 508: Ill 17. 512: Ill 17. 561: I II 17. 576: Ill 17. 579: 111 18. 3-4: 89 18. y-7: 8g 18. 38: 64 18. 41: 64 18. 49: 64 18. 51: 64

181

18. 52-3: 64 18. 53: 62, 64 18. 79-81: 64-5 18. 81: 62 18. I IO-I7: 76 18. 175: 78 18. 235: 102 18. 245: 98 18. 285: 98 19. 13: 66 19. 64:36 19. 209: 67 19. 357--9: 9s-6 19. 357: 95-6 19. 395: 103 20. 169: Ill 21. 144-7: 99 2 1. 167-73: 93 21. 176: 93 21. 2)4: Ill 21. 321: 95, g8 21. 381: II, 95-6 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22. 22.

8: 65 22: 65, 66 29-30: 65 31-2: 6s-6 32: 7, 13, 62, 147 136: 92 157: Ill 194: I II, 112 226: IOI 294: 138 312: IOI 317: 78 323: 79 344: IOI 416: 78 461: 136

23. 23. 23. 23. 23. 23. 23. 23. 23. 23.

5: 98 68: 77, 78--9 175-6: g6 177: 9s-6 205-8: 100 209-17: 100 209: 100-1 253: 74, 148 303: 47 351: 77

Index Locorum

182 Odyssey (cont.)

24- 1: 127 24- 22: 78 24- 31: 78 24- 36: 85, IOI 24- 72: 85 24- 76: 85 24- 94=85 24- 121: 101-2 24- 240: 62 24- 244 ft'.:62 24- 266: 62 24- 270: 62 24- 375: 137 24- 376: 102 24- 441: 66 7.enodotos OD II. g6

2.

314:

Scbolia OD Od. 6. 180: 63 h. 11(Cer.) 1-2: So h. IY(Mec.) 1-2: So 13: 45 439: 45 h. Y (Ym.) 218--38:131 h. XII: 49 h. XIV: 49 h. XY: 49 h. XYI: 49 h. XYII: 49 h. XYIII: 49 h. XX: 49 h. XXIII: 49 h. XXYII: 49 h. XXX: 49 h. XXXI: 49 h. XXXII: 49

IL P.

1-2:

So

Mimnermus, fr. 4 (West): 131 Nikandros of K.olophon, Tlumaca I. 541: 72 I. 715: 72 Scholia OD Nikandros 716: 72 Orph. Frag. 48(Kern):

49, 68 T7reb.1-2: 50 Virgil, Aeneid 1. 1:

so

1.

GENERALINDEX

accusative see theme-word pattern Achaioi: PNN of 125, 12fr7; see also Danaoi Achilleus: alternative PNN forms 1 1fr 17; alternative PNV forms 101; and Agamemnon 32-3, 82, 101-2; apostrophe to 82, 112 and n. 100; and Bienor 2-3; and epic core 117; and Helctor 99; intransigence of 112-13; narrative role and frequency of name 2-3; and ordinary heroes 99; and Patroklos 110; PNN of 11fr18; PNN lncaJiud but not formulaic 118; PNV forms and those of Odysseus 100; PNV of 86, 100-1; and poet 62 n. 52, 110 and n. 93, 155; positioning of name 30; and Trojans 56; wrath of 52-3, 57-8 Agamemnon: and Achilleus 101-2; not apostrophiud 112-13; PNN of 117; PNV of 101-2 AgeJaos, PNV of 92 Aiantes: PNN of (both T. and 0.) 11S19; PNV of (both T. and 0.) 99 Aineias, PNV of 99 AioJos 6o Aithon, PNV of 89 AJkinoos, PNV of 99 iuJ.a, see overriding of patterns alJegro/semiallegro, see phonostyJes ambiguity/ambivalence 141; see also deixis; PNN patterns; PNV patterns Amphitrite, PNN of 125-6 and n. 31 analysis of technique and intuitive understanding 4, 14, 16, 41-2 and n.

SS

anaphora 4S-9 and n. 18, 59, 64 n. 55; and denotation 61; and point of view 61, 64 lmie:and anaphora 59; &v6Qaand formulae 7-8; borderline categories 64 n. 56, 67; category 1: 59-62;

category 2: 62-6; category 3: 66; category 4: 6