The Politeness of Achilles Off-Record Conversation Strategies in Homer and the Meaning Of

8/8/2019 The Politeness of Achilles Off-Record Conversation Strategies in Homer and the Meaning Of

1/16

The Politeness of Achilles: Off-Record Conversation Strategies in Homer and the Meaning of"Kertomia"Author(s): Michael LloydSource: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 124 (2004), pp. 75-89

Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3246151Accessed: 07/05/2009 19:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/3246151?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenichttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenichttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3246151?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/16

Journalof Hellenic Studies 124 (2004) 75-89

THE POLITENESS OF ACHILLES: OFF-RECORD CONVERSATION STRATEGIES INHOMERAND THE MEANING OF KERTOMIA*

Abstract: This article examines social interaction n Homerin the light of modem conversationanalysis, especiallyGrice'stheoryof conversational mplicature.Some notoriouslyproblematicutterancesareexplained n terms of their'off-record'significance. Oneparticular ff-recordconversationstrategy s characterized y Homer as kertomia,andthis is discussed in detail. The articlefocusses on social problemsat the end of Achilles' meetingwith Priam n Iliad24, andin particular n the much-discussedword eciKEpToPCEov24.649).

HOMER'S ialogue is often very subtle. A famous example is the white lie with which OdysseusdefendsNausicaain Odyssey7. He pretends hathe refusedan offer by her to accompanyhimto her father's palace (Od. 7.298-307), although she had actually told him to make his own waythere(Od. 6.255-315). Odysseus'tact is not signalled explicitly,andit hasbeen deniedthatsuchnuances are to be foundin Homerat all.'One possible response to such scepticism is the accumulationand analysis of examples.Analysis can be done in a fairlyinformalway, appealing o such readily intelligible conceptsasdelicacy andtact. Thereis, however,somethingto be gainedfroma moresystematic approachwhich exploits the resourcesof modem conversationanalysis. This may seem laboriouswhenappliedto relatively simple examples,butcan be useful in analysingmorecomplexconversationstrategies. Sociolinguistsfind dialogue in literaryworks a useful source of evidence even forpopulationswhereexperimentaldata are available. Literarydialoguehas the advantageof beingcompletelytransparentn terms of context. All relevant actorsarein principleavailableforany-one to test. Experimentaldata,by contrast,are inevitablyincompleteand opaque,as well asbeing subjectto distortionby the prejudicesof the investigatoror the artificial nature of theexperiment.2Conversationn literaryworks will of course be designedto serve literarypurpos-es, not necessarilyto reflect the patternsof everyday speech in any straightforward ay. In thecase of Homer,the object of the exercise is not to reconstruct hespeech practicesof anypartic-ular historicalperiod,butrather o use the methodologyof conversationanalysisto give a moreexact accountof human nteractionas it is representedn the Iliad andthe Odyssey.The presentdiscussion will focus on a categoryof utteranceswhich Homercharacterizesbywordswith the root KipT:oL-.There are21 examplesof such words in Homer,nine in the Iliadandtwelve in the Odyssey. They are as follows, with the translationsofferedby LSJ: KEpTOJCLEO('taunt', 'sneer at', 'mock by false statement','make game of', II. 2.256, 16.261; Od. 2.323,7.17, 8.153, 13.326, 16.87, 18.350),?ECIKEPToI?Co'mock', 11.16.744, 24.649; Od.22.194), K?p-Troiiri 'mockery', 11.20.202, 433; Od. 20.263), KEPTO6u'gO'mocking', 'taunting', 11. 1.539, 4.6,5.419; Od. 9.474, 20.177, 24.240), and (ptloKEpToJ.oS ('fond of jeering', Od. 22.287).3 It will beassumed in what follows that all these words refer to a single type of activity, which will bereferred to as kertomia. Discussions of kertomia in Homer have tended to focus on one exam-ple in particular, where the usual translations as 'taunting' and the like have seemed especiallyinappropriate.This is at II. 24.649, where the participleepikertome6nntroducesa speech by

* I am grateful for comments on earlier versions of 18 (1989) 159-212; M. Sifianou,Politeness Phenomenathis article to DonaldLateiner,HaydenPelliccia, William in England and Greece. A Cross-CulturalPerspectiveSlater,andtwo anonymousJHS referees. (Oxford 1992); E. Dickey, Greek Forms of Address1See the discussionby J. Griffin,Homer on Lifeand (Oxford 1996) 30-42.Death (Oxford 1980) 50-80, esp. 61-2. 3 KicpTogo;('mocking', 'delusive') does not occur in2 Cf.R. Brown andA. Gilman,'Politenesstheoryand Homer.Shakespeare's ourmajor ragedies',Languagein Society


3/16

MICHAELLLOYDAchilles to Priam. The importance of a correct interpretation of this word can hardly be over-stated,since it not only indicatesAchilles' attitude o Priamat this intensely moving andmem-orable point of the Iliad but also has implications for his whole state of mind at the end of thepoem. More generally, the issue has a bearing on the nature of Homer's characterization and thedegreeof subtletythat can be found in his dialogue.

SLEEPINGUNDER THECOLONNADEThe conclusion of Achilles' meeting with Priam in Iliad 24 presents social problems which gowell beyond the baffling epikertomeon (649). The two men have taken food and wine, and Priamthen expressesthe desire to sleep. Achilles has beds made up for Priamand his heraldin theporch (p65o8ooL;, 673) under the colonnade (a'&Oovoa,644). This is outside (eKTO;,650) themain room (ntoyapov, 647) in which they have been dining. Achilles' 'tent' is a full-scale house,and the terminology s familiar romdescriptionsof otherbig houses in Homer. There hasbeenmuch discussion both of the exact meaningof this terminologyand of its relationship o thearchaeological remains of Mycenaean palaces.4 The main point here is that Priam is to pass thenight in a liminal space which is distinct from the interior of the building where Achilles himselfsleeps.When the beds areready,Achilles addressesPriam(11.24.649-55):

TOV ' eTKpTo0iov tcpoep i6a; OK'ci; 'AxiX?I);'?KTO;S ?FV One'0, YepOV (pih1e, i TtI; 'AXat&vev0d6' ?7&ikltv pourk(p6pop0;,i.x? ot aiitpo)Xas; po)XkElocImcaprijevoi, Ti0JLS; ecTt-T&V ' Ti; oE 'iY'o-roOoivt' vl5ca DKT aivav,a&rTiK'v e5eiFoi 'Ayag?t.vov no OtIvLXacov,Kai K?VavapritS 0Do10; VeKpoio y'vr|Tal.Then wift-footed chilles aidepikertomeono Priam:Youmust leepoutside,dearoldman, n caseone of theAchaeancounsellorscomes here- they areconstantly oining me to discussplans,as is thenormalway. If one of them were to see you herein thequickblacknight,he wouldimmediatelyreportit to Agamemnon,shepherdof the people, and that would mean delay in the release of the body.'5

The two men arrangea truce for the burialof Hector's body, and go to bed. Thus ends theirmeeting.The social problem in Achilles' speech is that in Homeric society it is entirely normal forguests to sleep outside under the colonnade while the host sleeps inside, and there is thereforeno reasonforhimto explainto Priamwhy he is to sleepthere(cf. Od.3.399, 4.297, 7.345). Thisarrangementepresents n spatialterms the intermediate tatus of the guestbetweeninsider andoutsider. The significantdistinctionis betweenthose who arepartof the household andthosewho arenot, rather han between differentcategoriesof guest. Thereis no evidence thatguestswere made to sleep outside because they could not be trusted with nocturnal access to the innerquarters.6 The most favoured guests sleep under the colonnade, and express no surprise orresentmentat being askedto do so. Nor is thereany evidence that a bed underthe colonnadewas regardedas uncomfortableor undignified,and thereforeinappropriateor an elderly or

4 For discussion and furtherreferences, see H.L. 5 Translations rom the Iliad are taken, with minorLorimer,Homer and the MonumentsLondon1950)415- adaptations, from the version by M. Hammond16; S. West, A Commentaryon Homer Odyssey 1 (Harmondsworth 987).(Oxford 1988) on Od. 3.399; A.F. Garvie, Homer 6 E.g. Lorimer(n.4) 416: 'Hospitalitywas extendedOdyssey Books 6-8 (Cambridge1994) on Od. 7.336. to all strangers,withor withoutcredentials,and theporchconcededa roof withoutgiving admission ... to the inte-rior of the house.'

76


4/16

THEPOLITENESSOFACHILLESdistinguishedvisitor.7 Telemachussleeps underthe colonnade at Pylos, where Nestor's invita-tion suggeststhat he is receivingthe best hospitality hat he can offer(Od. 3.346-55). Odysseussleeps under the colonnadein Scheriaimmediatelyafter Alcinous has made an effusive speechwhich includesthe offer of his daughter'shand n marriage Od. 7.336). He remainsa guest, nota memberof the family. Odysseus sleeps inside by the fire in Eumaeus'hut,no doubt becauseit is too small to maintain hespatialdistinctionsappropriateo a nobleman'shouse (Od. 14.518-22). Penelope, impressed by the disguisedOdysseus, invites him to bed down 'in this house'(Od. 19.598). Herrapportwith the strangerpromptsher to accept him not only as a visitor butas a memberof the household. Odysseus refuses her offer and spendsthe night in the porch,thereby indicatingthat he is not prepared o resume his place in the house on these terms.8 Healso rejectsa luxuriousbed (Od. 19.336-42, 20.138-43), but sleeping in the porch does not initself constitutea rejectionof luxury. Telemachus and Pisistratussleep in Menelaus'porch,althoughthey arereceivingsupremely avishhospitalityfromhim (Od. 4.296-9).Why then does Achilles volunteeran elaborateexplanation or makingPriamsleep outside,if it was entirelynormalfor visitorsto do so? Thisquestionis not answeredby Colin Macleod'ssuggestionthat Achilles is tactfully easing Priam'sdeparture,althoughit is certainlytrue thatPriam must be able to slip away duringthe night.9 The problemis not why he sleeps outside,butwhy Achilles feels the need to offer anexplanation.Thereis no hintthatPriamever expect-ed to sleep inside, for examplebecause of the unusual circumstancesof spendinga night in theenemy camp. Peter Jones suggests that the colonnadeof Achilles' tent would have been lesscomfortable han that of a big house, so that Priam s being fobbed off with ratherrough sleep-ing quarters.10Achilles' tent is, however,treatedas a full-scalehouse, andthereis no evidencethat his colonnade is especially uncomfortable. The formulaicparallelswith otherhospitalityscenes suggest that he enjoys similar facilities for entertainingguests as a nobleman in hishome.ll Jones observesthat there arehints thatPhoenix slept inside (1. 9.617, 658-68), butheis a family retainerrather hana guest.Achilles' speech may explaintoo much,but it also explains too little. It treatsthe possibili-ty of interventionby Agamemnonas no more than an inconvenience. Achilles speaks rathercasually,as if he and Priam were friends andAgamemnonlikely to cause disruptiononly on apurelysocial or administrativeevel. Furthermore,Macleod(on 649) remarks hat 'it is hardtosee how Priamby sleeping there[in the porch]would escape the notice of night-visitors'. Oneexplanationwould be that theporchis darker hanthemainroomof the building,as is shownbythe referenceto the torchesused by the servantsmakingupthe beds (647; cf. Od.4.300, 7.339).The departingslave-womenat Od. 20.6-8 pay no attention o Odysseus sleeping in the porch.Nevertheless,HermesforciblyremindsPriamthat he is in the gravest dangereven in the porch(683-8). His referenceto the implicationsof Priam'sbeing discoveredby Agamemnon,recall-ing Achilles' warningearlier,shows that he is in exactly the same dangeroutside as he wouldhave been inside. Finally, it is remarkablehatAchilles should feel thathe has so little defenceagainstnocturnal ntrusion. Visitors have hithertoapproachedhis dwellingwith extreme defer-ence. Agamemnon'sheralds stood 'with fear andrespect'(II. 1.331), waitingfor him to.speakfirst. The ambassadors stood before him' (II. 9.193), and waited for his response.12Now he

7 E.g. N.J. Richardson,The Iliad:A Commentary6 9 C.W. Macleod, Homer Iliad Book 24 (Cambridge(Cambridge1993) on 11.24.633-76: 'Given Priam'sage 1982) on 649.and status t couldhave seemed discourteous o make him 10P.V.Jones, 'Iliad 24.649: another olution', CQ 39sleep outside.' (1989) 247-50, at 250.8 Cf.R.B. Rutherford,HomerOdyssey Books 19 and II See Macleod (n.9) on 448-56, 643-8.20 (Cambridge1992) on Od. 20.1: 'It is appropriatehat 12These two scenes seem to envisage Achilles' tentOdysseus, at home but not recognised or accepted as as a less substantialstructure han it is in Iliad 24. Cf.masterof the house, shouldoccupy a "liminal"position.' J.B. Hainsworth,TheIliad:A Commentary (Cambridge1993) onIl. 9.185, 192.

77


5/16

MICHAELLLOYDspeaks as if anyone could wander in without notice. One might also have expected him toexpress some willingness to defendhis visitor fromarrestor otherharassment,as indeed Zeuspromised hathe would(156, 185). He unhesitatinglyofferedprotection o Calchasfromassaultby any of the Greeks(II. 1.85-91), andwarnedAgamemnonnot to lay hands on any of his pos-sessions other than Briseis (Ii. 1.293-303). He may now be more respectful towardsAgamemnonthanhe was in Book 1 (cf. ni. 23.890-1, 24.654), but his failureto guarantee hesafety of his suppliantseems odd.

OFF-RECORDCONVERSATIONSTRATEGIESN HOMERAchilles says bothtoo much and too little. A varietyof explanationsarein principlepossible forthis, but it seems worthinvestigatingwhether such behaviour s explicable in termsof conver-sationalpractice n Homerand elsewhere. Achilles' speech can in factbe illuminatedby Grice'swell-knownandinfluential heoryof conversational mplicature.13Griceproposedfour maximswhich specify the principles governing maximallyefficient communication. The maxims are:relevance (be relevant), quantity (say no more or less than is required),quality (be truthful,sincere),and manner be perspicuous,avoid ambiguityandobscurity). Grice did not of coursesuggest thatevery utterancemeets these conditions. The maxims arethe basic assumptionsofanytalkexchange,anddeparturesromthem arealwayssignificant.Thehearer nitiallyassumesthat the speaker is following the four maxims. If any of the maxims appears to have beenviolated, then the hearertries to interpret he utteranceas conformingto the maxims at somedeeper level. This kind of inference is called a conversational mplicature. S.C. Levinsonobserves that 'implicaturesare not semanticinferences,but rather nferences based on both thecontent of what has been said and some specific assumptionsabout the co-operativenatureofordinaryverbal interaction.'14The speakermay thus violate the maxim of relevanceby sayingsomethingapparentlyrrele-vant,thereby nvitingthe hearer o searchfor the realrelevanceof the utterance. The maximofquantitywould be violatedby exaggerationorunderstatement,he maximof quality by ironyorrhetoricalquestions,and themaxim of mannerby vaguenessorambiguity. Interpretationf suchclues will often dependto some extent on the speaker'stone of voice or facial expression,andon the hearer'sknowledgeof the context. In the presentcase, Achilles breachesthe maxim ofquantity by saying both too much and too little. He also breaches the maxim of quality bymisrepresentingboth the threatposed by a possible interventionby Agamemnonand his owncapacityto deal with it.Violations of the Gricean maxims can thus indicate that an utterance has an 'off-record'significance.

A communicativectis doneoff recordf it is done n sucha waythat t is notpossible o attributeonlyone clearcommunicativententiono the act. Inotherwords,heactoreaveshimselfan 'out'byproviding imselfwith a number f defensiblenterpretations;e cannotbe held to have committedhimself to just one particular nterpretationf his act.15Theremay often in practicebe only one viable interpretationf an off-recordcommunication,but the usefulness of the strategyresidesin the degreeof formallatitudeallowedby an indirectformulation. The speaker can always repudiatethe hearer's inference about the off-record

13H.P. Grice, 'Logic and conversation', in P. Cole 14Levinson(n. 13) 104.and J. Morgan (eds), Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech 15 P. Brown and S.C. Levinson, Politeness. SomeActs (New York 1975) 41-58 (basedon lecturesgiven in Universals in Language Usage (Studies in Interactional1967). Cf. S.C. Levinson,Pragmatics(Cambridge1983) Sociolinguistics 4; 2nd edn, Cambridge1987; 1st edn,ch.3. 1978) 211.

78


6/16

THE POLITENESSOFACHILLESsignificance of the utterance,and take refuge in its literalmeaning. This may be because thespeaker s afraid o go on recordwith a potentiallyoffensiveutterance,and wishes to leave somescope for evasion of retaliationby the victim or criticism from a thirdparty. Alternatively, hespeaker may choose politely to allow the heareran 'out', the formaloption of takingthe utter-ance at face value andignoring ts off-recordsignificance. Finally,the contrastbetweenon- andoff-recordmeaningsmay be a source of ironyor humour.The firstexampleof an off-recordcommunication n theIliad comes very earlyin thepoem,perhapssurprisinglyn themouthof Achilles. He may preferto say whathe thinks(cf. II.9.308-13), but he is also capableof being indirect. Inthe assemblyof the Greekarmyatthebeginningof the Iliad, he says to Agamemnon(1. 1.62-7):

aX^' aye 8TITva p&av'tvpeio1iev ? epia,iNKaiOveipon6Oov,KOCKap t' ovap ?KAt61;oxtv,05 K' Euotl 0 t T6oaooV x(YoacroDoi3oq;'AT6okxCv,Esk ap "' '' eX9n0Xfli; p?Ti eY'mK:a'Cpprq,,C1t ap 0 l'mJXO)11 t EYt0l rtKa4tPTj;,a(l K?VTC) (apvoIv KVior1 aMiyov eE TEtiOVpo0e)Tat &v'Ctroacsllav anio oIy6ov povat.Let us ask some prophetor priest,or an interpreter f dreams(as dreams too come fromZeus), whomight tell us why PhoebusApollo has felt such anger againstus, whether he faultsourprayeror oursacrifice- if in any way he may be willing to acceptthe smoke of lambs andgoats withoutblemish,anddrive heplagueaway romus.

Calchas is the only prophetmentioned n the Iliad as being attached o the Greekarmy,and hisgreat prestige(cf. Ii. 1.69-72) means that he will inevitablybe called upon by the Greek leadersin a crisis such as this. Achilles' proposalcan thus referonly to him. Calchas understandshis,and immediately stands up and says 'you ask [KEax1] me to tell of the anger of Apollo' (74-5).Achilles has done nothing of te kind, at least on record, but Calchas rightly identifies an off-record request. Achilles avoids asking him on record about the reason for Apollo's anger in casehe cannotexplainit, which would be embarrassingor both of them.16A directorderor requestby Achilles would have left Calchas no 'out' if he were unable or unwilling to answer. It wouldalso have committed Achilles on record to the belief that Calchas might help, which would beawkward f he then failed to do so. Furthermore,f he had asked Calchasdirectlyit mighthavelooked suspiciously as though he had suborned him to attack Agamemnon.Achilles' off-record order to Calchas is signalled by violations of the maxim of quantity. Hesays both too much and too little. He mentions dream-interpreters in his list of potentially help-ful religious experts, although there are no dream-interpreters in the Iliad and no dream to inter-pret in the present crisis. He also mentions priests, although there are no priests in the Greekarmy.17 On the other hand, he conspicuously fails to mention the distinguished prophet who ispresent at the assembly and has given useful advice in the past. He speculates about why Apollois angry and how he might be appeased, but omits to raise the obvious possibility that he wasoffended by Agamemnon's treatment of Chryses. The rest of the army had wanted Agamemnonto accept Chryses' ransom (1i. 1.22-3), so Agamemnon's offence against the priest was clear toeveryone. Achilles' elaboration of superfluous possibilities and omission of obvious ones drawattention to the off-record significance of his utterance.

16 R.P.Martin,TheLanguage of Heroes. Speechand 17 Cf. J. Latacz,Homers Ilias. GesamtkommentarPerformancein the Iliad (Ithacaand London 1989) 40, (Munich and Leipzig 2000) on II. 1.62-3: 'die zweiteobserves that Calchas interpretsAchilles' speech as 'a Kategorie (Priester) ist grundsatzlich an festespecific kind of request'. Martinalso remarks 33) that Heiligtiimer (Tempel) gebunden ... und erscheint'Achilles ... is good at hinting' (comparing11. 1.202-5, dementsprechendn derIlias nur auf troianischerSeite'.19.20-7).

79


7/16

MICHAELLLOYDAthenauses anequallysubtle off-recordstrategywhen she requestsZeus to releaseOdysseusfromOgygia (Od. 5.7-10):ZED ar&rp18' XXotLCaKcapE?eoiaiev 6vteq,

lj TIi; ?TI 7p6(pcv&aVyav6o Kcaii7ctto; ozc(KlrlcTOXO; paotoiXeG;, pj& (Ppeoavaoi{ta eifidG,aXX'aiel XaX?7cr6 T e?'T1K1aacoaXa pEiot.FatherZeus, and you other blessed immortalgods: I could wish that henceforth no sceptredkingshould set himself to be kind and gentle and equitable;I would have every king a tyrantand evil-doer.18

Athena violates the maxim of quality by saying the opposite of what she means, and violates themaxim of quantity by exaggerating. She then goes on to give an account of Odysseus' plight,butviolates the maximof relevanceby omittingto explain why she has made these observationsatthisparticularime. Zeusrealizes that she has made an off-recordrequest,andsends Hermesto tell Calypsoto releaseOdysseus. Zeus has the benefit of contextual clues as well as verbalones, since he knows thatAthena is well disposedtowardsOdysseus. She adoptsan off-recordstrategyboth out of deference to Zeus and in order to reduce the humiliation to herself if herefuses. Both deitieshave an 'out' if Zeus is disinclinedto accede to herrequest.19Off-record conversation strategies are especially common in the context of hospitality, andthere are three scenes in which Grice's theory of conversational implicature can illuminate subtleinteraction between host and guest. In the first of these scenes, Odysseus elicits the offer of furtherhospitality from Eumaeus by expressing his intention itogo into the town in order to beg and toserve the suitors (Od. 15.307-24). He violates the maxim of quantity by giving an unnecessarilyelaborate account of what he will do in the city, describing the strenuous and degrading activi-ties which awaithim there. He also violatesthemaximof qualityby dwellinginsincerelyon thegood treatment or which he hopes from the suitors. Odysseus' insincerityis obvious becauseEumaeus has already said enough to make it clear to him that the suitors would be likely to treathim badly (Od. 14.59-61, 80-108, 180-2). His suggestion that he is departing because his con-tinuedpresence would be a burden(309) shouldprobablybe seen as anotherviolation of themaxim of quality,since no competentguest would say such a thing if he believed it to be true.A genuineintention o departmust be statedforcefullyif the host is not to interprethe utteranceas an off-record request to stay longer (e.g. Od. 1.303-5, 10.17-18, 483-6, 13.38-46).Commentatorsmay thus be wrong to mock Telemachusfor 'the abruptboyish candour'withwhich he announces o Menelaushis wish to depart Od. 15.64-6, 87-91).20A guestwho reallywanted to leave must give no hint to his host thathe mighthave preferred o stay or thatdepar-ture will expose him to inconvenience or discomfort. Eumaeusgraspswhat is requiredof himandpressesOdysseusto stay.Odysseus'off-recordrequest s designedto test Eumaeus'hospitalitywithoutcausingoffence(Od. 15.304). Hosts can similarlyuse off-recordstrategies o test theirvisitorswithoutriskinga breach of the norms of hospitality. Telemachusdoes so shortlyafterwardswhen Eumaeus

18 Translations from the Odyssey are taken, with terms, Eumaeus breaches the maxim of quantity byminor adaptations, rom the version by W.H. Shewring includingdetailaboutLaerteswhich is unnecessary o the(Oxford 1980). ostensiblemeaningof his utterance.19 Eumaeus expresses off-record advice to 20W.B. Stanford,TheOdyssey of Homer2 (2nd edn,Telemachus n the formof a questionabouthis intentions London1965; 1stedn, 1948), on Od. 15.65-6. It is open(Od. 16.137-45). See E. Minchin, 'Verbalbehaviour n to question whether Telemachus'words at Od. 4.594-9its social context: three question strategies in Homer's are forcefulenough,butthe fact is thathe does not departOdyssey', CQ 52 (2002) 15-32, at 18-19. In Gricean then.

80


8/16

THEPOLITENESS FACHILLESpresentshim with the problemof dealingwith the disguisedOdysseus(Od. 16.65-7). Eumaeusseems to havebeen assumingthatTelemachuswould equipthestrangerand sendhimon his way(Od. 14.515-17, 15.337-9),but does not presumeeither to offeradviceor to vouch for Odysseuson the basis of his acquaintancewith him. Telemachus aunchesinto an elaborateand emotion-al account of the problemsin his house, and stresses his own inabilityto protecta guest there.Telemachus'outburst s superfluous,becausehe has not been asked to receive the strangerntohis house and has two satisfactoryalternatives o offer. He could eitherequipthe strangerandsend him on his way (Od. 16.78-81), or supplyEumaeuswith the resourcesto look afterhim inhis hut (Od. 16.82-4).16.8e should therefore nterprethis exaggeratedcomplaintas a breach ofthe maxim of quantitywhich signals an off-recordrequestto theteranger to offer some assist-ance. Odysseusunderstandshis, and volunteersan enthusiasticdenunciationof the suitors andan apology for not being able to do moreto help.Telemachus ubjectstheprophetTheoclymenus o a similartest. Telemachuswas sacrificingto Athenaby his ship before leaving Pylos when he was approachedby Theoclymenus,a fugi-tive desperateto escape from the relativesof a man he had killed (Od. 15.223-81). Telemachustook Theoclymenuson board,andpromisedhim hospitality n Ithaca. Whenthey arrived here,Telemachusannouncedhis own plansandgave orders o his crew,but made no provisionfor hissuppliant.Theoclymenusunsurprisingly skswhere he is supposedto go. Telemachusexplainsthat his own house is unsuitableto receive visitors, and suggests that he seek lodging withEurymachus,one of the leadingsuitors(Od. 15.513-24).The problemswith Telemachus'behaviourwere crisplyoutlinedby D.L. Page:

Youcannotstaywithme, says Telemachuso his new friend,but I can stronglyrecommendhehospitalityf mymostdangerousnemy;not thatyouwill often indhimat his home hespendshistime nmy palace,beingeasily he foremostompetitorormymother's andand ortheplace hat smyfather's.21

Replies to Page have not been convincing. The more mainstream uggestionshave been as fol-lows: thatTelemachushits upon Eurymachusonly as a first thoughtor in a moment of pess-imism;thatEurymachushas no quarrelwith Theoclymenusand is boundby the normal laws ofhospitality;andthatTheoclymenushas to go somewhere,andEurymachuss rich and influen-tial enough to be an effective host.22 No parallelsare offered for the unlikely practiceof lodg-ing guests with one's enemies,andEurymachushas in anycase shownunremitting ontempt orthe laws of hospitality.There is no reason to supposethat he would acceptTheoclymenusas aguest,orthat he would treathim decently if he did so. Theproblem hatTheoclymenushas to gosomewhere is readilysolved by the loyal, willing, and efficient Peiraeus.23The flaw in Page's account of the situation lies in his describing Theoclymenus asTelemachus' 'new friend'. His proposal would indeed be remarkablewere this the case.Theoclymenusis actuallya complete strangerwhom Telemachushas obligingly rescued frommen determined o kill him. Theoclymenuscould for all he knew be a friend of Eurymachus,and therefore someone to whom it would be dangerousin the extreme to give hospitality.21 D.L. Page, The Homeric Odyssey (Oxford 1955) 23Cf:N. Austin,'Telemachospolymechanos',CSCA84. 2 (1969) 45-63, at 58-9; id., Archeryat the Dark of the22E.g. W.J.Woodhouse,TheComposition fHomer s Moon (Berkeley,Los Angeles and London 1975) 190-1.Odyssey (Oxford 1930) 163; G.S. Kirk, The Songs of Austin himself revives the view of C.H.Whitman,HomerHomer (Cambridge 1962) 240-1; A. Thornton,People and the Heroic Tradition(Cambridge,MA 1958) 341and Themes n Homer s Odyssey (London 1970) 73; B. n.13, that Telemachus ries to solicit an omen by utteringFenik,Studies in the Odyssey (HermesEinzelschrift30, theoppositeof what he believes andhopes,but he admitsWiesbaden1974) 236-9; A. Hoekstra,A Commentary n thatthereare no parallelsfor such a practice.Homers Odyssey 2 (Oxford 1989) on Od. 15.513-22.

81


9/16

MICHAELLLOYDTelemachus' speech thus amounts to an off-record question to Theoclymenus about his views onIthacanpolitics, somethingwhich it would be impoliteto ask him directly. Telemachusbreach-es the maxim of quantity by giving an exaggerated account of the virtues of Eurymachus, andthe maxim of quality by making a suggestion which any genuine friend of his could only findoffensive, not to say alarming. If Theoclymenus accepted the suggestion without complaint, thenTelemachuswould be well rid of him. As thingsturnout,he is given the opportunityo demon-strate both his goodwill and his prophetic ability by interpreting an omen, and Telemachus imme-diatelymakes moreappropriate rrangementsor him.

KERTOMIAN HOMERIt was mentioned above that there is a particular verbal problem relating to the speech in whichAchilles invites Priam to sleep outside in Iliad 24. This is the verb epikertome6n 649) withwhich it is introduced. None of the meanings suggestedfor kertomiawordsby LSJ('mocking','taunting',etc.) has been thoughtsuitableeitherto thetone and content of Achilles' speechor tohis behaviour towards Priam generally. Walter Leaf agreed that epikertomeon does indeed mean'taunting' here, but suggested that it expresses Achilles' attitude to Agamemnon rather than toPriam ('as though he bitterly assumed that his enemy would thwart him at every opportunity').24This approach has not found much favour, since elsewhere the victim of kertomia is alwayseither the addressee of the utterance or at least within earshot of it.

Some scholars have therefore tried to find ways of weakening the force of epikertome6n hereso as to make it appropriate o Achilles' apparently friendly demeanour towards Priam.Suggestions include t?eTpito; X&aoiowv, 'with gentle mockery' (Eustathius 1369.53), 'laughing-ly' (LSJ), 'teasing', 'mystifying' (Macleod (n.9), ad loc.), 'in a bantering tone' (Willcock),25 'ina gently provocative or mocking tone' (Richardson (n.7), ad loc.). Other examples of kertomiain Homer do not give muchencouragemento these milder translations. Two examplesrefer tochallenges to enemy warriors, three to vaunts over defeated foes, and six to the hubristic behav-iour of the suitors and their henchman Melanthius. The context of kertomia has actual or threat-ened violence in eleven cases (1. 1.539,2.256,16.260, 744,20.202,433; Od. 9.474,20.177,263,22.194, 287), and actual or likely anger in four more (11.4.6, 5.419; Od. 8.153, 24.240).Kertomia s associatedwith wordsdenoting nsult,outrage,orprovocationikeV?tK?CO1. 2.224,20.251-4; Od. 20.267), O6v?6ico (It. 2.255), ipeOico (II. 4.5, 5.419, 16.261; Od. 9.494), hXop6(1n.2.275; Od. 2.323, 18.347), and iS3ppt;Od. 16.86, 18.381).Other scholars have thus accepted that epikertomeon expresses a degree of hostility, andemphasized the latent tension in the scene.26 Achilles responded angrily to Priam's impatienceto see Hector's corpse (559-70), and was aware that he might even be provoked to kill him (582-6). Scholars have commented on Priam's various gaffes.27 Mark W. Edwards thus suggested thatepikertomeon 'may be intended to convey that he [Achilles] and Priam, though recently unitedin hospitable meal and understanding of each other's grief, must remain formal enemies ... Theproper stage direction might be "distantly";translation should not perhaps be more specific than

24 W. Leaf, TheIliad (2nd edn, London 1900-02) on 25M.M. Willcock, The Iliad of Homer: Books XIII-649. Cf. N. Postlethwaite, AkhilleusandAgamemnon: XXIV London 1984) on 649.generalizedreciprocity', n C. Gill, N. Postlethwaiteand 26E.g. E. Minchin,'The interpretation f a theme inR. Seaford(eds), Reciprocity n Ancient Greece(Oxford oralepic: Iliad 24.559-70', G&R 33 (1986) 11-19.1998) 93-104, at 102-3. Postlethwaite uggests 'boasting 27E.g. 0. Taplin,HomericSoundings.TheShapingofhis superiority sc. overAgamemnon]' or epikertome6n, the Iliad (Oxford 1992) 269, 273; Martin(n.16) 144-5;but fails to consider other examples of kertomia in J.M. Redfield, Nature and Culture in the Iliad. TheHomer. See also, in the same volume, G. Zanker, Tragedyof Hector (ChicagoandLondon1975)218; R.J.'Beyond reciprocity: he Akhilleus-Priam scene in Iliad Rabel, Plot and Point of View in the Iliad (Ann Arbor24', 73-92, at 85. 1997) 202.

82


10/16

THEPOLITENESSOF ACHILLES"curtly" or "gruffly".'28 The first problem is that these translations bear little or no relation toother examples of kertomia in Homer. The second problem is that Achilles' speech is apparent-ly polite, and Priam responds in kind.J.T. Hooker introduced a useful new concept into the interpretation of kertomia, arguing thatit indicates'theprovocationof anotherpersonintobehavingin a certainway,whether hatis thebehaviourdesiredby the speaker .. or is not desiredby him'.29 This interpretation oes not, ashe observes,work for the threeexamplesof epikertome6n, ncludingthe very passagewhich hewas tryingto explain. Hooker thus makes the ratherdesperatesuggestionthat the word andthepassageareimperfectlyadapted rom anotherversion of the Iliad. JennyStraussClay developedHooker'snotionof provocation,andargued hat the provocation s indirect. She suggestedthatkertomia is 'a subtle way of manipulatingsomeone to do what you want him to do withoutexplicitly sayingso'.30Achilles is thustryingto provokePriam indirectlyandgently'to go backhome immediatelybecause he is in danger,but Priam fails to takethe hint. There is a dangerhere of the tailwagging the dog, with an interpretationwhich worksforII.24.649 at the cost ofdistorting he meaningof kertomiaeverywhereelse. Clay has little to say about those passageswhere kertomia s clearly 'mockery'or 'taunting',and there is no particular mphasison anyintentionto elicit a response (e.g. 11.16.744;Od.2.323, 16.87, 18.350, 20.177, 22.194).31

Clay may not have given an altogetherconvincing accountof kertomia,but she has made asignificantcontribution o the understanding f the concept by introducing he idea of indirect-ness. The way forwardmay lie in the directionof Grice'stheoryof conversational mplicature,discussedabove, with its abilityto explainhow the off-recordsignificanceof an utterancecanbe interpreted y the hearer.All the examplesof kertomia n Homerseem, in fact, to encode anoffensive or provocativemeaning in a form of words which is less overtly offensive or evenostensibly polite.32Thequestionarisesof why anyonewouldwant to employanoff-recordstrat-egy in orderto be offensive. The reason is partlythat it allows the speakeran 'out' in the caseof retaliationby the victim or criticism from a thirdparty. Moresubtly,the victimis deprivedofan on-recordoffence to which to respond. Sometimesthe victim is altogetherunawareof whatis happening.Tauntsand vaunts thus exploit off-recordstrategies n orderto allow the speakeran 'out' incase the victim retaliates,and several examples are characterizedas kertomia. The dangerofretaliation s especially greatwhen the addressee is Zeus. Hera asks him 'with kertomia'afterthe visit of Thetiswhich god was plottingwith him, and accuses him of habituallymakingdeci-sions withoutconsultingher(II. 1.539). Herquestionis an off-recordcriticism,since she is wellaware that he was plotting with Thetis to help the Trojans(536-8, 555-9). She violates themaxim of quantityby exaggerating,and the maxim of qualityby employing rhetoricalques-tions.33Zeus has enoughclues to graspher realmeaning,but exploits the 'out' affordedby her28M.W.Edwards,Homer Poet of the Iliad(Baltimoreand London 1987) 312-13.29J.T.Hooker, 'A residualproblemin Iliad 24', CQ36 (1986) 32-7, at 35. Hooker's useful catalogueof Kep-

Togl-words in Homeromits Od. 2.323 and 22.287.30J.S. Clay, 'Iliad 24.649 and the semanticsof KEP-TOMEEQ',Q49 (1999) 618-21, at 621.31 An ancient derivation of KEpTogCLorom KfCp+'T?cvo was revived by Jones (n.10), translating piercetothe heart', 'cut to the quick'. Critics (e.g. Richardson(n.7) on II. 24.649) observe that kertomia often has nosuch effect. M.J. Clarke,"'Heart-cuttingalk":HomericKEpToIR.oand related words', CQ 51 (2001) 329-38,argues hatTp'jvco eans 'divide' rather han'pierce', andthat division of the mentalapparatus escribes confusionor indecision. Kertomiawill thusbe 'talk that is liable to

temporarilyconfuse the person addressed'(335). Theweakness of this etymological approach s shown by thefactthat few if anyof the examplesof kertomia n Homerseem to be 'talk that is designed to cause confusion anduncertainty' 336).32Kertomia s thusa species of irony,which typical-ly involves anoppositionbetween two levels of discourseor awareness. See D.C. Muecke, TheCompass of Irony(London 1969) 19-20. Muecke's analysis of the tech-niques of 'impersonal' rony (67-86) containsmuch thatis relevantto kertomia.33 Rhetorical questions are formally insincerebecause they purport to seek information which thespeaker in reality already possesses. Cf Brown andLevinson(n. 15) 223-5.

83


11/16

MICHAELLLOYDoff-record strategy to give a reply which treats her utterance merely as an information-seekingquestion. She is thus forced to go on record with her complaint, and provokes the anger fromZeus which her initial off-record strategy had (at least ostensibly) been designed to evade.Athena employs kertomia when she addresses Zeus after the wounding of Aphrodite (II.5.421-5). Her tone is superficially polite, and she begins with the common politeness gambit ofapologizingin advance for any offence which her words may cause (cf. I/. 9.33, 10.115, 145,15.115, 16.22; Od. 1.158, 24.248).34 She breaches the maxim of quality by offering suggestionsaboutAphrodite's injury which are obviously false, and breaches the maxim of quantity by exag-gerating. These breachesgive clues to the real significanceof her utterance,which is an off-record taunt. Zeus is explicitly stated to be the object of this provocation (419), and it is his reac-tion which is described. Aphroditeherself is also within earshot,and it is commonin kertomiato talk about someone in the thirdperson in theirpresence,thus causingoffence but giving nohandle for a reply.Zeus himself employs kertomiaon one occasion. He mentions the possibilityof endingthewar in orderto provokeHera(IR. .7-19). He does not proposethis course of actionexplicitly,and does not even addressherdirectly.

By raisingthe possibilityof reconcilingtheAchaeanswith the Trojans,he intendsto inflame the angerof thepro-AchaeangoddessesAthene and Hereand so achieve his realaim,the resumptionof the gen-eral conflict after Menelaus'hollow victory [in the duel in Iliad 3].35When Hera interpretshis utteranceas a proposalto end the war, he could if he wished havedenied thathe had made any such proposal,or even thathe was talkingto her at all. He thusmanagesto provokeher withoutcommittinghimself on recordto any particularproposal.The suitorsin the Odysseyare addictedto kertomia. Telemachusexpects it from them (Od.16.87),andpromisesto protectOdysseusfrom it (Od.20.263). He has good reason for his fears.When Philoetius vaunts over the dead suitor Ctesippus he addresses him as (ptloKopTo,ioS('fondof kertomia', Od. 22.287), and alludes to the occasion when he threw an ox-foot at Odysseus ata banquet. That was Ctesippus' only other appearance in the Odyssey, and the speech which hemade before throwing the ox-foot should thus be understood as kertomia even though it was notso described at the time (Od. 20.292-8).

KEKX'TOt ?eeu, 1VTYTTipeqafyi1VOP?S,O(ppa TI E(1o)poi"pav g?FV 0| ei?vo; ?Xt aXmat,60; enE?OtKEV,-Orrlv D yap KcaXOvxpl3etv o86E 8i&Kaov

Seivoi; TTIX?.a6Xo),O;S ?V xa8 (OLa0'YiclTat.a&k' Xayol KaXtyo) 86co evtov, 0cppaKCaCToSil Xoe?xpoX6otl8onryTpag il: TO)a&Xot8g6(oov, o' Kaca6x(b,ax' '08vooioS; Oioto.High-hearted uitors,hearmy words. For some while now the strangerhas had his portionno less thanthe rest of us; rightlyso - it would not be just or honourable o deny his due to whateverguest ofTelemachuscomes to this house. And now I also shouldlike to makehim a gift in friendship,so thathe in turncan offera present to thebath-woman,perhaps,or to some otherservantof King Odysseus.

Ctesippus' speech is in itself almost perfectly polite, but its true significance is made clear bothby the context and by the violation of the maxim of quality in his incongruous suggestion that a

34 Cf I.M. Hohendahl-Zoetelief,Manners in the 35Hooker(n.29) 33.HomericEpic (MnemosyneSupplement63, Leiden 1980)22-7.

84


12/16

THEPOLITENESSOFACHILLESbeggar will exchange gifts with a bath-attendant.36The effect of Ctesippus'kertomia derivesfrom the contrastbetween the on-recorddiscourse of the aristocraticbanquetand the off-recordimplicationthat Odysseus is a contemptiblebeggar who has no place in such an environment.Eurymachusmakes similargesturesto politeness at the beginningof his jibe at Odysseus'bald-ness (Od. 18.351-5). The force of Eurymachus'kertomia ies in the contrastbetween his rela-tively polite on-recordsuggestionsand the off-record mplicationthatthey arewholly inappro-priateto this ugly and idle beggar.Telemachus experienced the kertomia of the suitors when he asserted his maturityandproposedto sail to Pylos. Two individualsuitorsrespondwithderisivespeecheswhich are char-acterizedas kertomia. The following is the firstof them(Od. 2.325-30):

Dla,a Tlk'aZoS; (povov 7IIv gipPlPirpI?.ii tIvac ?KHioV ai5et a&pvTopaq litraeO6vToq,110 ye Kai ZndpTr10ev, e?nei v ni?ep '?at aivix;/1WKal ?ei; 'EqVpprv?OXeit, ntiltpav apoupav,eX?eiv,O&pp' ve0?vOv)[to(p6pa (padpiaK'?VEi?f t,

:v 8f padrit KpTqlTpi Kce 1ltacdFvaTar; 6oXaOni.Beyondall question,Telemachus s plottingour deaths. He will bringback men to fight forhim, fromsandy Pylos or else fromSparta,so fierce is his appetitefor slaughter. Orperhapshe meansto makehis way to the fruitfulsoil of Ephyraand bringfrom therethose poisons that will destroya man;hewill drop hem ntoourmixingbowl,and hatwillbe the endof usall.

This speech breachesthe maxim of quantityby exaggerationandelaboration, ignallingthe off-record aunt hatTelemachus s manifestly ncapableof anysuch demarche.He had insistedthathe was no longera child (vtltos;, 313), but the suitorspretend o takehim seriouslywith ironiceuphemismwhile implyinganadult discoursefrom which he is excluded(cf. Hermes''you havetreatedme with kertomia ike a child', Aesch. PV 986). Achilles similarlytreatsAeneas like achild (vHrniZrtov, 00) when offering him ironical advice which encodes an off-recordthreat.Aeneas characterizes this as kertomia (II. 20.202).37The Phaeacians have something of the suitors' taste for kertomia, and Athena throws a mistaround Odysseus to defend him from it (Od. 7.17). A subtle example is Laodamas' invitation tothe disguised Odysseus to participate in the Phaeacian games.38 Odysseus refuses, characteriz-ing the Phaeacians' behaviour as kertomia (Od. 8.153).39 Some scholars have treated the invita-tion as genuinely polite, and regarded Odysseus as taking offence where none was intended.40There are indeed no violations of the Gricean maxims in Laodamas' speech, and the clues to theoff-record insult are contextual. He and Euryalus have talked about Odysseus in the third per-son in his presence, which is common in kertomia (cf. Ii. 5.421-5, 16.744-50; Od. 2.325-36,18.351-5, 20.292-8).41 The Phaeacians are confident of their skill in athletics, and thus that they

36Cf Rutherfordn.8) on Od. 20.292-5. he takes Laodamas o be merelythe spokesman' Garvie37Hector mplicitlycharacterizes one-line threatby (n.4) on Od. 8.153).Achilles as kertomia(II. 20.433), where the assonance 40 E.g. Jones (n.10) 247; Garvie (n.4) on Od. 8.133-aaoov ... Oacaoovsuggests 'grim sarcasm' (Macleod 57, 145, 146;Clay (n.30) 619. Better is J.B.Hainsworth,(n.9) 51). A Commentary n Homer s Odyssey 1 (Oxford 1988)on38 See generally M. Dickie, 'Phaeacian athletes', Od. 8.145: 'The offence lies in the challengeto a guest,PLLS4 (1983) 237-76, at 246-51; W.J.Slater,'Sympotic especially to a guest in Odysseus'condition.'ethics in the Odyssey', in 0. Murray ed.), Sympotica.A 41 Cf. H.N. Pelliccia, Mind, Body, and Speech inSymposiumon the Symposion (Oxford 1990) 213-20, at Homerand Pindar(Hypomnemata107, Gottingen1995)217-19. 169-70, 179-80, 270-1; id., 'The interpretation f Iliad39 'The plur. [KX'IcETZE]ither includes Euryalus, 6.145-9 and the sympoticcontribution o rhetoric',Colbywhose words Odysseus may then be assumed to have Quarterly38 (2002) 197-230, at 203 n.15, 214 n.45.heard ..., or is addressed to all the young men, of whom

85


13/16

MICHAELLLOYDwill beat him (100-3). Odysseus,despitehis evident strength 134-7), is in a badphysicalandpsychologicalstate(137-9, 149, 82-3, 230-3). He does not look like an athlete,and seems like-ly to make a fool of himself if he competes. Euryalusmakes this clear in his overtlyoffensivechallenge(159-64), but theunderlyingassumptionwas alreadypresent n Laodamas' nitialpro-posal. Odysseuscould have left Laodamas' nsult off recordby availinghimself of the 'out'andpolitely refusinghis invitation,but he chooses to give an explicit interpretation f the kertomia(cf.11.20.202, 433; Od. 13.326), and forces the Phaeaciannoblemen either to backdown or toperform the insult on record (cf. Zeus and Hera at R. 1.539-67, discussed above). He runs therisk of beingaccusedof overreactingo aninoffensive nvitation. Laodamas nsultsOdysseusoffrecord n the firstinstancepartly n order o protecthimselfagainstpreciselythis type of riposte,but largelyto emphasize he exclusion of this strangerromthe aristocraticworld of the games.Fourexamplesof kertomiaexploit the victim's ignoranceof the truesignificanceof what ishappening. Odysseus'vaunt overPolyphemus Od.9.475-9) beginsby evokinghis unawarenessat the time of his crimes of the natureof the man whose companionshe was eating,and of thepunishmentwhich was in store for him: 'Cyclops,your prisonerafterall was to provenot quitedefenceless- the manwhose friendsyou devouredso brutally n your cave. No, your sins wereto findyou out.' Odysseusonly goes fully on record n the lasttwo lines of the speech:'You feltno shameto devouryour guests in your own home;hence this requital romZeus and the othergods.' OdysseuslateraccusesAthena of mockinghim with a false statement hat he is in Ithaca(Od. 13.326-8). Her words are inoffensive in themselves,but he is always on the qui vive forkertomiaandwronglybelieves thatshe is amusingherself with an off-record oke.42 She adoptsa playful tone, treating Odysseus as childishly simple (viinto;, 237), and keeping him in sus-pense about where he is until the end of the speech. He plays a similargame himself withLaertes,when his actual wordsarequitepolite (Od. 24.240).43 Finally,thereis one case wherekertomiaconsists of actions rather hanwords. Waspsareprovokedby mischievousboys, withthe result that they attack innocentpassers-by(II. 16.259-62).44 The boys perpetratean off-recordoffence againstboth the wasps and the travellers. The pleasureof the kertomiafor theboys is thatonly they are n possessionof the full truth,andwaspsandtravellersmaynever knowwho has caused all the trouble.Kertomia is highly appropriateo the battlefieldvaunt, where the victor exploits contrastsbetweenthe (verbally)off-recordrealityof his victim'splight andan ironicalon-recordaccountof it. Patroclus hus vauntsover the dead Cebriones 1. 16.744-50):

TOV6'E?l1KEpT%OCO)V 7rpO?(pt(1;, IaXTpOKXEES7E&7ro6ioi, gak6'X^a(ppo6;vqp, ;0 ;Ea icipioati.El6i 7c1O KaCI71OVTCoIVitOuoEVTI yEVOlto,ttouXX0o'v KopEGeEvavnip OMEti OEaI6pcov,Vb60;(XCop(l)1(KO)V, ElKai5UoV?LUpEXo0; E'itn,

)5;VDVV TItESllt L5 ItOV pEaXKIpCCTT&l.i paKaClV Tp(c)aLXt IcpiarTfpE; Eotv.Then,horsemanPatroclus,you spoke epikertome6n:Oh,this is a really agile man,a readyacrobat! Ishouldthinkhe would be good too if he was out on the fish-filled sea - this man could feed a largenumberwith the oystershe could find, diving off a ship, even in roughweather,to judge by his easytumbleto the plainfrom his chariot. Oh yes, the Trojanshave their acrobats oo!'42Clay (n.30) 620 sees a reference o Athena'searli- 44 On the boys' game, see J.T. Kakridis, Homerer attempt o elicit a reaction romOdysseus (248-9), but Revisited (Lund 1971) 138-40; R. Janko, The Iliad: Ahis complainthere is that she is continuingto deceive Commentary (Cambridge1992) on Il. 16.259-65. Forhim, long after the game of concealed identities s over. kertomiameaningalmost 'practical oke', see Soph.Phil.43 Cf. generally A. Heubeck, 'Zwei homerische 1235-6; Eur.Cyc. 687;Ale. 1125;Hel. 619; IA 849.

eLpal (co205 ff.-B 53 ff.)', ZivaAntika31 (1981) 73-83.

86


14/16

THEPOLITENESSOFACHILLESPatroclus'humorouscompliment implies a conversationalcontextwhich is cruelly at variancewith Cebriones'death-spasm.Theoff-recordsignificanceof his utterance s signalled partlybyits context andpartly by violationsof the maxims of quantityandquality.45Clay suggests thatthis is a case where 'the addresseefails to hear the provocativestatement',but it is hardto seewhat Patroclus could have been manipulatingCebrionesinto doing even if the latterwere notobviously dead.46 Eumaeus'vaunt over Melanthiusemploys a similarstrategy(Od. 22.195-9).His wordsareostensibly quite polite,but their off-recordsignificanceis clear bothfromthe con-text and from their somewhatexaggeratedstyle. The effect of the kertomiaagainderives fromthe contrastbetween the utterance'scomparatively noffensive ostensiblemeaningand its men-acing off-recordsignificance.Finally, there are two cases where kertomia is so transparent s to be virtuallyon-recordabuse. This is no doubtevidence of the social ineptitudeof the perpetrators.Melanthius hareshis new masters' aste for kertomia.47His threat o the disguised Odysseus(Od. 20.178-82) vio-lates the maxim of quantity by employing understatement, s well as violating the maxim ofquality by employingrhetoricalquestions. His threat s formallyoff record,althoughthe literalsignificanceof his utterance s obvious. His kertomia s very crude, in keepingwith his coarseand abusivecharacter.Thersites'kertomia 1. 2.256) is also quitecrude,at best only minimallyoff recordand includinga good deal of on-recordabuse. The exaggeratedrhetoricalquestionswhichhe addresses o Agamemnonare humorous cf. 215) off-recordcriticisms,rather han sin-cere attempts o seek information.'Sarcasm' s the best Englishtranslation f kertomia,althoughmissingits distinctiveelementof ironic politeness. Kertomiaoperates from a position of superiority,or at least temporaryadvantage, toying with the victim's inabilityto retaliateagainstor even understandhe taunt.The offence is off record,encodedin words or behaviourwhich areostensiblyless offensive oreven polite.

ACHILLESAND PRIAMPriam'srequestto sleep in Achilles' tent is startlingandproblematic. He takes the initiative ingoing to bed, which is theprerogativeof the guest (cf. Od.4.294-5, 11.330-1).48 Suppliantsandotherdependents,by contrast,areusuallytoldby their hosts when to retire cf. II.9.617-18, 658-62; Od. 7.334-43). Priamthus misinterpretshis relationshipwithAchilles. It could be arguedthat the two men have achievedanunderstandingwhich transcendsmereetiquette,but the wordepikertome6n(1. 24.649) is an irreducibleobjection to such a reading.49Achilles does notoverlookPriam'sfaux pas, althoughhe respondsmorepolitely thanhe did to his earliergaffe(552-70).

Telemachusemploys off-recordstrategieson two occasions in the Odysseywhen he feelsunableto offer accommodation o visitors. Inthe first of them,he explainsto Theoclymenus hathis own house is unsuitable to receive guests, and suggests that he seek lodging withEurymachusOd. 15.513-24). The striking similarityhere is notjust thatAchilles says thathisdwelling is vulnerable o potentiallyhostile intruders,but thathe too proposesto accommodate45 See Pelliccia (n.41) 1995: 168 on the 'self-con- 48 Cf: W. Arend, Die typischen Scenen bei Homersciously artificialandflamboyant' anguage n Patroclus' (Berlin 1933) 101-5; S. Reece, TheStranger'sWelcome.taunt. Pelliccia (n.41) 2002 discusses the sympotic con- Oral Theory and the Aesthetics of the Homericnotations of the EicdE4tlvcomparison)which Patroclus HospitalityScene (AnnArbor 1993)31-2, 67-9.employs here (cf. Od. 18.353-5 for anotherexample in 49Some scholars, however, simply ignorethe impli-

kertomia). cations of epikertome6n. One JHS readercommented46Clay (n.30) 619 and n.7. that it is 'little more than a formulaic tag, not to be47Cf. Od. 17.217-32, 248-53;J.Russo,A Commentary pressed'.on Homers Odyssey3 (Oxford 1992)on Od. 17.231-2.

87


15/16

MICHAELLLOYDhis guestin a placewhich is if anythingeven moredangerous. Hermesmakes clear to Priam hathe is in danger even sleeping outside under Achilles' colonnade (//. 24.683-8). Later,Telemachusdescribes o the disguised Odysseustheproblems n his houseandapologizesfor hisinabilityto receive guests there (Od. 16.69-77), althoughhe has not actually been asked toaccommodatehim there at all. Achilles alleges that he has no privatedomesticspace, andthatthe interiorof his dwellingis freelyavailableto themilitaryproceduresof the Greekarmy,eventhougha visitorwould not have expectedto sleep thereanyway. Both men could have avoidedreference to these domestic difficulties and made more effective provision for their visitors.Telemachus'responsesareapparentlyllogical, butmake sense in terms of theiroff-recordsig-nificance.Achilles' invitation to Priam to sleep outside is superficially polite. He addresses him asyEpovcpi? ('dearold man'), andgives reasons for his suggestion.50The interpretationf kerto-miabeing proposedhere has the advantageof explaininghow an utterancecan be unfriendly nintent while being ostensibly polite. The true significance of kertomia is always more or less offrecord, and its surface meaning relatively inoffensive. What we should expect from Homer'scharacterization of Achilles' speech as kertomia is some violation of the Gricean maxims whichwould indicate that the speech has an off-record significance. Achilles does indeed violate themaxim of quantity, both by offering a superfluous explanation of why he is making Priam sleepoutside and by omitting to give the expected reassurance that he could deal with a possible inter-vention by Agamemnon. He also breaches the maxim of qualitybyb understatement and insin-cerity,since he misrepresentsboth the threatposed by an interventionby Agamemnonand hisown capacityto deal with it. He goes on to ask Priamhow long a truce he needs for the burialof Hector. This is a generous offer, to which Priamresponds with polite appreciation,andAchilles concludes the encounterwith a gestureof reassurance671-2). He may to some extentbe placated by Priam'srecognitionthatthe war must continue. Nevertheless,his kertomiahasdecisivelyrealigned heirrelationship.The terms on whichPriamgoes to bed have been definedin a way which makes clear thatwhat has passedbetween them does not affect the continuationof the war.

Secondly,thereis the questionof Priam'sdeparture.He has evidentlyforgotten he dangersof loiteringin the Greekcamp(cf. Hermes'warning,683-8).51Macleodmay not have given analtogether convincing interpretation of the meaning of epikertome6n, but he offers a usefulaccount of Achilles' predicament: 'Achilles knows that his guest must leave by night, and hisspeech hints at the danger of his remaining. He knows too that a god has escorted Priam (563-7); and he guesses that the same god will help him return, as in fact happens.'52 Achilles obvi-ously cannot make plans for his visitor's departure on this basis (e.g. 'When is Hermes comingto collect you?'), but he wants to establish that he knows what is going on and that he resentsPriam's disingenuousness. The closest parallel for kertomia in such a context is in Hesiod'sTheogony, when Zeus responds to Prometheus' attempt to trick him. Prometheus has given hima choice between two portions of a sacrificial animal, one of which seems unappetizing but actu-ally contains most of the best meat. Zeus replies (543-4): 'Son of Ilapetos,outstanding amongall the lords, my good sir, how unfairly you have divided the portions.'53 Hesiod characterizesthe speech as kertomia K?epTOg?.OV,45). Zeus's words arepolite, although t could be arguedthatironyis implied by a certainexaggeration breaching he maxim of quantity) n his address

50 On giving reasons as a politeness strategy, see n.8: 'even Hermes does not say the obvious: that PriamBrown and Levinson (n.15) 128-9; Minchin (n.l9) 18 will be killed if foundin the Greekcamp'.n.19. For other polite formulae in this scene, see 52Macleod(n.9) on 649.Macleod(n.9) on 661, 669. 53Trans.M.L. West (Oxford 1988). Westtranslates51 Cf Macleod (n.9) on 655: 'If Priamreally were (pato KEPTOgikov (545) as 'chided'. In his commentaryseen, somethingworse than"adelay in the releaseof the (Oxford 1966) he offers 'carping' for Kcpto0eov, andcorpse"would happen.' Moreexplicit is Clay (n.30) 619 comments'not injest but in displeasure'.

88


16/16

THEPOLITENESSOF ACHILLESto Prometheus.He sees throughPrometheus' rickandis angeredby it, althoughhe goes alongwith the deceptionforhis own reasons. Hesiod markshis superiorityover his would-be deceiv-er by giving him three times the rare formula&a(pOzaSi ua ei&x; ('whose designsdo not fail',545, 550, 561), and stressing that he 'recognized the trick and did not mistake it' (551).Kertomia s themotjuste for a sarcasticexpressionof superiorknowledge expressed n wordsofironicpoliteness.Priammay not actuallybe tryingto deceive Achilles, buthe has neverthelessnot felt it nec-essaryto be candid aboutthe role of the gods in his mission to the Greekcamp. Achilles is wellaware of it, however, having been informedby Thetis of Zeus's wishes (133-40). He wasangeredearlierby an impatient,even impertinent, equestfromPriam(552-70), and was espe-cially riledby the implication hathe was ignorantof theroleof thegods andincapableof under-standingwhatwas requiredof him: 'It is alreadymy own mind to release Hektor o you ... Andwhat is more,you do not deceive me, Priam. I have the wit to see thatone of the gods broughtyou to the fast ships of the Achaians'(560-4). Achilles now employs an off-recordstrategytoconvey a similarresponse(650-5), implyingalso thathe does notexpect to see Priamagain. Thespeech has the light tone which is typicalof kertomia,as Achilles suggests thatinterventionbyAgamemnonwould be a mere social inconvenience. He reaffirmshis control of the situation,althoughPriamgraspslittle or nothingof his meaning.Such social andpsychologicalsubtletieshave often been thought o have no place in Homer.The purposeof this article is to offer a theoreticalframework or interpreting particular ate-gory of them,andto contribute omethingto understandinghe puzzlingconclusionof the greatscene betweenAchilles andPriam n Iliad 24.

MICHAELLOYDUniversityCollegeDublin

89

Documents

The Politeness of Achilles Off-Record Conversation Strategies in Homer and the Meaning Of