Christos Tsagalis Epic Grief

Christos Tsagalis
Epic Grief
wDE
G
Untersuchungen zur
antiken Literatur und Geschichte
Herausgegeben von
Gustav-Adolf Lehmann, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath
und Otto Zwierlein
Band 70
Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

Epic Grief
Personal Laments in Homer's Iliad
by
Chris to s Tsagalis
Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

© Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines
of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability.
ISBN 3-11-017944-X
Library of Congress - Cataloging-in-Publication Data
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the Library
of Congress
Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek
Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deut-

schen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im
Internet über http://dnb.ddb.de abrufbar
© Copyright 2004 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin
All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. N o part of this book may
be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including
photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publisher.
Printed in Germany
Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin
Acknowledgements
Καιρός τοϋ σπείρειν, καιρός τοϋ θερίζειν wrote George Seferis many
years ago,* but it is only now, as I write these lines, that I feel the depth
of this metaphor like the good ploughman who has sown his field and
eagerly awaits harvest time. I only hope that both seeds and field were
good.
This book began its long journey to the Homeric seas as a PhD
dissertation submitted to the Classics Department of Cornell University at
the end of 1997. Its present state is much different, and I feel the need to
dwell for a while on the various changes done for this thorough revision.
One completely new chapter ("Distance, Closeness and Mors
Immatura: Common Motifs in the Iliadic Personal Laments"), has been
added. Chapters 1 and 4 ("The Morphology of the Iliadic Personal
Laments" and "Ars Allusiva: Intratextual Readings in the Iliadic Personal
Laments") have been thoroughly revised and the appendix on Iliadic short
obituaries has been considerably enriched. A chapter on the poetics of
Thetis' personal lament (to appear in QUCC) and the second appendix of
my thesis ("Localization and Metrical Shape of Lament Terms in the
Iliad'') have been omitted.
Many people have helped me improve my work in various ways. For
a first acquaintance with deixis and its poetics, I would like to express my
gratitude to Lucia Athanassaki and Natassa Peponi for inviting me to
attend a Conference in Delphi on Deixis in Greek and Latin Literature. I
also offer special thanks to two of my colleagues in Crete, Stavros
Frangoulidis and Yannis Tzifopoulos, as well as to Prof. George
Christodoulou in Athens, Michael Lipka and Andreas Markantonatos (to
whom I owe the first part of the book's title) in Patras for their
encouragement and insistence on the importance of turning this
dissertation into a book. For their generosity in offering valuable criticism
on this study, I would like to thank Fred Ahl, Kevin Clinton, Richard
' Γ. Σεφέρης, «Τελευταίος Σταθμός», Ημερολόγιο Καταστρώματος Β', "Ικαρος,

Athens 199217.
VI Acknowledgements
Martin, Nanno Marinatos, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, Philippe Rousseau

and Jeff Rusten. Finally, I acknowledge a long-standing debt to Pietro
Pucci, who initiated me to Homeric advanced research, both in a seminar
on the Iliad during the Fall of 1994 and during the preparation for a
Conference in Lausanne in May 1995. He directed my work from its first
beginnings with learning, fine Italian gusto and confidence in my
abilities.
For almost idyllic conditions of research, I am indebted mainly to the
the following libraries: Olin and Uris in Ithaca, the American School of
Classical Studies in Athens, the British School, Γ École Française d'
Athènes, the Deutsches Archaeologisches Institut in Athens, the Central
Library of the University of Crete at Rethymnon and the Classics Library
of the University of Athens. I would also like to express my gratitude to
the following Publishing Houses for their permission to use material from
their sources: (1) E. V. Rieu and Dominic Rieu, The Odyssey by Homer
(Penguin Classics, 1946, Revised edition 1991) Copyright © 1946 by E.
V. Rieu, Revised translation © the Estate of the late E. V. Rieu, and D. C. H.
Rieu, 1991, and (2) approximately forty-six selections from THE ILIAD OF
HOMER, transi. R. Lattimore (1951), University of Chicago Press, copy-
right © 1951 by the University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
On a personal level, I am truly grateful to Anna for her patience in
proofreading the indexes and the bibliography, and no less for shoring me
up in my hour of need.
My greatest debt is of a different nature, equally important, albeit not
academic. This book is, therefore, dedicated to my parents Constantinos
and Mary and to my brother George for all those things that cannot be
calculated, only gratefully acknowledged.
C.C.T.
Athens
March 2004
Contents
Chapter 1 Reading Madie Lament
1. Death in the Iliad 1

2. Γόοι vs Θρήνοι 2
3. Selection Criteria 8
a. Rethinking the Formula 9
b. Using Textual Markers 14
c. Thematic Typology 15
4. Types of Γόοι 16
5. Cenre and Sub-genre 17
6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι 21
7. Scope of Research 22
Chapter 2 The Typology of the Illiadic γόοι
2.1. Introductory Remarks 27

2.2. Praising Address 32
2.3. "Comparison" 36
2.4. Common fate 39
2.5. "Death-Wish" 42
2.6. Past and Present 44
2.7. Tripartite Structure 46
2.8. Ring-Composition 47
2.9. Antiphonal Element 48
Chapter 3 Introductory and Closing Formulas
3.1. Speech-formulas, speech-classification and γόος-speeches 53

3.2. Personal lament speech introductions 55
3.2.1. Single-verse introductions 55
3.2.2. Multi-verse introductions 58
3.3. Personal lament speech closures 64
VIII Contents
3.3.1. Single-verse closures 64

3.2.2. Multi-verse closures 65
3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus 68
3.4.1. Privileged Individuals 68
3.4.2. Unprivileged Chorus 72
Chapter 4 Distance, Separation and Mors Immatura:

Common Motifs in the Iliadic γόοι
4.1. Distance and Separation 75

4.1.1. Dying away from one's native land 76
Verbal and Local Deixis 76
4.1.2. Bereaved parents and family 88
4.2. Closeness 90
4.2.1. Personal Deixis (I) 90
4.2.2. Personal Deixis (II) 94
4.3.3. Personal Deixis (III) 99
4.3. Mors immatura 103
4.3.1. Personal Deixis and Narratee Shift 103
4.3.2. Temporal Deixis and Point of View 105
Chapter 5 Intratextual Readings
5.1. Introductory Remarks 109

5.2. Agamemnon 112
5.3. Andromache 118
5.3.1. Iliad 6 118
5.3.2. Iliad22 129
5.3.3. Iliad24 133
5.4. Thetis 136
5.5. Briséis 139
5.6. Achilles 143
5.6.1. Iliad 18 143
5.6.2. Iliad 19 148
5.7. Priam 151
5.8. Hecuba 154
Contents IX
5.8.1. Iliad 22 154

5.8.2. Iliad 24 158
5.9. Helen 161
Conclusion 166
Appendix I Privileged and Unprivileged Dead
1. Unreported γόοι in the Iliad 171

2. The Therapeutics of Lament 174
Appendix II Short obituaries in the Iliad
1. Introductory remarks 179

2. Types of Short Obituaries 181
2.1. The Brief SO 181
2.2. The Expanded SO 182
3. Iliadic γόοι between mirroring and deflecting 188
Table 1 51
Table 2 112
Bibliography
Editions, Commentaries, Concordances, Grammars, Léxica 193

Works Cited 195
Indexes
General Index 219

Index of Homeric Passages 222
Index of Greek Words 229
Chapter 1
"... the Iliad is a unity in a deeper sense than is sometimes allowed, embodying
a clear and unique vision of the world, of heroism and of life and death.'"
Jasper Griffin
Homer on Life and Death
I. Death in the Iliad
The Iliad is about the wrath of Achilles and the disasters it inflicted upon
the Achaean army; that is what its proem prepares us for.2 From the very
beginning of the poem, suffering and destruction creep up in the scene
and remain there virtually until the very end. The Iliad begins with pain
and suffering in the Achaean camp (due to the plague sent by Apollo), and
ends with pain and suffering in the city of Troy (during Hector's funeral).
As one of the fundamental themes of this epic, death is not simply
envisaged as a static phenomenon, but is replete with a remarkable
dynamism, since it initiates and later on enhances a sequence of events
that lead the Iliad to its destined end. The killing of Patroclus in Book 16
introduces the peripeteia which will be completed with Hector's death in
Book 22 and his funeral in Book 24. Thus "das große Gedicht vom Tod",
as Marg3 has put it, makes death the prevailing, unbroken theme which
directs the action.
The range of responses to death covers both physiological and psy-
chological reactions such as grief, as well culturally determined conduct
such as mourning.4 The principal poetic by-product of the deaths of warriors
is lament, which is expressed by mourning scenes and description of
1
Griffin (1980) 16.
2
See 1.1-7 (where a reference is not specified, I refer to the Iliad).
3
Marg (1965) 39.
4
See Derderian (2001) 4 referring to the work of Baudy (1980) 129-142.
2 Chapter 1
funerals5, by short obituaries reported by the external narrator, by the

θρήνος6 and the γόοι, a special form of lament referring to the dead and
uttered by the next of kin or a close friend.
The γόοι are the only marked form of lament speech verbalized in the
Iliad. This fact makes them significant, for they form part of a ritual or, at
times, a ritualized process, the Totenkult, and are linked to the theme of
death which dominates the whole of the Iliad·, Reinhardt was right in saying
that the Iliad is, from beginning to end, Todesdichtung (death poetry) and
it is perhaps this fact that increases the importance of this marked form of
lament; thus, the γόοι embody the poetics of lamentation that encompass
the whole poem and are interwoven with almost every other major theme
in preparing the final act: the death and lamentation for Hector. It seems
that when the lament is over, it is time for the poem to end.
2. Γόοι and Θρήνοι
The most celebrated passage for the purpose of this study is 24. 719-722,
where the Iliad makes the distinction between the θρήνοι and the γόοι.8
οι δ' έπεί είσάγαγον κλυτά δώματα, τον μέν επειτα

τρητοις έν λεχέεσσι θέσαν, παρά δ' εισαν άοιδούς
θρήνων έξάρχους, οϊ τε στονόεσσαν άοιδήν
οι μέν άρ' έθρήνεον, έπ'ι δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες. (24.719-722)'
5
As in Book 23 for Patroclus and in 24 for Hector.
6
For the loss of minor figures such as the sons of Diocles, Simoeisius etc.
7
There are also non-expressed lament speeches or threnodies (θρήνοι), which would be
normally uttered by professional singers (θρηνψδοί), and unreported γόοι (indicated
or alluded to by specific expressions containing the word γόοι).
* See Alexiou (2002) 102-103, who notes that "...Homeric and archaic usage may have
distinguished θρήνος and γόος according to the ritual manner of their performance,
using θρήνος for the set dirge composed and performed by the professional mourners,
and γόος for the personal weeping of the kinswomen. Further, early instances point to
the θρήνος as more ordered and polished, often associated with divine performers and
a dominant musical element".
9
The text of the Iliad is that of West (1998-2000).
2. Γόοι and Θρήνοι 3
And when they had brought him inside the renowned house, they
laid him
then on a carved bed, and seated beside him the singers
who were to lead the melody in the dirge, and the singers
chanted the song of sorrow, and the women were mourning beside
them.
Here we have a clear description of one of the principal forms of lament,

the θρήνος, which involves two groups of mourners, professionals and
kinswomen. The lament begins with the musical θρήνος sung by the
professionals and answered by the chorus' wailing, and is then continued
by the next of kin, each uttering a γόος-speech capped by a refrain of cries
from the chorus.10
A number of specialized terms used for the lament can be observed in
this passage: 1) the word έξάρχους, describing the preeminent role of the
singers of the θρήνος who lead the lament, while the chorus of women
accompany them with their mourning; 2) the words άοιδή/άοιδοΰς,
referring explicitly to the professionals who utter the θρήνοι and to the
character of their utterances, indicating that the θρήνοι are songs sung by
singers who usually perform this task (generalizing τε);" 3) the similarity
between line 24. 722 and the usual closing formula that caps a γόος-
speech: οι μέν αρ' έθρήνεον, έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες and ώς εφατο
κλαίουσ', έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες; 4) the presence of four Iliadic
hapaxes in these four lines: άοιδός, θρηνεΐν, θρήνος, εξαρχος;12 5) the
10
According to Seremetakis (1991) 125, the social parameters of the Homeric θρήνος
(which is solely performed by professional singers, the άοιδοί) have been treated in
Inner Mani as a performative relation. Performative rights and precedence in the order
of performance are often granted to an exceptionally skilled mourner, even if he/she
is only distantly related to the deceased.
11
On the particle τε in epic diction (not only Homeric), see the meticulous and
exhaustive study by Ruijgh (1971) and GH II, 340-345, especially 343-344.
12
In II. 18. 604-606 = Od. 4. 17-19 (τερπόμενοι· μετά δέ σφιν έμέλπετο θείος άοιδός
/ φορμίζων- δοιώ δέ κυβιστητήρε κατ' αυτούς, / μολπής έξάρχοντος, έδίνευον κατά
μέσσου), there is a description of a dance on the Shield of Achilles; the words άοιδός
and έξάρχοντες are attested in lines 604 and 606 respectively, but μετά δέ σφιν έμέλ-
πετο θειος άοιδός / φορμίζων do not appear in any manuscript of the Iliad; they have
been restored by some editors because Athenaeus (V 180c and 181°) reports that these
lines were taken out of the Iliad by Aristarchus; they also change έξάρχοντες to έξάρ-
χοντος so that it agrees with άοιδοϋ, which should be understood from the previous
4 Chapter 1
peculiarity of the syntax in 721-722. As Willcock13 notes: " The relative

clause is disrupted by a change of intention. It begins as if it is merely
going to describe the proceedings of the άοιδοί, but then in 722
distinguishes their behavior from that of women".14
The abundance of poetic terminology (άοιδός, άοιδή, θρηνεΐν, θρήνος,
εξαρχος), suggests the poetic nature of both the γόοι and the θρήνοι. In
particular, the θρήνοι are defined as στονόεσσα άοιδή (sorrowful song),15
an expression directly leading to the very nature of lament poetiy. The
term άοιδή (song) is an action noun and therefore describes poetry not as
something completed and stable, but as something in progress, underway,
not as είναι but as γίγνεσθαι. It consequently refers to something that is
closer to activity and performance than to a text or an aesthetic object.16
The θρήνοι are sung by άοιδοί,17 professional singers whose presence
gives the passage a rather solemn tone; for what is described here is a true
representation of a socially constructed occasion that belongs to the
organization of public life. In a song culture such a reference gains special
weight, for it calls attention to the existence of a genre which will be
reenacted through poetry."
A similar passage is also found in the Odyssey:
άμφί δέ σ' έστησαν κοΰραι άλίοιο γέροντος

οικτρ' όλοφυρόμεναι, περί δ' άμβροτα εϊματα εσσαν.
Μοϋσαι δ' έννέα πάσαι άμειβόμεναι όπί καλή
line; Van der Valk (1964) 530 thinks that έξάρχοντες should stand as it is. Nonethe-
less, εξαρχος in 24. 721 is a hapax, as it is a noun and not a participle like έξάρχο-
ντες; as far as άοιδός is concerned, I tend to side with West (ad loc. in his Teubner
edition), who does not supply this line since it is not given by the manuscript tradition.
13
Willcock (1984) 321.
14
See Eustathius ad. loc. (van der Valk 977): «έπεί ή γάρ στονόεσσα άοιδή, δ έστιν ό
θρήνος, ούκ ήν και άνδρων και γυναικών, άλλ' αί μέν έστενάχοντο, οι δ' έθρήνουν,
δι« τοϋτο ειπών 'οΐ στονόεσσαν άοιδήν', ô ούκ ήν δ' άμφοϊν κοινόν, έπαναλαβών
κα'ι μερίσας διευκρίνησεν».
15
See 24. 721.
16
Ford (1992) 15 and LfgrE s.v. άοιδή 2:"Gesang als Tätigkeit, wobei... der Charakter
des nom. act. jedoch immer gewahrt bleibt (nicht 'Werk')".
17
On άοιδός in Homer, see Kraus (1955) 65-87; Maehler (1963) 9-34; Svenbro (1976)
18-38; Thalmann (1984) 157-184; Gentiii (1988) 3-23; Goldhill (1991) 56-68; Ford
(1992) 90-130; Segal (1994) 113-141.
'« See Ford (1992) 14.
2. Γόοι and θρήνοι 5
θρήνεον- ενθα κεν οΰ τιν' άδάκρυτόν γ' ένόησας

Άργείων τοΐον γάρ ύπώρορε Μοΰσα λιγεΐα. {Od. 24. 58-62)"
The daughters of the Old Sea-god stood round you with bitter
lamentations, and wrapped your body in an imperishable shroud. The
Nine Muses chanted your dirge in sweet antiphony and you would not
have seen a single Argive without tears in his eyes, such was the clear-
voiced Muses' song.
Heubeck20 thinks that in the light of the Iliadic passage I have quoted
above (24. 719-722), "we should suppose that the Muses act as άοιδοί
(θρήνεον, 61), while the role taken in the earlier passage by the Trojan
women, is here assigned to the Nereids (οϊκτρ' όλοφυρόμεναι, 59)".21
From these two passages we can chart the basic similarities and
differences between the γόοι and the θρήνοι. The γόοι are personal
lamentations uttered by the next of kin, and are delivered in speech (not
sung) by both male and female mourners. The θρήνοι are musical laments,
set-dirges22 sung by non-kin professionals; they probably contain "a praise
to the dead referring to their deeds or a lament in more general terms"23
and are artistic in nature with less improvisation and spontaneity than the
γόοι. They are (like the γόοι) capped by cries or even phrases, probably
in the manner of a refrain, expressed by a chorus. Both γόοι and θρήνοι
represent a marked form of speech reserved only for the great heroes.24 It
is hard to tell whether the θρήνοι were gender-oriented.25 The majority of
" The text of the Odyssey used is the OCT (Allen, 1917-1919).
20
Russo/Fernandez-Galiano/Heubeck (1992) 366-367.
21
Bowra (1961) 5 argued that in Homer the chorus had not found its final duty (apart
from the γόοι, there are other instances in the Iliad where there is a chorus, like the
παιάν in 1. 472-474, the description of the ύμέναιος in 18. 493 ff., the λίνος in 18.
567), and that the leader, for whom a special term is used (έξάρχων), plays a
preeminent role.
22
See II. 24. 720; Od. 24. 60; Pi. P. 12. 6-8,1. 8. 63-64; Plato R. 388d, 398e; Plut. Sol.
21.5.
23
Kornarou (2001) 21 bases this claim on Reiner (1938) 62-63 (who supports the idea
of a θρήνος praising a hero's past deeds), and Harvey (1955) 169 (who argues that the
θρήνος would contain a lament in general terms).
24
The Iliadic γόοι are addressed to Menelaus, Patroclus, Achilles and Hector; the
θρήνοι are reserved for Hector (in the Iliad) and Achilles (in the Odyssey).
23
The γόοι were not gender-oriented. In the Iliad the majority of mourners are female
6 Chapter 1
scholars26 associate the performance of the θρήνοι with male hired

mourners, but Od. 24. 58-62 poses a serious problem, since all the
mourners (Muses and Nereids) are female.27 Although the entire matter
involves a high degree of speculation, I would rather side with those who
argue for the exclusive performance of the θρήνοι by hired male singers.
Exclusive female performance of the θρήνος for Achilles must be set
against the backcloth of the great hero's divine parentage on his mother's
side. The exceptional position Achilles occupies within the heroic
community entails certain modifications in the description of a typical
θρήνος-scene, and is responsible for the presence of female mourners
who testify to his association with the divine world through Thetis. A
lament sung by goddesses (playing the role of the professional άοιδοί)
would be quite appropriate for the son of Thetis, as it would certainly give
him, even through his loss, greater prestige and glory. It seems highly
improbable to me that a real θρήνος would solely involve hired female
singers, as professional song can hardly have been female-oriented at
such an early date.
The most puzzling question relating to the distinction between the γόοι
and the θρήνοι concerns the rich representation of the former in the Iliad
on the one hand, and the complete absence of the latter on the other. It is,
of course, widely known that the Iliad, in presenting itself as the poem
which sings the κλέος of Achilles and the άχος/πένθος for Hector, never
cites the songs of other competitive singers,2' as does the Odyssey in the
(Thetis, Andromache, Hecuba, Helen), but there are also male mourners
(Agamemnon, Achilles, Priam).
26
See Sourvinou-Inwood (1983) 39; Hutchinson (1985) 191; Easterling (1991) 149;
Shapiro (1991) 636; Segal (1993) 57-58.
27
In view of Od. 24. 58-62, of some ancient sources (Aesch. Cho. 733, Plato Lg. VII 800e,
Plut. Sol. 21.4) and of the fact that women play a more prominent role in iconographie
representations of πρόθεσις-scenes, Kornarou (2001) 21 recently argued that the
θρήνος was exclusively performed by hired female mourners. I am afraid I have to
disagree with this claim, given that the ancient sources she refers to are much later
than the Homeric θρήνοι and are unlikely to have reflected archaic practice; moreover,
iconographie representations may simply reflect the more prominent role of female
mourners in general, not specifically while performing the θρήνος. In addition, there
is an inherent difficulty in determining iconographically whether we are dealing with
the representation of a γόος or a θρήνος. For Od. 24. 58-62, see main text above.
28
Maronitis (1999) 157-159 rightly argues that it is the linear deployment of the plot in
the Iliad which is partly "responsible" for the lack of internal narratives, internal poets
2. Γόοι and θρήνοι 7
case of Demodocus.29 This may be one of the reasons why the Iliad avoids
the professional lamentations, the θρήνοι or set-dirges of the άοιδοί, but
extensively quotes the γόοι. The latter abound in condensed characteristics
of the inherited θρήνοι (such as those concerning the performance
framework they follow)30 and themes taking their cue from the Iliad itself;
in other words, the typology of the γόοι is combined with the very nature
of the poem that has given birth to them. The γόοι are personal laments
uttered by individuals closely related to the deceased; they are their
friends or relatives, not δημιοεργοί, and so the Iliad "is allowed" to give
them in full." Such a solution, however, does not cater for all cases. For,
if the answer is the typical Iliad vs Odyssey differentiation on most
matters poetical, why then does the Odyssey not cite or quote the content
of the set-dirge or θρήνος for Achilles by the Muses and the Nereids in 24.
58-62? This question becomes all the more pertinent when we consider that
the Odyssey cites or quotes in reported speech the song of other
professional singers such as Demodocus or Phemius.
The suppression of the θρήνος for Achilles in Odyssey 24 is due both
to specific parameters emanating from the immediate narrative and to a
general odyssean narrative strategy. The immediate alternative for the
Odyssey was to have Agamemnon -the speaker in this passage- either give
the θρήνος of the Muses in reported speech or quote it in direct speech;
both options must have been (rightly so) quite unthinkable. It would have
been rather inappropriate to use this scene for such an elaborate lamenta-
tion of Achilles. The internal audience, both the suitors who have recently
arrived in the Underworld and the heroes of the Trojan War who have
been there for some time, must listen to a praise for Odysseus. His ολβος
(in the manner of Demodocus or Phemius) and other songs embedded in the main
narrative.
19
One should note that the first (Od. 8. 73-82) and the third (Od. 8. 499-520) songs of
Demodocus are given in reported speech; in 8. 266 if. his second song starts in
reported speech but very soon slips into direct speech. The references to the other άοι-
δοί, Thamyris in II. 2. 594-600 and the two anonymous singers in Argos (Od. 3. 267-
271) and Sparta (Od. 4. 17-18), are insignificant. Phemius (Od. 22. 330-353) speaks
to Odysseus but his song is not given either in direct or reported speech. For a
comparison between Demodocus in Scheria and Phemius in Ithaca, see Marg (1957)
11 and Pucci (1987) 201-207.
30
This is clearly seen in the case of ritualistic (Iliad 22) or ritual γόοι (Iliad 24).
51
See Andronikos (1968) 12-13.
8 Chapter 1
surpasses that of both Achilles, who won κλέος but did not gain his νόστος
since he died at Troy, and Agamemnon, whose νόστος was practically
nullified by his own murder once he arrived at Mycenae.32 Moreover, the
narrative conditions (based on a typology of odyssean internal narratives)33
are not fulfilled. In particular, the placement of the scene in the Under-
world annuls all the temporal and spatial specifications which the Odyssey
typically employs when offering an internal narrative. This is compounded
by the masked absence of a request for such a speech, which the internal
narrator only somewhat grudgingly utters if specifically called upon to do
so. Within the above narrative parameters a threnodic encomium for
Achilles would have been rather unfitting, to say the least.
3. Selection Criteria
It is well known that 45% of the Iliad consists of speeches. Attempts to

classify them into categories were first made long ago, the best known
being that of Fingerle34 and the most recent that of Bezantakos.35 In this
study I have used three different but complementary criteria for the selec-
tion of the Iliadic γόοι,36 namely: 1) introductory and closing formulas; 2)
32
On the supremacy of Odysseus and of the Odyssey vs Achilles, Agamemnon and the
poetic traditions they represent, see Danek (1998) 486-487 and Tsagalis (2003) 43-56.
33
For a typology of internal narratives in the Odyssey, see Maronitis (1999) 162-164.
34
Fingerle (1939); for speech classification in the Odyssey, see Larrain (1987).
35
Bezantakos (1996).
36
Derderian's (2001) 33-34 classification of γόοι is problematic since only four of the
formal laments she cites occur in a ritual context and one is expressed by a male
mourner, Achilles (23. 19-23). Derderian includes in her discussion four other laments
(34, ft. 76) which she does not consider as γόοι because they are not labeled as such
(which is true) but exemplify more or less the same typical themes, motifs and
features of the formal γόοι. What Derderian has failed to see is that the γόοι "are bound
more by structure and content than ritual performance context" (Hame 2001) and that
they are not a female-genre but a female-dominated genre. Derderian has not consulted
Fingerle who offers a constructive, albeit not complete, guide to the use of reliable
criteria for classifying Iliadic speeches in general. To use a typical example, Achilles'
speech to Patroclus in 23. 19-23 is not a γόος, despite of the standard introductory
formula that is employed before the γόοι. The content and structure of this speech are
very different from any other lament; the use of the typical introductory formula is rather
due to the funereal context of Book 23 that "invites" the use of lament vocabulary.
other textual markers such as those often found outside the personal
laments, indicating that a speech to follow or one which has just been
completed is identified as a γόος; 3) thematic (and partly structural) typology
-by this I am referring not only to the actual content of a speech, but also
to a broadly defined set of motifs that the Iliadic γόοι employ and arrange
in a more or less stereotypical manner. In my view the formulation of
these criteria calls for some justification.
a. Rethinking the Formula
The groundbreaking discoveries of Milman Parry37 opened up new areas

in the study of Homeric poetry, which began to be examined not as the
work of a single gifted poet but as oral poetry. Parry's research38 originated
from his thorough examination of the formulaic nature of Homeric epic,
but gained in strength and was broadened in scope after extensive field-
work in the living oral-tradition of the guslari in former Yugoslavia. Albert
Lord continued and completed Parry's field-work, the results of which
enabled him to offer, via well-founded comparisons between Homeric and
Southslavic epic poetry, a more coherent theory for the oral nature of the
Homeric poems.39
Yet soon after Parry's brilliant discoveries, scholars who supported the
idea of a "written Homer" complained that the "deification" of the formula
37
See Parry (1971). For typical scenes in Homer, the scientific incipit belongs to Arend
(1933).
" A number of scholars (Bekker, Fick, Robert, Dilntzer, Ellendt, Hinrichs, Witte,
Meister) had partly anticipated the Panyan "discovery" of the formula, but they did
not work out a general, cohesive theory, nor did they realize the far-ranging implica-
tions of such an approach. See Holoka (1991) 456-481. Recently, Hummel (1998)
55-71 has drawn attention to the fact that certain of the main arguments of Parry had
been already expressed (though not in a systematic manner), by Pierre-Antoine Grenier
in 1861. These early studies in no way undermine the revolutionary contribution of
Milman Parry to Homeric research and the field of Oral Poetics. From the very
beginning, Chantraine (1929) 294-300 correctly observed that Parry was the first
scholar to study noun-epithet formulas in a systematic manner, and realized that his
approach "renouvelle la philologie homérique" (294).
" See Lord (1948) 34-44; (1951a) 57-61; (1951b) 71-80; (1953) 124-134; (1956) 301-
305; (1960); (1968) 1-46, (1969) 18-30; (1970) 13-28; (1976) 1-15; (1981) 451-461;
(1986a) 467-503; (1986b) 19-64; (1986c) 313-349; (1991); (1995).
10 Chapter 1
and theme as essential compositional devices of Homeric poetry would

irrevocably injure the idea of the individual poetic genius of Homer and
would, eventually, turn the Iliad and the Odyssey into "mechanical tours-
de-force".40 On the other hand, it has to be stated that the oral theory (as
advocated by Pany and Lord41) and, the formula in particular, was cha-
racterized by a certain rigidity and lack of flexibility. Scholars began
modifying the Parryan definition of the formula, so as to demonstrate that
it was not deprived of meaning, that it had a functional and not only a
metrical role and that it formed part of a much more complex and technically
sophisticated system of composition, one considerably more flexible than
that initially conceived.42 While these modifications to no extent undermine
the importance of Parry and his school's groundbreaking discoveries, they
did not lead to a division of the scholarly world reminiscent of the older
and admittedly harsher division between Analysts and Unitarians. Such
was the impact of the emergence of oral-formulaic theory that it shifted
the interest from the"Homeric Question" to the search for an oral Homer.43
One of the central questions asked concerned the amount of control the
singer could exercise on traditional material and the degree to which he
was able to create nuances, ironies and various semantical alterations to
the stock of expressions he had inherited from the tradition. Foley, one of
the most trustworthy authorities in the field of oral poetics, has summariz-
ed the above problems by using two sets of dichotomies: (a) inherent vs
conferred and (b) connotative vs denotative meaning.44 These "binary
tensions"45 do not, in any way, represent restrictions delineating a functional
framework within which verbal art, either in its oral-traditional or textual
form, must be placed.
Such a "Great Divide", as Finnegan has shown,46 exists only in the
mind of those scholars who attribute any single divergence from the norm
40
Foley (1991) xii.
41
I am here referring to Lord's initial studies.
42
The most noteworthy early efforts to modify the Parryan definition of the formula
were made by Hoekstra (1965), Nagler (1967) and Hainsworth (1968).
43
The bibliography on oral-formulaic theory is immense. The most comprehensive
survey for the research carried out, that I am aware of, is that of Foley (1985). See also
Edwards (1986 & 1988) for the formula and (1992) for the type-scenes.
44
Foley (1991) xiv.
45
Foley (1991) xiv.
« Finnegan (1977).
(dictional or thematic) to authorial activity and, at the end of the day,

consider orality as the trademark of poetic primitivism.
The next step from Finnegan's questioning the existence of a dividing
line between oral and written literature is the very idea of writing. Pucci,47
following Derrida,48 employed this term "to refer to the original oral mode
of composition and performance of the lays that developed diachronically
in the Iliad and the Odyssey'V This post-structuralist50 interpretation of
writing extends beyond the limitations of script, for it involves both graphic
and phonic signifiers. By adopting such an interpretation of writing and
using it for Homeric poetry, Pucci was able to bypass the obstacle set by
the polarity between oral versus written literature. For him, Homeric
poetry is orally- derived, i.e. oral in nature, but such "a technically complex
form of orality and therefore an elaborate 'text' composed through the
differential systems of the sign" that it should be treated as a kind of
writingIn this way, Homeric formulaic diction is fully compatible with
intertextuality and allusion,52 features which have traditionally been re-
garded as signs of written composition.53
More recently, Nagy insisted on attempting the broad brush-strokes
needed to avoid unnecessary confusion between two essential notions for
oral poetics, textualization or textuality and textification. The latter involves
the use of writing and refers to written texts as scripts54 (i.e. prerequisites
for performance), whereas the former argues that "no writing had been
required to bring about this textuality".55 Thus, the Iliad and the Odyssey
" Pucci (1987) 27.

« Derrida (1967); (1972).
« Pucci (1987) 27.
50 Foley (1991) xiii-xiv endorses a more conventional interpretation of writing.
Nevertheless, Foley's writing accepts that orality and literacy coexist and are "jointly
involved in the production of a work of verbal art". See also Finnegan (1988) 59-85,
86-109.
51 Pucci (1987) 30.
32 Repetition, forming an integral part of the notion o f formularity, almost necessitates
intertextuality and allusion by poetically exploiting the extensive network of
references contained in any given "text".
53 This post-structuralist notion of writing is reinforced by taking into account the factor
of oralcy, i.e. the coexistence of oral and written cultures. See Derderian (2001) 6-7,
11, 1 3 - 1 4 , 9 6 , 117, 139, 189.
» N a g y (1996b) 112.
» N a g y (1996a) 69.
12 Chapter 1
should be considered textualized (i.e. bearing all the features pertaining to

sophisticated written texts) even before they become textually fixed56 or
textified. According to Nagy's "Five-Age" Homeric evolution scheme,
this does not happen before "the completion of Aristarchus' editorial work
on the Homeric texts."
Given that the notion of textnality has been widened in scope, it comes
as no surprise that narratology has been used as an interpretative tool for
the understanding of Homeric poetry.58 Narratology is not interested in
reconstructing the process of evolution of the Homeric poems but in
studying them as narrative texts.59 Narratological considerations are of
prime importance for deciding on the function of introductory and closing
formulas which inaugurate and cap the majority of Homeric speeches,
and, in our case, the γόοι.
The introductory and closing formulas belong, in narratological terms,
to narrator-text.60 These are, in more traditional terminology, the ways the
diegesis speaks about the identity of a speech.61 This is an important point,
56
According to Nagy (1996b) 110, 112 text-fixation designates texts in the sense of
scripture "where the written text need not even presuppose performance".
57
Nagy (1996a) 42 and ( 1996b) 110 proposed a five-period Homeric transmission model
based on performance, not on text (but text in the traditional meaning of the word)
"with each period showing progressively less fluidity and more rigidity" (1996b) 109.
" There were also early advocates of this approach, like Bassett (1938).
59
On time and space, see Hellwig (1964) 4-22. On foreshadowing and suspense, see
Duckworth (1933); Reichel (1990) 125-151, (1998) 45-61; Nünlist (1998) 2-8;
Rengakos (1995) 1-33, (1999) 308-338. On characterization, see Van Ε φ Taalman
Kip ( 1971 ); Andersen ( 1978). On presentation of the story, see de Jong ( 1987b); Rabel
(1997). On the Homeric narrator, see Richardson (1990). Cf. also the twin narratological
approaches of Morrison (1995) and Doherty (1995) for the Iliad and the Odyssey
respectively, and de Jong's narratological commentary on the Odyssey (2001).
60
See de Jong (1987b) 29-40, who in turn employs Bal's model of analysis (19972
[1985]) "which incorporates and partly refines that of Genette (1980)".
61
The terms diegesis and mimesis are used by Plato in the Republic (3. 392d), where he
is concerned not only with the form and content of poetry but also with its ethos. By
laying emphasis on how (ώς λεκτέον 3. 392c) poets and mythologers say what they
say, Plato distinguishes between three types/classes of poetry: single-layered narrative
recounted by the poet himself (άπλη διηγήσει), narrative effected through
impersonation of a character (διά μιμήσεως γιγνομένη) and narrative effected through
both diegesis and mimesis (δι' άμφοτέρων). Aristotle followed Plato in classifying
poetic genres according to the way one imitates, but further elaborated his
classification of poetry in respect of epic: he distinguished between a brief non-
for apart from our own ideas, aesthetic principles or interpretative desires,
we should attempt to decode what the poem itself says about the
speeches' identity. When we pass from narrator-text to character-text, the
external narrator recedes into the background, withdraws and lets the
internal narrator express his ideas, feelings or arguments. Before doing so,
he uses an introductory line which lies on the border62 between diegesis
and mimesis·, this line functions as a "marker", a "literary label" that
describes the identity of the ensuing speech:
Τρψησιν δ' 'Εκάβη άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (22. 430)

But for the women of Troy Hekabe led out the thronging
There are, however, more complex cases:
τοΐσιν δ' ευχόμενος μετέφη κρείων 'Αγαμέμνων (2. 411)

and among them powerful Agamemnon spoke in prayer
The external narrator indicates here one speech-act with two distinct
aspects:63 a locutionary (μετέφη) which describes the utterance of the
speech and an illocutionary (ευχόμενος) that refers to the form of the
speech-act. In this way, he clearly sets a limit, marks a stop in the diegesis
and indicates not only that a speech will follow and that someone will
speak, but more importantly how the speaker will speak.
That is to say, despite the fact that he will withdraw from the scene
when the speech is uttered, only to return after its completion, the external
narrator smiles behind the curtain he himself has just drawn, since he is
mimetic proem (where the poet speaks as poet), a mimetic narrator-text (where the
poet speaks as narrator) and an equally mimetic character-text, the speeches (where the
poet speaks as the character he impersonates in any given situation). For a detailed
analysis of the two passages discussed above, see de Jong (1987b) 1-9; Ford (1992) 22.
62
Chatman (1990) rightly treats both diegesis and mimesis as separate narrative modes
and subordinates them to a wider category he calls Narrative. At the same time, the
two narrative modes often intermingle. In light of the above observations, the verse
introducing a speech stands between the diegetic and mimetic modes on the one hand
and comprises a part of the broader category of Narrative on the other. See Ricoeur
(1984-1988) vols, i-iii; Onega & Landa (1996) 3. I owe these bibliographical
references to Markantonatos (2002) 2, ft. 4.
63
See Searle (1976) 1-23; Prince (1978) 305.
14 Chapter 1
the one who has decided that it is now time for a character to speak. When
he uses a closing formula, he indicates that the actual speech is over and
that the diegesis will now continue.
b. Using Textual Markers
In addition to the introductory and closing formulas, there are other textual
markers -such as γόος-related terminology- which may indicate that a
speech should be identified as a γόος:
πύργω έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε (6. 373)

had taken her place on the tower in lamentation, and tearful
•ψυχή έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε64 (23.106)

the phantom ... stood over me in lamentation and mourning65
This line functions as a "marker", for it denotes either that a γόος will
follow (first case) or that it has preceded (second case). A textual marker
can be very helpful, but should be used with great caution and always in
combination with the other criteria I have referred to; its use of lament
vocabulary may be simply due to its immediate environment. In the case
of 23. 106, Achilles uses lament vocabulary to refer to the speech the
ghost of Patroclus has uttered because of the general funereal
environment it has been placed in and so Patroclus' speech does not, in
fact, meet any of the other criteria for being a γόος-speech.
64
The fact that line 6. 373 is expressed by the external narrator, whereas lines 23. 106
and 23. 157 by Achilles, who functions as an internal narrator, is not of particular
interest to me; I am using any textual indication, whether placed in narrator or
character-text, as evidence that the Iliad recognizes a speech as a γόος.
65
This is the R. Lattimore translation, which renders the same word (μυρομένη) into
English using two different adjectives, namely tearful and mourning.
c. Thematic and Structural Typology
"Theme is a basic unit of content"67 but is in no way limited to the packing

of a speech or a scene with a specific motif. The content of a γόος-speech
has to be that of a lamentation for someone who is already dead or will die
or is thought of as dying. Cases in point include Andromache's personal
lament for Hector in II. 6, although he is still alive, and Agamemnon's
personal lament for Menelaus in II. 4.
In addition to the content, the γόος exhibits a specific thematic pattern,
including the following typical elements:
a. a praising address to the deceased;
b. a comparison between the dead and/or between the present sufferings
of the mourner and other past sufferings, stressing the exceptionality of
the present loss and thus of the present grief, introducing an implicit
aretalogy of the deceased;
c. the antithesis between the mourner and the deceased;
d. a death wish;
e. the antithesis between past and present;
f. the tripartite structure of the lament;
g. ring-composition;
h. the antiphonal element;
This thematic (and partly structural) pattern should be also used with
caution; in no way should one treat it as restrictive. This pattern does not
set limits, but rather gives a repertory of means for treating the topics that
each speaker presents.
In some of the γόοι we will not find all these elements, while in others,
one or two of them will be much more predominant. On the other hand,
these features form a recurrent framework of motifs linked to the very
66
I have deliberately lumped together typical motifs and structural features of the γόοι;
the thematic typology of the Iliadic personal laments is inextricably interwoven with
its internal arrangement, i.e. the use of the same motifs in the same order by different
speakers. In other words, both patterns (thematic and structural) are the different faces
of the same coin. Moreover, the use of structural features of broader attestation, e.g.
ring-composition, shows how the Iliad has both "absorbed" and adapted the sub-genre
of the γόοι to its subject-matter, applying the same structural techniques it has used
for various sorts of speeches.
61
Nagy (1996a) 18.
16 Chapter 1
nature of the γόος as a personalized lament by someone who is very close

to the deceased and who has a special bond with him. The loss is traumatic
and severe, the greatest he/she has experienced up to now;68 at this point
their fate is the same and so death -should it have occurred- would have
saved the mourner from pain ("Death-Wish").
4. Types of Γόοι
Having established a thematic typology of all the Iliadic γόοι, we can

proceed to further differentiate between them on the basis of their form
and function within the Iliad.
Personal laments can be classified on the basis of form as 1) single; 2)
antiphonal and 3) triadic and according to function as 1) anticipatory; 2)
concealed/mixed; 3) informal/ritualistic and 4) formal/ritual.6'
This double classification of the Iliadic γόοι takes into account both
the textual environment they belong to and their content.70 By situating the
personal laments within the rest of the text, this study will examine their
micro-structure and their purpose for the macro-structure of the entire epic.
The γόος of Agamemnon for Menelaus in Book 4 is a single, anticipa-
tory lament, whereas that of Andromache in Book 24 is a ritual γόος,
coming first in a series of three laments. Likewise, the γόοι of Briseis and
Achilles in Book 19 are antiphonal and ritualistic -the scene they are
placed in bears only a vague similarity with a true ritual for the dead
person. On the other hand, the personal laments for Hector in Book 24 are
triadic (Andromache, Hecuba, Helen) and ritual -for the lamentation
process takes place in the presence of Hector's corpse.71 The Iliad not only
chooses to represent and verbalize the γόοι among other forms of laments
68
See the personal laments of Andromache in 6, Briseis in 18 and Hecuba in 24.
69
See also Chapter 5 (5. 1 Introductory remarks) and Table 2.
70
By textual environment I am referring both to what precedes and follows a personal
lament and to the positioning of the γόοι within the narrative structure of the whole
poem. Most speeches of this kind are situated in important narrative junctures that
designate a significant shift in the course of the epic plot.
71
The γόοι at the end of Book 22 are triadic (Priam, Hecuba, Andromache) and
ritualistic (for, unlike Book 24, they are uttered at the absence of the deceased's body,
since Hector's corpse is retained by Achilles).
5. Genre and sub-genre 17
(such as the θρήνοι), but also differentiates between them according to

their importance for the poem as a whole. Thus, the distribution of the
personal laments over the first and second parts of the poem is uneven.
There are only two personal laments in the first half, by Agamemnon in
Book 4 and Andromache in Book 6, both of which are anticipatory. In the
second, however, the death of main heroes like Patroclus and Hector leads
to a drastic increase in the number of γόοι, totalling ten in all. It is obvious
that as the Iliad approaches its destined end, precipitated by the death of
Patroclus and then of Hector, the γόοι will assume a pivotal role in the
continuation of the plot.
5. Genre and sub-genre
"Where there is style there is genre". This Bakhtinian maxim72 justly

stresses the interconnection between language style and speech genres.
Literary language is a complex system incorporating stylistic features
from various sorts of utterances and the social circumstances in which
these utterances have been developed. Historical changes in language
styles are interrelated with shifts in genres; the Homeric Kunstsprache is
linked to the evolution and creation of the monumental epics, the Iliad and
the Odyssey; when their epoch is over, the Kunstsprache dies out as well.
Although genre analysis is a relatively recent development focusing on
situated linguistic behavior in institutionalized academic or professional
settings, it delineates specific frames which, in their turn, shape the reception
of a text. This audience-oriented approach is known as Rezeptionaesthetik,
in which the interpretative tone is given or at least triggered by the, so
called, horizon of expectations73 of the reader. It emphasizes the importance
of two kinds of frames: common and intertextual·, common frames are
"representations of a stereotyped situation deriving from, and referring to,
general encyclopaedic knowledge including everyday experience".74
72
Bakhtin (1986) 66.
73
According to Suleiman (1980) 35, the horizon of expectations is "the set of cultural,
ethical and literary (generic, stylistic, thematic) expectations of the work's readers in
the historical moment of its appearance".
74
Sourvinou-Inwood (1995) 3.
18 Chapter 1
Intertextual frames connect the reader with the treasury of intertextual

knowledge" which his acquaintance with other texts has engraved in his
mind. This knowledge is encoded in the text by means of intertextual
frames such as generic rules, topoi, narrative patterns and in the case of
Homeric epic, one might add, formulaic material.
In the case of Iliadic lament, for example, the conditions in which the
γόοι are uttered seem to be quite standardized. The death, real or imaginary,
of an important Iliadic figure is the rhetorical topos activating the
utterance of a personal lament; this γόος fulfills specific communicative
purposes mutually shared by the participants typically associated with it.
Furthermore, its utterance initiates the creation of a number of organization-
al and structural forms that tend to crystallize themselves and acquire the
shape of a generic construct. Therefore, the typology of the Iliadic γόοι
(lexico-grammatical, discoursal, thematic and stylistic) results in the
complementarity of the common and intertextual frames I have referred
to above. The Iliadic γόοι represent a poetic amalgam containing features
derived from the experience of a real-time lamentation that were adapted
to the epic's genre-specific restrictions. In this way, the Iliad managed to
scissor out elements of traditional lamentation incompatible with its own
conventions (such as the expression of excessive pain by cries),76 so as to
offer its audience a new poetic product, the γόοι, filtered through the epic's
perspective and bearing a lasting imprint.
Apart from conventional knowledge, generic versatility is a key aspect
of genre theory. Overlapping communicative purposes tend to be
displayed and represented by different genres which make us ponder their
multiplicity. Here, categories and sub-categories seem to serve such
similar communicative purposes that one might be tempted to question
their validity or even existence. Why should we speak, for example, of
lament, θρήνοι, γόοι, mourning scenes, short obituaries and the like when
they all represent the same idea, namely that of lament for the dead?
The answer is that generic versatility should be treated in terms of the
discourse medium or, as in the case of the Iliad, of the speaker's identity
and the nature of his utterance, rather than its communicative goal.
75
On intertextuality, see Culler (1975) 139-140; Kristeva (1981) 170; Culler (1981) 12,
38, 100-118; Eco (1981) 21-22, 32.
76
In contrast, such cries do occur in Greek tragedy. See Koonce (1962) 77 if.; Stanford
(1983) 59; McClure (1995) 35-60; Kornarou (2001) 87-93; Loraux (2002) 35-41.
5. Genre and sub-genre 19
This does not mean that communicative purposes do not exist in such
cases. It is simply a question of distinguishing between marked and
unmarked elements. The more we adopt marked forms of expression, the
more we need to specify minute communicative purposes in order to
establish distinctions between genres and sub-genres.77 Hence the
distinction between the θρήνοι and the γόοι within the Iliad, which is
necessary for the designation of particular sub-generic subtleties.
Finally, genre analysis has shown that genres, situated as they are in
specific socio-cultural contexts, have always been considered as "sites of
contention between stability and change".78 The crystallization of genres
seems to be at odds with a propensity for innovation.79 The latter is often
exploited by the expert members of the community in order to create new
forms in response to new historical contexts. Genres based on conventio-
nalized and institutionalized discoursal practices of specific communities
are imbued with the rigidity of canonizing, but also with the fluidity
typical of tropes. Consequently, they adopt new forms and refuse to abide
by rules of integrity, whether generic or other. While language moves
towards less organized forms, the socio-cultural context in which it
evolves tries to classify and tame it through the creation of numerous sub-
categories and sub-branches.
This conflict between rigid stability and fluctuating change will be
observed in the case of Iliadic γόοι. Divergence from the norm does not
mean that the norm doesn't exist, but rather that by using established
generic knowledge, the poet handles generic resources and conventions in
such a way that they are able "to express private intentions within the
framework of socially recognized communicative purposes".'0 Beyond
the poet, the expert tradition within the discourse community works in the
same direction. This line of thought is greatly reinforced by the fact that
such innovations are realized within generic boundaries and, by recourse
to modified material from the collective treasury of resources accumulated
by generic convention.
This conflict can be seen in Saussurian terms as a slightly modified
version of the well known dichotomy between langue versus parole and
77
Bhatia (1997) 634.
78
Berkekotter and Huckin (1995) 6.
79
See Bhatia (1997) 634-635.
80
Bhatia (1997) 635. The italics are mine.
20 Chapter 1
synchrony versus diachrony; as opposed to linguistic units, literary texts

have aesthetic and cultural significance and consequently reshape generic
"codes" while functioning within the framework designated by the latter.81
So if by parole we refer to particular texts belonging to a genre as specific
manifestations of underlying generic conventions, by langue we allude to
the existence of a generic schema or frame of generic rules. The dicho-
tomy thus becomes a dialectal relationship, within the borders of which
we must trace the function of genre. Furthermore, synchrony concerns the
particular manifestation of a genre or, as in the case of Iliadic γόοι, a sub-
genre at a given moment in time, like that designated by its crystallization
within the Iliadic text. On the other hand, diachrony pertains to the evolu-
tion of a genre, to its transformation and shaping until it reaches its present
state.82 From this perspective, the synchronic examination of a sub-genre,
like the Iliadic γόοι, explores its current manifestation on a horizontal
time-axis, whereas the diachronic approach is interested in its linear
development on a vertical time-axis. Yet just as in the case of langue
versus parole, the two approaches must be combined, for it is almost
impossible to give a comprehensive account of a genre without tracing its
origins. In the case of the Iliadic personal laments, this diachronic
approach seems to have a built-in-limitation; there are no texts prior to the
Iliad in which to look for the predecessors of the γόοι. Nevertheless, in
certain cases the Iliadic text hints at what might have preceded certain
expressions concerning the presentation of lament in the form of
formulaic survivals, fossilized items that have survived through time and
been preserved by the epic tradition.
" See Fishelov (1997) 68.

" Despite our inability to attain a full-scale diachronic analysis revealing the process of
genre-evolution, diachronic comparisons are possible via what Foley (1991) 15 has
coined comparative analogues. Meter, phraseology and narrative patterns can be
traced back to their precursors by means of comparing genre-congruent works, as
Foley (1990) has done in the case of the Odyssey, Beowulf, and the Serbo-Croatian
"Return Song". On metrical analogues between Greek and Indie meter, see Nagy
(1974).
6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι, 21
6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι
"Originality in generic composition can be treated under four categories, which

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

representation and verbalization of the sub-genre of the γόοι? In other
words, how does the genre of epic treat the sub-genre of the γόοι?
The problem with this kind of question is that in our case we don't
have any pre-Iliadic proto-lament, so our answer has to be based on
inference; on the other hand, there may be some solid ground for such an
investigation if we use the common characteristics the γόοι exemplify in
the Iliad as a guide towards determining their typology. Once this typology
is defined, we can point out those themes or motifs which are not
associated with it. As far as the second and third categories are concerned,
both the arrangement of the standard topoi and their alterations and mo-
difications in the Iliad are due to the fact that the sub-genre of the γόοι is
represented in "character-text". That is to say, it is verbalized by characters
who function as internal narrators, thus offering their own interpretation
of events by stressing, altering and adapting the content of their speech to
their own needs and their personal role within the epic plot.M The last
category refers to major generic sophistications which the genre uses when
it treats a sub-genre. In a nutshell, it points to the numerous restrictions
the genre imposes on its thematic treatment of lamentations.85
Consequently, we could define the Iliadic γόοι as personal lament
speeches expressed by an important figure in the Iliadic plot, whether
male or female, concerning the death, past or future, real or imaginary of
a preeminent warrior, Greek or Trojan.
83
Cairns (1972) 99.
84
The Iliad bears traces of an established usage of lamentation, but voices only one form
of this lamentation, the γόοι. See Smyth (1906) cxxi.
85
Cf. Nagy (1979) 112.
22 Chapter 1
It has been maintained that "the theme and diction of lament appear to
have shaped the Iliad and can even be found embedded in the name of
Achilles, 'grief of the fighting-men"'.86 If this is true, then the fact that the
Iliad represents only the γόοι becomes even more significant, since it
poses another kind of question: do the γόοι represent a "better genre" than
other forms of lament? This may seem a naive question," but if sub-
genres found in epic (such as commanding, flyting and recollection)
demand treatment as "poetic" performances, then one can assume that an
ancient audience accustomed to traditional oral-poetics is "naive"" in the
sense that "it has internalized the conventions of the overarching genre (in
this case, epic) to the extent that it can focus more than we can on the
primary, sub-generic level..."."
7. Scope of Research
Scholars have scarcely treated the theme of lament in the Iliad as

a separate subject. Up to now, the focus of attention has centered either
on the study of the speeches in the entire poem90 or lament in gener-
16
Nagy (1979) 69-71 quoted in Martin (1989) 86.
17
On the same kind of question see Martin (1989) 89 ff., with revealing comments on
the function of speech-genres as primary types of performance.
" Scodel (2002) proposes a reassessment of epic performance by challenging the view
that Homeric audiences were minutely competent. She rightly argues that epic poetry
"speaks" as if everything is familiar; we do not need to postulate superbly informed
and experienced audiences in order to account for the understanding and appreciation
of the technical complexity and sophistication of Homeric poetry. Positive reception
of this poetry was, no doubt, a reality and, one might say, one of the basic factors
contributing to its diffusion. Therefore, it is not a question of competent or trained
listeners but of positively responding audiences.
·» Martin (1989) 90.
90
Fingerle (1939) classified all the speeches of both the Iliad and the Odyssey into
categories using various criteria. As far as lament is concerned, he was the first to
distinguish between two distinct types of lament speeches in the Iliad: the Totenklagen
and the Klagereden. As Totenklagen, Fingerle classified lament speeches addressed to
a dead person and as Klagereden general laments, not addressed to the dead. The
importance of Fingerle's study lies in his perceiving of the existence in Homer of
introductory and closing lines that initiate and cap the Totenklagen and in his using
them as criteria for his speech classification. In 1970, Lohmann attempted a sensitive
approach to the composition of all the Iliadic speeches. He examined both their
al," either in ancient Greek literature alone or throughout the evolution of

Greek tradition from antiquity to modern times.92
The present study of the Iliadic personal laments is an overall exa-
mination of this class of speeches within the Iliad: Having establishing a
corpus of personal laments by using specific criteria for this classification,
it proceeds to an analysis of the way the diegesis presents the γόοι. It
moves from an attempt to appreciate the verbalization of main themes and
interpret performance aspect to a detailed analysis of all the personal
laments, focusing on what one might call "the textual behavior" of this
particular kind of speech within the Iliad.
To my knowledge, no special study concerning the Iliadic personal
laments has yet appeared.93 Still more important, no scholars have concerned
internal and their external mode of composition and pointed to the existence of three
basic structural patterns: ring-composition, parallel composition and free expansion.
The most recent monograph on the speeches in the Iliad is by Bezantakos, which
modifies the pioneering work of Fingerle and offers a complete catalogue of all the
Iliadic speeches divided into categories. As far as the Odyssey is concerned, the most
recent comprehensive account known to me, is that of Larrain (1987), with rich
bibliography on the previous work done on this topic. Generally speaking, speeches
in the Iliad have received more attention than those in the Odyssey.
" Monsacré (1984) examined the expression of suffering in Homeric poetry, the
different attitudes of men and women in respect of the externalization or
internalization of grief, and the wider consequences these attitudes imply for our
understanding of Homeric society. Monsacré is influenced by the Paris school and the
emphasis in her book is on what Vidal-Naquet describes in his preface as Homeric
anthropology, which is actually an anthropology of the text.
92
Reiner (1938) examined the lament for the dead in all ancient Greek literature. The
wide thematic scope of his study did not allow him to focus his attention on the lament
theme in the Homeric poems; nevertheless, his survey is the first momentous
contribution to the research of the way lament operated in ancient Greek literary
tradition. A true landmark in the research concerning lament in Greek literary heritage
was the work of Alexiou (2002 [1974']). Alexiou studied lament not only in ancient
but also in byzantine and modern Greek culture, showing the existence of common
motifs, conventions, themes and even formulas in all phases of Greek literature, thus
pointing to its continuity. As far as Homer is concerned, Alexiou analyzed the
personal laments at the end of Book 24 of the Iliad and argued for a three-part form
following a ring-composition pattern (ABA). Her observations (2002,131-160) on the
antithetical thought and antiphonal structure of the laments as well as on the use of the
allusive method broke new ground in the study of lament in Greek literature.
93
Petersmann (1973) attempted an analysis of five speeches which he called "lament-
monologues". His analysis is not as pervasive as one would have expected. Not only
24 Chapter 1
themselves with the function of this specific categoiy of speeches as a

whole within the poem. The majority of previous studies on speech-
classification concentrate on determining and examining a specific class
of speeches or, on a more general level, on categorizing the speeches of
the Iliad and the Odyssey into groups.94 Little if any attempt has been
made to point out the relationship between these speeches and the rest of
the poem or to define their function on both a dictional and a thematic level.
In addition to the formula, which is a principal hermeneutic tool, we
have used the examination of allusion, the form of each speech as well as
its relation to the diegesis or, in narcological terms, the simple-narrator
text. The application of these approaches stems from our belief that as a
monumental composition, over the centuries the Iliad absorbed different
poetic genres from a long-standing oral tradition. These include praise
poetry, blame poetry and, most pertinently for this study, funerary poetry.95
In the case of funerary poetry, the Iliad itself produced a "sub-genre",
the γόοι or personal laments, which was then "subordinated" to the
did he fail to see the problem of the placement of the personal laments, he even included
Achilles' initial speech in 18. 6-14 in his category of "monologische Totenklage"
despite the fact that it is addressed to his own θυμός. Nevertheless, Petersmann made
an important distinction between ritual and non-ritual personal laments. He
convincingly argued that only the three final γόοι in II. 24 should be regarded as ritual
in the true sense of the word, since they are uttered during a funeral (that of Hector), and
show traces of a latent pattern of internal composition and sequential performance upon
which they are based. Pucci (1993) 258-272 was the first to analyze the personal dirges
of Briséis and Achilles in II. 19, by laying the emphasis on the importance of the re-
presentation and placement of the laments within the framework of oral performance.
Derderian (2001) 15-62 devotes one chapter to the study of Iliadic personal laments.
The rest of her book deals with the archaic epigram, the study of lament in the
classical period (Pindar, Simonides and Sophocles) and the epitaphios logos.
" Cf. Fingerle (1939).
95
Mawet (1975) turned the focus in a new direction scarcely studied before: the
connection between lament poetry and funerary epigrams. Later on (1979), extending
Anastassiou's study on the Homeric vocabulary of mourning (1971), she explored the
functional oppositions in the vocabulary of pain in Homer; though not concerned
solely with lament, she added much to our knowledge of the differences between
words pertaining to the semantic groups of πήμα and άλγος. On the relation between
the genre of lament and mourning in general with the inscribed epigram, see also
Derderian's detailed examination (2001) 63-113. Derderian convincingly
demonstrates how the ambiguous σήμα of epic is transformed into a μνήμα, with the
resultant increase in its communicative capacity by the use of writing.
"ambitious super-genre of epic".96 For no matter how many generic

features the γόοι inherited from the tradition, they also acquired new ones
in their new home, especially since they are not mere utterances but acts
of self-presentation, "which the genius of the Iliad... captured ... and used
... to humanize archaic figures of myth"."
It would perhaps be useful at this point to sketch the main outlines of
our examination of the Iliadic personal laments.
In chapter one, we set out the basic framework for the study of a
marked form of lament speech, such as the γόοι in the Iliad. The personal
laments are presented next to the other marked form of lament, the
musical θρήνος, which is not given in archaic Greek epic either in direct
or reported speech.
In chapter two, we study the typology of the personal laments and
trace various common motifs shared by the majority of them.
The study of the γόος introductory and closing formulas in chapter
three aims at exploring the reasons which determine variation from the
formulaic norm. In addition, emphasis is placed on the examination of
specific contextual parameters shaping the way these formulaic speech-
markers interact with the content of the γόοι they introduce or cap.
In chapter four, we examine deixis in the main themes and motifs used
in the personal laments, such as distance and separation from the beloved
ones and from one's fatherland, dying abroad, the theme of bereaved
parents, mors immatura and the opposition between κλέος and νόστος.
In chapter five, we focus our attention on the intratextuality of the
personal laments; in studying allusion, foreshadowing and correlation, we
point to the existence of latent correspondences and references between
them, as well as to the overlapping and development of basic epic themes
that transcend the whole Iliad. The personal laments develop the main
epic themes and unfold narrative threads that weave the thematic texture
of the poem. Their incorporation into the Iliad is so intricate that they tend
to represent, albeit in miniature form, both a summary and an emotional
commentary on the entire epic.
The quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles; the deaths of Patroclus
96
See Martin (1997) 138-166, who suggests the same thing for the Homeric similes,
arguing that they are "genre imports", swallowed by the "ambitious supergenre" of
epic poetry.
97
Martin (1989) 88.
26 Chapter 1
and Hector; the future destruction of Troy; Achilles' suffering and his
future death: in a nutshell, the kernel of the entire poem98 is mirrored in
the Iliadic personal laments." By using external analepses and prolepses,
the γόοι draw a circle that surpasses the epic and encompasses larger parts
of the Epic Cycle. In terms of poetics, the γόοι reproduce the fabric of the
Iliad and, by and large, summarize it.
98
See Griffin (1980) who studied the polarization between life and death, a theme of
central importance for the interpretation of the Iliad, of which lament constitutes an
integral part.
99
See Foley (2001) 44.
Chapter 2
The Typology of the Iliadic Γόοι
2.1 Introductory Remarks
In the Iliad there are twelve (12) γόοι100 quoted in direct speech, of which
ten are situated in the second part of the poem from Book 18 to Book
24101, but only two in the first part, namely in Books 4 and 6. The full list
contains the following γόοι:
100
By using the term γόος I refer either to a speech introduced with a phrase containing
this word or to a speech introduced by some other expression of lament and followed
by the formula έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες / γέροντες / πολΐται / δήμος άπειρων.
Although in the second case the word γόος is not used, the thematic development and
internal structure of these speeches place them within the category of γόος-speeches.
By thematic development I am referring to the selection and presentation and by
internal structure to the order and disposition of elements contained in γόος-
speeches. See also section 3 (Selection Criteria) in chapter 1.
101
Introductory and closing formulas are extremely important for classifying the γόοι.
Petersmann (1969) 113 and (1973) 4 makes a distinction between ritual death-
laments (rituelle Totenklage) and those which are more personal and directly function
as a form of monologue. He only considers the three γόοι in Iliad 24 by Andromache,
Hecuba and Helen as ritual, arguing that all the rest differ significantly from them.
On the other hand, Reiner (1938) 12 ft. 4 maintains that Thetis' speech in 18. 52-64
is a ritualistic γόος rather than a monologue. Petersmann's classification is closer to
mine. Ritual laments are those having both a formulaic introduction and a typical
closure. Formulaic introductions and closures are rather the by-product of the ritual
nature of a personal lament. As ritual γόοι we should classify those fulfilling the
following three criteria at the same time: (a) they are introduced and capped by
specific formulas (see chapter 3); (b) they are placed within a purely funerary
environment and (c) they contain a number of basic elements (which I examine in
this chapter). According to these criteria only the three laments in Book 24 are ritual
γόοι. Those in Books 19 and 22 are ritualistic, i. e. they share the personal laments'
basic properties but are not ritual, for one essential prerequisite is not met: the body
of Hector has not yet been returned by Achilles (cf. also Seaford 1994, 154-190). I
do not consider the speech of Achilles (23. 19-23) as a personal lament. The use of
the formula τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο in 23. 17 is a reflection of the
28 Chapter 2
1. 4. 155-182: Agamemnon for Menelaus

2. 6. 407-439: Andromache for Hector
3. 18.52-64: Thetis for Achilles
4. 18. 324-342 Achilles for Patroclus
5. 19. 287-300 Briséis for Patroclus
6. 19.315-337 Achilles for Patroclus
7. 22. 416-428 Priam for Hector
8. 22. 431-436 Hecuba for Hector
9. 22.477-514 Andromache for Hector
10. 24. 725-745 Andromache for Hector
11. 24. 748-759 Hecuba for Hector
12. 24. 762-775 Helen for Hector
As far as thematic development and internal structure are concerned, a
γόος-speech contains the following elements:
a. It often starts with a praising address to the deceased; by the term
"praising", I am referring to the use of a construction expressing praise in
the mourner's terms, namely the relationship between the dead and the
mourner, whether a beloved child, a dearest friend, or a most cherished
son. We can even say that in this address the term of praise would on
occasion have been in the superlative; this is due not only to the
exaggeration which often prevails in the feelings of the mourner when
(s)he has lost someone dear, but also to the "Comparison" motif often
following the "praising" address.
b. The "Comparison"102 constitutes an important part of the personal
lament aimed at highlighting the preeminence of the dead person. It takes
center stage and comprises some sort of digression, which in the mouth of
a skillful mourner could very well have developed into a short story or a
praise poem for the dead.103 The "Comparison" takes two forms: i) a
influence of the funereal context. There is nothing that recalls a personal lament in
this speech. For a different classification of the γόοι, see Bezantakos (1996) 154-156,
who classifies laments and complaints in the same category and considers certain
γόοι as general laments. Table 2 offers a classification of the Iliadic personal laments.
102 By "Comparison" and "Death-Wish" I am translating the German terms "Vergleich"
and "Todeswunsch" respectively. These terms were employed in the analysis of
Homeric speeches by Lohmann (1970) 99-11 who also draws on the groundwork of
Fingerle (1939).
103
Cf. Reiner (1938) 116-120. See also Garland (1985) 146, with a useful note on περί-
δειπνον; Garland says that according to Prof. L. R. Rossi in a talk entitled "Poem and
2.1 Introductory Remarks 29
contrast to other dead also connected by some sort of relationship to the

mourner (sons for Hecuba, brothers-in-law for Helen), and ii) a contrast
to other previous sufferings that the mourner has been through. In both
cases the same motif is used, namely, that this particular person/loss was
the greatest that the mourner has suffered. The "Comparison" virtually
introduces an aretalogy of the deceased, one which "offre la motivazione
per cui egli è compianto, cosí come nello schema basilare della preghiera
Γ υπόμνημα spiega perché e di che cosa si invochi il dio".104 So, for
example, in the cases of the personal laments of Briseis, Andromache in
Book 24 and Helen "il nesso fra aretalogia e dichiarazione del pianto
sottolinea la fondamentale funzione culturale del lamento funebre, ossia
quella di asorbire e canalizzare il dolore, smorzandone Γ urgenza col
dichiararlo a se stessi nello specchio della parola".105
c. Mourner and deceased are presented as sharing a common fate. This
topic is developed by the use of the first and second person personal
pronouns linking mourner and dead in the sphere of suffering.106
fee in Greek Archaic poetry, both choral and monodie" delivered to the Hellenic
Society on Nov. 15th 1979, the following fragments may be extracts from long lost
perideipnon songs: ΡMG 419, 485(?), 894, 896, 907, 911; Pi. /. 2 (?); Anaxandrides,
fr. 1 K.-A. See also Cie. De leg. II 63. In Homer we hear about something probably
linked to the perideipnon in 23. 29, after Achilles' personal lament for Patroclus; on
this occasion the eating takes place before the cremation of the body (23. 29 ff.),
whereas in Hector's funeral after the cremation (24. 802). Keeping this in mind one
could formulate an interesting hypothesis: since the γόος was the informal, improvised
lament uttered by the next of kin and was later on restricted to the house (due to
Solon's legislation), it may have been replaced by some sort of praising lamentation
uttered during the perideipnon. Both Zenobius V. 28 ("είώθεσαν oí παλαιοί έν χοϊς
περιδείπνοις τον τετελευτηκότα έπαινεΐν, και ει φαΰλος ήν") and the proverb "οΰκ
αν έπαινεθείης ούδ' έν περιδείπνψ" seem to support this claim. It is precisely this
praising element -so often encountered as an integral feature during my analysis of
the Iliadic personal laments- which makes me think that this praise might not have
been lost. Moreover one should keep in mind the belief of the Greeks that the dead
was present during the perideipnon in the capacity of a host. This fits in perfectly
with Patroclus' funeral in II. 23, since his dead soul visits Achilles and talks to him
after the funeral feast (23. 29).
104
Ferrari (1984) 264-265.
105
Fen-ari (1984) 265.
106
Alexiou (2002) refers to the same motif by using the exactly opposite term (!), as she
talks of "the antithesis between mourner and deceased". For all my respect for her
groundbreaking work on Greek lament, I think that all the Iliadic examples she refers
30 Chapter 2
d. The "Death-Wish" is an extreme verbal indication of the mourner's

unflagging desperation due to the pain caused by the loss of a dear one.
The suffering and grief are so deep and intense, the mourner's entire
vision of life so profoundly affected that he/she expresses a desire to die,
since life has no meaning after being deprived of his/her beloved one.
e. The antithesis between past and present is a manifestation of the
antithetical thought permeating the γόοι. When the dead was alive in the
past, he was a source of hope for the ones that depended on him, but now
the present and the future seem grim to the mourner. Indeed, the word νυν
is emphatically used in almost every single Iliadic personal lament for this
purpose. Furthermore, the word ζωός is often used in such cases to
contrast with different forms of the verb άποθνήσκω so as to stress the
antithesis between a happy life in the past and a miserable one in the
present.
f. The majority of the Iliadic γόοι have a tripartite structure consonant
with the tripartite structure of the whole Greek funeral, the κηδεία.107 This
was "a three-act drama with precise regulations governing the most
minute details of procedure. These three acts comprised the laying out of
the body (prothesis), the conveyance to the place of interment (ekphora),
and finally the deposition of its cremated or inhumed remains".108 One
to (the same as my study) do not separate mourner and deceased, but rather attempt
to create a link between them, in the world of suffering. To use a well known example
(also mentioned by Alexiou), when Andromache laments Hector in 22. 477-478, she
begins her speech with the following expression: Ifj άρα γεινόμεθ' αϊση / αμφότεροι
.... She then employs first and second person pronouns -not to differentiate her fate
from that of Hector, but to emphasize their unbroken bond, their common suffering.
See also 22. 485 when she refers to Astyanax: δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι.
The antithesis is at work, but rather as an opposition between past and present than
between mourner and deceased. The motif of common fate is also connected with the
expression of a "Death-Wish" by the mourner.
107
See Alexiou (2002), in which the author rightly claims that the origins of the tripartite
structure of the Iliadic γόοι must be sought in the very structure of primitive rituals
(the same applies, Alexiou argues, to the hymn, the encomium, and the funeral
oration). The alternative scenario, according to which the tripartite structure of the
Iliadic personal laments is due to structural techniques pertaining to Homeric speech
at large (since the γόοι are coherent, uninterrupted speeches), seems to me highly
unlikely, given that the tripartite structure is typical of other genres of ritual poetry.
108
Garland (1985) 21.
2.1 Introductory Remarks 31
cannot exclude the possibility that a primitive belief in the magic power
of number three may have survived in ritual lamentations, especially since
the chief mourner (εξαρχος γόοιο) was initially regarded as the equivalent
of the later magician (γόης),109 who communicates with the dead through
songs and spells and is considered to be the "necromantic counterpart of
the poet"."0
g. Iliadic personal laments show a remarkable preference for ring-
composition as opposed to parallel structure or simply free development.
The first question one should ask is what this compositional choice re-
veals about the origin of the γόοι; ring-composition is both a composition-
al aid and a rhetorical device used in order to achieve a specific stylistic
effect, often that of emphasis. By repeating, in more or less the same way,
themes previously expressed in the speech, the speaker aims either to
stress their importance or to encircle a digression or short episode (as in a
"Comparison"), by weaving a larger fabric. On the other hand, since the
structure of a speech -its compositional pattern- reflects the poet's choice
or the tradition's preference, the ring-composition technique must have
some other meaning connected to the way personal laments were uttered
in the Greek world, one that "scarcely changed between the Bronze Age
and the Hellenistic Period"."1 This argument remains valid regardless of
whether we favor a single authorship for the Iliad·, the tradition in which
epic was forged knew of a specific ritual for the lamentation of the dead,
part of which would have been personal laments. Emily Vermeule argues
that "the two great art forms of early historical Greece, Ionic epic poetry
in the east and Geometric painting in the mainland provinces of Attica,
Boiotia and the Argolid, focus on burial and mourning in styles so similar,
109
See LSJ s.v. γόης: "a wizard, a sorcerer".
110
See Reiner (1938) 20 ff., 27-28 where a list of expressions of incantation in tragedy
is given; also Rohde (1925) 14, 198; Bickel (1926) 22; Burkert (1962) 36-55;
Romilly (1975) 13, 31; Vermeule (1979) 16-17. Burkert (1962, 45) refers to 24. 720
ff. and notes that this may be a reminiscence (Erinnerung) "an magische Sänger bei
der Bestattung ..., eine Erinnerung, die darum gleich unterdrückt wird, weil das
homerische Epos an Stelle des Magischen das Menschliche entdeckt hat". The most
recent account of the origin and roles of the γόης in relation to the songs of mourning
is offered by Johnston (1999) 82-123. She convincingly shows how a basically
female-restricted genre such as the γόος was gradually transformed into a male γοη-
τεία in the fifth-century polis.
111
Vermeule (1979) 11.
32 Chapter 2
that scholars understood they both share an older tradition long before it
could be proved. The themes of the Homeric Iliad are precisely those of
Attic painting, battle and sea and the ceremonies for the dead. These were
the old themes of the Mycenaean Greeks, and of most other Bronze Age
cultures around the Mediterranean"."2 Thus the personal laments also
forming an integral part in the ceremonies of the dead must have followed
some speech conventions, which would have in turn developed over the
centuries since they were practiced for a long time. Like the other art forms
(e.g. painting), these must have exhibited some consistency in the way
they were performed and composed as well as in the themes they dealt
with. The typology of their structure and thematic material is probably a
reflection of the lamenting conventions that our Iliad is aware of.
h. The antiphonal nature of the funeral lament is typical in all eras of
Greek tradition."3 In Homer, each phase of the singing of the ritual lament
is antiphonal: it begins with the hired mourners singing the θρήνος, while
a chorus "responds" to their grief. The next of kin then utter a personal
lament, the γόος, accompanied by a chorus of anonymous mourners utter-
ing a refrain of cries."4
2.2 The Praising Address
The introductory address preceding the personal laments constitutes a

special form of "extended" or "expanded address" containing a comparison
of the deceased with other people mentioned or implied and, very often,
an epithet in the superlative degree. This praising element is consonant
with the inherent tendency of the γόος-speech to underscore the
deceased's special impact on the life and personality of the mourner. The
mourner builds his lament upon a comparison of the dead either with
others belonging to the same "category" (friends, kin, etc.) as him, or with
the pain the mourner has experienced in the past on losing a dear one. In
both cases the deceased or the pain his death has caused to the mourner
112
Vermeule (1979) 11. The italics are mine.
113
For a detailed analysis of this concept in ancient Greek, byzantine and modern Greek
tradition, see Alexiou (2002) 131-184.
114
I cannot agree with Garland (1985) 30 when he says "In Homer... a chorus of women
utter a refrain of cries"; this is not always true (see 19. 338; 22. 429; 24. 776).
2.2 The Praising Address 33
turns out to be far greater than before. This is a way of expressing the
intensity of grief exprienced by the mourner; the more important the dead,
the greater the suffering the mourner feels and tries to express. There are
four typical introductory lines preceding the Iliadic γόοι:
1. Πάτροκλέ μοι δείλη πλείστον κεχαρισμένε θυμψ (19.287)

2. ή ρά νύ μοί ποτε και σύ, δυσάμμορε, φίλταθ' έταίρων (19. 315)
3. Έκτορ, έμψ θυμψ πάντων πολύ φίλτατε παίδων (24. 748)
4. "Εκτορ, έμφ θυμψ δαέρων πολύ φίλτατε πάντων (24. 762)
All of these lines contain a vocative referring to the deceased and a dative
of either a personal pronoun referring to the mourner or a possessive
pronoun referring to the speaker's θυμός. In addition, there is a dative of
reference (usually modifying the word θυμός), an epithet in the
superlative degree and "an intensifier" of the superlative (such as the
adverb πλείστον or πολύ that may or may not accompany the superlative
epithet). Finally, we have a genitive expressing the second term of the
comparison, if it is not an absolute one. Therefore, it seems that the personal
lament has developed a particular form of introductory address to the
deceased stemming from its thematic preoccupation with the dead's special
impact on the life of the mourner. The particularity of the person results
in the particularization of the mourner's feelings and his specialness
effects a special verbal form of treatment, the expanded-praising address.
In Briséis' lament for Patroclus the expression κεχαρισμένε θυμψ used
when addressing a close friend and therefore showing endearment and
familiarity, acquires an intensifying tone lent by the superlative πλείστον
placed next to it."5 This particular case thus looks more like the other
initial addresses of the personal laments than those which use the phrase
κεχαρισμένε θυμψ; the superlative functions in such a way that it virtually
changes the scope of the address. Briséis is not only addressing Patroclus
but with him all the others who are dear to her or better were dear to her.
She is also addressing her three brothers (293) and husband (295) slain by
113
The expression έμφ κεχαρισμένε θυμφ is used five times in the ¡liad, for Patroclus
by Achilles (11. 608), for Diomedes by Sthenelus, Athene and Agamemnon (5. 243,
5. 8 2 6 , 1 0 . 2 3 4 respectively) and of course for Patroclus by Briséis (19.287). See also
Edwards (1991) 269. For the peculiar scansion of the vocative, see Pucci (1998) 99-
100.
34 Chapter 2
Achilles. This initial address is not simply a typical way to begin a speech;
it acquires a specific functional role, that of encompassing a wide scope
of people whom the speaker, through the comparison of the superlative
form that she uses, first implicitly and then explicitly includes in the
personal lament.
Briséis' introductory address to Patroclus contains the only Homeric
example of an enclitic following a vocative (Πάτροκλε μοι); the form εμώ
would have been perfectly possible, in which case it would refer to the
dative θυμφ and would follow the pattern of the other lines where the
expression κεχαρισμένε θυμφ is used. It seems that this unusual
expression creates an intense rhythm, reflecting the emotional involve-
ment and frustration of Briséis. Being a slave-girl, she is not connected to
Patroclus through family ties and is thus unable to address him using a
family term,"6 as often happens in the Iliadic funeral laments. Her speech is
actually looking ahead, towards the address (19. 315) by which Achilles'
γόος for Patroclus is initiated. It is to the dative μοι used there that the
personal pronoun μοι in 19. 287 responds, showing the level of consistency
between the initial address of the Iliadic γόος-speeches.
In Achilles' γόος-speech Patroclus is addressed by a line ending with
the phrase φίλταθ' έταίρων. The vocative of the word φίλος when used as
an adjective in the superlative degree is attested four times in the Iliad
three in the first line of the three personal laments I have quoted above
(19. 315, 24. 748, 24. 762) and one more at the beginning of the speech by
Idomeneus to his comrade Meriones in 13. 249. It is followed by the
genitive plural έταίρων in 13. 249 and 19. 315, since the genitive de-
termines the class of people among whom the speaker is placing the
deceased. Yet a closer look at the two passages shows that the meaning of
the genitive έταίρων is not the same in each case. When Idomeneus
addresses Meriones, the rest of his speech indicates that he refers to the
latter's identity as second-in-command, i. e. a front line warrior. This is
why he expresses his surprise on finding Meriones, a man of arms par
excellence, away from the battlefield. In Book 19 Achilles paints a picture
of Patroclus preparing and serving dinner for the Achaeans before the
battle; it is true that in both passages the word κλισίη is used to describe
the place where the person addressed either is present (Meriones) or
116
For the use of family terms in the funeral laments of the Iliad, see Ebbott (1999) 17.
2.2 The Praising Address 35
depicted (Patroclus),117 but the situation is very different. In the first case
both interlocutors are alive and present in the hut; the speech belongs to a
long series of exchanges between Idomeneus and Meriones. On the other
hand, following the death of Patroclus only Achilles can possibly be
physically present in the second case. Moreover, Idomeneus interprets
Meriones' coming to the hut either as a result of his wounding or because
he is bringing some message (ήέ τι βέβληαι, βέλεος δέ σε τείρει άκωκή, /
ήέ τε' άγγελίης μετ' εμ' ήλυθες;),"8 whereas Achilles is lamenting Patroclus
and recalling a familiar scene when his friend was alive, in the hut, pre-
paring dinner before the battle. One can thus see how the personal lament
shapes the meaning of the genitive έταίρων. The intimacy element that
emerges here to highlight the peaceful side of Patroclus is consonant with the
situation we encounter when we look at the initial addresses inaugurating
the personal laments of Hecuba and Helen in Book 24. There we hear the
genitives δαέρων and παίδων which, as other terms pointing to the
relation of the deceased to the mourner, show that the personal laments
use terms of familiarity and endearment. As a speech form uttered by the
next of kin or close friends, they stress first the mourner-deceased re-
lationship and then the impact of the loss on the entire community the
dead once belonged to. Patroclus' preeminent position among Achilles'
friends is, of course, a key-theme for the entire epic. Yet here it is treated in
a special way, being explained via personal memories such as the deceased's
gentleness and almost maternal role as one who cared, probably more
than anybody else, for his fellow comrades."9
The two initial addresses in the personal laments of Hecuba and Helen
in Book 24 share a number of similarities: they both begin with Hector's
name in the vocative and continue with the expression έμφ θυμφ. Metrical
reasons determine the positioning of the genitive to denote the class of
people the mourner considers the deceased to have been part of. In the
personal lament by Hecuba, this genitive comes at the end, whereas in that
by Helen it appears immediately after the phrase έμφ θυμφ. Consequently,
the word πάντων modifies the genitives παίδων and δαέρων.
Another common element is the adverb πολύ, which intensifies the
117
Cf. 13. 253 (ένί κλισί,-ησι) and 19. 316 (évi κλισίη) respectively.
118
See 13. 251-252.
See Shay (1995) 44-49.
36 Chapter 2
comparison and the phrase φίλτατε + genitive plural placed at the verse-
end. In these cases, the formula έμφ κεχαρισμένε θυμφ used as an
introductory address in non-personal lament speeches has been changed;
the participle κεχαρισμένε has been dropped and the vocative of the
adjective φίλος in the superlative has taken its placé. I have already pointed
to the fact that in the Iliad, this vocative is only used in the personal
lament initial addresses to the dead and in the case of Idomeneus' speech
to Meriones. This would seem to indicate the sharing of a common
pattern, but it is also obvious that the more ritual the context120 in which a
γόος is uttered, the more typical the form of the initial address. In these two
last cases, all the typical elements detected above are present: the praising
tone, use of family terms, the dative of reference and an intensifying
expression.
2.3 The "Comparison"
The "Comparison" is a device employed in almost eveiy personal lament

of the poem.121 It implicitly contains an agonistic element in narrative
form pointing to praise.122 Praise is one of the basic constituents of epic
poetry, as κλέα άνδρών became the subject of praise in the bardic tradition
before being monumentalized in epic poetry. The "Comparison"
originates from the same tradition of praise poetry employed in the ritual
connected with the cults of the dead. It is under these circumstances that
there was a perceived need to recount how in his lifetime the dead had
excelled among others.
In Andromache's personal lament for Hector in 6. 407-439, the
"Comparison" occupies the lengthy, central part of the speech. Hector
120
The ritual context is determined by the fulfillment of certain basic requirements of
the entire lamentation process: the lamentation takes place around the body of the
deceased and comprises two distinct and consecutive parts, the γόος and the θρήνος,
each expressed antiphonally, whereby the laments by individual mourners
(professionals or the next of kin) are answered by the cries of a chorus.
121
Of the total corpus of Iliadic personal laments (12 speeches), 9 contain a
"Comparison".
122
This agonistic element reflects the mourner's perception of the deceased as superior
to others belonging to an equivalent group of people designated as the έταΐρος (Pa-
troclus) or the family itself (Hector).
2.3 The "Comparison" 37
shines among everybody else by embodying almost every family relation

Andromache can possibly have. In this case, the "Comparison" refers to
other losses of dear ones she has suffered in the past, rather than to the
dear ones themselves. In a very effective digression, we hear about the
losses of her father, brother and mother;123 it is thus only too natural that
Hector means everything to her, that he determines her whole existence.
In this second part we also hear a short story about her father Eetion, who
was killed by Achilles, a story that is usually connected to the "Comparison"
theme.
In her γόος for Achilles in 18. 52-64, Thetis gives to the "Comparison"
a surprising form. Instead of comparing Achilles with other heroes, she
praises his excellence by elaborating on her self-representation in
"Achillean" terms. That is to say, Thetis addresses her pitiable self by
using an epithet (δυσαριστοτόκεια) which refers to both of them, its first
part to the mother and its second part to the son. Achilles' destined death
brings her pain and suffering (59-60: δυσ-) but his manhood is excellent,
that of a noble warrior to whom she has given birth (55-57: άριστοτό-
κεια).124 Thetis seems to be willing to make this point quite clear, which is
why she devotes almost three lines to explaining this epithet.125
This disguised form of the "Comparison" is expanded by referring to
Achilles' ability on the battlefield, rather than to previous and present
125
Cf. Briseis' γόος in 19. 287-300. She too has lost her husband and it was Patroclus
who used to tell her that she would marry Achilles when they returned to Phthia. Here
it seems that the poet has invented the death of Andromache's mother at the hands of
Artemis ad hoc; it remains unexplained for the simple reason that the poet wants to
present Andromache as a complete orphan for whom Hector is all that has been left
in the world. Together with Apollo, Artemis usually brings sudden death, as in the
case of the children of Niobe in Book 24 of the Iliad. On death coming from the
arrows of Artemis and Apollo, see Clarke (1999) 257-259. On the origins of Apollo's
death-bringing function in comparison with the Semitic Reshep, see Schretter (1974)
174-215 and Burkert (1985) 145-147 (I owe this information to Clarke 1999, 257, ft.
58 and 258, ft. 59).
124
Cf. Schadewaldt (1959 2 ) 250, who thinks that through this neat word-analysis the
poet links the past, temporally pointing to Achilles' excellence in the battlefield, to
the future, which determines his death away from home.
125
Compound epithets having the prefix δυο- as their first element are recurrent in epic
poetry, and when they occur in speeches they often lend the passage a sharp tone.
Other such epithets are δυσάμμορος (22. 428) and Δύσπαρι (3. 39; 13. 769), which
are found only in speeches.
38 Chapter 2
sufferings or losses of dear ones. As a masked "Comparison", it is verbalized

by a gradatio (αΰξησις): άμύμονά τε κρατερόν τε / εξοχον ηρώων, in
which the first two epithets characterize Achilles without any comparison
and the third makes him excel among heroes as the best warrior. Yet
again, this is consonant with the second part of the compound δυσαρι-
στοτόκεια, which (άριστο-) also insists on a comparison. The "Compa-
rison"-theme undergoes an unexpected change as it is at first condensed
into a single epithet and then analyzed in three lines with a mutual impact
on both Thetis and Achilles.
The "Comparison" is often used to differentiate the deceased from
others who either belong to the same group of people (warriors) or share
a common bond with the lamenter (brothers, husband). In Andromache's
lament in Book 24 the "Comparison" takes another surprising form. It is
not Hector who is compared to others, but the pain his death has caused.
The lamenter (Andromache) has suffered the greatest pain (24. 742: έμοί
δε μάλιστα λελείψεται αλγεα λυγρά) compared to the people of Troy (740)
and Hector's parents (741).
Hecuba's personal lament in 24. 748-759 implicitly points to the fact
that Hector's preeminence in life dictates the significance of his death.
The "Comparison" is fully developed following an allusion (748: φίλτα-
τε) to the comparison she is going to use. Achilles would sell (πέρνασχ')
Hecuba's other sons if he arrested them, but was determined not to spare
Hector and so, when he killed him, he dragged his body around the tomb
of Patroclus (754-756). Hecuba does not mention any other of her sons by
name126, their anonymity serving to underline Hector's uniqueness even
more.127
126
Macleod (1982) 153 rightly argues: "If Hecuba does not here recall the other sons
Achilles killed, that is to stress his savagery against Hector". One should notice how
the pronoun σέο in the beginning of line 754 contrasts with άλλους in 751, thus
underlying the difference between Hector and her other sons. Here she is of course
referring to the sons that Achilles sold before the death of Patroclus, as in 11. 104-
106; 21. 34-44, 57-58, 76-79; 22. 45, since after his friend's death he did not spare
anyone.
127
The "Comparison" contained in Hecuba's speech becomes the vehicle for the
development of a theme that lends a certain distinctiveness to the personal lament,
despite the typical deployment of its structural micro-units. Hecuba could have
restricted herself to saying that Hector was the dearest among her sons; nevertheless,
she gives the outline of the story dominating the last part of the Iliad with a focus on
2.4 Common Fate 39
Helen (24. 762-775) stresses that Hector was special, because of all
her kin in Troy, he never insulted her, but used his gentleness and his
gentle words (άγανοφροσύνη and άγανοΐς έπέεσι) to protect her. This
special relationship between the mourner and the deceased is expressed
by a "subtle and expressive construction'"28 involving: a) the repetition of
σύ... ofj... σοΐς (771-772) preceded by the emphatic σέ' (767), which brings
Hector into the foreground and shows the impact of his loss for her; b) the
creation of a circular verbal structure in the form of a κύκλος,129 where the
fact that Hector knew how to use words to protect Helen is stressed. The
"Comparison" used by Helen is untypical, even idiosyncratic. Instead of
explicitly praising Hector, she insists on his divergence from the behavior
of others towards her. Whenever somebody insulted her, he would come
to her assistance. In this way, the "Comparison" acquires new, surprising
dimensions, it becomes situation-based rather than person-dependent. The
effect of this idiosyncratic "Comparison" is not to be underestimated; by
giving the circumstantial coordinates of Hector's kindness, Helen
highlights the picture of Hector as a man "with a delicate understanding
for a woman's sad lot".130
2.4 Common Fate
The theme of common fate is a typical element of the Iliadic personal

laments.131 The mourner offers a grim picture of his/her life running
parallel to that of the beloved one he/she is lamenting. The principal idea
behind the use of this theme is that mourner and deceased have to be
Hector's involvement. Hector killed Patroclus, Achilles killed Hector and dragged his
body around his companion's grave, thus emphasizing that he will not bring back
Patroclus. This brief story is an extension or elaboration of the "Comparison"- it
gives the speaker the opportunity to render the comparison more vivid through use of
detail, as he reminds his audience of the events that preceded and actually caused the
lament.
128
Cf. Macleod (1982) 155.
129
Cf. Denniston (1954) 90.
130
Deichgräber (1972) 81.
131
Fingerle (1939) 167 implies that the use of family terms (τέκνον: 22. 431; άνερ: 24.
725) expresses the personal relationship between the lamenter and the person who is
lamented.
40 Chapter 2
presented as if their lives have always been closely connected; within the
ritual framework of the lament they are not separate individuals, but parts
of a whole linked by the inseparable bonds of fate.132
What is really at work here is a transformation process engendered by
the lament. One of the basic goals that the funeral lament attempts to
fulfill is the communalization of grief. This is a mental process leading to
some sort of healing achieved by turning what is personal into public, by
making the loss of a beloved one known to the whole community. The
externalization of suffering may have a therapeutic force, as it shifts the
focus of pain from the individual to the group.133 The traumatic
consequences caused by death will be longer-lasting and more severe if
death is marginalized, kept in secret and not shared by the members of the
community. The mourner needs to assimilate himself/herself with the
experience of the dead person, because in this way grief can heal the
internal wounds caused by the loss of a dear one. The individual uttering
the lament is responsible before the community for achieving this goal;
the motif of common fate shared by both mourner and deceased becomes
the thematic means enabling the mourner to create a figurative cohesion
between himself/herself and the deceased.134 This cohesion may very well
be something made up by the mourner to deal ad hoc with the necessity
of the lament. On the other hand, the same motif encompasses a wide
range of beliefs underscoring the key role of the funeral lament as a unify-
ing social factor within the framework of the community.
Andromache's γόος-speech in 22. 477-514 insists from the very
beginning on the fact that Hector and Andromache share a common fate:
Holst-Warhaft (1992) 71-73 shows how the popularity of a lament is based on the
way the mourner "manipulates traditional structures to make her private pain and
anger a generalized or communal reflection on death" (71). The author is right to
suggest that "the lamenter herself has become both an instrument of fate and Fate
herself' (73). The importance of fate for the Greek lament is reflected in the use of
the term μοιρολόι ( < μοίρα + λέγω: speaking one's fate rather than μυρολογώ: to
anoint with perfume, see Schmitt 1901,6-12) to designate traditional funeral laments
in Modern Greece. Sultan (1999) 107-108, n. 46 talks about "a 'voice' inherent in
women's lamentation", emphasizing the traditional Greek view of the inescapability
of fate. The fullest treatment of the subject is Alexiou (2002) 110, 116. See also
Holst-Warhaft (1992) 40-42.
Holst-Warhaft (1992) 73.
1M
Ebbott (1999) 5-7.
2.4 Common Fate 41
«Έκτορ, έγώ δύστηνος· ίη άρα γεινόμεθ' αί'ση

άμφότεροι, σύ μέν έν Τροίη Πριάμου κατά δώμα,
αύτάρ έγώ Θήβησιν υπό Πλάκψ ύληέσση
έν δόμφ Ήετίωνος, ô μ' ετρεφε τυτθόν έοΰσαν,
δύσμορος αΐνόμορον ώς μή ώφελλε τεκέσθαι.
νΰν δέ σύ μέν ρ' Άΐδαο δόμους υπό κεύθεσι γαίης
ερχεαι, αύτάρ έμέ στυγερω ένί πένθεϊ λείπεις
χήρην έν μεγάροισι. πάϊς δ' έτι νήπιος αύτως,
δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι· ούτε σύ τούτψ
εσσεαι, "Εκτορ ονειαρ, έπεί θάνες, ούτε σοι ούτος.»
"Hektor, I grieve for you. You and I were born to a single

destiny, you in Troy in the house of Priam, and I
in Thebe, underneath the timbered mountain of Plakos
in the house of Eëtion, who cared for me when I was little,
ill-fated he, I ill-starred. I wish he had never begotten me.
Now you go down to the house of Death in the secret places
of the earth, and left me here behind in the sorrow of mourning,
a widow in your house, and the boy is only a baby
who was born to you and me, the unfortunate. You cannot help him,
Hektor, any more, since you are dead. Nor can he help you."
After the initial address to the deceased, an "Ι" (έγώ) shifts the focus
to the poor widow, the part to the trochaic caesura of the first line being
shared by both dead and mourner. Moreover, the idea of sharing a common
fate is reinforced in the second part of the same verse by If) and stressed
by άμφότεροι at the beginning of the next line. The emphasis then turns
to the present (νυν), with further references to Hector, Andromache and
their son. This is the art of pain, whereby the lament offers the mourner
the opportunity to weep for her own broken fate and release personal
sorrows.
The Iliad has used this traditional feature of lament performance to
weave a special narrative thread around Hector, Andromache and their
son, Astyanax, all of whom become a compositional unit and are treated
as such. It can now be better understood why whenever the Iliad refers to
one of them in a non-battle context, it has to refer to the others. This
technique is not to be underestimated, the more so since it helps the epic
unfold one of the key-themes of the entire poem: the tragedy of Hector.
42 Chapter 2
2.5 The "Death-Wish"
The "Death-Wish" is a typical feature of Iliadic personal laments. The

mourner's wish to die along with the mourned person has a double origin;
it may emanate from the diction of blame -here acquiring an auto-
referential tone- but it may equally well be a desperate cry of the
individual who cannot deem life worthwhile without the presence of
his/her beloved one.
In order to explore the full depth of meanings innate in a "Death-
Wish", one has to consider its function and significance first as a type of
self-reproach and opprobrium, and second as a manifestation of an
inseparable bond between mourner and deceased.
By uttering a "Death-Wish" and virtually wishing his/her own death,
the speaker figuratively holds himself/herself responsible for the loss of
the beloved one. The incomprehensibility of death as a phenomenon
beyond human control makes the living transform grief into blame, blame
into anger, and anger, in our case, into a peculiar form of revenge and
punishment, one not directed towards others but towards one's own self.
This may very well be an entrenched way of being or even an emotional
escape from the intense suffering the mourner is experiencing. Holst-
Warhaft interprets blaming (as well as naming and fixing in a landscape)
in terms of the effort made by the individual to give order to pain and thus
gain control over it.135 This strenuous attempt to contextualize a flow of
painful feelings, to make them concrete and tangible, acquires a special
form in the case of the Iliadic γόος-speeches, the "Death-Wish". At the
same time, the way this form of self-blame is expressed -by an unfulfilled
wish- reveals its paradoxical nature. This observation is of prime
importance for understanding the inner doing and undoing of the
lamenter's self. By employing this self-effacing unattainable wish, the
mourner dies although still alive; he does not experience a physical death
but dies within the poetic reality of the performance.
The self-blame tone of a "Death-Wish" can be seen in Agamemnon's
γόος for Menelaus (4. 155-182), in Achilles' lament for Patroclus (19.
315-337) and in Helen's funeral lament for Hector (24. 762-775). Aga-
memnon wishes that the wide earth would open to take him (4.182: τότε
'» Holst-Warhaft (1992) 73.

2.5 The "Death-Wish' 43
μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών), because he regards himself as responsible for the
loss of his brother. In Achilles' lament for Patroclus, the mourner regards
his friend's death as the greatest disaster that could fall upon him (19. 321 :
οΰ μέν γάρ τι κακώτερον άλλο πάθοιμι). Patroclus was Achilles' θεράπων
as long as he was on his side but when he goes to battle on his own he
ceases to be his ritual substitute, his surrogate.136 Patroclus' death was
therefore "the wrong death, his substitution unintended".13' Helen (24.
764) wishes that she had died before being brought to Troy by Alexandras
(ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι), because she holds herself responsible for the
troubles inflicted upon both Achaeans and Trojans. These death-wishes
show clear traces of a self-blaming tone that blots out the distinction
between self and other and results in self-condemnation and guilt.
In other cases, the "Death-Wish" may serve more to hint at the
emotional contiguity between mourner and deceased. The wish to die may
reflect the utter desperation of the lamenter and his complete loss of
interest in life. Here self-blame is absent - it is deep affection and a sense
of proximity based on kinship or companionship that determines the
outburst of inconsolable grief resulting in such a profound self-destructive
desire.
Andromache's lament in 6.407-439 contains a "Death-Wish" emanating
from her utter desperation at foreseeing Hector's death. In 6. 410-411, she
says to Hector that "it would be far better to sink into the earth when I
have lost you" (έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον ε'ίη / σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι).
This "Death-Wish" is not due to Andromache's guilt, but to the close
connection with her husband that makes life without him incompre-
hensible.
In Priam's γόος for Hector (22. 416-428), the "Death-Wish" refers to
the deceased rather than to the mourner himself. By wishing that Hector
had died in his own hands (22. 426: ώς δφελεν θανέειν έν χερσίν έμησιν),
Priam expresses his pain and suffering through adoption of a stance that
"considers" another option. He does not wish that he had died in advance
so as not to experience the tragic loss of his beloved son, but wishes a
"better death" for Hector, a death without the humiliation caused by
Achilles' maltreatement of Hector's body. The self-referential tone, which
134
Nagy (1979)292-295.
Shay (1995) 70.
44 Chapter 2
is a typical feature of a "Death-Wish", is here expressed indirectly, aiming

at fulfilling the need for lamentation on the side of the mourner(s). As
Priam makes clear in the two following lines (22. 427-428: τώ κε κορεσ-
σάμεθα κλαίοντέ τε μυρομένω τε | μήτηρ θ', ή μιν ετικτε δυσάμμορος, ήδ'
έγώ αυτός), if Hector had died in his father's hands, then his parents
"would have glutted themselves with weeping for him and mourning".138
2.6 Past and Present
The antithesis between past and present constitutes one of the starkest
contrasts found in the Iliadic γόος-speeches. Like the antiphonal element,
it reflects a binary opposition or antithetical thought,139 lying at the heart
of the concept of death and consequently of the lament. In the Iliadic
personal laments it is often expressed through the polarity created
between a reference to the past and a switch to the present through use of
the adverb νϋν, the whole opposition being highlighted by the word ζωός
uttered in contrast to different forms of the verb άποθνήσκω. The kernel
of this motif is the more general theme of the disparity between the
happiness the deceased enjoyed during his lifetime and the grimness of
his death.
In Briséis' γόος-speech for Patroclus in 19. 287-300, the mourner uses
the contrast between life and death, placing it within the foil of past versus
present:
ζωόν μέν σε ελειπον έγώ κλισίηθεν ίοϋσα,

νϋν δέ σε τεθνηώτα κιχάνομαι, ορχαμε λαών,
I left you alive when I went away from the shelter,

but now I come back, lord of the people, to find you have fallen.
(19. 288-289)
The same typical elements are found in Achilles' antiphonal lament in 19.
315-337:
1,8
Adapted from Lattimore's translation (1951).
159
Alexiou (2002) 150-160.
2.6 Past and Present 45
ή ρά νύ μοί ποτε και σύ, δυσάμμορε, φίλταθ' εταίρων,

αυτός ένί κλισί,η λαρόν παρά δεΐπνον εθηκας
αιψα και ότραλέως, οπότε σπερχοίατ' 'Αχαιοί
Τρωσίν έφ' Ιπποδάμοισι φέρειν πολύδακρυν άρηα·
νυν δέ σύ μέν κεισαι δεδαϊγμένος, αύτάρ έμόν κήρ
ακμηνον πόσιος και έδητύος ένδον εόντων,
ofj ποθη.
There was a time, ill fated, o dearest of all my companions,

when you yourself would set the desirable dinner before me
quickly and expertly, at the time the Achaians were urgent
to carry sorrowful war on the Trojans, breakers of horses.
But now you lie here torn before me, and my heart goes starved
for meat and drink, though they are here beside me, by reason
of longing for you. (19.315-321)
As Patroclus was serving Achilles in their hut, so now Achilles is

abstaining from food and drink, despite the fact that he has supplies in his
tent (ένδον εόντων). Food and drink was a bond between the two friends,
a common activity they shared in the past; now that one of them cannot
share this activity, the other must also abstain from it.
In Hecuba's γόος in 22. 431-436, the lamenter offers a laconic yet
powerful contrast between past and present by reference to Hector's
honor when he was alive, as opposed to his implicit loss of that honor now
that he lies dead (435-436: since in truth you were their high honour /
while you lived. Now death and fate have closed in upon you). Moreover,
past and present here allude to the opposition between male κλέος and
female γόος, the former referring to the past and the latter to the present.
Hector is no longer a source of glory and honor for the Trojans, but the
female lament, the γόος uttered by his mother, will confer on him the
praise he deserves.140
140
See Sultan (1991) 153-169 and Holst-Warhaft (1992) 110-111.
46 Chapter 2
2.7 Tripartite Structure
Most Iliadic γόοι have a three-part structure: address to the dead, narrative
and renewed address.141 Tripartite structure may be a reflection in the
internal organization within the personal lament of the tripartite form of
the entire funeral, which comprises the prothesis, the ekphora, and finally
the deposition of the cremated or inhumed remains of the dead. Studies of
later forms of Greek lament have shown that this is a widely attested
feature,142 which must thus refer to some general perception of the lament
rather than to the survival of some ancient lyric form organized in stanzas
and derived from the νόμος.143
The funeral laments of Andromache, Hecuba and Helen exemplify
their three-part internal order in a strictly typical manner. They are the
only ones in the poem with a true ritual character, since they are uttered
at Hector's funeral.
The first part of Andromache's lament in 24. 725-745 referring to
Hector (725-732) starts with an address to her dead husband (άνερ), whose
body is lying in front of her. The second (732-740) contains a narrative
serving to foreshadow the grim future awaiting Astyanax and Andro-
mache herself,144 while the third (741-745) refers again to Hector.145
Hecuba's γόος (24. 748-759) begins with an expanded address to
Hector, whose name stands emphatically stressed in verse-initial position
and occupies the whole first line (748).146 In the second part of her lament,
Hecuba develops what has been called a "Comparison";147 the mourner
141
Holst-Warhaft (1992) 112.
'« Holst-Warhaft (1992) 112.
143
See van Leutsch (1857) 33 if., who had argued that each one of the three laments by
Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in II. 24 had been composed of four three-line strophes
(athetizing the lines which did not fit his pattern) and originated from the ancient
ν ό μ ο ς that was also composed in hexameters and addressed to the gods. He even tried
to identify in those laments the three constituent parts o f the νόμος, namely the άρχή,
the ο μ φ α λ ό ς and the σφρηγίς. His claims were rejected by Peppmiiller (1872).
144
The second part o f Andromache's lament starts with an address to Astyanax, "no
longer the dead man, as is normal in laments. The baby boy is clearly not with her,
which enhances the rhetorical and pathetic effect", Macleod (1982) 151 rightly argues.
145
The third part o f Andromache's lament begins with a line that is typical in laments
and epitaphs and renews the initial address to the deceased by using his name.
146
Note how 748 and 762 are recalling each other.
147
Lohmann (1970) 103.
2.8 Ring-composition 47
wants to compare the dead person to others and stresses the fact that the
deceased was exceptional, clearly outshining all others, which is why his
loss is of particular importance. After this narrative section, Hecuba returns
to consideration of Hector's present state as he lies dead in front of her.
Helen's lament in 24. 762-775 also follows the same three-fold
structural pattern. She begins her lament by using a "praising address" to
single out Hector for praise among her brothers-in-law and then (762-
766) summarizes her past life. In the second part (767-772), she implicitly
compares Hector with the rest of the Trojans and stresses his specialness
for her. Hector -and Priam- never insulted her, but would even use
gentleness and gentle words (άγανοφροσύνη and άγανοΐς έπέεσσι) to
protect her. In the third part of her γόος Helen does not repeat her initial
address to Hector, but returns to the lament theme. Deceased and mourner
are (773) united in their fate. Helen is not only crying for Hector but also
for herself, since his death will inevitably result in the deterioration of her
already grim position in Troy.
2.8 Ring-composition
Ring-composition14" is frequently149 used in the Iliadic personal laments as

an alternative to the other two structural patterns attested in Homeric
speeches, namely parallel composition and free expansion.150 The center
of the ring-composition within a speech is the place where a more or less
narrative element is developed. This acute observation can be applied to
the personal laments as well, with a necessary addition.151 The center of
148
For ring-composition in Homer, see van Otterlo (1944a) 192-207, (1944b), (1948);
van Groningen (1958) 51-56; Whitman (1958); Gaisser (1969) 1-43; Lohmann (1970)
12-30 and passim, (1988); Thalmann (1984) 1-32; Gordesiani (1986) 26-67; Richardson
(1993) 1-19; Minchin (2001) 181-202.
149
In 10 out of 12 Iliadic personal laments (see Table 1). Minchin (2001) 202 carefully
distinguishes between "occasional patterns which occur automatically in natural
discourse" and "premeditated patterns of reference and repetition across long
stretches of discourse". Minchin is right that in the case of Homer we are essentially
dealing with the former, but I disagree with the notion that we should not regard those
rings as ring composition (202).
See Lohmann (1970) and (1999) 239-257.
151
Lohmann (1999) 249.
48 Chapter 2
the ring-composition with its narrative character is here occupied by the

"Comparison", a special form the narrative element acquires within the
framework of a γόος speech. On the other hand, the outer rings (in ring-
composition) typically express a rather descriptive element. Here, we are
dealing with a case of mirroring that reflects the general tendencies of
Homeric narrative architecture where we encounter progressive and
descriptive passages. The former push forward the action, while the latter
with their digressive kernel express moments of narrative rest. The
narrative element is of key importance because "the hallmark of ring-
composition is not verbatim correspondence, but thematical connection".152
Thetis' γόος for Achilles (18. 52-64) clearly shows how ring-composi-
tion is used both to emphasize the central part of the speech (the mother's
pain for her son) and to create a correspondence between the outer rings
which push the action forward (Thetis and the Nereids will meet with
Achilles):
a. 52-53: Thetis addresses the Nereids and orders them to come and
listen to her suffering (εί'δετ' άκούουσαι, οσ' έμψ ενι κήδεα θυμφ)
b. 54: exclamation of suffering, ending with a significant self-cha-
racterization (δυσαριστοτόκεια), whose two components (δυσ- and άρι-
στοτόκεια) will be explained in the next lines
bl. 55-59: explanation of άριστοτόκεια
b2. 59-62: explanation of δυσ- in Thetis' and Achilles' terms
a' 63-64: Thetis expresses her intention to go and listen to his sorrow
(άλλ' ειμ', οφρα ϊδωμι φίλον τέκος ήδ' έπακούσω, / δττί μιν ϊκετο πένθος
άπό πτολέμοιο μένοντα).
2.9 The Antiphonal Element
The antiphonal element refers to the specifics of personal lament

performance as represented by the Iliad. The most elaborate description
of antiphonal organization in the Iliadic γόοι can be seen in the pre-
sentation of the funeral laments by Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in
Iliad 24. After the singing of the θρήνος by the professional mourners and
the responsive cries of a chorus of women,153 it is the time for the
152
Lohmann (1999) 250.
153
The use of the verbs στενάχω and στένω in the formulaic closure of the personal
2.9 The Antiphonal Element 49
deceased's kin to have their share in the lamentation. Each female

mourner utters a γόος and then her speech is capped by the refrain of a
chorus of female mourners. The whole scene may be schematically
represented as follows:
• A. Professional mourners (θρήνος)
• A'. Female chorus
• Bl. Andromache (γόος)
• Bl'. Female chorus
• B2. Hecuba (γόος)
• B2'. Female chorus
• B3. Helen (γόος)
• B3\ Chorus of the entire Trojan people
Alexiou talks of the existence of a simple strophic pattern (Ax Ax Ax),
which she accounts for as follows: "the predominance of the solo laments
with refrain and the choral laments in the earlier period ... by the tendency
of epic to develop the narrative element at the expense of antiphony and
refrain, and of lyric to concentrate on the choral and musical elements".154
Alexiou is right in making such a claim, especially since the epic was an
inappropriate medium for antiphony.155
Antiphony can also generate thematic resemblance, as in the
consecutive γόοι of Briseis and Achilles for Patroclus in 19. 287-300 and
19. 315-337 respectively. In this case, the antiphonal element refers not
only to the external reenactment of the funeral laments, but also to the
responsive nature of the themes both mourners unravel:
laments (έπΐ δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες) probably refers to the repetition of cries. See
Reiner (1938) 31-33; Alexiou (2002) 134-135; Kornarou (2001) 22.
Alexiou (2002) 132.
155
The κομμός of Greek tragedy was sung antiphonally by one or two actors and the
chorus, and had a rather complex (AA BB CC DD etc.) structure. See Alexiou (2002)
223 and Kornarou (2001) 41-50. The solid framework of epic genre restrictions was
inadequate for such a schema, for in epic we only have solo speech. One way in
which archaic epic attempted to deal with this problem was by verbalising the
thoughts and feelings of the troops. As it could not make them speak together, it
invented the τις-speeches, which were uttered by anonymous soldiers but expressed
the mental and emotional preoccupations of the whole army. The same device could
not be used in the case of the γόοι, because funeral practice had made the use of a
chorus of mourners a necessary condition for its poetic reenactment.
50 Chapter 2
a. Opposition between a blissful past when Patroclus was alive and a

painful present after his death (287-289 & 315-321 respectively);
b. Reference to other sufferings experienced by both mourners (290-
294 & 321-327 respectively);
a'. Personal hopes for a better future, which have been shattered (295-
300 & 328-337).
These two lament speeches form a unit in which antiphony and ring-
composition are brilliantly orchestrated around the typical motifs used by
the Iliadic γόοι, thus offering an alternative to the triadic representation of
the ritualistic and ritual laments in Books 22 and 24 respectively.
The above examination of the Iliadic γόοι typology has shown the
existence of certain typical elements creating a thematic coherence between
the speeches of this category.
The praising address to the deceased and the "Comparison " reflect the
importance of praise for the fallen warrior, a theme which is consonant with
the basic preoccupations of epic poetry in general. The "Death-Wish" and
the antithesis between past and present fall within the category of anti-
thetical thought, which is a typical mode of ordering and constructing
pain in Greek culture of all times. Together with the motif of sharing a
common fate the above modes mirror the mourner's wish to create an
inseparable bond with the deceased, to negate the veiy idea of death by
assimilating himself/herself with his/her beloved one. Finally, the Iliadic
γόοι share some common features with regard to structural organization,
such as tripartite structure, ring-composition and antiphonal form. The
first two refer to the inner disposition of thematic elements, whereas the
third relates to the external mode of presentation, i.e. to performance.
2.9 The Antiphonal Element 51
Table 1: Reference of Typical Features156

in the Iliadic Personal Laments
Pers. L a m BK PA c CF DW P-P TS RC Ant
l.Ag-M 4 0 0 X X 0 X χ χ
2. A n d - H c t 6 O X X X X 0 0 0
3. T h - A c h 18 0 X 0 0 X X χ χ
4. A c h - P 18 0 0 X 0 X o 0 χ
5. B r - P 19 X X X o X χ χ χ
6. A c h - P 19 X X X 0 X χ χ χ
7. P r - H c t 22 0 X X X X χ χ χ
8. H e c - H c t 22 0 0 X X X χ χ χ
9. A n d - H c t 22 0 0 X X X χ χ χ
10. A n d - H c t 24 X X X 0 X χ χ χ
11. H e c - H c t 24 X X 0 0 X χ χ χ
12. H e l - H c t 24 X X X X X χ χ χ
136
Abbreviated symbols: X = Presence; O = Absence; Pers. Lam = Personal Laments;
BK = Book (of the Iliad)·, PA = Praising Address; C = "Comparison"; CF = Common
Fate; DW = Death-Wish; P-P = Past/Present contrast; TS = Tripartite Structure; RC
= Ring-composition; Ant = Antiphonal element.
Chapter 3
Introductory and Closing Formulas
3.1 Speech-formulas, speech-classification

and γόος-speeches
Every single direct speech in the Homeric poems is anticipated by an

introduction -of vaiying length- and capped by a closure; taken together,
these encircle the speech, creating a visible and audible frame. The
introduction and the closure are often formulaic in nature, which is to say
they are both expressed by phrases frequently encountered throughout the
poems. There are of course exceptions; some speech introductions occur
only once or twice, since they are designed and created for the particular
context in which they are placed.
In general, an introduction gives us some information about the nature
of the speech that is to follow. Boiling1" separated speech introductions
into three types: a) the "brief' one, where the introductory verb speaks of
"the tone, the contents, or the purpose of the speech"; b) the "full" type,
where an explicit verb of speaking is used and c) a third type, where the
introductory verse is accompanied by additional information about the
speaker, and often by a second introduction before the actual words.
Edwards158 made a different categorization: a) introductions with verbs of
general sense; b) introductions with a verb of specific sense; c) anomalous
forms. Both scholars based their classification on the type of verb used in
the introductory line(s); such an approach is no doubt very useful for
dealing with speech introductions per se. But when we examine the latter
in relation to the speeches that follow, we have to consider both the
content and other textual markers pointing to the nature of the speech. For
although introductory formulas look alike or are very similar in form
157
See Boiling (1922) 213-221.
'» Edwards (1970) 1-36.
54 Chapter 3
(with undoubted genetic relations between them), they may nevertheless

represent different stages in a semantic evolution which to some extent
determines their functional use. The textualization of formulaic
introductions shows traces of a process that lasted throughout the period
of their shaping within the oral tradition of epic poetry.15' It has been
argued that the origin of these introductions and closures must be traced
back to the oral background of the Homeric text.160 A modern printed text
is primarily visual; the author has a number of means at his disposal to
note the passage from direct to indirect speech. But in the case of Homer,
in a formative "pan-Hellenic" era with no written texts,161 the performing
singer and the tradition lying behind him had to invent stereotypical
expressions in order to mark the beginning and the end of a speech. This
resulted in a whole system of speech introductions and closures, which
are highly formulaic precisely because they had to be repeated so often in
poems consisting largely of speeches -45% of the Iliad is character-text,
i.e. speeches.162
Following the path laid out by Beck,163 who has recently studied
variation in Homeric speech frames, we will examine certain variations,
insertions and expansions of personal lament speech introductions and
closures and the way they contribute to telling the story effectively.
139
See Muñoz Valle (1971) 39, 305-314.
160
See. Combellack (1939) 12, 43-56 and de Jong (1987b) 195-197.
161
SeeNagy (1996b) 110.
162
Scholars have approached speech-formulas either from a semantic point of view,
focusing their interest specifically on the formulaic introduction επος τ' εφατ' έκ χ'
όνόμαζεν and επεα πτερόεντα (Jacobsohn 1935, 132-140; Calhoun 1935, 215-227;
Couch 1937, 129-140; Muñoz Valle 1971, 305-314; Vivante 1975, 1-12), or from a
genetic one (Parry 1937, 59-63; Krarup 1941, 230-247; Fournier 1946, 29-68;
Edwards 1970, 1-36; Riggsby 1992, 99-114), where the stress is on the relations and
modifications of the speech-formulas according to the theory of oral composition.
Fingerle (1939) 306-372 adopts a different perspective, since he classifies all the
Homeric speeches, considering both the speech-introduction as well as the type of
speech that follows. See de Jong (1987b) 195-208, who follows a narratological
approach in examining speech-introductions as attributive discourse·, speech-
introductions are of a special interest to her, since they are placed on the borders
between narrator-text (simple and complex) and character-text.
163
Beck (1997).
3.2. Personal lament speech introductions
The Iliadic personal laments have either single or multi-verse introductions.

Of the twelve γόοι attested in the Iliad, six (19. 286; 19. 314; 22. 430; 22.
476; 24. 747; 24. 761) are introduced by single-verses and six (4. 153-
154; 6. 405-406; 18. 50-51, 18. 316-323; 22. 414-415; 24. 723-724) by
multi-verses.
3.2.1 Single-verse introductions
1. είπε δ' άρα κλαίουσα γυνή έϊκυΐα θεησιν (19. 286)

2. μνησάμενος δ' άδινώς άνενείκατο φώνησέν τε (19. 314)
3. Τρψήσιν δ* Ε κ ά β η άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (22. 430)
4. άμβλήδην γοόωσα μετά Τρψήσιν εειπεν (22. 476)
5. τήσιν δ' αυθ' Ε κ ά β η άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (24. 747)
6. τήσι δ' επειθ' Ελένη τριτάτη έξήρχε γόοιο (24. 761)
The formal pattern for speech introductions is: dative + particle +

nominative of the speaker + άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο. Two single-verse
introductions (22. 430, 24. 747) follow it impeccably and one (24. 761)
shows a slight variation: instead of άδινοϋ modifying γόοιο, we get τρι-
τάτη referring to Helen.164 Having examined the different meanings that
άδινός or άδινός has in various environments, Silk has argued that it is an
iconym, "a word that has become obsolete in the speech-community'" 65
and has survived passively, being virtually fossilised in set phrases such
as religious formulas or, one might add, lament terminology. Silk goes on
to say that "with an iconym it is barely possible to separate the question
of 'meaning' from the effect".166 The replacement of άδινοϋ by τριτάτη
highlights an important point in the description of the lamentation
process: Helen laments "third and last".167 The speech introduction thus
makes it clear through slight variation of the traditional formula άδινοϋ
164
άδινοϋ and τριτάτη are metricall equivalent words ( - - -).
See Silk (1983) 303-330 and LSJ9 s.v. άδινοΰ.
'« Silk (1983) 329.
167
See Lattimore 1951 ad loc.
56 Chapter 3
έξήρχε γόοιο that the ritual lament for Hector will come to an end after
Helen's speech.1"
The other three speech introductions display certain similarities, as
they all contain a participle + finite verb -19.314 and 22. 476 also having
an adverb (άδινώς/άμβλήδην). Verse 19. 314 (μνησάμενος δ' άδινώς άνε-
νείκατο φώνησέν τε) introduces Achilles' lament for Patroclus. This is by
no means a typical single-verse introduction to a γόος but on the other
hand, the closure of the speech (19.338-339: ώς εφατο κλαίων, έπί δέ στενά-
χοντο γέροντες | μνησάμενοι, τά έκαστος ένί μεγάροισιν ελειπον) chara-
cterizes it as a personal lament.169 Beck rightly observes that the adverb
άδινώς "makes the link with the language of lament introduction'"70 since
"[t]he word άδινός (adverbial in 314) also appears in the common lament
introduction for women".171 She also points to the participle μνησάμενοι
in verse 339, referring to the old men who accompany Achilles in his
lament, which in turn recalls μνησάμενος used of Achilles in 314. Thus,
the speech introduction, though atypical of a personal lament, contains
features that blend well both with lament terminology and with the actual
storytelling.
Verse 19. 286 (είπε δ' άρα κλαίουσα γυνή έϊκυΐα θεησιν) is another
speech introduction considerably deviating from the formal pattern. On
the other hand, "it contains the important verb κλαίειν and the variation is
probably related to the lack of a noun-epithet expression for 'Briséis'".172
This is certainly true, but the use of γυνή in place of the name Βρισηΐς
may also be due to the fact that a few verses earlier her name has already
168
Thus as the cause of the war, Helen is not only the last person to lament Hector, but
also the last speaker in the entire Iliad. See also our observations on the closure of
this personal lament and the use of the expression δήμος άπειρων (section 3. 3. 1).
169
See Beck (1997) 113.
110
For the expression άδινά στεναχ(ίζειν), see II. 23. 225, 24. 123 and Od. 24. 317,
where it refers only to males. See also Od. 7. 274, where it characterizes the sea
waves.
171
Beck (1997) 113. The word άδινός is also used in the common introduction to a
lament uttered by Achilles (see II. 18. 316 = 23. 17). Pucci (1998) 98, ft. 5 seems to
support the view that άνενείκατο may refer to frequency and pitch of ululation, "a
thick, intense activity, a repeated throbbing". See II. 16. 481 and Od. 19. 516 where
it refers to the "heart" (κήρ).
172
Beck (1997) 113.
been used. Βρισηΐς δ' άρ' επειτ' ίκέλη χρυσή 'Αφροδίτη (19. 282) initiates a
four-verse period ending just before the speech introduction to Briséis'
personal lament. Moreover, the use of γυνή emphatically stresses the
specific capacity in which the speaker will speak. Briseis will do so as a
wife both former and future, as indicated by her references to her dead
husband (295-296) and the promise of a future marriage with Achilles.173
Thus, the use of the term γυνή elevates her status from that of a slave
woman to that of a wife. The speech introduction implies what is to be
explicitly stated in the ensuing speech: Briseis will lament (κλαίουσα)174
as a woman deprived of a husband.173
Finally, 22. 476 (άμβλήδην γοόωσα μετά Τρψησιν εειπεν) is half-way
between serious variation (as in 19.286 and 19. 314) and compliance with
the formal pattern (22. 430; 24. 747; 24. 761). The participle γοόωσα
makes a link with the language of personal lament introductions, but the
Homeric hapax legomenon άμβλήδην (with deep sobs)176 is difficult to
explain. Curiously enough, the previous verses describe in detail how
Andromache almost fell unconscious, άμβλήδην seems to belong to those
corporeal signs of disorder which are typical of the lament, as they
illustrate the mourner's personal crisis, dissolution and figurative death.
Andromache's situation (22. 466-467: την δέ κατ' οφθαλμών έρεβεννη
νύξ έκάλυψεν, | ήριπε δ' έξοπίσω, άπό δέ ψυχήν έκάπυσσεν) is typical of
the mourner's condition when presented as being in the throes of death.
171
See de Jong (1987b) 198.
174
On κλαίειν see the perceptive analysis by Derderian (2001) 24-31. She rightly
observes that "κλαίειν can preface direct speech, but more often appears as a
participle combined with verbs denoting direct speech or lament, suggesting that
κλαίειν refers to 'spontaneous' lament as an accompanying action rather than as a
speech genre of mourning, κλαίειν is a markedly collective activity; apart from a few
informal individual laments, it designates primarily non-verbalized mourning performed
by individuals in collective contexts with group response". She also distinguishes
between the different semantical connotations of άχνυσθαι and όδύρεσθαι, the
former designating "personal motivated grief of individual men within the network
of έταΐροι or kin, a grief which necessitates the consideration of possible action to
resolve the loss" (19) and the latter unifying "the individual psychology and the
conventional activity of mourning" (24). Spatafora (1997) 4 is wrong in asserting that
κλαίειν refers only to non-verbalized lament.
175
On naming married women in Homer, see Higbie (1995) 113-114.
176
This word is rarely found in later authors. See Richardson (1993) 158.
58 Chapter 3
Seremetakis, who has studied the performance of laments for the dead
(μοιρολόγια) in the district of Inner Mani, has observed a similar feature
in the lament process: "Heavy breathing and loss of breath function as
emotional intensifiers in the context of spoken conversations. The word
xepsihisméni means (she is) out of breath, dying, losing the soul (psihf);
soul is equivalent to breath here. The term refers to strenuous activity,
struggle, or fight with death.'"77 Therefore, άμβλήδην γοόωσα signifies
Andromache's passage from life to death and back again, but also
represents a "poeticization of her ritual screaming".1711 By acoustically
violating the linguistic norms of her personal lament, this sob infiltrates
Andromache's language, endowing the speech that ensues with a special
emotional pitch.
3.2.2 Multi-verse introductions
There are six multi-verse introductions to γόος speeches in the Iliad:
1. τοις δέ βαρύ στενάχων μετέφη κρείων Αγαμέμνων,

χειρός εχων Μενέλαον, έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι. (4. 153-154)
2. Ανδρομάχη δέ οί άγχι παρίστατο δάκρυ χέουσα
εν τ' άρα οί φϋ χειρί επος τ' εφατ' εκ τ' όνόμαζεν- (6. 405-406)
3. ...αΐ δ' αμα πάσαι
στήθεα πεπλήγοντο. Θέτις δ' έξήρχε γόοιο· (18. 50-51)
4. τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο,
χείρας έπ' άνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν έταίρου, (18. 316-317)
ώς ο βαρύ στενάχων μετεφώνεε Μυρμιδόνεσσιν (18. 323)

5. πάντας δ' έλλιτάνευε κυλινδόμενος κατά κόπρον,
έξ όνομακλήδην όνομάζων άνδρα εκαστον (22. 414-415)
6. τησιν δ' Ανδρομάχη λευκώλενος ήρχε γόοιο,
Έκτορος άνδροφόνοιο κάρη μετά χερσίν έχουσα· (24. 723-724)179
177
Seremetakis (1991) 117.
178
179
West (1998-2000) ad loc. prefers the reading ίπποδάμοιο instead of άνδροφόνοιο. I
am following the editions of Leaf and Allen, who both have άνδροφόνοιο, as well as
Richardson's commentary (1993) ad loc. See also Beck (1997) 69, ft. 36.
In 4.153-154, the insertion of a single-verse in adding enjamebment (χειρός

εχων Μενέλαον, έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι) lends vividness and pathos to
Agamemnon's lament. The reference to the hands of the mourner, who is
now holding the presumably dead Menelaus, is a recurrent feature of
multi-verse introductions to γόος-speeches.180 In this case reference to
such a vivid detail only occupies the first half of the enjambed verse
(154), the second containing a variation of the closing formula."1
6. 405-406 is linked to lament language only by δάκρυ χέουσα. The
elliptical introduction is due to the non-funeral context within which this
γόος is placed. When the whole scene or context in which the personal
laments are found is less formal, and formulas are placed in an
environment other than the one they have been composed and shaped for,
the formulaic material is also enfeebled.182 Such material consequently
survives through some alteration of form and/or change of position.
In 18. 50-51 (αϊ δ' άμα πάσαι | στήθεα πεπλήγοντο. Θέτις δ' έξήρχε
γόοιο) the first part of the single-verse formulaic pattern has been
replaced183 by στήθεα πεπλήγοντο, while the nominative designating the
speaker comes after the caesura, which is now trochaic rather than
penthemimeral as in the typical formulaic introduction. Moreover, the
epithet άδινοΰ is absent and the line closes with the typical words for γόος
introductions, έξήρχε γόοιο. The beating of one's breast is a typical mourn-
ing sign symbolizing the grief and pain experienced by the mourner.184
180
See also 18. 316-317 and 24. 723-724. Alexiou (2002) 6 notes that touching and
holding the dead forms part of the process of the mourning ritual accompanying the
lament proper. See also Beck (1997) 70, ft. 37.
181
For this variation, see single-verse closures (section 3. 3. 1).
182
"Enfeebled" formulas cannot simply be due to the flexibility of the system sometimes
allowing a portion of a line or two to appear, sometimes two. Flexibility refers to the
entire system, and is unable to explain the high concentration of formulaic
introductions and closures of personal lament speeches within a ritual or ritualistic
framework as opposed to a low concentration within a non-ritual setting. Instances of
high concentration occur at the end of Books 22 and 24 of the Iliad, during the ritual
or ritualistic lamentation for Hector; low concentration is observed in non-ritual γόοι
by Agamemnon for Menelaus in Book 4 and by Andromache for Hector in Book 6.
185
Compare the single-verse formulas introducing a γόος: 18. 316, 22. 430, 24. 723,24.
747, 24. 761.
184
Sometimes mourners make specific gestures which, though not so self-violent as
those performed by the Nereids in II. 18 and Briseis in II. 19, still express their grief
through the use of particular parts of their body; both Achilles in 23. 18 and
60 Chapter 3
Likewise, in 19. 285 we come across an almost identical picture just

before Briséis' personal lament for Patroclus. Briséis scratches or tears
her breast (στήθεα), throat (δειρήν) and face (πρόσωπα); as Pucci has
shown,185 she disfigures her body, and it is this disfigurement that pertains
to a slave-woman and distinguishes her from the other free women. The
verb άμύσσω (to tear) is a hapax for a ritualised passage, whereas
in Thetis' case we find the verb πλήττομαι, which does not refer to
disfigurement but is limited to an intense but not uncontrollable
expression of grief. The scene in which the chorus of the Nereids beat
their breasts is consistent with a ritual mourning and fits the context
within which it is placed well, especially since the Nereids function as the
group of mourners who take over the lament from the slave women (18.
30-31: χερσί δέ πασαι | στήθεα πεπλήγοντο). The long Nereid catalogue
(18. 39-48) preceding the speech introduction to Thetis' γόος gives the
context majestic grandeur, as Thetis, the chief mourner, is surrounded by
numerous divine mourners. The modification of this speech introduction
highlights a significant point in the lament to follow: the exceptionality of
Achilles' γόος is enhanced by the participation of a chorus of divine
mourners, the Nereids who perform the same acts of lamentation for
Achilles (beating of the breast) as the slave women do for Patroclus.
18. 316-323 is a multi-verse passage preceding Achilles' first γόος for
Patroclus. It starts with an initial two-verse speech introduction (18. 316-
317), followed by an expanded simile with a final single-verse
introduction (18. 323) to the lament before Achilles (18. 324 ff.) begins to
speak. The first part of this extended passage contains a two-verse lament
introduction made up of a single-verse formula, representing the common
speech introduction pattern for the γόοι,"6 and a second verse in adding
enjambement. The latter expands the basic idea -someone uttered a γόος-
Andromache in 24. 724 express their grief either by putting the hands on the breast
of the deceased (Achilles) or by holding the dead's head (Andromache).
1,5
See Pucci (1998) 98 and, for a fine parallel reading of the two antiphonal γόοι by
Briséis and Achilles, 97-112.
186
The formula τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξηρχε γόοιο is also attested in 23. 19. Beck
(1997) 122 carefully notes that "[t]here is no structural reason why a simile could not
have appeared in Book 23 as well as in Book 18. But the appearance of the simile
when Achilles first observes the rituals of mourning for Patroclus, and when his grief
is presumably sharpest and strongest, gives the episode special prominence compared
to the later funeral games".
speech- by referring to the laying of the mourner's hands on the chest of

the deceased. The initial two-verse introduction (18. 316-317: τοΐσι δέ Πη-
λείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο, | χείρας έπ' άνδροφόνους θέμενος στήθεσσιν
εταίρου) prepares the audience for a γόος, but this expectation is temporally
suspended by the insertion of a lion simile. The simile functions as a
"point of departure" for the narrator,"7 because it gives him the
opportunity to postpone the utterance of the lament speech for a while and
channel the audience's attention towards the intervening simile, which
significantly contributes to the effectiveness of the storytelling. Achilles
is compared not to a mighty lion that attacks powerless cattle (as it often
happens in Iliadic similes), but to a parent-lion facing the loss of its cubs
to a hunter. Beck has masterfully emphasized the appropriateness of the
analogy for the actual situation Achilles finds himself in: like the lion in
the simile, he has arrived too late to save Patroclus' life, but still tries to
avenge his friend's death, just as a lion might look "in his grief and
anger'"" for the hunter and its cubs.
22. 414-415 poses a special problem, as this speech introduction has
nothing in common either with a personal lament introduction or with
lament language in general. Beck correctly observes that "the language of
this introduction describes Priam's speech in terms of his grief rather than
naming it with a term for 'ritual lament'"."9 Priam begins his speech by
addressing his fellow citizens, from whom he seeks permission to go to
Achilles' hut and beg for the return of Hector's body. Once the theme of
old age is mentioned, the speech turns into a lament. The typical closure
(22. 429: ώς εφατο κλαίων· έπί δέ στενάχοντο πολΐται) and the placement
of the speech first in the triad of formal laments for Hector in Book 22
shows that it is considered to be a personal lament. It seems that with the
exception of Achilles, no other man's speech was characterized as a γόος
in the Iliad.m
The formula used for Andromache in 24. 723 shows another form of
divergence from the pattern we have seen above; its second part is not
occupied by the formula άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο, but of a variant of it,
m
See Beck (1997) 121-122.
'» Beck (1997) 121.
Beck (1997) 70, ft. 40.
150
Beck (1997) 70, ft. 40.
62 Chapter 3
namely λευκώλενος ήρχε γόοιο. Here it is the use of the adjective λευκώ-
λενος that causes the prefix έξ to be dropped from έξήρχε, since λευκώ-
λενος ends in two shorts and begins with a long.1" Given the five syllable
adonic - - - - - closing the line, this means that έξήρχε must be reduced
to two syllables, since three-syllable γόοιο has to be placed at the very end
of the line. Edwards has argued that "since the following verse describes
how she [Andromache] is cradling Hector's head in her arms, it is
impossible not to feel that the usually formulaic epithet has here a vivid
descriptive force."192 This is a valid point, since Edwards highlights the
vividness of this particular epithet in this specific context, where the
second verse of the speech describes a typical gesture of lamentation, once
again in adding enjambement. Moreover, one could plausibly maintain
that λευκώλενος is also looking two lines ahead at 24. 725, and in
particular to the phrase νέος ώλεο. By reproducing almost the same sound
effect with λευκώλενος (λευκώλενος / νέος ώλεο), this phrase reflects the
epithet that has just been used. One could of course ask which of the two
influenced the other first, but whatever the answer is, the main point of
interest lies in the acoustic and semantic interaction unfolding their
compositional relation. This similarity of sound points to a semantic link:
Andromache and Hector are portrayed within the frame of a juxtaposed
and parallel analogy.193 Andromache is one of only three women to whom
the epithet λευκώλενος is attributed, the other two being Hera and Helen.194
1,1
Altogether rather different from άδινοϋ,
192
See Edwards (1970) 1-36. See also Beck (1997) 153 who observes that "speech
frames that depart from the most common patterns, whether through variation,
expansion, or insertion, consistently differ from these common patterns in ways that
emphasize important points in the story".
193
One could note that as the phrase άπ' αίωνος νέος ώλεο follows the vocative άνερ
(referring to Hector) so the epithet λευκώλενος follows Andromache; -in this way the
phrase referring to Hector functions as an epithet (something like νεοθανής or ώκυ-
μορώτατος)-; both these phrases occupy the same part of the verses they belong to,
that is to say the part before the final adonic (- - -1- in the 4th and 5th feet. 1 suggest
that these similarities in such a short space (there is just one intervening verse) and with
such a non-typical expression (as άπ' αίωνος νέος ώλεο) argue quite convincingly
for the fact that the parallelism I have just referred to is anything but accidental.
194
It is attributed to Hera in 1. 195, 208, 595 (= 21. 434); 5. 711, 767 (= 8. 381 = 14. 277
= 15. 78), 775, 784; 8. 350, 484; 15. 92, 130; 19. 407; 21. 377, 418; 24. 55 in the
nominative case; in 20. 112 in the accusative and in 1. 572 in the dative. It refers to
This particular epithet is typical of Andromache195 but the way it alludes

to the phrase νέος ώλεο shows that the poet wants to couple Andro-
mache's identity as a wife with Hector's doom; in this way husband and
wife are closely joined, since they share parallel fates. Indeed, parallels
between the fate of the mourner and the deceased are also encountered in
a number of other personal laments. Our line of interpretation is further
strengthened by yet another parallelism between Ανδρομάχη and άνδρο-
φόνοιο in the next line, which goes to show beyond any reasonable doubt
that we are dealing with an intentional device. In a nutshell, the poet aims
at underlining the common fate of the mourner and deceased (a typical
γόος theme), and does so not by abandoning the constraints and
limitations of his tradition, but by skillfully reorganizing and rearranging
it according to his own plan.
One of the methods that have shaped formulaic diction referring to
specific everyday life contexts is what Foley has coined "traditional
referentiality".196 This formula-shaping process can be seen in what he
calls métonymie relationships, "métonymie pathways to the poetic
conjuring of personalities";197 thus the epithet λευκώλενος describing
Andromache in 24. 723 is not used for metrical reasons. After all, the poet
could just as well have used άδινοϋ, which belonged to the formulaic
prototype on which the second part of the verse was formed, and which
was recurrently used in γόος formulaic introductions immediately after
the penthemimeral caesura. The use of λευκώλενος is determined by both
its general and particular references in the dictional environment; in short,
its immediate referentiality is combined with its traditional one. The
former "looks" at the epithet's placement in the scene and to the specific
environment in which it is incorporated, the latter to its métonymie
Helen only once, in 3. 121 in the dative and twice to Andromache, in 6. 371 in the
accusative and in 6. 377 in the nominative.
193
This epithet is attributed to Hera, Andromache and Helen, all of whom are wives; the
use of λευκώλενος points simultaneously to Andromache's paradeigmatic nature as
a wife and to the immediate context of the lament scene at the end of Book 24. Cf.
the use of the epithet άρηίφιλος in 5. 561, which refers both to its paradeigmatic
nature (since Menelaus, to whom it is attributed, is the casus belli) and to its
immediate context (Menelaus has just killed the two sons of Diocles).
196
See Foley (1991) 6-8.
197
See Foley (1991)23, (1992)281.
64 Chapter 3
allusion to the Andromache par excellence, who has become an integral

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

2. ώς εφατο κλαίων· έπί δέ στενάχοντο πολΐται (22. 429)
3. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'- έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες (22. 515; 24. 746)
4. ώς εφατο κλαίουσα, γόον δ' άλίαστον ορινε (24. 760)
5. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος άπειρων (24. 776)
4. 154 is a compressed form of the typical closure used for a γόος-speech.

It lacks the first part (ώς εφατο κλαί[ουσ'(α)] / -ων) of the single-verse
formulaic pattern described above and has a slight a variation of the
second (έπεστενάχοντο δ' εταίροι instead of έπί δέ στενάχοντο +
nominative of subject). Whereas this variation is easily explained in terms
of meter, the most noteworthy and puzzling feature of this closure is its
placement immediately after the speech introduction, before the
beginning of the γόος-speech. A similar peculiar feature is also observed
in Achilles' first personal lament for Patroclus in Book 18, in which both
introduction and closure frames present significant deviations from
the formulaic pattern. The lack of a ritual framework characterizing
Agamemnon's imaginary γόος for Menelaus has resulted in the
misplacement of the γόος closure. It also seems that the narrator wanted
to strengthen an introductory frame somewhat weak in terms of lament
3.3 Personal lament speech closures 65
language,19' and point out to his audience that the following speech was
indeed a personal lament.
With the exception of ώς εφατο κλαίουσα, γόον δ' άλίαστον δρινε (24.
760) and ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος απείρων (24. 776), no
single-verse closures contain significant variations from the typical
pattern. In both of the exceptions, the second part of the single-verse
formulaic closure could very well have been used, given that the entire
framework is that of the ritual/formal lament. It seems that in the context
of Iliad 24 the narrator wanted to vary the three closures199 and enlarge the
range of mourners participating in the lamentation proper for Hector. In
24. 746 Andromache only mentions the women mourners (by using the
second part of the typical formula έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες), whereas
Hecuba's γόος is more general (24. 760: γόον δ' άλίαστον ορινε)200 and
Helen's encompasses all the people of Troy, men and women alike (24.
776: δήμος άπειρων).201
3.3.2 Multi-verse closures
1. ...αύτάρ 'Αχαιοί |
παννύχιοι Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο γοώντες. (18. 314-315)
2. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δέ στενάχοντο γυναίκες,
Πάτροκλον πρόφασιν, σφών δ' αύτέων202 κήδε' εκάστη. (19. 301-302)
3. ώς εφατο κλαίων, έπί δέ στενάχοντο γέροντες
μνησάμενοι, τά έκαστος ένί μεγάροισιν ελειπον. (19. 338-339)
4. ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'· άλοχος δ' οΰ πώ τι πέπυστο
Έκτορος· (22. 437-438)
m
Curiously enough, there is no lament language pertaining to a typical γόος-speech
introduction (see section 3. 2).
"» Richardson (1993) 355 ad 24. 746.
200
For 24. 760: γόον δ' άλίαστον δρινε, cf. 2. 797: πόλεμος δ' άλίαστος ορωρεν, 12.
471 = 16. 296: δμαδος δ' άλίαστος έτύχθη, 20. 31: πόλεμον δ' άλίαστον εγειρεν.
201
See the scholia Vetera ad 24. 776 (V 640 Erbse): οΰ μόνον αί γυναίκες· πλείονα γάρ
έκίνησεν οικτον. έπί πλείστφ δέ έλέψ καταστρέφει την Ίλιάδα. "Not only the
women [wailed in response]. For she initiated a great deal of lamentation. [Homer]
brings the Iliad to a close with a view to achieving the most intense pity." The
translation is that of Dué (2002) 81, ft. 44.
202
I am following here Allen (1920'). West (2000) has adopted Rzach's reading αύτέων.
66 Chapter 3
In 18. 314-316 (...αύτάρ 'Αχαιοί | παννύχιοι Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο

γοώντες. | τοίσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο) the closing formula is
placed first, before the formulaic introduction at 323. The former deviates
from the pattern we have seen, but shows traces of the elements we have
come across while examining the other closing formulas; in other words,
we see here a nominative plural ('Αχαιοί / παννύχιοι) and the verb στενά-
χομαι, but with a different preposition (άνεστενάχοντο instead of έπεστε-
νάχοντο).
In this case, three facts should be taken into consideration: 1)
Eustathius'203 second interpretation of άνα- as expressing the extent of the
groaning; the first ("again") applies to 18. 355. 2) The depiction of the
Myrmidons and, in general, of the army as violent and harsher than the
typical choruses of mourners we encounter in the personal laments in
Books 19, 22 and 24. In Agamemnon's γόος for Menelaus the attested
form έπεστενάχοντο does not contain the emotional tension expressed
here, heightened through the use of παννύχιοι. The latter is emphatically
stressed at verse-initial position in both 18. 315 and 18. 355, and
underlines the long duration of the lament; 3) the possible semantic
attraction that άδινοϋ exercises, being almost juxtaposed to άνεστενάχο-
ντο, conveying the notion of an intense activity, a repeated throbbing.204
The above observations support the view that άνεστενάχοντο
expresses a rather dense and more abrupt lamentation, meaning "to groan
aloud over somebody", whereas έπεστενάχοντο means "to lament over"
and denotes a more restrained outburst of grief, restricted perhaps to
formal practice. It seems that έπεστενάχοντο describes a groan of lament
in answer to the preceding γόος, one which could on occasion be ritual.205
This explanation is consonant both with the scene in which this
203
See van der Valk (1964) ad loc.
204
See Pucci (1998) 99.
205
See Spatafora (1997) 22-23, who convincingly shows that various lament terms such
as οίμώζω-κωκύω-κλαίω-γοάω-στένω refer, apart form their specific semantic
denotations, to successive stages in the process of lamentation, οΐμώζω-κωκύω refer
to the immediate and instinctive expression of grief in the form of a strident cry,
κλαίω signifies the articulate or inarticulate lament accompanied by tears, γοάω
designates the lament speech with its therapeutical nature and, finally, στένω points
to a responsive and, principally, group-oriented sound following the expression of a
lament.
3.3 Personal lament speech closures 67
expression is placed and with the use of the adverb πυκίν' (meaning
"densely") next to άνεστενάχιζ'.206 Our interpretation also tallies with the
expression πυκνά μάλα στενάχων in 18. 318, expressing the same feeling
of dense throbbing which closely follows 18.315-316, and is even picked
up, one might argue, in the coming simile by ΰλης έκ πυκινής (18. 320).
In 19. 301-302 and 19. 338-339 the typical formulaic closure (19. 301
and 19. 338) is expanded by the insertion of a second verse (19. 302 and
19. 339) in adding enjambement. In both cases the insertions "look back"
to the introductions of these speeches,207 but also have a profound
significance for the antiphonal structure of this entire lament scene. For
the slave women, the death of Patroclus is a mere pretext to lament for
their own misery, i.e. their slavery. On the other hand, the old men who
accompany Achilles' ensuing personal lament grieve for "whatever they
left at home". Pucci has rightly emphasized the "antiphonal and
differential" nature of this comparison, by stressing the antithesis between
the females lamenting their loss of freedom at the hands of males (here
Achilles) and the males, who "lament for having abandoned their
possessions, of which wives and slaves are a part".208 Thus, the insertion
of a second verse in the above γόος closures is partly motivated by the
particular framework of this lament scene and the antiphonal function of
Briséis' and Achilles' γόοι.
22. 437-438 (ώς εφατο κλαίουσ'- άλοχος δ' οΰ πώ τι πέπυστο | "Εκτο-
ρος ) considerably "departs" from the second part of the formulaic closure.
This variation is to be explained through the specific plot requirements
determining the organization and presentation of the last scene of Iliad 22.
After the completion of Priam's and Hecuba's γόοι, the time is ripe for
Andromache's personal lament for Hector; but unlike his parents, his wife
is not on the walls, but weaving on her loom in her quarters. Since she
needs to be fetched to the walls in order to see Hector dead on the
battlefield and utter her lament, the narrator decides to make the transition
206
See also the other Iliadic attestation of a similar verbal form in 10.9. West (2000) 286
ad loc. has άνεστονάχιζ'.
207
See what has been argued in 3. 2. 1 above with regard to the introductions of these
two speeches. See aslo Beck's observations (1997) 113-114.
208
Pucci (1998) 104. See also Mackie (1996) 76, who rightly argues that "[F]emale talk
of personal sorrows corresponds formally to male discourse of lament that focuses on
remembering a far away oikos and possessions".
68 Chapter 3
to the scene of Andromache in her house immediately after the comple-

tion of Hecuba's γόος. The following narrative shows that this abrupt
transfer is poetically motivated and quite effective: Andromache's surprise
at the terrible news, her comparison to a maenad and her fainting, all
prepare the audience for her climactic γόος, which brings Book 22 to its end.
3.4. Privileged Individuals and Unprivileged Chorus209
3.4.1. Privileged Individuals
The relation between status and speech is explicit in the words of the
heroic performers and implicit in the γόος introductory formulas. The
lament seems to be a female-dominated genre since, with the exception of
Achilles and Agamemnon,210 all Iliadic laments are expressed by female
performers. This genre-oriented selectivity results in the attribution of
status to women, who are otherwise marginalized or secondary to the
Iliadic war due to their non-participation in the battle. Women, of course,
are not simple reflections of male prototypes in respect of character
drawing, but have their own "poetic" life. They contrast male power with
human weakness, κλέος with αχός and πένθος and, finally, the battlefield
with the οίκος.
As a heroic epic, the Iliad demands that all of its protagonists excel in
heroic status. Speech ability, status and ranking are all correlated aspects
of the Homeric notion of τιμή -Homeric heroes excel in both fighting and
speaking.2" By endowing women with the gift of speech, in a privileged
genre such as lament, the poet of the Iliad establishes their status, making
209
The Iliad voices the γόοι of individuals who are related to the deceased and occupy
central roles in the plot; so there is no γόος by any brother or father of some minor
warrior who died in the battlefield (in some cases like this the poet uses short
obituaries as in the case of the two son of Diocles, of Simoeisius and Othryoneus).
210
Priam also utters a lament for Hector in 22. 416-428, but the fact that this γόος is
placed first in the triad of laments at the end of Book 22 shows that it is there to
balance the previous plea by Priam to Hector not to face Achilles (22. 38-76), as well
as to foreshadow the highly emotional begging of Achilles in Book 24.
211
This is epitomized in the famous saying by Phoenix: μύθων τε ρήτηρ' εμεναι πρη-
κχήρά τε έργων (9. 443).
them center-stage performers and allowing them to excel in the one thing
they can do within the framework of the poem: speaking.
This process of conferring status212 is implicit in the use of the formula
άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο, which implies the existence of a chorus of mourners.213
In the Iliad, the chorus is always of the same gender;214 the lament of a
female mourner is capped by the refrain of cries expressed by a group of
female lamenters. Luetcke was the first to draw the distinction between
the literary and metaphorical use of the verb έξάρχω.215 When used
metaphorically (often followed by a genitive case), έξάρχω does not
simply mean to begin but also to have a leading role. In that respect, the
performative value of the epithet άδινοϋ reinforces the status of women
as privileged speakers even more; άδινοϋ is a marked term almost
exclusively used for the lament, denoting a thick emotional throbbing
applied to men and women alike.216
212
On the performance of the lament as a status-establishing process, giving women the
opportunity to acquire social roles they are by definition excluded from because they
pose a threat to the social order within a male-dominated society, see Hoist-Warhaft
(1992) 3-6.
213
A fact confirmed by the closing formula έπί δ' (έ) + verb στενάχομαι or στένω +
collective noun.
214
The formula ώς εφατο κλαίουσ', έπί δ' εστενε δήμος άπειρων (24. 776) capping the
personal lament of Helen is no exception, for her speech is the last in the triad of the
ritual laments uttered in Book 24 for the death of Hector. It is thus only natural for
the poet to be willing to represent the entire people of Troy lamenting Hector; after
all, his death foreshadows the future "death" of Troy.
215
Luetcke (1829) 17. See also Privitera (1957) 95-101; Andronikos (1968) 13 with
bibliography; Zimmermann (1992) 19-20, ft. 4-6.
216
Certain proper-name replacements in the personal lament introductory formulas are
also status-determining. Achilles, more than any other character in the poem, is
equipped with unparalleled riches in reference to his patronymic (Higbie 1995, 52).
He is called by his patronymic, his papponymic and even his metronymic (Higbie
1995, 58, Table 2. 1). Apart from specific metrical and compositional reasons
determining the use of the patronymic Πηλείδης instead of Achilles in γόος
introductory formulas such as 18. 316, its use is significant, for it alludes to a point
that Achilles is about to make and which will dominate the first part of his speech. In
18. 330-331 he talks both about his and Patroclus' ill-fated end at Troy; he goes to
say that his father Peleus will not meet him in the palace [in Phthia] (18. 330-332:
αύτοϋ ένίΤροίη, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστήσαντα / δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα
Πηλεύς / ούδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ γαϊα καθέξει.). The use of Achilles' patro-
nymic thus becomes context-oriented, since it specifies the status under which he will
speak. His parentage is of great importance while lamenting Patroclus, for it alludes
70 Chapter 3
Agamemnon and Achilles are the initiators of the wrath and the only
men217 to utter personal laments in the poem. This makes perfect sense,
since they are the heroes who have to experience the grief caused by the
loss of Menelaus and Patroclus respectively as the by-product of their
quarrel. The exigencies of the Iliadic plot do not allow Menelaus to die,
and so Agamemnon's lament is based on his perception of losing his
beloved brother.
In the case of Achilles, however, Patroclus' death is the culmination of
his suffering, thus rendering this highly favored hero equally privileged
with regard to the overwhelmingly "female" speech form, the lament.
Achilles is a unique speaker in the Iliad, he stands out from all others both
in his interpretation of the heroic code and in the proximity of his
language to the authorial style of the epic narrator.218 He is thus endowed
with the gift of special speech, which the Iliad has transformed into a
deliberate paradox. His ability to lament underscores his unavoidable fate,
namely to experience the uttermost grief, through the loss of his friend
Patroclus, before meeting his own doom.
It has rightly been observed that Achilles surpasses other heroes in
terms of sympathetic imagination.2" He is able, poet-like, to reach out to
the depths of grief, to absorb, adapt and externalize220 pain; his
assimilation of a female-specific sub-genre is performed so effectively
that Achilles is even able to compete with women mourners, as the
antiphonal laments that he and Briséis express in Book 19 so eloquently
show. This special ability he possesses is a sign of his higher authority as
a heroic performer. Using lament as a point of reference, the poet of the
Iliad has privileged his finest hero, rendering the expression of grief for
Achilles a status-establishing process.
Achilles and Hector are the only heroes lamented with θρήνοι (the
former in Od. 24 and the latter in II. 24), despite the fact that epic poetry
keeps them unvoiced. Both monumental compositions end with a
to their common upbringing in Phthia, as the soul of Patroclus explicitly reminds him
in 23. 84-90.
2
" For Priam, see ft. 210.
2111
The best account on this much debated topic is that of Martin (1989) 146-205.
2
" Martin (1989) 139.
220
These are typical qualities of Achilles' style. See Martin (1989) 139.
reference to the professional songs sung for them by the εξαρχοι θρήνων
(II. 24. 720 ff.) and the Muses (Od 24. 60 ff.). Achilles and Hector are
complementary,221 since they stand as a pair within the framework of the
Iliad. Once Hector dies, the poem reaches its destined end. There is no
Iliad without Hector and, likewise, there is no Iliadic Achilles without
him.
At the same time, these two heroes diverge in respect of speech. As
Martin has neatly put it: "Hektor's recollections are of human speech.
More than any hero, he quotes others. Achilles, on the other hand, calls to
mind grief. If Hector's memory-genre is praise, Achilles' is lament."222
One of the significant characteristics of the poem is that Hector does not
express a single personal lament for the death of any of his Trojan
companions.223 Furthermore, no character destined to die at a later point in
the Iliad is considered appropriate to express a γόος for the death of a
companion, friend or relative. It is for this very reason that Hector is
inappropriate for lamenting the death of a dear one. Yet the Iliad has
managed to overcome this obstacle through a remarkable poetic effect.
From the perspective of lament, it has made Achilles and Hector an
inseparable pair.
The death of the Achilles himself and the ensuing lament for him could
not possibly have fitted in with the plot of the Iliad, which is restricted to
the theme of his wrath. To overcome this difficulty, the poem united the
fate of its two greatest warriors, turning the one (Hector) into the chief
object of grief while transforming the other (Achilles) into its principal
male mourner. The epic has thus achieved the unthinkable, in bringing
together the two great adversaries Hector and Achilles, around whom the
tragedy of the Iliad unfolds, in the realm of grief and lament.
221
Martin (1989) 131.
222
Martin (1989) 131. See also 144: "One difference between Homer's representation of
Hector and of Achilles is that the former imagines himself praised in the future, while
the latter expends his rhetoric on a companion, showing once again a sympathetic
imagination."
223
The fact that Sarpedon's and Lycaon's death are not exploited in this direction shows
that it is the poet's deliberate choice to let this option aside.
72 Chapter 3
3.4.2. Unprivileged Chorus
The second part of the closing formula (έπί δ' (έ) + verb στενάχομαι or
στένω + nominative plural or nominative singular of a collective noun),
shifts the focus from the individual mourner to the collective mourning of
the people gathered around the body of the deceased. The content of the
chorus' speech is hard to speculate on, as any such attempt would require
a good deal of ethnographical research in various oral-traditional cultures.
Alexiou, who is rightly considered the authority on the ritual lament in
Greek tradition,224 has argued that the elaboration and evolution of the
narrative element in the ritual lament led to the subordination and
subsequent transformation of the second voice into a refrain, in the
manner of cries or sobs.225 Seremetakis, who has diligently studied the
performance of lament in the region of Inner Mani in the Southern Pelo-
ponneso, has mapped a complex system of "improvised, heterogeneous,
and superimposed linguistic, extralinguistic, musical, nonmusical, poetic,
and prosaic discourses that constitute the performative aesthetics of the
klàmâ\226 These "discourses" constitute what she calls "polyphony", the
"raw material of antiphonic practice".227 Polyphony consists of various
techniques: the μοιρολόι or improvised lament of the soloist; the refrain
of the chorus;228 the stylized sobbing of both soloist and chorus through a
carefully calibrated overlapping of parts; the multiple corporeal gestures
of soloist and chorus; the improvised prose monologues of individual
mourners and the screaming.22' This complex system shows that the
chorus forms an integral and indispensable part of the entire lament
process. It employs a wide repertoire of metanarrative techniques (such as
corporeal gestures, crying, sobbing, screaming) to accompany the mourner's
224
Her book The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition (1974) is the best contribution to the
study of lament in Greek culture.
225
Alexiou (2002) 134-135. Reiner (basing his interpretation on the meaning of the verb
στένω or οτενάχω used to designate the wailing of the chorus) had suggested that it
referred to cries similar to those found in tragic laments (1938) 31-33.
226
227
221
This may be called "refrain-composition" (Stanley 1993, 8) or "Ritornellkomposi-
tion" (van Otterlo 1944a, 193).
229
Seremetakis (1991) 106 and 99-125 in general.
song. Decentralisation of the chòrus is not what ethnographical field-work
teaches us in surviving oral cultures such as that in Inner Mani.
Therefore, the reasons explaining why the Iliad does not cite the
lament of the chorus of mourners after quoting the main soloist's γόος in
direct speech should be sought in the way the epic treats non-solo speech,
and not in a would-be performance-based marginalisation of the chorus .
The textual "silence" regarding the collective lament of the people is a
general problem related to the apparent reticence of the masses, whose
feelings and perceptions are only verbalized through a special category of
speeches, known as τις-speeches. In both real and imaginary forms they
voice the feelings of the anonymous crowd, since the anonymous τις who
speaks represents the mass of the people as he says what everybody would
have said.230 In the Iliad, such anonymous representative comments seem
to belong to the world of the inferiors, those of less importance and status
who do not form part of the élite. Scodel has recently argued that these
speeches principally express judgements, direct or indirect, giving a
narrative voice to the weak, whose only weapons are praise and blame.231
Through the communal nature of such anonymous representative com-
ments, the poet offers the authorial audience a view of the "other side" of
the events narrated. He invites his listeners to sympathize both with the
varied reactions of the masses (in real τις-speeches) and with the fears of
the Iliadic heroes (in imaginary τις-speeches).
Given that the Iliad uses the τις-speeches in order to express the
various judgments of the masses concerning the course of events and the
actions of heroes, one could plausibly argue that the reasons explaining
why the chorus' lament remains unquoted is particular to the γόοι and to
the "specifics" of their Iliadic representation. In the Iliad, the chorus of
mourners laments as a second voice, expressing its grief and offering a
ritualised supplement to the voice of the main mourner. In this way the
deceased is lamented on two levels: the personal, expressed by the next of
kin, and the general, expressed by the multiplicity of anonymous
mourners who act as a single voice.
The Iliad voices the γόοι: 1) of individuals who are related to the
deceased (Agamemnon is the brother of Menelaus; Achilles the best
130
See Fingerle (1939) 288.
231
Scodel (2002) 194 , 196.
74 Chapter 3
friend of Patroclus; Andromache the wife of Hector with Priam his father,
Hecuba his mother, Helen his sister-in-law; Briséis, though a slave, is
presented as Achilles' concubine; 2) of important individuals for the plot.
There is no γόος by the brother or father of any minor warrior who fall on
the battlefield. In some cases, the poet uses short obituaries, e.g. for the
two sons of Diocles, for Simoeisius and Othryoneus; 3) for Patroclus and
Hector (Menelaus being an exception), who are two of the main figures
directing the Iliadic plot in the second part of the poem.
Thus, the γόοι constitute a "highly privileged" speech form reserved
for significant figures. Conversely, the poem left both the θρήνοι,232 the
lament songs expressed by professional singers, and the response by the
chorus of mourners uncited.233
Achilles-like, poem and poet share and value the same memory-genre,
the lament. Among different forms of lament songs the Iliad has chosen
to represent only those it considered appropriate to its scope, subject
matter and perspective, remaining poetically "loyal" to its mission to sing
the κλέα άνδρών.
232
Alexiou (2002) 103: "γόος ... while less restrained, was from Homer onwards more
highly individualized, and since it was spoken rather than sung, it tended to develop
a narrative rather than a musical form".
233
See Andronikos ( 1968) 12-13, who carefully argues for an artistic content of the θρή-
νοι. I am not sure, however, that the θρήνοι lasted throughout the entire prothesis.
Chapter 4
Distance, Separation and Mors Immatura:

Common Motifs in the Iliadic Personal Laments
4.1 Distance and Separation234
Space235 is an important dimension in the verbalization of a personal

lament, since it offers the speaker the opportunity to develop certain
themes linking the distance between a warrior's native land with the place
he meets his death. This, given the Iliadic plot, should apply more to the
Greeks who die away from home, and not to the Trojans who perish in
their native land. But, as we will see, separation may also acquire another
scope when it refers to the Trojans: that of separation from dear ones and
a past life of happiness experienced by the deceased before the beginning
of the war.236 Space constitutes one of the most common motifs used in the
γόοι, and falls within the category of binary oppositions that Greek thought
in general, and in our case the Iliad, is fond of in its effort to view and re-
present almost any form of human activity.237 Homeric epic shows a
234
The terms 'distance' and 'separation' belong to the same semantic frame (that of
space) and will be examined together. Closeness is the exact opposite of distance and
pertains to the sharing of the same fate by both mourner and deceased, which
constitutes a typical theme in Iliadic γόοι. Mors immatura refers to the temporal
element and, therefore, will be dealt with separately.
2,5
By space I am hereby referring to the notion of distance between one's native land
and the place where he dies, and the separation from his dear ones (separation being
a by-product of distance). In this chapter, space is confined to the themes exploited
by the speaker within a γόος-speech and not to the conditions of its performance.
236
Trojan allies come from various places in Asia Minor and so (like the Greeks) fight
and die far from their native land. But this theme is not used in the Iliadic personal
laments, since the only Trojan to whom a γόος is devoted is Hector, who dies in his
own native land. This motif is developed in the short obituaries, for which see
Appendix two.
237
For duality in general see Lloyd (1966), which is the standard work on the subject.
Other significant contributions to this topic are Olrik (1965) 135-136 and Burkert
76 Chapter 4
consistent preference for a tension between distance and closeness, en-

counter and separation. In the case of the representation of death and its most
expressive verbalization, lament, this becomes a complete narrative strategy
using specific deictic markers to emphasize the basic Iliadic Problematik
of presence vs. absence, of past vs. here and now, of life vs. death.
4.1.1. Dying away from one's native land
Dying away from home seems to be a constant and persistent fear for
Iliadic warriors; this fear is clearly manifested in the so-called taunt-
speeches,238 where the victor insults the vanquished by reminding him that
he will die away from home, in a foreign land, that his parents and dear
ones will never be able to see him again and that his corpse will become
the prey for dogs and birds. This theme is also developed in the γ ό ο ι ,
where it acquires a different use once adapted to the general frame of
presence vs. absence that predominates in this particular form of speech.
In what follows we shall be focusing our attention on the function of
specific deictic239 markers within the Iliadic personal laments in
expressing the motif of dying away from home and through it the
separation between mourner and deceased in terms of locality.240
Verbal and Local Deixis
Verbal deixis is manifested by deictic verbs leading away from the origo
of the speaker. Local deixis is expressed by spatial adverbs, locative
(1979) 18-20. For duality in Homer, see Fenik (1974, part 2) and Bergren (1981) 201
ff. The fullest recent account of the topic is van Duzer (1996).
2,8
On taunt or vaunt speeches, see Fingerle (1939) 150-162; Fenik (1968) 134 ("speech
of triumph"); Adkins (1969) 20-33; Petersmann (1969) 44 ("Todesreden", i.e. "death-
speeches"); Muellner (1976) 89 ff.; Edwards (1987) 93-94; Parks (1990) 58, 73
("vaunts" or "boasts").
239
For a general account of deixis, see Collinson (1937); Benveniste (1946) 1-12, (1966)
251-257; Frei (1944) 111-129; Hjelmslev (1959); Fillmore (1966) 219-227, (1970)
251-274; Jakobson (1971) 130-147; Kurylowicz (1972) 174-183; Antinucci (1974)
223-247; Lyons (1977) 636-724; Levinson (1983) 54-96; Bühler (1990).
240
The sub-motif of "bereaved parents" will be treated separately.
4.1 Distance and Separation 77
prepositional phrases, relative adverbials and locative suffixes such as -φι

and -δε. In Agamemnon's γόος (4. 155-182) for the would-be death of
Menelaus, the speaker (Agamemnon) uses both afferent (centripetal) and
efferent (centrifugal) verbs to express the distance between his brother's
place of death (Troy) and his own future return to Argos:
«καί κεν έλέγχιστος πολυδίψιον Άργος ίκοίμην. 171

κάδ δέ κεν εύχωλήν Πριάμω καί Τρωσί λίποιμεν 173
Αργείην Έλένην· σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα
κειμένου εν Τροίη άτελευτήτφ επί εργφ.»
"And I must return a thing of reproach to Argos the thirsty,

for now at once the Achaians will remember the land of their fathers;
and thus we would leave to Priam and to the Trojans Helen
of Argos, to glory over, while the bones of you rot in the ploughland
as you lie dead in Troy, on a venture that went unaccomplished."
«'αϊθ' οΰτως έπί πάσι χόλον τελέσειε' Αγαμέμνων, 178

ώς καί νϋν αλιον στρατόν ήγαγεν ένθάδ' Αχαιών,
καί δή εβη οίκόνδε φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν
συν κεινησιν νηυσί, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον.'» 181
" 'Might Agamemnon accomplish his anger thus against all his
enemies, as now he led here in vain a host of Achaians
and has gone home again to the beloved land of his fathers
with ships empty, and leaving behind him brave Menelaos.' "
The speaker employs verbs of motion in the following order: first he uses
two efferent verbs to denote his future return to Argos (Ικοίμην) and his
"leaving" Menelaus behind (λίποιμεν), then one afferent verb (ήγαγεν) to
refer to his leading his army to Troy in vain and, finally, two more efferent
verbs (έβη-λιπών), reiterating his previous fears through an embedded
potential τις-speech (4. 179-181). This deliberate interplay between the
"here" of Troy, which constitutes the speaker's center, and the "there" of
Greece, where Agamemnon will eventually return, expresses the distance
between the two brothers (one dead in Troy, the other alive in Argos) and
their subsequent separation, which is Agamemnon's main concern in this
second part of the speech.
78 Chapter 4
In Achilles' γόος in 18. 324-342, both verbal and adverbial deixis are
employed in order to draw a grim picture of Achilles' fate, as Peleus and
Thetis will never see him return home in Phthia. Achilles is aware that he
is destined to die in Troy and that now that Patroclus lies dead, they will
both perish in Troy (18. 329-332).
«άμφω γάρ πέπρωται όμοίην γαΐαν έρεϋσαι

αυτοί) ένί Τροίη, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοσχήσαντα
δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς
ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει.»
"Thus it is destiny for us both to stain the same soil

here in Troy; since I shall never come home, and my father,
Peleus the aged rider, will not welcome me in his great house,
nor Thetis my mother, but in this place the earth will receive me."
As is implicit in Thetis' personal lament in 18. 52-64, Peleus and Thetis

are presented as a regular human couple who will never see their son
Achilles return home to Phthia. The accommodation of this motif to the
plot of the poem and to the peculiarities of Achilles' family (mortal father-
immortal mother) shows traces of a gap in the story of the epic. This can
be accounted for in terms of the antiquity of the motif.
The deictic verbs νοστήσαντα and δέξεται are vital for the picture that
Achilles is drawing for the audience. The first of these denotes a theme
which seems, at first glance, to be out of place in the Iliadic setting of
war;241 its poetic environment is that of the Odyssey, in which the key-role
of νόστος finds its programmatic expression from the epic proem onwards
{Od. 1. 9: νόστιμον ήμαρ). In the Odyssey the νόστος of its main hero,
Odysseus, is the most important element of the plot, and one that remains
unfulfilled until the very end of the epic. It condenses in itself all the other
sub-threads of the plot and is presented in a variety of forms: the
immediate and happy return of Nestor is balanced by the tragic return of
Agamemnon and the suspended but finally happy νόστος of Menelaus, all
these νόστοι being reflected in the νόστος of Odysseus himself. Whereas
241
For the theme of νόστος in the Odyssey, see Maronitis (1984 s ) 124-140; for the
meaning and etymology of νόστος, see Frame (1978) 1-33; Pignani (1995) 449-456.
the theme of return is intrinsic to the plot of the par excellence post-war
epic, i.e. the Odyssey, it is clearly a secondary issue in the wartime Iliad
and is somewhat subdued by the numerous restrictions imposed therein.
Nevertheless, the Iliad does use the theme of return in a highly
sophisticated way, by dramatizing the death of the Greek warriors away
from their native land.242 The Trojans seem rather fortunate in that they are
fighting at home ground, but the Iliad uses the future sack of Troy as a
constant reminder of the vanity of all Trojan efforts; in the short run the
defenders can return safe home inside the walls of Troy, but in the long
run they have no place to return to, as the city is doomed to fall.
The theme of νόστος is deployed in the case of several major heroes,
but it is in the tragic dilemma of Achilles (who has to choose between an
unglorious νόστος and a glorious θάνατος) that it reaches its sublime
vastness. The choice of Achilles determines the whole heroic ideal as
presented in Homeric poetry and is essentially connected with his
unfulfilled return to .Phthia. Achilles' dilemma has a profound poetic
dimension which can be read along the lines of interpretation that Pucci
has suggested for an odyssean passage.243 Achilles' decision to return to
the battlefield signifies his decision not to change poem and poet, not to
become one of the heroes of the Νόστοι but remain the hero of the Iliad,
the best of the Achaeans who chooses a physical and glorious death
instead of a long unimportant life in Phthia. In his determination to
avenge the death of Patroclus, Achilles decides to return to the Iliad, and
make it his poem, his poetic fatherland which will endow him with
immortal poetic fame. This form of νόστος introduces a figurative reading
for what Patroclus stands for.244 Patroclus symbolizes the Iliadic reading
242
Νόστος and θάνατος are examined by Frame (1978) 34 ff.; Pucci (1987) 123 ff. and
139 ff.; Segal (1994) 37-64. Νόστος in the Iliad is examined by Maronitis (1999)
101-123.
243
See Pucci (1998) 1-9 (= 1979, 121-132).
244
For another special kind of Iliadic νόστος, where the themes of return and war are
poetically "reconciled" with the former borrowing its final product (death) from the
latter, see Maronitis (1999) 112-120. Maronitis argues that in the cases of Sarpedon
and Hector we are dealing with a special kind of Iliadic νόστος which he coins
νεκρώσιμος νόστος, because the dead bodies of the two warriors are returned to their
homes for burial, the former by Sleep and Death, the latter by Priam after Achilles'
permission.
80 Chapter 4
of Achilles' fate, whereas by tempting Achilles to accept his geographical

νόστος instead of his poetic one, the bereaved parents Peleus and Thetis
symbolize the negation of this reading. This dilemma remains suspended
and undecided before the death of Patroclus, but then is drastically
resolved (18. 60, 330, 441; 24. 131, 507, 511, 540-542). Achilles will not
return to Phthia but will instead return to Patroclus, and be reunited with
his friend under the earth through the power of death. Achilles makes this
idea more than explicit (18. 333-335):
«νϋν δ' έπεί ουν, Πάτροκλε, σέ' ύστερος είμ' ύπό γαΐαν,
οΰ σε πριν κτερίω, πριν Έκτορος ένθάδ' ένεΐκαι
τεύχεα και κεφαλήν, μεγάθυμου σεΐο φονήος·»
"But seeing that it is I, Patroklos, who follow you underground,

I will not bury you till I bring to this place the armour
and the head of Hektor, since he was your great-hearted murderer."
The use of the word γαία three times within a few lines (329: όμοίην
γαιαν έρεΰσαι; 332: αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει; 335: ύπό γαΐαν) makes Achilles'
words acquire a special tone, as he suspends his νόστος or rather changes
its direction: rather than returning to his native land he will return to the
earth where Patroclus is; his journey will not be one towards Phthia that
represents life, but towards Patroclus and the earth, the soil of Troy that
represents death; Achilles has made his decision by choosing for himself
the κλέος of his fatherland (Πάτρο-κλος) instead of his return to his
fatherland.
Even after Achilles has made a choice, a new set of oppositions arises:
the contention between his willingness to remain with his dead friend and
the social necessity of giving him a proper burial with the due funeral rites
and letting go of him.245 Achilles' postponment of Patroclus' funeral is
explicable in terms of his desire to avenge his death and bring the corpse
245
Cf. Sourvinou-Inwood (1991) 112: "In the minds of the contemporary audience, this
nexus of ideas placed Achilles' grief in the framework of the unsolvable and truly tragic
conflict between, on the one hand the desire to 'stay with' the dead, refuse to let them
go and in a way identify with them, and on the other the necessity, social need and
even desire to let them go, separate ourselves from them, and carry on living".
of his murderer, Hector next to his death-bier. This new tragic conflict,
which comes as a consequence of the previous one that the Achaean hero
has been facing since the beginning of the poem, is also dictionally
manifested through the medium of deixis (18. 333-335). The temporal246
and spatial deixis expressed by the clause πριν "Εκτορος ένθάδ' ένεΐκαι /
τεύχεα και κεφαλήν shows that Achilles puts off the burial, i.e. the
process by which he will let Patroclus "go" to Hades, because he is not
ready yet to accept their separation. The temporal246 clause πριν... ένεΐκαι
denotes a narrative intention, that of delaying Achilles' symbolic distanc-
ing from Patroclus, of procrastinating their detachment; his personal lament
is only a temporary expression of his feelings with an emphasis on his desire
to postpone the two friends' partition, and by no means their last farewell.
Yet in this context even the burial and funeral will not be their final
separation, since Achilles knows that he will also soon die; the earth (γαία)
expresses an emotional landscape where Achilles will meet Patroclus for
ever. This being an event outside the limits of the poem, the poet prefers
to have Achilles merely designate the future by offering a conflation of
"now" and "then", by letting a future reality "intrude" into the immediate
reality of the performance. Spatial and temporal deixis are orchestrated in
such a way that they make the future an almost tangible reality, as if the
audience can see the corpse of Hector lying in front of Patroclus' death-
bier with Achilles subsequently joining his friend under the earth.
The Iliad has developed a special form of interplay between meeting
and distancing, closeness and separation, which finds its most elaborate
fulfillment in the case of the pairs Patroclus-Achilles and, as I will
demonstrate below, Andromache-Hector. In fact, this interplay forms part
of the very content of the Iliadic personal laments, since they are also
composed upon the binary opposition between life and death that is
embodied in the very writing47 of the Iliad.
246
Hogan (1976) 305-310 has suggested that the use of the double πριν is characteristic
of Achilles' language. Of the eighteen times it is attested in the Iliad "four are used
by Achilles himself, two more find him subject or object of the subordinate clause,
two are attributed to him by other speakers, and one is addressed to him" (305, ft. 2).
Having surveyed all the evidence, Hogan concludes that once the poet uses double
πριν for the description of Achilles, he stops employing it in relation to other
characters (305, ft. 2). I do not agree with Edwards (1991) 168, who believes the
evidence to be weak.
247
For this notion of writing, see Pucci (1987) 26-30.
82 Chapter 4
In Briseis' γόος in 19. 287-300, verbal deixis (άξειν τ' ένί νηυσίν / ές
Φθίην: 298-299) points to the "dying away from home" motif in the light
of its consequences on the speaker; Patroclus' death at Troy will result in
his failing to fulfill the promise he had given to Briséis, namely that he
would make her Achilles' wife. The use of deixis lends Briséis' speech a
dynamic touch, as it brings to the foreground a sense of visual presence
(a look at Phthia where a marriage is taking place), and situates both the
external and the internal audiences (Achilles and the choruses of female
and male mourners) in space and time. Her speech ends with the ex-
pression of painful disappointment for a once promising future in Phthia
which has now been overturned.248 The future infinitives θήσειν and άξειν
in 19. 298 are particularly pertinent in this context. Briséis is thus
transferring her audiences to a place and time far away; but her imaginary
transportation uses place and time as signs that express the coordinates of
her future happiness. Phthia is not only a place, but a new home, and the
future is not so much a point in time as a symbol of distancing from the
ruinous present of death to the blissful morrow of marriage. The speaker
is symbolically leading her audiences, external and internal alike, down
an imaginary pathway (ένί νηυσίν: 19. 298) to a "new spatiotemporal
location", which in its turn functions as the potential, but alas unfulfilled
hope of a happy life. This would-be journey to Phthia effects the visualiza-
tion of the referent249 in the hearers' minds and displaces the mental "here
and now" of the situation to a visual "there and then".
Vividness (ένάργεια)250 is only part of the effect conveyed through the
use of the deictic device I have referred to. The audiences of Briséis'
lament would have been stunned by the fact that her separation from
Patroclus and the distancing, literal and figurative alike, expressed in her
speech are capped by a carefully demarcated coda that alludes to an
imaginary situation, in which a marriage would have taken place and a
group of young girls would have sung a wedding song rather than a
248
This change has been textually marked in line 19. 289 by the "shifters" νυν δέ,
common in γόοι.
249
For the visualization of the referent in the hearer's mind in Homeric discourse, see
Bakker, (1997a) 77-79.
250
On ένάργεια in Homer, see: Gorgias, Hel. 9; Platon, Ion 535b-e; Ps.-Longinus, De
subi. 15; Quintilian, Inst. or. 6. 2. 29. For the scholia's view on ένάργεια in Homer,
see Zanker (1981) 297-311.
funeral dirge. One has to admit that there is no explicit mention of song,
but the detailed description of the antiphonal laments with the interplay
between chief female mourner/chorus of females mourners vs. chief male
mourner/chorus of male mourners bears a striking similarity with a
wedding ceremony. What Briséis is emphasizing is that instead of a
wedding there is death; are we to believe from the whole Stimmung of the
description that instead of a lament song there should be a wedding song?
Is there any indication for such a bold suggestion? Antiphonal singing251
was typical not only in lament for the dead but also on other social occa-
sions. Marriage252 constitutes a social event bearing striking resemblances
with death; the same applies to their sociocultural by-products, namely
251
Antiphonal singing is typical in Greek tradition. In the district of Mani in the center
of southern Peloponnese in modern-day Greece, antiphonal singing is frequently
employed in the ritual of death, and often becomes both the center of production and
reproduction of speech and the creation of an oral history concerning the deceased.
The so-called kldma of women is not a momentous outburst of female emotion at the
loss of a dear one, but an occasion for social intervention on the part of the women;
lament becomes a figurative place for social disorientation, where a personal
octasyllable verse becomes legitimized as marked speech and in which antiphonal
singing between the main mourner and a female chorus is a dialogue-based technique
for the production, memorization and diffusion of speech as oral history. For a
detailed presentation of female lament in Modern Mani, see Seremetakis (1991). For
a general presentation of Modern Greek lament songs, see Joannidu (1938) 62-64.
252
Antiphonal elements can be also traced in wedding poetry, which does not survive in
epic but is exceptionally represented in lyric poetry and in particular in Sappho's
wedding songs, the έπιθαλάμια. According to Stehle (1997) 278-282, in Sappho's
fragment 30 V (Voigt's edition), a wedding ceremony is described where the παρθέ-
νοι sing, followed by the two serenading choruses the couple is accompanied by. In
fragment 44.24-34 V, the παρθένοι sing a holy song (παρθένοι / άειδον μέλον
άγν[ον]), while the chorus of old women utter a ritual shout (γυναίκες δ' έλέλυσδον
δσαι προγενέστερα[ι]) and the chorus of men call out a delightful high-pitched
paean (πάντες ό' άνδρες έπήρατον ϊαχον ορθιον / πάον'). Bowra (1961) 220-225
notes that wedding songs were "of different kinds" depending on the circumstances
in which they were sung. He then proceeds to outline the whole wedding ceremony
with the initial nuptial banquet, the sacrifices to the gods offered by the bride's father,
the conducting of the bride on a chariot to her new home and, finally, the singing of
a nuptial hymn on the threshold of the bridal chamber where the newly-wed couple
would be joined in love for the first time. Bowra argues that the wedding song, the
ύμέναιος would at least begin "before the end of the feast" (221) and that "Sappho's
choir, like that of Catullus, was divided between youths and maidens, as befitted the
mixed company of the bridal procession" (225).
84 Chapter 4
the wedding ceremony and the lamentation for the dead respectively.253
These similarities refer to specific morphological characteristics of the
two rituals, as well as to the language and the overarching symbolism
lying behind these ceremonies.254 One can even trace a common semiotics
concerning place, time and sequence of events. The shared basis of these
two momentous incidents in human life, which are typical examples of rites
2,3
For similarities and differences between lament and wedding song, see Lonsdale
(1993) 243-244 . For a thorough discussion of the wedding and funeral ceremonies
based on the visual arts, see Rehm (1994) 30-42.
254
A full reconstruction of the antiphonal singing in the wedding ceremony is a risky
task, but one can at least feel safe in accepting that antiphonal responses by both solo
performers and choruses formed an integral part of the marriage ritual. See Bowra
(1961) 214-225; Calarne (1977), (1995); Lasserre (1989); Contiades-Tsitsoni (1990)
68-109. In the Iliad, the most important passage for the description of the wedding
ritual is that depicted on the Shield of Achilles (18. 491-496): έν τη μέν ρα γάμοι τ'
εσαν είλαπίναι τε, / νύμφας δ' έκ θαλάμων δαΐδων ΰπο λαμπομενάων / ήγίνεον
άνά άστυ, πολύς δ' ύμέναιος όρώρει· / κούροι δ' όρχηστήρες έδίνεον, έν δ' άρα
τοΐσιν / αυλοί φόρμιγγες τε βοήν εχον· αί δέ γυναίκες / ίστάμεναι θαύμαζον έπί
προθύροισιν έκάστη. Despite the reference to the wedding song (ύμέναιος) which
forms an integral part of the ceremony, there is no explicit mention of any antiphonal
element in the performance of the ύμέναιος (see Maas 1907, 590-596; 1914, 130-
134). Contiades-Tsitsoni (1990) 43 rightly points to the fact that one cannot be sure
whether the term ΰμέναιος actually describes a revel-cry, a joyous shout or a real
wedding-song. The expression πολύς δ' ύμέναιος όρώρει (= Ps.-Hesiod, Sc. 274)
could very well describe any kind of utterance, ranging from a simple uproar to an
actual song. This may be due to the fact that the description is brief and the poet
offers no more than an overview of the wedding ceremony. Moreover, the poet's
principal goal is to bring to view a city at peace, both through the blessings of ordered
communal life as represented by weddings and via the peaceful settlement of a
dispute over a man's death by the formal judicial system that such a city possesses
(Edwards 1991, 213). On the other hand, even in this abridged account of a wedding
ceremony one can see the existence of some form of interplay between two groups
of people, one male and the other female. There is a group of young males whirling
in dance (κοΰροι δ' όρχηστήρες έδίνεον) and a number of women standing on their
thresholds and admiring (αί δέ γυναίκες ίστάμεναι θαύμαζον έπί προθύροισιν έκά-
στη). This may be an indication, albeit vague and disguised, of the significance of
male and female interaction in the process of a wedding ceremony. Some sort of
antiphonal element seems to be present in the pseudo-Hesiodic Scutum Herculis
(273-280). The passage bears striking similarities with II. 18. 491-496 and also has
parallels in the visual arts, where the bride is depicted as being carried on a wagon
reminiscent of a death-bier (Fittschen 1973, Ν 17).
de passage,™ is that of the dissolvement of the family, the most elementary

unit in the web of a traditional society. The disintegration of the family is
realized by the departure (άποδημία), literal and figurative alike, and its
subsequent change of home (μετοικεσία) of one of its members.256
The antiphonal element was at the heart of both the wedding and the
funerary ritual and may have been linked in some way unknown to us
with both the performance of the ύμέναιος and the γόος. The personal
lament of Briséis seems to exploit this powerful interaction between
marriage and death by its very conception. She refers to the loss of her
family and laments the death of Patroclus, who would have made her the
wife of Achilles; instead of marriage and a new life she is faced with
death, the metaphorical death of her hopes for a new life. It seems that
Briséis' wedding has changed referents: in the case of Achilles she will
marry death himself, and instead of a ΰμέναιος she has to sing a γόος,
together with her female friends.
The situation we come across in the Iliad is a combination of what one
might call internal and external antiphonesis; for Briséis' γόος is ac-
companied by the lament of a female chorus but is answered by Achilles'
lament which, in its turn, is accompanied by the lament of a group of male
singers. One should keep in mind that what we encounter here is the
Iliadic representation of ritualized lament, and that in such a representa-
tion it is impossible to listen in direct speech to the voice of a group of
people; character-speech in Homer is only solo speech. Thus, the internal
255
For rites of passage, see the classic works of Van Gennep (1960); Hertz (1960);
Türmer (1969). For Greek culture in particular, see Garland (1985).
256
For the "marriage-death" poetic motif in ancient Greek culture and its connection to
Indoeuropean civilization, see Giannakis (1998) 93-113. See also Rehm (1994), who
provides a thorough examination of the coincidence of wedding and funeral rituals in
Greek tragedy. This theme is still alive today in the Balkans. For Romania, see Kligman
(1988); for Greece, Saunier (1968/1999); Danforth (1982); Alexiou (1983) 88-90,
(2002) 105-107,109,120-122,152, 155-157, 178, 195-196, 230 n. 64. In present day
Greece, even in urban centers, when an unmarried adult member of the family dies,
he/she is dressed as a bridegroom/bride; marriage wreaths are often placed on his/her
feet inside the coffin and a special kind of sugared almonds (κουφέτα, as in the
wedding) are given to those attending the funeral. In Modern Greek folk-song, the
similarities between the so-called marriage songs (νυφιάτικα/του γάμου), lament songs
(μοιρολόγια) and exile-songs (της ξενιτιάς), which all share the common motif of fami-
ly dissolvement and separation, are striking. See Saunier (1999) 287-291 with examples.
86 Chapter 4
and external antiphonesis is a relic either inherited from an actual lament

performance or necessitated by epic genre restrictions which did not voice
collective song, but only solo performances. Needless to say, the whole
framework is almost ideal for the expression of antiphonal lament.
In Achilles' antiphonal lament to Briséis for the death of Patroclus in
19. 315-337, the motif of dying away from home is expressed through a
rather complicated nexus of verbal and local deictic markers denoting
distance and separation. This is the most elaborate personal lament uttered
by Achilles himself in the Iliad. His use of deixis is distinguished from
that of other epic protagonists in respect of both the cornucopia of its
deictic markers and the complex links and relations it creates.
The fundamental idea upon which this personal lament rests is the
combination of two contrasts between: a) Achilles, who is doomed to die
in Troy and Patroclus, whom Achilles believed was destined to return to
Phthia but lies dead in front of him and b) Achilles, who will die at Troy
and his father Peleus, who is waiting for him to return home. The "dying
away from home motif' is used in both cases, but with Patroclus and
Achilles as respective recipients. This combination unites the fate of the
two friends, neither of whom will be able to return to Phthia. As speaker,
Achilles sees Patroclus' death from his own perspective, with regard to its
consequences for himself and his family. He does not lament the fact that
his friend will not be able to see his native land and family, but that
Patroclus will not be in a position to do for Neoptolemus what he himself
would certainly have done if he had been destined to return home.
Distance and separation are focalized by the speaker, who functions as
internal narrator, and are consequently expressed by a combination of
deictic markers, verbal and local alike (323: Φθίηφι, 324: άλλοδαπψ ένί
δήμψ, 326: Σκύρψ, 329: άπ' Άργεος, 330: αύτοΰ évi Τροίη and Φθίηνδε
νέεσθαι, 332: Σκυρόθεν έξαγάγοις, 336: ποτιδέγμενον). Achilles carries
the audience away from his deictic center (Troy) and presents a view of
the situation in Greece: Peleus waiting in pain, Neoptolemus alone in
Scyrus. This tableau reflecting sadness and pain is the result of Achilles'
separation from his dear ones, of a distance that keeps them apart and will
never be shortened. In this way, a grim picture is conjured up in the mind
of the audience: we experience a vicarious journey through the vividness
of Achilles' language as speaker. In other words, spatial deixis becomes
the means enabling the speaker to function like a modern film-maker; he
does not possess a camera but performs in real time, as he cannot develop
a scene and then edit it into a series of others that he has already shot. His
tools are language and an unsurpassed sense for poetry alone, as he
composes and recomposes in performance in front of a real and undoubted-
ly demanding audience. He thus creates a view of the past, a view that few
film-makers could recreate, allowing his listeners to travel far away from
Troy so as to see what his heroes will never see. In this manner the
audience can affiliate with the speaker, as they see a view of reality through
Achilles' own eyes. In this case, the audience experiences a situation quite
different from that in Briséis' speech, for the conditions at home are
similar to those in Troy. Whereas Briséis is longing for a better life as
Achilles' loyal wife back in Phthia, Achilles has not so much to hope for:
his father is in pain, his son abandoned in Scyrus and far from his father's
possessions. At the same time there is a common element in both cases,
namely Achilles himself. Despite the fact that she is lamenting Patroclus,
Briséis' happiness is in fact dependent on the survival of Achilles, whom
she has planned to marry.2" Likewise, both Peleus' pain and Neopto-
lemus' upbringing and reestablishment in Phthia are contingent on the
fortune of Achilles alone. The Iliad seems to be lacking a language of
lament for Patroclus and so its poet has to invent it for himself. As is only
natural, the poem turns to Achilles, for whom the epic stock of lament
material is extremely rich, and makes him the notional center of those
laments targeting Patroclus. In a nutshell, tradition deprived the poem of
a language and a stock of motifs for the death of Patroclus, which was an
innovation particular to the Iliad,258 So as to overcome this problem, the
epic borrowed traditional lament motifs originally pertaining to Achilles
and more clearly suited to him. Though the recipient was thus shifted, the
origo remained the same; this could only have been skillfully
accomplished by depicting Patroclus as a close friend of Achilles, and one
who was raised alongside him by Peleus in Phthia. Spatial and temporal
elements can therefore be said to co-ordinate the central principle of
affiliation between the two heroes.259
257
Taplin (1992) 81-82 maintains that "Briséis knew that Patroklos was the way to
Achilleus' heart" but this does not undermine the fact that her lament for him finally
amounts, even allusively, to her future marriage with Achilles.
"» I follow Kakridis (1949) 88 ff. and Erbse (1983) 1-15 who have convincingly argued
that the Patrokleia is a Homeric invention.
88 Chapter 4
4.1.2. Bereaved parents and family
In Thetis' γόος (18. 52-64), deictic verbs of motion are combined with
verbs of contact to create a marked combination highlighting the separa-
tion between mourner and deceased:
νηυσίν έπιπροέηκα260 κορωνίσιν "Ιλιον εΐσω 58

ΤρωσΙ μαχησόμενον τον δ' ούχ ύποδέξομαι αύτις
οΐκαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Πηλήϊον εΐσω 60
I sent him away with the curved ships into the land of Ilion
to fight with the Trojans; but I shall never again receive him
won home again to his country and into the house of Peleus.
Thetis' origo is not the same as Agamemnon's or Achilles', for she is

definitely absent from Troy during most of the narrative time, but constantly
appears out of the sea swell every time she is going to meet with her son
Achilles. Thetis locates herself "away from Troy", yet the language she
employs here shows that she considers herself to be together with her
husband Peleus in Phthia. The Iliad wants to emphasize the role of the
mother rather than that of the goddess, especially since this is the most
effective way to increase the pathos of the scene. After all, Thetis is
Achilles' mother and has to lament him by adopting the perspective of a
mortal mother who would, by definition, want her son to return home. It
would have been absurd and poetically ineffective to make Thetis say that
she wished for Achilles to go under the sea with her! Since this would not
have made sense, Thetis has to place herself in Phthia so as to form
Peleus' counterpart in terms of lament. In actual fact, we know that in all
of her Iliadic epiphanies she rises from the depths of the sea, and in this
particular scene is accompanied by a whole chorus of Nereids. This may
seem a mere triviality, but it has important consequences for the function
of the personal lament that Thetis is voicing. In particular, her use of the
efferent verb έπιπροέηκα is dissonant with the non-Iliadic epic tradition,
according to which Peleus, knowing that Achilles was destined to die at
Troy, prevent him from joining the expedition by sending him to Scyrus,
260
In this case, I am not following West's Teubner edition which reads επι προέηκα.
where he remained at the palace of king Lycomedes disguised in women's

clothes.261 Unfortunately for his father's plan, Achilles was discovered by
Odysseus and brought to Troy. This tradition was silenced in the Iliad,
since it would definitely have diminished the status and heroic prestige of
its main hero, Achilles. The Iliad makes Thetis oscillate between the
status of prescient goddess and mother helpless at the realisation that she
cannot change the course of events.262 The mother element has to be strong
in her, a fact which is reflected in all her Iliadic epiphanies at the presence
or absence of Achilles. It is even reflected in her γόος, where she adopts
the stance of a mortal mother who would have used the motif of sending
her son to war, and would have referred to that feeling of distancing and
separation that increases the parents' grief and makes the whole scene a
kernel of human pathos. What we see here is the constant tactic of
appropriating the unfitting, of turning epic material unsuitable for the
poem's point of view into familiar motifs serving the needs of the plot and
the Iliad's character-drawing. Thetis' use of spatial deixis leaves a specific
mark on the poetics of the Iliad, as she turns the non-Iliadic politics of
child-caring into the Iliadic rhetoric of lament. Her oscillation between
efferent (έπιπροέηκα) and afferent (ύποδέξομαι) deictic markers makes
her audience visualize her drama through an unaccomplished journey:
Achilles sent to Troy will not come back. The phrase τον δ' ούχ ύποδέ-
ξομαι αυτις / οικαδε νοστήσαντα δόμον Πηλήϊον εϊσω (18. 59-60) not only
forms the other end of the unaccomplished iter of Achilles, but unites the
two parents, Thetis and Peleus, and makes them one within the frame of
the γόος. The notion of bereaved parents who are deprived of their son not
destined to return home from the war (ούχ... οικαδε νοστήσαντα)263
corroborates the concept of separation between mourner and deceased
even more. The distance between Troy and Phthia transcends geography
and enters the realm of human feeling. Thus the two places Thetis is
261
On this incident, see PEG, Cypria fr. 19. Proclus' summary offers a different version
(apparently contradicting the previous one of the scholia, which attribute Achilles'
sojourn in Scyrus to the Epic Cycle): Achilles reached Scyrus after the first,
unsuccessful Teuthranian expedition. See Severyns (1928) 285 ff., Kullmann (1960)
190-192 and Burgess (2001) 21, all of whom support the view that Proclus' summary
does not accurately report Achilles' first pre-expeditionary sojourn in Scyrus.
262
On Thetis' helplessness, see Slatkin (1991) 17-52.
263
18.60.
90 Chapter 4
designating for her audiences through spatial deixis stand for the whole
tragic dilemma the poem is trying to express in respect of its main hero,
Achilles: the choice between Phthia and Troy, between a trivial life and a
glorious death. Thetis' use of deixis as a mechanism externalizing her
personal tragedy and transforming non-Iliadic elements into Iliadic material
reflects the speech's thematic dislocation within the corpus of the γόοι,
but also mirrors its exceptional position for the conception of the whole
epic. By reproducing one of the basic themes of the Iliad -the tragedy of
Achilles- in miniature, it bespeaks the way the poem was generated, its
coming into being. To put it briefly: for Thetis, spatial deixis becomes the
means by which heroism will be defined and through which this epic has
been created; by sending her son to Troy, Thetis makes the war and,
consequently, the Iliad possible.
4.2. Closeness
Personal Deixis (I)
(I) Iliadic personal laments use first and second person pronouns
representing proximal and intermediate deixis respectively, in relation to
the speaker's or/go.264 These deictic pronouns create an interplay between
the "I" of the mourner who is uttering the γόος and the "You" of the de-
ceased who is lamented.265 In Agamemnon's γόος for the would-be death
of Menelaus, first and second person pronouns emphasize the bond link-
ing the two brothers' fate (4. 169, 174, 175, 182).
«άλλά μοι αινόν αχός σέθεν εσσεται, ώ Μενέλαε, 169

"But I shall suffer a terrible grief for you, Menelaos,"
«Αργείην Έλένην σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα 174

κειμένου έν Τροίη άτελευτήτω επί εργω.»
264
By the origo of a speaker, Bühler (1990) 91-166 refers to a nexus of "here"-"now"-"I".
265
The interplay between first and second person personal pronouns is a locus
communis for Iliadic personal laments; in this chapter I have concentrated on the
γόος of Agamemnon, for this particular speech, as I will try to show, includes a bold
ironic reading of the stereotypical deictic formula φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν,
designating one's νόστος.
4.2. Closeness 91
"Helen of Argos,... while the bones of you rot in the ploughland

as you lie dead in Troy, on a venture that went unaccomplished."
«ώς ποτέ τις έρέει· τότε μοι χάνοι εύρεΐα χθών.» 182
"Thus shall a man speak: then let the wide earth open to take me."
The deictic devices used here have been fitted in the ring-composition
pattern: μοι-σέθεν (169), σέο (174), μοι (182). Deictics of the first and se-
cond person pronouns refer to the speaker and the addressee of a speech
and unite them via their presence in a given narrative environment. In this
respect they differ from the third person pronoun, which points to
somebody who is absent.266
Agamemnon envisages the dire consequences he will suffer as a result
of his brother's potential death; mourner (Agamemnon) and would-be
deceased (Menelaus) seem to be united through a bond that is not based
solely on kinship, as one may expect, but on the heroic code of life. The
key idea on which Agamemnon's thinking rests is that the war without
Menelaus is virtually senseless, since it is being waged so that Helen can
return to Sparta at his brother's side. If Menelaus dies, the war becomes
pointless and Agamemnon will have to return home having left his
mission unaccomplished and, moreover, having left his brother in Troy.
There will be αίνόν άχος (169) for Agamemnon, if Menelaus (σέθεν =
about you: 169) dies in Troy; his brother's bones will remain in a foreign
land (σέο δ' όστέα πύσει αρουρα) and, when insulted by an anonymous
Trojan, Agamemnon will wish that the wide earth would open and receive
him like his dead brother. As a result, the interplay of the first and second
person pronouns ends in the most emphatic manifestation of the inter-
dependence of the two brothers' fate: it is confirmed by Agamemnon's
imagined death (τότε μοι χάνοι εύρεΐα χθών).
The concentric ring pattern used in the deployment of the first and
second person deictic markers reflects the whole evolutionary process
leading to Agamemnon's dismal coda:
(a-b) μοι-σέθεν: the juxtaposition of the two deictic markers bespeaks
the community of fate shared by the "I" and "You" of the speech.
266
Benveniste (1971) 195-204,217-222 has argued that the system of personal pronouns
is bipartite, as first and second person designate presence, whereas the third signifies
absence. See also Felson (1999) 4 (especially footnotes 12-13).
92 Chapter 4
(b') σέο δ' όστέα πύσει άρουρα: the deictic "You" describes the fate of
Menelaus.
(a') τότε μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών: the deictic "I" is "united" with the
"You" by sharing the same fate.
But what has facilitated or, rather, brought about this process? What,
in other words, has made the final doleful wish of Agamemnon in respect
of language possible?
A closer look at the passage reveals that the initial deictic interplay
between the "I" of the speaker and the "You" of the addressee of the speech
is corroborated and enlarged by a contrast which is also verbalized in
deictic terms. As noted above, the Greek deictic system operates on a
distinction or opposition, in terms of roles, between the first and second
person constituting a separate level and the third, the former expressing
presence, the latter absence.267
Agamemnon's fear and resultant sorrowful closure springs from his
quoting a potential τις-speech,268 in which the theme of νόστος acquires a
bold development; the formulaic φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν (178) normally
used to designate someone's desire to return home becomes an ironic
allusion to the negation of Menelaus' νόστος. As often in the Iliadic
personal laments, spatial deixis denotes the separation motif which will
entail the loss of the war for the Greeks ("ώς και νϋν αλιον στρατόν ήγα-
γεν ένθάδ' 'Αχαιών, / και δή εβη οικόνδε φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν / σύν κει-
νησιν νηυσί, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον": 179-181).
This τις-speech is introduced and capped by the following lines:
«καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει Τρώων ύπερηνορεόντων /

τύμβο) έπιθρφσκων Μενελάου κυδαλίμοιο (176-177: introduction)
"And thus shall some Trojan speak in the proud show of hs
manhood,
leaping lightly as he speaks on the tomb of great Menelaos"
«ώς ποτέ τις έρέει- τότε μοι χάνοι ευρεία χθών.» (182: closure)
"Thus shall a man speak: then let the wide earth open to take me."
267
See Felson (1999) 4 , ft. 12.
261
For a detailed analysis of this speech, see chapter 5 and the bibliography cited there.
4.2. Closeness 93
The pronoun τις constitutes distant deixis, and is opposed to the proximal
and intermediate deixis realized by the "I" and "You" of the first and second
person pronouns I have referred to above. Distant deixis is on this occasion
integrated or, rather, embedded not only in represented speech but in a
speech within a speech, in tertiary focalization. By voicing an imaginary
speech, the speaking "I" conjures up a view of the future in front of the
audience, both external269 and internal; the "I" thus distinguishes itself
from the "third person's" point of view. Yet in doing so, the speaker brings
this "third person" within the perspective of his speech and makes him a
reality, a vital part of the mental hie et nunc of the situation; for even if
this "third person" speaks in the future, the speaking "I" conceives his
speech as a potential reality. By embedding a speech within a speech, a
second speaking "I" (the anonymous Trojan) is created, though only
within the limits of the tertiary focalization that Agamemnon offers to his
audience. The outcome of this powerful contrast between first-second
person proximal deixis and third person distant deixis is further reinforced
by the two discourse indexicals ώδ' and ώς introducing and capping the
tiw-speech (lines 176 and 182 respectively). These endophoric references
are cataphoric (ώδ') and anaphoric (ώς), pointing to the following (ώδ')
and preceding (ώς) units of the text respectively; their meaning is fixed
and not relative: they mean the same for both the poet, Agamemnon and
us as audience/readers. By referring to the concrete text of the τις-speech,
these deictic markers label it as credible and trustworthy, thus making its
potential character decrease in favor of certainty and creating the illusion
of an event witnessed distant in time; in short, that is the way some Trojan
will speak and this is guaranteed by the deictic tools applied in the
introduction and closure of the speech.
In this way, the τις-speech is transferred from the future to the present,
to the "here" and "now" of the performance. By becoming tangible reality
rather than a distant event and by gaining credibility, the distant deixis
that the third person pronoun expresses is counterbalanced. Thus, once the
269
This is a case of the so-called Deixis am Phantasma (figurative or imagination-
oriented deixis), a term coined by Bühler (1990) 137-157, who distinguishes it from
demonstratio ad oculos (literal deixis). Deixis am Phantasma refers to the audience's
perception of the deictic markers used by the characters within the plot. The term
Deixis am Phantasma is rather misleading, but fairly well established among scholars.
Perhaps external or imagination-oriented deixis would have been more effective.
94 Chapter 4
embedded speech is over, the speaking "I" (Agamemnon) hurriedly voices

his return to the "You" by deciding to share his fate and figuratively become
assimilated to it; then Menelaus-like, Agamemnon wishes that he would
recede into the open mouth of the earth, i.e. experience his own death.
Personal Deixis (II)
Andromache's laments for Hector (6. 407-439 and 22. 477-514) provide
a rich harvest of personal deictic markers.
In the first lament, the main interplay is between first and second person
pronouns referring to Andromache (speaker) and Hector (addressee of the
speech). There is, however, a third person, Astyanax, who is also a speech-
act participant (παϊδά τε νηπίαχον) despite the fact that he is not modified
by a third person pronoun of any kind.270 The speaking "I" (Andromache)
includes him in the frame of her thought and, consequently, in the diction
of her speech, establishing a pattern that is followed flawlessly throughout
the Iliad, by connecting Andromache and Astyanax's fate with that of
Hector.
«δαιμόνιε, φθείσει σε τεόν μένος, ούδ' έλεαίρεις 407

παΐδά τε νηπίαχον και εμ' άμμορον, ή τάχα χήρη
σεΐ' εσομαι· τάχα γάρ σε κατακτενέουσιν Αχαιοί
πάντες έφορμηθέντες. έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον εϊη
σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι- ού γάρ ετ' άλλη
εσται θαλπωρή, έπεί αν σύ γε πότμον έπίσπης,
άλλ' άχε'. ουδέ μοί έστι πατήρ καΐ πότνια μήτηρ·» 413
"Dearest, your own great strength will be your death, and you have
no pity
270
Pelliccia (1995) 179 correctly distinguishes between addressee (designated by the
second person pronoun) and an audience (entity or entities present at the moment the
speech is uttered. He calls "outside audience" not the poet's audience, but those
present at the moment of speaking though not directly receiving the content of the
speech. He also employs the term "inside audience" for one's θυμός, to which a
speech may be addressed.
4.2. Closeness 95
on your little son, nor on me, ill-starred, who soon must be your
widow;
for presently the Achaians, gathering together,
will set upon you and kill you; and for me it would be far better
to sink into the earth when I have lost you, for there is no other
consolation for me after you have gone to your destiny-
only grief; since I have no father, nor honoured mother."
«οΐ δέ μοι έπτά κασίγνητοι εσαν έν μεγάροισιν 421

"And they who were my seven brothers in the great house"
«Έκτορ, άτάρ σύ μοί έσσι πατήρ και πότνια μήτηρ 429

ήδέ κασίγνητος, σύ δέ μοι θαλερός παρακοίτης.»
"Hektor, thus you are father to me, and my honoured mother,
you are my brother, and you it is who are my young husband."
The distribution of personal deictic devices is as follows:

a. σε (407): Andromache foreshadows the destruction of Hector
b. εμ' (408): she refers to the results of his destruction upon her and
their child
c. σεΐ' (409): Andromache refers to the impact of Hector's loss on her
d. σε (409): the speaking "I" repeats the idea she has expressed in unit
a
e. έμοί (410): she verbalizes a would-be situation for herself if Hector
dies
f. σεΐ' (411): she practically repeats what she has said in unit c
g. σύ (412): she refers to Hector's death
h. μοι (413): she implies that Hector stood for her father and mother
i. μοι (421): Andromache implies that Hector stood also for her
brothers
j. σύ μοί (429): she resumes her speech by equating Hector with her
old family, as in units h-i (father, mother, brothers)
k. σύ (δέ) μοι (430): she refers to his role as a dear husband
In her second lament (22. 477-514), Andromache uses first and second
person deictic pronouns to point to herself and Hector, and third person
deictic markers to designate Astyanax. What was implicit in her lament in
Book 6 is now explicitly stated: the interplay between Hector, herself and
their child is mirrored through the use of deictics:
96 Chapter 4
«Έκτορ, εγώ δύστηνος· If) άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση

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

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

a. έγώ (477): Andromache exclaims in miseiy
b. άμφότεροι (478): she and Hector are both ill-fated
c. σύ (478): she refers to Hector's doomed house
d. έγώ (479): she refers to her own doomed house
e. μ' (480): she was the wretched daughter of a wretched father
f. σύ (482): she refers to the present misery of Hector in Hades
g. έμέ (483): she refers to her own misery as a widow in the palace
h. δν τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε (485): the whole family (Astyanax, Hector
and Andomache) is ill-fated
4.2. Closeness 97
i. σύ τούτψ (485): neither Hector could save his son

j. σοι ούτος (486): nor Astyanax his father
k. τούτω (488): Astyanax's life will be filled with pain and suffering
The way deictic pronouns are deployed can serve as a compass for mapp-
ing the inner rhythm of Andromache's speeches, of actually discovering
the rhythmic function of these verses which can then, hopefully, lead us
to a discussion of the role of performance that points to the interaction
between performer and audience.
I have arranged first and second person deictic pronouns in Andro-
mache's speech into separate sets because they correspond to equivalent
steps in the process of unfolding the speaker's ideas; Andromache's personal
lament is constructed by an array of distinct thoughts coinciding with
what has been successfully coinedfoci ofconsciousness.m By this term, I am
referring to the "amount of information that can be held in what cognitive
psychologists call the working memory, or short term memory".272 The
memory and perception centers that represent the very joints of human
thought are what speech theorists refer to as intonation units. These are
framed by pauses, which are in fact boundaries a speaker uses in order to
group his thoughts and move forward through the flow of his speech.
The striking feature in the use of first and second person deictic
markers is that their distribution corresponds to the intonation units of
Andromache's speech. The speaker is verbalizing and organizing the flow
of her speech by arranging her thoughts in agreement with the deictic
markers referring to herself and Hector. Only towards the end of her
lament in Book 6, when she sums up Hector's importance to her, does she
join first and second person deictic markers, thus mirroring through deixis
what was implicit from the outset of her lament: the closeness between
herself and Hector and consequently the mutual dependence and poetic
symbiosis of their fates. The correspondence between deictic markers and
»' See Bakker (1990) 1-21; (1993) 1-29; (1997a) 44-53, (1997b) 284-304; (1999) 38-
39. Bakker is using the work of the linguist Wallace Chafe (1994) as a guide in
examining Homeric poetry as special speech, thus avoiding the traditional dichotomy
between written and oral poetry, and more generally between literacy and orality,
which, he argues, is the by-product of a literate way of thinking about language.
272
Bakker (1999) 39.
98 Chapter 4
intonation units can be seen by the following analysis of her speech:273
a. δαιμόνιε, / b. φθείσει σε τεόν μένος, / c. ούδ' έλεαίρεις παΐδά τε νη-

πίαχον / d. και εμ' αμμορον, / e. ή τάχα χήρη σεΐ' εσομαι· / f. τάχα γάρ σε
κατακτενέουσιν 'Αχαιοί / g. πάντες έφορμηθέντες. / h. έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον
εΐη / i. σεΐ' άφαμαρτούση χθόνα δύμεναι· / j. ού γάρ ετ' άλλη εσται θαλ-
πωρή, / k. έπεί άν σύ γε πότμον έπίσπης, /1. άλλ' άχεα'. / m. ούδέ μοί έστι
πατήρ / η. και πότνια μήτηρ· / ... / ο. οΐ δέ μοι έπτά κασίγνητοι εσαν έν
μεγάροισιν, I... I p. "Εκτορ, άτάρ σΰ μοί έσσι πατήρ / q. και πότνια μήτηρ
/ r. ήδέ κασίγνητος, / s. σύ δέ μοι θαλερός παρακοίτης.
The same is true of Andromache's lament in Book 22. 477-514:

a. "Εκτορ, / b. έγώ δύστηνος· / c. íf¡ άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση / d. άμφότεροι,
/ e. σύ μεν èv Τροίη / f. Πριάμου κατά δώμα, / g. αύτάρ έγώ Θήβησιν / h.
ύπό Πλάκφ ύληέσση / i· έν δόμω Ήετίωνος, / j. ο μ' έτρεφε τυτθόν έοϋσαν,
/ k. δύσμορος /1. αίνόμορον / m. ώς μή ώφελλε τεκέσθαι. / η. νϋν δέ σύ μέν
ρ' Αΐδαο δόμους / ο. υπό κεύθεσι γαίης έρχεαι, / p. αύτάρ έμέ στυγερφ ένί
πένθεϊ λείπεις / q. χήρην έν μεγάροισι. / r. πάϊς δ' ετι νήπιος αΰτως, / s. öv
τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε /1. δυσάμμοροι- / u. ούτε σύ τούτφ εσσεαι, / ν. Έκτορ,
/ W. ονειαρ, / χ. έπεί θάνες, / y. ούτε σοί ούτος / / ζ . αίεί τοι τούτφ γε.
Deictic devices occur here in clusters,274 creating moments of emo-

tional tension; the rhythm of the speech becomes high, elevated just as the
voice of a mourner would become more emotional when uttering a lament.
Andromache enhances an interplay between speaker and addressee as if
she is intending to reenact a real-life dialogue between the two, just as in
a real lament the mourner addresses the deceased, whose body lies in front
of him/her. In these circumstances, the dialogue functions as a means of
dramatizing the situation (the dead person cannot respond), of highlight-
ing the absurdity and incomprehensibility of death as a universal pheno-
menon.
In a written text, these deictic markers are interpreted at a surface level
as grammatical devices used to emphasize meaning. Yet this way most of
273
Cf. Bakker (1999) 45-46.
274
The same is also true for enjambment (especially necessary or violent). See Bakker
(1999) 45-47.
4.2. Closeness 99
their true potential is lost, because they are decentered from the "natural
environment" of a true performance. Of course, we cannot possibly detect
the way Andromache's words would have sounded in an oral context, nor
is there any solid evidence that pronoun use mirrors gestural enactment.
On the other hand, deixis focusing on the interplay between first and
second person pronouns foregrounds the relationship between mourner
and deceased, which is a typical feature of lament in Greek tradition.
Personal Deixis (III)
Personal deixis also abounds in Helen's final personal lament for Hector
in 24. 762-775:
«Έκτορ, έμω θυμω δαέρων πολύ φίλτατε πάντων·

ή μέν μοι πόσις έστίν 'Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής,
ος μ' αγαγε Τροίηνδ'· ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι·275
ήδη γαρ νυν μοι τόδ' έεικοστόν ετος έστίν 765
έξ ού κείθεν εβην και έμής άπελήλυθα πάτρης,
άλλ' οΰ πω σέ' άκουσα κακόν έπος ούδ' άσύφηλον,
άλλ' εΐ τίς με και άλλος ένί μεγάροισιν ένίπτοι
δαέρων ή γαλόων ή' είνατέρων εύπέπλων
ή έκυρή -έκυρός δέ πατήρ ώς ήπιος αίεί- 770
άλλά συ τόν γ' έπέεσσι παραιφάμενος κατέρυκες
σί) τ' άγαγνοφροσύνη και σοις άγανοις έπέεσσιν.
τώ σέ θ' άμα κλαίω και εμ' άμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ-
ού γάρ τίς μοι έτ' άλλος ένί Τροίη εύρείη
ήπιος ουδέ φίλος, πάντες δέ με πεφρίκασιν»»
"Hektor, of all my lord's brothers dearest by far to my spirit:

my husband is Alexandras, like an immortal, who brought me
here to Troy; and I should have died before I came with him;
and here now is the twentieth year upon me since I came
273
I disagree with West (2000) 367 ad loc., who thinks that 24. 763-764 have been
interpolated.
100 Chapter 4
from the place where I was, forsaking the land of my fathers. In this
time
I have never heard a harsh saying from you, nor an insult.
No, but when another, one of my lord's brothers or sisters, a fair-
robed
wife of some brother, would say a harsh word to me in the palace,
or my lord's mother -but his father was gentle always, a father
indeed- then you would speak and put them off and restrain them
by your own gentleness of heart and your gentle words. Therefore
I mourn for you in sorrow of heart and mourn myself also
and my ill luck. There was no other in all the wide Troad
who was kind to me, and my friend; all others shrank when they
saw me."
Personal deixis is a typical means employed by the various lament

speakers to underscore the sharing of a common fate by the mourner and
the deceased. In Helen's final lament, which brings the epic to its closure,
the interplay between first and second person pronouns acquires a new
dimension by counterbalancing non-verbal and verbal signs. In Homer,
non-verbal signs encompass a rich variety of signs pertaining to body
language. These include ritualized and conventional gestures, postures
and vocalics, objects, tokens, clothes but also the so-called chronemics
and proxemics, namely the human use, perception and manipulation of
time and space.276
Verses 762-766 of Helen's lament are reserved to references to her
own self through the use of first person pronouns (έμφ: 762, μοι: 763, μ'
(ε): 764, μοι: 765, έμής: 766). Some of these refer to the proxemics of
Helen's distancing zone, which is, of course, her arrival at Troy and
abandonment of her house in Sparta. Moreover, the phrase ήδη γάρ νϋν
μοι τόδ' έεικοστόν ετος έστίν (765) designates not the time Helen has been
away from Sparta, but its chronemics, namely her perception and
manipulation of that time.277
In the second part of her lament, second person pronouns prevail (σέ':
276
For a detailed study of nonverbal behavior in Homeric epic, with special reference to
the Odyssey, see Lateiner (1995).
277
See Tsagalis 2004 (forthcoming).
4.2. Closeness 101
767, σύ: 771, ση, σοίς: 772). The only exception is the pronoun με (768),
which rather reinforces the previous observation, since it is virtually
anticipating the three second person pronouns that pile up in the apodosis
of the conditional clause in verses 771-772. On a surface level, in the
second part of her speech Helen refers to the dead Hector and considers
his importance for her. This is certainly true, but in no way exhausts the
semantic dynamics of her lament. A more careful reading would convince
even the most demanding reader that the second part of the lament, while
praising Hector's kindness towards Helen, explicitly refers to the nature
of her suffering while in Troy and identifies it as blame. Blame and the
protection offered by Hector are expressed by a number of verbal signs
which appear in this second part of the lament, but disappear later on in
the third part, just as they were absent from the first one. These verbal
signs include άκουσα κακόν επος ούδ' άσύφηλον, ένίπτοι, έπέεσσι παραι-
φάμενος, άγανοφροσύνη, άγανοϊς έπέεσσι. Helen seems to have created a
correspondence between speech (blame and verbal defense) and Hector,
who is thus presented as the emblem of her defense, the very support of
her existence in Troy. This point becomes all the more important given
that in the two previous laments, the best of the Trojans had been
lamented as the best warrior (by Andromache) and the dearest son (by
Hecuba). Now he must be lamented as the dearest brother-in-law, whose
loss Helen will experience more than anybody else. The explanation
offered for Hector's special importance to Helen is brilliantly incorporat-
ed and adapted to the overall presentation of Helen in this epic. Self-
blame,278 which she invariably uses in other instances, has here been
replaced by the blame of others, and Hector is presented as Helen's sole
protector, Priam aside. Helen has masterfully incorporated the language
of self-blame into the language of lament, which requires a praise to the
deceased. Moreover, she has preserved for her beloved brother-in-law the
final ovation to a quality she herself does not possess: coherent speech.27'
In the third part of the lament, first person deictics prevail once more
271
On Helen's self-blame, see Vodoklys (1992) 20-21, ft. 28; Graver (1995) 41-61;
Worman (2001) 21, 28-29; Tsagalis (2002-2003) 182-184.
275
For Helen's ambiguous voice in the Iliad and the Odyssey, see Worman (2001) 19-
37; for a detailed examination of Helen's lack of coherent speech and verbal
mutability in the Teichoskopia, see Tsagalis (2002-2003) 167-193.
102 Chapter 4
(εμ': 773 - μοι: 774 - με: 775). The link with the previous part is reflected
in the juxtaposition of second and first person pronouns (σέ: 773 -εμ':
773), which is the typical way the common fate motif is expressed in
Iliadic personal laments. First person pronouns obviously refer to Helen
herself, but also represent non-verbal signs. The dative μοι (774) expresses
the internalization of Hector's loss through the negation ού γάρ τίς μοι ετ'
άλλος (774) ... ήπιος ουδέ φίλος (775) and the spatial deixis indicated by
ένί Τροίη εύρείη (774). The vastness of the physical landscape is thus
tragically counterbalanced by Helen's emotional bareness, the complete
absence of dear ones. This "Gefühl der unendlichen Verlassenheit"280 is
iconized in the phrase πάντες δε με πεφρίκασιν (775) which recalls
Achilles' ριδεγανής Ελένης in 19. 325.281 Helen's desolation is almost
complete. The geographical distancing from Sparta and presence at Troy
had been translated into figurative proximity with Hector and Priam and
emotional distality from the Trojans, by whom she is abhorred, especially
now that Hector lies dead. Now that there is no speaker to protect her, she
has no speech for herself but simply tears (24. 773 : τώ σέ θ' αμα κλαίω
και εμ' αμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ) together with the speechless shuddering
of a hostile environment.
The interplay between first and second person deictics acquires a
special rhythm in Helen's concluding lament. In terms of performance, it
seems that the bard wanted to emphasize Helen's ultimate desolation by
transferring the tenderness of her lament speech to Hector, whose death
signifies her figurative death as a character. Though unable to utter a
gentle and compassionate lament for Hector, Helen is able to recall his
gentle words for her in the past. Yet as we know, this figurative efface-
ment comes at the very end of the poem and coincides with it. The φρίκη
that follows for Helen will never be narrated by the Iliad, but has been
implied through the special language of γόος and mimed by the poet as
loss of soothing speech.
280
Deichgräber (1972) 81.
281
See Macleod (1982) 155; Richardson (1993) 359.
4.3. Mors immatura
Andromache's last lament for Hector (24. 725-745) bears striking

differences with the two previous ones (6. 407-439 and 22. 477-514),
because the body of the deceased lies in front of the mourner and so the
performance conditions acquire a true ritual character. Moreover, within
the frame of a solemn occasion such as the prothesis, the mourner provides
a full picture of the tragedy of Hector and its significance for both Troy
and his family.
Personal Deixis and Narr atee Shift
Andromache's final lament starts, as is expected, with the canonical

address to the deceased, with whom the speaker initiates a fictive conversa-
tion "made tragically one-sided by the hero's absence".282 The speaker
brings forward an element which had not been developed before in any
personal lament, namely that of premature death (24. 725-726):
άνερ, άπ' αιώνος νέος ώλεο, κάδ δέ με χήρην
λείπεις έν μεγάροισι;
"My husband, you were lost young from life, and have left me
a widow in your house"
Premature death is a typical theme throughout the epic; Achilles, the
greatest hero of the poem, is destined to die young and it is precisely this
choice that he makes which shapes his role in the Iliad. Other heroes of a
smaller scale and caliber also die young; in the short obituaries dedicated
to them, they are often compared to falling trees.283 The vegetal imagery
links nature and culture in a fascinating way as "it conveys the cultural
negation of a natural process, the growing and the wilting of plants, and
also, by extension, the life and the death of mortals"284 and, moreover, is
particular to the genre of lamentation.285
282
Foley (1999) 192.
283
Cf. 4. 473-489, 5. 541-560. Vegetal imagery is also used for Achilles; cf. 18. 56, 57,
437, 438.
284
Nagy (1979) 184.
285
Nagy (1979) 184.
104 Chapter 4
In the present case, however, the situation we encounter is different,

since vegetal imagery is entirely absent; the explanation for this is that
Hector has traditionally been linked so much with the fate of Andromache
and his son, Astyanax, that virtually everything said about him has to bear
some connection with the other members of his family. Traditional
referentiality plays a dominant role, as it directs the verbalization of the
lament towards the main concerns of the speaker, as already developed
and shaped already in Andromache's proto-lament in Book 6. Hector's
premature death will render her a widow and their child an orphan.
What is even more striking is the sudden shift in Andromache's
narrative from Hector's premature death to Astyanax' s future murder
during the fall of Troy. At the beginning of her lament, Hector constituted
the addressee or narratee of her speech; but as the theme of premature
death is developed, the speaker decides to change internal addressee and
turn to a new "you", her son Astyanax (24. 732: σύ δ' αυ, τέκος), as if the
lament was for him, as if he had already died. Thus, the narrativization of
the initial "you" (Hector) is suspended for a while, due to the insertion in
the course of the speech of another "you" designating Astyanax. This change
is triggered by the role attributed to the initial "you" -the protecting
function of Hector for the women and the children.286 The narrative shift
is activated by the deictic marker σύ (you), which commences a new
speech, an extra lament for Astyanax. This highly evocative additional
lament offers a camera-eye view of a future situation, with a detailed
description of the grim fate in store for Astyanax, either as a slave
together with Andromache or as a victim thrown from the walls of Troy
by some Achaean warrior in an act of revenge. The speaker attempts to
telescope future events and bring them close to the hie et nunc of the
lament, as if they are occurring in the present.
That being said, the deictic marker of the second person pronoun is
only the initiator of the narrative shift I have pointed to. Temporal deixis
operated by future tenses such as εψεαι (24. 733) and ρίψει (24. 735)
1U
It should be noted that the addresss to Astyanax (τέκος: 24. 732) is caused by the
phrase εχες δ' άλόχους κεδνάς και νήπια τέκνα (24. 730), which expresses
implicitly what Andromache desires to say explicitly, namely that Hector protected
both her and their child. The particular has been replaced by the universal in order to
increase the importance of the deceased for the whole social framework of Troy.
zooms in and focuses on almost visible future events such as the slavery
or death of Astyanax.
Temporal Deixis and Point of View
"Time present and time past are always present in time future
and time future contained in time past"
T. S. Eliot, The Four Quartets
Andromache's γόος for Hector is a canvas depicting the role of the great
Trojan hero in the war and his importance for his city, painted in the
sorrowful color of a future destruction and its consequences for his
family. This emotional summary of Hector's life exemplifies a special
concern with time, as it unites past, present and future in relation to his
life and death. The interplay of tenses in this most ritual of Andromache's
Iliadic γόοι has yet another dimension, one more perfomative than purely
grammatical.
The pioneering studies of Bakker287 have shown that epic discourse is,
to some extent, tenseless and that dealing with tenses in Homer on a
horizontal time-axis prevents us from understanding their function within
the performance. "Augmented verbs", to use one of Bakker's beautiful
insights, "... may not be entirely compatible with our notion of the past
tense... [t]hey sometimes seem to be used in contrast with the injunctive
forms, not to mark an event as "past" in our sense, but as "near", in the
sense that a given idea derives notfrom the collective consciousness of the
tradition but from the consciousness of the individual speaker here and
now ".2"
Tenses in Homer have to do with perception or remembrance of events
and not so much with events per se;2" the narrator or individual character
who delivers a speech perceives events with respect to the moment of the
performance. This crucial observation enables us to interpret tenses from
the point of view of the speaker rather than as a purely chronological
sequence.
™ Bakker (1997c), (1997d).

288
Bakker (1997c) 29. The italics are mine.
289
See Bakker (1997c) 13.
106 Chapter 4
Andromache, to return to her lamentation, mixes tenses even though

referring to events which have occurred at the same moment in time (24.
725-726):
άνερ, άπ' αιώνος νέος ώλεο, κάδ δέ με χήρην 725

λείπεις έν μεγάροισι- πάϊς δ' ετι νήπιος αΰτως,
"My husband, you were lost young from life, and have left me
a widow in your house, and the boy is only a baby"
Both Hector's death and Andromache's widowhood have happened in the

past. In fact, she became a widow at the very moment of her husband's
death; in her speech, Andromache uses a past tense (ώλεο) for Hector's
death, but a present tense to refer to her widowhood (χήρην | λείπεις). This
is a contradiction only if tense is used as a time marker; I suggest,
following Bakker, that the difference in tense mirrors the way the speaker
(Andromache) perceives these events at the moment of performance.
When she delivers her lament, she presents her husband's death as a
displaced event that has occurred in the past, which is why she can lament
him now, in the present. On the other hand, her widowhood is present
when she laments Hector, and is a condition that functions as a marker of
visual evidence of the here and now of the speaker.290 In this way, a part
of the past that the speaker selects is turned into the present, because it is
perceived as such by the speaker when he/she verbalizes the lament.
Temporal deixis enables Andromache to create her own recognition of the
past, by segmenting and classifying it according to its importance or
impact on her; it is natural that she cares now more for the consequences
of Hector's death for her than for the very event of his death. This is one
of the fascinating results of epic storytelling -its ability to draw the past
into the present and resurrect it at the moment of speaking, by shifting the
emphasis from the narrative aspect of events to their visualization.
Later on in her speech, Andromache employs a series of verbs in the
future tense: όχήσονται (731), εψεαι (733), ρίψει (735). Through external
prolespis these verbs designate a future situation concerning the doom of
the Trojans as captives and of Astyanax in particular. This will of course
2,0
See Bakker (1997c) 17-18.
take place after the end of the Iliad, since it is beyond the chronological
limits of the poem. As a mortal Andromache291 does not know what will
happen in the future, but as an epic protagonist she is aware that what
happens in the present or has happened in the past (Hector's death) will
be present in time future or, to put it more neatly, will survive in the
memory of the future that she is here epitomizing. The future tenses of the
verbs she uses do not so much mirror some future events as reflect the
presence of the past in the future (Hector's death causing the death of
Astyanax and her own slavery). Such future tenses are generic,292 for they
commemorate rather than generate a series of events. Tense293 is not seen
as a linear sequence of events, but as a means of placing the storytelling
in the context of the performance.
Andromache's lament displays a remarkable tense combination. In
lines 740-742, three different tenses are used: present (οδύρονται), aorist
(εθηκας) and future perfect (λελείψεται). The interpretation of this tense
combination is inseparable from that of their function. In the case of οδύ-
ρονται, it is the people of Troy whose pain is focalized; this pain is not
expressed, but presented by the speaker as happening in front of the
audience's eyes, as if seen on the spot.294 Andromache is zooming to an
aspect of the lament performance so as to synchronize it with her own
utterance; her own lament and the lament of the people occur at the same
moment of time. On the other hand, the past tense εθηκας focuses on the
deceased - Hector is the one who has left pain and mourning to his
parents. The hero is dead, and so the aorist expresses the nearness of the
event, its "immediately present situation"295 becoming a means to mirror
the way the same event is perceived by different focalizers. Finally, the
future perfect λελείψεται used for Andromache herself refers to the event
of Hector's death but as experienced by her; Andromache offers a vivid
visualization of a future situation where she will be singled out as the one
to undergo the greatest suffering. What is present for the people and what
2,1
Bakker (1997c) 33.
295
Bakker (1997c) 33.
2,3
On aspect and tense, see Comrie (1976); (1985).
m
Bakker (1997d) 20 notes: "the aorist may be used to express an event whose comple-
tion constitutes the essence of a speaker's present experience, whereas the imperfect
seems to be incompatible with signs pertaining to a speaker's present situation".
295
Bakker (1997d) 21.
108 Chapter 4
is left for the parents will be always present for her in the future, for
Hector has not stretched his hands from his death-bed, nor has he told her
a πυκινόν επος that she would remember for days and nights while
shedding her tears (743-745). The consequences of Hector's death are not
seen in their temporal perspective, but from the perspective of the
different subjects involved in the lamentation. By figuratively translating
Hector's absence in her future life into pain and sorrow that will be
always present, Andromache is absorbing all temporal dimensions into an
eternal pain and lament reflecting the κλέος of the Iliad, which is in
essence the dramatic lament for Hector perpetuated through epic
memory.296
296
See Nagy (1979) 142-150.
Chapter 5
Ars Allusiva:
Intratextual Readings in the Iliadic Personal Laments
5.1 Introductory Remarks
Having established both a corpus of γόος-speeches and the elements of

the Iliadic γόοι, their boundaries and contexts, and the way they present
themselves with individual deixis, I shall now proceed to consider them
within the narrative as a whole.
My focus will be twofold, stretching towards two different but
complementary directions: allusion and narratology. I will examine each
γόοι by focusing on formulas or expressions in comparison to their use in
other parts of the epic. In other words, I will attempt to see how the Iliadic
γόοι "look at" other parts of the poem when they use expressions which
have already been used in other passages; how the personal laments
"read" what precedes or follows them, and what role allusion plays in this
process, as the latter can be used to quote, to asssimilate, to differentiate
or even to deviate from a pattern. As Pucci297 has said on allusion and
scholarly interest in it:
"... allusion dominates in the Homeric text. The reason for this lies also in the
fact that the allusion is a way of quoting in the highly conventional and stylized Ho-
meric language. Accordingly, the formulaic repetition-which has often discouraged
scholars from speaking of deliberate allusion -turns out to be the very ground of
a continuous intertextuality, of quotations, of incorporation, of an exchange of
views or polemic arguments among the texts".
What Pucci has successfully done on an intertextual level I will
297
See Pucci (1987) 242.
110 Chapter 5
attempt to do intratextually,29' by examining allusion299 between "a second

text" (that of the Iliadic γόος-speeches) and the rest of the poem; this
"second text" follows a parallel course with the plot, both maintaining its
fragmentation and forming part of the whole. The fundamental
intratextual premise adopted here is that "a text's meaning grows not only
out [of] the readings of its parts and its whole, but also out of readings of
the relationships between the parts and the reading of those parts as parts,
and parts as relationship".300 To cite a powerful example, the number of
personal laments in the Iliad, the frequency of their appearance and the
weight of their importance steadily increase as the poem approaches its
end. This observation is meaningful only to the extent that the γόοι are
identified as chunks of text acquiring cohesion and uniformity only within
the larger text of the poem they are placed in. Segmentation and unity
have to be renegotiated301 if one is to decode their interaction and subsequent
interdependence.
Narratology302 will be also used as a complementary hermeneutical
tool, inviting the modern reader to scan the text backward and forward.
Interrupted linearity and increased frequency of γόος-speeches are essential
for appreciating a typical intratextual reading of the laments, a reading
founded on relating "apparently disparate parts of the text, in order to
enhance the reading of each".303
The approach adopted here may seem at odds with the emphasis given
on formulas, orality and performance; how can we turn to a text-oriented
interpretive method, thus discarding all previous claims concerning
techniques of oral poetry and repetition exemplified through a variety of
devices?
Dealing with such a thorny issue calls for or even presupposes a
general statement expressing one's Homeric credo. In my view, the
298
On intratextuality, see Sharrock & Morales (2000) 4, ft. 8.
2W
Pasquali (1942) was the first to use the term arte allusiva. For further bibliography
and prudent reservations concerning some idiosyncratic uses of this method, see
Kyriakou (1995) 15, ft. 38.
300
Sharrock & Morales (2000) 5-6.
501
Sharrock & Morales (2000) 4.
502
See de Jong (1987b) and Richardson (1990). In addition to focalization, I examine
order and pace.
303
Sharrock & Morales (2000) 9.
5.1 Introductory remarks 111
Homeric poems should be treated as texts, in the sense that they are
extended manifestations of cohesive discourse "rather than compilations
of sentences from various other texts".304 Orality and textuality are not
irreconcilable qualities, and oral poetry such as that of the Iliad and the
Odyssey does not exclude the notion of a different kind of text, one that is
not fixed by writing and immune to significant variation. Distant and
proximal narrative relations are compatible with an oral text, oral with
respect to its continuous recomposition in performance and text in
reference to its technical complexity and sophisticated nature.305
These two methods of approach will be used in a complementary way;
that is to say, they will not be separated in my analysis but rather I will try
to employ them, through the different perspectives that they take, in order
to clarify the relation between each of the personal laments and the rest of
the poem. I will also look at the extent to which the γόοι create, use and
complete a narrative thread, summarizing or epitomizing the whole Iliadic
plot.
In the process of my analysis I will be using terms such as anticipatory
or ritual personal laments, which spring from the classification of the
personal laments on the basis of two distinct criteria: a) form and b)
function. According to the first criterion, the γόοι can be termed: 1 ) single;
2) antiphonal; 3) triadic, and according to the second: 1) anticipatory; 2)
concealed/mixed; 3) informal/ritualistic306 and 4) formal/ritual.
What follows is a table that shows in which categories each personal
lament belongs; the first term describes the personal lament according to
form and the second according to function (the first column designates the
speaker and the addressee of each γόος):
304
Martin (2000) 47.
305
See Pucci (1987) 26-27. On distant and proximal relations, see Reichel (1994) and
Martin (2000).
306
See also chapter 1 (Types of Γόοι). By the term 'ritualistic' I describe the γόοι for
Hector in II. 22 which are expressed within a semi-formal context (due to the absence
of the hero's body); by 'ritual' I designate personal laments uttered within a formal
context, e.g. the γόοι for Hector in //. 24.
112 Chapter 5
Table 2: Types of Personal Laments307

in the Iliad
Pers. Laments Book Form Function

l.Ag-M 4 single anticipatory
2. Andr-Hct 6 single anticipatory
3. Th-Ach 18 single concealed
4. Ach-P 18 single mixed
5. Br-P 19 antiphonal ritualistic
6. Ach-P 19 antiphonal ritualistic
7. Pr-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic
8. Hec-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic
9. Andr-Hct 22 triadic ritualistic
10. Andr-Hct 24 triadic ritual
11. Hec-Hct 24 triadic ritual
12. Hel-Hct 24 triadic ritual
5.2 Agamemnon
Agamemnon's personal lament for Menelaus (4. 155-182) is unique

within the corpus of Iliadic personal laments,308 being the only γόος-
speech which is virtually unfulfilled; as Andromache refers to Hector's
future death in II. 6, Agamemnon also anticipates the loss of his brother
Menelaus. But the striking difference between these two personal laments
is that Agamemnon's dirge is a pseudo-γόος as Menelaus will not die,
whereas Hector, whom Andromache laments in Book 6, will.
This point is highly significant when interpreting the function of this
307
Abbreviated Symbols: Pers. Laments = Personal Laments; Ag = Agamemnon; M =
Menelaus; Andr = Andromache; Hct = Hector; Th = Thetis; Ach = Achilles; Ρ =
Patroclus; Br = Briseis; Pr = Priam; Hec = Hecuba; Hel = Helen.
308
For a detailed description of the "structural morphology" of this speech, see chapter
2 above.
5.2 Agamemnon 113
speech -one basic question that has to be addressed concerns the reason
behind its utterance. Is it simply the verbalization of Agamemnon's fear
or does it also serve, in the long run, a more important goal?
The personal lament in question is roughly divided into two parts of
almost equal length. The first one is concerned with the lament for Me-
nelaus and the punishment of Zeus, whereas the second is a lament of
Agamemnon's own αιδώς, in which the emphasis is turned towards the
speaker and his thoughts linger on his own responsibility before the eyes
of the Achaean army.
The first part of the speech, which is in fact the personal lament proper,
treats three themes: the violation of the truce, the punishment of Zeus and
the vision of the future destruction of Troy.
The handling of these themes is carried out by means of one analepsis
and two prolepses. Agamemnon begins by referring to the truce and its
violation by the Trojans, but what is presented here is his own focalization
of past events. He was the one who put Menelaus alone (4. 156: οίον προ-
στήσας) in front of the Achaeans to fight the Trojans.309 This is not what
we have been told in Iliad 3. There, it was Menelaus1 choice to fight
against Paris; it was Menelaus himself who made this decision and
actually delivered a speech in 3.97-110, where he clearly stated that a duel
had to take place between himself and Paris (...έπεί κακά πολλά πέπασθε
/ εϊνεκ' έμής έριδος και 'Αλεξάνδρου ενεκ' άρχής) and not Agamemnon,
who only later declared the terms before carrying out the sacrifice.
On the contrary, in his γόος Agamemnon presents himself as
responsible for what he considers to be the death of his brother and, by
employing the phrase θάνατον νύ τοι δρκι' εταμνον (4. 155), looks back
to 3. 276-291, in which he announced the terms of the truce.
This internal homodiegetic analepsis does not supply or fill a gap in
the preceding narrative but rather effectuates a past event known from the
prior diegesis through the verbalization of a character's thoughts and
feelings. The result is a sophisticated re-reading of the truce scene and its
violation as seen by Agamemnon acting as internal narrator. Thus it is the
m
I do not think that the scholia (bT) are right when they say that προστήσας is
metaphorical: μεταφορικώς άπό των θυμάτων απερ προϊστωσι των βωμών; as Kirk
(1985) 347 ad loc. notes: "no good parallel is known for such a use". Moreover, the
emphatic use of οίον at the beginning of the line before προστήσας shifts the focus
onto the fact that Menelaus would fight alone; there is no allusion here to a sacrificial
victim, as the scholia imply.
114 Chapter 5
localization310 of a specific character's feeling of responsibility that

creates the γόος-speech.
The next theme is that of the punishment of Zeus, or rather the
fulfillment of his will. The use of αλιον in line 158 looks back at 4. 26,
when Hera complained to Zeus because he wanted her labor against the
Trojans to remain empty and unfulfilled; on the contrary, Agamemnon
expresses his certainty that the sacrifice to the father of gods and men will
not remain unfulfilled for long, as Zeus will not be slow to punish the
violators of the truce. Just as later in the same speech (4. 178-179), the
word αλιον (in vain, fruitless, empty) is neatly combined here with
different forms of the verb τελέω (ουκ έτέλεσσεν: 160, τελεί: 161, ουκ άτέ-
λεστα: 168, άτελευτήτφ: 175, τελέσει': 178). This allusion foregrounds
one of the fundamental themes of the Iliad, first introduced in the proem:
the fulfillment of Zeus' βουλή (Διός δ' έτελείετο βουλή: 1. 5). It is
precisely this thought that triggers the vision of the destruction of Troy.
This series of textual indicators connoting 3 " Agamemnon's certainty
as regards the fulfillment of Zeus' will is crowned by his emphatic
statement on the final outcome of the war: ευ γαρ έγώ τόδε οιδα κατά
φρένα και κατά θυμόν: 4. 163. This conviction has a twofold explanation
and function: first, it is known that the verbalization of one's emotions
and opinions results in them being communicated and shared with others.
Agamemnon is here addressing a specific internal audience -that of his
comrades- who also participate in the lament (έπεστενάχοντο δ' έταΐροι:
154). Therefore, he wants to assure them that ultimately, despite of the
violation of the truce, victory will be on their side. It will be granted by
Zeus to whom Agamemnon's oath was made before the sacrifice
preceding the duel between Paris and Menelaus. Second, it creates an
antithesis with the fear that he will leave Troy empty-handed, having lost
his own dear broher (4. 175, 178-179). The use of the verb τελέω or its
derivatives (άτελευτήτφ επί εργψ: 4. 175) and ούχ αλιον (178) creates an
opposition between certainty about Zeus' punishment and the speaker's
doubts and fears about the accomplishment of his own duty. Agamemnon
310
Cf. Ahl (1989) 16 who notes: "the narrator, or perhaps one should say internal
mythmaker, often seeks to substitute his version of the myth for the one previously
current". In this case Agamemnon as internal narrator substitutes Menelaus1 version
of events with his own.
311
On denotation and connotation, see Silk (1983) 330-333.
5.2 Agamemnon 115
draws a deliberate contrast between Zeus and himself, the former carrying
out his will, the latter failing to accomplish his goals.
The external narrator's statement of Zeus' plan in 1. 5 acquires a
different tone here, as it comes from Agamemnon's mouth: Zeus becomes
the one who will punish the Trojan injustice. The speaker corroborates
this belief with the vision of Troy in ruins, and the destruction of Priam
and his people under the avenging anger of the father of gods and men.312
In the second part of the personal lament (171-182), Agamemnon
laments his own αιδώς by considering his unglorious return to Argos.
What is significant here is the idea of failure, of the unaccomplished
goals which he, the foremost commander of the Achaean army, will not
achieve: Helen will be left for the Trojans to boast about, Menelaus will
lie unburied in Troy άτελευτήτψ επί εργψ. One may infer from Aga-
memnon's words as well as from the scholia313 that Menelaus is far more
important for the war than anybody else, since his death would logically
signify the end of the expedition.
Agamemnon goes on to introduce an embedded direct speech, which
we may term a potential τις-speech.314 This imaginary utterance is only
312
The same proleptic statement is expressed by Hector to Andromache in 6. 447-449;
comparison of these two instances, in which the same prophetic vision is repeated
verbatim, may be significant. No doubt the oral nature of the Homeric poems is the
main reason for the existence of such verbatim repetitions, but reiteration, the matrix
of epic poetry, referring not only to formulas but also to conceptual frames, creates
some enthralling associations, as epic diction constantly reshapes, quotes and alludes
to itself. See Pucci (1987) 19. The passage in which Hector expresses this proleptic
statement is an answer to the preceding personal lament by Andromache, containing
elements typical of the γόοι, such as the "Comparison" and the "Death-Wish". In
looking back to Andromache's γόος, this speech attempts to balance the importance
she has accorded to Hector. By quoting the same phrase that Agamemnon had
uttered, Hector reads it anew, with a quite different coloring. As de Jong (1987b) 188
notes: "With these words Agamemnon, the future victor, adhorts his troops (in Δ),
whereas Hector, the future loser, expresses to his wife Andromache his determination
to fight in spite of everything (in Z)".
313
See b (BCE3E4) 171b. I think that one can plausibly argue for an allusion here to the
fact that since the goal of the expedition is to take Helen back to Greece, if her
legitimate husband Menelaus died, there would be no reason for continuing the war.
314
For τις-speeches see: Hentze (1905) 254 who calls them Chorreden and considers
them to be the ancestors of the tragic chorus, whereas Fingerle (1939) 283-294 uses
the term tis-Reden. See also Wilson (1979) 1-2; de Jong (1987a), (1987b) 69-84.
Richardson (1990) 24-25 coins them pseudo-direct speeches; Bezantakos (1996)
116 Chapter 5
found in character-text, refers to the future and is attributed to an anony-

mous speaker. Potential τις-speeches differ from actual ones in that the
latter refer to events which have occurred or are currently taking place,
whereas the former pertain to future, completely hypothetical situations.
Actual τις-speeches express the "voice of anonymity",315 while potential
τις-speeches externalize and verbalize the fears or hopes of the speaker.
This particular potential τις-speech begins with a predictive introductory
formula and closes with an almost identical capping expression which is,
as ever in potential τις-speeches, future316 and "reflects in miniature a major
structural principle of the speeches in Homer".317
The question I would like to address concerns the particular function
of this τις-speech within Agamemnon's γόος. I will try to illuminate this
by pointing to three aspects of this embedded speech which I believe to
be crucial in answering the above question.
a. The potential τις-speech in question is an oral anti-epitaph with
reversion of traditional funerary phraseology, changing from commemo-
rative/laudatory for the deceased to derogatory for the mourner. At the
same time, although it is embedded within a personal lament, the symbolic
locus where a mourner laments the dead, within the τις-speech itself an
anonymous Trojan mocks Agamemnon for being responsible for the death
of his brother. The hypothetical speaker is bitterly ironic towards Aga-
memnon, who led the expedition and returned to Argos without having
achieved his goal and - what is more important - with his "brave" (άγα-
θός) brother dead in Troy.
Though άγαθός, Menelaus is considered dead and it is this specific
quality which increases the responsibility of Agamemnon for losing such
a brother.318 The leaping (επιθρώσκων) of the anonymous Trojan 3 " upon
the grave of Menelaus reinforces the mocking, since this is an insult to the
196-205 describes them as λόγοι κοινής γνώμης and offers a survey of previous work
on τις-speeches with an examination of their typology.
315
3,6
This embedded speech is introduced by the formula καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει and capped
by ώς ποτέ τις έρέει.
317
See Wilson (1979) 2.
3,8
Cf. the scholia vetera at II. 4. 181c'cJ (I 483 Erbse).
3
" The use of the epithet ύπερηνορεόντων for the Trojans implies that the anonymous
τις is also an ύπερήνωρ; this clearly indicates a negative quality. See also Kirk (1985)
350 ad loc.
5.2 Agamemnon 117
dead; the picture of Agamemnon's brother abandoned in a foreign land far

from home is made even more bitter by the mention of the enemy defiling
his grave. By reversing the scope of the personal lament (through the
insertion of an anti-epitaph), the speaker introduces a sophisticated indirect
praise, a laudatio fimebris, not by praising the deceased, but by rebuking
himself as responsible for the loss of άγαθός Μενέλαος.
This anti-epitaph with its typical epigrammatic funerary expressions
(φίλην ές πατρίδα γαΐαν, λιπών άγαθόν Μενέλαον) lends a dramatic vivid-
ness to Agamemnon's speech and externalizes his fears, which are consonant
with the Homeric view of one's interest in his posthumous fame.
b. Since we are dealing with tertiary focalization (a direct speech
within a speech), "the distance from the primary fabula increases and
therewith the reliability decreases";320 the reason for this decrease in
reliability lies in the creation of an intended contrast with the conviction
expressed in the first part of the speech. The insertion of the τις-speech
reinforces the opposition between the first part, which refers with
certainty to the punishment of Zeus and the end of Troy, and the second
part, which expresses Agamemnon's fears about his potential failure in
the most emphatic way.
c. By inserting a potential τις-speech of imaginary content within an
anticipatory personal lament, Agamemnon deviates from the "boundaries"
of the Iliadic plot and offers the audience a glimpse of what the Iliad will
not narrate. In fact, this potential τις-speech alludes to the epic tradition of
meta-Iliadic Νόστοι, hinting at a potential Iliadic version of them. Verbalized
and colored by Agamemnon's feelings, this summary points towards the
rest of the epic tradition, which refers to the return of the Greek heroes
after the fall of Troy by suggesting an imaginary return before the city is
captured.
The paradoxical nature of Agamemnon's speech, imbued with
contradictory statements, discloses the hero's inner conflict. On the other
hand, Agamemnon knows that he is to win, but remains a defeatist in his
own heart,"1 thus occupying a special position within the intratextual
frame of the personal laments: he is the only Greek apart from Achilles to
utter a γόος, and it is his own failure that he chooses to lament.
320
321
As in the beginning of Iliad 2.
118 Chapter 5
The autoreferential nature of Agamemnon's lament bears a profound

metapoetic statement, one which is not explicitly verbalized but implicitly
alluded to. The Iliadic personal laments have interiorized the archetypal
conflict between Agamemnon and Achilles, adapting it to their own,
"personal" subject-matter. Just as in the initial conflict between the two
heroes in Iliad 1, in which Agamemnon adopts a selfish stance, whereas
Achilles loses somebody dear to him (Briséis as a symbol of his heroic
τιμή), so in the γόοι it is Agamemnon again who fosters an egotistic attitude
even seeing his brother's death in respect of its impact on his αιδώς,
whereas Achilles experiences another terrible loss, that of Patroclus.321
Considering the function of Agamemnon's γόος as a whole, it becomes
clear that the wounding of Menelaus is not serious in itself, but could be
dramatic because its consequences are dramatic for the continuation of
the war; Agamemnon's personal lament and the ensuing verbal exchange
between himself and his brother Menelaus lend vividness to the scene and
increase the pathos. In this way, this particular γόος becomes a speech of
great significance, for it attaches great importance to a rather trivial wound-
ing, importance arising not from the facts, but confirming the poet's
intention to push the story forward and continue it. Thus, far from being
an isolated insertion into the epic plot, this speech is neatly interwoven
and sufficiently incorporated in the poem, activating the continuation of
the story.322
5.3 Andromache
5.3.1 Iliad 6
The personal lament of Andromache for Hector in Book 6 (407-439)

appears in one of the most significant scenes of the Iliad, and it is with
322
See Bezantakos (1996) 255, who rightly argues that the break of the truce acquires a
dramatic tone not because of the trivial wounding of Menelaus, but rather due to its
thematic expansion in the speeches, especially by Agamemnon, who considers his
brother's wounding to be fatal.
5.3 Andromache 119
this point in mind that the Alexandrian scholars gave this whole Book the
title Έκτορος και 'Ανδρομάχης ομιλία. Like the personal lament of Aga-
memnnon, this too is a single, anticipatory γόος; its anticipatory role is
probably the most noteworthy in the entire poem since it deals with the
death of Hector, with which the Iliad will come to an end.
This γόος is divided into two parts: the first (407-411) refers to Hector's
death and its consequences for Andromache and their child, while also
containing the "Death-Wish", and the second (411-439) pertains to the
"Comparison" theme.
In the first part Andromache begins with an internal prolepsis of the
future death of Hector. This death will take place within the Iliad, though
not in the way Andromache describes, for Hector will be killed by
Achilles and not by all the Achaeans (6. 409-410).
The "Death-Wish" expressed by έμοί δέ κε κέρδιον εϊη / σεΐ' άφαμαρ-
τούση χθόνα δύμεναι (410-411) is a specific thematic element recurrent
in personal laments in the form of an imaginary wish. Future-oriented and
describing the emotional state of the speaker, as it presents Andromache's
focalization, it alludes through a change of roles (Rollenwechsel) to the
ensuing tragedy of Hector. The expression χθόνα δύμεναι, like τότε μοι
χάνοι εύρεϊα χθών in Agamemnon's personal lament (4. 182), introduces
a metaphor in which the earth becomes a refuge, a sort of escape for the
mourner from a situation of excessive pain and -in the case of Aga-
memnon- liability. This becomes all the more important since the earth is
the place associated par excellence with the deceased." 3 Looking for
refuge among the dead, the mourner unconsciously seeks reunion with the
person mourned for.
The second part of Andromache's personal lament is organized upon
three consequent analepses referring to the deaths of her father, her seven
brothers and her mother. All three are external, which is to say they do not
interfere with the primary fabula, as they fall outside the time-span it
covers.324 External analepses uttered by speaking characters are known for
their allusive and elliptical nature. Their content is familiar to their
323
There are also expressions, which mean that somebody died, associated with the
earth such as γαΐαν είλον, or expressions like ψυχή δέ κατά χθονός ήΰτε καπνός /
ωχετο τετριγυια (23. 100-101), which refer to the earth as a place of dread.
324
For a discussion of prolepses and analepses in the Iliad, see de Jong (1987b) 81 ff.
For external analepses in character-text, see ibid. 160-168.
120 Chapter 5
addressee and the main interest of the speaker lies in the importance each
analepsis has in the present context.325 Their role is not informational, as
when the external narrator narrates one of them to provide background
information or to increase the dramatic tension. Therefore, when we
examine the external analepses which are contained in the second part of
Andromache's speech, we should be alert for clues hinting at two
different but complementary levels: the argumentative and the functional.
On the argumentative level, Andromache attempts to raise the feeling
of pity326 in Hector's heart by recalling the tragedy of all her dear ones.
Through the description of her past sufferings and losses, she highlights
the importance of Hector in her life, who -in an emotionally heated
couplet-327 is considered as encapsulating in himself all the family relations
she had with her next of kin in addition to that of being her husband. The
importance of the ascending scale of affection (father, brothers, mother,
Hector) is still here at work, just as it is in the whole scene of the Homilía
(Trojans, Hecuba, Priam, brothers, Andromache), and may well have been
derived from an earlier epic, as comparison with the story of Meleager has
shown.328 This augmentative addition as well as the balanced structure of
the couplet (429-430: with πατήρ and μήτηρ in the first line and κασίγνη-
τος with παρακοίτης329 in the second, as well as the emphatic anaphora of
325
See Austin (1966) 297; Kirk (1962) 164-166.
326
Cf. Burkert (1955) 86-90, who discusses this passage at length, showing how pity is
for her a force opposed to Hector's αιδώς and θυμός. One should also note that έλε-
αίρεις (6. 407) and έλέαιρε (6. 431) are contrasted with the absence of any terms
denoting legal or moral responsibility Hector might have for supporting
Andromache.
327
Cf. 6. 429-430. Scholars (Bonnet 1990, 265-268; Schmitz 1963, 144) have
convincingly shown how Andromache's language, metrics and style in this speech
reflect her emotional state, which is very different from Hector's balanced and
reserved reply that follows. See also Mackie (1996) 123-124, who observes that
while Andromache expresses her feelings "in a line or less at a time", Hector's
sentences stretch over two lines or more. Her emotional outburst is presented in stark
opposition to her husband's restrained response.
328
For a comparison between the Homilía scene in Iliad 6 and the Meleagris, see
Kakridis (1949) 43-64. For the embedded Meleager story, see Kakridis (1949) 11-42;
Willcock (1964) 147; Schadewaldt (1966) 139-142; Heubeck (1984) 128-135; March
(1987) 22-46; Swain (1988) 271-276; Voskos (1997 2 ) 39-89 (= 1974, 11-46); Alden
(2000) 179-290; Grossardt (2001) with all the previous bibliography.
329
The last person mentioned in this list of affection and loss is Hector, who is described
5.3 Andromache 121
σύ μοι... σύ δέ μοι)330 looks at the ensuing reply by Hector, who in his turn
highlights the importance of Andromache in his life by using a priamel (6.
450-454):"'
«άλλ' οΰ μοι Τρώων τόσσον μέλει άλγος όπίσσω,

οΰτ' αυτής Εκάβης ούτε Πριάμοιο άνακτος
οΰτε κασιγνήτων, οϊ κεν πολέες τε και έσθλοί
έν κονίησι πέσοιεν υπ' άνδράσι δυσμενέεσσιν,
δσσον σεΐ\»
"But it is not so much the pain to come of the Trojans

that troubles me, not even of Priam the king nor Hekabe,
not the thought of my brothers who in their numbers and valour
shall drop in the dust under the hands of men who hate them,
as troubles me the thought of you,"
One should also bear in mind that Andromache is placed at the top of the
series of dear ones whom Hector meets within the walls of Troy.332 In line
6. 450 Hector clearly states that he is most interested in his wife's future
after his death; the internal analepses intensify the role of this ascending
by an emotionally loaded expression (γόοι). See also II. 8. 190: ...δς πέρ οί θαλερός
πόσις εύχομαι είναι, παράκοιτις is also employed for Hera (//. 4. 60, 14. 346, 18.
184, 365, 21. 179), Leto (Od. 11. 580) and Helen (Od. 3. 53, 10. 590). It is used for
men only twice (II. 6. 430, 8. 156). The term θαλερός has both amorous and lament
connotations, since it is used with δάκρυ (II. 2. 266) and γόος (Od. 10. 457). See
Chantraine (1946-47) 226-227.
330
For the role of this anaphora see Kakridis (1949) 50.
331
According to Race (1988) ix, the priamel is a poetic/rhetorical form basically
consisting of two parts: "foil" and "climax". The first one introduces and highlights
the climactic term by enumerating or summarizing a number of other examples,
subjects, times, places or instances, which then yield (with varying degrees of
contrast or analogy) to the particular point of interest or importance. In the case
quoted above, the "foil" has a tripartite structure, in which the disjunctions are
amplified into three consecutive verses.
332
See also 9. 590 ff. and the mythological exemplum of Meleager that Phoenix uses in
his speech to persuade Achilles to return to the battlefield. In the story of Meleager it
is also his wife Cleopatra (emphatically placed at the very peak of the series of dear
ones) whose begging will make angry Meleager calm down, change his mind and
return to the fighting.
122 Chapter 5
scale, given that the most important person is presented as the most ill-
fated. Thus on that argumentative level, through their allusive power, the
external analepses try to raise pity333 in Hector's heart for his wife and
child; Andromache struggles in vain to persuade him to save his life.
On the functional level we have to draw a distinction between the first
two analepses and the remainder, since these are the ones that create a
significant interplay with the internal prolepsis which precedes them in
the first part of Andromache's speech.
In the first two analepses it is Achilles who killed her father Eetion and
her seven brothers. The expressions άπέκτανε δίος Άχιλλεύς (414) and
πάντας γαρ κατέπεφνε ποδάρκης δΐος Άχιλλεύς (423) both look back at
τάχα γάρ σε κατακτενέουσιν 'Αχαιοί / πάντες έφορμηθέντες (409-410).
These textual allusions make the name of Achilles heard even when it
is not stated; on the "hypo-diegetic"334 level such temporal digressions
interact and achieve a double effect: they implicitly reveal yet explicitly
conceal the identity of Hector's killer. The explanation for this may lie in
the fact that Andromache does not want Hector, who is on this occasion
the internal narratee (internal audience), to know who will kill him. It is
only in Book 22, when Hector decides to stay outside the walls of Troy
and face Achilles that he becomes aware of the identity of his potential
killer. Andromache's words in Book 6 have cryptically alluded to what
will become clear at the end of the poem: that Hector is doomed to be
killed by Achilles.
Andromache's γόος differs from the simple narrator-text in respect of
what it says about Eetion,335 who is explicitly mentioned in both the
diegesis before the personal lament of Andromache in Book 22 and in her
333
The killing of Andromache's mother by Artemis -to whom a woman's sudden death
was attributed; see also the story of Niobe in 24. 602-607- is probably an ad hoc
invention of Homer which remains completely unexplained, unjustified and vague.
What is important here is the fact that the poet wants to portray Andromache as a full
orphan who has lost all her family; this detail increases the argumentative force of
the third analepsis, as it is now evident that Hector is the only person she has in life.
334
Analepses, prolepses and other temporal digressions or discrepancies form another
narrative level, secondary to that of the "first narrative", which narratology calls
"hypo-diegetic"; see Rimmon-Kenan (1983) 91-92.
335
As Kakridis (1949) 50, ft. 9 notes: "The fall of Eetion's Thebes to Achilles is often
mentioned elsewhere in the Iliad (A 366,1 188, Π 153, cf. also Ψ 827), which shows
a tradition formed before Homer".
5.3 Andromache 123
ensuing γόος-speech. In narrator-text in 6. 395-397, the brief digression is

purely informational -the external narrator gives genealogical information
to the external narratees about Andromache's father. This piece of informa-
tion about her pedigree is used to introduce a new character who will soon
speak for herself; thus the external narratees know that Hector's wife also
descends from a royal family like him. Her status is elevated, since she is
a queen's daughter336 and now the wife of the best of the Trojans.337 Later
on, when Andromache speaks to Hector, she also refers to her father
Eetion (414-419), but in a quite different way; she recounts her father's
death at the hands of Achilles in order to raise pity in her husband's heart
and ultimately persuade him to save his life. The detail concerning the
respect that Achilles showed to her father's body (since he did not strip it
of its armour) is not in the least graphic or informational. The allusion
shows a wide reference-span, as it contains two distinct but comple-
336
Cf. Wathelet (1988) 282 : "La mère d' Andromache régnait à Thèbes, ce qui η' a pas
manqué d'intriguer les commentateurs; elle est rachetée contre une immense rançon,
ce qui ne semble pas avoir été Γ usage pour une femme. Le sort de sa mère renforce
le côté 'amazone' d'Andromache".
337
The cumulative technique used in the composition of this digression is noteworthy;
the last word or idea of its line or colon is used as a basis upon which the next line
or colon is built up: (395) 'Ανδρομάχη, θυγάτηρ μεγαλήτορος Ήετίωνος, (396)
Ήετίων, δς εναιεν ΰπό Πλάκω ΰληέσοη, (397) θ ή β η Ύποπλακιη, Κιλίκεσσ'
άνδρεσσιν άνάσσων·. Schematically speaking, this technique follows the pattern
AA'BB'. It is in such cases that the oral background of the tradition is most clearly
exemplified. One could also refer to the role of the two "internal adding"
enjambments (type la according to Higbie's classification, see Higbie 1990, 34-35);
here the noun Ήετίων functions like a patronymic "which is often in such cases
enjambed with the preceding verse to take the poet to a convenient starting-point in
the line for the next clause" as Higbie argues. In our passage the same thing is
effected by the repetition of the noun Ήετίων, but since this noun is found in the
genitive in the preceding line, Ήετίων will be attracted in the nominative by the
relative clause that follows. This pattern is used successively in 396 and 397 and has
been identified by Hoekstra (1965, 34) as a syntactic type of enjambment which is
thought to be traditional. Kirk (1990) 211 says that this digression (394-399) is
structured upon the ring-composition technique; both these techniques (cumulative
and ring-composition) speak for the careful composition of the digression, which in
its turn points to a pre-Iliadic development of the sack of Thebe and the killing of
Eetion. Note also that the phorminx played by Achilles in 9. 188, his horse Pedasus
at 16. 152 ff. and an iron weight in 23. 826 ff., are all connected with Thebe and
Eetion.
124 Chapter 5
mentary functions.338 The first is a reversive one, since it points to

Hector's death at the hands of Achilles, who will not respect the dead
man's body, but will strip it of its armour, drag it three times around the
walls of Troy yet not bury the corpse of his own accord or build a mound
as he did for Eetion (419: ήδ' έπί σήμ' εχεεν).339 The second function
served by the allusion is a parallel one, because it refers to the eventual
treatment of Patroclus' body by Achilles, which is similar to his treatment
of the body of Eetion.340
A somewhat similar situation is encountered in Book 22. In the
narrator-text preceding Andromache's personal lament, Eetion is
mentioned as her father during reference to her wedding day. The
emphasis is on the phrase έπεί πόρε μυρία εδνα (22. 472), which looks
back at πολύδωρος in 6. 394; both of these expressions point to the
wedding of Andromache and Hector, in the days of their past happiness.
Yet in the character-text of Andromache's personal lament, at the point
where she verbalizes her pain and suffering, she recalls her father not in
respect of her wedding day, but of his grim fate (22. 481: δύσμορος)
which is paralleled to her own (22. 481: αΐνόμορον).
The last part of Andromache's speech is rich in allusive references, all
of which have hitherto gone more or less unnoticed.341
"« The functionality of the allusion in two different directions is in agreement with the
fact that the allusive phrase is marked by repetition and difference, pointing both to
the same and the reverse.
339
The expression νύμφαι όρεστιάδες in II. 6. 420 is not attested in the Odyssey. One
can find νύμφαι νηϊάδες in Od. 13. 356 and νύμφαι κρηναΐαι in Od. 17. 240. See
Kirk (1990) 215, who corrects Wilamowitz (1916, 313) and argues that these nymphs
may have "funeral significance as also in Virgil at Aen. 6. 283. They are added to
confirm Eetion as a great man, cf. the sea-nymphs at Achilles' funeral at Od. 24. 27".
See also Tsagalis (2002) 218-219.
340
Cf. Wathelet (1988) 135 who says: "Apparement, il a appliqué à Eetion le même
cérémonial funéraire qu' il observera plus tard pour Patrocle".
341
Lines 433-439 have been considered to be inappropriate to the content of
Andromache's speech. Aristarchus was the first to athetize these lines -he thought
that they did not suit Andromache, as she would replace Hector as a general and also
because there was no other mention in the Iliad of an attack on that part of the wall.
Lohmann (1988) 33 ff. added anticlimax and disturbance of ring-form to the above
arguments. Moreover, the words άμβατός and έπίδρομον, are hapaxes. Aristarchus
had failed to notice that there are other instances where advice is given to Hector to
stay inside the walls (22. 84 ff.); the purpose of Andromache is to keep him alive and
5.3 Andromache 125
The first among these allusions is the use and metrical placement of
the word έρινεόν in line 433, which is two more times attested in the Iliad·,
in 11. 166-168 the Trojans rushed in full retreat past the wild fig-tree. In
this case the same expression is used as in 6. 433: παρ' έρινεόν. Also in
22. 145 when Achilles chases Hector, we hear the same word once more
as "they rushed past the look-out place (σκοπιήν) and wind-tossed wild
fig-tree (έρινεόν ήνεμόεντα)". Thus in the Iliad the word έρινεός is always
attested in the accusative and placed at position 5, after the penthemimeral
caesura. Such localization of a lexical item with a limited range of
referents (the Trojans, including Hector, and Achilles) deserves
interpretation. The wild fig-tree342 (έρινεός) is a "pattern-marker", which
whenever evoked alludes, by its métonymie function, not only to a visible
spot in the Trojan plain, but also to a situation of despair and danger for
the Trojans. In all these cases either Hector343 or the Trojans are in peril or
persecuted by some Achaean. It is noteworthy that in 11.166-168 the
not to replace him as a general. Aristarchus' first point originated from a sort of
"moral preoccupation" about the preservation of male superiority in conducting war,
but this superiority is not challenged at all; the point is rather different. Willcock
(1977) 51 if. is right to argue that this is an ad hoc invention by the poet of the Iliad
"to give Andromache an excuse for asking Hector to stay near the city wall", because
this theme is completely forgotten afterwards. See Edwards (1987) 210, who asks an
interesting question which he does not attempt to answer: "Is this the poet's hint at
the eventual breaching of the wall in the last days of Troy?" Lohmann's arguments
(1988) 33 ff. are very subjective, for one has to admit that the criteria used, in order
to describe the limits of a structural technique such as ring-composition, depend on
rather personal and aesthetic grounds. Even more importantly, ring-composition
comes after poetry, not vice-versa. The same is the case for his anticlimax argument,
which is also based on an individual line of interpretation; why should a personal
lament end with the highest possible touch of pathos? Sometimes a low key end is
more appropriate. As for the hapaxes άμβατός and έπίδρομον, it is very risky to base
an athetesis on such grounds. There was a legend (Pindar O. 8. 31-46) that Aiacus
helped Apollo and Poseidon to built Troy's walls at this particular part of the
fortification, so Andromache reminds her husband that this part of the walls should
be defended. One more argument pointing to the authenticity of these lines is
Hector's answer (6. 492: πόλεμος δ' άνδρεσσι μελήσει), which would have been
deprived of any sense had she not just offered him some military advice.
3« See Kahane (1994) 51.
343 Cf. 22. 459: άλλά πολύ προθέεσκε, which probably alludes to the έρινεός, for what
does πολύ προθέεσκε mean for Hector or the Trojans in general? To pass the wild
fig-tree limit, as if safety lies before it but death beyond it.
126 Chapter 5
Trojans run in panic past the wild fig-tree, but when they arrive at the oak
tree (the other visible spot in the Trojan plain), they stop their retreat.
Therefore the word έρινεός, by means of pattern-deixis, has through all
these passages a specific Iliadic function: it is the métonymie equivalent
of danger and death for the Trojans.
A second point worthy of consideration is the emphatic use of the
numeral τρίς at the beginning of line 435.344 Andromache says to Hector
that the Achaeans have thrice attempted to assault the wall at the weak
spot where she advises him to place his army. This same adverb is also
used repeatedly in Books 5, 16 and 22. In lines 22. 165 and 22. 251 we
are explicitly told that Achilles and Hector have run three times around
the citadel of Troy,345 but in 22. 208 we hear the "apodosis" of this poetic
device: άλλ' οτε δή το τέταρτον, which links the two scenes intratextually.
The sequence "three times ... and then the fourth time" is an Iliadic device
used elsewhere in the poem,346 but the way it is interwoven with the theme
of the chase of Hector by Achilles is unique in respect of the gradual
augmentation of the tension and the vividness of the whole episode. The
emphatic use of the adverb τρίς at the beginning of line 6. 433 functions
as an allusion to the fatal chase of Hector by Achilles in Book 22; the fact
that the addressee of Andromache's speech in 6 is Hector makes this
allusion even more significant.
Lines 438 and 439 (ή πού τίς σψιν ενισπε θεοπροπίων ευ είδώς, / ή νυ
και αύτών θυμός έποτρύνει και άνώγει) seem an addition to the kernel of
Andromache's advice, since the meaning could very well have been
completed in line 437 alongside the reference to the Achaean leaders who
had carried out the three assaults at the weak spot of the Trojan walls. But
544
See Bannert (1988) 41-57.
345
Note that τρίς is placed at the beginning of verses 6. 435, 22. 165, 22. 251.
346
See 5. 436-438 (Diomedes), 16. 702-705 & 784-786 (Patroclus), 20. 445-447 & 21.
176-177 (Achilles), 23. 816-817 (Diomedes). Bannert (1988) 41 thinks this device
marks either a change in the narrative or the final point in a description. The sequence
τρίς μεν - τρις δέ - τό τέταρτον creates an intratextual association between the three
protagonists, Diomedes, Patroclus and Achilles. The latter must take the place of his
two military surrogates. Amongst other things, all three have faced the god Apollo as
an opponent at a critical moment. The use of τρίς in Andromache's γόος may well be
a dislocated reference belonging to this whole group of intratextual relations and
working as a Verknüpfungspunkt (Bannert 1988, 54) that helps the audience "read"
forward and backward at the same time.
5.3 Andromache 127
a closer look at Hector's speech reveals that these two lines are answered
there, albeit in a disguised form, as Hector picks them up, reverses their
order and adjusts them to his own situation. Line 439:
«ή νυ και αυτών θυμός έποτρύνει και άνώγει.»

"or the very spirit within themselves had stirred them to the
onslaught"
is answered by the first part of line 444:
«ουδέ με θυμός άνωγεν...»

"and the spirit will not let me"
and line 438:
«ή πού τίς σφιν ενισπε θεοπροπίων ευ είδώς»

"either some man well skilled in prophetic arts had spoken"
by the prophetic vision about the fall of Troy in lines 447-449:
«ευ μέν έγώ τόδε οίδα κατά φρένα και κατά θυμόν
εσσεται ήμαρ οτ' αν ποτ' όλώλη "Ιλιος ίρή
και Πρίαμος και λαός έϋμμελίω Πριάμοιο »
"For I know this thing well in my heart, and my mind knows it:
there will come a day when sacred Ilion shall perish,
and Priam, and the people of Priam of the strong ash spear."
Andromache wonders in line 438 whether someone skilled in oracles has

told the Achaeans about the weak spot on the walls; Hector does not reply
to that, but uses the same language in order to state explicitly what he
knows well in his mind and heart. He responds to the doubts Andromache
harbors with determination and clear thinking; he is aware of the future
fall of Troy but will fight to the bitter end nevertheless. In line 439
Andromache examines a second possibility; the Achaean assault on the
the walls may be due to the enemy's eagerness and prompting. Hector
uses equivalent language, but in respect of himself: his heart does not urge
him to slink away from the war because he has learnt to be brave and fight
in the frontline.
128 Chapter 5
Intratextual references can be observed in the absence of Achilles from

the list of Achaean leaders who have in the past attacked the weak spot in
the Trojan walls. Andromache's strategy throughout her γόος is to puzzle
with her advice and conceal her true thoughts by relating the two external
analepses to her father and brothers. It is exactly because she wants to
allude to Achilles' final pursuit of Hector in Book 22 that she does not
mention him; she presents him as a danger to her own family, not to
Hector, as she did in 409-410, when she foresaw her husband's death at
the hands of all the Achaeans without mentioning Achilles.
Andromache seems here to adopt a kind of discourse most typical of
Polydamas throughout the Iliad. What she expresses is not usually a
woman's position but the opinion of Polydamas, who has often warned
that when Hector dies, Troy will fall. By fostering a form of speech which
is not typical of her, Andromache acquires a role alien to a woman.347 It is
noteworthy that Hector's future attitude will discredit both Andromache
and Polydamas' advice and warnings. By moving away from his wife's
advice Hector starts moving away from prudence. In the case of
Polydamas, this becomes even more obvious in 22. 98-130, when Hector
admits his own mistake in failing to listen to Polydamas' advice in 18.
243-283.348
341
Wathelet (1988) 282 notes: "Andromache porte un nom agressif, qui est également
attesté sur des peintures des vases du Vile siècle comme nom d'amazone (la scène
représente le combat d'Héraclès contre celles-ci). Beaucoup plus tard, Andromache
désignera aussi une amazone dans le texte de Γ Iliade, elle est curieusement mêleé à
des tâches guerrières (Z 431-439), elle soigne les chevaux de son mari en les dopant
au vin, ce qui représente un usage inattendu, mais témoigne d' une certaine
connaissance de la matière (cf. Delebecque 1951:57). Zeus souligne qu'Andromache
ne recevra pas d'Hector les armes d'Achille" (see 8. 185-190; 17. 208). In addition,
the Iliad seems to insist on her impulsive character: in 6. 389 (μαινόμενη έικυΐα) and
22.460 (μαινάδι ίση) she is compared to a maenad, a woman who has "departed from
herself' and has become "alien" to her true nature. Segal (1971a) 47 also "reads"
something masculine in her behavior when he compares her attitude to that of her
mother-in-law, Hecuba. Though the Iliad presents Andromache as the paragon of
wifely virtue, in pre-homeric tradition she may well have been something of an
"amazon". See also Wathelet (1988) 283, who points to the fact that Andromache's
mother was ruling in Thebes, and that Hector won his bride after paying an immense
ransom, which was not common for a woman. See also Pomeroy (1975) 16-19.
548
See Redfield (1975) 157-158, Edwards (1991) 117-118 and bT's comment (Erbse V
290) on lines 22. 101-102.1 owe this observation to Prof. Philippe Rousseau.
5.3 Andromache 129
The loose ends in Andromache's anticipatory personal lament in Iliad

6 are masterly dangled as a prima facie unintelligible code that the
audience has to decypher during the unfolding of the plot. The proleptic
indeterminacy of this γόος, with its obscure allusions to the details of
Hector's future death, leaves the audience in a state of narrative limbo. In
the long run, one does appreciate this technique for, as the action goes on,
the result is a clear gain in narrative momentum that alerts the audience to
an impending calamity. By entwining past and future, Andromache's γόος
makes the coming destruction so immanent to the plot that the audience
is left to flirt with the idea that disaster is, after all, unavoidable.
5.3.2 Iliad 22
Andromache's personal lament (22. 477-514) comes last in the triad of

γόοι which close Book 22. This is her longest personal lament, full of
brilliant imagery and pathos, and it plays a quite different role349 from the
two preceding ones by Priam and Hecuba. The very placement of this
γόος falls within the symmetrical construction of Book 22. Of the three
initial speeches,350 two are by Priam and Hecuba, who try to convince
Hector not to stay outside the walls of Troy, while the third is an internal
monologue by Hector, who is puzzled as to which course of action to
follow. The three are balanced by another triad at the end of the Book,
containing the personal laments of Priam, Hecuba and Andromache. The
order of speakers in each triad is significant because the most important
speaker in the first triad (Hector) is placed last, only to be balanced by
Andromache's γόος, which is also placed last in the triad of laments at the
end of this Book.
The intratextual reference to Eetion is here handled in a different way
from Book 6, where he was mentioned by both the external narrator and
Andromache (internal narrator). In this case, by recalling Andromache's
wedding day through an external analepsis in simple-narrator text, the
Iliad prepares the ground for her emotional outburst. Her father's death is
3W
See Segal (1971a) 50, who argues that "Homer has given this gesture of Andromache
in 468-472 a richness which goes far beyond the Hecuba scene of 405-407, for
Andromache is clearly the more important and the more fully developed character".
550
Richardson (1993) 105.
130 Chapter 5
presented in terms of her being ill-fated in the same way Hector is (22.
477-478: lf¡ άρα γεινόμεθ' αΐση / αμφότεροι). Sharing a common fate with
Hector increases the pathos epitomized by δυσάμμοροι (22. 485-486: ôv
τέκομεν σύ τ' έγώ τε δυσάμμοροι· οΰτε σύ τούτψ / εσσεαι, "Εκτορ, ονειαρ,
έπεί θάνες, οΰτε σοΙ ούτος), looking back at Priam's lament in 22. 428
(μήτηρ θ', ή μιν ετικτε δυσάμμορος, ήδ' έγώ αυτός). In Priam's γόος,
father and mother were ill-fated for losing their son, but here it is the son
(Astyanax) who links the fates of both mourner and deceased forever. The
intratextual allusion to Priam's lament opens a window into the poem's
technique of building up the emotional tension, as the triad of the laments
for Hector in Book 22 finds its emotional peak in Andromache's vision of
future grief.351
Yet there is much more to this analepsis. Seaford352 has argued that the
oneness of Andromache and Hector is oneness in disaster353 and traces the
origins of this line of thought in the connection between the bridal journey
and the journey to Hades. One feature of the wedding procession was the
μακαρισμός of bride and groom; the people who participated and
followed the wedding procession wished the best to the new couple.354 The
reference to Eetion and the motif of sharing the same fate with Hector are
here successfully joined under the subversion of a ritual process that
safeguarded the household and guaranteed the well-being of the new
οίκος. The disaster described is a destruction on the ritual level, not only
on the level of actual events, i.e. that Eetion was indeed killed by Achilles.
Another aspect of Andromache's presentation in the Iliad, which is
connected to the subversion of a ritual process, is μαιναδισμός. Twice in
the Iliad (6. 389 and 22. 460) she is depicted as being in a condition of
maenadic frenzy. The expressions used are: (μαινόμενη έικυία) in 6. 389
and (μαινάδιϊση) in 22. 460. In the first one, Andromache is presented as
being in frenzy when Hector asks the maids whether she had gone to see
her sisters in-law at the temple of Athena. By asking this question, Hector
practically "specifies the normal reasons for the wife leaving the house-
351
See Ferrari (1984) 262.
552
Seaford (1994) 334 ff.
353
See also Mackie (1996) 100-101, who rightly observes that Andromache employs
language echoing certain idiosyncratic features of Hector's style, like his
preoccupation with anticipating his future death.
354
See Sappho fr. 44. 34 V: ϋμνην δ' Έκχορα κ' Άνδρομάχαν θεοεικέλοις.
5.3 Andromache 131
hold";355 it is the external narrator who then attributes a maenadic quality

to her that virtually negates the spatial and social activity of the female.
This subversion of her traditional role as bride and woman is the result of
the interplay created by the external analepsis of Eetion and the rest of the
scene depicting the encounter between Andromache and Hector.
The central core of this speech contains a brilliant image of Astyanax's
social marginalization after his father's death: Andromache imagines her
son being excluded from the banquets held by his father's friends due to
his status as an orphan. This long external prolepsis lies in sharp contrast
to a brief external analepsis referring to Astyanax's privileged status in the
past, when Hector was alive.356 The emotional impact of the afore-
mentioned contrast is of crucial importance for the interpretation of this
personal lament, for it holds the key to explaining its function and role in
the poem.
Lohmann357 has argued that this speech is the continuation of the
Homilía scene between Hector and Andromache in Book 6. There,
Andromache referred to the possibility of Astyanax becoming an orphan
if Hector fell on the battlefield, whereas Hector (6. 476-481) prayed to
Zeus that his son might distinguish himself among the Trojans. The
imagery referring to Astyanax in Book 22 is a direct rejection of Hector's
hopes as verbalized in his prayer. Andromache practically corrects her
husband's words. This she does by means of an embedded τις-speech
initiating a tertiary focalization, through which she puts a line into the
mouth of an imaginary young man (22. 498: 'ερρ' οΰτως· ού σός γε πατήρ
μεταδαίνυται, ήμΐν'),358 in direct contrast to another τις-speech embedded
in Hector's prayer '"πατρός γ' δδε πολλόν άμείνων'" in 6. 476. In these
two lines the function of the word πατήρ is dramatically different: in
Hector's prayer the father is a positive point of reference, but in Andro-
mache's γόος it is a negative one, since the loss of the father excludes the
son from social life. The "father" has become the decisive factor de-
termining the life of the son. In this way the Homilía scene in Book 6 is
connected to Andromache's personal lament in Book 22. The latter
355
Seaford (1994) 332.
356
Andromache imagines Astyanax eating the most precious food while seated on his
father's knees, and sleeping in happiness in his nurse's lap.
357
See Lohmann (1988) 66.
»" West (2000) 291 ad loc. has ημιν.
132 Chapter 5
"replies" to the former by presenting the grim picture of reality once

Hector is dead, and by imagining the future of Astyanax, whose father's
prayer has been in vain; in powerful colors, the imagery depicts
Astyanax's future with the same certainty expressed by Andromache
when imagining her husband's death in Book 6.
Another aspect of the μακαρισμός of bride and groom was the rearing
of fine children similar to their parents.359 It is then significant to link this
passage to the missing father figure, especially since the imagined speaker
of line 22. 498, which is embedded in Andromache's speech, is an άμφι-
θαλής (a child whose parents are both alive). The Iliad underlines the
opposition between these two situations (being an orphan versus having
both parents alive) and creates an allusion to a symbolical reversal of the
wedding process.
In lines 508-514, Andromache imagines Hector's body naked
(γυμνόν), being eaten by αίόλαι εύλαί (wriggling worms) after being
mutilated by the dogs. This grim picture brings to her mind his clothes,
which had been made by women especially for him; he is not able to wear
them, nor will he ever be again able to, and so she decides to burn them.
The theme of the mutilation of the corpse360 has now reached its climax.
In 16. 836 Hector boasted over Patroclus (σέ δέ τ' ένθάδε γύπες εδονται)
and in 22. 42 Priam wished that dogs and vultures would eat Achilles
(τάχα κέν έ κύνες και γΰπες εδοιεν). Hecuba expressed almost the same
idea in 22. 86-89; Andromache's words are a fine elaboration not only for
their euphony, but also because they introduce the theme of the garments
showing the "separation between inner and outer worlds, city and
battlefield, female and male which has already been important in the
presentation of Hector's fate".361 In 22. 440 Andromache had been
weaving, and so her reference to Hector's garments alludes to domestic
peace and the beauty of the civilized world, which is contrasted in this
whole scene with the grimness of war; Hector's naked body eaten by dogs
See Men. Rhet. Epid. 404. 27: τέξετε παΐδας ύμιν τε όμοιους και έν άρετη
λαμπρούς.
560
See Segal (1971b).
'61 Segal (1971a) 45-47; he also notes that "the addition of the vivid adjective αίόλαι,
with the open vowels and repeated 1 sounds of αίόλαι εύλαί, as well as the k
alliteration in the second half of 22. 509, indicates how graphically and courageously
she pictures to herself the horror to which her husband's corpse is exposed".
5.3 Andromache 133
and worms is contrasted with the garment-theme, just as happened with

life and death in the fate of Andromache. Her decision to burn the clothes
she had made is a "substitute funeral"362 for her dead husband; the nice use
of ουκ έγκείσεαι αύτοΐς (513) plays with the verb κεΐμαι, which is the
word that describes a hero's death. In this way, the garments (a metonymy
for civilized life) become the allusive antonym of death.
5.3.3 Iliad24
Andromache's personal lament (24. 725-745) is placed first in the triad of

laments that bring the poem to its end.363 It is the third γόος by Andro-
mache in the poem, her most proper personal lament, since the two condi-
tions needed for a formal lament are here fulfilled for the first time:
Hector is dead (he was still alive in her lament in Book 6) and his body is
lying on the bier in front of her (it had not been returned to his family by
Achilles when she uttered her second personal lament in Book 22).
Hector is lamented on three different levels: as protector of the city and
its people (24. 729-730), as a relentless warrior (24. 736-739) and finally
as a son and husband (24. 741-745).364 This is the most comprehensive
personal lament for Hector, at least on Andromache's part, as she tries to
encompass every possible aspect of his life and show that his loss will
have serious repercussions for the whole city. It is no coincidence that this
speech comes at the end of the poem. The Iliad will soon be over, without
describing the end of Troy, but there are no longer any doubts: the death
of Hector, the protector of the city, signifies the fall of Ilium; by lamenting
Hector the Iliad virtually laments Troy.
Andromache's γόος-speech bears similarities to her previous personal
laments in Books 6 and 22,365 but here her speech is more concrete in the
sense that her prediction of the future is clear: she will be enslaved and
562
See Richardson (1993) 162.
363
This is the same triad of persons that Hector met and talked to in Book 6, but the
order has changed. Andromache now speaks first, whereas in Book 6 she was the last
one to speak to him.
364
Lohmann (1988) 70-74.
365
The following lines share common elements: 24. 725-727-6. 407-409, 22. 482-485;
24. 728-730-6. 402-403, 22. 507; 24. 731-6. 410-413, 6. 450-63.
134 Chapter 5
Astyanax will be thrown from the walls of Troy by some Achaean warrior.
In Book 6 she simply referred to Astyanax as an orphan; in Book 22 she
used vivid imagery in order to describe her son's grim future. Now, in
Book 24, his death is not imagined in some vague context, but localized
in Troy itself.
Lohmann366 has argued that Astyanax's future has been depicted
continuously in Andromache's personal laments; his future has been
described on four different levels:
a) simply as that of an orphan (6. 407-408 & 432)
b) with emphasis on his social status after his father's death (22.496 ff.)
c) his enslaving (24. 732-734)
d) his death (24. 734-735)
One can see here how this theme has been treated in the Iliadic
personal laments and notice the existence of a thread that is carefully
woven from its beginning in Book 6, through Book 22 to the end in Book
24. In Book 22, Andromache's reference to her son's fate is vague, then
his social exclusion from certain activities is explained as a result of his
father's death and finally in 24 his possible enslavement or death is
foreshadowed. Andromache's predictions move from the general to the
specific, just as her personal laments become more concrete and subtle
towards the end of the poem; thus, Astyanax's future, which occupies the
central core of her speeches in 22 and 24, follows a parallel course to that
of her γόοι as a whole.
Andromache's personal laments throughout the poem are characte-
rized for their flowing style, but here in Book 24 the careful construction
of the speech, with its three distinct parts (725-732a, 732b-740, 741-745),
is fertile ground for the rhythm to be easily felt.
Andromache's speech contains a number of necessary enjambments367
so that the thematic transitions occur in mid-verse or mid-sentence, with
many emphatic words positioned at the beginning of verses. The flowing
necessary enjambments result in emphasis being placed on a train of
** Lohmann (1988) 73.

367
Richardson (1993) 353; Richardson follows Kirk's terminology and calls them
integral. I follow Higbie, who calls them necessary (type 3); see chapter 4 and also
Higbie (1990) 29, with a comparison of different enjambment terminology (as
proposed by Parry, Kirk and Higbie) and a thorough analysis of the function of the
different types of enjambment as a hermeneutic tool in literary interpretation.
5.3 Andromache 135
thought that is carried to the mid-verse or mid-sentence; this "cumulative"

technique makes speech flow markedly faster than the γόοι of Hecuba and
Helen that are to follow.368
Whereas in the first two parts369 of her lament the enjambment carries
the thought to mid-verse, in the third part, from 738 on, the emphasis lies
at the verse-end with a series of formulaic verse-ends or repeated lines
(735, 737, 738, 739, 740, 741, 742, 743, 745). These familiar formulaic
expressions, acting as a sort of counterbalance to the first part of the γόος,
where the emphasis was rather on the first part of the verse, bear a
negative meaning, that of grief and suffering. The epithet λυγρός is used
three times at verse-end (λυγρόν ολεθρον: 735; έν δαΐ λυγρη: 739; αλγεα
λυγρά: 742), referring first to Astyanax, second to battle, in which Hector
used to prevail and third to Andromache. Its use in an emphatic position
in formulaic expressions -at verse end- inscribes a circle which starts from
the fate of the son, passes through the doom of the father and ends in
Andromache, who summarises the two previous losses in her twofold
personality: that of the mother and that of the wife.370 Line 742 (λελείψε-
ται αλγεα λυγρά) also alludes through pattern-deixis to the Iliadic proem
(1. 2) as it recalls the phrase ή μυρί' Άχαιοΐς άλγε' εθηκεν. Polysemy371 is
an essential epic characteristic based on three distinct narrative properties:
1) basic semantical denotation, 2) connotation by means of reference
specification provided by the immediate verbal context and 3) a context-
free thematic reference offered by pattern-deixis. In the case of αλγεα,
polysemy refers to: a) sufferings as a universal theme of human life (basic
denotation); b) Andromache's αλγεα (connotation) and c) the specific
sufferings of men and women in the Iliad, i.e. particular Iliadic sufferings
(through pattern deixis). The word άλγεα is not attributed to a specific
person as, for example, the word μήνις is, but pattern-deixis tends to link
368
Necessary enjambment stresses the importance of the verb that often comes in the
second line of an enjambed couplet; when the verb is omitted, with a subsequent
division of subject and predicate at verse end, then the enjambment is also necessary.
See Higbie (1990) 49.
369
First part:725-732a; Second part:732b-739; Third part:740-745.
370
For the impact of successive formulas at verse-end in the context of a γόοι, see Pucci
(1998) 100-101.
371
See Kahane (1994) 43-79 who explores the polysemy of keywords like μηνις, άνήρ
and νόστος.
136 Chapter 5
it (through metrical specification in phrases where it is placed at the

beginning of the terminal adonic) with the general thematic register of the
"innumerable sufferings" of the Achaeans. From the beginning of the
poem, these words draw a circle of pain and mourning into which the
Iliad will be unfolded. Therefore, the αλγεα λυγρά of Andromache
simultaneously refer, to her own sufferings because of her husband's death,
and to the general and universal theme of suffering interpreted by the
poem as the sufferings caused by the wrath of Achilles (1. 1-2). Polysemy
has joined the sufferings of the Achaeans to the sufferings caused to the
Trojans and Andromache in particular, by means of a polytropy that links
beginning and end of the poem through correspondence and symmetrical
analogy.
One may ask what the impact of this sequence of formulaic
expressions on this speech is; formulaic material may here have the "same
effect as the repetition of a refrain and accordingly produce an emphasis
and a relief at the same time".372 The rhythm of this speech recalls a
mourning song with repeated expressions of grief -it does not contain any
inarticulate cries (ε ε, αίαΐ, ότοτοΐ etc.) as is the case in Greek tragedy, but
through its fluidity and flexibility retains a dignity that makes it deeply
emotional, yet not strident: a true laudatio funebris.m
With this speech Andromache closes her role in the Iliad. She has
shown remarkable consistency as a speaker, moving forward from the
initial foreshadowing of Hector's death to his final lamentation. What lies
in between these two points in the epic are Books 6-24, that is to say five
sixths of the Iliad: the Trojan episode in Book 6 was not an interlude, but
a narrative mechanism creating the "tension which sustains the poem to
its end".374
5.4 Thetis
This personal lament (18. 52-64), and above all the scene it is placed in,
has attracted scholarly interest since the early analytical studies of Bethe
372
See Pucci (1998) 100.
See Macleod (1982) 148-149.
™ See Macleod (1982) 149; Schadewaldt (1970) 21-38.
5.4 Thetis 137
and Wilamowitz and the first neo-analytical approaches of Kakridis,

Schadewaldt and Pestalozzi375 in the first half of the 20th century. The
peculiarity of this personal lament376 derives from the fact that it seems to
have been initially designed and used in another epic poem, which
Kakridis believes to have been an * Achilleis preceding the Iliad and not
the Aethiopis which probably postdates it.377 The whole scene would have
been more appropriate to an epic poem referring to the death of Achilles
than to Iliad 18, whose first part describes the lament for Patroclus; in
such a poem it would have been reasonable for Thetis to emerge from the
sea swell accompanied by the Nereids to lament her dead son.
As far as the personal lament proper is concerned, analysis by
Lohmann378 has pointed to the fact that the content of her speech is
skillfully adapted to the context it is placed in, since Thetis uses lines
which are related to the scene as it is constructed (52-53 and 63-64) and
closes her speech by referring to her present situation. We cannot know
how much this speech owes to an earlier epic, but its incorporation into
the Iliad shows the art of a skillful poet, who uses this lament as "part of
the building up towards Achilles' decision to seek vengeance at the cost
of his life; Hector too is lamented before his death by his wife and
household."379 The lament points to the meeting between mother and son
which will lead to the όπλοποιΐα forming the second part of this Book.
The overall function of this single γόος is to set in motion a course of
action that will lead to the building of a scene and the continuation of the
plot; its placement between the brief introductory scene with Antilochus
373
See Bethe (1914) 96; Wilamowitz (19202) 163 ff.; Schadewaldt (1936) 66 ff.;
Pestalozzi (1945); Kakridis (1949) 65 ff.
376
In respect of its function, this is a 'concealed' personal lament (see Table 2): Thetis
comes to lament Achilles, who is alive, on the pretext of her son's lament for
Patroclus, who is dead; the mourner (Achilles) is prematurely mourned by his future
mourners (Thetis and the Nereids).
377
The question here is whether an epic like the Aethiopis should be considered later
than the Iliad, in this case, Book 18, the Aethiopis and the scene with the Nereids and
Thetis lamenting Achilles in Odyssey 24. 47 ff., must all have used an earlier epic as
their model, as Kakridis (1949) argued. The chronology of the Aethiopis is not
certain. See Severyns (1928). Aristarchus also thought that the Epic Cycle came later
than the Iliad
371
See Lohmann (1970) 54.
37
' Cf. Edwards (1991) 151.
138 Chapter 5
and the dialogue between Achilles and Thetis explains its role. The lament
links two otherwise separate scenes and prepares the main theme of Book
18: Thetis' visit to Hephaestus and the making of Achilles' new armour,
with the verbatim repetition of 56-62 in 437-443 emphasizing the conne-
ction between them. Both the singularity of the speech and its placement
at the beginning of the scene enhance its function as the introduction to
the first part of this Book.
Thetis pretends to be ignorant of the nature of Achilles' troubles (as in
1. 362 if.); although this is in contrast to her prophetic powers (17. 408-
409; 21.277-278), it is likely that this is a device used by the Iliad in order
to make Achilles express his suffering himself. It has been convincingly
maintained380 that the Iliad emphasizes the antithesis between the mortality
of the son (Achilles) versus the immortality of the mother (Thetis), and
that it is in this respect that it differs from the Aethiopis, in which Eos,
Memnon's mother, granted her son immortality. The Iliad underlines the
disparity between Thetis and Achilles by using "heroic experience as a
metaphor for the condition of mortality, with all its contradictions".381
When Thetis visits Zeus in Book 1, she practically requests to offer
Achilles the chance of becoming the hero of the Iliad and "create the
terms by which heroism will be redefined".382 Thetis' ignorance in Book
18 may be a result of the evolution of the Iliad, which moves increasingly
away from the Aethiopis in presenting Achilles living the "violation of
expectations, of the assumption of what it means to be the goddess' son:
to be beyond compromise",383 whence his mother's helplessness.
Thetis' γόος looks back at the scene of the first meeting between
herself and Achilles in Book 1 of the Iliad', if aivà τεκοϋσα in 1. 414, 418
refers to her son's grim fate, then δυσαρισχοτόκεια presents her own
focalization of his supremacy among other heroes (άρισχοτόκεια). The
epithet is fully explained in the ensuing verses: lines 55-56 refer to
Achilles' excellence among the other warriors, by means of a peculiar
indirect form of the "Comparison" motif. While this explains the second
part of the compound epithet (άριστοτόκεια), lines 59-60 point to
380
See Slatkin (1991) 17-52 on the helplessness of Thetis.
381
Slatkin (1991) 38.
382
Slatkin (1991) 40.
385
Slatkin (1991) 50-51.
5.5 Briscis 139
Achilles' grim fate (δυσ-). In between, lines 56-57 and 58-59 describe her
son's past through a short simile and an external analepsis (that of Thetis'
sending Achilles to Troy); the latter presents Thetis' own focalization as
internal narrator and emphasizes the antithesis between her consent to the
departure of Achilles (έπιπροέηκα) and the tragedy of his failure to return
to Phthia.3'4
The short simile in which Achilles is compared to a sapling needs our
attention. The word ερνος is attested three times in the Iliad. Once in 17.
53, in an extended simile, referring to the death of Euphorbus, and twice
in Book 18, in Thetis' personal lament and in her subsequent request to
Hephaestus (18. 437), where she actually repeats line 18. 56 verbatim.
Edwards3'5 carefully notes that sometimes heroes are compared to the
growing and falling of young trees;386 another noteworthy example is that
of Simoeisios in 4. 473-489, who is compared to a poplar when he is killed
by Ajax. Given the practice of the tree simile, 18. 56 can be considered as
alluding to Achilles' death, for the use of the word ερνος looks at the
Euphorbus passage, where the death of the hero is explicitly stated.
Achilles is like a sapling not only in respect of his growing up, but also
because of his future death.
The examination of Thetis' personal lament has shown that although
probably derived from an earlier epic poem now lost to us, this speech is
skillfully incorporated within the scene it belongs, as it links the Anti-
lochus episode with that of the meeting between mother and son. At the
same time, it looks both backwards (first scene between Thetis and
Achilles in Book 1) and forwards, whether within the Iliadic framework
or further than it (όπλοποιΐα and death of Achilles respectively).
5.5 Briséis
Patroclus is lamented antiphonally by both Briséis (19.287-300) and Achilles
384
See also Schadewaldt (1959 2 ) 248-251.
385
See Edwards (1991) 68, 151.
3,6
Cf. Alexiou (2002) 198-201, who gives examples of the presence of this motif in
Greek literature: she mentions, among others, Herodotus, Sophocles' Electra, the
15th century Byzantine play Άχιληίς, the 17th century Cretan play Ή Θυσία τον
'Αβραάμ and modern Greek folk-songs.
140 Chapter 5
(19.315-337). Lohmann387 and Pucci3" have studied both speeches in detail,

the former with an emphasis on their structure and themes and the latter
with a keen eye for specific dictional elements initiating and enhancing a
"discussion" between these two antiphonal laments.389 Rather than
reiterating the perceptive insights offered by the aforementioned scholars,
my analysis focuses on the following two topics: first, the connections
between Briséis' personal lament and that of Andromache in Iliad 24 and,
second, the form and function of her γόος within the Iliadic plot.390
Three features create a link between these two γόοι: (a) the raids on
Thebe (Andromache) and Lyrnessos (Briseis); (b) the list of losses of dear
ones at the hands of Achilles; (c) the interconnection between Hector and
Achilles.
(a) In the Catalogue of Ships (2. 690-693), we hear that Achilles took
Briséis when he sacked the city of Lyrnessos and killed Mynes and
Epistrophus. The Iliad refers again to the same incident in 16. 57, but
Achilles as speaker describes the sack of a city with strong walls (πόλιν
εύτείχεα πέρσας) without mentioning Mynes.391 Briséis' personal lament
in Book 19 is therefore the first occasion on which the name of Mynes is
used by a speaker other than Achilles. This is no insignificant detail, for
it is connected to the problem of the relationship between Briséis and
Mynes. Dué has rightly argued that "the syntax of II. 19. 295-296
expresses paratactically what in English prose would be subordinated:
387
Lohmann (1970); (1988) 13-32.
318
Pucci (1998) 97-112 (=1993, 258-272).
3
" See Pucci (1998) 97-98, who rightly emphasizes the temporal sequence of the two
speeches: "One question, often ignored by the commentators, concerns the temporal
sequence of the two texts. The first text appears to be repeated only when the second
text is uttered or read, and this inevitable temporal succession implies a consequence.
It doubles the language of the first text and therefore increases the pathos of the
second, reducing the first one to a relatively marginal or weaker posture. It becomes
a sort of a 'second' text, though, temporally speaking, it is the first".
3,0
For the connection between Briséis' γόος and that of Helen in //. 24, see the analysis
of Helen's personal lament in 5. 9.
391
There is also another, albeit indirect, reference to the taking of Briseis in 9. 343,
where Achilles calls Briséis δουρικτήτην; he does not mention the sack of the city of
Mynes explicitly, but this line is important, for Achilles expresses his love for Briséis,
whom he considers a wife (9. 341-343): έπεί δς τις άνηρ αγαθός και έχέφρων, / ήν
αυτοΐί φιλέει και κήδεται, ώς καΐ έγώ την / έκ θυμοΰ φίλεον, δουρικτήτην περ
έοΰσαν.
5.5 Briseis 141
that Achilles killed Briseis' husband Mynes, who was the ruler of the city
(Lyrnessos)".392 Should such an interpretation be adopted, Briséis' γόος
offers her personal look at the tragedy of her life, a life filled with loss.
On the other hand, a number of conflicting non-Homeric traditions refer to
the same event. In the Iliad Achilles (20.191-194) mentions only Lyrnessos,
while Aeneas explicitly declares that both Lyrnessos and Pedasos were
sacked by Achilles (20. 92). The Cypria offer a different version, situating
the capture of Briseis in Pedasos (another city in the Troad).393 The
Panhellenic scope of the Iliad has determined its inclusion of both variants,
without silencing Aeneas' version, which probably represents a rival epic
tradition, as the great Trojan hero was the chief representative of some
local stream of Trojan War epic poetry.394 The inclusion of all variants
does not exclude the possiblity that the Iliad favored one of the versions
it recorded in its subject matter. The Catalogue of Ships (2. 690-693), the
Panhellenic part of the epic par excellence, connects Thebe and Lyrnessos
which were captured by Achilles in a single raid. A single raid means a
single fate for those who were killed or enslaved, a fate in store for
Andromache had she not been married to Hector before the sack of her
city. In her personal laments in 6. 415-416 and 22. 479, Andromache
explicitly refers to the sack of her city by Achilles, just as Briséis has
mentioned her fate in 19. 296. The reciprocity of these intratextual
references implicitly assumes that Andromache will share the same fate
as Briséis, namely she will have her husband killed at the hands of
Achilles and subsequently become a slave.
(b) Briséis bewails the loss of three brothers and husband during the
sack of her city by Achilles. Such a reference would alert the audience,
who have come across another list of losses in Andromache's γόος (6.414-
428), where she recalled the slaughter of her father and seven brothers395
by Achilles when he sacked the city of Thebe; in this same raid the
3.2
See Dué (2002) 13, ft. 36. For a different view, see Leaf (1912) 246; Edwards (1991)
269-270; Pucci (1993) 102-103.
3.3
See the scholia vetera at II. 16. 57 (IV 172 Erbse) and Cypria, fr. 27 (PEG): την
Πήδασον οίτών Κυπρίων ποιηταί, αυτός δέ Λυρνησ<σ>όν. See Dué (2002) 23, ft. 13.
394
Dué (2002) 25, ft. 16 argues that the traces of a now lost epic tradition with Aeneas
as protagonist can be seen in his quarrel with Priam (13. 459-461).
3,5
Andromache's mother was also killed, but not in the raid; for her murder by Artemis,
see my analysis of this particular personal lament in chapter five.
142 Chapter 5
Achaeans took Chryseis and gave her to Agamemnon (1. 366-369).396

These climactic lists397 aim at emphasizing the utter desperation and
immense pain the two women have experienced. In such circumstances,
with suffering being set against the backcloth of personal losses,
Andromache and Briséis establish a special emotional filter through the
analeptic recollection of painful memories, one of complete dependence
on a single person, Hector and Patroclus respectively.398
(c) The above do not represent mere details of a purely informational
nature, but trigger off a line of thought which compares Andromache to
Briséis, and through them Hector to Achilles, as Briséis and Achilles are
presented in direct parallel to Andromache and Hector. What is odd in this
parallel is that whereas Hector is the one who has surpassed all
Andromache's previous losses, Achilles is the one who has, in the case of
Briséis, provoked them; at the same time he is depicted by Briséis as her
only savior, since he was to marry her once they returned to Phthia (19.
297-298). By combining two distinct and contradictory personae, that of
murderer of Briséis' dear ones and that of her future husband, Achilles
adopts a role that is both parallel and antithetical to that of Hector; in this
way the comparison of the two heroes is further emphasized as the epic
moves towards their fated conflict. The intratextual references between
the personal laments create allusive links between the two major Iliadic
heroes and confer the monumental vastness of the entire poem on their
final duel in Book 22.
As far as the form and function of the personal lament as a whole is
concerned, both the Mynes episode and the allusion to Achilles must be
taken into consideration. Hainsworth399 has pointed out that it takes the
place of the meal and council of chiefs that usually follow an assembly.
The postponement of the meal until 23. 56-65 shows that the lamentations
of Briséis and Achilles interrupt the typical thematic sequence assembly-
meal and create a pause, the role of which is to shed light on Achilles and
See Reinhardt (1961) 50-57; Krischer (1971) 93-94 .

5.7
The list of losses of dear ones have the person (Hector and Patroclus) privileged by
the speaker (Andromache and Briséis) placed last.
3.8
Dué (2002) 15 points to the assimilation of Patroclus and Hector achieved by Briséis'
reenactment of Andromache's lament in Iliad 6. Andromache is considered to be the
archetypal singer of lament in Greek song tradition. See Dué (2002) 106.
See Hainsworth (1966) 158-166.
5.6. Achilles 143
emphasize his marginal position. From the beginning of the poem he has
been standing apart from the other Achaeans, refusing to fight; even now
that his quarrel with Agamemnon is over, he continues to remain marginal
by refusing to eat, thus disturbing the traditional order of things. Achilles
has been attached to specific characters (first Patroclus, then Briséis),
whose fate is contrasted:400 when Achilles has lost Briséis (to Aga-
memnon), Patroclus is alive; when he has lost Patroclus, Briséis has been
returned to him. These two figures function as markers which illuminate
and shade Achilles, and whose existence at his side determines his
feelings and behavior. It is the role of this personal lament to emphasize
Achilles' dependence on these two characters and highlight their inter-
connection.
5.6. Achilles
5.6.1 Iliad 18
This is the first of the personal laments401 Achilles will utter for Patroclus
(18. 324-342) and is divided into two parts of almost equal length: the
first (324-332) deals with his thoughts about his friend's fate, the second
(333-342) is the personal lament proper.
In line 324 Achilles uses the word αλιον, which had been also employed
in the personal lament of Agamemnon for Menelaus (4. 158 and 4. 179);
on that occasion, it referred to both the fact that the will of Zeus would
not remain unfulfilled (4. 158) and to the vanity of Agamemnon's
expedition to Troy (4. 179), thus creating an emphatic contrast between
Zeus' power and Agamemnon's failure. The word αλιον reappears in
Achilles' γόος under somewhat similar circumstances -he feels himself
partly responsible for the death of Patroclus, just as Agamemnon regrets
his part in the "loss" of Menelaus. In using the same word as Aga-
memnon, Achilles touches upon the vanity of human promises and
400
During the course of the Iliad, Achilles loses Briséis and Patroclus permanently or
temporarily.
401
There will be one more in Book 19.
144 Chapter 5
ignorance of the future. This line of thought, explicitly stated in 18. 328:
«άλλ' ού Ζεύς ανδρεσσι νοήματα πάντα τελευτφ» ("but Zeus does not
bring to accomplishment all thoughts in men's minds"), had been
expressed by Agamemnon in his personal lament in Book 4;402 here it is
presented as a "gnome" both conveying special authority and alluding,
through ανδρεσσι (18. 328), to Achilles himself. The same idea is also
expressed in Nestor's speech to Agamemnon in 10. 104-105: «οΰ θην
"Εκτορι πάντα νοήματα μητίετα Ζεύς / έκτελέει, οσα πού νυν έέλπεται»
("Zeus of the counsels, I think, will not accomplish for Hektor | all his
designs and all he hopes for now"). Thus Achilles' maxim in 18. 328
conjures up the two heroes (Agamemnon and Hector) with whom he is
confronted in the Iliad, and creates a "reading" at once dramatic and
ironic, by distinguishing between Zeus' determination to fulfill his own
will (1.5) and human weakness to determine one's own fate.
At the same time, the line used by Achilles in 18. 324 seems to have a
different impact than the other two Iliadic attestations of αλιον modifying
επος:
«ώ πόποι, ή ρ' αλιον επος εκβαλον ήματι κείνφ

θαρσύνων ήρωα Μενοίτιον εν μεγάροισιν· (18. 324-325)
"Ah me. It was an empty word I cast forth on that day

when in his halls I tried to comfort the hero Menoitios"
«ειμι μεν, ούδ' αλιον επος εσσεται, οττί κεν ε'ίπη.» (24. 92)
"But I will go. No word shall be in vain, if he says it."
«ειμι, και ούχ αλιον επος εσσεται. εί δέ μοι αισα

τεθνάμεναι παρά νυησίν Αχαιών χαλκοχιτώνων,
βούλομαι·» (24.224-226)
"I am going, and this word shall not be in vain. If it is my destiny

to die there by the ships of the bronze-armoured Achaians,
then I wish that."
W2
See lines 4. 160, 161, 168, 175, 178.
5.6. Achilles 145
Verses 24. 92 and 24. 224 share common structural features -they both
have one ICB marked by light punctuation, and another stop after position
8 before the terminal adonic, although in 24.92 this is a second ICB again
marked by light punctuation, whereas in 24. 224 it is an ISB marked by
heavy punctuation.403 On the other hand, 24. 92 is coterminous (verse-end
and sense correspond), whereas 24. 224 is followed by a necessary
enjambment (type 3, according to Higbie's classification). Thus, 24. 92
has a clear staccato effect: "But I will go. No word shall be in vain,
whatever he says", while 24. 224 starts with a staccato effect ("I am going,
and this word shall not be in vain"). A faster effect is then created by the
necessaiy enjambment, which does not even allow the slightest pause at
verse-end. This rapidly carries the speaker's thought to the idea of death,
emphatically expressed by the infinitive τεθνάμεναι at verse-initial
position. Verse 24. 92 is uttered by Thetis, who assures Iris of her
obedience to Zeus' will by using short self-contained cola; on the other
hand, Priam's words in 24. 224 show something of the abruptness arising
from his fear of going to the Achaean camp to ransom his son's body.
Now we can see how verse 18. 324, uttered by Achilles, deviates from the
other two verses that contain the word αλιον modifying επος. 18. 324 has
an ICB before position 3, but the second ICB occuring before position 9
is unmarked by punctuation and, moreover, has an internal adding
enjambment (Higbie's type la) that simply adds more information,
explaining why Achilles' επος was αλιον. The absence of a negative
particle before αλιον, such as ούδ' / ούχ preceding επος in 24. 92 and 24.
224 respectively, intensifies Achilles' deviation from a rather typical use
(negative + αλιον επος εσσεται). Achilles' words refer to the past, not the
future as in the other two cases, and reproduce the diction of the external
narrator, who is the only one to use the phrase ήματι κείνφ in the Iliad
(4x), always in the terminal adonic. So Achilles' use of the word αλιον not
only alludes to Agamemnon's personal lament in Book 4, but at the same
time separates itself from other non-personal lament uses of the phrase
αλιον επος in the Iliad.
The main body of the first part of the personal lament is occupied by
403
I am using Higbie's terminology (1990); ICB stands for "internal clause boundary"
and ISB for "internal sentence boundary". For metrical notation and position
numbering, see Kahane (1994).
146 Chapter 5
an external analepsis (324-327), verbalized by Achilles acting as internal

narrator. This is easily observable if one compares these lines with 9. 254-
258 and 11. 765-789, where Odysseus and Nestor respectively refer to the
same events, giving their own point of view as internal narrators in their
proper speeches. Thus in 9. 254-258 Odysseus refers to Peleus' advice to
his son to abstain from ερις κακομήχανος (ληγέμεναι δ' έριδος κακομη-
χάνου: 257); Peleus words form an embedded direct speech quoted by
Odysseus in order to reinforce his own exhortation to Achilles to
overcome his anger, accept Agamemnon's gifts and return to the
battlefield. Likewise, when Nestor addresses Patroclus in 11. 765-789, he
refers to Menoetius, his addressee's father, because as speaker he knows
that invocation of a father will have a much more powerful effect on his
interlocutor than reference to a non-relative. Menoetius advises Patroclus
to go to Troy with Achilles, as he is older and wiser than his friend, even
if an inferior warrior. As de Jong notes:404 "This is exactly what Nestor
now wants Patroclus to do (note πείσεται: 789 and πίθηται: 791). Of Peleus'
admonition (to Achilles), Nestor only reports (as embedded indirect
speech) the general heroic maxim 'always to be the best and surpass the
others'".405 In the same manner, Achilles acts as an internal narrator,
making himself responsible for urging Menoetius to send his son Pa-
troclus to Troy, as he had promised that he would bring him back in glory
after sacking Ilium and taking his proper share in the booty. This fo-
calization is consonant with the main feeling that dominates this first part
of the speech, namely that of Achilles' responsibility for the death of his
friend. It is this responsibility that determines his focalization.
The chiastic-ring form (ABBA) of lines 329-332 created by (Α): όμοί-
ην γαΐαν έρεϋσαι / αύτοϋ ένΐ Τροίη (329-330); (Β): έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστή-
σαντα / δέξεται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς (330-331); (Β'):
ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ (332); (Α') άλλ' αύτοϋ γαία καθέξει (332) has a twofold
function: like all chiasmi, it emphasizes parallel situations through the
repetition of similar or equivalent expressions, but also distinguishes
between occasions apparently similar, though different in tone and
emphasis. This chiasmus concerns the typical γόος-motif of "sharing a
common fate", according to which the mourner believes that the death of
404
405
See 11. 784: αίέν άριστεΰειν και ΰπεί<3οχον εμμεναι άλλων.
5.6. Achilles 147
the person he/she laments will result in his/her experiencing a grim future,
that of slavery (Andromache) or simply a life deprived of the presence of
his/her dear one (Priam, Hecuba). On this occasion, the motif of "sharing
a common fate" acquires an extratextual dimension, since the Iliad makes
Achilles foreshadow his future death, Patroclus-like, in Troy, although
this event falls out of the limits of this epic. In this way, Achilles' speech-
perspective transcends the scope of the Iliad and it is only to this extent
that he can share a common fate with his friend.406
The second part of Achilles' personal lament is the γόος proper. It
contains three internal prolepses, which will be fulfilled in Books 19, 22
and 23. Achilles will place Hector's body next to the ships (23) and strip
it of its armour (22), he will decapitate twelve Trojan youths next to the
funeral pyre for Patroclus (23), and he will make the Trojan women
(whom he had caught while sacking cities found close to Troy) lament his
dead friend (19). Voiced in a higher emotional key, Achilles' lament
presents his avenging Patroclus' death as a single event, whereas the Iliad
will treat the aforementioned proleptic statements separately. The
mourner's intimacy towards the deceased allows a profound rearrange-
ment of distinct narrative phases, highlighting Achilles' emotional turmoil,
which colors his expression of inconsolable sorrow.
The personal lament proper also alludes to the diegesis just before the
beginning of this γόος-speech. The external narrator has used a simile
comparing Achilles to a lion whose cubs have been stolen by a deer-
hunter; Achilles picks up the language of the external narrator and
reshapes it for his own purpose; σέ' ύστερος είμ' ύπό γαίαν in line 18.333
answers line 18. 320: δ δέ τ' αχνυται ύστερος έλθών and σέθεν κταμένοιο
χολωθείς (337) looks back at μάλα γάρ δριμύς χόλος αίρει (322). What
the external narrator says about the lion refers also to Achilles; later on,
he will try to find Hector and confront him. But when Achilles speaks as
an internal narrator, he adjusts the language of the external narrator to the
406
On the relation between the death of Patroclus and those of Achilles and Hector, see
Reichel (1994) 86; Kullmann (1992) 238. The lamentation of the Myrmidons for
Patroclus lasts for the whole night. See Polkas (1999) 167-168, who is right in
arguing that the sorrowful sleeplessness of the Achaean army, contrasted with the
sleep of the Trojans, foreshadows the reversal of events in the fighting of the
following day, since the Trojans will be defeated, whereas the Achaeans will emerge
victorious.
148 Chapter 5
needs of the γόος, the specific genre of discourse his speech belongs to
(ύστερος in 333 points to his future death and χολωθείς in 337 explains
the reason for his revenge).
Having examined the content of Achilles' personal lament, it is time to
consider its function within the Iliad. This is a single γόος, placed before
the όπλοπούα. If we look at the end of the first part of Book 18, we can
distinguish five different scenes: 1) the scene with Antilochus (1-35); 2)
the scene with Thetis, the Nereids and the discussion with Achilles (35-
148); 3) the fighting over Patroclus' body (148-242); 4) the Polydamas-
Hector episode (243-313) and 5) the lament of Achilles (314-355). We
have seen how Thetis' personal lament, which is placed at the beginning
of scene two, determines the direction of its continuation. In scene three,
the exhortation of Iris to Achilles causes an exchange of speeches and
leads to the hero's vocal intervention in the fighting over Patroclus' body,
making the Trojans withdraw. Scene four deals with the exchange of
speeches between Polydamas and Hector. But what can be the function of
Achilles' γόος in a scene which contains little more than the lament itself,
and whose beginning and end are filled with almost identical lines?
Drawn from the pattern of personal lament closing formulas,'107 these lines
form a ring encircling the whole scene. It is placed just before the
beginning of the second and main part of this Book, the όπλοποιία and,
despite the fact that it seems autonomous, it performs a wider function:
lines (18. 339-340) prepare the γόος of Briséis and the Trojan slave
women in Book 19, whereas lines 18. 334-337 foreshadow the first part
of Book 23, where Achilles' promises will be carried out (18. 334-337).
5.6.2 Iliad 19
Achilles' γόος (19. 315-337)40* is a good example of the influence the
407
Lines 315 and 355 contain almost identical personal lament closing formulas. Line
315: Πάτροκλον άνεστενάχοντο γοωντες and 355: Μυρμιδόνες Πάτροκλον άνε-
στενάχοντο γοώντες with παννύχιοι placed at the beginning of the previous verse
(354).
408
West (2000) 213 ad loc. omits 19. 326-337. He argues (West 2001, 12, item 2) that
"[references to Cyclic material that is otherwise unknown or ignored in the Iliad" are
interpolated and that "[t]he prime examples are two passages that introduce
5.6. Achilles 149
form of a lament can exert on the themes it treats. This speech is uttered
antiphonally to that of Briséis and must be read and interpreted as such. I
am going to deal with three themes I regard as relevant to the Iliadic
personal laments: that of food and drink, that of Achilles' "Comparison"
between Patroclus and other members of his family and that of the
interplay between the words Φθία, φθείσεσθαι and άποφθιμένοιο.
Achilles' reluctance to eat or to allow others to do so (19. 155-172,
205-237 and 303-308) has a special role to play in the context of this
speech,409 as can be seen by the kind of reminiscence of Patroclus that
Achilles brings forward. In 19. 316 he remembers Patroclus preparing a
tasty meal in the hut (αυτός ένί κλισίη λαρόν παρά δεΐπνον εθηκας),
whereas he could have recalled some other detail of daily life or
mentioned a feature of his friend's personality. Achilles has decided to
abstain from food and drink not only because he wants to express his pain
for the loss of his friend, but also because he cannot imagine his life
without Patroclus, and especially those parts of his life which they used
to share in the past. In other words, Achilles remembers Patroclus preparing
the meal rather than doing anything else, because he will abstain from
food and drink as if they signified their common life.4I° He does not even
allow the other Achaean chiefs to eat and drink, as they should have done
after the reconciliation with Agamemnon; in doing so he postpones the
real end of his quarrel until he buries Patroclus in Book 23. In this way, the
Iliad looks back at its beginning -since the result of the quarrel between
Achilles and Agamemnon is the death of Patroclus- and at the same time
ascribes a line of thought permeating the whole epic to a γόος-speech.
Neoptolemus, Achilles' son by Deidameia and the one that refers to the Judgement of
Paris". I disagree with such an editorial principle and follow Allen (1920 5 ) and van
Thiel (1996), who do not omit the above passages.
409
Martin (1989) 65 is right in maintaining that Achilles rejects Odysseus' proposal for
food and drink and "rises into another level of performance. Instead of arguing, he
refuses food outright, as if too much has yet to come out of his mouth -a poetic
lament, in which even the texture of speech resembles song more than oratory, as can
be seen from alliterations: 321, pothe...pathoimi/322, patros apophthimenoio
pithoimen/323, hos pou nun Phthiephi/325, polemizo/327, Neoptolemos/329,
phthisesthai/330, Phthiende/334, Pelea ... pampan/337, apophthimenoio puthetai".
4,0
Achilles does not eat properly until he kills Hector, i.e. until he eliminates the reason
that caused the end of his sharing of food and drink with Patroclus, symbolising their
common life. See also Edwards (1991) 271.
150 Chapter 5
The "Comparison" between Patroclus and other members of Achilles'

family seems peculiar at first glance, for both Peleus and Neoptolemus are
alive back in Phthia and Scyrus respectively. In other personal laments in
which the "Comparison" constitutes the central core of the speech, the
speaker compares the dead (or future dead if the personal lament was
anticipatory) with other relatives that he/she has lost. That is precise what
happens in the lament by Andromache in Book 6, by Briseis in Book 19,
by Priam and Andromache in 22 and in all the personal laments in 24. But
Achilles has not lost anyone other than Patroclus. His words must be read
in parallel with those of Briséis, since it is the antiphonal order of the two
personal laments which make Achilles' words be uttered as a "response"
to those of his female slave. As she indirectly compared the loss of
Patroclus to that of her husband and three brothers, so Achilles must
compare the loss of his dear friend to that of somebody else; and if these
losses are not real, then Achilles must invent them. One can see here that
as in the case of abstention from food and drink, Homer makes Achilles'
view extend to the whole poem, as if the latter was aware of the antiphonal
nature of these two personal laments or the final burial of Patroclus in
Book 23. Once more, Achilles functions like the poet of the Iliad
himself. 4 "
Nagy412 has argued in favor of a connection between κλέος άψθιτον
and its negation in the context of Φθίη as can be seen in Iliad 9. 413-416
and in the γόος of Achilles in Iliad 19. The ring-composition between
19. 322: άποφθιμένοιο πυθοίμην and 19. 337: άποφθιμένοιο πύθηται,
referring to the hypothetical deaths of Peleus and Achilles respectively,
points to a line of thought alluding to the death of Achilles, which falls
outside the limits of the Iliad but permeates the epic from beginning to
end. Placed at the very end of this personal lament, it rings a bell for the
following consideration: if the element φθι- "is either a genuine formant
of Φθίη or is at least perceived as such in the process of Homeric
composition"413 creating a contrast between the death of Achilles in Troy
411
See Martin (1989) 222-223 where he finds one more proof that Achilles sounds like
a performer in the "expansion aesthetic" which characterizes the language of Achilles
and of the Iliadic poet alone.
412
Nagy (1979) 185.
413
Nagy (1979) 185.
5.7 Priam 151
(329-330: οίον έμέ φθείσεσθαι άπ' 'Άργεος Ιπποβότοιο / αύτοϋ ένίΤροίη)

and his surrogate Patroclus (330: σέ δέ τε Φθίηνδε νέεσθαι), then the
lament uses this language-contrast to point to something really re-
markable, a life-death circle which encompasses everybody: Peleus,
Patroclus, Neoptolemus and finally the speaker, Achilles himself. This is
all the more striking if one considers that Neoptolemus' upbringing in
Scyrus is expressed by τρέφεται (19. 326),4I4, which is a word also referring
to vegetation. If one keeps in mind that Achilles is the only Iliadic
personal lament-utterer to speak of his own death, it becomes clear that he
anticipates not only his own death but also a future-hypothetical personal
lament for himself; again Achilles resembles the poet of the Iliad, who
makes him a privileged speaker endowed with special qualities, such as
foreknowledge of his death and his own γόος.
5.7 Priam
Priam's personal lament415 (22.416-428) starts as a λιτή416 foreshadowing

one of the main scenes of Book 24, his visit to Achilles' hut and his
subsequent offering of a ransom for Hector's body. The important word
here is olov (22. 416: "alone"), which is repeated in a number of passages
connected to personal laments and, even more often, to the death of
Hector. In Priam's initial speech in Book 22 the old man begs Hector not
to fight Achilles alone apart from others (39: οίον άνευθ' άλλων); in Book
414
I am here following Allen (1920'). West (2000) 213 ad loc. has ένιτρέφεται.
4,3
The triads of personal laments in Books 22 and 24 of the Iliad belong to the pattern
of "three"; according to Olrik (1965, 129-141) three is the largest number used for
people and objects in a traditional narrative; that is why for example Achilles chases
Hector three times around the walls of Troy. This may explain the triads of personal
laments in Books 22 and 24 on a poetic level since it is based on an inherent
psychological substratum common to many peoples and folk-traditions as the "epic
laws" of Olrik suggest. It can even explain other phenomena which belong to social
or religious life, as the triple invocation of the dead (Od. 9. 65, Ar. Ran. 1176). See
Usener (1903) 24-28; Mehrlein (1959) col. 269-310; for a diachronic examination of
the pattern of "three" in Greek tradition with references from Homer, tragedy down
to modern Greek folk-songs, see Sifakis (1988) 201-208.
416
For the λιτή, the fullest recent treatment is Alden (2000) 181-290 with rich bi-
bliography.
152 Chapter 5
24, when Priam visits Achilles, he again stresses the same word, this time
in order to refer to Hector: δς δέ μοι οίος έην, εΐρυτο δέ άστυ και αυτούς,
/ τον σύ πρφην κτεΐνας άμυνόμενον περί πάτρης, / Έκτορα (24. 499-501 ).
These instances appear to be opposed to the cases where Achilles and
Patroclus speak about their common fate and common past, bur are not:
in Book 18, in his personal lament for Patroclus, Achilles stressed that
they were both doomed to die in Troy (329-332: αμφω γάρ πέπρωται
όμοίην γαίαν έρεϋσαι / αύτοΰ ένί Τροίχι, έπεί ούδ' έμέ νοστήσαντα / δέξε-
ται έν μεγάροισι γέρων ίππηλάτα Πηλεύς / ουδέ Θέτις μήτηρ, άλλ' αύτοϋ
γαία καθέξει)· In Book 19, Achilles had also referred to his false belief
about dying alone in Troy (19. 329: οίον έμέ), a thought which is also
consonant with the realization (18. 324-328) of the vain promises he had
given to Patroclus' father Menoetius that his son would return from Troy
alive. Finally, in Book 23 Patroclus expresses his wish to be buried
together with Achilles, as they were brought up together (23. 83-84): μή
έμά σων άπάνευθε τιθήμεναι όστέ', Άχιλλεϋ, / άλλ' όμοϋ, ώς τράφομέν
περ έν ύμετέροισι δόμοισιν.
The use of this word in scenes which belong to a funerary context
creates an interplay between these two groups of passages, the first
referring to the function of οίος and the second to that of the element όμ-
in words like όμοίην and όμοΰ. Here we cannot talk of pattern deixis,
since common pattern markers do not exist,417 but it is clear that both
words have acquired a specific function transcending their typical lexical
significance. The use of οίος in Priam's personal lament in Book 22
alludes both to his initial speech to Hector at the beginning of the same
Book and to his entreaty to Achilles in 24; when used by one of these two
characters, οίος acquires a metonymical reference to their common fate.
When Priam says "alone" to Hector, one must "read" an allusion to the
former's future visit to Achilles' hut, and when he says to the Achaean
hero that Hector was the only son left to him (24. 499), the audience will
recall his earlier words to Hector in Book 22.
The result of this interplay is that Priam and Hector's actions
progressively converge. Human solitude attains a diacritical feature in
these actions and is emphasized e contrario by divine presence (although
411
For the use of the term "pattern deixis" in Homer and pattern markers in general, see
Kahane (1994) 58-59.
5.7 Priam 153
of a different nature) as Hermes leaves Priam just before meeting with

Achilles, and Athena abandons Hector when he faces Achilles. By visiting
Achilles alone, Priam does exactly what he begged Hector not to do; the
old men in Troy try in vain to change his mind just as he failed to change
his son's mind. In this respect, father and son have become one.
The second result is that as the poem moves to its end, Hector and Priam
seem to acquire an Achillean quality par excellence: that of solitude. At
the beginning of the Iliad, Achilles goes to the sea shore alone and calls
his mother for help; he subsequently stays away from the battlefield and
is only reintegrated into the community he has been separated from
towards the end of the poem. Achilles' excessive liminality418 is
highlighted by his solitude. Likewise, Priam "approaches" the figure of
Hector and then the two of them seem to absorb Achillean characteristics.
There are multiple echoes alluding to Priam's entreaty to Achilles in
Book 24. Richardson4" points out that "not only is the train of thought
similar to that of Priam's actual speech of supplication of Achilles, with
the mention of Peleus leading on to Priam's own grief for his sons, and
thus to Hector, but there are verbal parallels too. Cf. 419 with 24. 503
αΐδεΐο... αυτόν τ' έλέησον; 420-24.486-487; and the climactic positioning
of Έκτορος (426) with 24.501 Έκτορα." These elements show how
Priam's γόος-speech prepares a major scene to follow by using intra-
Iliadic material alluding to other parts of the plot.
In 22. 422 a major Iliadic motif is evoked and adapted to the specific
needs of Priam's personal lament. Through pattern-deixis, μάλιστα δ' έμοί
περί πάντων αλγε' εθηκεν recalls the theme of the innumerable sufferings
caused to the Achaeans, which is foreshadowed in the Iliadic proem (1.
2): ή μυρί' Αχαιοίς αλγε' εθηκεν. This evocation is reinforced by the fact
that the expression αλγε' εθηκεν occupies the same metrical position,
namely the terminal adonic, and also by the fact that common features are
shared by the preceding parts of the two verses, such as the dative of the
indirect object (έμοί - Άχαιοΐς) and an expression of excessiveness in
suffering (μάλιστα / περί πάντων - μυρί').
In the second part of the speech, Priam makes the typical "Comparison"
between Hector and the other sons he has lost at the hands of Achilles; the
418
On Achilles' excessive liminality, see Seaford (1994) 166-172.
419
Richardson (1993) 151.
154 Chapter 5
same theme is used by Priam in his supplication speech at the beginning

of Book 22 (22.44 ff.) and in his visit to Achilles' hut in Book 24 (24. 495
ff.). Yet on these other two occasions, the reference to the other sons
whom Achilles has killed is not of a comparative nature; Priam says that
Achilles has killed his sons whereas here he stresses the fact that his άχος
for Hector overcomes any other previous pain. His "Comparison" reaches
its climax by piling up almost every single lament term the Iliad is aware
of: πήμα (421), αλγε' (422), οδύρομαι (424), άχνύμενος (424), άχος (425),
κλαίοντε (427), μυρομένω (427), δυσάμμορος (428). Here we see the re-
verse of what we noted in the first part of the speech: the personal lament
differentiates and therefore autonomizes the use of a theme (the mention-
ing by Priam of his sons and Hector), by attributing a special quality to it
which is absent in non-personal lament context: the comparative element
crystallized in the "Comparison" within a personal lament.
As for the function of this personal lament within the poem as a whole,
one may notice that after Hector's death we hear two distinct triads of
mourners uttering γόος-speeches; Priam, Hecuba and Andromache in
Book 22 and Andromache, Hecuba and Helen in Book 24. As far as
Priam's speech is concerned (starting as an entreaty and then turning into
a personal lament), it is of a preparatory nature, for it foreshadows his
visit to Achilles in the last Book of the poem. That is why Priam will not
utter a personal lament in 24; this will be done only by the women.420
Priam's role as revealed by his speech is different: he will meet Achilles.
5.8 Hecuba
5.8.1 Iliad 22
Hecuba's personal lament (22. 431-436) is placed in second position421 in

the triad of γόοι for Hector at the end of Book 22. It begins with the
420
The lament in 24 is the formal one performed in front of the body of Hector; that of
22 is more abrupt, more personal, as it is expressed once it is realized that Hector has
been killed; Priam and Hecuba see him dying from the walls of Troy and
Andromache finds out about his death from her maids.
421
The same is the case for her lament in Book 24.
5.8 Hecuba 155
vocative τέκνον, which is only ever used (in the singular and without any
complement) in the Iliad for two mortals, Hector and Achilles:422 it is
employed by Thetis (1. 362; 18. 73, 128; 19. 29) and by Hecuba (6. 254;
22. 431). It is followed by έγώ δειλή, which is only attested here and in
Thetis' personal lament for Achilles in 18. 54: ω μοι έγώ δειλή, ψ μοι
δυσαριστοτόκεια. The allusive character of the above expressions,
underscored by their occyping the same metrical slot in the hexameter
line, make Hecuba's words recall those of Thetis to her son. All the above
expressions are uttered in moments of suffering, and create a thematic
ring linking Thetis and Hecuba as mourners and mothers, but also
Achilles and Hector as sons and tragic figures.
The typical "Death-Wish" forming part of the content of many personal
laments takes a new form here; it is not expressed by the common ώφελ-
λον + infinitive construction, but is replaced by the rhetorical question: τί
νυ βείομαι αίνά παθοϋσα, / σεΐ' άποτεθνηώτος. Placed at the very
beginning of the speech, it gives the style a certain abruptness and lack of
formality, whereas the expression αίνά παθοϋσα recalls, like the vocative
τέκνον and δειλή, Thetis' words to Achilles in 1. 414: ψ μοι τέκνον έμόν,
τί νύ σ' ετρεφον αίνά τεκοϋσα. I tend to regard this as an emotional
judgment, given that Hecuba and Thetis undergo the same pain and adopt
similar language patterns to verbalize it.423 Thetis' helplessness is also
shared by Hecuba and even by Andromache (αίνόμορος: 22. 481), and the
use of similar diction suggests that the paragon pair of mother and son
(Thetis-Achilles) exercises424 its influence on the Trojan dyad of mother
and son (Hecuba-Hector), with the former shaping the latter.
This speech looks in two directions: backwards to Hecuba's begging
speech at the beginning of Book 22 and forwards to her personal lament
for Hector in Book 24. Towards the end of her speech in 22. 82-89,
Hecuba says:
«σχέτλιος· εϊ περ γάρ σε κατακτάνη, οΰ σ' ετ' έγώ γε (22. 86)
κλαΰσομαι έν λεχέεσσι, φίλον θάλος, δν τέκον αύτή,
ούδ' άλοχος πολύδωρος (22. 88)
422
For vocatives in general in Greek epic and tragedy see Wendel (1929), who provides
useful lists.
423
22.431.
424
See the case of Priam and Hector, who acquire the Achillean feature of solitude and
marginalization.
156 Chapter 5
"o hard one; for if he kills you I can no longer

mourn you on the death-bed, sweet branch, o child of my bearing,
nor can your generous wife"
From these lines it is clear that Hecuba's words look at her personal
lament at the end of Book 22, as she explicitly talks about her own lament
and that of Andromache, which will be uttered in the absence of the
deceased's body. The words έν λεχέεσσι designate a condition that gives
the lament its formal, solemn tone, implying that without Hector's body
the γόος is deprived of its most elementary prerequisite for forming part
of a ritual. This becomes more evident in 24. 719-720: οι δ' έπεί εισάγα-
γον κλυτά δώματα, τον μέν επειτα / τρητοΐς έν λεχέεσσι θέσαν, παρά δ'
είσαν αοιδούς, as well as in Andromache's personal lament in 24. 743:
λεχέων εκ χείρας ορεξας. The bed where the body was laid marks the
beginning of the πρόθεσις which constituted the main occasion for the
ritual lament;425 this point explains both the briefness of Hecuba's personal
lament in 22 and its preparatory nature, not for a scene of supplication, as
was the case with Priam, but for her main γόος in Book 24.
If Hecuba's speech of entreaty to Hector is connected to her personal
lament in 22, her personal lament in 24 undoubtedly presupposes it, for in
both γόοι we find the intriguing repetition of the words θεός and ζωός:
«Τρωσί τε και Τρψησι κατά πτόλιν, οι σε θεόν ώς (22. 434)

δειδέχατ'· ή γάρ καί σφι μάλα μέγα κΰδος εησθα
ζωός έών νΰν αΰ θάνατος καί μοίρα κιχάνει.» (22. 436)426
"and the women of Troy a blessing throughout the city. They

adored you
425
See Reiner (1938) 35 ff.; Alexiou (2002) 4-7.
426
West (2000) 288 ad loc. omits 22. 436, but not the other Iliadic attestations of this
verse, namely 17. 478 and 17. 672. He argues (West 2001, 12, item 4) that
"[r]hetorical expansions, that is, lines or passages added to clarify an expression or a
reference that might be unclear or ambiguous" must be regarded as interpolations.
West obviously thinks that the other two Iliadic attestations of the same verse that
refer to Patroclus (17. 478; 17. 672) are the genuine ones. I strongly disagree with
such an editorial principle, and follow Allen (1920 3 ) and van Thiel (1996), who do
not omit the above passages.
5.8 Hecuba 157
as if you were a god, since in truth you were their high honour
while you lived. Now death and fate have closed in upon you."
and in 24. 749-750:
«ή μέν μοι ζωός περ έών φίλος ήσθα θεοΐσιν,

οϊ δ' άρα σεο κήδοντο και έν θανάτοιό περ αϊση.»
"while you still lived for me you were dear to the gods, and even
in the stage of death they cared about you still."
In Book 22 Hecuba says that the Trojans, men and women alike, regarded
Hector as a god, and that when he was alive he had great glory; in Book
24 she says that as long as he was alive he was dear to the gods. Hector
was honored by both men and gods, as the former worshipped him for
protecting their city, and the latter loved him and protected his body from
decay as long as it remained in the Achaean camp unburied. Finally, in her
personal lament in 22, Hecuba speaks only of the presence of death,
whereas in 24 she refers to the special treatment that the gods had shown
to Hector's body even after his death. Apart from the recurrence of themes
which are typical of the personal lament (such as the opposition between
life and death), the complementarity of these two γόοι becomes evident.
The one in 22 with its more abrupt and less formal nature depicts the grim
picture of Hector's recent death and Trojans' grief, whereas that in 24
stresses the deceased's relation with the gods, as his body has been
preserved and disfigurement has been delayed.
The lack of formality characterizing Hecuba's γόος in 22, its greater
abruptness, its harsher tone and more fluid rhythm exemplify the epic's
progressive handling of the γόοι according to the needs of the plot. The
passage from the ritualistic but informal laments of Book 22, when Hector
has just died, to the highly formal, ritual γόοι of Book 24, when his body
lies in front of the mourners to be lamented, bespeaks the poem's
flexibility in keeping the sub-genre of γόοι bound by its structure and
content despite the fact that the change of performance context has
resulted in a subsequent shift of tone and rhythm of the lament.427
427
This shift is due to the alternation of adding and violent enjambments, which are in
direct contrast to the balanced structure of Hecuba's personal lament in 24, with the
four three-line groups of verses.
158 Chapter 5
5.8.2 Iliad 24
Hecuba's personal lament (24. 748-759) looks back at lines 24. 416-423,
when Hermes meets Priam on his way to the Achaean camp and tells him
that his son's body has not been eaten by dogs and birds, nor is it rotten
and devoured by worms. Hermes then goes on as follows:
«ή μέν μιν περί σήμα έοϋ έτάροιο φίλοιο

ελκει άκηδέστως, ηώς δτε δια φανήη,
ουδέ μιν αίσχύνει· θηοΐό κεν αυτός έπελθών,
οίον έερσήεις κείται, περί δ' αιμα νένιπται,
ουδέ ποθι μιαρός· συν δ' ελκεα πάντα μέμυκεν,
δσσ' έτύπη· πολέες γαρ έν αύτψ χαλκόν ελασσαν.
ώς τοι κήδονται μάκαρες θεοί υιος έήος
και νέκυός περ έόντος, έπεί σφι φίλος περί κήρι.» (24. 416-423)
"It is true, Achilleus dags him at random around his beloved

companion's tomb, as dawn on dawn appears, yet he cannot
mutilate him; you yourself can see when you go there
how fresh with dew he lies, and the blood is all washed from him,
nor is there any corruption, and all the wounds have been closed up
where he was struck, since many drove the bronze in his body.
So it is that the blessed immortals care for your son, though
he is nothing but a dead man; because in their hearts they loved him."
Hecuba's words bear a striking similarity to the following passage:
«Έκτορ, εμψ θυμψ πάντων πολύ φίλτατε παίδων,

ή μέν μοι ζωός περ έών φίλος ήσθα θεοισιν,
οΐ δ' άρα σεο κήδοντο και έν θανάτοιό περ αί'ση.» (24. 748-750)
"Hektor, of all my sons the dearest by far to my spirit;

while you still lived for me you were dear to the gods, and even
in the stage of death they cared about you still."
«σέο δ' έπεί έξέλετο ψυχήν ταναήκεϊ χαλκφ,

πολλά ρυστάζεσκεν έοϋ περί σήμ' έτάροιο
Πατρόκλου, τον επεφνες -άνέστησεν δέ μιν ούδ' ώς-
5.8 Hecuba 159
νυν δέ μοι έρσήεις και πρόσφατος έν μεγάροισιν

κεϊσαι,» (24.754-758)
"when he had taken your life with the thin edge of the bronze
sword,
he dragged again and again around his beloved companion's
tomb, Patroklos', whom you killed, but even so did not
bring him back to life. Now you lie in the palace, handsome
and fresh with dew"
Hecuba uses Hermes' language to lament her son, and in doing so makes
a gesture to the preceding scene between Hermes and Priam, where the
preservation of Hector's body was also a key topic.428 Hermes' words are
not only confirmed by what Priam finds when he visits Achilles, but also
by the fact that Hecuba becomes an indirect addressee of his speech; she
was not present in the encounter between Hermes and her husband, but
her personal lament seems to have absorbed material from the previous
scene and adapted it to its own needs. The "Comparison" between the two
parts of Hecuba's speech and Hermes' language as reproduced by them
gives evidence for the process of incorporation and adaptation of non-
personal lament diction by a γόος-speech.
The "Comparison" initiates an external analepsis,429 creating a pause
428
Taplin (1992) 281-282 notes: "... there is an echo of the key phrase in Achilleus'
speech to Priam: «οΰδέ μιν άνσχήσεις» ('you will not bring him back to life') (551).
Achilleus found his own way to the truth, the 'lesson' that no amount of grief or
vengeance or resurrectionary magic can make a dead person stand up: by applying
this 'lesson' to Achilleus, Hecuba also reaches it for herself'. In other words, in
Hecuba's personal lament, Patroclus has become the funerary surrogate of Hector;
what applied to the former in terms of grief applies allusively to the latter.
429
Line 24. 753 has some special characteristics: the meaning of the word άμιχθαλόεσ-
σαν is unknown to us and even in antiquity it remained obscure; the scholia vetera ad
753ab (V Erbse 637) offer various interpretations such as "rocky", "unhospitable",
"misty" or even "prosperous". One should note the fact that we have a fourth foot
trochaic caesura with no Hermann's bridge -a rare phenomenon, which only occurs
once every 1000 lines in the Iliad. I am inclined to see here the traces of an intended
dictional differentiation from the other two parts of Hecuba's speech, where she
reproduces the language of Hermes. Other elements pointing in the same direction
are: the alliterative interplay between παΐδας and πόδας in line 751, the parisa πέρ-
νασχ' and ελεσκε in line 752 (observed by Eustathius) and finally the internal
160 Chapter 5
between the two parts of the speech which recall that of Hermes, thus
bringing the focus back to what is for most Iliadic personal laments a
locus communis: the preeminence of the deceased when compared to
other dead. The particularly merciless treatment reserved for Hector, who
is killed and defiled rather than being sold into slavery like his brothers,
speaks volumes for his special place in Achilles' life. The explanation for
this Achillean savagery towards Hector is given briefly but emphatically
at the first part of 24. 756:
Πατρόκλου, τον επεφνες·
Of Patroclus whom you killed;
Hecuba's personal lament ends with a reference to the gentle arrows of

Apollo (οίς άγανοΐσι βέλεσσιν: 24. 759) by which he kills someone who
is like Hector. This is a peculiar line with some parallels in the Odyssey
(3.279-280,5. 123-124, 11. 172-173, 11. 198-199, 15. 410-411) but none
in the Iliad.™
It has been argued that this line refers to "a sudden, painless death";431
Reinhardt432 argued that this is not a formula, but was created for this
particular context where it fits the situation; Macleod agrees, adding that
it could later on have been "reproduced more or less appropriately to the
context in the Odyssean passages".433
These remarks seem highly apposite, but at the same time we should
note that this line can be "read" in three différent yet complementary ways.
rhyming of the two-syllable names of islands (Σάμον, "Ιμβρον, Λημνον) all ending in
-ov. Note also the well balanced organization of the passsage into four three-verse
blocks, which show the more restricted and formal internal organization of the ritual
γόοι when compared to the more fluid and loose rhythm of abrupt verbalizations of
mourning and lamentation, as is the case in the personal laments in Book 22 of the
Iliad.
430
In 6. 428 Andromache says that her mother was killed by Artemis but the expression
used there is not the same with 24. 759; for the same reason I will exclude from the
discussion the killing of the children of Niobe by Artemis and Apollo narrated in 24.
605-606.
431
Cf. Richardson (1993) 357; Macleod (1982) 153; Heubeck/Hoekstra (1989) 258.
432
See Reinhardt (1961) 485 ("Nur einmal, nur hier bedeutet der Vers nicht Todesart, ist
nicht Formel, sondern erfüllter Ausdruck der 'Situation'").
433
Macleod (1982) 153.
5.9 Helen 161
First, one is tempted to see here a deliberate allusion to Book 1 of the Iliad,
and in particular to lines 8-52, where Apollo brings pain and death to the
Achaean camp. Second, this line creates a deliberate contrast between the
protective role of the gods towards Hector's body (and we know that it
was Apollo who protected it) and Apollo's destructive presence at the end
of the personal lament, as if Hecuba was saying that Apollo is capable of
bringing both death and protection. Third, in this line I am inclined to see
a well-covered allusion to Achilles' future death by Apollo, a reference to
an extra-Iliadic event foreshadowed in Book 22 in Achilles' futile pursuit
of the god outside the walls of Troy. If this third interpretation is taken
into account, then we can see a nice touch of pathos in Hecuba's words,
for she virtually compares Hector to Achilles!
5.9 Helen
Helen is both the last speaker and mourner in the Iliad. The placement of
her lament at the end of the triad of γόοι closing the epic is not a matter
of mere chance, since the poem comes to an end with a speech by the
person who caused the whole war in the first place.434
Helen begins her lament by using the same formula that Hecuba
employed in the first line of her speech (748), with necessary changes,
since her relation to Hector is of a different kind than that of Hecuba. She
distinguishes Hector among her brothers-in-law, thus underscoring their
family relationship. Helen had also used the term δαήρ in 3. 180 in the
Teichoskopia, when she described Agamemnon to Priam, and in 6. 344 in
434
The inclusion of Helen in the triad of mourners makes this whole lament look back
to Book 6 when Hector met with the same three women in the city of Troy (Macleod
1982, 149), but apart from the family term δαήρ and the "Death-Wish" typical for
Helen's speeches (3. 173: ώς δφελεν θάνατος μοι άδεΐν κακός | 6. 345-346: ώς μ'
όφελ' ήματι τω, δτε με πρώτον τέκε μήτηρ, / οίχεσθαι προφέρουσα κακή άνέμοιο
θύελλα I 24. 764: ώς πριν ώφελλον όλέσθαι), the phraseology employed in Helen's
lament in Book 24 is very different. See also Christopoulos (forthcoming 2004) who
argues that by including Helen in the triad of mourners at the end of the epic, the poet
of the Iliad incorporates an aenigmatic and rather fluctuating figure within the
framework of epic conventions (expressed by the typology of the ritual lament for
Hector). Pantelia (2002) 21-27 suggests that Helen's lament in Iliad 24 «sings the
glory of Hector within the larger frame of Homer's song» and in that respect her γόος
may be considered the "first" song in Hector's honor.
162 Chapter 5
her encounter with Hector inside the walls of Troy. Thus, Helen re-
cognizes both her husbands, Menelaus and Paris, and the family relations
that these two marriage bonds imply. This double perspective paints the
picture of a Helen oscillating between Sparta and Troy, happy past and
sorrowful present, whose diction is a vain effort of our tradition to attest
to the already shattered instability of her escaping figure.
It has been argued that Helen and Briséis share a structural relationship
of key importance for the entire epic.435 This relationship includes reciprocal
correspondence between two themes pertaining to the fate of both
women: (a) abduction; (b) loss of husband.436 By weaving an intricate web
of these themes, Helen's personal lament in Iliad 24 alludes backwards to
Briséis' lament for Patroclus in Book 19. It also contributes significantly
to portraying Briséis as a "second Helen", since both women "perceive them-
selves as victims, as pawns to be shuttled back and forth between men".437
Briséis is to the Iliad what Helen is to the Trojan War. Just as the
abduction of Helen by Paris has resulted in the Achaean expedition
against Troy, so the abduction of Briséis by Agamemnon causes Achilles'
wrath and results in an internal conflict between two of the chief Greek
leaders. The tradition seems to flirt with the idea of creating surrogates
who function as sacrificial substitutes: as Iphigeneia has been sacrificied
for the sake of Helen, so Briséis is treated as the sacrificial substitute of
Chiyseis.438 Pressing the analogies to the level of poetics, we could argue
that Briséis is the Iliadic surrogate of Helen, since the latter's original
abduction became subordinated to the former's, with Agamemnon taking
in the Iliad the place of Paris as the violator within the epic.439
455
See Reinhardt (1961) 421; Erbse (1983) 1-15; Edwards (1991) 270; Taplin (1992) 84-
86, 212-218; Suzuki (1989) 21-29, 55; Dué (2002) 15-16.
436
Both Briséis (19. 293-294) and Helen have lost their brothers, but Helen's personal
lament in II. 24 does not refer to this event. In the Teichoskopia, Helen expresses her
agonizing thoughts (3. 236-242) about the fate of her brothers, whom she cannot see
among the Achaean warriors. At that very point, her speech is curtailed and the
external narrator takes the floor, reminding us that Castor and Pollux have died in
Lakedaimon (3. 243-244). See Pucci (1987) 152-154.
437
Suzuki (1989) 28. Suzuki is right in arguing that "Patroclus appears to have assuaged
Briséis' sense of loss and vulnerability in a new and alien environment, as Hector had
done for Helen".
438
Suzuki (1989) 22-25.
439
Dué (2002) 40 employs the terms micro- and macronarratives and argues that "the
5.9 Helen 163
In the light of Suzuki's revealing observations, we may proceed to the

examination of certain features of Helen's personal lament that hauntingly
echo Briséis' γόος in Iliad 19.
As the lament is drawing to a close, Helen's frustration and distress are
epitomized when the narrative lens zooms in on her present condition:
«τώ σέ θ' αμα κλαίω και εμ' άμμορον άχνυμένη κήρ·» (24. 773)
"Therefore I mourn for you in sorrow of heart and mourn myself

also and my ill luck."
24. 773 describes Helen's emotional imbroglio, as now, after Hector's

death, she is abandoned in a sea of troubles amidst a hostile Trojan
community. The γόος has not explained or accounted for the past, but has
helped the mourner come to terms with it. A similar filter is established in
Briséis' personal lament in Book 19:
«τώ σ' άμοτον κλαίω τεθνηότα, μείλιχον αίεί.» (19. 300)
"Therefore I weep your death without ceasing. You were kind

always."
Both women lament their protectors, the men who supported them while
both being trapped in a new, unfriendly environment. Helen's power-
lessness in view of the past takes the form of the typical "Death-Wish", a
contrary-to-fact, indirect declaration of her unwillingness to have caused
all this suffering crowned by the death of Hector. A similar point of view
is expressed by Achilles (19. 59-60), who wishes that Artemis had killed
Briséis the day he sacked the city of Lyrnessos, so that his quarrel with
Agamemnon had not taken place.440 On the other hand, the negative role
of Briséis and Helen on the level of the plot becomes positive on the field
of poetics, as the former represents a necessary requirement for the
figures in any compressed (micro-) narrative can be substitutes for those of the
expanded (macro-) narrative". According to this observation, Helen's substitution by
Briséis "is typical of micronarratives" (40).
440
Dué (2002) 15.
164 Chapter 5
narrative unraveling of the Iliad and the latter the raison d' être for the
Trojan War. Likewise, the intratextual affinities concerning the unattainabi-
lity of both wishes underscore the speakers' (Achilles' and Helen's)
realization of a grim present, but also help reformulate the narrative
jigsaw: Helen and Briseis, Briseis and Helen represent women splintered
off from their environment, lonely and defenseless in a "foreign" land, a
place where they have been reduced to mere outsiders. Conversely, their
mourning songs bring them to the foreground; through their intratextual
resonances, allusions and references, the audience become alert to their
significance for an entire span of traditions pertaining to the Trojan War.
Apart from the above dictional references, there are substantial
contextual similarities between Briséis' lament for Patroclus and Helen's
for Hector. In her γόος in Iliad 19, Briséis informs the audience of
Patroclus' promise to make possible her marriage to Achilles after their
return to Phthia. In Helen's personal lament in Iliad 24, the marriage
theme is brought forward through the confirmation of her wedding status
with Paris, which is, of course, well known to everybody (ή μέν μοι, πόσις
έστίν 'Αλέξανδρος θεοειδής: 24. 763).441 Such a prima facie unnecessary
addition acquires its full meaning once we see how well it collaborates
with the protocols of the Iliadic song, as it provides a context thematically
corresponding to Briséis' focus on the marriage theme. We are not dealing
here with allusive repetitions, but with a typical lament theme that is
instrumental in highlighting the dramatic parallelism of both situations.
The "text" wittily entertains the idea that both situations are analogous, as
the polarity slave/free woman becomes progressively nullified within the
poetic realm of the personal lament. Helen thus adopts a stance similar to
that of Briséis, and incorporates an indirect criticism or questioning of
what happiness means for a woman into her speech. Her γόος expresses
an unfulfilled yearning for a blissful marriage that has been permanently
cancelled.442 Its intratextual affinities to the personal lament of Briséis
unite the narratively fractured and splintered perspective of the female
within the heroic world.
By echoing the γόος of Briseis (Book 19), Helen's personal lament443
441
I am here following Allen (1920 J ). West (2000) 367 ad loc. omits the line.
442
See Murnaghan (1999) 209.
443
See also Austin (1994) 23-50.
5.9 Helen 165
has contrived a way of bridging the gap between the personal and the
universal, the timeless and the occasional. At the same time, her lament
for Hector, the best of the Trojans, her protective shield not against the
darts of some god or warrior, but against the insulting words of the
Trojans is no less a lament for her own self.444 This was, after all, her own
war, which she is beginning to lose now that Hector is no longer alive.
444
This is consonant with her "Death-Wish" in 24. 764. Suzuki (1989) 55-56 correctly
points out: "Her lament thus accurately predicts her literary afterlife, for in the
Odyssey, having returned to Sparta with Menelaus, she is represented as an
unassimilable and sinister presence in her own house. Helen's lament for Hector
parallels the poet's elegy for Troy and for the heroic age. In marking the loss and
absence not only of Hector but also of her former self, her lament, like all elegies,
enacts the disjunction between word and deed, between language and what it
describes."
Conclusion
The Iliad distinguishes between two marked forms of lament, the γόοι and
the θρήνοι. The γόοι can be defined as personal lament speeches ex-
pressed by a figure important to the Iliadic plot, male or female, concern-
ing the death, past or future, real or imaginary of a preeminent warrior,
Achaean or Trojan. On the other hand, the θρήνοι are lament speeches
sung by professional mourners. In both cases the soloist's speech or song
is accompanied by a response from a chorus, perhaps in the form of cries.
The epic freely indulges in extensive quotation of the γόοι, while leaving
the θρήνοι uncited. This intentional epic promotion of one form of lament
speech at the expense of the other is probably due to the poem's fondness
for non-professional speech. On the other hand, the γόοι are highly
marked speeches employed by the epic protagonists for the death of other
epic protagonists. The Iliad has deftly used the personal laments as an
internal reflection and comment on its very subject matter, the heroic world
itself. The γόοι explore the poem's heroic landscape by helping the
narrative lens focus on those heroes around whom the tragedy of the Iliad
is unraveled: the death of Patroclus receives full lament treatment by
Briséis and Achilles, and consequently leads to the death and most
extensive lamentation in the epic, that for Hector.
Further, the poem succeeds in weaving γόοι that would normally fall
out of its narrative blueprint into its plot. Agamemnon's personal lament
for Menelaus (who finally escapes death) offers an internal look at the
heroic code, as the Achaean leader questions the very meaning of the war
without Menelaus, who virtually is the measure of Agamemnon's own
κλέος. This is also, mutatis mutandis, the case with Thetis' γόος for
Achilles in Book 18: she refers to an extra-Iliadic event, the death of
Achilles, which the epic has been persistently exploiting since Book 1. By
using the γόοι to reflect events not covered by its time span, the Iliad is
able to offer its audience a general view of the epic tradition stretching
backwards and forwards, extending its range and joining the past with the
future.
The Iliad contains twelve γόοι the majority of which (ten in all) are
placed in the last Books of the poem. Certain characters express more
than one personal lament for the same person. The key role is played by
female mourners, although there are males who utter γόος-speeches, most
notably Achilles. The lamentation for Hector is performed by his wife
Conclusion 167
Andromache, who seems to be the archetypal lament singer with three

γόοι (Books 6, 22, 24), his mother Hecuba with two (Books 22, 24), his
sister-in-law Helen with one (Book 24) and, finally, his father Priam
(Book 22). Patroclus is lamented twice by his devoted friend Achilles
(Books 18, 19) and once by the slave-girl Briseis (Book 19). The personal
laments for Menelaus by his brother Agamemnon (Book 4) and Achilles
by his mother Thetis (Book 18) complete the picture. The distribution of
γόοι among male and female speakers shows that the personal lament is
not gender-restricted. Conversely, the gender of the chorus accompanying
the soloist's speech is invariably determined by the gender of the principal
mourner.
The γόοι show remarkable consistency in respect of both structural
pattern and thematic typology. Their use of tripartite structure and ring-
composition is, of course, consonant with common epic techniques of
organizing material either on micro- or macronarrative level. In the case
of the Iliadic personal laments, the aforementioned structural principles
enable the mourner to thematise certain issues pertaining to the γόος
typology of content with unparalleled explicitness: the antithesis between
past and present, the praise to the deceased, the motif of common fate.
Structural patterns establish the necessary background for a successful
presentation of topics regarding the main concerns of the lament, as they
aim to promote the narrative goals of the γόοι. Other γόος themes include
the comparison of the deceased to others belonging to the same group of
people, in order to extol the dead person and highlight the significance of
his loss, and the mourner's death-wish. These two topics reveal a latent
connection to larger issues concerning epic poetry, as they contribute to
an encomium of the dead hero, explicitly the first and implicitly the
second. Focusing on an aretalogy of the deceased, the γόος congruously
agrees with the main preoccupation of heroic epic that sings the γόος.
Furthermore, through its extensive Iliadic citing and focused interest on
the epic protagonists (mourners and deceased alike) the personal lament
becomes the form of speech that best represents the poem's perspective,
offering a compressed but profusely resonant summary of the Iliad's
lasting imprint on the presentation of the world of heroes.
The γόοι have single- or multiple-verse introductions and closures that
fall within the larger category of speech frames inaugurating and capping
speeches in Homeric poetry. The common introductory pattern under-
scores the preeminent role of the non-professional soloist leading the
168 Conclusion
lament among a chorus of mourners. Likewise, the typical closing

formula indicates the completion of the lament and the accompanying
collective response of the chorus. The departure from a specific formulaic
pattern observed in a significant number of personal laments is not a
matter of mere chance, but concurs with context-specific parameters
displaying the skillful adaptation of formulaic material to its immediate
environment. Variations from the norm are effected by addition, expansion
or insertion triggered by contextual factors that cue the audience to a
specific interpretive note. Speech introductory and closing frames re-
present an indispensable part in the interpretation of the γόοι. Localized
on the textual borderline between the mimetic and diegetic narrative
modes, personal lament introductions and closures are not strictly
compartmentalized, as they amalgamate with the content of the ensuing
or preceding γόος, collapsing or at least blunting the strictly defined
dichotomy between "telling" and "showing".
The γόοι are personal lament speeches about life stories desperately
oscillating between spatial and temporal polarities. They reflect the tragic
problems facing the world of heroes from the mourner's point of view. As
Homeric heroes are temporarily on the horns of a dilemma between
νόστος and κλέος, only to choose the latter at the expense of the former,
so mourners in their γόοι for heroes constantly emphasize a tension
between distance and closeness, encounter and separation, past and
future. When the Iliad is completed, the end of the heroic race may still
be far away, but the Iliadic γόοι are keen to epitomize the critical position
of the heroes mediated through the mourners' focalization. To this end,
spatial and temporal deictic markers are powerfully marshalled, allowing
a significantly wider outlook on the event of a hero's death and a more
penetrating glance at the larger issues that trouble the epic.
Intratextual affinities allow one to comprehend how the Iliad has
elevated the γόοι from simple lament speeches to its narrative fulcrum.
Crosstextual comparisons reveal surprising connections between distant
passages, formulaic repetition and variation lead to hidden resonances and
unexpected links. The γόοι are not randomly scattered throughout the
poem. They masterly follow the unraveling of the plot and get involved in
an internal dialogue, as if forming a coherent and self-contained corpus.
By scrupulously employing allusion, the primary method of intratextual
reshuffling in the highly sophisticated medium that Homeric language is,
the Iliad is able to fully exploit interrupted linearity and increased
Conclusion 169
frequency in the deployment of γόος-speeches. Taking its time in turning

the focus on its chief protagonists, it purposely teaches the audience the
ultimate lesson, namely that this is a poem about death, anticipated but
unavoidable, just like the tragic fate awaiting its best heroes.
APPENDIX I
Privileged and Unprivileged Dead
Unreported γόοι in the Iliad
Apart from the twelve personal laments found in the Iliad, there are a
number of expressions referring to unreported γόος-speeches, i.e. which
are not verbalized by any speaker. Before I offer a list of these instances
and then try to explain the reason(s) lying behind this apparently weird,
silence to which the poem "condemns" some of its characters, I need to
make a necessary distinction between the two different meanings of the
word γόος in the Iliad.
The term γόος refers to: a) the intense grief and pain caused by some-
body's death and b) the actual personal lament, a γόος-speech uttered
usually by the deceased's next of kin or close friend.
All the cases I have classified as unreported personal laments refer to
the second meaning of the word. So, e.g., cases like:
«άρητόν δέ τοκεΰσι γόον και πένθος εθηκας.

ή κέ σφιν δειλοΐσι γόου κατάπαυμα γενοίμην». (17. 37-38)
"and left to his parents the curse of lamentation and sorrow.

Yet I might stop the mourning of these unhappy people"
are not considered to be unreported personal laments, for the word γόος
expresses the idea of grief, of mourning and lamenting, not of the speech
that specifically pertains to this kind of lamentation.445 In other words, in
this case the word γόος denotes the action rather than the speech-act that
verbalizes it.446
445
I have also excluded 6. 373, pointing to the lament that will later be expressed by
Andromache.
446
The formula (23. 17) τοΐσι δέ Πηλείδης άδινοΰ έξήρχε γόοιο will not be examined
172 APPENDIX I
Below is a list of the expressions referring to unreported personal

laments in the Iliad:
1. 6.499: άμφιπόλους· τησιν δέ γόον πάσησιν ένώρσεν.

2. 6.500: αΐ μέν ετι ζωόν γόον "Εκχορα ω ένί οϊκψ·
3. 16. 857: δν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποΰσ' άνδροτήτα και ήβην.
4. 22.363: δν πότμον γοόωσα, λιποϋσ' άνδροτήτα και ήβην447
5. 23.108: ώς φάτο· τοΐσι δέ πάσιν ύφ' ιμερον ώρσε γόοιο.
6. 23.153: θήκεν τοΐσι δέ πάσιν ύφ' ϊμερον ώρσε γόοιο.
7. 24. 507: ώς φάτο- τψ δ' άρα πατρός ύφ' ϊμερον ώρσε γόοιο
8. 24. 513: αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο διος Άχιλλεΰς
a. Items 1-2 (the άμφίπολοι)44' and 5-6 (the Myrmidons) refer to groups of
potential mourners. According to Homeric practice, their lament cannot
be verbalized, since epic voices only solo speeches.
The external narrator concludes/closes the Homilía scene in 6. 499-
500, which has turned out to be a lament scene. Then, when Hector goes
to meet Paris the scope changes significantly (6. 501-502):
ού γάρ μιν ετ' εφαντο ύπότροπον έκ πολέμοιο

ϊξεσθαι προφυγόντα μένος κα'ι χείρας 'Αχαιών.
for they thought he would never again come back from fighting
alive, escaping the Achaean hands and their violence.
Likewise, lines 23.108 and 153 mark the beginning and end of a unreported
lamentation scene functioning as the framework for the preparation of the
funeral (cutting and collecting wood, preparation of a military parade,
casting of hair on the bier of the dead, Achilles holding Patroclus' hand
in this appendix. I do not consider Achilles' speech (23. 19-23) a personal lament,
because its structure and content does not fit the requirements we have set in chapter
2. The use of a personal lament introductory formula without an ensuing γόος is
instead due to the general funereal framework of Book 23.
447
I am here following Allen (19203). West (2000) 285 ad loc. omits this line.
448
Note that the attendants were in the palace during the meeting between husband and
wife: κιχήσατο δ' ενδοθι πολλάς I άμφιπόλους (6. 498-499).
Privileged and Unprivileged Dead 173
etc.)·449 They clearly denote the beginning and end of the scene they are
placed in.
In both cases, the lament expressions are used as narrative signs
marking not the beginning or completion of a personal lament, but rather
the end (Book 6) or the beginning and end (Book 23) of a whole scene.
The silence of the chorus is due to the fact that, according to the Homeric
practice of voicing solo speeches only, the γόοι are uttered solely by the
main protagonists, not by minor figures or groups of people.
b. In items 3-4 the participle γοόωσα refers to both meanings of the
word γόος. These two items are practically one, as the same formula is
being employed. It would have been very awkward to hear a personal
lament from the soul of Patroclus or Hector at the moment they died, for
the context would have been entirely inappropriate; the scene is one of
fighting with only two or three lines given over to the beautiful descrip-
tion of the flying of the soul to the Underworld. Moreover, the repetition
of the same four lines after each hero's death (Patroclus and Hector alike)
creates a strong link between their fates and their treatment within the
Iliadic plot.450
c. Item 7 and 8 (24. 507: ώς φάτο· τω δ' αρα πατρός ύφ' ιμερον ώρσε
γόοιο and 24. 513 : αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο δίος Άχιλλεύς) refer to
Achilles, whose personal lament is not verbalized. His silence has to be
interpreted within the larger context of the scene with Priam (24. 508-
513):
άψάμενος δ' άρα χειρός άπώσατο ήκα γέροντα,

τώ δέ μνησαμένω, ô μέν "Εκτορος άνδροφόνοιο
κλαϊ' άδινά προπάροι,θε ποδών Άχιληος έλυσθείς,
αύτάρ Άχιλλεύς κλαϊεν έόν πατέρ', άλλοτε δ' αύτε
Πάτροκλον των δέ στοναχή κατά δώματ' όρώρει
αύτάρ έπεί ρα γόοιο τετάρπετο δΐος Άχιλλεύς.
449
See that in both these cases the dative of a participle expressing grief follows in the
next line: μυρομένοισι δέ τοΐσι φάνη ροδοδάκτυλος Ήώς (23. 109) and καί νύ κ'
όδυρομένοισιν εδυ φάος ήελίοιο (23. 154). The two participles are followed by two
expressions denoting the beginning and end of the day, namely the beginning and end
of a scene.
450
In 23. 106 the expression γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε refers to the unspeakable lament
of Patroclus' soul. This reference does not denote a personal lament but the grief and
pain the soul undergoes as long as it remains unburied.
174 APPENDIX I
He took the old man's hand and pushed him

gently away, and the two remembered, as Priam sat huddled
at the feet of Achilleus and wept close for manslaughtering Hektor
and Achilleus wept now for his own father, now again
for Patroklos. The sound of their mourning moved in the house.
Then when great Achilleus had taken full satisfaction in sorrow
The external narrator has decided to depict the whole scene of the two
men lamenting without verbalizing their personal laments, for this would
have interrupted their meeting, and the theme of ransoming Hector's body
would have been postponed for too long. This is exactly why we should
"read" line 24. 507 within the larger framework of the scene between
Priam and Achilles.451
The selectivity of the Iliad can be seen not only in its verbalization of
the γόοι rather than the θρήνοι of professional singers, but also in its
insistence on voicing solely those personal laments uttered by the next of
kin, not those expressed by the chorus of mourners. The lines it devotes
to the latter must be interpreted as narrative signs indicating the end
(meeting between Andromache and Hector in Book 6) or the beginning
and end (lamentation for Patroclus in Book 23) of a scene.
The Therapeutics of Lament
«αύτάρ έπει κ' όλοοΐο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο» (23. 10)

«άλλήλους όλοοΐο τεταρπώμεσθα γόοιο» (23. 98)
«...γόοιο μεν έστι καί άσαι» (23. 157)
«άγκάς έλόντ' έμόν υίόν, έπήν γόου έξ ερον εϊην.» (24. 227)
451
In 24. 84-86 Thetis is lamenting the death of Achilles although he is still alive;
moreover, this personal lament remains unexpressed (the term κλαίε practically
refers to a personal lament). Kakridis (1949) 69, note 7 has argued that "the fact that
in 24. 83 ff. Thetis laments again in the depths of the sea among her sisters μόρον ου
παιδός does not appear strange to us. Hector is now dead and Achilles' death will
follow immediately. It is this feeling that the poet wishes to emphasize a little before
the end of his poem: Achilles now belongs to the underworld, although the Iliad does
not describe his death".
The first three lines refer to a desire which has to be satisfied; still, the
γόος is characterized as pernicious (όλοός). Achilles urges first the
Myrmidons and then Patroclus to find satisfaction together with him by
means of a destructive γόος. This revealing expression should be
interpreted once we take into account the fact that in the first two cases,
Achilles exhorts the Myrmidons to approach the body of Patroclus, and
Patroclus' ghost to stand close: ασσον ίόντες (23. 8) and άλλά μοι άσσον
στήθι (23. 97) respectively. This may well be an indication of a miming
of the closeness between the two friends. The γόος seems to have
substituted a natural situation connoting the bond that kept Achilles and
Patroclus together, for this symbolic substitution of an emotional link is
iconized in lament terms, and in particular by means of a reversal of roles:
the γόος is to bring the delight of satisfaction.452 The same applies to
Achilles' γόοιο μεν έστι καΐ άσαι (23. 157), which is triggered by the
general funereal context designating that the lamentation should be
brought to an end.453
Priam uses an equivalent expression to refer to the dictional context
denoting the satiety of the desire for food and drink.454 In 24. 227, he
functions as the internal narrator, verbalizing his feelings as he wants,
even at the expense of his life, to lament his son; the expression γόου έξ
452
According to Latacz (1966) 174-219, who studied the semantical evolution of τέρ-
πομαι in Homer, there is a clear distinction between κορέσσασθαι and άσαι, which
show the satiety of an activity or thing (das Satthaben einer Sache oder Tätigkeit),
that is to say its κόρος (Überdruß), and the a-stem of the verb τέρπομαι, which
expresses a positive, emotionally stressed and delightful physical satisfaction.
453
The tone is the same as in 22. 427: τώ κε κορεσσάμεθα κλαίοντέ τε μυρομένω τε,
and 24. 717: άσεσθε κλαυθμοΐο.
454
See Latacz (1966) 179 who notes: Vom Subjekt her gesehen, erscheint derselbe
Vorgang als Tätigkeit: έξ ερον εσθαι - "den Drang auslassen'. Daß mit ίμερος hier
nichts wesentlich anderes gemeint sein kann als mit έρος mit Formelvers αύτάρ έπεί
πόσιος και έδητύος έξ ερον εντο, zeigt V 227: έπήν γόου έξ ερον εϊην" Kloss (1994)
44-65 rightly notes that ερος and ϊμερος are sometimes used in a similar manner and
sometimes differently, the former referring to the satisfying aspect of desire that is
situated inside the human body and has bodily connotations, the latter denoting more
of a spiritual feeling coming from outside (attested by the verbs αίρεΐν, όρνύναι,
έμβάλλειν) and describing the beginning of a desire. But I cannot agree with Kloss'
opinion that the expression ίμερος γόοιο is almost always (with the exception of II.
23. 14) "eine wörtliche Rede" (53). On the contrary, this expression never introduces
a direct speech in the Iliad.
176 APPENDIX I
ερον εϊην is Priam's indirect reply to two similar phrases Hecuba has used
just before, when trying in vain to dissuade him from going to Achilles'
hut to ransom Hector's body. The first one is νυν δέ κλαίωμεν άνευθεν
(24. 208), capped by έών άπάνευθε τοκήων (24. 211), and the second άρ-
γίποδας κύνας άσαι (24. 211). Priam's words allude to both of these
phrases. A formal, ritual γόος will take place when the body of the
deceased is brought back to Troy; at the same time, the words represent a
humanizing effort, as Priam tries to transform the bestial satiety of vio-
lence (in reference to the dogs) into the therapeutic satiety of
lamentation.4"
As Pucci456 has shown in the case of Briséis' and Achilles' antiphonal
laments in Iliad 19, the "heart, seat of life, ceases to have its normal
desires and longs for death, and with this longing prepares the next
procession of deaths, imaginary and real, of the father, of the son, and of
himself'. Something equivalent is going on here, where γόοιο coupled
with όλοοίο expresses its regular function, but when combined with
τεταρπώμεσθα it produces an oxymoronic effect.
Γόος points in two directions: it expresses the belief that, through this
particular form of lamentation, the suffering and distress of the individual
can be eased, reduced and satisfied. There can even be some sort of
delight in uttering a personal lament, because the grief piled up due to the
death of a dear one may find a way out and be released through its
verbalization, its transformation into language.
On the other hand, the desire for γόος that brings satisfaction alludes
to a latent menace: that of the dead. If γόος brings satisfaction and there
is a desire for it, there is at the same time a negation of life and its
everyday manifestations. Achilles -and this is no coincidence- is the only
one who employs these expressions in the Iliad. He finds the satisfaction
he can no longer find in life in a ritual process that is linked to death. This
looks at his own future death, as from Book 19 onwards, when he
expresses his desire to abstain from food and drink,457 he is continuously
455
This is consonant with the general tendency of epic to characterize the singer's own
performance as pleasure (τέρψις). See Derderian (2001) 67-69 and ft. 11.
456
See Pucci (1998) 106.
457
Note that the verb for satiety is again used: "μή με πριν σίτοιο κελεύετε μηδέ
ποχήτος / άσαθαι φίλον ήτορ" (19. 306-307).
moving towards his own "frightening and ascetic companionship of

death".45" Achilles desires the satisfaction that a γόος can offer, and tries
to pass the same feeling on to the Myrmidons and the ghost of Patroclus.
This symbolizes a welcoming gesture towards death: now that his friend
is no longer alive, the only delight he can find is granted to him by the
negation of the manifestations of life, as expressed in abstention from
food and drink or a death ritual.
«» See Pucci (1998) 106.

APPENDIX II
Short obituaries in the Iliad
Introductory remarks
The Iliadic short obituaries can be defined as brief necrological vignettes

dedicated to a dead warrior, Greek or Trojan, of little or no importance to
the plot, in most cases reported in indirect speech. Short obituaries in the
Iliad (SO) are thus a poetic miniature of the stylized personal laments, the
γόοι. They represent the way the epic deals with the death of hundreds of
warriors who relentlessly fall on the battlefield; at first glance, one might
think these deaths function as long casualty lists of no weight and
significance. Yet a closer look reveals that they share some common
characteristics with their "bigger brothers", the personal laments and that
their abbreviated, reference-style is not insignificant at all.459
Once we set out to study the SO, we have to turn our attention to the
highly frequent battle scenes in the Iliad. This is natural, since the SO are
almost always attested within the framework of one of the four types of
battle-scenes found in the epic: the duel, the simple androktasia, the
aristeia and the massive or multiple androktasiai.46° Iliadic battle scenes
are classified not only on the basis of the number of slayers and slain,461
but also according to the distribution and organization of their constituent
elements. According to Niens,462 we can distinguish between three forms
of battle-scenes, which she calls the brief type (Kurzform), the basic form
459
On the importance of the SO as poetic devices conveying emotion and offering status
to their subjects, see Griffin (1980) 103-143.
460
On the classification of typical battle-scenes and their function, see Fenik (1968);
Latacz (1977); Niens (1987); Hellmann (2000).
461
Single vs. single (duel), multiple vs. multiple with one side victorious (simple
androktasia), single vs. multiple (aristeia), and finally multiple vs. multiple at the
same time with no victor (multiple androktasiai).
462
Niens (1987) xi-xiv.
180 APPENDIX II
(Normal-/Grundform) and the expanded form (which results from the

expansion of the basic form).463 The brief form is one or two verses long
and comprises the following elements:
1. an explicit reference to the killer
2. a reference to the victim
3. a verbal expression meaning "to kill"
The ensuing verse shows the co-existence of these elements in a single
verse: Πήδαιον δ' άρ' επεφνε Μέγης, 'Αντήνορος υίόν (5. 69).
The basic form includes the following elements:
1. Killer
2. Victim
3. Indication of the action
4. Weapons
5. Reference to the wounded part of the body
6. Effect of the injury
7. Description of death approaching
Niens464 offers a splendid example (16. 345-350): Ιδομενεύς (1) δ'
Έρύμαντα (2) κατά στόμα (5) νηλέϊ χαλκψ (4) νύξε· (3) τό δ' αντικρύ
δόρυ χάλκεον έξεπέρησεν νέρθεν ύπ' έγκεφάλοιο, κέασσε δ' αρ' όστέα
λευκά... (6) ... θανάτου δέ μέλαν νέφος άμφεκάλυψεν (7).
The expanded form has the following internal structure:
1. Reference to the position of the warrior (standing on a chariot,
running etc.)
2. An indication of the poet's view
3. Biographical information originating from the use of the patronymic
4. A simile of various size
5. Direct triumph speeches against the opponent
6. Emotional reactions about one's fate465
This short digression on the forms of battles scenes in the Iliad is
essential for the study of the SO, since it constitutes the "poetic environ-
ment" where they (the SO) are developed. Moreover, like the battle-
scenes, the SO display considerable variation in their length, constituent
elements and function.
Previous research conducted on this topic aimed at showing "that the
461
Niens does not give a specific name to this form of battle-scene.
« 4 Niens (1987) xiii.
445
For examples, see Niens (1987) xiv.
Short obituaries in the Iliad 181
dispassionate manner in which these slayings are recorded, and above all
the short obituaries which many of them are given, are important and
striking because they do in fact convey emotion, and because in doing so
they give status and significance to their subjects".466 This appendix has a
rather different aim: it is an attempt to classify the SO into categories and
examine their relation to the Iliadic personal laments.
Types of Short Obituaries
There are two types of SO in the Iliad: the brief type and the expanded
one. This may sound strange, since the SO are by definition laconic. On
the other hand, they also display variation in size in a way that resembles
their "textual neighbors", i.e. the battle-scenes within whose framework
they are located.
The Iliad contains 45 expanded SO:467 2. 872-875; 4. 473-489; 5. 49-
58; 5. 59-68; 5. 69-75; 5. 76-83; 5. 152-158; 5. 541-560; 5. 708-710; 6.
12-19; 6. 20-28; 6. 33-35; 7. 327-370; 8. 302-308; 11. 101-121; 11. 218-
247; 11. 262-263; 11. 301-309; 12. 110-117; 13. 170-181; 13. 363-369;
13. 384-393; 13. 427-444; 13. 560-575; 13. 660-672; 13. 758-764; 14.
442-445; 15. 333-335; 15. 525-539; 16. 404-410; 16. 480-491; 16. 570-
580; 16. 594-599; 16. 633-637; 16. 855-857; 17. 51-60; 17. 300-303; 17.
348-351; 17. 426-440; 17. 520-524; 17. 575-581; 17. 609-616; 20. 381-
392; 20. 401-406; 20. 407-418.
The Brief SO
The brief type of SO (16. 333-334: τον δέ κατ' οσσε / ελλαβε πορφύρεος
θάνατος και μοίρα κραταιή) has the following structure: Victim + Verb
figuratively meaning "death" + Death/Metaphor for Death. The internal
organisation of the brief form bears a striking resemblance to the
"Kurzform"46" of androktasia: Πήδαιον δ' άρ' επεφνε Μέγης, 'Αντήνορος
466
Griffin (1980) 104.
447
I have not counted all the brief SO in the Iliad.
See Niens (1987) xii.
182 APPENDIX II
υΐόν (5. 69) [Victim + Verb denoting "killing" + Killer]. In the brief form
of SO there is often an expression referring to the part of the body death
or darkness has fallen upon (mainly the eyes / κατ' δσσε). This seems to
be a reflection of the typical reference of battle-scenes to the part of
warrior's body where the fatal wound has been inflicted: άλλ' εβαλ'
Ίππασίδην Ύψήνορα ποιμένα λαών / ήπαρ ύπό πραπίδων, ειθαρ δ' ύπό
γούνατ' ελυσεν (13. 411-412). This similarity is due to poetic economy,
which characterizes not only formulaic use, the micro-units of the
Homeric verse, but also any form of typical scene. At the same time, it can
be easily explained as a result of context-reference and even context-
proximity, since both scenes, the "Kurzform" of the battle-scene and the
brief form of the SO, are "poetically nourished" in the same environment.
On the other hand, what is important is the impact this similarity has on
the way killing, dying and commemorating are perceived by the Iliad and
the tradition it represents. The parallel structure detected above reflects
how epic comprehends death. Death takes "hold of', "covers" (κατ' δσσε
/ ελλαβε - θανάτου δέ μέλαν νέφος άμφεκάλυψεν - έρεβεννή νύξ/σκότος
(έ)κάλυψε(ν)) the victim, just as the victor "hits" (εβαλε) the victim. Death
is envisaged as a figurative victor who always comes after his mortal
counterpart and completes the former's work. This is because killing
pertains to the world of the living, whereas dying is a transitional process
linking the world of the living to that of the dead. Their resemblance as
exemplified through the epic's perception of killing and dying is reflected
in the structure of the brief form of the Iliadic SO.
The Expanded SO
I have selected two expanded SO for close examination, the obituary of

Simoeisius in 4. 473-489, and that for the two sons of Diocles in 5. 541-
560.
Simoeisius (4. 473-489):

ενθ' εβαλ' Άνθεμίωνος υίόν Τελαμώνιος Αϊας,
ήΐθεον θαλερόν Σιμοείσιον, ον ποτε μήτηρ
"Ιδηθεν κατιούσα παρ' οχθησιν Σιμόεντος
γείνατ', έπεί ρα τοκεΰσιν αμ' εσπετο μήλα ίδέσθαι.
τούνεκά μιν κάλεον Σιμοείσιον ουδέ τοκεΰσιν
θρέπτρα φίλοις άπέδωκε, μινυνθάδιος δέ οι αιών

επλεθ' ΰπ' Αΐαντος μεγάθυμου δουρί δαμέντι.
πρώτον γάρ μιν Ιόντα βάλε στήθος παρά μαζόν
δεξιόν, άντικρύ δέ δι' ώμου χάλκεον έγχος
ήλθεν δ δ' έν κονίησι χαμαί πέσεν αίγειρος ώς,
ή ρά τ' έν είαμενή ελεος μεγάλοιο πεφύκη
λείη, άτάρ τέ οί οζοι έπ' άκροτάτη πεφύασιν·
την μέν θ' άρματοπηγός άνήρ αΐθωνι σιδήρφ
έξέταμ', οφρα ιτυν κάμψη περικαλλέϊ δίφρφ·
ή μέν τ' άζομένη κείται ποταμοΐο παρ' οχθας·
τοίον άρ' Ανθεμίδην Σιμοείσιον έξενάριξεν
Α'ίας διογενής.
There Telamonian Aias struck down the son of Anthemion

Simoeisios in his stripling's beauty, whom once his mother
descending from Ida bore beside the banks of Simoeis
when she had followed her father and mother to tend the sheep-
flocks.
Therefore they called him Simoeisios; but he could not
render again the care of his dear parents; he was short-lived,
beaten down beneath the spear of high-hearted Aias,
who struck him as he first came forward beside the nipple
of the right breast, and the bronze spearhead drove clean through
the shoulder.
He dropped then to the ground in the dust, like some black poplar,
which in the land low-lying about a great marsh grows
smooth trimmed yet with branches growing at the uttermost tree-top:
one whom a man, a maker of chariots, fell with the shining
iron, to bend it into a wheel for a fine-wrought chariot,
and the tree lies hardening by the banks of a river.
Such was Anthemion's son Simoeisios, whom illustrious
Aias killed.
The sons of Diodes (5. 541-560):

ενθ' αυτ' Αινείας Δαναών ελεν άνδρας άριστους,
υιε Διοκλήος, Κρήθωνά τε Όρτίλοχόν τε,
τών ρα πατήρ μέν έναιεν έϋκτιμένη ενί Φηρή,
άφνειός βιότοιο, γένος δ' ην έκ ποταμοΐο
APPENDIX II
Αλφειού, ος τ' εύρύ ρέει Πυλίων δια γαίης·

δς τέκετ' Όρτίλοχον πολέεσσ' άνδρεσσιν άνακτα,
Όρτίλοχος δ' αρ' ετικτε Διοκλήα μεγάθυμον,
έκ δέ Διοκλήος διδυμάονε παΐδε γενέσθην,
Κρήθων Όρτίλοχός τε, μάχης ευ είδότε πάσης,
τώ μέν αρ' ήβήσαντε μελαινάων έπΐ νηών
"Ιλιον εις εύπωλον αμ' Αργείοισιν επεσθην,
τιμήν Ατρεΐδης, Αγαμέμνονι και Μενελάψ,
άρνυμένω· τώ δ' αυθι τέλος θανάτοιο κάλυψεν.
οΐω τώ γε λέοντε δύω ορεος κορυφήσιν
έτραφέτην ύπό μητρί βαθείης τάρφεσιν ΰλης·
τώ μέν άρ' άρπάζοντε βόας και ιφια μήλα
σταθμούς άνθρώπων κεραΐζετον, οφρα και αύτώ
άνδρών έν παλάμησι κατέκταθεν όξέϊ χαλκψ·
τοίω τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε
καππεσέτην, έλάτησιν έοικότες ύψηλησιν.
Now Aineias killed two great men of the Danaans,

the sons of Diokles, Orsilochos and Krethon,
men whose father dwelt in Phere the strong-founded,
rich in substance, and his generation was of the river
Alpheios, who flows wide through the country of the Pylians,
and who got a son, Ortilochos, to be lord over many
men, but the son of Ortilochos was high-hearted Diokles;
and to Diokles in his turn were two twin sons born,
Orsilochos and Krethon, both well skilled in all fighting.
These two as they were grown to young manhood followed along
with
the Argives in their black ships to Ilion, land of good horses,
winning honour for the sons of Atreus, Agamemnon
and Menelaos; now fulfilment of death was a darkness upon them.
These, as two young lions in the high places of the mountains,
had been raised by their mother in the dark of the deep forest,
lions which as they prey upon the cattle and the fat sheep
lay waste the steadings where there are men, until they also
fall and are killed under the cutting bronze in the men's hands;
such were these two who beaten under the hands of Aineias
crashed now to the ground as if they were two tall pine trees.
These two expanded SO share some common characteristics:
1. brief genealogical information

Both passages begin with some genealogical information, either about
one's immediate parentage (Simoeisius' mother) or going back three
generations (Alpheius-Orsilochus-Diocles-twin sons of Diocles).
2. the theme of premature death or death during one's youth

This is a stylized manner the SO employ to express a brief comment
on a warrior's fate. Simoeisius' short life is referred to by the expression
μινυνθάδιος δέ oí αιών (4. 478); the words ήΐθεον θαλερόν used at the
beginning of line 474 and attributed to Simoeisius also refer to his youth,
as if to prepare the theme of premature death. In the case of the twin sons
of Diocles, we hear an indirect reference to this same theme: the word
ήβήσαντε in line 550 determines their age at the time they sailed to Troy.
The theme of their youth is also highlighted by the simile that follows, in
which the sons are compared to two mountain lions killed by men during
a raid on livestock. In the same way, when the sons of Diocles go away
from their father, they meet their doom.469
3. the theme of excellence in battle

In 5. 541 the twins of Diocles are characterized as άνδρας άριστους
and later on, in 5. 549 as μάχης ευ είδότε πάσης, with the adjective άρι-
στους and the participle είδότε accompanied by the adverb ευ referring to
their excellence on the battlefield. Although there is no direct mention of
Simoeisius' bravery in his obituary, in the simile following the description
of his death he is compared to a smooth poplar (αίγειρος λείη) falling
down; one of the main aspects that the simile brings to light is the
antithesis between έν κονίησι χαμαί πέσεν (482) and έπ' άκροτάτη (484),
the tall poplar's headlong fall. In this I am inclined to see an allusion to
the headlong downfall of a mighty young warrior.470 Thus, the afore-
469
Premature death constitutes a typical theme in funerary epigrams. See Lattimore
(1942); Skiadas (1959); Griessmair (1966); Verilhac (1978), (1982).
470
Despite referring to Simoeisius' youth, the epithet θαλερός reserved for him also
contains a sense of strength, given the general association between youth and the
peak of power.
186 APPENDIX II
mentioned obituaries contain both direct and indirect references to the

might of the young warriors and their excellence on the battlefield.
4. ring-composition
Ring-composition is the most typical way of building and organizing
an Iliadic γόος-speech. The same organizational method has been used in
these two "necrological vignettes". The passage referring to Simoeisius
begins with the one and a half-line (4. 474-475): ενθ' εβαλ' Ανθεμίωνος
υίόν Τελαμώνιος Αϊας, / ήΐθεον θαλερόν Σιμοείσιον and ends with the one
and a half-line (4. 488-489): τοΐον άρ' Ανθεμίδην Σιμοείσιον έξενάριξεν /
Α'ίας διογενής. The obituary for the sons of Diocles also exhibits the same
feature; beginning with (5. 541-542): ενθ' αυτ' Αινείας Δαναών ελεν
άνδρας άριστους, / υιε Διοκλήος, it also ends in ring-form (5. 559-560):
τοίω τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε / καπεσσέτην.471
5. a simile
Both passages472 contain a long simile immediately after the
genealogical information. The similes resemble each other in two
respects:473 reference to 1) a kind of tree (a poplar: αίγειρος / pine trees:
έλάτησιν) and 2) the notion of height (on the highest edge of [the poplar]:
έπ' άκροτάτη / on the peaks of the mountain: ορεος κορυφησιν/the
highest pines: έλάτησιν ύψηλησιν). The vegetal imagery which here takes
the form of tree-reference is typical not only of the SO, but also of the
whole Iliadic conception of death. Nagy has shown how άφθιτος -
"conveys the cultural negation of a natural process, the growing and
wilting of plants, and also, by extension the life and the death of
mortals".474 This epithet is particularly associated with Achilles, the best
of the Achaeans, whose death results from his refusal to gain his νόστος
and return to his homeland, Φθίη, in order to win κλέος άφθιτον by dying
at Troy. In a poem like the Iliad, where death is the preeminent theme, it
is no wonder that even the simple, second or even third-rate warriors
471
Cf. also the almost identical ideas expressed by those lines which refer to the very act
of the killing: 4. 479: επλεθ' ύπ' Αί'αντος μεγάθυμου δουρί δαμέντι and 5. 559: τοίω
τώ χείρεσσιν ΰπ' Αίνείαο δαμέντε.
472
The Diocles passage also contains one more short simile at its very end.
473
Here both similes, the long and the short one included in the obituary of Diocles'
sons, are taken into consideration.
474
Nagy (1979) 184 ff.
share the same imagery. The earth and everything that grows from it
symbolize the other homeland of the warriors, who will not be "received"
by their dear ones at home but by the very soil they are standing on. Trees
stand high like warriors and fall suddenly, they may even be used as
symbols of youth and beauty,475 so the tertium comparationis seems self-
evident. Moreover, the tree or flower is sometimes cut down by metal
tools, just as the warrior is killed by the metal-wrought weapon of his
enemy.476 At the same time, trees form part of the general Iliadic
consciousness concerning the cycle of life and death.477 As one critic has
neatly put it "[t]he Iliad, in its most stern spirit, dislikes this agricultural
image, since it is inconsistent with heroic death, and directly debunks it
by the elaborate equation of the heroic life with the corruptible life of
nature and by the repeated similes that compare the fallen hero with the
cut-down tree, or flower... [b]y these similes the Iliad raises funeral
images to honor death and to give a brutal representation of it... it [the
Iliad] also 'invents' death, a brutal death, indeed, but it is this sort of death
that produces the funeral poetry of the Iliad."*1*
6. Absence of explicitly stated pathos
475
See Griffin (1980) 105 who notes: "... the scholiast observes: 'expressed emotionally,
through the tall pine-trees, because of their youth and beauty'".
476
Pucci (1996) 18, footnote 13.
477
It is characteristic that in the SO for the twin sons of Diocles there is first a lion simile
and then a tree simile. Kirk (1990) 116 thinks that "the poet may feel that the
brothers' actual death has not been illuminated by the main lion simile, and so adds
a short and pathetic reference to their collapsing like pine-trees". This may be true,
but the question Kirk never asks is why the poet considered the tree simile more
appropriate and illuminating than the lion one? Probably because of the inherent
connection between the cycle of life and human fate (cf. 11. 155-159, 14. 414-415,
18. 55-57). This is a typical theme in Greek funeral tradition of all ages. See Alexiou
(2002) 198-201, 241, n. 45. Moulton (1977) 60-61 comments on the lion simile as a
device whose "variation and balance complement the shift in the battle narrative, in
which at this point the Trojans have the upper hand." Other tree similes with
elaborate development are found in 13. 178; 13. 389 (= 16. 482 ff.); 14. 414 ff.; 17.
53 ff., as Kirk (1990) 116 notes.
478
Pucci (1996) 17-18, ft. 13. The trees of the famous garden scene in Odyssey 24 are
very different from the ones mentioned in the Iliadic SO. See Pucci (1996) 5-24. Note
also Lowenstam's view (1981) 133-134 that there is a connection between the scene
in 23. 110-126 where Meriones and his men cut down trees on Mount Ida for
Patroclus' funeral pyre and the simile employed by the poet for the death of Asius
(13. 389 £f.), as well as another woodcutting simile in 16. 633-637 before Patroclus'
188 APPENDIX II
Words explicitly stating pathos are absent or very rare in the Iliadic
SO.479 The abundance of similes may be some sort of response to the low-
key tone of these scenes. This reminds one of funerary epigrams whose
style is also laconic not only in respect of size but also, and perhaps more
importantly, in respect of sentimental terminology.
7. Structural order
I. Simoeisius obituary
a. Ajax killed him (473-474)
b. Genealogical information and reference to the past (474-477)
c. Young as he was he was killed (478-479)
d. Long-simile (482-487)
a'. Ajax killed him (488-489a)
II. Obituary for the sons of Diocles
a. Aeneas killed them (541-542)
b. Genealogical information (543-549)
c. Young as they were they died at Troy (550-553)
d. Long-simile (554-558)
a'. Aeneas killed them (558-559)
The previous comparison reveals certain similarities and analogies
shared by these two expanded obituaries, as they both contain the same
thematic elements displayed in the same order.
Iliadic γόοι between mirroring and deflecting
This analysis will take the form of a comparison. I will examine how each
of the features of the Iliadic obituaries functions in the personal laments.
death. The affinity between these scenes is underscored by their sharing the same
imagery and the same agents; Lowenstam (1981, 133-134) rightly implies that as in
the Homeric Hymn to Demeter (228-230), there may be a magical and ritual aspect.
See also Nagy (1979) 186-189 and for the Meleager fire-brand story, Kakridis (1949)
21 ff. Trees provide inspiration for one of the most fertile types of imagery in poetry
produced by many ancient cultures. It seems that such imagery is also connected with
the first origins of mankind. See Nagy (1990) 181-201. See Shannon (1975) 31-86,
who plausibly maintains that myths connected with the origins of humankind are
related to the theme of Achilles' ash spear in the Iliad.
47
' See Griffin (1980) 105.
1. genealogical information
The genealogical information which is given in the necrological
vignettes undergoes a thorough transformation in the Iliadic personal
laments; when Andromache utters her γόοι in Books 6 and 22, we often
hear some information about her father Eetion, her wedding and how
Hector took her from her house and led her to Troy as his wife. What was
pure genealogy480 has been transformed for the particular occasion of
Andromache's speech to serve a more important goal -that of opposing
her past happiness with her present sufferings for the loss of her husband.
What had been a graphic detail in the obituaries is elevated here to a
theme typical for the personal lament: the contrast between past and present.
In Andromache's personal lament in Book 6, genealogical information
has been transformed into a picture of death in order to sustain her
argument (429-430) that Hector is at once her father, her mother and her
brother, since she has lost the whole of her family. In the case of Briséis,
who resembles Hector's widow (19. 287-300) in that she too has lost her
three brothers and husband at the hands of Achilles, the γόος reference to
her family and the sack of her father Mynes' city introduce the typical
"Comparison" with other sufferings that the mourner has undergone.
Genealogical information is used here to promote a basic thematic unit of
an Iliadic personal lament and make it more effective. In Achilles' γόος in
Book 19, genealogical details concerning his father Peleus and his son
Neoptolemus have been elevated by the Iliad to a major theme: the
suffering of the father for the predestined death of his son in Troy.
2. shortness of life or premature death

Hector dies young (24. 725), his son will soon die νήπιος (24. 726),
but the most important example of all is that of Achilles, who is ώκυμο-
ρώτατος. Despite the fact that Achilles' death is an extra-Iliadic event,
foreshadowed but not actually narrated in the epic, we still have
references to his perishing in Troy (19. 329; 19. 337 etc.). It is true that
the personal laments make no explicit mention of Achilles dying young,
and even the adjectives ώκύμορος/ώκυμορώτατος do not express the idea
of a premature death, but rather of a death that is coming soon. On the
other hand, the references to Neoptolemus and Astyanax in various
480
For an examination of the family in archaic literature in general, see Siurla-
Theodoridou (1989).
190 APPENDIX II
personal laments (Book 6, Book 19, Books 22 and 24) may imply the
youth of both Achilles and Hector, albeit indirectly. Apart from this, the
Iliad seems to build on this theme and combine it with that of dying far
from one's native land. In 4. 180-181 Agamemnon reports verbatim the
speech of a hypothetical speaker, who might say that Agamemnon re-
turned from Troy to his own land but left his brother Menelaus behind. In
18. 332 Achilles says that neither his father Peleus nor his mother Thetis
will welcome him home, but "the earth will hold me here" (άλλ' αύτοϋ
γαία καθέξει). The same theme is found in verse-epitaphs; in an epigram
from Egypt (Hansen 171, 475-400? B. C) we read: νόσφι τοκέ / [ων]: τηλ'
ώ πατρίδ / [ος] ήμετέρης; one can see here that the Iliadic personal laments
have combined the two motifs, that of premature death and that of dying
away from home and family, thus creating a new, more vivid theme.
3. excellence on the battlefield

Hector is constantly depicted as a great warrior. In her personal lament
in Iliad 24, Andromache characterizes him as ού μείλιχος (24. 739). This
expression is used to introduce the theme of the "Comparison", this time
not with sufferings previously undergone by the mourner, but with other
men of the same class (i.e. warriors) among whom Hector excells: after
his death nobody else can protect Troy, which is doomed to fall. The
deceased's might in war has been exploited to suit the "Comparison"
theme.
4. ring-composition
This is the typical organizational method for both the personal laments
and the obituaries. It caps a passage and links beginning and end,
strengthening its unity and cohesion; it also marks the lament's borders
clearly and throws the light onto its kernel.
5. simile
Though common in narrative sections, there are no similes in the
personal laments.
The similarities detected between the short obituaries and the personal
laments can lead us to general conclusions about the connections between
them as well as to the poetics of the Iliad.
The main explanation offered thus far for the presence of the short
obituaries in the epic has followed the basic interpretative line prevailing
in Homeric scholarship for many years. The short obituaries offer a pause
from the continuous fighting that is typical of many Iliadic Books,
especially the initial and central ones.481 They (the SO) help ease the
pressure exercised on the reader or listener because of the long casualty
lists. The monumental poet varied the material he had inherited from a long
lasting tradition of epic poetry, which had furnished him with catalogues
of warriors and a typical way of depicting the so-called battle-scenes. This
kind of approach (found in respectable works of modern scholarship)4'2
was consonant with the approach of the ancient scholiasts, who were
eager to underscore the supremacy of the Iliadic poet on account of his
ability to create emotional tension at a moment of mere brutality.
No doubt this hermeneutic method has been of great help for
appreciating the mastery of the Iliad but it is, I dare say, somewhat
incautious, or at the very least one-sided. Its basic flaw is that it fails to
consider the short obituaries within the larger framework of death and
concomitant lament, which together form the dominant theme throughout
the Iliad. The SO are not isolated insertions within vast segments of
narrative concerning fighting, but a natural outcome of the poem's
preoccupation with the heroic code and the fate of warriors who die in
battle. The Iliad depicts the killing of a warrior with the utmost brevity.
As Griffin rightly notes,4'3 this style is very different from the long
descriptions of fighting found in later European medieval literature, in
which knights fight lengthy duels before one succumbs to the other's
force. The Iliad is concerned with human fate rather than war and
adventurous fighting, and employs a reference-style distinguished for the
economy typical of oral or orally-derived texts. It makes extensive use of
a highly stylized manner of dealing with pain and suffering, of
representing death, one which banishes shrieks and cries from the battle-
scenes just as they are banished from epigrammatic poetry. Pathos has to
be expressed in different ways, and the Iliad can only be praised for the
SO, those "poetic gems" which contrast variety with consistency in
4
" See Schadewaldt (1959 2 ) 326; Kirk (1962) 341-342. See also Friedrich (1956) 66,
who highlights the parallelism between the endings of three consecutive killing
scenes where Ajax is the protagonist.
482
Griffin (1980).
4,3
Griffin (1980) 140-143 with more bibliography.
192 APPENDIX II
presenting a tragic view of human life on the one hand, and sheer pathos
crowned with abbreviated sentiment on the other. This poetical brevity,
with its remarkable laconic style, is comparable to funerary poetry found
in epigrams of the archaic and classical periods. The absence of lament ex-
pressions484 is also at work in short obituaries and bespeaks the existence
of a paradox based on the emotional cornucopia of the SO through a
diction of thrift.
484
For a reccnt study of the archaic epigram in comparison with the Greek lament
tradition, see Derderian (2001) 63-113.
Bibliography
Editions, Commentaries, Concordances, Grammars, Léxica
Allen (1912) T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera V, (Hymns, Cycle, etc.),

Oxford 1912.
Allen (1917-1919) T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus III, Odysseae
Libros I-XII continens; Tomus IV, Odysseae Libros
XIII-XXIVcontinens; Oxford 1917-1919.
Allen (19203) T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus I, Iliadis Libros I-
XII continens; Tomus II, Iliadis Libros XIII-XXIV
continens; Oxford 19203.
Ameis-Hentze K. F. Améis & C. Hentze, Homers Ilias, Leipzig 1868-
1932 (repr. Amsterdam 1965).
Bechtel F. Bechtel, Lexilogus zu Homer, Halle 1914.
CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum, I-IV, ed. A. Boeckh
et al., Berlin 1828-1877.
CEG P. A. Hansen, Carmina Epigraphica Graeca, 2 vols.,
Berlin-New York 1983-1989.
DELG P. Chantraine, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue
grecque, I-II, Paris 1968-1980.
DGE Diccionario Griego-Español, eds. F. R. Adrados & E.
Ganguita, Madrid 1980-.
Denniston J. D. Denniston, The Greek Particles, Oxford 19542.
Ebeling H. Ebeling, Lexicon Homericum, Leipzig 1880-1885.
Edwards 1991 M. Edwards, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. V, Books
17-20, Cambridge 1991.
Erbse H. Erbse, Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem (Scholia
Vetera), I-VII, Berlin 1969-1988.
GHI-II P. Chantraine, Grammaire homérique, I-II, Paris 1986-
19886 [1948-19531].
Heubeck/
Hoekstra 1989 A. Heubeck & A. Hoekstra, A Commentary on Homer's
Odyssey, vol. II, Oxford 1989.
194 Bibliography
IG Inscriptiones Graecae, I-XIV, Berlin 1873-.

R. Kassel-C. Austin, Poetae Comici Graeci, Berlin and
K.-A. New York 1983-1998.
G. S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. I, Books 1-
Kirk 1985 4, Cambridge 1985.
G. S. Kirk, The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. II, Books 5-
Kirk 1990 8, Cambridge 1990.
Leaf W. Leaf, The Iliad, I-II, London 1900-19022.
LfgrE Lexikon des frühgriechischen Epos, eds. Β. Snell & Η.
Erbse, Göttingen 1955-1984.
LIMC Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae, eds.
H. Ackermann & G.-R. Gisler, Zurich 1981-1977.
LSJ A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th edn. rev. by Sir H. S.
Jones & R. McKenzie, Oxford 1940 (with rev. suppl.
by P. G. W. Glare 1996).
Monro & Allen D. B. Monro & T. W. Allen, Homeri Opera: Tomus I,
Iliadis Libros I-XII continens: Tomus II, Iliadis Libros
XIII-XXIVcontinens; Oxford 19203.
Monro 18912 D. B. Monro, A Grammar of the Homeric dialect,
Oxford 189P.
OCD3 The Oxford Classical Dictionary, eds. S. Hornblower
& A. Spawforth, Oxford 19963.
OCT Oxford Classical Texts
PEG Poetarum Epicorun Graecorum testimonia et
fragmenta, pars I, ed. A. Bernabé, Stuttgart-Leipzig
19962.
PMG Poetae Melici Graeci, ed. D. L. Page, Oxford 1962.
RE Paulys Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertum-
swissenschaft, ed. G. Wissowa et al., Stuttgart 1894-
1978.
Prendergast L. Prendergast, A Complete Concordance to the Iliad
of Homer, rev. by B. Marzullo, Hildesheim 1962.
Richardson 1993 Ν. Richardson, The Iliad. A Commentary, vol. VI,
Books 21-24, Cambridge 1993.
Risch 19742 E. Risch, Wortbildung der homerischen Sprache, Berlin-
New York 19742 [1937].
Russo/
Fernandez-Galiano/
Bibliography 195
Heubeck 1992 Russo J., Fernández-Galiano M., Heubeck Α.,

A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, vol III, Oxford
1992.
Schwyzer E. Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik, I, Munich 1939.
Schwyzer-Debr. E. Schwyzer & A. Debrunner, Griechische Gram-
matik, II, Munich 1950.
Sihler A. L. Sihler, New Comparative Grammar of Greek
and Latin, New York-Oxford 1995.
TLG Thesaurus Linguae Graecae (CD-ROM E [latest copy],
University of California at Irvine)
van der Valk M. H. A. L. Η van der Valk, Eustathii Commentarli ad
Homeri Iliadem pertinentes, vol. I-IV, Leiden 1971-
1989.
van Thiel 1991 H. van Thiel, Homeri Odyssea, Hildesheim 1991.
van Thiel 1996 H. van Thiel, Homeri Ilias, Hildesheim 1996.
West 1998-2000 M. L. West, Homerus Ilias, vol. I: rhapsodiae I-XII;
vol. II: rhapsodiae XIII-XXIV, Stuttgart-Leipzig
1998-2000.
Translations of the Iliad are based on Richmond Lattimore, The Iliad of

Homer, Chicago 1951 and of the Odyssey on E. V. Rieu, Homer. The
Odyssey, London 2003 (1946) unless indicated otherwise. The quotation of
T. S. Eliot's The Four Quartets, Burnt Norton is taken from his Collected
Poems 1909-1962, Faber and Faber, Boston & London 1974.
Works Cited
The abbreviations of journals normally follow the conventions of L'

Année Philologique or will be obvious.
Adkins (1969) Adkins A. W. Η., "Εύχομαι, εύχωλή, and ευχος in

Homer", CQ 19 (1969) 20-33.
Ahl (1989) Ahl F., "Homer, Virgil, and Complex Narrative Stru-
ctures in Latin Epic: An Essay", ICS 14 (1989) 1-31.
Alden (2000) Alden M., Homer Beside Himself: Para-narratives in
the Iliad, Oxford 2000.
Alexiou (20022) Alexiou M., The Ritual Lament in Greek Tradition,
196 Bibliography
rev. by D. Yatromanolakis & P. Roilos, Lanham-

Boulder-New York-Oxford 20022 [1974].
Alexiou (1983) Alexiou M., "Sons, Wives and Mothers. Reality and
Fantasy in Some Modern Greek Ballads", JMGS 1
(1983) 73-112.
Allen (1973) Allen W. S., Accent and Rhythm. Prosodie Features of
Latin and Greek: A Study in Theory and Reconstruc-
tion, Cambridge 1973.
Anastassiou (1971)Anastassiou I., Zum Wortfeld "Trauer" in der Sprache
Homers, Hamburg 1971.
Andersen (1978) Andersen 0., Die Diomedesgestalt in der Ilias,
(Symbolae Osloenses Supplement 25), Oslo-Bergen
1978.
Andronikos (1968) Andronikos M., Totenkult, Archaeologia Homérica
Kapitel W, Göttingen 1968.
Antinucci (1974) Antinucci F., "Sulla deissi", Lingua e Stile 11 (1974)
223-247.
Arend (1933) Arend W., Die typischen Scenen bei Homer, (Pro-
blemata 7), Berlin 1933.
Arnould (1990) Arnould D., Le rire et les larmes dans la littérature
grecque d'Homère à Platon, Paris 1990.
Austin (1966) Austin Ν., "The Function of Digressions in the Iliact\
GRBS 7.4(1966) 295-312.
Bakhtin (1986) Bakhtin M. M., Speech Genres and Other Late Essays,
trans. Vern W. McGee, Austin 1986.
Bakker(1990) Bakker E. J., "Homeric Discourse and Enjambement.
A Cognitive Approach", TAPhA 120(1990) 1-21.
Bakker &
Fabbricotti (1991) Bakker E. J. & Fabbriconi F., "Peripheral and Nuclear
Semantics in Homeric Diction. The Case of Dative Ex-
pressions for 'Spear'", Mnemosyne 44 (1991) 63-84.
Bakker &
van den Houten
(1992) Bakker E. J. & van den Houten N., "Aspects of Sy-
nonymy in Homeric Formulaic Diction. An Investiga-
tion of Dative Expressions for 'Spear'", CPh 87
(1992) 1-13.
Bakker (1993) Bakker E. J., "Discourse and Performance: Involve-
Bibliography 197
ment, Visualization and 'Presence' in Homeric

Poetry", Classical Antiquity 12 (1993) 1-29.
Bakker(1995) Bakker E. J., "Noun-Epithet Formulas, Milman Parry,
and the Grammar of Poetry", in J. P. Crielaard (ed.),
Homeric Questions, Essays in Philology, Art History
and Archaeology, Conference organized by the
Netherlands Institute at Athens (15 May 1993),
Amsterdam 1995, 97-125.
Bakker(1997a) Bakker E. J., Poetry in Speech: Orality and Homeric
Discourse, Ithaca 1997a.
Bakker(1997b) Bakker E. J., "The Study of Homeric Discourse", in I.
Morris & B. Powell (eds.), A New Companion to
Homer (Mnemosyne Supplement 163), Leiden-New
York-Köln 1997b, 284-304.
Bakker(1997c) Bakker E. J., "Storytelling in the Future: Truth, Time,
and Tense in Homeric Epic", in E. J. Bakker & A.
Kahane (eds.), Written Voices, Spoken Signs:
Tradition, Performance, and the Epic Text, Cambridge
Mass.-London 1997c, 11-36.
Bakker(1997d) Bakker E. J., "Verbal Aspect and Mimetic Description
in Thucydides", in E. J. Bakker (ed.), Grammar as
Interpretation: Greek Literature in Linguistic
Contexts, Leiden-New York-Köln 1997d, 7-53.
Bakker (1999) Bakker E. J., "Homeric ΟΥΤΟΣ and the Poetics of
Deixis", CPh 94 (1999) 1-19.
Bal (19972) Bal M., Narratology: Introduction to the Theory of
Narrative, trans.C.van Boheemen, Toronto 19972[1985].
Bannert (1988) Bannert H., Formen der Wiederholung bei Homer.
Beispiele für eine Poetik des Epos (Wiener Studien-
Beiheft 13), Wien 1988.
Bassett (1938) Bassett S. E., The Poetry of Homer, (Sather Classical
Lectures 15), Berkeley 1938.
Baudy (1980) Baudy G. J., Exkommunikation und Reintegration: Zur
Genese und Kulturfunktion frühgriechischer Einstel-
lungen zum Tod, Frankfurt 1980.
Beck (1997) Beck D., Points of Departure: Variation in Homeric
Speech-Frames, (PhD diss. Harvard University), 1997.
Behaghel (1909) Behaghel O., "Beziehungen zwischen Umfang und
198 Bibliography
Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern", Indogermanische

Forschungen 25 (1909) 39.
Benveniste (1946) Benveniste E., "Structure des relations de person dans
le verbe", Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique 126
(1946) 1-12 (repr. in Benveniste 1966, 225-236).
Benveniste (1971) Benveniste E., Problems in General Linguistics, trans.
M. E. Meek, Coral Gables FL 1971.
Bergren (1981) Bergren Α., "Helen's Good Drug: Odyssey IV: 1 -305",
in S. Kresic (ed.), Contemporary Literary Herme-
neutics and the Interpretation of Classical Texts,
Ottawa 1981.
Berkenkotter &
Huckin (1995) Berkenkotter C. and Huckin Τ. N., Genre Knowledge
in Disciplinary Communication-Cognition/Cultural
Power, New Jersey 1995.
Bethe (1914) Bethe E., Homer. Dichtung und Sage, Nr. 1, Leipzig
1914.
Bezantakos (1996)Bezantakos N. P., Ή'Ρητορική της 'Ομηρικής μάχης,
Athens 1996.
Bhatia (1997) Bhatia V. Κ., "Genre analysis today", in Genre Theo-
ry: New Perspectives, Révue Belge de Philologie et d'
Histoire, 75.3-4 (1997) 629-652.
Bickel (1926) Bickel E., Homerischer Seelenglaube, Berlin 1926.
Boiling (1922) Boiling G. M., "On the Interpretation of certain Ho-
meric Formulas", CPh 17 (1922) 213-221.
Bonnet (1990) Bonnet Α., "Les adieux d'Hector", LEC 58 (1990)
265-268.
Bowra (1961) Bowra C. M., Greek Lyric Poetry, Oxford 1961.
Bühler (1990) Bühler Κ., Theory of Language: The Representational
Function of Language, trans. D. F. Goodwin, Amster-
dam 1990.
Burgess (2001) Burgess J. S., The Tradition of the Trojan War in
Homer and the Epic Cycle, Baltimore-London 2001.
Burkert (1955) Burkert W., Zum Altgriechischen Mitleidsbegriff, (PhD
diss. Friedrich-Alexander-University of Erlangen),
1955.
Burkert (1962) Burkert W., "ΓΟΗΣ: Zum griechischen 'Schamani-
smus'", RhM 105 (1962) 36-55.
Bibliography 199
Burkert (1979) Burkert W., Structure and History in Greek Mythology

and Ritual, Berkeley 1979.
Burkert (1985) Burkert W., Greek Religion, trans. J. Raffan, Cambridge
Mass. 1985.
Cairns (1972) Cairns F., Generic Composition in Greek and Roman
Poetry, Edinburgh 1972.
Calarne (1977) Caíame C., Les Choeurs de jeunes filles en Grèce
archaïque, 2 vols., Rome 1977.
Calarne (1995) Calarne C., The Craft of Poetic Speech in Ancient
Greece, trans. J. Orion, Ithaca 1995.
Calhoun (1935) Calhoun G. M., "The Art of Formula in Homer: επεα
πτερόεντα", CPh 30 (1935) 215-227.
Chafe (1994) Chafe W. L., Discourse, Consciousness, and Time:
The Flow and Displacement of Conscious Experience
in Speaking and Writing, Chicago 1994.
Chantraine (1929) Chantraine P., "Sur un trait du style homérique", Re-
vue de Philologie 3 (1929) 294-300.
Chantraine (1946-
1947) Chantraine P., "Les noms de mari et de la femme, du
père et de la mère en Grec", RÉG 59-60 (1946-1947)
219-250.
Chatman (1990) Chatman S., Coming to Terms: The Rhetoric of
Narrative in Fiction and Film, Ithaca NY 1990.
Christopoulos
(2004) Christopoulos Μ., «Ομηρικοί νεκρικοί θρήνοι (Ιλιά-
δος Ω 607-804): μαρτυρίες και ερμηνείες», in Νεκρο-
πόλεις-Σήματα. Ταφικές πρακτικές και παραδόσεις της
Μεσογείου από το 1100 π.Χ. έως το 400μ.Χ. (Proceed-
ings of the International Symposium at Rhodes, 24-28
June 2000), 2004 (forthcoming).
Clarke (1999) Clarke M., Flesh and Spirit in the Songs of Homer: A
Study of Words and Myths, Oxford 1999.
Collinson (1937) Collinson W. E., Indication: A Study of Demonstra-
tives, Articles and Other 'Indicators ' (Language Mo-
nographs 17), Baltimore 1937.
Combellack
(1939) Combellack F. M., "Omitted Speech Formulas in
Homer", UCPPh 12 (1939) 43-56.
200 Bibliography
Comrie (1976) Comrie B., Aspect, Cambridge 1976.

Comrie (1985) Comrie B., Tense, Cambridge 1985.
Contiades-
Tsitsoni (1990) Contiades-Tsitsoni E., Hymenaios und Epithalamion:
Das Hochzeitslied in der frühgriechischen Lyrik,
Stuttgart 1990.
Couch (1937) Couch Η. Ν., "A Prelude to Speech in Homer", TAPhA
68 (1937) 129-140.
Culler (1975) Culler J., Structuralist Poetics, London 1975.
Culler (1981) Culler J., The Pursuit of Sings: Semiotics, Literature,
Deconstruction, London 1981.
Danek (1998) Danek G., Epos und Zitat. Studien zu den Quellen der
Odyssee, (Wiener Studien 22), Wien 1998.
Danforth (1982) Danforth L. M., The Death Rituals of Rural Greece,
Princeton 1982.
Deichgräber
(1972) Deichgräber Κ., "Der letzte Gesang der Ilias'' Mainz
1972.
Delebecque (1951) Delebecque E., Le cheval dans l'Iliade, Paris 1951.
Derderian (2001) Derderian K., Leaving Words to Remember: Greek
Mourning and the Advent of Literacy, Leiden 2001.
Derrida (1967) Derrida J., De la Grammatologie, Paris 1967.
Derrida (1972) Derrida J., "La Pharmacie de Platon" in La Dissémi-
nation, Paris 1972.
Doherty (1995) Doherty L.E., Siren Songs: Gender, Audiences, and
Narrators in the Odyssey, Ann Arbor 1995.
Duckworth (1933) Duckworth G. E., Foreshadowing and Suspense in the
Epics of Homer, Apollonius and Vergil, Princeton
1933.
Dué (2002) Dué C., Homeric Variations on a Lament by Briséis,
Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 2002.
Easterling (1991) Easterling P. E., "Men's κλέος and women's γόος:
Female voices in the Iliad", JMGS 9.2 (1991) 145-
151.
Ebbott (1999) Ebbott M., "The Wrath of Helen: Self-Blame and
Nemesis in the Iliad\ in M. Carlisle & O. Levaniouk
(eds.), Nine Essays on Homer, Lanham-Boulder-New
York-Oxford 1999.
Bibliography 201
Eco (1981) Eco U., The Role of the Reader: Explorations in the
Semiotics of Texts, London 1981.
Edwards (1970) Edwards M. W., "Homeric Speech Introductions",
HSCPh 74 (1970) 1-36.
Edwards (1987) Edwards M. W., Homer Poet of the Iliad, Baltimore
and London 1987.
Edwards (1986 &
1988) Edwards M. W., "Homer and Oral Tradition: The
Formula, Part I and II", Oral Tradition 1.2 (1986)
171-230 & 3.1-2 (1988) 11-60.
Edwards (1992) Edwards M. W., "Homer and Oral Tradition: The Type
Scene", Oral Tradition 7.2 (1992) 284-330.
Erbse ( 1983) Erbse H., "Ilias und 'Patroklie'", Hermes 111 ( 1983) 1 -15.
Felson (1999) Felson N., "Vicarious Transport: Fictive Deixis in
Pindar's Pythian Four", HSCPh 103 (1999) 1-31.
Fenik (1968) Fenik B., Typical Battle-Scenes in the Iliad, (Hermes
Einzelschriften 21), Wiesbaden 1968.
Fenik (1974) Fenik B., Studies in the Odyssey, (Hermes
Einzelschriften 30), Wiesbaden 1974.
Ferrari (1984) Ferrari F., "Dizione epica e pianto rituale (Iliade 22,
405-36)", RFIC 112 (1984) 257-265.
Fillmore (1966) Fillmore C. J., "Deictic categories in the semantics of
'come'", Foundations of Language 2 (1966) 219-227.
Fillmore (1970) Fillmore C. J., "Subjects, speakers and roles", Synthese
21 (1970) 251-274.
Fingerle (1939) Fingerle Α., Typik der homerischen Reden, (PhD diss.
Ludwig-Maximilian University of Munich), 1939.
Finnegan (1977) Finnegan R., Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Significance, and
Social Context, Cambridge 1977.
Finnegan (1988) Finnegan R. (ed.), Literacy and Orality: Studies in the
Technology of Communication, London 1988.
Fishelov (1997) Fishelov D., "Literary genres - alive and kicking: the
productivity of a literary concept", Revue Belge de
Philologie et d'Histoire 75.3-4 (1997) 652-663.
Fittschen (1973) Fittschen K., Bildkunst, Archaeologia Homérica, Kap.
Ν, Part I, Göttingen 1973.
Foley (2001) Foley H. P., Female Acts in Greek Tragedy, Princeton-
Oxford 2001.
202 Bibliography
Foley (1985) Foley J. M., Oral-Formulaic Theory and Research: An

Introduction and Annotated Bibliography, New York
1985.
Foley (1990) Foley J. M., The Odyssey, Beowulf and the Serbo-
Croatian Return Song, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London
1990.
Foley (1991) Foley J. M., Immanent Art, From Structure to Mean-
ing in Traditional Oral Epic , Bloomington 1991.
Foley (1992) Foley J. M., "Word-Power, Performance, and Tradi-
tion", Journal of American Folklore 105 (1992) 275-301.
Foley (1999) Foley J. M., Homer's Traditional Art, Pennsylvania
1999.
Ford (1992) Ford Α., Homer: The Poetry of the Past, Ithaca-
London 1992.
Fournier (1946) Fournier H., "Formules homériques de référence avec
le verbe 'dire'", RPh 20 (1946) 29-68.
Frame (1978) Frame D., The Myth of Return in Early Greek Epic,
New Haven 1978.
Frei(1944) Frei H., "Système de deictiques", Acta Linguistica 4
(1944) 111-129.
Friedrich (1956) Friedrich W.-H., Verwundung und Tod in der Ilias,
Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in
Göttingen, Nr. 38, Göttingen 1956.
Friis-Johansen
(1967) Friis-Johansen K., The Iliad in Early Greek Art, Co-
penhagen 1967.
Gaisser (1969) Gaisser J. H., "A Structural Analysis of the Digres-
sions in the Iliad and the Odyssey", HSCPh 73 (1969)
1-43.
Garland (1985) Garland R., The Greek Way of Death, Ithaca NY 1985.
Genette (1980) Genette G., Narrative Discourse, trans. E. Lewin, Ithaca
NY 1980.
Gentili (1988) Gentili Β., Poetry and its Public in Ancient Greece:
From Homer to the Fifth Century, trans. Th. Cole,
Baltimore 1988.
Giannakis (1998) Giannakis G. Κ., "Tò ποιητικό μοτίβο Τάμος-Θάνα-
τος' στην άρχαία ελληνική και στήν Ινδοευρωπαϊκή",
Δωδώνη 27.2 (1998) 93-113.
Bibliography 203
Goldhill (1991) Goldhill S., The Poet's Voice: Essays on Poetics and
Greek Literature, Cambridge 1991.
Gordesiani (1986) Gordesiani R., Kriterien der Schriftlichkeit und
Mündlichkeit im homerischen Epos, Frankfurt am
Main 1986.
Graver (1995) Graver M., "Dog-Helen and Homeric Insult",
Classical Antiquity 14.1 (1995)41-61.
Griessmair (1966) Griessmair E., Das Motiv der mors immatura in den
griechischen metrischen Grabinschriften, Commenta-
tiones Aenipontanae XVII, Innsbruck 1966.
Griffin ( 1980) Griffin J., Homer on Life and Death, Oxford 1980.
Grossardt (2001) Grossardt P., Die Erzählung von Meleagros: zur lite-
rarischen Entwicklung der kalydonischen Kultle-
genden, Leiden 2001.
Hainsworth (1966) Hainsworth J. B., "Joining battle in Homer", G&R 13
(1966)158-166.
Hainsworth (1968) Hainsworth J. B., The Flexibility of the Homeric For-
mula, Oxford 1968.
Hame (2001) Hame K. J., review of "K. Derderian, Leaving Words
to Remember: Greek Mourning and the Advent of
Literacy, (Mnemosyne Supplement 209), Leiden-Bo-
ston-Köln 2001", Biyn Mawr Classical Review 2001-
09-09.
Harvey (1955) Harvey A. E., "The Classification of Greek Lyric
Poetry", CQ 5 (1955) 157-175.
Hellmann (2000) Hellmann O., Die Schlachtszenen der Ilias: das Bild des
Dichters vom Kampf in der Heroenzeit, (Hermes
Einzelschriften 83), Stuttgart 2000.
Hellwig (1964) Hellwig B., Raum und Zeit im homerischen Epos,
(Spudasmata 2), Hildesheim 1964.
Hentze(1905) Hentze C., "Die Chorreden in den homerischen
Epen", Philologus 64 (1905) 254-268.
Hertz (1960) Hertz R., Death and the Right Hand, trans. R.
Needham, Glencoe Illinois 1960.
Heubeck (1984) Heubeck Α., "Das Meleagros-Paradeigma in der
Ilias", in Kleine Schriften, Erlangen 1984, 128-135.
Higbie(1990) Higbie C., Measure and Music: Enjambement and
Sentence Structure in the Iliad, Oxford 1990.
204 Bibliography
Higbie (1995) Higbie C., Heroes ' Names, Homeric Identities, New
York-London, (Albert Bates Lord Studies in Oral
Tradition 10), 1995.
Hjelmslev (1959) Hjelmslev L., Essais Linguistiques, Travaux du cercle
linguistique de Copenhague 12, Copenhagen 1959.
Hoekstra (1965) Hoekstra Α., Homeric Modifications of Formulaic
Prototypes. Studies in the Development of Greek Epic
Diction, Amsterdam-London 1965.
Hogan (1976) Hogan J. C., "Double πρίν and the Language of
Achilles", C/71 (1976) 305-310.
Holoka (1991) Holoka J. P., "Homer, Oral Poetry Theory, and Compa-
rative Literature: Major Trends and Controversies in
Twentieth-Century Criticism", in J. Latacz (ed.),
Zweihundert Jahre Homer-Forschung. Rückblick und
Ausblick, (Colloquium Rauricum, II), Stuttgart 1991,
456-481.
Holst-Warhaft
(1992) Holst-Warhaft G., Dangerous Voices: Women's
Laments and Greek Literature, New York-London
1992.
Hummel (1998) Hummel P., "Pré-Parryana: les épithètes homériques
au miroir d' une tradition exégétique féconde ou pour
la relativisation d' une trouvaille", Eranos 96.1-2
(1998)55-71.
Hutchinson (1985) Hutchinson G. O., Aeschylus. Septem contra Thebas,
Oxford 1985.
Jacobsohn (1935) Jacobsohn H., "Zum homerischen επος τ' εφατ' εκ τ'
όνόμαζεν", Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachfor-
schung 62 (1935) 132-140.
Jakobson (1971) Jakobson R., Selected Writings, vol. 2, The Hague
1971,130-147.
Joannidu (1938) Joannidu M., Untersuchungen zur Form der neugrie-
chischen Klagelieder (Mirologien), Berlin 1938.
Johnston (1999) Johnston S. I., Restless Dead: Encounters Between the
Living and the Dead in Ancient Greece, Berkeley-Los
Angeles-London 1999.
de Jong (1987a) de Jong I. J. F., "Silent Characters in the Iliad", in J.
Bremer, I. J. F. de Jong & J. Kalff (eds.), Homer:
Bibliography 205
Beyond Oral Poetry. Recent Trends in Homeric Inter-

pretation, Amsterdam 1987a, 105-121.
de Jong (1987b) de Jong I. J. F., Narrators and Focalizers: The
Presentation of the Story in the Iliad, Amsterdam
1987b.
de Jong (2001) de Jong I. J. F., A Narratological Commentary on the
Odyssey, Cambridge 2001.
Kahane (1994) Kahane Α., The Interpretation of Order, Oxford 1994.
Kakridis (1949) Kakridis J. Th., Homeric Researches, Lund 1949.
Kemp-
Lindeman (1975) Kemp-Lindeman D., Darstellungen des Achilleus in
griechischer und römischer Kunst, Franfurt 1975.
Kirk (1962) Kirk G. S., The Songs of Homer, Cambridge 1962.
Kligman (1988) Kligman G., The Wedding of the Dead. Ritual, Poetics
and Popular Culture in Transsylvania, Berkeley-Los
Angeles-London 1988.
Kloss (1994) Kloss G., Untersuchungen zum Wortfeld "Verlangen/
Begehren" im frühgriechischen Epos, Göttingen 1994.
Koonce (1962) Koonce D. M., Formal Lamentation for the Dead in
Greek Tragedy, (PhD diss. University of Pennsylva-
nia), 1962.
Kornarou (2001) Kornarou E., Kommoi in Greek Tragedy, (PhD diss.
King's College London), 2001.
Krarup(1941) Krarup P., "Beobachtungen zur Typik und Technik
einiger homerischen Gesprächformeln", C & M 4
(1941)230-247.
Kraus (1955) Kraus W., "Die Auffassung des Dichterberufs im
frühen Griechentum", WS 68 (1955) 65-87.
Krischer (1971) Krischer T., Formale Konventionen der homerischen
Epik, Munich 1971.
Kristeva (198 Ρ) Kristeva J., Le langage, cet inconnu, Paris 19812.
Kullmann ( 1960) Kullmann W., Die Quellen der Ilias, Wiesbaden 1960.
Kulimann (1992) Kullmann W., "Vergangenheit und Zukunft in der
Ilias", in J. Müller (ed.), Homerische Motive. Beiträge
zur Entstehung, Eigenart und Wirkung von Ilias und
Odyssee, Stuttgart 1992, 219-242.
Kurylowicz (1972) Kurylowicz J., "The role of deictic elements in
linguistic evolution", Semiotica 5 (1972) 174-183.
206 Bibliography
Kyriakou (1995) Kurylowicz J., Homeric hapax legomena in the

Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. A Literary Study,
(Palingenesia 54) Stuttgart 1995.
Larrain (1987) Larrain C. J., Struktur der Reden in der Odyssee 1-8,
(Spudasmata63), Hildesheim-Zürich-New York 1987.
Lasserre (1989) Lasserre F., Sappho: Une autre lecture, Padua 1989.
Latacz(1966) Latacz J., Zum Wortfeld "Freude" in der Sprache
Homers, Heidelberg 1966.
Latacz (1977) Latacz J., Kampfparänese, Kampfdarstellung und
Kampfwirklichkeit in der Ilias, bei Kallinos und
Tyrtaios, (Zetemata 66), Munich 1977.
Lattimore (1951) Lattimore R., The Iliad of Homer, Chicago 1951.
Lattimore (1942) Lattimore R., Themes in Greek and Latin Epitaphs,
Urbana Illinois 1942.
Lateiner (1995) Lateiner D. L., Sardonic Smile: Nonverbal Behavior in
Homeric Epic, Ann Arbor 1995.
Leaf (1912) Leaf W., Troy: A Study in Homeric Geography,
London 1912.
Levinson (1983) Levinson S. C., Pragmatics, Cambridge 1983.
Lloyd (1966) Lloyd G. E. R., Polarity and Analogy: Two Types of
Argumentation in Greek Thought, Cambridge 1966.
Lohmann (1970) Lohmann D., Die Komposition der Reden in der Ilias,
Berlin 1970.
Lohmann (1988) Lohmann D., Die Andromache-Szenen der Ilias:
Ansätze und Methoden der Homer-Interpretation,
(Spudasmata 42), Hildesheim 1988.
Lohmann ( 1999) Lohmann D., "The 'Inner Composition' of the Speeches
in the Iliad\ in I. J. F. de Jong (ed.), Homer: Critical
Assessments, trans, of chapter 55 C. Krojzl & S. R. van
der Mije, London-New York, 1999, vol. Ill, 239-257.
Lonsdale ( 1993) Lonsdale S., Dance and Ritual Play in Greek Religion,
Baltimore 1993.
Loraux (2002) Loraux N., The Mourning Voice: An Essay on Greek
Tragedy, trans. E. T. Rawlings, Ithaca-London 2002.
Lord (1948) Lord A. B., "Homer, Parry, and Huso", AJA 52 (1948)
34-44 (repr. in M. Parry 1971, 465-478).
Lord (1951a) Lord A. B., "Yugoslav Epic Folk Poetry", International
Folk Music Journal 3 (195 la) 57-61.
Bibliography 207
Lord (1951b) Lord A. B., "Composition by Theme in Homer and

Southslavic Epos", TAPhA 82 (1951b) 71-80.
Lord (1953) Lord A. B., "Homer's Originality: Oral Dictated
Texts", TAPhA 84 (1953) 124-134.
Lord (1956) Lord A. B., "The Role of Sound-Patterns in Serbo-
Croatian Epic", in For Roman Jakobson, Hague 1956,
301-305.
Lord (1960) Lord A. B., The Singer of Tales, Cambridge Mass.
1960.
Lord (1968) Lord A. B., "Homer as Oral Poet", HSCPh 72 (1968)
1-46.
Lord (1969) Lord A. B., "The Theme of the Withdrawn Hero in
Serbo-Croatian Epic", Prilozi za knjizevnost, jezik,
istoriju ifolklor, 35 (1969) 18-30.
Lord (1970) Lord A. B., "Tradition and the Oral Poet: Homer,
Huso, and Avdo Medjedovic", in E. Cernili et al. (eds.),
Atti del Convegno Internazionale sul Tema: La Poesia
Orale e la sua Formazione, Rome 1970, 13-28.
Lord ( 1976) Lord A. B., "The Traditional Song", in B. A. Stolz & R.
S. Shannon (eds.), Oral Literature and the Formula,
Ann Arbor 1976, 1-15.
Lord (1981), Lord A. B., "Memory, Fixity, and Genre in Traditional
Oral Poetries", in J. M. Foley (ed.), Oral traditional
Literature: A Festschrift for Albert James Lord,
Columbus 1981,451-461.
Lord ( 1986a) Lord A. B., "Perspectives on Recent Work on the Oral
Traditional Formula", Oral Tradition 1 (1986a) 467-
503.
Lord (1986b) Lord A. B„ "The Merging of Two Worlds: Oral and
Written Poetry as Carriers of Ancient Values", in J. M.
Foley (ed.), Oral Tradition in Literature: Interpretation
in Context, Columbia 1986b, 19-64.
Lord (1986c) Lord A. B., "The Nature of Oral Poetry", in J. M.
Foley (ed.), Comparative Research on Oral Tradi-
tions: A Memorial for Milman Parry, Columbus
1986c, 313-349.
Lord (1991) Lord A. B., Epic Singers and Oral Tradition, Ithaca
N.Y. 1991.
208 Bibliography
Lord (1995) Lord A. B., The Singer Resumes the Tale, Ithaca N.Y.
1995.
Lowenstam (1981) Lowenstam S., The Death of Patroclus: A Study in Ty-
pology, (Beiträge zur klassischen Philologie 133),
Königstein 1981.
Luetcke (1829) Luetcke F. G. L. Α., De Graecorum dithyrambis et
poetis dithyrambicis, (PhD diss. University of Berlin),
1829.
Lyons(1977) Lyons J., Semantics 2, London 1977.
Maas (1907) Maas P., "ύμήν ύμήν", Philologus 66 (1907) 590-596.
Maas (1914) Maas P., "Hymenaios", RE IX 1 (1914) 130-134.
Mackie (1996) Mackie Η., Talking Trojan: Speech and Community in
the Iliad, Lanham-Boulder-New York-London 1996.
Macleod (1982) Macleod C. W., Iliad, BookXXIV, Cambridge 1982.
Maehler (1963) Maehler H., Die Auffassung des Dichterberufs im frü-
hen Griechentum bis zur Zeit Pindars, (Hypomnemata
3), Göttingen 1963.
March (1987) March J. R., The Creative Poet. Studies on the Treat-
ment of Myths in Greek Poetry, (BICS Suppl., 49),
London 1987.
Marg (1957) Marg W., Homer über die Dichtung. Der Schild des
Achilles, Münster 1957.
Marg (1965) Marg W., Held und Mensch bei Homer, in A. Schaefer
(ed.), Das Menschenbild in der Dichtung, Munich 1965.
Markantonatos
(2002) Markantonatos Α., Tragic Narrative: A Narratological
Study of Sophocles ' Oedipus at Colonus, Berlin-New
York 2002.
s
Maronitis (1984 ) Maronitis D. Ν., 'Αναζήτηση και νόστος τοϋ 'Οδυσ-
σέα: Ή διαλεκτική της 'Οδύσσειας, Athens 19845.
Maronitis (1999) Maronitis D. Ν., 'Ομηρικά Μεγαθέματα: Πόλεμος -
'Ομιλία - Νόστος, Athens 1999.
Martin (1989) Martin R. P., The Language of Heroes: Speech and
Performance in the Iliad, Ithaca-London 1989.
Martin (1997) Martin R. P., "Similes and Performance", in E. Bakker
& A. Kahane (eds.), Written Voices, Spoken Signs:
Performance, Tradition, and the Epic Text, Cambridge
Mass. 1997, 138-166.
Bibliography 209
Martin (2000) Martin R. P., "Wrapping Homer Up: Cohesion,

Discourse, and Deviation in the Iliad", in A. Sharrock
& H. Morales (eds.), Intratextuality: Greek and
Roman Textual Relations, Oxford 2000, 43-65.
Mawet (1975) Mawet Fr., "Épigrammes, thrènes et dithyrambes. Les
lamentations funèbres de Γ épopée", in J. Bingen et al.
(eds.), Le monde grec. Pensée, littérature, histoire,
documents. Hommages à Claire Préaux, Brussels 1975,
33-44.
Mawet (1979) Mawet Fr., Recherches sur les oppositions fonction-
nelles dans le vocabulaire homérique de la douleur
(autour de πήμα-αλγος), Académie royale de Belgi-
que, Mémoires de la classe de lettres, t. 63, fase. 4,
Brussels 1979.
Mehrlein (1959) Mehrlein R., "Drei", Reallexikon für Antike und
Christentum, v. 4, Stuttgart 1959.
McClure (1995) McClure L. K., "Female Speech and Characterization
in Euripides", in F. de Martino & Α. Sommerstein (eds.),
Lo Spettacolo Delle Voci, Bari 1995, 35-60 (part 2).
Minchin (2001) Minchin E., Homer and the Resources of Memory:
Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to the Iliad
and the Odyssey, Oxford 2001.
Monsacré (1984) Monsacré H., Les larmes d' Achille. Le héros, la
femme et la souffrance dans la poésie d'Homère, Paris
1984.
Morrison (1995) Morrison J. V., Homeric Misdirection: False Predic-
tions in the Iliad, Ann Arbor 1995.
Moulton (1977) Moulton C., Similes in the Homeric Poems, (Hy-
pomnemata 49), Göttingen 1977.
Muellner (1976) Muellner L. Ch., The Meaning of Homeric efxomai
through its Formulas, Innsbruck 1976.
Muñoz Valle
(1971) Muñoz Valle I., "Interpretación de la fòrmula επος τ'
εφαχ' εκ τ' όνόμαζεν", Emerita 39 (1971) 305-314.
Murnaghan (1999) Murnaghan S., "The Poetics of Loss in Greek Epic",
in M. Beissinger, J. Tylus & S. Woflford (eds.), Epic
Traditions in the Contemporary World: The Poetics of
Community, Berkeley 1999, 203-220.
210 Bibliography
Nagler (1967) Nagler M.N., "Towards a Generative View of the Oral

Formula", TAPhA 98 (1967) 269-311.
Nagy (1974) Nagy G., Comparative Studies in Greek and Indie
Meter, Cambridge Mass. 1974.
Nagy (1979) Nagy G., The Best of the Achaeans: Concepts of the
Hero in Archaic Greek Poetry, Baltimore-London 1979.
Nagy (1990) Nagy G., Greek Mythology and Poetics, Ithaca-
London 1990.
Nagy (1996a) Nagy G., Homeric Questions, Austin Texas 1996a.
Nagy (1996b) Nagy G., Poetry as Performance: Homer and beyond,
Cambridge 1996b.
Niens (1987) Niens C., Struktur und Dynamik in den Kampfszenen
der Ilias, Heidelberg 1987.
Nünlist (1998) Nünlist R., "Der homerische Erzähler und das
sogennante Sukzessionsgesetz", MH 55.1 (1998) 2-8.
Olrik (1965) Olrik Α., "Epic laws of folk narrative", in A. Dundes
(ed.), The Study of Folklore, Prentice Hall NJ 1965,
129-141.
Onega S. &
Landa(1996) Onega S. & Landa J. A. G., Narratology: An Introduc-
tion, London-New York 1996.
Pantelia (2002) Pantelia M., "Helen and the Last Song for Hector",
TAPhA 132.1-2 (2002) 21-27.
Parks(1990) Parks W., Verbal Dueling in Heroic Narrative: The
Homeric and Old English Traditions, Princeton 1990.
Parry (1937) Parry M., "About Winged Words", CPh 32 (1937) 59-
63.
Parry (1971) Parry M., The Making of Homeric Verse: The Col-
lected Papers of Milman Parry, trans. & ed. A. Parry,
Oxford 1971.
Pasquali (1942) Pasquali G., "Arte allusiva", Italia che scrive 25
(1942) 185-187.
Pope (1985) Pope M., "A nonce-word in the IliadCQ 35 (1985)
1-8.
Pelliccia (1995) Pelliccia Η., Mind, Body and Speech in Homer and
Pindar, (Hypomnemata 107), Göttingen 1995.
Peppmüller (1872) Peppmüller R. H., Über die Composition der Klagelie-
der im vierundzwanzigsten Buch der Ilias, Halle 1872.
Bibliography 211
Pestalozzi (1945) Pestalozzi H., Die Achilleis als Quelle der Ilias,
Erlenbach-Zurich 1945.
Petersmann (1969) Petersmann G., Die monologischen Reden der home-
rischen Epen, Graz 1969.
Petersmann (1973) Petersmann G., "Die monologische Totenklage der
Ilias", RhM 116 (1973) 3-16.
Pignani(1995) Pignani Α., "ΝΟΣΤΟΣ", in S. Cerasuolo (ed.), ΜΑ-
THESIS e ΡHI LIA: Studi in onore di Marcello Gi-
gante, Napoli 1995.
Prince (1978) Prince G., "Le discours attributif du récit", Poétique
35 (1978)305-313.
Privitera (1957) Privitera Α., "Archiloco e il ditirambo letterario pre-
Simonideo", Maia 9 (1957) 95-110.
Polkas (1999) Polkas L., Ύπνος - Αγρυπνία - Όνειρο: από την Ιλιάδα
στην Οδύσσεια, (PhD diss. University of Thessalo-
niki), 1999.
Pomeroy (1975) Pomeroy S. Β., "Andromache: un example méconnu
de matriarcat", RÉG 88 (1975) 16-19.
Privitera (1957) Privitera Α., "Archiloco e il ditirambo letterario pre-
simonideo", Maia 9 (1957) 95-110.
Pucci(1979) Pucci P., "The Song of the Sirens", Arethusa 12 (1979)
121-132.
Pucci(1987) Pucci P., Odysseus Polutropos: Intertextual Read-
ings in the Odyssey and in the Iliad, Ithaca-London
1987.
Pucci(1993) Pucci P., "Antiphonal Lament between Achilles and
Briséis", Colby Quarterly 29.3 (1993) 258-272.
Pucci(1996) Pucci P., "Between Narrative and Catalogue: Life and
Death of the Poem", Métis 11 (1996) 5-24.
Pucci(1998) Pucci P., The Song of the Sirens: Essays on Homer,
Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 1998.
Rabel (1997) Rabel J. R., Plot and Point of View in the Iliad, Ann
Arbor 1997.
Race(1988) Race W. R., The Classical Priamel from Homer to
Boethius, (Mnemosyne Supplement 74), Leiden 1988.
Redfield (1975) Redfield J., Nature and Culture in the Iliad. The
Tragedy of Hector, Chicago 1975.
Rehm (1994) Rehm R., Marriage to Death. The Conflation of
212 Bibliography
Wedding and Funeral Rituals In Greek Tragedy,

Princeton 1994.
Reichel (1990) Reichel M., "Retardationstechniken in der Ilias", in W.
Kullmann & M. Reichel (eds.), Der Übergang von der
Mündlichkeit zur Literatur bei den Griechen, (Sripta
Oralia 30), Tübingen 1990, 125-151.
Reichel (1994) Reichel M., Fernbeziehungen in der Ilias, Tübingen
1994.
Reichel (1998) Reichel M., "Narratologische Methoden in der
Homerforschung", in H. L. C. Tristram (ed.), New Me-
thods in the Research of Epic = Neue Methoden der
Epenforschung, (Scripta Oralia 107), Tübingen 1998,
45-61.
Reiner (1938) Reiner E., Die rituelle Totenklage der Griechen,
Stuttgart-Berlin 1938.
Reinhardt (1961) Reinhardt K., Die Ilias und ihr Dichter, Göttingen
1961.
Rengakos(1995) Rengakos Α., "Zeit und Gleichzeitigkeit in den ho-
merischen Epen", Antike und Abendland 41 (1995) 1-
33.
Rengakos(1999) Rengakos Α., "Spannungsstrategien in den homerischen
Epen", in J. N. Kazazis and A. Rengakos (eds.),
Euphrosyne: Studies in Ancient Epic and its Legacy in
Honor ofD. N. Maronitis, Stuttgart 1999, 308-338.
Richardson (1990) Richardson S., The Homeric Narrator, Nashville 1990.
Ricoeur(1984-
1988) Ricoeur R, Time and Narrative, trans. K. McLaughlin
& D. Pellauer, 3 vols., Chicago 1984-1988.
Rieu (2003) Rieu E. V., Homer. The Odyssey, London 2003 (1946).
Riggsby (1992) Riggsby Α., "Homeric Speech Introductions and the
Theory of Homeric Composition", TAPhA 122 (1992)
99-114.
Rimmon-
Kenan (1983) Rimmon-Kenan S., Narrative Fiction: Contemporary
Poetics, London 1983.
2
Rohde (1925 ) Rohde E., Psyche: The Cult of Souls and Belief in
Immortality Among the Greeks, transi. W. B. Hillis,
London 19252.
Bibliography 213
Romilly (1975) Romilly J. D., Magic and Rhetoric in Ancient Greece,

Cambridge Mass.-London 1975.
Rossi (1979) Rossi L. R., "Poem and Fee in Greek Archaic Poetry,
both Choral and Monodie", (talk delivered to the
Hellenic Society on Nov. 15th 1979; for the reference
see Garland 1985:146).
Ruijgh (1971) Ruijgh C. J., Autour de "τε épique", Amsterdam 1971.
Saunier (1968) Saunier G., Les chansons de noces à thèmes funèbres.
Recherches sur la famille et la société grecques (PhD
diss. University of Paris), 1968.
Saunier (1999) Saunier G., 'Ελληνικά Δημοτικά Τραγούδια. Tà Μοι-
ρολόγια, Athens 1999.
Schadewaldt
(1936) Schadewaldt W., "Homerische Szenen, II: Die
Entscheidung des Achilleus", Antike (1936) 173-201.
Schadewaldt
(19592) Schadewaldt W., Von Homers Welt und Werk, Stuttgart
19592.
Schadewaldt
(1966) Schadewaldt W., Iliasstudien, repr. Darmstadt 1966.
Schadewaldt
(1970) Schadewaldt W., Hellas und Hesperien, Zurich-
Stuttgart 1970.
Schefold (1993) Schefold K, Götter und Heldensagen der Griechen in
der Früh- und Hocharchaischen Kunst, Munich 1993.
Schmitt (1901) Schmitt J., "Myrolog oder Moirolog?", Indogerma-
nische Forschungen 12 (1901) 6-12.
Schmitz (1963) Schmitz Α., "La polarité des contraires dans la
rencontre d' Hector et d' Andromache", LEC 31
(1963) 129-158.
Schretter (1974) Schretter M. K., Alter Orient und Hellas, (Beiträge zur
Kulturwissenschaft 33), Innsbruck 1974.
Scodel (2002) Scodel R., Listening to Homer: Tradition, Narrative,
and Audience, Ann Arbor 2002.
Seaford (1994) Seaford K., Reciprocity and Ritual: Homer and Tra-
gedy in the Developing City-State, Oxford 1994.
Searle (1976) Searle J. R., "A classification of Illocutionaiy Acts",
Language in Society 5 (1976) 1-23.
214 Bibliography
Segal (1971a) Segal C. P., "Andromache's Anagnorisis: Formulaic

Artistry in Iliad 22.437-476", HSCPh 75 (1971a) 33-
57.
Segal (1971b) Segal C. P., The Theme of the Mutilation of the
Corpse, (Mnemosyne Supplement 17), Leiden 1971b.
Segal (1993) Segal C. P., "The Female Voice and its Ambiguïtés:
From Homer to Tragedy", in J. Dalfen, G. Petersmann
& F. F. Schwarz (eds.), Religio Graeco-Romana:
Festschrift für Walter Pötscher, Graz-Horn 1993, 57-
75.
Segal (1994) Segal C. P., Singers, Heroes, and Gods in the Odyssey,
Ithaca 1994.
Seremetakis
(1991) Seremetakis C. N., The Last Word: Women, Death and
Divination in Inner Mani, Chicago 1991.
Severyns (1928) Severyns Α., Le cycle épique dans l' école d' Ari-
starque, Liège 1928.
Shannon (1975) Shannon R. S., The Arms of Achilles and Homeric
Compositional Technique, Leiden 1975.
Shapiro (1991) Shapiro Η. Α., "The Iconography of Mourning in
Athenian Art", AJA 95 (1991) 629-656.
Sharrock A. &
Morales (2000) Sharrock A. & Morales H. (eds.), Intratextuality. Greek
and Roman Textual Relations, Oxford 2000.
Shay (1995) Shay J., Achilles in Vietnam: Combat Trauma and the
Undoing of Character, New York 1995.
Sifakis (1988) Sifakis G. Μ., Για μια Ποιητική τοϋ 'Ελληνικού Δημο-
τικού Τραγουδιού, Heraklion 1988.
Silk (1983) Silk M. S., "LSJ and the Problem of Poetic Archaism:
from Meaning to Iconyms", CQ, 33.2 (1983) 303-330.
Siurla-Theo-
doridou (1989) Siurla-Theodoridou V., Die Familie in der
griechischen Kunst und Literatur des 8. bis 6.
Jahrhunderts, (Quellen und Forschungen zur antiken
Welt 4), Munich 1989.
Skiadas (1959) Skiadas A. D., 'Επί Τνμβω. Συμβολή εις την έρμηνείαν
των ελληνικών επιτύμβιων έμμετρων επιγραφών,
Athens 1959.
Bibliography 215
Slatkin (1991) Slatkin L., The Power of Thetis: Allusion and Inter-
pretation in the Iliad, Berkeley-Los Angeles 1991.
Smyth (1906) Smyth H. W., Greek Melic Poets, New York 1906.
Sourvinou-
Inwood (1983) Sourvinou-Inwood C., "A Trauma in Flux: Death in
the 8th Century and After", in R. Hägg (ed.), The
Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century B. C.:
Tradition and Innovation, (Proceedings of the Second
International Symposium at the Swedish Institute in
Athens, 1-5 June 1981), Stockholm 1983, 33-48.
Sourvinou-
Inwood (1991) Sourvinou-Inwood C., 'Reading'Greek Culture: Texts
and Images, Rituals and Myths, Oxford 1991.
Sourvinou-
Inwood (1995) Sourvinou-Inwood C., 'Reading' Greek Death,
Oxford 1995.
Spatafora (1997) Spatafora G., "Esigenza fisiologica e funzione te-
rapeutica del lamento nei poemi omerici. Studio sul
significato di κλαίω, γοάω, στένω, οίμώζω-κωκύω,
οδύρομαι", AC 66 (1997) 1-23.
Stanford (1969) Stanford W. Β., "Euphonie reasons for the choice of
Homeric formulae", Hermathena 108 (1969) 11-17.
Stanford (1983) Stanford W. B., Greek Tragedy and the Emotions: An
Introductory Study, London 1983.
Stanley (1993) Stanley K., The Shield of Homer, Narrative Structure
in the Iliad, Princeton 1993.
Stehle (1997) Stehle E., Performance and Gender in Ancient Greece.
Nondramatic Poetry in its Setting, Princeton 1997.
Suleiman, (1980) Suleiman, S. R., 'Introduction: Varieties of Audience-
Oriented Criticism', in S. R. Suleiman & I. Crosman
(eds.), The Reader in the text: Essays on Audience and
Interpretation, Princeton 1980, 3-45.
Sultan (1991) Sultan N., "Women in 'Akritic' Song: The Hero's
'Other'Voice", JMGS 9 (1991) 153-169.
Sultan (1999) Sultan N., Exile and the Poetics of Loss in Greek
Tradition, Lanham-Boulder-New York-Oxford 1999.
Suzuki(1989) Suzuki M., Metamorphoses of Helen. Authority,
Difference, and the Epic, Ithaca NY 1989.
216 Bibliography
Svenbro ( 1976) Svenbro J., La parole et le marbre: Aux origines de la

poétique grecque, Lund 1976.
Swain ( 1988) Swain S. C. R., "A note on Iliad 9.524-99. The story of
Meleager", CQ 38 (1988) 271-276.
Taplin (1992) Taplin O., Homeric Soundings: The Shaping of the
Iliad, Oxford 1992.
Thalmann (1984) Thalmann W. G., Conventions of Form and Thought
in Early Greek Epic Poetry, Baltimore 1984.
Touchefeu-
Meynier Touchefeu-Meynier O., LIMC, s.v. 'Patroklos'.
Tsagalis (2002) Tsagalis C. C., «Ανδρομάχη μαινομένη: το διονυσιακό
στοιχείο στην Ιλιάδα», Hellenika 52.1 (2002) 199-
225.
Tsagalis (2002-
2003) Tsagalis C. C., "Viewing from the Walls, Viewing
Helen: Language and Indeterminacy in the Teicho-
skopia", EEAth (Annual of the School of Philosophy of
the University of Athens) 34 (2002-2003) 167-193.
Tsagalis (2003) Tsagalis C. C., "Odyssey 24.191-202: A Reconsidera-
tion", WS 116 (2003) 43-56.
Tsagalis (2003-
2004) Tsagalis C. C., "Time Games: Helen, Odysseus, and
Intertextuality", EEAth (Annual of the School of
Philosophy of the University of Athens) 35 (2003-
2004) 109-125.
Turmer (1969) Turmer V., The Ritual Process. Structure and Anti-
Structure, Chicago 1969.
Usener(1903) Usener H., "Dreiheit", RhM58 (1903) 24-28.
van der Valk
(1963-1964) van der Valk M. H. A. L. H., Researches on the Text
and Scholia of the Iliad, vols. I-II, Leiden 1963-1964.
van Duzer (1996) van Duzer C. Α., Duality and Structure in the Iliad and
in the Odyssey, New York-Washington D. C. 1996.
van Ε φ Taalman
Kip (1971) van Ε φ Taalman Kip A. M., Agamemnon in Epos en
Tragedie, Assen 1971.
van Gennep
( 1960) van Gennep Α., The Rites of Passage, Chicago 1960.
Bibliography 217
van
Groningen (1958) van Groningen Β. Α., La composition littéraire
archaïque grecque, Amsterdam 1958.
van Leutsch
(1857) van Leutsch E., "Metrische Fragmente", Philologus
12(1857) 12-40.
van Otterlo
(1944a) van Otterlo W. A. A, "Eine merkwündige Komposi-
tionsform der älteren griechischen Literatur", Mne-
mosyne 312 (1944a) 192-207.
van Otterlo
(1944b) van Otterlo W. Α. A, Untersuchungen über Begriff,
Anwendung, und Enstehung der griechischen Ringko-
mposition, Amsterdam 1944b.
van Otterlo (1948) van Otterlo W. Α. A, De ringcompositie als
opbouwprincipe in de epische gedichten van Ho-
merus, Amsterdam 1948.
Verilhac (1982) Verilhac Α. Μ., Παίδες άωροι. Poésiefiméraire,vol. 1,
textes, Athens 1978 & vol. 2, commentaire, Athens
1982.
Vermeide (1979) Vermeule E., Aspects of Life and Death in Early
Greek Art and Poetry, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London
1979.
Vivante (1975) Vivante P., "On Homer's Winged Words", CQ 25
(1975) 1-12.
Vodoklys (1992) Vodoklys E. J., Blame-Expression in the Epic Tradi-
tion, New York-London 1992.
Voigt(1971) Voigt E.-M., Sappho et Alcaeus, Amsterdam 1971.
Voskos(1997) Voskos A. I., Méléagre-Achille et Phénix: contribu-
tion à la recherche de l'Iliade, Besançon 1997 (= Με-
λέαγρος - Άχιλλενς καΐ Φοίνιξ. Συμβολή εις την ερευ-
ναν της ένότητος της Ίλιάδος, Nicosia 1974).
Wathelet (1988) Wathelet P., Dictionnaire des Troyens de /' Iliade,
(Documenta et Instrumenta), vols. I-II, Liège 1988.
Wendel (1929) Wendel Th., Gesprächsanrede im griechischen Epos
und Drama der Blütezeit, Stuttgart 1929.
Whitman (1958) Whitman C. H., Homer and the Heroic Tradition,
Cambridge Mass. 1958.
218 Bibliography
Wilamowitz-
Moellendorf U.
(19202) Wilamowitz-Moellendorf U. von., Die Ilias und
Homer, Berlin 19202 [1916],
Willcock (1964) Willcock M. M., "Mythological Paradeigma in the
üiad\ CQ 14 (1964) 141-154.
Willcock (1977) Willcock M. M., "Ad hoc Invention in the Iliad\
HSCPh 81 (1977)41-53.
Willcock (1978-
1984) Willcock M. M., The Iliad of Homer, vols. I-II, London
1978-1984.
Wilson (1979) Wilson J. R., "Καί κέ τις ώδ' έρέει. An Homeric
Device in Greek Literature", ICS IV (1979) 1-15.
Worman (2001) Worman N., "This Voice Which Is Not One: Helen's
Verbal Guises in Homeric Epic", in A. Lardinois & L.
McClure (eds.), Making Silence Speak: Women's Voices
in Greek Literature and Society, Princeton 2001, 19-
37.
Zanker (1981) Zanker G., "Enargeia in the Ancient Criticism on
Poetry", RhM 124 ( 1981 ) 297-311.
Zimmermann
(1992) Zimmermann Β., Dithyrambes: Geschichte einer
Gattung, (Hypomnemata 98), Göttingen 1992.
Indexes
I. General Index
deixis
* Achilleis 137 afferent and efferent 77, 88-89
Aeschylus am Phantasma 93 η. 269
Cho. 733 6 n. 27 pattern- 126, 135, 153
Aethiopis 137-138 personal 90, 94, 99-100, 103
allusion 11, 109, 124 n. 338, 164 spatial 81, 86-87, 89-90, 92
analepsis temporal 81, 87, 104-106
internal 113, 119 n. 324 verbal and local 76, 86
external 119 n. 324, 122, 128, 131, Demodocus 7 n. 29
146, 159 demonstratio ad oculos 93 n. 269
Anaxandrides diegesis 12 n. 61,13 n. 62,14, 23,24,113,
fr. 1 K.-A. 29 n. 103 122, 147
andròtasia 179-181 diachrony see synchrony
antiphonal element/singing 15, 23 n. 92, Diodes 68 n. 209, 74, 183-184, 188
32, 48, 83 n. 251, 84 n. 254 distance and separation 75 n. 234,86,89,102
antiphonesis (internal and external) 85 encomium 30 n. 107
aristeia 179 enjambment 98 n. 274, 134 n. 367, 145,
Athenaeus 157 n. 427
V 180c, V 181c 3 n. 12 Eustathius
bereaved parents and family 88 977 4 n. 14
CEC focalization 93, 110 n. 302, 113-114, 117,
171 190 131, 146
chiastic-ring form 146 foci of consciousness 97
chorus of mourners 3, 68-74, 88 foreshadowing 25, 134, 136, 148, 153-
Cicero 154, 160
De leg. II 63 29 n. 103 formula 9, 10
closeness see personal deixis frames
common fate 29, 39, 146-147, 168 common 17
comparative analogues 20 n. 82 intertextual 17, 18
comparison 15, 28, 36, 115 n. 312, 119, free expansion 23, 47
138, 149-150, 153-154, 159, 168, 190 funeral oration 24 n. 93, 30 n. 107
cumulative technique 123 n. 337, 135 Gorgias
death-wish 15,16, 30, 42,119,155, 161 n. Hel. 9 82 n. 250
434, 165 n. 444, 168 "Great Divide" 10
deictic references guslari 9
anaphoric 93 horizon of expectations 17 n. 73
cataphoric 93 Homeric Hymn to Demeter
endophoric 93 228-230 188 η. 478
220 Indexes
hymn 30 η. 107 pace 110 n. 302

"hypo-diegetic" 122 parallel composition 23,47
internal clause boundary 145 n. 403 parole see langue
internal sentence boundary 145 n. 403 past-present contrast 30, 44
intertextuality 11, 18 n. 75, 109-110 "pattern-marker" 125, 152 n. 417
intratextuality 110, 126, 128, 129, 164, PEG
169 Cypria fr. 19, 89 n. 261
Klagereden 22 η. 90 Cypria fr. 27 141 n. 393
kláma 72 performance 11, 22 n. 88, 24 n. 93, 87,
Kunstsprache 17 102, 105-107, 110, 111
langue vs parole 19, 20 peripeteia 1
laudatio íunebris 117, 136 personal laments
marriage see wedding anticipatory 16, 111, 117, 119
meaning antiphonal 16, 60 n. 185, 86, 111, 140-
inherent vs conferred 10 141, 149-150
connotative vs denotative 10 concealed/mixed 16, 111, 137 n. 376
Meleager story 120 n. 328, 121 n. 332 formal/ritual 16, 27 n. 101, 111, 133
Menander Rhetor informal/ritualistic 16, 111 n. 306
Epid. 404.27 132 n. 359 single 16
mimesis 12 n. 61, 13 n. 62 triadic 16
mors immatura 25, 75 η. 234, 103, 185, unreported 171
189-190 Phemius 7 n. 29
mourners (of personal laments) Pindar
Achilles O. 8.31-36 125 n. 341
Iliad 18 143-148 0. 12.6-8 5 n. 22
Iliad 19 148-151 1. 8.63-64 5 n. 22, 29 n. 103
Agamemnon 112-118 Plato
Andromache Ion 535b-e 82 n. 250
Iliad 6 118-129 Lg. VII 800e 6 n. 27
Iliad 22 129-133 R. 388d, 398e 5 n. 22
Iliad 24 133-136 R. 392c-d 12 n. 61
Briséis 139-143 Plutarch
Hecuba Sol. 21.4 6 n. 27
Iliad 22 154-157 Sol. 21.5 5 n. 22
Iliad 24 158-161 PMG
Helen 161-165 419, 485, 894, 896, 907, 911 29 n. 103
Priam 151-154 praising address 15, 28, 32, 168
Thetis 136-139 priamel 121 n. 331
Muses 5, 7 professional mourners/singers 2 n. 8, 4-7
narratology 12 n. 59, 109-110 prolepsis
Nereids 60, 88, 137 internal 119 n. 324, 122, 147
oral anti-epitaph 116-117 external 106, 119 n. 324, 131
oralcy 11 n. 53 proto-lament 21, 104
orality l l , 9 7 n . 271, 110-111 "refrain-composition" 72 n. 228
order 110 n. 302 Ps.-Hesiod
Indexes 221
Sc. 273-280, 274 84 η. 254 signifiers

Ps.-Longinus graphic 11
De subi. 15 82 η. 250 phonic 11
Quintilian Simoeisius 68 n. 209, 74, 139, 182-183,
Inst. or. 6.2.29 82 η. 250 188
rites of passage 85 n. 255 sub-genre 15 n. 66,17, 19, 20, 21,24,157
Rezeptionaesthetik 17 sympathetic imagination 70, 71 n. 222
ring-composition 15, 23 n. 90, 31, 47, 91, synchrony vs diachrony 20
123 n. 337, 168, 186, 190 textifïcation 11
Rollenwechsel 119 textualization/textuality 11,12, 111
Sappho Thamyris 7 n. 29
30 V, 44.24-34 V 83 n. 252 theme 10, 15
44.34 V 130 n. 354 ης-speech 73, 77, 92, 93, 115 n. 314, 117,
script 11 131
self-blame 101 n. 278 Totenkult 2
separation see distance Todesdichtung 2
short obituaries 2, 103, 257 ff. Totenklagen 22 η. 90, 24 η. 93, 27 η. 101
brief 181-182 traditional referentiality 104
expanded 182-188 tripartite structure 15, 30, 46, 168
speech-act typical scene/type scene 10 n. 43
illocutionary 13 vegetal imagery 103-104
locutionary 13 Verknüpfungspunkt 126 η. 346
speech closures visualization 82, 106
multi-verse 65, 168-169 wedding 82-85, 130-132, 162, 164
single-verse 64, 168-169 writing 11, 81
speech introductions Zenobius
multi-verse 58, 168-169 V 28 29 n. 103
single-verse 55, 168-169
222 Indexes
II. Index of Homeric Passages
Iliad 4.168 114, 144 η. 402

1.1-2 136 4.169 90,91
1.1-7 1 η. 2 4.171-175 77
1.2 135, 153 4.171-182 77, 115
1.5 114, 115, 144 4.174 90,91
1.8-52 161 4.175 90, 114, 115, 144 η. 402
1.195 62 η. 194 4.176 93
1.208 62 η. 194 4.176-177 92
1.362 fr. 155 4.178 92, 114, 115, 144 η. 402
1.366 122 η. 335 4.178-179 114
1.366-369 142 4.178-181 77
1.414 138 4.179 143
1.418 138 4.179-181 77,92
1.472-474 5 η. 21 4.180-181 190
1.572 62 η. 194 4.181 116 η. 318
1.595 62 η. 194 4.182 42, 90,91,92, 93, 119
2.266 121 η. 329 4.473-489 103 η. 283, 139, 181, 182-183
2.411 13 4.474 185
2.594-600 7 η. 29 4.474-475 186
2.690-693 140, 141 4.478 185
2.797 65 η. 200 4.479 186 η. 471
2.872-875 181 4.488-489 186
3.39 37 η. 125 5.49-58 181
3.97-110 113 5.59-68 181
3.99-100 113 5.69 180, 182
3.121 63 η. 194 5.69-75 181
3.173 161 η. 434 5.76-83 181
3.180 161 5.152-158 181
3.236-242 162 η. 436 5.243 33 η. 115
3.243-244 162 η. 436 5.436-438 126 η. 346
3.276-291 113 5.541 185
4.26 114 5.541-542 186
4.60 121 η. 329 5.541-560 103 η. 283, 181, 183-184
4.153-154 55, 58, 59 5.559 186 η. 471
4.154 64, 114 5.559-560 186
4.155 113 5.561 63 η. 195
4.155-182 28,42, 77, 112 5.708-710 181
4.156 113 5.711 62 η. 194
4.158 114, 143 5.767 62 η. 194
4.160 114, 144 η. 402 5.775 62 η. 194
4.161 114, 144 η. 402 5.784 62 η. 194
4.163 114 5.826 33 η. 115
Indexes
6.12-19 181 6.444 127

6.20-28 181 6.447-449 115 η. 312, 127
6.33-35 181 6.450-454 121
6.254 155 6.450-463 133 η. 365
6.344 161 6.476 131
6.371 63 η. 194 6.476-481 131
6.373 14, 171 η. 445 6.492 125 η. 341
6.377 63 η. 194 6.498-499 172
6.389 128 η. 347, 130 6.499-500 172 η. 448
6.394 124 6.501-502 172
6.394-399 123 η. 337 7.327-370 181
6.395-397 123 8.156 121 η. 329
6.402-403 133 η. 365 8.185-190 128 η. 347
6.405-406 55, 58, 59 8.190 121 η. 329
6.407 95, 120 η. 326 8.302-308 181
6.407-408 95, 134 8.381 62 η. 194
6.407-409 95, 133 η. 365 8.350 62 η. 194
6.407-411 95, 119 8.484 62 η. 194
6.407-413 94, 95 9.188 122 η. 335, 123 η. 337
6.407-439 28, 36, 43, 94, 103, 118 9.254-258 146
6.409-410 119, 122, 128 9.257 146
6.410-411 43, 119 9.341-343 140 η. 391
6.410-413 133 η. 365 9.343 140 η. 391
6.411-439 119 9.413-416 150
6.414 122 9.443 68 η. 211
6.414-419 123 9.590 ff. 121 η. 332
6.414-428 141 10.104-105 144
6.415-416 141 10.234 33 η. 115
6.419 124 11.101-121 181
6.420 124 η. 339 11.104-106 38 η. 126
6.421 95 11.155-159 187 η. 477
6.423 122 11.166-168 125
6.428 160 η. 430 11.218-247 181
6.429-430 95, 120, 189 11.262-263 181
6.430 95, 121 η. 329 11.301-309 181
6.431 120 η. 326 11.608 33 η. 115
6.431-439 128 η. 347 11.765-789 146
6.432 134 11.784 146 η. 405
6.433 125, 126 11.789 146
6.433-439 124 η. 341 11.791 146
6.435 126 12.110-117 181
6.437 126 12.471 65 η. 200
6.438 127 13.170-181 181
6.438-439 126 13.178 187 η. 477
6.439 127 13.249 34
224 Indexes
13.251-252 35 η. 118 17.426-440 181

13.253 35 η. 117 17.478 156 η. 426
13.363-369 181 17.520-524 181
13.384-393 181 17.575-581 181
13.389 187 η. 478 17.609-616 181
13.411-412 182 17.672 156 η. 426
13.427-444 181 18.1-35 148
13.560-575 181 18.6-14 24 η. 93
13.660-672 181 18.30-31 60
13.758-764 181 18.35-148 148
13.769 37 η. 125 18.39-48 60
14.277 62 η. 194 18.50-51 55, 58, 59
14.414-415 187 η. 477 18.52-53 48, 137
14.346 121 η. 329 18.52-64 27 η. 101, 28, 37, 48, 78, 88, 136
14.442-445 181 18.54 48
15.78 62 η. 194 18.55-57 37, 187 η. 477
15.92 62 η. 194 18.55-59 48
15.130 62 η. 194 18.55-56 138
15.333-335 181 18.56 103 η. 283, 139
15.525-539 181 18.56-62 138
16.57 140, 141 η. 393 18.56-57 139
16.152 ff. 123 η. 337 18.57 103 η. 283
16.153 122 η. 335 18.58-59 139
16.296 65 η. 200 18.58-60 88
16.333-334 181 18.59-60 37, 89, 138
16.345-350 180 18.59-62 48
16.404-410 181 18.60 80, 89 η. 263
16.480-491 181 18.63-64 48, 137
16.481 56 η. 171 18.73 155
16.482 187 η. 477 18.128 155
16.570-580 181 18.148-242 148
16.594-599 181 18.184 121 η. 329
16.633-637 181, 187 η. 478 18.243-283 128
16.702-705 126 η. 346 18.314-315 64, 65
16.784-786 126 η. 346 18.314-316 66, 67
16.836 132 18.315 66, 148 η. 407
16.855-857 181 18.316 56 η. 171, 59 η. 182
16.857 172 18.316-317 58, 59 η. 180,60,61
17.37-38 171 18.316-323 55, 60
17.51-60 181 18.318 67
17.53 139, 187 η. 477 18.320 67, 147
17.208 128 η. 347 18.322 147
17.300-303 181 18.323 58, 60, 66
17.348-351 181 18.324 ff. 60, 145
17.408-409 138 18.324-325 144
Indexes 225
18.324-327 146 19.295 33
18.324-328 152 19.295-296 57, 140
18.324-332 143 19.295-300 50
18.324-342 28, 78, 143 19.296 141
18.328 144 19.297-298 142
18.329 80 19.298 82
18.329-332 78, 146, 152 19.298-299 82
18.330 80 19.300 163
18.330-331 69 η. 216, 146 19.301-302 64, 65, 67
18.330-332 69 η. 216 19.302 67
18.332 80, 146, 190 19.303-308 149
18.333 147, 148 19.306-307 176 η. 457
18.333-335 80, 81 19.314 55, 56, 57
18.333-342 143 19.315 33, 34
18.334-337 148 19.315-321 45, 50
18.335 80 19.315-337 28, 42, 44, 49, 86, 140, 148
18.337 147, 148 19.316 35 η. 117, 149
18.339-340 148 19.321 43
18.354 148 η. 407 19.321-327 50
18.355 66, 148 η. 407 19.322 150
18.365 121 η. 329 19.323 86
18.437 103 η. 283, 139 19.324 86
18.437-443 138 19.326 86, 151
18.438 103 η. 283 19.326-337 148 η. 408
18.441 80 19.328-337 50
18.491-496 84 η. 254 19.329 86, 152, 189
18.493 ff. 5 η. 21 19.329-330 151
18.567 5 η. 21 19.330 86, 151
18.604-606 3 η. 12 19.332 86
19.29 155 19.336 86
19.59-60 163 19.337 150, 189
19.155-172 149 19.338 32 η. 114, 67
19.205-237 149 19.338-339 56, 64, 65, 67
19.282 57 19.339 67
19.285 60 19.407 62 η. 194
19.286 55, 56, 57 20.31 65 η. 200
19.287 33, 33 η. 115, 34 20.92 141
19.287-289 50 20.112 62 η. 194
19.287-300 28, 37 η. 123, 44, 49, 82, 139, 20.191-194 141
189 20.381-392 181
19.288-289 44 20.401-406 181
19.289 82 η. 248 20.407-418 181
19.290-294 44 20.445-447 126 η. 346
19.293 33 21.34-44 38 η. 126
19.293-294 162 η. 436 21.57-58 38 η. 126
226 Indexes
21.76-79 38 η. 126 22.468-472 129 η. 349

21.176-177 126 η. 346 22.472 124
21.179 121 η. 329 22.476 55, 56, 57
21.277-278 138 22.477 96
21.377 62 η. 194 22.477-478 30 η. 106, 130
21.418 62 η. 194 22.477-514 28, 40, 94, 95, 98, 103, 129
21.434 62 η. 194 22.478 96
22.38-76 68 η. 210 22.479 96, 141
22.39 151 22.480 96
22.42 132 22.481 124, 155
22.44 ff. 154 22.482 96
22.45 38 η. 126 22.482-485 133 η. 365
22.82-89 155 22.483 96
22.84 ff. 124 η. 341 22.485 30 η. 106,96, 97
22.86-88 155 22.486 97
22.86-89 132 22.488 97
22.98-130 128 22.496 ff. 134
22.101-102 128 η. 348 22.498 131, 132
22.145 125 22.507 133 η. 365
22.165 126 22.508-514 132
22.208 126 22.509 132
22.251 126 22.513 133
22.363 172 22.515 64
22.405-407 129 η. 349 23.8 175
22.414-415 55, 58,61 23.10 174
22.416 151 23.14 175 η. 454
22.416-428 28, 43, 68 η. 210, 151 23.17 27 η. 101, 56 η. 171, 171 η. 446
22.421-428 154 23.18 59 η. 183
22.422 153 23.19 60 η. 186
22.426 43 23.19-23 8 η. 36, 27 η. 101, 172 η. 446
22.427 175 η. 453 23.29 29 η. 103
22.427-428 44 23.56-65 142
22.428 37 η. 125, 130 23.83-84 152
22.429 32 η. 114,61,64 23.84-90 70 η. 216
22.430 13, 55, 57, 59 η. 182 23.97 175
22.431 39 η. 131, 155 23.98 174
22.431-436 28, 45, 154 23.100-101 119
22.434-436 156 23.106 14, 173 η. 450
22.435-436 45 23.108 172
22.436 156 η. 426 23.109 173 η. 449
22.437-438 64, 65, 67 23.110-126 187 η. 478
22.440 132 23.153 172
22.459 125 η. 343 23.154 173 η. 449
22.460 128 η. 347, 130 23.157 14 η. 64, 174, 175
22.466-467 57 23.225 56 η. 170
Indexes 227
23.816-817 126 η. 346 24.731 106, 133 η. 365
23.826 ff. 123 η. 337 24.732 104
23.827 122 η. 335 24.732-734 134
24.55 62 η. 194 24.732-740 46, 134
24.83 ff. 174 η. 451 24.733 104, 106
24.84-86 174 η. 451 24.734-735 134
24.92 144, 145 24.735 104, 106, 135
24.123 56 η. 170 24.736-739 133
24.131 80 24.737 135
24.208 176 24.738 135
24.211 176 24.739 135, 190
24.224 145 24.740 38, 135
24.224-226 144 24.740-742 107
24.227 174, 175 24.741 38, 135
24.416-423 158 24.741-745 46, 133, 134
24.486-487 153 24.742 38, 135
24.495 154 24.743 135, 156
24.499 152 24.743-745 108
24.499-501 152 24.745 135
24.501 153 24.746 64, 65
24.503 153 24.747 55, 57,59 η. 182
24.507 80, 172, 173, 174 24.748 33, 34, 38, 46, 161
24.508-513 173 24.748-750 158
24.511 80 24.748-759 28, 38, 46, 158
24.513 172, 173 24.749-750 157
24.540-542 80 24.751-753 159 η. 429
24.602-607 122 η. 333 24.754 38 η. 126
24.605-606 160 η. 430 24.754-756 38
24.717 175 η. 454 24.754-758 159
24.719-720 156 24.756 160
24.719-722 2, 5 24.759 160
24.720 5 η. 22,31 η. 110,71 24.760 64, 65
24.721 4 η. 12 24.761 55, 57, 59 η. 182
24.721-722 4 24.762 33, 34, 100
24.723 59 η. 182,61,63 24.762-766 47, 100
24.723-724 55, 58, 59 η. 180 24.762-775 28, 39, 42, 47, 99
24.724 60 η. 183 24.763 100, 164
24.725 39 η. 131,62, 189 24.763-764 99 η. 275
24.725-726 103, 106 24.764 43, 100, 161 η. 434, 165 η. 444
24.725-727 133 η. 365 24.767 39, 101
24.725-732 46, 134, 135 η. 369 24.767-772 47
24.725-745 28, 46, 103, 133 24.768 101
24.728-730 133 η. 365 24.771 101
24.729-730 133 24.771-772 39, 101
24.730 104 η. 286 24.773 47, 102, 163
228 Indexes
24.774 102 9.65 151 η. 415

24.775 102 10.457 121 η. 329
24.776 32 η. 114, 64, 65, 69 η. 214 10.590 121 η. 329
24.802 29 η. 103 11.172-173 160
11.198-199 160
Odyssey 11.580 121 η. 329
1.9 78 13.356 124 η. 339
3.53 121 η. 329 15.410-411 160
3.267-271 7 η. 29 17.240 124 η. 339
3.279-280 160 19.516 56 η. 171
4.17-18 7 η. 29 22.330-353 7 η. 29
4.17-19 3 η. 12 24.27 124 η. 339
5.123-124 160 24.47 ff. 137 η. 377
7.274 56 η. 170 24.58-62 4-5, 6 η. 27, 7
8.73-82 7 η. 29 24.59 5
8.266 ff. 7 η. 29 24.60 5 η. 22, 71
8.499-520 7 η. 29 24.317 56 η. 170
Indexes 229
III. Index of Greek Words
άγαθός 116-117 γυνή / γυναίκες 27 η. 100, 56, 57, 84 η.

άγανός 39,47,101,160 254
άγανοφροσύνη 39,47,101
άγω 77,82,86 δαήρ 33,35,161
άδινός 27 n. 100,55,56 n. 171,61,96 δάκρυ 59,121 η. 329
άείδω 83 n. 252 δειρή 60
αιδώς 115,118,120 n. 326 (ΰπο)δέχομαι 89
αίνόμορος 124,155 δημιοεργοί 7
αΐόλαι εύλαί 132 δήμος 27 η. 100,56 η. 168
άλγος 24 η. 95,38,135-136,153,154 δυσάμμορος 30 η. 106, 33, 37 η. 125,
άλίαστος 65 η. 200 130.154
αλιος 114-115,143-145 δυσαριστοτόκεια 37,38,138,155
άλοχος 104 η. 286 δύσμορος124
άμβατός 124 η. 341 Δΰσπαρις 37 η. 125
άμβλήδην 56,57,58
αμμορος102 έγώ / έμέ / μοι / έμφ 41, 91, 95, 96,100,
άμΰσσω 60 102.155
άμφιθαλής 132 έλεαίρω 120 η. 326
άναστενάχομαι 66,148 π. 407 ενάργεια 82
άνδροφόνος 58 η. 179,63 ένίπτω 101
άνήρ 39 η. 131,46,83 η. 252,135 η. 371 εξαρχος 3,4 η. 12,71
άοιδή 3,4 η. 16 (έξ)άρχω 5 η. 21,27 η. 100,31,55,61,69
άοιδός 3,4 η. 17,7 η. 29 έπίδρομος 124 η. 341
άποδημία 85 έπιθαλάμια 83 η. 252
αποθνήσκω 30,44 έπιπροέηκα 88-89,139
"Αργός 86 έπιστενάχομαι 59,64,66
αρχή 46 η. 143 επος 39,47,54 η. 162,101,108,144-145
άσσον 175 έπομαι 104,106
άσύφηλος101 έρινεός 125
άφθιτος 150,186 ερνος 139
άχνυμαι 57 η. 174,102,154 έταΐρος 33,34,35,57 η. 174,59
άχος 6,68,91,154 εύχομαι 13
βαίνω 77 ζωός 30,44,156
γαία 80,81,90 η. 265 θάνατος 79

γάμος 84 η. 254 θεός 156
γέρων / γέροντες 27 η. 100 θρηνέω 3
γόης 31 θρήνος 2,3,4,6,7,32
γόος 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 η. 36,16, 21, 27 η. 100, θρηνφδός 2 η. 7
61,74 η. 232,171-172 θυμός 24 η. 93, 33, 34, 94 η. 270,120 η.
γοάω 57, 58,66 η. 205,148 η. 407 326
230 Indexes
ίκάνω 77 όλβος 7
όλοφύρομαι 5
κασίγνητος 120 όμοιος / ομού 152
κεχαρισμένος 33,34 ομφαλός 46 η. 143
κηδεία 30 όπλοποιία 137,139,148
κλαίω 56, 57 η. 174, 66 η. 205,102,154, όφέλλω 43
174 η. 451,176 όχοΰμαι 106
κλέος 6,8,25,36,45,68,74,80,108,150,
186 παις 35,94
κλισίη 34, 35 η. 117 παιάν / πάον '(α) 5 η. 21,83 η. 252
κωκύω 66 η. 205 παρθένοι 83 η. 252
παρακοίτης 120
λείπω 77,106-107,135 πατήρ 131
λευκώλενος 62,63 πένθος 6,68
λέχεα 156 περίδειπνον 28 η. 103
λίνος 5 η. 21 πήμα 24 η. 95,154
λιτή 151 η. 416 πλείστον 33
λυγρός 38,135-136 πλήττομαι 59,60
πολϊται 27 η. 100
μαιναδισμός 130 πολύ 33
μαινάς 128 η. 347,130 πολύδωρος 124
μαίνομαι 128 η. 347,130 πρίν 81
μακαρισμός 130,132 πρόθεσις 6 η. 27,156
μετέφη 13 πρόσωπα 60
μετοικεσία 85 πυκίν' (α) 67,108
μήνις 135 η. 371
μνήμα 24 η. 95 ρίπτω 104,106
μνησάμενος / μνησάμενοι 56
μοιρολόι 40 η. 132, 57,85 η. 256 σημα 24 η. 95,124
μΰθος 68 η. 211 Σκύρος 86
μύρομαι 14 η. 65, 40 η. 132,154,173 η. στεναχίζω 56 η. 170
449 στενάχω 56,64,69 η. 213,72 η. 225
μυρολογώ 40 η. 132 στένω 64,66 η. 205,72 η. 225
στήθεα 59
νέομαι 86 στονόεις 4
νόμος 46 σφρηγίς 46 η. 143
νοστέω 78, 89 σύ / σέ / σεϊ' / σέθεν / σέο / σεΰ / ση / σοί
νόστος 8,25,78-79,80,135 η. 371 / σοΐς 38 η. 126, 39, 91, 95, 96, 97,
νόστιμος 78 100-102,104
νύμφαι 124 η. 339
τε 3
οδύρομαι 57 η. 174,107,154,173 η. 449 τέκνον 39 η. 131,104 η. 286,155
οίκος / οΐκαδε / οϊκόνδε 68,89,130 τελέω 114,144
οίμώζω 66 η. 205 τέρπομαι 175 η. 452
οίος 113,151-152 τίθημι 82,107
Indexes 231
τιμή 68 Φθία 86,149-150,186

τρις 126 n. 346 φίλτατος 33,34,38
τριτάτη 55 n. 164
Τροίη 102 χθών 91,119
χολωθείς 148
ύμέναιος 5 n. 21,83 n. 252,84 n. 254,85
ύπερήνωρ 116 n. 319 ώδ' (ε) 93,116 η. 316
ύστερος 147-148 ώς 93,116 η. 316
ώκύμορος / ώκυμορώτατος 62 η. 193,
189

Christos Tsagalis Epic Grief

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Christos Tsagalis Epic Grief

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Christos Tsagalis

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York

Library of Congress - Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek

Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deut-

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

Martin, Nanno Marinatos, Heinz-Günther Nesselrath, Philippe Rousseau

Chapter 1 Reading Madie Lament

1. Death in the Iliad 1

Chapter 2 The Typology of the Illiadic γόοι

2.1. Introductory Remarks 27

Chapter 3 Introductory and Closing Formulas

3.1. Speech-formulas, speech-classification and γόος-speeches 53

3.3.1. Single-verse closures 64

Chapter 4 Distance, Separation and Mors Immatura:

4.1. Distance and Separation 75

Chapter 5 Intratextual Readings

5.1. Introductory Remarks 109

5.8.1. Iliad 22 154

Appendix I Privileged and Unprivileged Dead

1. Unreported γόοι in the Iliad 171

Appendix II Short obituaries in the Iliad

1. Introductory remarks 179

Editions, Commentaries, Concordances, Grammars, Léxica 193

General Index 219

I. Death in the Iliad

funerals5, by short obituaries reported by the external narrator, by the

2. Γόοι and Θρήνοι

οι δ' έπεί είσάγαγον κλυτά δώματα, τον μέν επειτα

Here we have a clear description of one of the principal forms of lament,

peculiarity of the syntax in 721-722. As Willcock13 notes: " The relative

άμφί δέ σ' έστησαν κοΰραι άλίοιο γέροντος

θρήνεον- ενθα κεν οΰ τιν' άδάκρυτόν γ' ένόησας

scholars26 associate the performance of the θρήνοι with male hired

It is well known that 45% of the Iliad consists of speeches. Attempts to

a. Rethinking the Formula

The groundbreaking discoveries of Milman Parry37 opened up new areas

and theme as essential compositional devices of Homeric poetry would

(dictional or thematic) to authorial activity and, at the end of the day,

" Pucci (1987) 27.

should be considered textualized (i.e. bearing all the features pertaining to

Τρψησιν δ' 'Εκάβη άδινοϋ έξήρχε γόοιο (22. 430)

There are, however, more complex cases:

τοΐσιν δ' ευχόμενος μετέφη κρείων 'Αγαμέμνων (2. 411)

b. Using Textual Markers

πύργω έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε (6. 373)

•ψυχή έφεστήκει γοόωσά τε μυρομένη τε64 (23.106)

c. Thematic and Structural Typology

"Theme is a basic unit of content"67 but is in no way limited to the packing

nature of the γόος as a personalized lament by someone who is very close

Having established a thematic typology of all the Iliadic γόοι, we can

(such as the θρήνοι), but also differentiates between them according to

5. Genre and sub-genre

"Where there is style there is genre". This Bakhtinian maxim72 justly

Intertextual frames connect the reader with the treasury of intertextual

synchrony versus diachrony; as opposed to linguistic units, literary texts

" See Fishelov (1997) 68.

6. Defining the Iliadic γόοι

"Originality in generic composition can be treated under four categories, which

Which of these four categories does the Iliad employ in its

Scholars have scarcely treated the theme of lament in the Iliad as

al," either in ancient Greek literature alone or throughout the evolution of