Copyrighted Material PUBLISHED BY THt PRESS SYNDICATE OF Tilt I'NIVF.RSITY OF CAMBRIDGE The Pitt Building. '1 rumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 2RU, IJK ht(p://www.cup.cam.ac.uk 40 West 20th Street. New York, NV IOOI 1-4211, l:SA http://www.cup.org 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, Melbourne 3166, Australia Ruiz de Alarcon 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain C'1 Cambridge University Press UJQ,{ This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, 110 reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge I Iniversicy Press. First published 11)94 Reprinted 1993, Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge . 1 catalogue recordfor this book is amilable from the British Library Library of Co/igms Cataloguing in Publication data Kirk. G. S. (GeolVrey Stephen) The Iliad, a commentary. Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Contents: v. 1. Books 1 4 v. 4. Books 13 l(> / Richard Janko. i. Homer. Iliad. 2. Achilles (Greek mythology) in literature. I. Trojan War in literature. II. Janko, Richard. III. Ilomer. Iliad. PA/.037.K45R 1985 883'.01 84-11330 ISBN o 521 23712 2 hardback isbn' o 521 28174 i paperback AO Copyrighted Material THE ILIAD : A COMMENTARY GENERAL EDITOR G.S. KIRK Volume IV: books 13-16 RICHARD JANKO The Iliad: a commentary Volume iv: books 13-16 This volume is dedicated to t Milman Parry Albert Lord t Michael Ventris John Chad wick founders of modern Homeric scholarship and to the memory of my father Charles Arthur Janko 28 vii 1914 - 10 v 1991 T^PCV KCTTA fxfrxpuov iffko X^|T£iToio06'&v6p6s. TR&rep, fjttios fjcrfla. This, the fourth volume in the six-volume Commentary on the Iliad being prepared under the General Editorship of Professor G. S. Kirk, covers books 13-16. including the Battle for the Ships, the Deception of Zeus and the Death of Patroklos. Three introductory essays discuss the role of Homer's gods in his poetry; the origins and development of the epic diction; and the transmission of the text, from the bard's lips to our own manuscripts. It is now widely recognized that the first masterpiece of Western literature is an oral poem; Professor Janko's detailed commentary aims to show how this recognition can clarify many linguistic and textual problems, entailing a radical reassessment of the work of Homer's Alexandrian editors. The commentary also explores the poet's subtle creativity in adapting traditional materials, whether formulae, typical scenes, mythology or imagery, so as best to move, inspire and entertain his audience, ancient and modern alike. Discussion of the poem's literary qualities and structure is, where possible, kept separate from that of more technical matters. This volume will be an essential reference work for all students of Greek litera- ture and of oral epic poetry. Those who study and teach in a wide variety of related disciplines - mythology, ancient history and Aegean archaeology, humanities courses and Indo-European linguistics - will also find that it contains material of value to them. CONTENTS Preface page xi Abbreviations xiv Map of the northern Aegean xxvi INTRODUCTION 1 The gods in Homer: further considerations i (i) The literary and religious aims of Homer's innovations i (ii) 'Double motivation' and human responsibility 3 (iii) Free will, fate and the gods 4 2 The origins and evolution of the epic diction 8 (i) The artificial nature of the epic diction 8 (ii) The prehistoric origins of the Kunstspraehe 9 (iii) Trends of development in Homeric diction 12 (iv) The Aeotic phase of the epic tradition 15 3 The text and transmission of the Iliad 20 (i) The Roman and Byzantine vulgate 20 (ii) The Alexandrian scholars: Zenodotus and Aristophanes 22 (iii) The Alexandrian scholars: Aristarchus 25 (iv) The Panathenaic rule and 'Pisistratean recension' 29 (v) The orthography of the earliest texts 32 (vi) The script of the earliest texts - Attic or Ionic? 34 (vii) The original recording of the Homeric poems: a hypothesis 37 COMMENTARY Book 13 39 Book 14 149 Book 15 225 Book 16 309 Index 423 ix PREFACE The aims of this commentary are laid down by its originator, Geoffrey Kirk, in vol. i (pp. ix-xi). I am grateful to him both for undertaking to fill this lacuna in classical scholarship and for asking me to share in his enterprise, which is all the more important at a time when bigotry worthy of Ptolemy Physcon has endangered the future of classical studies in my native land. Inspired by the late Sir Denys Page, I first began to investigate the diction of the Homeric poems in order to prove that they result from multiple authorship, but reached the opposite conclusion: that the Iliad and Odyssey were taken down by dictation, much as we have them, from the lips of a single eighth-century singer. In my view, one cannot do full justice to the songs of Homer without the benefit of many methods and approaches. These include Unitarianism, the view that each epic is a basically unified creation by a poetic genius; the proof by Parry and Lord that the cpics belong to an oral tradition; the study of other such poems, both post-Homeric and from other traditional societies, especially in the Balkans; the recognition of Near Eastern influence on early Greece; the work of Burkert and the structuralists on myth; the work ofSeveryns and the Neo-Analysts on how Homer adapts traditional tales, especially those found in the post-Homeric Epic Cycle; Aristotelian and narratological literary theory; the decipherment of Linear B by Ventris and Chadwick; Greek dialectology and onomastics; Indo- European linguistics; Bronze and Iron-Age Aegean archaeology; the textual criticism ofan oral-dictated poem, transmitted with oral and scribal variants in an open recension; van der Valk's work on Alexandrian scholarship; Erbse's edition of the scholia; and the recognition that our basic notions of 'literary' style have been decisively shaped by poems of oral origin. My vast debt to prior scholars and commentators will be plain to those who know. A note on how to use this volume. I have tried to discuss more 'literary* questions in notes on whole blocks of text, and more technical items in notes on individual verses or small groups of verses, especially at the ends of notes. Thus, for example, the largest unit may be 14.153-353, then 153-9, and then 153-5. In this I have sought to help readers who know little or no Greek. At the same time I have not wished to stint on the full range of comment valuable to advanced students, particularly on the text and scho- lia; the radically oralist approach adopted here has revolutionary implica- tions for Homeric textual criticism, and hence for the interpretation of many xi Preface passages. I have not been able to note explicitly all my disagreements with the OCT, but these will usually be evident from my comments. Lack of space has demanded that I write with Aristotelian brevity (and, no doubt, obscu- rity), using many cross-references; exclude all later echoes or imitations, literary or pictorial, unless they clarify the text itself; erase numerous details, perhapses and scholarly debts; and adopt many short-hand conventions which may mislead the uninitiated. Readers will need to be attentive. When 1 write •pace' someone, I imply not only disagreement but also that that scholar offers useful arguments and/or references; lack of citation does not prove that I have not profited from a work. Other important conventions are explained after the list of abbreviations. Lastly, I must thank the people and institutions that have assisted in this book's painfully slow and nomadic genesis. 1 am grateful above all to the John Simon Cuggenheim Memorial Foundation for the Fellowship which gave me a year free of teaching. I thank my collaborators for commenting on my drafts and for their help, especially Mark Edwards. I am grateful to my teachers, colleagues and students, in Cambridge, New York and now the University of California at Los Angeles, for inspiration, advice and friendship; and to many others who have helped in ways of which they may well be unaware. Egbert Bakker, John Chadwick, Michael Haslam, Steve Reece and Keith Stanley read parts of the manuscript. With financial support from the UCLA Academic Senate Committee on Research, the following graduate students helped prepare the MS: Laurel Bowman, Todd Compton, Christine Ferris, Julie Laskaris, Leslie Myrick and Steve Reece. Caroline Alexander of Columbia and Fiona Wilson of Cambridge also aided me in this. Michael Cohen and David Blank resolved computer problems; Dana Sutton of UC Irvine gave me a copy of his database *Homer in the papyri*. I am still indebted to John Dawson and his staff at the Literary and Linguistic Computing Centre, Cambridge, for helping me in 1977 to create an invaluable concordance to the entire epos. I also thank Susan Moore of the Press for her skilful and erudite copy-editing, and the staff of the university libraries at Cambridge, Columbia, UC Davis, the Ecole Normale Superieure, Stanford and UCLA. I shall always be grateful to the late Lord William Taylour for many summers of archaeological work in Greece; to John Leatham for fostering my early love of all things Greek; and to the memory of William Cowper, who rendered to both Homer and my native fields an equally inspiring homage. Farewell, dear scenes^ for ever closed tome. It is a privilege to have sat at the feet of John Chadwick and, when passing through the other Cam- bridge, of Albert Lord; my dedication expresses my gratitude to them for their knowledge and example. Finally, I must thank my wife Michele for xii Preface reading the manuscript, for help with the index at a difficult time, and for her staunch support and companionship during this epic journey; she may not always have wished to hear whether Aristarchus read OOTCO or OVTCOS. Westwood, California, April 4 1990 R.J. xiii