The Best of the Achaeans
Concepts of the Hero in Archaic Greek Poetry
Revised Edition
Gregory Nagy

Copyright © 1980, 1997 The Johns Hopkins University Press. All rights reserved. First edition 1979. Revised edition 1999. This document may be used, with this notice included, for noncommercial purposes within a subscribed institution. No copies of this work may be distributed electronically outside of the subscribed institution, in whole or in part, without written permission from the JHU Press.

Go to Previous chapter; Next chapter; Table of Contents; Information

Chapter 17

On the Antagonism of God and Hero

§1. Aside from the direct testimony of Pap.Oxy. 1800 and Aesop Vitae G+W 142 about a hero cult of Aesop, there is important indirect evidence for his actual function as cult hero. Again we turn to the parallelism between the deaths of Aesop and Pyrrhos. In the myth of Pyrrhos, the theme of his antagonism with Apollo is fundamental to his essence as cult hero of Delphi.[1] Now we see a parallel pattern of antagonism in the Life of Aesop tradition. At the moment that the Delphians plot the death of Aesop, Apollo is described as having mênis 'anger' against him (mhnontow : Vita G 127).[2] There is a crucial supplementary detail in the Golenißçev Papyrus, where the god is described as actively helping the Delphians bring about Aesop's death (Pap.Gol.: sunergontow ).[3] Apollo's anger is motivated by an incident in Samos: Aesop had sacrificed to the Muses and set up a shrine for them, neglecting to place Apollo in the center (VitaG 100, 127; Pap.Gol.).[4] The pattern of antipathy between Aesop and Apollo is in fact complemented by a pattern of sympathy between him and the Muses. In the course of Vita G, there is mention of the Muses no fewer than twenty-five times, often in the context of Aesop's swearing by them.[5] It was the Muses who had originally given Aesop his power of verbal skills (Vita G 7).[6] Before he dies, it is at a sanctuary of the Muses that Aesop takes refuge (Vita G 134), imploring the Delphians in the name of Zeus Xenios not to despise the smallness of the sanctuary (Vita G 139)--as the eagle had once despised the smallness of the dung beetle (Vita G 135).[7] The implicit but obvious foil here for the smallness of the Muses' sanctuary is the overwhelming greatness of Apollo's sanctuary at Delphi. In this connection, we may observe that Aesop never mentions Apollo by name in Vita G: instead, he refers to the god either as the prostatês 'leader' of the Muses (G 33, 142) or simply as 'he who is greater than the Muses' (G 33). The latter designation meshes neatly with the implicit theme that the Muses' sanctuary is small in comparison to Apollo's.

§2. Significantly, the two contexts of these references by Aesop to Apollo are by no means marginal to the central themes of Aesop's death. In the first instance, Aesop is telling a humorous fable about Apollo's powers of prophecy, and the humor is at the god's expense (Vita G 33);[1] in effect, Aesop is here implicitly provoking Apollo's anger. In the second instance, Aesop is by now at the actual moment of his death and is calling upon Apollo to be a witness of his unjust execution by the Delphians (Vita G 142). It seems a matter of ostentatious indirectness that Aesop is presented as referring to Apollo at these very moments by way of tabu periphrasis. Moreover, the timing as well as the meaning of Aesop's reference to Apollo as "leader of the Muses" and as "he who is greater than the Muses" amount to a clear acknowledgment by the narrative that Aesop's essence as poet is defined not only by the Muses but also by their leader, Apollo himself.[2]

§3. In fact, the traditional diction of archaic Greek poetry makes it explicit that the essence of the poet is defined by the Muses and Apollo:

k gr toi Mousvn ka khblou Apllvnow
ndrew oido asin p xyna ka kiyarista

For it is from the Muses and from far-shooting Apollo
that there are poets on earth, and lyre players too.[1]
Hesiod Th. 94-95[2]

Moreover, Apollo is traditionally the leader of the Muses from the standpoint of ritual poetry, as we see from the following spondaic fragment concerning libations:

spndvmen taw Mnmaw paisn Mosaiw
ka t Mousrx Latow ue[3]

Let us pour libations to the Muses, children of Mnâmâ [Memory]
and to the Mousarkhos [Leader of the Muses], the son of Leto.
fr.adesp. 941 Page

Besides the title Mousarkhos, Apollo also qualifies as Mouseîos (IG 7.1.36: Megara) and Mousagetês 'Leader of the Muses' (IG 12.5.893: Tenos).[4] Still, in view of this evidence, an important question arises: why is it, then, that the archaic poet as a rule invokes the Muses without Apollo at the beginning of his composition (Iliad I 1, Odyssey i 1, W&D 1, etc.)? We will arrive at an answer, I submit, by looking further at the context of the same Hesiodic passage that explicitly derives the essence of the poet from the Muses and Apollo (Th. 94-95): the aoidos 'poet' is now specifically called Mousvn yerpvn 'the therapôn of the Muses' (Th. 100). Before we can interpret this expression, however, an excursus on the word therapôn is in order.

§4. As Nadia Van Brock can show,[1] therapôn had actually meant something like 'ritual substitute' at the time it was borrowed into Greek from Anatolia, probably in the second millennium B.C. Compare Hittite tarpaßßa-/tarpan(alli)- 'ritual substitute', corresponding formally to Greek theraps/therapôn. To paraphrase Van Brock, the Hittite word designates an entity's alter ego ("un autre soi-même"), a projection upon whom the impurities of this entity may be transferred.[2] She goes on to cite a Greek reflex of these semantics in the Iliadic application of therapôn to Patroklos,[3] the one Achaean who is by far the most philos to Achilles[4] --and who is killed wearing the very armor of Achilles.[5] Without any such comparative evidence, without even having to consider the word therapôn, Cedric Whitman has independently reached a parallel conclusion: that Patroklos functions as the epic surrogate of Achilles.[6] Granted, the prevailing applications of the word therapôn in ancient Greek poetry are semantically secondary: 'warrior's companion' (as typically at IV 227, VIII 104, XIII 246, etc.) or simply 'attendant' (XI 843, XIX 143, xviii 424, etc.). But we can see from the contexts where Patroklos is therapôn of Achilles (XVI 165, 244, 653; XVII 164, 271, 388) that the force of the word goes far beyond the dimensions of 'warrior's companion'. As Dale Sinos has convincingly argued,[7] Patroklos qualifies as therapôn of Achilles only so long as he stays within his limits as the recessive equivalent of the dominant hero.[8] In the words of Achilles himself, Patroklos and he are equivalent warriors, so long as Patroklos stays by his side; once he is on his own, however, the identity of Patroklos as warrior is in question:

t kdow ma prew, eropa Ze,
yrsunon d o tor n fresn, fra ka Ektvr
esetai =a ka oow psthtai polemzein
mterow yerpvn, o tte xerew aptoi
manony', ppt' g per v met mlon Arhow

Far-seeing Zeus! Let the glory of victory go forth with him.
Make him breathe courage from inside, so that Hektor too
will find out whether our therapôn knows how to fight in battle alone,
or whether his hands rage invincible only those times
when I myself enter the struggle of Ares.[9]
XVI 241-245

By its very outcome, the fatal impersonation of Achilles by Patroklos reveals that the therapôn is no longer the equivalent of Achilles once he leaves his side and goes beyond the limits Achilles had set for him (XVI 87-96).[10] Since even the epithet assigned to the therapontesof Achilles is ankhemakhoi 'those who fight nearby' (XVI 272, XVII 165),[11] we may infer that Patroklos has ceased to be therapônof Achilles at the moment of his death. As we shall now see, he has become the therapôn of someone else.

§5. When Patroklos has his fatal confrontation with Apollo, he is described as daimoni îsos 'equal to a daimôn' (XVI 786), and we have observed that this epithet is traditionally appropriate for marking the climactic moment of god-hero antagonism in epic narrative.[1] In the Death Scene of Patroklos, this climactic moment is also the context of a more specific epithet: he is described as thoôi atalantos Arêi 'equal to swift Ares' (XVI 784). There was one other time when Patroklos was equated with Ares: back in Iliad XI, when he first became involved in his fatal impersonation of Achilles. There we find Patroklos leaving the tent of Achilles and coming out of seclusion; he is described at that very moment as îsos Arêi 'equal to Ares' (XI 604). In the very same verse, the narrative itself takes note that the application of this epithet marks Patroklos for death:

kmolen sow Arh, kako d' ra o plen rx

He came out, equal to Ares, and that was the beginning of his doom.[2]
XI 604

We recall that the designation 'equal to Ares' is particularly appropriate in the Iliad to the two other heroes who wear the armor of Achilles--the two main antagonists who are thereby cast in the same mold of warrior:[3]

Achillessow Arh XX 46
sow Enual [4] XXII 132
Hektorsow Arh XI 295, XIII 802
tlantow Arh VIII 215, XVII 72.

In fact, when Hektor puts on the armor of Achilles which he had despoiled from the body of Patroklos,[5] he is sealed in this armor by Zeus (XVII 209-210) and then, quite literally, "Ares entered him" (d d min Arhw : XVII 210). Here we see Ares not so much as an Olympian ally of the Trojans but as the divine embodiment of murderous war. The same notion is inherent in such Homeric adjectives as Arêiphatos (XIX 31, etc.) and Arêiktamenos (XXII 72), both meaning 'killed by Ares' = 'killed in war'. No matter who the immediate killer may be in any given narrative of mortal combat, the ultimate killer is Ares as god of war. For example, the Achaean Idomeneus kills the Trojan Alkathoos[6] in mortal combat (XIII 424-444), with the direct help of the god Poseidon (XIII 434-435); nevertheless, Ares is designated as the god who actually takes the hero's life (XIII 444).[7] So also with the death of Patroklos: although it is Hektor who kills him, with the direct help of the god Apollo, Patroklos is the ultimate victim of the war god, Ares. In his fatal moment of god-hero antagonism, the therapôn of Achilles is overtly equated with Ares, who is the ultimate motivation for his dying as a warrior of epic. Accordingly, Patroklos is identified no longer with Achilles but rather with Ares himself. In that sense, he is now the therapôn of Ares! And the most important evidence for this assertion has yet to be adduced: as an aggregate of warriors, the Achaeans [Danaans] are specifically addressed as yerpontew Arhow 'therapontes of Ares' (II 110, VI 67, XV 733, XIX 78). As a generic warrior, the hero of epic qualifies as a therapôn of Ares.[8]

§6. This formulation needs further refinement, for besides the dimension of myth as stylized in epic, we must also consider the dimension of ritual. As a generic warrior, the hero of epic is a therapôn of Ares precisely because he must experience death. The requirement of the hero's death, however, is dictated not so much by the narrative traditions of epic but by the ritual traditions of cult. Death is fundamental to the essence of the hero in cult, as we have already had occasion to observe.[1] This much said, we may finally return to the designation of the poet as Mousvn yerpvn 'therapôn of the Muses' in Hesiod Th. 100, and, in this same context, to the explicit derivation of the poet's essence from the Muses and Apollo (Th. 94-95).[2] We see from this testimony the emergence of a parallel pattern: whereas the generic warrior is the 'therapôn of Ares', the generic poet is the 'therapôn of the Muses'. Furthermore, the parallelism in itself indicates that the poet, as 'therapôn of the Muses', is thereby worthy of being a cult hero.

§7. We find supporting evidence in the Life of Hesiod tradition (see especially Aristotle Constitution of the Orchomenians fr. 565 Rose). Its themes, especially the theme of Hesiod's death, correspond to the typical mythology surrounding the cult of a typical epichoric hero. For a convincing exposition, I simply refer to the discussion of Hesiod as cult hero by Angelo Brelich--a discussion framed by countless other examples of typical mythology surrounding local heroes.[1] I will content myself here by citing his conclusion: the figure of Hesiod in the Life of Hesiod tradition fits perfectly the characteristic morphology of the cult hero.[2]

§8. Significantly, even the figure of Hesiod as presented by Hesiodic poetry itself fits this same pattern of the cult hero; Brelich cites in particular such details as the poetic contest entered by Hesiod at the Funeral Games of Amphidamas (W&D 654-659).[1] It follows, then, that the Hesiodic compositions determine the identity of their composer. This inference may strike us at first as an absurdity--until we reconsider the implications of the simple fact that Hesiodic poetry is not idiosyncratic but deeply traditional in both form and content.[2] The ambition of a poem like the Theogony is to present the traditions that reveal the very essence of the universe, and to do so with a Panhellenic "audience" in mind.[3] To enact such a vast program, the composer must surely be presented as the ultimate poet and sage who has all of tradition under his control.

§9. This ambition even motivates the generic function of the poet's name at Th. 22: Hêsiodos 'he who emits the Voice'.[1] Compare also the generic function of the name Homêros 'he who fits [the Song] together',[2] to be interpreted in conjunction with the patterns characteristic of a cult hero as we find them in the Life of Homer tradition.[3] In fact, the themes inherent in both names Hêsi-odos and Hom-êros recur in the actual diction of the proem to the Hesiodic Theogony itself, and the context for these themes is the actual description of the Muses and their poetic function:

perikalla ssan esai 'emitting a beautiful voice'Th. 10
mbroton ssan esai 'emitting an immortal voice'Th. 43
ratn ... ssan esai 'emitting a lovely voice'Th. 65
praton ssan esai 'emitting a lovely voice'Th. 67[4]
So also Hs-odow 'he who emits the voice'[5]
rtipeiai 'having words [epos plural] fitted together'Th. 29
fvn mhresai 'fitting [the song] together with their voice'Th. 39[6]
So also Om-hrow 'he who fits [the song] together'

In short, the names Hêsiodos and Homêros identify the poet's function with that of the Muses themselves.[7] Thus the poet's very name indicates that he is 'therapôn of the Muses' (Th. 100), in that the word therapôn identifies god with hero through death. And by being a therapôn, the generic poet assumes the ritual dimensions of a cult hero.

§10. Supplement: The Name of HomerMore needs to be said about the name of Homer, since its meaning seems to reveal a particularly archaic view of the poet and his function. For the interpretation of Hom-êros as 'he who fits [the song] together', built from the verb root *ar- as in ar-ar-iskô 'fit, join', we may compare the following use of the same verb, as an intransitive perfect:

otv sfin kal sunrhren oid

So beautifully is their song fitted together.[1]
H.Apollo 164

Moreover, I adduce the semantics of the Indo-European root *tek(s)-, which like *ar- means 'fit, join'. From the comparative evidence assembled by Rüdiger Schmitt,[2] we see that *tek(s)- was traditionally used to indicate the activity of a carpenter in general (compare the semantics of joiner, an older English word for "carpenter") and of a chariot-carpenter in particular. In addition, Schmitt adduces comparative evidence to show that *tek(s)- was also used to indicate, by metaphor, the activity of a poet: much as a chariot-carpenter fits together his chariot, so also the poet fits together his poem/song.[3] This comparison is actually attested as an overt simile in the most archaic body of Indic poetry:

imam te vacam vasûyánta âyávo
rátham ná dhirah svápâ ataksisuh

The sons of Âyu, wishing for good things, have fitted together [root taks-, from *tek(s)-] this utterance,[4]
just as the skilled artisan (fits together) a chariot.
Rig-Veda 1.130.6ab

It is, then, an Indo-European poetic tradition that the poet may compare his activity with that of artisans like carpenters.[5] Moreover, we see from Odyssey xvii 381-387 that poets are in fact the social equals of artisans--carpenters included.[6]

§11. In this light, we may now turn to the internal Greek evidence of *ar-, which parallels the comparative evidence on *tek(s)-. In the Linear B texts (e.g., Knossos tablets Sg 1811, So 0437, etc.), the word for "chariot-wheel" is a-mo = harmo, by etymology an abstract noun ("fitting") derived from the verb root *ar- as in ar-ar-iskô 'fit, join'.[1] Note too the Homeric name at V 59-60: Harmonidês 'son of Harmôn' (root *ar-), the patronymic of one Tektôn 'Carpenter' (root *tek[s]-).[2]

§12. The technical sense of Harmonidês is parallel to that of harmoniê 'joint [in woodwork]' (e.g., v 248),[1] but the latter form also has the social sense of "accord" (e.g., XXII 255)--as well as a musical sense roughly corresponding to our notion of "harmony" (e.g., Sophocles fr. 244 Pearson).[2] Both the musical and the social aspects of the word are incorporated in the figure Harmoniê, bride of Kadmos (Hesiod Th. 937, 975),[3] at whose wedding the Muses themselves sang a song inaugurating the social order of Thebes--a song quoted by Theognis (verses 17-18W) in the context of his invoking the Muses and thus inaugurating his own poem (verses 15-16W):

Mosai ka Xritew, korai Diw, a pote Kdmou
w gmon lyosai kaln esat' pow:
"tti kaln flon st, t d' o kaln o flon st":
tot' pow yantvn lye di stomtvn

Muses and Kharites, daughters of Zeus! You were the ones
who once came to the wedding of Kadmos, and you sang this beautiful epos:[4]
"What is beautiful is philon, what is not beautiful is not philon."[5]
This is the epos[6] that came through their immortal mouths.
Theognis 15-18W

§13. I conclude, then, that the root *ar- in Homêros traditionally denotes the activity of a poet as well as that of a carpenter, and this semantic bivalence corresponds neatly with the Indo-European tradition of comparing music/poetry with carpentry, by way of the root *tek(s)-.[1] This tradition is proudly recaptured in the words of Pindar extolling the themes of Homer:[2]

Nstora ka Lkion Sarphdn', nyrpvn fti_w,
j pvn keladennn, tktonew oa sofo
rmosan, ginskomen

We know of Nestor and Lycian Sarpedon--subjects for men to talk about--
from famed words [epos plural]
such as skilled carpenters fitted together.[3]
Pindar P.3.112-114


§1n1. See Ch.7 in general and Ch.7§4 in particular.

§1n2. Here as well as throughout the Life of Aesop, the involvement of Apollo as Aesop's antagonist has been eliminated in the "W" branch of the story's transmission. For evidence that this adjustment is secondary and amounts to a distortion, see Wiechers 1961.11n9.

§1n3. For the pertinent passage in this fragment, see Perry 1952.11. For the entire text of the Golenißçev Papyrus, see Perry 1936.58-67.

§1n4. Instead, the central place is assigned to Mnemosyne, mother of the Muses (Vita G 100). This incident in the Life of Aesop tradition is linked by the narrative itself with Aesop's ultimate position as cult hero: see Ch.16§8 and n1.

§1n5. Conversely, there is not a single mention of the Muses in Vita W; see n2 and cf. Perry 1952.11.

§1n6. The role of Isis as leader of the Muses (Vita G 6) is an innovation made possible by (1) an Egyptian phase in the transmission of the Aesop story and (2) the Egyptian religious trend of associating the cult of Isis with the cult of the Muses (on which see the evidence adduced by Perry, p.2n8, esp. Plutarch De Iside 352b).

§1n7. The message of "The Dung-Beetle and the Eagle," as built into the narrative of Vita G 135 and as formally enunciated in the moral that concludes Aesop Fable 3 Perry, is that one should not despise the small, since no one is so negligible as to be incapable of revenge. For more on this fable, see Ch.16§5. Note that Aesop appeals to the ultimate protector of guest-strangers, Zeus Xenios, in acknowledging the smallness of the Muses' sanctuary; compare the appeal made by Odysseus, in his disguise as a lowly beggar, to the same moral code of the xenos 'guest-stranger' (Ch.12§16). See in general Ch.12§§12-16 on the ideology of the poet as xenos.

§2n1. See Perry 1962.299-300 on the probability that this fable was in the collection of Demetrius of Phaleron.

§2n2. I disagree here with Wiechers 1961.14n21, who thinks that Aesop's periphrastic references to Apollo in Vita G 142 are an innovation, not an archaism. Also, I think that the story of Aesop's encounter with Isis and the Muses at Vita G 6-7 is the reflex of an older version in which Apollo functioned as the leader of the Muses. The replacement of Apollo by the polymorphous Egyptian goddess Isis would have been facilitated if the references to Apollo had been periphrastic even in this older version. From the Egyptian standpoint, Isis could then be substituted easily as "leader of the Muses" or as "she who is greater than the Muses" (cf. §1n6). Still, the question remains: if indeed the older version presents Apollo and the Muses as givers of speech and speech skills respectively to Aesop, why is Apollo in this case beneficent, rather than maleficent? See Ch.18§2.

§3n1. Whereas{bw,10} aoidoi 'poets' (`singers') are traditionally pictured as accompanying themselves on the lyre (as at Odyssey viii 67-69), they are here mentioned along with "lyre players" (kitharistai). This doublet of singers and lyre players reflects not the fragmentation of the poet's traditional function but rather the ensemble of song as embodied by the Muses and Apollo combined: the former sing while the latter plays the lyre, as at Iliad I 603-604. In this passage, the ensemble of the Muses and Apollo is described in a manner more appropriate to a specific picture than to a general event; cf. H.Apollo 186-206. By "picture" I mean a traditional mode of iconographic representation.{bw,12}

§3n2. The same verses recur in Homeric Hymn 25.2-3. On the integrity of this hymn as a piece of traditional poetry, see Koller 1956.178-179 (pace West 1966.186: "a senseless bit of patchwork").

§3n3. Page (1962) supplies t in front of Latow.

§3n4. Cf. Plato Laws 653d; Strabo 468; Pausanias 5.18.4, 8.32.2, 10.19.4. Cf. also Iliad I 603-604 and H.Hermes 450-452.

§4n1. Van Brock 1959.

§4n2. Van Brock, p. 119; cf. also Lowenstam 1975.

§4n3. Van Brock, pp. 125-126.

§4n4. Ch.6§§12-21.

§4n5. Cf. Householder/Nagy 1972.774-776.

§4n6. Whitman 1958.199-203.

§4n7. Sinos 1975.46-52.

§4n8. Cf. Ch.2§8 (and Ch.6).

§4n9. Whitman (1958.200) quotes the same passage, adding: "When Achilles prays to Zeus for Patroclus' safety, he seems to ask, indirectly, whether his friend can play his role adequately or not."

§4n10. Note especially what Achilles tells him at XVI 89: do not be eager to fight neuyen meo 'apart from me'. Dan Petegorsky draws my attention to a parallel: Pindar O. 9.76-79.

§4n11. See Sinos, pp. 46, 61(n6).

§5n1. Ch.8§§3-4.

§5n2. See Nagy 1974.230-231. Cf. Whitman 1958.200: "Then he is `like Ares'; but here the poet is looking forward consciously to the Patrocleia, as is shown by the remark, `this was the beginning of his woe' [XI 604]." Cf. also Whitman, pp. 114, 194.

§5n3. Cf. Ch.2§8. When Hektor sets out to fight in the armor of Achilles, he is specifically described as looking just like him (XVII 213-214).

§5n4. On the equivalence of Ares and Enyalios, see Nagy 1974.136.

§5n5. The manner in which Patroklos is denuded of Achilles' armor is highly significant: see Ch.9§33n2.

§5n6. The semantics of -thoos in Alkâ-thoos seems relevant to the passage: Ch.20§10. On alka-, see Ch.5§31n5. On the parallelisms between the death of Patroklos and the death of Alkathoos, see Fenik 1968.132-133.

§5n7. For another striking example, consider the description of the tapestry woven by Helen depicting the aethloi'struggles' endured by Trojans and Achaeans alike at the hands of Ares (III 125-128). For the connotations of poetic theme ("The Ordeals of the Trojans and Achaeans") in the image of weaving here, see Clader 1976.6-9.

§5n8. Note also the epithet ozos Arêos (ten times in Iliad), where ozos is not the same word as the one meaning `branch' but rather a reflex of a compound: o- `together' + *-sd-os 'seated'; see Chantraine III 777. The hero Leonteus, described as îsos Arêi (XII 130), also qualifies as ozos Arêos (II 745, XII 188, XXIII 841). In the Alexandrian lexicographical tradition, ozos and therapônwere apparently considered synonyms (cf. Hesychius s.v. zea: yerapea ). The semantics of ozos are suggestive of the relationship between god and hero in cult. Compare the description of Erikhthonios as a hero who gets a share of the sacrifices offered to Athena in her temple: Epigrammata 1046.89-90 Kaibel (on which see Nock 1972 [= 1930] 237). For more on Erikhthonios/Erekhtheus, see Nagy 1973.170-171. On the convergences and divergences of the Erikhthonios and Erekhtheus figures, see Burkert 1972.176, 211.

§6n1. Ch.10.

§6n2. Above, §3.

§7n1. Brelich{bw,10} 1958.321-322. The most convincing aspect of Brelich's book is the sheer accumulation of evidence for parallel patterns; it is well worth reading in its entirety.{bw,12}

§7n2. Brelich, p. 322: "Così il poeta rientra perfettamente nella morfologia caratteristica dell' eroe."

§8n1. Brelich, p. 321. Note that Hesiod's divine patronage is local: the Muses of Helicon (W&D 658-659) as distinct from the Muses of Olympus/Pieria as invoked in the proem (W&D 1). In the Theogony too, we see that Hesiod's essence as poet is defined by the Muses of Helicon (Th. 22-34).

§8n2. Cf. Ch.5§§4, 18-19.

§8n3. Note the transformation of the Muses from Heliconian (Th. 1) to Olympian (Th. 25, 52, etc.), once they have defined Hesiod's essence as poet at Helicon (Th. 22-34). For the correlation of Olympus and Panhellenic ideology, see Intro.§14.

§9n1. The root *uod- of *Hêsí-uodos recurs as *ud- in audê 'voice' and audaô 'speak': Chantraine I 137-138, II 417. At Th. 31, audê designates the poetry with which the Muses themselves inspire Hêsiodos. See now Nagy 1990b.47n32.

§9n2. I agree with Durante 1976.194-197 (cf. Welcker 1835.128) that Hom-êros is a compound built from the Indo-European elements *som- `together' and *{an,2,10}r- `fit, join' (as in Greek ar-ar-iskô 'fit, join'). My interpretation of the semantics, however, is different (see §§10-13); so too is my reconstruction of the earliest Greek form: *homo-ar-os, becoming *hom-âros.

§9n3. On these patterns, see the brief remarks of Brelich 1958.320-321.

§9n4. For a defense of this line, see West 1966.178-179 (I fail to agree, however, with his objections to the line on esthetic grounds).

§9n5. In Pindar O.6.61-62, the oracular response of Apollo is called artiepês / patriâ ossa 'the ancestral voice having words [epos plural] fitted together'; for more on ossa, see Ch.7§25n1.

§9n6. West (1966.170) translates "with voices in tune," helpfully adducing H.Apollo 164 for comparison.

§9n7. And, latently, with that of Apollo. Cf. n5.

§10n1. Cf. West 1966.170.

§10n2. Schmitt 1967.296-298.

§10n3. Ibid.

§10n4. The vak 'utterance' here is the sacral hymn itself; see Muellner 1976.128.

§10n5. On the comparative evidence for the likening with weavers, see Schmitt, pp. 298-301. For an attestation of this comparison in the semantics of the word rhapsidos 'he who stitches the song together', see Durante 1976.177-179.

§10n6. For the text of this passage from the Odyssey, with discussion, see Ch.12§13.

§11n1. See Chantraine I 110-111.

§11n2. The noun tektôn occasionally designates `artisan' in general, not necessarily `carpenter', but the context of V 60-63 clearly indicates carpentry. For more on tektôn, see §12n1.

§12n1. The woodwork here is described as the kind done by one well-versed in tektosunai 'carpentry' (v 250).

§12n2. On which see Nagy 1974.45.

§12n3. Note that Harmoniê is daughter of Ares (Th. 937). For the theory that the name Arês itself is derived from *ar- `fit, join', see Sinos 1975.52-54 and 71-72, who argues that Ares is the obsolete embodiment of the principles joining together the members of society in general and of warrior-society in particular.

§12n4. On the use of epos to mean not just `utterance' but also `poetic utterance' as quoted by the poetry itself: Ch.12§15n3 and Ch.15§7.

§12n5. Neuter philon indicates the institutional and sentimental bonds that join society together (cf. Ch.6§13). Since beauty is philon, the social cohesion of Thebes is implicitly embodied in the esthetics of the Muses' song, which in turn sets the cohesion of the poetry composed by Theognis. The concept of Harmoniê is appropriate to both the social and the artistic cohesion.

§12n6. Note that the quoted utterance of the Muses is called an epos both before and after the quotation. This framing effect may itself suggest Harmoniê.

§13n1. The Latin and Greek words ars and tekhnê are formed from verb roots that are no longer attested in the respective languages: Latin no longer has the verb *ar- from which the noun ars (*ar-ti-) is derived, while Greek no longer has the verb *tek(s)- from which the noun tekhnê (*téks-nâ) is derived. But Latin does have the verb texô (`build, join' in the older Latin, `weave' in the later), and Greek does have the verb ar-ar-iskô (`fit, join'). Note that Homeric diction actually combines the verb ar-ar-iskô with tektôn 'artisan' as subject: êrare tektôn (IV 110, XXIII 712; in the latter passage, the artisan is actually a carpenter). This word tektôn is by origin an agent noun derived from the verb *tek(s)- `fit, join'.

§13n2. For further discussion, see Schmitt 1967.297.

§13n3. The verb harmozô 'fit together' is derived from the noun *hármo, by origin an abstract noun ("fitting") which came to have a concrete designation ("chariot wheel") and which is in turn derived from the verb *ar- as in ar-ar-iskô (`join, fit'); see §11. The phonology of harmozô (from *hármo as distinct from standard classical harma, meaning 'chariot') suggests that the word was inherited from the élite social strata of the second millennium B.C. See Risch 1966, esp. p. 157. On the name of Homer and its relevance to the concept of rhapsode, see now Nagy 1996.74-78.

Go to Previous chapter; Next chapter; Table of Contents; Information

Copyright © 1980, 1997 The Johns Hopkins University Press. All rights reserved. This document may be used, with this notice included, for noncommercial purposes within a subscribed institution. No copies of this work may be distributed electronically outside of the subscribed institution, in whole or in part, without written permission from the JHU Press.