marchinus h. a. l. h. van der valk, homer's nationalistic attitude

7/26/2019 MARCHINUS H. a. L. H. Van Der Valk, Homer's Nationalistic Attitude

1/23

L'antiquit classique

Homer's Nationalistic AttitudeMarchinus H. A. L. H. Van der Valk

Citer ce document Cite this document :

Van der Valk Marchinus H. A. L. H. Homer's Nationalistic Attitude. In: L'antiquit classique, Tome 22, fasc. 1, 1953. pp. 5-26 ;

doi : 10.3406/antiq.1953.3461

http://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1953_num_22_1_3461

Document gnr le 15/03/2016
http://www.persee.fr/collection/antiqhttp://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1953_num_22_1_3461http://www.persee.fr/author/auteur_antiq_534http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/antiq.1953.3461http://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1953_num_22_1_3461http://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1953_num_22_1_3461http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/antiq.1953.3461http://www.persee.fr/author/auteur_antiq_534http://www.persee.fr/doc/antiq_0770-2817_1953_num_22_1_3461http://www.persee.fr/collection/antiqhttp://www.persee.fr/


2/23

HOMER'S

NATIONALISTIC ATTITDE

par M. H. A. L. . van der Valk

Ancient as well as

modern critics

have been struck by the fact

that Homer

represents

the Trojans

less favourably

than the

Greeks

(*).

When

Trojan

heroes

such

as

Hector

or

Aeneas

are

mentioned in the Iliad, the Scholia abound with

notes pointing

to

the

inferiority

of the

Trojans

and the

superior character

of

their

Greek

opponents

(2).

Though the observations of the Scholia

are

no doubt

exaggerated

on this

point, modern

critics, too,

have

observed

that

in

some passages the Trojans are represented as

inferior to the

Greeks (3).

On the

other hand, it

cannot be denied

that the Trojans are portrayed sympathetically

in

their domestic

(1)

Cp.

e.

g.,

Schol. BT

14 :

.

Cp.

also

Schol.

ABT

1 and Schol.

29,

Schol. BT 78 and

BT 1.

(2)

Cp.

Schol. BT

192,

227,

810,

O

502,

where

Ajax'

moderateness

is opposed to Hector's

vainglorious

attitude. Cp. also Eustath., 800, 45 :

,

; cp. Eustath.,

970, 8 : ,

. Also Aeneas is

unfavourably over against Diomedes in Schol. BT

168, 224, 252,

256,

258.

It is

also

to be noted that Paris, who is already represented

in Homer, is

depicted still

more unfavourably in the Scholia, cp.

my

observations in Lexikon zu Homer, Hesiod

und

dem lteren Epos (to be published),

s. v. Alexandros. In

the

main it can

be

said that

the Trojan commanders

are

represented

in

the

Scholia

in a more

unfavourable way

than

their

in reality

is depicted

in

the

Iliad. On

the other hand,

the

Greek

are sometimes

depicted more

favourably in

the

Scholia

than

in the

Iliad,

cp. my observations in Lexikon zu Homer, Hesiod

und

dem lteren Epos,

s.

.

Agamemnon. Rightly also

on the

Scholia

Wilamowitz, Iliasu. Horn. 39,

n. 1.

(3) Cp. e.

g.,

the similes used in the beginning

of

the description of the

battle ( 1 ff., 433

ff.)

; cp. on

this

passage already

Plut.,

De aud. Poet., X,

and

Philodem., . , VII, 27. For

modern

scholars

Homer's pro-Greek attitude,

cp.

Scott, Unity of

Homer (1921),

p.

206 and W. J. Verdenius, Hector, Inaugrele Orcttie Utrecht (1947), p. 41

(here a complete bibliography), p. also

TAPA

1949,

3,


3/23

6

M.

H. A. L. H.

VAN

DER

VALK

relations. Thus

Hector in

Z,

Priamus in

,

and

are depicted

with sympathy. Also Hector s

corpse

is solemnly returned

to

his parents

in

and is

carefully preserved by

the

gods

( 184

ff.

and

20

f.).

We

also

see

that

Hera,

though

a

pro-Greek

goddess

is depicted

as a

rash and

jealous

wife.

We

may conclude that as

an

artist,

Homer

portrayed

the Trojans (Priamus,

Andromache,

Hector) objectively

and

even

favourably,

whereas as a Greek he

was influenced by nationalistic sympathies. We must

add,

that these sympathies have never

conclusively

influenced

or weakened Homer s

artistic

qualities. He is

in

the

first

place

an artist. We wish to

support our

statement

by a

discussion of

Hector's character which has a dualistic appearance

in

the Iliad.

On the

one

hand,

he

is

represented

favourably as father, husband

and

son

(cp. books

and

X)

and as

a

pious

hero

(cp.

266

ff.,

33

f.).

On

the

other, less favourable

characteristics

appear,

when

Hector

comes into

contact

with Greek heroes.

Thus in the

description of

the

combat between

Ajax

and Hector in H, Ajax'

conduct

is manly and moderate (*), whereas Hector is depicted

as being rash

and on

the

other hand fearful.

In

the

Trojan

is

not only

physically but

also

morally inferior

to

the Greek (2).

In

the same

way

in

JV

809

ff. Ajax

and Hector

are contrasted when

rearranging

and addressing the

troops. The

Scholia

already

observed

that

Ajax'#

speech

is

more

moderate

and

virile

than

Hector's

(3).

Hector e.g. is immoderate in supposing that

he

might be a son of Zeus

and

equal

to

Apollo and Athene (N 827),

whereas

Ajax,

though prophesying

Troy's destruction,

does

so

in

moderate

words

(N 813

ff.) (4). These examples are corroborated

by

other passages, in which

Hector

is

represented as a

boasting

warrior. Thus

in

497-541, when addressing his

troops,

Hector

(1)

Cp.

especially 195-199 ;

the

lines

were wrongly athetized by the

Alexandrian

critics.

(2) Incorrect on

this

point, Bowra,

Tradition

and Design in

the

Iliad,

p. 96. For the view of the

Scholia

on Hector, cf. especially Schol.

49.

(3) Cp.

Schol.

BT 810. Note

also

that Ajax only

addresses

Hector

as

, whereas

Hector

uses

the less moderate epithets ,

.

(4)

Cp.

also Hector's

admonition to

the soldiers in O 347-351.

Hector

menaces

to

kill the soldiers

who tarry.

Nestor

when giving a similar

in

67-71 speaks in more moderate terms, also Agamemnon in 2? 391-3

speaks in

more

covert

terms.


4/23

HOMER S

NATIONALISTIC

ATTITUDE 7

does

not end his speech with

an

appeal

to the

gods

(*),

but

with

self-assertive and presumptuous words. In H 75

he

speaks about

himself

as

,

although

in

the

Iliad

and

the

Odyssey

it

is

not

usual

for persons

to call

themselves

. He also

says

twice

*

{

538

ff.,

825

ff.),

a sentence which

is

never used by a Greek

hero

(2). These

features

have

been

used on purpose

in

order

to

characterize

Hector

as

overbold. We

also

point

to the

fact

that in

X

Hector has been

expressly represented as fleeing before he

accepts

battle. These

facts allow us

to

state that Homer

was

animated

by nationalistic

feelings

(3).

This nationalistic attitude Homer s can also be traced

in

the

composition

of

the Iliad

as

a

whole and

of

some

of

its

books

(4).

It

can be

seen

especially in books

M-P,

of which

we

shall

discuss

a few

instances

(5). In these

books Homer is

loath

to admit the

gradual

defeat

of the

Greeks

and is

markedly influenced by this

disinclination in

the

composition of these books. We point

to

the second

part

of

M, 11.

290-439, of which

passage

analytical

critics

are suspicious (6). For

the Greek wall is

attacked by Sar-

pedon and not, as we

should

have expected, by Hector

himself.

Hector

does not attack the wall until the end of M.

We

have to

take

into

consideration that

Hector s

victorious

assault

on the

wall is

purposely

delayed,

because the poet

is influenced

by

tendencies.

By way of

comparison we point

to book

A,

where

Hector is purposely removed from

the

battle-field

in

order

(1)

In

526

he

had

mentioned

the

gods

incidentally.

(2)

Perhaps

also 298,

where Hector

says

:

,

can

be explained in this way ; cp. 761,

467, O 481. It is,

however, possible that is an ethic dative; thus,

e.

g.,

Mazon, Iliade, II,

14

Cp.

also

W.

Leaf,

The

Iliad

(1900),

on

H

298

:

The

expression

would

be intolerably impious .

(3)

Cp. for

this

unfavourable representation of the Trojans

441-57, where

the impious attitude of the

Trojan

king Laomedon,

who

even threatens the

gods is mentioned.

(4) For an example of this nationalistic attitude in 548-52

cp.

v. d.

Valk,

Textual Criticism

of

the

Odyssey, p.

87-9.

(5) W.

Schadewaldt,

I iasstudien, Abhandl. Sachs. Akadem., 1938, Nr.

6,

had

no

opportunity

to discuss

these

books which are

very

interesting in view

of the analysis of the Iliad.

(6) Cp. WitAMOwnz, Die Jifas

Hopxer (1916), 214,


5/23

8 M.

H. A. L. H.

VAN

DER VALK

that Greek victories

may

take

place and

the

Greek defeat may

be delayed. This is the reason why in M Sarpedon,

who

is

not

so

important

as

Hector is

introduced.

For in

this

way the poet

is enabled to

describe

the

Trojan

hero

as being

held in

check by

the

principal

Greek hero, Ajax

(1). We

may argue

as

follows.

Of course

the Greek wall had to be forced and

we expect it

to

be

forced

by Hector

himself (cp.

M 445).

Even if

Hector

should

be opposed

by

Ajax

at

that moment, the economy of the plot

made

it imperative

that Ajax should be

driven back.

By

Sarpedon Homer could

save

the

honour

of the

Greeks.

For

now he could first show that

the

Greek commander,

Ajax

and his

troops were

equal

to the

assaulting Trojans.

Only

then

does

he

narrate Hector s

forcing

of the wall

(2). We

also

point

to

M

108-194.

We

are

expecting that

the

Trojans

after

having

divided

themselves

into five divisions will

make a

general attack

on the wall. Instead of

it

our

attention

is focussed on the left

side

of

the battle-field,

the

less important one

(3),

where a less

important hero,

Asius,

is

repelled by

the

Greeks.

At

this moment

Homer

cannot represent

the

Greeks as victorious on

the

main

part of

the

battle-field.

Therefore, he introduces a less important

Trojan

and

a less

important part of the battle-field in order once

again

to

mention

Greek

successes.

This

method can

be

observed

especially

in

book

JV,

here

it

is

even a clue to the explanation of the book.

We

know that the

retreat

of the

Greeks forms

the

subject matter

of

, , , 0.

Homer has,

however, managed

to

construct these

books in

such

a

way that the

actual setback

of the

Greeks

is only

narrated

in

M

and

O (4), whereas JV

and

mention Greek victories. The

principal

Greek victory

takes place

in

, where

Hector is wounded

and eliminated from the battle by Ajax. In Homer has

to

be

more cautious in relating Greek victories. This appears

from

the

(1) Cp.

M

413 ff. and

M

436 :

-

.

(2) Also in 497 ff. where the Greek defeat begins, no

combat

between

Hector

and

Ajax takes

place.

The

poet

evaded it,

because

the economy of

the plot

would

have

required

Ajax

to be inferior.

(3)

Cp.

for this below, p. 9.

(4) For

this

reason M is one

of

the shortest books of the Iliad (M

has

only

471 lines,

has

837 lines). Also

, which narrates serious defeats

of the.

Creeks is a short

book

(565 lines),


6/23

homer's

nationalistic attitude 9

fact that only

minor Greek heroes

such as Idomeneus are prominent

there, whereas

Ajax remains in

the

background. Analytical

critics

thought

that

repeats an

older

lay,

the

aristeia

of

Idomeneus

),

because

they did not pay attention to the curious

composition

of this book. For

the

successes of

the

Greeks could not

be

for

the reasons

pointed

out

just

now.

Just as in M

118 ff.,

the

main part of

the

battle

in

takes place

'

( 312 ff.). This place is the less important

as we

may learn from 375

ff. (2).

Here, the

main action,

the combat

for

Patroclus corpse

takes

place in the

middle

of

the battle-field, whereas

Antilochus

is summoned from the left

side of the battle-field

(P

682). In the

situation

is quite the

reverse.

The

principal

heroes,

Hector and

Ajax are in

the

central

part, which is, according

to Homer

himself

(N 312

ff.,

679 ff.),

at

that moment of minor

importance.

The poet's reasons are plain.

He

cannot in

this

book give

the Greeks a decisive

victory ;

he

makes

them

victorious on

the less

important left side.

If

he

presented an

independent lay, it

cannot be explained

why

the

combats should take place

precisely there.

If

we

accept the

unity of the Iliad, an

explanation can

be

given, as we

saw

just

now.

We point

to the

following

examples illustrating

Homer's

cautious

behaviour

in

N.

In

190

ff.

Ajax

pushes

Hector

back

but

does

not inflict

any

wound on him

(3).

Also

in

155 ff.

Meriones

hits Deiphobus,

but

does not yet wound him.

Only

further on

in

and in

Meriones

and

Ajax are

to

wound their

opponents. Likewise

in

169

ff.

when a

Greek and

a Trojan

are killed,

the

success

of the

Greeks

is only

revealed here

in the

Greeks taking possession of the corpses. In

the

same

way in

the

beginning

of

JV 11. 125-135)

the Greeks are

still

on

the

defensive,

whereas

in

the beginning of

11.

364

ff.)

they

are on the offensive.

A similar typical example of Homer's nationalism was already

referred

to

above

viz.

the

death

of

Cebriones

in

IT

712-781.

Since

Hector himself cannot be

killed

by Patroclus, his

charioteer

is

killed instead

and

in

this

way

a kind

of victory over Hector

is

(1) Gp.

WiLAMowiTZ, Was

und Homer, p.

217

ff.

(2) For

the

meaning of left and right in Homer,

cp. Joseph

Cuillandre,

La droite et la gauche dans les

Pomes

homriques, Rennes, 1943.

(3)

Cp.

also Schadewaldt,

Iliasst.,

p.

69

f. His explanation as

,

however, is incorrect.


7/23

10 M. H.

A. L. H. VAN DER

VALK

assigned

to

him. Therefore,

in

775

f. it is said of Cebriones

o

'

., a line

which

actually does

not suit a hero of minor

importance, but

which has been

inserted

in order to signalize

Patroclus'

victory.

A

striking parallel

is

furnished by

118

ff.,

where Diomedes has

to

retreat

and is attacked

by Hector. At this moment Diomedes

kills Hector's charioteer, since

Hector

himself of course

cannot

be

killed as yet. We also point

to the

aristeia of Agamemnon,

218

ff.

The economy of the plot demands that at last

should

be

wounded. This appears from

the

fact that

when Iphidamas attacks

him,

Agamemnon

misses his adversary

at first (

233). We have to bear in

mind, however,

that

he

has

not

as yet lost his energy (*).

For

he

is

compared

with

a

lion

(2)

and

kills

Iphidamas

;

only

after

this

is

he

wounded

by

Coon.

We see that, just as

was

the case

with Patroclus,

the wounding

of Agamemnon is being delayed.

A similar vein of

nationalism

can be observed in E. In 29

ff.

Athene proposes

to

Ares

to leave

the

battle-field

and

she actually

leaves the field

in 133

(3).

Thus Homer succeeds in

disculpating

the

pro-Greek

gods

and in showing

that Ares himself

is the

cause

of

his

subsequent

misfortunes. After the victorious attack of

Diomedes

and

his assault on

the

Trojan

walls

(4) has been

(E

35-440), Ares comes into the battle. It is

necessary

that

now the Trojans should

be victorious in order that

the

subsequent

intervention of Athene and

the wounding

of

Ares by

Diomedes

can be motivated.

However, it

is not Hector

but

Sarpedon

who

is the

principal

hero in

this passage E

627-667), whereas

only

in

680-710

Hector is

mentioned.

The

situation

is

clear.

The

Trojans

should

be

victorious.

However, the

poet

is

loth

to admit

this fact

and

therefore assigns

the

principal

victory

not

to Hector

but

to a minor figure, Sarpedon.

We can observe similar

features in

the

second part of 0. Already

(1)

This

is

Schadewaldt's

view : Iliasst., p. 58 : Den Agamemnon beseelt

nicht mehr der

alte

Geist .

(2) In the preceding

lines, Agamemnon

has been thrice

compared

with

a

lion,

113 ff.,

129, 173 ff.

(3) Ameis-Hentze,

Anhang Was, II,

p.

59, wrongly takes

exception

to

this fact.

(4) Cp.

702

ffv where Patroclus

also attacks the

walls of

Troy.


8/23

homer's

nationalistic

attitude 11

in

0 379

ff.

the Trojans victoriously approach the

ships,

while

in

O

414

ff. Ajax and

Hector

fight for a

ship.

However,

in O 653

ff.

the

Trojans

are

apparently

again

approaching

the ships, while

Ajax again defends a

ship against

Hector. It

is

understandable

that analytical critics

such as Wilamowitz

have taken exception

to

this fact and have thought

that O

379 ff.

is

a doublet of

O 674

ff.

x)

The passages must,

however,

be explained from Homer s

point

of

view. Just as

in M

the

Trojans under Sarpedon

were at

first

brought

to

a standstill

and only

were victorious at

the end of

M, so

in

O

they

are at first

held in

check

when

the ships

(2).

Not until O 592

ff.

does a decisive

turn

take

place (3),

just

as

at

the end of M Hector decisively attacks

the

wall.

For

the

difference

between

O

390-591

and

O

592-746 we

point

to the

two speeches delivered by Ajax

in

O 502-513 (4) and

in O

733-741.

In the

first speech

the

situation

is

not yet critical (5)

and therefore Ajax' speech is ironical. In

the

second passage

the situation has

become considerably

worse. This time Ajax

is no longer ironical, but

flatters

and beseeches his

compatriots (6).

(1) Cp. Wilamowitz, I ias..., pp. 238 ff. and pp. 242 ff. ; Ameis-Hentze,

Anhang, III, p. 115.

The lines

have been defended by

Schadewaldt,

I

93

The

explanation

of

O

653

:

'

by the

ancient

critics (Sch.

BT O

653) is

a

forced one.

(2) Cp. O 413 = M 436 :

. Cp.

also

the similes in

M 433-5 and in O 410-2,

which indicate that the

battle

remains

stationary.

(3) At the end of O the defeat is

postponed,

because the

poet

did not wish

to

end

this book with a

defeat

of the Greeks.

(4)

It is interesting

to observe

the

difference between

the

exhortations of

Hector

and Ajax

in O 486-99 and O 502-13 and

those

of the early

elegists

such as Tyrtaeus. Tyrtaeus

points

to the

fame

which the

valiant soldiers

will

receive after

death.

This topic is not touched upon by the Homeric

heroes.

This

is

understandable

because

the

Homeric view

of

life

after

death

is gloomy.

(5) In O 514-91 Homer

wishes

to give the

Greeks

some

more

successess

However,

because the situation is already critical for the Greeks only les-

important heroes such as Antilochus and Meges

come

to the fore.

Cp.

for

a similar situation our observations on

book

N.

(6)

He

calls

them

in O 733 f. Cp,

189

f., where Odysseus,

when

in great danger, addresses his comrades in a similar way, cp. v. d. Valk,

Text.

Crit.

Odyss.,

p. 274. Cp. also Eustath., 1050, 24 :

,

Schol.

BT O

735 wrongly

assumes

that the

second speech

is

of

the

same

stamp

as

the first (

).

Already in the


9/23

12

M.

H. A. L. H.

VAN

DER VALK

A similar

fact

can be

observed

in 0 668-673,

where it

is said that

at Hector's decisive

attack the goddess

Athene lifted

the

mist

from

the

eyes of

the

Greeks and made them see

Hector

clearly.

It is understandable that

the

lines were athetized by the

since

before

this

passage

there

was

no

question

of

a

mist

and

accordingly

the lifting of

it was

unnecessary Q). However

those

critics

did not take into account Homer's

religious

and

nationalistic

mentality.

When the Trojans attacked the ships

for

the

first

time Nestor had

prayed to

Zeus (0

370

ff.) and

the

god had thundered

loudly

(0 377

f.).

Because the Trojans were

held

in

check this time, Homer could picture Nestor as

praying to

Zeus.

When,

however,

the Trojans approach

for

the second time, they

are bound

to be

victorious. Therefore,

this time

Nestor

does

not

pray

to

Zeus,

since

it

is

impossible,

according to

the

economy of the plot, that Zeus should hear

him

and

give a

favourable

omen. Accordingly,

Nestor only addresses

the

troops,

0 659-667. However, Homer wishes

to

show that the

gods have not completely

deserted

the Greeks. Therefore, instead

of

Zeus, the

minor goddess Athene

gives

a sign and thus it appears

that even at this critical moment divine favour does

not

wholly

desert

the

Greeks. Accordingly we see

that the lines cannot be

removed, if we take into account Homer's religious mentality

and

his

partiality for the Greeks.

A

similar

fact can be observed

in

0 610-4

which lines were

equally athetized by

the

Alexandrians (2).

The lines state that Zeus honoured Hector at this moment, but

that the latter's death by the hand of Athene and Achilles is

near.

The lines occur at a decisive moment, when Hector

definitely

approaches the ships and the

approach

of the Trojans is described

at length

in

0 592-614. The

passage may be

divided into two

parts. In

0 592-602 the Trojans

are

described and compared to

lions, in

0

603-614, their commander

Hector

is described

and

is

compared

to Ares. Since

Homer

is

partial

to the

Greeks, he im-

short speech which he delivers in 0 561-4 = 529-32)

Ajax

speaks in a

flattering way

(in 0 562

he

says ).

(1) Cp.

Schol.

ABT,

0

668 ; the Scholia and the

views

of modern

scholars

on the passage are

given

by Bulling,

Athetized lines

of the Iliad (1944),

p. 149 f.

(2)

Cp.

Schol.

ABT,

0 610, Zenodotus

did

not even write

the

lines. The

passage has

been

defended

by Schadewaljt,

Iliasstudien,

p. 107i


10/23

homer's nationalistic attitude 13

mediately emphasizes that

the

success of

the

Trojans

will only

be

a temporary

one. Thus in O 599-602

he says

that

soon a -

will

take

place,

in O

610-4

he

says that Hector

will be killed

(*).

Accordingly

it

appears

that the lines

cannot

be athetized.

Moreover,

the

same motif

occurs in

O

56-77, where

Zeus at length exposes

to

Hera

the coming

events viz.

Hector s

attack on the

ships,

Patroclus intervention, Hector s death and

even the

final destruction

of

Troy. These

lines

were

equally

athetized

by the

Alexandrians

(2).

In

reality,

if

we

take into

account their

specific point

of

view, we

have to admit that

they

showed critical

acumen.

For it is surprising that Zeus should

explain

and excuse

his conduct

to

Hera, who

had

just now been

severely

rebuked (3).

In fact,

the

poet addresses

the

public

in

this passage and emphasizes at the beginning

of

this

book in which

the

darkest events

will

befall

the

Greeks, that their

setback will

be only

a

temporary one, and that at

the

end Troy will be

etc. (4).

In

this connection

we

also

point

to

O

113-141, where

Ares

is

ready

to

transgress Zeus' interdiction

and to attack

the

Trojans,

he

is only

prevented from carrying out this

design

by Athene.

Though

at first

sight it

would seem

that

the scene

is

a needless

intermezzo,

it

completely

fits

in

with the

religious

mentality

of

those

times. For to the archaic

religious mind defeats are caused

by

the

gods.

If

a defeat

threatens the

Greeks,

the audience will

expect

the

pro-Greek gods

to

avert

the

defeat. Thus in , where

the

Greeks are

defeated, Homer narrates that

Athene

and

Hera

try

to

intervene on their behalf

(

198 ff., 350 ff.)

and

are

only

prevented

by Zeus. It appears

here

that

the

pro-Greek gods

are

willing

to

give their support. In O

the

situation

is more serious

and

accordingly

an intervention of pro-Greek gods is impossible

at

this

moment.

In

order

to satisfy

religious

feeling

Homer

the scene with Ares in order to

show

that the intervention

(1) Cp. the parallelism between O 592-602

and

O 603-14 and between O 610

and O 593 f.

(2) Cp.

Schol.

ABT,

O

56.

(3)

In

O

174-183

Zeus

does

not explain his conduct to Poseidon.

(4) Thus at the beginning of O, when the Greek defeat begins,

Homer

points

to

the

future

destruction

of Troy and in O

592

ff. ;

when

the

Trojans

approach the

ships he

again emphasizes

this

fact.


11/23

14 M. ti.

A.

L. .

VAN >R VALfc

in behalf of

the Greeks

is

impossible

and can

on ly

be taken

into

consideration

by

a

hot-heated god

such

as Ares.

In

view of this

we

can also

understand

that M

175-181

were

wrongly athetized

by

the Alexandrians Q).

For

the lines

state at

the moment

when

the

Greek

wall was

attacked

by the Trojans, that the pro-Greek

gods deplored this fact. Thus Homer expressly disculptes

the

pro-Greek gods from inactivity

in

situations which are critical

for

the

Greeks.

We also point to the composition of

, 0.

It

was

necessary

that

the Greeks should

be

decisively defeated.

To this end

Hera's

deception of Zeus

was

useful

(2).

For

by it

the Greek successes in

were made possible

and Zeus' anger

against

the

Greeks,

which

resulted

in their serious defeat in 0, was made

plausible.

Also

in

Homer

was

led

by

nationalistic motives,

a

fact

which

has sometimes given a dualistic appearance to this book. Thus

Wilamowitz (?) was already struck by the incongruity

between

753-761,

where the Greeks

have to

retreat

and

735-752,

where

the

offensive strength

of the

two

Ajaxes is underlined. However,

Homer was

led by

two

conflicting motives.

For

reasons

of

it

was

desirable

that

Patroclus' corpse

should be rescued

by Achilles and

accordingly it was necessary

that the Greeks

should retreat

(4).

However, because Homer is partial

to the

Greeks, he

expressly

stresses

at

the

beginning

of

the

retreat

the

strength of

the

Greek

heroes and depicts them

in

three

similes,

722-752. We may compare

the way

how Ajax

in

548-563

when he

has to

retreat,

is

also

depiected in

two similes (6).

The

two conflicting motives

can

be equally observed

in

545

f. and

(1)

Cp.

Schol. ABT, M

175.

Aristarchus and Aristophanes athetized

the

lines, Zenodotus did not write them. Jachmann, Nachricht. Akadem.

1949, 174 f, rightly emphasizes that the

omission

of the lines

by

does

not prove that they

were

absent from his mss. (Bulling, Athetized

lines

of

the

Iliad,

p.

130

f.,

is

wrong).

(2) The scene between Hera and Zeus in possibly goes back to older

poems

(thus,

e.

g.,

Bielolahwek in A. R.W.,

28,

117), at least

it

mirrors older

representations.

(3) Was

und

Homer, p. 153 f.

(4) In 160 ff. it is even said that the two

Ajaxes

could not

push

back

Hector, whereas ordinarily Hector is no match for Ajax.

(5) In

where

the

situation

is

crucial,

Ajax is

compared to

the lion.

In

P,

where the

situation

is less critical, the two Ajaxes are

compared

to

a less

majestic animal, the

boar.


12/23


in 593

ff.

In 593

ff.

Zeus

lifts

the aegis and makes the Trojans

victorious,

in 545

ff.

Athene

descends

from

heaven, sent by

Zeus

in

order

to

aid

the

Greeks.

The passages

seemed

to

contrast

with each other and therefore 545 (the

sending

of Athene by

Zeus)

was

already excised by Zenodotus

).

The Alexandrian

critic

did

not

take into account that Homer was led by

two

con

trasting

motives.

He had to make the Trojans victorious in

order

to

make it

possible

for

Achilles

to

be

summoned

(P

593

ff.).

On the other

hand,

Homer wishes to show that Zeus is

no longer

unfavourable to the

Greeks, after Achilles' wrath has

been satisfied.

Therefore, Athene

is

sent by Zeus,

545

ff.

(2).

Because the

Greeks

had to

retreat soon (P

593 ff.),

no

decisive

turn

could

be

given

to

the

battle

by

Athene's

appearance.

she

only

aids a warrior of minor importance, Menelaus,

553

ff. As

to Homer s

partiality for

the

Greeks

in

we

point

to

862-7, where Hector

pursues Achilles' chariot and

leaves Patroclus corpse. In this way

Patroclus'

slayer,

Euphor-

bus, can be killed by

Menelaus

(3).

Also

Menelaus

is brought

purposely

to the fore in P. Since

he

is a warrior of minor

he can retreat without dishonour before Hector after he

has slain Euphorbus

(P

106 ff.),

a

fact which would have been

dishonourable

in the

case

of

Ajax.

Menelaus has

to

retreat

in

order that Hector can take

possession

of Achilles' armour. On

purpose Hector does not

immediately put on

Achilles'

armour,

but

first

retreats before Ajax,

128

ff. In this

way

Homer

can

show

his inferiority with respect

to

the

Greek

hero (4). Also the

scene

of Automedon, 426-542, has the

purpose

to show that

the dishonour

put

upon Achilles' chariot by

Patroclus

death has

been effaced. This partiality

for

the

Greeks

in

shows

that

545 is genuine,

since it

emphasizes that

the supreme god

is

again favourable

to the

Greeks

(5).

(1) Cp. Schol. AT

P

545.

(2) In

545 ff.

Athene

is

compared to a rainbow. We may

compare

75 ff.,

where

Athene is also

sent

by Zeus, and is

compared

to a

star, etc.

(3) Euphorbus is in all

probability an

invention of Homer's. The name

suits a rich

Trojan. Cp.

the name Phorbas. His mother's name Phrontis

suits the mother of the sagacious Polydamas.

(4) If Hector had put on the armour immediately, it

would

have

been

improper

to

represent him

as

fleeing

before Ajax.

(5)

356-67,

where Zeus teases Hera for

having

succeeded in recalling

f


13/23

16 M.

H. .

L.

H.

VAN Dfe VALlt

Homer's nationalism

also

appears

in the

portrayals of Paris

and Helen

in

. On

purpose

Homer has

assigned

the principal

part

in not to Hector, the

Trojan commander, but

to Paris.

For in

this

way

he

is enabled to emphasize Paris'

crime and

to

show that

the

Trojans

are

responsible

for

the

war. Accordingly

Paris

crime

is

mentioned

again and again in

this

book

(x).

he is represented

in

a very

unfavourable way

;

for

he is

vainglorious, 15-20,

a

coward, 30 ff., weak and inferior to

Menelaus,

346

ff.

and voluptuous, 437

ff. On

the other

hand,

Helen has been represented as favourably as

possible.

Whereas

Paris

is

called

the

cause

of the

war,

Priamus says of

Helen

164)

that she

is

innocent,

since

the

gods are

the

cause

of the

calamities.

Paris is hated

even

by his own countrymen (2), whereas Helen

is

admired

even

by the

Trojan

elders

157

f.).

Helen,

too,

has

a sense of shame

(cp.

243

ff.)

and

wishes

to

be dead 173

f.).

It is significant that such wishes

are

never

uttered

by Paris,

but

that his

own brother

and

wife

wish his death 40, 428 f.,

281

f.).

Helen is also unwilling to return to

Paris

and has to

be

forced by Aphrodite (3).

Helen, the

Greek

queen, is

on

purpose

disculpated, whereas

the

whole responsibility for

the

war

is

shifted

on

to

Paris (4).

Homer even hints

at

the fact that

she

has

not

been persuaded

by

Paris,

but

has been kidnapped

by

him

(6).

Achilles to action

(cp. also

168) is not

at variance

with the above-named

notice. For Homer only

wishes

to emphasize

here

the fervour of the pro-

Greek

goddesses.

(1) Cp.

87:

(cp.

also

374 and

388),

100 :

' '

,

Menelaus says in

366 :

and in

351

:

' . In 28

Paris

is

called , in 42: , 50:

.

The kidnapping of Helen

is mentioned on

purpose

in 46-51 and at the end of the book,

443-6.

(2)

Cp. 320-2, 453

f., H 390.

(3) Aristarchus

wrongly athetized

this passage, because

he thought

Helen's

words

unbecoming,

addressed

as they

were

to

a

goddess.(4)

This has already

been observed

by

Eustath.,

434, 20 ff.

Whereas

Helen is represented favourably,

her

sister Clytaemnestra is represented in

the Odyssey in an unfavourable way. The

reason

for it is that in the Odyssey

the poet need not take

account

of

nationalistic

motives.

(5) Cp.

444 : .

This

may

be the reason why the first intercourse

between

Paris

and Helen took

place

in an isle according to 445.

If Paris

had

kidnapped Helen,

the intercourse

could

only take place

after

they had

departed in

the ships.

In

the Cgpria

Helen

is

not kidnapped but persuaded

cp.

Proclus,

Chrest. Allen,

103,

5 : 'Evfl ' and


14/23

OMER*S

NATIONALISTIC ATTTUDE 17

Nestor's

words

in

356 are

in

keeping with this representation.

For

he

says that the Greeks wish to take

revenge for

.

Also

in

the remaining

part

of

the

Iliad Paris crime is emphasized. Thus in when the

first

battles

begin,

one

of the Trojans

killed by the Greeks,

is the son of Harmo-

nides who built

the

for

Paris.

In

the same

way

in A

when

the

principal

battle

begins,

two

sons

of

Antimachus

are killed by Agamemnon. Antimachus

is the

Trojan who tried

to

please Paris

and

advanced

the felonious proposal of killing

the

Greek

ambassadors, A 122

ff. ?).

In

post-Homeric literature

the judgement passed by

Paris

on the three goddesses is thought

to

be

the

cause

of

the

war

(2).

Homer

mentions

this

judgment

in

28-30, a

passage whose genuineness is

convincingly

established

by Reinhardt

(3).

It has

surprised

scholars that this fact has not

been

mentioned

until the

end

of the Iliad.

The reason for it

is

that Homer wished to make Paris'

crime

against Menelaus the

real cause of the

war.

For this

crime

is

much

more villainous (4)

than

the

judgment on

the

goddesses. For this reason

the

other

motif

was

thrown into

the

background

(5).

Some scholars have

thought

that

Homer's

representation of

Paris

is on the whole

not

unfavourable

(6), because

the latter wounds and

kills

a

number

accordingly the first intercourse takes place in Sparta, cp. Proclus, Chrest.

Allen, 103,

8.

(1) Agamemnon's three victories in 91-148 are represented

according,

to

the

principle

of the descending

scale (cp. v. d.

Valk, Museum, 1950,

p. 164 f.). The three couples of Trojans

offer

gradually decreasing resistance.

On

the other hand, they are gradually

more intimately connected

with the

culpable. For the first

couple are

ordinary Trojans, the second

couple

(

101

ff.)

belong to the guilty family of Priamus, the

third

couple (

122

ff.)

are sons of the felonious Antimachus.

(2) Cp. the Cypria, Proclus,

Chrest.,

Allen, 102, 13 ff.

(3)

K.

Reinhardt,

Das

Parisurteil,

Frankfurt,

1938.

(4)

Cp.

also that in

355

ff.

the Trojans

are

made responsible

for

the fact

that Helen is not delivered to the Greeks. Homer wishes to underline

their

responsibility, too.

Also

in

620

ff.

Menelaus

does

not accuse Paris but the

Trojans of the kidnapping of Helen.

(5)

It

is to be noted that in 28 the judgement passed on the goddesses

by Paris is

called

an

, whereas

Helen's kidnapping is called in 100

(viz.

the

cause

of the war). For the text in

100 cp. v. d. Valk, Text. Crit.

Od.,

p. 129 ; v, d. Mhll,

Hypomnema

zur Ilias (1952), p. 67, n.

10.

(6) Thus Bowra,

Tradition

and design in the Iliad, p. 210 ; Severyns,

Homre,

III,

84.


15/23

18

M. H.

A. L. H. VAN DER VALK

of Greek warriors, cp.

82

ff.

and

passim. In my opinion,

Homer has

allotted

some

victories to

Paris

for

nationalistic reasons.

For Paris is an archer and consequently his victories are no proof

of

the

inferiority

of

his

Greek

adversaries

in

a

pitched

battle.

Thus Paris is introduced in passages, where the Greeks have to

be defeated, in

order to minimize their

defeat in

this way. We

point

to Paris counterpart on

the

Greek

side, the archer Teucer.

The latter specially

comes

to

the fore,

when the

Greeks

are

cp. 226

ff.,

O 442

ff.,

and when Homer

wishes

to

some victories to them. He elects

an

archer, because

the

latter's victories are

less

significant and can

accordingly

be more

readily

admitted. Thus

the

Greek archer

comes to the

fore,

when

the Greeks

are

retreating,

the

Trojan

archer

is

prominent,

when

the

Trojans

are

victorious.

The

nationalistic motif

is especially

of

importance

in , ,

,

which books, as

we observed

already,

are not dominated

by the leading

theme of the

Iliad, the

wrath

of

Achilles, but

by

the

motif of

Troy's destruction.

It is

that analytical

critics because

of the

difference

with

the

other

books of

the

Iliad, should have

ascribed the above-

named

books

to

a different poet,

an

explanation which is not

necessary,

if we take account of Homer s

partiality

for

the

Greeks.

For Homer, from

nationalistic

motives,

does

not

make

the

theme

of

Achilles'

wrath

effective

until

,

and

thus

was

not forced to

narrate Greek

defeats in

B-. On

the

contrary,

he

was enabled

to mention Greek

successes

in ,

,

and to stress in these books

the approaching

destruction

of

Troy

Q. This motif

was prepared

by , , where

Paris

defeat

and the

breaking of

the

solemn

oaths

by

the

Trojans were

narrated,

while

book

forms

a connection

with Achilles' wrath in A and

accordingly presents a

somewhat

dualistic character. In

the first

part of B, 11. 1-283, the motif of

Achilles' wrath

is dominant.

This

theme is

superseded, however,

in

the

second

part

of

by

the

motif

of

the

destruction

of

Troy.

This theme is emphasized in the

speech

of Odysseus, 300 ff.,

as

well

as

in that of Nestor,

350

ff.

This

motif

is also

dominant

in the last

speech

which is

delivered

in the assembly,

viz. the

(1) For

Z, cp.

WilaMowitz, Was und Homer, pp. 302 if. ; SchadewaldT,

I Hasst., p.

150

f. Recently

has

been discussed by G. Jachmann,

Symbola

Coloniensia

J.

Kroll

oblata,

pp. 1-70.


16/23

Homer's nationalistic attitude

id

speech of Agamemnon,

369

ff.,

and

gives a clue

to

the right

of that

speech.

Agamemnon

says

in 375 ff. that

he

has

quarrelled

with Achilles and that

this quarrel

hampers

the

success of

the

army.

It

is

curious

that

the

haughty commander

at a moment when the troops are ready

to

fight

and

the

for

the

future are bright, should admit his fault (cp. 378 :

' ). This

becomes

understant^able,

if we

take into

account the poet's

aims. The destruction

of

Troy,

to

which Odysseus and Nestor

had

pointed,

will not take place

in the following books

Q) because

of

Achilles' menis. On

the

contrary, defeats

of the Greeks

will

be narrated. Therefore,

the

poet

makes

on

purpose Agamemnon emphasize

that

only

Achilles'

menis prevents a final success. As soon as

he

and

Agamemnon

are

reconciled, the

destruction

of Troy

is

inevitable (cp.

379

f.).

We have also to

take into

consideration that in A 245

ff. Nestor's

speech,

which

represented

the

views of

the

army

was ineffective,

whereas

in

336

ff.

his speech is of

great

importance

and

will

be fulfilled.

After the preparatory indications of , , the above-named

motif

comes

to the

fore

especially in ,

, .

For

a

good

of we

should

bear

in

mind that

in

archaic times special

attention was paid

to the gods,

human

action

being

intermingled

with and

often overruled by divine action.

Thus in ,

we see

not only that the Greeks

are

victorious

but also

that the

pro-

Trojan gods are defeated by the

pro-Greek

gods (2).

Also in

the

Greek

victory is

emphasized by

the

fact that not

only

the

Trojans

but

also the pro-Trojan

gods

are defeated. In

this

we

first

of all point

to the

fact

that

the

Trojans who are

and killed

in

the beginning of

11.

1-83) are special

of

the

gods. Thus

the son

of a priest of

Hephaestus,

a

of

Artemis

and

a

favourite

of

Athene

and last

of

all

a

priest

of Scamander (3)

are

killed

by

the

Greeks.

In this way the

poet

wishes

to

show that

even the

gods do

not

save

their

favourites

(1) Cp. already 419

f.

where

it

is stated

that

Agamemnon's prayer for

the

destruction

of Troy is at the

moment

ineffective.

(2) In

,

the

pro-Trojan gods begin

the battle. Thus the

pro-

Greek

gods

are

disculpated.

(3) The

last-named

person

is the most important

in

this

connection, since

he

is a

priest. Cp.

below

for

the

importance

of

Adrestus

in

Z.


17/23

20 M.

H. A. L. H.

VAN

t>R VALK

from

the

impending disaster. The remaining part of is in

with the

beginning, since in it there is

narrated

that Diomedes

irresistibly

defeats

the

Trojans and their

gods.

Book has the

special

function

to

indicate that

the

divine protection

of

the

Trojans is ineffective.

Book forms a

corresponding

sequel

to it.

It

is

well-known

that

is one of

the most crucial

books of the

Iliad from

the point

of view of

composition.

For

it

is

surprising

that Hector s

death and

Troy's destruction are

emphasized,

whereas

in

already the Greeks are defeated and Hector is victorious.

critics

have

thought that

was

an independent

lay, whose

main

purpose

was

to

give

a sympathetic picture

of

Hector and

Andromache

Q).

Homer's principal

purpose, however,

is

to

show

in

this

book

the

inevitability of

the

destruction

of Troy. This

appears already in the

beginning

of

Z,

11. 1-66, in which passage

just as

in the

beginning

of victories of the

Greeks occur. Now

the last

Trojan

who is killed is typical of this

passage

and of the

trend of

Z.

For in 37-66 Adrastus,

who

is caught

alive by

Menelaus, is

killed by Agamemnon, who says that no one

of the

Trojans shall escape the nearing

doom.

The Trojan's

name

he

who cannot

escape

and

the fact that he

is

killed by

the

commander-

in-chief

are significant. We

may

compare 34-135, where Lycaon

is

also

caught

alive

by

Achilles and

is

not

spared

either.

Lycaon,

however, is killed

for personal

reasons and

in

order

to

emphasize

Achilles' anger

over Patroclus death

(2).

Adrestus is

typical

of

the Trojans

who shall all

be killed

ruthlessly.

Just

as

in

Et

the

beginning of

(3)

is in

keeping with

the remaining

part of

it.

For

the

ineffective supplication of Athene shows that

the

city-

goddess herself is

hostile

to the

Trojans (4)

and

thus

will not

save

the

city.

In the

interview

between Hector and Andromache

(1)

Thus

Wilamowitz,

Mas...,

p.

308

;

Schadewaldt,

Iliasst.,

p.

155

thinks that

is a

prelude to

Hector's

death in

X.

(2) Achilles is the

typical

individualist.

(3) Cp. 548-552, where the gods do not accept the

offerings

of the Trojans

(4) Unlike

in

no favourites of the gods are killed in

Z.

The

passages

also

differ

insomuch

as

in inhabitants of Troy, but in representatives of

the neighbouring cities

are

killed. Inhabitants of Percote,

Pedasus

and Teu-

thrania. Even

two

Trojans named after a city

(Pedasus)

and after a river

(Aesepus) are mentioned (Z 21). Aristarchus'

reading for

is

no doubt

a

conjecture.


18/23

homer's


the

commander of

the

enemies himself prophesies

the

nearing

destruction

of

the city,

447-9.

The

words had

already been

used

by

Agamemnon and

have

been repeated

here

in

order to

show

that the

Trojan commander himself emphasizes the

of the city. Hector is also

bewailed at

his departure as if

he

were dead (Z

499-502). Thus

it

appears that both the city and

the

commander of

the

enemies are doomed.

It

is understandable that

minor

inconsistencies

could

not be

avoided

in

Z. Thus

the

gloomy picture of Hector

given in

does

not fit in with the following

books.

We also

point

to 433-9,

where

Andromache

says

that the

Greeks have already thrice

attacked the city-wall. The

Alexandrians rightly observed

that

this

statement

was

not

in

agreement

with

the

situation

as

pictured

in and therefore

athetized the lines

Q). The passage

is, however,

typical

of Homer s

method. Because

in

he wishes

to

stress

the

critical situation

of Troy,

he says

that the

walls

have already been

attacked.

We may point

to

our

discussion of

P, where also

conflicting notices

were

found.

We

also point

to the

of Diomedes in and

Z.

In 128

ff. he does

not

wish

to

fight

with

gods,

whereas in

he

wounds

Aphrodite

and Ares.

We have to take

into consideration

that

Diomedes

is one of

Homer's

special

favourites.

Thus

the Greek hero

even

defeats

the

pro-Trojan gods.

At the

same

time,

however,

the

poet wishes

to represent him as the

ideal hero who

is

pious

towards the gods

(2).

Therefore, he

emphasizes

this motif

in

Z,

lest the hearer should

think that fighting with gods, etc. was characteristic of Diomedes.

Book

forms a transition

to

the following books. It

narrates

the defeat of the

Trojan hero,

Hector, by Ajax (3),

but it

also

narrates the building of the

Greek

wall, 327-343.

Books , ,

show

the

same theme,

viz.

the destruction

of

Troy.

Homer s

nationalistic attitude can also

be

observed

in the

fact

(1)

Cp.

Schol. A Z 436; an extensive discussion of the passage is

to

be

found

in

Bulling,

Athetized lines of

the

Iliad, p. 99 f.

(2)

Achilles is

differently represented,

cp. X 15

ff.

At the same time

it

becomes apparent

that the Iliad

would have

been far less imposing,

if

the

moderate Diomedes

had

been

the

principal hero. Cf.

for

Diomedes my

in

Mnemos. 1952, 316

ff.

(3) The combat remains ineffective, because

Hector

fcas to be preserved

for the following bocks,


19/23

22

M.

H. A. L. H. VAN DER VALK

that an object

has

different names in

the language

of gods and of

men

(cp.

A

404, 813, 291, Y 74)

(*).

Bowra

has rightly observed

that

the words wich

are

used

in

the

language of

men,

are

probably

of pre-Greek origin (2). An exception seems to

be presented

by

813 f.,

where

a hill is

called

by men

and

by gods. seems

to be

pre-Greek, can

be connected

with . However, no

distinction is made

here between

two

different names but between

two

different

conditions.

Gods have

a greater knowledge than

men and

therefore they know that

originally a heroine was

buried

there. Men have a limited

they only

know

the

hill by a general name,

.

In

this connection we also point to

305 and to

61, where

only

the

divine

name of an

object

(viz.

the plant

and

the rocks -

)

is

given.

According

to

archaic

religious belief those

who

know

an

object by name have power over it

(3).

The plant moly

is

a mysterious

plant which is only

known to

the

gods

and

has no name

in

the

language

of

men.

In

the

same

way

the

Planktai cannot be passed by men (4) and therefore only have

a name

in

the

language of gods.

II

In

the

preceding chapter we had an opportunity to

point

to

the fact

that,

if

the

situation

so

requires,

Homer

does

not

shrink

from

giving a

representation of facts which is at variance with

other parts of

the

Iliad or even with other passages of

the

same

book

(5).

This

characteristic

of

the

poet should be borne

in

mind,

if

one wishes to give

a correct

explanation of / and

especially

of

Phoenix.

It is well-known that

in

connection with Phoenix

the Dual Number of / 182

(6) represents

a

(1)

Cp.

Bowra, Tradition...,

pp.

152-5.

(2) Thus is

to

be connected with pre-Greek words, cp. Chan-

traine,

La

formation des

noms

en

Grec

ancien,

p.

248.

(3)

Cp.,

e. g. the Egyptian

myth

of the sun-god Re

who

is persuaded by

Isis to enounce nis name. Cp. Pleyte-Rossi, Turiner Pap., 131,

14 ff.

(4) Iason can only pass by the divine aid of Hera.

(5)

This characteristic

can also

be observed

in

the Odyssey. Cp.

v. d.

Valk,

Textual Criticism of the

Odyssey,

pp.

226

ff.

(6) Cp.

also

/ 196 : ; I 197 : . A good

survey of the

question

of the Duals is given by Miss M. No, Phoinix, Ilias

Ufid Homer, Preisschr. Jablonowski

Gesellschaft, 1940,

pp.

12 ff.


20/23

homer's


special

difficulty. Since this

Dual

no

doubt referred

to Odysseus

and

Ajax, critics have concluded

that Phoenix

was added by

a

later

poet

(1).

However,

even

analytical

critics

(2)

are not

inclined to accept this solution, because by

the removal

of Phoenix

that part of I which has

the

greatest

artistic

merits is eliminated.

Now

we should

bear in

mind

that

apparently

Homer

wished

to

have

Achilles

appealed

to

not only by a representative of

the

Greek

army, but also

by someone who stood nearest to him. It

appears

from other parts of

the

Iliad that

Phoenix

is a subordinate

of Achilles

(cp.

196). Therefore, we

would

expect him to

stay

with Achilles. However, in

/

Homer makes

him stay on

purpose

with the Greek

commanders. If he

had

stayed

with

Achilles

the

latter

would have

had

no

occasion

to

address

him

in

/

427

ff.

and thus

call

forth

his speech, while Phoenix

himself would

have

had no

authority

to

admonish Achilles. Therefore,

Homer

invents

the expedient of

making

Phoenix

stay with the

Greek

army.

In

this way

he

can

introduce

two persons

addressing Achilles viz.

Odysseus, who

is the leader of

the deputation

and

who

speaks

on behalf

of the

Greek

army

; Phoenix, who is intimately connected

with Achilles

and

who

is

mindful

of Achilles'

personal

interests

only. In this

way

it can

be

explained why

in

I 179

ff.

before

the

departure

of

the

deputation,

Nestor

urges

especially Odysseus

to persuade

Achilles.

In fact, Odysseus

in

his speech conveys

the wishes of the Greek army, whereas Phoenix

only

has

Achilles'

personal interest

in mind.

Thus we see that

the

actual

which

speaks

on behalf of

the

army, is represented by Odysseus

and

Ajax. Phoenix has

to

belong

to

this deputation

so

that he

can address Achilles as

an

independent king. By the introduction

of Phoenix, Homer has deepened and

variegated

the situation.

For the special significance of Phoenix' speech is that

he

speaks

with the authority and also

with the

love of a

father.

We

may say

that

Phoenix

speaks

in

loco

parentis

(3). Therefore,

Phoenix

first

of all narrates his

personal

adventures, / 434-495, a story which

is in my

opinion a personal invention

of

Homer's.

For

this

story

(1) Thus No, L

I.,

pp. 18 ff.

(2) Cp. Wilamowitz, Die Was

und

Homer, pp. 64 f. ; Mazon, Introduction

Iliade, pp. 176 ff. ; cp. also

Schadewaldt,

Iliasstudien (1939),

pp.

137 f.

(3) Scholars

have thought

that Phoenix is

reminiscent

of Chiron,

Achilles'

teacher, cp. No, I, L, p. 24.


21/23

24 M.

H.

A. L.

H.

VAN DER

VALK

enables Homer to represent Phoenix

as a

hero

who

has no children

of

his own

and

who,

accordingly,

can consider

Achilles

as his child.

In this

way Achilles could

be addressed

by a

person

who almost

had

a father's authority

and

who, just

like

a father,

was only

thinking

of

Achilles'

interests.

Odysseus does

not

speak

to

Achilles

with authority. For

he comes as a suppliant. He only cautiously

admonishes Achilles

to

abandon his wrath

and reminds

him

of

his father's words at his

departure,

/

247

ff.

i1).

The scene

of the

departure from Phthia is a personal invention

of

Homer's. In this

way

Odysseus is

enabled to make

use

of Peleus'

authority, since

he does not venture

to

admonish

Achilles directly to

abandon

his wrath.

Phoenix,

on the other

hand,

admonishes Achilles

directly, because he

has

the authority

of

a father. It

is also to be

noted

that

Odysseus

only

cautiously touches

upon

the

hazardous

subject of Achilles'

abandoning his

wrath,

whereas Phoenix

enlarges

precisely upon this topic, I 496-605. It

is of

special importance

that

Achilles' wrath

is

discussed at length in /, because

in the

sequel

Achilles himself

has to bear the deplorable consequences

of it.

Because a

member of

the

Greek embassy like Odysseus has

no

authority

to

bring

up this subject, Homer has introduced

a

person who

is one of

Achilles' closest friends. First

of

all Phoenix'

points

to

the gods, /

496-514,

who

in archaic times

always occupy

the first place.

Then he

reminds Achilles of the Greek

army, /

515-523,

a

topic which

had already

been

touched

upon

by

Odysseus

and which is

therefore dismissed briefly. Finally he

dwells

at

length

upon Achilles'

personal

interests, /

524-605 and

corroborates

his arguments

by the

story of Meleager. In this way

Phoenix'

speech has

the

function of showing that the problem of

the

wrath

is not only of vital interest

for

the

Greeks but

also

most

intimately

concerns

Achilles himself.

Homer has shown a deep psychological

insight,

since

he

has distributed the

topic

of the wrath over two

persons

(Odysseus and Phoenix).

It would be a great disadvantage,

if

one assigned

/

to

different

poets

(2).

(1) We also point to the fact that Odysseus purposely does not repeat

Agamemnon's final words, /

158-60

: .

(the

Alexandrians wrongly replaced

by

the

weaker

). Instead, Odysseus

in his peroration

makes

a personal

appeal to Achilles,

/

300-6.

Phoenix,

however, says (/ 496) :

.

(2) We remind the reader

of

the fact that the Dual is used in / 182,

etc.,


22/23


The same psychological insight which

we

observed in

I,

can

be

seen

in the

interview between Achilles

and Priamus in . In

this

scene

Homer

had

to

show

the

king

of

the

enemies

prostrated

as a

suppliant

before Achilles, a

sight which ought to be gratifying

to

a

Greek audience. At the

same time he was

anxious not to

diminish Priamus'

dignity

by

presenting

him

in

this attitude.

In

this he succeeded by placing Priamus

and

Achilles on

the

same

level,

since

after Priamus'

first

speech, 486-506, both

Achilles

and

Priamus

mourn

over their fate,

507-512.

Accordingly,

the

situation

is less humiliating for Priamus (1). We also point

to

the two invitations Achilles extends to the Trojan

king,

518 ff.,

and

599

ff.

The

first

invitation is declined by

Priamus, the

latter

is

accepted.

Now

both

speeches delivered

by

Achilles are

tuned

to the occasion.

For

in

the

first speech

Achilles

mainly

thinks of his own situation. The image of

the

two jars, 527 ff.,

exemplifying that human existence is a mixture of

good

and

bad,

fits

in with

Achilles'

and not

with Priamus' fate.

This

time the

admonitions are superficial (2).

In his second

speech Achilles

transposes

himself

into Priamus' position. For

the example of

Niobe

(3) entirely suits Priamus'

fate.

We further point

to Andromache's

laments

in

X

477-514 and

in

725-745

which

reveal Homer's psychological

insight.

The

scene

in

X

is the

most pathetic one,

since Hector has

just been

killed. At this

moment Andromache especially comes

to

the

fore,

whereas the

laments

of Hector's

father

and

mother are only

short,

X

416-436. Homer has purposely placed

the

principal

lament

of Priamus

and

Hecuba

at the beginning

of book X, 11.

38-

89

(4).

In this way, at

the

moment of

Hector's

death, he

can

in view of the fact that

Odysseus

and

Ajax

actually represent the

interests

of

the

Greek army.

(1) We may

compare

the

beginning

of .

The

poet purposely

represents

Odysseus

as

being

attacked

by

Eumaeus'

dogs, when approaching the

latter's

barrack. In this way

the humiliating

scene of Odysseus

approaching

as

a suppliant can be avoided.

(2) Achilles can only apply the

example

to Priamus

by

reasoning

that

the

latter had

formerly been a rich king ( 543 if.).

(3)

A

fine

explanation of

Niobe

in is given by

J.

Th. Kakridis, Homeric

Researches

(Lund,

1949), Chapt.

IV.

(4) We

observe

that in X 416-28

Priam

delivers

a short

second

speech.

It is interesting

to

compare

the

two

speeches. In his

first speech, X

38-76?


23/23

26 M.

H. A. L. H. VAN DER VALK

focus

the main

attention on Hector s nearest relation, his wife.

As to Andromache's

lament, it seems

that

her speech

is more

passionate in

X

than in . For in she speaks in

a

more

official

way

as one of

the

chief-mourners at Hector s hearse (1). While

in

X

she only

mentions

herself,

their

son

and

Hector,

in

she

does

not omit to

mention

Hector s

parents,

741,

and his

740. It

is

also understandable

that in

the

last book of

the

Iliad, she

especially mentions Troy's impending

destruction,

a theme which is absent from

X.

The

fact

that in

X

508-514

she mentions her

intention to burn Hector s

clothes

is in keeping

with

the

character of

the

lament. For in

the

pathetical

lament

of

X

Homer wishes to emphasize that Hector remains unburied.

Thus

we can

say that in

X the relation between Hector

and

is

the

principal

theme,

in

the

impending

destruction

of

Troy.

Rumpt (Pays-Bas).

Priam had mainly spoken from the egotistic point

of

view,

a

feature common

in archaic times (cp. ,e.

g.,

v. d.

Valk, Text. Critic.

Odyss.,

22 ab). He

also

laments his other sons and especially fears lest by Hector's death Troy

will

be

captured

and he

himself slain. It is significant

that

Priam's speech ends

here with

a

poignant description of his

own

fate 11. 66-76).

In

X

416 ff.,

however,

after

Hector's

death,

Priam

only

laments

his

son

and does

not

think

of the

consequences

for

himself

and

his family.

(1) We

must

not

forget

that in

Hector is lamented

by Andromache,

Hecuba and Helen, whereas in

X

there

is

room

only for Andromache's

lament. It is interesting to note

that neither in

X

nor in

does Andromache

depict her own

fate after the capture

of

Troy. This

has

been done by

Hector

in

450

ff. There,

the passage

had been given in

order to stress

in

this

book

the impending doom

of

the Trojans. (For

a

reference

to

in

X

cp.

X

477-81).

marchinus h. a. l. h. van der valk, homer's nationalistic attitude

Documents