UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Stesichorus and the epic tradition Maingon, Alison Dale 1978

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1978_A1 M33.pdf [ 21.12MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0100235.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0100235-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0100235-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0100235-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0100235-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0100235-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0100235-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0100235-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0100235.ris

Full Text

STESICHORUS  AND  THE  EPIC  TRADITION  by A l i s o n Dale Maingon M.A., University of S t . Andrews, 1970 M.A., University of Alberta, 1972  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department of Classics)  We accept t h i s thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May 1978.  Cc}  A l i s o n Dale Maingon, 1978  In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s  thesis  an advanced degree at the L i b r a r y I  in p a r t i a l  f u l f i l m e n t o f the  the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  s h a l l make i t  freely  available  for  requirements f o r  Columbia, I agree  that  reference and study.  f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e copying o f t h i s  thesis  f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s of  representatives.  It  i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n  this thesis for financial  gain s h a l l  written permission.  Department o f The U n i v e r s i t y  d-^SSlO } 4  o f B r i t i s h Columbia  2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  Date  not be allowed without my  i Abstract  In antiquity Stesichorus was l a b e l l e d "Homeric" by the commentators, but h i s innovation i n myth was also noted.  U n t i l the  discovery of fragments of h i s poems among the papyri from Oxyrhynchus there was l i t t l e material from which any conclusions could be reached regarding the poet's treatment of h i s inheritance from the epic tradition.  In t h i s dissertation,therefore , I have examined the new  evidence from the papyri with a view to assessing the poet's reliance upon that t r a d i t i o n i n both d i c t i o n and content, and the extent to which he was  innovative.  The poet's language at a morphological l e v e l i s seen to be almost i d e n t i c a l to that of epic, whereas at the l e v e l of phonology the i n t r u s i o n of a Western or "Doric" pronunciation has occurred.  The  poets adaptation of Homeric "formulae" reveals a prevalent tendency to avoid the r e p e t i t i o n of phrases commonly found i n the epic corpus by the introduction  of new, unprecedented word-associations.  In chapter VI a detailed examination of four of the fragments of  four poems,(the Nostoi, the Sack of Troy, the Geryoneis and the  Suotherae) indicates the ways i n which the poet adapted thematic elements from the epic t r a d i t i o n , amalgamating epic with non-epic , conventional with o r i g i n a l material. The second h a l f of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n i s devoted to Stesichorus' treatment of the inherited body of Greek myth.  In those poems i n which  the poet was concerned with the legends of mainland Greece, innovations appear , with the exception of the Palinode, structure of the myths.  not to a l t e r the basic  However, there i s evidence of the poet's  i n t e r e s t i n elaborating upon or inventing legends located i n the Greek  ii  west, notably i n poems r e l a t i n g the exploits of Heracles, but also i n h i s orestela  and Sack of Troy.  In so doing the poet would create or  give authority t o a body of myths s p e c i f i c a l l y relevant t o h i s western audience.  iii Table of Contents Page Abstract  i  Table of Contents  i i i  Abbreviations and Texts  A  v  Acknowledgement  v  Chapter I  Stesichorus, Homer's h e i r i n the Greek west.  1  Chapter I I  Stesichorus  Chapter I I I  Verbatim adaptation of Homeric "formulae" i n Stesichorus.  53  Stesichorus' modification of "formulae" from Homer.  82  Chapter IV Chapter V  1  "mixed" d i a l e c t .  13  "Formulaic" expressions that are found i n non-Homeric e p i c .  137  Chapter VI  S t r u c t u r a l patterns derived from epic.  157  Chapter VII  Stesichorus' adaptation of myth from the epic t r a d i t i o n .  234  Chapter VIII  Heracles i n the poems of Stesichorus .  265  Chapter IX  That infamous Palinode .  300  Chapter X  The Sack of Troy_ .  330  Chapter XI Bibliography  Conclusion .  355 361  iv  Abbreviations and Texts  Throughout t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n I have referred to the e d i t i o n of Stesichorus' fragments made by Page i n Poetae M e l i c i Graeci (Oxford, 1962) i n the abbreviated form PMG.  The new fragments have been c i t e d  according to t h e i r number i n the Oxyrhynchus Papyri  volumes,published  by the Egypt Exploration Society,in the form P.Oxy. : thus the fragments of the Geryoneis are designated P.Oxy. 2617.  The texts of the I l i a d ,  Odyssey and the Hymns are derived from the Oxford C l a s s i c a l Texts s e r i e s , Homerl Opera v o l s . I-V, edited by Munro and A l l e n . are derived from  The texts of Hesiod  Solmsen's e d i t i o n , Hesiodi Theogania, Opera e t Dies,  Scutum (Oxford, 1970)  while the fragments are c i t e d as i n Fragmenta  Hesiodea, edited by Merkelbach and West (Oxford, 1967) by the l e t t e r s  and so indicated  M.&W.  Other abbreviations employed are as follows: ABFV; J.Boardman, Athenian Black-Figure Vases (London, 1967). ABV  : J.D.Beazley, A t t i c Black-Figure Va3e-Painters  ARV  j J . Beazley,  DK  (Oxford, 1956).  A t t i c Red-Figure Vase-Painters  (Oxford, 2nd ed., 1963) . : H. Diels and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (Berlin,  GLP  6th ed., 1952). : F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen H i s t o r i k e r (Leiden, 2nd ed., 1957). : C.M.Bowra, Greek L y r i c Poetry (Oxford, 2nd ed., 1961).  LGS  : D. Page, L y r i c a Graeca Selecta (Oxford, 1968).  FGH  LSJ : Liddell-Scott-Jones, A Greek - English Lexicon (Oxford, 9th ed., 1940). OCD : N.G.L.Hammond and H.H.Scullard, The Oxford C l a s s i c a l Dictionary (Oxford, 2nd ed.1970). PLF : E.Lobel and D.Page, Poetarum Lesbiorum Fragmenta (Oxford, 1955). SLG s D.Page, Supplementum L y r i c l s Graecis (Oxford, 1974). A l l Journals are referred to i n the conventional abbreviations found i n L'Ann^e Philologjque.  V  Acknowledgements  I  wish  to thank  encouragement also  H.G.  throughout  i n d e b t e d t o Mrs  helpful  Edinger  comments  for his diligent  the w r i t i n g  E.A.E. Bongie  i n the  final  of t h i s  and A . J .  stages of t h i s  guidance  and  thesis.  I  Podlecki  for  work.  am their  Chapter I  Stesichorus, Homer's heir i n the Greek west. E t a a u x o p o v , e c n t X n & e s d u e x p r t t o u OToya M o t i a n s , e x x ^ p t a e v K a x c f v a s a C S a X c J e v 6dne6ov oZ xaxa nudaydpayipwaLxav (pcfxtv a i t p t v ' O u n p o u 4»uxc\ e v t a x £ p v o u s 6 e v 5 x e p o v < i i , x J a a x o .  AP VII  75.  Stesichorus was the f i r s t eminent l i t e r a r y figure to emerge from, the western Greek world and to make such an impact on the c u l t u r a l centres of the Greek mainland that h i s works were ensured preservation for posterity.^"  The poems that brought him fame were primarily h i s  arrangements of epic themes t o be performed t o the accompaniment of the 2 lyre:  hence e p i c i carminia onera l y r a sustinentem. The surviving  t i t l e s and fragments give us a f a i r i n d i c a t i o n of the extent and l i m i t a t i o n s of the poet's new approach to heroic poetry. Although he may well have been preceded by Terpander (and others unknown) i n the invention of musical settings f o r the t r a d i t i o n a l epics, h i s poems on epic themes appear to have been d i s t i n c t i v e i n t h e i r completely " l y r i c a l " form, composed as they were i n a t r i a d i c structure and adapted to nomoi f o r the l y r e .  Whether the number "twenty-six" quoted i n the  Suda r e f e r s t o volumes or t i t l e s known t o the author(s) of that lexicon, we known of only t h i r t e e n t i t l e s of poems on legends from the epic t r a d i t i o n s (Athla, Geryoneis, Helen, Palinode, Eriphyle, Europeia, I l i o u Persis, Cerberus, Cycnua, Nostoi, Oresteia I and I I , S c y l l a , Suotherae) and, i n addition to these, one or two poems composed on a less l o f t y plane, c l o s e r to the sentimental romance of the early "novel" (Calyce, Daphnis, Rhadine).  The poet's reputation i n antiquity was wide-spread,  i f we can believe Cicero :  (Stesichorus) qui frait Himerae, sed et est  et f u i t t o t a Graecia summo propter ingenium honore et nomine (Verr. II 2 23) .  2  The precise dates of the poet's l i f e are no more r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e to us than they were to our  predecessors, the p h i l o l o g o i of  the ancient world, nor are they of d i r e c t relevance f o r an appreciation of the poet's a r t i s t i c achievement.  West r i g h t l y c r i t i c i s e s the a l l - t o o -  hasty acceptance of the dates assigned by the Suda, Eusebius,et a l . ,  who  appear to follow a t r a d i t i o n that Stesichorus was born i n the 37th Olympiad 5  and died i n the 56th,  The comparative l a t i t u d e of the 4-year  Olympiad'  has been reduced to a misleadingly exact 632-556 B.C. i n many hand-books of Greek l i t e r a t u r e , w i t h l i t t l e j u s t i f i c a t i o n . ^  Of the various t r a d i t i o n s  claiming either that Stesichorus was the son of Hesiod, or that h i s death occurred i n the same year as Simonides' b i r t h , or that he was  Pythagoras'  contemporary, none can be divorced from the context of the l i v e s of other 7 l i t e r a r y figures whose dates are equally uncertain. A possible source for the Suda may have been a schematising l i t e r a r y h i s t o r y such as that of Apollodorus, i n which convenient synchronisations of poets' l i v e s 8 were made.  Apart from the evidence of the Parian Marble, which claims 9 '  Stesichorus came to Greece i n 485/4 B.C.,  chronological associations  point to Stesichorus' having been a l i v e and active i n the major part of the 6th century.  We f i n d allusions t o the poet's reaction to an  eclipse of the sun, to h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p with Phalaris, tyrant of Acragas, and to a connection with a c o n f l i c t between L o c r i and Croton, a l l of which may be f i r m l y placed i n the 6th c e n t u r y . ^  These a l l u s i o n s ,  together with Simonides' reference to Stesichorus i n a poem,^ outweigh the 5th-century date suggested by the Parian Marble.  The early  chronographers themselves produced chronological schemes of events i n 12 the Greek west which were widely discrepant.  There is,therefore,  l i t t l e point i n pursuing the matter of the poet's dates further i n the present context.  3  Nor i s there a single t r a d i t i o n concerning Stesichorus'>place of o r i g i n : Mataurus i n southern I t a l y , Himera i n S i c i l y , Pallantion i n Arcadia.^  The discussions of various scholars have proved that again  the evidence i s inconclusive.  The t r a d i t i o n of a Stesichorus ,trom :  14 Himera appears i n a number of ancient sources.  On the other hand,  West, i n the most recent compilation of the evidence, i s i n c l i n e d to see a more consistent t r a d i t i o n connecting Stesichorus with Mataurus i n  15 southern I t a l y .  In f a c t , from the scanty remains of biographical  information we can assume only that Stesichorus pursued a distinguished career as a poet i n the Greek west, associated with Himera i n p a r t i c u l a r , but also known to have t r a v e l l e d and resided i n southern Italy.  Just as h i s predecessors, the wandering bards and  rhapsodes,  gave r e c i t a t i o n s aj.1 over the Greek world, so Stesichorus must have carried h i s talents to the large c u l t u r a l centres of both S i c i l y and southern I t a l y , even to Greece i t s e l f , a n d hence there arose a number of t r a d i t i o n s from d i f f e r e n t quarters claiming association with the poet. For our present purpose we need only acknowledge the poet's presence i n the Greek west i n the 6th century. By the middle of the 6th century many of the o r i g i n a l Greek colonies of southern I t a l y and S i c i l y were f l o u r i s h i n g centres of commercial a c t i v i t y , f o r example, Syracuse, Zancle, Rhegion, Tarenturn, L o c r i , Croton, S y b a r i s . ^  Some of these c i t i e s had  themselves  established colonies, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the more westerly areas of S i c i l y ; Selinus, Himera and Acragas were colonies of colonies. Exploration had c a r r i e d the Greeks i n t o the western reaches of the Mediterranean, to the mineral wealth of Spain and to the shores of the  17 Atlantic  , so that not only the a g r i c u l t u r a l richness of the c i t i e s of  4  southern I t a l y and S i c i l y , but also t h e i r p o s i t i o n on the sea-routes t o the f a r west made them of c r u c i a l importance commercially to the states of the Greek mainland, p a r t i c u l a r l y Athens and Corinth.  As a r e s u l t of  t h i s commercial importance, the c i t y - s t a t e s of southern I t a l y and S i c i l y prospered and t h e i r prosperity i s duly witnessed by the magnificence of their public architecture and sculpture, t h e i r l o c a l l y produced coinage and pottery, together with the profusion of imported pottery of 18 high q u a l i t y .  I t has been noted that the s t y l e s prevalent i n the mid  to l a t e 6th century may have lagged behind the trends of Athens and Corinth, but t h i s f a c t i s by no means i n d i c a t i v e of i n f e r i o r q u a l i t y i n 19 the a r t i s t i c achievement of the western colonies.  The p a r t i c u l a r  tastes of the western .market, as much as the distance from the chief centres of a r t i s t i c a c t i v i t y i n the Aegean, may account f o r what appears to be a slower evolution i n forms.  I t i s important therefore to note  that prosperity^ i n the west i n the 6th century fostered a l i v e l y i n t e r e s t i n the preservation of the a r t i s t i c heritage of the mothercountry . We can assume that western i n t e r e s t i n i t s Hellenic inheritance was not r e s t r i c t e d t o the p l a s t i c arts alone.  The colonists s e t t l i n g i n  the west must have imported the traditional r e l i g i o n and myths of t h e i r forebears.  At any rate, c e r t a i n l y i n the 6th century there i s  evidence of strong t i e s preserved between the colonies i n the west  20 and the r e l i g i o u s centres of the mainland of Greece.  At both Delphi  and Olympia treasuries were b u i l t by c i t i e s such as Syracuse, Tarenturn, Sybaris and Gela.  From the l i s t s of v i c t o r s a t the Olympic Games we  know that athletes came from the west t o compete as early as 684 B.C., when a man from Syracuse i s recorded as having won the wrestling event.  5  In 576 B.C.  the f i r s t seven men  to f i n i s h i n the stadion foot-race were  from Croton, and Milon of that same c i t y was wrestlers seen a t Olympia;  one of the most remarkable  his v i c t o r i e s spanned s i x successive  21 Olympiads i n the second h a l f of the 6th century. at Selinus, Faestum and Si ±s r  The famous temples  , to name but three, were b u i l t i n honour  of d e i t i e s from the t r a d i t i o n a l Greek pantheon, t e s t i f y i n g to the  22 perpetuation of Hellenic r e l i g i o n i n the vrest. that i n the west i n the 6th century there was  I t seems, therefore,  economic expansion that  could have promoted the development of an independent western culture, but, perhaps contrary to expectation, we discover that there i s a d i s t i n c t tendency to turn t o and preserve the Hellenic c u l t u r a l heritage. Evidence of the importation of the Homeric and other epics into the west i s s l i g h t ; we must simply assume that as part and parcel of the way  of l i f e i n mainland Greece of the 8th and following  centuries the ubiquitous epics were brought to thennew land by the colonists who  continued to transmit them as verbal embodiments of the  excellence of panhellenic c u l t u r e .  Although we have no precise record  of the travels of the anonymous r e c i t e r s of the t r a d i t i o n a l epics, there i s some proof i n the western voyage of Arion around the l a s t quarter of the 7th century.  Herodotus recounts the story of t h i s poet;, who,  having  arrived at the court of Periander of Corinth from h i s native Lesbos,  23 l a t e r t r a v e l l e d to I t a l y and S i c i l y , where he amassed a great fortune. Herodotus' i n t e r e s t i n the t a l e l i e s i n the miraculous incident i n which Arion was  aided by a dolphin i n escaping the murderous hands of  fchescrew on h i s return to Corinth.  The t a l e does, however, substantiate  our assumption that bards could and d i d s a i l from Greece to the colonies  6  i n the west. improving  Arion appears to have t r a v e l l e d with the express purpose of  h i s f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n , carrying with him on the voyage h i s  l y r e and professional garb.  Another t r a v e l l i n g poet was Xenocritus of  L o c r i , who found h i s way to the mainland and became noted as one of a 24 group:-) of innovative musicians a c t i v e i n Sparta.  According to the 25  Parian Marble, Sappho spent time i n e x i l e i n S i c i l y . the west to take up residence i n Samos; take up residence i n the west.  Ibycus l e f t  Pythagoras l e f t Samos t o  Thus, i t was not uncommon for renowned  poets or philosophers to t r a v e l abroad.  The constant  sea-traffic  between Greece and the colonies made possible the importation of the singers of epic, so that i n the colonies as i n Greece i t s e l f , there were, one imagines, professional entertainers either r e s i d i n g i n one place or else following a c i r c u i t of performance around the major centres. The l i n e s of Antipater's poem quoted above r e f l e c t the general v e r d i c t of t h e ^ l i t e r a r y c r i t i c s of a n t i q u i t y upon Stesichorus. The poet was recognised as an imitator of Homer.  The p u b l i c a t i o n of  fragments of Stesichorus' poems discovered among the papyri from Oxyrhynchus, containing pieces i d e n t i f i e d as belonging to the Geryoneis, I l i o u P e r s i s , Eriphyle, Suotherae and Nostoi, now provides us with f a r more concrete material than was a v a i l a b l e to scholars before the 1950's 26 for a d e t a i l e d study of the poet's d i c t i o n and s t y l e .  In t h i s  d i s s e r t a t i o n , therefore, I propose t o examine the p o s i t i o n of Stesichorus as imitator of the epic t r a d i t i o n and as innovator, bearing i n mind the environment i n which he composed, namely the times of prosperity i n the west that gave r i s e to a f l o u r i s h i n g interest i n the a r t s .  We have  indicated that there was, on the one hand, a somewhat conservative tendency encouraging the preservation of the c u l t u r a l inheritance of  7  the motherland;  presumably Stesichorus i n his youth was exposed to  and influenced by the r e c i t a t i o n of the t r a d i t i o n a l epics.  On the other  hand, by the 6th century there may also have been some opposition to more conservative attitudes i n poetry.  Arion, who had gained a  reputation f o r c e r t a i n innovations i n l y r i c compositions, made an extremely successful tour of the western provinces.  The connection  between Xenocritus, known as a member of an innovative school of music a t Sparta, and L o c r i , where there appears t o have been some sort 27 of "school" of poetry  , again hints a t the importation of new ideas i n  composition into the west. Thus, i n the examination of the fragments of Stesichorus' poems I s h a l l consider the extent to which the poet i n h i s adaptation of epic material adhered t o the precedents of the epic t r a d i t i o n i n h i s use of language and myth derived from that t r a d i t i o n and the extent to which he endeavoured to r e v i t a l i s e an art-form that may have begun to stagnate through the constant r e p e t i t i o n of the same m a t e r i a l . The poet's choice of a new musical medium was i n i t s e l f a decisive movement away from the intoned d e l i v e r y of the t r a d i t i o n a l epic poems. Unfortunately, nothing has survived of the musical accompaniments to the >,poems of Stesichorus apart from comments such as that i n (piutarchj, 28 de Musica 7, about h i s use of the Harmatian nome  , so that there i s  l i t t l e t o be discussed on the subject of the poet's innovations i n musical accompaniment. The poet's innovations i n m e t r i c a l schemes .and the movement away from the purely d a c t y l i c measures towards the sophisticated d a c t y l o - e p i t r i t e schemes that are to be found in-Pindar's 29 Odes are the subject of an exhaustive study by M. Haslam* . There has not as yet, however, been published a comprehensive study of the poet's  8  treatment of language and myth i n r e l a t i o n to the epic t r a d i t i o n . the f i r s t part of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n , therefore, I s h a l l consider  In the  poet's d i c t i o n i n respect to h i s " d i a l e c t " (chapter II) and his use of "formulaic" expression  (chapters III,IV,V) whether imitated from known  Homeric phrases, modified from them, or t o t a l l y a l i e n to the epic convention.  By way  of a conclusion to the discussion of the poet's  use of language, I s h a l l devote a chapter to a d e t a i l e d examination of four fragments  that compares and contrasts t h e i r d i c t i o n and structure  with p a r a l l e l passages i n the epic corpus (chapter V I ) .  In the second  part of the d i s s e r t a t i o n I s h a l l consider the poet's adaptation of the t r a d i t i o n a l myths giving attention to some of the l e s s well-documented poems (chapter VII) and discussing i n d e t a i l his treatment of the hero Heracles  (chapter VIII), of Helen (chapter IX) and of the legend of the  Sack of Troy (chapter X).  I s h a l l be concerned i n p a r t i c u l a r  to note  where the poet i s consciously avoiding the r e p e t i t i o n of epic material and to suggest what might be the possible motivation f o r h i s innovations.  Footnotes to chapter I. 1  The Suda's information that the poet was o r i g i n a l l y c a l l e d T e i s i a s , whether or not correct, i s i r r e l e v a n t f o r the study of the poet's work since he was known .to antiquity as Stesichorus, e.g. by Plato, Pausanias, Cicero, Q u i n t i l i a n e t . a l . Of h i s predecessors i n the west we know the names of figures such as Xanthiis and Xenocritus, but of t h e i r works nothing has survived. Cf. A. Lesky, A History of Greek L i t e r a t u r e (translated by J . W i l l i s and C. de Heer,London, 1966) p. 151 and CM. Bowra, GLP p. 82 f f . G. V a l l e t , Rhegion et Zancle, (Paris, 1958) p. 312, suggests the p o s s i b i l i t y of a Locrian "school" of poetry, which i s not inconceivable, but lacks the support of external evidence.  2  Q u i n t i l i a n , Inst. Orat. X 1 62; c f . Longinus, De. Subl. 13 3, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Cens. Vet. 2 7, Horace, Odes IV 9 8, a l l a l l u d i n g to the epic content of Stejsichorus' poems.  9  3 On Terpander's musical setting f o r the verses of Homer, see §lutarchj, De Mus. 7. *» 1132 c. The c i t a t i o n of Chamaeleon's remarks on the "singing" of Homer , Hesiod, etc., made by Athenaeus XIV 620 c unfortunately does not name the "singer"> Chamaeleon was writing a work On Stesichorus, but t h i s does not exclude, the p o s s i b i l i t y of h i s c i t i n g Terpander. For a discussion of the nomes see M.L. West,"Stesichorus," C£ 21 (1971) pp. 309-311 ..and T.J. Fleming,"The musical nomoi i n Aeschylus' Oresteia," CJ 72 (1976) p. 222f. The Harmateion appears to have been adapted from an a u l e t i c acccmp&himent to a l y r i c a l one. The Tpuot mentioned by the Suda i s borne out by the evidence of the papyri. A t r i a d i c structure of strophe/antistrophe and epode may be seen i n the Geryoneis and the I l i o u Persia . There aiready existed a system of strophic responsion before Stesichorus' time, as i s witnessed by Alcman's Partheneion, but the Suda may well be correct i n " ascribing to Stesichorus the invention of a t r i a d i c m e t r i c a l structure. 4  On the authenticity of the Rhadine etc., there i s l i t t l e evidence to support either case. Page, PMG p. 137 endorses the views of H.J. Rose, i n "Stesichorus and the Rhadine fragment," CQ_ 26(1932)pp.82-89, i n which he argues that the fragment i n Strabo VIII 3 20 can be no e a r l i e r than the Alexandrian era. V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p. 284ff., sees i n these fragments (=»PMG 277, 278, 279) traces of popular S i c i l i a n t a l e s .  5  West, a r t . c i t . , p.  302.  2 6  For example, Bowra, GLP p. 74, or H.Smyth, Greek Melic Poetry, (New York, 1963) p. 255. Many, such as Rose, i n h i s Handbook of Greek L i t e r a t u r e (London, 1965)p. 108, q u a l i f y the magic numbers 632-556 with an "approximately".  7  On Stesichorus, son of Hesiod, i n A r i s t o t l e f r . 565 and Philochorus 328 F 213, see West, a r t . c i t . , pp. 304-305. Some scholars have associated the t r a d i t i o n of Hesiod's being the father of Stesichorus with the Pindaric (?) epigram quoted by the Suda, under TO *Haco6eC*ov YnpoiS, that refers to Hesiod's longevity and rejuvenation. For a f u l l discussion of t h i s see M Kay, "Hesiod's rejuvenation," CQ^ 9 (1959) pp. 1-5. According to Thucydides, H i s t . I l l 96, there was a Locrian t r a d i t i o n that Hesiod died there, which West takes together with other a l l u s i o n s to r e f l e c t Stesichorus' s p e c i a l association with I t a l i a n L o c r i ( a r t . c i t . , pp. 304^305). The father-son r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two poets seems to betray signs of popular legend and the tendencies of l a t e r chronographers et al_. to make convenient synchronisations of the l i v e s of poets. S i m i l a r l y , Tzetzes* declaration (Vit. Hes. 18) that Stesichorus was a contemporary of Pythagoras looks l i k e a useful synchronism of eminent figures i n the Greek wes.t, but may i n f a c t be closer to the truth than i s generally believed.  8  See F. Jacoby, Apollodors Chronik (Berlin, 1902) pp. 196-200.  9 I t i s recorded on the Parian Marble that Stesichorus arrived i n Athens i n the year 485/4 B.C., the year of Aeschylus' f i r s t v i c t o r y and of Euripides' b i r t h , when Philocrates was Archon.(Note the rather patent synchronisation of important events concerning l i t e r a r y figures.)  10  A p l a u s i b l e suggestion f o r the l a t e r date f o r Stesichorean chronology i s proposed by W. F e r r a r i , i n "Stesicoro Imerese e Stesicoro Locrese," Athenaeum;15( 1937) p. 235 f f . , where he points out that the dichotomies i n chronology and place of o r i g i n may have resulted from a double t r a d i t i o n of Stesichorus' dates, rather than from there being two poets of the same name , as was argued by Wilamowitz i n Sappho und Simonides (Berlin, 1913)pp. 233,234. 10  11  P l i n y , NjH.II 54 and Plutarch de Fac. i n Orbe Lun.19 (=PMG 271) record that Stesichorus was profoundly affected by a t o t a l e c l i p s e of the sun which may be i d e n t i f i e d as that of 19th May, 557 B.C.; c f . West, a r t . c i t . , p. 306. The connection with the tyrant Phalaris i s mentioned i n an anecdote repeated by A r i s t o t l e , Rhet.II 1393 b. Phalaris' dates may be placed ca.570/65 and 554/49 B.C. (OCD). On the problems of S i c i l i a n chronography, see note 12 below. I t has been argued by some scholars (e.g. F. S i s t i , "Le due Palinodie d i Stesicoro," Studi Urbinati 39 (1965) p. 313 and A.J. Podlecki, "Stesichorea," Athenaeum 49 (1971) p. 316 f.) that the legend appearing i n Pausanias I I I 19 11 and Conon N a r r . x v i i i i n which Stesichorus i s informed of the cause of h i s blindness by one of the generals of the Crotonians a f t e r t h e i r defeat by the Locrians may r e f e r t o the c o n f l i c t between these two states known as the battle; of the r i v e r Sagra (Strabo V i 261» c f . J u s t i n , Epitome XX 2 3 f f . ) This b a t t l e i s thought t o have occurred between 560 and 540 B.C. : T. Dunbabin, i n The Western Gr,eeks (Oxford, 1948)p. 359 f f . , although P. B i c k n e l l believes i n an e a r l i e r date, "The Date of the B a t t l e of the Sagra River," Phoenix 20 (1966) pp. 294-301. PMG  564:  0*5 6oupl T t a V T O S v £ o u s » 6uvdevTci BaX&v "Avaupov ' ' O u e p i t o X u B ^ d T p u o s e £ ' I u i X x o y . OOTOJ yhp "Oynpos i f a e EtaaJxopos S e t a e X a o u s *  vCnaoe  These l i n e s give a^terminus antebuem, although no r e a l i n d i c a t i o n as to how much before Simonides Stesichorus l i v e d . The association of Stesichorus with Homer need not mean that Simonides thought he was of the same vintage as Homer. 12 For example;-, Antiochus applied a 36-year generation-count, while Ephonis one of 39 years, i n t h e i r calculations of the foundation-date of Syracuse which had been set as 7 generations of Gamoroi before Gel on. C f . R. van Compemolle, Etudes de chronologie et d'histoxiographie S i c i l i o t e s (Bruxelles, 1959) p. 59 f f . and J . Be'rard, La colonisation grecque (Paris, 1941)p.285."ff.. 13  The Suda gives Himera as the most l i k e l y place of o r i g i n , quoting other s u g g e s t i o n s ^ . Pallantion i n Arcadia. Stephanus of Byzantion, under McfxaOpos, says that t h i s was a Locrian colony i n S i c i l y ( ? ) and c a l l s Stesichorus MneToiiptvos.  14 The sources who specify that Stesichorus came from Himera are as follows: Plato, Phaedrus 243 a; Athenaeus XII 512 f . ; Pausanias II 22 6, Ix 11 1; Aelian VH 10 18; Cicero In Ver.II 2 34; {Plutarch de_ Mus. 7; the Suda under Stesichorus . Pollux Ix 100  c l a i m s t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s * tomb was a t Himera. A r i s t o t l e , Conon ( as i n note 10 above) and H i m e r i u s (Ori29 3) mention S t e s i c h o r u s as b e i n g r e s p o n s i b l e f o r g i v i n g t h e p e o p l e o f Himera a d v i c e a g a i n s t t y r a n n y , a l t h o u g h t h e c o n n e c t i o n does not n e c e s s a r i l y imply t h a t S t e s i c h o r u s came from Himera. F i n a l l y t h e r e i s an i n s c r i p t i o n oh a fragment o f a Herm found a t T i b u r (I.G. 14 1231) t h a t r e a d s " S t e s i c h o r u s , son o f E u c l i d e s , o f Himera." 15  west, a r t . c i t . , pp.  302-304.  16  See, f o r example, A.R.Burn, The L y r i c Age o f Greece (London, 1967) p. 143 f f . ; Dunbabin, o p . c i t . , c h a p t e r s I I , I I I , X ; V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p. 139 f f . .  17  See Herodotus H i s t . IV 152; V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p . 87 f f . ,  18  See Burn o p . c i t . , p. 151 and M . I . F i n l e y , A n c i e n t S i c i l y (London, 1968) p . 29 f f . , On t h e s p l e n d i d D o r i c temples o f t h e 6 t h - c e n t u r y , see f o r example, G. R i c h t e r , A Handbook o f Greek A r t (London,1969) p. 28 f f . Imported p o t t e r y was m o s t l y C o r i n t h i a n u n t i l the b e g i n n i n g o f t h e 6 t h c e n t u r y , when t h e A t h e n i a n work-shops began t o dominate western markets; see M. R o b e r t s o n , i n "The V i s u a l A r t s i n G r e e c e , " i n T.he Greek World, ed. H. L l o y d - J o n e s (Harmondsworth, 1965)p. 198 f . and f o r a d e t a i l e d account o f t h e i m p o r t a t i o n s i n t o Rhegion and Z a n c l e see V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p. 1 4 0 f f . . On c o i n a g e , see F i n l e y , o p . c i t . , p . 35 'ff... .  c f . Berard,  o p . c i t . , p. 3 0 3 f f . and ..  19r On t h e p r o v i n c i a l i s m o f western a r t , s e e , f o r example, Robertson, o p . c i t . , p. 196 arid 199, Burn, o p . c i t . , p. 151. p o t t e r y workrshops, see V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p . 210 f f . .  On  local  20  See A.J.Graham, Colony and M o t h e r - c i t y i n A n c i e n t Greece (Manchester, 1964) pp. 25 and 30; on Syracuse*:! and C o r i n t h , see p. 143'iff •  21  On M i l o n , see D i o d o r u s IV 24 7 and Strab© VI 1 12. On t h e C r o t o n i a n s , see S t r a b o VI 1 12. C f . H . A . H a r r i s , Greek A t h l e t e s and A t h l e t i c s (London, 1964) p. 110 f f . .  22  Finley, op.cit.,  23  Herodotus, H i s t . I  24 25 26  (J>lutarchJ,  p.27. 24.  de Mus.9 (=1134 b) .  C f . D.L.Page, Sappho and A l c a e u s  (Oxford,  1955)  p.223 f f . .  The new fragments appear i n t h e f o l l o w i n g e d i t i o n s o f t h e Oxyrhynchus P a p y r i , p u b l i s h e d by t h e E g y p t E x p l o r a t i o n S o c i e t y i n London e d i t e d by E. L o b e l : F r . 2359(Suotherae) and f r . 2360 (Nostoi) i n P. Oxy. v . X X I I I ( L o n d o n , 1956)pp. 11-18. F r . 2617 ( G e r y o n e i s ) , f r . 2618 ( E r i p h y l e ) and f r . 2 6 1 9 ( I l i o u , P e r s i s ) i n  P.Oxy. v. XXXII (London, 1967)pp. 1-55. F r . 2803 ( I l l o u Persis) i n P.Oxy.v. XXXVII(London,1971)pp. 3-11. P.Oxy. 2359 and 2360 appeared before the p u b l i c a t i o n of Page's PMG i n 1962 and are therefore included i n that c o l l e c t i o n of the fragments of Stesichorus. The l a t e r fragments are c o l l e c t e d i n Page's SLG (Oxford, 1974)pp. 5-43. In SLG Page assigns P.Oxy. 2735 (published i n P. Oxy. v. XXXV (London, 1968) . .9-32)_to Ibycus, whereas West, "Stesichorus redivivus," ZPE 4 (1969) knd R. Fuhrer, "Zum 'Stesichorus redivivus'," ZPE 5 (1970)p. 15 f . believe that the fragment i s to be assigned to Stesichorus^ as was suggested by Lobel i n the e d i t i o princepSy possibly deriving from the. Helen; On account of the uncertainty of authorship I have not incorporated examples from P.Oxy. 2735 i n my'examination of the language of Stesichorus. 27  Cf. V a l l e t , o p . c i t . , p.  312.  28  See page 9, note 3.  29  M.W.Haslam, "Stesichorean Metre," QUCC  17 (1974) pp.  5-57.  Chapter II  Stesichorus' "mixed" d i a l e c t .  The new papyri of poems by Stesichorus are naturally disappointing i n t h e i r fragmentary nature.  One always hopes f o r the  discovery of a complete poem so that extensive study of a l l aspects of language and structure may be pursued.  As i t i s , the l i n e a r incomplete-  ness of the fragments necessarily c u r t a i l s the discussion of the poet's language, r e s t r i c t i n g i n p a r t i c u l a r discussion of those elements of syntax that l i e beyond the structuring of phrases.  Moreover, since the  l i n g u i s t i c evidence derived from the works of a single poet cannot be considered i n a vacuum, but rather must be considered i n comparison  and  contrast with other l i t e r a r y works from the period of composition, a farther l i m i t a t i o n the contemporary  i s imposed through the lack of evidence f o r much of  or near-contemporary  poets who may have influenced  or  have been influenced by, Stesichorus. As evidence f o r possible pre-r: cedents from o r a l epic we have the I l i a d and the Odyssey, together with a f a i r representation of Hesiod's works, but from the works of most other epic poets, continental or otherwise, we possess a mere handful of citations.  Early elegiac and l y r i c poetry, although hardly voluminous i n  i t s state of preservation, i s our only evidence f o r the l i n g u i s t i c or s t y l i s t i c a f f i l i a t i o n s of the poets of the Archaic period.  L i t t l e before  the Odes of Pindar can t r u l y s a t i s f y any scholar investigating the techniques of the early l y r i c poets, and hence any examination of the evidence that we do posses must remain open to further elucidation or contradiction upon the discovery of new evidence fromAscroe iE^9"0^^ ?  en  hoard of papyri lurking beneath the sands of Egypt. Since the d i c t i o n of the poets of the Archaic period does not belong to one invariable form of the Greek tongue, but rather to one or  more than one o f the l o c a l d i a l e c t s of the Greek-speaking aseas of the Mediterranean, any discussion of the language or d i c t i o n of a poet w i l l revolve around the d i a l e c t a l features found within h i s poetry,  whatever  the l i m i t a t i o n s imposed by i n s u f f i c i e n t evidence, the study of the d i a l e c t s of p r e - c l a s s i c a l l i t e r a r y figures i s j u s t i f i e d because of the use of d i a l e c t i n r e l a t i o n to the p a r t i c u l a r "genre" favoured by the poet i n question. The study of Greek d i a l e c t s has concentrated primarily on the evidence of i n s c r i p t i o n s , w h i l s t the equally complex problems of l i t e r a r y d i a l e c t have been somewhat neglected.  The new  papyri furnish those interested i n the development of the so-called l i t e r a r y languages with evidence of a more c e r t a i n nature than that which i s derived from the c i t a t i o n s of such l a t e r authors as Athenaeus, whose native A t t i c or Koine has obscured many of the l i n g u i s t i c phenomena belonging to the non-Attic d i a l e c t s . We ask ourselves What i s " d i a l e c t " . from the Mycenaean tablets  I n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence  onwards provides us with a r e l a t i v e l y  limited p i c t u r e of the d i a l e c t a l v a r i a t i o n i n the Greek tongue as spoken by the isolated communities of Greece from the 2nd millenium B.C., revealing a few t a n t a l i s i n g f a c t s regarding t h e i r temporal and s p a t i a l relationships through l i n g u i s t i c a f f i l i a t i o n s .  The d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e  d i a l e c t s i s a complex problem and can only be adequately understood .. : through elaborate systems such as the f a c t o r i a l analysis suggested by Coleman^".  The ancients,on the other hand,believed i n a highly  schematic, t r i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n of d i a l e c t i n t o Ionic, Aeolic  and  Doric,, a d i v i s i o n that derived from some misconceptions of t r i b a l d i v i s i o n i n the p r e h i s t o r i c period  and from assumptions based on the  approximate d i v i s i o n s of d i a l e c t a l a f f i l i a t i o n of l i t e r a r y figures i n the c l a s s i c a l period and l a t e r . . I t i s with caution therefore thafc,we  15  must approach statements such as that of the Suda, where i t i s asserted 3  that Stesichorus wrote i n the Doric d i a l e c t , and yet ultimately  i n the  study of' l i t e r a r y d i a l e c t i n the Archaic period we discover that i t i s s t i l l to some extents useful to r e l y on a schematic d i a l e c t a l d i v i s i o n . Recently i n the study of early epic i t has been suggested that the language of the Homeric epics, whose present form evolved a f t e r the migrations to the eastern sea-board of the Aegean,be considered  as  belonging to a d i s t i n c t d i a l e c t group designated as the Southern d i a l e c t group, i n contrast to the Northern dia&ect group which encompasses 4  both the continental epics and the d i a l e c t s known as A e o l i c . A t h i r d d i a l e c t group, the Occidental or Western, only appears as a d i s t i n c t entity i n the l i t e r a t u r e of the post-epic era.  For Southern d i a l e c t a l  features of-the? 7i/6th centuries iweccan f i n d testimony i n the works of Archilochus and Mimnermus, whose diction,although indebted to the Homeric epics, also exhibits features of t h e i r native Ionian d i a l e c t ^ . The Northern group i s c h i e f l y represented language of Sappho and Alcaeus .  at the l i t e r a r y l e v e l by the  Of the Western group, Alcman''s  Laconian vernacular i s the principal^evidence .  In his poetry i n  p a r t i c u l a r we can observe the admixture of elements from both Southern and Northern l i n g u i s t i c sources with elements of his native d i a l e c t , within the structure of a single work. I propose,therefore,  to examine the d i a l e c t a l features of the  language of Stesichorus i n the f i r s t instance i n r e l a t i o n to the features of the Western group, since t h i s corresponds approximately with the "Doric"dialect that was mentioned by the Suda and since one would expect the appearance of c e r t a i n Western l i n g u i s t i c features i n an area that was primarily "Doric"-speaking.  I s h a l l then  make a d e t a i l e d examination of l i n g u i s t i c elements that Stesichorus shares i n ccmmon with the language of epic, taking into consideration the question of the Northern-group features that have often been c a l l e d "Doric" u n t i l recent studies have demonstrated t h e i r 8  possible o r i g i n s i n continental epic . There are two points to which attention must be drawn i n preface to the discussion of d i a l e c t a l features i n l i t e r a r y works. F i r s t , l o c a l i n s c r i p t i o n s give us evidence f o r features of a locaL d i a l e c t at a p a r t i c u l a r time.  We must note,however, that poets do not  necessarily r e s t r i c t t h e i r expression t o t h e i r native d i a l e c t alone. i.n the case of choral l y r i c f o r example, one can sooner f i n d l i n g u i s t i c a f f i l i a t i o n s between the d i c t i o n of Pindar and Bacchylides than between the d i c t i o n of the poet and the d i a l e c t of his mother-state.  It is,  therefore important to d i s t i n g u i s h between l i t e r a r y d i a l e c t and d i a l e c t as t e s t i f i e d i n i n s c r i p t i o n s .  Secondly, the i n s c r i p t i o n a l  evidence a v a i l a b l e t o us dates p r i m a r i l y from the 5 t h century onwards, with the exception of the Linear-B t a b l e t s . Evidence from the Archaic period i s scanty, and yet i t i s f o r the poetry of t h i s period that scholars draw upon i n s c r i p t i o n & l material f o r d i a l e c t a l features.  This  evidence should therefore fee used with caution.  A.  Features from the papyri of Stesichorus that are found i n the Occidental or Western group. If we compare c e r t a i n phenomena occurring i n the poems of  Stesichorus with the standard features of the Western group of d i a l e c t s , as seen i n the language of Alcman, we discover that the term "Doric" might be l e g i t i m a t e l y used of c e r t a i n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c features of Stesichorus' language.  These features may be l i s t e d as follows:  9  i)  Phonology a) O r i g i n a l long alpha i s preserved throughout. b) Short alpha occurs where the equivalent i s short epsilon i n other d i a l e c t groups. c) The contraction of a * e to n , i n contrast to long alpha elsewhere. d) Dentals remain unchanged before i o t a , e s p e c i a l l y i n the 3rd person singular,of the present i n d i c a t i v e of athematic verbs, and i n the 3rd person p l u r a l of the present i n d i c a t i v e of thematic verbs. The preservation of o r i g i n a l long alpha was one of the  p r i n c i p a l d i s t i n c t i v e features of s o - c a l l e d l i t e r a r y Doric i n c l a s s i c a l times, presumably i n pronunciation and therefore orthography, although i t i s m e t r i c a l l y i d e n t i c a l to the long eta of Ionic.  The new  fragments of  Stesichorus' poetry contain over 60 examples of t h i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c feature, with only one exception: pnCri/vopa  2619 f r . 1  i  21.  Even i n  c i t a t i o n s of Stesichorus i n other authors the A t t i c i s a t i o n of the long alpha amounts to l e s s than 15%, which i s the lowest percentage the choral l y r i c p o e t s ^ . 1  for a l l  I t i s without doubt, therefore, that a n t i q u i t y  recognised the long alpha as a d i s t i n c t i v e t r a i t i n the language of Stesichorus, and accordingly where long alpha does not occur, the reason may  be a t t r i b u t e d to an error i n transmission. Short alpha i s witnessed  Qopav in  2803 f r . 11  "Aptayts 2619  i n uapav  2359 f r . 1  i i 6  6, ,:.£his form being the equivalent of Cepog  f r . 18  11 f o r '^ptepts .  , and  Other possible instances,  such as axepos^pr Tpanu.jhave not turned up i n the papyri as yet. quotation from the G&ryoneis c i t e d by Athenaeus, the MS diptxnd' Cepas TIOTL Bevdea VUXTOE epepvas PMG  and  185  3.  In the  records:  One may  postulate  an o r i g i n a l uxpSc., which has not been preserved i n the transmission, despite the "Doric" alpha of the g e n i t i v e singular of epepvas. Another instance of short alpha may  be seen i n 6'xot  2617  fr. 4  i i 15,  corresponding  to ^ « Te  The alpha caused the o r i g i n a l  labio-velar to become a p a l a t a l , thus producing the s u f f i x -Ha i n the western group of d i a l e c t s , whereas the a l t e r n a t i v e form with epsilon i n the southern group developed i n t o dental -T,C. In the fragments of Stesichorus we f i n d two examples of contraction of o + e to n : icotctu^n PMG  264 and 3$Vt.V*i. "2803  1.  fr.ll  Otherwise Stesichorus would appear to follow the epic convention of not contracting vowels of unequal length: hence 'AXxudov  2618  fr. 1  i  3 and  ECXaxu6ao  'AutpwEpaos PMG  179  2359 f r . 1  (b).  9,  i  I t i s no doubt  s i g n i f i c a n t , however, that the examples of non-contraction occur only i n proper names, derived from epic sources. In the f i n a l category of Occidental features l i s t e d above, the retention of the o r i g i n a l termination -TU occurs almost c e r t a i n l y i n exovxb  2617  fr.6  4 and possibly i n  3\»TV  2619  fr. 1  i  6,  the c i t a t i o n s present us with the a t t i c i s e d form Tt-dnai, PMG  whereas 22 3  4.  P a r a l l e l to the preservation of the o r i g i n a l termination in'TU i s the retention of the dental i n the second person singular;of the^, personal pronoun: TU as opposed to co . s o l i t a r y TUV  i n 2617  f r . 11  5.  Of t h i s feature we f i n d a  In view of the lack of further  evidence we assume, but cannot assert,that the dental form of the personal pronoun was normal i n Stesichorus. The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s considered i n the preceding paragraphs are those elements of phonology noted as d i s t i n c t i v e l y Doric by Thumb I f , however, we examine more recently compiled tables of d i a l e c t a l 12  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s , such as those which Risch, Coleman or P£vese present  ,  then we discover that the long alpha occurs a l s o i n the Northern group, namely i n the poetry of Sappho and Alcaeus, as well as i n the i n s c r i p t i o n s  from Thessaly also  and B o e o t i a .  occurs i n the  The  Lesbian  short  poets,  and the  retention  of-xc  a n d may  therefore  be p o s t u l a t e d  group  a s >;well a s  consider  affiliations  survive  group  of  solely with  Morphology  r e t a i n the  iota  c)  Pronouns  d)  Termination  e)  The  f)  Future passive with active  g)  Verbs  h)  Athematic  f)  preferred example  of  -ev>s h a v e  their  :  -5e<ji>.:  infinitive and  n  inscriptions  Northern therefore,  assuming that  to  the  their  group.?^  au,  dyes =  of  the  1st  in  Doric  have  their  declension.  singular in  -eoc.  nyeus  person p l u r a l of  the  active voice  is-yes.  f u t u r e : itpaSew. . endings.  guttural-stem characteristics.  infinitive in  these  throughout  genitive  TU=  so-called  -yev.  c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s we h a v e  no evidence f o r  categories  a n d g) . In  the  case of  to  the  Occidental genitive  epu£u)  Greek formation in  the  must pause,  before  the Western  Nouns  d) ,  later Boeotian  e to  d i a l e c t s as p o s s i b l e source f o r  b)  a)),  c o n t r a c t i o n of J a +  as c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of One  epsilon  ^  a) } c - s t e m n o u n s  Of  i n the  phonological features,  are  in  while the  the western group.  the Northern  above-mentioned  ii)  of  both  alpha alternating with  In  the  b),  2360 f r .  of  the  1  i  future  case of  h) ,  S t e s i c h o r u s shows  eC^etV;t'26i;9fr.l3  the  5 for  epic form  10  in  -eoj.  would  as opposed to for  the  BacuXrjos In  appear the  the to  termination  "to  be""!*^.  fr.  case of  of  x6  14 e),  the tTv  Doric  is the  confirm the  so-called  the u n p a r a l l e l e d forms the verb  2619  common future  athematic 2617  fr.4  We l a c k e v i d e n c e  i for  7  the i n f i n i t i v e s of other athematic verbs. I t appears to be only i n the case of c) ,2 pronouns, that we f i n d the western or "Doric" formations i n the morphology of Stesichorus' language: T U V 2617  fr. 1  i  21 and autv 2360 f r . l  i  3.  Thus, at the l e v e l of morphology, Stesichorus* d i a l e c t a l a f f i l i a t i o n s with the Occidental group are rather less obvious than at the l e v e l of phonology.  As we s h a l l see l a t e r , Stesichorus shows a  greater a f f i n i t y i n t h i s area with the language of epic. Unfortunately, an example of the d i s t i n c t i v e termination of the f i r s t person p l u r a l of the a c t i v e voice i s not found i n the fragments.  As a r u l e , l a t e r choral  l y r i c does not employ the Occidental -yes, but follows the epic and 15 common Greek -yev  . Alcman alone gives evidence f o r the use of -yes  i n a l i t e r a r y work, f o r example nctpnaoyes i n f r . l possible that Stesichorus, who  12, but i t i s  l i k e Alcman prefers the Occidental .:.  foscmation of the personal pronoun, also used -yes, although the l a t e r choral l y r i c poets.do inot.  One wonders i f Stesichorus might have been  more i n c l i n e d to employ Western forms i n passages of d i r e c t speech than i n narrative ones on account of h i s presumed background of spoken "Doric". Of the "Doric" features exemplified by the papyrus text of Alcman, several are notable by t h e i r absence i n Stesichorus, such as the nominative p l u r a l of the a r t i c l e , which i n the Occidental group of d i a l e c t s retains the tau:TOL and xau  . Although there are two  instances  of the spurious diphthong 0 being represented by to, as i n Alcman-, namely (ipovo'dev 2360 f r . l  i  3 and Y^vasoyai, 2617  fr.ll  4, the  accusative p l u r a l of O-stem nouns and of the a r t i c l e i s consistently represented i n the form - 0 0 s .  {  The text of Alcman,on the other hand,  contains forms i n omega with complete r e g u l a r i t y i n the  genitive  singular of feminine nouns i n -u>, i n the accusative p l u r a l of O-stem nouns, i n the accusative p l u r a l of O-stem nouns, i n cases of metrical lengthening, and i n l e x i c a l instances such as (twice)  S i m i l a r l y i n Alcman  for spurious diphthong  ,e  i n f i n i t i v e pa<y6cfvny f r . l  (Stimes) and &pav6$  there i s consistent appearance of  n  f o r example i n the form of the thematic  (eli),  88.  Mwaa  Iii the papyri of Stesichorus, however,  there i s one such example,(ptiynv  2617 f r . 7  i  2, but t h i s i s by no  means the norm There are several l e x i c a l items, considered to be of"Doric" or Occidental o r i g i n , which i t w i l l be convenient to mention here. a)  The conjunction at i s a feature of the Western group of d i a l e c t s ,  but i n f a c t also occurs i n the Northern group, i n f o r example Sappho and Alcaeus, as w e l l as i n the l a t e r i n s c r i p t i o n s of the Thessalian and Boeotian a r e a s ^ . b)  Although the partidlel x a does not i t s e l f occur i n Stesichomis, the  forms  itoxa  2617  fr.42 (b)  4 and  oxa  as opposed to x e or dfv might appear.  2617  fr.4  i i i 15, suggest that  Xo  Apart from i t s belonging to  the Western group of d i a l e c t s , - , x a occurs i n the Boeotian branch of the Northern group, but hot however m  19 the Lesbian poets,; .  c) In both alcman and Stesichorus instances of the "Doric" occur:  even before a consonant: hythv  AEYU> 2619  fr.16  d)  OIUTEU  6*a\!>  2619 fr.13  eywv  3 and  with nu hybi\>  8.  , the "Doric" variant f o r ctutod occurs i n 2619 fr.47  10.  Apart from the example of Alcman f r . l 79, the only evidence f o r t h i s form i s to be found i n t r a d i t i o n a l l y ascribed "Doric" i n s c r i p t i o n s . e) The,preposition  ueSdf  occurs i n the papyri of Stesichorus a t 2619 fr.21  3, while yeTd* appears i n the c i t a t i o n PMG 210.  The two forms are  l i n g u i s t i c a l l y unrelated, ne6d replacing the originayyexct i n an odd assortment of d i a l e c t s , as f a r as the i n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence goes: Lesbian, Boeotian, Arcadian, A r g o l i c , Cretan and Theran.  Some of the  Western group of d i a l e c t s preserve yexcf, f o r example Corinthian, but i n l i t e r a r y works  ite6di i s well established i n both Western and Northern 20  groups, occurring i n Airman, Sappho and Alcaeus f) The Occidental form itoxt appears t o have been preferred t o the alternative upds , occurring eleven times as opposed t o two. instances of the l a t t e r i n 2619 f r , l i i 6 and 2617 fr.4  The  13 may be  explained by the influence of the appearance of both forms i n epic. In t h i s case the Lesbian poets used  itptSs,  p a r a l l e l to the a s s i b i l i s a t i o n of  ?Tb to -au, whereas the l a t e r i n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence of the other two major branches of the Northern group give examples o f 21  itoxC  p a r a l l e l to  the usage i n the Western groups. . At the l e v e l of  lexicon  i n the language of Stesichorus one  would perhaps expect some evidence of l o c a l influence and the  '. - ,,  incorporation of vernacular words into poems, as i n the case of Alcman. Since, however, Stesichorus' material-Is derived from a more universal t r a d i t i o n , and since his compositions  were intended f o r a more universal  audience, thevConstSnt use of vernacular would not be appropriate, although i t s occasional use could have been turned to the poet's advantage i n terms of innovation.  In any case, the evidence of the papyri does not  indicate that Stesichorus i n c l i n e d towards the embellishment of his poetry with elements of S i c i l i a n vernacular. As f a r as the so-called Doric accent i n concerned , i t should be noted that the accent marks applied t o the texts of Stesichorus by  Alexandrian scribes were based on assumptions that the language of the poems was comparable to the "Doric" of l a t e r times with which the scribes were acquainted. There are no means b y which one may determine i f the peculiar c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the "Doric" pronunciation and the "Doric" intonation r e f l e c t e d by these accent marks are i n f a c t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the language of choral l y r i c of the early Archaic period, p a r t i c u l a r l y since the apparent rules of accentuation do not 22 seem to correspond to the apparent metrical phenomena  B.  Features from the papyri of Stesichorus that are shared with epic features. C r i t i c s both ancient and modern have commented upon the 23  "Homeric" nature-- of Stesichorus* poetry  .  I s h a l l attempt, therefore,  i n t h i s section to assess how f a r this "Homericness" l i e s within the phonological and morphological structure of Stesichorus' language, and how f a r this comment i s merely a r e f l e c t i o n on the poef's s t y l e , developed from the appropriation of words and phrases from the epic poems. The language of the Homeric poems has long been recognised as a composite one, manifesting elements that are a f f i l i a t e d to more than 24. one dialect-group  .  In terms of modern dialect-geography of the  GKeek language, these elements belong primarily to the Southern group of d i a l e c t s , the t r a d i t i o n a l A t t i c - I o n i c and Arcado-Cypriot groups, with a secondary admixture  from the! Northern group.  The fusion of features  from d i f f e r e n t d i a l e c t a l origins may have taken place at such an aarly period that, although the resultant "language" was not actually spoken i n any one area, i t would have been understood by members of different d i a l e c t a l areas. The  hypothesis of f a i r l y wide comprehensibility  can be more e a s i l y accepted i f indeed l i n g u i s t s are correct i n t h e i r asBumptions that there was less divergence between the various d i a l e c t s  25 i n the p r e h i s t o r i c period I s h a l l begin by l i s t i n g the d i s t i n c t i v e features of the  26 language of the Homeric poems, as suggested by Palmer , and then proceed t o consider those aspects of Stesichorus' language: .recoghisably derived from e p i c . i)  Southern gafoup Characteristics of Attic-Ionic a) O r i g i n a l long oivfco n. b) Movable nu. c) Prepositions not apocopised. d) Athematic i n f i n i t i v e with termination -vac . e) Secondary ending o f the 3rd person p l u r a l = -acxv. f) Potential p a r t i c l e i s  5v.  D i s t i n c t i v e l y Ionic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a) Complete change of o r i g i n a l long o t o i). b) Absence of contraction : -ea, -eo, -eto. c) ;:Treatment o f M with compensatory lengthening : Servos • d) Gen.sing, of masc. A-stem nouns i n -eco. e) Gen. p l u r . of masc. A-stem nouns i n -euiv. f) Analogical g e n i t i v e s :  3aoCAeo£ for BaauAe'ios  g) fnv f o r A t t i c eav, av. ii)  Northern group a) Labio-velars become l a b i a l s before f r o n t vowels: Tturupes . b) Doubling of consonants instead of compensatory lengthening o f vowels: auy e c) Patronymic adjective instead of genitive case: TEACIUISVCOS.  d)  ux for yu*.  e) Dative p l u r a l of the athematic declension i n -eaot. f) Double sigma ,aa from -xu§;»^§ir,-6t-. g) Athematic i n f i n i t i v e terminations: -yevctt,  -yev.  h) Potential p a r t i c l e i s xe. i)  -yu i n f l e c t i o n of contracting verbs: (puXnyb.  j)  Perfect p a r t i c i p l e with present p a r t i c i p i a l endings: eXqXtfdiov. Of the six points i n the f i r s t category, A t t i c - I o n i c ,  contradicted by Stesichorus' use of o r i g i n a l long alpha,  a)  is  b) and c)  are observed i n Stesichorus,movable nu appearing m o s t l y l i n the dative plural.  There i s no evidence f o r points d) and e)  , while i n view of the  occurrence of forms such as 5xa or noxa i t i s m o s t u n l i k e l y that we should f i n d 5,v rather than  xa.  Of the seven points i n the category of s p e c i f i c a l l y Ionic features only b) i s c l e a r l y i n evidencef observed i n xeCxeos2803 f r . 5 2617 f r . 4  ii  8.  the absence of confcraction may be  7, i n ito&eio  2619 f r . 1 6  12  and i n oorea  In the case of c ) , two examples from the;-papyri  contain long vowels betraying the loss of i n t e r n a l digamma: Tapudva yuivofcoyac 2617 f r . l l  -2, with,however,  the non-epic omega representing  the secondary long vowel, and oXeadvo'Pos atoXodetpou  2617 f r . 4  22.  Less c e r t a i n are two further examples from the c i t a t i o n s : xoupCSuxv x' aXoxov  PMG 185 A">, and Acos xoupa( gaauXeuauy) PMG 200  2.  In both  "these examples close p a r a l l e l s from epic may be responsible for the lengthened form, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the case of xoupi?6Lav, where a short vowel would be m e t r i c a l l y unsuitable i n d a c t y l i c verse. possible occurrences of the lack of compensation 223  2 and i n xopotts PMG 223  in  There are two  ydvag(  3, which show that there i s already the  ;PMG  26  tendency to neglect the o r i g i n a l digamma which became prevalent i n l a t e r choral l y r i c . Points d), f) and g) are contradicted by Western or other non-Ionic forms i n Stesichorus, and although  there i s no evidence f o r  e) , i t i s highly u n l i k e l y that t h i s Ionic form wouM occur. In the category of Northern features, we f i n d p a r a l l e l s f o r two of the ten c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p o i n t s .  There i s one instance of the use  of the patronymic adjective, namely ' O 6 \ 3 a e u o v 2360 f r . l another possible example i n Exayav6puov 2619  fr.27  i n - u 6 n s i s a l s o found in'Yrcepiovi6ctSPMG 185  fr.15 (b)  13.  2, with  The patronymic  1. W.8 f i n d two examples of  the dative p l u r a l i n -eaau: yaxapeaau deotau 2617 -ecrao npypjL 2619  4.  i  f r . 15  1  and i n  The former i s obviously reminiscent of  the epic formula which occurs s i x times i n the dative p l u r a l i n the Homeric corpus.  There are, however, f i v e examples of a normal dative  i n -cru i n Stesichorus, i n positions Where the form i n -eaau would have 27 been possible m e t r i c a l l y : xnpotv 2617 2617  27i^}pa*ctOLV  fr.13  noat? PMG  185  6  and  2619  fr.l  i  uSat Qeous, PMG  fr.13  \ \ 1; itepu Bouauv eyats  13; and from the c i t a t i o n s 223  2.  The c h a r a c t e r i s t i c doubling of consonants instead of compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel i n the treatment of consonant+sibilant  c l u s t e r s appears to be confined i n the Homeric poems  to forms of the personal pronouns.  As we have seen, the personal  pronouns i n Stesichorus appear to follow the Occidental pattern, ahd the sole example of a double-consonantal treabaeht ©ccurs i n the 28 anomalous case of xAesvvos' which M • s h a l l discuss l a t e r  .This  NiOrthern c h a r a c t e r i s t i c does not therefore generally appear i n Stesichorus.  Number f ) eaxtae 2617  There  i s no evidence  seems  t o be c o n t r a d i c t e d by words  2617  f r . 4  fr.18  Further  i i  remarks  declensions  on aspects of we c a n n o t  and conjugations  lack of conformity  indicates  that  where  common t o a l l G r e e k ,  i)  Thematic  0-stem  h),and  oiCav  such as  2,  and j)  by  i ) .  .'2617  fr.13  24  oXuXoxes  morphology. present from  with  a complete  we must  the Occidental  look  outline  the fragments  t h e i n f l e c t i o n does  the genitive  as epic  Alcman  does  form  and l a t e r  of  of  the  Stesichorus,  group  not belong  of  for  the  dialects  t o one  t o t h e e p i c poems  70% o f  s i n g u l a r we f i n d - o t o , as i n  -oo.  not occur.  seems t o h a v e about  g),  s&uxce'  precedents.  nouns.  peculiarly epic  well  PMG 1 8 1  d),  declension.  In the  8,xepaaas  a),  4.  Although  general  f o r points  ,  The Western  the shorter  the genitives  instances  Ava£cfv6pouor2'Q.8 f r . l contraction  From t h e evidence  preferred  i n Stesichorus  form  of  i i  8,  i n -w found  the fragments  a s compared w i t h  as  i n  Stesichorus  i n - o u , which accounts  o f O-stem nouns  of  for  the  29. Homeric  use of both One  from  assumes  epic precedent,  Occidental occurs  -o)Sr  admits  equal  frequency  the accusative plural  since thereiis not, the short  form  and t h e HOmeric  the case of  the use of both  epic one tends  with  that  or of  i n Hesiod In  In  forms  a t any r a t e ,  a trace  the accusative  plural,  early  Greek  and - o t s » as semantically  to find-ouxt  in  derives of  the  -os» which  Hymns.  the dative  -ouau  of  i n -ous also  before  a consonant  in  general  equivalent  and the shorter  3 0  .  -OL<S  before a vowel, as i f i t represented an e l i s i o n of-©tat.  In Stesichorus  the two examples of the longer form both bear the nu-ephelcusticon: Iv ueYcfpou0uv 2359 f r . l i  3  and 3 6 t x o u a u v 2617 fr.21 10.  In the  case of the A-stem nouns also, Stesichorus apparently prefers the longer form, with nu t o avoid hiatus where necessary.  Since the  Occidental group of d i a l e c t s seenfe to have employed the shorter form 31 alone  ( a t l e a s t as f a r as the l a t e r i n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence indicates)  we must a t t r i b u t e the use of the longer form i n Stesichorus t o epic influence and t o the greater convenience of that form i n d a c t y l i c metres. A-stem nouns. In the genitive singular masculine , we f i n d one example of the r e l a t i v e l y rare epic form i n -ao.  EuXattSao  6cn,'q>povos 2359 f r . l  i 9.  Since the epithet accompanying the proper name i s also derived from 32 epic, the use of the epic genitive i s hardly surprising i n i t s context . The Occidental equivalent, which contracts to "3, does not occur i n Stesichorus"^. Stesichorus appears to have employed the dative p l u r a l with more frequency than -otus. the epic  -ntai,  -auau  One suspects that -auou simply represents  with the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c long alpha f o r eta, rather than  the possible formation from short alpha.  There i s no evidence of  "Doric" -^aoi,. I f we are correct i n supposing that i n 2619 f r . l  i  16-17,  eiSpuoptot belongs t o the common epic eop:\I6iit6i j Zed's/ then we may c l a s s t h i s as an instance of borrowing from epic the use of the a l t e r n a t i v e form of the nominative singular of the A-stem "masculine noun i n short alpha.  The short alpha derives from the vocative singular, but  i n t h i s phrase has been lengtfened by p o s i t i o n . The phrase,commonly placed at the verse-end, must have become well established early i n the development of the epic hexameter, since there i s no evidence of the o r i g i n a l nominative form, d i r e c t l y from epic.  Stesichorus presumably adopted the phrase  We note, however, that the o r i g i n a l confinement of  the phrase to the verse-end i s not maintained, and that the length of the alpha i s l e f t ambiguous, although s t r i c t l y speaking i t i s no longer lengthened by p o s i t i o n .  i i ) Athematic declension. Nouns with consonantal  stems of the athematic declension  possess the same terminationsiiri a l l d i a l e c t s , with the exception of the dative p l u r a l .  The papyri fragments contain two instances of the  so-called "Aeolic" dative p l u r a l i n -eacru, which was  employed i n the  Homeric hexameter to accommodate c e r t a i n words to the metre, such as Muppt,6d*veao"c.  The Homeric device would n a t u r a l l y be s u i t a b l e f o r a  poet composing i n d a c t y l i c measures,whether or not hexameter, but as Iras mentioned above, there are more instances of the simple dative i n - a u , 34 which i s equally epic i n o r i g i n . . There are a few i n d i v i d u a l points which should be mentioned i n t h i s category of the athematic declension: a) In the S-stem nouns, such as xecxos, Stesichorus follows the epic pattern of not contracting the vowels placed i n juxtaposition by the loss of i n t e r v o c a l i c sigma: thus one finds xetxeosr.not  TEUXOUS.  b) For the declension of ndXus we have only the evidence of the accusative singular and hence no evidence of d i a l e c t a l variants used by Stesichorus. c) 3aai>Xfjos  i n 2619  fr.14  6  demonstrates again the influence of epic  verse.  The eta r e f l e c t s the o r i g i n a l stem-ending -E"0&.?np, whose long  vowel was preserved  i n the Northern group of d i a l e c t s and i n epic. In  the Occidental group, however, the o r i g i n a l long diphthong was shortened to eu ; hence $ctcrcXeK>S  and $aabXe)-os  .  In the dative  p l u r a l epic verse shows both long and short vowel versions: SaouXeuou and  gacrtXTfeaau, the fonner being the precedent for flaauXeSai. PMG  d) In the case of vnuaiTv i n PMG  192  200  2, one suspects l a t e r correction  since i n the matter of o r i g i n a l alpha, i f nctfrexge else, one finds a consistency of form i n the papyri.  There i s , however, one possible 36  instance of "Doric" vaas £)) In 2619  fr.l  supplemented i n 2619 fr.33  3  i i 7, the nominative p l u r a l of the adjective TioXtis  appears as noXe'es, no doubt derived from the athematic declension i n epic, which i s i n f a c t found side by side with the thematic form.  It  seems to be the l a t t e r that i s preferred i n the Western group of d i a l e c t s , however, as i n itoXXots.f in. Alcman. There are one or two instances of s p e c i a l case-endings that derive from epic, namely -Sev i n tipavdOev, as i n -vo6* 2618 f r . l i i 5-6. come to l i g h t i n Stesichorus.  2360 f r . 1 i  3,  -6e  No instances of -(pt, however, have The old instrumental dase i s 37  p a r t i c u l a r l y associated with epic, and i s seldom found elsewhere iii)  Conjugation. From the meagre evidence we possess of the verbal  formations  and terminations i n the fragments of Stesichorus, there are a few instances where we may sadly incomplete.  point out epic influence, but the picture i s  For example, we are lacking the type of personal  endings for the f i r s t person p l u r a l of the active voice, which  2.  could have given us  a useful  i n d i c a t i o n of d i a l e c t a l a f f i l i a t i o n .  It  appears that Stesichorus has imitated the epic convention of omitting the s y l l a b i c and temporal augment, almost c e r t a i n l y for metrical reasons. There i s no s y l l a b i c augment, f o r example , i n 2617 1  2619  fr.l  i  i  i i  10,  11 and possibly i n the case of 6e uoX* 2359 f r . l  and v}auov 2359 f r . 1 fr.4  fr.4  5, 2617  fr4  i i Ii  i  6  The temporal augment i s omitted i n  i i 7 and 2617  fr.6  2617  1.Elsewhere i n the  fragments the augment i s retained, there being six examples of the s y l l a b i c augment and f i v e of the temporal.  iv) Miscellaneous variants derived from epic. a) The variant form of the second a o r i s t of the verb "to go",fiXudov, i s attested i n JnXud'  2617  fr.29  5, and must have originated  from the  epic corpus, there being no evidence of i t elsewhere. b) itoxe'euitev i n 2618  fr.l  i s precedented i n Homer.  i  6 ( and also possibly i n 2360 f r . l  Examples from Alcman and l a t e r  i  2)  Occidental  i n s c r i p t i o n s indicate that i n the Occidental group of d i a l e c t s the loss of i n t e r v o c a l i c digamma resulted i n contraction of the vowels juxtaposed: thus'ApeXuos became "AXtog.  The derivation of the second a o r i s t of  38 *eitu) i s complex  , but the penultimate stage i n i t s p r e h i s t o r i c  evolution appears to have been  epeunov,  with the digamma between the  s y l l a b i c augment andAthe diphthong of the stem.  In epic the loss of  digamma i s not followed by contraction, hence the form eeuitov, which has i n turn been adopted by Stesichorus i n a passage highly reminiscent  of  epic. From t h i s comparison of the language of Stesichorus and that of  32  the epic poems we may conclude that there i s l i t t l e ccoincidence o f phonological features.  C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s such as the lack of contraction  occur i n cases of m e t r i c a l convenience and where the phraseology i s borrowed almost d i r e c t l y from epic.  On the other hand, i n the poet's  morphology there i s a much greater incidence of usage p a r a l l e l with epic, so much so that without the evidence o f Occidental ^lies and without evidence f o r the terminations of the athematic i n f i n i t i v e s , which are anomalous, the general impression given by the language of Stesichorus i s of one that i s structured on the same morphological  base  39 as epic. . At the l e v e l of morphology a language i s more highly f  40 structured and l e s s l i k e l y to permit i n f i l t r a t i o n from a l i e n sources In the language of Stesichorus  1  poems therefore one can see that the  poet was b a s i c a l l y perpetuating the linguistic structures of epic, incorpacatLng very l i t t l e that may be i d e n t i f i e d as morphological features of his native d i a l e c t . intrusions  C.  A t the iame time, however,  a t the more susceptible l e v e l of phonology may be observed*  Features of Stesichorus' language that do not occur either i n the Homeric epics or i n the Occidental d i a l e c t group. 1  i) Phonology. There are instances of the treatment <qf nasal+sibilant clusters i n Stesichorus" language that d i f f e r from the comparable treatment of such features i n epic or i n the Occidental dialect-group . a)  In the accusative p l u r a l of the feminine A-stem nouns,  original-etvg was reduced t o sigma, with compensatory lengthening of the precedingj vowel (the o r i g i n a l long alpha having become short as a r e s u l t o£'.0i'$ho£f'*M\:law) :ih"3shV- Southern group and - Western group the  r e s u l t was  -as, while i n Lesbian-ats  Occasionally i n Hesiod,  the Homeric hymns, Alcman and l a t e r Theocritus, a short for,m of the accusative p l u r a l of the thematic declension occurs, possibly adopted as a metrical device by analogy with the short alpha of the accusative p l u r a l of the athematic declension and extended from the A-stem to the 42 O-stem of the thematic declension  . In Stesichorus we f i n d one  example of t h i s short accusative i n itaycf s PMG  184  2  .  Not one of .  the other instances of the accusative p l u r a l A-or O-stem i n the papyri or the c i t a t i o n s i s of c e r t a i n length, since they a l l are followed by words beginning with a consonant or occur at the versef end.  The occurrence of such a short-vowel  recognised as a metrical device employed  accusative p l u r a l i s now increasingly i n the l a t e r 44  epic poets, and not, as was  once thought, a feature of "Doric" ;.  Pavese considers the device as one that belongs to the poets of the continental", epics, adopted from  the Northern d i a l e c t  ( h i s Setten-.  trionale) at a time subsequent to the migrations to the coast of Asia 45 Minor  .  however,  The occurrence of the short-vowel  accusative i n choral l y r i c ,  and p a r t i c u l a r l y i n Stesichorus, may  indicate that the  practice was  found useful i n the composition of d a c t y l i c verse, and 46 therefore does not prove any s p e c i f i c d i a l e c t a l a f f i l i a t i o n s  b)  The feminine ending of the present p a r t i c i p l e derives from 47  *-ont- ia /  , which became -ovao and i n turn followed the same pattern  of developments as the accusative p l u r a l termination of the A-stem nouns mentioned above.  In epic, A t t i c and Ionic we f i n d -ouaa, the regular  product of compensatory lengthening i n the Southern dialect-group.  In  the Western group we would expect to f i n d the secondary vowel represented as u), as i n the case of  MSaa i n Alcman. >  _* Stesichorus and Alcman,  however, both used the form-ouaa, f o r the feminine p a r t i c i p l e , such as i s attested i n the Lesbian branch of the Northern d i a l e c t group. 48 According to Page  , the usage i n Alcman i s to be explained by ortho-  graphy and hot by phonology: "We have reason to suppose that Alcman himself spelt exoaa  fr.37  3  and evSoaa  pronounced them we have l i t t l e or no idea."  f r . l 73 etc.; how he The discovery of instances  of -ouaa i n Stesichorus, so f a r unsubstantiated by the same type of ccmpen SatSory lengthening i n other words i n which l i g u i d + s i b i l a n t clusters are involved, seems to suggest that the occurrence of an apparently "Aeolic" form i n Alcman was not merely a quirk of orthography but rather some vestige of an early non-epic t r a d i t i o n .  The form a l s o  makes an occasional appearance i n non-Homeric hexameters such as the 49 l i n e s of Eumelus (ca. 730 B.C.) quoted by Pausanias : xcJu y^P  'I^oiydfxctx xaxadu*yLO£ eltXexo Motaa  a xadapat xa\,' eXeu^epa adyflaX' e^ouaa.  50  Another example may .be .seen i n the hexameter l i n e on the D u n s cup Moujct you  dytpl  Zxcfyav6pov eii(p)pu)v  :  Spxoy* deu<v>6ev  And a t h i r d instance i s the dedicatory i n s c r i p t i o n from the Heraion 51 T r at Perachora (ca. 650 B.C.) : ejyyeveouxa hurto6 le^ou*. The evidence i s hardly s u f f i c i e n t to substantiate any theory properly and the 52 problem o f the o r i g i n of such a form i s l i k e l y t o remain unsolved However, the evidence from Alcman (11 examples) and from Stesichorus 53, (7/8 examples) /does provide grounds f o r asserting that t h i s p a r t i c u l a r form of the feminine present p a r t i c i p l e was the r u l e ratherathan the exception i n early choral l y r i c , and that by the time of Pindar and Bacchylides i t had almost c e r t a i n l y become the t r a d i t i o n a l l y accepted form, which i n turn affected the form of the 54 masculine a o r i s t p a r t i c i p l e , namely -otug. .  In the poetry of Stesichorus i t i s not c e r t a i n whether t h i s formation of secondary long o u  occurred i n other words.  Later l y r i c  poets, Ibycus, Pindar and Bacchylides, present us with examples of Mouaa^.  In Alcman*, however, we f i n d the normal Laconian M&aa^ , but 6  the papyri of Stesichorus have not preserved the word.  Later  commentators record c e r t a i n of Stesichorus' invocations, but appear to be periphrases, not s p e c i f i c a l l y including Motaa  these - or  57 Mcniaa PMG  , or else epithets that Stesichorus applied to the Muse, as i n  240 and 250, without any i n d i c a t i o n of the form of the word Muse  itself.  What i s assumed to be.a parody of Stesichorus' introductory  l i n e s to h i s Oresteia i n Aristophanes' Peace 755 f f . , n a t u r a l l y employs 58 the A t t i c Mouca  .  Thus there are no grounds other than the form of  the present p a r t i c i p l e f o r assuming that Stesichorus used M ouca , and the influence of epic i n other areas, such as i n the form of the accusative p l u r a l of 0-stem houns and of the masculine a r t i c l e ,  may  have resulted i n the use of Mouaa as opposed to M otca. c) Another instance of a s o - c a l l e d Aeolism appearing i n both Stesichorus and Alcman, again involves the phonological development of 59 j a nasal+sibilant c l u s t e r . The non-epic adjective xXeuvos takes the form of  xAeevvo-  from an o r i g i n a l root  to which was added  *xAePe—  the a d j e c t i v a l s u f f i x -avo-, the l a t t e r un^ftgoing phonological change consistent with the group of d i a l e c t s i n question. expect to f i n d i n Laconian digamma would contract to  Thus one would  xXefnvdg , which with the loss of i n t e r v o c a l i c xXnvo*s.  This does not, however, occur i n the  texts of Alcman as they have survived. what i s almost c e r t a i n l y xAeefvivje  We f i n d  xXevvd*  i n f r . 10 (b)  12.  in f r . l  44 and  Page believes  that the oddity of the former r e s u l t s from the 7/6th century s p e l l i n g  xXevd* f o r xXnvtf which was In fr.10 (b)  l a t e r interpreted , as an error foryjxXevvd' 1  w  .  12, however, the space i n the papyrus allows f o r the  restoration of  {yvj,hinting that the double nasal from o r i g i n a l nasal+  s i b i l a n t could occur i n Alcman. i n Stesichorus 2619  fr.32  The emergence of the same form xXeevvot-  7 removes some of the doubts cast upon the  veracity of the form i n Alcman.  As i n the case of the feminine  present  p a r t i c i p l e i n -otaa, so i n the case of the word xXeevvdsi. i t s occurrence i n early l y r i c points to some a f f i l i a t i o n of the language used by the 61 early l y r i c poets v/ith the Northern d i a l e c t a l group, where compensatory lengthening by means of a double consonant i s a regular feature.  The  62 form xXeevvds recurs i n Pindar and Bacchylides  , and hence  one assumes  that t h i s p a r t i c u l a r form of the word had at some point during the development of choral l y r i c become t r a d i t i o n a l . Just as i n the use of - ouoa, the treatment of av to vv seems to be confined to a small l i n g u i s t i c area and i s not u n i v e r s a l l y 63 applied  .  In the personal pronouns we f i n d i n both Alcman and  Stesichorus the Occidental form SfrCv (PMG  1  60, and 2360 f r . 1  i  3).  I t i s p r e c i s e l y i n the case of these pronouns that the Homeric epics o f f e r the a l t e r n a t i v e forms p a r a l l e l to the "Aeolic" double consonant form, as i n ayuu\>. Thus the choice of the termination-otaa  and  the form of xXeevvd's cannot have been determined by the precedent of Homeric epic, either d i r e c t l y or by analogy, originate?  where d i d the forms  I t seems u n l i k e l y that Stesichorus invented the forms,  or was responsible f o r the introduction of t h e i r usage i n t o choral l y r i c i n view of t h e i r appearance i n the poetry of Alcman.  On the  other hand, ;inasmuch • < as h i s poetry may have c i r c u l a t e d more widely than that of Alcman, / ' i t does seem probable that Stesichorus  was  37  responsible f o r the s u r v i v a l of the forms as part of the choral l y r i c apparatus^.  ii)  Morphology.  a)  2617 fr.13 (a) 1 presents us with an apparently i s o l a t e d  formation of the dative p l u r a l of the word f o r "hand".  x e t p and i t s  variants have remained a p h i l o l o g i c a l mystery, which r e s u l t s primarily from an obvious confusion i n the development of the consonantal c l u s t e r  -pa- and the possible existence of two a l t e r n a t i v e stems: x ^ P " ^ d  -  65 Xepa-  . On the one hand there are certain words i n which - p a - i s  preserved i n t a c t , eg.dd*p0os , and by analogy dative p l u r a l s such as d n p a c occur from Homer onwards.  Assuming the stem xep-# one would  consider the epic version of the dative p l u r a l x e p o t as belonging t o t h i s category.  On the other hand, there also exists a group of words  i n which the treatment of the o r i g i n a l rho and sigma appears to follow the pattern of such a combination i n the sigmatic a o r i s t , namely by the doubling of the rho or by the lengthening of the preceding vowel to compansate f o r the loss of sigma.  /Thus we f i n d the Lesbian cfeppat,  and Atifcic-Ionic (Jeupai, from'dpepaai,.  By the same token, therefore,  from the postulated stem * x e p o - one would expect t o derive a double consonant i n the Morthern d i a l e c t group,X£PP"# as exhibited by the 66 Lesbian poets vowel,xnp-.  , w h i l s t i n the Occidental group, a secondary long The texts of Alcman provide an instance of the genitive  singular xnpo's PMG 3  f r . 3 i i 80  and PMG 84. We discover, however, 67  that not only i n Alcman, but also i n Sappho and Alcaeus  the epic form  Xepau prevails;. as the dative p l u r a l . In Stesichorus we f i n d two occurrences of the word i n i t s  oblique cases; xepi- C  «  ii  and xepo>fjki 2617  fr.47  1,  where undoubtedly the short vowel formation from the stem x^P"  was  2 6 1 7  f r  1 9  8  m e t r i c a l l y u s e f u l , epic verse providing a precedent f o r at l e a s t the dative singular.  I t i s strange, therefore, i n view of  of the short form i n x^P  -  Stesichorus'use  and the general prevalence of xepat i n other  poets, that we should f i n d xnpcri,' i n the papyrus.  Metrically  -pa-  makes p o s i t i o n , thus obviating the need for a special long vowel i n the dative p l u r a l . .  Are we therefore j u s t i f i e d i n assuming that the  anomalous form i s the hyper-correction of a l a t e r scribe?  I t seems to  me that one could argue equally f o r e i t h e r case from the meagre evidence w6 have at present.\r\p  - appears i n texts belonging to the  occidental d i a l e c t group although not i n Stesichorus and not elsewhere i n the dative p l u r a l .  Secondary long vowel n i s t e s t i f i e d i n the same  papyrus i n ^uynv 2617  fr.7  i  2, but t h i s word has not escaped the  68 doubts  of scholars  .  F i n a l l y , i t i s not inconceivable that Stesichorus  made use of anomalous forms and that, since the v a r i a t i o n i n possible forms of the word apparently existed from e a r l i e s t times,the poet had a c e r t a i n amount of l a t i t u d e i n h i s choice of the a l t e r n a t i v e forms and may  even have had the l i c e n s e to  create a form such as xnpcrC to s u i t  the p a r t i c u l a r context. b)  Another confusing p i c t u r e is. presented by the evidence f o r  the termination of the present i n f i n i t i v e of the thematic verb, both contracted and otherwise. (pOynv  2616 f r . 7  i  instance of the so-called Laconian i n f i n i t i v e .  2 represents  one  This type of i n f i n i t i v e  derives i t s name from i t s frequent appearance i n the papyri of Alcman, where there are, among several ambiguous instances, two incontestable ones of a secondary long vowel i n the thematic i n f i n i t i v e of a  non-contracting verb: (pauvnv  P M G  1  4 3  a  n  dv6dvnv  d  PMG  case of the former, the papyrus i n f a c t reads <pdt\>ev#  1  88.  c u t  i  f c  (In the i s certain  that as soon as the introduction of the A t t i c alphabetffi&adei t possible to d i f f e r e n t i a t e between long ev and short ev , the normal representation - nv^*)!  of the i n f i n i t i v e was enauvnvPMG 1  we f i n d  S i m i l a r l y i n contracted verbs i n Alcman  4 3 and yautfv PMG  1  17.  In the case of contracted verbs the evidence i n Stesichorus i s not i n accord with the examples c i t e d from Alcman. TtoAeuefjuv  2617  fr.4  i  8 , whose termination i n -  suggest that (puynv was a hyper-Doricism.  eLV  We  find  » i f correct, might  Conversely,  TtoAepe^tv may  be  erroneous, but we have no othex evidence i n support of one case or the other. 9,  More puzzling,however, i s the occurrence of yapev 2 6 1 8 f r . l  where the epsilon i s incontestably short.  ii  An a l t e r n a t i v e short form  of the i n f i n i t i v e , assumed to be derived from the termination - e v added to the zero-grade of the thematic stem, does occur i n early Greek.  We  f i n d examples from, l i t e r a r y texts such as i n Hesiod , Works and Days otito6pe*TiEV  or Pindar Olympian  I  3,  yapdev,  611,  but the only instance i n  which a contracted verb i s found with a short termination occurs i n Argolic rooAev (? c e n t u r y ) ^ . 0  eitauvitv  Page admits that the f i n a l s y l l a b l e s of  and yaufTv are m e t r i c a l l y i n d i f f e r e n t , but argues f o r - n v  on the  grounds that qxxtvnv and a v 6 & V r i y are d e f i n i t e l y long and because of the 71  representation of such i n f i n i t i v e s i n l a t e r i n s c r i p t i o n s the termination of ya\i£v  .  Metrically  i n Stesichorus i s undoubtedly short and hence  we are forced again through lack of further evidence >to postulate that metrical expediency must be the explanation f o r the poet's use of the short form of the f i n a i s y l l a b l e of the i n f i n i t i v e , whether or not there was a precedent f o r such a form i n previous  poets.  The other instances of the thematic i n f i n i t i v e occur i n c i t a t i o n s where the r i s k of contamination makes any judgment uncertain. This i s a l s o true  of the example of frxXXeuv i n 2506 fr.26  i i 24, a  quotation from a commentary on the Oresteia of Stesichorus. whether the o r i g i n a l Occidental -nv a s l o s t i n the course of transmission, or W  the commentary preserves the  o r i g i n a l form -ei,v, which would betray  epic influence, we s h a l l -probably never know. Sojrjsuj.'v 2617 fr.13  I f readings such as  18 are correct and (puyfiv i s also possible i n view  of other Occidental features, then we f i n d ourselves proposing the somewhat untenable hypothesis that the poet used d i f f e r e n t forms on d i f f e r e n t occasions according to whim. We must ultimately admit that, although the papyri are more r e l i a b l e as evidence than the c i t a t i o n s , they are not i n f a l l i b l e .  The evidence as i t stands cannot provide the  basis f o r any d e f i n i t e statement on the form of the thematic i n f i n i t i v e i n Stesichorus. c)  The two instances that give evidence of the terminations used  by Stesichorus f o r the athematic i n f i n i t i v e are quite unprecedented i n l i t e r a r y works fr.4  i  and almost unknown i n inscriptional material.  7 we discover what  appears to be  itoXu M^p6uov  etv.  In 2617 The phrase  has epic precedents, although not with the i n f i n i t i v e , and the p o s s i b i l i t y of epic etvat seems to be precluded by the f a c t that enjambement would demand the d i v i s i o n et|vau.  The only p a r a l l e l f o r  euv as i n f i n i t i v e of the verb"to be" occurs i n Euboean Ionic, which 72 seems an improbable source f o r Stesichorus  .  One therefpre suspects  some sort of conflation with the thematic i n f i n i t i v e i n -etv, . and i f t h i s were the case then one would be assuming that the thematic form in-euv d i d occur elsewhere  i n Stesichorus.  S i m i l a r l y , t h e form  eCyeuv 2619 f r . 1 3  i n f l u e n c e o f t h e t h e m a t i c -euv.  5 suggests t h e c r o s s -  I n t h e O c c i d e n t a l d i a l e c t group t h e  a t h e m a t i c : i n f i n i t i v e ends i n -yev, such as i n nyev , Alcman PMG 1  45  (from o r i g i n a l *eayev, w i t h O c c i d e n t a l n showing t h e compensation f o r the l o s s o f sigma).  A r c h a i c i n s c r i p t i o n s do a t t e s t t h e form -ynv and a  » Rhodian  form  73  nyeuv a l s o o c c u r s  .  I t i s possible,therefore, t o explain  euyetv as a combination o f t h e a t h e m a t i c -yev and thematic -euv.  The 74  •w  S i c i l i a n comic p o e t , Epicharmus, so t h a t  a l s o p r e s e n t s us w i t h t h e form  i t i s remotely p o s s i b l e that  eCyeuv  ,  eCyetv i s i n f a c t a s p e c i a l  S i c i l i a n v a r i a n t , whatever i t s l i n g u i s t i c o r i g i n may b e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , we have no e v i d e n c e as t o t h e f r e q u e n c y o f t h e form i n S t e s i c h o r u s ' works.  I n so f a r as S t e s i c h o r u s appears  t o have employed e p i c morphemes  i n p r e f e r e n c e t o O c c i d e n t a l ones, one would s u s p e c t t h a t e p i c t e r m i n a t i o n s for  b o t h thematic and a t h e m a t i c i n f i n i t i v e s would c r e e p i n t o h i s poems,  b u t t h e t e x t s thus f a r have remained  silent.  Of t h e s e m i s c e l l a n e o u s o d d i t i e s o f language c o n s i d e r e d above, we f i n d t h a t  t h r e e appear  t o have been d e r i v e d from a s o u r c e o t h e r than  feh^VQpjSl^en^al  ; d $ f 3 t e < & ^ j ^ £ g ^ 4 3 * ' t h e Homeric e p i c s : namely t h e s h o r t  form o f t h e a c c u s a t i v e p l u r a l , t h e s h o r t form o f t h e t h e m a t i c i n f i n i t i v e and t h e f e m i n i n e p a r t i c i p l e i n -ovaa. Pavese c o n s i d e r s a l l t h r e e t o 75 have o r i g i n a t e d i n t h e N o r t h e r n d i a l e c t group  .  The f i r s t  two, however,  c o u l d e a s i l y have emerged s o l e l y from w i t h i n t h e sphere o f l a t e r whose p o e t s were perhaps  lacking the f a c i l i t y  epic,  i n o r a l composition  p o s s e s s e d by t h e i r p r e d e c e s s o r s , and do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y p o i n t t o s t i m u l u s from an o u t s i d e d i a l e c t group.  There i s a s t r o n g e r c a s e f o r  i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e emergence o f t h e p a r t i c i p l e i n i n f l u e n c e from t h e N o r t h e r n d i a l e c t group, t h a t have s u r v i v e d i n t h e L e s b i a n p o e t s .  -ouaa as t h e r e s u l t o f  i n view o f t h e p a r a l l e l  forms  Pavese q u e s t i o n s t h e r e l e v a n c e  of the p a r a l l e l phonological change witnessed  i n the Lesbian  poets , 76  but since there i s a c e r t a i n amount of consistency i n t h e i r treatment of the -va- c l u s t e r as opposed t o the more or less i s o l a t e d instance of the feminine p a r t i c i p l e i n the language of Alcman and Stesichorus, the form i n the l a t t e r case must have been acquired by way of crossinfluence or as a loan-formation, as i n the case of xXeevvd's. The l a t t e r does not belong to epic a t a l l , the regular form or xXoxds.  being  XXEUTO'S  I can conclude only that both of these, peculiar forms may  have been absorbed i n t o a t r a d i t i o n on which both Alcman and Stesichorus drew,faestradition not associated with the Homeric poems but having, a f f i l i a t i o n s with the Northern d i a l e c t group a t some point.  Thus, from this examination of the limited evidence f o r the language of Stesichorus, we see that i t may be described as morphologically close to the language of the epic poems, while i n i t s pronunciation, t o judge from the representation of the vowels i n p a r t i c u l a r , i t i s akin to the Northern and Western d i a l e c t groups. The language of Stesichorus  1  poems may therefore e x h i b i t a mixture  of d i a l e c t s , but i t i s important t o note that there i s on the whole consistency  of d i a l e c t a l a f f i l i a t i o n i n the := phonology and morphology  of that language. In the preceding discussion I have been concerned p r i m a r i l y with d i s t i n c t i v e features and l i n g u i s t i c oddities that occur i n Stesichorus, without recounting the standard features of what we might c a l l common Gfeek.  Many of the features observable i n the epic poems  do i n f a c t remain constant throughout the h i s t o r y of the Greek language, and i t i s therefore not s u r p r i s i n g that Stesichorus' language  43  should show some s t r u c t u r a l s i m i l a r i t y to that of the epic poems, representing as i t does a continuation of the Greek language at a l i t e r a r y l e v e l i n the Archaic period.  In the development of the o r a l  t r a d i t i o n i t s e l f one can see the amalgamation of elements from d i f f e r e n t d i a l e c t a l sources  which constitutesa l i n g u i s t i c creation unrepresentative  of any one d i a l e c t group or branch of a group.  Yet within i t s own  special context, that i s , the o r a l performance of the poetic composition, the mixture of d i a l e c t would be neither a r t i f i c i a l to the performer nor incomprehensible to the audience.  As a l i t e r a r y creation the epic i s not  an a r t i f i c i a l conglomeration of incongruous elements, but a u n i f i e d reality.  F5som a h i s t o r i c a l or l i n g u i s t i c point of view, the, scholar may  reduce the whole to a number of components, determined by some a r t i f i c i a l frame of reference f o r h i s own s p e c i f i c purpose.  He must not,  however, forget that the audience f o r whose ears the poem was intended would hardly have questioned whether the language represented to them a l i n g u i s t i c unity or not.  Hence the s i m i l a r i t i e s of morphology seen i n  theilanguage of Stesichorus and that of epic should be thought of only i n terms of a continuation of the t r a d i t i o n a l l i t e r a r y language i n which the d i s t i n c t i v e elements from Northern or Southern d i a l e c t groups were no longer recognised. On the other hand the phonology of Stesichorus' language i s d i s t i n c t l y western i n i t s a f f i n i t i e s , with an admixture of features i d e n t i f i e d as belonging to the Northern d i a l e c t group. Although i t has been suggested that choral l y r i c has developed  out of the continental  epic t r a d i t i o n and has absorbed d i a l e c t a l features from the Northern d i a l e c t group that were l a t e r misunderstood to be of "Doric" or 77 Western origin,- , there  i s another, less complicated explanation f o r  the consistent appearance of long alpha and other phonological  features  that may be either of Northern or Western o r i g i n i n the poems of Stesichorus.  With the importation and dissemination o f the Homeric  and alsbvthe continental epics i n t o the west through large c u l t u r a l  78 centres such as Syracuse  i t i s hard not t o imagine that professional  bards would emerge from the western colonies whose native d i a l e c t belonged t o the Western group and that t h e i r pronunciation of the epic poems could have been influenced by t h e i r native d i a l e c t .  Features  such as the preservation of long alpha , the equivalent of eta i n the Homeric poems, would make no differences to the structure of the * -'hexameter l i n e .  I t would be possible, therefore, f o r a S i c i l i a n version  of the epic poems to influence a poet wishing to create a novel form of verse or a t l e a s t r e v i t a l i s e the time-worn epic t r a d i t i o n with western material that included of the western communities.  l i n g u i s t i c elements from the d i a l e c t s  The proximity of Stesichorus' metres to  the hexameter also suggest that the hexameter epic was the d i r e c t predecessor of his verse.  Whether or not c e r t a i n metrical patterns of  79 choral l y r i c were derived from the hexameter verse i s open to debate  ,  but poems such as the Geryoneis , with i t s purely d a c t y l i c measures, together with the proximity of the morphological structure o f Stesichorus  ' language t o that of epic, point t o a very close  relationship. The hypothesis that an epic background with overtones of the Occidental d i a l e c t formed the basis of Stesichorus'  mixed l i t e r a r y  d i a l e c t does not exclude the p o s s i b i l i t y of simultaneous influence from non-epic compositions.  Choral odes appear to have some a f f i l i a t i o n with  cult-songs composed f o r performance i n r e l i g i o u s f e s t i v a l s , and are  p a r t i c u l a r l y associated with the "Dorian" communities  . There are  some indications i n the remarks of l a t e r grammarians that Stesichorus 81 also composed Hymns  , and the preeminence apparently given to Apollo  might be interpreted i n the l i g h t of the importance of his c u l t i n the 82 Greek west  . Evidence f o r poetic composition  Stesichorus' time i s meagre.  i n the west p r i o r t o  The presence i n the west of Xenocritus 83  of L o c r i , of Xanthus, a S i c i l i a n writer of Dithyramb , and of Arion, gives some i n d i c a t i o n of the existence of poetic forms other than the epic i n the west from the 7th century onwards.  Such compositions  may  have been i n part responsible f o r the superimposition of non-epic elements  i n the poems of Stesichorus, p a r t i c u l a r l y i f he himself also  composed  works other than the l y r i c o - e p i c s that have survived.  suggestion of non-epic influence  The  , p a r t i c u l a r l y as an explanation of  some of the odd l i n g u i s t i c forms that have been discovered i n Stesichorus runs contrary to Pavese's theory of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between continental epic and the emergence of choral l y r i c .  Indeed, while i t i s true that  the assumption of a continental epic t r a d i t i o n displaying features from the Northern d i a l e c t group may account f o r non-Homeric forms i n Hesiod and the Hymns that were hitherto considered "Doric", and may account i n part f o r i s o l a t e d forms i n choral l y r i c i n mainland Greece, is insufficient  the evidence  to prove conclusively that the whole t r a d i t i o n of 84  choral l y r i c derived from i t  . I t i s interesting to note , f o r example,  that i n Alcman the two instances of the feminine p a r t i c i p l e i n -exact that appears to be precedented i n the quotation from Eumelus,' dp not occur i n d a c t y l i c measures.  whether one thinks of Eumelus or Arion  as possible sources f o r the introduction of the Northern form -ouaa i n Stesichorus, theories cannot a t present transcend the boundaries of  speculation. We can state, however, that Stesichorus i n h i s creation of l y r i c o - e p i c poems was not only well-versed  i n the structure of epic  language i n general, but , as we s h a l l see i n the ensuing chapters, had also an excellent knowledge of the I l i a d and Odyssey s p e c i f i c a l l y . cannot consider his poems to have belonged to a t r a d i t i o n that from the continental epics  One  evolved  alone.  Footnotes to chapter I I . 1  R. Coleman, "The D i a l e c t Geography of Ancient Greece," TPhS (1963) pp.. 58-126. In t h i s lengthy a r t i c l e Coleman elaborates upon the theories put forward by W. Porzig i n "Sprachegeographische Untersuchungen zu den altgriechischen Dialekten," IF_61 (1954) pp. 147-169) and by E. Risch i n "Die Gliederung der griechische Dialekte i n nsuer Sicht, " MH 12 (1955) pp. 61-36, regarding the d i s t r i b u t i o n of d i a l e c t s i n ancient Gfceece, showing the inadequacy of a simple t r i p a r t i t e system, since i t f a i l e d to account for the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p s of the sub-dialects of one group with the sub-dialects of another group, i n p a r t i c u l a r the various a f f i l i a t i o n s of the Thessalian/Boeotian/Lesbian group.  2 Certain d i s t i n c t i o n s hetween Ionic, Doric and Aeolic were recognised as early as Herodotus" time (cf. H i s t . I 142 and Thucydides, H i s t . I l l 112 and VI 5), although Strabo (VIII i 2) appears to have been l a r g e l y responsible f o r the t r a d i t i o n a l concept of a t r i p a r t i t e d i v i s i o n which was generally adopted by scholars u n t i l the investigaions of Porzig and Risch i n the 1950's. On the h i s t o r y of Dialectology, see J.B.Hainsworth, "Greek view of Greek Dialectology," TPhS (1968) pp.62-76 and A.Bartonek, "Greek Dialects of the Second Millenium B.C.," Eirene 9 (1971) pp. 49-67. 3  See the Suda s.v.  ExncCxopoc. Bu3AC*ot,s x c " .  •••  x a  ^  eoxuv  OUTOU x a  nouifyaxa  Thucydides speaks of a "mixed" d i a l e c t spoken a t Himera, which he attributed t o the f a c t that i t was colonised by Chalchidians from Zancle (Ionic) who were joined by a group of Syracusans (Doric) (Hist. <*VI 5). Possibly the concept of the "mixed" d i a l e c t of Himera was Thucydides' solution to the problem raised by the language of a poet, supposedly from a colony of a t l e a s t p a r t i a l "Ionian" o r i g i n , which was ostensibly "Doric" on account of features such as the long alpha. Thucydides' suggestion has been followed by some scholars (eg. by Holsten, De S t e s i c h o r i e t Ibyci d i a l e c t o et copia verborum , Stralsund, 1884) i n theories that the d i a l e c t a l mixture i n the language of Stesichorus and Ibycus resulted from some s o r t of hybrid vernacular spoken a t Himera and Rhegion. However, i n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence from Himera i s minimal on account of i t s sack i n 409 B.C. and i n any case we are not even c e r t a i n Stesichorus came from Himera. The recognisably " l i t e r a r y " nature of the poet's language rendeis such speculations on the nature of the vernacular i n Himera or whenever, totally pointless. AuipC*6t StaA.e'xxaJu  ev  4 For this theory, see C O . Pavese, Tradizione e Generi p o e t i c i d e l l a Grecia Archaica (Rome, 1972)pp.16-19. Cf. also J.A. Notopoulos, "Studies i n early Greek Oral Poetry," HSFh , 68 (1964) pp. 18-64. 5 For the l i t e r a r y d i a l e c t of Archilochus a useful summary i s to be found i n A. Bonnard, Archiloque (Pa\ris, 1958) pp. l v i i - l x i . See also A. Scherer,"Die Sprache des Archilochos," i n Archiloque, Entretiens Hardt X (Geneva, 1964) pp. 89-116. 6 For the d i a l e c t of the Lesbian poets, the standard work i s E.M. Hamm, Grammatik zu Sappho und A l k a i o s B e r l i n 1957) . A short summary of the main features i s given i n D. Page, Sappho and Alcaeus (Oxford, 1955) pp. 327-329. 7  The language of Alcman i s dealt with extensively by Page, i n Alcman: the Partheneion (Oxford, 1951) pp. 102-163 and subsequently by Risch, "Die Sprache AlkmansJ" MH 11(1954) pp. 20-37. Recently w.F.wyatt i n "The Aeolic substrate i n the Peloponnese," AJPh 94 (1973) pp.37-46, traces the r e l i c s of Aeolic features back to a .proto-stage of Greek which arrived i n the Peloponnese with a migration of Greek-speaking peoples southwards i n the second millenium B.C. His theory does not however take into account the controversial appearance of -otcra i n the language of Alcman ( c f . page 33 f f . ) .  8  Cf. note 4,above.  9 See A. Thumb, Handbuch der griechischen DiaiLekte (2nd ed. rev. by E.Ki'eckers, Heidelberg, 1932)p;, 70f. Cf. CD.Buck, The Geeek Dialects (Chicago, 2nd ed., 1955) p. 154 f . . 10  M. Nothiger, Die Sprache des Stesichorus und des Ibycus 1971" p. 72.  11 12  (Zurich,  Thumb, op.cit., p. 75 f f .  Risch, a r t . c i t . , pp.61-76, Coleman, a r t . c i t . , p 58 f f . , and Pavese, op.cit., i n the tables a t the end of the book.  13  Thumb, op.cit., pp.71-73.  14  See page 40 f . of t h i s chapter.  15 Pavese, op.cit., p.94: choral l y r i c poets, with the exception of Alcman,use -yev. 16 17 18 19  Page, Alcman..., p. 131 f . and Nothiger, o p . c i t . , p.74. Nothiger, op.cit., p. 75 and see page the thematic i n f i n i t i v e s .  38 f . of t h i s chapter on  Nothiger, op.cit.,p. 5. Nothiger, op.cit.,p. 47. Buck, o p . c i t . , p. 22, i d e n t i f i e s the s u f f i x -xct equivalent to -xe and p a r t i c l e xct equivalent to xe, as  exemplifying Occidental short alpha where the other d i a l e a t groups have short e p s i l o n . In the case of the former the o r i g i n a l consonant was a labio-velar, while i n the l a t t e r a pure p a l a t a l ; hence the change to a dental i n the case of Ionic e t c . In "Doric" verse the lengthened xa would appear to stem from metrical expediency/. \ 20  Nothiger, o p . c i t . , p.52.  21  N&thiger, o p . c i t . , p.12.  22  There are four p e c u l i a r i t i e s of the so-called Doric accent,of which 2 are borne out by the accent-marks occasionally inserted i n the papyri of Stesichorus: 1).Short .accusative p l u r a l s ofco- and A-stem nouns seem to have been considered long f o r purposes of accentuation, eg.Mcfaos Pindar, 01. II 71. There are no c e r t a i n examples of t h i s short accusative i n the papyri, of Stesichorus,and itayctg i n PMG 184 i s accented "normally" on the ultima. 2) F i n a l diphthongs at and ouin the nominative p l u r a l of 0-and A-stem nouns appear to have been counted long i n "Doric" accentuation: 6<J)i/yd"vou T E xat doitaaC'loL 2359 f r ; 1 1 2 ; Exouaai, 2617 f r . l . 2v. 3) F i n a l short s y l l a b l e s considered as long: C^cTvov 2359 f r . l i i 2. e a n A d ' d o v 2617  f r . 29  3.  4) c e r t a i n adverbs and the genitive p l u r a l s of nouns receive a circumflex on the ultima: cf.navtSs 2735 f r . l 6» of Ibycus? 23  The author of the t r e a t i s e On the Sublime 13 3 places Stesichorus together with Archilochus as the "most Homeric" a f t e r Plato. Cf. Dio Chrysostora, Or. i i 33, Q u i n t i l i a n X 1 62 and the verse from the Palatine Anthology VII 75. Of the remarks made by modern scholars, we may point f o r example to Lesky, o p . c i t . , p. 151 or Frankel, o p . c i t . , p. 320. Bowra, GLP pp.78-80 describes Stesichorus' debt owed more to Hesiod and l a t e r epic poets than to Homer himself. Cf. however, C. Santini's a r t i c l e "Omerismi i n Stesicoro," GIF 22 (1970)pp.71-76.  24  See L.R.Palmer's a r t i c l e , "The language of Homer," i n A Companion to Homer, edd. Wace and Stubbings (London, 1962) p. 97 f f . and P. Mazon, Introduction a l ' l l i a d a (Paris, 1948) p. 110 f f . .  25  See Bartonek, a r t . c i t . , p . 58 f f . and Risch, a r t . c i t . , p.  26  Palmer, o p . c i t . , p. 85 f f . .  27  Nothiger, o p . c i t . , pp.33-34.  28  See page 35 f . of t h i s  29  30  63.  chapter.  See Nfithlger, o p . c i t . , p 46, Pavese , o p . c i t . , p.49, for the usage i n Stesichorus, and P. Chantraine, Grammaire Homerique I pp. 46, 69 and 200 f o r the Homeric usage and H. Troxler, Sprache und Wortschatz Hesiods (Zurich, 1964) p$5B f f . f o r Hesiodic usage. P. Chantraine, Morphologie historique du Grec (Paris, 1967)  p.40.  31  Chantraine, op.cit., pp. 40-41  32  See page 220,  33  See page 26 of this chapter. Chantraine, op.cit., pp. 99-100. The reason for shortening o r i g i n a l long diphthongs i s uncertain. ,\M. Lejeune, T r a i t e de phon^tigue grecque (Paris, 1955) p. 196 , believes that t h i s phenomenon i s analogous with the shortening of ei, to E L i n the f i n a l p o s i t i o n .  36 37  chapter V I .  There i s no evidence for the form of the genitive p l u r a l , which i n the Homeric d i a l e c t was uncontracted : 'Otov . There are two very doubtful p o s s i b i l i t i e s of the Occidental contracted fcrnm i n Stesichorus: AtcocJSctv 2619 fr.28 2 ( but the accusative singular i s more probable) and 6av 2803 f r . 4 5. In P.Oxy. 2735, whose authorship i s contror v e r s i a l , we f i n d the form MotpSv f r . l 14. Pavese (op.cit., p.87,8) i s inclined to think that the uncontracted forms are of Northern o r i g i n on account of t h e i r appearance i n Kesiod.  34 35  and Nothiger, o p . c i t . , p. 19 f f . .  M.L.west, "Stesichorus redivivus," ZPE 4 (1969) p.  141.  Chantraine, o p . c i t . , p. 119, according to whom the usage even i n Homer had become redundant and a r t i f i c i a l . w A possible derivation of the stag.es from *wek may be stated as follows, beginning with the reduplicated a o r i s t of the zero-grade of the root : *we-wk- > e - we - wk -> e-we-uk - > e-weik -> e euit-> eetn- .  38  w  39  Cf. the statement made by Page i n h i s a r t i c l e , "Ibycus* poem i n honour of Polycrates," Aegyptus 31(1951) pp. 162-164, which was written before the publication of P. Oxy. vol- XXXII . Although the limitations of the fragments prevent a f u l l synopsis of the phonology and morphology of Stesichorus' language, we can now see the truth of Page's supposition that n^^£?^ase:''"the:'idUAlec^ i s i n f a c t b a s i c a l l y that of epic, with a veneer of "Doric" and a s l i g h t admixture of "Aeolic"/and that the aame was true f o r Stesichorus, except that there were no "Aeolisms" i n the l a t t e r . At the time there was no evidence of the forms -otact and KXeevvos i n Stesichorus.  40  Coleman, a r t . c i t . , p. 64 f f . .  41  Lejeune, op.cit.,pp. 112-113 and Chantraine, op.cit., p.  42 675;  50.  For example, Theogony 60, 267, 401, 534; Works and Days 564, Hymn to Mercury 106. See Nothiger, o p . c i t . , pp. l O O - l o l .  663,  43  Cf. however, Haslam's suggestion that i f the colometry of PMG were revised, the f i n a l s y l l a b l e of itctycfs would be without doubt short ( a r t . c i t . , p. 17).  44  The question of the short accusative p l u r a l s i n Hesiod i s discussed by A.Morpurgo-Davies i n "'Doric features i n the language of 1  184  50  Hesiod," G l o t t a 42(1964) pp. 138-165, The old theory that features such as the short accusative and the short form of the thematic i n f i n i t i v e were of "Doric" o r i g i n i s dismissed and i t i s suggested that metrical expediency of a short form i n an altered v a r i a t i o n on an o l d formulaic expression might explain the creation of such features on the possible analogy of the double form of the preposition eg / etc. 45  Pavese, op.cit., p. 38 f f . .  46  In early choral l y r i c the form i n f a c t only makes sporadic appearances; apart from Stesichorus' itaycts i n PMG 184, i t occurs i n Alcman PMG 17 5. Later examples from Pindar often occur where there are alternative readings, eg. i n 01. I 53 or II 71 or Nem. I 24.  47  See Lejeune, op.cit., p. 110 f f . , Nothiger, op.cit., p. 89-95, Page, Alcman... , p. 133-134 and Risclj, "Die Sprache Alkmans," MH 11 (1954) p. 31 f f . .  /  48  Page, op.cit., p.  49  Pausanias, IV  50 51 52  133.  33  2.  Cf. Pavese,op.cit., p.  104.  Risch, a r t . c i t . , p. 37. P.K. Kretschmer, Griechischen Vaseninschriften (Gutersloh, 1894) p. 104 f . , no. 87. SEG  XI  233.  Page, op.cit., p. 133-134, believes that h i s t o r i c a l connections between Cyrene and Thera, and between Thera and Laconia make i t possible that the language of Alcman and the Cyrenean d i a l e c t had a common ancestor i n "old Laconian", which would explain the appearance of the feminine p a r t i c i p l e i n -ouaa i n Alcman and i n the d i a l e c t of Cyrene. However, the i n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence from Cyrene i s much l a t e r than Alcman, the e a r l i e s t being a 4-th century oath. Cf. the objections to Page's theory expressed by Risch, a r t . c i t . , p. 31 f f . There may be some significance that the odd. : occurrence of-ovso)rOuaa i s confined to the feminine p a r t i c i p l e . Does i t perhaps stem from some formulaic expression i n a choral t r a d i t i o n r e s t r i c t e d to female ' performers? ' • " • ' ~ "• ;  '  53  54  •  "1  ' r  For example, Alcman, PMG 1 61,73; 3 f r . 3 i i 5 and 15, and Stesichorus, 2360 f r . l i 1, 11; 2615 f r . l 2; fr.4 11 16,17; fr.ll 3; fr.43. 6. For example, Pindar, Pyth. I l l 50 : Ai5aaus.  • 55 Ibycus, PMG 232 (a) 23; Pindar, 0l_. I 112, I I I 4, XIII 22 etc. Bacchylides, 5 4; f r . 55 2. In Pindar there are 40 examples of Mouaa and not one instance o£'".:M ouaa, whereas Bacchylides prefers Mouaa, of which there are 12 examples, as opposed to one certain and one doubtful example of Mouaa.  56  Alcman PMG  5 7  P. Oxy.  58  PMG  59  30;  2506  5 fr 2 f r . 26  i i  22; 8:; 9;  46.  16,11.  210.  Lejeune, op.cit., p. 110; Page, op.cit., pp.107-108; Nothiger, op.cit.,pp.41-42.  60  Page, op.cit., p. 107.  61  Pavese, op.cit., p. 93.  62  5  For example, Pindar, Pyth. V 20, IX 182. Also, Simonides, 136 3D.  15  and Bacchylides 2  6;  63  (fyitfivva i s recorded i n Alcman PMG 62, other than the example of xAeevvds c i t e d above. In Stesichorus only the formxAeevvd's occurs as an example of t h i s treatment of the nasal+sibilant c l u s t e r .  64  I t appears that the highest percentage of these so-called Aeolisms occurs i n Pindar (although the impression may i n part be due to the greater amount of his poetry surviving i n comparison to that of the other i y r i c poets. The p r i n c i p a l examples are: a) the feminine p a r t i c i p l e i n -ooaa; b) the a o r i s t p a r t i c i p l e i n -aus;c)Mouact = Muse; d) 3rd person p l u r a l of the present i n d i c a t i v e i n - O L C J L ; e) personal pronouns ctuues etc.; f) the i n f i n i t i v e of the verb "to be" : euuevaL g) consonantal doubling i n xeAa6£vv6*s, (paevvds , MXeevv6*£.  65  Lejeune, op.cit., p. 106 and Chantraine, o p . c i t . , p. 79.  66  XepPes, Sappho, PLF 90 (1)  67  Sappho,; PLFf-81 (b)  68  2; 96  i i 21;xe*ppa  Alcaeus, PLF C l  29; Alcaeus, PLF  B 13  21.  6.  On the papyrus, a "corrector" has written E L beneath n(v). since other i n f i n i t i v e s seem to have been written - E L V , eg.itoA.£UEr_LV 2618 fr.4 i 8, one ironders whether t h i s i s a case of correction, or an explanatory gloss.  69  Page, op.cit., p. 121f.  70  See F. Bechtel, Die Griechischen Dialekte II (Berlin, 1923) p. 449.  71  Page, op.cit., p. 122.  72  See.Bechtel, op.cit., v o l . I l l p.  73  Chantraine, op.cit., p. 276;  74  180.  Bechtel, op.cit., v o l . II p.646.  Epicharmus, f r . 99 2 (Kaibel); c f . the form TtE'itoaxct which i s found i n both Stesichorus (PMG 261) and Epicharmus ( f r . 11 Kaibel).  75  Pavese,op.cit., p. 88 f f . .  76  Pavese,op.cit., p. 106.  77  See page 33 of t h i s chapter, with notes 44 and 45.  78  Note that the epic poet Euiaelus came from Corinth. Could the source of the feminine p a r t i c i p l e i n Stesichorus have beennthe r e c i t a t i o n of Eumelus' poems i n the chief Corinthian colony i n the Greek west?  79  Cf. M.L.West, "Greek Poetry 2000-700 B.C.," Cg_ 23 (1973) pp. 179192,,,innwhich he relates the d i v i s i o n of the various types of Greek poetry and their modes to t h e i r d i a l e c t a l origins: Ionic, Lesbian and Doric. The Lesbian mode derived from the Northern d i a l e c t group i n l a t e Mycenaean times, while Ionic and Dorian developed out of the Southern group, the l a t t e r being absorbed by the post-Mycenaean i n f i l t r a t i o n of the Occidental d i a l e c t group. According to h i s theory the metrical evolution of the hexameter was l a t e : not much before the 8th century and thus heresy to those who believe i n the Mycenaean o r i g i n of the Catalogue of Ships-. As West himself admits h i s hypothesis must remain speculative.: what the poetic forms of non-epic compositions were i n the dark ages we s h a l l probably never know.  80  A i M e i l l e t , Apercu d'une h i s t o i r e de l a langue grecque (Paris, p. 200. Cf. V a l l e t , op.cit., p.305.  81 VI  Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 250b.  I  x v i 78 (PMG 276)j c f . Athenaeus  82  V a l l e t , op.cit., pp. 305-306.  83  See chapter I, note 1, with page 7 and note 27.  84  1948)  Cf. PMGW232.  Cf. Pavese's own admission of the limitations of h i s theory, op.cit., p. 108.  Chapter I I I  Verbatim adaptation of Homeric "formulae" i n Stesichorus.  In t h i s and the following chapters I s h a l l examine the nature of Stesichorus' d i c t i o n i n r e l a t i o n to i t s epic precedents, s p e c i f i c a l l y in,terms of that feature considered d i s t i n c t i v e to o r a l epic, namely the "formula".  The generic, s t y l i z e d and r e p e t i t i v e nature of the language  of Greek epic i s i n i t s e l f t o t a l l y evident and undisputed*.  Parry i n h i s  o r i g i n a l s t a t i s t i c a l examination of the function of the t r a d i t i o n a l , f i x e d epithet i n the Homeric poems introduced the word formule, with h i s own s p e c i f i c d e f i n i t i o n of the word, indicating i t s technical application 2 within the framework of h i s thesis .  His study of the nature of the  repeated phrases, t h e i r extension and their economy, i n the narrowly l i m i t e d area of noun-epithet expressions gave the i n i t i a l impetus to" the extensive investigations i n t o the i n t e g r a l constituents of o r a l techniques i n the composition of heroic verse. initially  The term "formula",  employed as a technical term, whose usefulness i s immense;  provided that i t s d e f i n i t i o n i s c l e a r l y understood, has i n recent years come under a barrage of c r i t i c i s m s and warnings against the misconceptions and erroneous connotations that may be construed with regard to the nature of o r a l composition.  Nonetheless, the word has become s u f f i c i e n t l y w e l l  established i n the jargon of Homeric studies that i t i s acceptable as a generic term, on the understanding that the author w i l l and must define his  own s p e c i f i c application of the term i n h i s p a r t i c u l a r area of  research. Modern scholarship i n Homeric d i c t i o n has produced two theories of p a r t i c u l a r relevance to t h i s examination of Stesichorus' adaptation of Homeric "formulae".  F i r s t l y , Nagler, i n his generative approach to the  study of "formulae" hasia.ttempted t o remove the whole  issue' of "formulae"  from s t a t i s t i c a l counts of repetitions and purely s t r u c t u r a l a f f i l i a t i o n s 3 of phrases with m e t r i c a l patterns .  Deriving h i s method of approach  from the generative view of speech habits developed i n transformational l i n g u i s t i c s , he suggested applying a theory of a pre-verbal Gestalt to o r a l composition i n which each formulary r e p e t i t i o n would be considered as a p a r t i c u l a r manifestation on a p a r t i c u l a r occasion of performance, generated out of, or r e a l i s e d from a mental, not v e r b a l "form" *hat i s , 4 as i t were, inherent i n the poet .  The theory,subject as i t i s to the  c r i t i c i s m of being applicable to poetic composition of a non-oral nature also, has far-reaching implications i n terms of the poetic process i n general, and e s p e c i a l l y i n l i t e r a r y t r a d i t i o n s i n which imitation i s acclaimed  and not castigated. In the case of poets such as Stesichorus,  whose l i t e r a r y formation has been strongly influenced by the t r a d i t i o n a l epics from t h e i r c u l t u r a l heritage, we can, by Nagler's theory, i n t e r p r e t the poet's choice of phrase inca given context as i n part generated out of the t r a d i t i o n a l associations of that context. The second and more important theory i s that of Hainsworth i n which he considers the "bond of mutual expectancy" as being i n t e g r a l to the concept of  a "formula" as a r e p e t i t i o n of content^.  expectancy admits of i n f i n i t e gradations,  "Mutual  words, at f i r s t f o r t u i t o u s l y  combined, by recreation slowly become regularly associated. that Hainsworth places emphasis on the words, toe: content.  One must note Mutual  expectancy depends on content, not form, and t h i s i s of p a r t i c u l a r r e l e vance when one considers the treatment of Homeric "formulae" by l a t e r poets Since the m e t r i c a l structure of the phrases, considered of prime importance 7 i n the theories of some scholars on the nature of o r a l i m p r o v i s a t i o n i s not--always functional i n non-hexameter composition, the poet's use of  the t r a d i t i o n a l "formulae" must depend on content.  The t r a d i t i o n a l l y  associated word-groups may, be imitated by the poet on the basis of content not structure.  Just as i n o r a l improvisation the "formula" i s a  device that cannot be divorced from i t s end, namely the narrative, so i n l a t e r , non-epic composition, the adaptation of such "formulae" by the poet i s dictated by the content and by the s p e c i f i c association of noun and epithet i n a s p e c i f i c context. Thus I define the "formula" as a repeated word-group; a group of words that occur together i n the poems of the epic corpus.  that i s ,  more than onceln s i m i l a r contexts  By v i r t u e of the r e p e t i t i o n of these  word-groups the bond of mutual expectancy established between a c e r t a i n noun and epithet can become f i r m l y s e t i n the subconscious of both a poet and h i s audiende through continual exposure to the r e p e t i t i o n s .  Thus, the  bond of mutual expectancy w i l l operate outside the s p e c i f i c context of the hexameter poems.  The poet may repeat the "formulae" i n one of  several ways that we s h a l l see i n the course of examining Stesichorus' adaptation of "formulae".  I t mVs.t be noted that the "formula" i s no  longer p a r t of the technique of the o r a l aoudo's, but rather one of the tools of a itotnxn*s who creates as w e l l as imitates  r  . the formulaic  inheritance fromihis predecessors. I propose to examine the d i c t i o n of Stesichorus i n terms of h i s use of "formulae" , which w i l l be divided into various categories according to the r e l a t i o n of the phrases to t h e i r Homeric precedents; a) word-groups that have recognisable precedents i n  the Homeric poems,  and have been imitated verbatim by Stesichorus; b) those word-groups that have recognisable precedents, but that have been modified by the poet; c)  phrases that have precedents i n sources other than the I l i a d  and Odyssey .  In t h i s chapter I s h a l l examine those "formulae" that  have acted as precedents f o r Stesichorus and Odyssey.  1  phrases d i r e c t l y from the I l i a d  I have subdivided the word-groups i n t o the following  categories, and within each category the order i s determined according to the  alphabetical order of the nouns i i i each group:  a) Noun-epithet groups b) Noun + genitive of possession c) Double noun groups, linked by HOC* or xe ... xctt d) Noun-epithet groups i n which one element i s supplemented e) Miscellaneous f) Word-groups occurring only once i n the Homeric corpus.  a) 1.  g Noun-epithet groups . yXavjQ Situs 'ASdva  2617 f r . 3  3.  There seems l i t t l e doubt that the supplement f i r s t proposed by Label i n P.Oxy. volume XXXII i s correct.  In the I l i a d there are over 30  instances of the "formula" i n the nominative case, at the verse-end, and i n the Odyssey over 50 instances.  In l y r i c , however, there are very few  examples of the association of Y^cuxSitus with"' AS'dfva. the  Page believes that  context of t h i s fragment i s a council of the g o d s ^ , and i f t h i s i s  correct, then one imagines that perhaps here Athene was speaking-^on Heracles' behalf, i n a way that r e c a l l s her defence of Odysseus i n the f i r s t book of the Odyssey.  2.  xoupu6uxv x' ctXoxov  PMG  185  4 ( SLG 17  6)  We f i n d t h i s word-group i n the I l i a d t h r i c e i n the, accusative, twice i n the genitive case, but i n the Odyssey only once i n the genitive  57  case and once i n the dative.  The epithet  xoupt6uos  i s almost always  r e s t r i c t e d to ctXoxos i n the feminine, ctvnp or Tco*cms;in the masculine. aXoxos,however, possesses a v a r i e t y of epithets :yvno-xtf, dvxu$e*n, HeSvrf, &uyapns» but p a r t i c u l a r l y the almost i n s i g n i f i c a n t (ptXn.  The a d d i t i o n a l  association with children i s best exemplified i n the I l i a d by the l i n e s : ev^'* aAoxdv xe <pi?Xnv eXticov xal vifntov utdv or EUtpPaveetv aXoxdv X E <ptXnv Kal vtfituov uudv  ( I l i a d V 480, 688; VI 366).  The association of  "wife" and "children", though natural, i s not i n every case appropriate, as f o r example when B r i s e i s i s described as XIX  298).  xoupu6ufjv  aXoxov ( I l i a d  I t would seem, however, that i n t h i s fragment of Stesichorus  we have i n  naj6as  XE  (puXous a v a r i a t i o n of the formulaic xctt vrfituov  utdv, i n which the poet employs an a l t e r n a t i v e word-group, not previously associated with xoupuSuiv ctXoxov or aXoxov xe q)tXnv^.  3.  6€nas ... XPtoeov The "formula"  PMG XPUCTEWL  185  1,2  (SLG 17  1,2)  6e*itaC occurs 6 times i n the I l i a d and  Odyssey, and need hardly surprise us since golden drinking cups and 12 bowls are f i t t i n g i n any heroic society  .  The image of the c o l o s s a l  cup of gold f l o a t i n g upon the streams of Ocean i s not found i n the Homeric corpus.  Helios departs to Ocean f o r the duration of the night  but the vehicle of transport goes unmentioned : he seturns'-' e-?' ctxaXappeuxcto l  gaduppdou * ftxeavoto (Odyssey XIX  433 f f . , c f . XXIV  V ::  11,12,). ffrom  Athenaeus one discovers that the poet who wrote the Titanomachia the f i r s t t o describessthe Sun's n i g h t l y transport as 13 one Theolytus also used t h i s term  .  XE*3TIS  was  and that  In the epic t r a d i t i o n r e l a t i n g to  Heracles' e x p l o i t s , Peisander (7th/6th century) and l a t e r Panyassis t e l l of Heracles capturing the Sun's cup,6Enas or (ptctXn, but no further d e t a i l s are given of the cup's composiiton^  In Mimnermus' version of  the Sun's journey back t o the East, a d i f f e r e n t , although l o g i c a l image i s found: Tovy£v Y^P 6ta xoya cpepeu TtoXunpaxos euvii, ^HouXn 'H<paCo"rou x PCf^v eAnXayevn Xpuaou T t y n e v t o s ... £  Believing that t h i s "hollow bed" i n which the Sun sleeps resembles the hollow of a cup, Athenaeus includes t h i s fragment i n h i s c o l l e c t i o n of "cups".  In t h i s instance the association of gold i s e x p l i c i t :  the bed  has been fashioned by the blacksmith of the gods, i n precious metal appropriate for the furniture of the gods. One might think that the association of "gold" and "sun" was obvious.  I t i s perhaps surprising that the epithets of Helios i n the  I l i a d and Odyssey are few, and those that do occur describe the sun's luminosity: cpae'duiv, <paea£yBpOTOs, Aaynp6*s. Golden,on the other hand, q u a l i f i e s various material goods - armour, clothing, thrones, cups and i s occasionally transferred t o d e i t i e s such as Aphrodite. one isolated comparison between the sun and gold;  a necklace brought by  one of the suitors f o r Penelope i s described as : X P ^ eepye"vov, n^Xtov (5s. (Odyssey XVIII 296) .  There i s  C T £ 0 V  J  nAexTpoLCtv  From a l a t e r date, the Hymn to  Helios XXXI (7/6th century) aeeveals a stronger association between the brightness of the god and h i s golden helmet (lines 9/10) yoked chariot ( l i n e 15).  and his golden-  Even though there i s this l a t e r association of  gold with the Sun, as he shines on the earth, there i s no l o g i c a l reason  7  for the vessel that c a r r i e s him a f t e r he has ceased shining upon the world to be created out of bright gold.  I conclude rather that the amazing cup  of the Sun was described as golden because cups of the gods and heroes were naturally and t r a d i t i o n a l l y made of gold. Since the dates of Peisander  of Rhodes , those of the poet of  the Hymn to Helios and those of Stesichorus  a l l belong somewhat nebulously  to the 7th or 6th centuries, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to determine where the image of the golden cup f i r s t originated, and what part, i f any,  the  golden bed of Mimnermus' poem played i n the creation of the image.  The  aptness of presenting the Sun's nocturnal transport as a cup, which Heracles could "hijack" f o r h i s expedition to the west, i s i n t e r e s t i n g l y 14 explained by Athenaeus as a joke on the part of poets  j i n view of  Heracles' propensity f o r cups of wine, what could be more f i t t i n g than a c o l o s s a l cup i n which to traverse the Ocean? i n a context which may  The motif d i d recur l a t e r  not have been concerned with Heracles, namely i n  a fragment of Aeschylus* Heliades*^.  Both Pherecydes and  Apollodorus  repeat the t a l e of Heracles borrowing the golden cup of the sun and t h e i r accounts may Stesichorus was he may  have been derived from Stesichorus  whether or not  the inventor of the image of the Sun's unusual v e s s e l ,  have been the f i r s t to explore, the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of using the  t r a d i t i o n a l association of 6e"itas and xptiaeov / thus presenting his audience with a f a r more concrete picture of the Sun.?s nightly voyage than i s giveniintthe Odyssey. 4.  yaxa{pe]crat def_o]t^t  2617  fr.13  2.5  Of t h i s formulaic association there are i n the dative p l u r a l alone 6 examples^in'the I l i a d and 7 i n the Odyssey, of which a t o t a l of 7 occur at the verse-end. Hymns and 2 from Hesiod.  A further 5 examples may be added from the There i s , however, only one instance that may  have acted as a precedent f o r the sentiment expressed Stesichorus, namely i n Odyssey I deotot.  i n t h i s fragment of  82: et yev 6f| v\3v TOUTO <j>C"Aov yaxapeaau  In t h i s same fragment of Stesichorus, 7 l i n e s above, we  a s i m i l a r association i n $[e]<3v yaxctpwCv • genitive p l u r a l Seuiv  find  Generally i n the case of the  , the epic poets preferred to leave the noun  without any epithet attached, presumably convenience.  on account of metrical  However, regardless of p o s i t i o n or frequency of t h i s word-  group i n p a r t i c u l a r cases, the association of yctxapes with d e o t i s s u f f i c i e n t l y obvious f o r us to i d e n t i f y Stesichorus' usage as "Homeric".  5.  en  1  d|xpoxdxav  xopuipcfv  2617  fr.4  i i  10,11  This word-group constitutes an imitation of a Homeric "formula" i f one compares i t with dxpoxefxrii, xopu<pnt itoXu6etpd6os 0<JX\5ynoto ( I l i a d I  499, V  754, VIII  3) and e n ' dxpoxcfxris xopucpris Ea'you ( I l i a d XIII  12).  Outside the actual Homeric corpus , the combination i s found i n the Hymn to Pan  : dxppxcfxnv xopu<pnv ynXoaxd'itov  etcavoiBaCva>v  (XIX  12) .  In the epic t r a d i t i o n , however, the word xopu<pn i s used p r i m a r i l y i n the sense of p h y s i c a l mountains such as Olympus or Ida.  The secondary  meaning of "head", of an i n d i v i d u a l creature, does occur once i n the I l i a d , as VIII  83, a l s o i n the context of a combat between heroes.  In t h i s instance the epithet axpnv indicates the p o s s i b i l i t y of i t s a p p l i c a t i o n to the word xopuipn i n both l i t s senses.  The passage i n  Stesichorus appears to involve the shooting of one of Geryon's three heads by the hero Heracles. Doubtless i t i s the head that towers highest above the hero, as i s suggested by some of the early representations of the 17 scene on vase-paintings  .  The poet has employed xopu<pri  i n i t s less  common sense of "head!', and i n retaining the epithet most frequently associated with the word i n i t s sense "mountain" he has d e l i b e r a t e l y suggested both p o t e n t i a l meanings, magnifying the dimensions of the monster.  Knowing the popular epic usage d x p o x d x n t xopuipnu, the audience  would automatically compare the height and s i z e of Geryon's head to a mountain peak.  They could envisage the hero faced by a massive, grotesque  mountain of a monster.  Thus we may observe that i n the case of e i t '  61  d x p o x d x a v xopu<pdv, Stesichorus has obviously copied a "formula" from the epic corpus, but the usage can hardly be termed b l i n d i m i t a t i o n . The word-play f a c i l i t a t e d by the double meaning of xoputprf, depends upon the audience's awareness of the t r a d i t i o n a l , or more„,frequent context of dxpoTCtxn xopuipn and i t s recognition of the implications o f the "formula" when applied to Geryon.  6.  ye*Xi, x^wpdv  PMG 179  2  The association of x^<*>p6"v and y d X t does occur twice i n the  18 Homeric poems, a t I l i a d XI 630 and Odyssey X  234  count t h i s as a "formula" precedented i n Homer.  , and hence we may  The epithet x ^ p d s  however, i s more often applied to grass and leaves, p a r t i c u l a r l y young shoots, as i n x^wP<*S pii)Ttas B (Odyssey XVI 47) and also to luxuriant under:  growth or even t o opos# as i n the Hymn to Apollo  233.  In i t s second  sense o f "pale" or " p a l l i d " , x ^ p d s occurs i n a metaphorical context with dx*0*s (Hesiodic Scutum 264  u  .  ) and with 6eos(Iliad_=VII 479)..  I t i s assumed by :LSJ that y £ X u q u a l i f i e d by x ^ p d v must be understood as a reference t o the "yellow" o f the honey, but there seems no reason why "paleness" i s not intended as the sense of the epithet . The phrase ye*At x ^ p d v , therefore, demonstrates how Stesichorus may derive a wordgroup from the Homeric poems, but h i s choice may represent an association of noun and epithet that i s less common than other p o s s i b l e combinations of e i t h e r the noun or the epithet. 7.  na"C6a cpuXov toiC*6as t e qiuXous  2619 f r . 1 6 PMG 185 4  18  Although there are precedents f o r t h i s word-combination i n the Homeric poems, i t seems that the "formula" <pC*Xov xe*xos was much more common, p r i m a r i l y i n singular contexts.  S t a t i s t i c a l l y , of a t o t a l of  57 instances of the singular, there are 5 examples of itau6ce <ptXov/nv i n the I l i a d and 3 i n the Odyssey.  Indeed, over h a l f of the instances  occur without any accompanying epithet. Accusative (pCXov UL6*V on the other hand, appears 21 times i n the I l i a d and 8 i n the Odyssey, while nominative <ptAos uildg 6 times i n the I l i a d and 22 i n the Odyssey. In Hesiod also, only one instance of nau6d'<pJXov'stands beside 7 cases of singular itaus'without any epithet and 4 of the p l u r a l .  I t would appear  that the group TtatSct ipJXov became popular only, i n l a t e r poets.  8.  <p£Xou  itctTQQd's  2350 f r . l  1 9  i  11  The association of (ptXos and itd*Tnp exists i n a l l  grammatical  cases i n the Homeric poems, although the genitive singular i s more often avoided on account of metrical awkwardness.  This d i f f i c u l t y , however,  may be overcome by the i n s e r t i o n of a preposifeion between the epithet and i t s noun, as f o r example i n cpiTXou yeta itaxpos axouifv (Odyssey XVII or by the use of the longer form of the masculine genitive i n  43)  -oto.  Stesichorus' metre allowed him to r e t a i n the t r a d i t i o n a l association without making use of these a l t e r n a t i v e s .  9.  ev vnualv euacre*Xyoi,s  PMG  192  (SLG p. 156, corr.)  Despite the fact that t h i s "formula" occurs i n a quotation from Plato, which may not be t o t a l l y accurate i n representing the poet's words, I include the&bra^ijroup i n t h i s category since the association of euaaeXyos with vaus i s w e l l attested i n epic and i t s recurrence i n t h i s fragment of Stesichorus (in some form) must be considered an imitation pf the Homeric "formula".  I t i s noteworthy, however, that i n the majority of  cases of t h i s "formula" i n the epic poems the preposition eitiT i s found, ev,  i f correct, may r e f l e c t a necessary change, metri g r a t i a .  1©.  <pJXa  xe*xva  2359 f r . l  i i 3  In the p l u r a l one frequently finds the epithets dyXotd or v n i t u a q u a l i f y i n g x e x v a i n the I l i a d and the Odyssey. x e * x v a <pJXa occurs twice i n the I l i a d  and not at a l l i n the Odyssey, but Stesichorus doubtless  relied  upon the association's being recognisable from the prevalence of the vocative q>£Xs~ire*x$>ov.  The most common word-group involving x e * x v o v i s i n  fact x £ x v o v e u o v , i t s v e r s a t i l i t y demonstrated by i t s occurrence at three d i f f e r e n t positions i n the hexameter l i n e . xe*xvov  followed by a break i n the papyrus.  In 2617  f r . 19  7  one reads  There i s every p o s s i b i l i t y  that, since t h i s fragment appears to belong to a personal address or exhortation, the common phrase x e " x v o v e u o v 11.  4*»  eupetav  X'&Mva  2260  occurred.  f r . l i i 18 (PMG  233)  In the Homeric :poems t h i s noun-epithet group occurs i n the nominative case alone, 4 times i n the I l i a d (and t h r i c e i n the Hymns) i n a l l instances taking the f i n a l p o s i t i o n i n the lines oaa X § o J v , ( I l i a d IV 182 e t c . ) .  xpetpet  eupeta  When the accusative i s given an epithet the  sole candidate appears to be i c o u X u B o x e t p a v (cf. dative gwxtavetpnt.-.arid yeAatvnM,but  the accusative occurs more often without an epithet.  If  we turn to the scope of e u p e t a , we discover that i n the Odyssey, perhaps naturally, the epithet i s applied mostly to the sea rather than to the land, and s i m i l a r l y i n the I l i a d , with the exception of i t s association with Troy/: e v t  Tpotnt  eupetni'  scheme e u p e t a v x § d * v a was  •  I assume that i n Stesichorus' metrical  possible, although unprecedented'in the hexameter,  and that the word-group arose from the pattern set by the nominative eupeta  x$"h>»  b)  1.  Noun+genitive of possession groups.  "_\zag ifjraTi,  2619 fr.15 (b)  4  In the Homeric poems this word-group normally takes a less precise form,Se2v-  CdxnxL.  Barrett's supplement suggests that the 20  goddess who i s exerting her w i l l i s Athena  , and I i n t e r p r e t . t h i s :  instance of Stesichorus r e f e r r i n g t o a s p e c i f i c deity , rather than to the gods inqgeneral, as one o f a number of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c  attempts t o  regenerate phrases that had become meaningless i n the Homeric poems on account of continual r e p e t i t i o n .  In t h i s way the poet could render -  episodes i n h i s poems with greater vigour and immediacy, despite t h e i r reliance on the epic t r a d i t i o n . 2.  Jitoxotuoi)  itapa  The word  Ttoyds itnytf  PMG  184  3,4  i s rare i n the Homeric poems, but there are three  instances of this notion of the "streams of r i v e r s " : aZ x veyovxctL J xcu, Ttnyas noxauffiv xaV n u a e a VI 123,4) . There  iinyi  ^  s  n  °  f c  nourfevxa  f  aXaea xaXa  ( I l i a d XX  8,9;  Odyssey  given an epithet, while i n this fragment  of Stesichorus' Geryonels we discover that the "streams" are diteJpovcts and  dpyopopucous,  and that the i d e n t i t y of the r i v e r i s s p e c i f i e d .  I  s h a l l deal with t h i s passage i n greater d e t a i l i n the discussion of wordgroups that contain elements from the epic t r a d i t i o n with new juxtapositions and associations  21  . We may note here that the epic "formula"  % Ttnyds  TtoxctySv was probably i n f l u e n t i a l i n the construction of the Stesichorean phrase, but ithat the poet required a s p e c i f i c reference, and so replaces the p l u r a l with the singular itoxauou and introduces the l o c a l i t y of Tartessus: statement.  another example of the p a r t i c u l a r i s a t i o n of a general  3.  ucas Abo's  PMG 185 6  By c a l l i n g Heracles "son of Zeus" Stesichorus i s apparently following the Hesiodic t r a d i t i o n , as exemplified i n the Theocjony and 22 ^"  ne  Shield  , but of the 11 instances the use of TOILS i s confined to  TOILS xe ALOS yeyaXou  i n the Shield  371. Elsewhere UL<5S occurs.  In the  I l i a d and Odyssey there are indeed precedents f o r the combination of TOILS and Aud*s, but there too OLD'S i s more prevalent.  Heracles i s  chronologically too early to make a legitimate appearance i n the Trojan c y c l e , but Odysseus' journey to the Underworld gave the poet an excellent opportunity to incorporate many of the heroes who l i v e d p r i o r to that era.  The f a c t of Heracles' being the son of Zeus i s made  pertinent t o the s i t u a t i o n ; t  yev uctbs J\a KpovL*ovos  he has t o s u f f e r despite his lineage: Znvos 23  (Odyssey XI 620)  . I t i s perhaps odd however  that i n both Odyssey XI and Theogony 952 i t . i s H^ae who i s i d e n t i f i e d as Tta"C6ct ALOS yeydXoLO  Heracles' "companion"  , and not Heracles.  As regards the completion of the l i n e i n accordance with Page's proposed colometry,  i t i s possible that aLYtoXou occurred, ctLYLo'xoLO'/ou  and yeYCtAouo/ou being the two most prominent epithets that accompany Atds. I t seems, however, from the texts that survive, that f o r m e t r i c a l or other reasons, the second,yeYdX^oco,was the epithet employed i n phrases containing itd Cs/^du6a,whilstxauYbdxobo most frequently occurred i n the -  "formula" describing Athena: xoup^v ALOS ctLYLOxc-LO (11 times i n the Odyssey) .  A l t e r n a t i v e l y , one might expect that the proper name 'Hpot>tXe"ns  would appear i n t h i s n i n e - l i n e sentence, but for such an assumption one would need a great deal more evidence on Stesichorus' methods of structuring  sentences.  I conclude , therefore, that i n h i s choice of t h i s  "formula"  the poet again appears to make use of the less common word-group f o r the  expression "son of Zeus".  4.  <pdos deXuoo  2619  fr.13  8  <pa*os neXifoto occurs 18 times i n the f i n a l two and a h a l f feet of the hexameter l i n e i n the I l i a d and the Odyssey  I f the colometry of  25 t h i s fragment has been c o r r e c t l y reconstructed  , Stesichorus appears to  have retained the f i n a l p o s i t i o n i n the l i n e , although f o r metrical ., reasons he was  forced to use the shorter form of the g e n i t i v e .  There are  three contexts i n which t h i s "formula" appears i n the Homeric poems: 1) with reference to the s e t t i n g sun;  2) with reference to an i n d i v i d u a l  being a l i v e , that i s , looking upon the l i g h t of the sun;  3) with  reference to an i n d i v i d u a l dying, that i s , departing from the l i g h t of the sun.  The t h i r d " of these contexts seems most l i k e l y i n t h i s fragment of  Stesichorus, i n view of x a x ' o t a a v  two l i n e s below.  One i s reminded  perhaps of A c h i l l e s ' speech at the beginning of Book XVIII of the I l i a d , i n which the hero r e f l e c t s upon the fated death of Patroclus: tog itoxe' uou urfxrip SueitdcppaS.e > you eecite MuityuSdvojv xdv apcaxov exu StSavxos eueto x a i  xepalv 3tto TpoJwv XeC*4>euv cpdos neXJoto  'Iliad 'XVIII  9.-11  However, although imitation of Homeric "formulae" i s quite evident i n t h i s fragment, the precise context i s only a matter f o r speculation. c)  Double noun groups linked by xaC or xe ... xau. In t h i s category there are few examples.  xa\, ailxpab  fr.4  2619  fr.l  i  6 and  Two groups, Btau xe  SoSpaxcf xe xat, 3poxd"evx[a ueXea  i i 13, properly belong to the category of new  2617  juxtapositions and  26 w i l l be considered i n chapter IV 1.  ydxotu T ' dvSpoQxxaaCat  2617 f r . 17  6  There are two p a r a l l e l s f o r this p a i r of nouns  i n conjunction  to be found i n I l i a d VII  237 and XXIV  548:  auxctp eydv eu* ot&a yctx S x' dvSpoxxaau'as xe. a  aieC TOU uept daxu ycJxctt T* avfipoxxaauxo xe. An extension of t h i s association exists i n Odyssey XI  uctxcto  xe  <pd*V0L  x  1  612:  uayLVctu*  xe  dvdpoxxaauxu, with general reference to the*>exploits of  Heracles, and the same l i n e , or "formula" appears i n the Theogony i n a p e r s o n i f i c a t i o n of these abstractions as the children of E r i s (line 228). Thus the association of ucfxca and dvSpoxxacruxL was probably w e l l established i n the epic corpus, and i n this instance Stesichorus has borrowed the phrase d i r e c t l y .  Unfortunately the fragment i s i n s u f f i c i e n t l y  complete , so that i t s content remains obscure.  One suspects that the  description of the horrors of war may have been applied to Heracles' adventures i n the west i n a way  2.  cap xct [xcA]  &C 3? aT  a  s i m i l a r to l i n e 612 of Odyssey XI.  2 6 1 7  f r  «  4  i i  8  There i s some question as to whether there i s s u f f i c i e n t space i n the l e t t e r i n g on the papyrus t o include the xao between the alpha and omicron, but there seems to be l i t t l e a l t e r n a t i v e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n view of the two precedents f o r the conjunction of actpxcts with oaxe'ct i n the Odyssey: thus eyxctxcf xe actpxctg  xe xcu, oaxect yueXdevxa (Odyssey IX  £TU acfpxcts xe xcu, 6axe*a tves exouauv  (Odyssey XI  293)  and ou yap  219) . adpB, , however, i s  not common i n the Homeric poems, and tends to occur i n the p l u r a l , as i n the l i n e s quoted above. Odyssey XIX  The only instance of the singular occurs i n  450>451: itoXXdv 6e 6utt<puae adtpxos 66<JVXL j XuxpupLg dC^cts,  ouS' 6axe"ov oxexo (ptoxds.  One could seek an epithet agreeing with atfpxct  for the mutilated part of the l i n e , but there i s no evidence for an epithet r e g u l a r l y attached to crcfp£.  In view of the emphasis placed upon  the penetration of the arrow, by means of the r e p e t i t i o n of 6to? i n l i n e s 8 and 10, i t seems more l i k e l y that the bones as w e l l as the skin were  pierced.  Hence I read a a p x a x a u  dcfpxas  xau  xe  oaxea  oaxea  as an imitation of the Homeric  assuming that the poet  employed the singular rather  than the p l u r a l of a d p 5 on account of the metrical requirements  and  that the scribe perhaps, compressed the letter-spacing of the x a u .  d)  Noun-epithet groups i n which one element must be  supplemented.  In t h i s category I have included noun-epithet groups of which one element i s missing i n the text of the papyri, but of which, f o r most cases, the t r a d i t i o n a l "formula" from the epic corpus gives a good i n d i c a t i o n of a probable supplement i n the context. In some cases the association i s r e s t r i c t e d i n such a way i n the Homeric corpus that, given a s i m i l a r context i n Stesichorus, the p r o b a b i l i t y of the same phrase being imitated by Stesichorus i s higher.  This section , however, i s  speculative i n content, and i t s only value i s that i t incorporates a l l the epithets from the fragments that are precedented i n epic.  In each  case the p r o b a b i l i t y of Stesichorus* imitating the "formula" p r e c i s e l y i s considered i n as f a r as the context may be determined from what survives of the fragments. ( I t w i l l be more convenient i n t h i s section to arrange the phrases by alphabetical order of the epithets rather than the nouns.)  1.  dyxuXoxdSou  2619  fr.l  i  9  This epithet occurs only twice i n the Homeric poems, i n I l i a d II  848 and X  428, i n both cases q u a l i f y i n g IladoVES  3  oves  aYXuAoxd*5ou  i n this fragment  epithet appears with Mn|6euou (Pindar, Pyth. I  and thus suggesting 27  .  Elsewhere the  78) and K u u e p u u i v  (Anacreon,  PMGH504), neither of which would be p a r t i c u l a r l y relevant to the Tfcojan theme.  2.  dXtud'pqJupov  2619 fr.16  7  The word dAuTtd*p<pupos i s not common i n the Homeric poems, occurring only t h r i c e , and appears to be associated with the colour of garments.  The context of t h i s fragment appears to involve Aphrodite,  |K]Uupoyevn's(line 6), but there i s no tangible clue as t o the person or thing described as dAi,7td'p<pupov.  3.  yaufoxos  2619  fr.18  9  In the Homeric poems,yaLrfaxoc. refers s p e c i f i c a l l y to Poseidon, whether i n conjunction with IIoaeu6do)V or with the periphrasis 'Evvoauyaoos. In the I l i a d there are s i x instances of the l a t t e r combination, one of the former and three i n which the epithet occurs without any substantive There i s also one example of a l l three combined: aXXa IIoaeu6d*a)V Y°H'tf X S 0  evvoaC*Yatos  ( I l i a d XIII 43) .  In the Odyssey  the epithet with IIoaeu6da)V and one with 'EvvoaifYaLOs  0  there are s i x instances of  'EvvoaCyauos.  noo"£L6du>v or  are therefore possible conjectures i n t h i s fragment.  Barrett  West and Fuhrer j o i n t h i s fragment with 2803 f r . l l which contains the Doric  0 4.  6]uaaSvuuos  28  2619 fr.19  4  An uncommon word, as i s indicated by there being only three instances of i t i n the Homeric poems, without any perceptible f i x e d associations. 6u0oJvuuo£ 6d0Ttapts  i n Iliad;8III  might from the context here r e f e r t o Paris (cf. "760  . ) . I f t h i s were the case, the application  of the epithet may be o r i g i n a l .  5.  euaaadrepoi,  2803 fr.7  7  The occurrences of t h i s epithet i n Greek are almost t o t a l l y confined to epic, nor are they frequent there.  One formulaic precedent  might be recognised i n 1 9 4 , XVI  ( I l i a d XII  itavxcts enaaauTe'pous u€Xaae x^o\)i TtouXugOTetpnt  4 1 8 , VIII 2 7 7 ) .  The context of the fragment i t s e l f  sheds no l i g h t as to what the associated noun might have been, but since the fragments of 2 8 0 3 are related to the Trojan c y c l e , we might consider a possible p a r a l l e l from I l i a d I .  Between l i n e s 5 and 7 of this fragment  a l a t e r hand has inserted a remark or gloss :"2?o $ p u y C , possibly r e f e r r i n g to 6 TO j  3 TO£OT.[] .. 5  i n line 5 .  followed by The apparent  a l l u s i o n to an "archer" i s reminiscent i n t h i s context of the s i t u a t i o n at the beginning of I l i a d - 1 where Apollo dpyupciToEos i n h i s anger (cf. the possible supplement x e x o X J c S y e v o g i n l i n e 4 of t h i s fragment) spreads f a t a l disease through the Greek camp by means of a xaxdv 3 £ X o s .  The  epithet used to describe the mass of people who succumbed to death as a r e s u l t i s eitaacriJTepos: ... TOEO 6 ' 'ATtdXXaJV e u £ a y e * v o u fixouaev, eitet ydfXa ot q>C"Xos ?iev ?ixe 6 ' eit' 'Apyeuouat x a x o v 3 e * X o s * ou 6£ v\) X a o \  §vn£o"xov eitctaad'TepoL, . . .  ( Iliad I  ogpuyo-.  The other word i d e n t i f i a b l e i n the marginal: notefis In i t s simple form t h i s epithet i s applied to Ares ( I l i a d V Achilles  (XIX  845) , *  4 0 8 ) and Hector (VIII 4 7 3 ) , but not t o Apollo.  Homeric Hymn VIII, Ares i s c a l l e d o g p u y d & u u o s  (line 2 ) ,  380 ff.)  In the  but he i s t r a d i -  t i o n a l l y associated with the spear not the bow. 6.  euxTtyeCv-  2 6 1 9 f r . 32  7  euxTuyevov i s consistently associated with TtToXt'edpov, 7 times i n the I l i a d and 3' times i n the Odyssey. Moreover, there i s ah interesting  precedent f o r the Stesichorean expression i n :  l X L ' o t i ^ | ^ ^ ^ ^ :  XXI  433).  S  j  euxxiTyevov  TtToXiTeSpov  ( I l i a d IV  3 3 - VIII  288,  We s h a l l see i n the l a t e r discussion of xXeevva[ i n l i n e 6 of  t h i s fragment that Stesichorus has taken the f a m i l i a r l i n e from the epic  71  t r a d i t i o n , and while r e t a i n i n g some of the elements has introduced others  A that are foreign to the Homeric poems,such as xAeevvos and even Tpoucts , 29 instead of IXuou, to break the expected formular pattern. .  7.  e u p u o [ i t a \ Ze&s  2619  fr. 1  i  16  The frequency of t h i s "formula' i n the Homeric poems (and i n addition  i n Hesiod and the Hymns) makes the supplement v i r t u a l l y  certain,  eupuorca ZeO*s i s in' control of the fate of Troy, as i s expressed i n the v  words of A c h i l l e s : ud*Xa ydp edev euptfonct Zeus I X ^ p o  env  uitepe*axe  (Iliad  IX 419,420).  8.  eoxpox[  2619  fr.41  1  The usage of t h i s epithet i s obviously r e s t r i c t e d . association withapua  or aua£a i  n  I t s regular  the epic t r a d i t i o n would suggest  such  a context i n t h i s fragment.  9.  QnnoMSXeu^ov  2617  fr.3  5  This epithet occurs only i n the Homeric poems, and i t s a p p l i c a t i o n i s severely l i m i t e d , namely to Patroclus i n I l i a d XVI and 839.  126,584  The subject-matter of the Geryoneis would suggest that  Stesichorus d i d not i imitate • . t h i s s p e c i a l i s e d use of the epithet, but i n f a c t made a novel a p p l i c a t i o n of i t .  ilO.  uevexa*puct[\,  2359 f r . l  i i 9  Five of the s i x instances of t h i s epithet i n the Homeric poems are i n the singular, r e f e r r i n g to s p e c i f i c i n d i v i d u a l s . a single case of A u x w X c A , uevexcJpyau ( I l i a d IX  There i s , however,  529) which occurs within  the context of the war between the AiixuXoC* and Koup?jTes » * Meleager fought.  n  which  The context of the Stesichorean fragment appears to be  related to the legend of the Calydonian Boar h u n t , but whether the 30  poet followed the p a r t i c u l a r version of I l i a d IX , which has been adapted to s u i t the s i t u a t i o n of A c h i l l e s * r e f u s a l t o f i g h t , cannot be determine!'* . -  11.  iteO] x a X u y o [ -  2617 fr.46  i i 5,6  The epithet neuxcfXuyos has survived only i n epic sources, there being 4 instances i n the I l i a d , a l l i n the dative p l u r a l q u a l i f y i n g This l i m i t a t i o n o f scope suggests, therefore, that masculine neuxaXiTyou0LV  9pe0t'.  the conjectured  does not belong t o an imitation of the Homeric  "formula" cppeoL i t e u x a X u y n t O L .  12.  xQya i i o X u jjpXo.tfafJou SctXcfaocts 2619 fr.25  5/6  This "formula" i s a combination of categories a) and b) discussed above.  In terms of category b), noun+genitive  of possession,  the u n i t i t o X u i p X o o ' o g o u o SaXdaans occurs with xuya or xtfyctTct i n I l i a d I I 209, VI 247, XIII 798 and also i n the Hymn t o Aphrodite VI  4 and  the Kypria f r . V I I 8 (Allen).  xuya combined with S a X d a o n s unqualified  i s more common, as i n I l i a d IV  422, X  96;  Odyssey XIII »:88.  574, XV  381, XVIII  66, 145, XXIV  On the other hand, i t o X u t p X o i T o & O L O %a\dooT\£ occurs  most frequently with itapa S u v a  (Iliad I  34 etc.) .  In terms of category a) , noun+epithet groups  itoXO*q)Xou03os  i s confined t o the genitive singular, long form, q u a l i f y i n g ^ a X a o a a 6 times i n the Iliad., 2 i n the Odyssey, together with 2 instances i n the Hymns and one i n Hesiod. be correct.  Hence the supplement of daXcfooag  i s assumed t o  I note therefore that Stesichorus had again probably repeated  a "formula" from the epic corpus, although,.as f a r as one can t e l l , he has chosen a less common grouping.  13.  itovj r o i t o p o o L  2619 fr.25  2  From i t s sense alone, this epithet must r e f e r t o a ship, and  indeed i n the epic corpus i t s a p p l i c a t i o n i s r e s t r i c t e d to vaus. In the Odyssey there are 4 examples of the "formula" i n the nominative singular, 2 i n the g e n i t i v e , and i n the I l i a d 2 examples,of the genitive and 11 of the dative p l u r a l . . . vaus  14.  :  ev  Ttovxc-itopotcn, ye'eaao (III 46 etc.) and i t a p a vfiuat  (VII  itovTOndpouo-uv  72 e t c . ) .  I f Stesichbrus used a word other than  f o r "ship", we have no evidence of i t .  pnSrfvopa  2619  fr.l  i  21  This attribute i s applied s o l e l y to the hero A c h i l l e s , 4 times HOU, yex'  i n the Iliad,^.once i n the Odyssey and once i n the Theogony; 'AxtXXna  priSrfvopa  duyoXe*ovxa  ( I l i a d VTI  228 = Theogony 1007).  In the  context of a debate p r i o r to the Trojans* acceptance of the wooden horse i n t o t h e i r c i t y , column i of t h i s fragment preserves part of a speech of encouragement  from one of-the Trojans who i s suspicious of the horse and  who advocates reliance on t h e i r f i g h t i n g strength.  pnf-Tyvopa i n t h i s  context could r e f e r to the dead A c h i l l e s as hoMonger being a threat to the Trojan v i c t o r y .  A l t e r n a t i v e l y , the epithet may have been applied to  one of the Trojan heroes who has subsumed the Homeric a t t r i b u t e of i ' . Achilles.  15.  aTOyerpJou | SavdxoiQo  2617 f r . 4  i i 1,2  The supplement i n t h i s l i n e i s derived from an i n t e r l i n e a r note made by a l a t e r hand.  The combination of tfxuyepos and Scfvaxog occurs  only twice i n the Odyssey; uvno-rtfpwv axoyepov ddvaxov Mat, xnp'  eve*Ttouca  itavxeg yev OTuyepou dcfvaxou 6 e u X o t a i , 3 p o x 5 t a u Thus we may say that the association  (Odyssey XXIV (Odyssey XII  414) and 341) .  i s "formulaic", but we find that  axoyepd's more often q u a l i f i e s substantives, such as  O-MOXOS,  which imply  death, or others such as voOaog, a x n , ynpas » the precursors of death.  In the I l i a d xaxds and ue*Acts are the most common epithets of death. In t h i s fragment,therefore, i t can be seen that Stesichorus has adopted a word-group whose elements are subject to an i n d i r e c t bond of mutual expectancy, in.as- much as the p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n s h i p of o"nJY P°'s and e  dctvaxog i s infrequent i n the epic poetry that has survived.  16.  f l epicuxepoi [yv-  2617 ff:49  2  I f the poet here follows the traditional"formula", one would expect that the epithet i s applied to Zeus, as i s the case without exception  i n the epic corpus:  Zeus Tepiuxe"pauvos or Aut Tepiaxepctuvaju  occurs 8 times i n the I l i a d , 7 times i n the Odyssey, 5 times i n the Hymn and 3 times i n the Hesiodic corpus.  17.  unep£u*uoL  2359 f r . l i i 5  This epithet i n the p l u r a l i s r e g u l a r l y applied t o Trojans i n the I l i a d  (7 times) and to depcJnovTes in. the Odyasey (3 times) .  In the  context of the Calydonian Boar Hunt , the Trojan association i s highly u n l i k e l y , nor i s the single instance of i t s a p p l i c a t i o n t o the Lapiths ( I l i a d XII 128) a possible precedent.  The poet has most probably trans  ferred the epithet from i t s customary p o s i t i o n with the Trojans to some other group deserving  of the t i t l e .  I t i s l e s s l i k e l y that the epithet  was applied to SepcfitovTes i n the context of a l i s t of heroes.  e)  Miscellaneous word-groups.  2619  fr.l  i  TOU 6' ditb xpaxSs  2617  fr.4  i 14,15  h%L x^ova  2617  fr.l. 3  xax'  2619  fr.13  1.  aXX 1  2. 3.  aye  6rf  auaav  7  10  There i s l i t t l e to note regarding these "formulae" other than that t h e i r Homeric o r i g i n was probably recognised by the poet's audience on account of t h e i r frequent appearance i n the epic poems. p a r t i c u l a r l y close to I l i a d XVI Muve*nv &d\e fotSos  'ATKJXXOIV  793 i n context :  Number 2  is  T O O 6' dub yev xpotxos  . Noteworthy i s the p a r a l l e l use of the  a r t i c l e as a r e l a t i v e of connection. Number 4, occurs 4 times i n the I l i a d , but xata uoupav appears to be the more frequent usage (21 times i n the Odyssey and 9 times i n the I l i a d ) .  f)  Word-groups occurring only once i n the Homeric corpus. By Hainsworth's d e f i n i t i o n a phrase occurring only once i n the  epic poems does not constitute a "formula", and yet the adaptation of such a phrase by l a t e r poets such as Stesichorus would indicate that the said phrase was constructed of "formulaic" elements* that i s , of  words  and groups of words that were suitable f o r incorporation into "formulae", but were never required.  A l t e r n a t i v e l y , such a phrase may have occurred'  1  more than once i n the epic corpus as a whole, but other instances of i t have been l o s t .  The following four word-groups from Stesichorus' poems  occur only once each i n the Homeric corpus.  1.  afyctxo itopqi[upecot  2617 f r . 4  In the single instance i n which  i i 12  itoptpdpeos  i s applied to atya  ( I l i a d XVII 360-361) we f i n d a description of the earth stained with the purple-dark.blood around the body of Patr.oclus, over whom a f i e r c e b a t t l e has been raging with Ajax the foremost defender of the corpse. the epithet  itop<pd*peos'"is more  frequently  Although  employed to describe a r t i c l e s  of clothing or blankets of such a colour, or else the sea (which was the o r i g i n a l source of the dye), there e x i s t s an i n t e r e s t i n g extension of the  idea of darkness XVI  334 = V  i n EAActgE  itoptpupeos  dcfvctxos xal yotpct vpctTctJn  (Iliad  83). Epithets conveying the sense of the darkness of blood  are  generally pe'Aav ( I l i a d XVI  and  xeActLveqJEs ( I l i a d XVI  529), xeAatvdv ( I l i a d - I  303, VII 329)  667). Thus, Stesichorus has adopted a less  common association , precedented only once as f a r as we can t e l l , which may incorporate the sense of the profusion of the blood pouring from the monster's wound as well as i t s colour on account of the common use of mopcpupeos  with  ndvxos.  The verb employed by Stesichorus i n t h i s fragment,yvctuvw, often occurs i n the Homeric poems i n the context of both duuct and x o v t r i .  For  example, the helmet of Patroclus l i e s on the ground, i t s plumes befouled with blood and dust: 795,6).  yuxvdnactv  62  edeupctu a C y a r u  xau xovLnwx ( I l i a d XVI  In Stesichorus' description, however, the S5Spa£ i s s t i l l worn by  Geryon, so that the formulaic "with blood and dust" would be inappropriate.  2.  UK] n d x o y o s  Tp^^d'Aci,'  2617 f r . 4  i  14  The phrase i n i t o x d y t o v xpufpotAeuov appears once i n the Homeric poems, i n a battle-scene i n which the noise of clashing shields and plumed helmets reaches the heavens: duxn xcu, C i t n o x d y a i v  6'  xpucpaAEUOV ( I l i a d XII  with xopus and <pd*Aos ( I l i a d XIII  oupctvov  T X E | 3aAAoyE*vujv  38,39).  aaxsuv  TE  More frequently associated  132 and XVI  216) , u i t i t d x o y o s  may  without d i f f i c u l t y be extended to q u a l i f y TpixpcfAEua, i t s e l f a compound of (pdtAos.  TpoqJCtAeux i n the epic corpus, f o r reasons probably m e t r i c a l ,  tends t o occur without an epithet.  3.  qnJAoKLS A  epithet  dpyctA^a  2617 fr.17 4  s t r i c t l y epic word,  dpYCtAea:;  ( I l i a d XI  qnJAoitts  occurs only once q u a l i f i e d by the  278), whereas i t s epithet  auvri,  regularly  found i n the p o s i t i o n a t the verse-end, i s repeated not only i n the  Homeric corpus, but also i n Hesiod's Works and Days 161, Shield 200 and in the Hymn to Demeter  267.  The l i s t of nouns q u a l i f i e d by dpYaXeos  in  Homer i s lengthy, but i t s association with, f o r example, epts or uautvr) i n the I l i a d , and i n p a r t i c u l a r with the sound-word CTOVOS, may for  account  the transference of the epithet to (pd'XoTtLS, the "din of b a t t l e " .  Stesichorus has again chosen an apparently infrequent noun-epithet combination. The fragment belongs to a context of f u l l - s c a l e warfare, as not only t h i s l i n e , but also y d x c x i , T' dv6po[_XTaau*ab ( l i n e 6) suggests . Whether part of the Geryoneis incorporated another ergon of Heracles, i n which he p a r t i c i p a t e d i n some great b a t t l e , or whether these l i n e s in a s i m i l e , we cannot t e l l .  fall  Their r e l a t i o n to the encounter between  Heracles and Geryon himself i s not e n t i r e l y obvious. In uAo7tbva[..  2617 f r . 18  3 the papyrus breaks a f t e r the alpha i n  Did dpyaX^a or  auvd*  follow?  B r i e f though the fragment may  be,  the context again appears t o be one of a b a t t l e on a large s c a l e , with individuals (plural) perishing,]]OXU)XOTE£S ( l i n e 4), possibly with helmets or bodies r o l l i n g i n the dust, .JAL x o v C a c s ^  ( l i n e 1), i n a scene perhaps  comparable with one of the battle-scenes i n I l i a d XVII.  According to 32  the structure of the Geryoneis proposed by Barrett and Page  , the major  part of the poem was concerned with the encounter between Heracles and Geryon.  Thus, assuming that fragments 17 and 18 do belong to the same  poem as the i d e n t i f i a b l e fragments of 2617, I conclude that these elements of 4.  a battle-scene belong t o a simile or digression. 6t' :'  ftxeavoCo  uepa'aas  PMG  185  2  (SLG 17  3)  Apart from one example of 6u' " U x e a v o u o i t e p n a n L S  (Odyssey X  508), one can c i t e several i n d i r e c t p a r a l l e l s f o r t h i s phrase such as  itepctu) with  HOVTOS  ( I l i a d I I 617, Odyssey XXIV  Ttopov '' ftxeavoto (Hesiod, Theogony 292) .  118) or else Stagcts  The other sphere i n which one  finds the verb itepcta) with the preposition 6ux" i s that of a m i s s i l e p i e r c i n g the breast of a hero (Hymn to Mercury 45) or his forehead 502): f| 6* £Te"poLO 6uct xpotcfcpoLO Ttepnoev J aCxyn x ^ ^ t e ^ l .  ( I l i a d IV  Accordingly, although the phrase used by Stesichorus has but one extant precedent, i t i s by no means unusual i n i t s structure or associations. I t i s noteworthy, however, that the phrase occurs i n annon-Homeric 33 context and amid a series of d i s t i n c t i v e l y modified Homeric phrases  Three other "formulaic" phrases, 6u' ctu§epo£s ctx]puYET S A  2360 f r , l  i  2619 f r . 1  i  4, 6a6|yovos ducat, 19  2617 f r . 4  8,9 and ituxuvfas)-. <PP DO V S A  also have single precedents i n the Homeric corpus,  but w i l l be noted only here and d e a l t with i n greater d e t a i l i n chapter V on account of t h e i r relationship t o phrases i n Hesiod and the Hymns.  From the c o l l e c t i o n i n t h i s chapter of word-groups that have recognisable precedents i n the I l i a d and Odyssey I conclude that Stesichorus could and d i d employ regular "formulaic" expressions drawn from the monumental epics.  I note, however, that not a l l of the examples  c i t e d are p a r t i c u l a r l y frequent, or the most common expression that the poet could have selected. In category a ) , of the eleven noun+epithet  "formulae", only  seven appear to be highly frequent i n t h e i r occurrence.  Number 3, 6ends  Xpudeov, i s o r i g i n a l i n i t s usage, although the t r a d i t i o n a l association of XPUCEOV and 6e'nas plays an important part i n the new context.  Number  5 i s likewise an example of a "formula" that i n the Stesichorean context has a s i g n i f i c a n c e a d d i t i o n a l to that of i t s usage i n epic, through the  poet's play on words.  Number 6 occurs only twice i n the Homeric poems,  but by Hainsworth's d e f i n i t i o n of a"formula", may be considered as an limitation thereof.  In number 11 the association of top eta and x ^ v has  been established firmly enough f o r the nominative case t o confirm that the Stesichorean phrase  i n the accusative must r e l y on the Homeric  o f the other seven word-groups, numbers 7, and 10 are  precedent, demonstrably  less frequent i n t h e i r appearance i n the Homeric poems  than other "formulae" involving one or other of t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r components . In category b ) , of the four instances c i t e d , number 2 i s rare i n the Homeric poems and number 3 appears t o follow the Hesiddic tradition.  In category c) neither example i s overtly frequent, as f a r as  our evidence goeS:.% In category d), of the 17 supplemented phrases with epic p a r a l l e l s , 8 are rare. In category e ) , number 4 i s an example of  the poet's choice of an a l t e r n a t i v e phrase that was less common. The a d d i t i o n a l 7 examples of Homeric phrases that occur only  once i n the Homeric poems further support the view that Stesichorus apparently preferred t o copy of. imitate "formulae" of a less stereotyped nature.  Footnotes t o chapter I I I  1  p.19.  J.B.Hainsworth, Homer , Greece and Rome Surveys 3 (Oxford,1969)  2 M. Parry, L'epithete t r a d i t i o n a l l e chez Homere (Paris, 1928) p. 16, i n which he gave the following d e f i n i t i o n : Dans l a d i c t i o n des poemes aediques l a formule peut e t r e d e f i n i e comme une expression qui est re"g'ulie*rement employee, dans les memes conditions metriques, pour exprimer une certaine idee e s s e n t i e l l e . 3  M.N.Nagler,"Towards a Generative View of the Oral Formula," TAPhA 98 (1967) pp. 269-311 and also i n Spontaneity and T r a d i t i o n : a study  80 J J  i n the o r a l a r t of Homer 4  (Berkeley,1974).  Nagler, a r t . c i t . , p. 311.  5 Hainsworth, "Structure and content i n epic formulae;the question of unique expression," Cg_ 14 (1964) p. 155. 6 Hainsworth, The F l e x i b i l i t y of the Homeric Formulae (Oxford, 1968) p. 35 f f . and p. 42. 7 For example i n the work of E.G.O'Neill J r . , "The l o c a l i s a t i o n of metrical word-types i n the Greek Hexameter," YC1S 8 (1942) pp. 103-178, or more (recently i n that of J.A.Russo,"The Structural Formulae i n Homeric Verse," YC1S 20 (1960) pp. 219-240. 8 In t h i s chapter , by Homeric poems we mean the I l i a d and the Odyssey. Although I s h a l l take separate account of the phrases r e l a t e d to p a r a l l e l s from Hesiod and the Hymns and the so-called epic Cycle, i n chapter V, I s h a l l mention where necessary instances of phrases that occur i n both Homeric and non-Homeric epic sources. J9 Note that v a r i a t i o n i n i n f l e c t i o n , aord order etc., i s regarded as modification which does not,however,alter the basic bond of mutual expectancy. 10  D.L.Page, "Stesichorus' Geryoneis," JHS 93 (1973) p. 147.  11  On Ttatdas Te q>C*Aous see number 7 below.  12  Cf. N.R. pp. 55-59.  Collinge, "Mycenaean di-pa and 6e'itas," BICS  4 (1954)  13  Athenaeus*Deipnosophistae XI 469e-470d. The fragments mentioned i n the following discassion on the Sun's cup a l l derive from Athenaeus' c o l l e c t i o n of examples of a cup c a l l e d a 'HpaxAecov. 469d refers to itctu£0VTss OL HOUTITCU, ....  14  Athenaeus, XI  15  The fragment of Aeschylus appears i n Athenaeus XI 469f.  16  Pherecydes , as quoted by Athenaeus, XI 470c and^Apollodorus B i b l . I I 5 10 both r e f e r to a x P ^ e o v 6e'itas, ev <Lu T O V 'ftxeavbv oeeitepaae.  17  Cf. the discussion by M. Robertson i n "GSryoneis : Stesichorus and the Vase-painters," CR 19 (1969) p. 208 f f . .  18  Cf. Hymn t o Hermes  560.  19  On <pt*Aqu uax[p] bs utov see page 109, chapter IV.  20  Barrett i n Page's SLG p. 26.  21  See page 122 chapter IV.  22  Theogony 316;  Shield  66, 110, 150, 163, 320, 371, 392, 413, 424,  447. 23  See page 267 f f . , chapter VIII.  24  Page, a r t . c i t . , p. 146 f f . .  25  West, "Stesichorus redivivus*" ZPE  26  See page  27  E. Lobel, P.Oxy.vol.XXXII, p. 37.  4 (1969) p. 135.  115, chapter IV.  28 See West and Fiihrer i n ZPE 1 (197D pp. 262-264 and pp. 265-266 respectively. Page argues against the j o i n i n PCBhS 19 (1973) p. 51ff. 29  See page 106 f . , chapter IV.  30  Lobel, P.Oxy. v o l . XXIII, P-H# suggested that at l e a s t the f i r s t column of 2359 might belong t o the Suotherae of Stesichorus. For a f u l l discussion of the fragment see ;215 f f . , chapter VI.  31  Cf. M.M.Wilcock, "Mythological paradeigmata i n the I l i a d , " CQ 14 (1964) pp. 147-153.  32  See P a g e s r a r t i c l e "Stesichorus' Geryoneis," JHS 93 (1973) p. 148 f . ,  33  See page 110 f f . and 119 f f . , chapter IV.  1  Chapter IV  Stesichorus* modification of "formulae** from Homer. •  This chapter examines word-groups i n Stesichorus that have the outward appearance of Homeric "formulae", but are i n f a c t new combinations, unprecedented i n the epic t r a d i t i o n as f a r as the extant corpus i n d i c a t e s . The f i v e subdivisions i n t o which these word-groups may be categorised are as follows: I  Noun+epithet : groups that comprise new combinations of i n d i v i d u a l elements from Homeric "formulae".  II  Noun+epithet : groups of which one element i s non-Homeric, thus providing evidence f o r new associations of elements from "formulaic" contexts i n the epic t r a d i t i o n with elements from outside the epic tradition.  III  Longer units that constitute expansions of simple noun+epithet groups.  IV  Noun+epithet : groups i n which both elements are foreign to the epic t r a d i t i o n . As i n the previous chapter, the basic u n i t with which we are  dealing consists of a noun together with i t s associated epithet, and also of a noun with accompanying genitive of possession, since such word-groups show the highest number of i n d i v i d u a l connections with the "'formulae" of epic.  Again, we are primarily concerned with the precedents observable i n  the I l i a d and Odyssey, although p a r a l l e l s from the Hymns and the Hesiddic corpus are taken i n t o account where relevant.  I  New combinations of t r a d i t i o n a l elements  a)  Non-supplemented  1.  potdtvous ctxoVTCts  PMG  243  The epithet pocStvcis i s not common i n the epic corpus, occurring once i n *-Homer> J ^ t o describe a whip ( I l i a d XXIII (Theogony  538) , once i n Hesiod  195) and once i n the Hymns (Hymn to Demeter  183), both of  these Instances describing f e e t .  The accusative singular axovxa  r e g u l a r l y a t t r a c t s the epithet oStfv, whilefcfehe p l u r a l sometimes appears with euCeaxot and daue*es, but more frequently without an epithet.  The  combination p a 6 o v o b s axovxas i s a unique "formula", i f one grants that the epithet h a i formulary p o t e n t i a l on account of i t s association with itd*6es on two occasions. 'Unfortunately  the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the epithet i s l o s t , other  than i n d i c a t i n g the "slender" appearance of the spears, since the s c h o l i a s t who gives t h i s example i n h i s l i s t of the occurrences of pa6i,*>tfs, does not include the context of the Stesichoraan according  t o the s c h o l i a s t , described  as pct6uvoC"  phrase . 1  Ibycus, however,  oi xov oupovov gaaxasdvxes xudves  instead of jeuu eyelets. This,therefore, i s one of several  instances i n which the same unusual epithet i s attested f o r both poets, although i n t h i s case t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n of the epithet i s markedly different.  Stesichorus*  s t r i k i n g use of pa6t,v<$s may have held the same  implications of s i z e that one finds i n Ibycus ' use, but the emphasis on 1  the t a l l , slender nature of the warriors' spears i s more.likely when one notes that i n Theocritus the same epithet describes the cypress tree: 2 t a l l , dark, slender and, indeed, spear-like . Stesichorus'  association  of pa6uv<?S with spears may have influenced h i s S i c i l i a n descendant i n the choice of t h i s epithet highly appropriate 2.  apuo-rov doL6o*v  f o r the cypress t r e e .  2618 f r . l  i .4  Examples of the use of epithets with docdds come from the Odyssey for the most p a r t  3  and we note that there the most prominent  a t t r i b u t e of the bard i s t o be deios natives  (10 times), with l e s s common a l t e r -  uepuxXuxo's and epu'npos. (Sptaxos, on the other hand, i s used  predominantly as a substantive  (avdpuitos/avriP being omitted), rather than  as an epithet, and hence the combination of dpucTOS with dou66*s i s not precedented even by a p a r a l l e l of a d i f f e r e n t noun q u a l i f i e d by ctptaxos. Although i t i s easy t o assume that ctpooxos i s more or less the equivalent of fcetos, both epithets r e f l e c t i n g the singer's excellence, the l a t t e r also has connotations of divine associations, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n view of the b e l i e f that the poet was d i v i n e l y i n s p i r e d .  The mortal nature of the  bards i s more apparent i n the Hesiodic corpus, which f a c t i s perhaps i n d i c a t i v e of a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t a t t i t u d e t o the substance of poets. Inspiration may come from the Muses and Apollo ( c f . Hesiod, Theogony and f r . 305  2, M.SVW.), but the bards themselves are mortal.  95  ctptcxos  i s d i s t i n c t l y "mortal" i n i t s associations, and hence i t may be that Stesichorus i n h i s choice of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r epithet the f a c t that the  bard i s a man,  wishes to stress  granting; him r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h i s own  4 excellence rather than assuming t o t a l reliance upon d i v i n e i n s p i r a t i o n . ||npes 'Axctuotf  2359 f r . l  i i  3,4  eptfnpes i s an epithet found almost exclusively i n conjunction with e T o t p o v , t h e sole exception being the word-group ep^npov dou6d*v which occurs t h r i c e i n the Odyssey^.  The exact meaning of epCnpes i s  uncertain, although i t i s generally assumed that i t d e r i v e i from dpopt'crxw to " f i x " , with e p i , - ,  an i n t e n s i f y i n g p r e f i x , and hence, i n the context of  eTdu&oi*, eptfnpes would be sensibly translated "steadfast" o r " f a i t h f u l " . Would such connotations be meaningful i n the context of 'AxcttoiT i n t h i s passage from the Suotherae?  The  'Axottou, when they do receive an epithet  i n fche I l i a d , are q u a l i f i e d most frequently by euxviftaSes or xctpn xoudwvxes*  The  -  'Axcaot i n t h i s passage, however, are more l i k e l y to be  the people from the area Achaea, i n the northern Peloponnese, since the l i s t of p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the Boar Hunt appears t o be a regional one.  85  Since each of the regional groups l i s t e d receives an epithet appropriate to renowned warriors, namely cttx cttKxi?s yevexcfpyau and uitepddviou, I would u  suggest that epJnpes i n t h i s passage has the meaning of "steadfast" or "determined i n b a t t l e " .  In view of the frequent association o f  euxVTfyudes and xapraxoydwvxes with eptnpes  4.  'Axauotf (=Greeks), the word-group  'Axcttot would have doubtless struck the audience as unusual.  it[aYXP3&rea 6i6*|ua] T  1  2617 f r . 6  (a) 3,4  The obvious model f o r the e n t i r e phrase itotYXP^o'e' 6«Jya'T*SxovTt 0  must be 'OXdyitta 6o5yax' exouau/exovxes (10 times i n the I l i a d , 3 i n the Odyssey, 5 i n the Hymns) and one i s reminded p a r t i c u l a r l y o f those instances that r e f e r t o the Muses, f o r example i n I l i a d I I 484 and XI 218.  Naturally the h a l l s o f the Hesperides, situated i n the f a r west,  w i l l require a d e s c r i p t i v e epithet other than 'OAuynux.  itayxP^o-ea  appears tm be i n unique combination with 6<iSuctxa, the common groupings being ocJyaxa xXuxcJ o r 6uJyaxa xaXdt, o r e l s e a phrase such as 6oJyax  1  '06uaonos £euoto o r 6uSuaxa Ktfpxns i n which the owner o f the house i s %ayxp\5acos occurs infrequently i n the epic poems;  indicated.  there i s  but one example i n the I l i a d , a t I I 448 du*crctvoL itctYXPudeot, and none i n the Odyssey. xd*£d (XXVII  In the Hymns one finds one instance of the epithet q u a l i f y i n g 5) and one q u a l i f y i n g apya (3X 4) .  In f a c t , compounds with  irctv as f i r s t element are not common i n the epic corpus.  Thus the associa*;  t i o n of %ayxp\Saea and 6t5yoxa i s new, as f a r as the surviving evidence shows. The association of gold with the Hesperides  i s hardly s u r p r i s i n g  since, from Hesiod onwards, they are the guardians of th'e golden apples that were presented as a wedding-gift t o Zeus and Hera: 'EcuepCdcis $',nls yTy&ct ite'priv xXuxou ' flxectvoLO Xpuaect xctXa yeXouot q^povxa* xe 6e*v6pea x a p u d v .  (Theogony 215,216).  In l a t e r t r a d i t i o n , possibly beginning with Peisander , and c e r t a i n l y adopted by the H e l l e n i s t i c poets such as Apollonius of Rhodes, there i s also a guardian snake watching over the apples... This snake must surely be the r e s u l t of a conflation of the t r a d i t i o n of the Hesperides' duty with that,:r©f the snake i n the Theogony 335, who guards Ttayxp\Jo"ea u r j X a of no s p e c i f i c o r i g i n .  There i s no evidence i n the extant fragments of  Stesichorus of any guardian snake.  What may be o r i g i n a l , however, i s the  poet's transference of the expected epithet that q u a l i f i e s the apples of the Hesperides to t h e i r abode, t h e i r itaYXP^o"e<* 6oJyaTa.  5.  |Javda 6* ' E X e v a  2619 fr.14  5  As an a t t r i b u t e of a person i n the I l i a d and Odyssey SavOrfE belongs p r i m a r i l y t o Menelaus (16 times i n the Iliads and 15 i n the Odyssey) while i t i s used i n the feminine of Demeter (twice), of Agamede (once) and of Ariadne (once, i n the Theogony).  The epithets of Helen tend t o be  rather uninformative about her p h y s i c a l appearance:  'Apyeu'n gives her  place of o r i g i n ; xaXXticdpnos and xaXXixouos/nuxouos i n d i c a t e that she has b e a u t i f u l cheeks and h a i r , without giving any frame of reference from which one might determine what aspect of these was considered b e a u t i f u l . One further epithet,TovvJiteiiXos , i s likewise no more d i s t i n c t i v e , since most of the Argive. or Trojan women of noble o r i g i n presumably wore long The epithet S a v S o s denotes  flowing robes  a reddish-brown colour when  describing h a i r , but without more evidence of Stesichorus' depiction 1 0  of Helen, I cannot claim that h i s use of t h i s epithet i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y more s p e c i f i c than the Homeric ones.  Thus, although non-Homeric, the  application of Sctvda* to'Helen i s not s u r p r i s i n g , but e f f e c t i v e enough that l a t e r poets such as Sappho and Ibycus a l s o c a l l e d Helen g a v d d  rather than repeating one from the epic corpus" " ". 1  -1  I t i s possible that  the firm association of E,av%6s with Menelaus i n the Homeric poems i s significant;  Stesichorus probably intended the r e l a t i o n s h i p between  Menelaus and Helen to be accentuated (perhaps i r o n i c a l l y ) by t h i s transference of the epithet regularly expected with Menelaus to h i s misguided wife. 12 The context of t h i s fragment seems to be a scene i n Troy  , in  which some reference i s made to the ultimate;'destrttc:tlc» of Troy by  fire,  whether i n prospect, or immediately before the event.  This being the  case, the presence of Helen shows that the I l i o u Persia and the Palinode were separate poems and that i n the former Helen was  depicted i n f a i r l y  t r a d i t i o n a l manner : . I t i s possible, however, that even i n the I l i o u 1  P e r s i s , the poet was  3  perhaps consciously s t r i v i n g to move away from the  firmly established v i s i o n of Helen by his introduction of the epithet Zav%d i n h i s v i s i o n of her. 6.  xJpxov  xavocui Qepov  2619  fr.l i i  20  Of the four occasions on which a xtpxog appears i n the  Iliad  and Odyssey, i n two the b i r d i s described as eAa<ppd*xaxov uexenvwv ,"the s w i f t e s t of winged creatures"  (Iliad"'XXII 109 and Odyssey XIII  xovuaL'Ttxepos i s applied to b i r d s i n general i n Odyssey V thrushes s p e c i f i c a l l y i n Odyssey XXII  87).  56 and to  468, but not to the xt'pxos.  The  14 xCpxos apparently  belongs to the species of  Hesiod c a l l s the CpriS; 212). for  Cpn|-~ ,land we note:: that V~  uxune*xns Cpn£, xavuai/itxepos opvts (Works and Days  The species i s i n .general remarkable for  i t s long slender wings and  i t s speed, and hence i t i s not an unexpected a p p l i c a t i o n of  epithet xavuat'itxepos that we f i n d i n Stesichorus, although i t unprecedented i n the Homeric epics.  is  the  7.  niti,o6(ipou Ku itpt6os  PMG 2 2 3  ,  2  The epithet n i t n & w p o s occurs only once i n the Homeric poems: eVdct  ol  nnL<j6wpos  Hecuba. . KO*itpts#  evavTLti nXude Vifanp ( I l i a d VI  251) r e f e r r i n g t o  Otherwise, i t makes one l a t e r appearance i n Oppian "^. 3  as a periphrasis f o r Aphrodite, i s not common i n the Homeric  poems, there being only 5 instances of i t i n the f i f t h book of the I l i a d , a l l without epithets.  The only instance t o occur i n the Hymns f a l l s i n  the second l i n e of the Hymn t o Aphrodite, as one of the t i t l e s of the goddess.  The name 'Aippodtrn i t s e l f i s frequently accompanied by the  epithets <pt,Xouuei,6Tis, itoXuxptfo-os or A t o s %\)y<£xr\p i n t h i s Hymn.  I f one  considers the formation nui.o-6wpos t o be a close p a r a l l e l t o the equally rare compound dyXao-Swpos, which q u a l i f i e s Demeter i n the Hymn t o that goddess (lines 5 4 , 1 9 2 , 4 9 2 ) together with i t s association with Hecuba i n the I l i a d , one notices that Stesichorus' use of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r epithet has connotations not present i n any o f the other epithets commonly found i n descriptions of the goddess of love.  The epithet i s suggestive of the  image of a gentle, a l l - g i v i n g mother, which appears t o be an e n t i r e l y new a t t i t u d e towards Aphrodite.  8.  nepcxaXXe*{a v ^ a a o v  2617 f r . 6  (a)  2  The epithet i t e p t x a X X n s , r e f e r r i n g t o o v e r a l l beauty, i s applied i n a v a r i e t y o f spheres i n the Homeric poems: xuSapus,  XVI  85.  Tte*itXos and 3u>u6*s;  t o inanimate objects 6 u p p o s »  t o women, as f o r example i n I l i a d V  398 or  A geographical context of the sea presents i t s e l f i n 'He*Xuos  6* dvopouae, Xuituv  itepuxaXXea Xu'uvnv (Odyssey I I I  1).  Since among the  epithets q u a l i f y i n g vfiaos we f i n d eOxTtuevn, SevSpnecroro, u X n e a c a and epnpn»  but not n e p u x a X X n s , I assume that the poet has created y e t another  new word-group of a "formulaic" nature, possibly hinted at by the Homeric  itepcxaXXe*a  Xcyvnv.  The  itepuxaXXea  uaab.v. belongs to the gods;  i t i s an island  beyond the l i m i t s of human habitation, a magical i s l e .  On t h i s i s l a n d  dwell the Hesperides, guardians of the golden apples and t h e i r abode, according to Stesichorus, i s all-golden on t h i s account and  presumably  because gold i s associated with the possessions of the gods (cf.xpdaeov 6e*itas , I l i a d  VI  220 and XXIV  101) .  I t appears that, from the e a r l i e r  sources a v a i l a b l e to Stesichorus, p r i n c i p a l l y Hesiod, the poet absorbed the notion that the Hesperides l i v e d beyond Ocean, but since the poet i n t h i s fragment gives a more detailed description of the i s l a n d , I assume that he, or some not too d i s t a n t predecessor, elaborated upon the elusive abode "beyond Ocean" to ••.create a d i s t i n c t i v e i s l a n d , of which we 16 catch a glimpse i n t h i s fragment. The only p a r a l l e l instance of t h i s word-group , i s to be found i n Theognis, 1277:  TWOS  "Epws  itepuxaXXea  itpoXtnuv Kditpov,  vrjaov, i n which the poet refers to Cyprus as such.  vaaov,  rceptxaXXEa  Is the p a r a l l e l  e n t i r e l y coincidental, or has Theognis derived the phrase d i r e c t l y from Stesichorus?  In an a r t i c l e on poetry i n S i c i l y i n the Archaic period, A.  Garzya reconsiders the theory that Theognis * Megara was i n f a c t Megara 17 Hyblaea i n eastern S i c i l y  , and i f t h i s were the case, then l i n g u i s t i c  reminiscences of Stesichorean expressions i n Theognis would be somewhat easier to explain. 9.  %_  xpov  oXeSpov  261?  fr.4  i  The Hoaeric epithets associated with auto's,  while  nuxpds  11 oXeSpog  are  Xoypds  and  i s applied almost exclusively t o otaxds (.10 times i n  the I l i a d , i i n the Odyssey) i n i t s primary sense of physical "piercing". In Stesichorus* manipulation of the r e g u l a r l y associated words one can  observe a t r a n s i t i o n from the physical t o the metaphorical sense of ittxpo"s, as i t i s found i n l a t e r authors, namely as"causing b i t t e r n e s s "  18  As the oXe^pos of Geryon contemplated by the hero w i l l i n f a c t be perpetrated by an arrow, the choice of the epithet ubxpos c l e v e r l y f o r e shadows t h i s and i s consequently highly appropriate;  i t i s both p i e r c i n g  A further connotation inherent i n Ttxxpd's  and ultimately grief-causing.  i s the bitterness of the poisonous g a l l of the Hydra i n which the arrow had been dipped.  That the arrows of Heracles were indeed smeared with  this poison i s indicated i n the elaborate description of the arrow as ite<popuYPe\>os a"uon:[t  ...}  T  e  xoXat, 6Xeactvopb,s ailoXo6eCc*p3ou  *  oduvacauv  19  Y6pag,  i n the second column of fragment 4, l i n e s 5,6  . The transference  of the epithet ittxpd's as seen i n t h i s fragment i s highly s i g n i f i c a n t i n that i t demonstrates c l e a r l y the poet's i ^ t e h i i i o n a i s e l e c t i o n of an epithet, possibly hackneyed i n i t s t r a d i t i o n a l association with  oZax6z,  in  an imaginative," e f f e c t i v e manner that r e l i e s on the audience's awareness of i t s o r i g i n a l usage i n epic.  10.  xpuo-o'itxepe itctpSe've  2506 f r . 26  (PMG 193)  In the epic t r a d i t i o n the sole r e c i p i e n t of the epithet XPtyao'itTepos  appears t o be I r i s , i n I l i a d VIII  Hymn to Demeter as follows:  314. One finds  398, XI  185 and i n the  itapde*vos l i t t l e used, i t s  epithets being  a 1.6 o i n , once i n the I l i a d and twice i n the Hymns; d 6 u t f s  twice i n the Odyssey and twice i n the Hymns. From the context of Chamaeleon's remark on the two Palinodes, one would suppose that t h i s vocative address was an introductory invocation, p a r a l l e l to Sect (puXduoXue.  The l a t t e r i s undoubtedly a  reference to the Muse, i n accordance with normal epic practice of c a l l i n g upon the goddess of i n s p i r a t i o n . We have evidence from the c i t a t i o n s  that elsewhere Stesichorus invoked the Muse by various t i t l e s . to Atheaaeus ( V  180e = PMG  250)  According  Stesichorus c a l l e d the Muse  ctpxectuoAitov, presumably i n an invocation and doubtless derived from the t r a d i t i o n of addressing the Muse at the beginning of a song  (although  equally possible i s the meaning "queen of sang"). Moreover, Eustathius, on the f i r s t l i n e of the I l i a d (9  43) remarks that not only Hesiod, but  also Stesichorus began h i s poems with an invocation to the Muse: 6e0p'aye? KaAXidneia Auyeux (PMG  240).  Stesichorus was  apparently aware of the  t r a d i t i o n found i n Hesiod, but not i n Homer, that distinguished C a l l i o p e 20 as chief of the Muses and patroness of epic the papyri, however, contain what may  .  None of the fragments-from  be i d e n t i f i e d as an exordium of a  poem, but there i s season to believe that the l i n e s of Aristophanes' Peace c a l l e d Stesichorean by the s c h o l i a s t , namely 775 f f . , were composed as a parody of the invocation from one of Stesichorus' poems, thought by 21 some to be the Oreateia : Motaa au yev itoAe*yous ditobaayeva yet' eyou xXetotaa $euiv te yayous dv6puv xe 6a£xas xal fcaAuxs yctnoipuv .... (as arranged/in PMG,210). I t i s noteworthy that there i s no decorative epithet such as Aeyeto or (puAdyoAitos, but the l i n e s do a t t e s t the poet's movement away from the t r a d i t i o n a l invocation of the Homeric poems.  The r e j e c t i o n of one topic  for another more appropriate one i s more akin to personal l y r i c than to 22 the epic t r a d i t i o n Thus, i n view of the above-cited stesichorean invocations, i t would not be s u r p r i s i n g f o r Chamaeleon to have i d e n t i f i e d the two  Palinodes  by t h e i r invocatory f i r s t l i n e s , nor that there were i n these l i n e s unrHomeric features. I f xpuco'ittepe napdeve wasa intended as a periphrasis for the Muse of Stesichorus' poetry, then we have a new and unusual v i s i o n of the Muse.  In the Homeric t r a d i t i o n epithets are r a r e l y applied to the  Muses.  Their Olympian domicile i s indicated i n 'OAuynua 6oJyaT' e x o v x e s *  or else t h e i r kinship with Zeus:in xodpas Abbs aiyioxoto . Mouaa Xbyeta occurs once i n the Odyssey and theee times i n the Hymns, while a further description of t h e i r vocal talents appears i n the phrase itSaat  dyecBdyevat out xaXnt (pdyssey XXIV  MoCaat 6* evvea  60 and Hymn to Apollo  189).  In the Hesiodic t r a d i t i o n the nature of the Muses and t h e i r method of i n s p i r a t i o n i s enlarged, but the description of them nowhere mentions 23 golden wings  .  One could perhaps explain, the association of gold through  t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p with Apollo, who i s known i n l y r i c as xP o*oxdyns» u  XPuaoxoSos or  xPUo-cxpopytyS.  In l y r i c the Muse i s x p u a e a (Pindar) and  XPuadSpovos (PMG 953 and 1023).  Sappho summons the Muses : 6eupo 6nuxe  Mouaau xP^'-ov ACnotaai, ... (PLF, 127), where xP^atov possibly q u a l i f i e s 6dyov.  Thus the use of an epithet compounded from X P U 0 0 ~ i s not i n i t s e l f  exceptional, but the symbol of wings i s unprecedented.  The M,uses are not  responsible f o r enea itxepd'evxa , but rather f o r song that l a s t s * . Thus i f 25 Xpuao'itxepe i s intended to invoke the Muse i t i s c e r t a i n l y u n t r a d i t i o n a l 2-  11 •  X;apbx<j)v ... xaXXixdywv  PMG 212  1  The epithet xaXXdxoyos occurs once i n the Odyssey of Helen (XV 58) and once i n the I l i a d of a concubine (IX of the genitive at the verse-end.  449), both i n the long form  The epithet i s a l s o rare i n the  Hesiodic poems, although i t s a p p l i c a t i o n to the^flpat;; > Works and Days 75,is i n t e r e s t i n g i n that the ilpau are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d to the Graces i n T  that passage.  The Graces are not unnaturally renowned f o r t h e i r beauty,  as comparisons such as exouai ( f r . 70 indicate.  Xaptxuv dyapuyyax' exouoav or Xapuxwv dub xaXXos  38, 196, 215) which occur p a r t i c u l a r l y inufehe E o i a i ,  Their o v e r a l l beauty i n e v i t a b l y presupposes f i n e tresses, and  the Gfcaces are described as eunXo'xayot, which i s more or less synonymous  with  i n the Hymn to Apollo  xaXXuxouai,,  the 'son of Panthous, who  194.  Indeed, i n I l i a d XVII 51ff.  l i e s blood-bespattered  i n the dust, smitten  by  the sword of Menelaus, i s described as having had h a i r l i k e that of the Graces, although i t i s now befouled with blood and grime.  Thus, the  beauty of the h a i r of the Graces must have been proverbial. group  XotptTUV  12.  x^dva  xaXXux6*ucov  The word-  i s therefore unprecedented, but not unexpected.  2359 f r . l  uupoqxJp^ov  i i 7  The epithet that most commonly accompanies x^ova and; x^ovC* i n 26 the Homeric poems i s  itouXOBbxeCpav/nt  occurs frequently without an epithet. noted e a r l i e r ,  eupeta  x^^v  x^dvo i n the  ,although  In the nominative case, as  i s the expected "formula"*  appearing i n the genitive with nedtouo ( I l i a d XXI ( I l i a d XII 314)  495 the  s u i t the m e t r i c a l requirements! —  u v / , —  _  form C?ov  ituprnpopos  6*  es  itupcxpd'pos  was i s rare,  602), with dpoupns  and i n the nominative p l u r a l with  while i n the Odyssey I I I  accusative  apoupat  replaces  ne6L*ov  ( I l i a d XIV itupo<pd'pos  123), to  icupn<pd'pov  — < / > / — > . 27 nupotprfpoto.  instead of ... xat daotfpns The l i m i t e d application of t h i s epithet i n the Homeric poems presents no problem to Stesichorus, p a r t i c u l a r l y since an extension of association from ue6C*ov to x ^ v a e n t a i l s no d i f f i c u l t i e s of l o g i c .  ?  -/  From the reconstruction of the colometry  28 proposed by S n e l l apposition to  , i t would appear that  uapav  BOLU>TU6»J  are i n f a c t the Boeotians. poet chose the epithet nouXuBoTecpa,  ~>  x$°"va  itupocpdpov  lies in  the dwellers i n the "wheat-bearing land"  Consequently, i t i s a l i t t l e odd that the  nupo<po*pos,  which implies c u l t i v a t i o n , when  which implies grazing land, would have been more appropriate,  given that the o r i g i n of the name cattle-pastures.  Boui)Tt*a  l i e s i n the f a c t of her having  However, the epithets d i s t r i b u t e d throughout t h i s small  portion of the l i s t of p a r t i c i p a n t s i n the hunt on the whole create  new  word-groups, a l i e n to the t r a d i t i o n a l "formulae" of the Homeric poems.,  In I l i a d V 710 the Boeotians are c a l l e d t