[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review.]
This densely argued collection of essays is a special edition of Philologia Antiqua. Bertrand, Nagy, Scafoglio and Zucker explain in the short forward that the volume is a result of a conference held in Nice in 2021 where a range of scholars from backgrounds that included pure Homerists, philologists, linguists, and comparatists, gave papers on the concept of Homeric culture, which is defined as analysis of Homeric texts as well as the literary trail that goes beyond the texts. As the editors express in the introduction, “The Iliad and Odyssey prove, time and again, that these epics are an inexhaustible reservoir of ideas, feeding exegesis and reflection on all aspects of humanity, not only on ancient society, but even on our own current practices and on the construction of speech, texts, communication – even culture itself.” (p.11–12) The collection is characterized by the variety of approaches, methods and topics found under the ‘umbrella’ of Homeric culture, including how Homer is an important part of our civilisation and cultural identity. The interdisciplinary nature of the volume situates it at the forefront of studies on Homeric culture.
Nagy and Davidson focus on Homeric composition and comparisons with medieval French and Provençal poetics, and with medieval Persian poetic traditions. The essay is written in a unique manner in that Nagy and Davidson wrote different paragraphs, and sometimes paragraphs together (the paragraphs being signified by their initials throughout), thereby giving a sense of the original oral paper. It discusses attempts to trace originators within an oral tradition and that starting at the beginning is not necessarily the way to successfully proceed. This essay will be important to those interested in comparative oral poetics. The audience will be a select one, as understandings of the select linguistic nuances of ancient Greek, medieval Persian and medieval French and Provençal French, in addition to understanding the comparison of elements of authorship within the differing oral poetic traditions are needed. Nagy’s method of using the letters L M N and so on, to signify the various reconstructed stages of authorship in the oral traditions is familiar to the reader since he had previously employed it in his work Pindar’s Homer (1990a: 80). His expansion of this method in applying it to other oral traditions demonstrates its reliability. The essay is interesting since it illustrates the similarities between the three comparanda regarding composition and oral authorships.
Létoublon’s essay examines the Iliad as one large-scale composition by analysing the structuring role of repetition. What makes this different from other unitarian arguments, particularly those found within the German tradition, is the focus on repetition through comparison of character. The individuals compared are Achilles, Hector and Patroclus. Létoublon argues that the descriptive repetitions not only integrate the overall scheme of Achilles’ anger but also allude to a united mythologically diffuse background due to the mythological allusions in the Iliad which are glimpsed in the traditions in the Epic Cycle. Létoublon heavily draws on Lang’s argument,[1] acknowledges this (38), and combines it with Slatkin’s arguments that a key to Achilles’ wrath is Zeus being chained by Athena, Hera and Poseidon (37). The argument goes beyond epithets and formulaic descriptive episodes and looks at the focused mythic backgrounds. This method is certainly very interesting, particularly with the added specific analysis of Achilles, Hector and Patroclus as foundational for the understanding of the unity of the Iliad. It would have been more thought provoking to have included Helen and examined what part her mythic background and its diffusions within the Iliad, Epic Cycle and Hesiodic works play in the unitarian argument.
The Homer Multitext project has been ongoing for more than twenty years. The project has involved from the beginning an examination of Venetus A, a tenth century manuscript of the Iliad, and the publication of the copious excerpts, found in its margins, of Homeric scholarship from the Hellenistic and Roman eras. The marginalia itself also includes comments on many earlier instantiations of the text. Dué’s essay is a very important contribution to this collection, since she, as a co-editor of the project (with Mary Ebbott), not only provides information about the Homer Multitext project (available on online at http://www.homermulitext.org), but also explains the intersection with Cerquiglini’s ‘New Philology.’ Cerquiglini’s theory is that the written text cannot be separated from its context, which includes images, marginalia, and even layout. Therefore, as Dué notes, “The Homer Multitext’s initial focus on the Venetus A manuscript of the Iliad, with its many layers of scholia, interlinear glosses and corrections … has much in common with this approach to philology.” (45) The black and white images of the text are very handy for comparing when reading the comments by Dué; one small flaw is reference to a crimson asterisk (not discernible in black and white) in the text (50), but the reader can easily go to the website to see the crimson mark. Again, this essay is an important contribution to the volume, since it demonstrates and argues for the interaction and intersection of digital platforms with philology.
The Genavensis graecus 44 is a thirteenth century manuscript of the Iliad. It contains scholia and an interlinear paraphrase of the first twelve books of the poem. Jambé’s essay focuses on the Sarpedon episode (Il.5.696–698). It ostensibly examines the choice of lexical equivalences used in the paraphrase that is intended to clarify the meaning of the episode, but in reality it borders on interpretation. Jambé questions whether this paraphrase is the only one to use the verbs ζωοποιέω and ἀναζωοποιέω and notes that the lack of editions of paraphrases makes it impossible to have certainty on this matter. This leaves the episode open to interpretation: Boreas’ breath on the dying Sarpedon leads to further enquiry into ancient physical principles inherited from pre-Socratic philosophy, and there is a multiformity of readings of this manuscript. The essay is well-placed, being thoughtfully positioned after that on the Homer Multi-Text Project.
Nobili’s essay on female lyric voices in the Odyssey focuses on examining the points of contact between female narrative and discourse in the Homeric poems, primarily in the Odyssey, on the one hand, and the tradition of female lyric poetry on the other hand. The section on Helen is interesting in that Nobili comments on Helen’s regret in Odyssey 4 vis-à-vis the madness sent by Aphrodite by comparing it with Sappho’s rendering of Helen and her defense of Helen’s choice. Nobili concludes that Sappho evokes the Homeric figure by alluding to passages from the Homeric poems, while at the same time Helen’s speech shares themes with female poetry: mythic, choral, nuptial and erotic. (71) She points out that the case is the same for the figure Calypso. This is a tantalising observation, since, given that most female poetry has been lost, female speeches and reported contextual female actions in Homeric poetry may offer the beginnings of traces of specific topics and formulae that follow through into later poetry. This is an important essay that suggests further avenues for Homeric feminist literary criticism.
Martin assesses the semantics of ‘care’ by focusing on the word κῆδος and associated forms. In Homeric contexts, the word appears in episodes concerning funeral rites and in ones concerning familiar relations and marriage rites. The semantic meaning thus shifts from ‘care’ to ‘anxiety’ to ‘concern.’ Martin focuses primarily on the rites of death and mourning in the Iliad with a further refined focus on Achilles’ reaction to the death of Patroculus. He finds that in the Homeric world the κῆδος-as-relation group comprises “those who participate centrally in the κῆδος-funeral.” (96) As a result, this upturns the Aristotelian model in which pre-existing relations (συγγενεῖς) are involved in the ritual; in the Iliad, the ritual itself instead transforms into κήδιστοι individuals who gravitate toward the ritual. What Martin has revealed is that the Iliadic meaning of κῆδος is more intricate and nuanced, because the Iliad is set during a war and the word is there largely applied to episodes concerning funeral rites, whereas Aristotle’s framework is the πόλις and is focused on society with the result that the word has a more refined meaning.
Cognitive approaches are a significant branch in Homeric studies. Allan’s essay concerns Homeric colometry, which he acknowledges has found little agreement among scholars regarding the nature, meaning, number and position of caesurae in the hexameter. His cognitive approach is characterised by approaching metrical cola as stylised Intonation Units. In a semantic sense, Allan argues that they can be understood as functional-cognitive units that are used to focus the audience’s attention on particular sections of information usually containing only one new concept. He argues persuasively that metrical cola are not just formal components of hexameter, but were audible to the audience, and that they performed the function of drawing attention to important parts in the narrative. In addition, understood as Intonation Units they determine the phrasing and pitch of the sung lines. They aid the audience in processing information. Situating colometry within a cognitive framework reminds us of the role of caesurae in Homeric epic: the poetry was listened to, there were pauses, there was pitch and melody, and there were narrative episodes that needed attention, pause, and thought by the audience.
Decloquement examines the role of commentaries on Homer in preliminary exercises in rhetoric, or Progymnasmata, in the first to fourth centuries CE. As part of his argument, he compares the scholia and the Progymnasmata and shows that pupils critically analysed the Iliad and Odyssey to understand narrative composition. This, Decloquement argues, can be understood as a mental paratext that enabled pupils to allude to, quote, and thematically rework Homeric episodes when writing their own works. Paratextual studies in Homeric epic is a field in itself, but this essay by Decloquement greatly widens this field in that his argument shows that the pupils schooled in this technique blurred the lines between paratext, intertext and metatext, and even goes so far as to demonstrate a lack of separation between text and exegesis. In this way, Decloquement’s argument creates multiple pathways in Homeric studies, and so is fitting for a collection on ‘Homer and Cultural Horizons’ since it clearly has its outlook faced on future avenues and horizons.
The essay by Amata that concludes this volume concerns a new critical edition, translation and commentary in Italian of the Dialexeis of Choricius of Gaza. This will be of interest to scholars of Late Antiquity and Greek rhetorical education. Its place in this volume follows on from Decloquement’s essay due to also being concerned with the history of education. Declamations One and Two concern the Homeric figures Achilles, Polyxena, Polydamas, with mention of Briseis, and Neoptolemus; the nature of the discourses is the proposed marriage of Achilles and Polyxena. Declamation Ten is based on Iliad 14.21–45, where Patroclus begs Achilles to allow him to return to battle. The other declamations are not Homeric in theme or episode. The inclusion of this essay highlights the importance of Late Antiquity discourses, which contain Homeric episodic references, and in essence it highlights the impact of Homeric epic on the later literary landscape, its importance within education practices in antiquity, and its ever evolving nature.
The volume is thoughtfully put together, and it is evident that the editors have made selections that focus on prime areas that have built on previous scholarship and will precipitate further scholarship in Homeric studies. In this, the contents of the volume are in alignment with the title words: Homer as a Cultural Horizon.
Authors and Titles
Nicolas Bertrand, Gregory Nagy, Giampiero Scafoglio, Arnaud Zucher, Homer as a cultural horizon. A short foreward
Gregory Nagy, Olga M. Davidson, On the problem of envisioning Homeric composition: some comparative observations
Françoise Létoublon, The Iliad, a large-scale composition
Casey Dué, New Philology and the Homer multitext
Ariane Jambé, Sarpedon resurrected? About an exegetical interaction in the Geneva Manuscript of the Iliad
Cecilia Nobili, Female Lyric voices in the Odyssey
Richard P. Martin, Friends, death, and kinship: Homeric diction and the semantics of ‘care’
Rutger J. Allan, Coda and caesurae in the Homeric hexameter: A functional-cognitive approach to colometry
Valentin Decloquement, Mental paratext? Homeric criticism in the Progymnasmata
Eugenio Amato, Le dialexeis di Coricio di Gaza: Edizione critica, traduzione e commento (parte1. Dial.1-11)
Notes
[1] Lang, M ‘Reverberation and Mythology in the Iliad’ in Rubino and Shelmerdine 1983:140–164.