Christos Tsagalis

Epic Grief

w DE

G

Untersuchungen zur antiken Literatur und Geschichte

Herausgegeben von Gustav-Adolf Lehmann, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath

und Otto Zwierlein

Band 70

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

Epic Grief

Personal Laments in Homer's Iliad

by

Chris to s Tsagalis

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

© Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.

ISBN 3-11-017944-X

Library of Congress - Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress

Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek

Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deut-schen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im

Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar

© Copyright 2004 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin

All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in

writing from the publisher. Printed in Germany

Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin

Acknowledgements

Καιρός τοϋ σπείρειν, καιρός τοϋ θερίζειν wrote George Seferis many years ago,* but it is only now, as I write these lines, that I feel the depth of this metaphor like the good ploughman who has sown his field and eagerly awaits harvest time. I only hope that both seeds and field were good.

This book began its long journey to the Homeric seas as a PhD dissertation submitted to the Classics Department of Cornell University at the end of 1997. Its present state is much different, and I feel the need to dwell for a while on the various changes done for this thorough revision.

One completely new chapter ("Distance, Closeness and Mors Immatura: Common Motifs in the Iliadic Personal Laments"), has been added. Chapters 1 and 4 ("The Morphology of the Iliadic Personal Laments" and "Ars Allusiva: Intratextual Readings in the Iliadic Personal Laments") have been thoroughly revised and the appendix on Iliadic short obituaries has been considerably enriched. A chapter on the poetics of Thetis' personal lament (to appear in QUCC) and the second appendix of my thesis ("Localization and Metrical Shape of Lament Terms in the Iliad'') have been omitted.

Many people have helped me improve my work in various ways. For a first acquaintance with deixis and its poetics, I would like to express my gratitude to Lucia Athanassaki and Natassa Peponi for inviting me to attend a Conference in Delphi on Deixis in Greek and Latin Literature. I also offer special thanks to two of my colleagues in Crete, Stavros Frangoulidis and Yannis Tzifopoulos, as well as to Prof. George Christodoulou in Athens, Michael Lipka and Andreas Markantonatos (to whom I owe the first part of the book's title) in Patras for their encouragement and insistence on the importance of turning this dissertation into a book. For their generosity in offering valuable criticism on this study, I would like to thank Fred Ahl, Kevin Clinton, Richard

' Γ. Σεφέρης, «Τελευταίος Σταθμός», Ημερολόγιο Καταστρώματος Β', "Ικαρος, Athens 199217.

VI Acknowledgements

Martin, Nanno Marinatos, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, Philippe Rousseau and Jeff Rusten. Finally, I acknowledge a long-standing debt to Pietro Pucci, who initiated me to Homeric advanced research, both in a seminar on the Iliad during the Fall of 1994 and during the preparation for a Conference in Lausanne in May 1995. He directed my work from its first beginnings with learning, fine Italian gusto and confidence in my abilities.

For almost idyllic conditions of research, I am indebted mainly to the the following libraries: Olin and Uris in Ithaca, the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, the British School, Γ École Française d' Athènes, the Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut in Athens, the Central Library of the University of Crete at Rethymnon and the Classics Library of the University of Athens. I would also like to express my gratitude to the following Publishing Houses for their permission to use material from their sources: (1) E. V. Rieu and Dominic Rieu, The Odyssey by Homer (Penguin Classics, 1946, Revised edition 1991) Copyright © 1946 by E. V. Rieu, Revised translation © the Estate of the late E. V. Rieu, and D. C. H. Rieu, 1991, and (2) approximately forty-six selections from THE ILIAD OF HOMER, transi. R. Lattimore (1951), University of Chicago Press, copy-right © 1951 by the University of Chicago. All rights reserved.

On a personal level, I am truly grateful to Anna for her patience in proofreading the indexes and the bibliography, and no less for shoring me up in my hour of need.

My greatest debt is of a different nature, equally important, albeit not academic. This book is, therefore, dedicated to my parents Constantinos and Mary and to my brother George for all those things that cannot be calculated, only gratefully acknowledged.

C.C.T. Athens March 2004

Contents

Chapter 1 Reading Madie Lament

1. Death in the Iliad 1 2. Γόοι vs Θρήνοι 2 3. Selection Criteria 8

a. Rethinking the Formula 9 b. Using Textual Markers 14 c. Thematic Typology 15

4. Types of Γόοι 16 5. Cenre and Sub-genre 17 6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι 21 7. Scope of Research 22

Chapter 2 The Typology of the Illiadic γόοι

2.1. Introductory Remarks 27 2.2. Praising Address 32 2.3. "Comparison" 36 2.4. Common fate 39 2.5. "Death-Wish" 42 2.6. Past and Present 44 2.7. Tripartite Structure 46 2.8. Ring-Composition 47 2.9. Antiphonal Element 48

Chapter 3 Introductory and Closing Formulas

3.1. Speech-formulas, speech-classification and γόος-speeches 53 3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 55

3.2.1. Single-verse introductions 55 3.2.2. Multi-verse introductions 58

3.3. Personal lament speech closures 64

VIII Contents

3.3.1. Single-verse closures 64 3.2.2. Multi-verse closures 65

3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus 68 3.4.1. Privileged Individuals 68 3.4.2. Unprivileged Chorus 72

Chapter 4 Distance, Separation and Mors Immatura: Common Motifs in the Iliadic γόοι

4.1. Distance and Separation 75 4.1.1. Dying away from one's native land 76 Verbal and Local Deixis 76 4.1.2. Bereaved parents and family 88

4.2. Closeness 90 4.2.1. Personal Deixis (I) 90 4.2.2. Personal Deixis (II) 94 4.3.3. Personal Deixis (III) 99

4.3. Mors immatura 103 4.3.1. Personal Deixis and Narratee Shift 103 4.3.2. Temporal Deixis and Point of View 105

Chapter 5 Intratextual Readings

5.1. Introductory Remarks 109 5.2. Agamemnon 112 5.3. Andromache 118

5.3.1. Iliad 6 118 5.3.2. Iliad22 129 5.3.3. Iliad24 133

5.4. Thetis 136 5.5. Briséis 139 5.6. Achilles 143

5.6.1. Iliad 18 143 5.6.2. Iliad 19 148

5.7. Priam 151 5.8. Hecuba 154

Contents I X

5.8.1. Iliad 22 154 5.8.2. Iliad 24 158

5.9. Helen 161

Conclusion 166

Appendix I Privileged and Unprivileged Dead

1. Unreported γόοι in the Iliad 171 2. The Therapeutics of Lament 174

Appendix II Short obituaries in the Iliad

1. Introductory remarks 179 2. Types of Short Obituaries 181

2.1. The Brief SO 181 2.2. The Expanded SO 182

3. Iliadic γόοι between mirroring and deflecting 188

Table 1 51 Table 2 112

Bibliography

Editions, Commentaries, Concordances, Grammars, Léxica 193 Works Cited 195

Indexes

General Index 219 Index of Homeric Passages 222 Index of Greek Words 229

Chapter 1

"... the Iliad is a unity in a deeper sense than is sometimes allowed, embodying a clear and unique vision of the world, of heroism and of life and death.'"

Jasper Griffin Homer on Life and Death

I. Death in the Iliad

The Iliad is about the wrath of Achilles and the disasters it inflicted upon the Achaean army; that is what its proem prepares us for.2 From the very beginning of the poem, suffering and destruction creep up in the scene and remain there virtually until the very end. The Iliad begins with pain and suffering in the Achaean camp (due to the plague sent by Apollo), and ends with pain and suffering in the city of Troy (during Hector's funeral).

As one of the fundamental themes of this epic, death is not simply envisaged as a static phenomenon, but is replete with a remarkable dynamism, since it initiates and later on enhances a sequence of events that lead the Iliad to its destined end. The killing of Patroclus in Book 16 introduces the peripeteia which will be completed with Hector's death in Book 22 and his funeral in Book 24. Thus "das große Gedicht vom Tod", as Marg3 has put it, makes death the prevailing, unbroken theme which directs the action.

The range of responses to death covers both physiological and psy-chological reactions such as grief, as well culturally determined conduct such as mourning.4 The principal poetic by-product of the deaths of warriors is lament, which is expressed by mourning scenes and description of

1 Griffin (1980) 16. 2 See 1.1-7 (where a reference is not specified, I refer to the Iliad). 3 Marg (1965) 39. 4 See Derderian (2001) 4 referring to the work of Baudy (1980) 129-142.

2 Chapter 1

funerals5, by short obituaries reported by the external narrator, by the θρήνος6 and the γόοι, a special form of lament referring to the dead and uttered by the next of kin or a close friend.

The γόοι are the only marked form of lament speech verbalized in the Iliad. This fact makes them significant, for they form part of a ritual or, at times, a ritualized process, the Totenkult, and are linked to the theme of death which dominates the whole of the Iliad·, Reinhardt was right in saying that the Iliad is, from beginning to end, Todesdichtung (death poetry) and it is perhaps this fact that increases the importance of this marked form of lament; thus, the γόοι embody the poetics of lamentation that encompass the whole poem and are interwoven with almost every other major theme in preparing the final act: the death and lamentation for Hector. It seems that when the lament is over, it is time for the poem to end.

2. Γόοι and Θρήνοι

The most celebrated passage for the purpose of this study is 24. 719-722, where the Iliad makes the distinction between the θρήνοι and the γόοι.8

οι δ' έπεί είσάγαγον κλυτά δώματα, τον μέν επειτα τρητοις έν λεχέεσσι θέσαν, παρά δ' εισαν άοιδούς θρήνων έξάρχους, οϊ τε στονόεσσαν άοιδήν οι μέν άρ' έθρήνεον, έπ'ι δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες. (24.719-722)'

5 As in Book 23 for Patroclus and in 24 for Hector. 6 For the loss of minor figures such as the sons of Diocles, Simoeisius etc. 7 There are also non-expressed lament speeches or threnodies (θρήνοι), which would be

normally uttered by professional singers (θρηνψδοί), and unreported γόοι (indicated or alluded to by specific expressions containing the word γόοι).

* See Alexiou (2002) 102-103, who notes that "...Homeric and archaic usage may have distinguished θρήνος and γόος according to the ritual manner of their performance, using θρήνος for the set dirge composed and performed by the professional mourners, and γόος for the personal weeping of the kinswomen. Further, early instances point to the θρήνος as more ordered and polished, often associated with divine performers and a dominant musical element".

9 The text of the Iliad is that of West (1998-2000).

2. Γόοι and Θρήνοι 3

And when they had brought him inside the renowned house, they laid him then on a carved bed, and seated beside him the singers who were to lead the melody in the dirge, and the singers chanted the song of sorrow, and the women were mourning beside them.

Here we have a clear description of one of the principal forms of lament, the θρήνος, which involves two groups of mourners, professionals and kinswomen. The lament begins with the musical θρήνος sung by the professionals and answered by the chorus' wailing, and is then continued by the next of kin, each uttering a γόος-speech capped by a refrain of cries from the chorus.10

A number of specialized terms used for the lament can be observed in this passage: 1) the word έξάρχους, describing the preeminent role of the singers of the θρήνος who lead the lament, while the chorus of women accompany them with their mourning; 2) the words άοιδή/άοιδοΰς, referring explicitly to the professionals who utter the θρήνοι and to the character of their utterances, indicating that the θρήνοι are songs sung by singers who usually perform this task (generalizing τε);" 3) the similarity between line 24. 722 and the usual closing formula that caps a γόος-speech: οι μέν αρ' έθρήνεον, έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες and ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες; 4) the presence of four Iliadic hapaxes in these four lines: άοιδός, θρηνεΐν, θρήνος, εξαρχος;12 5) the

10 According to Seremetakis (1991) 125, the social parameters of the Homeric θρήνος (which is solely performed by professional singers, the άοιδοί) have been treated in Inner Mani as a performative relation. Performative rights and precedence in the order of performance are often granted to an exceptionally skilled mourner, even if he/she is only distantly related to the deceased.

11 On the particle τε in epic diction (not only Homeric), see the meticulous and exhaustive study by Ruijgh (1971) and GH II, 340-345, especially 343-344.

12 In II. 18. 604-606 = Od. 4. 17-19 (τερπόμενοι· μετά δέ σφιν έμέλπετο θείος άοιδός / φορμίζων- δοιώ δέ κυβιστητήρε κατ' αυτούς, / μολπής έξάρχοντος, έδίνευον κατά μέσσου), there is a description of a dance on the Shield of Achilles; the words άοιδός and έξάρχοντες are attested in lines 604 and 606 respectively, but μετά δέ σφιν έμέλ-πετο θειος άοιδός / φορμίζων do not appear in any manuscript of the Iliad; they have been restored by some editors because Athenaeus (V 180c and 181°) reports that these lines were taken out of the Iliad by Aristarchus; they also change έξάρχοντες to έξάρ-χοντος so that it agrees with άοιδοϋ, which should be understood from the previous

4 Chapter 1

peculiarity of the syntax in 721-722. As Willcock13 notes: " The relative clause is disrupted by a change of intention. It begins as if it is merely going to describe the proceedings of the άοιδοί, but then in 722 distinguishes their behavior from that of women".14

The abundance of poetic terminology (άοιδός, άοιδή, θρηνεΐν, θρήνος, εξαρχος), suggests the poetic nature of both the γόοι and the θρήνοι. In particular, the θρήνοι are defined as στονόεσσα άοιδή (sorrowful song),15

an expression directly leading to the very nature of lament poetiy. The term άοιδή (song) is an action noun and therefore describes poetry not as something completed and stable, but as something in progress, underway, not as είναι but as γίγνεσθαι. It consequently refers to something that is closer to activity and performance than to a text or an aesthetic object.16

The θρήνοι are sung by άοιδοί,17 professional singers whose presence gives the passage a rather solemn tone; for what is described here is a true representation of a socially constructed occasion that belongs to the organization of public life. In a song culture such a reference gains special weight, for it calls attention to the existence of a genre which will be reenacted through poetry."

A similar passage is also found in the Odyssey:

άμφί δέ σ' έστησαν κοΰραι άλίοιο γέροντος οικτρ' όλοφυρόμεναι, περί δ' άμβροτα εϊματα εσσαν. Μοϋσαι δ' έννέα πάσαι άμειβόμεναι όπί καλή

line; Van der Valk (1964) 530 thinks that έξάρχοντες should stand as it is. Nonethe-less, εξαρχος in 24. 721 is a hapax, as it is a noun and not a participle like έξάρχο-ντες; as far as άοιδός is concerned, I tend to side with West (ad loc. in his Teubner edition), who does not supply this line since it is not given by the manuscript tradition.

13 Willcock (1984) 321. 14 See Eustathius ad. loc. (van der Valk 977): «έπεί ή γάρ στονόεσσα άοιδή, δ έστιν ό

θρήνος, ούκ ήν και άνδρων και γυναικών, άλλ' αί μέν έστενάχοντο, οι δ' έθρήνουν, δι« τοϋτο ειπών 'οΐ στονόεσσαν άοιδήν', ô ούκ ήν δ' άμφοϊν κοινόν, έπαναλαβών κα'ι μερίσας διευκρίνησεν».

15 See 24. 721. 16 Ford (1992) 15 and LfgrE s.v. άοιδή 2:"Gesang als Tätigkeit, wobei... der Charakter

des nom. act. jedoch immer gewahrt bleibt (nicht 'Werk')". 17 On άοιδός in Homer, see Kraus (1955) 65-87; Maehler (1963) 9-34; Svenbro (1976)

18-38; Thalmann (1984) 157-184; Gentiii (1988) 3-23; Goldhill (1991) 56-68; Ford (1992) 90-130; Segal (1994) 113-141.

'« See Ford (1992) 14.

2. Γόοι and θρήνοι 5

θρήνεον- ενθα κεν οΰ τιν' άδάκρυτόν γ' ένόησας Άργείων τοΐον γάρ ύπώρορε Μοΰσα λιγεΐα. {Od. 24. 58-62)"

The daughters of the Old Sea-god stood round you with bitter lamentations, and wrapped your body in an imperishable shroud. The Nine Muses chanted your dirge in sweet antiphony and you would not have seen a single Argive without tears in his eyes, such was the clear-voiced Muses' song.

Heubeck20 thinks that in the light of the Iliadic passage I have quoted above (24. 719-722), "we should suppose that the Muses act as άοιδοί (θρήνεον, 61), while the role taken in the earlier passage by the Trojan women, is here assigned to the Nereids (οϊκτρ' όλοφυρόμεναι, 59)".21

From these two passages we can chart the basic similarities and differences between the γόοι and the θρήνοι. The γόοι are personal lamentations uttered by the next of kin, and are delivered in speech (not sung) by both male and female mourners. The θρήνοι are musical laments, set-dirges22 sung by non-kin professionals; they probably contain "a praise to the dead referring to their deeds or a lament in more general terms"23

and are artistic in nature with less improvisation and spontaneity than the γόοι. They are (like the γόοι) capped by cries or even phrases, probably in the manner of a refrain, expressed by a chorus. Both γόοι and θρήνοι represent a marked form of speech reserved only for the great heroes.24 It is hard to tell whether the θρήνοι were gender-oriented.25 The majority of

" The text of the Odyssey used is the OCT (Allen, 1917-1919). 20 Russo/Fernandez-Galiano/Heubeck (1992) 366-367. 21 Bowra (1961) 5 argued that in Homer the chorus had not found its final duty (apart

from the γόοι, there are other instances in the Iliad where there is a chorus, like the παιάν in 1. 472-474, the description of the ύμέναιος in 18. 493 ff., the λίνος in 18. 567), and that the leader, for whom a special term is used (έξάρχων), plays a preeminent role.

22 See II. 24. 720; Od. 24. 60; Pi. P. 12. 6-8,1. 8. 63-64; Plato R. 388d, 398e; Plut. Sol. 21.5 .

23 Kornarou (2001) 21 bases this claim on Reiner (1938) 62-63 (who supports the idea of a θρήνος praising a hero's past deeds), and Harvey (1955) 169 (who argues that the θρήνος would contain a lament in general terms).

24 The Iliadic γόοι are addressed to Menelaus, Patroclus, Achilles and Hector; the θρήνοι are reserved for Hector (in the Iliad) and Achilles (in the Odyssey).

23 The γόοι were not gender-oriented. In the Iliad the majority of mourners are female

6 Chapter 1

scholars26 associate the performance of the θρήνοι with male hired mourners, but Od. 24. 58-62 poses a serious problem, since all the mourners (Muses and Nereids) are female.27 Although the entire matter involves a high degree of speculation, I would rather side with those who argue for the exclusive performance of the θρήνοι by hired male singers. Exclusive female performance of the θρήνος for Achilles must be set against the backcloth of the great hero's divine parentage on his mother's side. The exceptional position Achilles occupies within the heroic community entails certain modifications in the description of a typical θρήνος-scene, and is responsible for the presence of female mourners who testify to his association with the divine world through Thetis. A lament sung by goddesses (playing the role of the professional άοιδοί) would be quite appropriate for the son of Thetis, as it would certainly give him, even through his loss, greater prestige and glory. It seems highly improbable to me that a real θρήνος would solely involve hired female singers, as professional song can hardly have been female-oriented at such an early date.

The most puzzling question relating to the distinction between the γόοι and the θρήνοι concerns the rich representation of the former in the Iliad on the one hand, and the complete absence of the latter on the other. It is, of course, widely known that the Iliad, in presenting itself as the poem which sings the κλέος of Achilles and the άχος/πένθος for Hector, never cites the songs of other competitive singers,2' as does the Odyssey in the

(Thetis, Andromache, Hecuba, Helen), but there are also male mourners (Agamemnon, Achilles, Priam).

26 See Sourvinou-Inwood (1983) 39; Hutchinson (1985) 191; Easterling (1991) 149; Shapiro (1991) 636; Segal (1993) 57-58.

27 In view of Od. 24. 58-62, of some ancient sources (Aesch. Cho. 733, Plato Lg. VII 800e, Plut. Sol. 21.4) and of the fact that women play a more prominent role in iconographie representations of πρόθεσις-scenes, Kornarou (2001) 21 recently argued that the θρήνος was exclusively performed by hired female mourners. I am afraid I have to disagree with this claim, given that the ancient sources she refers to are much later than the Homeric θρήνοι and are unlikely to have reflected archaic practice; moreover, iconographie representations may simply reflect the more prominent role of female mourners in general, not specifically while performing the θρήνος. In addition, there is an inherent difficulty in determining iconographically whether we are dealing with the representation of a γόος or a θρήνος. For Od. 24. 58-62, see main text above.

28 Maronitis (1999) 157-159 rightly argues that it is the linear deployment of the plot in the Iliad which is partly "responsible" for the lack of internal narratives, internal poets

2. Γόοι and θρήνοι 7

case of Demodocus.29 This may be one of the reasons why the Iliad avoids the professional lamentations, the θρήνοι or set-dirges of the άοιδοί, but extensively quotes the γόοι. The latter abound in condensed characteristics of the inherited θρήνοι (such as those concerning the performance framework they follow)30 and themes taking their cue from the Iliad itself; in other words, the typology of the γόοι is combined with the very nature of the poem that has given birth to them. The γόοι are personal laments uttered by individuals closely related to the deceased; they are their friends or relatives, not δημιοεργοί, and so the Iliad "is allowed" to give them in full." Such a solution, however, does not cater for all cases. For, if the answer is the typical Iliad vs Odyssey differentiation on most matters poetical, why then does the Odyssey not cite or quote the content of the set-dirge or θρήνος for Achilles by the Muses and the Nereids in 24. 58-62? This question becomes all the more pertinent when we consider that the Odyssey cites or quotes in reported speech the song of other professional singers such as Demodocus or Phemius.

The suppression of the θρήνος for Achilles in Odyssey 24 is due both to specific parameters emanating from the immediate narrative and to a general odyssean narrative strategy. The immediate alternative for the Odyssey was to have Agamemnon -the speaker in this passage- either give the θρήνος of the Muses in reported speech or quote it in direct speech; both options must have been (rightly so) quite unthinkable. It would have been rather inappropriate to use this scene for such an elaborate lamenta-tion of Achilles. The internal audience, both the suitors who have recently arrived in the Underworld and the heroes of the Trojan War who have been there for some time, must listen to a praise for Odysseus. His ολβος

(in the manner of Demodocus or Phemius) and other songs embedded in the main narrative.

19 One should note that the first (Od. 8. 73-82) and the third (Od. 8. 499-520) songs of Demodocus are given in reported speech; in 8. 266 if. his second song starts in reported speech but very soon slips into direct speech. The references to the other άοι-δοί, Thamyris in II. 2. 594-600 and the two anonymous singers in Argos (Od. 3. 267-271) and Sparta (Od. 4. 17-18), are insignificant. Phemius (Od. 22. 330-353) speaks to Odysseus but his song is not given either in direct or reported speech. For a comparison between Demodocus in Scheria and Phemius in Ithaca, see Marg (1957) 11 and Pucci (1987) 201-207.

30 This is clearly seen in the case of ritualistic (Iliad 22) or ritual γόοι (Iliad 24). 51 See Andronikos (1968) 12-13.

8 Chapter 1

surpasses that of both Achilles, who won κλέος but did not gain his νόστος since he died at Troy, and Agamemnon, whose νόστος was practically nullified by his own murder once he arrived at Mycenae.32 Moreover, the narrative conditions (based on a typology of odyssean internal narratives)33

are not fulfilled. In particular, the placement of the scene in the Under-world annuls all the temporal and spatial specifications which the Odyssey typically employs when offering an internal narrative. This is compounded by the masked absence of a request for such a speech, which the internal narrator only somewhat grudgingly utters if specifically called upon to do so. Within the above narrative parameters a threnodic encomium for Achilles would have been rather unfitting, to say the least.

3. Selection Criteria

It is well known that 45% of the Iliad consists of speeches. Attempts to classify them into categories were first made long ago, the best known being that of Fingerle34 and the most recent that of Bezantakos.35 In this study I have used three different but complementary criteria for the selec-tion of the Iliadic γόοι,36 namely: 1) introductory and closing formulas; 2)

32 On the supremacy of Odysseus and of the Odyssey vs Achilles, Agamemnon and the poetic traditions they represent, see Danek (1998) 486-487 and Tsagalis (2003) 43-56.

33 For a typology of internal narratives in the Odyssey, see Maronitis (1999) 162-164. 34 Fingerle (1939); for speech classification in the Odyssey, see Larrain (1987). 35 Bezantakos (1996). 36 Derderian's (2001) 33-34 classification of γόοι is problematic since only four of the

formal laments she cites occur in a ritual context and one is expressed by a male mourner, Achilles (23. 19-23). Derderian includes in her discussion four other laments (34, ft. 76) which she does not consider as γόοι because they are not labeled as such (which is true) but exemplify more or less the same typical themes, motifs and features of the formal γόοι. What Derderian has failed to see is that the γόοι "are bound more by structure and content than ritual performance context" (Hame 2001) and that they are not a female-genre but a female-dominated genre. Derderian has not consulted Fingerle who offers a constructive, albeit not complete, guide to the use of reliable criteria for classifying Iliadic speeches in general. To use a typical example, Achilles' speech to Patroclus in 23. 19-23 is not a γόος, despite of the standard introductory formula that is employed before the γόοι. The content and structure of this speech are very different from any other lament; the use of the typical introductory formula is rather due to the funereal context of Book 23 that "invites" the use of lament vocabulary.

3. Selection Criteria 9

other textual markers such as those often found outside the personal laments, indicating that a speech to follow or one which has just been completed is identified as a γόος; 3) thematic (and partly structural) typology -by this I am referring not only to the actual content of a speech, but also to a broadly defined set of motifs that the Iliadic γόοι employ and arrange in a more or less stereotypical manner. In my view the formulation of these criteria calls for some justification.

a. Rethinking the Formula

The groundbreaking discoveries of Milman Parry37 opened up new areas in the study of Homeric poetry, which began to be examined not as the work of a single gifted poet but as oral poetry. Parry's research38 originated from his thorough examination of the formulaic nature of Homeric epic, but gained in strength and was broadened in scope after extensive field-work in the living oral-tradition of the guslari in former Yugoslavia. Albert Lord continued and completed Parry's field-work, the results of which enabled him to offer, via well-founded comparisons between Homeric and Southslavic epic poetry, a more coherent theory for the oral nature of the Homeric poems.39

Yet soon after Parry's brilliant discoveries, scholars who supported the idea of a "written Homer" complained that the "deification" of the formula

37 See Parry (1971). For typical scenes in Homer, the scientific incipit belongs to Arend (1933).

" A number of scholars (Bekker, Fick, Robert, Dilntzer, Ellendt, Hinrichs, Witte, Meister) had partly anticipated the Panyan "discovery" of the formula, but they did not work out a general, cohesive theory, nor did they realize the far-ranging implica-tions of such an approach. See Holoka (1991) 456-481. Recently, Hummel (1998) 55-71 has drawn attention to the fact that certain of the main arguments of Parry had been already expressed (though not in a systematic manner), by Pierre-Antoine Grenier in 1861. These early studies in no way undermine the revolutionary contribution of Milman Parry to Homeric research and the field of Oral Poetics. From the very beginning, Chantraine (1929) 294-300 correctly observed that Parry was the first scholar to study noun-epithet formulas in a systematic manner, and realized that his approach "renouvelle la philologie homérique" (294).

" See Lord (1948) 34-44; (1951a) 57-61; (1951b) 71-80; (1953) 124-134; (1956) 301-305; (1960); (1968) 1-46, (1969) 18-30; (1970) 13-28; (1976) 1-15; (1981) 451-461; (1986a) 467-503; (1986b) 19-64; (1986c) 313-349; (1991); (1995).

10 Chapter 1

and theme as essential compositional devices of Homeric poetry would irrevocably injure the idea of the individual poetic genius of Homer and would, eventually, turn the Iliad and the Odyssey into "mechanical tours-de-force".40 On the other hand, it has to be stated that the oral theory (as advocated by Pany and Lord41) and, the formula in particular, was cha-racterized by a certain rigidity and lack of flexibility. Scholars began modifying the Parryan definition of the formula, so as to demonstrate that it was not deprived of meaning, that it had a functional and not only a metrical role and that it formed part of a much more complex and technically sophisticated system of composition, one considerably more flexible than that initially conceived.42 While these modifications to no extent undermine the importance of Parry and his school's groundbreaking discoveries, they did not lead to a division of the scholarly world reminiscent of the older and admittedly harsher division between Analysts and Unitarians. Such was the impact of the emergence of oral-formulaic theory that it shifted the interest from the"Homeric Question" to the search for an oral Homer.43

One of the central questions asked concerned the amount of control the singer could exercise on traditional material and the degree to which he was able to create nuances, ironies and various semantical alterations to the stock of expressions he had inherited from the tradition. Foley, one of the most trustworthy authorities in the field of oral poetics, has summariz-ed the above problems by using two sets of dichotomies: (a) inherent vs conferred and (b) connotative vs denotative meaning.44 These "binary tensions"45 do not, in any way, represent restrictions delineating a functional framework within which verbal art, either in its oral-traditional or textual form, must be placed.

Such a "Great Divide", as Finnegan has shown,46 exists only in the mind of those scholars who attribute any single divergence from the norm

40 Foley (1991) xii. 41 I am here referring to Lord's initial studies. 42 The most noteworthy early efforts to modify the Parryan definition of the formula

were made by Hoekstra (1965), Nagler (1967) and Hainsworth (1968). 43 The bibliography on oral-formulaic theory is immense. The most comprehensive

survey for the research carried out, that I am aware of, is that of Foley (1985). See also Edwards (1986 & 1988) for the formula and (1992) for the type-scenes.

44 Foley (1991) xiv. 45 Foley (1991) xiv. « Finnegan (1977).

3. Selection Criteria 11

(dictional or thematic) to authorial activity and, at the end of the day, consider orality as the trademark of poetic primitivism.

The next step from Finnegan's questioning the existence of a dividing line between oral and written literature is the very idea of writing. Pucci,47

following Derrida,48 employed this term "to refer to the original oral mode of composition and performance of the lays that developed diachronically in the Iliad and the Odyssey'V This post-structuralist50 interpretation of writing extends beyond the limitations of script, for it involves both graphic and phonic signifiers. By adopting such an interpretation of writing and using it for Homeric poetry, Pucci was able to bypass the obstacle set by the polarity between oral versus written literature. For him, Homeric poetry is orally- derived, i.e. oral in nature, but such "a technically complex form of orality and therefore an elaborate 'text' composed through the differential systems of the sign" that it should be treated as a kind of writingIn this way, Homeric formulaic diction is fully compatible with intertextuality and allusion,52 features which have traditionally been re-garded as signs of written composition.53

More recently, Nagy insisted on attempting the broad brush-strokes needed to avoid unnecessary confusion between two essential notions for oral poetics, textualization or textuality and textification. The latter involves the use of writing and refers to written texts as scripts54 (i.e. prerequisites for performance), whereas the former argues that "no writing had been required to bring about this textuality".55 Thus, the Iliad and the Odyssey

" Pucci (1987) 27. « Derrida (1967); (1972). « Pucci (1987) 27. 50 Foley (1991) xiii-xiv endorses a more conventional interpretation of writing.

Nevertheless, Foley's writing accepts that orality and literacy coexist and are "jointly involved in the production of a work of verbal art". See also Finnegan (1988) 59-85, 86-109.

51 Pucci (1987) 30. 32 Repetition, forming an integral part of the notion of formularity, almost necessitates

intertextuality and allusion by poetically exploiting the extensive network of references contained in any given "text".

53 This post-structuralist notion of writing is reinforced by taking into account the factor of oralcy, i.e. the coexistence of oral and written cultures. See Derderian (2001) 6-7, 11, 13-14,96, 117, 139, 189.

» Nagy (1996b) 112. » Nagy (1996a) 69.

12 Chapter 1

should be considered textualized (i.e. bearing all the features pertaining to sophisticated written texts) even before they become textually fixed56 or textified. According to Nagy's "Five-Age" Homeric evolution scheme, this does not happen before "the completion of Aristarchus' editorial work on the Homeric texts."

Given that the notion of textnality has been widened in scope, it comes as no surprise that narratology has been used as an interpretative tool for the understanding of Homeric poetry.58 Narratology is not interested in reconstructing the process of evolution of the Homeric poems but in studying them as narrative texts.59 Narratological considerations are of prime importance for deciding on the function of introductory and closing formulas which inaugurate and cap the majority of Homeric speeches, and, in our case, the γόοι.

The introductory and closing formulas belong, in narratological terms, to narrator-text.60 These are, in more traditional terminology, the ways the diegesis speaks about the identity of a speech.61 This is an important point,

56 According to Nagy (1996b) 110, 112 text-fixation designates texts in the sense of scripture "where the written text need not even presuppose performance".

57 Nagy (1996a) 42 and ( 1996b) 110 proposed a five-period Homeric transmission model based on performance, not on text (but text in the traditional meaning of the word) "with each period showing progressively less fluidity and more rigidity" (1996b) 109.

" There were also early advocates of this approach, like Bassett (1938). 59 On time and space, see Hellwig (1964) 4-22. On foreshadowing and suspense, see

Duckworth (1933); Reichel (1990) 125-151, (1998) 45-61; Nünlist (1998) 2-8; Rengakos (1995) 1-33, (1999) 308-338. On characterization, see Van Ε φ Taalman Kip ( 1971 ); Andersen ( 1978). On presentation of the story, see de Jong ( 1987b); Rabel (1997). On the Homeric narrator, see Richardson (1990). Cf. also the twin narratological approaches of Morrison (1995) and Doherty (1995) for the Iliad and the Odyssey respectively, and de Jong's narratological commentary on the Odyssey (2001).

60 See de Jong (1987b) 29-40, who in turn employs Bal's model of analysis (19972

[1985]) "which incorporates and partly refines that of Genette (1980)". 61 The terms diegesis and mimesis are used by Plato in the Republic (3. 392d), where he

is concerned not only with the form and content of poetry but also with its ethos. By laying emphasis on how (ώς λεκτέον 3. 392c) poets and mythologers say what they say, Plato distinguishes between three types/classes of poetry: single-layered narrative recounted by the poet himself (άπλη διηγήσει), narrative effected through impersonation of a character (διά μιμήσεως γιγνομένη) and narrative effected through both diegesis and mimesis (δι' άμφοτέρων). Aristotle followed Plato in classifying poetic genres according to the way one imitates, but further elaborated his classification of poetry in respect of epic: he distinguished between a brief non-

3. Selection Criteria 13

for apart from our own ideas, aesthetic principles or interpretative desires, we should attempt to decode what the poem itself says about the speeches' identity. When we pass from narrator-text to character-text, the external narrator recedes into the background, withdraws and lets the internal narrator express his ideas, feelings or arguments. Before doing so, he uses an introductory line which lies on the border62 between diegesis and mimesis·, this line functions as a "marker", a "literary label" that describes the identity of the ensuing speech:

Τρψησιν δ' 'Εκάβη άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (22. 430) But for the women of Troy Hekabe led out the thronging

There are, however, more complex cases:

τοΐσιν δ' ευχόμενος μετέφη κρείων 'Αγαμέμνων (2. 411) and among them powerful Agamemnon spoke in prayer

The external narrator indicates here one speech-act with two distinct aspects:63 a locutionary (μετέφη) which describes the utterance of the speech and an illocutionary (ευχόμενος) that refers to the form of the speech-act. In this way, he clearly sets a limit, marks a stop in the diegesis and indicates not only that a speech will follow and that someone will speak, but more importantly how the speaker will speak.

That is to say, despite the fact that he will withdraw from the scene when the speech is uttered, only to return after its completion, the external narrator smiles behind the curtain he himself has just drawn, since he is

mimetic proem (where the poet speaks as poet), a mimetic narrator-text (where the poet speaks as narrator) and an equally mimetic character-text, the speeches (where the poet speaks as the character he impersonates in any given situation). For a detailed analysis of the two passages discussed above, see de Jong (1987b) 1-9; Ford (1992) 22.

62 Chatman (1990) rightly treats both diegesis and mimesis as separate narrative modes and subordinates them to a wider category he calls Narrative. At the same time, the two narrative modes often intermingle. In light of the above observations, the verse introducing a speech stands between the diegetic and mimetic modes on the one hand and comprises a part of the broader category of Narrative on the other. See Ricoeur (1984-1988) vols, i-iii; Onega & Landa (1996) 3. I owe these bibliographical references to Markantonatos (2002) 2, ft. 4.

63 See Searle (1976) 1-23; Prince (1978) 305.

14 Chapter 1

the one who has decided that it is now time for a character to speak. When he uses a closing formula, he indicates that the actual speech is over and that the diegesis will now continue.

b. Using Textual Markers

In addition to the introductory and closing formulas, there are other textual markers -such as γόος-related terminology- which may indicate that a speech should be identified as a γόος:

πύργω έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε (6. 373) had taken her place on the tower in lamentation, and tearful

•ψυχή έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε64 (23.106) the phantom ... stood over me in lamentation and mourning65

This line functions as a "marker", for it denotes either that a γόος will follow (first case) or that it has preceded (second case). A textual marker can be very helpful, but should be used with great caution and always in combination with the other criteria I have referred to; its use of lament vocabulary may be simply due to its immediate environment. In the case of 23. 106, Achilles uses lament vocabulary to refer to the speech the ghost of Patroclus has uttered because of the general funereal environment it has been placed in and so Patroclus' speech does not, in fact, meet any of the other criteria for being a γόος-speech.

64 The fact that line 6. 373 is expressed by the external narrator, whereas lines 23. 106 and 23. 157 by Achilles, who functions as an internal narrator, is not of particular interest to me; I am using any textual indication, whether placed in narrator or character-text, as evidence that the Iliad recognizes a speech as a γόος.

65 This is the R. Lattimore translation, which renders the same word (μυρομένη) into English using two different adjectives, namely tearful and mourning.

3. Selection Criteria 15

c. Thematic and Structural Typology

"Theme is a basic unit of content"67 but is in no way limited to the packing of a speech or a scene with a specific motif. The content of a γόος-speech has to be that of a lamentation for someone who is already dead or will die or is thought of as dying. Cases in point include Andromache's personal lament for Hector in II. 6, although he is still alive, and Agamemnon's personal lament for Menelaus in II. 4.

In addition to the content, the γόος exhibits a specific thematic pattern, including the following typical elements:

a. a praising address to the deceased; b. a comparison between the dead and/or between the present sufferings

of the mourner and other past sufferings, stressing the exceptionality of the present loss and thus of the present grief, introducing an implicit aretalogy of the deceased;

c. the antithesis between the mourner and the deceased; d. a death wish; e. the antithesis between past and present; f. the tripartite structure of the lament; g. ring-composition; h. the antiphonal element; This thematic (and partly structural) pattern should be also used with

caution; in no way should one treat it as restrictive. This pattern does not set limits, but rather gives a repertory of means for treating the topics that each speaker presents.

In some of the γόοι we will not find all these elements, while in others, one or two of them will be much more predominant. On the other hand, these features form a recurrent framework of motifs linked to the very

66 I have deliberately lumped together typical motifs and structural features of the γόοι; the thematic typology of the Iliadic personal laments is inextricably interwoven with its internal arrangement, i.e. the use of the same motifs in the same order by different speakers. In other words, both patterns (thematic and structural) are the different faces of the same coin. Moreover, the use of structural features of broader attestation, e.g. ring-composition, shows how the Iliad has both "absorbed" and adapted the sub-genre of the γόοι to its subject-matter, applying the same structural techniques it has used for various sorts of speeches.

61 Nagy (1996a) 18.

16 Chapter 1

nature of the γόος as a personalized lament by someone who is very close to the deceased and who has a special bond with him. The loss is traumatic and severe, the greatest he/she has experienced up to now;68 at this point their fate is the same and so death -should it have occurred- would have saved the mourner from pain ("Death-Wish").

4. Types of Γόοι

Having established a thematic typology of all the Iliadic γόοι, we can proceed to further differentiate between them on the basis of their form and function within the Iliad.

Personal laments can be classified on the basis of form as 1) single; 2) antiphonal and 3) triadic and according to function as 1) anticipatory; 2) concealed/mixed; 3) informal/ritualistic and 4) formal/ritual.6'

This double classification of the Iliadic γόοι takes into account both the textual environment they belong to and their content.70 By situating the personal laments within the rest of the text, this study will examine their micro-structure and their purpose for the macro-structure of the entire epic.

The γόος of Agamemnon for Menelaus in Book 4 is a single, anticipa-tory lament, whereas that of Andromache in Book 24 is a ritual γόος, coming first in a series of three laments. Likewise, the γόοι of Briseis and Achilles in Book 19 are antiphonal and ritualistic -the scene they are placed in bears only a vague similarity with a true ritual for the dead person. On the other hand, the personal laments for Hector in Book 24 are triadic (Andromache, Hecuba, Helen) and ritual -for the lamentation process takes place in the presence of Hector's corpse.71 The Iliad not only chooses to represent and verbalize the γόοι among other forms of laments

68 See the personal laments of Andromache in 6, Briseis in 18 and Hecuba in 24. 69 See also Chapter 5 (5. 1 Introductory remarks) and Table 2. 70 By textual environment I am referring both to what precedes and follows a personal

lament and to the positioning of the γόοι within the narrative structure of the whole poem. Most speeches of this kind are situated in important narrative junctures that designate a significant shift in the course of the epic plot.

71 The γόοι at the end of Book 22 are triadic (Priam, Hecuba, Andromache) and ritualistic (for, unlike Book 24, they are uttered at the absence of the deceased's body, since Hector's corpse is retained by Achilles).

5. Genre and sub-genre 17

(such as the θρήνοι), but also differentiates between them according to their importance for the poem as a whole. Thus, the distribution of the personal laments over the first and second parts of the poem is uneven. There are only two personal laments in the first half, by Agamemnon in Book 4 and Andromache in Book 6, both of which are anticipatory. In the second, however, the death of main heroes like Patroclus and Hector leads to a drastic increase in the number of γόοι, totalling ten in all. It is obvious that as the Iliad approaches its destined end, precipitated by the death of Patroclus and then of Hector, the γόοι will assume a pivotal role in the continuation of the plot.

5. Genre and sub-genre

"Where there is style there is genre". This Bakhtinian maxim72 justly stresses the interconnection between language style and speech genres. Literary language is a complex system incorporating stylistic features from various sorts of utterances and the social circumstances in which these utterances have been developed. Historical changes in language styles are interrelated with shifts in genres; the Homeric Kunstsprache is linked to the evolution and creation of the monumental epics, the Iliad and the Odyssey; when their epoch is over, the Kunstsprache dies out as well.

Although genre analysis is a relatively recent development focusing on situated linguistic behavior in institutionalized academic or professional settings, it delineates specific frames which, in their turn, shape the reception of a text. This audience-oriented approach is known as Rezeptionaesthetik, in which the interpretative tone is given or at least triggered by the, so called, horizon of expectations73 of the reader. It emphasizes the importance of two kinds of frames: common and intertextual·, common frames are "representations of a stereotyped situation deriving from, and referring to, general encyclopaedic knowledge including everyday experience".74

72 Bakhtin (1986) 66. 73 According to Suleiman (1980) 35, the horizon of expectations is "the set of cultural,

ethical and literary (generic, stylistic, thematic) expectations of the work's readers in the historical moment of its appearance".

74 Sourvinou-Inwood (1995) 3.

18 Chapter 1

Intertextual frames connect the reader with the treasury of intertextual knowledge" which his acquaintance with other texts has engraved in his mind. This knowledge is encoded in the text by means of intertextual frames such as generic rules, topoi, narrative patterns and in the case of Homeric epic, one might add, formulaic material.

In the case of Iliadic lament, for example, the conditions in which the γόοι are uttered seem to be quite standardized. The death, real or imaginary, of an important Iliadic figure is the rhetorical topos activating the utterance of a personal lament; this γόος fulfills specific communicative purposes mutually shared by the participants typically associated with it. Furthermore, its utterance initiates the creation of a number of organization-al and structural forms that tend to crystallize themselves and acquire the shape of a generic construct. Therefore, the typology of the Iliadic γόοι (lexico-grammatical, discoursal, thematic and stylistic) results in the complementarity of the common and intertextual frames I have referred to above. The Iliadic γόοι represent a poetic amalgam containing features derived from the experience of a real-time lamentation that were adapted to the epic's genre-specific restrictions. In this way, the Iliad managed to scissor out elements of traditional lamentation incompatible with its own conventions (such as the expression of excessive pain by cries),76 so as to offer its audience a new poetic product, the γόοι, filtered through the epic's perspective and bearing a lasting imprint.

Apart from conventional knowledge, generic versatility is a key aspect of genre theory. Overlapping communicative purposes tend to be displayed and represented by different genres which make us ponder their multiplicity. Here, categories and sub-categories seem to serve such similar communicative purposes that one might be tempted to question their validity or even existence. Why should we speak, for example, of lament, θρήνοι, γόοι, mourning scenes, short obituaries and the like when they all represent the same idea, namely that of lament for the dead?

The answer is that generic versatility should be treated in terms of the discourse medium or, as in the case of the Iliad, of the speaker's identity and the nature of his utterance, rather than its communicative goal.

75 On intertextuality, see Culler (1975) 139-140; Kristeva (1981) 170; Culler (1981) 12, 38, 100-118; Eco (1981) 21-22, 32.

76 In contrast, such cries do occur in Greek tragedy. See Koonce (1962) 77 if.; Stanford (1983) 59; McClure (1995) 35-60; Kornarou (2001) 87-93; Loraux (2002) 35-41.

5. Genre and sub-genre 19

This does not mean that communicative purposes do not exist in such cases. It is simply a question of distinguishing between marked and unmarked elements. The more we adopt marked forms of expression, the more we need to specify minute communicative purposes in order to establish distinctions between genres and sub-genres.77 Hence the distinction between the θρήνοι and the γόοι within the Iliad, which is necessary for the designation of particular sub-generic subtleties.

Finally, genre analysis has shown that genres, situated as they are in specific socio-cultural contexts, have always been considered as "sites of contention between stability and change".78 The crystallization of genres seems to be at odds with a propensity for innovation.79 The latter is often exploited by the expert members of the community in order to create new forms in response to new historical contexts. Genres based on conventio-nalized and institutionalized discoursal practices of specific communities are imbued with the rigidity of canonizing, but also with the fluidity typical of tropes. Consequently, they adopt new forms and refuse to abide by rules of integrity, whether generic or other. While language moves towards less organized forms, the socio-cultural context in which it evolves tries to classify and tame it through the creation of numerous sub-categories and sub-branches.

This conflict between rigid stability and fluctuating change will be observed in the case of Iliadic γόοι. Divergence from the norm does not mean that the norm doesn't exist, but rather that by using established generic knowledge, the poet handles generic resources and conventions in such a way that they are able "to express private intentions within the framework of socially recognized communicative purposes".'0 Beyond the poet, the expert tradition within the discourse community works in the same direction. This line of thought is greatly reinforced by the fact that such innovations are realized within generic boundaries and, by recourse to modified material from the collective treasury of resources accumulated by generic convention.

This conflict can be seen in Saussurian terms as a slightly modified version of the well known dichotomy between langue versus parole and

77 Bhatia (1997) 634. 78 Berkekotter and Huckin (1995) 6. 79 See Bhatia (1997) 634-635. 80 Bhatia (1997) 635. The italics are mine.

20 Chapter 1

synchrony versus diachrony; as opposed to linguistic units, literary texts have aesthetic and cultural significance and consequently reshape generic "codes" while functioning within the framework designated by the latter.81

So if by parole we refer to particular texts belonging to a genre as specific manifestations of underlying generic conventions, by langue we allude to the existence of a generic schema or frame of generic rules. The dicho-tomy thus becomes a dialectal relationship, within the borders of which we must trace the function of genre. Furthermore, synchrony concerns the particular manifestation of a genre or, as in the case of Iliadic γόοι, a sub-genre at a given moment in time, like that designated by its crystallization within the Iliadic text. On the other hand, diachrony pertains to the evolu-tion of a genre, to its transformation and shaping until it reaches its present state.82 From this perspective, the synchronic examination of a sub-genre, like the Iliadic γόοι, explores its current manifestation on a horizontal time-axis, whereas the diachronic approach is interested in its linear development on a vertical time-axis. Yet just as in the case of langue versus parole, the two approaches must be combined, for it is almost impossible to give a comprehensive account of a genre without tracing its origins. In the case of the Iliadic personal laments, this diachronic approach seems to have a built-in-limitation; there are no texts prior to the Iliad in which to look for the predecessors of the γόοι. Nevertheless, in certain cases the Iliadic text hints at what might have preceded certain expressions concerning the presentation of lament in the form of formulaic survivals, fossilized items that have survived through time and been preserved by the epic tradition.

" See Fishelov (1997) 68. " Despite our inability to attain a full-scale diachronic analysis revealing the process of

genre-evolution, diachronic comparisons are possible via what Foley (1991) 15 has coined comparative analogues. Meter, phraseology and narrative patterns can be traced back to their precursors by means of comparing genre-congruent works, as Foley (1990) has done in the case of the Odyssey, Beowulf, and the Serbo-Croatian "Return Song". On metrical analogues between Greek and Indie meter, see Nagy (1974).

6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι,

6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι

21

"Originality in generic composition can be treated under four categories, which together cover the whole field: first, the novelty which consists in introducing into a generic pattern topoi and notions not hitherto associated with it; second, the individual writer's own choice, combination and arrangement of the standard topoi of a particular genre; third, his alterations and modifications of single topoi; and fourth, the employment by a writer of the major generic sophistications which are potentially applicable to all genres."83

Which of these four categories does the Iliad employ in its representation and verbalization of the sub-genre of the γόοι? In other words, how does the genre of epic treat the sub-genre of the γόοι?

The problem with this kind of question is that in our case we don't have any pre-Iliadic proto-lament, so our answer has to be based on inference; on the other hand, there may be some solid ground for such an investigation if we use the common characteristics the γόοι exemplify in the Iliad as a guide towards determining their typology. Once this typology is defined, we can point out those themes or motifs which are not associated with it. As far as the second and third categories are concerned, both the arrangement of the standard topoi and their alterations and mo-difications in the Iliad are due to the fact that the sub-genre of the γόοι is represented in "character-text". That is to say, it is verbalized by characters who function as internal narrators, thus offering their own interpretation of events by stressing, altering and adapting the content of their speech to their own needs and their personal role within the epic plot.M The last category refers to major generic sophistications which the genre uses when it treats a sub-genre. In a nutshell, it points to the numerous restrictions the genre imposes on its thematic treatment of lamentations.85

Consequently, we could define the Iliadic γόοι as personal lament speeches expressed by an important figure in the Iliadic plot, whether male or female, concerning the death, past or future, real or imaginary of a preeminent warrior, Greek or Trojan.

83 Cairns (1972) 99. 84 The Iliad bears traces of an established usage of lamentation, but voices only one form

of this lamentation, the γόοι. See Smyth (1906) cxxi. 85 Cf. Nagy (1979) 112.

22 Chapter 1

It has been maintained that "the theme and diction of lament appear to have shaped the Iliad and can even be found embedded in the name of Achilles, 'grief of the fighting-men"'.86 If this is true, then the fact that the Iliad represents only the γόοι becomes even more significant, since it poses another kind of question: do the γόοι represent a "better genre" than other forms of lament? This may seem a naive question," but if sub-genres found in epic (such as commanding, flyting and recollection) demand treatment as "poetic" performances, then one can assume that an ancient audience accustomed to traditional oral-poetics is "naive"" in the sense that "it has internalized the conventions of the overarching genre (in this case, epic) to the extent that it can focus more than we can on the primary, sub-generic level..."."

7. Scope of Research

Scholars have scarcely treated the theme of lament in the Iliad as a separate subject. Up to now, the focus of attention has centered either on the study of the speeches in the entire poem90 or lament in gener-

16 Nagy (1979) 69-71 quoted in Martin (1989) 86. 17 On the same kind of question see Martin (1989) 89 ff., with revealing comments on

the function of speech-genres as primary types of performance. " Scodel (2002) proposes a reassessment of epic performance by challenging the view

that Homeric audiences were minutely competent. She rightly argues that epic poetry "speaks" as if everything is familiar; we do not need to postulate superbly informed and experienced audiences in order to account for the understanding and appreciation of the technical complexity and sophistication of Homeric poetry. Positive reception of this poetry was, no doubt, a reality and, one might say, one of the basic factors contributing to its diffusion. Therefore, it is not a question of competent or trained listeners but of positively responding audiences.

·» Martin (1989) 90. 90 Fingerle (1939) classified all the speeches of both the Iliad and the Odyssey into

categories using various criteria. As far as lament is concerned, he was the first to distinguish between two distinct types of lament speeches in the Iliad: the Totenklagen and the Klagereden. As Totenklagen, Fingerle classified lament speeches addressed to a dead person and as Klagereden general laments, not addressed to the dead. The importance of Fingerle's study lies in his perceiving of the existence in Homer of introductory and closing lines that initiate and cap the Totenklagen and in his using them as criteria for his speech classification. In 1970, Lohmann attempted a sensitive approach to the composition of all the Iliadic speeches. He examined both their

7. Scope of Research 23

al," either in ancient Greek literature alone or throughout the evolution of Greek tradition from antiquity to modern times.92

The present study of the Iliadic personal laments is an overall exa-mination of this class of speeches within the Iliad: Having establishing a corpus of personal laments by using specific criteria for this classification, it proceeds to an analysis of the way the diegesis presents the γόοι. It moves from an attempt to appreciate the verbalization of main themes and interpret performance aspect to a detailed analysis of all the personal laments, focusing on what one might call "the textual behavior" of this particular kind of speech within the Iliad.

To my knowledge, no special study concerning the Iliadic personal laments has yet appeared.93 Still more important, no scholars have concerned

internal and their external mode of composition and pointed to the existence of three basic structural patterns: ring-composition, parallel composition and free expansion. The most recent monograph on the speeches in the Iliad is by Bezantakos, which modifies the pioneering work of Fingerle and offers a complete catalogue of all the Iliadic speeches divided into categories. As far as the Odyssey is concerned, the most recent comprehensive account known to me, is that of Larrain (1987), with rich bibliography on the previous work done on this topic. Generally speaking, speeches in the Iliad have received more attention than those in the Odyssey.

" Monsacré (1984) examined the expression of suffering in Homeric poetry, the different attitudes of men and women in respect of the externalization or internalization of grief, and the wider consequences these attitudes imply for our understanding of Homeric society. Monsacré is influenced by the Paris school and the emphasis in her book is on what Vidal-Naquet describes in his preface as Homeric anthropology, which is actually an anthropology of the text.

92 Reiner (1938) examined the lament for the dead in all ancient Greek literature. The wide thematic scope of his study did not allow him to focus his attention on the lament theme in the Homeric poems; nevertheless, his survey is the first momentous contribution to the research of the way lament operated in ancient Greek literary tradition. A true landmark in the research concerning lament in Greek literary heritage was the work of Alexiou (2002 [1974']). Alexiou studied lament not only in ancient but also in byzantine and modern Greek culture, showing the existence of common motifs, conventions, themes and even formulas in all phases of Greek literature, thus pointing to its continuity. As far as Homer is concerned, Alexiou analyzed the personal laments at the end of Book 24 of the Iliad and argued for a three-part form following a ring-composition pattern (ABA). Her observations (2002,131-160) on the antithetical thought and antiphonal structure of the laments as well as on the use of the allusive method broke new ground in the study of lament in Greek literature.

93 Petersmann (1973) attempted an analysis of five speeches which he called "lament-monologues". His analysis is not as pervasive as one would have expected. Not only

24 Chapter 1

themselves with the function of this specific categoiy of speeches as a whole within the poem. The majority of previous studies on speech-classification concentrate on determining and examining a specific class of speeches or, on a more general level, on categorizing the speeches of the Iliad and the Odyssey into groups.94 Little if any attempt has been made to point out the relationship between these speeches and the rest of the poem or to define their function on both a dictional and a thematic level.

In addition to the formula, which is a principal hermeneutic tool, we have used the examination of allusion, the form of each speech as well as its relation to the diegesis or, in narcological terms, the simple-narrator text. The application of these approaches stems from our belief that as a monumental composition, over the centuries the Iliad absorbed different poetic genres from a long-standing oral tradition. These include praise poetry, blame poetry and, most pertinently for this study, funerary poetry.95

In the case of funerary poetry, the Iliad itself produced a "sub-genre", the γόοι or personal laments, which was then "subordinated" to the

did he fail to see the problem of the placement of the personal laments, he even included Achilles' initial speech in 18. 6-14 in his category of "monologische Totenklage" despite the fact that it is addressed to his own θυμός. Nevertheless, Petersmann made an important distinction between ritual and non-ritual personal laments. He convincingly argued that only the three final γόοι in II. 24 should be regarded as ritual in the true sense of the word, since they are uttered during a funeral (that of Hector), and show traces of a latent pattern of internal composition and sequential performance upon which they are based. Pucci (1993) 258-272 was the first to analyze the personal dirges of Briséis and Achilles in II. 19, by laying the emphasis on the importance of the re-presentation and placement of the laments within the framework of oral performance. Derderian (2001) 15-62 devotes one chapter to the study of Iliadic personal laments. The rest of her book deals with the archaic epigram, the study of lament in the classical period (Pindar, Simonides and Sophocles) and the epitaphios logos.

" Cf. Fingerle (1939). 95 Mawet (1975) turned the focus in a new direction scarcely studied before: the

connection between lament poetry and funerary epigrams. Later on (1979), extending Anastassiou's study on the Homeric vocabulary of mourning (1971), she explored the functional oppositions in the vocabulary of pain in Homer; though not concerned solely with lament, she added much to our knowledge of the differences between words pertaining to the semantic groups of πήμα and άλγος. On the relation between the genre of lament and mourning in general with the inscribed epigram, see also Derderian's detailed examination (2001) 63-113. Derderian convincingly demonstrates how the ambiguous σήμα of epic is transformed into a μνήμα, with the resultant increase in its communicative capacity by the use of writing.

7. Scope of Research 25

"ambitious super-genre of epic".96 For no matter how many generic features the γόοι inherited from the tradition, they also acquired new ones in their new home, especially since they are not mere utterances but acts of self-presentation, "which the genius of the Iliad... captured ... and used ... to humanize archaic figures of myth"."

It would perhaps be useful at this point to sketch the main outlines of our examination of the Iliadic personal laments.

In chapter one, we set out the basic framework for the study of a marked form of lament speech, such as the γόοι in the Iliad. The personal laments are presented next to the other marked form of lament, the musical θρήνος, which is not given in archaic Greek epic either in direct or reported speech.

In chapter two, we study the typology of the personal laments and trace various common motifs shared by the majority of them.

The study of the γόος introductory and closing formulas in chapter three aims at exploring the reasons which determine variation from the formulaic norm. In addition, emphasis is placed on the examination of specific contextual parameters shaping the way these formulaic speech-markers interact with the content of the γόοι they introduce or cap.

In chapter four, we examine deixis in the main themes and motifs used in the personal laments, such as distance and separation from the beloved ones and from one's fatherland, dying abroad, the theme of bereaved parents, mors immatura and the opposition between κλέος and νόστος.

In chapter five, we focus our attention on the intratextuality of the personal laments; in studying allusion, foreshadowing and correlation, we point to the existence of latent correspondences and references between them, as well as to the overlapping and development of basic epic themes that transcend the whole Iliad. The personal laments develop the main epic themes and unfold narrative threads that weave the thematic texture of the poem. Their incorporation into the Iliad is so intricate that they tend to represent, albeit in miniature form, both a summary and an emotional commentary on the entire epic.

The quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles; the deaths of Patroclus

96 See Martin (1997) 138-166, who suggests the same thing for the Homeric similes, arguing that they are "genre imports", swallowed by the "ambitious supergenre" of epic poetry.

97 Martin (1989) 88.

26 Chapter 1

and Hector; the future destruction of Troy; Achilles' suffering and his future death: in a nutshell, the kernel of the entire poem98 is mirrored in the Iliadic personal laments." By using external analepses and prolepses, the γόοι draw a circle that surpasses the epic and encompasses larger parts of the Epic Cycle. In terms of poetics, the γόοι reproduce the fabric of the Iliad and, by and large, summarize it.

98 See Griffin (1980) who studied the polarization between life and death, a theme of central importance for the interpretation of the Iliad, of which lament constitutes an integral part.

99 See Foley (2001) 44.

Chapter 2

The Typology of the Iliadic Γόοι

2.1 Introductory Remarks

In the Iliad there are twelve (12) γόοι100 quoted in direct speech, of which ten are situated in the second part of the poem from Book 18 to Book 24101, but only two in the first part, namely in Books 4 and 6. The full list contains the following γόοι:

100 By using the term γόος I refer either to a speech introduced with a phrase containing this word or to a speech introduced by some other expression of lament and followed by the formula έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες / γέροντες / πολΐται / δήμος άπειρων. Although in the second case the word γόος is not used, the thematic development and internal structure of these speeches place them within the category of γόος-speeches. By thematic development I am referring to the selection and presentation and by internal structure to the order and disposition of elements contained in γόος-speeches. See also section 3 (Selection Criteria) in chapter 1.

101 Introductory and closing formulas are extremely important for classifying the γόοι. Petersmann (1969) 113 and (1973) 4 makes a distinction between ritual death-laments (rituelle Totenklage) and those which are more personal and directly function as a form of monologue. He only considers the three γόοι in Iliad 24 by Andromache, Hecuba and Helen as ritual, arguing that all the rest differ significantly from them. On the other hand, Reiner (1938) 12 ft. 4 maintains that Thetis' speech in 18. 52-64 is a ritualistic γόος rather than a monologue. Petersmann's classification is closer to mine. Ritual laments are those having both a formulaic introduction and a typical closure. Formulaic introductions and closures are rather the by-product of the ritual nature of a personal lament. As ritual γόοι we should classify those fulfilling the following three criteria at the same time: (a) they are introduced and capped by specific formulas (see chapter 3); (b) they are placed within a purely funerary environment and (c) they contain a number of basic elements (which I examine in this chapter). According to these criteria only the three laments in Book 24 are ritual γόοι. Those in Books 19 and 22 are ritualistic, i. e. they share the personal laments' basic properties but are not ritual, for one essential prerequisite is not met: the body of Hector has not yet been returned by Achilles (cf. also Seaford 1994, 154-190). I do not consider the speech of Achilles (23. 19-23) as a personal lament. The use of the formula τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο in 23. 17 is a reflection of the

28 Chapter 2

1. 4. 155-182: Agamemnon for Menelaus 2. 6. 407-439: Andromache for Hector 3. 18.52-64: Thetis for Achilles 4. 18. 324-342 Achilles for Patroclus 5. 19. 287-300 Briséis for Patroclus 6. 19.315-337 Achilles for Patroclus 7. 22. 416-428 Priam for Hector 8. 22. 431-436 Hecuba for Hector 9. 22.477-514 Andromache for Hector 10. 24. 725-745 Andromache for Hector 11. 24. 748-759 Hecuba for Hector 12. 24. 762-775 Helen for Hector

As far as thematic development and internal structure are concerned, a γόος-speech contains the following elements:

a. It often starts with a praising address to the deceased; by the term "praising", I am referring to the use of a construction expressing praise in the mourner's terms, namely the relationship between the dead and the mourner, whether a beloved child, a dearest friend, or a most cherished son. We can even say that in this address the term of praise would on occasion have been in the superlative; this is due not only to the exaggeration which often prevails in the feelings of the mourner when (s)he has lost someone dear, but also to the "Comparison" motif often following the "praising" address.

b. The "Comparison"102 constitutes an important part of the personal lament aimed at highlighting the preeminence of the dead person. It takes center stage and comprises some sort of digression, which in the mouth of a skillful mourner could very well have developed into a short story or a praise poem for the dead.103 The "Comparison" takes two forms: i) a

influence of the funereal context. There is nothing that recalls a personal lament in this speech. For a different classification of the γόοι, see Bezantakos (1996) 154-156, who classifies laments and complaints in the same category and considers certain γόοι as general laments. Table 2 offers a classification of the Iliadic personal laments.

102 By "Comparison" and "Death-Wish" I am translating the German terms "Vergleich" and "Todeswunsch" respectively. These terms were employed in the analysis of Homeric speeches by Lohmann (1970) 99-11 who also draws on the groundwork of Fingerle (1939).

103 Cf. Reiner (1938) 116-120. See also Garland (1985) 146, with a useful note on περί-δειπνον; Garland says that according to Prof. L. R. Rossi in a talk entitled "Poem and

2.1 Introductory Remarks 29

contrast to other dead also connected by some sort of relationship to the mourner (sons for Hecuba, brothers-in-law for Helen), and ii) a contrast to other previous sufferings that the mourner has been through. In both cases the same motif is used, namely, that this particular person/loss was the greatest that the mourner has suffered. The "Comparison" virtually introduces an aretalogy of the deceased, one which "offre la motivazione per cui egli è compianto, cosí come nello schema basilare della preghiera Γ υπόμνημα spiega perché e di che cosa si invochi il dio".104 So, for example, in the cases of the personal laments of Briseis, Andromache in Book 24 and Helen "il nesso fra aretalogia e dichiarazione del pianto sottolinea la fondamentale funzione culturale del lamento funebre, ossia quella di asorbire e canalizzare il dolore, smorzandone Γ urgenza col dichiararlo a se stessi nello specchio della parola".105

c. Mourner and deceased are presented as sharing a common fate. This topic is developed by the use of the first and second person personal pronouns linking mourner and dead in the sphere of suffering.106

fee in Greek Archaic poetry, both choral and monodie" delivered to the Hellenic Society on Nov. 15th 1979, the following fragments may be extracts from long lost perideipnon songs: Ρ MG 419, 485(?), 894, 896, 907, 911; Pi. /. 2 (?); Anaxandrides, fr. 1 K.-A. See also Cie. De leg. II 63. In Homer we hear about something probably linked to the perideipnon in 23. 29, after Achilles' personal lament for Patroclus; on this occasion the eating takes place before the cremation of the body (23. 29 ff.), whereas in Hector's funeral after the cremation (24. 802). Keeping this in mind one could formulate an interesting hypothesis: since the γόος was the informal, improvised lament uttered by the next of kin and was later on restricted to the house (due to Solon's legislation), it may have been replaced by some sort of praising lamentation uttered during the perideipnon. Both Zenobius V. 28 ("είώθεσαν oí παλαιοί έν χοϊς περιδείπνοις τον τετελευτηκότα έπαινεΐν, και ει φαΰλος ήν") and the proverb "οΰκ αν έπαινεθείης ούδ' έν περιδείπνψ" seem to support this claim. It is precisely this praising element -so often encountered as an integral feature during my analysis of the Iliadic personal laments- which makes me think that this praise might not have been lost. Moreover one should keep in mind the belief of the Greeks that the dead was present during the perideipnon in the capacity of a host. This fits in perfectly with Patroclus' funeral in II. 23, since his dead soul visits Achilles and talks to him after the funeral feast (23. 29).

104 Ferrari (1984) 264-265. 105 Fen-ari (1984) 265. 106 Alexiou (2002) refers to the same motif by using the exactly opposite term (!), as she

talks of "the antithesis between mourner and deceased". For all my respect for her groundbreaking work on Greek lament, I think that all the Iliadic examples she refers

30 Chapter 2

d. The "Death-Wish" is an extreme verbal indication of the mourner's unflagging desperation due to the pain caused by the loss of a dear one. The suffering and grief are so deep and intense, the mourner's entire vision of life so profoundly affected that he/she expresses a desire to die, since life has no meaning after being deprived of his/her beloved one.

e. The antithesis between past and present is a manifestation of the antithetical thought permeating the γόοι. When the dead was alive in the past, he was a source of hope for the ones that depended on him, but now the present and the future seem grim to the mourner. Indeed, the word νυν is emphatically used in almost every single Iliadic personal lament for this purpose. Furthermore, the word ζωός is often used in such cases to contrast with different forms of the verb άποθνήσκω so as to stress the antithesis between a happy life in the past and a miserable one in the present.

f. The majority of the Iliadic γόοι have a tripartite structure consonant with the tripartite structure of the whole Greek funeral, the κηδεία.107 This was "a three-act drama with precise regulations governing the most minute details of procedure. These three acts comprised the laying out of the body (prothesis), the conveyance to the place of interment (ekphora), and finally the deposition of its cremated or inhumed remains".108 One

to (the same as my study) do not separate mourner and deceased, but rather attempt to create a link between them, in the world of suffering. To use a well known example (also mentioned by Alexiou), when Andromache laments Hector in 22. 477-478, she begins her speech with the following expression: Ifj άρα γεινόμεθ' αϊση / αμφότεροι .... She then employs first and second person pronouns -not to differentiate her fate from that of Hector, but to emphasize their unbroken bond, their common suffering. See also 22. 485 when she refers to Astyanax: δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι. The antithesis is at work, but rather as an opposition between past and present than between mourner and deceased. The motif of common fate is also connected with the expression of a "Death-Wish" by the mourner.

107 See Alexiou (2002), in which the author rightly claims that the origins of the tripartite structure of the Iliadic γόοι must be sought in the very structure of primitive rituals (the same applies, Alexiou argues, to the hymn, the encomium, and the funeral oration). The alternative scenario, according to which the tripartite structure of the Iliadic personal laments is due to structural techniques pertaining to Homeric speech at large (since the γόοι are coherent, uninterrupted speeches), seems to me highly unlikely, given that the tripartite structure is typical of other genres of ritual poetry.

108 Garland (1985) 21.

2.1 Introductory Remarks 31

cannot exclude the possibility that a primitive belief in the magic power of number three may have survived in ritual lamentations, especially since the chief mourner (εξαρχος γόοιο) was initially regarded as the equivalent of the later magician (γόης),109 who communicates with the dead through songs and spells and is considered to be the "necromantic counterpart of the poet"."0

g. Iliadic personal laments show a remarkable preference for ring-composition as opposed to parallel structure or simply free development. The first question one should ask is what this compositional choice re-veals about the origin of the γόοι; ring-composition is both a composition-al aid and a rhetorical device used in order to achieve a specific stylistic effect, often that of emphasis. By repeating, in more or less the same way, themes previously expressed in the speech, the speaker aims either to stress their importance or to encircle a digression or short episode (as in a "Comparison"), by weaving a larger fabric. On the other hand, since the structure of a speech -its compositional pattern- reflects the poet's choice or the tradition's preference, the ring-composition technique must have some other meaning connected to the way personal laments were uttered in the Greek world, one that "scarcely changed between the Bronze Age and the Hellenistic Period"."1 This argument remains valid regardless of whether we favor a single authorship for the Iliad·, the tradition in which epic was forged knew of a specific ritual for the lamentation of the dead, part of which would have been personal laments. Emily Vermeule argues that "the two great art forms of early historical Greece, Ionic epic poetry in the east and Geometric painting in the mainland provinces of Attica, Boiotia and the Argolid, focus on burial and mourning in styles so similar,

109 See LSJ s.v. γόης: "a wizard, a sorcerer". 110 See Reiner (1938) 20 ff., 27-28 where a list of expressions of incantation in tragedy

is given; also Rohde (1925) 14, 198; Bickel (1926) 22; Burkert (1962) 36-55; Romilly (1975) 13, 31; Vermeule (1979) 16-17. Burkert (1962, 45) refers to 24. 720 ff. and notes that this may be a reminiscence (Erinnerung) "an magische Sänger bei der Bestattung ..., eine Erinnerung, die darum gleich unterdrückt wird, weil das homerische Epos an Stelle des Magischen das Menschliche entdeckt hat". The most recent account of the origin and roles of the γόης in relation to the songs of mourning is offered by Johnston (1999) 82-123. She convincingly shows how a basically female-restricted genre such as the γόος was gradually transformed into a male γοη-τεία in the fifth-century polis.

111 Vermeule (1979) 11.

32 Chapter 2

that scholars understood they both share an older tradition long before it could be proved. The themes of the Homeric Iliad are precisely those of Attic painting, battle and sea and the ceremonies for the dead. These were the old themes of the Mycenaean Greeks, and of most other Bronze Age cultures around the Mediterranean"."2 Thus the personal laments also forming an integral part in the ceremonies of the dead must have followed some speech conventions, which would have in turn developed over the centuries since they were practiced for a long time. Like the other art forms (e.g. painting), these must have exhibited some consistency in the way they were performed and composed as well as in the themes they dealt with. The typology of their structure and thematic material is probably a reflection of the lamenting conventions that our Iliad is aware of.

h. The antiphonal nature of the funeral lament is typical in all eras of Greek tradition."3 In Homer, each phase of the singing of the ritual lament is antiphonal: it begins with the hired mourners singing the θρήνος, while a chorus "responds" to their grief. The next of kin then utter a personal lament, the γόος, accompanied by a chorus of anonymous mourners utter-ing a refrain of cries."4

2.2 The Praising Address

The introductory address preceding the personal laments constitutes a special form of "extended" or "expanded address" containing a comparison of the deceased with other people mentioned or implied and, very often, an epithet in the superlative degree. This praising element is consonant with the inherent tendency of the γόος-speech to underscore the deceased's special impact on the life and personality of the mourner. The mourner builds his lament upon a comparison of the dead either with others belonging to the same "category" (friends, kin, etc.) as him, or with the pain the mourner has experienced in the past on losing a dear one. In both cases the deceased or the pain his death has caused to the mourner

112 Vermeule (1979) 11. The italics are mine. 113 For a detailed analysis of this concept in ancient Greek, byzantine and modern Greek

tradition, see Alexiou (2002) 131-184. 114 I cannot agree with Garland (1985) 30 when he says "In Homer... a chorus of women

utter a refrain of cries"; this is not always true (see 19. 338; 22. 429; 24. 776).

2.2 The Praising Address 3 3

turns out to be far greater than before. This is a way of expressing the intensity of grief exprienced by the mourner; the more important the dead, the greater the suffering the mourner feels and tries to express. There are four typical introductory lines preceding the Iliadic γόοι:

1. Πάτροκλέ μοι δείλη πλείστον κεχαρισμένε θυμψ (19.287) 2. ή ρά νύ μοί ποτε και σύ, δυσάμμορε, φίλταθ' έταίρων (19. 315) 3. Έκτορ, έμψ θυμψ πάντων πολύ φίλτατε παίδων (24. 748) 4. "Εκτορ, έμφ θυμψ δαέρων πολύ φίλτατε πάντων (24. 762)

All of these lines contain a vocative referring to the deceased and a dative of either a personal pronoun referring to the mourner or a possessive pronoun referring to the speaker's θυμός. In addition, there is a dative of reference (usually modifying the word θυμός), an epithet in the superlative degree and "an intensifier" of the superlative (such as the adverb πλείστον or πολύ that may or may not accompany the superlative epithet). Finally, we have a genitive expressing the second term of the comparison, if it is not an absolute one. Therefore, it seems that the personal lament has developed a particular form of introductory address to the deceased stemming from its thematic preoccupation with the dead's special impact on the life of the mourner. The particularity of the person results in the particularization of the mourner's feelings and his specialness effects a special verbal form of treatment, the expanded-praising address.

In Briséis' lament for Patroclus the expression κεχαρισμένε θυμψ used when addressing a close friend and therefore showing endearment and familiarity, acquires an intensifying tone lent by the superlative πλείστον placed next to it."5 This particular case thus looks more like the other initial addresses of the personal laments than those which use the phrase κεχαρισμένε θυμψ; the superlative functions in such a way that it virtually changes the scope of the address. Briséis is not only addressing Patroclus but with him all the others who are dear to her or better were dear to her. She is also addressing her three brothers (293) and husband (295) slain by

113 The expression έμφ κεχαρισμένε θυμφ is used five times in the ¡liad, for Patroclus by Achilles (11. 608), for Diomedes by Sthenelus, Athene and Agamemnon (5. 243, 5. 826,10.234 respectively) and of course for Patroclus by Briséis (19.287). See also Edwards (1991) 269. For the peculiar scansion of the vocative, see Pucci (1998) 99-100.

34 Chapter 2

Achilles. This initial address is not simply a typical way to begin a speech; it acquires a specific functional role, that of encompassing a wide scope of people whom the speaker, through the comparison of the superlative form that she uses, first implicitly and then explicitly includes in the personal lament.

Briséis' introductory address to Patroclus contains the only Homeric example of an enclitic following a vocative (Πάτροκλε μοι); the form εμώ would have been perfectly possible, in which case it would refer to the dative θυμφ and would follow the pattern of the other lines where the expression κεχαρισμένε θυμφ is used. It seems that this unusual expression creates an intense rhythm, reflecting the emotional involve-ment and frustration of Briséis. Being a slave-girl, she is not connected to Patroclus through family ties and is thus unable to address him using a family term,"6 as often happens in the Iliadic funeral laments. Her speech is actually looking ahead, towards the address (19. 315) by which Achilles' γόος for Patroclus is initiated. It is to the dative μοι used there that the personal pronoun μοι in 19. 287 responds, showing the level of consistency between the initial address of the Iliadic γόος-speeches.

In Achilles' γόος-speech Patroclus is addressed by a line ending with the phrase φίλταθ' έταίρων. The vocative of the word φίλος when used as an adjective in the superlative degree is attested four times in the Iliad three in the first line of the three personal laments I have quoted above (19. 315, 24. 748, 24. 762) and one more at the beginning of the speech by Idomeneus to his comrade Meriones in 13. 249. It is followed by the genitive plural έταίρων in 13. 249 and 19. 315, since the genitive de-termines the class of people among whom the speaker is placing the deceased. Yet a closer look at the two passages shows that the meaning of the genitive έταίρων is not the same in each case. When Idomeneus addresses Meriones, the rest of his speech indicates that he refers to the latter's identity as second-in-command, i. e. a front line warrior. This is why he expresses his surprise on finding Meriones, a man of arms par excellence, away from the battlefield. In Book 19 Achilles paints a picture of Patroclus preparing and serving dinner for the Achaeans before the battle; it is true that in both passages the word κλισίη is used to describe the place where the person addressed either is present (Meriones) or

116 For the use of family terms in the funeral laments of the Iliad, see Ebbott (1999) 17.

2.2 The Praising Address 35

depicted (Patroclus),117 but the situation is very different. In the first case both interlocutors are alive and present in the hut; the speech belongs to a long series of exchanges between Idomeneus and Meriones. On the other hand, following the death of Patroclus only Achilles can possibly be physically present in the second case. Moreover, Idomeneus interprets Meriones' coming to the hut either as a result of his wounding or because he is bringing some message (ήέ τι βέβληαι, βέλεος δέ σε τείρει άκωκή, / ήέ τε' άγγελίης μετ' εμ' ήλυθες;),"8 whereas Achilles is lamenting Patroclus and recalling a familiar scene when his friend was alive, in the hut, pre-paring dinner before the battle. One can thus see how the personal lament shapes the meaning of the genitive έταίρων. The intimacy element that emerges here to highlight the peaceful side of Patroclus is consonant with the situation we encounter when we look at the initial addresses inaugurating the personal laments of Hecuba and Helen in Book 24. There we hear the genitives δαέρων and παίδων which, as other terms pointing to the relation of the deceased to the mourner, show that the personal laments use terms of familiarity and endearment. As a speech form uttered by the next of kin or close friends, they stress first the mourner-deceased re-lationship and then the impact of the loss on the entire community the dead once belonged to. Patroclus' preeminent position among Achilles' friends is, of course, a key-theme for the entire epic. Yet here it is treated in a special way, being explained via personal memories such as the deceased's gentleness and almost maternal role as one who cared, probably more than anybody else, for his fellow comrades."9

The two initial addresses in the personal laments of Hecuba and Helen in Book 24 share a number of similarities: they both begin with Hector's name in the vocative and continue with the expression έμφ θυμφ. Metrical reasons determine the positioning of the genitive to denote the class of people the mourner considers the deceased to have been part of. In the personal lament by Hecuba, this genitive comes at the end, whereas in that by Helen it appears immediately after the phrase έμφ θυμφ. Consequently, the word πάντων modifies the genitives παίδων and δαέρων.

Another common element is the adverb πολύ, which intensifies the

117 Cf. 13. 253 (ένί κλισί,-ησι) and 19. 316 (évi κλισίη) respectively. 118 See 13. 251-252.

See Shay (1995) 44-49.

36 Chapter 2

comparison and the phrase φίλτατε + genitive plural placed at the verse-end. In these cases, the formula έμφ κεχαρισμένε θυμφ used as an introductory address in non-personal lament speeches has been changed; the participle κεχαρισμένε has been dropped and the vocative of the adjective φίλος in the superlative has taken its placé. I have already pointed to the fact that in the Iliad, this vocative is only used in the personal lament initial addresses to the dead and in the case of Idomeneus' speech to Meriones. This would seem to indicate the sharing of a common pattern, but it is also obvious that the more ritual the context120 in which a γόος is uttered, the more typical the form of the initial address. In these two last cases, all the typical elements detected above are present: the praising tone, use of family terms, the dative of reference and an intensifying expression.

2.3 The "Comparison"

The "Comparison" is a device employed in almost eveiy personal lament of the poem.121 It implicitly contains an agonistic element in narrative form pointing to praise.122 Praise is one of the basic constituents of epic poetry, as κλέα άνδρών became the subject of praise in the bardic tradition before being monumentalized in epic poetry. The "Comparison" originates from the same tradition of praise poetry employed in the ritual connected with the cults of the dead. It is under these circumstances that there was a perceived need to recount how in his lifetime the dead had excelled among others.

In Andromache's personal lament for Hector in 6. 407-439, the "Comparison" occupies the lengthy, central part of the speech. Hector

120 The ritual context is determined by the fulfillment of certain basic requirements of the entire lamentation process: the lamentation takes place around the body of the deceased and comprises two distinct and consecutive parts, the γόος and the θρήνος, each expressed antiphonally, whereby the laments by individual mourners (professionals or the next of kin) are answered by the cries of a chorus.

121 Of the total corpus of Iliadic personal laments (12 speeches), 9 contain a "Comparison".

122 This agonistic element reflects the mourner's perception of the deceased as superior to others belonging to an equivalent group of people designated as the έταΐρος (Pa-troclus) or the family itself (Hector).

2.3 The "Comparison" 37

shines among everybody else by embodying almost every family relation Andromache can possibly have. In this case, the "Comparison" refers to other losses of dear ones she has suffered in the past, rather than to the dear ones themselves. In a very effective digression, we hear about the losses of her father, brother and mother;123 it is thus only too natural that Hector means everything to her, that he determines her whole existence. In this second part we also hear a short story about her father Eetion, who was killed by Achilles, a story that is usually connected to the "Comparison" theme.

In her γόος for Achilles in 18. 52-64, Thetis gives to the "Comparison" a surprising form. Instead of comparing Achilles with other heroes, she praises his excellence by elaborating on her self-representation in "Achillean" terms. That is to say, Thetis addresses her pitiable self by using an epithet (δυσαριστοτόκεια) which refers to both of them, its first part to the mother and its second part to the son. Achilles' destined death brings her pain and suffering (59-60: δυσ-) but his manhood is excellent, that of a noble warrior to whom she has given birth (55-57: άριστοτό-κεια).124 Thetis seems to be willing to make this point quite clear, which is why she devotes almost three lines to explaining this epithet.125

This disguised form of the "Comparison" is expanded by referring to Achilles' ability on the battlefield, rather than to previous and present

125 Cf. Briseis' γόος in 19. 287-300. She too has lost her husband and it was Patroclus who used to tell her that she would marry Achilles when they returned to Phthia. Here it seems that the poet has invented the death of Andromache's mother at the hands of Artemis ad hoc; it remains unexplained for the simple reason that the poet wants to present Andromache as a complete orphan for whom Hector is all that has been left in the world. Together with Apollo, Artemis usually brings sudden death, as in the case of the children of Niobe in Book 24 of the Iliad. On death coming from the arrows of Artemis and Apollo, see Clarke (1999) 257-259. On the origins of Apollo's death-bringing function in comparison with the Semitic Reshep, see Schretter (1974) 174-215 and Burkert (1985) 145-147 (I owe this information to Clarke 1999, 257, ft. 58 and 258, ft. 59).

124 Cf. Schadewaldt (19592) 250, who thinks that through this neat word-analysis the poet links the past, temporally pointing to Achilles' excellence in the battlefield, to the future, which determines his death away from home.

125 Compound epithets having the prefix δυο- as their first element are recurrent in epic poetry, and when they occur in speeches they often lend the passage a sharp tone. Other such epithets are δυσάμμορος (22. 428) and Δύσπαρι (3. 39; 13. 769), which are found only in speeches.

38 Chapter 2

sufferings or losses of dear ones. As a masked "Comparison", it is verbalized by a gradatio (αΰξησις): άμύμονά τε κρατερόν τε / εξοχον ηρώων, in which the first two epithets characterize Achilles without any comparison and the third makes him excel among heroes as the best warrior. Yet again, this is consonant with the second part of the compound δυσαρι-στοτόκεια, which (άριστο-) also insists on a comparison. The "Compa-rison"-theme undergoes an unexpected change as it is at first condensed into a single epithet and then analyzed in three lines with a mutual impact on both Thetis and Achilles.

The "Comparison" is often used to differentiate the deceased from others who either belong to the same group of people (warriors) or share a common bond with the lamenter (brothers, husband). In Andromache's lament in Book 24 the "Comparison" takes another surprising form. It is not Hector who is compared to others, but the pain his death has caused. The lamenter (Andromache) has suffered the greatest pain (24. 742: έμοί δε μάλιστα λελείψεται αλγεα λυγρά) compared to the people of Troy (740) and Hector's parents (741).

Hecuba's personal lament in 24. 748-759 implicitly points to the fact that Hector's preeminence in life dictates the significance of his death. The "Comparison" is fully developed following an allusion (748: φίλτα-τε) to the comparison she is going to use. Achilles would sell (πέρνασχ') Hecuba's other sons if he arrested them, but was determined not to spare Hector and so, when he killed him, he dragged his body around the tomb of Patroclus (754-756). Hecuba does not mention any other of her sons by name126, their anonymity serving to underline Hector's uniqueness even more.127

126 Macleod (1982) 153 rightly argues: "If Hecuba does not here recall the other sons Achilles killed, that is to stress his savagery against Hector". One should notice how the pronoun σέο in the beginning of line 754 contrasts with άλλους in 751, thus underlying the difference between Hector and her other sons. Here she is of course referring to the sons that Achilles sold before the death of Patroclus, as in 11. 104-106; 21. 34-44, 57-58, 76-79; 22. 45, since after his friend's death he did not spare anyone.

127 The "Comparison" contained in Hecuba's speech becomes the vehicle for the development of a theme that lends a certain distinctiveness to the personal lament, despite the typical deployment of its structural micro-units. Hecuba could have restricted herself to saying that Hector was the dearest among her sons; nevertheless, she gives the outline of the story dominating the last part of the Iliad with a focus on

2.4 Common Fate 3 9

Helen (24. 762-775) stresses that Hector was special, because of all her kin in Troy, he never insulted her, but used his gentleness and his gentle words (άγανοφροσύνη and άγανοΐς έπέεσι) to protect her. This special relationship between the mourner and the deceased is expressed by a "subtle and expressive construction'"28 involving: a) the repetition of σύ... ofj... σοΐς (771-772) preceded by the emphatic σέ' (767), which brings Hector into the foreground and shows the impact of his loss for her; b) the creation of a circular verbal structure in the form of a κύκλος,129 where the fact that Hector knew how to use words to protect Helen is stressed. The "Comparison" used by Helen is untypical, even idiosyncratic. Instead of explicitly praising Hector, she insists on his divergence from the behavior of others towards her. Whenever somebody insulted her, he would come to her assistance. In this way, the "Comparison" acquires new, surprising dimensions, it becomes situation-based rather than person-dependent. The effect of this idiosyncratic "Comparison" is not to be underestimated; by giving the circumstantial coordinates of Hector's kindness, Helen highlights the picture of Hector as a man "with a delicate understanding for a woman's sad lot".130

2.4 Common Fate

The theme of common fate is a typical element of the Iliadic personal laments.131 The mourner offers a grim picture of his/her life running parallel to that of the beloved one he/she is lamenting. The principal idea behind the use of this theme is that mourner and deceased have to be

Hector's involvement. Hector killed Patroclus, Achilles killed Hector and dragged his body around his companion's grave, thus emphasizing that he will not bring back Patroclus. This brief story is an extension or elaboration of the "Comparison"- it gives the speaker the opportunity to render the comparison more vivid through use of detail, as he reminds his audience of the events that preceded and actually caused the lament.

128 Cf. Macleod (1982) 155. 129 Cf. Denniston (1954) 90. 130 Deichgräber (1972) 81. 131 Fingerle (1939) 167 implies that the use of family terms (τέκνον: 22. 431; άνερ: 24.

725) expresses the personal relationship between the lamenter and the person who is lamented.

40 Chapter 2

presented as if their lives have always been closely connected; within the ritual framework of the lament they are not separate individuals, but parts of a whole linked by the inseparable bonds of fate.132

What is really at work here is a transformation process engendered by the lament. One of the basic goals that the funeral lament attempts to fulfill is the communalization of grief. This is a mental process leading to some sort of healing achieved by turning what is personal into public, by making the loss of a beloved one known to the whole community. The externalization of suffering may have a therapeutic force, as it shifts the focus of pain from the individual to the group.133 The traumatic consequences caused by death will be longer-lasting and more severe if death is marginalized, kept in secret and not shared by the members of the community. The mourner needs to assimilate himself/herself with the experience of the dead person, because in this way grief can heal the internal wounds caused by the loss of a dear one. The individual uttering the lament is responsible before the community for achieving this goal; the motif of common fate shared by both mourner and deceased becomes the thematic means enabling the mourner to create a figurative cohesion between himself/herself and the deceased.134 This cohesion may very well be something made up by the mourner to deal ad hoc with the necessity of the lament. On the other hand, the same motif encompasses a wide range of beliefs underscoring the key role of the funeral lament as a unify-ing social factor within the framework of the community.

Andromache's γόος-speech in 22. 477-514 insists from the very beginning on the fact that Hector and Andromache share a common fate:

Holst-Warhaft (1992) 71-73 shows how the popularity of a lament is based on the way the mourner "manipulates traditional structures to make her private pain and anger a generalized or communal reflection on death" (71). The author is right to suggest that "the lamenter herself has become both an instrument of fate and Fate herself' (73). The importance of fate for the Greek lament is reflected in the use of the term μοιρολόι ( < μοίρα + λέγω: speaking one's fate rather than μυρολογώ: to anoint with perfume, see Schmitt 1901,6-12) to designate traditional funeral laments in Modern Greece. Sultan (1999) 107-108, n. 46 talks about "a 'voice' inherent in women's lamentation", emphasizing the traditional Greek view of the inescapability of fate. The fullest treatment of the subject is Alexiou (2002) 110, 116. See also Holst-Warhaft (1992) 40-42. Holst-Warhaft (1992) 73.

1M Ebbott (1999) 5-7.

2.4 Common Fate 41

«Έκτορ, έγώ δύστηνος· ίη άρα γεινόμεθ' αί'ση άμφότεροι, σύ μέν έν Τροίη Πριάμου κατά δώμα, αύτάρ έγώ Θήβησιν υπό Πλάκψ ύληέσση έν δόμφ Ήετίωνος, ô μ' ετρεφε τυτθόν έοΰσαν, δύσμορος αΐνόμορον ώς μή ώφελλε τεκέσθαι. νΰν δέ σύ μέν ρ' Άΐδαο δόμους υπό κεύθεσι γαίης ερχεαι, αύτάρ έμέ στυγερω ένί πένθεϊ λείπεις χήρην έν μεγάροισι. πάϊς δ' έτι νήπιος αύτως, δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι· ούτε σύ τούτψ εσσεαι, "Εκτορ ονειαρ, έπεί θάνες, ούτε σοι ούτος.»

"Hektor, I grieve for you. You and I were born to a single destiny, you in Troy in the house of Priam, and I in Thebe, underneath the timbered mountain of Plakos in the house of Eëtion, who cared for me when I was little, ill-fated he, I ill-starred. I wish he had never begotten me. Now you go down to the house of Death in the secret places of the earth, and left me here behind in the sorrow of mourning, a widow in your house, and the boy is only a baby who was born to you and me, the unfortunate. You cannot help him, Hektor, any more, since you are dead. Nor can he help you."

After the initial address to the deceased, an "Ι" (έγώ) shifts the focus to the poor widow, the part to the trochaic caesura of the first line being shared by both dead and mourner. Moreover, the idea of sharing a common fate is reinforced in the second part of the same verse by If) and stressed by άμφότεροι at the beginning of the next line. The emphasis then turns to the present (νυν), with further references to Hector, Andromache and their son. This is the art of pain, whereby the lament offers the mourner the opportunity to weep for her own broken fate and release personal sorrows.

The Iliad has used this traditional feature of lament performance to weave a special narrative thread around Hector, Andromache and their son, Astyanax, all of whom become a compositional unit and are treated as such. It can now be better understood why whenever the Iliad refers to one of them in a non-battle context, it has to refer to the others. This technique is not to be underestimated, the more so since it helps the epic unfold one of the key-themes of the entire poem: the tragedy of Hector.

42 Chapter 2

2.5 The "Death-Wish"

The "Death-Wish" is a typical feature of Iliadic personal laments. The mourner's wish to die along with the mourned person has a double origin; it may emanate from the diction of blame -here acquiring an auto-referential tone- but it may equally well be a desperate cry of the individual who cannot deem life worthwhile without the presence of his/her beloved one.

In order to explore the full depth of meanings innate in a "Death-Wish", one has to consider its function and significance first as a type of self-reproach and opprobrium, and second as a manifestation of an inseparable bond between mourner and deceased.

By uttering a "Death-Wish" and virtually wishing his/her own death, the speaker figuratively holds himself/herself responsible for the loss of the beloved one. The incomprehensibility of death as a phenomenon beyond human control makes the living transform grief into blame, blame into anger, and anger, in our case, into a peculiar form of revenge and punishment, one not directed towards others but towards one's own self. This may very well be an entrenched way of being or even an emotional escape from the intense suffering the mourner is experiencing. Holst-Warhaft interprets blaming (as well as naming and fixing in a landscape) in terms of the effort made by the individual to give order to pain and thus gain control over it.135 This strenuous attempt to contextualize a flow of painful feelings, to make them concrete and tangible, acquires a special form in the case of the Iliadic γόος-speeches, the "Death-Wish". At the same time, the way this form of self-blame is expressed -by an unfulfilled wish- reveals its paradoxical nature. This observation is of prime importance for understanding the inner doing and undoing of the lamenter's self. By employing this self-effacing unattainable wish, the mourner dies although still alive; he does not experience a physical death but dies within the poetic reality of the performance.

The self-blame tone of a "Death-Wish" can be seen in Agamemnon's γόος for Menelaus (4. 155-182), in Achilles' lament for Patroclus (19. 315-337) and in Helen's funeral lament for Hector (24. 762-775). Aga-memnon wishes that the wide earth would open to take him (4.182: τότε

'» Holst-Warhaft (1992) 73.

2.5 The "Death-Wish' 43

μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών), because he regards himself as responsible for the loss of his brother. In Achilles' lament for Patroclus, the mourner regards his friend's death as the greatest disaster that could fall upon him (19. 321 : οΰ μέν γάρ τι κακώτερον άλλο πάθοιμι). Patroclus was Achilles' θεράπων as long as he was on his side but when he goes to battle on his own he ceases to be his ritual substitute, his surrogate.136 Patroclus' death was therefore "the wrong death, his substitution unintended".13' Helen (24. 764) wishes that she had died before being brought to Troy by Alexandras (ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι), because she holds herself responsible for the troubles inflicted upon both Achaeans and Trojans. These death-wishes show clear traces of a self-blaming tone that blots out the distinction between self and other and results in self-condemnation and guilt.

In other cases, the "Death-Wish" may serve more to hint at the emotional contiguity between mourner and deceased. The wish to die may reflect the utter desperation of the lamenter and his complete loss of interest in life. Here self-blame is absent - it is deep affection and a sense of proximity based on kinship or companionship that determines the outburst of inconsolable grief resulting in such a profound self-destructive desire.

Andromache's lament in 6.407-439 contains a "Death-Wish" emanating from her utter desperation at foreseeing Hector's death. In 6. 410-411, she says to Hector that "it would be far better to sink into the earth when I have lost you" (έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον ε'ίη / σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι). This "Death-Wish" is not due to Andromache's guilt, but to the close connection with her husband that makes life without him incompre-hensible.

In Priam's γόος for Hector (22. 416-428), the "Death-Wish" refers to the deceased rather than to the mourner himself. By wishing that Hector had died in his own hands (22. 426: ώς δφελεν θανέειν έν χερσίν έμησιν), Priam expresses his pain and suffering through adoption of a stance that "considers" another option. He does not wish that he had died in advance so as not to experience the tragic loss of his beloved son, but wishes a "better death" for Hector, a death without the humiliation caused by Achilles' maltreatement of Hector's body. The self-referential tone, which

134 Nagy (1979)292-295. Shay (1995) 70.

44 Chapter 2

is a typical feature of a "Death-Wish", is here expressed indirectly, aiming at fulfilling the need for lamentation on the side of the mourner(s). As Priam makes clear in the two following lines (22. 427-428: τώ κε κορεσ-σάμεθα κλαίοντέ τε μυρομένω τε | μήτηρ θ', ή μιν ετικτε δυσάμμορος, ήδ' έγώ αυτός), if Hector had died in his father's hands, then his parents "would have glutted themselves with weeping for him and mourning".138

2.6 Past and Present

The antithesis between past and present constitutes one of the starkest contrasts found in the Iliadic γόος-speeches. Like the antiphonal element, it reflects a binary opposition or antithetical thought,139 lying at the heart of the concept of death and consequently of the lament. In the Iliadic personal laments it is often expressed through the polarity created between a reference to the past and a switch to the present through use of the adverb νϋν, the whole opposition being highlighted by the word ζωός uttered in contrast to different forms of the verb άποθνήσκω. The kernel of this motif is the more general theme of the disparity between the happiness the deceased enjoyed during his lifetime and the grimness of his death.

In Briséis' γόος-speech for Patroclus in 19. 287-300, the mourner uses the contrast between life and death, placing it within the foil of past versus present:

ζωόν μέν σε ελειπον έγώ κλισίηθεν ίοϋσα, νϋν δέ σε τεθνηώτα κιχάνομαι, ορχαμε λαών,

I left you alive when I went away from the shelter, but now I come back, lord of the people, to find you have fallen.

(19. 288-289)

The same typical elements are found in Achilles' antiphonal lament in 19. 315-337:

1,8 Adapted from Lattimore's translation (1951). 159 Alexiou (2002) 150-160.

2.6 Past and Present 45

ή ρά νύ μοί ποτε και σύ, δυσάμμορε, φίλταθ' εταίρων, αυτός ένί κλισί,η λαρόν παρά δεΐπνον εθηκας αιψα και ότραλέως, οπότε σπερχοίατ' 'Αχαιοί Τρωσίν έφ' Ιπποδάμοισι φέρειν πολύδακρυν άρηα· νυν δέ σύ μέν κεισαι δεδαϊγμένος, αύτάρ έμόν κήρ ακμηνον πόσιος και έδητύος ένδον εόντων, ofj ποθη.

There was a time, ill fated, o dearest of all my companions, when you yourself would set the desirable dinner before me quickly and expertly, at the time the Achaians were urgent to carry sorrowful war on the Trojans, breakers of horses. But now you lie here torn before me, and my heart goes starved for meat and drink, though they are here beside me, by reason of longing for you. (19.315-321)

As Patroclus was serving Achilles in their hut, so now Achilles is abstaining from food and drink, despite the fact that he has supplies in his tent (ένδον εόντων). Food and drink was a bond between the two friends, a common activity they shared in the past; now that one of them cannot share this activity, the other must also abstain from it.

In Hecuba's γόος in 22. 431-436, the lamenter offers a laconic yet powerful contrast between past and present by reference to Hector's honor when he was alive, as opposed to his implicit loss of that honor now that he lies dead (435-436: since in truth you were their high honour / while you lived. Now death and fate have closed in upon you). Moreover, past and present here allude to the opposition between male κλέος and female γόος, the former referring to the past and the latter to the present. Hector is no longer a source of glory and honor for the Trojans, but the female lament, the γόος uttered by his mother, will confer on him the praise he deserves.140

140 See Sultan (1991) 153-169 and Holst-Warhaft (1992) 110-111.

46 Chapter 2

2.7 Tripartite Structure

Most Iliadic γόοι have a three-part structure: address to the dead, narrative and renewed address.141 Tripartite structure may be a reflection in the internal organization within the personal lament of the tripartite form of the entire funeral, which comprises the prothesis, the ekphora, and finally the deposition of the cremated or inhumed remains of the dead. Studies of later forms of Greek lament have shown that this is a widely attested feature,142 which must thus refer to some general perception of the lament rather than to the survival of some ancient lyric form organized in stanzas and derived from the νόμος.143

The funeral laments of Andromache, Hecuba and Helen exemplify their three-part internal order in a strictly typical manner. They are the only ones in the poem with a true ritual character, since they are uttered at Hector's funeral.

The first part of Andromache's lament in 24. 725-745 referring to Hector (725-732) starts with an address to her dead husband (άνερ), whose body is lying in front of her. The second (732-740) contains a narrative serving to foreshadow the grim future awaiting Astyanax and Andro-mache herself,144 while the third (741-745) refers again to Hector.145

Hecuba's γόος (24. 748-759) begins with an expanded address to Hector, whose name stands emphatically stressed in verse-initial position and occupies the whole first line (748).146 In the second part of her lament, Hecuba develops what has been called a "Comparison";147 the mourner

141 Holst-Warhaft (1992) 112. '« Holst-Warhaft (1992) 112. 143 See van Leutsch (1857) 33 if., who had argued that each one of the three laments by

Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in II. 24 had been composed of four three-line strophes (athetizing the lines which did not fit his pattern) and originated from the ancient νόμος that was also composed in hexameters and addressed to the gods. He even tried to identify in those laments the three constituent parts of the νόμος, namely the άρχή, the ομφαλός and the σφρηγίς. His claims were rejected by Peppmiiller (1872).

144 The second part of Andromache's lament starts with an address to Astyanax, "no longer the dead man, as is normal in laments. The baby boy is clearly not with her, which enhances the rhetorical and pathetic effect", Macleod (1982) 151 rightly argues.

145 The third part of Andromache's lament begins with a line that is typical in laments and epitaphs and renews the initial address to the deceased by using his name.

146 Note how 748 and 762 are recalling each other. 147 Lohmann (1970) 103.

2.8 Ring-composition 47

wants to compare the dead person to others and stresses the fact that the deceased was exceptional, clearly outshining all others, which is why his loss is of particular importance. After this narrative section, Hecuba returns to consideration of Hector's present state as he lies dead in front of her.

Helen's lament in 24. 762-775 also follows the same three-fold structural pattern. She begins her lament by using a "praising address" to single out Hector for praise among her brothers-in-law and then (762-766) summarizes her past life. In the second part (767-772), she implicitly compares Hector with the rest of the Trojans and stresses his specialness for her. Hector -and Priam- never insulted her, but would even use gentleness and gentle words (άγανοφροσύνη and άγανοΐς έπέεσσι) to protect her. In the third part of her γόος Helen does not repeat her initial address to Hector, but returns to the lament theme. Deceased and mourner are (773) united in their fate. Helen is not only crying for Hector but also for herself, since his death will inevitably result in the deterioration of her already grim position in Troy.

2.8 Ring-composition

Ring-composition14" is frequently149 used in the Iliadic personal laments as an alternative to the other two structural patterns attested in Homeric speeches, namely parallel composition and free expansion.150 The center of the ring-composition within a speech is the place where a more or less narrative element is developed. This acute observation can be applied to the personal laments as well, with a necessary addition.151 The center of

148 For ring-composition in Homer, see van Otterlo (1944a) 192-207, (1944b), (1948); van Groningen (1958) 51-56; Whitman (1958); Gaisser (1969) 1-43; Lohmann (1970) 12-30 and passim, (1988); Thalmann (1984) 1-32; Gordesiani (1986) 26-67; Richardson (1993) 1-19; Minchin (2001) 181-202.

149 In 10 out of 12 Iliadic personal laments (see Table 1). Minchin (2001) 202 carefully distinguishes between "occasional patterns which occur automatically in natural discourse" and "premeditated patterns of reference and repetition across long stretches of discourse". Minchin is right that in the case of Homer we are essentially dealing with the former, but I disagree with the notion that we should not regard those rings as ring composition (202). See Lohmann (1970) and (1999) 239-257.

151 Lohmann (1999) 249.

48 Chapter 2

the ring-composition with its narrative character is here occupied by the "Comparison", a special form the narrative element acquires within the framework of a γόος speech. On the other hand, the outer rings (in ring-composition) typically express a rather descriptive element. Here, we are dealing with a case of mirroring that reflects the general tendencies of Homeric narrative architecture where we encounter progressive and descriptive passages. The former push forward the action, while the latter with their digressive kernel express moments of narrative rest. The narrative element is of key importance because "the hallmark of ring-composition is not verbatim correspondence, but thematical connection".152

Thetis' γόος for Achilles (18. 52-64) clearly shows how ring-composi-tion is used both to emphasize the central part of the speech (the mother's pain for her son) and to create a correspondence between the outer rings which push the action forward (Thetis and the Nereids will meet with Achilles):

a. 52-53: Thetis addresses the Nereids and orders them to come and listen to her suffering (εί'δετ' άκούουσαι, οσ' έμψ ενι κήδεα θυμφ)

b. 54: exclamation of suffering, ending with a significant self-cha-racterization (δυσαριστοτόκεια), whose two components (δυσ- and άρι-στοτόκεια) will be explained in the next lines

bl . 55-59: explanation of άριστοτόκεια b2. 59-62: explanation of δυσ- in Thetis' and Achilles' terms

a' 63-64: Thetis expresses her intention to go and listen to his sorrow (άλλ' ειμ', οφρα ϊδωμι φίλον τέκος ήδ' έπακούσω, / δττί μιν ϊκετο πένθος άπό πτολέμοιο μένοντα).

2.9 The Antiphonal Element

The antiphonal element refers to the specifics of personal lament performance as represented by the Iliad. The most elaborate description of antiphonal organization in the Iliadic γόοι can be seen in the pre-sentation of the funeral laments by Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in Iliad 24. After the singing of the θρήνος by the professional mourners and the responsive cries of a chorus of women,153 it is the time for the

152 Lohmann (1999) 250. 153 The use of the verbs στενάχω and στένω in the formulaic closure of the personal

2.9 The Antiphonal Element 49

deceased's kin to have their share in the lamentation. Each female mourner utters a γόος and then her speech is capped by the refrain of a chorus of female mourners. The whole scene may be schematically represented as follows:

• A. Professional mourners (θρήνος) • A'. Female chorus • Bl . Andromache (γόος) • B l ' . Female chorus • B2. Hecuba (γόος) • B2'. Female chorus • B3. Helen (γόος) • B3\ Chorus of the entire Trojan people

Alexiou talks of the existence of a simple strophic pattern (Ax Ax Ax), which she accounts for as follows: "the predominance of the solo laments with refrain and the choral laments in the earlier period ... by the tendency of epic to develop the narrative element at the expense of antiphony and refrain, and of lyric to concentrate on the choral and musical elements".154

Alexiou is right in making such a claim, especially since the epic was an inappropriate medium for antiphony.155

Antiphony can also generate thematic resemblance, as in the consecutive γόοι of Briseis and Achilles for Patroclus in 19. 287-300 and 19. 315-337 respectively. In this case, the antiphonal element refers not only to the external reenactment of the funeral laments, but also to the responsive nature of the themes both mourners unravel:

laments (έπΐ δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες) probably refers to the repetition of cries. See Reiner (1938) 31-33; Alexiou (2002) 134-135; Kornarou (2001) 22. Alexiou (2002) 132.

155 The κομμός of Greek tragedy was sung antiphonally by one or two actors and the chorus, and had a rather complex (AA BB CC DD etc.) structure. See Alexiou (2002) 223 and Kornarou (2001) 41-50. The solid framework of epic genre restrictions was inadequate for such a schema, for in epic we only have solo speech. One way in which archaic epic attempted to deal with this problem was by verbalising the thoughts and feelings of the troops. As it could not make them speak together, it invented the τις-speeches, which were uttered by anonymous soldiers but expressed the mental and emotional preoccupations of the whole army. The same device could not be used in the case of the γόοι, because funeral practice had made the use of a chorus of mourners a necessary condition for its poetic reenactment.

50 Chapter 2

a. Opposition between a blissful past when Patroclus was alive and a painful present after his death (287-289 & 315-321 respectively);

b. Reference to other sufferings experienced by both mourners (290-294 & 321-327 respectively);

a'. Personal hopes for a better future, which have been shattered (295-300 & 328-337).

These two lament speeches form a unit in which antiphony and ring-composition are brilliantly orchestrated around the typical motifs used by the Iliadic γόοι, thus offering an alternative to the triadic representation of the ritualistic and ritual laments in Books 22 and 24 respectively.

The above examination of the Iliadic γόοι typology has shown the existence of certain typical elements creating a thematic coherence between the speeches of this category.

The praising address to the deceased and the "Comparison " reflect the importance of praise for the fallen warrior, a theme which is consonant with the basic preoccupations of epic poetry in general. The "Death-Wish" and the antithesis between past and present fall within the category of anti-thetical thought, which is a typical mode of ordering and constructing pain in Greek culture of all times. Together with the motif of sharing a common fate the above modes mirror the mourner's wish to create an inseparable bond with the deceased, to negate the veiy idea of death by assimilating himself/herself with his/her beloved one. Finally, the Iliadic γόοι share some common features with regard to structural organization, such as tripartite structure, ring-composition and antiphonal form. The first two refer to the inner disposition of thematic elements, whereas the third relates to the external mode of presentation, i.e. to performance.

2.9 The Antiphonal Element 51

Table 1: Reference of Typical Features156

in the Iliadic Personal Laments

Pers . L a m B K PA c C F D W P - P T S R C A n t

l . A g - M 4 0 0 X X 0 X χ χ 2. A n d - H c t 6 O X X X X 0 0 0 3. T h - A c h 18 0 X 0 0 X X χ χ 4. A c h - P 18 0 0 X 0 X o 0 χ 5. B r - P 19 X X X o X χ χ χ 6. A c h - P 19 X X X 0 X χ χ χ 7. P r - H c t 2 2 0 X X X X χ χ χ 8. H e c - H c t 2 2 0 0 X X X χ χ χ 9. A n d - H c t 2 2 0 0 X X X χ χ χ 10. A n d - H c t 2 4 X X X 0 X χ χ χ 11. H e c - H c t 2 4 X X 0 0 X χ χ χ 12. H e l - H c t 2 4 X X X X X χ χ χ

136 Abbreviated symbols: X = Presence; O = Absence; Pers. Lam = Personal Laments; BK = Book (of the Iliad)·, PA = Praising Address; C = "Comparison"; CF = Common Fate; DW = Death-Wish; P-P = Past/Present contrast; TS = Tripartite Structure; RC = Ring-composition; Ant = Antiphonal element.

Chapter 3

Introductory and Closing Formulas

3.1 Speech-formulas, speech-classification and γόος-speeches

Every single direct speech in the Homeric poems is anticipated by an introduction -of vaiying length- and capped by a closure; taken together, these encircle the speech, creating a visible and audible frame. The introduction and the closure are often formulaic in nature, which is to say they are both expressed by phrases frequently encountered throughout the poems. There are of course exceptions; some speech introductions occur only once or twice, since they are designed and created for the particular context in which they are placed.

In general, an introduction gives us some information about the nature of the speech that is to follow. Boiling1" separated speech introductions into three types: a) the "brief' one, where the introductory verb speaks of "the tone, the contents, or the purpose of the speech"; b) the "full" type, where an explicit verb of speaking is used and c) a third type, where the introductory verse is accompanied by additional information about the speaker, and often by a second introduction before the actual words. Edwards158 made a different categorization: a) introductions with verbs of general sense; b) introductions with a verb of specific sense; c) anomalous forms. Both scholars based their classification on the type of verb used in the introductory line(s); such an approach is no doubt very useful for dealing with speech introductions per se. But when we examine the latter in relation to the speeches that follow, we have to consider both the content and other textual markers pointing to the nature of the speech. For although introductory formulas look alike or are very similar in form

157 See Boiling (1922) 213-221. '» Edwards (1970) 1-36.

54 Chapter 3

(with undoubted genetic relations between them), they may nevertheless represent different stages in a semantic evolution which to some extent determines their functional use. The textualization of formulaic introductions shows traces of a process that lasted throughout the period of their shaping within the oral tradition of epic poetry.15' It has been argued that the origin of these introductions and closures must be traced back to the oral background of the Homeric text.160 A modern printed text is primarily visual; the author has a number of means at his disposal to note the passage from direct to indirect speech. But in the case of Homer, in a formative "pan-Hellenic" era with no written texts,161 the performing singer and the tradition lying behind him had to invent stereotypical expressions in order to mark the beginning and the end of a speech. This resulted in a whole system of speech introductions and closures, which are highly formulaic precisely because they had to be repeated so often in poems consisting largely of speeches -45% of the Iliad is character-text, i.e. speeches.162

Following the path laid out by Beck,163 who has recently studied variation in Homeric speech frames, we will examine certain variations, insertions and expansions of personal lament speech introductions and closures and the way they contribute to telling the story effectively.

139 See Muñoz Valle (1971) 39, 305-314. 160 See. Combellack (1939) 12, 43-56 and de Jong (1987b) 195-197. 161 SeeNagy (1996b) 110. 162 Scholars have approached speech-formulas either from a semantic point of view,

focusing their interest specifically on the formulaic introduction επος τ' εφατ' έκ χ' όνόμαζεν and επεα πτερόεντα (Jacobsohn 1935, 132-140; Calhoun 1935, 215-227; Couch 1937, 129-140; Muñoz Valle 1971, 305-314; Vivante 1975, 1-12), or from a genetic one (Parry 1937, 59-63; Krarup 1941, 230-247; Fournier 1946, 29-68; Edwards 1970, 1-36; Riggsby 1992, 99-114), where the stress is on the relations and modifications of the speech-formulas according to the theory of oral composition. Fingerle (1939) 306-372 adopts a different perspective, since he classifies all the Homeric speeches, considering both the speech-introduction as well as the type of speech that follows. See de Jong (1987b) 195-208, who follows a narratological approach in examining speech-introductions as attributive discourse·, speech-introductions are of a special interest to her, since they are placed on the borders between narrator-text (simple and complex) and character-text.

163 Beck (1997).

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 55

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions

The Iliadic personal laments have either single or multi-verse introductions. Of the twelve γόοι attested in the Iliad, six (19. 286; 19. 314; 22. 430; 22. 476; 24. 747; 24. 761) are introduced by single-verses and six (4. 153-154; 6. 405-406; 18. 50-51, 18. 316-323; 22. 414-415; 24. 723-724) by multi-verses.

3.2.1 Single-verse introductions

1. είπε δ' άρα κλαίουσα γυνή έϊκυΐα θεησιν (19. 286) 2. μνησάμενος δ' άδινώς άνενείκατο φώνησέν τε (19. 314) 3. Τρψήσιν δ* Εκάβη άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (22. 430) 4. άμβλήδην γοόωσα μετά Τρψήσιν εειπεν (22. 476) 5. τήσιν δ' αυθ' Εκάβη άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (24. 747) 6. τήσι δ' επειθ' Ελένη τριτάτη έξήρχε γόοιο (24. 761)

The formal pattern for speech introductions is: dative + particle + nominative of the speaker + άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο. Two single-verse introductions (22. 430, 24. 747) follow it impeccably and one (24. 761) shows a slight variation: instead of άδινοϋ modifying γόοιο, we get τρι-τάτη referring to Helen.164 Having examined the different meanings that άδινός or άδινός has in various environments, Silk has argued that it is an iconym, "a word that has become obsolete in the speech-community'"65

and has survived passively, being virtually fossilised in set phrases such as religious formulas or, one might add, lament terminology. Silk goes on to say that "with an iconym it is barely possible to separate the question of 'meaning' from the effect".166 The replacement of άδινοϋ by τριτάτη highlights an important point in the description of the lamentation process: Helen laments "third and last".167 The speech introduction thus makes it clear through slight variation of the traditional formula άδινοϋ

164 άδινοϋ and τριτάτη are metricall equivalent words ( - - -). See Silk (1983) 303-330 and LSJ9 s.v. άδινοΰ.

'« Silk (1983) 329. 167 See Lattimore 1951 ad loc.

56 Chapter 3

έξήρχε γόοιο that the ritual lament for Hector will come to an end after Helen's speech.1"

The other three speech introductions display certain similarities, as they all contain a participle + finite verb -19.314 and 22. 476 also having an adverb (άδινώς/άμβλήδην). Verse 19. 314 (μνησάμενος δ' άδινώς άνε-νείκατο φώνησέν τε) introduces Achilles' lament for Patroclus. This is by no means a typical single-verse introduction to a γόος but on the other hand, the closure of the speech (19.338-339: ώς εφατο κλαίων, έπί δέ στενά-χοντο γέροντες | μνησάμενοι, τά έκαστος ένί μεγάροισιν ελειπον) chara-cterizes it as a personal lament.169 Beck rightly observes that the adverb άδινώς "makes the link with the language of lament introduction'"70 since "[t]he word άδινός (adverbial in 314) also appears in the common lament introduction for women".171 She also points to the participle μνησάμενοι in verse 339, referring to the old men who accompany Achilles in his lament, which in turn recalls μνησάμενος used of Achilles in 314. Thus, the speech introduction, though atypical of a personal lament, contains features that blend well both with lament terminology and with the actual storytelling.

Verse 19. 286 (είπε δ' άρα κλαίουσα γυνή έϊκυΐα θεησιν) is another speech introduction considerably deviating from the formal pattern. On the other hand, "it contains the important verb κλαίειν and the variation is probably related to the lack of a noun-epithet expression for 'Briséis'".172

This is certainly true, but the use of γυνή in place of the name Βρισηΐς may also be due to the fact that a few verses earlier her name has already

168 Thus as the cause of the war, Helen is not only the last person to lament Hector, but also the last speaker in the entire Iliad. See also our observations on the closure of this personal lament and the use of the expression δήμος άπειρων (section 3. 3. 1).

169 See Beck (1997) 113. 110 For the expression άδινά στεναχ(ίζειν), see II. 23. 225, 24. 123 and Od. 24. 317,

where it refers only to males. See also Od. 7. 274, where it characterizes the sea waves.

171 Beck (1997) 113. The word άδινός is also used in the common introduction to a lament uttered by Achilles (see II. 18. 316 = 23. 17). Pucci (1998) 98, ft. 5 seems to support the view that άνενείκατο may refer to frequency and pitch of ululation, "a thick, intense activity, a repeated throbbing". See II. 16. 481 and Od. 19. 516 where it refers to the "heart" (κήρ).

172 Beck (1997) 113.

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 57

been used. Βρισηΐς δ' άρ' επειτ' ίκέλη χρυσή 'Αφροδίτη (19. 282) initiates a four-verse period ending just before the speech introduction to Briséis' personal lament. Moreover, the use of γυνή emphatically stresses the specific capacity in which the speaker will speak. Briseis will do so as a wife both former and future, as indicated by her references to her dead husband (295-296) and the promise of a future marriage with Achilles.173

Thus, the use of the term γυνή elevates her status from that of a slave woman to that of a wife. The speech introduction implies what is to be explicitly stated in the ensuing speech: Briseis will lament (κλαίουσα)174

as a woman deprived of a husband.173

Finally, 22. 476 (άμβλήδην γοόωσα μετά Τρψησιν εειπεν) is half-way between serious variation (as in 19.286 and 19. 314) and compliance with the formal pattern (22. 430; 24. 747; 24. 761). The participle γοόωσα makes a link with the language of personal lament introductions, but the Homeric hapax legomenon άμβλήδην (with deep sobs)176 is difficult to explain. Curiously enough, the previous verses describe in detail how Andromache almost fell unconscious, άμβλήδην seems to belong to those corporeal signs of disorder which are typical of the lament, as they illustrate the mourner's personal crisis, dissolution and figurative death. Andromache's situation (22. 466-467: την δέ κατ' οφθαλμών έρεβεννη νύξ έκάλυψεν, | ήριπε δ' έξοπίσω, άπό δέ ψυχήν έκάπυσσεν) is typical of the mourner's condition when presented as being in the throes of death.

171 See de Jong (1987b) 198. 174 On κλαίειν see the perceptive analysis by Derderian (2001) 24-31. She rightly

observes that "κλαίειν can preface direct speech, but more often appears as a participle combined with verbs denoting direct speech or lament, suggesting that κλαίειν refers to 'spontaneous' lament as an accompanying action rather than as a speech genre of mourning, κλαίειν is a markedly collective activity; apart from a few informal individual laments, it designates primarily non-verbalized mourning performed by individuals in collective contexts with group response". She also distinguishes between the different semantical connotations of άχνυσθαι and όδύρεσθαι, the former designating "personal motivated grief of individual men within the network of έταΐροι or kin, a grief which necessitates the consideration of possible action to resolve the loss" (19) and the latter unifying "the individual psychology and the conventional activity of mourning" (24). Spatafora (1997) 4 is wrong in asserting that κλαίειν refers only to non-verbalized lament.

175 On naming married women in Homer, see Higbie (1995) 113-114. 176 This word is rarely found in later authors. See Richardson (1993) 158.

58 Chapter 3

Seremetakis, who has studied the performance of laments for the dead (μοιρολόγια) in the district of Inner Mani, has observed a similar feature in the lament process: "Heavy breathing and loss of breath function as emotional intensifiers in the context of spoken conversations. The word xepsihisméni means (she is) out of breath, dying, losing the soul (psihf); soul is equivalent to breath here. The term refers to strenuous activity, struggle, or fight with death.'"77 Therefore, άμβλήδην γοόωσα signifies Andromache's passage from life to death and back again, but also represents a "poeticization of her ritual screaming".1711 By acoustically violating the linguistic norms of her personal lament, this sob infiltrates Andromache's language, endowing the speech that ensues with a special emotional pitch.

3.2.2 Multi-verse introductions

There are six multi-verse introductions to γόος speeches in the Iliad:

1. τοις δέ βαρύ στενάχων μετέφη κρείων Αγαμέμνων, χειρός εχων Μενέλαον, έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι. (4. 153-154) 2. Ανδρομάχη δέ οί άγχι παρίστατο δάκρυ χέουσα εν τ' άρα οί φϋ χειρί επος τ' εφατ' εκ τ' όνόμαζεν- (6. 405-406) 3. ...αΐ δ' αμα πάσαι στήθεα πεπλήγοντο. Θέτις δ' έξήρχε γόοιο· (18. 50-51) 4. τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο, χείρας έπ' άνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν έταίρου, (18. 316-317)

ώς ο βαρύ στενάχων μετεφώνεε Μυρμιδόνεσσιν (18. 323) 5. πάντας δ' έλλιτάνευε κυλινδόμενος κατά κόπρον, έξ όνομακλήδην όνομάζων άνδρα εκαστον (22. 414-415) 6. τησιν δ' Ανδρομάχη λευκώλενος ήρχε γόοιο, Έκτορος άνδροφόνοιο κάρη μετά χερσίν έχουσα· (24. 723-724)179

177 Seremetakis (1991) 117. 178 Seremetakis (1991) 118. 179 West (1998-2000) ad loc. prefers the reading ίπποδάμοιο instead of άνδροφόνοιο. I

am following the editions of Leaf and Allen, who both have άνδροφόνοιο, as well as Richardson's commentary (1993) ad loc. See also Beck (1997) 69, ft. 36.

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 59

In 4.153-154, the insertion of a single-verse in adding enjamebment (χειρός εχων Μενέλαον, έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι) lends vividness and pathos to Agamemnon's lament. The reference to the hands of the mourner, who is now holding the presumably dead Menelaus, is a recurrent feature of multi-verse introductions to γόος-speeches.180 In this case reference to such a vivid detail only occupies the first half of the enjambed verse (154), the second containing a variation of the closing formula."1

6. 405-406 is linked to lament language only by δάκρυ χέουσα. The elliptical introduction is due to the non-funeral context within which this γόος is placed. When the whole scene or context in which the personal laments are found is less formal, and formulas are placed in an environment other than the one they have been composed and shaped for, the formulaic material is also enfeebled.182 Such material consequently survives through some alteration of form and/or change of position.

In 18. 50-51 (αϊ δ' άμα πάσαι | στήθεα πεπλήγοντο. Θέτις δ' έξήρχε γόοιο) the first part of the single-verse formulaic pattern has been replaced183 by στήθεα πεπλήγοντο, while the nominative designating the speaker comes after the caesura, which is now trochaic rather than penthemimeral as in the typical formulaic introduction. Moreover, the epithet άδινοΰ is absent and the line closes with the typical words for γόος introductions, έξήρχε γόοιο. The beating of one's breast is a typical mourn-ing sign symbolizing the grief and pain experienced by the mourner.184

180 See also 18. 316-317 and 24. 723-724. Alexiou (2002) 6 notes that touching and holding the dead forms part of the process of the mourning ritual accompanying the lament proper. See also Beck (1997) 70, ft. 37.

181 For this variation, see single-verse closures (section 3. 3. 1). 182 "Enfeebled" formulas cannot simply be due to the flexibility of the system sometimes

allowing a portion of a line or two to appear, sometimes two. Flexibility refers to the entire system, and is unable to explain the high concentration of formulaic introductions and closures of personal lament speeches within a ritual or ritualistic framework as opposed to a low concentration within a non-ritual setting. Instances of high concentration occur at the end of Books 22 and 24 of the Iliad, during the ritual or ritualistic lamentation for Hector; low concentration is observed in non-ritual γόοι by Agamemnon for Menelaus in Book 4 and by Andromache for Hector in Book 6.

185 Compare the single-verse formulas introducing a γόος: 18. 316, 22. 430, 24. 723,24. 747, 24. 761.

184 Sometimes mourners make specific gestures which, though not so self-violent as those performed by the Nereids in II. 18 and Briseis in II. 19, still express their grief through the use of particular parts of their body; both Achilles in 23. 18 and

60 Chapter 3

Likewise, in 19. 285 we come across an almost identical picture just before Briséis' personal lament for Patroclus. Briséis scratches or tears her breast (στήθεα), throat (δειρήν) and face (πρόσωπα); as Pucci has shown,185 she disfigures her body, and it is this disfigurement that pertains to a slave-woman and distinguishes her from the other free women. The verb άμύσσω (to tear) is a hapax for a ritualised passage, whereas in Thetis' case we find the verb πλήττομαι, which does not refer to disfigurement but is limited to an intense but not uncontrollable expression of grief. The scene in which the chorus of the Nereids beat their breasts is consistent with a ritual mourning and fits the context within which it is placed well, especially since the Nereids function as the group of mourners who take over the lament from the slave women (18. 30-31: χερσί δέ πασαι | στήθεα πεπλήγοντο). The long Nereid catalogue (18. 39-48) preceding the speech introduction to Thetis' γόος gives the context majestic grandeur, as Thetis, the chief mourner, is surrounded by numerous divine mourners. The modification of this speech introduction highlights a significant point in the lament to follow: the exceptionality of Achilles' γόος is enhanced by the participation of a chorus of divine mourners, the Nereids who perform the same acts of lamentation for Achilles (beating of the breast) as the slave women do for Patroclus.

18. 316-323 is a multi-verse passage preceding Achilles' first γόος for Patroclus. It starts with an initial two-verse speech introduction (18. 316-317), followed by an expanded simile with a final single-verse introduction (18. 323) to the lament before Achilles (18. 324 ff.) begins to speak. The first part of this extended passage contains a two-verse lament introduction made up of a single-verse formula, representing the common speech introduction pattern for the γόοι,"6 and a second verse in adding enjambement. The latter expands the basic idea -someone uttered a γόος-

Andromache in 24. 724 express their grief either by putting the hands on the breast of the deceased (Achilles) or by holding the dead's head (Andromache).

1,5 See Pucci (1998) 98 and, for a fine parallel reading of the two antiphonal γόοι by Briséis and Achilles, 97-112.

186 The formula τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξηρχε γόοιο is also attested in 23. 19. Beck (1997) 122 carefully notes that "[t]here is no structural reason why a simile could not have appeared in Book 23 as well as in Book 18. But the appearance of the simile when Achilles first observes the rituals of mourning for Patroclus, and when his grief is presumably sharpest and strongest, gives the episode special prominence compared to the later funeral games".

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 61

speech- by referring to the laying of the mourner's hands on the chest of the deceased. The initial two-verse introduction (18. 316-317: τοΐσι δέ Πη-λείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο, | χείρας έπ' άνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν εταίρου) prepares the audience for a γόος, but this expectation is temporally suspended by the insertion of a lion simile. The simile functions as a "point of departure" for the narrator,"7 because it gives him the opportunity to postpone the utterance of the lament speech for a while and channel the audience's attention towards the intervening simile, which significantly contributes to the effectiveness of the storytelling. Achilles is compared not to a mighty lion that attacks powerless cattle (as it often happens in Iliadic similes), but to a parent-lion facing the loss of its cubs to a hunter. Beck has masterfully emphasized the appropriateness of the analogy for the actual situation Achilles finds himself in: like the lion in the simile, he has arrived too late to save Patroclus' life, but still tries to avenge his friend's death, just as a lion might look "in his grief and anger'"" for the hunter and its cubs.

22. 414-415 poses a special problem, as this speech introduction has nothing in common either with a personal lament introduction or with lament language in general. Beck correctly observes that "the language of this introduction describes Priam's speech in terms of his grief rather than naming it with a term for 'ritual lament'"."9 Priam begins his speech by addressing his fellow citizens, from whom he seeks permission to go to Achilles' hut and beg for the return of Hector's body. Once the theme of old age is mentioned, the speech turns into a lament. The typical closure (22. 429: ώς εφατο κλαίων· έπί δέ στενάχοντο πολΐται) and the placement of the speech first in the triad of formal laments for Hector in Book 22 shows that it is considered to be a personal lament. It seems that with the exception of Achilles, no other man's speech was characterized as a γόος in the Iliad.m

The formula used for Andromache in 24. 723 shows another form of divergence from the pattern we have seen above; its second part is not occupied by the formula άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο, but of a variant of it,

m See Beck (1997) 121-122. '» Beck (1997) 121.

Beck (1997) 70, ft. 40. 150 Beck (1997) 70, ft. 40.

6 2 Chapter 3

namely λευκώλενος ήρχε γόοιο. Here it is the use of the adjective λευκώ-λενος that causes the prefix έξ to be dropped from έξήρχε, since λευκώ-λενος ends in two shorts and begins with a long.1" Given the five syllable adonic - - - - - closing the line, this means that έξήρχε must be reduced to two syllables, since three-syllable γόοιο has to be placed at the very end of the line. Edwards has argued that "since the following verse describes how she [Andromache] is cradling Hector's head in her arms, it is impossible not to feel that the usually formulaic epithet has here a vivid descriptive force."192 This is a valid point, since Edwards highlights the vividness of this particular epithet in this specific context, where the second verse of the speech describes a typical gesture of lamentation, once again in adding enjambement. Moreover, one could plausibly maintain that λευκώλενος is also looking two lines ahead at 24. 725, and in particular to the phrase νέος ώλεο. By reproducing almost the same sound effect with λευκώλενος (λευκώλενος / νέος ώλεο), this phrase reflects the epithet that has just been used. One could of course ask which of the two influenced the other first, but whatever the answer is, the main point of interest lies in the acoustic and semantic interaction unfolding their compositional relation. This similarity of sound points to a semantic link: Andromache and Hector are portrayed within the frame of a juxtaposed and parallel analogy.193 Andromache is one of only three women to whom the epithet λευκώλενος is attributed, the other two being Hera and Helen.194

1,1 Altogether rather different from άδινοϋ, 192 See Edwards (1970) 1-36. See also Beck (1997) 153 who observes that "speech

frames that depart from the most common patterns, whether through variation, expansion, or insertion, consistently differ from these common patterns in ways that emphasize important points in the story".

193 One could note that as the phrase άπ' αίωνος νέος ώλεο follows the vocative άνερ (referring to Hector) so the epithet λευκώλενος follows Andromache; -in this way the phrase referring to Hector functions as an epithet (something like νεοθανής or ώκυ-μορώτατος)-; both these phrases occupy the same part of the verses they belong to, that is to say the part before the final adonic (- - -1- in the 4th and 5th feet. 1 suggest that these similarities in such a short space (there is just one intervening verse) and with such a non-typical expression (as άπ' αίωνος νέος ώλεο) argue quite convincingly for the fact that the parallelism I have just referred to is anything but accidental.

194 It is attributed to Hera in 1. 195, 208, 595 (= 21. 434); 5. 711, 767 (= 8. 381 = 14. 277 = 15. 78), 775, 784; 8. 350, 484; 15. 92, 130; 19. 407; 21. 377, 418; 24. 55 in the nominative case; in 20. 112 in the accusative and in 1. 572 in the dative. It refers to

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 63

This particular epithet is typical of Andromache195 but the way it alludes to the phrase νέος ώλεο shows that the poet wants to couple Andro-mache's identity as a wife with Hector's doom; in this way husband and wife are closely joined, since they share parallel fates. Indeed, parallels between the fate of the mourner and the deceased are also encountered in a number of other personal laments. Our line of interpretation is further strengthened by yet another parallelism between Ανδρομάχη and άνδρο-φόνοιο in the next line, which goes to show beyond any reasonable doubt that we are dealing with an intentional device. In a nutshell, the poet aims at underlining the common fate of the mourner and deceased (a typical γόος theme), and does so not by abandoning the constraints and limitations of his tradition, but by skillfully reorganizing and rearranging it according to his own plan.

One of the methods that have shaped formulaic diction referring to specific everyday life contexts is what Foley has coined "traditional referentiality".196 This formula-shaping process can be seen in what he calls métonymie relationships, "métonymie pathways to the poetic conjuring of personalities";197 thus the epithet λευκώλενος describing Andromache in 24. 723 is not used for metrical reasons. After all, the poet could just as well have used άδινοϋ, which belonged to the formulaic prototype on which the second part of the verse was formed, and which was recurrently used in γόος formulaic introductions immediately after the penthemimeral caesura. The use of λευκώλενος is determined by both its general and particular references in the dictional environment; in short, its immediate referentiality is combined with its traditional one. The former "looks" at the epithet's placement in the scene and to the specific environment in which it is incorporated, the latter to its métonymie

Helen only once, in 3. 121 in the dative and twice to Andromache, in 6. 371 in the accusative and in 6. 377 in the nominative.

193 This epithet is attributed to Hera, Andromache and Helen, all of whom are wives; the use of λευκώλενος points simultaneously to Andromache's paradeigmatic nature as a wife and to the immediate context of the lament scene at the end of Book 24. Cf. the use of the epithet άρηίφιλος in 5. 561, which refers both to its paradeigmatic nature (since Menelaus, to whom it is attributed, is the casus belli) and to its immediate context (Menelaus has just killed the two sons of Diocles).

196 See Foley (1991) 6-8. 197 See Foley (1991)23, (1992)281.

64 Chapter 3

allusion to the Andromache par excellence, who has become an integral part of the tradition's collective consciousness.

3.3 Personal lament speech closures

Eight closing formulas come immediately after the personal laments and two more are placed together with the speech introduction, most of which constitute variations on the same pattern: ώς εφατο κλαί[ουσ' (α)] / -ων + έπί δ' (έ) + verb στενάχομαι or στένω + nominative plural or nominative singular of a collective noun. Six of them are single-verse (4. 154, 22. 429, 22. 515,24. 746,24. 760, 24. 776) and four multi-verse closures (18. 314-315, 19. 301-302, 19. 338-339, 22. 437-438).

3.3.1 Single-verse closures

1. έπεστενάχοντο δ' εταίροι· (4. 154) 2. ώς εφατο κλαίων· έπί δέ στενάχοντο πολΐται (22. 429) 3. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'- έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες (22. 515; 24. 746) 4. ώς εφατο κλαίουσα, γόον δ' άλίαστον ορινε (24. 760) 5. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος άπειρων (24. 776)

4. 154 is a compressed form of the typical closure used for a γόος-speech. It lacks the first part (ώς εφατο κλαί[ουσ'(α)] / -ων) of the single-verse formulaic pattern described above and has a slight a variation of the second (έπεστενάχοντο δ' εταίροι instead of έπί δέ στενάχοντο + nominative of subject). Whereas this variation is easily explained in terms of meter, the most noteworthy and puzzling feature of this closure is its placement immediately after the speech introduction, before the beginning of the γόος-speech. A similar peculiar feature is also observed in Achilles' first personal lament for Patroclus in Book 18, in which both introduction and closure frames present significant deviations from the formulaic pattern. The lack of a ritual framework characterizing Agamemnon's imaginary γόος for Menelaus has resulted in the misplacement of the γόος closure. It also seems that the narrator wanted to strengthen an introductory frame somewhat weak in terms of lament

3.3 Personal lament speech closures 65

language,19' and point out to his audience that the following speech was indeed a personal lament.

With the exception of ώς εφατο κλαίουσα, γόον δ' άλίαστον δρινε (24. 760) and ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος απείρων (24. 776), no single-verse closures contain significant variations from the typical pattern. In both of the exceptions, the second part of the single-verse formulaic closure could very well have been used, given that the entire framework is that of the ritual/formal lament. It seems that in the context of Iliad 24 the narrator wanted to vary the three closures199 and enlarge the range of mourners participating in the lamentation proper for Hector. In 24. 746 Andromache only mentions the women mourners (by using the second part of the typical formula έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες), whereas Hecuba's γόος is more general (24. 760: γόον δ' άλίαστον ορινε)200 and Helen's encompasses all the people of Troy, men and women alike (24. 776: δήμος άπειρων).201

3.3.2 Multi-verse closures

1. ...αύτάρ 'Αχαιοί | παννύχιοι Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο γοώντες. (18. 314-315) 2. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες, Πάτροκλον πρόφασιν, σφών δ' αύτέων202 κήδε' εκάστη. (19. 301-302) 3. ώς εφατο κλαίων, έπί δέ στενάχοντο γέροντες μνησάμενοι, τά έκαστος ένί μεγάροισιν ελειπον. (19. 338-339) 4. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'· άλοχος δ' οΰ πώ τι πέπυστο Έκτορος· (22. 437-438)

m Curiously enough, there is no lament language pertaining to a typical γόος-speech introduction (see section 3. 2).

"» Richardson (1993) 355 ad 24. 746. 200 For 24. 760: γόον δ' άλίαστον δρινε, cf. 2. 797: πόλεμος δ' άλίαστος ορωρεν, 12.

471 = 16. 296: δμαδος δ' άλίαστος έτύχθη, 20. 31: πόλεμον δ' άλίαστον εγειρεν. 201 See the scholia Vetera ad 24. 776 (V 640 Erbse): οΰ μόνον αί γυναίκες· πλείονα γάρ

έκίνησεν οικτον. έπί πλείστφ δέ έλέψ καταστρέφει την Ίλιάδα. "Not only the women [wailed in response]. For she initiated a great deal of lamentation. [Homer] brings the Iliad to a close with a view to achieving the most intense pity." The translation is that of Dué (2002) 81, ft. 44.

202 I am following here Allen (1920'). West (2000) has adopted Rzach's reading αύτέων.

66 Chapter 3

In 18. 314-316 (...αύτάρ 'Αχαιοί | παννύχιοι Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο γοώντες. | τοίσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο) the closing formula is placed first, before the formulaic introduction at 323. The former deviates from the pattern we have seen, but shows traces of the elements we have come across while examining the other closing formulas; in other words, we see here a nominative plural ('Αχαιοί / παννύχιοι) and the verb στενά-χομαι, but with a different preposition (άνεστενάχοντο instead of έπεστε-νάχοντο).

In this case, three facts should be taken into consideration: 1) Eustathius'203 second interpretation of άνα- as expressing the extent of the groaning; the first ("again") applies to 18. 355. 2) The depiction of the Myrmidons and, in general, of the army as violent and harsher than the typical choruses of mourners we encounter in the personal laments in Books 19, 22 and 24. In Agamemnon's γόος for Menelaus the attested form έπεστενάχοντο does not contain the emotional tension expressed here, heightened through the use of παννύχιοι. The latter is emphatically stressed at verse-initial position in both 18. 315 and 18. 355, and underlines the long duration of the lament; 3) the possible semantic attraction that άδινοϋ exercises, being almost juxtaposed to άνεστενάχο-ντο, conveying the notion of an intense activity, a repeated throbbing.204

The above observations support the view that άνεστενάχοντο expresses a rather dense and more abrupt lamentation, meaning "to groan aloud over somebody", whereas έπεστενάχοντο means "to lament over" and denotes a more restrained outburst of grief, restricted perhaps to formal practice. It seems that έπεστενάχοντο describes a groan of lament in answer to the preceding γόος, one which could on occasion be ritual.205

This explanation is consonant both with the scene in which this

203 See van der Valk (1964) ad loc. 204 See Pucci (1998) 99. 205 See Spatafora (1997) 22-23, who convincingly shows that various lament terms such

as οίμώζω-κωκύω-κλαίω-γοάω-στένω refer, apart form their specific semantic denotations, to successive stages in the process of lamentation, οΐμώζω-κωκύω refer to the immediate and instinctive expression of grief in the form of a strident cry, κλαίω signifies the articulate or inarticulate lament accompanied by tears, γοάω designates the lament speech with its therapeutical nature and, finally, στένω points to a responsive and, principally, group-oriented sound following the expression of a lament.

3.3 Personal lament speech closures 6 7

expression is placed and with the use of the adverb πυκίν' (meaning "densely") next to άνεστενάχιζ'.206 Our interpretation also tallies with the expression πυκνά μάλα στενάχων in 18. 318, expressing the same feeling of dense throbbing which closely follows 18.315-316, and is even picked up, one might argue, in the coming simile by ΰλης έκ πυκινής (18. 320).

In 19. 301-302 and 19. 338-339 the typical formulaic closure (19. 301 and 19. 338) is expanded by the insertion of a second verse (19. 302 and 19. 339) in adding enjambement. In both cases the insertions "look back" to the introductions of these speeches,207 but also have a profound significance for the antiphonal structure of this entire lament scene. For the slave women, the death of Patroclus is a mere pretext to lament for their own misery, i.e. their slavery. On the other hand, the old men who accompany Achilles' ensuing personal lament grieve for "whatever they left at home". Pucci has rightly emphasized the "antiphonal and differential" nature of this comparison, by stressing the antithesis between the females lamenting their loss of freedom at the hands of males (here Achilles) and the males, who "lament for having abandoned their possessions, of which wives and slaves are a part".208 Thus, the insertion of a second verse in the above γόος closures is partly motivated by the particular framework of this lament scene and the antiphonal function of Briséis' and Achilles' γόοι.

22. 437-438 (ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'- άλοχος δ' οΰ πώ τι πέπυστο | "Εκτο-ρος ) considerably "departs" from the second part of the formulaic closure. This variation is to be explained through the specific plot requirements determining the organization and presentation of the last scene of Iliad 22. After the completion of Priam's and Hecuba's γόοι, the time is ripe for Andromache's personal lament for Hector; but unlike his parents, his wife is not on the walls, but weaving on her loom in her quarters. Since she needs to be fetched to the walls in order to see Hector dead on the battlefield and utter her lament, the narrator decides to make the transition

206 See also the other Iliadic attestation of a similar verbal form in 10.9. West (2000) 286 ad loc. has άνεστονάχιζ'.

207 See what has been argued in 3. 2. 1 above with regard to the introductions of these two speeches. See aslo Beck's observations (1997) 113-114.

208 Pucci (1998) 104. See also Mackie (1996) 76, who rightly argues that "[F]emale talk of personal sorrows corresponds formally to male discourse of lament that focuses on remembering a far away oikos and possessions".

68 Chapter 3

to the scene of Andromache in her house immediately after the comple-tion of Hecuba's γόος. The following narrative shows that this abrupt transfer is poetically motivated and quite effective: Andromache's surprise at the terrible news, her comparison to a maenad and her fainting, all prepare the audience for her climactic γόος, which brings Book 22 to its end.

3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus209

3.4.1. Privileged Individuals

The relation between status and speech is explicit in the words of the heroic performers and implicit in the γόος introductory formulas. The lament seems to be a female-dominated genre since, with the exception of Achilles and Agamemnon,210 all Iliadic laments are expressed by female performers. This genre-oriented selectivity results in the attribution of status to women, who are otherwise marginalized or secondary to the Iliadic war due to their non-participation in the battle. Women, of course, are not simple reflections of male prototypes in respect of character drawing, but have their own "poetic" life. They contrast male power with human weakness, κλέος with αχός and πένθος and, finally, the battlefield with the οίκος.

As a heroic epic, the Iliad demands that all of its protagonists excel in heroic status. Speech ability, status and ranking are all correlated aspects of the Homeric notion of τιμή -Homeric heroes excel in both fighting and speaking.2" By endowing women with the gift of speech, in a privileged genre such as lament, the poet of the Iliad establishes their status, making

209 The Iliad voices the γόοι of individuals who are related to the deceased and occupy central roles in the plot; so there is no γόος by any brother or father of some minor warrior who died in the battlefield (in some cases like this the poet uses short obituaries as in the case of the two son of Diocles, of Simoeisius and Othryoneus).

210 Priam also utters a lament for Hector in 22. 416-428, but the fact that this γόος is placed first in the triad of laments at the end of Book 22 shows that it is there to balance the previous plea by Priam to Hector not to face Achilles (22. 38-76), as well as to foreshadow the highly emotional begging of Achilles in Book 24.

211 This is epitomized in the famous saying by Phoenix: μύθων τε ρήτηρ' εμεναι πρη-κχήρά τε έργων (9. 443).

3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus 69

them center-stage performers and allowing them to excel in the one thing they can do within the framework of the poem: speaking.

This process of conferring status212 is implicit in the use of the formula άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο, which implies the existence of a chorus of mourners.213

In the Iliad, the chorus is always of the same gender;214 the lament of a female mourner is capped by the refrain of cries expressed by a group of female lamenters. Luetcke was the first to draw the distinction between the literary and metaphorical use of the verb έξάρχω.215 When used metaphorically (often followed by a genitive case), έξάρχω does not simply mean to begin but also to have a leading role. In that respect, the performative value of the epithet άδινοϋ reinforces the status of women as privileged speakers even more; άδινοϋ is a marked term almost exclusively used for the lament, denoting a thick emotional throbbing applied to men and women alike.216

212 On the performance of the lament as a status-establishing process, giving women the opportunity to acquire social roles they are by definition excluded from because they pose a threat to the social order within a male-dominated society, see Hoist-Warhaft (1992) 3-6.

213 A fact confirmed by the closing formula έπί δ' (έ) + verb στενάχομαι or στένω + collective noun.

214 The formula ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος άπειρων (24. 776) capping the personal lament of Helen is no exception, for her speech is the last in the triad of the ritual laments uttered in Book 24 for the death of Hector. It is thus only natural for the poet to be willing to represent the entire people of Troy lamenting Hector; after all, his death foreshadows the future "death" of Troy.

215 Luetcke (1829) 17. See also Privitera (1957) 95-101; Andronikos (1968) 13 with bibliography; Zimmermann (1992) 19-20, ft. 4-6.

216 Certain proper-name replacements in the personal lament introductory formulas are also status-determining. Achilles, more than any other character in the poem, is equipped with unparalleled riches in reference to his patronymic (Higbie 1995, 52). He is called by his patronymic, his papponymic and even his metronymic (Higbie 1995, 58, Table 2. 1). Apart from specific metrical and compositional reasons determining the use of the patronymic Πηλείδης instead of Achilles in γόος introductory formulas such as 18. 316, its use is significant, for it alludes to a point that Achilles is about to make and which will dominate the first part of his speech. In 18. 330-331 he talks both about his and Patroclus' ill-fated end at Troy; he goes to say that his father Peleus will not meet him in the palace [in Phthia] (18. 330-332: αύτοϋ ένίΤροίη, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστήσαντα / δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς / ούδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ γαϊα καθέξει.). The use of Achilles' patro-nymic thus becomes context-oriented, since it specifies the status under which he will speak. His parentage is of great importance while lamenting Patroclus, for it alludes

70 Chapter 3

Agamemnon and Achilles are the initiators of the wrath and the only men217 to utter personal laments in the poem. This makes perfect sense, since they are the heroes who have to experience the grief caused by the loss of Menelaus and Patroclus respectively as the by-product of their quarrel. The exigencies of the Iliadic plot do not allow Menelaus to die, and so Agamemnon's lament is based on his perception of losing his beloved brother.

In the case of Achilles, however, Patroclus' death is the culmination of his suffering, thus rendering this highly favored hero equally privileged with regard to the overwhelmingly "female" speech form, the lament. Achilles is a unique speaker in the Iliad, he stands out from all others both in his interpretation of the heroic code and in the proximity of his language to the authorial style of the epic narrator.218 He is thus endowed with the gift of special speech, which the Iliad has transformed into a deliberate paradox. His ability to lament underscores his unavoidable fate, namely to experience the uttermost grief, through the loss of his friend Patroclus, before meeting his own doom.

It has rightly been observed that Achilles surpasses other heroes in terms of sympathetic imagination.2" He is able, poet-like, to reach out to the depths of grief, to absorb, adapt and externalize220 pain; his assimilation of a female-specific sub-genre is performed so effectively that Achilles is even able to compete with women mourners, as the antiphonal laments that he and Briséis express in Book 19 so eloquently show. This special ability he possesses is a sign of his higher authority as a heroic performer. Using lament as a point of reference, the poet of the Iliad has privileged his finest hero, rendering the expression of grief for Achilles a status-establishing process.

Achilles and Hector are the only heroes lamented with θρήνοι (the former in Od. 24 and the latter in II. 24), despite the fact that epic poetry keeps them unvoiced. Both monumental compositions end with a

to their common upbringing in Phthia, as the soul of Patroclus explicitly reminds him in 23. 84-90.

2" For Priam, see ft. 210. 2111 The best account on this much debated topic is that of Martin (1989) 146-205. 2" Martin (1989) 139. 220 These are typical qualities of Achilles' style. See Martin (1989) 139.

3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus 71

reference to the professional songs sung for them by the εξαρχοι θρήνων (II. 24. 720 ff.) and the Muses (Od 24. 60 ff.). Achilles and Hector are complementary,221 since they stand as a pair within the framework of the Iliad. Once Hector dies, the poem reaches its destined end. There is no Iliad without Hector and, likewise, there is no Iliadic Achilles without him.

At the same time, these two heroes diverge in respect of speech. As Martin has neatly put it: "Hektor's recollections are of human speech. More than any hero, he quotes others. Achilles, on the other hand, calls to mind grief. If Hector's memory-genre is praise, Achilles' is lament."222

One of the significant characteristics of the poem is that Hector does not express a single personal lament for the death of any of his Trojan companions.223 Furthermore, no character destined to die at a later point in the Iliad is considered appropriate to express a γόος for the death of a companion, friend or relative. It is for this very reason that Hector is inappropriate for lamenting the death of a dear one. Yet the Iliad has managed to overcome this obstacle through a remarkable poetic effect. From the perspective of lament, it has made Achilles and Hector an inseparable pair.

The death of the Achilles himself and the ensuing lament for him could not possibly have fitted in with the plot of the Iliad, which is restricted to the theme of his wrath. To overcome this difficulty, the poem united the fate of its two greatest warriors, turning the one (Hector) into the chief object of grief while transforming the other (Achilles) into its principal male mourner. The epic has thus achieved the unthinkable, in bringing together the two great adversaries Hector and Achilles, around whom the tragedy of the Iliad unfolds, in the realm of grief and lament.

221 Martin (1989) 131. 222 Martin (1989) 131. See also 144: "One difference between Homer's representation of

Hector and of Achilles is that the former imagines himself praised in the future, while the latter expends his rhetoric on a companion, showing once again a sympathetic imagination."

223 The fact that Sarpedon's and Lycaon's death are not exploited in this direction shows that it is the poet's deliberate choice to let this option aside.

72 Chapter 3

3.4.2. Unprivileged Chorus

The second part of the closing formula (έπί δ' (έ) + verb στενάχομαι or στένω + nominative plural or nominative singular of a collective noun), shifts the focus from the individual mourner to the collective mourning of the people gathered around the body of the deceased. The content of the chorus' speech is hard to speculate on, as any such attempt would require a good deal of ethnographical research in various oral-traditional cultures. Alexiou, who is rightly considered the authority on the ritual lament in Greek tradition,224 has argued that the elaboration and evolution of the narrative element in the ritual lament led to the subordination and subsequent transformation of the second voice into a refrain, in the manner of cries or sobs.225 Seremetakis, who has diligently studied the performance of lament in the region of Inner Mani in the Southern Pelo-ponneso, has mapped a complex system of "improvised, heterogeneous, and superimposed linguistic, extralinguistic, musical, nonmusical, poetic, and prosaic discourses that constitute the performative aesthetics of the klàmâ\226 These "discourses" constitute what she calls "polyphony", the "raw material of antiphonic practice".227 Polyphony consists of various techniques: the μοιρολόι or improvised lament of the soloist; the refrain of the chorus;228 the stylized sobbing of both soloist and chorus through a carefully calibrated overlapping of parts; the multiple corporeal gestures of soloist and chorus; the improvised prose monologues of individual mourners and the screaming.22' This complex system shows that the chorus forms an integral and indispensable part of the entire lament process. It employs a wide repertoire of metanarrative techniques (such as corporeal gestures, crying, sobbing, screaming) to accompany the mourner's

224 Her book The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (1974) is the best contribution to the study of lament in Greek culture.

225 Alexiou (2002) 134-135. Reiner (basing his interpretation on the meaning of the verb στένω or οτενάχω used to designate the wailing of the chorus) had suggested that it referred to cries similar to those found in tragic laments (1938) 31-33.

226 Seremetakis (1991) 106. 227 Seremetakis (1991) 106. 221 This may be called "refrain-composition" (Stanley 1993, 8) or "Ritornellkomposi-

tion" (van Otterlo 1944a, 193). 229 Seremetakis (1991) 106 and 99-125 in general.

3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus 73

song. Decentralisation of the chòrus is not what ethnographical field-work teaches us in surviving oral cultures such as that in Inner Mani.

Therefore, the reasons explaining why the Iliad does not cite the lament of the chorus of mourners after quoting the main soloist's γόος in direct speech should be sought in the way the epic treats non-solo speech, and not in a would-be performance-based marginalisation of the chorus .

The textual "silence" regarding the collective lament of the people is a general problem related to the apparent reticence of the masses, whose feelings and perceptions are only verbalized through a special category of speeches, known as τις-speeches. In both real and imaginary forms they voice the feelings of the anonymous crowd, since the anonymous τις who speaks represents the mass of the people as he says what everybody would have said.230 In the Iliad, such anonymous representative comments seem to belong to the world of the inferiors, those of less importance and status who do not form part of the élite. Scodel has recently argued that these speeches principally express judgements, direct or indirect, giving a narrative voice to the weak, whose only weapons are praise and blame.231

Through the communal nature of such anonymous representative com-ments, the poet offers the authorial audience a view of the "other side" of the events narrated. He invites his listeners to sympathize both with the varied reactions of the masses (in real τις-speeches) and with the fears of the Iliadic heroes (in imaginary τις-speeches).

Given that the Iliad uses the τις-speeches in order to express the various judgments of the masses concerning the course of events and the actions of heroes, one could plausibly argue that the reasons explaining why the chorus' lament remains unquoted is particular to the γόοι and to the "specifics" of their Iliadic representation. In the Iliad, the chorus of mourners laments as a second voice, expressing its grief and offering a ritualised supplement to the voice of the main mourner. In this way the deceased is lamented on two levels: the personal, expressed by the next of kin, and the general, expressed by the multiplicity of anonymous mourners who act as a single voice.

The Iliad voices the γόοι: 1) of individuals who are related to the deceased (Agamemnon is the brother of Menelaus; Achilles the best

130 See Fingerle (1939) 288. 231 Scodel (2002) 194 , 196.

74 Chapter 3

friend of Patroclus; Andromache the wife of Hector with Priam his father, Hecuba his mother, Helen his sister-in-law; Briséis, though a slave, is presented as Achilles' concubine; 2) of important individuals for the plot. There is no γόος by the brother or father of any minor warrior who fall on the battlefield. In some cases, the poet uses short obituaries, e.g. for the two sons of Diocles, for Simoeisius and Othryoneus; 3) for Patroclus and Hector (Menelaus being an exception), who are two of the main figures directing the Iliadic plot in the second part of the poem.

Thus, the γόοι constitute a "highly privileged" speech form reserved for significant figures. Conversely, the poem left both the θρήνοι,232 the lament songs expressed by professional singers, and the response by the chorus of mourners uncited.233

Achilles-like, poem and poet share and value the same memory-genre, the lament. Among different forms of lament songs the Iliad has chosen to represent only those it considered appropriate to its scope, subject matter and perspective, remaining poetically "loyal" to its mission to sing the κλέα άνδρών.

232 Alexiou (2002) 103: "γόος ... while less restrained, was from Homer onwards more highly individualized, and since it was spoken rather than sung, it tended to develop a narrative rather than a musical form".

233 See Andronikos ( 1968) 12-13, who carefully argues for an artistic content of the θρή-νοι. I am not sure, however, that the θρήνοι lasted throughout the entire prothesis.

Chapter 4

Distance, Separation and Mors Immatura: Common Motifs in the Iliadic Personal Laments

4.1 Distance and Separation234

Space235 is an important dimension in the verbalization of a personal lament, since it offers the speaker the opportunity to develop certain themes linking the distance between a warrior's native land with the place he meets his death. This, given the Iliadic plot, should apply more to the Greeks who die away from home, and not to the Trojans who perish in their native land. But, as we will see, separation may also acquire another scope when it refers to the Trojans: that of separation from dear ones and a past life of happiness experienced by the deceased before the beginning of the war.236 Space constitutes one of the most common motifs used in the γόοι, and falls within the category of binary oppositions that Greek thought in general, and in our case the Iliad, is fond of in its effort to view and re-present almost any form of human activity.237 Homeric epic shows a

234 The terms 'distance' and 'separation' belong to the same semantic frame (that of space) and will be examined together. Closeness is the exact opposite of distance and pertains to the sharing of the same fate by both mourner and deceased, which constitutes a typical theme in Iliadic γόοι. Mors immatura refers to the temporal element and, therefore, will be dealt with separately.

2,5 By space I am hereby referring to the notion of distance between one's native land and the place where he dies, and the separation from his dear ones (separation being a by-product of distance). In this chapter, space is confined to the themes exploited by the speaker within a γόος-speech and not to the conditions of its performance.

236 Trojan allies come from various places in Asia Minor and so (like the Greeks) fight and die far from their native land. But this theme is not used in the Iliadic personal laments, since the only Trojan to whom a γόος is devoted is Hector, who dies in his own native land. This motif is developed in the short obituaries, for which see Appendix two.

237 For duality in general see Lloyd (1966), which is the standard work on the subject. Other significant contributions to this topic are Olrik (1965) 135-136 and Burkert

7 6 Chapter 4

consistent preference for a tension between distance and closeness, en-counter and separation. In the case of the representation of death and its most expressive verbalization, lament, this becomes a complete narrative strategy using specific deictic markers to emphasize the basic Iliadic Problematik of presence vs. absence, of past vs. here and now, of life vs. death.

4.1.1. Dying away from one's native land

Dying away from home seems to be a constant and persistent fear for Iliadic warriors; this fear is clearly manifested in the so-called taunt-speeches,238 where the victor insults the vanquished by reminding him that he will die away from home, in a foreign land, that his parents and dear ones will never be able to see him again and that his corpse will become the prey for dogs and birds. This theme is also developed in the γ ό ο ι , where it acquires a different use once adapted to the general frame of presence vs. absence that predominates in this particular form of speech. In what follows we shall be focusing our attention on the function of specific deictic239 markers within the Iliadic personal laments in expressing the motif of dying away from home and through it the separation between mourner and deceased in terms of locality.240

Verbal and Local Deixis

Verbal deixis is manifested by deictic verbs leading away from the origo of the speaker. Local deixis is expressed by spatial adverbs, locative

(1979) 18-20. For duality in Homer, see Fenik (1974, part 2) and Bergren (1981) 201 ff. The fullest recent account of the topic is van Duzer (1996).

2,8 On taunt or vaunt speeches, see Fingerle (1939) 150-162; Fenik (1968) 134 ("speech of triumph"); Adkins (1969) 20-33; Petersmann (1969) 44 ("Todesreden", i.e. "death-speeches"); Muellner (1976) 89 ff.; Edwards (1987) 93-94; Parks (1990) 58, 73 ("vaunts" or "boasts").

239 For a general account of deixis, see Collinson (1937); Benveniste (1946) 1-12, (1966) 251-257; Frei (1944) 111-129; Hjelmslev (1959); Fillmore (1966) 219-227, (1970) 251-274; Jakobson (1971) 130-147; Kurylowicz (1972) 174-183; Antinucci (1974) 223-247; Lyons (1977) 636-724; Levinson (1983) 54-96; Bühler (1990).

240 The sub-motif of "bereaved parents" will be treated separately.

4.1 Distance and Separation 77

prepositional phrases, relative adverbials and locative suffixes such as -φι and -δε. In Agamemnon's γόος (4. 155-182) for the would-be death of Menelaus, the speaker (Agamemnon) uses both afferent (centripetal) and efferent (centrifugal) verbs to express the distance between his brother's place of death (Troy) and his own future return to Argos:

«καί κεν έλέγχιστος πολυδίψιον Άργος ίκοίμην. 171 κάδ δέ κεν εύχωλήν Πριάμω καί Τρωσί λίποιμεν 173 Αργείην Έλένην· σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα κειμένου εν Τροίη άτελευτήτφ επί εργφ.»

"And I must return a thing of reproach to Argos the thirsty, for now at once the Achaians will remember the land of their fathers; and thus we would leave to Priam and to the Trojans Helen of Argos, to glory over, while the bones of you rot in the ploughland as you lie dead in Troy, on a venture that went unaccomplished."

«'αϊθ' οΰτως έπί πάσι χόλον τελέσειε' Αγαμέμνων, 178 ώς καί νϋν αλιον στρατόν ήγαγεν ένθάδ' Αχαιών, καί δή εβη οίκόνδε φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν συν κεινησιν νηυσί, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον.'» 181

" 'Might Agamemnon accomplish his anger thus against all his enemies, as now he led here in vain a host of Achaians and has gone home again to the beloved land of his fathers with ships empty, and leaving behind him brave Menelaos.' "

The speaker employs verbs of motion in the following order: first he uses two efferent verbs to denote his future return to Argos (Ικοίμην) and his "leaving" Menelaus behind (λίποιμεν), then one afferent verb (ήγαγεν) to refer to his leading his army to Troy in vain and, finally, two more efferent verbs (έβη-λιπών), reiterating his previous fears through an embedded potential τις-speech (4. 179-181). This deliberate interplay between the "here" of Troy, which constitutes the speaker's center, and the "there" of Greece, where Agamemnon will eventually return, expresses the distance between the two brothers (one dead in Troy, the other alive in Argos) and their subsequent separation, which is Agamemnon's main concern in this second part of the speech.

78 Chapter 4

In Achilles' γόος in 18. 324-342, both verbal and adverbial deixis are employed in order to draw a grim picture of Achilles' fate, as Peleus and Thetis will never see him return home in Phthia. Achilles is aware that he is destined to die in Troy and that now that Patroclus lies dead, they will both perish in Troy (18. 329-332).

«άμφω γάρ πέπρωται όμοίην γαΐαν έρεϋσαι αυτοί) ένί Τροίη, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοσχήσαντα δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει.»

"Thus it is destiny for us both to stain the same soil here in Troy; since I shall never come home, and my father, Peleus the aged rider, will not welcome me in his great house, nor Thetis my mother, but in this place the earth will receive me."

As is implicit in Thetis' personal lament in 18. 52-64, Peleus and Thetis are presented as a regular human couple who will never see their son Achilles return home to Phthia. The accommodation of this motif to the plot of the poem and to the peculiarities of Achilles' family (mortal father-immortal mother) shows traces of a gap in the story of the epic. This can be accounted for in terms of the antiquity of the motif.

The deictic verbs νοστήσαντα and δέξεται are vital for the picture that Achilles is drawing for the audience. The first of these denotes a theme which seems, at first glance, to be out of place in the Iliadic setting of war;241 its poetic environment is that of the Odyssey, in which the key-role of νόστος finds its programmatic expression from the epic proem onwards {Od. 1. 9: νόστιμον ήμαρ). In the Odyssey the νόστος of its main hero, Odysseus, is the most important element of the plot, and one that remains unfulfilled until the very end of the epic. It condenses in itself all the other sub-threads of the plot and is presented in a variety of forms: the immediate and happy return of Nestor is balanced by the tragic return of Agamemnon and the suspended but finally happy νόστος of Menelaus, all these νόστοι being reflected in the νόστος of Odysseus himself. Whereas

241 For the theme of νόστος in the Odyssey, see Maronitis (1984s) 124-140; for the meaning and etymology of νόστος, see Frame (1978) 1-33; Pignani (1995) 449-456.

4.1 Distance and Separation 79

the theme of return is intrinsic to the plot of the par excellence post-war epic, i.e. the Odyssey, it is clearly a secondary issue in the wartime Iliad and is somewhat subdued by the numerous restrictions imposed therein. Nevertheless, the Iliad does use the theme of return in a highly sophisticated way, by dramatizing the death of the Greek warriors away from their native land.242 The Trojans seem rather fortunate in that they are fighting at home ground, but the Iliad uses the future sack of Troy as a constant reminder of the vanity of all Trojan efforts; in the short run the defenders can return safe home inside the walls of Troy, but in the long run they have no place to return to, as the city is doomed to fall.

The theme of νόστος is deployed in the case of several major heroes, but it is in the tragic dilemma of Achilles (who has to choose between an unglorious νόστος and a glorious θάνατος) that it reaches its sublime vastness. The choice of Achilles determines the whole heroic ideal as presented in Homeric poetry and is essentially connected with his unfulfilled return to .Phthia. Achilles' dilemma has a profound poetic dimension which can be read along the lines of interpretation that Pucci has suggested for an odyssean passage.243 Achilles' decision to return to the battlefield signifies his decision not to change poem and poet, not to become one of the heroes of the Νόστοι but remain the hero of the Iliad, the best of the Achaeans who chooses a physical and glorious death instead of a long unimportant life in Phthia. In his determination to avenge the death of Patroclus, Achilles decides to return to the Iliad, and make it his poem, his poetic fatherland which will endow him with immortal poetic fame. This form of νόστος introduces a figurative reading for what Patroclus stands for.244 Patroclus symbolizes the Iliadic reading

242 Νόστος and θάνατος are examined by Frame (1978) 34 ff.; Pucci (1987) 123 ff. and 139 ff.; Segal (1994) 37-64. Νόστος in the Iliad is examined by Maronitis (1999) 101-123.

243 See Pucci (1998) 1-9 (= 1979, 121-132). 244 For another special kind of Iliadic νόστος, where the themes of return and war are

poetically "reconciled" with the former borrowing its final product (death) from the latter, see Maronitis (1999) 112-120. Maronitis argues that in the cases of Sarpedon and Hector we are dealing with a special kind of Iliadic νόστος which he coins νεκρώσιμος νόστος, because the dead bodies of the two warriors are returned to their homes for burial, the former by Sleep and Death, the latter by Priam after Achilles' permission.

80 Chapter 4

of Achilles' fate, whereas by tempting Achilles to accept his geographical νόστος instead of his poetic one, the bereaved parents Peleus and Thetis symbolize the negation of this reading. This dilemma remains suspended and undecided before the death of Patroclus, but then is drastically resolved (18. 60, 330, 441; 24. 131, 507, 511, 540-542). Achilles will not return to Phthia but will instead return to Patroclus, and be reunited with his friend under the earth through the power of death. Achilles makes this idea more than explicit (18. 333-335):

«νϋν δ' έπεί ουν, Πάτροκλε, σέ' ύστερος είμ' ύπό γαΐαν, οΰ σε πριν κτερίω, πριν Έκτορος ένθάδ' ένεΐκαι τεύχεα και κεφαλήν, μεγάθυμου σεΐο φονήος·»

"But seeing that it is I, Patroklos, who follow you underground, I will not bury you till I bring to this place the armour and the head of Hektor, since he was your great-hearted murderer."

The use of the word γαία three times within a few lines (329: όμοίην γαιαν έρεΰσαι; 332: αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει; 335: ύπό γαΐαν) makes Achilles' words acquire a special tone, as he suspends his νόστος or rather changes its direction: rather than returning to his native land he will return to the earth where Patroclus is; his journey will not be one towards Phthia that represents life, but towards Patroclus and the earth, the soil of Troy that represents death; Achilles has made his decision by choosing for himself the κλέος of his fatherland (Πάτρο-κλος) instead of his return to his fatherland.

Even after Achilles has made a choice, a new set of oppositions arises: the contention between his willingness to remain with his dead friend and the social necessity of giving him a proper burial with the due funeral rites and letting go of him.245 Achilles' postponment of Patroclus' funeral is explicable in terms of his desire to avenge his death and bring the corpse

245 Cf. Sourvinou-Inwood (1991) 112: "In the minds of the contemporary audience, this nexus of ideas placed Achilles' grief in the framework of the unsolvable and truly tragic conflict between, on the one hand the desire to 'stay with' the dead, refuse to let them go and in a way identify with them, and on the other the necessity, social need and even desire to let them go, separate ourselves from them, and carry on living".

4.1 Distance and Separation 81

of his murderer, Hector next to his death-bier. This new tragic conflict, which comes as a consequence of the previous one that the Achaean hero has been facing since the beginning of the poem, is also dictionally manifested through the medium of deixis (18. 333-335). The temporal246

and spatial deixis expressed by the clause πριν "Εκτορος ένθάδ' ένεΐκαι / τεύχεα και κεφαλήν shows that Achilles puts off the burial, i.e. the process by which he will let Patroclus "go" to Hades, because he is not ready yet to accept their separation. The temporal246 clause πριν... ένεΐκαι denotes a narrative intention, that of delaying Achilles' symbolic distanc-ing from Patroclus, of procrastinating their detachment; his personal lament is only a temporary expression of his feelings with an emphasis on his desire to postpone the two friends' partition, and by no means their last farewell.

Yet in this context even the burial and funeral will not be their final separation, since Achilles knows that he will also soon die; the earth (γαία) expresses an emotional landscape where Achilles will meet Patroclus for ever. This being an event outside the limits of the poem, the poet prefers to have Achilles merely designate the future by offering a conflation of "now" and "then", by letting a future reality "intrude" into the immediate reality of the performance. Spatial and temporal deixis are orchestrated in such a way that they make the future an almost tangible reality, as if the audience can see the corpse of Hector lying in front of Patroclus' death-bier with Achilles subsequently joining his friend under the earth.

The Iliad has developed a special form of interplay between meeting and distancing, closeness and separation, which finds its most elaborate fulfillment in the case of the pairs Patroclus-Achilles and, as I will demonstrate below, Andromache-Hector. In fact, this interplay forms part of the very content of the Iliadic personal laments, since they are also composed upon the binary opposition between life and death that is embodied in the very writing47 of the Iliad.

246 Hogan (1976) 305-310 has suggested that the use of the double πριν is characteristic of Achilles' language. Of the eighteen times it is attested in the Iliad "four are used by Achilles himself, two more find him subject or object of the subordinate clause, two are attributed to him by other speakers, and one is addressed to him" (305, ft. 2). Having surveyed all the evidence, Hogan concludes that once the poet uses double πριν for the description of Achilles, he stops employing it in relation to other characters (305, ft. 2). I do not agree with Edwards (1991) 168, who believes the evidence to be weak.

247 For this notion of writing, see Pucci (1987) 26-30.

82 Chapter 4

In Briseis' γόος in 19. 287-300, verbal deixis (άξειν τ' ένί νηυσίν / ές Φθίην: 298-299) points to the "dying away from home" motif in the light of its consequences on the speaker; Patroclus' death at Troy will result in his failing to fulfill the promise he had given to Briséis, namely that he would make her Achilles' wife. The use of deixis lends Briséis' speech a dynamic touch, as it brings to the foreground a sense of visual presence (a look at Phthia where a marriage is taking place), and situates both the external and the internal audiences (Achilles and the choruses of female and male mourners) in space and time. Her speech ends with the ex-pression of painful disappointment for a once promising future in Phthia which has now been overturned.248 The future infinitives θήσειν and άξειν in 19. 298 are particularly pertinent in this context. Briséis is thus transferring her audiences to a place and time far away; but her imaginary transportation uses place and time as signs that express the coordinates of her future happiness. Phthia is not only a place, but a new home, and the future is not so much a point in time as a symbol of distancing from the ruinous present of death to the blissful morrow of marriage. The speaker is symbolically leading her audiences, external and internal alike, down an imaginary pathway (ένί νηυσίν: 19. 298) to a "new spatiotemporal location", which in its turn functions as the potential, but alas unfulfilled hope of a happy life. This would-be journey to Phthia effects the visualiza-tion of the referent249 in the hearers' minds and displaces the mental "here and now" of the situation to a visual "there and then".

Vividness (ένάργεια)250 is only part of the effect conveyed through the use of the deictic device I have referred to. The audiences of Briséis' lament would have been stunned by the fact that her separation from Patroclus and the distancing, literal and figurative alike, expressed in her speech are capped by a carefully demarcated coda that alludes to an imaginary situation, in which a marriage would have taken place and a group of young girls would have sung a wedding song rather than a

248 This change has been textually marked in line 19. 289 by the "shifters" νυν δέ, common in γόοι.

249 For the visualization of the referent in the hearer's mind in Homeric discourse, see Bakker, (1997a) 77-79.

250 On ένάργεια in Homer, see: Gorgias, Hel. 9; Platon, Ion 535b-e; Ps.-Longinus, De subi. 15; Quintilian, Inst. or. 6. 2. 29. For the scholia's view on ένάργεια in Homer, see Zanker (1981) 297-311.

4.1 Distance and Separation 83

funeral dirge. One has to admit that there is no explicit mention of song, but the detailed description of the antiphonal laments with the interplay between chief female mourner/chorus of females mourners vs. chief male mourner/chorus of male mourners bears a striking similarity with a wedding ceremony. What Briséis is emphasizing is that instead of a wedding there is death; are we to believe from the whole Stimmung of the description that instead of a lament song there should be a wedding song? Is there any indication for such a bold suggestion? Antiphonal singing251

was typical not only in lament for the dead but also on other social occa-sions. Marriage252 constitutes a social event bearing striking resemblances with death; the same applies to their sociocultural by-products, namely

251 Antiphonal singing is typical in Greek tradition. In the district of Mani in the center of southern Peloponnese in modern-day Greece, antiphonal singing is frequently employed in the ritual of death, and often becomes both the center of production and reproduction of speech and the creation of an oral history concerning the deceased. The so-called kldma of women is not a momentous outburst of female emotion at the loss of a dear one, but an occasion for social intervention on the part of the women; lament becomes a figurative place for social disorientation, where a personal octasyllable verse becomes legitimized as marked speech and in which antiphonal singing between the main mourner and a female chorus is a dialogue-based technique for the production, memorization and diffusion of speech as oral history. For a detailed presentation of female lament in Modern Mani, see Seremetakis (1991). For a general presentation of Modern Greek lament songs, see Joannidu (1938) 62-64.

252 Antiphonal elements can be also traced in wedding poetry, which does not survive in epic but is exceptionally represented in lyric poetry and in particular in Sappho's wedding songs, the έπιθαλάμια. According to Stehle (1997) 278-282, in Sappho's fragment 30 V (Voigt's edition), a wedding ceremony is described where the παρθέ-νοι sing, followed by the two serenading choruses the couple is accompanied by. In fragment 44.24-34 V, the παρθένοι sing a holy song (παρθένοι / άειδον μέλον άγν[ον]), while the chorus of old women utter a ritual shout (γυναίκες δ' έλέλυσδον δσαι προγενέστερα[ι]) and the chorus of men call out a delightful high-pitched paean (πάντες ό' άνδρες έπήρατον ϊαχον ορθιον / πάον'). Bowra (1961) 220-225 notes that wedding songs were "of different kinds" depending on the circumstances in which they were sung. He then proceeds to outline the whole wedding ceremony with the initial nuptial banquet, the sacrifices to the gods offered by the bride's father, the conducting of the bride on a chariot to her new home and, finally, the singing of a nuptial hymn on the threshold of the bridal chamber where the newly-wed couple would be joined in love for the first time. Bowra argues that the wedding song, the ύμέναιος would at least begin "before the end of the feast" (221) and that "Sappho's choir, like that of Catullus, was divided between youths and maidens, as befitted the mixed company of the bridal procession" (225).

84 Chapter 4

the wedding ceremony and the lamentation for the dead respectively.253

These similarities refer to specific morphological characteristics of the two rituals, as well as to the language and the overarching symbolism lying behind these ceremonies.254 One can even trace a common semiotics concerning place, time and sequence of events. The shared basis of these two momentous incidents in human life, which are typical examples of rites

2,3 For similarities and differences between lament and wedding song, see Lonsdale (1993) 243-244 . For a thorough discussion of the wedding and funeral ceremonies based on the visual arts, see Rehm (1994) 30-42.

254 A full reconstruction of the antiphonal singing in the wedding ceremony is a risky task, but one can at least feel safe in accepting that antiphonal responses by both solo performers and choruses formed an integral part of the marriage ritual. See Bowra (1961) 214-225; Calarne (1977), (1995); Lasserre (1989); Contiades-Tsitsoni (1990) 68-109. In the Iliad, the most important passage for the description of the wedding ritual is that depicted on the Shield of Achilles (18. 491-496): έν τη μέν ρα γάμοι τ' εσαν είλαπίναι τε, / νύμφας δ' έκ θαλάμων δαΐδων ΰπο λαμπομενάων / ήγίνεον άνά άστυ, πολύς δ' ύμέναιος όρώρει· / κούροι δ' όρχηστήρες έδίνεον, έν δ' άρα τοΐσιν / αυλοί φόρμιγγες τε βοήν εχον· αί δέ γυναίκες / ίστάμεναι θαύμαζον έπί προθύροισιν έκάστη. Despite the reference to the wedding song (ύμέναιος) which forms an integral part of the ceremony, there is no explicit mention of any antiphonal element in the performance of the ύμέναιος (see Maas 1907, 590-596; 1914, 130-134). Contiades-Tsitsoni (1990) 43 rightly points to the fact that one cannot be sure whether the term ΰμέναιος actually describes a revel-cry, a joyous shout or a real wedding-song. The expression πολύς δ' ύμέναιος όρώρει (= Ps.-Hesiod, Sc. 274) could very well describe any kind of utterance, ranging from a simple uproar to an actual song. This may be due to the fact that the description is brief and the poet offers no more than an overview of the wedding ceremony. Moreover, the poet's principal goal is to bring to view a city at peace, both through the blessings of ordered communal life as represented by weddings and via the peaceful settlement of a dispute over a man's death by the formal judicial system that such a city possesses (Edwards 1991, 213). On the other hand, even in this abridged account of a wedding ceremony one can see the existence of some form of interplay between two groups of people, one male and the other female. There is a group of young males whirling in dance (κοΰροι δ' όρχηστήρες έδίνεον) and a number of women standing on their thresholds and admiring (αί δέ γυναίκες ίστάμεναι θαύμαζον έπί προθύροισιν έκά-στη). This may be an indication, albeit vague and disguised, of the significance of male and female interaction in the process of a wedding ceremony. Some sort of antiphonal element seems to be present in the pseudo-Hesiodic Scutum Herculis (273-280). The passage bears striking similarities with II. 18. 491-496 and also has parallels in the visual arts, where the bride is depicted as being carried on a wagon reminiscent of a death-bier (Fittschen 1973, Ν 17).

4.1 Distance and Separation 85

de passage,™ is that of the dissolvement of the family, the most elementary unit in the web of a traditional society. The disintegration of the family is realized by the departure (άποδημία), literal and figurative alike, and its subsequent change of home (μετοικεσία) of one of its members.256

The antiphonal element was at the heart of both the wedding and the funerary ritual and may have been linked in some way unknown to us with both the performance of the ύμέναιος and the γόος. The personal lament of Briséis seems to exploit this powerful interaction between marriage and death by its very conception. She refers to the loss of her family and laments the death of Patroclus, who would have made her the wife of Achilles; instead of marriage and a new life she is faced with death, the metaphorical death of her hopes for a new life. It seems that Briséis' wedding has changed referents: in the case of Achilles she will marry death himself, and instead of a ΰμέναιος she has to sing a γόος, together with her female friends.

The situation we come across in the Iliad is a combination of what one might call internal and external antiphonesis; for Briséis' γόος is ac-companied by the lament of a female chorus but is answered by Achilles' lament which, in its turn, is accompanied by the lament of a group of male singers. One should keep in mind that what we encounter here is the Iliadic representation of ritualized lament, and that in such a representa-tion it is impossible to listen in direct speech to the voice of a group of people; character-speech in Homer is only solo speech. Thus, the internal

255 For rites of passage, see the classic works of Van Gennep (1960); Hertz (1960); Türmer (1969). For Greek culture in particular, see Garland (1985).

256 For the "marriage-death" poetic motif in ancient Greek culture and its connection to Indoeuropean civilization, see Giannakis (1998) 93-113. See also Rehm (1994), who provides a thorough examination of the coincidence of wedding and funeral rituals in Greek tragedy. This theme is still alive today in the Balkans. For Romania, see Kligman (1988); for Greece, Saunier (1968/1999); Danforth (1982); Alexiou (1983) 88-90, (2002) 105-107,109,120-122,152, 155-157, 178, 195-196, 230 n. 64. In present day Greece, even in urban centers, when an unmarried adult member of the family dies, he/she is dressed as a bridegroom/bride; marriage wreaths are often placed on his/her feet inside the coffin and a special kind of sugared almonds (κουφέτα, as in the wedding) are given to those attending the funeral. In Modern Greek folk-song, the similarities between the so-called marriage songs (νυφιάτικα/του γάμου), lament songs (μοιρολόγια) and exile-songs (της ξενιτιάς), which all share the common motif of fami-ly dissolvement and separation, are striking. See Saunier (1999) 287-291 with examples.

86 Chapter 4

and external antiphonesis is a relic either inherited from an actual lament performance or necessitated by epic genre restrictions which did not voice collective song, but only solo performances. Needless to say, the whole framework is almost ideal for the expression of antiphonal lament.

In Achilles' antiphonal lament to Briséis for the death of Patroclus in 19. 315-337, the motif of dying away from home is expressed through a rather complicated nexus of verbal and local deictic markers denoting distance and separation. This is the most elaborate personal lament uttered by Achilles himself in the Iliad. His use of deixis is distinguished from that of other epic protagonists in respect of both the cornucopia of its deictic markers and the complex links and relations it creates.

The fundamental idea upon which this personal lament rests is the combination of two contrasts between: a) Achilles, who is doomed to die in Troy and Patroclus, whom Achilles believed was destined to return to Phthia but lies dead in front of him and b) Achilles, who will die at Troy and his father Peleus, who is waiting for him to return home. The "dying away from home motif' is used in both cases, but with Patroclus and Achilles as respective recipients. This combination unites the fate of the two friends, neither of whom will be able to return to Phthia. As speaker, Achilles sees Patroclus' death from his own perspective, with regard to its consequences for himself and his family. He does not lament the fact that his friend will not be able to see his native land and family, but that Patroclus will not be in a position to do for Neoptolemus what he himself would certainly have done if he had been destined to return home. Distance and separation are focalized by the speaker, who functions as internal narrator, and are consequently expressed by a combination of deictic markers, verbal and local alike (323: Φθίηφι, 324: άλλοδαπψ ένί δήμψ, 326: Σκύρψ, 329: άπ' Άργεος, 330: αύτοΰ évi Τροίη and Φθίηνδε νέεσθαι, 332: Σκυρόθεν έξαγάγοις, 336: ποτιδέγμενον). Achilles carries the audience away from his deictic center (Troy) and presents a view of the situation in Greece: Peleus waiting in pain, Neoptolemus alone in Scyrus. This tableau reflecting sadness and pain is the result of Achilles' separation from his dear ones, of a distance that keeps them apart and will never be shortened. In this way, a grim picture is conjured up in the mind of the audience: we experience a vicarious journey through the vividness of Achilles' language as speaker. In other words, spatial deixis becomes the means enabling the speaker to function like a modern film-maker; he does not possess a camera but performs in real time, as he cannot develop

4.1 Distance and Separation 87

a scene and then edit it into a series of others that he has already shot. His tools are language and an unsurpassed sense for poetry alone, as he composes and recomposes in performance in front of a real and undoubted-ly demanding audience. He thus creates a view of the past, a view that few film-makers could recreate, allowing his listeners to travel far away from Troy so as to see what his heroes will never see. In this manner the audience can affiliate with the speaker, as they see a view of reality through Achilles' own eyes. In this case, the audience experiences a situation quite different from that in Briséis' speech, for the conditions at home are similar to those in Troy. Whereas Briséis is longing for a better life as Achilles' loyal wife back in Phthia, Achilles has not so much to hope for: his father is in pain, his son abandoned in Scyrus and far from his father's possessions. At the same time there is a common element in both cases, namely Achilles himself. Despite the fact that she is lamenting Patroclus, Briséis' happiness is in fact dependent on the survival of Achilles, whom she has planned to marry.2" Likewise, both Peleus' pain and Neopto-lemus' upbringing and reestablishment in Phthia are contingent on the fortune of Achilles alone. The Iliad seems to be lacking a language of lament for Patroclus and so its poet has to invent it for himself. As is only natural, the poem turns to Achilles, for whom the epic stock of lament material is extremely rich, and makes him the notional center of those laments targeting Patroclus. In a nutshell, tradition deprived the poem of a language and a stock of motifs for the death of Patroclus, which was an innovation particular to the Iliad,258 So as to overcome this problem, the epic borrowed traditional lament motifs originally pertaining to Achilles and more clearly suited to him. Though the recipient was thus shifted, the origo remained the same; this could only have been skillfully accomplished by depicting Patroclus as a close friend of Achilles, and one who was raised alongside him by Peleus in Phthia. Spatial and temporal elements can therefore be said to co-ordinate the central principle of affiliation between the two heroes.259

257 Taplin (1992) 81-82 maintains that "Briséis knew that Patroklos was the way to Achilleus' heart" but this does not undermine the fact that her lament for him finally amounts, even allusively, to her future marriage with Achilles.

"» I follow Kakridis (1949) 88 ff. and Erbse (1983) 1-15 who have convincingly argued that the Patrokleia is a Homeric invention.

88 Chapter 4

4.1.2. Bereaved parents and family

In Thetis' γόος (18. 52-64), deictic verbs of motion are combined with verbs of contact to create a marked combination highlighting the separa-tion between mourner and deceased:

I sent him away with the curved ships into the land of Ilion to fight with the Trojans; but I shall never again receive him won home again to his country and into the house of Peleus.

Thetis' origo is not the same as Agamemnon's or Achilles', for she is definitely absent from Troy during most of the narrative time, but constantly appears out of the sea swell every time she is going to meet with her son Achilles. Thetis locates herself "away from Troy", yet the language she employs here shows that she considers herself to be together with her husband Peleus in Phthia. The Iliad wants to emphasize the role of the mother rather than that of the goddess, especially since this is the most effective way to increase the pathos of the scene. After all, Thetis is Achilles' mother and has to lament him by adopting the perspective of a mortal mother who would, by definition, want her son to return home. It would have been absurd and poetically ineffective to make Thetis say that she wished for Achilles to go under the sea with her! Since this would not have made sense, Thetis has to place herself in Phthia so as to form Peleus' counterpart in terms of lament. In actual fact, we know that in all of her Iliadic epiphanies she rises from the depths of the sea, and in this particular scene is accompanied by a whole chorus of Nereids. This may seem a mere triviality, but it has important consequences for the function of the personal lament that Thetis is voicing. In particular, her use of the efferent verb έπιπροέηκα is dissonant with the non-Iliadic epic tradition, according to which Peleus, knowing that Achilles was destined to die at Troy, prevent him from joining the expedition by sending him to Scyrus,

νηυσίν έπιπροέηκα260 κορωνίσιν "Ιλιον εΐσω ΤρωσΙ μαχησόμενον τον δ' ούχ ύποδέξομαι αύτις οΐκαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Πηλήϊον εΐσω 60

58

260 In this case, I am not following West's Teubner edition which reads επι προέηκα.

4.1 Distance and Separation 89

where he remained at the palace of king Lycomedes disguised in women's clothes.261 Unfortunately for his father's plan, Achilles was discovered by Odysseus and brought to Troy. This tradition was silenced in the Iliad, since it would definitely have diminished the status and heroic prestige of its main hero, Achilles. The Iliad makes Thetis oscillate between the status of prescient goddess and mother helpless at the realisation that she cannot change the course of events.262 The mother element has to be strong in her, a fact which is reflected in all her Iliadic epiphanies at the presence or absence of Achilles. It is even reflected in her γόος, where she adopts the stance of a mortal mother who would have used the motif of sending her son to war, and would have referred to that feeling of distancing and separation that increases the parents' grief and makes the whole scene a kernel of human pathos. What we see here is the constant tactic of appropriating the unfitting, of turning epic material unsuitable for the poem's point of view into familiar motifs serving the needs of the plot and the Iliad's character-drawing. Thetis' use of spatial deixis leaves a specific mark on the poetics of the Iliad, as she turns the non-Iliadic politics of child-caring into the Iliadic rhetoric of lament. Her oscillation between efferent (έπιπροέηκα) and afferent (ύποδέξομαι) deictic markers makes her audience visualize her drama through an unaccomplished journey: Achilles sent to Troy will not come back. The phrase τον δ' ούχ ύποδέ-ξομαι αυτις / οικαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Πηλήϊον εϊσω (18. 59-60) not only forms the other end of the unaccomplished iter of Achilles, but unites the two parents, Thetis and Peleus, and makes them one within the frame of the γόος. The notion of bereaved parents who are deprived of their son not destined to return home from the war (ούχ... οικαδε νοστήσαντα)263

corroborates the concept of separation between mourner and deceased even more. The distance between Troy and Phthia transcends geography and enters the realm of human feeling. Thus the two places Thetis is

261 On this incident, see PEG, Cypria fr. 19. Proclus' summary offers a different version (apparently contradicting the previous one of the scholia, which attribute Achilles' sojourn in Scyrus to the Epic Cycle): Achilles reached Scyrus after the first, unsuccessful Teuthranian expedition. See Severyns (1928) 285 ff., Kullmann (1960) 190-192 and Burgess (2001) 21, all of whom support the view that Proclus' summary does not accurately report Achilles' first pre-expeditionary sojourn in Scyrus.

262 On Thetis' helplessness, see Slatkin (1991) 17-52. 263 18.60.

9 0 Chapter 4

designating for her audiences through spatial deixis stand for the whole tragic dilemma the poem is trying to express in respect of its main hero, Achilles: the choice between Phthia and Troy, between a trivial life and a glorious death. Thetis' use of deixis as a mechanism externalizing her personal tragedy and transforming non-Iliadic elements into Iliadic material reflects the speech's thematic dislocation within the corpus of the γόοι, but also mirrors its exceptional position for the conception of the whole epic. By reproducing one of the basic themes of the Iliad -the tragedy of Achilles- in miniature, it bespeaks the way the poem was generated, its coming into being. To put it briefly: for Thetis, spatial deixis becomes the means by which heroism will be defined and through which this epic has been created; by sending her son to Troy, Thetis makes the war and, consequently, the Iliad possible.

4.2. Closeness

Personal Deixis (I)

(I) Iliadic personal laments use first and second person pronouns representing proximal and intermediate deixis respectively, in relation to the speaker's or/go.264 These deictic pronouns create an interplay between the "I" of the mourner who is uttering the γόος and the "You" of the de-ceased who is lamented.265 In Agamemnon's γόος for the would-be death of Menelaus, first and second person pronouns emphasize the bond link-ing the two brothers' fate (4. 169, 174, 175, 182).

«άλλά μοι αινόν αχός σέθεν εσσεται, ώ Μενέλαε, 169 "But I shall suffer a terrible grief for you, Menelaos,"

«Αργείην Έλένην σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα 174 κειμένου έν Τροίη άτελευτήτω επί εργω.»

264 By the origo of a speaker, Bühler (1990) 91-166 refers to a nexus of "here"-"now"-"I". 265 The interplay between first and second person personal pronouns is a locus

communis for Iliadic personal laments; in this chapter I have concentrated on the γόος of Agamemnon, for this particular speech, as I will try to show, includes a bold ironic reading of the stereotypical deictic formula φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν, designating one's νόστος.

4.2. Closeness 91

"Helen of Argos,... while the bones of you rot in the ploughland as you lie dead in Troy, on a venture that went unaccomplished."

«ώς ποτέ τις έρέει· τότε μοι χάνοι εύρεΐα χθών.» 182 "Thus shall a man speak: then let the wide earth open to take me."

The deictic devices used here have been fitted in the ring-composition pattern: μοι-σέθεν (169), σέο (174), μοι (182). Deictics of the first and se-cond person pronouns refer to the speaker and the addressee of a speech and unite them via their presence in a given narrative environment. In this respect they differ from the third person pronoun, which points to somebody who is absent.266

Agamemnon envisages the dire consequences he will suffer as a result of his brother's potential death; mourner (Agamemnon) and would-be deceased (Menelaus) seem to be united through a bond that is not based solely on kinship, as one may expect, but on the heroic code of life. The key idea on which Agamemnon's thinking rests is that the war without Menelaus is virtually senseless, since it is being waged so that Helen can return to Sparta at his brother's side. If Menelaus dies, the war becomes pointless and Agamemnon will have to return home having left his mission unaccomplished and, moreover, having left his brother in Troy. There will be αίνόν άχος (169) for Agamemnon, if Menelaus (σέθεν = about you: 169) dies in Troy; his brother's bones will remain in a foreign land (σέο δ' όστέα πύσει αρουρα) and, when insulted by an anonymous Trojan, Agamemnon will wish that the wide earth would open and receive him like his dead brother. As a result, the interplay of the first and second person pronouns ends in the most emphatic manifestation of the inter-dependence of the two brothers' fate: it is confirmed by Agamemnon's imagined death (τότε μοι χάνοι εύρεΐα χθών).

The concentric ring pattern used in the deployment of the first and second person deictic markers reflects the whole evolutionary process leading to Agamemnon's dismal coda:

(a-b) μοι-σέθεν: the juxtaposition of the two deictic markers bespeaks the community of fate shared by the "I" and "You" of the speech.

266 Benveniste (1971) 195-204,217-222 has argued that the system of personal pronouns is bipartite, as first and second person designate presence, whereas the third signifies absence. See also Felson (1999) 4 (especially footnotes 12-13).

92 Chapter 4

(b') σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα: the deictic "You" describes the fate of Menelaus.

(a') τότε μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών: the deictic "I" is "united" with the "You" by sharing the same fate.

But what has facilitated or, rather, brought about this process? What, in other words, has made the final doleful wish of Agamemnon in respect of language possible?

A closer look at the passage reveals that the initial deictic interplay between the "I" of the speaker and the "You" of the addressee of the speech is corroborated and enlarged by a contrast which is also verbalized in deictic terms. As noted above, the Greek deictic system operates on a distinction or opposition, in terms of roles, between the first and second person constituting a separate level and the third, the former expressing presence, the latter absence.267

Agamemnon's fear and resultant sorrowful closure springs from his quoting a potential τις-speech,268 in which the theme of νόστος acquires a bold development; the formulaic φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν (178) normally used to designate someone's desire to return home becomes an ironic allusion to the negation of Menelaus' νόστος. As often in the Iliadic personal laments, spatial deixis denotes the separation motif which will entail the loss of the war for the Greeks ("ώς και νϋν αλιον στρατόν ήγα-γεν ένθάδ' 'Αχαιών, / και δή εβη οικόνδε φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν / σύν κει-νησιν νηυσί, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον": 179-181).

This τις-speech is introduced and capped by the following lines:

«καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει Τρώων ύπερηνορεόντων / τύμβο) έπιθρφσκων Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο (176-177: introduction) "And thus shall some Trojan speak in the proud show of hs manhood, leaping lightly as he speaks on the tomb of great Menelaos"

«ώς ποτέ τις έρέει- τότε μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών.» (182: closure) "Thus shall a man speak: then let the wide earth open to take me."

267 See Felson (1999) 4 , ft. 12. 261 For a detailed analysis of this speech, see chapter 5 and the bibliography cited there.

4.2. Closeness 93

The pronoun τις constitutes distant deixis, and is opposed to the proximal and intermediate deixis realized by the "I" and "You" of the first and second person pronouns I have referred to above. Distant deixis is on this occasion integrated or, rather, embedded not only in represented speech but in a speech within a speech, in tertiary focalization. By voicing an imaginary speech, the speaking "I" conjures up a view of the future in front of the audience, both external269 and internal; the "I" thus distinguishes itself from the "third person's" point of view. Yet in doing so, the speaker brings this "third person" within the perspective of his speech and makes him a reality, a vital part of the mental hie et nunc of the situation; for even if this "third person" speaks in the future, the speaking "I" conceives his speech as a potential reality. By embedding a speech within a speech, a second speaking "I" (the anonymous Trojan) is created, though only within the limits of the tertiary focalization that Agamemnon offers to his audience. The outcome of this powerful contrast between first-second person proximal deixis and third person distant deixis is further reinforced by the two discourse indexicals ώδ' and ώς introducing and capping the tiw-speech (lines 176 and 182 respectively). These endophoric references are cataphoric (ώδ') and anaphoric (ώς), pointing to the following (ώδ') and preceding (ώς) units of the text respectively; their meaning is fixed and not relative: they mean the same for both the poet, Agamemnon and us as audience/readers. By referring to the concrete text of the τις-speech, these deictic markers label it as credible and trustworthy, thus making its potential character decrease in favor of certainty and creating the illusion of an event witnessed distant in time; in short, that is the way some Trojan will speak and this is guaranteed by the deictic tools applied in the introduction and closure of the speech.

In this way, the τις-speech is transferred from the future to the present, to the "here" and "now" of the performance. By becoming tangible reality rather than a distant event and by gaining credibility, the distant deixis that the third person pronoun expresses is counterbalanced. Thus, once the

269 This is a case of the so-called Deixis am Phantasma (figurative or imagination-oriented deixis), a term coined by Bühler (1990) 137-157, who distinguishes it from demonstratio ad oculos (literal deixis). Deixis am Phantasma refers to the audience's perception of the deictic markers used by the characters within the plot. The term Deixis am Phantasma is rather misleading, but fairly well established among scholars. Perhaps external or imagination-oriented deixis would have been more effective.

94 Chapter 4

embedded speech is over, the speaking "I" (Agamemnon) hurriedly voices his return to the "You" by deciding to share his fate and figuratively become assimilated to it; then Menelaus-like, Agamemnon wishes that he would recede into the open mouth of the earth, i.e. experience his own death.

Personal Deixis (II)

Andromache's laments for Hector (6. 407-439 and 22. 477-514) provide a rich harvest of personal deictic markers.

In the first lament, the main interplay is between first and second person pronouns referring to Andromache (speaker) and Hector (addressee of the speech). There is, however, a third person, Astyanax, who is also a speech-act participant (παϊδά τε νηπίαχον) despite the fact that he is not modified by a third person pronoun of any kind.270 The speaking "I" (Andromache) includes him in the frame of her thought and, consequently, in the diction of her speech, establishing a pattern that is followed flawlessly throughout the Iliad, by connecting Andromache and Astyanax's fate with that of Hector.

«δαιμόνιε, φθείσει σε τεόν μένος, ούδ' έλεαίρεις 407 παΐδά τε νηπίαχον και εμ' άμμορον, ή τάχα χήρη σεΐ' εσομαι· τάχα γάρ σε κατακτενέουσιν Αχαιοί πάντες έφορμηθέντες. έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον εϊη σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι- ού γάρ ετ' άλλη εσται θαλπωρή, έπεί αν σύ γε πότμον έπίσπης, άλλ' άχε'. ουδέ μοί έστι πατήρ καΐ πότνια μήτηρ·» 413

"Dearest, your own great strength will be your death, and you have no pity

270 Pelliccia (1995) 179 correctly distinguishes between addressee (designated by the second person pronoun) and an audience (entity or entities present at the moment the speech is uttered. He calls "outside audience" not the poet's audience, but those present at the moment of speaking though not directly receiving the content of the speech. He also employs the term "inside audience" for one's θυμός, to which a speech may be addressed.

4.2. Closeness 95

on your little son, nor on me, ill-starred, who soon must be your widow; for presently the Achaians, gathering together, will set upon you and kill you; and for me it would be far better to sink into the earth when I have lost you, for there is no other consolation for me after you have gone to your destiny-only grief; since I have no father, nor honoured mother."

«οΐ δέ μοι έπτά κασίγνητοι εσαν έν μεγάροισιν 421 "And they who were my seven brothers in the great house"

«Έκτορ, άτάρ σύ μοί έσσι πατήρ και πότνια μήτηρ 429 ήδέ κασίγνητος, σύ δέ μοι θαλερός παρακοίτης.» "Hektor, thus you are father to me, and my honoured mother, you are my brother, and you it is who are my young husband."

The distribution of personal deictic devices is as follows: a. σε (407): Andromache foreshadows the destruction of Hector b. εμ' (408): she refers to the results of his destruction upon her and

their child c. σεΐ' (409): Andromache refers to the impact of Hector's loss on her d. σε (409): the speaking "I" repeats the idea she has expressed in unit

a e. έμοί (410): she verbalizes a would-be situation for herself if Hector

dies f. σεΐ' (411): she practically repeats what she has said in unit c g. σύ (412): she refers to Hector's death h. μοι (413): she implies that Hector stood for her father and mother i. μοι (421): Andromache implies that Hector stood also for her

brothers j. σύ μοί (429): she resumes her speech by equating Hector with her

old family, as in units h-i (father, mother, brothers) k. σύ (δέ) μοι (430): she refers to his role as a dear husband In her second lament (22. 477-514), Andromache uses first and second

person deictic pronouns to point to herself and Hector, and third person deictic markers to designate Astyanax. What was implicit in her lament in Book 6 is now explicitly stated: the interplay between Hector, herself and their child is mirrored through the use of deictics:

96 Chapter 4

«Έκτορ, εγώ δύστηνος· If) άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση άμφότεροι, σύ μέν έν Τροίη Πριάμου κατά δώμα, αύτάρ έγώ Θήβησιν ΰπό Πλάκφ ύληέσση εν δόμφ Ήετίωνος, ο μ' ετρεφε τυτθόν έοΰσαν, 480 δύσμορος αίνόμορον ώς μή ώφελλε τεκέσθαι. νυν δέ σύ μέν ρ' Άΐδαο δόμους υπό κεύθεσι γαίης ερχεαι, αύτάρ έμέ στυγερφ ένΐ πένθεϊ λείπεις χήρην έν μεγάροισι. πάϊς δ' ετι νήπιος αΰτως, δν τέκομεν σύ τ* έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι· ούτε σύ τούτω 485 έσσεαι, "Εκτορ, ονειαρ, έπεί θάνες, ούτε σοι ούτος. ήν περ γάρ πόλεμόν γε φύγη πολύδακρυν 'Αχαιών, αίεί τοι τούτφ γε πόνος και κήδε' όπίσσω έσσοντ'»

"Hektor, I grieve for you. You and I were born to a single destiny, you in Troy in the house of Priam, and I in Thebe, underneath the timbered mountain of Plakos in the house of Eëtion, who cared for me when I was little, ill-fated he, I ill-starred. I wish he had never begotten me. Now you go down to the house of Death in the secret places of the earth, and left me here behind in the sorrow of mourning, a widow in your house, and the boy is only a baby who was born to you and me, the unfortunate. You cannot help him, Hektor, any more, since you are dead. Nor can he help you. Though he escape the attack of the Achaians with all its sorrows, yet all his days for your sake there will be hard work for him and sorrows"

The distribution of first, second and third personal pronouns as follows: a. έγώ (477): Andromache exclaims in miseiy b. άμφότεροι (478): she and Hector are both ill-fated c. σύ (478): she refers to Hector's doomed house d. έγώ (479): she refers to her own doomed house e. μ' (480): she was the wretched daughter of a wretched father f. σύ (482): she refers to the present misery of Hector in Hades g. έμέ (483): she refers to her own misery as a widow in the palace h. δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε (485): the whole family (Astyanax, Hector

and Andomache) is ill-fated

4.2. Closeness 97

i. σύ τούτψ (485): neither Hector could save his son j. σοι ούτος (486): nor Astyanax his father k. τούτω (488): Astyanax's life will be filled with pain and suffering

The way deictic pronouns are deployed can serve as a compass for mapp-ing the inner rhythm of Andromache's speeches, of actually discovering the rhythmic function of these verses which can then, hopefully, lead us to a discussion of the role of performance that points to the interaction between performer and audience.

I have arranged first and second person deictic pronouns in Andro-mache's speech into separate sets because they correspond to equivalent steps in the process of unfolding the speaker's ideas; Andromache's personal lament is constructed by an array of distinct thoughts coinciding with what has been successfully coinedfoci of consciousness.m By this term, I am referring to the "amount of information that can be held in what cognitive psychologists call the working memory, or short term memory".272 The memory and perception centers that represent the very joints of human thought are what speech theorists refer to as intonation units. These are framed by pauses, which are in fact boundaries a speaker uses in order to group his thoughts and move forward through the flow of his speech.

The striking feature in the use of first and second person deictic markers is that their distribution corresponds to the intonation units of Andromache's speech. The speaker is verbalizing and organizing the flow of her speech by arranging her thoughts in agreement with the deictic markers referring to herself and Hector. Only towards the end of her lament in Book 6, when she sums up Hector's importance to her, does she join first and second person deictic markers, thus mirroring through deixis what was implicit from the outset of her lament: the closeness between herself and Hector and consequently the mutual dependence and poetic symbiosis of their fates. The correspondence between deictic markers and

»' See Bakker (1990) 1-21; (1993) 1-29; (1997a) 44-53, (1997b) 284-304; (1999) 38-39. Bakker is using the work of the linguist Wallace Chafe (1994) as a guide in examining Homeric poetry as special speech, thus avoiding the traditional dichotomy between written and oral poetry, and more generally between literacy and orality, which, he argues, is the by-product of a literate way of thinking about language.

272 Bakker (1999) 39.

98 Chapter 4

intonation units can be seen by the following analysis of her speech:273

a. δαιμόνιε, / b. φθείσει σε τεόν μένος, / c. ούδ' έλεαίρεις παΐδά τε νη-πίαχον / d. και εμ' αμμορον, / e. ή τάχα χήρη σεΐ' εσομαι· / f. τάχα γάρ σε κατακτενέουσιν 'Αχαιοί / g. πάντες έφορμηθέντες. / h. έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον εΐη / i. σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι· / j. ού γάρ ετ' άλλη εσται θαλ-πωρή, / k. έπεί άν σύ γε πότμον έπίσπης, /1. άλλ' άχεα'. / m. ούδέ μοί έστι πατήρ / η. και πότνια μήτηρ· / ... / ο. οΐ δέ μοι έπτά κασίγνητοι εσαν έν μεγάροισιν, I... I p. "Εκτορ, άτάρ σΰ μοί έσσι πατήρ / q. και πότνια μήτηρ / r. ήδέ κασίγνητος, / s. σύ δέ μοι θαλερός παρακοίτης.

The same is true of Andromache's lament in Book 22. 477-514: a. "Εκτορ, / b. έγώ δύστηνος· / c. íf¡ άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση / d. άμφότεροι,

/ e. σύ μεν èv Τροίη / f. Πριάμου κατά δώμα, / g. αύτάρ έγώ Θήβησιν / h. ύπό Πλάκφ ύληέσση / i· έν δόμω Ήετίωνος, / j. ο μ' έτρεφε τυτθόν έοϋσαν, / k. δύσμορος /1. αίνόμορον / m. ώς μή ώφελλε τεκέσθαι. / η. νϋν δέ σύ μέν ρ' Αΐδαο δόμους / ο. υπό κεύθεσι γαίης έρχεαι, / p. αύτάρ έμέ στυγερφ ένί πένθεϊ λείπεις / q. χήρην έν μεγάροισι. / r. πάϊς δ' ετι νήπιος αΰτως, / s. öv τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε /1. δυσάμμοροι- / u. ούτε σύ τούτφ εσσεαι, / ν. Έκτορ, / W. ονειαρ, / χ. έπεί θάνες, / y. ούτε σοί ούτος / / ζ . αίεί τοι τούτφ γε.

Deictic devices occur here in clusters,274 creating moments of emo-tional tension; the rhythm of the speech becomes high, elevated just as the voice of a mourner would become more emotional when uttering a lament. Andromache enhances an interplay between speaker and addressee as if she is intending to reenact a real-life dialogue between the two, just as in a real lament the mourner addresses the deceased, whose body lies in front of him/her. In these circumstances, the dialogue functions as a means of dramatizing the situation (the dead person cannot respond), of highlight-ing the absurdity and incomprehensibility of death as a universal pheno-menon.

In a written text, these deictic markers are interpreted at a surface level as grammatical devices used to emphasize meaning. Yet this way most of

273 Cf. Bakker (1999) 45-46. 274 The same is also true for enjambment (especially necessary or violent). See Bakker

(1999) 45-47.

4.2. Closeness 99

their true potential is lost, because they are decentered from the "natural environment" of a true performance. Of course, we cannot possibly detect the way Andromache's words would have sounded in an oral context, nor is there any solid evidence that pronoun use mirrors gestural enactment. On the other hand, deixis focusing on the interplay between first and second person pronouns foregrounds the relationship between mourner and deceased, which is a typical feature of lament in Greek tradition.

Personal Deixis (III)

Personal deixis also abounds in Helen's final personal lament for Hector in 24. 762-775:

«Έκτορ, έμω θυμω δαέρων πολύ φίλτατε πάντων· ή μέν μοι πόσις έστίν 'Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής, ος μ' αγαγε Τροίηνδ'· ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι·275

ήδη γαρ νυν μοι τόδ' έεικοστόν ετος έστίν 765 έξ ού κείθεν εβην και έμής άπελήλυθα πάτρης, άλλ' οΰ πω σέ' άκουσα κακόν έπος ούδ' άσύφηλον, άλλ' εΐ τίς με και άλλος ένί μεγάροισιν ένίπτοι δαέρων ή γαλόων ή' είνατέρων εύπέπλων ή έκυρή -έκυρός δέ πατήρ ώς ήπιος αίεί- 770 άλλά συ τόν γ' έπέεσσι παραιφάμενος κατέρυκες σί) τ' άγαγνοφροσύνη και σοις άγανοις έπέεσσιν. τώ σέ θ' άμα κλαίω και εμ' άμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ-

ού γάρ τίς μοι έτ' άλλος ένί Τροίη εύρείη ήπιος ουδέ φίλος, πάντες δέ με πεφρίκασιν»»

"Hektor, of all my lord's brothers dearest by far to my spirit: my husband is Alexandras, like an immortal, who brought me here to Troy; and I should have died before I came with him; and here now is the twentieth year upon me since I came

273 I disagree with West (2000) 367 ad loc., who thinks that 24. 763-764 have been interpolated.

100 Chapter 4

from the place where I was, forsaking the land of my fathers. In this time I have never heard a harsh saying from you, nor an insult. No, but when another, one of my lord's brothers or sisters, a fair-robed wife of some brother, would say a harsh word to me in the palace, or my lord's mother -but his father was gentle always, a father indeed- then you would speak and put them off and restrain them by your own gentleness of heart and your gentle words. Therefore I mourn for you in sorrow of heart and mourn myself also and my ill luck. There was no other in all the wide Troad who was kind to me, and my friend; all others shrank when they saw me."

Personal deixis is a typical means employed by the various lament speakers to underscore the sharing of a common fate by the mourner and the deceased. In Helen's final lament, which brings the epic to its closure, the interplay between first and second person pronouns acquires a new dimension by counterbalancing non-verbal and verbal signs. In Homer, non-verbal signs encompass a rich variety of signs pertaining to body language. These include ritualized and conventional gestures, postures and vocalics, objects, tokens, clothes but also the so-called chronemics and proxemics, namely the human use, perception and manipulation of time and space.276

Verses 762-766 of Helen's lament are reserved to references to her own self through the use of first person pronouns (έμφ: 762, μοι: 763, μ' (ε): 764, μοι: 765, έμής: 766). Some of these refer to the proxemics of Helen's distancing zone, which is, of course, her arrival at Troy and abandonment of her house in Sparta. Moreover, the phrase ήδη γάρ νϋν μοι τόδ' έεικοστόν ετος έστίν (765) designates not the time Helen has been away from Sparta, but its chronemics, namely her perception and manipulation of that time.277

In the second part of her lament, second person pronouns prevail (σέ':

276 For a detailed study of nonverbal behavior in Homeric epic, with special reference to the Odyssey, see Lateiner (1995).

277 See Tsagalis 2004 (forthcoming).

4.2. Closeness 101

767, σύ: 771, ση, σοίς: 772). The only exception is the pronoun με (768), which rather reinforces the previous observation, since it is virtually anticipating the three second person pronouns that pile up in the apodosis of the conditional clause in verses 771-772. On a surface level, in the second part of her speech Helen refers to the dead Hector and considers his importance for her. This is certainly true, but in no way exhausts the semantic dynamics of her lament. A more careful reading would convince even the most demanding reader that the second part of the lament, while praising Hector's kindness towards Helen, explicitly refers to the nature of her suffering while in Troy and identifies it as blame. Blame and the protection offered by Hector are expressed by a number of verbal signs which appear in this second part of the lament, but disappear later on in the third part, just as they were absent from the first one. These verbal signs include άκουσα κακόν επος ούδ' άσύφηλον, ένίπτοι, έπέεσσι παραι-φάμενος, άγανοφροσύνη, άγανοϊς έπέεσσι. Helen seems to have created a correspondence between speech (blame and verbal defense) and Hector, who is thus presented as the emblem of her defense, the very support of her existence in Troy. This point becomes all the more important given that in the two previous laments, the best of the Trojans had been lamented as the best warrior (by Andromache) and the dearest son (by Hecuba). Now he must be lamented as the dearest brother-in-law, whose loss Helen will experience more than anybody else. The explanation offered for Hector's special importance to Helen is brilliantly incorporat-ed and adapted to the overall presentation of Helen in this epic. Self-blame,278 which she invariably uses in other instances, has here been replaced by the blame of others, and Hector is presented as Helen's sole protector, Priam aside. Helen has masterfully incorporated the language of self-blame into the language of lament, which requires a praise to the deceased. Moreover, she has preserved for her beloved brother-in-law the final ovation to a quality she herself does not possess: coherent speech.27'

In the third part of the lament, first person deictics prevail once more

271 On Helen's self-blame, see Vodoklys (1992) 20-21, ft. 28; Graver (1995) 41-61; Worman (2001) 21, 28-29; Tsagalis (2002-2003) 182-184.

275 For Helen's ambiguous voice in the Iliad and the Odyssey, see Worman (2001) 19-37; for a detailed examination of Helen's lack of coherent speech and verbal mutability in the Teichoskopia, see Tsagalis (2002-2003) 167-193.

102 Chapter 4

(εμ': 773 - μοι: 774 - με: 775). The link with the previous part is reflected in the juxtaposition of second and first person pronouns (σέ: 773 -εμ': 773), which is the typical way the common fate motif is expressed in Iliadic personal laments. First person pronouns obviously refer to Helen herself, but also represent non-verbal signs. The dative μοι (774) expresses the internalization of Hector's loss through the negation ού γάρ τίς μοι ετ' άλλος (774) ... ήπιος ουδέ φίλος (775) and the spatial deixis indicated by ένί Τροίη εύρείη (774). The vastness of the physical landscape is thus tragically counterbalanced by Helen's emotional bareness, the complete absence of dear ones. This "Gefühl der unendlichen Verlassenheit"280 is iconized in the phrase πάντες δε με πεφρίκασιν (775) which recalls Achilles' ριδεγανής Ελένης in 19. 325.281 Helen's desolation is almost complete. The geographical distancing from Sparta and presence at Troy had been translated into figurative proximity with Hector and Priam and emotional distality from the Trojans, by whom she is abhorred, especially now that Hector lies dead. Now that there is no speaker to protect her, she has no speech for herself but simply tears (24. 773 : τώ σέ θ' αμα κλαίω και εμ' αμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ) together with the speechless shuddering of a hostile environment.

The interplay between first and second person deictics acquires a special rhythm in Helen's concluding lament. In terms of performance, it seems that the bard wanted to emphasize Helen's ultimate desolation by transferring the tenderness of her lament speech to Hector, whose death signifies her figurative death as a character. Though unable to utter a gentle and compassionate lament for Hector, Helen is able to recall his gentle words for her in the past. Yet as we know, this figurative efface-ment comes at the very end of the poem and coincides with it. The φρίκη that follows for Helen will never be narrated by the Iliad, but has been implied through the special language of γόος and mimed by the poet as loss of soothing speech.

280 Deichgräber (1972) 81. 281 See Macleod (1982) 155; Richardson (1993) 359.

4.3. Mors immatura 103

4.3. Mors immatura

Andromache's last lament for Hector (24. 725-745) bears striking differences with the two previous ones (6. 407-439 and 22. 477-514), because the body of the deceased lies in front of the mourner and so the performance conditions acquire a true ritual character. Moreover, within the frame of a solemn occasion such as the prothesis, the mourner provides a full picture of the tragedy of Hector and its significance for both Troy and his family.

Personal Deixis and Narr atee Shift

Andromache's final lament starts, as is expected, with the canonical address to the deceased, with whom the speaker initiates a fictive conversa-tion "made tragically one-sided by the hero's absence".282 The speaker brings forward an element which had not been developed before in any personal lament, namely that of premature death (24. 725-726):

άνερ, άπ' αιώνος νέος ώλεο, κάδ δέ με χήρην λείπεις έν μεγάροισι;

"My husband, you were lost young from life, and have left me a widow in your house"

Premature death is a typical theme throughout the epic; Achilles, the greatest hero of the poem, is destined to die young and it is precisely this choice that he makes which shapes his role in the Iliad. Other heroes of a smaller scale and caliber also die young; in the short obituaries dedicated to them, they are often compared to falling trees.283 The vegetal imagery links nature and culture in a fascinating way as "it conveys the cultural negation of a natural process, the growing and the wilting of plants, and also, by extension, the life and the death of mortals"284 and, moreover, is particular to the genre of lamentation.285

282 Foley (1999) 192. 283 Cf. 4. 473-489, 5. 541-560. Vegetal imagery is also used for Achilles; cf. 18. 56, 57,

437, 438. 284 Nagy (1979) 184. 285 Nagy (1979) 184.

104 Chapter 4

In the present case, however, the situation we encounter is different, since vegetal imagery is entirely absent; the explanation for this is that Hector has traditionally been linked so much with the fate of Andromache and his son, Astyanax, that virtually everything said about him has to bear some connection with the other members of his family. Traditional referentiality plays a dominant role, as it directs the verbalization of the lament towards the main concerns of the speaker, as already developed and shaped already in Andromache's proto-lament in Book 6. Hector's premature death will render her a widow and their child an orphan.

What is even more striking is the sudden shift in Andromache's narrative from Hector's premature death to Astyanax' s future murder during the fall of Troy. At the beginning of her lament, Hector constituted the addressee or narratee of her speech; but as the theme of premature death is developed, the speaker decides to change internal addressee and turn to a new "you", her son Astyanax (24. 732: σύ δ' αυ, τέκος), as if the lament was for him, as if he had already died. Thus, the narrativization of the initial "you" (Hector) is suspended for a while, due to the insertion in the course of the speech of another "you" designating Astyanax. This change is triggered by the role attributed to the initial "you" -the protecting function of Hector for the women and the children.286 The narrative shift is activated by the deictic marker σύ (you), which commences a new speech, an extra lament for Astyanax. This highly evocative additional lament offers a camera-eye view of a future situation, with a detailed description of the grim fate in store for Astyanax, either as a slave together with Andromache or as a victim thrown from the walls of Troy by some Achaean warrior in an act of revenge. The speaker attempts to telescope future events and bring them close to the hie et nunc of the lament, as if they are occurring in the present.

That being said, the deictic marker of the second person pronoun is only the initiator of the narrative shift I have pointed to. Temporal deixis operated by future tenses such as εψεαι (24. 733) and ρίψει (24. 735)

1U It should be noted that the addresss to Astyanax (τέκος: 24. 732) is caused by the phrase εχες δ' άλόχους κεδνάς και νήπια τέκνα (24. 730), which expresses implicitly what Andromache desires to say explicitly, namely that Hector protected both her and their child. The particular has been replaced by the universal in order to increase the importance of the deceased for the whole social framework of Troy.

4.3. Mors immatura 105

zooms in and focuses on almost visible future events such as the slavery or death of Astyanax.

Temporal Deixis and Point of View

"Time present and time past are always present in time future and time future contained in time past"

T. S. Eliot, The Four Quartets

Andromache's γόος for Hector is a canvas depicting the role of the great Trojan hero in the war and his importance for his city, painted in the sorrowful color of a future destruction and its consequences for his family. This emotional summary of Hector's life exemplifies a special concern with time, as it unites past, present and future in relation to his life and death. The interplay of tenses in this most ritual of Andromache's Iliadic γόοι has yet another dimension, one more perfomative than purely grammatical.

The pioneering studies of Bakker287 have shown that epic discourse is, to some extent, tenseless and that dealing with tenses in Homer on a horizontal time-axis prevents us from understanding their function within the performance. "Augmented verbs", to use one of Bakker's beautiful insights, "... may not be entirely compatible with our notion of the past tense... [t]hey sometimes seem to be used in contrast with the injunctive forms, not to mark an event as "past" in our sense, but as "near", in the sense that a given idea derives notfrom the collective consciousness of the tradition but from the consciousness of the individual speaker here and now ".2"

Tenses in Homer have to do with perception or remembrance of events and not so much with events per se;2" the narrator or individual character who delivers a speech perceives events with respect to the moment of the performance. This crucial observation enables us to interpret tenses from the point of view of the speaker rather than as a purely chronological sequence.

™ Bakker (1997c), (1997d). 288 Bakker (1997c) 29. The italics are mine. 289 See Bakker (1997c) 13.

106 Chapter 4

Andromache, to return to her lamentation, mixes tenses even though referring to events which have occurred at the same moment in time (24. 725-726):

άνερ, άπ' αιώνος νέος ώλεο, κάδ δέ με χήρην 725 λείπεις έν μεγάροισι- πάϊς δ' ετι νήπιος αΰτως,

"My husband, you were lost young from life, and have left me a widow in your house, and the boy is only a baby"

Both Hector's death and Andromache's widowhood have happened in the past. In fact, she became a widow at the very moment of her husband's death; in her speech, Andromache uses a past tense (ώλεο) for Hector's death, but a present tense to refer to her widowhood (χήρην | λείπεις). This is a contradiction only if tense is used as a time marker; I suggest, following Bakker, that the difference in tense mirrors the way the speaker (Andromache) perceives these events at the moment of performance. When she delivers her lament, she presents her husband's death as a displaced event that has occurred in the past, which is why she can lament him now, in the present. On the other hand, her widowhood is present when she laments Hector, and is a condition that functions as a marker of visual evidence of the here and now of the speaker.290 In this way, a part of the past that the speaker selects is turned into the present, because it is perceived as such by the speaker when he/she verbalizes the lament. Temporal deixis enables Andromache to create her own recognition of the past, by segmenting and classifying it according to its importance or impact on her; it is natural that she cares now more for the consequences of Hector's death for her than for the very event of his death. This is one of the fascinating results of epic storytelling -its ability to draw the past into the present and resurrect it at the moment of speaking, by shifting the emphasis from the narrative aspect of events to their visualization.

Later on in her speech, Andromache employs a series of verbs in the future tense: όχήσονται (731), εψεαι (733), ρίψει (735). Through external prolespis these verbs designate a future situation concerning the doom of the Trojans as captives and of Astyanax in particular. This will of course

2,0 See Bakker (1997c) 17-18.

4.3. Mors immatura 107

take place after the end of the Iliad, since it is beyond the chronological limits of the poem. As a mortal Andromache291 does not know what will happen in the future, but as an epic protagonist she is aware that what happens in the present or has happened in the past (Hector's death) will be present in time future or, to put it more neatly, will survive in the memory of the future that she is here epitomizing. The future tenses of the verbs she uses do not so much mirror some future events as reflect the presence of the past in the future (Hector's death causing the death of Astyanax and her own slavery). Such future tenses are generic,292 for they commemorate rather than generate a series of events. Tense293 is not seen as a linear sequence of events, but as a means of placing the storytelling in the context of the performance.

Andromache's lament displays a remarkable tense combination. In lines 740-742, three different tenses are used: present (οδύρονται), aorist (εθηκας) and future perfect (λελείψεται). The interpretation of this tense combination is inseparable from that of their function. In the case of οδύ-ρονται, it is the people of Troy whose pain is focalized; this pain is not expressed, but presented by the speaker as happening in front of the audience's eyes, as if seen on the spot.294 Andromache is zooming to an aspect of the lament performance so as to synchronize it with her own utterance; her own lament and the lament of the people occur at the same moment of time. On the other hand, the past tense εθηκας focuses on the deceased - Hector is the one who has left pain and mourning to his parents. The hero is dead, and so the aorist expresses the nearness of the event, its "immediately present situation"295 becoming a means to mirror the way the same event is perceived by different focalizers. Finally, the future perfect λελείψεται used for Andromache herself refers to the event of Hector's death but as experienced by her; Andromache offers a vivid visualization of a future situation where she will be singled out as the one to undergo the greatest suffering. What is present for the people and what

2,1 Bakker (1997c) 33. 295 Bakker (1997c) 33. 2,3 On aspect and tense, see Comrie (1976); (1985). m Bakker (1997d) 20 notes: "the aorist may be used to express an event whose comple-

tion constitutes the essence of a speaker's present experience, whereas the imperfect seems to be incompatible with signs pertaining to a speaker's present situation".

295 Bakker (1997d) 21.

108 Chapter 4

is left for the parents will be always present for her in the future, for Hector has not stretched his hands from his death-bed, nor has he told her a πυκινόν επος that she would remember for days and nights while shedding her tears (743-745). The consequences of Hector's death are not seen in their temporal perspective, but from the perspective of the different subjects involved in the lamentation. By figuratively translating Hector's absence in her future life into pain and sorrow that will be always present, Andromache is absorbing all temporal dimensions into an eternal pain and lament reflecting the κλέος of the Iliad, which is in essence the dramatic lament for Hector perpetuated through epic memory.296

296 See Nagy (1979) 142-150.

Chapter 5

Ars Allusiva: Intratextual Readings in the Iliadic Personal Laments

5.1 Introductory Remarks

Having established both a corpus of γόος-speeches and the elements of the Iliadic γόοι, their boundaries and contexts, and the way they present themselves with individual deixis, I shall now proceed to consider them within the narrative as a whole.

My focus will be twofold, stretching towards two different but complementary directions: allusion and narratology. I will examine each γόοι by focusing on formulas or expressions in comparison to their use in other parts of the epic. In other words, I will attempt to see how the Iliadic γόοι "look at" other parts of the poem when they use expressions which have already been used in other passages; how the personal laments "read" what precedes or follows them, and what role allusion plays in this process, as the latter can be used to quote, to asssimilate, to differentiate or even to deviate from a pattern. As Pucci297 has said on allusion and scholarly interest in it:

"... allusion dominates in the Homeric text. The reason for this lies also in the fact that the allusion is a way of quoting in the highly conventional and stylized Ho-meric language. Accordingly, the formulaic repetition-which has often discouraged scholars from speaking of deliberate allusion -turns out to be the very ground of a continuous intertextuality, of quotations, of incorporation, of an exchange of views or polemic arguments among the texts".

What Pucci has successfully done on an intertextual level I will

297 See Pucci (1987) 242.

1 1 0 Chapter 5

attempt to do intratextually,29' by examining allusion299 between "a second text" (that of the Iliadic γόος-speeches) and the rest of the poem; this "second text" follows a parallel course with the plot, both maintaining its fragmentation and forming part of the whole. The fundamental intratextual premise adopted here is that "a text's meaning grows not only out [of] the readings of its parts and its whole, but also out of readings of the relationships between the parts and the reading of those parts as parts, and parts as relationship".300 To cite a powerful example, the number of personal laments in the Iliad, the frequency of their appearance and the weight of their importance steadily increase as the poem approaches its end. This observation is meaningful only to the extent that the γόοι are identified as chunks of text acquiring cohesion and uniformity only within the larger text of the poem they are placed in. Segmentation and unity have to be renegotiated301 if one is to decode their interaction and subsequent interdependence.

Narratology302 will be also used as a complementary hermeneutical tool, inviting the modern reader to scan the text backward and forward. Interrupted linearity and increased frequency of γόος-speeches are essential for appreciating a typical intratextual reading of the laments, a reading founded on relating "apparently disparate parts of the text, in order to enhance the reading of each".303

The approach adopted here may seem at odds with the emphasis given on formulas, orality and performance; how can we turn to a text-oriented interpretive method, thus discarding all previous claims concerning techniques of oral poetry and repetition exemplified through a variety of devices?

Dealing with such a thorny issue calls for or even presupposes a general statement expressing one's Homeric credo. In my view, the

298 On intratextuality, see Sharrock & Morales (2000) 4, ft. 8. 2W Pasquali (1942) was the first to use the term arte allusiva. For further bibliography

and prudent reservations concerning some idiosyncratic uses of this method, see Kyriakou (1995) 15, ft. 38.

300 Sharrock & Morales (2000) 5-6. 501 Sharrock & Morales (2000) 4. 502 See de Jong (1987b) and Richardson (1990). In addition to focalization, I examine

order and pace. 303 Sharrock & Morales (2000) 9.

5.1 Introductory remarks 1 1 1

Homeric poems should be treated as texts, in the sense that they are extended manifestations of cohesive discourse "rather than compilations of sentences from various other texts".304 Orality and textuality are not irreconcilable qualities, and oral poetry such as that of the Iliad and the Odyssey does not exclude the notion of a different kind of text, one that is not fixed by writing and immune to significant variation. Distant and proximal narrative relations are compatible with an oral text, oral with respect to its continuous recomposition in performance and text in reference to its technical complexity and sophisticated nature.305

These two methods of approach will be used in a complementary way; that is to say, they will not be separated in my analysis but rather I will try to employ them, through the different perspectives that they take, in order to clarify the relation between each of the personal laments and the rest of the poem. I will also look at the extent to which the γόοι create, use and complete a narrative thread, summarizing or epitomizing the whole Iliadic plot.

In the process of my analysis I will be using terms such as anticipatory or ritual personal laments, which spring from the classification of the personal laments on the basis of two distinct criteria: a) form and b) function. According to the first criterion, the γόοι can be termed: 1 ) single; 2) antiphonal; 3) triadic, and according to the second: 1) anticipatory; 2) concealed/mixed; 3) informal/ritualistic306 and 4) formal/ritual.

What follows is a table that shows in which categories each personal lament belongs; the first term describes the personal lament according to form and the second according to function (the first column designates the speaker and the addressee of each γόος):

304 Martin (2000) 47. 305 See Pucci (1987) 26-27. On distant and proximal relations, see Reichel (1994) and

Martin (2000). 306 See also chapter 1 (Types of Γόοι). By the term 'ritualistic' I describe the γόοι for

Hector in II. 22 which are expressed within a semi-formal context (due to the absence of the hero's body); by 'ritual' I designate personal laments uttered within a formal context, e.g. the γόοι for Hector in //. 24.

112 Chapter 5

Table 2: Types of Personal Laments307

in the Iliad

Pers. Laments Book Form Function

l.Ag-M 4 single anticipatory

2. Andr-Hct 6 single anticipatory

3. Th-Ach 18 single concealed 4. Ach-P 18 single mixed 5. Br-P 19 antiphonal ritualistic 6. Ach-P 19 antiphonal ritualistic 7. Pr-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic 8. Hec-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic 9. Andr-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic 10. Andr-Hct 24 triadic ritual 11. Hec-Hct 24 triadic ritual 12. Hel-Hct 24 triadic ritual

5.2 Agamemnon

Agamemnon's personal lament for Menelaus (4. 155-182) is unique within the corpus of Iliadic personal laments,308 being the only γόος-speech which is virtually unfulfilled; as Andromache refers to Hector's future death in II. 6, Agamemnon also anticipates the loss of his brother Menelaus. But the striking difference between these two personal laments is that Agamemnon's dirge is a pseudo-γόος as Menelaus will not die, whereas Hector, whom Andromache laments in Book 6, will.

This point is highly significant when interpreting the function of this

307 Abbreviated Symbols: Pers. Laments = Personal Laments; Ag = Agamemnon; M = Menelaus; Andr = Andromache; Hct = Hector; Th = Thetis; Ach = Achilles; Ρ = Patroclus; Br = Briseis; Pr = Priam; Hec = Hecuba; Hel = Helen.

308 For a detailed description of the "structural morphology" of this speech, see chapter 2 above.

5.2 Agamemnon 113

speech -one basic question that has to be addressed concerns the reason behind its utterance. Is it simply the verbalization of Agamemnon's fear or does it also serve, in the long run, a more important goal?

The personal lament in question is roughly divided into two parts of almost equal length. The first one is concerned with the lament for Me-nelaus and the punishment of Zeus, whereas the second is a lament of Agamemnon's own αιδώς, in which the emphasis is turned towards the speaker and his thoughts linger on his own responsibility before the eyes of the Achaean army.

The first part of the speech, which is in fact the personal lament proper, treats three themes: the violation of the truce, the punishment of Zeus and the vision of the future destruction of Troy.

The handling of these themes is carried out by means of one analepsis and two prolepses. Agamemnon begins by referring to the truce and its violation by the Trojans, but what is presented here is his own focalization of past events. He was the one who put Menelaus alone (4. 156: οίον προ-στήσας) in front of the Achaeans to fight the Trojans.309 This is not what we have been told in Iliad 3. There, it was Menelaus1 choice to fight against Paris; it was Menelaus himself who made this decision and actually delivered a speech in 3.97-110, where he clearly stated that a duel had to take place between himself and Paris (...έπεί κακά πολλά πέπασθε / εϊνεκ' έμής έριδος και 'Αλεξάνδρου ενεκ' άρχής) and not Agamemnon, who only later declared the terms before carrying out the sacrifice.

On the contrary, in his γόος Agamemnon presents himself as responsible for what he considers to be the death of his brother and, by employing the phrase θάνατον νύ τοι δρκι' εταμνον (4. 155), looks back to 3. 276-291, in which he announced the terms of the truce.

This internal homodiegetic analepsis does not supply or fill a gap in the preceding narrative but rather effectuates a past event known from the prior diegesis through the verbalization of a character's thoughts and feelings. The result is a sophisticated re-reading of the truce scene and its violation as seen by Agamemnon acting as internal narrator. Thus it is the

m I do not think that the scholia (bT) are right when they say that προστήσας is metaphorical: μεταφορικώς άπό των θυμάτων απερ προϊστωσι των βωμών; as Kirk (1985) 347 ad loc. notes: "no good parallel is known for such a use". Moreover, the emphatic use of οίον at the beginning of the line before προστήσας shifts the focus onto the fact that Menelaus would fight alone; there is no allusion here to a sacrificial victim, as the scholia imply.

114 Chapter 5

localization310 of a specific character's feeling of responsibility that creates the γόος-speech.

The next theme is that of the punishment of Zeus, or rather the fulfillment of his will. The use of αλιον in line 158 looks back at 4. 26, when Hera complained to Zeus because he wanted her labor against the Trojans to remain empty and unfulfilled; on the contrary, Agamemnon expresses his certainty that the sacrifice to the father of gods and men will not remain unfulfilled for long, as Zeus will not be slow to punish the violators of the truce. Just as later in the same speech (4. 178-179), the word αλιον (in vain, fruitless, empty) is neatly combined here with different forms of the verb τελέω (ουκ έτέλεσσεν: 160, τελεί: 161, ουκ άτέ-λεστα: 168, άτελευτήτφ: 175, τελέσει': 178). This allusion foregrounds one of the fundamental themes of the Iliad, first introduced in the proem: the fulfillment of Zeus' βουλή (Διός δ' έτελείετο βουλή: 1. 5). It is precisely this thought that triggers the vision of the destruction of Troy.

This series of textual indicators connoting3" Agamemnon's certainty as regards the fulfillment of Zeus' will is crowned by his emphatic statement on the final outcome of the war: ευ γαρ έγώ τόδε οιδα κατά φρένα και κατά θυμόν: 4. 163. This conviction has a twofold explanation and function: first, it is known that the verbalization of one's emotions and opinions results in them being communicated and shared with others. Agamemnon is here addressing a specific internal audience -that of his comrades- who also participate in the lament (έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι: 154). Therefore, he wants to assure them that ultimately, despite of the violation of the truce, victory will be on their side. It will be granted by Zeus to whom Agamemnon's oath was made before the sacrifice preceding the duel between Paris and Menelaus. Second, it creates an antithesis with the fear that he will leave Troy empty-handed, having lost his own dear broher (4. 175, 178-179). The use of the verb τελέω or its derivatives (άτελευτήτφ επί εργψ: 4. 175) and ούχ αλιον (178) creates an opposition between certainty about Zeus' punishment and the speaker's doubts and fears about the accomplishment of his own duty. Agamemnon

310 Cf. Ahl (1989) 16 who notes: "the narrator, or perhaps one should say internal mythmaker, often seeks to substitute his version of the myth for the one previously current". In this case Agamemnon as internal narrator substitutes Menelaus1 version of events with his own.

311 On denotation and connotation, see Silk (1983) 330-333.

5.2 Agamemnon 115

draws a deliberate contrast between Zeus and himself, the former carrying out his will, the latter failing to accomplish his goals.

The external narrator's statement of Zeus' plan in 1. 5 acquires a different tone here, as it comes from Agamemnon's mouth: Zeus becomes the one who will punish the Trojan injustice. The speaker corroborates this belief with the vision of Troy in ruins, and the destruction of Priam and his people under the avenging anger of the father of gods and men.312

In the second part of the personal lament (171-182), Agamemnon laments his own αιδώς by considering his unglorious return to Argos.

What is significant here is the idea of failure, of the unaccomplished goals which he, the foremost commander of the Achaean army, will not achieve: Helen will be left for the Trojans to boast about, Menelaus will lie unburied in Troy άτελευτήτψ επί εργψ. One may infer from Aga-memnon's words as well as from the scholia313 that Menelaus is far more important for the war than anybody else, since his death would logically signify the end of the expedition.

Agamemnon goes on to introduce an embedded direct speech, which we may term a potential τις-speech.314 This imaginary utterance is only

312 The same proleptic statement is expressed by Hector to Andromache in 6. 447-449; comparison of these two instances, in which the same prophetic vision is repeated verbatim, may be significant. No doubt the oral nature of the Homeric poems is the main reason for the existence of such verbatim repetitions, but reiteration, the matrix of epic poetry, referring not only to formulas but also to conceptual frames, creates some enthralling associations, as epic diction constantly reshapes, quotes and alludes to itself. See Pucci (1987) 19. The passage in which Hector expresses this proleptic statement is an answer to the preceding personal lament by Andromache, containing elements typical of the γόοι, such as the "Comparison" and the "Death-Wish". In looking back to Andromache's γόος, this speech attempts to balance the importance she has accorded to Hector. By quoting the same phrase that Agamemnon had uttered, Hector reads it anew, with a quite different coloring. As de Jong (1987b) 188 notes: "With these words Agamemnon, the future victor, adhorts his troops (in Δ), whereas Hector, the future loser, expresses to his wife Andromache his determination to fight in spite of everything (in Z)".

313 See b (BCE3E4) 171b. I think that one can plausibly argue for an allusion here to the fact that since the goal of the expedition is to take Helen back to Greece, if her legitimate husband Menelaus died, there would be no reason for continuing the war.

314 For τις-speeches see: Hentze (1905) 254 who calls them Chorreden and considers them to be the ancestors of the tragic chorus, whereas Fingerle (1939) 283-294 uses the term tis-Reden. See also Wilson (1979) 1-2; de Jong (1987a), (1987b) 69-84. Richardson (1990) 24-25 coins them pseudo-direct speeches; Bezantakos (1996)

116 Chapter 5

found in character-text, refers to the future and is attributed to an anony-mous speaker. Potential τις-speeches differ from actual ones in that the latter refer to events which have occurred or are currently taking place, whereas the former pertain to future, completely hypothetical situations. Actual τις-speeches express the "voice of anonymity",315 while potential τις-speeches externalize and verbalize the fears or hopes of the speaker.

This particular potential τις-speech begins with a predictive introductory formula and closes with an almost identical capping expression which is, as ever in potential τις-speeches, future316 and "reflects in miniature a major structural principle of the speeches in Homer".317

The question I would like to address concerns the particular function of this τις-speech within Agamemnon's γόος. I will try to illuminate this by pointing to three aspects of this embedded speech which I believe to be crucial in answering the above question.

a. The potential τις-speech in question is an oral anti-epitaph with reversion of traditional funerary phraseology, changing from commemo-rative/laudatory for the deceased to derogatory for the mourner. At the same time, although it is embedded within a personal lament, the symbolic locus where a mourner laments the dead, within the τις-speech itself an anonymous Trojan mocks Agamemnon for being responsible for the death of his brother. The hypothetical speaker is bitterly ironic towards Aga-memnon, who led the expedition and returned to Argos without having achieved his goal and - what is more important - with his "brave" (άγα-θός) brother dead in Troy.

Though άγαθός, Menelaus is considered dead and it is this specific quality which increases the responsibility of Agamemnon for losing such a brother.318 The leaping (επιθρώσκων) of the anonymous Trojan3" upon the grave of Menelaus reinforces the mocking, since this is an insult to the

196-205 describes them as λόγοι κοινής γνώμης and offers a survey of previous work on τις-speeches with an examination of their typology.

315 See de Jong (1987b) 69. 3,6 This embedded speech is introduced by the formula καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει and capped

by ώς ποτέ τις έρέει. 317 See Wilson (1979) 2. 3,8 Cf. the scholia vetera at II. 4. 181c'cJ (I 483 Erbse). 3" The use of the epithet ύπερηνορεόντων for the Trojans implies that the anonymous

τις is also an ύπερήνωρ; this clearly indicates a negative quality. See also Kirk (1985) 350 ad loc.

5.2 Agamemnon 117

dead; the picture of Agamemnon's brother abandoned in a foreign land far from home is made even more bitter by the mention of the enemy defiling his grave. By reversing the scope of the personal lament (through the insertion of an anti-epitaph), the speaker introduces a sophisticated indirect praise, a laudatio fimebris, not by praising the deceased, but by rebuking himself as responsible for the loss of άγαθός Μενέλαος.

This anti-epitaph with its typical epigrammatic funerary expressions (φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον) lends a dramatic vivid-ness to Agamemnon's speech and externalizes his fears, which are consonant with the Homeric view of one's interest in his posthumous fame.

b. Since we are dealing with tertiary focalization (a direct speech within a speech), "the distance from the primary fabula increases and therewith the reliability decreases";320 the reason for this decrease in reliability lies in the creation of an intended contrast with the conviction expressed in the first part of the speech. The insertion of the τις-speech reinforces the opposition between the first part, which refers with certainty to the punishment of Zeus and the end of Troy, and the second part, which expresses Agamemnon's fears about his potential failure in the most emphatic way.

c. By inserting a potential τις-speech of imaginary content within an anticipatory personal lament, Agamemnon deviates from the "boundaries" of the Iliadic plot and offers the audience a glimpse of what the Iliad will not narrate. In fact, this potential τις-speech alludes to the epic tradition of meta-Iliadic Νόστοι, hinting at a potential Iliadic version of them. Verbalized and colored by Agamemnon's feelings, this summary points towards the rest of the epic tradition, which refers to the return of the Greek heroes after the fall of Troy by suggesting an imaginary return before the city is captured.

The paradoxical nature of Agamemnon's speech, imbued with contradictory statements, discloses the hero's inner conflict. On the other hand, Agamemnon knows that he is to win, but remains a defeatist in his own heart,"1 thus occupying a special position within the intratextual frame of the personal laments: he is the only Greek apart from Achilles to utter a γόος, and it is his own failure that he chooses to lament.

320 See de Jong (1987b) 178. 321 As in the beginning of Iliad 2.

118 Chapter 5

The autoreferential nature of Agamemnon's lament bears a profound metapoetic statement, one which is not explicitly verbalized but implicitly alluded to. The Iliadic personal laments have interiorized the archetypal conflict between Agamemnon and Achilles, adapting it to their own, "personal" subject-matter. Just as in the initial conflict between the two heroes in Iliad 1, in which Agamemnon adopts a selfish stance, whereas Achilles loses somebody dear to him (Briséis as a symbol of his heroic τιμή), so in the γόοι it is Agamemnon again who fosters an egotistic attitude even seeing his brother's death in respect of its impact on his αιδώς, whereas Achilles experiences another terrible loss, that of Patroclus.321

Considering the function of Agamemnon's γόος as a whole, it becomes clear that the wounding of Menelaus is not serious in itself, but could be dramatic because its consequences are dramatic for the continuation of the war; Agamemnon's personal lament and the ensuing verbal exchange between himself and his brother Menelaus lend vividness to the scene and increase the pathos. In this way, this particular γόος becomes a speech of great significance, for it attaches great importance to a rather trivial wound-ing, importance arising not from the facts, but confirming the poet's intention to push the story forward and continue it. Thus, far from being an isolated insertion into the epic plot, this speech is neatly interwoven and sufficiently incorporated in the poem, activating the continuation of the story.322

5.3 Andromache

5.3.1 Iliad 6

The personal lament of Andromache for Hector in Book 6 (407-439) appears in one of the most significant scenes of the Iliad, and it is with

322 See Bezantakos (1996) 255, who rightly argues that the break of the truce acquires a dramatic tone not because of the trivial wounding of Menelaus, but rather due to its thematic expansion in the speeches, especially by Agamemnon, who considers his brother's wounding to be fatal.

5.3 Andromache 119

this point in mind that the Alexandrian scholars gave this whole Book the title Έκτορος και 'Ανδρομάχης ομιλία. Like the personal lament of Aga-memnnon, this too is a single, anticipatory γόος; its anticipatory role is probably the most noteworthy in the entire poem since it deals with the death of Hector, with which the Iliad will come to an end.

This γόος is divided into two parts: the first (407-411) refers to Hector's death and its consequences for Andromache and their child, while also containing the "Death-Wish", and the second (411-439) pertains to the "Comparison" theme.

In the first part Andromache begins with an internal prolepsis of the future death of Hector. This death will take place within the Iliad, though not in the way Andromache describes, for Hector will be killed by Achilles and not by all the Achaeans (6. 409-410).

The "Death-Wish" expressed by έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον εϊη / σεΐ' άφαμαρ-τούση χθόνα δύμεναι (410-411) is a specific thematic element recurrent in personal laments in the form of an imaginary wish. Future-oriented and describing the emotional state of the speaker, as it presents Andromache's focalization, it alludes through a change of roles (Rollenwechsel) to the ensuing tragedy of Hector. The expression χθόνα δύμεναι, like τότε μοι χάνοι εύρεϊα χθών in Agamemnon's personal lament (4. 182), introduces a metaphor in which the earth becomes a refuge, a sort of escape for the mourner from a situation of excessive pain and -in the case of Aga-memnon- liability. This becomes all the more important since the earth is the place associated par excellence with the deceased."3 Looking for refuge among the dead, the mourner unconsciously seeks reunion with the person mourned for.

The second part of Andromache's personal lament is organized upon three consequent analepses referring to the deaths of her father, her seven brothers and her mother. All three are external, which is to say they do not interfere with the primary fabula, as they fall outside the time-span it covers.324 External analepses uttered by speaking characters are known for their allusive and elliptical nature. Their content is familiar to their

323 There are also expressions, which mean that somebody died, associated with the earth such as γαΐαν είλον, or expressions like ψυχή δέ κατά χθονός ήΰτε καπνός / ωχετο τετριγυια (23. 100-101), which refer to the earth as a place of dread.

324 For a discussion of prolepses and analepses in the Iliad, see de Jong (1987b) 81 ff. For external analepses in character-text, see ibid. 160-168.

120 Chapter 5

addressee and the main interest of the speaker lies in the importance each analepsis has in the present context.325 Their role is not informational, as when the external narrator narrates one of them to provide background information or to increase the dramatic tension. Therefore, when we examine the external analepses which are contained in the second part of Andromache's speech, we should be alert for clues hinting at two different but complementary levels: the argumentative and the functional.

On the argumentative level, Andromache attempts to raise the feeling of pity326 in Hector's heart by recalling the tragedy of all her dear ones. Through the description of her past sufferings and losses, she highlights the importance of Hector in her life, who -in an emotionally heated couplet-327 is considered as encapsulating in himself all the family relations she had with her next of kin in addition to that of being her husband. The importance of the ascending scale of affection (father, brothers, mother, Hector) is still here at work, just as it is in the whole scene of the Homilía (Trojans, Hecuba, Priam, brothers, Andromache), and may well have been derived from an earlier epic, as comparison with the story of Meleager has shown.328 This augmentative addition as well as the balanced structure of the couplet (429-430: with πατήρ and μήτηρ in the first line and κασίγνη-τος with παρακοίτης329 in the second, as well as the emphatic anaphora of

325 See Austin (1966) 297; Kirk (1962) 164-166. 326 Cf. Burkert (1955) 86-90, who discusses this passage at length, showing how pity is

for her a force opposed to Hector's αιδώς and θυμός. One should also note that έλε-αίρεις (6. 407) and έλέαιρε (6. 431) are contrasted with the absence of any terms denoting legal or moral responsibility Hector might have for supporting Andromache.

327 Cf. 6. 429-430. Scholars (Bonnet 1990, 265-268; Schmitz 1963, 144) have convincingly shown how Andromache's language, metrics and style in this speech reflect her emotional state, which is very different from Hector's balanced and reserved reply that follows. See also Mackie (1996) 123-124, who observes that while Andromache expresses her feelings "in a line or less at a time", Hector's sentences stretch over two lines or more. Her emotional outburst is presented in stark opposition to her husband's restrained response.

328 For a comparison between the Homilía scene in Iliad 6 and the Meleagris, see Kakridis (1949) 43-64. For the embedded Meleager story, see Kakridis (1949) 11-42; Willcock (1964) 147; Schadewaldt (1966) 139-142; Heubeck (1984) 128-135; March (1987) 22-46; Swain (1988) 271-276; Voskos (19972) 39-89 (= 1974, 11-46); Alden (2000) 179-290; Grossardt (2001) with all the previous bibliography.

329 The last person mentioned in this list of affection and loss is Hector, who is described

5.3 Andromache 121

σύ μοι... σύ δέ μοι)330 looks at the ensuing reply by Hector, who in his turn highlights the importance of Andromache in his life by using a priamel (6. 450-454):"'

«άλλ' οΰ μοι Τρώων τόσσον μέλει άλγος όπίσσω, οΰτ' αυτής Εκάβης ούτε Πριάμοιο άνακτος οΰτε κασιγνήτων, οϊ κεν πολέες τε και έσθλοί έν κονίησι πέσοιεν υπ' άνδράσι δυσμενέεσσιν, δσσον σεΐ\»

"But it is not so much the pain to come of the Trojans that troubles me, not even of Priam the king nor Hekabe, not the thought of my brothers who in their numbers and valour shall drop in the dust under the hands of men who hate them, as troubles me the thought of you,"

One should also bear in mind that Andromache is placed at the top of the series of dear ones whom Hector meets within the walls of Troy.332 In line 6. 450 Hector clearly states that he is most interested in his wife's future after his death; the internal analepses intensify the role of this ascending

by an emotionally loaded expression (γόοι). See also II. 8. 190: ...δς πέρ οί θαλερός πόσις εύχομαι είναι, παράκοιτις is also employed for Hera (//. 4. 60, 14. 346, 18. 184, 365, 21. 179), Leto (Od. 11. 580) and Helen (Od. 3. 53, 10. 590). It is used for men only twice (II. 6. 430, 8. 156). The term θαλερός has both amorous and lament connotations, since it is used with δάκρυ (II. 2. 266) and γόος (Od. 10. 457). See Chantraine (1946-47) 226-227.

330 For the role of this anaphora see Kakridis (1949) 50. 331 According to Race (1988) ix, the priamel is a poetic/rhetorical form basically

consisting of two parts: "foil" and "climax". The first one introduces and highlights the climactic term by enumerating or summarizing a number of other examples, subjects, times, places or instances, which then yield (with varying degrees of contrast or analogy) to the particular point of interest or importance. In the case quoted above, the "foil" has a tripartite structure, in which the disjunctions are amplified into three consecutive verses.

332 See also 9. 590 ff. and the mythological exemplum of Meleager that Phoenix uses in his speech to persuade Achilles to return to the battlefield. In the story of Meleager it is also his wife Cleopatra (emphatically placed at the very peak of the series of dear ones) whose begging will make angry Meleager calm down, change his mind and return to the fighting.

122 Chapter 5

scale, given that the most important person is presented as the most ill-fated. Thus on that argumentative level, through their allusive power, the external analepses try to raise pity333 in Hector's heart for his wife and child; Andromache struggles in vain to persuade him to save his life.

On the functional level we have to draw a distinction between the first two analepses and the remainder, since these are the ones that create a significant interplay with the internal prolepsis which precedes them in the first part of Andromache's speech.

In the first two analepses it is Achilles who killed her father Eetion and her seven brothers. The expressions άπέκτανε δίος Άχιλλεύς (414) and πάντας γαρ κατέπεφνε ποδάρκης δΐος Άχιλλεύς (423) both look back at τάχα γάρ σε κατακτενέουσιν 'Αχαιοί / πάντες έφορμηθέντες (409-410).

These textual allusions make the name of Achilles heard even when it is not stated; on the "hypo-diegetic"334 level such temporal digressions interact and achieve a double effect: they implicitly reveal yet explicitly conceal the identity of Hector's killer. The explanation for this may lie in the fact that Andromache does not want Hector, who is on this occasion the internal narratee (internal audience), to know who will kill him. It is only in Book 22, when Hector decides to stay outside the walls of Troy and face Achilles that he becomes aware of the identity of his potential killer. Andromache's words in Book 6 have cryptically alluded to what will become clear at the end of the poem: that Hector is doomed to be killed by Achilles.

Andromache's γόος differs from the simple narrator-text in respect of what it says about Eetion,335 who is explicitly mentioned in both the diegesis before the personal lament of Andromache in Book 22 and in her

333 The killing of Andromache's mother by Artemis -to whom a woman's sudden death was attributed; see also the story of Niobe in 24. 602-607- is probably an ad hoc invention of Homer which remains completely unexplained, unjustified and vague. What is important here is the fact that the poet wants to portray Andromache as a full orphan who has lost all her family; this detail increases the argumentative force of the third analepsis, as it is now evident that Hector is the only person she has in life.

334 Analepses, prolepses and other temporal digressions or discrepancies form another narrative level, secondary to that of the "first narrative", which narratology calls "hypo-diegetic"; see Rimmon-Kenan (1983) 91-92.

335 As Kakridis (1949) 50, ft. 9 notes: "The fall of Eetion's Thebes to Achilles is often mentioned elsewhere in the Iliad (A 366,1 188, Π 153, cf. also Ψ 827), which shows a tradition formed before Homer".

5.3 Andromache 123

ensuing γόος-speech. In narrator-text in 6. 395-397, the brief digression is purely informational -the external narrator gives genealogical information to the external narratees about Andromache's father. This piece of informa-tion about her pedigree is used to introduce a new character who will soon speak for herself; thus the external narratees know that Hector's wife also descends from a royal family like him. Her status is elevated, since she is a queen's daughter336 and now the wife of the best of the Trojans.337 Later on, when Andromache speaks to Hector, she also refers to her father Eetion (414-419), but in a quite different way; she recounts her father's death at the hands of Achilles in order to raise pity in her husband's heart and ultimately persuade him to save his life. The detail concerning the respect that Achilles showed to her father's body (since he did not strip it of its armour) is not in the least graphic or informational. The allusion shows a wide reference-span, as it contains two distinct but comple-

336 Cf. Wathelet (1988) 282 : "La mère d' Andromache régnait à Thèbes, ce qui η' a pas manqué d'intriguer les commentateurs; elle est rachetée contre une immense rançon, ce qui ne semble pas avoir été Γ usage pour une femme. Le sort de sa mère renforce le côté 'amazone' d'Andromache".

337 The cumulative technique used in the composition of this digression is noteworthy; the last word or idea of its line or colon is used as a basis upon which the next line or colon is built up: (395) 'Ανδρομάχη, θυγάτηρ μεγαλήτορος Ήετίωνος, (396) Ήετίων, δς εναιεν ΰπό Πλάκω ΰληέσοη, (397) θήβη Ύποπλακιη, Κιλίκεσσ' άνδρεσσιν άνάσσων·. Schematically speaking, this technique follows the pattern AA'BB'. It is in such cases that the oral background of the tradition is most clearly exemplified. One could also refer to the role of the two "internal adding" enjambments (type la according to Higbie's classification, see Higbie 1990, 34-35); here the noun Ήετίων functions like a patronymic "which is often in such cases enjambed with the preceding verse to take the poet to a convenient starting-point in the line for the next clause" as Higbie argues. In our passage the same thing is effected by the repetition of the noun Ήετίων, but since this noun is found in the genitive in the preceding line, Ήετίων will be attracted in the nominative by the relative clause that follows. This pattern is used successively in 396 and 397 and has been identified by Hoekstra (1965, 34) as a syntactic type of enjambment which is thought to be traditional. Kirk (1990) 211 says that this digression (394-399) is structured upon the ring-composition technique; both these techniques (cumulative and ring-composition) speak for the careful composition of the digression, which in its turn points to a pre-Iliadic development of the sack of Thebe and the killing of Eetion. Note also that the phorminx played by Achilles in 9. 188, his horse Pedasus at 16. 152 ff. and an iron weight in 23. 826 ff., are all connected with Thebe and Eetion.

124 Chapter 5

mentary functions.338 The first is a reversive one, since it points to Hector's death at the hands of Achilles, who will not respect the dead man's body, but will strip it of its armour, drag it three times around the walls of Troy yet not bury the corpse of his own accord or build a mound as he did for Eetion (419: ήδ' έπί σήμ' εχεεν).339 The second function served by the allusion is a parallel one, because it refers to the eventual treatment of Patroclus' body by Achilles, which is similar to his treatment of the body of Eetion.340

A somewhat similar situation is encountered in Book 22. In the narrator-text preceding Andromache's personal lament, Eetion is mentioned as her father during reference to her wedding day. The emphasis is on the phrase έπεί πόρε μυρία εδνα (22. 472), which looks back at πολύδωρος in 6. 394; both of these expressions point to the wedding of Andromache and Hector, in the days of their past happiness. Yet in the character-text of Andromache's personal lament, at the point where she verbalizes her pain and suffering, she recalls her father not in respect of her wedding day, but of his grim fate (22. 481: δύσμορος) which is paralleled to her own (22. 481: αΐνόμορον).

The last part of Andromache's speech is rich in allusive references, all of which have hitherto gone more or less unnoticed.341

"« The functionality of the allusion in two different directions is in agreement with the fact that the allusive phrase is marked by repetition and difference, pointing both to the same and the reverse.

339 The expression νύμφαι όρεστιάδες in II. 6. 420 is not attested in the Odyssey. One can find νύμφαι νηϊάδες in Od. 13. 356 and νύμφαι κρηναΐαι in Od. 17. 240. See Kirk (1990) 215, who corrects Wilamowitz (1916, 313) and argues that these nymphs may have "funeral significance as also in Virgil at Aen. 6. 283. They are added to confirm Eetion as a great man, cf. the sea-nymphs at Achilles' funeral at Od. 24. 27". See also Tsagalis (2002) 218-219.

340 Cf. Wathelet (1988) 135 who says: "Apparement, il a appliqué à Eetion le même cérémonial funéraire qu' il observera plus tard pour Patrocle".

341 Lines 433-439 have been considered to be inappropriate to the content of Andromache's speech. Aristarchus was the first to athetize these lines -he thought that they did not suit Andromache, as she would replace Hector as a general and also because there was no other mention in the Iliad of an attack on that part of the wall. Lohmann (1988) 33 ff. added anticlimax and disturbance of ring-form to the above arguments. Moreover, the words άμβατός and έπίδρομον, are hapaxes. Aristarchus had failed to notice that there are other instances where advice is given to Hector to stay inside the walls (22. 84 ff.); the purpose of Andromache is to keep him alive and

5.3 Andromache 125

The first among these allusions is the use and metrical placement of the word έρινεόν in line 433, which is two more times attested in the Iliad·, in 11. 166-168 the Trojans rushed in full retreat past the wild fig-tree. In this case the same expression is used as in 6. 433: παρ' έρινεόν. Also in 22. 145 when Achilles chases Hector, we hear the same word once more as "they rushed past the look-out place (σκοπιήν) and wind-tossed wild fig-tree (έρινεόν ήνεμόεντα)". Thus in the Iliad the word έρινεός is always attested in the accusative and placed at position 5, after the penthemimeral caesura. Such localization of a lexical item with a limited range of referents (the Trojans, including Hector, and Achilles) deserves interpretation. The wild fig-tree342 (έρινεός) is a "pattern-marker", which whenever evoked alludes, by its métonymie function, not only to a visible spot in the Trojan plain, but also to a situation of despair and danger for the Trojans. In all these cases either Hector343 or the Trojans are in peril or persecuted by some Achaean. It is noteworthy that in 11.166-168 the

not to replace him as a general. Aristarchus' first point originated from a sort of "moral preoccupation" about the preservation of male superiority in conducting war, but this superiority is not challenged at all; the point is rather different. Willcock (1977) 51 if. is right to argue that this is an ad hoc invention by the poet of the Iliad "to give Andromache an excuse for asking Hector to stay near the city wall", because this theme is completely forgotten afterwards. See Edwards (1987) 210, who asks an interesting question which he does not attempt to answer: "Is this the poet's hint at the eventual breaching of the wall in the last days of Troy?" Lohmann's arguments (1988) 33 ff. are very subjective, for one has to admit that the criteria used, in order to describe the limits of a structural technique such as ring-composition, depend on rather personal and aesthetic grounds. Even more importantly, ring-composition comes after poetry, not vice-versa. The same is the case for his anticlimax argument, which is also based on an individual line of interpretation; why should a personal lament end with the highest possible touch of pathos? Sometimes a low key end is more appropriate. As for the hapaxes άμβατός and έπίδρομον, it is very risky to base an athetesis on such grounds. There was a legend (Pindar O. 8. 31-46) that Aiacus helped Apollo and Poseidon to built Troy's walls at this particular part of the fortification, so Andromache reminds her husband that this part of the walls should be defended. One more argument pointing to the authenticity of these lines is Hector's answer (6. 492: πόλεμος δ' άνδρεσσι μελήσει), which would have been deprived of any sense had she not just offered him some military advice.

3« See Kahane (1994) 51. 343 Cf. 22. 459: άλλά πολύ προθέεσκε, which probably alludes to the έρινεός, for what

does πολύ προθέεσκε mean for Hector or the Trojans in general? To pass the wild fig-tree limit, as if safety lies before it but death beyond it.

126 Chapter 5

Trojans run in panic past the wild fig-tree, but when they arrive at the oak tree (the other visible spot in the Trojan plain), they stop their retreat. Therefore the word έρινεός, by means of pattern-deixis, has through all these passages a specific Iliadic function: it is the métonymie equivalent of danger and death for the Trojans.

A second point worthy of consideration is the emphatic use of the numeral τρίς at the beginning of line 435.344 Andromache says to Hector that the Achaeans have thrice attempted to assault the wall at the weak spot where she advises him to place his army. This same adverb is also used repeatedly in Books 5, 16 and 22. In lines 22. 165 and 22. 251 we are explicitly told that Achilles and Hector have run three times around the citadel of Troy,345 but in 22. 208 we hear the "apodosis" of this poetic device: άλλ' οτε δή το τέταρτον, which links the two scenes intratextually. The sequence "three times ... and then the fourth time" is an Iliadic device used elsewhere in the poem,346 but the way it is interwoven with the theme of the chase of Hector by Achilles is unique in respect of the gradual augmentation of the tension and the vividness of the whole episode. The emphatic use of the adverb τρίς at the beginning of line 6. 433 functions as an allusion to the fatal chase of Hector by Achilles in Book 22; the fact that the addressee of Andromache's speech in 6 is Hector makes this allusion even more significant.

Lines 438 and 439 (ή πού τίς σψιν ενισπε θεοπροπίων ευ είδώς, / ή νυ και αύτών θυμός έποτρύνει και άνώγει) seem an addition to the kernel of Andromache's advice, since the meaning could very well have been completed in line 437 alongside the reference to the Achaean leaders who had carried out the three assaults at the weak spot of the Trojan walls. But

544 See Bannert (1988) 41-57. 345 Note that τρίς is placed at the beginning of verses 6. 435, 22. 165, 22. 251. 346 See 5. 436-438 (Diomedes), 16. 702-705 & 784-786 (Patroclus), 20. 445-447 & 21.

176-177 (Achilles), 23. 816-817 (Diomedes). Bannert (1988) 41 thinks this device marks either a change in the narrative or the final point in a description. The sequence τρίς μεν - τρις δέ - τό τέταρτον creates an intratextual association between the three protagonists, Diomedes, Patroclus and Achilles. The latter must take the place of his two military surrogates. Amongst other things, all three have faced the god Apollo as an opponent at a critical moment. The use of τρίς in Andromache's γόος may well be a dislocated reference belonging to this whole group of intratextual relations and working as a Verknüpfungspunkt (Bannert 1988, 54) that helps the audience "read" forward and backward at the same time.

5.3 Andromache 127

a closer look at Hector's speech reveals that these two lines are answered there, albeit in a disguised form, as Hector picks them up, reverses their order and adjusts them to his own situation. Line 439:

«ή νυ και αυτών θυμός έποτρύνει και άνώγει.» "or the very spirit within themselves had stirred them to the onslaught"

is answered by the first part of line 444:

«ουδέ με θυμός άνωγεν...» "and the spirit will not let me"

and line 438:

«ή πού τίς σφιν ενισπε θεοπροπίων ευ είδώς» "either some man well skilled in prophetic arts had spoken"

by the prophetic vision about the fall of Troy in lines 447-449:

«ευ μέν έγώ τόδε οίδα κατά φρένα και κατά θυμόν εσσεται ήμαρ οτ' αν ποτ' όλώλη "Ιλιος ίρή και Πρίαμος και λαός έϋμμελίω Πριάμοιο »

"For I know this thing well in my heart, and my mind knows it: there will come a day when sacred Ilion shall perish, and Priam, and the people of Priam of the strong ash spear."

Andromache wonders in line 438 whether someone skilled in oracles has told the Achaeans about the weak spot on the walls; Hector does not reply to that, but uses the same language in order to state explicitly what he knows well in his mind and heart. He responds to the doubts Andromache harbors with determination and clear thinking; he is aware of the future fall of Troy but will fight to the bitter end nevertheless. In line 439 Andromache examines a second possibility; the Achaean assault on the the walls may be due to the enemy's eagerness and prompting. Hector uses equivalent language, but in respect of himself: his heart does not urge him to slink away from the war because he has learnt to be brave and fight in the frontline.

128 Chapter 5

Intratextual references can be observed in the absence of Achilles from the list of Achaean leaders who have in the past attacked the weak spot in the Trojan walls. Andromache's strategy throughout her γόος is to puzzle with her advice and conceal her true thoughts by relating the two external analepses to her father and brothers. It is exactly because she wants to allude to Achilles' final pursuit of Hector in Book 22 that she does not mention him; she presents him as a danger to her own family, not to Hector, as she did in 409-410, when she foresaw her husband's death at the hands of all the Achaeans without mentioning Achilles.

Andromache seems here to adopt a kind of discourse most typical of Polydamas throughout the Iliad. What she expresses is not usually a woman's position but the opinion of Polydamas, who has often warned that when Hector dies, Troy will fall. By fostering a form of speech which is not typical of her, Andromache acquires a role alien to a woman.347 It is noteworthy that Hector's future attitude will discredit both Andromache and Polydamas' advice and warnings. By moving away from his wife's advice Hector starts moving away from prudence. In the case of Polydamas, this becomes even more obvious in 22. 98-130, when Hector admits his own mistake in failing to listen to Polydamas' advice in 18. 243-283.348

341 Wathelet (1988) 282 notes: "Andromache porte un nom agressif, qui est également attesté sur des peintures des vases du Vile siècle comme nom d'amazone (la scène représente le combat d'Héraclès contre celles-ci). Beaucoup plus tard, Andromache désignera aussi une amazone dans le texte de Γ Iliade, elle est curieusement mêleé à des tâches guerrières (Z 431-439), elle soigne les chevaux de son mari en les dopant au vin, ce qui représente un usage inattendu, mais témoigne d' une certaine connaissance de la matière (cf. Delebecque 1951:57). Zeus souligne qu'Andromache ne recevra pas d'Hector les armes d'Achille" (see 8. 185-190; 17. 208). In addition, the Iliad seems to insist on her impulsive character: in 6. 389 (μαινόμενη έικυΐα) and 22.460 (μαινάδι ίση) she is compared to a maenad, a woman who has "departed from herself' and has become "alien" to her true nature. Segal (1971a) 47 also "reads" something masculine in her behavior when he compares her attitude to that of her mother-in-law, Hecuba. Though the Iliad presents Andromache as the paragon of wifely virtue, in pre-homeric tradition she may well have been something of an "amazon". See also Wathelet (1988) 283, who points to the fact that Andromache's mother was ruling in Thebes, and that Hector won his bride after paying an immense ransom, which was not common for a woman. See also Pomeroy (1975) 16-19.

548 See Redfield (1975) 157-158, Edwards (1991) 117-118 and bT's comment (Erbse V 290) on lines 22. 101-102.1 owe this observation to Prof. Philippe Rousseau.

5.3 Andromache 129

The loose ends in Andromache's anticipatory personal lament in Iliad 6 are masterly dangled as a prima facie unintelligible code that the audience has to decypher during the unfolding of the plot. The proleptic indeterminacy of this γόος, with its obscure allusions to the details of Hector's future death, leaves the audience in a state of narrative limbo. In the long run, one does appreciate this technique for, as the action goes on, the result is a clear gain in narrative momentum that alerts the audience to an impending calamity. By entwining past and future, Andromache's γόος makes the coming destruction so immanent to the plot that the audience is left to flirt with the idea that disaster is, after all, unavoidable.

5.3.2 Iliad 22

Andromache's personal lament (22. 477-514) comes last in the triad of γόοι which close Book 22. This is her longest personal lament, full of brilliant imagery and pathos, and it plays a quite different role349 from the two preceding ones by Priam and Hecuba. The very placement of this γόος falls within the symmetrical construction of Book 22. Of the three initial speeches,350 two are by Priam and Hecuba, who try to convince Hector not to stay outside the walls of Troy, while the third is an internal monologue by Hector, who is puzzled as to which course of action to follow. The three are balanced by another triad at the end of the Book, containing the personal laments of Priam, Hecuba and Andromache. The order of speakers in each triad is significant because the most important speaker in the first triad (Hector) is placed last, only to be balanced by Andromache's γόος, which is also placed last in the triad of laments at the end of this Book.

The intratextual reference to Eetion is here handled in a different way from Book 6, where he was mentioned by both the external narrator and Andromache (internal narrator). In this case, by recalling Andromache's wedding day through an external analepsis in simple-narrator text, the Iliad prepares the ground for her emotional outburst. Her father's death is

3W See Segal (1971a) 50, who argues that "Homer has given this gesture of Andromache in 468-472 a richness which goes far beyond the Hecuba scene of 405-407, for Andromache is clearly the more important and the more fully developed character".

550 Richardson (1993) 105.

130 Chapter 5

presented in terms of her being ill-fated in the same way Hector is (22. 477-478: lf¡ άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση / αμφότεροι). Sharing a common fate with Hector increases the pathos epitomized by δυσάμμοροι (22. 485-486: ôv τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι· οΰτε σύ τούτψ / εσσεαι, "Εκτορ, ονειαρ, έπεί θάνες, οΰτε σοΙ ούτος), looking back at Priam's lament in 22. 428 (μήτηρ θ', ή μιν ετικτε δυσάμμορος, ήδ' έγώ αυτός). In Priam's γόος, father and mother were ill-fated for losing their son, but here it is the son (Astyanax) who links the fates of both mourner and deceased forever. The intratextual allusion to Priam's lament opens a window into the poem's technique of building up the emotional tension, as the triad of the laments for Hector in Book 22 finds its emotional peak in Andromache's vision of future grief.351

Yet there is much more to this analepsis. Seaford352 has argued that the oneness of Andromache and Hector is oneness in disaster353 and traces the origins of this line of thought in the connection between the bridal journey and the journey to Hades. One feature of the wedding procession was the μακαρισμός of bride and groom; the people who participated and followed the wedding procession wished the best to the new couple.354 The reference to Eetion and the motif of sharing the same fate with Hector are here successfully joined under the subversion of a ritual process that safeguarded the household and guaranteed the well-being of the new οίκος. The disaster described is a destruction on the ritual level, not only on the level of actual events, i.e. that Eetion was indeed killed by Achilles. Another aspect of Andromache's presentation in the Iliad, which is connected to the subversion of a ritual process, is μαιναδισμός. Twice in the Iliad (6. 389 and 22. 460) she is depicted as being in a condition of maenadic frenzy. The expressions used are: (μαινόμενη έικυία) in 6. 389 and (μαινάδιϊση) in 22. 460. In the first one, Andromache is presented as being in frenzy when Hector asks the maids whether she had gone to see her sisters in-law at the temple of Athena. By asking this question, Hector practically "specifies the normal reasons for the wife leaving the house-

351 See Ferrari (1984) 262. 552 Seaford (1994) 334 ff. 353 See also Mackie (1996) 100-101, who rightly observes that Andromache employs

language echoing certain idiosyncratic features of Hector's style, like his preoccupation with anticipating his future death.

354 See Sappho fr. 44. 34 V: ϋμνην δ' Έκχορα κ' Άνδρομάχαν θεοεικέλοις.

5.3 Andromache 131

hold";355 it is the external narrator who then attributes a maenadic quality to her that virtually negates the spatial and social activity of the female. This subversion of her traditional role as bride and woman is the result of the interplay created by the external analepsis of Eetion and the rest of the scene depicting the encounter between Andromache and Hector.

The central core of this speech contains a brilliant image of Astyanax's social marginalization after his father's death: Andromache imagines her son being excluded from the banquets held by his father's friends due to his status as an orphan. This long external prolepsis lies in sharp contrast to a brief external analepsis referring to Astyanax's privileged status in the past, when Hector was alive.356 The emotional impact of the afore-mentioned contrast is of crucial importance for the interpretation of this personal lament, for it holds the key to explaining its function and role in the poem.

Lohmann357 has argued that this speech is the continuation of the Homilía scene between Hector and Andromache in Book 6. There, Andromache referred to the possibility of Astyanax becoming an orphan if Hector fell on the battlefield, whereas Hector (6. 476-481) prayed to Zeus that his son might distinguish himself among the Trojans. The imagery referring to Astyanax in Book 22 is a direct rejection of Hector's hopes as verbalized in his prayer. Andromache practically corrects her husband's words. This she does by means of an embedded τις-speech initiating a tertiary focalization, through which she puts a line into the mouth of an imaginary young man (22. 498: 'ερρ' οΰτως· ού σός γε πατήρ μεταδαίνυται, ήμΐν'),358 in direct contrast to another τις-speech embedded in Hector's prayer '"πατρός γ' δδε πολλόν άμείνων'" in 6. 476. In these two lines the function of the word πατήρ is dramatically different: in Hector's prayer the father is a positive point of reference, but in Andro-mache's γόος it is a negative one, since the loss of the father excludes the son from social life. The "father" has become the decisive factor de-termining the life of the son. In this way the Homilía scene in Book 6 is connected to Andromache's personal lament in Book 22. The latter

355 Seaford (1994) 332. 356 Andromache imagines Astyanax eating the most precious food while seated on his

father's knees, and sleeping in happiness in his nurse's lap. 357 See Lohmann (1988) 66. »" West (2000) 291 ad loc. has ημιν.

132 Chapter 5

"replies" to the former by presenting the grim picture of reality once Hector is dead, and by imagining the future of Astyanax, whose father's prayer has been in vain; in powerful colors, the imagery depicts Astyanax's future with the same certainty expressed by Andromache when imagining her husband's death in Book 6.

Another aspect of the μακαρισμός of bride and groom was the rearing of fine children similar to their parents.359 It is then significant to link this passage to the missing father figure, especially since the imagined speaker of line 22. 498, which is embedded in Andromache's speech, is an άμφι-θαλής (a child whose parents are both alive). The Iliad underlines the opposition between these two situations (being an orphan versus having both parents alive) and creates an allusion to a symbolical reversal of the wedding process.

In lines 508-514, Andromache imagines Hector's body naked (γυμνόν), being eaten by αίόλαι εύλαί (wriggling worms) after being mutilated by the dogs. This grim picture brings to her mind his clothes, which had been made by women especially for him; he is not able to wear them, nor will he ever be again able to, and so she decides to burn them. The theme of the mutilation of the corpse360 has now reached its climax. In 16. 836 Hector boasted over Patroclus (σέ δέ τ' ένθάδε γύπες εδονται) and in 22. 42 Priam wished that dogs and vultures would eat Achilles (τάχα κέν έ κύνες και γΰπες εδοιεν). Hecuba expressed almost the same idea in 22. 86-89; Andromache's words are a fine elaboration not only for their euphony, but also because they introduce the theme of the garments showing the "separation between inner and outer worlds, city and battlefield, female and male which has already been important in the presentation of Hector's fate".361 In 22. 440 Andromache had been weaving, and so her reference to Hector's garments alludes to domestic peace and the beauty of the civilized world, which is contrasted in this whole scene with the grimness of war; Hector's naked body eaten by dogs

See Men. Rhet. Epid. 404. 27: τέξετε παΐδας ύμιν τε όμοιους και έν άρετη λαμπρούς.

560 See Segal (1971b). '61 Segal (1971a) 45-47; he also notes that "the addition of the vivid adjective αίόλαι,

with the open vowels and repeated 1 sounds of αίόλαι εύλαί, as well as the k alliteration in the second half of 22. 509, indicates how graphically and courageously she pictures to herself the horror to which her husband's corpse is exposed".

5.3 Andromache 133

and worms is contrasted with the garment-theme, just as happened with life and death in the fate of Andromache. Her decision to burn the clothes she had made is a "substitute funeral"362 for her dead husband; the nice use of ουκ έγκείσεαι αύτοΐς (513) plays with the verb κεΐμαι, which is the word that describes a hero's death. In this way, the garments (a metonymy for civilized life) become the allusive antonym of death.

5.3.3 Iliad24

Andromache's personal lament (24. 725-745) is placed first in the triad of laments that bring the poem to its end.363 It is the third γόος by Andro-mache in the poem, her most proper personal lament, since the two condi-tions needed for a formal lament are here fulfilled for the first time: Hector is dead (he was still alive in her lament in Book 6) and his body is lying on the bier in front of her (it had not been returned to his family by Achilles when she uttered her second personal lament in Book 22).

Hector is lamented on three different levels: as protector of the city and its people (24. 729-730), as a relentless warrior (24. 736-739) and finally as a son and husband (24. 741-745).364 This is the most comprehensive personal lament for Hector, at least on Andromache's part, as she tries to encompass every possible aspect of his life and show that his loss will have serious repercussions for the whole city. It is no coincidence that this speech comes at the end of the poem. The Iliad will soon be over, without describing the end of Troy, but there are no longer any doubts: the death of Hector, the protector of the city, signifies the fall of Ilium; by lamenting Hector the Iliad virtually laments Troy.

Andromache's γόος-speech bears similarities to her previous personal laments in Books 6 and 22,365 but here her speech is more concrete in the sense that her prediction of the future is clear: she will be enslaved and

562 See Richardson (1993) 162. 363 This is the same triad of persons that Hector met and talked to in Book 6, but the

order has changed. Andromache now speaks first, whereas in Book 6 she was the last one to speak to him.

364 Lohmann (1988) 70-74. 365 The following lines share common elements: 24. 725-727-6. 407-409, 22. 482-485;

24. 728-730-6. 402-403, 22. 507; 24. 731-6. 410-413, 6. 450-63.

134 Chapter 5

Astyanax will be thrown from the walls of Troy by some Achaean warrior. In Book 6 she simply referred to Astyanax as an orphan; in Book 22 she used vivid imagery in order to describe her son's grim future. Now, in Book 24, his death is not imagined in some vague context, but localized in Troy itself.

Lohmann366 has argued that Astyanax's future has been depicted continuously in Andromache's personal laments; his future has been described on four different levels:

a) simply as that of an orphan (6. 407-408 & 432) b) with emphasis on his social status after his father's death (22.496 ff.) c) his enslaving (24. 732-734) d) his death (24. 734-735) One can see here how this theme has been treated in the Iliadic

personal laments and notice the existence of a thread that is carefully woven from its beginning in Book 6, through Book 22 to the end in Book 24. In Book 22, Andromache's reference to her son's fate is vague, then his social exclusion from certain activities is explained as a result of his father's death and finally in 24 his possible enslavement or death is foreshadowed. Andromache's predictions move from the general to the specific, just as her personal laments become more concrete and subtle towards the end of the poem; thus, Astyanax's future, which occupies the central core of her speeches in 22 and 24, follows a parallel course to that of her γόοι as a whole.

Andromache's personal laments throughout the poem are characte-rized for their flowing style, but here in Book 24 the careful construction of the speech, with its three distinct parts (725-732a, 732b-740, 741-745), is fertile ground for the rhythm to be easily felt.

Andromache's speech contains a number of necessary enjambments367

so that the thematic transitions occur in mid-verse or mid-sentence, with many emphatic words positioned at the beginning of verses. The flowing necessary enjambments result in emphasis being placed on a train of

** Lohmann (1988) 73. 367 Richardson (1993) 353; Richardson follows Kirk's terminology and calls them

integral. I follow Higbie, who calls them necessary (type 3); see chapter 4 and also Higbie (1990) 29, with a comparison of different enjambment terminology (as proposed by Parry, Kirk and Higbie) and a thorough analysis of the function of the different types of enjambment as a hermeneutic tool in literary interpretation.

5.3 Andromache 135

thought that is carried to the mid-verse or mid-sentence; this "cumulative" technique makes speech flow markedly faster than the γόοι of Hecuba and Helen that are to follow.368

Whereas in the first two parts369 of her lament the enjambment carries the thought to mid-verse, in the third part, from 738 on, the emphasis lies at the verse-end with a series of formulaic verse-ends or repeated lines (735, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741, 742, 743, 745). These familiar formulaic expressions, acting as a sort of counterbalance to the first part of the γόος, where the emphasis was rather on the first part of the verse, bear a negative meaning, that of grief and suffering. The epithet λυγρός is used three times at verse-end (λυγρόν ολεθρον: 735; έν δαΐ λυγρη: 739; αλγεα λυγρά: 742), referring first to Astyanax, second to battle, in which Hector used to prevail and third to Andromache. Its use in an emphatic position in formulaic expressions -at verse end- inscribes a circle which starts from the fate of the son, passes through the doom of the father and ends in Andromache, who summarises the two previous losses in her twofold personality: that of the mother and that of the wife.370 Line 742 (λελείψε-ται αλγεα λυγρά) also alludes through pattern-deixis to the Iliadic proem (1. 2) as it recalls the phrase ή μυρί' Άχαιοΐς άλγε' εθηκεν. Polysemy371 is an essential epic characteristic based on three distinct narrative properties: 1) basic semantical denotation, 2) connotation by means of reference specification provided by the immediate verbal context and 3) a context-free thematic reference offered by pattern-deixis. In the case of αλγεα, polysemy refers to: a) sufferings as a universal theme of human life (basic denotation); b) Andromache's αλγεα (connotation) and c) the specific sufferings of men and women in the Iliad, i.e. particular Iliadic sufferings (through pattern deixis). The word άλγεα is not attributed to a specific person as, for example, the word μήνις is, but pattern-deixis tends to link

368 Necessary enjambment stresses the importance of the verb that often comes in the second line of an enjambed couplet; when the verb is omitted, with a subsequent division of subject and predicate at verse end, then the enjambment is also necessary. See Higbie (1990) 49.

369 First part:725-732a; Second part:732b-739; Third part:740-745. 370 For the impact of successive formulas at verse-end in the context of a γόοι, see Pucci

(1998) 100-101. 371 See Kahane (1994) 43-79 who explores the polysemy of keywords like μηνις, άνήρ

and νόστος.

136 Chapter 5

it (through metrical specification in phrases where it is placed at the beginning of the terminal adonic) with the general thematic register of the "innumerable sufferings" of the Achaeans. From the beginning of the poem, these words draw a circle of pain and mourning into which the Iliad will be unfolded. Therefore, the αλγεα λυγρά of Andromache simultaneously refer, to her own sufferings because of her husband's death, and to the general and universal theme of suffering interpreted by the poem as the sufferings caused by the wrath of Achilles (1. 1-2). Polysemy has joined the sufferings of the Achaeans to the sufferings caused to the Trojans and Andromache in particular, by means of a polytropy that links beginning and end of the poem through correspondence and symmetrical analogy.

One may ask what the impact of this sequence of formulaic expressions on this speech is; formulaic material may here have the "same effect as the repetition of a refrain and accordingly produce an emphasis and a relief at the same time".372 The rhythm of this speech recalls a mourning song with repeated expressions of grief -it does not contain any inarticulate cries (ε ε, αίαΐ, ότοτοΐ etc.) as is the case in Greek tragedy, but through its fluidity and flexibility retains a dignity that makes it deeply emotional, yet not strident: a true laudatio funebris.m

With this speech Andromache closes her role in the Iliad. She has shown remarkable consistency as a speaker, moving forward from the initial foreshadowing of Hector's death to his final lamentation. What lies in between these two points in the epic are Books 6-24, that is to say five sixths of the Iliad: the Trojan episode in Book 6 was not an interlude, but a narrative mechanism creating the "tension which sustains the poem to its end".374

5.4 Thetis

This personal lament (18. 52-64), and above all the scene it is placed in, has attracted scholarly interest since the early analytical studies of Bethe

372 See Pucci (1998) 100. See Macleod (1982) 148-149.

™ See Macleod (1982) 149; Schadewaldt (1970) 21-38.

5.4 Thetis 137

and Wilamowitz and the first neo-analytical approaches of Kakridis, Schadewaldt and Pestalozzi375 in the first half of the 20th century. The peculiarity of this personal lament376 derives from the fact that it seems to have been initially designed and used in another epic poem, which Kakridis believes to have been an * Achilleis preceding the Iliad and not the Aethiopis which probably postdates it.377 The whole scene would have been more appropriate to an epic poem referring to the death of Achilles than to Iliad 18, whose first part describes the lament for Patroclus; in such a poem it would have been reasonable for Thetis to emerge from the sea swell accompanied by the Nereids to lament her dead son.

As far as the personal lament proper is concerned, analysis by Lohmann378 has pointed to the fact that the content of her speech is skillfully adapted to the context it is placed in, since Thetis uses lines which are related to the scene as it is constructed (52-53 and 63-64) and closes her speech by referring to her present situation. We cannot know how much this speech owes to an earlier epic, but its incorporation into the Iliad shows the art of a skillful poet, who uses this lament as "part of the building up towards Achilles' decision to seek vengeance at the cost of his life; Hector too is lamented before his death by his wife and household."379 The lament points to the meeting between mother and son which will lead to the όπλοποιΐα forming the second part of this Book. The overall function of this single γόος is to set in motion a course of action that will lead to the building of a scene and the continuation of the plot; its placement between the brief introductory scene with Antilochus

373 See Bethe (1914) 96; Wilamowitz (19202) 163 ff.; Schadewaldt (1936) 66 ff.; Pestalozzi (1945); Kakridis (1949) 65 ff.

376 In respect of its function, this is a 'concealed' personal lament (see Table 2): Thetis comes to lament Achilles, who is alive, on the pretext of her son's lament for Patroclus, who is dead; the mourner (Achilles) is prematurely mourned by his future mourners (Thetis and the Nereids).

377 The question here is whether an epic like the Aethiopis should be considered later than the Iliad, in this case, Book 18, the Aethiopis and the scene with the Nereids and Thetis lamenting Achilles in Odyssey 24. 47 ff., must all have used an earlier epic as their model, as Kakridis (1949) argued. The chronology of the Aethiopis is not certain. See Severyns (1928). Aristarchus also thought that the Epic Cycle came later than the Iliad

371 See Lohmann (1970) 54. 37' Cf. Edwards (1991) 151.

138 Chapter 5

and the dialogue between Achilles and Thetis explains its role. The lament links two otherwise separate scenes and prepares the main theme of Book 18: Thetis' visit to Hephaestus and the making of Achilles' new armour, with the verbatim repetition of 56-62 in 437-443 emphasizing the conne-ction between them. Both the singularity of the speech and its placement at the beginning of the scene enhance its function as the introduction to the first part of this Book.

Thetis pretends to be ignorant of the nature of Achilles' troubles (as in 1. 362 if.); although this is in contrast to her prophetic powers (17. 408-409; 21.277-278), it is likely that this is a device used by the Iliad in order to make Achilles express his suffering himself. It has been convincingly maintained380 that the Iliad emphasizes the antithesis between the mortality of the son (Achilles) versus the immortality of the mother (Thetis), and that it is in this respect that it differs from the Aethiopis, in which Eos, Memnon's mother, granted her son immortality. The Iliad underlines the disparity between Thetis and Achilles by using "heroic experience as a metaphor for the condition of mortality, with all its contradictions".381

When Thetis visits Zeus in Book 1, she practically requests to offer Achilles the chance of becoming the hero of the Iliad and "create the terms by which heroism will be redefined".382 Thetis' ignorance in Book 18 may be a result of the evolution of the Iliad, which moves increasingly away from the Aethiopis in presenting Achilles living the "violation of expectations, of the assumption of what it means to be the goddess' son: to be beyond compromise",383 whence his mother's helplessness.

Thetis' γόος looks back at the scene of the first meeting between herself and Achilles in Book 1 of the Iliad', if aivà τεκοϋσα in 1. 414, 418 refers to her son's grim fate, then δυσαρισχοτόκεια presents her own focalization of his supremacy among other heroes (άρισχοτόκεια). The epithet is fully explained in the ensuing verses: lines 55-56 refer to Achilles' excellence among the other warriors, by means of a peculiar indirect form of the "Comparison" motif. While this explains the second part of the compound epithet (άριστοτόκεια), lines 59-60 point to

380 See Slatkin (1991) 17-52 on the helplessness of Thetis. 381 Slatkin (1991) 38. 382 Slatkin (1991) 40. 385 Slatkin (1991) 50-51.

5.5 Briscis 139

Achilles' grim fate (δυσ-). In between, lines 56-57 and 58-59 describe her son's past through a short simile and an external analepsis (that of Thetis' sending Achilles to Troy); the latter presents Thetis' own focalization as internal narrator and emphasizes the antithesis between her consent to the departure of Achilles (έπιπροέηκα) and the tragedy of his failure to return to Phthia.3'4

The short simile in which Achilles is compared to a sapling needs our attention. The word ερνος is attested three times in the Iliad. Once in 17. 53, in an extended simile, referring to the death of Euphorbus, and twice in Book 18, in Thetis' personal lament and in her subsequent request to Hephaestus (18. 437), where she actually repeats line 18. 56 verbatim. Edwards3'5 carefully notes that sometimes heroes are compared to the growing and falling of young trees;386 another noteworthy example is that of Simoeisios in 4. 473-489, who is compared to a poplar when he is killed by Ajax. Given the practice of the tree simile, 18. 56 can be considered as alluding to Achilles' death, for the use of the word ερνος looks at the Euphorbus passage, where the death of the hero is explicitly stated. Achilles is like a sapling not only in respect of his growing up, but also because of his future death.

The examination of Thetis' personal lament has shown that although probably derived from an earlier epic poem now lost to us, this speech is skillfully incorporated within the scene it belongs, as it links the Anti-lochus episode with that of the meeting between mother and son. At the same time, it looks both backwards (first scene between Thetis and Achilles in Book 1) and forwards, whether within the Iliadic framework or further than it (όπλοποιΐα and death of Achilles respectively).

5.5 Briséis

Patroclus is lamented antiphonally by both Briséis (19.287-300) and Achilles

384 See also Schadewaldt (19592) 248-251. 385 See Edwards (1991) 68, 151. 3,6 Cf. Alexiou (2002) 198-201, who gives examples of the presence of this motif in

Greek literature: she mentions, among others, Herodotus, Sophocles' Electra, the 15th century Byzantine play Άχιληίς, the 17th century Cretan play Ή Θυσία τον 'Αβραάμ and modern Greek folk-songs.

1 4 0 Chapter 5

(19.315-337). Lohmann387 and Pucci3" have studied both speeches in detail, the former with an emphasis on their structure and themes and the latter with a keen eye for specific dictional elements initiating and enhancing a "discussion" between these two antiphonal laments.389 Rather than reiterating the perceptive insights offered by the aforementioned scholars, my analysis focuses on the following two topics: first, the connections between Briséis' personal lament and that of Andromache in Iliad 24 and, second, the form and function of her γόος within the Iliadic plot.390

Three features create a link between these two γόοι: (a) the raids on Thebe (Andromache) and Lyrnessos (Briseis); (b) the list of losses of dear ones at the hands of Achilles; (c) the interconnection between Hector and Achilles.

(a) In the Catalogue of Ships (2. 690-693), we hear that Achilles took Briséis when he sacked the city of Lyrnessos and killed Mynes and Epistrophus. The Iliad refers again to the same incident in 16. 57, but Achilles as speaker describes the sack of a city with strong walls (πόλιν εύτείχεα πέρσας) without mentioning Mynes.391 Briséis' personal lament in Book 19 is therefore the first occasion on which the name of Mynes is used by a speaker other than Achilles. This is no insignificant detail, for it is connected to the problem of the relationship between Briséis and Mynes. Dué has rightly argued that "the syntax of II. 19. 295-296 expresses paratactically what in English prose would be subordinated:

387 Lohmann (1970); (1988) 13-32. 318 Pucci (1998) 97-112 (=1993, 258-272). 3" See Pucci (1998) 97-98, who rightly emphasizes the temporal sequence of the two

speeches: "One question, often ignored by the commentators, concerns the temporal sequence of the two texts. The first text appears to be repeated only when the second text is uttered or read, and this inevitable temporal succession implies a consequence. It doubles the language of the first text and therefore increases the pathos of the second, reducing the first one to a relatively marginal or weaker posture. It becomes a sort of a 'second' text, though, temporally speaking, it is the first".

3,0 For the connection between Briséis' γόος and that of Helen in //. 24, see the analysis of Helen's personal lament in 5. 9.

391 There is also another, albeit indirect, reference to the taking of Briseis in 9. 343, where Achilles calls Briséis δουρικτήτην; he does not mention the sack of the city of Mynes explicitly, but this line is important, for Achilles expresses his love for Briséis, whom he considers a wife (9. 341-343): έπεί δς τις άνηρ αγαθός και έχέφρων, / ήν αυτοΐί φιλέει και κήδεται, ώς καΐ έγώ την / έκ θυμοΰ φίλεον, δουρικτήτην περ έοΰσαν.

5.5 Briseis 141

that Achilles killed Briseis' husband Mynes, who was the ruler of the city (Lyrnessos)".392 Should such an interpretation be adopted, Briséis' γόος offers her personal look at the tragedy of her life, a life filled with loss. On the other hand, a number of conflicting non-Homeric traditions refer to the same event. In the Iliad Achilles (20.191-194) mentions only Lyrnessos, while Aeneas explicitly declares that both Lyrnessos and Pedasos were sacked by Achilles (20. 92). The Cypria offer a different version, situating the capture of Briseis in Pedasos (another city in the Troad).393 The Panhellenic scope of the Iliad has determined its inclusion of both variants, without silencing Aeneas' version, which probably represents a rival epic tradition, as the great Trojan hero was the chief representative of some local stream of Trojan War epic poetry.394 The inclusion of all variants does not exclude the possiblity that the Iliad favored one of the versions it recorded in its subject matter. The Catalogue of Ships (2. 690-693), the Panhellenic part of the epic par excellence, connects Thebe and Lyrnessos which were captured by Achilles in a single raid. A single raid means a single fate for those who were killed or enslaved, a fate in store for Andromache had she not been married to Hector before the sack of her city. In her personal laments in 6. 415-416 and 22. 479, Andromache explicitly refers to the sack of her city by Achilles, just as Briséis has mentioned her fate in 19. 296. The reciprocity of these intratextual references implicitly assumes that Andromache will share the same fate as Briséis, namely she will have her husband killed at the hands of Achilles and subsequently become a slave.

(b) Briséis bewails the loss of three brothers and husband during the sack of her city by Achilles. Such a reference would alert the audience, who have come across another list of losses in Andromache's γόος (6.414-428), where she recalled the slaughter of her father and seven brothers395

by Achilles when he sacked the city of Thebe; in this same raid the

3.2 See Dué (2002) 13, ft. 36. For a different view, see Leaf (1912) 246; Edwards (1991) 269-270; Pucci (1993) 102-103.

3.3 See the scholia vetera at II. 16. 57 (IV 172 Erbse) and Cypria, fr. 27 (PEG): την Πήδασον οίτών Κυπρίων ποιηταί, αυτός δέ Λυρνησ<σ>όν. See Dué (2002) 23, ft. 13.

394 Dué (2002) 25, ft. 16 argues that the traces of a now lost epic tradition with Aeneas as protagonist can be seen in his quarrel with Priam (13. 459-461).

3,5 Andromache's mother was also killed, but not in the raid; for her murder by Artemis, see my analysis of this particular personal lament in chapter five.

142 Chapter 5

Achaeans took Chryseis and gave her to Agamemnon (1. 366-369).396

These climactic lists397 aim at emphasizing the utter desperation and immense pain the two women have experienced. In such circumstances, with suffering being set against the backcloth of personal losses, Andromache and Briséis establish a special emotional filter through the analeptic recollection of painful memories, one of complete dependence on a single person, Hector and Patroclus respectively.398

(c) The above do not represent mere details of a purely informational nature, but trigger off a line of thought which compares Andromache to Briséis, and through them Hector to Achilles, as Briséis and Achilles are presented in direct parallel to Andromache and Hector. What is odd in this parallel is that whereas Hector is the one who has surpassed all Andromache's previous losses, Achilles is the one who has, in the case of Briséis, provoked them; at the same time he is depicted by Briséis as her only savior, since he was to marry her once they returned to Phthia (19. 297-298). By combining two distinct and contradictory personae, that of murderer of Briséis' dear ones and that of her future husband, Achilles adopts a role that is both parallel and antithetical to that of Hector; in this way the comparison of the two heroes is further emphasized as the epic moves towards their fated conflict. The intratextual references between the personal laments create allusive links between the two major Iliadic heroes and confer the monumental vastness of the entire poem on their final duel in Book 22.

As far as the form and function of the personal lament as a whole is concerned, both the Mynes episode and the allusion to Achilles must be taken into consideration. Hainsworth399 has pointed out that it takes the place of the meal and council of chiefs that usually follow an assembly. The postponement of the meal until 23. 56-65 shows that the lamentations of Briséis and Achilles interrupt the typical thematic sequence assembly-meal and create a pause, the role of which is to shed light on Achilles and

See Reinhardt (1961) 50-57; Krischer (1971) 93-94 . 5.7 The list of losses of dear ones have the person (Hector and Patroclus) privileged by

the speaker (Andromache and Briséis) placed last. 3.8 Dué (2002) 15 points to the assimilation of Patroclus and Hector achieved by Briséis'

reenactment of Andromache's lament in Iliad 6. Andromache is considered to be the archetypal singer of lament in Greek song tradition. See Dué (2002) 106. See Hainsworth (1966) 158-166.

5.6. Achilles 143

emphasize his marginal position. From the beginning of the poem he has been standing apart from the other Achaeans, refusing to fight; even now that his quarrel with Agamemnon is over, he continues to remain marginal by refusing to eat, thus disturbing the traditional order of things. Achilles has been attached to specific characters (first Patroclus, then Briséis), whose fate is contrasted:400 when Achilles has lost Briséis (to Aga-memnon), Patroclus is alive; when he has lost Patroclus, Briséis has been returned to him. These two figures function as markers which illuminate and shade Achilles, and whose existence at his side determines his feelings and behavior. It is the role of this personal lament to emphasize Achilles' dependence on these two characters and highlight their inter-connection.

5.6. Achilles

5.6.1 Iliad 18

This is the first of the personal laments401 Achilles will utter for Patroclus (18. 324-342) and is divided into two parts of almost equal length: the first (324-332) deals with his thoughts about his friend's fate, the second (333-342) is the personal lament proper.

In line 324 Achilles uses the word αλιον, which had been also employed in the personal lament of Agamemnon for Menelaus (4. 158 and 4. 179); on that occasion, it referred to both the fact that the will of Zeus would not remain unfulfilled (4. 158) and to the vanity of Agamemnon's expedition to Troy (4. 179), thus creating an emphatic contrast between Zeus' power and Agamemnon's failure. The word αλιον reappears in Achilles' γόος under somewhat similar circumstances -he feels himself partly responsible for the death of Patroclus, just as Agamemnon regrets his part in the "loss" of Menelaus. In using the same word as Aga-memnon, Achilles touches upon the vanity of human promises and

400 During the course of the Iliad, Achilles loses Briséis and Patroclus permanently or temporarily.

401 There will be one more in Book 19.

144 Chapter 5

ignorance of the future. This line of thought, explicitly stated in 18. 328: «άλλ' ού Ζεύς ανδρεσσι νοήματα πάντα τελευτφ» ("but Zeus does not bring to accomplishment all thoughts in men's minds"), had been expressed by Agamemnon in his personal lament in Book 4;402 here it is presented as a "gnome" both conveying special authority and alluding, through ανδρεσσι (18. 328), to Achilles himself. The same idea is also expressed in Nestor's speech to Agamemnon in 10. 104-105: «οΰ θην "Εκτορι πάντα νοήματα μητίετα Ζεύς / έκτελέει, οσα πού νυν έέλπεται» ("Zeus of the counsels, I think, will not accomplish for Hektor | all his designs and all he hopes for now"). Thus Achilles' maxim in 18. 328 conjures up the two heroes (Agamemnon and Hector) with whom he is confronted in the Iliad, and creates a "reading" at once dramatic and ironic, by distinguishing between Zeus' determination to fulfill his own will (1.5) and human weakness to determine one's own fate.

At the same time, the line used by Achilles in 18. 324 seems to have a different impact than the other two Iliadic attestations of αλιον modifying επος:

«ώ πόποι, ή ρ' αλιον επος εκβαλον ήματι κείνφ θαρσύνων ήρωα Μενοίτιον εν μεγάροισιν· (18. 324-325)

"Ah me. It was an empty word I cast forth on that day when in his halls I tried to comfort the hero Menoitios"

«ειμι μεν, ούδ' αλιον επος εσσεται, οττί κεν ε'ίπη.» (24. 92) "But I will go. No word shall be in vain, if he says it."

«ειμι, και ούχ αλιον επος εσσεται. εί δέ μοι αισα τεθνάμεναι παρά νυησίν Αχαιών χαλκοχιτώνων, βούλομαι·» (24.224-226)

"I am going, and this word shall not be in vain. If it is my destiny to die there by the ships of the bronze-armoured Achaians, then I wish that."

W2 See lines 4. 160, 161, 168, 175, 178.

5.6. Achilles 145

Verses 24. 92 and 24. 224 share common structural features -they both have one ICB marked by light punctuation, and another stop after position 8 before the terminal adonic, although in 24.92 this is a second ICB again marked by light punctuation, whereas in 24. 224 it is an ISB marked by heavy punctuation.403 On the other hand, 24. 92 is coterminous (verse-end and sense correspond), whereas 24. 224 is followed by a necessary enjambment (type 3, according to Higbie's classification). Thus, 24. 92 has a clear staccato effect: "But I will go. No word shall be in vain, whatever he says", while 24. 224 starts with a staccato effect ("I am going, and this word shall not be in vain"). A faster effect is then created by the necessaiy enjambment, which does not even allow the slightest pause at verse-end. This rapidly carries the speaker's thought to the idea of death, emphatically expressed by the infinitive τεθνάμεναι at verse-initial position. Verse 24. 92 is uttered by Thetis, who assures Iris of her obedience to Zeus' will by using short self-contained cola; on the other hand, Priam's words in 24. 224 show something of the abruptness arising from his fear of going to the Achaean camp to ransom his son's body. Now we can see how verse 18. 324, uttered by Achilles, deviates from the other two verses that contain the word αλιον modifying επος. 18. 324 has an ICB before position 3, but the second ICB occuring before position 9 is unmarked by punctuation and, moreover, has an internal adding enjambment (Higbie's type la) that simply adds more information, explaining why Achilles' επος was αλιον. The absence of a negative particle before αλιον, such as ούδ' / ούχ preceding επος in 24. 92 and 24. 224 respectively, intensifies Achilles' deviation from a rather typical use (negative + αλιον επος εσσεται). Achilles' words refer to the past, not the future as in the other two cases, and reproduce the diction of the external narrator, who is the only one to use the phrase ήματι κείνφ in the Iliad (4x), always in the terminal adonic. So Achilles' use of the word αλιον not only alludes to Agamemnon's personal lament in Book 4, but at the same time separates itself from other non-personal lament uses of the phrase αλιον επος in the Iliad.

The main body of the first part of the personal lament is occupied by

403 I am using Higbie's terminology (1990); ICB stands for "internal clause boundary" and ISB for "internal sentence boundary". For metrical notation and position numbering, see Kahane (1994).

146 Chapter 5

an external analepsis (324-327), verbalized by Achilles acting as internal narrator. This is easily observable if one compares these lines with 9. 254-258 and 11. 765-789, where Odysseus and Nestor respectively refer to the same events, giving their own point of view as internal narrators in their proper speeches. Thus in 9. 254-258 Odysseus refers to Peleus' advice to his son to abstain from ερις κακομήχανος (ληγέμεναι δ' έριδος κακομη-χάνου: 257); Peleus words form an embedded direct speech quoted by Odysseus in order to reinforce his own exhortation to Achilles to overcome his anger, accept Agamemnon's gifts and return to the battlefield. Likewise, when Nestor addresses Patroclus in 11. 765-789, he refers to Menoetius, his addressee's father, because as speaker he knows that invocation of a father will have a much more powerful effect on his interlocutor than reference to a non-relative. Menoetius advises Patroclus to go to Troy with Achilles, as he is older and wiser than his friend, even if an inferior warrior. As de Jong notes:404 "This is exactly what Nestor now wants Patroclus to do (note πείσεται: 789 and πίθηται: 791). Of Peleus' admonition (to Achilles), Nestor only reports (as embedded indirect speech) the general heroic maxim 'always to be the best and surpass the others'".405 In the same manner, Achilles acts as an internal narrator, making himself responsible for urging Menoetius to send his son Pa-troclus to Troy, as he had promised that he would bring him back in glory after sacking Ilium and taking his proper share in the booty. This fo-calization is consonant with the main feeling that dominates this first part of the speech, namely that of Achilles' responsibility for the death of his friend. It is this responsibility that determines his focalization.

The chiastic-ring form (ABBA) of lines 329-332 created by (Α): όμοί-ην γαΐαν έρεϋσαι / αύτοϋ ένΐ Τροίη (329-330); (Β): έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστή-σαντα / δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς (330-331); (Β'): ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ (332); (Α') άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει (332) has a twofold function: like all chiasmi, it emphasizes parallel situations through the repetition of similar or equivalent expressions, but also distinguishes between occasions apparently similar, though different in tone and emphasis. This chiasmus concerns the typical γόος-motif of "sharing a common fate", according to which the mourner believes that the death of

404 See de Jong (1987b) 174. 405 See 11. 784: αίέν άριστεΰειν και ΰπεί<3οχον εμμεναι άλλων.

5.6. Achilles 147

the person he/she laments will result in his/her experiencing a grim future, that of slavery (Andromache) or simply a life deprived of the presence of his/her dear one (Priam, Hecuba). On this occasion, the motif of "sharing a common fate" acquires an extratextual dimension, since the Iliad makes Achilles foreshadow his future death, Patroclus-like, in Troy, although this event falls out of the limits of this epic. In this way, Achilles' speech-perspective transcends the scope of the Iliad and it is only to this extent that he can share a common fate with his friend.406

The second part of Achilles' personal lament is the γόος proper. It contains three internal prolepses, which will be fulfilled in Books 19, 22 and 23. Achilles will place Hector's body next to the ships (23) and strip it of its armour (22), he will decapitate twelve Trojan youths next to the funeral pyre for Patroclus (23), and he will make the Trojan women (whom he had caught while sacking cities found close to Troy) lament his dead friend (19). Voiced in a higher emotional key, Achilles' lament presents his avenging Patroclus' death as a single event, whereas the Iliad will treat the aforementioned proleptic statements separately. The mourner's intimacy towards the deceased allows a profound rearrange-ment of distinct narrative phases, highlighting Achilles' emotional turmoil, which colors his expression of inconsolable sorrow.

The personal lament proper also alludes to the diegesis just before the beginning of this γόος-speech. The external narrator has used a simile comparing Achilles to a lion whose cubs have been stolen by a deer-hunter; Achilles picks up the language of the external narrator and reshapes it for his own purpose; σέ' ύστερος είμ' ύπό γαίαν in line 18.333 answers line 18. 320: δ δέ τ' αχνυται ύστερος έλθών and σέθεν κταμένοιο χολωθείς (337) looks back at μάλα γάρ δριμύς χόλος αίρει (322). What the external narrator says about the lion refers also to Achilles; later on, he will try to find Hector and confront him. But when Achilles speaks as an internal narrator, he adjusts the language of the external narrator to the

406 On the relation between the death of Patroclus and those of Achilles and Hector, see Reichel (1994) 86; Kullmann (1992) 238. The lamentation of the Myrmidons for Patroclus lasts for the whole night. See Polkas (1999) 167-168, who is right in arguing that the sorrowful sleeplessness of the Achaean army, contrasted with the sleep of the Trojans, foreshadows the reversal of events in the fighting of the following day, since the Trojans will be defeated, whereas the Achaeans will emerge victorious.

148 Chapter 5

needs of the γόος, the specific genre of discourse his speech belongs to (ύστερος in 333 points to his future death and χολωθείς in 337 explains the reason for his revenge).

Having examined the content of Achilles' personal lament, it is time to consider its function within the Iliad. This is a single γόος, placed before the όπλοπούα. If we look at the end of the first part of Book 18, we can distinguish five different scenes: 1) the scene with Antilochus (1-35); 2) the scene with Thetis, the Nereids and the discussion with Achilles (35-148); 3) the fighting over Patroclus' body (148-242); 4) the Polydamas-Hector episode (243-313) and 5) the lament of Achilles (314-355). We have seen how Thetis' personal lament, which is placed at the beginning of scene two, determines the direction of its continuation. In scene three, the exhortation of Iris to Achilles causes an exchange of speeches and leads to the hero's vocal intervention in the fighting over Patroclus' body, making the Trojans withdraw. Scene four deals with the exchange of speeches between Polydamas and Hector. But what can be the function of Achilles' γόος in a scene which contains little more than the lament itself, and whose beginning and end are filled with almost identical lines? Drawn from the pattern of personal lament closing formulas,'107 these lines form a ring encircling the whole scene. It is placed just before the beginning of the second and main part of this Book, the όπλοποιία and, despite the fact that it seems autonomous, it performs a wider function: lines (18. 339-340) prepare the γόος of Briséis and the Trojan slave women in Book 19, whereas lines 18. 334-337 foreshadow the first part of Book 23, where Achilles' promises will be carried out (18. 334-337).

5.6.2 Iliad 19

Achilles' γόος (19. 315-337)40* is a good example of the influence the

407 Lines 315 and 355 contain almost identical personal lament closing formulas. Line 315: Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο γοωντες and 355: Μυρμιδόνες Πάτροκλον άνε-στενάχοντο γοώντες with παννύχιοι placed at the beginning of the previous verse (354).

408 West (2000) 213 ad loc. omits 19. 326-337. He argues (West 2001, 12, item 2) that "[references to Cyclic material that is otherwise unknown or ignored in the Iliad" are interpolated and that "[t]he prime examples are two passages that introduce

5.6. Achilles 149

form of a lament can exert on the themes it treats. This speech is uttered antiphonally to that of Briséis and must be read and interpreted as such. I am going to deal with three themes I regard as relevant to the Iliadic personal laments: that of food and drink, that of Achilles' "Comparison" between Patroclus and other members of his family and that of the interplay between the words Φθία, φθείσεσθαι and άποφθιμένοιο.

Achilles' reluctance to eat or to allow others to do so (19. 155-172, 205-237 and 303-308) has a special role to play in the context of this speech,409 as can be seen by the kind of reminiscence of Patroclus that Achilles brings forward. In 19. 316 he remembers Patroclus preparing a tasty meal in the hut (αυτός ένί κλισίη λαρόν παρά δεΐπνον εθηκας), whereas he could have recalled some other detail of daily life or mentioned a feature of his friend's personality. Achilles has decided to abstain from food and drink not only because he wants to express his pain for the loss of his friend, but also because he cannot imagine his life without Patroclus, and especially those parts of his life which they used to share in the past. In other words, Achilles remembers Patroclus preparing the meal rather than doing anything else, because he will abstain from food and drink as if they signified their common life.4I° He does not even allow the other Achaean chiefs to eat and drink, as they should have done after the reconciliation with Agamemnon; in doing so he postpones the real end of his quarrel until he buries Patroclus in Book 23. In this way, the Iliad looks back at its beginning -since the result of the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon is the death of Patroclus- and at the same time ascribes a line of thought permeating the whole epic to a γόος-speech.

Neoptolemus, Achilles' son by Deidameia and the one that refers to the Judgement of Paris". I disagree with such an editorial principle and follow Allen (19205) and van Thiel (1996), who do not omit the above passages.

409 Martin (1989) 65 is right in maintaining that Achilles rejects Odysseus' proposal for food and drink and "rises into another level of performance. Instead of arguing, he refuses food outright, as if too much has yet to come out of his mouth -a poetic lament, in which even the texture of speech resembles song more than oratory, as can be seen from alliterations: 321, pothe...pathoimi/322, patros apophthimenoio pithoimen/323, hos pou nun Phthiephi/325, polemizo/327, Neoptolemos/329, phthisesthai/330, Phthiende/334, Pelea ... pampan/337, apophthimenoio puthetai".

4,0 Achilles does not eat properly until he kills Hector, i.e. until he eliminates the reason that caused the end of his sharing of food and drink with Patroclus, symbolising their common life. See also Edwards (1991) 271.

150 Chapter 5

The "Comparison" between Patroclus and other members of Achilles' family seems peculiar at first glance, for both Peleus and Neoptolemus are alive back in Phthia and Scyrus respectively. In other personal laments in which the "Comparison" constitutes the central core of the speech, the speaker compares the dead (or future dead if the personal lament was anticipatory) with other relatives that he/she has lost. That is precise what happens in the lament by Andromache in Book 6, by Briseis in Book 19, by Priam and Andromache in 22 and in all the personal laments in 24. But Achilles has not lost anyone other than Patroclus. His words must be read in parallel with those of Briséis, since it is the antiphonal order of the two personal laments which make Achilles' words be uttered as a "response" to those of his female slave. As she indirectly compared the loss of Patroclus to that of her husband and three brothers, so Achilles must compare the loss of his dear friend to that of somebody else; and if these losses are not real, then Achilles must invent them. One can see here that as in the case of abstention from food and drink, Homer makes Achilles' view extend to the whole poem, as if the latter was aware of the antiphonal nature of these two personal laments or the final burial of Patroclus in Book 23. Once more, Achilles functions like the poet of the Iliad himself.4"

Nagy412 has argued in favor of a connection between κλέος άψθιτον and its negation in the context of Φθίη as can be seen in Iliad 9. 413-416 and in the γόος of Achilles in Iliad 19. The ring-composition between 19. 322: άποφθιμένοιο πυθοίμην and 19. 337: άποφθιμένοιο πύθηται, referring to the hypothetical deaths of Peleus and Achilles respectively, points to a line of thought alluding to the death of Achilles, which falls outside the limits of the Iliad but permeates the epic from beginning to end. Placed at the very end of this personal lament, it rings a bell for the following consideration: if the element φθι- "is either a genuine formant of Φθίη or is at least perceived as such in the process of Homeric composition"413 creating a contrast between the death of Achilles in Troy

411 See Martin (1989) 222-223 where he finds one more proof that Achilles sounds like a performer in the "expansion aesthetic" which characterizes the language of Achilles and of the Iliadic poet alone.

412 Nagy (1979) 185. 413 Nagy (1979) 185.

5.7 Priam 151

(329-330: οίον έμέ φθείσεσθαι άπ' 'Άργεος Ιπποβότοιο / αύτοϋ ένίΤροίη) and his surrogate Patroclus (330: σέ δέ τε Φθίηνδε νέεσθαι), then the lament uses this language-contrast to point to something really re-markable, a life-death circle which encompasses everybody: Peleus, Patroclus, Neoptolemus and finally the speaker, Achilles himself. This is all the more striking if one considers that Neoptolemus' upbringing in Scyrus is expressed by τρέφεται (19. 326),4I4, which is a word also referring to vegetation. If one keeps in mind that Achilles is the only Iliadic personal lament-utterer to speak of his own death, it becomes clear that he anticipates not only his own death but also a future-hypothetical personal lament for himself; again Achilles resembles the poet of the Iliad, who makes him a privileged speaker endowed with special qualities, such as foreknowledge of his death and his own γόος.

5.7 Priam

Priam's personal lament415 (22.416-428) starts as a λιτή416 foreshadowing one of the main scenes of Book 24, his visit to Achilles' hut and his subsequent offering of a ransom for Hector's body. The important word here is olov (22. 416: "alone"), which is repeated in a number of passages connected to personal laments and, even more often, to the death of Hector. In Priam's initial speech in Book 22 the old man begs Hector not to fight Achilles alone apart from others (39: οίον άνευθ' άλλων); in Book

414 I am here following Allen (1920'). West (2000) 213 ad loc. has ένιτρέφεται. 4,3 The triads of personal laments in Books 22 and 24 of the Iliad belong to the pattern

of "three"; according to Olrik (1965, 129-141) three is the largest number used for people and objects in a traditional narrative; that is why for example Achilles chases Hector three times around the walls of Troy. This may explain the triads of personal laments in Books 22 and 24 on a poetic level since it is based on an inherent psychological substratum common to many peoples and folk-traditions as the "epic laws" of Olrik suggest. It can even explain other phenomena which belong to social or religious life, as the triple invocation of the dead (Od. 9. 65, Ar. Ran. 1176). See Usener (1903) 24-28; Mehrlein (1959) col. 269-310; for a diachronic examination of the pattern of "three" in Greek tradition with references from Homer, tragedy down to modern Greek folk-songs, see Sifakis (1988) 201-208.

416 For the λιτή, the fullest recent treatment is Alden (2000) 181-290 with rich bi-bliography.

152 Chapter 5

24, when Priam visits Achilles, he again stresses the same word, this time in order to refer to Hector: δς δέ μοι οίος έην, εΐρυτο δέ άστυ και αυτούς, / τον σύ πρφην κτεΐνας άμυνόμενον περί πάτρης, / Έκτορα (24. 499-501 ). These instances appear to be opposed to the cases where Achilles and Patroclus speak about their common fate and common past, bur are not: in Book 18, in his personal lament for Patroclus, Achilles stressed that they were both doomed to die in Troy (329-332: αμφω γάρ πέπρωται όμοίην γαίαν έρεϋσαι / αύτοΰ ένί Τροίχι, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστήσαντα / δέξε-ται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς / ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει)· In Book 19, Achilles had also referred to his false belief about dying alone in Troy (19. 329: οίον έμέ), a thought which is also consonant with the realization (18. 324-328) of the vain promises he had given to Patroclus' father Menoetius that his son would return from Troy alive. Finally, in Book 23 Patroclus expresses his wish to be buried together with Achilles, as they were brought up together (23. 83-84): μή έμά σων άπάνευθε τιθήμεναι όστέ', Άχιλλεϋ, / άλλ' όμοϋ, ώς τράφομέν περ έν ύμετέροισι δόμοισιν.

The use of this word in scenes which belong to a funerary context creates an interplay between these two groups of passages, the first referring to the function of οίος and the second to that of the element όμ-in words like όμοίην and όμοΰ. Here we cannot talk of pattern deixis, since common pattern markers do not exist,417 but it is clear that both words have acquired a specific function transcending their typical lexical significance. The use of οίος in Priam's personal lament in Book 22 alludes both to his initial speech to Hector at the beginning of the same Book and to his entreaty to Achilles in 24; when used by one of these two characters, οίος acquires a metonymical reference to their common fate. When Priam says "alone" to Hector, one must "read" an allusion to the former's future visit to Achilles' hut, and when he says to the Achaean hero that Hector was the only son left to him (24. 499), the audience will recall his earlier words to Hector in Book 22.

The result of this interplay is that Priam and Hector's actions progressively converge. Human solitude attains a diacritical feature in these actions and is emphasized e contrario by divine presence (although

411 For the use of the term "pattern deixis" in Homer and pattern markers in general, see Kahane (1994) 58-59.

5.7 Priam 153

of a different nature) as Hermes leaves Priam just before meeting with Achilles, and Athena abandons Hector when he faces Achilles. By visiting Achilles alone, Priam does exactly what he begged Hector not to do; the old men in Troy try in vain to change his mind just as he failed to change his son's mind. In this respect, father and son have become one.

The second result is that as the poem moves to its end, Hector and Priam seem to acquire an Achillean quality par excellence: that of solitude. At the beginning of the Iliad, Achilles goes to the sea shore alone and calls his mother for help; he subsequently stays away from the battlefield and is only reintegrated into the community he has been separated from towards the end of the poem. Achilles' excessive liminality418 is highlighted by his solitude. Likewise, Priam "approaches" the figure of Hector and then the two of them seem to absorb Achillean characteristics.

There are multiple echoes alluding to Priam's entreaty to Achilles in Book 24. Richardson4" points out that "not only is the train of thought similar to that of Priam's actual speech of supplication of Achilles, with the mention of Peleus leading on to Priam's own grief for his sons, and thus to Hector, but there are verbal parallels too. Cf. 419 with 24. 503 αΐδεΐο... αυτόν τ' έλέησον; 420-24.486-487; and the climactic positioning of Έκτορος (426) with 24.501 Έκτορα." These elements show how Priam's γόος-speech prepares a major scene to follow by using intra-Iliadic material alluding to other parts of the plot.

In 22. 422 a major Iliadic motif is evoked and adapted to the specific needs of Priam's personal lament. Through pattern-deixis, μάλιστα δ' έμοί περί πάντων αλγε' εθηκεν recalls the theme of the innumerable sufferings caused to the Achaeans, which is foreshadowed in the Iliadic proem (1. 2): ή μυρί' Αχαιοίς αλγε' εθηκεν. This evocation is reinforced by the fact that the expression αλγε' εθηκεν occupies the same metrical position, namely the terminal adonic, and also by the fact that common features are shared by the preceding parts of the two verses, such as the dative of the indirect object (έμοί - Άχαιοΐς) and an expression of excessiveness in suffering (μάλιστα / περί πάντων - μυρί').

In the second part of the speech, Priam makes the typical "Comparison" between Hector and the other sons he has lost at the hands of Achilles; the

418 On Achilles' excessive liminality, see Seaford (1994) 166-172. 419 Richardson (1993) 151.

154 Chapter 5

same theme is used by Priam in his supplication speech at the beginning of Book 22 (22.44 ff.) and in his visit to Achilles' hut in Book 24 (24. 495 ff.). Yet on these other two occasions, the reference to the other sons whom Achilles has killed is not of a comparative nature; Priam says that Achilles has killed his sons whereas here he stresses the fact that his άχος for Hector overcomes any other previous pain. His "Comparison" reaches its climax by piling up almost every single lament term the Iliad is aware of: πήμα (421), αλγε' (422), οδύρομαι (424), άχνύμενος (424), άχος (425), κλαίοντε (427), μυρομένω (427), δυσάμμορος (428). Here we see the re-verse of what we noted in the first part of the speech: the personal lament differentiates and therefore autonomizes the use of a theme (the mention-ing by Priam of his sons and Hector), by attributing a special quality to it which is absent in non-personal lament context: the comparative element crystallized in the "Comparison" within a personal lament.

As for the function of this personal lament within the poem as a whole, one may notice that after Hector's death we hear two distinct triads of mourners uttering γόος-speeches; Priam, Hecuba and Andromache in Book 22 and Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in Book 24. As far as Priam's speech is concerned (starting as an entreaty and then turning into a personal lament), it is of a preparatory nature, for it foreshadows his visit to Achilles in the last Book of the poem. That is why Priam will not utter a personal lament in 24; this will be done only by the women.420

Priam's role as revealed by his speech is different: he will meet Achilles.

5.8 Hecuba

5.8.1 Iliad 22

Hecuba's personal lament (22. 431-436) is placed in second position421 in the triad of γόοι for Hector at the end of Book 22. It begins with the

420 The lament in 24 is the formal one performed in front of the body of Hector; that of 22 is more abrupt, more personal, as it is expressed once it is realized that Hector has been killed; Priam and Hecuba see him dying from the walls of Troy and Andromache finds out about his death from her maids.

421 The same is the case for her lament in Book 24.

5.8 Hecuba 155

vocative τέκνον, which is only ever used (in the singular and without any complement) in the Iliad for two mortals, Hector and Achilles:422 it is employed by Thetis (1. 362; 18. 73, 128; 19. 29) and by Hecuba (6. 254; 22. 431). It is followed by έγώ δειλή, which is only attested here and in Thetis' personal lament for Achilles in 18. 54: ω μοι έγώ δειλή, ψ μοι δυσαριστοτόκεια. The allusive character of the above expressions, underscored by their occyping the same metrical slot in the hexameter line, make Hecuba's words recall those of Thetis to her son. All the above expressions are uttered in moments of suffering, and create a thematic ring linking Thetis and Hecuba as mourners and mothers, but also Achilles and Hector as sons and tragic figures.

The typical "Death-Wish" forming part of the content of many personal laments takes a new form here; it is not expressed by the common ώφελ-λον + infinitive construction, but is replaced by the rhetorical question: τί νυ βείομαι αίνά παθοϋσα, / σεΐ' άποτεθνηώτος. Placed at the very beginning of the speech, it gives the style a certain abruptness and lack of formality, whereas the expression αίνά παθοϋσα recalls, like the vocative τέκνον and δειλή, Thetis' words to Achilles in 1. 414: ψ μοι τέκνον έμόν, τί νύ σ' ετρεφον αίνά τεκοϋσα. I tend to regard this as an emotional judgment, given that Hecuba and Thetis undergo the same pain and adopt similar language patterns to verbalize it.423 Thetis' helplessness is also shared by Hecuba and even by Andromache (αίνόμορος: 22. 481), and the use of similar diction suggests that the paragon pair of mother and son (Thetis-Achilles) exercises424 its influence on the Trojan dyad of mother and son (Hecuba-Hector), with the former shaping the latter.

This speech looks in two directions: backwards to Hecuba's begging speech at the beginning of Book 22 and forwards to her personal lament for Hector in Book 24. Towards the end of her speech in 22. 82-89, Hecuba says:

«σχέτλιος· εϊ περ γάρ σε κατακτάνη, οΰ σ' ετ' έγώ γε (22. 86) κλαΰσομαι έν λεχέεσσι, φίλον θάλος, δν τέκον αύτή, ούδ' άλοχος πολύδωρος (22. 88)

422 For vocatives in general in Greek epic and tragedy see Wendel (1929), who provides useful lists.

423 22.431. 424 See the case of Priam and Hector, who acquire the Achillean feature of solitude and

marginalization.

156 Chapter 5

"o hard one; for if he kills you I can no longer mourn you on the death-bed, sweet branch, o child of my bearing, nor can your generous wife"

From these lines it is clear that Hecuba's words look at her personal lament at the end of Book 22, as she explicitly talks about her own lament and that of Andromache, which will be uttered in the absence of the deceased's body. The words έν λεχέεσσι designate a condition that gives the lament its formal, solemn tone, implying that without Hector's body the γόος is deprived of its most elementary prerequisite for forming part of a ritual. This becomes more evident in 24. 719-720: οι δ' έπεί εισάγα-γον κλυτά δώματα, τον μέν επειτα / τρητοΐς έν λεχέεσσι θέσαν, παρά δ' είσαν αοιδούς, as well as in Andromache's personal lament in 24. 743: λεχέων εκ χείρας ορεξας. The bed where the body was laid marks the beginning of the πρόθεσις which constituted the main occasion for the ritual lament;425 this point explains both the briefness of Hecuba's personal lament in 22 and its preparatory nature, not for a scene of supplication, as was the case with Priam, but for her main γόος in Book 24.

If Hecuba's speech of entreaty to Hector is connected to her personal lament in 22, her personal lament in 24 undoubtedly presupposes it, for in both γόοι we find the intriguing repetition of the words θεός and ζωός:

«Τρωσί τε και Τρψησι κατά πτόλιν, οι σε θεόν ώς (22. 434) δειδέχατ'· ή γάρ καί σφι μάλα μέγα κΰδος εησθα ζωός έών νΰν αΰ θάνατος καί μοίρα κιχάνει.» (22. 436)426

"and the women of Troy a blessing throughout the city. They adored you

425 See Reiner (1938) 35 ff.; Alexiou (2002) 4-7. 426 West (2000) 288 ad loc. omits 22. 436, but not the other Iliadic attestations of this

verse, namely 17. 478 and 17. 672. He argues (West 2001, 12, item 4) that "[r]hetorical expansions, that is, lines or passages added to clarify an expression or a reference that might be unclear or ambiguous" must be regarded as interpolations. West obviously thinks that the other two Iliadic attestations of the same verse that refer to Patroclus (17. 478; 17. 672) are the genuine ones. I strongly disagree with such an editorial principle, and follow Allen (19203) and van Thiel (1996), who do not omit the above passages.

5.8 Hecuba 157

as if you were a god, since in truth you were their high honour while you lived. Now death and fate have closed in upon you."

and in 24. 749-750:

«ή μέν μοι ζωός περ έών φίλος ήσθα θεοΐσιν, οϊ δ' άρα σεο κήδοντο και έν θανάτοιό περ αϊση.»

"while you still lived for me you were dear to the gods, and even in the stage of death they cared about you still."

In Book 22 Hecuba says that the Trojans, men and women alike, regarded Hector as a god, and that when he was alive he had great glory; in Book 24 she says that as long as he was alive he was dear to the gods. Hector was honored by both men and gods, as the former worshipped him for protecting their city, and the latter loved him and protected his body from decay as long as it remained in the Achaean camp unburied. Finally, in her personal lament in 22, Hecuba speaks only of the presence of death, whereas in 24 she refers to the special treatment that the gods had shown to Hector's body even after his death. Apart from the recurrence of themes which are typical of the personal lament (such as the opposition between life and death), the complementarity of these two γόοι becomes evident. The one in 22 with its more abrupt and less formal nature depicts the grim picture of Hector's recent death and Trojans' grief, whereas that in 24 stresses the deceased's relation with the gods, as his body has been preserved and disfigurement has been delayed.

The lack of formality characterizing Hecuba's γόος in 22, its greater abruptness, its harsher tone and more fluid rhythm exemplify the epic's progressive handling of the γόοι according to the needs of the plot. The passage from the ritualistic but informal laments of Book 22, when Hector has just died, to the highly formal, ritual γόοι of Book 24, when his body lies in front of the mourners to be lamented, bespeaks the poem's flexibility in keeping the sub-genre of γόοι bound by its structure and content despite the fact that the change of performance context has resulted in a subsequent shift of tone and rhythm of the lament.427

427 This shift is due to the alternation of adding and violent enjambments, which are in direct contrast to the balanced structure of Hecuba's personal lament in 24, with the four three-line groups of verses.

158 Chapter 5

5.8.2 Iliad 24

Hecuba's personal lament (24. 748-759) looks back at lines 24. 416-423, when Hermes meets Priam on his way to the Achaean camp and tells him that his son's body has not been eaten by dogs and birds, nor is it rotten and devoured by worms. Hermes then goes on as follows:

«ή μέν μιν περί σήμα έοϋ έτάροιο φίλοιο ελκει άκηδέστως, ηώς δτε δια φανήη, ουδέ μιν αίσχύνει· θηοΐό κεν αυτός έπελθών, οίον έερσήεις κείται, περί δ' αιμα νένιπται, ουδέ ποθι μιαρός· συν δ' ελκεα πάντα μέμυκεν, δσσ' έτύπη· πολέες γαρ έν αύτψ χαλκόν ελασσαν. ώς τοι κήδονται μάκαρες θεοί υιος έήος και νέκυός περ έόντος, έπεί σφι φίλος περί κήρι.» (24. 416-423)

"It is true, Achilleus dags him at random around his beloved companion's tomb, as dawn on dawn appears, yet he cannot mutilate him; you yourself can see when you go there how fresh with dew he lies, and the blood is all washed from him, nor is there any corruption, and all the wounds have been closed up where he was struck, since many drove the bronze in his body. So it is that the blessed immortals care for your son, though he is nothing but a dead man; because in their hearts they loved him."

Hecuba's words bear a striking similarity to the following passage:

«Έκτορ, εμψ θυμψ πάντων πολύ φίλτατε παίδων, ή μέν μοι ζωός περ έών φίλος ήσθα θεοισιν, οΐ δ' άρα σεο κήδοντο και έν θανάτοιό περ αί'ση.» (24. 748-750)

"Hektor, of all my sons the dearest by far to my spirit; while you still lived for me you were dear to the gods, and even in the stage of death they cared about you still."

«σέο δ' έπεί έξέλετο ψυχήν ταναήκεϊ χαλκφ, πολλά ρυστάζεσκεν έοϋ περί σήμ' έτάροιο Πατρόκλου, τον επεφνες -άνέστησεν δέ μιν ούδ' ώς-

5.8 Hecuba 159

νυν δέ μοι έρσήεις και πρόσφατος έν μεγάροισιν κεϊσαι,» (24.754-758)

"when he had taken your life with the thin edge of the bronze sword, he dragged again and again around his beloved companion's tomb, Patroklos', whom you killed, but even so did not bring him back to life. Now you lie in the palace, handsome and fresh with dew"

Hecuba uses Hermes' language to lament her son, and in doing so makes a gesture to the preceding scene between Hermes and Priam, where the preservation of Hector's body was also a key topic.428 Hermes' words are not only confirmed by what Priam finds when he visits Achilles, but also by the fact that Hecuba becomes an indirect addressee of his speech; she was not present in the encounter between Hermes and her husband, but her personal lament seems to have absorbed material from the previous scene and adapted it to its own needs. The "Comparison" between the two parts of Hecuba's speech and Hermes' language as reproduced by them gives evidence for the process of incorporation and adaptation of non-personal lament diction by a γόος-speech.

The "Comparison" initiates an external analepsis,429 creating a pause

428 Taplin (1992) 281-282 notes: "... there is an echo of the key phrase in Achilleus' speech to Priam: «οΰδέ μιν άνσχήσεις» ('you will not bring him back to life') (551). Achilleus found his own way to the truth, the 'lesson' that no amount of grief or vengeance or resurrectionary magic can make a dead person stand up: by applying this 'lesson' to Achilleus, Hecuba also reaches it for herself'. In other words, in Hecuba's personal lament, Patroclus has become the funerary surrogate of Hector; what applied to the former in terms of grief applies allusively to the latter.

429 Line 24. 753 has some special characteristics: the meaning of the word άμιχθαλόεσ-σαν is unknown to us and even in antiquity it remained obscure; the scholia vetera ad 753ab (V Erbse 637) offer various interpretations such as "rocky", "unhospitable", "misty" or even "prosperous". One should note the fact that we have a fourth foot trochaic caesura with no Hermann's bridge -a rare phenomenon, which only occurs once every 1000 lines in the Iliad. I am inclined to see here the traces of an intended dictional differentiation from the other two parts of Hecuba's speech, where she reproduces the language of Hermes. Other elements pointing in the same direction are: the alliterative interplay between παΐδας and πόδας in line 751, the parisa πέρ-νασχ' and ελεσκε in line 752 (observed by Eustathius) and finally the internal

160 Chapter 5

between the two parts of the speech which recall that of Hermes, thus bringing the focus back to what is for most Iliadic personal laments a locus communis: the preeminence of the deceased when compared to other dead. The particularly merciless treatment reserved for Hector, who is killed and defiled rather than being sold into slavery like his brothers, speaks volumes for his special place in Achilles' life. The explanation for this Achillean savagery towards Hector is given briefly but emphatically at the first part of 24. 756:

Πατρόκλου, τον επεφνες·

Of Patroclus whom you killed;

Hecuba's personal lament ends with a reference to the gentle arrows of Apollo (οίς άγανοΐσι βέλεσσιν: 24. 759) by which he kills someone who is like Hector. This is a peculiar line with some parallels in the Odyssey (3.279-280,5. 123-124, 11. 172-173, 11. 198-199, 15. 410-411) but none in the Iliad.™

It has been argued that this line refers to "a sudden, painless death";431

Reinhardt432 argued that this is not a formula, but was created for this particular context where it fits the situation; Macleod agrees, adding that it could later on have been "reproduced more or less appropriately to the context in the Odyssean passages".433

These remarks seem highly apposite, but at the same time we should note that this line can be "read" in three différent yet complementary ways.

rhyming of the two-syllable names of islands (Σάμον, "Ιμβρον, Λημνον) all ending in -ov. Note also the well balanced organization of the passsage into four three-verse blocks, which show the more restricted and formal internal organization of the ritual γόοι when compared to the more fluid and loose rhythm of abrupt verbalizations of mourning and lamentation, as is the case in the personal laments in Book 22 of the Iliad.

430 In 6. 428 Andromache says that her mother was killed by Artemis but the expression used there is not the same with 24. 759; for the same reason I will exclude from the discussion the killing of the children of Niobe by Artemis and Apollo narrated in 24. 605-606.

431 Cf. Richardson (1993) 357; Macleod (1982) 153; Heubeck/Hoekstra (1989) 258. 432 See Reinhardt (1961) 485 ("Nur einmal, nur hier bedeutet der Vers nicht Todesart, ist

nicht Formel, sondern erfüllter Ausdruck der 'Situation'"). 433 Macleod (1982) 153.

5.9 Helen 161

First, one is tempted to see here a deliberate allusion to Book 1 of the Iliad, and in particular to lines 8-52, where Apollo brings pain and death to the Achaean camp. Second, this line creates a deliberate contrast between the protective role of the gods towards Hector's body (and we know that it was Apollo who protected it) and Apollo's destructive presence at the end of the personal lament, as if Hecuba was saying that Apollo is capable of bringing both death and protection. Third, in this line I am inclined to see a well-covered allusion to Achilles' future death by Apollo, a reference to an extra-Iliadic event foreshadowed in Book 22 in Achilles' futile pursuit of the god outside the walls of Troy. If this third interpretation is taken into account, then we can see a nice touch of pathos in Hecuba's words, for she virtually compares Hector to Achilles!

5.9 Helen

Helen is both the last speaker and mourner in the Iliad. The placement of her lament at the end of the triad of γόοι closing the epic is not a matter of mere chance, since the poem comes to an end with a speech by the person who caused the whole war in the first place.434

Helen begins her lament by using the same formula that Hecuba employed in the first line of her speech (748), with necessary changes, since her relation to Hector is of a different kind than that of Hecuba. She distinguishes Hector among her brothers-in-law, thus underscoring their family relationship. Helen had also used the term δαήρ in 3. 180 in the Teichoskopia, when she described Agamemnon to Priam, and in 6. 344 in

434 The inclusion of Helen in the triad of mourners makes this whole lament look back to Book 6 when Hector met with the same three women in the city of Troy (Macleod 1982, 149), but apart from the family term δαήρ and the "Death-Wish" typical for Helen's speeches (3. 173: ώς δφελεν θάνατος μοι άδεΐν κακός | 6. 345-346: ώς μ' όφελ' ήματι τω, δτε με πρώτον τέκε μήτηρ, / οίχεσθαι προφέρουσα κακή άνέμοιο θύελλα I 24. 764: ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι), the phraseology employed in Helen's lament in Book 24 is very different. See also Christopoulos (forthcoming 2004) who argues that by including Helen in the triad of mourners at the end of the epic, the poet of the Iliad incorporates an aenigmatic and rather fluctuating figure within the framework of epic conventions (expressed by the typology of the ritual lament for Hector). Pantelia (2002) 21-27 suggests that Helen's lament in Iliad 24 «sings the glory of Hector within the larger frame of Homer's song» and in that respect her γόος may be considered the "first" song in Hector's honor.

162 Chapter 5

her encounter with Hector inside the walls of Troy. Thus, Helen re-cognizes both her husbands, Menelaus and Paris, and the family relations that these two marriage bonds imply. This double perspective paints the picture of a Helen oscillating between Sparta and Troy, happy past and sorrowful present, whose diction is a vain effort of our tradition to attest to the already shattered instability of her escaping figure.

It has been argued that Helen and Briséis share a structural relationship of key importance for the entire epic.435 This relationship includes reciprocal correspondence between two themes pertaining to the fate of both women: (a) abduction; (b) loss of husband.436 By weaving an intricate web of these themes, Helen's personal lament in Iliad 24 alludes backwards to Briséis' lament for Patroclus in Book 19. It also contributes significantly to portraying Briséis as a "second Helen", since both women "perceive them-selves as victims, as pawns to be shuttled back and forth between men".437

Briséis is to the Iliad what Helen is to the Trojan War. Just as the abduction of Helen by Paris has resulted in the Achaean expedition against Troy, so the abduction of Briséis by Agamemnon causes Achilles' wrath and results in an internal conflict between two of the chief Greek leaders. The tradition seems to flirt with the idea of creating surrogates who function as sacrificial substitutes: as Iphigeneia has been sacrificied for the sake of Helen, so Briséis is treated as the sacrificial substitute of Chiyseis.438 Pressing the analogies to the level of poetics, we could argue that Briséis is the Iliadic surrogate of Helen, since the latter's original abduction became subordinated to the former's, with Agamemnon taking in the Iliad the place of Paris as the violator within the epic.439

455 See Reinhardt (1961) 421; Erbse (1983) 1-15; Edwards (1991) 270; Taplin (1992) 84-86, 212-218; Suzuki (1989) 21-29, 55; Dué (2002) 15-16.

436 Both Briséis (19. 293-294) and Helen have lost their brothers, but Helen's personal lament in II. 24 does not refer to this event. In the Teichoskopia, Helen expresses her agonizing thoughts (3. 236-242) about the fate of her brothers, whom she cannot see among the Achaean warriors. At that very point, her speech is curtailed and the external narrator takes the floor, reminding us that Castor and Pollux have died in Lakedaimon (3. 243-244). See Pucci (1987) 152-154.

437 Suzuki (1989) 28. Suzuki is right in arguing that "Patroclus appears to have assuaged Briséis' sense of loss and vulnerability in a new and alien environment, as Hector had done for Helen".

438 Suzuki (1989) 22-25. 439 Dué (2002) 40 employs the terms micro- and macronarratives and argues that "the

5.9 Helen 163

In the light of Suzuki's revealing observations, we may proceed to the examination of certain features of Helen's personal lament that hauntingly echo Briséis' γόος in Iliad 19.

As the lament is drawing to a close, Helen's frustration and distress are epitomized when the narrative lens zooms in on her present condition:

«τώ σέ θ' αμα κλαίω και εμ' άμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ·» (24. 773)

"Therefore I mourn for you in sorrow of heart and mourn myself also and my ill luck."

24. 773 describes Helen's emotional imbroglio, as now, after Hector's death, she is abandoned in a sea of troubles amidst a hostile Trojan community. The γόος has not explained or accounted for the past, but has helped the mourner come to terms with it. A similar filter is established in Briséis' personal lament in Book 19:

«τώ σ' άμοτον κλαίω τεθνηότα, μείλιχον αίεί.» (19. 300)

"Therefore I weep your death without ceasing. You were kind always."

Both women lament their protectors, the men who supported them while both being trapped in a new, unfriendly environment. Helen's power-lessness in view of the past takes the form of the typical "Death-Wish", a contrary-to-fact, indirect declaration of her unwillingness to have caused all this suffering crowned by the death of Hector. A similar point of view is expressed by Achilles (19. 59-60), who wishes that Artemis had killed Briséis the day he sacked the city of Lyrnessos, so that his quarrel with Agamemnon had not taken place.440 On the other hand, the negative role of Briséis and Helen on the level of the plot becomes positive on the field of poetics, as the former represents a necessary requirement for the

figures in any compressed (micro-) narrative can be substitutes for those of the expanded (macro-) narrative". According to this observation, Helen's substitution by Briséis "is typical of micronarratives" (40).

440 Dué (2002) 15.

164 Chapter 5

narrative unraveling of the Iliad and the latter the raison d' être for the Trojan War. Likewise, the intratextual affinities concerning the unattainabi-lity of both wishes underscore the speakers' (Achilles' and Helen's) realization of a grim present, but also help reformulate the narrative jigsaw: Helen and Briseis, Briseis and Helen represent women splintered off from their environment, lonely and defenseless in a "foreign" land, a place where they have been reduced to mere outsiders. Conversely, their mourning songs bring them to the foreground; through their intratextual resonances, allusions and references, the audience become alert to their significance for an entire span of traditions pertaining to the Trojan War.

Apart from the above dictional references, there are substantial contextual similarities between Briséis' lament for Patroclus and Helen's for Hector. In her γόος in Iliad 19, Briséis informs the audience of Patroclus' promise to make possible her marriage to Achilles after their return to Phthia. In Helen's personal lament in Iliad 24, the marriage theme is brought forward through the confirmation of her wedding status with Paris, which is, of course, well known to everybody (ή μέν μοι, πόσις έστίν 'Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής: 24. 763).441 Such a prima facie unnecessary addition acquires its full meaning once we see how well it collaborates with the protocols of the Iliadic song, as it provides a context thematically corresponding to Briséis' focus on the marriage theme. We are not dealing here with allusive repetitions, but with a typical lament theme that is instrumental in highlighting the dramatic parallelism of both situations. The "text" wittily entertains the idea that both situations are analogous, as the polarity slave/free woman becomes progressively nullified within the poetic realm of the personal lament. Helen thus adopts a stance similar to that of Briséis, and incorporates an indirect criticism or questioning of what happiness means for a woman into her speech. Her γόος expresses an unfulfilled yearning for a blissful marriage that has been permanently cancelled.442 Its intratextual affinities to the personal lament of Briséis unite the narratively fractured and splintered perspective of the female within the heroic world.

By echoing the γόος of Briseis (Book 19), Helen's personal lament443

441 I am here following Allen (1920J). West (2000) 367 ad loc. omits the line. 442 See Murnaghan (1999) 209. 443 See also Austin (1994) 23-50.

5.9 Helen 165

has contrived a way of bridging the gap between the personal and the universal, the timeless and the occasional. At the same time, her lament for Hector, the best of the Trojans, her protective shield not against the darts of some god or warrior, but against the insulting words of the Trojans is no less a lament for her own self.444 This was, after all, her own war, which she is beginning to lose now that Hector is no longer alive.

444 This is consonant with her "Death-Wish" in 24. 764. Suzuki (1989) 55-56 correctly points out: "Her lament thus accurately predicts her literary afterlife, for in the Odyssey, having returned to Sparta with Menelaus, she is represented as an unassimilable and sinister presence in her own house. Helen's lament for Hector parallels the poet's elegy for Troy and for the heroic age. In marking the loss and absence not only of Hector but also of her former self, her lament, like all elegies, enacts the disjunction between word and deed, between language and what it describes."

Conclusion

The Iliad distinguishes between two marked forms of lament, the γόοι and the θρήνοι. The γόοι can be defined as personal lament speeches ex-pressed by a figure important to the Iliadic plot, male or female, concern-ing the death, past or future, real or imaginary of a preeminent warrior, Achaean or Trojan. On the other hand, the θρήνοι are lament speeches sung by professional mourners. In both cases the soloist's speech or song is accompanied by a response from a chorus, perhaps in the form of cries. The epic freely indulges in extensive quotation of the γόοι, while leaving the θρήνοι uncited. This intentional epic promotion of one form of lament speech at the expense of the other is probably due to the poem's fondness for non-professional speech. On the other hand, the γόοι are highly marked speeches employed by the epic protagonists for the death of other epic protagonists. The Iliad has deftly used the personal laments as an internal reflection and comment on its very subject matter, the heroic world itself. The γόοι explore the poem's heroic landscape by helping the narrative lens focus on those heroes around whom the tragedy of the Iliad is unraveled: the death of Patroclus receives full lament treatment by Briséis and Achilles, and consequently leads to the death and most extensive lamentation in the epic, that for Hector.

Further, the poem succeeds in weaving γόοι that would normally fall out of its narrative blueprint into its plot. Agamemnon's personal lament for Menelaus (who finally escapes death) offers an internal look at the heroic code, as the Achaean leader questions the very meaning of the war without Menelaus, who virtually is the measure of Agamemnon's own κλέος. This is also, mutatis mutandis, the case with Thetis' γόος for Achilles in Book 18: she refers to an extra-Iliadic event, the death of Achilles, which the epic has been persistently exploiting since Book 1. By using the γόοι to reflect events not covered by its time span, the Iliad is able to offer its audience a general view of the epic tradition stretching backwards and forwards, extending its range and joining the past with the future.

The Iliad contains twelve γόοι the majority of which (ten in all) are placed in the last Books of the poem. Certain characters express more than one personal lament for the same person. The key role is played by female mourners, although there are males who utter γόος-speeches, most notably Achilles. The lamentation for Hector is performed by his wife

Conclusion 167

Andromache, who seems to be the archetypal lament singer with three γόοι (Books 6, 22, 24), his mother Hecuba with two (Books 22, 24), his sister-in-law Helen with one (Book 24) and, finally, his father Priam (Book 22). Patroclus is lamented twice by his devoted friend Achilles (Books 18, 19) and once by the slave-girl Briseis (Book 19). The personal laments for Menelaus by his brother Agamemnon (Book 4) and Achilles by his mother Thetis (Book 18) complete the picture. The distribution of γόοι among male and female speakers shows that the personal lament is not gender-restricted. Conversely, the gender of the chorus accompanying the soloist's speech is invariably determined by the gender of the principal mourner.

The γόοι show remarkable consistency in respect of both structural pattern and thematic typology. Their use of tripartite structure and ring-composition is, of course, consonant with common epic techniques of organizing material either on micro- or macronarrative level. In the case of the Iliadic personal laments, the aforementioned structural principles enable the mourner to thematise certain issues pertaining to the γόος typology of content with unparalleled explicitness: the antithesis between past and present, the praise to the deceased, the motif of common fate. Structural patterns establish the necessary background for a successful presentation of topics regarding the main concerns of the lament, as they aim to promote the narrative goals of the γόοι. Other γόος themes include the comparison of the deceased to others belonging to the same group of people, in order to extol the dead person and highlight the significance of his loss, and the mourner's death-wish. These two topics reveal a latent connection to larger issues concerning epic poetry, as they contribute to an encomium of the dead hero, explicitly the first and implicitly the second. Focusing on an aretalogy of the deceased, the γόος congruously agrees with the main preoccupation of heroic epic that sings the γόος. Furthermore, through its extensive Iliadic citing and focused interest on the epic protagonists (mourners and deceased alike) the personal lament becomes the form of speech that best represents the poem's perspective, offering a compressed but profusely resonant summary of the Iliad's lasting imprint on the presentation of the world of heroes.

The γόοι have single- or multiple-verse introductions and closures that fall within the larger category of speech frames inaugurating and capping speeches in Homeric poetry. The common introductory pattern under-scores the preeminent role of the non-professional soloist leading the

1 6 8 Conclusion

lament among a chorus of mourners. Likewise, the typical closing formula indicates the completion of the lament and the accompanying collective response of the chorus. The departure from a specific formulaic pattern observed in a significant number of personal laments is not a matter of mere chance, but concurs with context-specific parameters displaying the skillful adaptation of formulaic material to its immediate environment. Variations from the norm are effected by addition, expansion or insertion triggered by contextual factors that cue the audience to a specific interpretive note. Speech introductory and closing frames re-present an indispensable part in the interpretation of the γόοι. Localized on the textual borderline between the mimetic and diegetic narrative modes, personal lament introductions and closures are not strictly compartmentalized, as they amalgamate with the content of the ensuing or preceding γόος, collapsing or at least blunting the strictly defined dichotomy between "telling" and "showing".

The γόοι are personal lament speeches about life stories desperately oscillating between spatial and temporal polarities. They reflect the tragic problems facing the world of heroes from the mourner's point of view. As Homeric heroes are temporarily on the horns of a dilemma between νόστος and κλέος, only to choose the latter at the expense of the former, so mourners in their γόοι for heroes constantly emphasize a tension between distance and closeness, encounter and separation, past and future. When the Iliad is completed, the end of the heroic race may still be far away, but the Iliadic γόοι are keen to epitomize the critical position of the heroes mediated through the mourners' focalization. To this end, spatial and temporal deictic markers are powerfully marshalled, allowing a significantly wider outlook on the event of a hero's death and a more penetrating glance at the larger issues that trouble the epic.

Intratextual affinities allow one to comprehend how the Iliad has elevated the γόοι from simple lament speeches to its narrative fulcrum. Crosstextual comparisons reveal surprising connections between distant passages, formulaic repetition and variation lead to hidden resonances and unexpected links. The γόοι are not randomly scattered throughout the poem. They masterly follow the unraveling of the plot and get involved in an internal dialogue, as if forming a coherent and self-contained corpus. By scrupulously employing allusion, the primary method of intratextual reshuffling in the highly sophisticated medium that Homeric language is, the Iliad is able to fully exploit interrupted linearity and increased

Conclusion 169

frequency in the deployment of γόος-speeches. Taking its time in turning the focus on its chief protagonists, it purposely teaches the audience the ultimate lesson, namely that this is a poem about death, anticipated but unavoidable, just like the tragic fate awaiting its best heroes.

APPENDIX I

Privileged and Unprivileged Dead

Unreported γόοι in the Iliad

Apart from the twelve personal laments found in the Iliad, there are a number of expressions referring to unreported γόος-speeches, i.e. which are not verbalized by any speaker. Before I offer a list of these instances and then try to explain the reason(s) lying behind this apparently weird, silence to which the poem "condemns" some of its characters, I need to make a necessary distinction between the two different meanings of the word γόος in the Iliad.

The term γόος refers to: a) the intense grief and pain caused by some-body's death and b) the actual personal lament, a γόος-speech uttered usually by the deceased's next of kin or close friend.

All the cases I have classified as unreported personal laments refer to the second meaning of the word. So, e.g., cases like:

«άρητόν δέ τοκεΰσι γόον και πένθος εθηκας. ή κέ σφιν δειλοΐσι γόου κατάπαυμα γενοίμην». (17. 37-38)

"and left to his parents the curse of lamentation and sorrow. Yet I might stop the mourning of these unhappy people"

are not considered to be unreported personal laments, for the word γόος expresses the idea of grief, of mourning and lamenting, not of the speech that specifically pertains to this kind of lamentation.445 In other words, in this case the word γόος denotes the action rather than the speech-act that verbalizes it.446

445 I have also excluded 6. 373, pointing to the lament that will later be expressed by Andromache.

446 The formula (23. 17) τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο will not be examined

172 APPENDIX I

Below is a list of the expressions referring to unreported personal laments in the Iliad:

1. 6.499: άμφιπόλους· τησιν δέ γόον πάσησιν ένώρσεν. 2. 6.500: αΐ μέν ετι ζωόν γόον "Εκχορα ω ένί οϊκψ· 3. 16. 857: δν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποΰσ' άνδροτήτα και ήβην. 4. 22.363: δν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποϋσ' άνδροτήτα και ήβην447

5. 23.108: ώς φάτο· τοΐσι δέ πάσιν ύφ' ιμερον ώρσε γόοιο. 6. 23.153: θήκεν τοΐσι δέ πάσιν ύφ' ϊμερον ώρσε γόοιο. 7. 24. 507: ώς φάτο- τψ δ' άρα πατρός ύφ' ϊμερον ώρσε γόοιο 8. 24. 513: αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο διος Άχιλλεΰς

a. Items 1-2 (the άμφίπολοι)44' and 5-6 (the Myrmidons) refer to groups of potential mourners. According to Homeric practice, their lament cannot be verbalized, since epic voices only solo speeches.

The external narrator concludes/closes the Homilía scene in 6. 499-500, which has turned out to be a lament scene. Then, when Hector goes to meet Paris the scope changes significantly (6. 501-502):

ού γάρ μιν ετ' εφαντο ύπότροπον έκ πολέμοιο ϊξεσθαι προφυγόντα μένος κα'ι χείρας 'Αχαιών.

for they thought he would never again come back from fighting alive, escaping the Achaean hands and their violence.

Likewise, lines 23.108 and 153 mark the beginning and end of a unreported lamentation scene functioning as the framework for the preparation of the funeral (cutting and collecting wood, preparation of a military parade, casting of hair on the bier of the dead, Achilles holding Patroclus' hand

in this appendix. I do not consider Achilles' speech (23. 19-23) a personal lament, because its structure and content does not fit the requirements we have set in chapter 2. The use of a personal lament introductory formula without an ensuing γόος is instead due to the general funereal framework of Book 23.

447 I am here following Allen (19203). West (2000) 285 ad loc. omits this line. 448 Note that the attendants were in the palace during the meeting between husband and

wife: κιχήσατο δ' ενδοθι πολλάς I άμφιπόλους (6. 498-499).

Privileged and Unprivileged Dead 173

etc.)·449 They clearly denote the beginning and end of the scene they are placed in.

In both cases, the lament expressions are used as narrative signs marking not the beginning or completion of a personal lament, but rather the end (Book 6) or the beginning and end (Book 23) of a whole scene. The silence of the chorus is due to the fact that, according to the Homeric practice of voicing solo speeches only, the γόοι are uttered solely by the main protagonists, not by minor figures or groups of people.

b. In items 3-4 the participle γοόωσα refers to both meanings of the word γόος. These two items are practically one, as the same formula is being employed. It would have been very awkward to hear a personal lament from the soul of Patroclus or Hector at the moment they died, for the context would have been entirely inappropriate; the scene is one of fighting with only two or three lines given over to the beautiful descrip-tion of the flying of the soul to the Underworld. Moreover, the repetition of the same four lines after each hero's death (Patroclus and Hector alike) creates a strong link between their fates and their treatment within the Iliadic plot.450

c. Item 7 and 8 (24. 507: ώς φάτο· τω δ' αρα πατρός ύφ' ιμερον ώρσε γόοιο and 24. 513 : αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο δίος Άχιλλεύς) refer to Achilles, whose personal lament is not verbalized. His silence has to be interpreted within the larger context of the scene with Priam (24. 508-513):

άψάμενος δ' άρα χειρός άπώσατο ήκα γέροντα, τώ δέ μνησαμένω, ô μέν "Εκτορος άνδροφόνοιο κλαϊ' άδινά προπάροι,θε ποδών Άχιληος έλυσθείς, αύτάρ Άχιλλεύς κλαϊεν έόν πατέρ', άλλοτε δ' αύτε Πάτροκλον των δέ στοναχή κατά δώματ' όρώρει αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο δΐος Άχιλλεύς.

449 See that in both these cases the dative of a participle expressing grief follows in the next line: μυρομένοισι δέ τοΐσι φάνη ροδοδάκτυλος Ήώς (23. 109) and καί νύ κ' όδυρομένοισιν εδυ φάος ήελίοιο (23. 154). The two participles are followed by two expressions denoting the beginning and end of the day, namely the beginning and end of a scene.

450 In 23. 106 the expression γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε refers to the unspeakable lament of Patroclus' soul. This reference does not denote a personal lament but the grief and pain the soul undergoes as long as it remains unburied.

174 APPENDIX I

He took the old man's hand and pushed him gently away, and the two remembered, as Priam sat huddled at the feet of Achilleus and wept close for manslaughtering Hektor and Achilleus wept now for his own father, now again for Patroklos. The sound of their mourning moved in the house. Then when great Achilleus had taken full satisfaction in sorrow

The external narrator has decided to depict the whole scene of the two men lamenting without verbalizing their personal laments, for this would have interrupted their meeting, and the theme of ransoming Hector's body would have been postponed for too long. This is exactly why we should "read" line 24. 507 within the larger framework of the scene between Priam and Achilles.451

The selectivity of the Iliad can be seen not only in its verbalization of the γόοι rather than the θρήνοι of professional singers, but also in its insistence on voicing solely those personal laments uttered by the next of kin, not those expressed by the chorus of mourners. The lines it devotes to the latter must be interpreted as narrative signs indicating the end (meeting between Andromache and Hector in Book 6) or the beginning and end (lamentation for Patroclus in Book 23) of a scene.

451 In 24. 84-86 Thetis is lamenting the death of Achilles although he is still alive; moreover, this personal lament remains unexpressed (the term κλαίε practically refers to a personal lament). Kakridis (1949) 69, note 7 has argued that "the fact that in 24. 83 ff. Thetis laments again in the depths of the sea among her sisters μόρον ου παιδός does not appear strange to us. Hector is now dead and Achilles' death will follow immediately. It is this feeling that the poet wishes to emphasize a little before the end of his poem: Achilles now belongs to the underworld, although the Iliad does not describe his death".

The Therapeutics of Lament

«αύτάρ έπει κ' όλοοΐο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο» «άλλήλους όλοοΐο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο» «...γόοιο μεν έστι καί άσαι» «άγκάς έλόντ' έμόν υίόν, έπήν γόου έξ ερον εϊην.»

(23. 10) (23. 98)

(23. 157) (24. 227)

Privileged and Unprivileged Dead 175

The first three lines refer to a desire which has to be satisfied; still, the γόος is characterized as pernicious (όλοός). Achilles urges first the Myrmidons and then Patroclus to find satisfaction together with him by means of a destructive γόος. This revealing expression should be interpreted once we take into account the fact that in the first two cases, Achilles exhorts the Myrmidons to approach the body of Patroclus, and Patroclus' ghost to stand close: ασσον ίόντες (23. 8) and άλλά μοι άσσον στήθι (23. 97) respectively. This may well be an indication of a miming of the closeness between the two friends. The γόος seems to have substituted a natural situation connoting the bond that kept Achilles and Patroclus together, for this symbolic substitution of an emotional link is iconized in lament terms, and in particular by means of a reversal of roles: the γόος is to bring the delight of satisfaction.452 The same applies to Achilles' γόοιο μεν έστι καΐ άσαι (23. 157), which is triggered by the general funereal context designating that the lamentation should be brought to an end.453

Priam uses an equivalent expression to refer to the dictional context denoting the satiety of the desire for food and drink.454 In 24. 227, he functions as the internal narrator, verbalizing his feelings as he wants, even at the expense of his life, to lament his son; the expression γόου έξ

452 According to Latacz (1966) 174-219, who studied the semantical evolution of τέρ-πομαι in Homer, there is a clear distinction between κορέσσασθαι and άσαι, which show the satiety of an activity or thing (das Satthaben einer Sache oder Tätigkeit), that is to say its κόρος (Überdruß), and the a-stem of the verb τέρπομαι, which expresses a positive, emotionally stressed and delightful physical satisfaction.

453 The tone is the same as in 22. 427: τώ κε κορεσσάμεθα κλαίοντέ τε μυρομένω τε, and 24. 717: άσεσθε κλαυθμοΐο.

454 See Latacz (1966) 179 who notes: Vom Subjekt her gesehen, erscheint derselbe Vorgang als Tätigkeit: έξ ερον εσθαι - "den Drang auslassen'. Daß mit ίμερος hier nichts wesentlich anderes gemeint sein kann als mit έρος mit Formelvers αύτάρ έπεί πόσιος και έδητύος έξ ερον εντο, zeigt V 227: έπήν γόου έξ ερον εϊην" Kloss (1994) 44-65 rightly notes that ερος and ϊμερος are sometimes used in a similar manner and sometimes differently, the former referring to the satisfying aspect of desire that is situated inside the human body and has bodily connotations, the latter denoting more of a spiritual feeling coming from outside (attested by the verbs αίρεΐν, όρνύναι, έμβάλλειν) and describing the beginning of a desire. But I cannot agree with Kloss' opinion that the expression ίμερος γόοιο is almost always (with the exception of II. 23. 14) "eine wörtliche Rede" (53). On the contrary, this expression never introduces a direct speech in the Iliad.

176 APPENDIX I

ερον εϊην is Priam's indirect reply to two similar phrases Hecuba has used just before, when trying in vain to dissuade him from going to Achilles' hut to ransom Hector's body. The first one is νυν δέ κλαίωμεν άνευθεν (24. 208), capped by έών άπάνευθε τοκήων (24. 211), and the second άρ-γίποδας κύνας άσαι (24. 211). Priam's words allude to both of these phrases. A formal, ritual γόος will take place when the body of the deceased is brought back to Troy; at the same time, the words represent a humanizing effort, as Priam tries to transform the bestial satiety of vio-lence (in reference to the dogs) into the therapeutic satiety of lamentation.4"

As Pucci456 has shown in the case of Briséis' and Achilles' antiphonal laments in Iliad 19, the "heart, seat of life, ceases to have its normal desires and longs for death, and with this longing prepares the next procession of deaths, imaginary and real, of the father, of the son, and of himself'. Something equivalent is going on here, where γόοιο coupled with όλοοίο expresses its regular function, but when combined with τεταρπώμεσθα it produces an oxymoronic effect.

Γόος points in two directions: it expresses the belief that, through this particular form of lamentation, the suffering and distress of the individual can be eased, reduced and satisfied. There can even be some sort of delight in uttering a personal lament, because the grief piled up due to the death of a dear one may find a way out and be released through its verbalization, its transformation into language.

On the other hand, the desire for γόος that brings satisfaction alludes to a latent menace: that of the dead. If γόος brings satisfaction and there is a desire for it, there is at the same time a negation of life and its everyday manifestations. Achilles -and this is no coincidence- is the only one who employs these expressions in the Iliad. He finds the satisfaction he can no longer find in life in a ritual process that is linked to death. This looks at his own future death, as from Book 19 onwards, when he expresses his desire to abstain from food and drink,457 he is continuously

455 This is consonant with the general tendency of epic to characterize the singer's own performance as pleasure (τέρψις). See Derderian (2001) 67-69 and ft. 11.

456 See Pucci (1998) 106. 457 Note that the verb for satiety is again used: "μή με πριν σίτοιο κελεύετε μηδέ

ποχήτος / άσαθαι φίλον ήτορ" (19. 306-307).

Privileged and Unprivileged Dead 177

moving towards his own "frightening and ascetic companionship of death".45" Achilles desires the satisfaction that a γόος can offer, and tries to pass the same feeling on to the Myrmidons and the ghost of Patroclus. This symbolizes a welcoming gesture towards death: now that his friend is no longer alive, the only delight he can find is granted to him by the negation of the manifestations of life, as expressed in abstention from food and drink or a death ritual.

«» See Pucci (1998) 106.

APPENDIX II

Short obituaries in the Iliad

Introductory remarks

The Iliadic short obituaries can be defined as brief necrological vignettes dedicated to a dead warrior, Greek or Trojan, of little or no importance to the plot, in most cases reported in indirect speech. Short obituaries in the Iliad (SO) are thus a poetic miniature of the stylized personal laments, the γόοι. They represent the way the epic deals with the death of hundreds of warriors who relentlessly fall on the battlefield; at first glance, one might think these deaths function as long casualty lists of no weight and significance. Yet a closer look reveals that they share some common characteristics with their "bigger brothers", the personal laments and that their abbreviated, reference-style is not insignificant at all.459

Once we set out to study the SO, we have to turn our attention to the highly frequent battle scenes in the Iliad. This is natural, since the SO are almost always attested within the framework of one of the four types of battle-scenes found in the epic: the duel, the simple androktasia, the aristeia and the massive or multiple androktasiai.46° Iliadic battle scenes are classified not only on the basis of the number of slayers and slain,461

but also according to the distribution and organization of their constituent elements. According to Niens,462 we can distinguish between three forms of battle-scenes, which she calls the brief type (Kurzform), the basic form

459 On the importance of the SO as poetic devices conveying emotion and offering status to their subjects, see Griffin (1980) 103-143.

460 On the classification of typical battle-scenes and their function, see Fenik (1968); Latacz (1977); Niens (1987); Hellmann (2000).

461 Single vs. single (duel), multiple vs. multiple with one side victorious (simple androktasia), single vs. multiple (aristeia), and finally multiple vs. multiple at the same time with no victor (multiple androktasiai).

462 Niens (1987) xi-xiv.

180 APPENDIX II

(Normal-/Grundform) and the expanded form (which results from the expansion of the basic form).463 The brief form is one or two verses long and comprises the following elements:

1. an explicit reference to the killer 2. a reference to the victim 3. a verbal expression meaning "to kill" The ensuing verse shows the co-existence of these elements in a single

verse: Πήδαιον δ' άρ' επεφνε Μέγης, 'Αντήνορος υίόν (5. 69). The basic form includes the following elements: 1. Killer 2. Victim 3. Indication of the action 4. Weapons 5. Reference to the wounded part of the body 6. Effect of the injury 7. Description of death approaching Niens464 offers a splendid example (16. 345-350): Ιδομενεύς (1) δ'

Έρύμαντα (2) κατά στόμα (5) νηλέϊ χαλκψ (4) νύξε· (3) τό δ' αντικρύ δόρυ χάλκεον έξεπέρησεν νέρθεν ύπ' έγκεφάλοιο, κέασσε δ' αρ' όστέα λευκά... (6) ... θανάτου δέ μέλαν νέφος άμφεκάλυψεν (7).

The expanded form has the following internal structure: 1. Reference to the position of the warrior (standing on a chariot,

running etc.) 2. An indication of the poet's view 3. Biographical information originating from the use of the patronymic 4. A simile of various size 5. Direct triumph speeches against the opponent 6. Emotional reactions about one's fate465

This short digression on the forms of battles scenes in the Iliad is essential for the study of the SO, since it constitutes the "poetic environ-ment" where they (the SO) are developed. Moreover, like the battle-scenes, the SO display considerable variation in their length, constituent elements and function.

Previous research conducted on this topic aimed at showing "that the

461 Niens does not give a specific name to this form of battle-scene. «4 Niens (1987) xiii. 445 For examples, see Niens (1987) xiv.

Short obituaries in the Iliad 181

dispassionate manner in which these slayings are recorded, and above all the short obituaries which many of them are given, are important and striking because they do in fact convey emotion, and because in doing so they give status and significance to their subjects".466 This appendix has a rather different aim: it is an attempt to classify the SO into categories and examine their relation to the Iliadic personal laments.

Types of Short Obituaries

There are two types of SO in the Iliad: the brief type and the expanded one. This may sound strange, since the SO are by definition laconic. On the other hand, they also display variation in size in a way that resembles their "textual neighbors", i.e. the battle-scenes within whose framework they are located.

The Iliad contains 45 expanded SO:467 2. 872-875; 4. 473-489; 5. 49-58; 5. 59-68; 5. 69-75; 5. 76-83; 5. 152-158; 5. 541-560; 5. 708-710; 6. 12-19; 6. 20-28; 6. 33-35; 7. 327-370; 8. 302-308; 11. 101-121; 11. 218-247; 11. 262-263; 11. 301-309; 12. 110-117; 13. 170-181; 13. 363-369; 13. 384-393; 13. 427-444; 13. 560-575; 13. 660-672; 13. 758-764; 14. 442-445; 15. 333-335; 15. 525-539; 16. 404-410; 16. 480-491; 16. 570-580; 16. 594-599; 16. 633-637; 16. 855-857; 17. 51-60; 17. 300-303; 17. 348-351; 17. 426-440; 17. 520-524; 17. 575-581; 17. 609-616; 20. 381-392; 20. 401-406; 20. 407-418.

The Brief SO

The brief type of SO (16. 333-334: τον δέ κατ' οσσε / ελλαβε πορφύρεος θάνατος και μοίρα κραταιή) has the following structure: Victim + Verb figuratively meaning "death" + Death/Metaphor for Death. The internal organisation of the brief form bears a striking resemblance to the "Kurzform"46" of androktasia: Πήδαιον δ' άρ' επεφνε Μέγης, 'Αντήνορος

466 Griffin (1980) 104. 447 I have not counted all the brief SO in the Iliad.

See Niens (1987) xii.

182 APPENDIX II

υΐόν (5. 69) [Victim + Verb denoting "killing" + Killer]. In the brief form of SO there is often an expression referring to the part of the body death or darkness has fallen upon (mainly the eyes / κατ' δσσε). This seems to be a reflection of the typical reference of battle-scenes to the part of warrior's body where the fatal wound has been inflicted: άλλ' εβαλ' Ίππασίδην Ύψήνορα ποιμένα λαών / ήπαρ ύπό πραπίδων, ειθαρ δ' ύπό γούνατ' ελυσεν (13. 411-412). This similarity is due to poetic economy, which characterizes not only formulaic use, the micro-units of the Homeric verse, but also any form of typical scene. At the same time, it can be easily explained as a result of context-reference and even context-proximity, since both scenes, the "Kurzform" of the battle-scene and the brief form of the SO, are "poetically nourished" in the same environment. On the other hand, what is important is the impact this similarity has on the way killing, dying and commemorating are perceived by the Iliad and the tradition it represents. The parallel structure detected above reflects how epic comprehends death. Death takes "hold of ' , "covers" (κατ' δσσε / ελλαβε - θανάτου δέ μέλαν νέφος άμφεκάλυψεν - έρεβεννή νύξ/σκότος (έ)κάλυψε(ν)) the victim, just as the victor "hits" (εβαλε) the victim. Death is envisaged as a figurative victor who always comes after his mortal counterpart and completes the former's work. This is because killing pertains to the world of the living, whereas dying is a transitional process linking the world of the living to that of the dead. Their resemblance as exemplified through the epic's perception of killing and dying is reflected in the structure of the brief form of the Iliadic SO.

The Expanded SO

I have selected two expanded SO for close examination, the obituary of Simoeisius in 4. 473-489, and that for the two sons of Diocles in 5. 541-560.

Simoeisius (4. 473-489): ενθ' εβαλ' Άνθεμίωνος υίόν Τελαμώνιος Αϊας, ήΐθεον θαλερόν Σιμοείσιον, ον ποτε μήτηρ "Ιδηθεν κατιούσα παρ' οχθησιν Σιμόεντος γείνατ', έπεί ρα τοκεΰσιν αμ' εσπετο μήλα ίδέσθαι. τούνεκά μιν κάλεον Σιμοείσιον ουδέ τοκεΰσιν

Short obituaries in the Iliad 183

θρέπτρα φίλοις άπέδωκε, μινυνθάδιος δέ οι αιών επλεθ' ΰπ' Αΐαντος μεγάθυμου δουρί δαμέντι. πρώτον γάρ μιν Ιόντα βάλε στήθος παρά μαζόν δεξιόν, άντικρύ δέ δι' ώμου χάλκεον έγχος ήλθεν δ δ' έν κονίησι χαμαί πέσεν αίγειρος ώς, ή ρά τ' έν είαμενή ελεος μεγάλοιο πεφύκη λείη, άτάρ τέ οί οζοι έπ' άκροτάτη πεφύασιν· την μέν θ' άρματοπηγός άνήρ αΐθωνι σιδήρφ έξέταμ', οφρα ιτυν κάμψη περικαλλέϊ δίφρφ· ή μέν τ' άζομένη κείται ποταμοΐο παρ' οχθας· τοίον άρ' Ανθεμίδην Σιμοείσιον έξενάριξεν Α'ίας διογενής.

There Telamonian Aias struck down the son of Anthemion Simoeisios in his stripling's beauty, whom once his mother descending from Ida bore beside the banks of Simoeis when she had followed her father and mother to tend the sheep-flocks. Therefore they called him Simoeisios; but he could not render again the care of his dear parents; he was short-lived, beaten down beneath the spear of high-hearted Aias, who struck him as he first came forward beside the nipple of the right breast, and the bronze spearhead drove clean through the shoulder. He dropped then to the ground in the dust, like some black poplar, which in the land low-lying about a great marsh grows smooth trimmed yet with branches growing at the uttermost tree-top: one whom a man, a maker of chariots, fell with the shining iron, to bend it into a wheel for a fine-wrought chariot, and the tree lies hardening by the banks of a river. Such was Anthemion's son Simoeisios, whom illustrious Aias killed.

The sons of Diodes (5. 541-560): ενθ' αυτ' Αινείας Δαναών ελεν άνδρας άριστους, υιε Διοκλήος, Κρήθωνά τε Όρτίλοχόν τε, τών ρα πατήρ μέν έναιεν έϋκτιμένη ενί Φηρή, άφνειός βιότοιο, γένος δ' ην έκ ποταμοΐο

APPENDIX II

Αλφειού, ος τ' εύρύ ρέει Πυλίων δια γαίης· δς τέκετ' Όρτίλοχον πολέεσσ' άνδρεσσιν άνακτα, Όρτίλοχος δ' αρ' ετικτε Διοκλήα μεγάθυμον, έκ δέ Διοκλήος διδυμάονε παΐδε γενέσθην, Κρήθων Όρτίλοχός τε, μάχης ευ είδότε πάσης, τώ μέν αρ' ήβήσαντε μελαινάων έπΐ νηών "Ιλιον εις εύπωλον αμ' Αργείοισιν επεσθην, τιμήν Ατρεΐδης, Αγαμέμνονι και Μενελάψ, άρνυμένω· τώ δ' αυθι τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψεν. οΐω τώ γε λέοντε δύω ορεος κορυφήσιν έτραφέτην ύπό μητρί βαθείης τάρφεσιν ΰλης· τώ μέν άρ' άρπάζοντε βόας και ιφια μήλα σταθμούς άνθρώπων κεραΐζετον, οφρα και αύτώ άνδρών έν παλάμησι κατέκταθεν όξέϊ χαλκψ· τοίω τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε καππεσέτην, έλάτησιν έοικότες ύψηλησιν.

Now Aineias killed two great men of the Danaans, the sons of Diokles, Orsilochos and Krethon, men whose father dwelt in Phere the strong-founded, rich in substance, and his generation was of the river Alpheios, who flows wide through the country of the Pylians, and who got a son, Ortilochos, to be lord over many men, but the son of Ortilochos was high-hearted Diokles; and to Diokles in his turn were two twin sons born, Orsilochos and Krethon, both well skilled in all fighting. These two as they were grown to young manhood followed along with the Argives in their black ships to Ilion, land of good horses, winning honour for the sons of Atreus, Agamemnon and Menelaos; now fulfilment of death was a darkness upon them. These, as two young lions in the high places of the mountains, had been raised by their mother in the dark of the deep forest, lions which as they prey upon the cattle and the fat sheep lay waste the steadings where there are men, until they also fall and are killed under the cutting bronze in the men's hands; such were these two who beaten under the hands of Aineias crashed now to the ground as if they were two tall pine trees.

Short obituaries in the Iliad 185

These two expanded SO share some common characteristics:

1. brief genealogical information Both passages begin with some genealogical information, either about

one's immediate parentage (Simoeisius' mother) or going back three generations (Alpheius-Orsilochus-Diocles-twin sons of Diocles).

2. the theme of premature death or death during one's youth This is a stylized manner the SO employ to express a brief comment

on a warrior's fate. Simoeisius' short life is referred to by the expression μινυνθάδιος δέ oí αιών (4. 478); the words ήΐθεον θαλερόν used at the beginning of line 474 and attributed to Simoeisius also refer to his youth, as if to prepare the theme of premature death. In the case of the twin sons of Diocles, we hear an indirect reference to this same theme: the word ήβήσαντε in line 550 determines their age at the time they sailed to Troy. The theme of their youth is also highlighted by the simile that follows, in which the sons are compared to two mountain lions killed by men during a raid on livestock. In the same way, when the sons of Diocles go away from their father, they meet their doom.469

3. the theme of excellence in battle In 5. 541 the twins of Diocles are characterized as άνδρας άριστους

and later on, in 5. 549 as μάχης ευ είδότε πάσης, with the adjective άρι-στους and the participle είδότε accompanied by the adverb ευ referring to their excellence on the battlefield. Although there is no direct mention of Simoeisius' bravery in his obituary, in the simile following the description of his death he is compared to a smooth poplar (αίγειρος λείη) falling down; one of the main aspects that the simile brings to light is the antithesis between έν κονίησι χαμαί πέσεν (482) and έπ' άκροτάτη (484), the tall poplar's headlong fall. In this I am inclined to see an allusion to the headlong downfall of a mighty young warrior.470 Thus, the afore-

469 Premature death constitutes a typical theme in funerary epigrams. See Lattimore (1942); Skiadas (1959); Griessmair (1966); Verilhac (1978), (1982).

470 Despite referring to Simoeisius' youth, the epithet θαλερός reserved for him also contains a sense of strength, given the general association between youth and the peak of power.

186 APPENDIX II

mentioned obituaries contain both direct and indirect references to the might of the young warriors and their excellence on the battlefield.

4. ring-composition Ring-composition is the most typical way of building and organizing

an Iliadic γόος-speech. The same organizational method has been used in these two "necrological vignettes". The passage referring to Simoeisius begins with the one and a half-line (4. 474-475): ενθ' εβαλ' Ανθεμίωνος υίόν Τελαμώνιος Αϊας, / ήΐθεον θαλερόν Σιμοείσιον and ends with the one and a half-line (4. 488-489): τοΐον άρ' Ανθεμίδην Σιμοείσιον έξενάριξεν / Α'ίας διογενής. The obituary for the sons of Diocles also exhibits the same feature; beginning with (5. 541-542): ενθ' αυτ' Αινείας Δαναών ελεν άνδρας άριστους, / υιε Διοκλήος, it also ends in ring-form (5. 559-560): τοίω τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε / καπεσσέτην.471

5. a simile Both passages472 contain a long simile immediately after the

genealogical information. The similes resemble each other in two respects:473 reference to 1) a kind of tree (a poplar: αίγειρος / pine trees: έλάτησιν) and 2) the notion of height (on the highest edge of [the poplar]: έπ' άκροτάτη / on the peaks of the mountain: ορεος κορυφησιν/the highest pines: έλάτησιν ύψηλησιν). The vegetal imagery which here takes the form of tree-reference is typical not only of the SO, but also of the whole Iliadic conception of death. Nagy has shown how άφθιτος -"conveys the cultural negation of a natural process, the growing and wilting of plants, and also, by extension the life and the death of mortals".474 This epithet is particularly associated with Achilles, the best of the Achaeans, whose death results from his refusal to gain his νόστος and return to his homeland, Φθίη, in order to win κλέος άφθιτον by dying at Troy. In a poem like the Iliad, where death is the preeminent theme, it is no wonder that even the simple, second or even third-rate warriors

471 Cf. also the almost identical ideas expressed by those lines which refer to the very act of the killing: 4. 479: επλεθ' ύπ' Αί'αντος μεγάθυμου δουρί δαμέντι and 5. 559: τοίω τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε.

472 The Diocles passage also contains one more short simile at its very end. 473 Here both similes, the long and the short one included in the obituary of Diocles'

sons, are taken into consideration. 474 Nagy (1979) 184 ff.

Short obituaries in the Iliad 187

share the same imagery. The earth and everything that grows from it symbolize the other homeland of the warriors, who will not be "received" by their dear ones at home but by the very soil they are standing on. Trees stand high like warriors and fall suddenly, they may even be used as symbols of youth and beauty,475 so the tertium comparationis seems self-evident. Moreover, the tree or flower is sometimes cut down by metal tools, just as the warrior is killed by the metal-wrought weapon of his enemy.476 At the same time, trees form part of the general Iliadic consciousness concerning the cycle of life and death.477 As one critic has neatly put it "[t]he Iliad, in its most stern spirit, dislikes this agricultural image, since it is inconsistent with heroic death, and directly debunks it by the elaborate equation of the heroic life with the corruptible life of nature and by the repeated similes that compare the fallen hero with the cut-down tree, or flower... [b]y these similes the Iliad raises funeral images to honor death and to give a brutal representation of it... it [the Iliad] also 'invents' death, a brutal death, indeed, but it is this sort of death that produces the funeral poetry of the Iliad."*1*

6. Absence of explicitly stated pathos

475 See Griffin (1980) 105 who notes: "... the scholiast observes: 'expressed emotionally, through the tall pine-trees, because of their youth and beauty'".

476 Pucci (1996) 18, footnote 13. 477 It is characteristic that in the SO for the twin sons of Diocles there is first a lion simile

and then a tree simile. Kirk (1990) 116 thinks that "the poet may feel that the brothers' actual death has not been illuminated by the main lion simile, and so adds a short and pathetic reference to their collapsing like pine-trees". This may be true, but the question Kirk never asks is why the poet considered the tree simile more appropriate and illuminating than the lion one? Probably because of the inherent connection between the cycle of life and human fate (cf. 11. 155-159, 14. 414-415, 18. 55-57). This is a typical theme in Greek funeral tradition of all ages. See Alexiou (2002) 198-201, 241, n. 45. Moulton (1977) 60-61 comments on the lion simile as a device whose "variation and balance complement the shift in the battle narrative, in which at this point the Trojans have the upper hand." Other tree similes with elaborate development are found in 13. 178; 13. 389 (= 16. 482 ff.); 14. 414 ff.; 17. 53 ff., as Kirk (1990) 116 notes.

478 Pucci (1996) 17-18, ft. 13. The trees of the famous garden scene in Odyssey 24 are very different from the ones mentioned in the Iliadic SO. See Pucci (1996) 5-24. Note also Lowenstam's view (1981) 133-134 that there is a connection between the scene in 23. 110-126 where Meriones and his men cut down trees on Mount Ida for Patroclus' funeral pyre and the simile employed by the poet for the death of Asius (13. 389 £f.), as well as another woodcutting simile in 16. 633-637 before Patroclus'

188 APPENDIX II

Words explicitly stating pathos are absent or very rare in the Iliadic SO.479 The abundance of similes may be some sort of response to the low-key tone of these scenes. This reminds one of funerary epigrams whose style is also laconic not only in respect of size but also, and perhaps more importantly, in respect of sentimental terminology.

7. Structural order I. Simoeisius obituary a. Ajax killed him (473-474) b. Genealogical information and reference to the past (474-477) c. Young as he was he was killed (478-479) d. Long-simile (482-487) a'. Ajax killed him (488-489a) II. Obituary for the sons of Diocles a. Aeneas killed them (541-542) b. Genealogical information (543-549) c. Young as they were they died at Troy (550-553) d. Long-simile (554-558) a'. Aeneas killed them (558-559)

The previous comparison reveals certain similarities and analogies shared by these two expanded obituaries, as they both contain the same thematic elements displayed in the same order.

Iliadic γόοι between mirroring and deflecting

This analysis will take the form of a comparison. I will examine how each of the features of the Iliadic obituaries functions in the personal laments.

death. The affinity between these scenes is underscored by their sharing the same imagery and the same agents; Lowenstam (1981, 133-134) rightly implies that as in the Homeric Hymn to Demeter (228-230), there may be a magical and ritual aspect. See also Nagy (1979) 186-189 and for the Meleager fire-brand story, Kakridis (1949) 21 ff. Trees provide inspiration for one of the most fertile types of imagery in poetry produced by many ancient cultures. It seems that such imagery is also connected with the first origins of mankind. See Nagy (1990) 181-201. See Shannon (1975) 31-86, who plausibly maintains that myths connected with the origins of humankind are related to the theme of Achilles' ash spear in the Iliad.

47' See Griffin (1980) 105.

Short obituaries in the Iliad 189

1. genealogical information The genealogical information which is given in the necrological

vignettes undergoes a thorough transformation in the Iliadic personal laments; when Andromache utters her γόοι in Books 6 and 22, we often hear some information about her father Eetion, her wedding and how Hector took her from her house and led her to Troy as his wife. What was pure genealogy480 has been transformed for the particular occasion of Andromache's speech to serve a more important goal -that of opposing her past happiness with her present sufferings for the loss of her husband. What had been a graphic detail in the obituaries is elevated here to a theme typical for the personal lament: the contrast between past and present. In Andromache's personal lament in Book 6, genealogical information has been transformed into a picture of death in order to sustain her argument (429-430) that Hector is at once her father, her mother and her brother, since she has lost the whole of her family. In the case of Briséis, who resembles Hector's widow (19. 287-300) in that she too has lost her three brothers and husband at the hands of Achilles, the γόος reference to her family and the sack of her father Mynes' city introduce the typical "Comparison" with other sufferings that the mourner has undergone. Genealogical information is used here to promote a basic thematic unit of an Iliadic personal lament and make it more effective. In Achilles' γόος in Book 19, genealogical details concerning his father Peleus and his son Neoptolemus have been elevated by the Iliad to a major theme: the suffering of the father for the predestined death of his son in Troy.

2. shortness of life or premature death Hector dies young (24. 725), his son will soon die νήπιος (24. 726),

but the most important example of all is that of Achilles, who is ώκυμο-ρώτατος. Despite the fact that Achilles' death is an extra-Iliadic event, foreshadowed but not actually narrated in the epic, we still have references to his perishing in Troy (19. 329; 19. 337 etc.). It is true that the personal laments make no explicit mention of Achilles dying young, and even the adjectives ώκύμορος/ώκυμορώτατος do not express the idea of a premature death, but rather of a death that is coming soon. On the other hand, the references to Neoptolemus and Astyanax in various

480 For an examination of the family in archaic literature in general, see Siurla-Theodoridou (1989).

190 APPENDIX II

personal laments (Book 6, Book 19, Books 22 and 24) may imply the youth of both Achilles and Hector, albeit indirectly. Apart from this, the Iliad seems to build on this theme and combine it with that of dying far from one's native land. In 4. 180-181 Agamemnon reports verbatim the speech of a hypothetical speaker, who might say that Agamemnon re-turned from Troy to his own land but left his brother Menelaus behind. In 18. 332 Achilles says that neither his father Peleus nor his mother Thetis will welcome him home, but "the earth will hold me here" (άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει). The same theme is found in verse-epitaphs; in an epigram from Egypt (Hansen 171, 475-400? B. C) we read: νόσφι τοκέ / [ων]: τηλ' ώ πατρίδ / [ος] ήμετέρης; one can see here that the Iliadic personal laments have combined the two motifs, that of premature death and that of dying away from home and family, thus creating a new, more vivid theme.

3. excellence on the battlefield Hector is constantly depicted as a great warrior. In her personal lament

in Iliad 24, Andromache characterizes him as ού μείλιχος (24. 739). This expression is used to introduce the theme of the "Comparison", this time not with sufferings previously undergone by the mourner, but with other men of the same class (i.e. warriors) among whom Hector excells: after his death nobody else can protect Troy, which is doomed to fall. The deceased's might in war has been exploited to suit the "Comparison" theme.

4. ring-composition This is the typical organizational method for both the personal laments

and the obituaries. It caps a passage and links beginning and end, strengthening its unity and cohesion; it also marks the lament's borders clearly and throws the light onto its kernel.

5. simile Though common in narrative sections, there are no similes in the

personal laments.

The similarities detected between the short obituaries and the personal laments can lead us to general conclusions about the connections between them as well as to the poetics of the Iliad.

The main explanation offered thus far for the presence of the short

Short obituaries in the Iliad 191

obituaries in the epic has followed the basic interpretative line prevailing in Homeric scholarship for many years. The short obituaries offer a pause from the continuous fighting that is typical of many Iliadic Books, especially the initial and central ones.481 They (the SO) help ease the pressure exercised on the reader or listener because of the long casualty lists. The monumental poet varied the material he had inherited from a long lasting tradition of epic poetry, which had furnished him with catalogues of warriors and a typical way of depicting the so-called battle-scenes. This kind of approach (found in respectable works of modern scholarship)4'2

was consonant with the approach of the ancient scholiasts, who were eager to underscore the supremacy of the Iliadic poet on account of his ability to create emotional tension at a moment of mere brutality.

No doubt this hermeneutic method has been of great help for appreciating the mastery of the Iliad but it is, I dare say, somewhat incautious, or at the very least one-sided. Its basic flaw is that it fails to consider the short obituaries within the larger framework of death and concomitant lament, which together form the dominant theme throughout the Iliad. The SO are not isolated insertions within vast segments of narrative concerning fighting, but a natural outcome of the poem's preoccupation with the heroic code and the fate of warriors who die in battle. The Iliad depicts the killing of a warrior with the utmost brevity. As Griffin rightly notes,4'3 this style is very different from the long descriptions of fighting found in later European medieval literature, in which knights fight lengthy duels before one succumbs to the other's force. The Iliad is concerned with human fate rather than war and adventurous fighting, and employs a reference-style distinguished for the economy typical of oral or orally-derived texts. It makes extensive use of a highly stylized manner of dealing with pain and suffering, of representing death, one which banishes shrieks and cries from the battle-scenes just as they are banished from epigrammatic poetry. Pathos has to be expressed in different ways, and the Iliad can only be praised for the SO, those "poetic gems" which contrast variety with consistency in

4" See Schadewaldt (19592) 326; Kirk (1962) 341-342. See also Friedrich (1956) 66, who highlights the parallelism between the endings of three consecutive killing scenes where Ajax is the protagonist.

482 Griffin (1980). 4,3 Griffin (1980) 140-143 with more bibliography.

1 9 2 APPENDIX II

presenting a tragic view of human life on the one hand, and sheer pathos crowned with abbreviated sentiment on the other. This poetical brevity, with its remarkable laconic style, is comparable to funerary poetry found in epigrams of the archaic and classical periods. The absence of lament ex-pressions484 is also at work in short obituaries and bespeaks the existence of a paradox based on the emotional cornucopia of the SO through a diction of thrift.

484 For a reccnt study of the archaic epigram in comparison with the Greek lament tradition, see Derderian (2001) 63-113.

Bibliography

Editions, Commentaries, Concordances, Grammars, Léxica

Allen (1912)

Allen (1917-1919)

Allen (19203)

Ameis-Hentze

Bechtel CIG

CEG

DELG

DGE

Denniston Ebeling Edwards 1991

Erbse

GHI-II

Heubeck/ Hoekstra 1989

T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera V, (Hymns, Cycle, etc.), Oxford 1912. T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus III, Odysseae Libros I-XII continens; Tomus IV, Odysseae Libros XIII-XXIVcontinens; Oxford 1917-1919. T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus I, Iliadis Libros I-XII continens; Tomus II, Iliadis Libros XIII-XXIV continens; Oxford 19203. K. F. Améis & C. Hentze, Homers Ilias, Leipzig 1868-1932 (repr. Amsterdam 1965). F. Bechtel, Lexilogus zu Homer, Halle 1914. Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, I-IV, ed. A. Boeckh et al., Berlin 1828-1877. P. A. Hansen, Carmina Epigraphica Graeca, 2 vols., Berlin-New York 1983-1989. P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque, I-II, Paris 1968-1980. Diccionario Griego-Español, eds. F. R. Adrados & E. Ganguita, Madrid 1980-. J. D. Denniston, The Greek Particles, Oxford 19542. H. Ebeling, Lexicon Homericum, Leipzig 1880-1885. M. Edwards, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. V, Books 17-20, Cambridge 1991. H. Erbse, Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem (Scholia Vetera), I-VII, Berlin 1969-1988. P. Chantraine, Grammaire homérique, I-II, Paris 1986-19886 [1948-19531].

A. Heubeck & A. Hoekstra, A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol. II, Oxford 1989.

194 Bibliography

IG

K.-A.

Kirk 1985

Kirk 1990

Leaf LfgrE

LIMC

LSJ

Monro & Allen

Monro 18912

OCD3

OCT PEG

PMG RE

Prendergast

Richardson 1993

Risch 19742

Inscriptiones Graecae, I-XIV, Berlin 1873-. R. Kassel-C. Austin, Poetae Comici Graeci, Berlin and New York 1983-1998. G. S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. I, Books 1-4, Cambridge 1985. G. S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. II, Books 5-8, Cambridge 1990. W. Leaf, The Iliad, I-II, London 1900-19022. Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos, eds. Β. Snell & Η. Erbse, Göttingen 1955-1984. Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae, eds. H. Ackermann & G.-R. Gisler, Zurich 1981-1977. A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edn. rev. by Sir H. S. Jones & R. McKenzie, Oxford 1940 (with rev. suppl. by P. G. W. Glare 1996). D. B. Monro & T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus I, Iliadis Libros I-XII continens: Tomus II, Iliadis Libros XIII-XXIVcontinens; Oxford 19203. D. B. Monro, A Grammar of the Homeric dialect, Oxford 189P. The Oxford Classical Dictionary, eds. S. Hornblower & A. Spawforth, Oxford 19963. Oxford Classical Texts Poetarum Epicorun Graecorum testimonia et fragmenta, pars I, ed. A. Bernabé, Stuttgart-Leipzig 19962. Poetae Melici Graeci, ed. D. L. Page, Oxford 1962. Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertum-swissenschaft, ed. G. Wissowa et al., Stuttgart 1894-1978. L. Prendergast, A Complete Concordance to the Iliad of Homer, rev. by B. Marzullo, Hildesheim 1962. Ν. Richardson, The Iliad. A Commentary, vol. VI, Books 21-24, Cambridge 1993. E. Risch, Wortbildung der homerischen Sprache, Berlin-New York 19742 [1937].

Russo/ Fernandez-Galiano/

Bibliography 195

Heubeck 1992

Schwyzer Schwyzer-Debr.

Sihler

TLG

van der Valk

van Thiel 1991 van Thiel 1996 West 1998-2000

Russo J., Fernández-Galiano M., Heubeck Α., A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol III, Oxford 1992. E. Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik, I, Munich 1939. E. Schwyzer & A. Debrunner, Griechische Gram-matik, II, Munich 1950. A. L. Sihler, New Comparative Grammar of Greek and Latin, New York-Oxford 1995. Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (CD-ROM E [latest copy], University of California at Irvine) M. H. A. L. Η van der Valk, Eustathii Commentarli ad Homeri Iliadem pertinentes, vol. I-IV, Leiden 1971-1989. H. van Thiel, Homeri Odyssea, Hildesheim 1991. H. van Thiel, Homeri Ilias, Hildesheim 1996. M. L. West, Homerus Ilias, vol. I: rhapsodiae I-XII; vol. II: rhapsodiae XIII-XXIV, Stuttgart-Leipzig 1998-2000.

Translations of the Iliad are based on Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of Homer, Chicago 1951 and of the Odyssey on E. V. Rieu, Homer. The Odyssey, London 2003 (1946) unless indicated otherwise. The quotation of T. S. Eliot's The Four Quartets, Burnt Norton is taken from his Collected Poems 1909-1962, Faber and Faber, Boston & London 1974.

Works Cited

The abbreviations of journals normally follow the conventions of L' Année Philologique or will be obvious.

Adkins (1969) Adkins A. W. Η., "Εύχομαι, εύχωλή, and ευχος in Homer", CQ 19 (1969) 20-33.

Ahl (1989) Ahl F., "Homer, Virgil, and Complex Narrative Stru-ctures in Latin Epic: An Essay", ICS 14 (1989) 1-31.

Alden (2000) Alden M., Homer Beside Himself: Para-narratives in the Iliad, Oxford 2000.

Alexiou (20022) Alexiou M., The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition,

196 Bibliography

Alexiou (1983)

Allen (1973)

rev. by D. Yatromanolakis & P. Roilos, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 20022 [1974]. Alexiou M., "Sons, Wives and Mothers. Reality and Fantasy in Some Modern Greek Ballads", JMGS 1 (1983) 73-112. Allen W. S., Accent and Rhythm. Prosodie Features of Latin and Greek: A Study in Theory and Reconstruc-tion, Cambridge 1973.

Anastassiou (1971)Anastassiou I., Zum Wortfeld "Trauer" in der Sprache Homers, Hamburg 1971.

Andersen (1978) Andersen 0. , Die Diomedesgestalt in der Ilias, (Symbolae Osloenses Supplement 25), Oslo-Bergen 1978.

Andronikos (1968) Andronikos M., Totenkult, Archaeologia Homérica Kapitel W, Göttingen 1968.

Antinucci (1974) Antinucci F., "Sulla deissi", Lingua e Stile 11 (1974) 223-247. Arend W., Die typischen Scenen bei Homer, (Pro-blemata 7), Berlin 1933. Arnould D., Le rire et les larmes dans la littérature grecque d'Homère à Platon, Paris 1990. Austin Ν., "The Function of Digressions in the Iliact\ GRBS 7.4(1966) 295-312. Bakhtin M. M., Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, trans. Vern W. McGee, Austin 1986. Bakker E. J., "Homeric Discourse and Enjambement. A Cognitive Approach", TAPhA 120(1990) 1-21.

Bakker & Fabbricotti (1991) Bakker E. J. & Fabbriconi F., "Peripheral and Nuclear

Semantics in Homeric Diction. The Case of Dative Ex-pressions for 'Spear'", Mnemosyne 44 (1991) 63-84.

Arend (1933)

Arnould (1990)

Austin (1966)

Bakhtin (1986)

Bakker(1990)

Bakker & van den Houten (1992)

Bakker (1993)

Bakker E. J. & van den Houten N., "Aspects of Sy-nonymy in Homeric Formulaic Diction. An Investiga-tion of Dative Expressions for 'Spear'", CPh 87 (1992) 1-13. Bakker E. J., "Discourse and Performance: Involve-

Bibliography 197

Bakker(1995)

Bakker(1997a)

Bakker(1997b)

Bakker(1997c)

Bakker(1997d)

Bakker (1999)

Bal (19972)

Bannert (1988)

Bassett (1938)

Baudy (1980)

Beck (1997)

Behaghel (1909)

ment, Visualization and 'Presence' in Homeric Poetry", Classical Antiquity 12 (1993) 1-29. Bakker E. J., "Noun-Epithet Formulas, Milman Parry, and the Grammar of Poetry", in J. P. Crielaard (ed.), Homeric Questions, Essays in Philology, Art History and Archaeology, Conference organized by the Netherlands Institute at Athens (15 May 1993), Amsterdam 1995, 97-125. Bakker E. J., Poetry in Speech: Orality and Homeric Discourse, Ithaca 1997a. Bakker E. J., "The Study of Homeric Discourse", in I. Morris & B. Powell (eds.), A New Companion to Homer (Mnemosyne Supplement 163), Leiden-New York-Köln 1997b, 284-304. Bakker E. J., "Storytelling in the Future: Truth, Time, and Tense in Homeric Epic", in E. J. Bakker & A. Kahane (eds.), Written Voices, Spoken Signs: Tradition, Performance, and the Epic Text, Cambridge Mass.-London 1997c, 11-36. Bakker E. J., "Verbal Aspect and Mimetic Description in Thucydides", in E. J. Bakker (ed.), Grammar as Interpretation: Greek Literature in Linguistic Contexts, Leiden-New York-Köln 1997d, 7-53. Bakker E. J., "Homeric ΟΥΤΟΣ and the Poetics of Deixis", CPh 94 (1999) 1-19. Bal M., Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of Narrative, trans.C.van Boheemen, Toronto 19972[1985]. Bannert H., Formen der Wiederholung bei Homer. Beispiele für eine Poetik des Epos (Wiener Studien-Beiheft 13), Wien 1988. Bassett S. E., The Poetry of Homer, (Sather Classical Lectures 15), Berkeley 1938. Baudy G. J., Exkommunikation und Reintegration: Zur Genese und Kulturfunktion frühgriechischer Einstel-lungen zum Tod, Frankfurt 1980. Beck D., Points of Departure: Variation in Homeric Speech-Frames, (PhD diss. Harvard University), 1997. Behaghel O., "Beziehungen zwischen Umfang und

198 Bibliography

Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern", Indogermanische Forschungen 25 (1909) 39.

Benveniste (1946) Benveniste E., "Structure des relations de person dans le verbe", Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique 126 (1946) 1-12 (repr. in Benveniste 1966, 225-236).

Benveniste (1971) Benveniste E., Problems in General Linguistics, trans. M. E. Meek, Coral Gables FL 1971.

Bergren (1981) Bergren Α., "Helen's Good Drug: Odyssey IV: 1 -305", in S. Kresic (ed.), Contemporary Literary Herme-neutics and the Interpretation of Classical Texts, Ottawa 1981.

Berkenkotter & Huckin (1995) Berkenkotter C. and Huckin Τ. N., Genre Knowledge

in Disciplinary Communication-Cognition/Cultural Power, New Jersey 1995. Bethe E., Homer. Dichtung und Sage, Nr. 1, Leipzig 1914.

Bezantakos (1996)Bezantakos N. P., Ή'Ρητορική της 'Ομηρικής μάχης, Athens 1996. Bhatia V. Κ., "Genre analysis today", in Genre Theo-ry: New Perspectives, Révue Belge de Philologie et d' Histoire, 75.3-4 (1997) 629-652. Bickel E., Homerischer Seelenglaube, Berlin 1926. Boiling G. M., "On the Interpretation of certain Ho-meric Formulas", CPh 17 (1922) 213-221. Bonnet Α., "Les adieux d'Hector", LEC 58 (1990) 265-268. Bowra C. M., Greek Lyric Poetry, Oxford 1961. Bühler Κ., Theory of Language: The Representational Function of Language, trans. D. F. Goodwin, Amster-dam 1990. Burgess J. S., The Tradition of the Trojan War in Homer and the Epic Cycle, Baltimore-London 2001. Burkert W., Zum Altgriechischen Mitleidsbegriff, (PhD diss. Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen), 1955. Burkert W., "ΓΟΗΣ: Zum griechischen 'Schamani-smus'", RhM 105 (1962) 36-55.

Bethe (1914)

Bhatia (1997)

Bickel (1926) Boiling (1922)

Bonnet (1990)

Bowra (1961) Bühler (1990)

Burgess (2001)

Burkert (1955)

Burkert (1962)

Bibliography 199

Burkert (1979)

Burkert (1985)

Cairns (1972)

Calarne (1977)

Calarne (1995)

Calhoun (1935)

Chafe (1994)

Chantraine (1929)

Chantraine (1946-1947)

Chatman (1990)

Christopoulos (2004)

Clarke (1999)

Collinson (1937)

Combellack (1939)

Burkert W., Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual, Berkeley 1979. Burkert W., Greek Religion, trans. J. Raffan, Cambridge Mass. 1985. Cairns F., Generic Composition in Greek and Roman Poetry, Edinburgh 1972. Caíame C., Les Choeurs de jeunes filles en Grèce archaïque, 2 vols., Rome 1977. Calarne C., The Craft of Poetic Speech in Ancient Greece, trans. J. Orion, Ithaca 1995. Calhoun G. M., "The Art of Formula in Homer: επεα πτερόεντα", CPh 30 (1935) 215-227. Chafe W. L., Discourse, Consciousness, and Time: The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience in Speaking and Writing, Chicago 1994. Chantraine P., "Sur un trait du style homérique", Re-vue de Philologie 3 (1929) 294-300.

Chantraine P., "Les noms de mari et de la femme, du père et de la mère en Grec", RÉG 59-60 (1946-1947) 219-250. Chatman S., Coming to Terms: The Rhetoric of Narrative in Fiction and Film, Ithaca NY 1990.

Christopoulos Μ., «Ομηρικοί νεκρικοί θρήνοι (Ιλιά-δος Ω 607-804): μαρτυρίες και ερμηνείες», in Νεκρο-πόλεις-Σήματα. Ταφικές πρακτικές και παραδόσεις της Μεσογείου από το 1100 π.Χ. έως το 400μ.Χ. (Proceed-ings of the International Symposium at Rhodes, 24-28 June 2000), 2004 (forthcoming). Clarke M., Flesh and Spirit in the Songs of Homer: A Study of Words and Myths, Oxford 1999. Collinson W. E., Indication: A Study of Demonstra-tives, Articles and Other 'Indicators ' (Language Mo-nographs 17), Baltimore 1937.

Combellack F. M., "Omitted Speech Formulas in Homer", UCPPh 12 (1939) 43-56.

200 Bibliography

Comrie (1976) Comrie (1985) Contiades-Tsitsoni (1990)

Couch (1937)

Culler (1975) Culler (1981)

Danek (1998)

Danforth (1982)

Deichgräber (1972)

Comrie B., Aspect, Cambridge 1976. Comrie B., Tense, Cambridge 1985.

Contiades-Tsitsoni E., Hymenaios und Epithalamion: Das Hochzeitslied in der frühgriechischen Lyrik, Stuttgart 1990. Couch Η. Ν., "A Prelude to Speech in Homer", TAPhA 68 (1937) 129-140. Culler J., Structuralist Poetics, London 1975. Culler J., The Pursuit of Sings: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction, London 1981. Danek G., Epos und Zitat. Studien zu den Quellen der Odyssee, (Wiener Studien 22), Wien 1998. Danforth L. M., The Death Rituals of Rural Greece, Princeton 1982.

Mainz

Derrida (1967) Derrida (1972)

Doherty (1995)

Deichgräber Κ., "Der letzte Gesang der Ilias'' 1972.

Delebecque (1951) Delebecque E., Le cheval dans l'Iliade, Paris 1951. Derderian (2001) Derderian K., Leaving Words to Remember: Greek

Mourning and the Advent of Literacy, Leiden 2001. Derrida J., De la Grammatologie, Paris 1967. Derrida J., "La Pharmacie de Platon" in La Dissémi-nation, Paris 1972. Doherty L.E., Siren Songs: Gender, Audiences, and Narrators in the Odyssey, Ann Arbor 1995.

Duckworth (1933) Duckworth G. E., Foreshadowing and Suspense in the Epics of Homer, Apollonius and Vergil, Princeton 1933.

Dué (2002) Dué C., Homeric Variations on a Lament by Briséis, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 2002.

Easterling (1991) Easterling P. E., "Men's κλέος and women's γόος: Female voices in the Iliad", JMGS 9.2 (1991) 145-151. Ebbott M., "The Wrath of Helen: Self-Blame and Nemesis in the Iliad\ in M. Carlisle & O. Levaniouk (eds.), Nine Essays on Homer, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 1999.

Ebbott (1999)

Bibliography 201

Eco (1981) Eco U., The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the Semiotics of Texts, London 1981.

Edwards (1970) Edwards M. W., "Homeric Speech Introductions", HSCPh 74 (1970) 1-36.

Edwards (1987) Edwards M. W., Homer Poet of the Iliad, Baltimore and London 1987.

Edwards (1986 & 1988) Edwards M. W., "Homer and Oral Tradition: The

Formula, Part I and II", Oral Tradition 1.2 (1986) 171-230 & 3.1-2 (1988) 11-60.

Edwards (1992) Edwards M. W., "Homer and Oral Tradition: The Type Scene", Oral Tradition 7.2 (1992) 284-330.

Erbse ( 1983) Erbse H., "Ilias und 'Patroklie'", Hermes 111 ( 1983) 1 -15. Felson (1999) Felson N., "Vicarious Transport: Fictive Deixis in

Pindar's Pythian Four", HSCPh 103 (1999) 1-31. Fenik (1968) Fenik B., Typical Battle-Scenes in the Iliad, (Hermes

Einzelschriften 21), Wiesbaden 1968. Fenik (1974) Fenik B., Studies in the Odyssey, (Hermes

Einzelschriften 30), Wiesbaden 1974. Ferrari (1984) Ferrari F., "Dizione epica e pianto rituale (Iliade 22,

405-36)", RFIC 112 (1984) 257-265. Fillmore (1966) Fillmore C. J., "Deictic categories in the semantics of

'come'", Foundations of Language 2 (1966) 219-227. Fillmore (1970) Fillmore C. J., "Subjects, speakers and roles", Synthese

21 (1970) 251-274. Fingerle (1939) Fingerle Α., Typik der homerischen Reden, (PhD diss.

Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich), 1939. Finnegan (1977) Finnegan R., Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance, and

Social Context, Cambridge 1977. Finnegan (1988) Finnegan R. (ed.), Literacy and Orality: Studies in the

Technology of Communication, London 1988. Fishelov (1997) Fishelov D., "Literary genres - alive and kicking: the

productivity of a literary concept", Revue Belge de Philologie et d'Histoire 75.3-4 (1997) 652-663.

Fittschen (1973) Fittschen K., Bildkunst, Archaeologia Homérica, Kap. Ν, Part I, Göttingen 1973.

Foley (2001) Foley H. P., Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, Princeton-Oxford 2001.

202 Bibliography

Foley (1985)

Foley (1990)

Foley (1991)

Foley (1992)

Foley (1999)

Ford (1992)

Fournier (1946)

Frame (1978)

Frei(1944)

Friedrich (1956)

Friis-Johansen (1967)

Foley J. M., Oral-Formulaic Theory and Research: An Introduction and Annotated Bibliography, New York 1985. Foley J. M., The Odyssey, Beowulf and the Serbo-Croatian Return Song, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1990. Foley J. M., Immanent Art, From Structure to Mean-ing in Traditional Oral Epic , Bloomington 1991. Foley J. M., "Word-Power, Performance, and Tradi-tion", Journal of American Folklore 105 (1992) 275-301. Foley J. M., Homer's Traditional Art, Pennsylvania 1999. Ford Α., Homer: The Poetry of the Past, Ithaca-London 1992. Fournier H., "Formules homériques de référence avec le verbe 'dire'", RPh 20 (1946) 29-68. Frame D., The Myth of Return in Early Greek Epic, New Haven 1978. Frei H., "Système de deictiques", Acta Linguistica 4 (1944) 111-129. Friedrich W.-H., Verwundung und Tod in der Ilias, Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Göttingen, Nr. 38, Göttingen 1956.

Friis-Johansen K., The Iliad in Early Greek Art, Co-penhagen 1967. Gaisser J. H., "A Structural Analysis of the Digres-sions in the Iliad and the Odyssey", HSCPh 73 (1969) 1-43. Garland R., The Greek Way of Death, Ithaca NY 1985. Genette G., Narrative Discourse, trans. E. Lewin, Ithaca NY 1980. Gentili Β., Poetry and its Public in Ancient Greece: From Homer to the Fifth Century, trans. Th. Cole, Baltimore 1988.

Giannakis (1998) Giannakis G. Κ., "Tò ποιητικό μοτίβο Τάμος-Θάνα-τος' στην άρχαία ελληνική και στήν Ινδοευρωπαϊκή", Δωδώνη 27.2 (1998) 93-113.

Gaisser (1969)

Garland (1985) Genette (1980)

Gentili (1988)

Bibliography 203

Goldhill (1991) Goldhill S., The Poet's Voice: Essays on Poetics and Greek Literature, Cambridge 1991.

Gordesiani (1986) Gordesiani R., Kriterien der Schriftlichkeit und Mündlichkeit im homerischen Epos, Frankfurt am Main 1986.

Graver (1995) Graver M., "Dog-Helen and Homeric Insult", Classical Antiquity 14.1 (1995)41-61.

Griessmair (1966) Griessmair E., Das Motiv der mors immatura in den griechischen metrischen Grabinschriften, Commenta-tiones Aenipontanae XVII, Innsbruck 1966.

Griffin ( 1980) Griffin J., Homer on Life and Death, Oxford 1980. Grossardt (2001) Grossardt P., Die Erzählung von Meleagros: zur lite-

rarischen Entwicklung der kalydonischen Kultle-genden, Leiden 2001.

Hainsworth (1966) Hainsworth J. B., "Joining battle in Homer", G&R 13 (1966)158-166.

Hainsworth (1968) Hainsworth J. B., The Flexibility of the Homeric For-mula, Oxford 1968.

Hame (2001) Hame K. J., review of "K. Derderian, Leaving Words to Remember: Greek Mourning and the Advent of Literacy, (Mnemosyne Supplement 209), Leiden-Bo-ston-Köln 2001", Biyn Mawr Classical Review 2001-09-09.

Harvey (1955) Harvey A. E., "The Classification of Greek Lyric Poetry", CQ 5 (1955) 157-175.

Hellmann (2000) Hellmann O., Die Schlachtszenen der Ilias: das Bild des Dichters vom Kampf in der Heroenzeit, (Hermes Einzelschriften 83), Stuttgart 2000.

Hellwig (1964) Hellwig B., Raum und Zeit im homerischen Epos, (Spudasmata 2), Hildesheim 1964.

Hentze(1905) Hentze C., "Die Chorreden in den homerischen Epen", Philologus 64 (1905) 254-268.

Hertz (1960) Hertz R., Death and the Right Hand, trans. R. Needham, Glencoe Illinois 1960.

Heubeck (1984) Heubeck Α., "Das Meleagros-Paradeigma in der Ilias", in Kleine Schriften, Erlangen 1984, 128-135.

Higbie(1990) Higbie C., Measure and Music: Enjambement and Sentence Structure in the Iliad, Oxford 1990.

204 Bibliography

Higbie (1995)

Hjelmslev (1959)

Hoekstra (1965)

Hogan (1976)

Holoka (1991)

Holst-Warhaft (1992)

Hummel (1998)

Hutchinson (1985)

Jacobsohn (1935)

Jakobson (1971)

Joannidu (1938)

Johnston (1999)

de Jong (1987a)

Higbie C., Heroes ' Names, Homeric Identities, New York-London, (Albert Bates Lord Studies in Oral Tradition 10), 1995. Hjelmslev L., Essais Linguistiques, Travaux du cercle linguistique de Copenhague 12, Copenhagen 1959. Hoekstra Α., Homeric Modifications of Formulaic Prototypes. Studies in the Development of Greek Epic Diction, Amsterdam-London 1965. Hogan J. C., "Double πρίν and the Language of Achilles", C/71 (1976) 305-310. Holoka J. P., "Homer, Oral Poetry Theory, and Compa-rative Literature: Major Trends and Controversies in Twentieth-Century Criticism", in J. Latacz (ed.), Zweihundert Jahre Homer-Forschung. Rückblick und Ausblick, (Colloquium Rauricum, II), Stuttgart 1991, 456-481.

Holst-Warhaft G., Dangerous Voices: Women's Laments and Greek Literature, New York-London 1992. Hummel P., "Pré-Parryana: les épithètes homériques au miroir d' une tradition exégétique féconde ou pour la relativisation d' une trouvaille", Eranos 96.1-2 (1998)55-71. Hutchinson G. O., Aeschylus. Septem contra Thebas, Oxford 1985. Jacobsohn H., "Zum homerischen επος τ' εφατ' εκ τ' όνόμαζεν", Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachfor-schung 62 (1935) 132-140. Jakobson R., Selected Writings, vol. 2, The Hague 1971,130-147. Joannidu M., Untersuchungen zur Form der neugrie-chischen Klagelieder (Mirologien), Berlin 1938. Johnston S. I., Restless Dead: Encounters Between the Living and the Dead in Ancient Greece, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1999. de Jong I. J. F., "Silent Characters in the Iliad", in J. Bremer, I. J. F. de Jong & J. Kalff (eds.), Homer:

Bibliography 205

Beyond Oral Poetry. Recent Trends in Homeric Inter-pretation, Amsterdam 1987a, 105-121.

de Jong (1987b) de Jong I. J. F., Narrators and Focalizers: The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad, Amsterdam 1987b.

de Jong (2001) de Jong I. J. F., A Narratological Commentary on the Odyssey, Cambridge 2001.

Kahane (1994) Kahane Α., The Interpretation of Order, Oxford 1994. Kakridis (1949) Kakridis J. Th., Homeric Researches, Lund 1949. Kemp-Lindeman (1975) Kemp-Lindeman D., Darstellungen des Achilleus in

griechischer und römischer Kunst, Franfurt 1975. Kirk (1962) Kirk G. S., The Songs of Homer, Cambridge 1962. Kligman (1988) Kligman G., The Wedding of the Dead. Ritual, Poetics

and Popular Culture in Transsylvania, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1988.

Kloss (1994) Kloss G., Untersuchungen zum Wortfeld "Verlangen/ Begehren" im frühgriechischen Epos, Göttingen 1994.

Koonce (1962) Koonce D. M., Formal Lamentation for the Dead in Greek Tragedy, (PhD diss. University of Pennsylva-nia), 1962.

Kornarou (2001) Kornarou E., Kommoi in Greek Tragedy, (PhD diss. King's College London), 2001.

Krarup(1941) Krarup P., "Beobachtungen zur Typik und Technik einiger homerischen Gesprächformeln", C & M 4 (1941)230-247.

Kraus (1955) Kraus W., "Die Auffassung des Dichterberufs im frühen Griechentum", WS 68 (1955) 65-87.

Krischer (1971) Krischer T., Formale Konventionen der homerischen Epik, Munich 1971.

Kristeva (198 Ρ) Kristeva J., Le langage, cet inconnu, Paris 19812. Kullmann ( 1960) Kullmann W., Die Quellen der Ilias, Wiesbaden 1960. Kulimann (1992) Kullmann W., "Vergangenheit und Zukunft in der

Ilias", in J. Müller (ed.), Homerische Motive. Beiträge zur Entstehung, Eigenart und Wirkung von Ilias und Odyssee, Stuttgart 1992, 219-242.

Kurylowicz (1972) Kurylowicz J., "The role of deictic elements in linguistic evolution", Semiotica 5 (1972) 174-183.

206 Bibliography

Kyriakou (1995) Kurylowicz J., Homeric hapax legomena in the Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. A Literary Study, (Palingenesia 54) Stuttgart 1995.

Larrain (1987) Larrain C. J., Struktur der Reden in der Odyssee 1-8, (Spudasmata63), Hildesheim-Zürich-New York 1987.

Lasserre (1989) Lasserre F., Sappho: Une autre lecture, Padua 1989. Latacz(1966) Latacz J., Zum Wortfeld "Freude" in der Sprache

Homers, Heidelberg 1966. Latacz (1977) Latacz J., Kampfparänese, Kampfdarstellung und

Kampfwirklichkeit in der Ilias, bei Kallinos und Tyrtaios, (Zetemata 66), Munich 1977.

Lattimore (1951) Lattimore R., The Iliad of Homer, Chicago 1951. Lattimore (1942) Lattimore R., Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs,

Urbana Illinois 1942. Lateiner (1995) Lateiner D. L., Sardonic Smile: Nonverbal Behavior in

Homeric Epic, Ann Arbor 1995. Leaf (1912) Leaf W., Troy: A Study in Homeric Geography,

London 1912. Levinson (1983) Levinson S. C., Pragmatics, Cambridge 1983. Lloyd (1966) Lloyd G. E. R., Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of

Argumentation in Greek Thought, Cambridge 1966. Lohmann (1970) Lohmann D., Die Komposition der Reden in der Ilias,

Berlin 1970. Lohmann (1988) Lohmann D., Die Andromache-Szenen der Ilias:

Ansätze und Methoden der Homer-Interpretation, (Spudasmata 42), Hildesheim 1988.

Lohmann ( 1999) Lohmann D., "The 'Inner Composition' of the Speeches in the Iliad\ in I. J. F. de Jong (ed.), Homer: Critical Assessments, trans, of chapter 55 C. Krojzl & S. R. van der Mije, London-New York, 1999, vol. Ill, 239-257.

Lonsdale ( 1993) Lonsdale S., Dance and Ritual Play in Greek Religion, Baltimore 1993.

Loraux (2002) Loraux N., The Mourning Voice: An Essay on Greek Tragedy, trans. E. T. Rawlings, Ithaca-London 2002.

Lord (1948) Lord A. B., "Homer, Parry, and Huso", AJA 52 (1948) 34-44 (repr. in M. Parry 1971, 465-478).

Lord (1951a) Lord A. B., "Yugoslav Epic Folk Poetry", International Folk Music Journal 3 (195 la) 57-61.

Bibliography 207

Lord (1951b) Lord A. B., "Composition by Theme in Homer and Southslavic Epos", TAPhA 82 (1951b) 71-80.

Lord (1953) Lord A. B., "Homer's Originality: Oral Dictated Texts", TAPhA 84 (1953) 124-134.

Lord (1956) Lord A. B., "The Role of Sound-Patterns in Serbo-Croatian Epic", in For Roman Jakobson, Hague 1956, 301-305.

Lord (1960) Lord A. B., The Singer of Tales, Cambridge Mass. 1960.

Lord (1968) Lord A. B., "Homer as Oral Poet", HSCPh 72 (1968) 1-46.

Lord (1969) Lord A. B., "The Theme of the Withdrawn Hero in Serbo-Croatian Epic", Prilozi za knjizevnost, jezik, istoriju ifolklor, 35 (1969) 18-30.

Lord (1970) Lord A. B., "Tradition and the Oral Poet: Homer, Huso, and Avdo Medjedovic", in E. Cernili et al. (eds.), Atti del Convegno Internazionale sul Tema: La Poesia Orale e la sua Formazione, Rome 1970, 13-28.

Lord ( 1976) Lord A. B., "The Traditional Song", in B. A. Stolz & R. S. Shannon (eds.), Oral Literature and the Formula, Ann Arbor 1976, 1-15.

Lord (1981), Lord A. B., "Memory, Fixity, and Genre in Traditional Oral Poetries", in J. M. Foley (ed.), Oral traditional Literature: A Festschrift for Albert James Lord, Columbus 1981,451-461.

Lord ( 1986a) Lord A. B., "Perspectives on Recent Work on the Oral Traditional Formula", Oral Tradition 1 (1986a) 467-503.

Lord (1986b) Lord A. B„ "The Merging of Two Worlds: Oral and Written Poetry as Carriers of Ancient Values", in J. M. Foley (ed.), Oral Tradition in Literature: Interpretation in Context, Columbia 1986b, 19-64.

Lord (1986c) Lord A. B., "The Nature of Oral Poetry", in J. M. Foley (ed.), Comparative Research on Oral Tradi-tions: A Memorial for Milman Parry, Columbus 1986c, 313-349.

Lord (1991) Lord A. B., Epic Singers and Oral Tradition, Ithaca N.Y. 1991.

208 Bibliography

Lord (1995)

Lowenstam (1981)

Luetcke (1829)

Lyons(1977) Maas (1907) Maas (1914) Mackie (1996)

Macleod (1982) Maehler (1963)

March (1987)

Marg (1957)

Marg (1965)

Markantonatos (2002)

Maronitis (1984s)

Maronitis (1999)

Martin (1989)

Martin (1997)

Lord A. B., The Singer Resumes the Tale, Ithaca N.Y. 1995. Lowenstam S., The Death of Patroclus: A Study in Ty-pology, (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 133), Königstein 1981. Luetcke F. G. L. Α., De Graecorum dithyrambis et poetis dithyrambicis, (PhD diss. University of Berlin), 1829. Lyons J., Semantics 2, London 1977. Maas P., "ύμήν ύμήν", Philologus 66 (1907) 590-596. Maas P., "Hymenaios", RE IX 1 (1914) 130-134. Mackie Η., Talking Trojan: Speech and Community in the Iliad, Lanham-Boulder-New York-London 1996. Macleod C. W., Iliad, BookXXIV, Cambridge 1982. Maehler H., Die Auffassung des Dichterberufs im frü-hen Griechentum bis zur Zeit Pindars, (Hypomnemata 3), Göttingen 1963. March J. R., The Creative Poet. Studies on the Treat-ment of Myths in Greek Poetry, (BICS Suppl., 49), London 1987. Marg W., Homer über die Dichtung. Der Schild des Achilles, Münster 1957. Marg W., Held und Mensch bei Homer, in A. Schaefer (ed.), Das Menschenbild in der Dichtung, Munich 1965.

Markantonatos Α., Tragic Narrative: A Narratological Study of Sophocles ' Oedipus at Colonus, Berlin-New York 2002. Maronitis D. Ν., 'Αναζήτηση και νόστος τοϋ 'Οδυσ-σέα: Ή διαλεκτική της 'Οδύσσειας, Athens 19845. Maronitis D. Ν., 'Ομηρικά Μεγαθέματα: Πόλεμος -'Ομιλία - Νόστος, Athens 1999. Martin R. P., The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad, Ithaca-London 1989. Martin R. P., "Similes and Performance", in E. Bakker & A. Kahane (eds.), Written Voices, Spoken Signs: Performance, Tradition, and the Epic Text, Cambridge Mass. 1997, 138-166.

Bibliography 209

Martin (2000) Martin R. P., "Wrapping Homer Up: Cohesion, Discourse, and Deviation in the Iliad", in A. Sharrock & H. Morales (eds.), Intratextuality: Greek and Roman Textual Relations, Oxford 2000, 43-65.

Mawet (1975) Mawet Fr., "Épigrammes, thrènes et dithyrambes. Les lamentations funèbres de Γ épopée", in J. Bingen et al. (eds.), Le monde grec. Pensée, littérature, histoire, documents. Hommages à Claire Préaux, Brussels 1975, 33-44.

Mawet (1979) Mawet Fr., Recherches sur les oppositions fonction-nelles dans le vocabulaire homérique de la douleur (autour de πήμα-αλγος), Académie royale de Belgi-que, Mémoires de la classe de lettres, t. 63, fase. 4, Brussels 1979.

Mehrlein (1959) Mehrlein R., "Drei", Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, v. 4, Stuttgart 1959.

McClure (1995) McClure L. K., "Female Speech and Characterization in Euripides", in F. de Martino & Α. Sommerstein (eds.), Lo Spettacolo Delle Voci, Bari 1995, 35-60 (part 2).

Minchin (2001) Minchin E., Homer and the Resources of Memory: Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to the Iliad and the Odyssey, Oxford 2001.

Monsacré (1984) Monsacré H., Les larmes d' Achille. Le héros, la femme et la souffrance dans la poésie d'Homère, Paris 1984.

Morrison (1995) Morrison J. V., Homeric Misdirection: False Predic-tions in the Iliad, Ann Arbor 1995.

Moulton (1977) Moulton C., Similes in the Homeric Poems, (Hy-pomnemata 49), Göttingen 1977.

Muellner (1976) Muellner L. Ch., The Meaning of Homeric efxomai through its Formulas, Innsbruck 1976.

Muñoz Valle (1971) Muñoz Valle I., "Interpretación de la fòrmula επος τ'

εφαχ' εκ τ' όνόμαζεν", Emerita 39 (1971) 305-314. Murnaghan (1999) Murnaghan S., "The Poetics of Loss in Greek Epic",

in M. Beissinger, J. Tylus & S. Woflford (eds.), Epic Traditions in the Contemporary World: The Poetics of Community, Berkeley 1999, 203-220.

210 Bibliography

Nagler (1967)

Nagy (1974)

Nagy (1979)

Nagy (1990)

Nagy (1996a) Nagy (1996b)

Niens (1987)

Nünlist (1998)

Olrik (1965)

Onega S. & Landa(1996)

Pantelia (2002)

Parks(1990)

Parry (1937)

Parry (1971)

Pasquali (1942)

Pope (1985)

Pelliccia (1995)

Peppmüller (1872)

Nagler M.N., "Towards a Generative View of the Oral Formula", TAPhA 98 (1967) 269-311. Nagy G., Comparative Studies in Greek and Indie Meter, Cambridge Mass. 1974. Nagy G., The Best of the Achaeans: Concepts of the Hero in Archaic Greek Poetry, Baltimore-London 1979. Nagy G., Greek Mythology and Poetics, Ithaca-London 1990. Nagy G., Homeric Questions, Austin Texas 1996a. Nagy G., Poetry as Performance: Homer and beyond, Cambridge 1996b. Niens C., Struktur und Dynamik in den Kampfszenen der Ilias, Heidelberg 1987. Nünlist R., "Der homerische Erzähler und das sogennante Sukzessionsgesetz", MH 55.1 (1998) 2-8. Olrik Α., "Epic laws of folk narrative", in A. Dundes (ed.), The Study of Folklore, Prentice Hall NJ 1965, 129-141.

Onega S. & Landa J. A. G., Narratology: An Introduc-tion, London-New York 1996. Pantelia M., "Helen and the Last Song for Hector", TAPhA 132.1-2 (2002) 21-27. Parks W., Verbal Dueling in Heroic Narrative: The Homeric and Old English Traditions, Princeton 1990. Parry M., "About Winged Words", CPh 32 (1937) 59-63. Parry M., The Making of Homeric Verse: The Col-lected Papers of Milman Parry, trans. & ed. A. Parry, Oxford 1971. Pasquali G., "Arte allusiva", Italia che scrive 25 (1942) 185-187. Pope M., "A nonce-word in the IliadCQ 35 (1985) 1-8. Pelliccia Η., Mind, Body and Speech in Homer and Pindar, (Hypomnemata 107), Göttingen 1995. Peppmüller R. H., Über die Composition der Klagelie-der im vierundzwanzigsten Buch der Ilias, Halle 1872.

Bibliography 211

Pestalozzi (1945)

Petersmann (1969)

Petersmann (1973)

Pignani(1995)

Prince (1978)

Privitera (1957)

Polkas (1999)

Pomeroy (1975)

Privitera (1957)

Pucci(1979)

Pucci(1987)

Pucci(1993)

Pucci(1996)

Pucci(1998)

Rabel (1997)

Race(1988)

Redfield (1975)

Rehm (1994)

Pestalozzi H., Die Achilleis als Quelle der Ilias, Erlenbach-Zurich 1945. Petersmann G., Die monologischen Reden der home-rischen Epen, Graz 1969. Petersmann G., "Die monologische Totenklage der Ilias", RhM 116 (1973) 3-16. Pignani Α., "ΝΟΣΤΟΣ", in S. Cerasuolo (ed.), ΜΑ-THESIS e Ρ HI LIA: Studi in onore di Marcello Gi-gante, Napoli 1995. Prince G., "Le discours attributif du récit", Poétique 35 (1978)305-313. Privitera Α., "Archiloco e il ditirambo letterario pre-Simonideo", Maia 9 (1957) 95-110. Polkas L., Ύπνος - Αγρυπνία - Όνειρο: από την Ιλιάδα στην Οδύσσεια, (PhD diss. University of Thessalo-niki), 1999. Pomeroy S. Β., "Andromache: un example méconnu de matriarcat", RÉG 88 (1975) 16-19. Privitera Α., "Archiloco e il ditirambo letterario pre-simonideo", Maia 9 (1957) 95-110. Pucci P., "The Song of the Sirens", Arethusa 12 (1979) 121-132. Pucci P., Odysseus Polutropos: Intertextual Read-ings in the Odyssey and in the Iliad, Ithaca-London 1987. Pucci P., "Antiphonal Lament between Achilles and Briséis", Colby Quarterly 29.3 (1993) 258-272. Pucci P., "Between Narrative and Catalogue: Life and Death of the Poem", Métis 11 (1996) 5-24. Pucci P., The Song of the Sirens: Essays on Homer, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 1998. Rabel J. R., Plot and Point of View in the Iliad, Ann Arbor 1997. Race W. R., The Classical Priamel from Homer to Boethius, (Mnemosyne Supplement 74), Leiden 1988. Redfield J., Nature and Culture in the Iliad. The Tragedy of Hector, Chicago 1975. Rehm R., Marriage to Death. The Conflation of

212 Bibliography

Reichel (1990)

Reichel (1994)

Reichel (1998)

Reiner (1938)

Reinhardt (1961)

Rengakos(1995)

Rengakos(1999)

Richardson (1990) Ricoeur(1984-1988)

Rieu (2003) Riggsby (1992)

Rimmon-Kenan (1983)

Rohde (19252)

Wedding and Funeral Rituals In Greek Tragedy, Princeton 1994. Reichel M., "Retardationstechniken in der Ilias", in W. Kullmann & M. Reichel (eds.), Der Übergang von der Mündlichkeit zur Literatur bei den Griechen, (Sripta Oralia 30), Tübingen 1990, 125-151. Reichel M., Fernbeziehungen in der Ilias, Tübingen 1994. Reichel M., "Narratologische Methoden in der Homerforschung", in H. L. C. Tristram (ed.), New Me-thods in the Research of Epic = Neue Methoden der Epenforschung, (Scripta Oralia 107), Tübingen 1998, 45-61. Reiner E., Die rituelle Totenklage der Griechen, Stuttgart-Berlin 1938. Reinhardt K., Die Ilias und ihr Dichter, Göttingen 1961. Rengakos Α., "Zeit und Gleichzeitigkeit in den ho-merischen Epen", Antike und Abendland 41 (1995) 1-33. Rengakos Α., "Spannungsstrategien in den homerischen Epen", in J. N. Kazazis and A. Rengakos (eds.), Euphrosyne: Studies in Ancient Epic and its Legacy in Honor ofD. N. Maronitis, Stuttgart 1999, 308-338. Richardson S., The Homeric Narrator, Nashville 1990.

Ricoeur R, Time and Narrative, trans. K. McLaughlin & D. Pellauer, 3 vols., Chicago 1984-1988. Rieu E. V., Homer. The Odyssey, London 2003 (1946). Riggsby Α., "Homeric Speech Introductions and the Theory of Homeric Composition", TAPhA 122 (1992) 99-114.

Rimmon-Kenan S., Narrative Fiction: Contemporary Poetics, London 1983. Rohde E., Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality Among the Greeks, transi. W. B. Hillis, London 19252.

Bibliography 213

Romilly (1975)

Rossi (1979)

Ruijgh (1971) Saunier (1968)

Saunier (1999)

Schadewaldt (1936)

Schadewaldt (19592)

Schadewaldt (1966) Schadewaldt (1970)

Schefold (1993)

Schmitt (1901)

Schmitz (1963)

Schretter (1974)

Scodel (2002)

Seaford (1994)

Searle (1976)

Romilly J. D., Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece, Cambridge Mass.-London 1975. Rossi L. R., "Poem and Fee in Greek Archaic Poetry, both Choral and Monodie", (talk delivered to the Hellenic Society on Nov. 15th 1979; for the reference see Garland 1985:146). Ruijgh C. J., Autour de "τε épique", Amsterdam 1971. Saunier G., Les chansons de noces à thèmes funèbres. Recherches sur la famille et la société grecques (PhD diss. University of Paris), 1968. Saunier G., 'Ελληνικά Δημοτικά Τραγούδια. Tà Μοι-ρολόγια, Athens 1999.

Schadewaldt W., "Homerische Szenen, II: Die Entscheidung des Achilleus", Antike (1936) 173-201.

Schadewaldt W., Von Homers Welt und Werk, Stuttgart 19592.

Schadewaldt W., Iliasstudien, repr. Darmstadt 1966.

Schadewaldt W., Hellas und Hesperien, Zurich-Stuttgart 1970. Schefold K, Götter und Heldensagen der Griechen in der Früh- und Hocharchaischen Kunst, Munich 1993. Schmitt J., "Myrolog oder Moirolog?", Indogerma-nische Forschungen 12 (1901) 6-12. Schmitz Α., "La polarité des contraires dans la rencontre d' Hector et d' Andromache", LEC 31 (1963) 129-158. Schretter M. K., Alter Orient und Hellas, (Beiträge zur Kulturwissenschaft 33), Innsbruck 1974. Scodel R., Listening to Homer: Tradition, Narrative, and Audience, Ann Arbor 2002. Seaford K., Reciprocity and Ritual: Homer and Tra-gedy in the Developing City-State, Oxford 1994. Searle J. R., "A classification of Illocutionaiy Acts", Language in Society 5 (1976) 1-23.

214 Bibliography

Segal (1971a)

Segal (1971b)

Segal (1993)

Segal (1994)

Seremetakis (1991)

Severyns (1928)

Shannon (1975)

Shapiro (1991)

Sharrock A. & Morales (2000)

Shay (1995)

Sifakis (1988)

Silk (1983)

Siurla-Theo-doridou (1989)

Skiadas (1959)

Segal C. P., "Andromache's Anagnorisis: Formulaic Artistry in Iliad 22.437-476", HSCPh 75 (1971a) 33-57. Segal C. P., The Theme of the Mutilation of the Corpse, (Mnemosyne Supplement 17), Leiden 1971b. Segal C. P., "The Female Voice and its Ambiguïtés: From Homer to Tragedy", in J. Dalfen, G. Petersmann & F. F. Schwarz (eds.), Religio Graeco-Romana: Festschrift für Walter Pötscher, Graz-Horn 1993, 57-75. Segal C. P., Singers, Heroes, and Gods in the Odyssey, Ithaca 1994.

Seremetakis C. N., The Last Word: Women, Death and Divination in Inner Mani, Chicago 1991. Severyns Α., Le cycle épique dans l' école d' Ari-starque, Liège 1928. Shannon R. S., The Arms of Achilles and Homeric Compositional Technique, Leiden 1975. Shapiro Η. Α., "The Iconography of Mourning in Athenian Art", AJA 95 (1991) 629-656.

Sharrock A. & Morales H. (eds.), Intratextuality. Greek and Roman Textual Relations, Oxford 2000. Shay J., Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character, New York 1995. Sifakis G. Μ., Για μια Ποιητική τοϋ 'Ελληνικού Δημο-τικού Τραγουδιού, Heraklion 1988. Silk M. S., "LSJ and the Problem of Poetic Archaism: from Meaning to Iconyms", CQ, 33.2 (1983) 303-330.

Siurla-Theodoridou V., Die Familie in der griechischen Kunst und Literatur des 8. bis 6. Jahrhunderts, (Quellen und Forschungen zur antiken Welt 4), Munich 1989. Skiadas A. D., 'Επί Τνμβω. Συμβολή εις την έρμηνείαν των ελληνικών επιτύμβιων έμμετρων επιγραφών, Athens 1959.

Bibliography 215

Slatkin (1991)

Smyth (1906) Sourvinou-Inwood (1983)

Sourvinou-Inwood (1991)

Sourvinou-Inwood (1995)

Spatafora (1997)

Stanford (1969)

Stanford (1983)

Stanley (1993)

Stehle (1997)

Suleiman, (1980)

Sultan (1991)

Sultan (1999)

Suzuki(1989)

Slatkin L., The Power of Thetis: Allusion and Inter-pretation in the Iliad, Berkeley-Los Angeles 1991. Smyth H. W., Greek Melic Poets, New York 1906.

Sourvinou-Inwood C., "A Trauma in Flux: Death in the 8th Century and After", in R. Hägg (ed.), The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century B. C.: Tradition and Innovation, (Proceedings of the Second International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in Athens, 1-5 June 1981), Stockholm 1983, 33-48.

Sourvinou-Inwood C., 'Reading'Greek Culture: Texts and Images, Rituals and Myths, Oxford 1991.

Sourvinou-Inwood C., 'Reading' Greek Death, Oxford 1995. Spatafora G., "Esigenza fisiologica e funzione te-rapeutica del lamento nei poemi omerici. Studio sul significato di κλαίω, γοάω, στένω, οίμώζω-κωκύω, οδύρομαι", AC 66 (1997) 1-23. Stanford W. Β., "Euphonie reasons for the choice of Homeric formulae", Hermathena 108 (1969) 11-17. Stanford W. B., Greek Tragedy and the Emotions: An Introductory Study, London 1983. Stanley K., The Shield of Homer, Narrative Structure in the Iliad, Princeton 1993. Stehle E., Performance and Gender in Ancient Greece. Nondramatic Poetry in its Setting, Princeton 1997. Suleiman, S. R., 'Introduction: Varieties of Audience-Oriented Criticism', in S. R. Suleiman & I. Crosman (eds.), The Reader in the text: Essays on Audience and Interpretation, Princeton 1980, 3-45. Sultan N., "Women in 'Akritic' Song: The Hero's 'Other'Voice", JMGS 9 (1991) 153-169. Sultan N., Exile and the Poetics of Loss in Greek Tradition, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 1999. Suzuki M., Metamorphoses of Helen. Authority, Difference, and the Epic, Ithaca NY 1989.

216 Bibliography

Svenbro ( 1976) Svenbro J., La parole et le marbre: Aux origines de la poétique grecque, Lund 1976.

Swain ( 1988) Swain S. C. R., "A note on Iliad 9.524-99. The story of Meleager", CQ 38 (1988) 271-276.

Taplin (1992) Taplin O., Homeric Soundings: The Shaping of the Iliad, Oxford 1992.

Thalmann (1984) Thalmann W. G., Conventions of Form and Thought in Early Greek Epic Poetry, Baltimore 1984.

Touchefeu-Meynier O., LIMC, s.v. 'Patroklos'. Tsagalis C. C., «Ανδρομάχη μαινομένη: το διονυσιακό στοιχείο στην Ιλιάδα», Hellenika 52.1 (2002) 199-225.

Tsagalis C. C., "Viewing from the Walls, Viewing Helen: Language and Indeterminacy in the Teicho-skopia", EEAth (Annual of the School of Philosophy of the University of Athens) 34 (2002-2003) 167-193. Tsagalis C. C., "Odyssey 24.191-202: A Reconsidera-tion", WS 116 (2003) 43-56.

Tsagalis C. C., "Time Games: Helen, Odysseus, and Intertextuality", EEAth (Annual of the School of Philosophy of the University of Athens) 35 (2003-2004) 109-125. Turmer V., The Ritual Process. Structure and Anti-Structure, Chicago 1969. Usener H., "Dreiheit", RhM58 (1903) 24-28.

van der Valk M. H. A. L. H., Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad, vols. I-II, Leiden 1963-1964.

van Duzer (1996) van Duzer C. Α., Duality and Structure in the Iliad and in the Odyssey, New York-Washington D. C. 1996.

van Ε φ Taalman Kip (1971) van Ε φ Taalman Kip A. M., Agamemnon in Epos en

Tragedie, Assen 1971. van Gennep ( 1960) van Gennep Α., The Rites of Passage, Chicago 1960.

Touchefeu-Meynier Tsagalis (2002)

Tsagalis (2002-2003)

Tsagalis (2003)

Tsagalis (2003-2004)

Turmer (1969)

Usener(1903) van der Valk (1963-1964)

Bibliography 217

van Groningen (1958)

van Leutsch (1857)

van Otterlo (1944a)

van Otterlo (1944b)

van Otterlo (1948)

Verilhac (1982)

Vermeide (1979)

Vivante (1975)

Vodoklys (1992)

Voigt(1971) Voskos(1997)

Wathelet (1988)

Wendel (1929)

Whitman (1958)

van Groningen Β. Α., La composition littéraire archaïque grecque, Amsterdam 1958.

van Leutsch E., "Metrische Fragmente", Philologus 12(1857) 12-40.

van Otterlo W. A. A, "Eine merkwündige Komposi-tionsform der älteren griechischen Literatur", Mne-mosyne 312 (1944a) 192-207.

van Otterlo W. Α. A, Untersuchungen über Begriff, Anwendung, und Enstehung der griechischen Ringko-mposition, Amsterdam 1944b. van Otterlo W. Α. A, De ringcompositie als opbouwprincipe in de epische gedichten van Ho-merus, Amsterdam 1948. Verilhac Α. Μ., Παίδες άωροι. Poésie fiméraire, vol. 1, textes, Athens 1978 & vol. 2, commentaire, Athens 1982. Vermeule E., Aspects of Life and Death in Early Greek Art and Poetry, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London 1979. Vivante P., "On Homer's Winged Words", CQ 25 (1975) 1-12. Vodoklys E. J., Blame-Expression in the Epic Tradi-tion, New York-London 1992. Voigt E.-M., Sappho et Alcaeus, Amsterdam 1971. Voskos A. I., Méléagre-Achille et Phénix: contribu-tion à la recherche de l'Iliade, Besançon 1997 (= Με-λέαγρος - Άχιλλενς καΐ Φοίνιξ. Συμβολή εις την ερευ-ναν της ένότητος της Ίλιάδος, Nicosia 1974). Wathelet P., Dictionnaire des Troyens de / ' Iliade, (Documenta et Instrumenta), vols. I-II, Liège 1988. Wendel Th., Gesprächsanrede im griechischen Epos und Drama der Blütezeit, Stuttgart 1929. Whitman C. H., Homer and the Heroic Tradition, Cambridge Mass. 1958.

218

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. (19202)

Willcock (1964)

Willcock (1977)

Willcock (1978-1984)

Wilson (1979)

Worman (2001)

Zanker (1981)

Zimmermann (1992)

Bibliography

Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von., Die Ilias und Homer, Berlin 19202 [1916], Willcock M. M., "Mythological Paradeigma in the üiad\ CQ 14 (1964) 141-154. Willcock M. M., "Ad hoc Invention in the Iliad\ HSCPh 81 (1977)41-53.

Willcock M. M., The Iliad of Homer, vols. I-II, London 1978-1984. Wilson J. R., "Καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει. An Homeric Device in Greek Literature", ICS IV (1979) 1-15. Worman N., "This Voice Which Is Not One: Helen's Verbal Guises in Homeric Epic", in A. Lardinois & L. McClure (eds.), Making Silence Speak: Women's Voices in Greek Literature and Society, Princeton 2001, 19-37. Zanker G., "Enargeia in the Ancient Criticism on Poetry", RhM 124 ( 1981 ) 297-311.

Zimmermann Β., Dithyrambes: Geschichte einer Gattung, (Hypomnemata 98), Göttingen 1992.

Indexes

I. General Index

* Achilleis 137 Aeschylus

Cho. 733 6 n. 27 Aethiopis 137-138 allusion 11, 109, 124 n. 338, 164 analepsis

internal 113, 119 n. 324 external 119 n. 324, 122, 128, 131, 146, 159

Anaxandrides fr. 1 K.-A. 29 n. 103

andrò tasia 179-181 antiphonal element/singing 15, 23 n. 92,

32, 48, 83 n. 251, 84 n. 254 antiphonesis (internal and external) 85 aristeia 179 Athenaeus

V 180c, V 181c 3 n. 12 bereaved parents and family 88 CEC

171 190 chiastic-ring form 146 chorus of mourners 3, 68-74, 88 Cicero

De leg. II 63 29 n. 103 closeness see personal deixis common fate 29, 39, 146-147, 168 comparative analogues 20 n. 82 comparison 15, 28, 36, 115 n. 312, 119,

138, 149-150, 153-154, 159, 168, 190 cumulative technique 123 n. 337, 135 death-wish 15,16, 30, 42,119,155, 161 n.

434, 165 n. 444, 168 deictic references

anaphoric 93 cataphoric 93 endophoric 93

deixis afferent and efferent 77, 88-89 am Phantasma 93 η. 269 pattern- 126, 135, 153 personal 90, 94, 99-100, 103 spatial 81, 86-87, 89-90, 92 temporal 81, 87, 104-106 verbal and local 76, 86

Demodocus 7 n. 29 demonstratio ad oculos 93 n. 269 diegesis 12 n. 61,13 n. 62,14, 23,24,113,

122, 147 diachrony see synchrony Diodes 68 n. 209, 74, 183-184, 188 distance and separation 75 n. 234,86,89,102 encomium 30 n. 107 enjambment 98 n. 274, 134 n. 367, 145,

157 n. 427 Eustathius

977 4 n. 14 focalization 93, 110 n. 302, 113-114, 117,

131, 146 foci of consciousness 97 foreshadowing 25, 134, 136, 148, 153-

154, 160 formula 9, 10 frames

common 17 intertextual 17, 18

free expansion 23, 47 funeral oration 24 n. 93, 30 n. 107 Gorgias

Hel. 9 82 n. 250 "Great Divide" 10 guslari 9 horizon of expectations 17 n. 73 Homeric Hymn to Demeter

228-230 188 η. 478

220 Indexes

hymn 30 η. 107 "hypo-diegetic" 122 internal clause boundary 145 n. 403 internal sentence boundary 145 n. 403 intertextuality 11, 18 n. 75, 109-110 intratextuality 110, 126, 128, 129, 164,

169 Klagereden 22 η. 90 kláma 72 Kunstsprache 17 langue vs parole 19, 20 laudatio íunebris 117, 136 marriage see wedding meaning

inherent vs conferred 10 connotative vs denotative 10

Meleager story 120 n. 328, 121 n. 332 Menander Rhetor

Epid. 404.27 132 n. 359 mimesis 12 n. 61, 13 n. 62 mors immatura 25, 75 η. 234, 103, 185,

189-190 mourners (of personal laments)

Achilles Iliad 18 143-148 Iliad 19 148-151

Agamemnon 112-118 Andromache

Iliad 6 118-129 Iliad 22 129-133 Iliad 24 133-136

Briséis 139-143 Hecuba

Iliad 22 154-157 Iliad 24 158-161

Helen 161-165 Priam 151-154 Thetis 136-139

Muses 5, 7 narratology 12 n. 59, 109-110 Nereids 60, 88, 137 oral anti-epitaph 116-117 oralcy 11 n. 53 orality l l , 9 7 n . 271, 110-111 order 110 n. 302

pace 110 n. 302 parallel composition 23,47 parole see langue past-present contrast 30, 44 "pattern-marker" 125, 152 n. 417 PEG

Cypria fr. 19, 89 n. 261 Cypria fr. 27 141 n. 393

performance 11, 22 n. 88, 24 n. 93, 87, 102, 105-107, 110, 111

peripeteia 1 personal laments

anticipatory 16, 111, 117, 119 antiphonal 16, 60 n. 185, 86, 111, 140-141, 149-150 concealed/mixed 16, 111, 137 n. 376 formal/ritual 16, 27 n. 101, 111, 133 informal/ritualistic 16, 111 n. 306 single 16 triadic 16 unreported 171

Phemius 7 n. 29 Pindar

O. 8.31-36 125 n. 341 0. 12.6-8 5 n. 22 1. 8.63-64 5 n. 22, 29 n. 103

Plato Ion 535b-e 82 n. 250 Lg. VII 800e 6 n. 27 R. 388d, 398e 5 n. 22 R. 392c-d 12 n. 61

Plutarch Sol. 21.4 6 n. 27 Sol. 21.5 5 n. 22

PMG 419, 485, 894, 896, 907, 911 29 n. 103

praising address 15, 28, 32, 168 priamel 121 n. 331 professional mourners/singers 2 n. 8, 4-7 prolepsis

internal 119 n. 324, 122, 147 external 106, 119 n. 324, 131

proto-lament 21, 104 "refrain-composition" 72 n. 228 Ps.-Hesiod

Indexes 221

Sc. 273-280, 274 84 η. 254 Ps.-Longinus

De subi. 15 82 η. 250 Quintilian

Inst. or. 6.2.29 82 η. 250 rites of passage 85 n. 255 Rezeptionaesthetik 17 ring-composition 15, 23 n. 90, 31, 47, 91,

123 n. 337, 168, 186, 190 Rollenwechsel 119 Sappho

30 V, 44.24-34 V 83 n. 252 44.34 V 130 n. 354

script 11 self-blame 101 n. 278 separation see distance short obituaries 2, 103, 257 ff.

brief 181-182 expanded 182-188

speech-act illocutionary 13 locutionary 13

speech closures multi-verse 65, 168-169 single-verse 64, 168-169

speech introductions multi-verse 58, 168-169 single-verse 55, 168-169

signifiers graphic 11 phonic 11

Simoeisius 68 n. 209, 74, 139, 182-183, 188

sub-genre 15 n. 66,17, 19, 20, 21,24,157 sympathetic imagination 70, 71 n. 222 synchrony vs diachrony 20 textifïcation 11 textualization/textuality 11,12, 111 Thamyris 7 n. 29 theme 10, 15 ης-speech 73, 77, 92, 93, 115 n. 314, 117,

131 Totenkult 2 Todesdichtung 2 Totenklagen 22 η. 90, 24 η. 93, 27 η. 101 traditional referentiality 104 tripartite structure 15, 30, 46, 168 typical scene/type scene 10 n. 43 vegetal imagery 103-104 Verknüpfungspunkt 126 η. 346 visualization 82, 106 wedding 82-85, 130-132, 162, 164 writing 11, 81 Zenobius

V 28 29 n. 103

222 Indexes

II. Index of Homeric Passages

Iliad 4.168 114, 144 η. 402 1.1-2 136 4.169 90,91 1.1-7 1 η. 2 4.171-175 77 1.2 135, 153 4.171-182 77, 115 1.5 114, 115, 144 4.174 90,91 1.8-52 161 4.175 90, 114, 115, 144 η. 402 1.195 62 η. 194 4.176 93 1.208 62 η. 194 4.176-177 92 1 .362 fr. 155 4.178 92, 114, 115, 144 η. 402 1.366 122 η. 335 4.178-179 114 1.366-369 142 4.178-181 77 1.414 138 4.179 143 1.418 138 4.179-181 77,92 1.472-474 5 η. 21 4.180-181 190 1.572 62 η. 194 4.181 116 η. 318 1.595 62 η. 194 4.182 42, 90,91,92, 93, 119 2.266 121 η. 329 4.473-489 103 η. 283, 139, 181, 182-183 2.411 13 4.474 185 2.594-600 7 η. 29 4.474-475 186 2.690-693 140, 141 4.478 185 2.797 65 η. 200 4.479 186 η. 471 2.872-875 181 4.488-489 186 3.39 37 η. 125 5.49-58 181 3.97-110 113 5.59-68 181 3.99-100 113 5.69 180, 182 3.121 63 η. 194 5.69-75 181 3.173 161 η. 434 5.76-83 181 3.180 161 5.152-158 181 3.236-242 162 η. 436 5.243 33 η. 115 3.243-244 162 η. 436 5.436-438 126 η. 346 3.276-291 113 5.541 185 4.26 114 5.541-542 186 4.60 121 η. 329 5.541-560 103 η. 283, 181, 183-184 4.153-154 55, 58, 59 5.559 186 η. 471 4.154 64, 114 5.559-560 186 4.155 113 5.561 63 η. 195 4.155-182 28,42, 77, 112 5.708-710 181 4.156 113 5.711 62 η. 194 4.158 114, 143 5.767 62 η. 194 4.160 114, 144 η. 402 5.775 62 η. 194 4.161 114, 144 η. 402 5.784 62 η. 194 4.163 114 5.826 33 η. 115

Indexes

6.12-19 181 6.444 127 6.20-28 181 6.447-449 115 η. 312, 127 6.33-35 181 6.450-454 121 6.254 155 6.450-463 133 η. 365 6.344 161 6.476 131 6.371 63 η. 194 6.476-481 131 6.373 14, 171 η. 445 6.492 125 η. 341 6.377 63 η. 194 6.498-499 172 6.389 128 η. 347, 130 6.499-500 172 η. 448 6.394 124 6.501-502 172 6.394-399 123 η. 337 7.327-370 181 6.395-397 123 8.156 121 η. 329 6.402-403 133 η. 365 8.185-190 128 η. 347 6.405-406 55, 58, 59 8.190 121 η. 329 6.407 95, 120 η. 326 8.302-308 181 6.407-408 95, 134 8.381 62 η. 194 6.407-409 95, 133 η. 365 8.350 62 η. 194 6.407-411 95, 119 8.484 62 η. 194 6.407-413 94, 95 9.188 122 η. 335, 123 η. 337 6.407-439 28, 36, 43, 94, 103, 118 9.254-258 146 6.409-410 119, 122, 128 9.257 146 6.410-411 43, 119 9.341-343 140 η. 391 6.410-413 133 η. 365 9.343 140 η. 391 6.411-439 119 9.413-416 150 6.414 122 9.443 68 η. 211 6.414-419 123 9.590 ff. 121 η. 332 6.414-428 141 10.104-105 144 6.415-416 141 10.234 33 η. 115 6.419 124 11.101-121 181 6.420 124 η. 339 11.104-106 38 η. 126 6.421 95 11.155-159 187 η. 477 6.423 122 11.166-168 125 6.428 160 η. 430 11.218-247 181 6.429-430 95, 120, 189 11.262-263 181 6.430 95, 121 η. 329 11.301-309 181 6.431 120 η. 326 11.608 33 η. 115 6.431-439 128 η. 347 11.765-789 146 6.432 134 11.784 146 η. 405 6.433 125, 126 11.789 146 6.433-439 124 η. 341 11.791 146 6.435 126 12.110-117 181 6.437 126 12.471 65 η. 200 6.438 127 13.170-181 181 6.438-439 126 13.178 187 η. 477 6.439 127 13.249 34

2 2 4 Indexes

13.251-252 35 η. 118 17.426-440 181 13.253 35 η. 117 17.478 156 η. 426 13.363-369 181 17.520-524 181 13.384-393 181 17.575-581 181 13.389 187 η. 478 17.609-616 181 13.411-412 182 17.672 156 η. 426 13.427-444 181 18.1-35 148 13.560-575 181 18.6-14 24 η. 93 13.660-672 181 18.30-31 60 13.758-764 181 18.35-148 148 13.769 37 η. 125 18.39-48 60 14.277 62 η. 194 18.50-51 55, 58, 59 14.414-415 187 η. 477 18.52-53 48, 137 14.346 121 η. 329 18.52-64 27 η. 101, 28, 37, 48, 78, 88, 136 14.442-445 181 18.54 48 15.78 62 η. 194 18.55-57 37, 187 η. 477 15.92 62 η. 194 18.55-59 48 15.130 62 η. 194 18.55-56 138 15.333-335 181 18.56 103 η. 283, 139 15.525-539 181 18.56-62 138 16.57 140, 141 η. 393 18.56-57 139 16.152 ff. 123 η. 337 18.57 103 η. 283 16.153 122 η. 335 18.58-59 139 16.296 65 η. 200 18.58-60 88 16.333-334 181 18.59-60 37, 89, 138 16.345-350 180 18.59-62 48 16.404-410 181 18.60 80, 89 η. 263 16.480-491 181 18.63-64 48, 137 16.481 56 η. 171 18.73 155 16.482 187 η. 477 18.128 155 16.570-580 181 18.148-242 148 16.594-599 181 18.184 121 η. 329 16.633-637 181, 187 η. 478 18.243-283 128 16.702-705 126 η. 346 18.314-315 64, 65 16.784-786 126 η. 346 18.314-316 66, 67 16.836 132 18.315 66, 148 η. 407 16.855-857 181 18.316 56 η. 171, 59 η. 182 16.857 172 18.316-317 58, 59 η. 180,60,61 17.37-38 171 18.316-323 55, 60 17.51-60 181 18.318 67 17.53 139, 187 η. 477 18.320 67, 147 17.208 128 η. 347 18.322 147 17.300-303 181 18.323 58, 60, 66 17.348-351 181 18.324 ff. 60, 145 17.408-409 138 18.324-325 144

Indexes 225

18.324-327 146 18.324-328 152 18.324-332 143 18.324-342 28, 78, 143 18.328 144 18.329 80 18.329-332 78, 146, 152 18.330 80 18.330-331 69 η. 216, 146 18.330-332 69 η. 216 18.332 80, 146, 190 18.333 147, 148 18.333-335 80, 81 18.333-342 143 18.334-337 148 18.335 80 18.337 147, 148 18.339-340 148 18.354 148 η. 407 18.355 66, 148 η. 407 18.365 121 η. 329 18.437 103 η. 283, 139 18.437-443 138 18.438 103 η. 283 18.441 80 18.491-496 84 η. 254 18.493 ff. 5 η. 21 18.567 5 η. 21 18.604-606 3 η. 12 19.29 155 19.59-60 163 19.155-172 149 19.205-237 149 19.282 57 19.285 60 19.286 55, 56, 57 19.287 33, 33 η. 115, 34 19.287-289 50 19.287-300 28, 37 η. 123, 44, 49, 82, 139,

189 19.288-289 44 19.289 82 η. 248 19.290-294 44 19.293 33 19.293-294 162 η. 436

19.295 33 19.295-296 57, 140 19.295-300 50 19.296 141 19.297-298 142 19.298 82 19.298-299 82 19.300 163 19.301-302 64, 65, 67 19.302 67 19.303-308 149 19.306-307 176 η. 457 19.314 55, 56, 57 19.315 33, 34 19.315-321 45, 50 19.315-337 28, 42, 44, 49, 86, 140, 148 19.316 35 η. 117, 149 19.321 43 19.321-327 50 19.322 150 19.323 86 19.324 86 19.326 86, 151 19.326-337 148 η. 408 19.328-337 50 19.329 86, 152, 189 19.329-330 151 19.330 86, 151 19.332 86 19.336 86 19.337 150, 189 19.338 32 η. 114, 67 19.338-339 56, 64, 65, 67 19.339 67 19.407 62 η. 194 20.31 65 η. 200 20.92 141 20.112 62 η. 194 20.191-194 141 20.381-392 181 20.401-406 181 20.407-418 181 20.445-447 126 η. 346 21.34-44 38 η. 126 21.57-58 38 η. 126

226 Indexes

21.76-79 38 η. 126 21.176-177 126 η. 346 21.179 121 η. 329 21.277-278 138 21.377 62 η. 194 21.418 62 η. 194 21.434 62 η. 194 22.38-76 68 η. 210 22.39 151 22.42 132 22.44 ff. 154 22.45 38 η. 126 22.82-89 155 22.84 ff. 124 η. 341 22.86-88 155 22.86-89 132 22.98-130 128 22.101-102 128 η. 348 22.145 125 22.165 126 22.208 126 22.251 126 22.363 172 22.405-407 129 η. 349 22.414-415 55, 58,61 22.416 151 22.416-428 28, 43, 68 η. 210, 151 22.421-428 154 22.422 153 22.426 43 22.427 175 η. 453 22.427-428 44 22.428 37 η. 125, 130 22.429 32 η. 114,61,64 22.430 13, 55, 57, 59 η. 182 22.431 39 η. 131, 155 22.431-436 28, 45, 154 22.434-436 156 22.435-436 45 22.436 156 η. 426 22.437-438 64, 65, 67 22.440 132 22.459 125 η. 343 22.460 128 η. 347, 130 22.466-467 57

22.468-472 129 η. 349 22.472 124 22.476 55, 56, 57 22.477 96 22.477-478 30 η. 106, 130 22.477-514 28, 40, 94, 95, 98, 103, 129 22.478 96 22.479 96, 141 22.480 96 22.481 124, 155 22.482 96 22.482-485 133 η. 365 22.483 96 22.485 30 η. 106,96, 97 22.486 97 22.488 97 22.496 ff. 134 22.498 131, 132 22.507 133 η. 365 22.508-514 132 22.509 132 22.513 133 22.515 64 23.8 175 23.10 174 23.14 175 η. 454 23.17 27 η. 101, 56 η. 171, 171 η. 446 23.18 59 η. 183 23.19 60 η. 186 23.19-23 8 η. 36, 27 η. 101, 172 η. 446 23.29 29 η. 103 23.56-65 142 23.83-84 152 23.84-90 70 η. 216 23.97 175 23.98 174 23.100-101 119 23.106 14, 173 η. 450 23.108 172 23.109 173 η. 449 23.110-126 187 η. 478 23.153 172 23.154 173 η. 449 23.157 14 η. 64, 174, 175 23.225 56 η. 170

Indexes 227

23.816-817 126 η. 346 24.731 106, 133 η. 365 23.826 ff. 123 η. 337 24.732 104 23.827 122 η. 335 24.732-734 134 24.55 62 η. 194 24.732-740 46, 134 24.83 ff. 174 η. 451 24.733 104, 106 24.84-86 174 η. 451 24.734-735 134 24.92 144, 145 24.735 104, 106, 135 24.123 56 η. 170 24.736-739 133 24.131 80 24.737 135 24.208 176 24.738 135 24.211 176 24.739 135, 190 24.224 145 24.740 38, 135 24.224-226 144 24.740-742 107 24.227 174, 175 24.741 38, 135 24.416-423 158 24.741-745 46, 133, 134 24.486-487 153 24.742 38, 135 24.495 154 24.743 135, 156 24.499 152 24.743-745 108 24.499-501 152 24.745 135 24.501 153 24.746 64, 65 24.503 153 24.747 55, 57,59 η. 182 24.507 80, 172, 173, 174 24.748 33, 34, 38, 46, 161 24.508-513 173 24.748-750 158 24.511 80 24.748-759 28, 38, 46, 158 24.513 172, 173 24.749-750 157 24.540-542 80 24.751-753 159 η. 429 24.602-607 122 η. 333 24.754 38 η. 126 24.605-606 160 η. 430 24.754-756 38 24.717 175 η. 454 24.754-758 159 24.719-720 156 24.756 160 24.719-722 2, 5 24.759 160 24.720 5 η. 22,31 η. 110,71 24.760 64, 65 24.721 4 η. 12 24.761 55, 57, 59 η. 182 24.721-722 4 24.762 33, 34, 100 24.723 59 η. 182,61,63 24.762-766 47, 100 24.723-724 55, 58, 59 η. 180 24.762-775 28, 39, 42, 47, 99 24.724 60 η. 183 24.763 100, 164 24.725 39 η. 131,62, 189 24.763-764 99 η. 275 24.725-726 103, 106 24.764 43, 100, 161 η. 434, 165 η. 444 24.725-727 133 η. 365 24.767 39, 101 24.725-732 46, 134, 135 η. 369 24.767-772 47 24.725-745 28, 46, 103, 133 24.768 101 24.728-730 133 η. 365 24.771 101 24.729-730 133 24.771-772 39, 101 24.730 104 η. 286 24.773 47, 102, 163

228 Indexes

24.774 102 9.65 151 η. 415 24.775 102 10.457 121 η. 329 24.776 32 η. 114, 64, 65, 69 η. 214 10.590 121 η. 329 24.802 29 η. 103 11.172-173 160

11.198-199 160 Odyssey 11.580 121 η. 329 1.9 78 13.356 124 η. 339 3.53 121 η. 329 15.410-411 160 3.267-271 7 η. 29 17.240 124 η. 339 3.279-280 160 19.516 56 η. 171 4.17-18 7 η. 29 22.330-353 7 η. 29 4.17-19 3 η. 12 24.27 124 η. 339 5.123-124 160 24.47 ff. 137 η. 377 7.274 56 η. 170 24.58-62 4-5, 6 η. 27, 7 8.73-82 7 η. 29 24.59 5 8.266 ff. 7 η. 29 24.60 5 η. 22, 71 8.499-520 7 η. 29 24.317 56 η. 170

Indexes 229

III. Index of Greek Words

άγαθός 116-117 άγανός 39,47,101,160 άγανοφροσύνη 39,47,101 άγω 77,82,86 άδινός 27 n. 100,55,56 n. 171,61,96 άείδω 83 n. 252 αιδώς 115,118,120 n. 326 αίνόμορος 124,155 αΐόλαι εύλαί 132 άλγος 24 η. 95,38,135-136,153,154 άλίαστος 65 η. 200 αλιος 114-115,143-145 άλοχος 104 η. 286 άμβατός 124 η. 341 άμβλήδην 56,57,58 αμμορος102 άμΰσσω 60 άμφιθαλής 132 άναστενάχομαι 66,148 π. 407 άνδροφόνος 58 η. 179,63 άνήρ 39 η. 131,46,83 η. 252,135 η. 371 άοιδή 3,4 η. 16 άοιδός 3,4 η. 17,7 η. 29 άποδημία 85 αποθνήσκω 30,44 "Αργός 86 αρχή 46 η. 143 άσσον 175 άσύφηλος101 άφθιτος 150,186 άχνυμαι 57 η. 174,102,154 άχος 6,68,91,154

βαίνω 77

γαία 80,81,90 η. 265 γάμος 84 η. 254 γέρων / γέροντες 27 η. 100 γόης 31 γόος 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 η. 36,16, 21, 27 η. 100,

61,74 η. 232,171-172 γοάω 57, 58,66 η. 205,148 η. 407

γυνή / γυναίκες 27 η. 100, 56, 57, 84 η. 254

δαήρ 33,35,161 δάκρυ 59,121 η. 329 δειρή 60 (ΰπο)δέχομαι 89 δημιοεργοί 7 δήμος 27 η. 100,56 η. 168 δυσάμμορος 30 η. 106, 33, 37 η. 125,

130.154 δυσαριστοτόκεια 37,38,138,155 δύσμορος124 Δΰσπαρις 37 η. 125

έγώ / έμέ / μοι / έμφ 41, 91, 95, 96,100, 102.155

έλεαίρω 120 η. 326 ενάργεια 82 ένίπτω 101 εξαρχος 3,4 η. 12,71 (έξ)άρχω 5 η. 21,27 η. 100,31,55,61,69 έπίδρομος 124 η. 341 έπιθαλάμια 83 η. 252 έπιπροέηκα 88-89,139 έπιστενάχομαι 59,64,66 επος 39,47,54 η. 162,101,108,144-145 έπομαι 104,106 έρινεός 125 ερνος 139 έταΐρος 33,34,35,57 η. 174,59 εύχομαι 13

ζωός 30,44,156

θάνατος 79 θεός 156 θρηνέω 3 θρήνος 2,3,4,6,7,32 θρηνφδός 2 η. 7 θυμός 24 η. 93, 33, 34, 94 η. 270,120 η.

326

230 Indexes

ίκάνω 77

κασίγνητος 120 κεχαρισμένος 33,34 κηδεία 30 κλαίω 56, 57 η. 174, 66 η. 205,102,154,

174 η. 451,176 κλέος 6,8,25,36,45,68,74,80,108,150,

186 κλισίη 34, 35 η. 117 κωκύω 66 η. 205

λείπω 77,106-107,135 λευκώλενος 62,63 λέχεα 156 λίνος 5 η. 21 λιτή 151 η. 416 λυγρός 38,135-136

μαιναδισμός 130 μαινάς 128 η. 347,130 μαίνομαι 128 η. 347,130 μακαρισμός 130,132 μετέφη 13 μετοικεσία 85 μήνις 135 η. 371 μνήμα 24 η. 95 μνησάμενος / μνησάμενοι 56 μοιρολόι 40 η. 132, 57,85 η. 256 μΰθος 68 η. 211 μύρομαι 14 η. 65, 40 η. 132,154,173 η.

449 μυρολογώ 40 η. 132

νέομαι 86 νόμος 46 νοστέω 78, 89 νόστος 8,25,78-79,80,135 η. 371 νόστιμος 78 νύμφαι 124 η. 339

οδύρομαι 57 η. 174,107,154,173 η. 449 οίκος / οΐκαδε / οϊκόνδε 68,89,130 οίμώζω 66 η. 205 οίος 113,151-152

όλβος 7 όλοφύρομαι 5 όμοιος / ομού 152 ομφαλός 46 η. 143 όπλοποιία 137,139,148 όφέλλω 43 όχοΰμαι 106

παις 35,94 παιάν / πάον '(α) 5 η. 21,83 η. 252 παρθένοι 83 η. 252 παρακοίτης 120 πατήρ 131 πένθος 6,68 περίδειπνον 28 η. 103 πήμα 24 η. 95,154 πλείστον 33 πλήττομαι 59,60 πολϊται 27 η. 100 πολύ 33 πολύδωρος 124 πρίν 81 πρόθεσις 6 η. 27,156 πρόσωπα 60 πυκίν' (α) 67,108

ρίπτω 104,106

σημα 24 η. 95,124 Σκύρος 86 στεναχίζω 56 η. 170 στενάχω 56,64,69 η. 213,72 η. 225 στένω 64,66 η. 205,72 η. 225 στήθεα 59 στονόεις 4 σφρηγίς 46 η. 143 σύ / σέ / σεϊ' / σέθεν / σέο / σεΰ / ση / σοί

/ σοΐς 38 η. 126, 39, 91, 95, 96, 97, 100-102,104

τε 3 τέκνον 39 η. 131,104 η. 286,155 τελέω 114,144 τέρπομαι 175 η. 452 τίθημι 82,107

Indexes 231

τιμή 68 τρις 126 n. 346 τριτάτη 55 n. 164 Τροίη 102

ύμέναιος 5 n. 21,83 n. 252,84 n. 254,85 ύπερήνωρ 116 n. 319 ύστερος 147-148

Φθία 86,149-150,186 φίλτατος 33,34,38

χθών 91,119 χολωθείς 148

ώδ' (ε) 93,116 η. 316 ώς 93,116 η. 316 ώκύμορος / ώκυμορώτατος 62 η. 193,

189