Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
OF THE
HOMERIC FORMULA
J. B. H A IN S W O R T H
O X FO RD
AT T H E C LA R EN D O N PR ESS
1968
Oxford University Press, Ely House, London W. I
G LASGOW N EW YORK TO RO N TO M E L B O U R N E W E L L IN G T O N
CA PE TOW N S A L IS B U R Y I B A D A N N A IR O B I L U S A K A A D D IS A B A B A
KU ALA LU M PU R
M ADRAS K A RA CH I L A H O R E DACCA
H O NG KONG TO KY O
PREFACE
Abbreviations ix
h i. What is a Formula? 33
v. Modification 58
vii. Separation 90
Tables 129
Index 145
ABBREVIATIONS
objection that a formulation which was not concerned with the be fixed, for the most part by the shape and length of the formulae
techniques of composition has been applied to one of the basic under discussion. But when formulae and sentence-patterns are
elements of the improvising style. All my complaints spring from made the basis for a theory of improvisation the assumption is
this root. more perilous, for it concentrates our attention on a limited part
Parry mentioned meaning in his definition only to raise the of the diction and biases the argument in such a way that certain
point that his formulae incorporated words (i.e. ornamental conclusions are bound to be drawn. To escape the hazard of any
epithets) superfluous in the context of use. This point was vital such circularity the fixity of the formula ought not to be made
in ET, for its strict application sorts out the material there re a defining feature, that is, part of the meaning of the term. It
quired for establishing the extension and economy of the for might still, of course, turn out to be a property of the formula.
mula-types. But from the first paper in HSCP the net has always In the practical study ofHomeric diction qualifications soon began
been cast more widely so as to include expressions in which all to creep in. At one point Parry himself allowed that some for
constituent words were functional. There is no avoiding this ex mulae were not tied completely to one position.1 From any
tension once the use of the formula in composition replaces flexibility in shape, however, he shied away. A formula may de
its antiquity as the focus of interest. For the study of shifted and cline or conjugate, ‘but any less simple alteration in the word-
modified expressions it is of no consequence whether an epithet group supposes thought of some length on the part of the poet’.2
is ornamental or not, provided it is regular. In any case the line I object that one does not know a priori what requires thought
between the two categories is much harder to draw among and what does not. How can we assert that a change from
common-noun formulae than among personal names.1 There is 'irapov φίλον to ίτάρω φίλω needs hardly any thought at all while
no difficulty in finding formulae in which almost all the content the change to ίτάροιο φίλοιο needs considerable thought?
is borne by the epithet and scarcely any by the noun, e.g. φίλον
avSpa, κακά ’έργα, or in which the noun is only weakly functional, 2. A revised definition
e.g. νηλέίς ητορ, ταλασίφρονα θυμόν. Again, epithets may be weakly It is obvious that the formula in Homer is a special feature and
functional and at the same time obviously useful metrically, e.g. needs special definition.3 In any field the essence of a formula
απΐρείσι άποινα, χρυσάμπυχας ίππους, μήδζα πυκνά. Accordingly is repetition. In literature, as opposed to the sciences, the re
I have not sought to exclude any adjectives of quality, demon petition is normally of the matter and not of its arrangement.
stratives, numerals,2 πάς, or άλλος from participation in noun This is a convenient practice, for it permits the application of the
epithet formulae. It must be conceded, however, that a regular term ‘formula’ to be confined to the poet’s diction with the least
association is harder to establish for a functional epithet and departure from normal usage, and leaves the terms ‘pattern’ and
indeed can never be finally proved. For an ornamental epithet ‘theme’ free to be used for repetitions respectively in the arrange
there is nothing but the noun to suggest the adjective, for a func ment of the words and the subject-matter of the poems. The genus
tional one there is always in the nature of the case the context. of the formula is thus a ‘repeated word-group’.4
Must a formula be fixed in shape and position ? Fixed position, 1 HSCP xli (1930) 129, apropos of a 1, ‘Moi <Vi'<TTΐ Μοΰσa is one of the rare cases
conveyed by the phrase ‘dans les memes conditions metriques’, is of a formula of any length which is found in more than one place in the verse’.
an implicit assumption in ET. It does no harm to the argument 2 HSCP xli (1930) 84.
3 In the extra-Homeric field one may refer to O. Jespersen, Philosophy of Gram
there because the material, with very few exceptions, happens to mar, London 1924, 18-24. Is necessary to add that the Homeric formula is not
1 L. Bergson, L’£pithite ornementale dans Eschyle, Sophocle el Euripide, Lund 1956, the same thing as a clichi, either in the sense that it is an ossified expression or that
9 ff. has some useful criticisms of our concept of ornament. See also p. 76 n. 1 it is a defect of style?
below. 4 If the formula is a word-group we cannot use the term to designate the repeti-
2 The numerals severely strain our now traditional categories: they cannot be lion of a single word at the same point in the verse, as is done, for example, by
purely ornamental, yet are very often habitual, cf. G. Germain, Homlre et la Kirk, SoH 67, and Notopoulos, AJP lxxxiii (1962) 355 ff, and HSCP Ixviii (1964)
mystique des nombres, Paris 1954, 5 ff. 28 ff. We need a term for this regularity.
36 W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? 37
By the differentiae other kinds of repetition at this level, the (d) Fluctuations in adjectival inflexion (or gender in nouns),
accidental and the deliberate, are marked off. This may be done e.g. ηέρα πολληνjπουλυν.
from a consideration either of the way in which the formula is (e) Shifts in meaning (i.e. within the same semantic field—
used or of the way in which it is held together. Parry’s differentiae actual homophones must be separated), e.g. μάρμαρον (adj.
are of the former type.1Unfortunately such differentiae are likely Π 735) όκριόεντα—-μαρμΛρω (noun M 380) όκριόεντι. These are
to be too narrow, to be too subjective and psychological, and accidents that may overtake a word in the Greek poetical lan
may be circular. In fact the only datum the scholar has is the guage generally, but there are others which are characteristically
text of the poems. There the occurrences of word-groups can be Homeric. The Kunstsprache arms the poet with many alternative
counted, and it is obvious that some groups are very frequent. forms. They are invoked where (a), (b), and (d) above are not
Even if the text were in an unknown language, it would be natural available. Hence the following Homeric accidents will not
to call such groups formulae. In doing so we should not be com separate words and phrases:1
mitting ourselves to any evaluation of the author’s mental pro (/) Alternative inflexions, e.g. -otoj-ov, etc., including the ob
cesses, but stating only that the use of one word created a strong servance or neglect of contraction or diectasis.
presumption that the other would follow. This degree of mutual (g) Alternative forms of suffix. The problem here is one of
expectancy I choose as the best differentia of the formulaic word- demarcation. If the metrical alternants μαχείομενος—μαχεούμενος
group.2 By this terminology we say nothing about the function, are admitted, then suffixes giving just the same effect though in
shape, manner of use, or position of the formula, nor about the fact at different stages of their phonological evolution, e.g.
order, proximity, or syntactical relations3 of the words in it. No κήδειος—κηδεος, may not be excluded, since the poet cannot be
flexibility is legislated into limbo before the investigation begins. supposed to have distinguished the two types. Again such a pair
3. When are word-groups the same? as οίνοχοευω— οίνοχοεω give the same result, but the means, the
‘Word’ is a very fluid term, scarcely worthy to be a technical exploitation of similar but formally distinct suffixes, is different.
expression. To define it further I postulate that for present pur However, in a study devoted in part to the modification of for
poses the following accidents permit words and word-groups to mulae it would be misleading to exclude this last category. To the
be counted the same: poet they are clearly another sort of metrical alternant.
(h) Presence or absence of prefixes, including the augment.
(a) Changes in metrics, e.g. μέλι χλωρόν, including synizesis
and lengthening metri gratia, e.g. χρειώ— χρεω, "Ολυμπος— Performing the same duty at the head of the word are prefixes
Ουλυμπος.
which, when semantically insignificant, are optional, e.g. the
prepositional compounds of many verbs and the intensifying pre
(.b) Elision and correption.
fixes (whose force is often much weakened) of adjectives: κλυτός—
(c) Inflexion, including the usual cases of suppletion, e.g. δέος
περικλυτός and άγακλυτός. Compounded epithets also may have
αίρει/εΐλε.
very little additional force, e.g. [νεό)πριστος, (ποδ)ωκυς.
1 And deliberately developed in that direction in order to cover expressions of (i) Alternative forms of the stem. These arise through the
questionable status. ‘We could not observe certain phrases found only once in
different places, and thus prove their regular usage, but we saw that they belong analogical extension of a certain grade throughout a paradigm,
to particular artifices of versification which have a fixed place in the diction. We e.g. μητερος for μητρός from the accusative μητέρα; from the
have thus brought into the category of formulas not only the repeated expressions, dialect mixture, e.g. ημβροτε and άμαρτε; from the continued
but those which are of the same type as others’ (HSCP xli [1930] 132-3).
2 This was the older opinion, if it was thought useful to express it, e.g. van coexistence of older and newer formations, e.g. νηες and νέες,
Gennep, La Question d'Homere, 13-14, before its phrase-pattern became the essence and from metrical lengthenings, e.g. άπειρέσιος and άπερείσιος.
of a formula.
3 A syntactical relation, e.g. noun + adjective, is normal (but flexible, see below 1 Most of these points have been widely discussed, most recently by L. R.
pp. 38 f.): sometimes it is absent, e.g. αύτάρ εγώ and variants 122 x , θυμός «VI στψ Palmer, Companion to Homer (edd. Wace and Stubbings) 106 ff., and Chantraine,
θεσσι 6l x («VI στ. is adverbial), etc. Gram. Horn. 94 ff., but usually in terms of the single word only.
W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? 39
38 W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ?
Outside the same paradigm, however, it cannot be assumed that of a formula, so that the internal syntax is changed without the
there was any perception of the underlying unity in different association of the words being impaired, e.g. δια θεάων and δία
grades or modifications of the same root. θεά, ερκος Αχαιών and ερκος Άχαιοΐσιν. These too will not be
separated.
It is clear that same word and synonym are not in practice There is nothing of course to prevent two, or even all four
sharply distinguished, but merge through a series of modifica of these modifications being applied to the same formula at once.
tions. Consequently, wherever the line is drawn, there is bound Finally, there is one other accident that may overtake a for
to be something of the arbitrary. Thus I have not ventured to mula, an accident which need not modify its original constituents,
equate words with differences in both suffix and prefix together. namely its expansion by the addition to it of further terms, e.g.
The modifications listed will be regarded as making variants οβριμος Άρης is used five times by itself and once preceded by
of the same word, so that the word-groups in which they appear βριήπυος. Influenced in his thought by the system of formula-
will not be separated, but will constitute modifications of the types, Parry separated these into two formulae, because they are
same formula. Besides these there are modifications which the of different over-all lengths.1 But this is to ignore the obvious
word-group itself may undergo, independently of any modifica relation between the two, and in the present study such phrases
tion of its members, without upsetting the bond of mutual ex will not be separated: the formula is the smallest recurrent word-
pectancy by which it is cemented. Four categories may be set u p : group, but is a unit capable of extension.
(a) Rearrangement of the word-order, e.g. χεΐρας άάπτονς and The above criteria of identity, therefore, have been deliberately
άάπτους χεΐρας. framed to admit all possible material relevant to the study of the
(b) Separation of the constituent words, e.g. βροτός άνήρ but formula’s flexibility. In marginal cases it is not impossible that
βροτός ζοΰτασεν) άνήρ. Separation may also take place even across their scope will allow unworthy expressions to be elevated to
the verse-end, e.g. χάλκεον εγχος and εγχος \ χάλκεον. formulaic status. But no matter how skilfully a definition is drawn
(c) Insertion, omission, or change of particles or prepositions. such marginal cases are bound to arise, for flexibility in the
The syntactical links of formulae are normally indicated by the formulae is but one technique out of several for meeting the
inflexions, but these may be supplemented by the prepositions. problems of improvised composition, and merges into other
Because the prepositions perform this syntactical function, their techniques, particularly the use of synonymous words and for
addition to a formula does not turn it into a different formula. mulae.
Likewise the introduction of connectives does not change a word-
group. If the connective is prefixed, it is scarcely noticed, but
4. What is a repetition?
it is of no more consequence if the connective is infixed, e.g. άναξ
<δ’> άνδρών Αγαμέμνων. Some formulae are especially common in The high antiquity of some formulae and so the traditional
a prepositional or connective construction, but such developments association of the words may be inferred from lexical, archaeo
are accidental, like the frequent use in certain case-forms of other logical, or linguistic criteria,2 but such criteria are available for
formulae. pronouns are not perfectly interchangeable (e.g. (f) os will lengthen even a naturally
(d) Special cases of inflexion. Several formulae have in them short open final syllable, aos will not, and the first person has no monosyllable).
Thus just as in normal declension the shape of the formula may have to be trans
a personal adjective or pronoun, the person of which (whether formed in order to preserve the word-association.
first, second, or third) must vary according to circumstances. 1 E T 50-51, Tableau I.
This is a special case of declension or conjugation, and expres 2 Many, indeed most, items are controversial, and the literature correspondingly
voluminous, see Lustrum i (1956) 18 ff., v (i960) 651; T. B. L. Webster, ‘Early and j
sions which incorporate such words are counted as variants of late in Homeric diction’, Eranos xiv (1956) 34-48; Kirk, Objective dating criteria ;
the same formula.1 Exceptionally inflexion may affect only part In Homer’, Mus. Helv. xvii (i960) 189-205. By lexical items are meant the glosses,
i f. Parry, ‘The Homeric Gloss: a study in word sense’, ΤΑΡΑ lix (1928) 233-47,
1 This is Parry’s view also, HSCP xli (1930) 84; but the personal adjectives and
40 W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? 41
but a small proportion of the sum of Homeric formulae. For the (b) Conventions of narration
rest the sole valid criterion is that of repetition in the same or in Some repetitions are deceptive, the true repetition being in the
a modified form, and from this the element of chance is insepar structure and above the level of diction.1 First, in the epic
able. There are in Homer three specific reasons for this, the effects direct speech is the rule.2 When a message or command is re
of inadequate representation, conventions of narration, and cer ported to another character, it is repeated verbatim or with only
tain phrase-patterns. slight condensations. Similarly, when the execution of a command
or the fulfilment of a prophecy is reported, the original words of
(a) Inadequate representation the command or prophecy are used with only the necessary
Despite their generous bulk (27,800 verses) the two Homeric changes of person and tense. The convention is prevalent in most
epics cannot be more than a sample of the production of Greek oral traditions,3 but though it amply proves the capacity of the
heroic verse in its heyday.1 This matters little where an incident poet to retain extensive passages in the mind over a short period,
is regular, e.g. the formulae of the fighting scenes, but some it proves nothing about the mutual expectancy of words which
themes and so much phraseology are quite rare. Hence among chance to occur. Second, an archaic device extensively used in
the wholly unique expressions are doubtless some formulae,2 but Homer to organize and coordinate the narrative is ring-composi
these are scarcely to be picked out by any criteria of technique, tion, by which a given passage is framed by identical or similar
for any resemblance they may have to other formulae may be expressions and so is clearly marked off from its context.4 Similes
grounds for questioning the traditional association of the words. are very commonly embedded into the narrative by this device,
The great variation in the popularity of themes also makes it which, being purely structural, can tell nothing of the internal
impossible to fix a quota of repetitions which a phrase must fulfil relations of the words that happen to be so repeated.
to be counted a formula.3 Outside the special area of the personal
names expressions that occur but two or three times are a (c) Phrase patterns
numerous class. Often, if the epithet,'say, of a noun-epithet for Mutual expectancy admits of infinite gradations. Words, at
mula is of a typically Homeric sense and formation, and if the first fortuitously combined, by re-creation slowly become re
occurrences are widely spaced so that one is not the immediate gularly associated.5 Conversely, a firm association, by desuetude,
inspiration of the other, then it is hard to deny a formulaic status: unintelligibility, or competition from other formulae, becomes
e.g. σπόγγοισι πολυτρήτοισι, a 111, χ 439 = 453> the last pair being slack and sporadic. Created and re-created expressions may follow
an order and its execution. a familiar phrase-pattern, with the result that any rare expression
and the so-called Arcado-Cypriot words, now supplemented by Mycenaean, cf. ' The refrain is of this type, the repetition of the phrases being due to the chance
J. Chadwick, ‘Mycenaean elements in the Homeric dialect’, Minoica: Festschr. f . of their inclusion in the refrain-structure. Parry’s idea that ‘regular repetition’
J . Sundwall, Berlin 1958,116-22, with G. P. Shipp’s evaluation, Essays in Mycenaean could be equated with ‘habitual’ and then ‘useful repetition’ (HSCP xli [1930]
and Homeric Greek, Melbourne 1961, 1-14 (both papers now reprinted in Language II0-82) was not happy: the utility of the formula is what we are trying to elucidate.
and Background of Homer, 119 ff. and 126 ff.). The whole field is compendiously sur Kefrain-like effects are Homeric, e.g. evBev Sc προτίρια πλίομΐν ακαχημςνοt rjrop
veyed by Page, HHI 218 ff. 1 6 2 = 105 = 565 = k 77 = 133. Are we to say that, (e.g.) άκαχr/peros (-οι) ήτορ is
1 Parry insists on this matter strongly. The essential point is whether or not the .1 very frequent formula with nine occurrences altogether, or that it is a moderately
two epics are a representative sample of Greek heroic verse. There seems no reason frequent formula with four occurrences in the body of the text plus an occurrence
to doubt that they are. in a refrain?
2 Some unique expressions even contain glosses, e.g. αΐμονα θηρης E 49, which 2 The only considerable piece of oratio obliqua is φ 310-43.
increases the probability of their antiquity. ■
’ Bowra, HP 254-64.
2 Pope, Acta Classica vi (1963) 14-15, operates with the idea of a quota of three 4 Ring-composition has been the especial study of W. A. A. van Otterlo. For its
occurrences and concludes that the poet of the similes had very little prefabricated use in Homer see his De Ringcompositie als Opbouwprincipe in de Epische Gedichten van
terminology available to him. But the topics of the similes are prime examples of / laments, Amsterdam 1948, and B. A. van Groningen, La Composition littiraire grecque,
relatively rare themes. 184 different similes in the Iliad give 665 lines, a total in Amsterdam 1958, 51 ff.
sufficient to prove much about technique. 4 On this see Lord, SoT 43-45.
42 W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? 43
must lie under suspicion if it is constructed on such a schema, Since there are few verses in Homer which on this definition
especially if the occurrences are in close proximity. Phrases in <lo not contain at least one formula it is obviously necessary to
corporating a generic epithet, i.e. an epithet used indifferently extract from this material some classes of expressions representa
with a whole class of nouns, are a prime example of this am tive of the poet’s natural practice and comparable with each
biguous status. Such phrases are constructed on a pattern in other in the factors controlling their use.
which one element, the generic epithet, is a constant, and the It is this matter of comparability that poses the severest prob
other, any noun of a certain shape, is a variable. Thus κρατερός lems. The personal names are a true class, governing the same
is used with seven proper names to make useful phrases after predicates as each other and utilizing the same generic epithets:
the 4th-foot caesura. Now κρατερός Διομήδης i8 x may be for but common nouns, for example, are not such a class. Helmets,
mulaic on grounds of much repetition, but what of κρατερός horses, ships, and mountains appear in quite different contexts,
Μεγαπενθης and κρατερός Πολύφημος, both twice only ? share no epithets, and give rise to no analogies between each
The deceptive results of the conventions of narration can be other. Consequently many common-noun formulae have been
detected and corrected, but there are no general rules by which studied according to meaning, with useful results in every field
the effects of haphazard re-creation and inadequate representa but that of the technique of composition. We have marked time
tion can be eliminated. These are opposite dangers, Scylla and at this point because helmets, horses, etc., give rise to very small
Charybdis. Setting up a quota of occurrences would exclude groups of formulae constituted in the same way as the very large
chance repetitions, if it were set high enough, but as was pointed group of heroes. We thus discover again the economy of the dic-
out, this would exclude much material that was not only for Iion, the special fixed and (sometimes) generic epithets, complex
mulaic but also interesting from the point of view of flexibility. Ibrmulae, and (occasionally) sentence-patterns: but the evidence
It is the rarer phrases that are particularly liable to modification. is usually very fragmentary and needs the analogy of the personal
Moreover the quota might have to be set unexpectedly high. names to elucidate it. To advance a little we must bring together
Even quite frequent formulae are sometimes found to be lacking all the common-noun formulae (or all the verbal formulae, or
in enough cohesion to prevent their disruption. Thus θεοί whatever our chosen class is). How do we sort them out? The
Ούρανίωνες 6 X ought to represent a firm association. But the pat technical problem of the poet is that of fitting expressions into a
tern, pyrrhic word before diaeresis and pentasyllable in the 5th certain rhythmical shape. His immediate datum is a word or
and 6th feet, is a very marked one, and a favourite with the poet. expression of a certain shape. Shape therefore must be the first
Re-creation would thus be easy. For lack of cohesion compare the classifying factor to introduce comparability. However, a list of
following lines: expressions compiled solely on the basis of shape, besides being
impossibly long, would not consist of comparable expressions.
ώχθησαν δ’ ava δώμα Δ ιός θεοί Ούρανίωνες A 5?Oj
Suppose the poet gets into some technical difficulty and cannot
ώχθησαν δ ’ άνά δώμα Δ ιός θεοί· η δε γελασσε 0 ΙΟ Ι.
use a formula in the way he normally does. He may (i) abandon the
Which pitfall is likely to prove the least uncomfortable? It Ibrmula, (ii) move it, (iii) modify it, or (iv) keep it and move or
seems to me that too much concern about re-created expressions modify some other element. Ideally the members of the list should
is going to exclude far too much material without any obvious I>e comparable in the ease with which they and their associated
gain. In the first instance therefore I place together both de words may be subjected to these alternative treatments: an
veloping and developed formulae and count as a formula any III«· Hesiodic corpus) as representing different and in some respects more developed
expression occurring at least twice in the Homeric text.1 schools, but I see no point, in the first instance, in separating the two epics and still
less in separating parts of them (e.g. the Odyssean ‘Continuation’). As Μ. I. Finley
reminds us (World of Odysseus, London 1956, 32-33), ‘the style and language of
1 ‘Homeric text’ means Iliad and Odyssey in the editions of Munro-Allen and ihr poems . . . are essentially indistinguishable apart from certain interesting pre
Allen of the Oxford Classical Texts series. I exclude the Hymns (and, of course, ferences in vocabulary’, whatever other differences there may be, cf. E T 238-9.
W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? W H A T IS A F O R M U L A ? 45
44
impossible demand, since formulae vary in cohesion and their I should hesitate to assert that any metrically possible shape is
elements may have many, few, or no alternant forms or synonyms. wholly neglected.
These are points also on which information can never be known It would be an unnecessarily repetitive proof of Homeric tech
to be complete. The best that can be done is to use a grammatical nique to work out the usage of each shape in detail, and I select
criterion (nouns are more likely to be comparable with nouns only the classes - w w - w and ^ w - w; as used in the two epics,
than with verbs), which at the same time cuts down numbers to lor close inspection here. Several reasons determine this choice.
a manageable but still significant quantity. From these con Both classes are large, they exemplify very well the various de
siderations it is easy to see that the noun-epithet formulae con vices of flexibility, and the shorter of the two has been unjustly
sisting of a noun (common, abstract, or collective) with an neglected. But my principal motive springs from the part played
attributive epithet, a numerous and usually unambiguous class, by the mobility of formulae in this study, for it would be illogical
provide the most convenient material. On these I concentrate, to scrutinize material for freedom in placing if there are grave
but the field can with advantage be narrowed further. What difficulties besetting its use in more than one position. With a
shape or shapes can be most usefully analysed ? Among personal short final syllable the shapes chosen can be used in as many as
names this question was answered by the prominence of at most lour positions (ist-2nd, 2nd~3rd, 4th-5th, and 5th-6th feet),1
five shapes. Yet even in that field, though the point is not and in two or three with perfect facility. Ease of use, it may be
stressed by the exponents of the formula-type theory of composi said, is more important in this connexion than possibility, for
tion, expressions are found of almost every possible shape and although some shapes with favourable word-division, e.g.
length. The same is true of common-noun expressions except that WW—WO and - w w - 3may also theoretically be placed in at least
the spread is more even and shorter formulae are possible, because lour different positions, at the margins of the verse and near the
disyllabic and trisyllabic common nouns are more numerous than caesura they create difficulties in the choice of words to be juxta
personal names of such dimensions and there is less use of com posed which in practice seem to limit their flexibility severely.
pounded epithets with common nouns. One has no difficulty in Thus w w - w w effectively belongs to 3rd-4th and 4th~5th feet
compiling substantial lists of formulae of at least the following only. The same factors largely confine the other shapes also to
shapes (uu is normally equivalent to - ) : a pair of positions. The two chosen classes also mark two dif
1. αίνον άγος ferent relations to the inner metrics of the hexameter. The
2. — <-»—s=! εχχεα μακρα shape coincides with only one of the more weakly defined
w w —w w αίμα κελaw€<f>es natural portions of the hexameter (in 2nd-3rd feet), whereas
4. —υ υ —v u —αίετόί νψιπέτης shape —^ w —w at the verse-end is one of the most obvious sub
5* —>_>»_/ — —w θηλυτερ-ησι γνναιξί sections into which the verse breaks. Since the natural portions
6. κακόν μόρον of the verse have at various times been supposed to influence
η. ν —w —άλός ττολιης the development of formulae, it is useful to inspect the behaviour
8. '-' —w o —'-' άεικέα €ργα both of a class that must have been affected by the verse-structure,
9· w —υ υ — w άρήια τευχεα if any was, and of one that may have escaped.
10. w —w ν_<— —!=: διϊπετεοί ποταμοΐο 1 This notation means that the expression in question begins at a point in the
11. ν —!=; φίλον ητορ lu st foot and ends at a point in the second, etc. Other notations are used for special
12. w w —w w 8όρν μΐίλινον purposes, but none seems so clear and convenient for my present needs as that
adopted.
l g . ν '- » — — ξίφ ΐϊ
μίγά λω
Ι4· —w —s=! 8ολιχόσκιον εγχοί
15. —ο —<-<w λιμένος πολυβ4νθΐος
ΐ6 . υ υ - υ υ - υ υ - y ύττίρωϊα σιγάXoevra.
MOBILE FORMULAE 47
colometric theories, it would be uncritical to assume that the
distribution would be equal throughout all theoretically possible
positions. The average word length in the Homeric vocabulary
IV and the average phrase length in the diction conspire with the
metrical breaks (which need not all be colometric in nature) to
M OB I L E F O R M U L A E load the dice in favour of certain positions. It is thus easy to guess
1hat if the poet takes the line of least resistance more - w w - w
expressions will fall in the 5th-6th feet than elsewhere, with
he question posed is: how much freedom should we expect
pace Parry (E T 204) it is hard for the student of common-noun more functional epithets cannot be expansions, except in the very
formulae to take as meaningful,1so prominent is their ornamental rare event of both epithets being synonymous when one can be
character. They are here grouped with (a) and (b). Adjectives looked upon as an ornament of the other. Otherwise the func
of material and colour are mostly determinative: numerals are tional phrases do no more than illustrate the use of a formula in
taken as meaningful throughout. a given contextual situation.
When a functional epithet is part of the ‘expanded’ phrase
its analysis is more complicated. The most favourable case is (i) > ( u ) u - u u - u u - v i n 3rd-6th feet
when there is no question of conflation and the kernel phrase is If no epithets are functional the technique is easily understood:
securely and independently attested. One may then venture to it is a matter of simple addition. This sort of expansion, though
separate the complex expression (in which a functional epithet unremarked,1 is quite common among personal names where
has been attached to a noun-epithet formula with an ornamental frequent need has often consolidated the expansion into a new
epithet) and the truly expanded expression (in which an orna formula, e.g. βριηπυος όβριμος Άρης ι X on the one hand but
mental epithet has been used to supplement a noun-epithet for πολντλας δΐος ’Οδυσσεΰς 42 X . O ft. ioo expressions for personal
mula whose epithet, though regular, is necessary and significant names between caesura and verse-end twenty-three are expan
for the sense). The former do not concern us here. Statistical sions.2
criteria can be applied to conflations but with much less safety. Simple expansion :3 (ίονθάδος) αγρίου αίγός ξ 5° > (γεροόσιον)
In the nature of the case both components are pre-existent. But α’ίθοπα οίνον Δ 2 5 9 > ν 8 .
it is only too often the case that the functional phrase is rare, the Conflation: (καί) (ειλίποδας)) έλικας βοΰς I 466 etc. 5 X > (and
decorative phrase well established. We are then confronted by the I X in 2nd— 4th feet), cf. ειλίποδας β . ; έλικας βόας (εύρυμετώπονς)
impossible question whether context (which suggests the priority λ 289, cf. έλικας βοΰς and καλοί β. εύρνμετωποι I X ; (καί ΟΓ καθ’)
of the functional phrase) is to be preferred to epic custom (which (ΰφερεφες'} μεγα δώμα Ε 2 13 etc. 5 X >cf. ύφ. δώ ; (ερυσάρματες'}*
would insist on the cohesion of the ornamental word-group). ώκεες ίπποι Π 37°> cf· *Ρ· ίππους I X ; (μεγακητεϊ) νηι μελαίνη
Were the question important it could only be settled example Θ 222 == Λ 5> cf. μ. νηί I X ; (καί) (αίθοπα'} οίνον ερυθρόν μ igj
by example by scrutiny of the context, for most formulae are (μελιηδεα~) οίνον ερυθρόν ι 2θδ, cf. μ . οίνον 6 X .
members of wider and looser word-associations. Here conflations 1 Pope, Acta Classica vi (1963) 11, seems to be the only scholar who has seriously
are noted only as phrases involved in expansion without implica objected that the commonly quoted formula-systems offer ‘what are in effect the
same goods under a different label or in a different size’.
tion of the direction of the process. Word-groups displaying two or 2 Ten with γάρων, three with θεά, two with μάγος, eight (all - v w - a ) with
1 Cf. Bergson’s criticisms, op. cit. 21 ff. Parry’s discussion of the functional miscellaneous epithets, all added at the head of the formula. Parry asserts ‘le style
epithet, E T 192 ff., is throughout extreme and polemical, inspired probably by heroique ne permet pas d’intercaler dans le meme vers le nom d’un personnage
a wish to reinforce the case for economy in formula systems. By ‘meaningful’ I entre deux adjectifs epithitiques’, E T 72 (Parry’s italics). This restriction by no
intend that something is added to the content of the expression. Confusion has means applies to common nouns and is probably accidental, for personal names
arisen through the equation of such ideas as meaningful and appropriate, or con are very usually final. The insistence that adjectives are different in this respect,
ventional and meaningless, which are in fact different levels of evaluation. There I suppose, from appositional nouns (cf. Ota Θάτις άργυρόπεζα and γάρων Πρίαμος
is no reason why conventional epithets should not be either meaningful or decora θεοειδής) seems arbitrary. In any case the restriction is not absolute, cf. χρυσήνιος
tive, or indeed both simultaneously. The decorative epithet is not intended to Άρτεμις αγνή e 123.
inform, but neither is it intended to confuse: therefore it must be appropriate 3 Here and subsequently I quote components only if the term is of a shape not
generally (ού το t o t « όν τι άλλα το καθόλου, as the scholiasts say). I cannot agree listed in the Tables or if it has undergone some modification.
, therefore with Whallon, Tale Classical Studies xvii (1961) 134 fr., that a carefully 4 This word has caused undue mystification. Parry, E T 140 n. 1, wants it to
I appropriate use of certain epithets implies that they are meaningful in the sense make ‘une distinction entre les chevaux de char et les chevaux de trait’. But the
required. A word is never mere noise (as if the poet were to sing tra la la) but has Homeric draught animal is the mule. For Delebfccque, LeCheval dansl'Iliade, Paris
certain compatibilities with other words and incompatibilities built into it. Respect 1951, ·53> the epithet marks a contrast with ‘chevaux destines non ä l’attelage mais
for the compatibilities, like respect for grammar, allows inattention: incom a la selle’. But the Homeric saddle is as rare as the carthorse. In the contexts,
patibility, like anacoluthon, causes puzzlement, and in good epic style must be O 354 and Π 370, it is a decorative epithet, ruinous as this may be to the economy
avoided. of the formula-series for ‘horses’.
T H E E X P A N S I O N OF F O R M U L A E T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E 79
7«
A number of noun-epithet formulae are used so regularly in It is easy for the poet to improve on this artifice by continuing
construction with prepositions and coalesce so firmly that their the expression as far as the verse-end. In so doing he merges the
expansion takes place outside the preposition, which is not dis technique of expansion with a habit of phrase-construction. Paired
placed from its position. All are conflations. Most are used with epithets in the second half of the verse are very usual, e.g. άμύμονος /
several prepositions, all occurrences of which I have added into ίπποδάμοιο, δαίφρονα ποικιλομητην, χαλκηρεος ίπποδασείης, etc.1
the totals: (φίλης} από πατρίδος αΐης Β ΐβ2 etc. 4Χ , cf. φίλην ες Hence (Ολκιμα) δοΰρε δύω (κεκορνθμενα χαλκω) Λ 43, X Ι 25>cf.
πατρίδ’ 8 X in acc. sing, only; (φίλην} is πατρίδα γαΐαν Β 140 etc. δύο δοΰρε and δοΰρε δύω κ. χ. I χ ; τά μήλα (ταναύποδα) πίονα
7 X ; (θοην) ini νηα μελαιναν β 43° CtC. 7 X 5cf. θοην ini νηα 3 X » (δημω) ι 464, cf. πίονα μ . ; φάσγανα καλά (μελάνδετα κωπηεντα)
(κ οίλην) ini νηα μελαιναν δ 731 etc. 4 X , cf. κοίλην ini νηα 4Χ > Ο 713, without any simple component attested.
both ship-formulae are treated in exactly the same way in the The remainder are a mixed class: two expressions are brought
genitive singular (with νηδς ϋ σ η ς ) ; (θοην} διά νύκτα μελαιναν up to the diaeresis by adding epithets in front of the noun: άλλοι
(μάκαρες) θεοί ε J etc. 4 X , a conflation, cf. θεοί άλλοι and μάκαρες
Κ 394 etc. 4 X 5 διά νύκτα θοην I X .
O f word-groups incorporating a functional epithet as well as θ. 7 X ; and (άργύφεον) φάρος μύγα ε 2^0 = κ 543, cf* μύγα φ.
a decorative term the following are, or may be, expansions. Four expressions acquire the shape (w) υ - u υ - useful in the
Simple expansion: (μεγαθόμου) σοΐο φονήος Σ 335>presumably 3rd~5th feet and found also before the caesura: (λ ε ύ κ ) άλφιτα
an expansion, but no simple component is attested. πολλά Σ 560, but cf. ά. λευκά; (πυκινόν) δόλον άλλον Ζ l 8 j and
Conflation: (επιχθόνιος) βροτός άλλος Ω 505, cf. β. επιχθόνιος two conflations: τάδε δώματα (κ ά Χ ) ρ 264, cf. τάδε δώμα ; τεόν
I X ; (ηδ’ ΟΓ και) (άθανάτοι) θεοί άλλοι Γ 298 etc. 9 X , cf. αθάνατοι θ. (εάν) (φίλον) υιόν Ε 314 etc. 4 Χ , cf. εάν υιόν ; the shorter σάς (ον)
I X ; (μον (δολιχόσκιον} ίγχος, erratically placed in the 2nd- φίλος (-ον) υιός (-όν) occurs 8 χ . In 2nd— 5th feet is οΐς ετάροισι
5th feet, Z 126, cf. δολιχ. (γχος 24X ; εοΰ ετάροιο (φίλοιο} Ω 416, (φιλοπτολεμοισι) Ψ 5; and in the 2nd— 4th feet ράκος άλλο (κακόν)
cf. ον Ιτ., er. φίλοιο 3 X ; nόσιος ου (κουριδίοιο) φ 150, cf. κουρίδιον ν 434, ξ 342, which has no simple components attested.
compendiously described as adverbial qualification, is a relatively construction with epithets, e.g. ποικίλα with χαλκώ in various
minor technique. The poet’s self-denial is not readily explained, τεύχεα- and άρματα-expressions. Our only instance has already
since adverbs of weak force, such as μ άλα, μύγα, and πολύ are been noted. It is μήλα . . . πίονα δημώ ι 464.
very common in his general diction which at the same time is the
greatest employer of the graecus accusations, the accusative noun (iii) With another adjective
as a modifier of an adjective.* Typically the adverb is used to Certain adjectives may perform the qualifying function where
make an adverb-adjective formula, such as μάλα πολλά, μύγα the epithet is a numeral. These are πας, οίος, and μοΰνος. The
νηπιος, νήπιος αντως, which is then constructed as a predicate. most extensively used is πας. Like the true adverbs πας shows
a tendency to make autonomous groupings separated from their
(i) With an adverb noun: ύννύα πάντες (πασαι), ενδεκα πάντα, δώδεκα πάντας (πασαι).
This use of πας may from time to time give rise to ambiguous
( πολύ) χείρονες άνδρες φ 3 25; •(μάλα) πίova δήμον E 7 10 ; (μ ά λα ) constructions. Thus at K 560, ετάρους δυοκαίδεκα πάντας άρίστους,
πολλοί εταίροι θ 2 1 7 ; (μ ά λ α ) μύγα κΰδος I 303, X 4 3 5 > (μ ά λ α ) Ebeling takes πάντας with the numeral despite the fact that π.
λνγρός όλεθρος Κ 174 > (π ο λ ύ ) χείρονι φω τί λ 621,' and (π ο λ ύ ) άμισχοι (-ους) 15 X is firmly entrenched as a formula. The use of
μείζονα λ& ανΗ 2 6 8 , 1537> which is not attested without the adverb. οίος is similar but more restricted.
All these (except for πολύ μείζονα λάαν) are conflations, the
adverb-adjective phrase being independently attested. Seven expressions of the —^ w —w class are listed in this section
There seems to be no reason in principle why the adverbial and two of the w ^ class.
increment should not follow rather than precede the formula,
but clear examples are lacking.12 One notes that the normal 3. Expansion by means of the article
placings of most formulae are before major boundaries in the The Homeric article is of erratic use,1and its placing in noun
verse, so that the natural thing is to expand in front of them epithet word-groups is not bound by the classical word-order.
unless some strong verbal habit, such as continuation with Hence the motive for its employment, not being necessarily one
epithets, pulls in the other direction. of sense, may sometimes be metrical, augmenting a phrase to
a more convenient length. Thus (ο ΐ) άλλοι πάντες Φ 3712 (ist—3rd
feet); (οι δ') άλλοι πάντες ρ 411 {πάντες, ist—
3rd feet), and Λ 693
(ii) With a constructed noun
{πάντες, 3rd~5th feet); σύμπαντες οί άλλοι X 380, cf. άλλοι
Despite some obtrusive phraseology the construction of the άπαντες; (τ ά ) τεύχεα καλά Φ 317· Various expressions, all occur
accusative noun as modifier to an adjective is very ossified in ring once only, are not found without the article: τον δεξιόν ίππον
Homer. Most expressions show a highly formulaic use; the rest are ψ 336; αί κύνες αίδε τ 372 > τ °ΰ παιδός άγανοΰ λ 492 >3 τά τείρεα
mostly clearly derivative. Note the series (πόδα ς) ταχύς άγγελος,
πόδας αιόλος ίππος, (πόδα ς) ταχύν άμφ’ Ά χιλήα, Ά χιλήα πόδας in the mature epic with ώκύς. Carpenter has ingeniously taken the word as a noun
meaning ‘hound’, AJA Iiv (1950) 177 ff., while Delebecque, Le Chevaldans I'lliade,
ταχνν, doubtless based on the πόδας ώκύς Ά χιλλεύς formula. In 144-6, takes Πόδαργος as ‘le rapide’, but prefers ‘qui tremble ou frimit sur les
this series we must place κάνες (πόδα ς) αργοί Σ 578, 3 the sole jarrets’ for ιτόδαι αΐόλος. The Linear B po-da-ko, KN Ch 899 and 1029, (Πόδαργος,
expression to concern us here. The dative noun is also found in the name of an ox), is presumably no gloss, and may be assigned the primitive
sense of αργός, whatever that was.
1 Cf. Chantraine, Gram. Horn. ii. 158 ff.
1 Schwyzer, Gr. Gr. i. 84-85. 2 Chantraine, loc. cit., notes the ‘tour en plein d6veloppement’ of the article
2 Ιδοί όσφαλίς aid ζ 42 has no simplex, καλόν θρόνον άφθίτον aid Ξ 238 contains with ίλλοί (and Itepos and αυτός).
an autonomous formula άφθιτον aid 2 x and once in neut. pi. 3 The commonest παιδδϊ-formula in this position is οό παίδός 8 X. Thus the article
3 With the sense ‘swift of foot’. Thus iroäas αργός and its hypostases αργΐπους serves as a replacement, semantically not significant, for the possessive as in τοΓο
and the names Πόδαργος (-η) are twice over revivals, since αργός is a gloss equated άνακτος 3 X beside oto a. ; cf. the use of φίλος in φίλην / Ιην dς πατρίδα γαΐαν.
814345 G
82 T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E 83
καλά Σ 4 8 5 ; and the very elongated formula τά μήλα ταναύποδα is especially common among the —w w —w formulae located at
. . . 1 464. the verse-end. The effect is to bring the whole phrase back to
Six expressions of the - ^ w - <-> class and one of the w ^ - w the main caesura. Should the co-ordinated noun be a synonym
class are affected. of the noun in the formula then the technique is a variety of ex
Considering its apparent usefulness in extending a formula at pansion, for no meaningful content is added to the sentence.
its head, a point where alternative formations in nouns and Eleven examples follow: (μόνος και} φαίδιμα γ ν ΐα Ζ 2 j ; ( μόνος
epithets are mostly lacking, the use made of the article seems very και} θυμός άγήνωρ Υ 174 > (κραδίη και} θυμός άγήνωρ I 635 etc.
unenterprising. But this is to ignore the chronological factor. 6 X ; (γό ο ν και} κήδεα λυγρά Ε I § 6 ', (θάνατον και} κήρα μόλαιναν
The poet cannot be said to neglect something that is not freely β 283 etc. 4 X I (φόνον και} κήρα μόλαιναν Ε 652 = Λ 443 >(βόλους
available to him, and we cannot assume that the article was so και} μήδεα πυκνά Γ 202 ; (θάνατος και} μοίρα κραταιή Π 853 etc.
available.1 6 X ; (κορυφάς και} πρωονας άκρους Μ 282 ; (σκοπιαι και} πρώονες
άκροι Θ 55^ = Π 299 i (μόνος και} χεΐρες (-ας) άαπτοι (-ους)
Θ 45° etc- 6 X ·
4. Expansion by means of a co-ordinated synonym Several of those listed are conflations, the two nouns being
Synonyms sustain a role in epic diction both important and as found independently co-ordinated: μόνος και θυμός 2 X (acc. 11 X);
yet unexplored. By the combination and interchange of both κραδίη και θυμός 2 X (acc. 6 X ) ; φόνον και κήρα 6 X ; θάνατον
nouns and epithets which are wholly or partly synonymous a και κήρα 2 X ; θάνατος και μοίρα 4 X ; μόνος κα'ι χεΐρας 4 X ·
remarkable degree of elasticity is attained.12 Thus at the appro The distinction between the otiose synonym and the un
priate points in the verse the poet has available (besides the un related functional noun is too nice to be boldly drawn. Because
qualified nouns) the following phrases in the accusative singular powerful limbs are but the outward manifestation of the μόνος
giving the sense ‘war’ : φύλοπιν αΐνήν, αΐνοτάτον πόλεμον, πόλεμον within, the addition of that word is little more than a grace note
φθισήνορα, πόλεμον κακόν (or θρασυν), πόλεμον πολύδακρυν, κρατερήν on the γυΐα - and ^e/p-formulac. Yet we must resist the danger of
ύσμίνην, πολύδακρυν Άρηα, ονλον Άρηα. In some contexts the quasi- equating an ‘empty’ word, which tells us nothing that we did
synonymous ερις and νεΐκος can be laid under contribution to give not know already, with a synonym. Exclude therefore such
αίνοτάτην έριδα, έριδα κρατερήν, and μύγα νεΐκος. μάχην (except co-ordinations as πάλας και μακράν οχήα and χλαΐναι και ρήγεα
for the functional μάχην άλίαστον) occurs in the prepositional καλά. But the construction of such phrases is only marginally
formula μάχην ες (άνά) κυδιάνειραν, which complements πόλεμον different: the addition may not be a synonym even on the most
κατά δακρυόεντα and κατά κρατερήν ύσμίνην in the second half liberal view, but it shares a similar area of meaning.
of the verse. Synonyms moreover can be usefully co-ordinated, so The co-ordinated synonym has a further potential. It can re
that we have πόλεμον και δηιότητα (the only formula of this sense ceive an epithet of its own, and carry the whole expression back
to fill the whole second half without the aid of a preposition), into the first half of the verse :
πολεμάν τε μάχην τε, έριδας καί νείκεα, and the lengthy πόλεμόν (θάνατόν τε κακόν καί} κήρα μόλαιναν Φ 66, χ 14
τε κακόν και φύλοπιν αίνήν. (πορφυρεος θάνατος καί} μοίρα κραταιή Ε 83 etc. 3 X ΐ
Co-ordination with a second noun is a pattern of use ex 82,
(πόλεμός (-όν) τε κακός (-ον) και} φύλοπις (-ιν) αίνή (-ήν) Δ
hibited by most shapes of noun-epithet formulae, but the usage etc. 3 X ·
(The shorter πολεμάς και φύλοπις α'ινή is not attested.) At this
1 Hoekstra, MFP passim, shows that developments in the vernacular penetrate point, however, it must be clear that two co-ordinated formulae
deeply and apparently quickly into the epic diction. But the article has not (that are in question and not an adjustment to a single one.
is, notyet) become so organic as the movable -v or the dropped p-.
2 First explored, like so many other matters now in prominence, by Diintzer, Eight formulae of the —w w - w class receive this kind of ex
Horn. Abhandlungen, 535-48. pansion.
84 T H E E X P A N S I O N OF F O R M U L A E T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E 85
5. The contraction of extended and complex formulae phrase is a more complicated operation.1 Often either the
It is evident that the expansion and continuation of formulae eliminated term is medial, or the words that survive the contrac
is a potent means by which the resources of a traditional poetic tion are changed in position. It is rare that anything so simple as
diction might be enriched and increased. The habit of adapting θάνατόν τε κακόν καί κηρα, without μελαιναν Π 47, is encountered,
formulae by these devices provides a foot-hold for a new word- nor are the frequencies generally sufficiently high to support an
association to arise and develop unobtrusively, until it is secure unimpeachable statistical argument. It is often necessary to be
enough to exist in its own right without the support of the content with the point that the frequencies are compatible with,
primary formula at all. Some of the expressions which were for or are suggestive of, a certain origin.
convenience labelled ‘conflations’ doubtless illustrate a point in Thus of the expansions noted above, είλίποδας έλικας βοΰς,
this history, and are in fact the middle terms, A + B + C , through φίλην ες πατρίδα γαΐαν, θάνατος καί μοίρα κραταιη, σκοπίαι καί
which a secondary association, A +C , grew out of a primary πρώονες άκροι, πορφύρεον μ εγα φάρος, are more frequent in the
A-f-B: e.g. νη ϊ μελαίνη tout court 13 X , expanded to μεγακη τεϊ νηϊ extended form than in any other. It is therefore entirely probable
μελαίνη 2 X, contracted to μεγακητεϊ νηι ι X . But here a difficulty that a given extended formula is more truly part of the basis of
is encountered, if the picture is presented in terms of the historical the poet’s style than the simple member, which derives from it
development of a poetic tradition. The evidence is only the regu when the need arises by the process of contraction. However, it
larities exhibited by a given poet’s practice, and there is no is not extended noun-epithet formulae that are the most fertile
necessity that what is most ancient will there be most regular. soil for the processes of contraction to flourish, but rather complex
What can be inferred is only a sequence of suggestion: thus νηϊ formulae. The complex formula arises through the repeated con
μελαίνη is sufficiently popular to suggest itself in suitable contexts, struction of the simple formula with the same governed or
μεγακη τεϊ νηϊ μελαίνη is suggested by it, and in its turn suggests governing term. Every word that the poet uses (other than inter
μεγακη τεϊ νηι. In an accomplished performer, the mental pro jections and vocatives) must, of course, be construed. Construc
cesses that this implies may be, in the Homeric phrase, ώκεΐαι ώς tion, apart from the not infrequent whole formulaic sentences,
ε ί . . . νόημα. Again, some extended phrases are quite frequent, implies the creation ofa new sentence out of the words and phrases
e.g. είλίποδας έλικας βοΰς 6 X , and may be more popular than their suggested by the context. With a regular need a regular complex
simple constituents. Whatever the real history, in the act of formula develops, and at this stage the phrases used under a less
composition such a phrase, being itself established as a unit, may regular need may be formed by the modification of the dominant
be analysed indifferently as (A +B )+C , or as (A +C )+B , ac complex formula. Thus, to take a frequent sentence-pattern, the
cording to whatever analogy the poet calls to mind. - w w - w noun-epithet formula lying at the verse-end is construed
That the resources of the Homeric diction included the apocope with a verb so as to bring the whole expression back to the main
of formulaic sentences has been already noted in Homeric caesura. This has resulted in the emergence of several complex
scholarship.1 The phrase that suffers the apocope is regularly formulae, which may then be contracted: (σην/ην) πατρίδα γαΐαν
located between diaeresis and verse-end, e.g. ίκεσθαι {-ηται etc.) 14 X > ην γαΐαν ίκεσθαι 2 X , or πατρίδ’ ίκεσθαι
4 X ; ακόντισε δονρί φαεινω 14 X > ακόντισε δουρί I X ; λίπε δ’ (λίπ’)
> jl' S' s' a>\ I ” VXee δακρυσασα p 38
αμφι oe παώ ι φ ιλφ ραΛεί ' . ' s' όστεα θυμός άγήνωρ 3 X > λίπε δ’ όστέα θυμός 2 X ; εμησατο λυγρόν
(πηχεε· τον δε ποτϊ ο ΐ ω 347
όλεθρον2 X > μήσατ (μ η δετ) όλεθρον2 X ;(επ-)ηρκεσελυγρόνόλεθρον
~ ν « λ , ,·> λ / ί έκέλσαμεν εν φαμάθοισι <■5 4 6 = μ 5
VYICL LL€V € V v f A v O V T C J { s / \ 4 X > ηρκεσ’ (ηρκει) όλεθρον 2 X ; εδυσετο νωροπα χαλκόν 2 Χ >
1 Γ {€Κ€λσαμςν, €κ be τ α μ ή λ α λ 20.
For the most part, however, the contraction of a formulaic 1 Meister, Horn. Kunstsprache, 233 ff·, has a section on the contraction of certain
verbal formulae; otherwise only sporadic examples have been noticed, e.g. (δόμον)
! 1 Cf. Chantraine, ‘Remarques sur l’emploi des formules dans le premier chant ili'Sos (ΐσοι, Witte, Glotta iii (1912) 105-6; ποικίλος (χαλκψ), G. M. Bolling, AJP
de l’lliade’, REG xlv (1932) 121-54, especially 138 ff. xxix (1958) 279.
86 T H E E X P A N S I O N OF F O R M U L A E T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E 87
δυσετο χαλκόν i X. Quite different frequencies are also encoun the extended phrases are not unitary but are to be analysed.
tered within this group, e.g. εγείνατο πότνια μήτηρ I X , cf. yetVaro The latter clause at once points to the first class of extended
μητηρ 8 X, pointing in this instance to a genuine conflation. Am phrases to be rejected in formulating the minimum figure. What
biguous examples with low frequencies throughout are of course ever the previous history of a phrase its repetition means prima
very common, even when expressing ideas which would naturally facie a formula. Second, in a conflation there is an expanded
be considered quite regular, e.g. φ όγ αδ’ ετραπε μώνυχας ίππους and an expanding member. The latter is simply the identified
ι X, cf. φ υγ αδ’ ετραπεν 'ίππους also once only. Nothing can be in source of the term used and must be counted out. It is recognized
ferred from these, except that some process of adaptation is at by being less frequent and so less well-established in the poet’s
work. mind than the basic expanded formula. In the case of a tie the
Expansion, like modification, is not a technique for which the analogy of unambiguous conflations suggests that the formula
evidence unequivocally exposes the poet’s thought. It has also placed in its normal position is most likely to be primary. The
some complications of its own. For the first (and only) time an result is summarized as follows:
artifice is attested among unique expressions. This follows from
Total Expansions Proportion (%)
our selection of all noun epithet phrases of certain shapes without Shape formulae Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum
prejudging the nature of their formation, so that with δέρμα
βόειον εϋχροες in the text we list an expression δέρμα βόειον. Since -w v -'-w 3*9 35 24 11 8
u u -ü 140 17 9 12 7
the shape is regularly a basic element in the poet’s
diction it is likely enough that this really is an expansion: δέρμα I have chosen to diagnose primary formulae by the numerical
βόειον + εϋχροες. For there is no reason, if the poet is obliged to
criterion because this is the only method that can be applied
create an expression, why he should not fit it into the verse by consistently to all types of formular adaptation. Yet from time
means of any artifice at his disposal, although expansion is the to time other means of probing the poet’s technique become
only one that is likely to reveal itself to us. The odd thing is that available. Although these agree substantially with the results of
he makes so very little use of it—only eight times for an assumed the numerical method occasionally there is conflict. Thus the
basic expression of - «->- shape and three times for the w w- primary formula is typically located in one of the favoured
shape. I say ‘odd’ because we might be inclined to think that positions for the shape in question. That arouses no surprise. But
a unique expression, which may well be an ad hoc creation, re if we make a rule that a noun-epithet group which represents
presents an awkward crisis in composition so that every artifice a formula of that shape in its normal position is the basic formula
must be called up in support. I prefer, however, to consider that of the expansion then we find a small number of conflicts with
the rarity of expanded unique expressions tells us more about the numerical evidence: αΐθοπα οίνον ερυθρόν, where αΐθοπα οίνον
regular formulae than about unique expressions, namely that notches up eighteen further occurrences (and three more in the
formulae can suggest themselves when there is no straightforward dative) against only five for οίνον ερυθρόν. The clash is not so sharp
way of using them. To express a non-formular idea, of course, the in the case of μελιηδέα οίνον ερυθρόν and έλικας βόας εύρυμετώπους. 1
poet does not necessarily have to create a phrase: the simple word That the primary formula is normally in its natural position may
will usually do. Since we are here concerned with the manipula tell us something about the motives for expansion, based on the
tion of formulae these unique expansions do not figure in the stability of the formulaic kernel. But if this is stable we should
summary tables. not expect it to be split in order to accommodate the expanding
Maximum and minimum figures can be given for the extent of
expansion. The maximum figure assumes that all formulae of 1 Elsewhere μ,ελιι]Sea ohov 6 X , 2 X in gen. sing., and separated 3 X in nom.,
acc. and gen. sing., a productive formula; οI. ερυθρό; (-όν) 5X elsewhere, fixed
the two inspected shapes which are involved in expansion are both in shape and position, ευρυμετωπο; is associated with βοΰς 6 X elsewhere but
the primary expressions in the extended phrases, and also that only once juxtaposed, έλιξ has ten other occurrences, mostly very formulaic.
88 TH E E X P A N S IO N OF F O R M U L A E T H E E X P A N S IO N O F F O R M U L A E 89
term. In Section i (i) there is only one1contravention of this rule, the problem of continuing the sentence, and the formulae may
πάντας εϋκνη μίδας εταίρους , 2 against a dozen observances: in not b e readily movable. Expansion can thus be looked upon as
Section I (ii) and (iii) there are two, μήλα ταναυποδα πίονα δήμω in p art an alternative or complement to mobility, an artifice
and άλλοι μάκαρες θεοί, against half a dozen clear observances. I whereby a formula may retain its natural place in the verse and
believe, however, that the rule is tighter than the exceptions be combined with other desirable words which might otherwise
indicate. Two of them have functional epithets, always tricky have to be abandoned.
material since the poet uses them under the compulsion of the Several ideas are latent in this inference. Formulaic associa
context and not merely for their word-associations. In the third tions are not only tenacious, as was shown both by their mobility
the expansion is complex and assimilates itself to the technique and their modification, but are suggested also by contexts even
of paired compound epithets in the second half of the verse.3 when the metrical environment is not immediately suitable. This
A clear case of a primary formula with decorative epithet being may not conform with formula-type theory but it does conform
split for expansion seems not to occur among the common nouns.4 with most people’s experience of cliches and formulae: they come
The expanded phrase with its heaped up epithets is so con into m ind quite mysteriously and certainly with no respect for
spicuous that it may be overlooked that Homer does not use the grammar and structure of sentences. We must be on our
a discreeter artifice whereby the expanding term is detached guard against the notion that a formula is pure gain for the
a little in front of its primary formula: a line like ήδεα δ’ εκ improviser even on the technical level. It is almost inevitable
κρητήρος άφυσσατο οίνον ερυθρόν is unhomeric. A functional that a small price at least must be paid for the advantages. With
epithet, however, may be so separated, e.g. πολλοί δ’ εν τάφρω formulae of various shapes and normal positions it is easy to see
ερυσάρματες ώκεες ΐπποι Π 37°j and often is. The separation of that p a rt of the price is the hazard of the unfilled gap. Against
an expanding word that follows the primary formula is attested, it a device, expansion, must be developed. To operate it most
but only very rarely, e.g. πυκνοΐσιν λάεσσι κατεστόρεσαν μεγάλοισι dexterously, as the numerous conflated phrases make plain, what
Ω 798· I infer something about the purpose of expansion in the is needed is a fund of associations out of which the additional
poet’s technique. It is not a mere flourish or an Aeschylean dis words can be provided.
play of composita, but derives from the usefulness of filling certain
natural portions of the verse especially in the second half. The
usefulness of such a device arises from the phrase-by-phrase
construction of the Homeric sentence, the disadvantage of which
is that the phrases which the context suggests may leave spaces
between their natural positions. We have seen that formulae
may be moved and this may close up the gap, but there is then
1 In άμφφρότήν . . . ασπίδα θοΰριν the new grammatical case requires that the
regular άσπ. άμφφρότης be adapted.
2 ευκνήμιδες (-as) εταίροι (-ovs) occurs 5 X in all, in Odyssey only, and presumably
derives from εϋκν. Αχαιοί (-oos) 28 X . Were πάιη-ας έϋκν. Άχ. to occur, we should not
wish, using the numerical criterion, to analyse it as an expansion, since π. Αχαιοί
(•oils) is not so frequent (23 X ) as the ornamental component.
1 The paired epithet technique has several peculiar features, among which is
the separation of the epithets from their noun, as in ποταμόν . . . βαβύρροον αγρυρο-
δίιτην Φ 8, which marks them as an autonomous unit. For the μ^λα-phrase the
poet has drawn (rather unusually, be it said) on the regular associations of the
word to fill the framework of the phrase-pattern.
4 There are odd instances among the personal names, e.g. Τελαμώνιος όλκιμος
Αίας Μ 349 and 362.
S E P A R A T IO N 91
formula is divided, this was so grave an adjustment to its normal
shape that it could not be regarded as a habitual, and so a for
mulaic use, of the epithet in question. But this is a priori argumen
VI I tation from definitions, against which I have protested earlier.
Parry had defined the formula in terms of an expression occupy
SEPARATION ing a certain space, and consequently has no framework within
which to discuss even modified word-groups, much less separated
ones. Yet defined in such a way as to divorce its connotation
to this point I have considered the formula as a word-
p
are those that contain a word that itself exactly fits a portion of (ηλυθον) άμφιΆισσαι N 174 = 0 549 etc.1 Dactylic words are
the hexameter or has some affinity for a certain position, and a hazard no poet of the Greek language could escape, but there
these can be usefully sorted into three chief categories: are other pitfalls in the use of the longer formulae which are
(i) Those in which a word shaped —w w - w is retained at, or almost self-sought. The epic likes words of the measure (J) s j - u \ j
brought to, the verse-end, or a phrase of that shape created so useful in the 3rd-4th feet, and liking them must face their
there, with the intrusive words lying before i t ; incompatibility with the longer formulae of the second half of
(ii) Those in which a word shaped (w) ^ - y y is retained at, the verse. Separation, if the word-divisions are right, is again an
or brought to, a position immediately after the caesura, or obvious artifice, but it must normally be combined with some sort
a phrase created there, with the intrusive words lying of modification. A word displaced from the 4th foot will not im
either before or after i t ; mediately place itself before the caesura: hence vrjas <αλαδ’
(iii) Those in which a word shaped y —y, w - y or - y, ε'λκε'μ,εν) άμφκλίσσas B 165 == l8l, or even vrjas (Jvaae\px>vs
is retained at, or brought to, the verse-end, with the in άλαδ’ (λκέμςν) άμφκλίσσας I 683 etc.i.2 This pattem of use is like
trusive words lying before it. that of long epithets generally. Often they are fixed in position,
sometimes under metrical necessity, while their noun falls where
The technique here pursued is evident. Words no less than it can. N 614 κόρυθος φάλον rjAaaev ImroSaxrelrjs is arranged very
formulae fall into their natural positions in the verse. Around like 5 165 above, but KopvOos cannot be juxtaposed with its
this pivot the sentence is constructed, and its associated terms epithet. What then is surprising if a long epithet reverts to the
must fall where they can. There are various other separations convenient verse-end position when the formula in which it is
whose origin is less evident. incorporated is disrupted ?3 For instance, άθανάτοισι Oeoiai 20 X
in ist—3rd or 4th—6th feet but Oeotoi μ€τάγγ(λος άθανάτοισι
i . Separations based on a term scanned - ^ w - y at the verse-end Ο I44·4
Even with the aid of additional adjustments the artifice is very I have introduced this additional formulaic material in order
feebly developed among the two classes of shorter formulae, for to establish the pattern of use into which a few of the shorter
obvious reasons of physical size. Make the formulae a little longer, formulae have been attracted. All fill the 5th-6th feet by expand
and the device will be found to enjoy a certain vogue. The un ing their final component: τόδε (βάζαι εμ.εΰ πάρα καλόν)· άλεισον
shifted term will almost always be an epithet which, in order 1 I count thirty formulae and possible formulae of the shape and word-division
to achieve the dimensions of two whole feet, is usually compound ww | - u u - u of which nine are separated to admit a dactylic (or occasionally
and may present the appearance of being created for the verse- spondaic) word: ßoos . . . άγρανλοιο, δόμον . . . evpuieντα, πτόλις . . . ινρνάγνια,
χθονί. . . ττουλυβοτΐίρΎΐ, xpoos . . . άνδρομόοιο, besides the two examples quoted in
end position. With such an epithet a noun of pyrrhic scansion the text, and with a change to the acc. sing, case βοΰν . . . ΐύρνμότωπον, σΰν . . .
may be combined to give a formula of the useful shape ^ - w w άργtoSorra.
—y , e.g. 8 eT7as άμφικυπΐλλον, veas άμφιελίσσας, etc. With all 2 Add seven examples of the shape and word-division - v u | - u u - u (out of
twenty-six formulae and possible formulae of that structure): ασπίδα <μ«ν> . . .
its advantages1 the shape has one defect: it is impossible to con πάντοσ* όΐσην, δόνδρεα ζμακρά} . . . τηλιθόιοντα, ίππων . . . ώκειάων, πασιν <δε> . . .
strue a dactylic word with it without modification, unless the μνηστηρεσσι, οίών φμεγα πώυ) . . . άργεννάων, οΐνοιο (for οίνον) . . . ηδυπστοιο,
poet is willing to place the dactylic word at the beginning of the υΐοίσι (for υίάσι) . . . κυδαλίμοισι. An isolated example from a longer class is ποταμόν
(-ον) . . . δινήΐντα (-os) cf. π. βαθυδινηιντα.
line and fill out the intervening space. The neatest modification 3 Theoretically as many as eighty-five formulae and possible formulae of the
is to split the formula and intrude the dactylic word into the shape - might fall victims to this accident. I count seven, the other
fourth foot, e.g. Senas (ρϊσεται) άμφικνπίλλον Ψ 663, 667; vets six being μακριοί. . . όγχίί-ηαι, επίεσσι /επεσσι. . . μαλιχίοισι, ϊπποισι... ώκυπόδεσσι,
νηνσί I νψσσι . . . ποντοπόροισι, νηνσ'ι . . . ωκυπόροισι, χοροί . . . άμφοτίρ-ησι.
1 E T 63-67 gives the sentence-patterns into which the personal name formulae 4 ποσί. . . άμφοτόροισι χ 87 cannot be quoted as a modification giving - ^ ^
of this shape enter (see p. 14 above). The common noun formulae are similarly The expression attested in one of our shapes is πόδι* άμφιο which has no dative of
used. the same shape, άμφω is found as genitive but not as dative and άμφοιϊν is unknown.
S E P A R A T IO N S E P A R A T IO N 95
94
Ω 429; σόν (S’ έκτανε πιστόν) εταΐρον Ρ 589» ληιδα (8’ εκ πεδίου ponents to the (w) ^ ^ w phrase the short formulae may enter
σννΐλάσσαμΐν ήλιθα) πολλήν Λ 677 j the expanded formula μήλα the present pattern of separation. The additional word is usually
(ταναυποδα) πΙονα (βημω) ι 464 has the same structure. A fifth fully functional, but occasionally the key phrase is constructed
example has augmentation of more generous size at the verse-end: by the artifices of expansion. For the most part the second term
πάσιν (έλέγχιστον θέμεναι μερόπεσσι) βροτοΐσι Β 285.1 of the formula is then placed in the first half of the verse, thus:
(μ ό λ ο ) πολλά (πάθ’~> άλγεα ν go, and πολλά (δ ’ ο γ ’ εν πόντιο
' 2. Separations based on a term scanned (y) w - ^ w in yd-^lh feet πάθεν} άλγεα a 4, cf. ά. πολλά;
The typical expression subjected to this kind of separation is άνδρες (νηών ενΐ} τέκτονες ι 126, cf. τ. άνδρες;
located at the verse-end and consists of a long epithet scanned πολλά (βροτών επί} άστεα π 63, cf. ά. πολλά (the complex
- u u with a trochaic or spondaic noun, e.g. περικαλλέα δίφρον, formula is mobile—2 X in ist-3rdfeet, ι X in3rd-5th feet—
μεγαλήτορι θυμω, etc. The space between caesura and diaeresis, with elision);
however, has a strong attraction for words of such dimensions, οξύ (πάγ-η) βέλος Δ 185, cf. β. όξυ;
a position which they fill exactly. And if the epithet is drawn δώρα (δ ’ άγ’ άλλήλοισί) περικλυτά Η 2 9 9 ) cf· κλυτά δ.;
back to this position, dactylic words can be accommodated in έλκος (μεν γάρ εχω τάδε) καρτεράν Π 51 cf. (τάδε) κ, ε.;
the 5th foot between the epithet and noun, e.g. περικαλλεα (ο ι S’y άλλοι (ου σφι πάρεσαν} θεοί Λ 7 5 ) a n d (οι δ’)> άλλοι
(βησετο) δίφρον γ 481.2 The pattern of use has again attracted (προς "Ολυμπον ϊσαν) θεοί Φ 518, cf. θ. άλλοι',
some of the short formulae, which must make use of modification ιστόν (εποιχομενης') μεγαν (άμβροτον) κ 222, cf. μ. ιστόν,
or expansion to obtain the crucial (w) w - w ^ term : thus ποδώκεες πόΛΛ’ (επ ι τοΐς πάθομεν) κακά γ 113, cf. κ. πολλά ‘
(έκφερον) 'ίπποι W 376, and ποδώκεas (ήλασεν) ίππους Ρ 614, cf. μήλα (κατεκτάνομεν μάλα) πίονα ω 66, cf. π. μήλα',
ώκέες (- α ς ) ίπποι (-ους) ; άεικέα (μήδετο) έργα X 395 = ^ 24> ήμετερας (ίεναί) νέας Ν ΙΟ Ι, cfi ν. άμάς ;
cf. εργον αεικες ;3 (μάλα) μερμερα (μήσατο) έργα Κ 289. An νύξ (φθΐτν) άμβροτος λ 33°> ck άμβροσίη ννξ;
epithet scanned (w) w — is undesirable in this position, but ευρύ (γάρ άμφ’ ωμοισιν έχει) σάκος Λ 5 27) c^· σ· €ύρΰ;
a few occur4 and, as it happens, one provides a separated for τόξα (λαβών φέρε)? καμπύλα φ 359) c^· κ· τ°ξα ;
mula of one of our shapes : τάφρον (S’ εκδιαβάντες) ορυκτήν Κ 198, ύπνος (έχ ε) γλυκύς ο *], cf. γ. ύπνος;
a much-separated formula with the noun itself this time shifted σήσιν (ε χ ε) φρεσίν Β 33> 7 °) c^· Φρ· σήσι I
to the beginning of the verse. πάντα (δ ’ από πλευρών) χρόα (έργαθεν) Λ 437) c^· ΧΡ· πάντα.
The position between caesura and diaeresis is attractive to The expanded formula άλλοι (μάκαρες) θεοί ε η etc. slips into
phrases as much as to words, and by lending one of their com- this pattern. The total is twenty-one formulae, eleven of the
- w ^ - w and ten of the w ^ - w class.
1 The only parallel to the length of the verse-end member appears to be άνδρών
. . . ύπερηνορεόντων φ 31. 3. Separations based on a term scanned —ςν, ^ —w, or —ς?
2 Fifty-two formulae and possible formulae of this structure might be affected,
sixteen in fact are, the others being ναυσικλυτοί . . . άνδρες, μεγαλήτορι . . . θυμω, at the verse-end
καλλίτριχε . . . ίπποι (Ρ 504, for acc. plur. but in the sense ‘chariot’), χρυοάμπυκας The attraction felt towards the verse-end by words shorter than
. . . ίππους, διδυμάονε . . . παΐδε, and the expanded formulae ερυσάρματες <cWes> those scanned - o w - w is strictly related to the quantity of the
ΐπποι and Καπανήϊος (αγλαός) υιός’, and with the noun shifted into the first half
of the verse: άγρον ., . πολυδενδρεον, εγχος . . . δολιχόσκιον, ίππους ■. ■κρατερώνυχας, final syllable and the length of the word. A word w w — is as
πολλά . . . κειμήλια, λώβην . . . θυμαλγεα, νήας . . . δυώδεκα (for δυοκαίδεκα ν.), οίνον constricted as one - ^ is emancipated.1 In many cases therefore
. . . μελι·ηδ4α, χαλκόν . . . ταμεοίχροα. the technique of anchoring one term in a favoured place while
3 A metrical equivalent is έμήαατο εργον άεικές λ 429· ^ 11[ the association of
μήδεσθαι with εργον (-α) is very fluid: economy is a characteristic of settled formulaic 1 Using O ’Neill’s material from Yale Classical Studies viii (1942) we find that the
phraseology. proportion of final placings for ^ ^ ----is c. 94 per cent., for >->----- 88 per cent., for
4 Only one other separated formula gives a comparable rhythm, πολυφόρβου . . . w - v 30 per cent., for u - u 6 6 per cent., fo r----17 per cent., and for —-~j only
χαί-ης Ξ 200, 301, cf. γαΐαν πολυφύρβςν itself in the 2nd—4th feet, 1 569* 12 per cent.
S E P A R A T IO N S E P A R A T IO N 97
96
the other floats freely about the verse is not evident. Moreover i 367. Using a by-form are άνέρας (εδρον) άρίστους M I 2 J and
many of the formulae that bring a short word to the verse-end άνέρε (δήμου) «χριστοί Λ 328, cf. άνδρας άρίστους. Formulae of the
Eire themselves of the shorter classes, and are freely movable, if word-division are rare, and separated I notice only
need be, without adjustment. The separation of the words is τάδε (φ α ίν ε τ ) άεθλον φ 73 = ιθ6.
therefore an alternative rather than a complementary technique Separation based on a word - ^ at the verse-end is a pattern
to mobility. into which the shorter formulae can naturally very freely enter.
I count only two of the shorter formulae divided on the basis Most favoured is the | ^ shape, between whose members
of a final vvw —w: cot? <[περί σημ') άτάροιο Ω 7551 cf· έτάροιο ; a dactylic word may be intruded, filling the fifth foot and bring
and by the conflation of two ε/aya-formulae τάδε (πευθόμενος ing the whole expression back to the fourth foot caesura, hence:
κακά) έργα p 158. βροτός (οντασεν) άνήρ E 361 ;
Formulae which have <->- ^ as their second term are naturally αχός (εσσεται) αίνον π 8 j ;
numerous in the - v u - ü class. Thirteen are split. An obvious κακά (μήσατο) έργα ω 199 j
place for the first term is immediately before the caesura, hence: μέγα —u u έργο ν γ 261, χ 408;
δαιτός (κεκορήμεθa θυμόvy έίσης Θ 98; τάδε —ν *->έργα Ε 757 etC· 3 χ >
δαιτι <συνήοράς έστί) θαλείη θ 99 j φίλον (αϊον) ήτορ Ο 252 ;
νηυσι. . . θοήσι 0 673, Ρ 7°^ > (at Ο 673 ήδ’ οσσοι παρά νηυσι μέγας (εσσεται) όρκος A 239!
μάχην έμάχοντο θοήσι the split is caused by the rearrange μέγα (βάλλετο) φάρος Β 4 3 >
ment of a complex formula caused in its turn by a change in and φρεσί (βάλλεο) σήσι A 297 etC· 13 X ·
the connective phrase, cf. 1 54 στησάμενοι δ’ έμάχοντο μάχην
παρά ν. θ.). That there are two intrusions of βάλλειν is fortuitous, one being
πάσι (περιδείσασα) θεοΐσι Ο 123 5 όή (επεδωκε) θυγατρί I 148 metaphorical, but the three insertions of μήσατο (N.B. μέγα
= 290, a repeated passage, cf. θυγατέρα (-os) ήν (ής) ; τούτο (μήσατο) έργον γ 2ÖI, and τάδε (μήσατο) έργα ω 444) form A re
(βιών δείσειε) νόημα Η 456 >τάφρον (-ω) — ορυκτήν (-fj) Μ 72, lated group and properly speaking are conflations o f the nominal
Θ 179 5and ταυτα (διεξερέεσθέ) έκαστα Κ 432; cf. the expan and verbal formulae. We note also the two intrusions of εσσεται,
ded formula πάντας (έϋκνήμιδας) εταίρους κ 203· The first cf. κλέος (έσσεταί) έσθλόν ω 94 in the 3rd—5th feet. The —w —
term may even stand at the very beginning of the verse: class are brought back too close to the caesura by the separation
πάντας. . . εταίρους γ i g i πολλός . . . όμιλος Σ 603, the juxta to be so dexterously handled, but I count three examples:
posed form being πουλύς όμ. ; and τάφρω . . . ορυκτή Ο 344·* χαλκέω (εστασαν) ούδω η 8 g ; αγλαόν (οίσέμεν) ΰδωρ γ 429 5 and
εύρέας (άμπεχεν) ωμούς ζ 225·
If the first term remains in the second hEilf of the verse it will The only other pattern to show any development shunts the
require some sort of modification to evade the familiEir difficulties first term as far back as the main caesura:
of the fourth foot. This may be no more than to cancel the effects
of elision or correption: hence αγλαά (δέχθαΐ) άποινα 4 23 = 377, μέλαν (δ 1 άνακήκιεν) αίμα Η 2Ö2 ;
a repeated passage; and πολλοί (δ’ άμφ’ αυτόν) εταίροι λ 520; the φίλον ν ν - ν υ ήτορ Θ 4 3 7 etc· 8 X ;
Iliad has πολέες for πολλοί ß 417 etc· 3 x >despite the juxtaposed θεοί <w>w — <-> αυτοί Η 360 = Μ 234? ω 4 01 >
πολλοί εταίροι ; and the conflated formula άλλοι (πάντες) εταίροι πάλιν w w —w w αίπήν γ 130 etc. 4 χ 5
πάλιν (κεραϊζέμεν) άμήν Π 830, cf. π. ύμήν ;
1 One of a series of manipulations in Ω, cf. ire/» σήμ' έτάροιο φιλοιο ß 51 and
περί σήμα ίοΰ έτάροιο φίλοιο Ω 4: ®·
κακά (δε φρεσί μήδετο) έργα Φ 19 = Ψ 176 >
* The line is τάφρψ και σκολόπεασιν ένιπλήξαντε; άρνκτή, a harsh hyperbaton
to be explained, like many grammatical questions in Homer, in terms of technique cf. Λ 24Ι~3 ιτεσών κοιμήαατο χάλκεον νττνον \ οικτράς, αϊτό μνηστή; άλόχου, άστοΐσιν
(the division of a formula) not of rhetoric (a hendiadys in the first half of the verse): άρήγων, \ κουριοίης, assisted or excused by the pattern of the runover word.
814345 H
98 S E P A R A T IO N S E P A R A T IO N 99
μέγα (δε σφισι φαίνετο) εργον Μ 416 and (δ ’ αυτώ φ .) χ 149 » = 674, τ 353, cf. μήδεα ττνκνά; κλέος(εσσεταΐ) εσθλόν ω 94 >τάδε (δ ’
πυρά <(δέ σφισι καίετο) πολλά Θ 554 > αυτοί) πάντα ß 368» and δυο <(δ’ οΰπω) φώτε Ρ 377 » c^· the two
and with modifications, θεοΐς (ίνδεξια) πάσι A 597» c^· 7Τ· expanded formulae κάνες πόδας αργοί and ιόν φίλον υιόν in this
θεοΐσι; same position. Isolated, and with a pyrrhic term in the thesis
and εμοΰ {ίου} —w w πατρός X 500, ο 459 » cf· π · εμοίο of the fifth foot, is αίνον (από πραπίδων) άχος X 43» cf. ά. αίνον.
(εοίο). The conflated expression ε/χον (δολιχόσκιον) εγχος Ζ The relatively frequent use made of the —^ o —w formulae
12Ö has the same pattern, but is put into the 2nd~5th feet. in the first half of the verse leads to a number of separations in
which the first term is placed at the beginning of the verse and
If convenience demands there is no reason why the first term the second kept at, or moved to, a point just before the feminine
should not be drawn back still further: thus rjSe (ist foot). . . caesura: hence 01? (άγανοΐσΐ) βίλεσσι Ω 759 etc. 6 X , a firm com
βουλή B 5 etc. 6 X , cf. ήδε ye βουλή; and μ ίγα (2nd foot) . . . πήμα
plex, but cf. σοΐσi β . ; δάκρυα (δ ’ εκβαλε) θερμά τ 362; κτήμαθ'
Z 282. (ελών ευ) πάντα Γ J 2 = 93» a repeated passage; νήα (μεν ο ΐγε)
υψερεφες (θέτ ο) δώμα ο 241 has no parallel at all, except in the
μίλαιναν Α 485 etc. 3 X ; πί1ρ (εθελεις) άίδηλον I 436 > and ταΰτα
expanded formula ΰφερεφές μ ίγα δώμα, from which it derives by
kj - υ υ -πάντα / 135 etc· 3 χ · Modification naturally appears also,
substitution of the verb.1 Another unparalleled separation pro
if necessary or convenient: τωδ’ (εφες) άνδρίΕ 174 (2nd-3rd feet),
duced by expansion is είλίποδας έλικα? βοΰς 5 X , but είλίποδας is
cf. άνερι τώ δε ; γαστέρα (τύφε) μεσην Δ 53 1 (2nd—4th feet), a
there the secondary term.
variant of a regular complex formula, cf. y. μεσσην ; and πάντα?
Altogether in this section there are 35 split formulae, 18 of the
(ιώ ν) ετάρους γ 424 » for εταίρους. For the w w —w class inversion
- w w - w shape and 17 of the >-»w - or modification is de rigueur: άνδρί (δέμας εϊκυΐα) νεω ν 222; άλλο
(δε τοί τ ι) έπος ο 2 J ; παν ( δ’ εξηράνθη) πεδίον Φ 345 » άπνος w —
These patterns of separation include all those parts of the dic
γλυκερός τ 511 and (2nd— 4th feet) Κ 4. δόλον (τόνδ’) άλλον β 93
tion where there has been developed a technique of splitting
retains its word-order because it is not brought to the very be
these noun-epithet formulae which correlates with recognizable
ginning of the first foot.
and familiar features in the distribution of words. There are
Counting all varieties of separation there are forty-five divided
many other examples which seem to correlate only with the
formulae in the —w w —<-> class and thirty-eight in the w ^ - w
convenience of the moment. Thus separation may occur when
class. These are separations made to accommodate a major
a formula is partly displaced from the verse-end by a term
functional term in the formula’s immediate vicinity. The separa
scanned w — w : hence πολλά (τετεάξεταΐ) άλγε’ (επ ’ αυτή')
tion is thus physically fairly wide, sometimes indeed very wide.
Φ 585, cf. ά. πολλά ; οΐ δ’ άλλοι (φιλότητι νεώτεροι) άνδρες (επονται)
I pass on now to consider less disruptive separations of formulae
γ 363, cf. άνερες άλλοι ; καλά (περί χροϊ ) εΐματ (εχοντι) π 210, cf.
caused by minor functional words, the enclitic connectives and
εΐματ α κ. ; ταΰτα ( y ---- ) πάντ (αγορεύω (-σαι)) A 365» Μ 176, cf.
infixed prepositions.
τ. γε π. It is no surprise that εΐματ εχοντα and πάντ άγορευειν
are formulae in their own right. Other separated formulae that The adaptation of formulae to receive connectives and prepositions
locate a term in the 5th foot are τάδε ( γ ’ αίεν άεικε'α) έργα π ιοη
No small number of divided formulae, both in the second and
= υ 3171 ενα (φρεσΐ) θυμόν Ν 487, an ingenious expansion of the
first half of the verse, receive a connective between their members
complex formula ενα θυμόν εχοντες ; πυκινό. (φρεσΐ) μήδε’ Ω 2 Ö2
along with the words of weightier import, e.g. κακά δε φρεσΐ
1 Substitution is an important artifice in the handling of complex formulae, e.g. μήδετο έργα, δάκρυα δ’ εκβαλε θερμά, etc. At the point of discussion
κόρυθος φάλον (βάλεν) ίπποδασείη;, κεφαλήν εττεθηκε (έφνπερθε) καλνπτρτ], βοάων
εχμ,ατα {εκτοθι) νηών, άστυ μεγα (^ept) Ιϊριάμοια. This must not be contused with this was of no great consequence. Yet it signals one of the im
the formula-type systems as ordinarily presented, where the variables are of the proviser’s gravest problems. A formula is not made to exist
same grammatical category. in isolation but to be used in conjunction with other words.
ΙΟ Ο SEPA RA TIO N S E P A R A T IO N 101
Unhappily for our understanding of the art of the formula the most the connective, and not disturb the over-all shape. Thus for
obvious formulae are verse-end phrases, whose position makes χερσιν εμήσι we have χερσί (τ’) εμήσι θ l8 l, for δήμον άπαντα,
it unlikely they will often be the first phrases of new sen πάντα τε δήμον θ 157, cf. Γ 5°, ß 7°^> and for ταϋτά γε πάντα,
tences. Consequently the problem of fitting the formulae to ταΰτά (τε) πάντ or τ. (δε)- π. I 35 etc. 3 X , cf· τ αυτά (κε') π.
gether was seen as a matter of the poet’s ‘hitting, as he composed, Κ 211. The shorter class shows δύο (δ’} άνδρες Ν 499» Σ 49^> for
upon the type of formula and the particular formula, which, δ ύ ο γ’ άνδρε; and κρεα ( τ ’) οπτά χ 21, for κρέας οπτόν.
at any point in his poem, he needed’. A special class of connec Such convenience is not generally at hand. However, the in
tive formulae would, it is presumed, be the type he would hit truded connective need not be violently disruptive, though it
upon for beginning a sentence. Let us concede at once that there might require the elongated formula to change its position. Thus
are such connective formulae— άλλ’ ore δη, αντάρ επεί (ρα, δη), φίλον (δε οί) ητορ1 δ 840, and θεάς (δε οί) αυτός τ 396 move back
ήμος δ’ . . . τήμος (άρ’), οι δ’ επεί οΰν, άλλ’ ονδ’ ώς, αντάρ άγω (ye), to the caesura ; δαιτος (μεν) είσης I 225 straddles the caesura;
αντάρ « re ira.1 But we have seen that the rigidity of the Homeric and οντος (μεν δη) άεθλος χ 5, cf. τούτον ά. ; άλλοι (μεν γάρ) πάντες
formulaic systems is not exempt from a certain looseness. The Ε 877 et sim. 11 X , cf. ά. απόντες, ήερι (γάρ) πολλή Π JQO, and
noun-epithet formula and the connective will not for ever be κτήματα (γάρ κεν) πάντα β 3 3 5 move to the beginning of the verse.
kept apart. What happens when they come face to face? Very The initial position, one of obvious importance for beginning
often there is no reason why anything should happen at all: sentences, is impossible for the w w - ^ shape, and the intrusion
αλλά, αντάρ, καί, and the adverbial conjunctions simply lie outside of an enclitic does nothing to improve it. Inversion may give
the formula, and unless the formula is very long there need be a perfect shape: thus ήδε (δ’) οδός o ig 8 ; αίπύ (δ’) ορος τ 4315
no difficulty in accommodating them. But the enclitic connec and σήμα, (δε μοί) τόδ’ φ 273· άλλοι (τε) θεοί Ζ 476 begins in the
tives are quite a different matter. Unless they can be elided away thesis of the first foot, παν δ’ ήμαρ A 592, Σ 453, cf. πρόπαν ήμαρ,
the length of the formula is necessarily increased, and such an falls back on modification. Inversion is neither so necessary nor
increment may bring no end of further mutations in its train. so neat for the - w w - ^ class, but inevitably the odd example
There are in fact some types of formula where a short connec occurs: 7τολλά (γάρ) άλγε’ δ 164; and with strong modification
tive can be inserted with every facility, e.g. κουριδίην (S’) άλοχον, δώματά (θ’) ύφερεφεa δ 757, cf. ύφερεφές δώ.
άγροτερας ( τ ’) ελάφους, νηών ( τ ’) ώκυττάρων, etc., which are first- One small advantage that the enclitic connective gives is that
half formulae, and at the verse-end θαλερούς ( τ ’) αίζηούς, ττροτέρων its attachment to a word scanned w - by abolishing the danger
( τ ’) ανθρώπων, κλειτών ( τ ’) επικούρων. The conditions that permit of a weak caesura in the 4th foot, enables the word to be used
this intrusion are, of course, extremely limited: the first word of after the main caesura. Since the word-division —o | <_>—<_>is not
the formula must end in a long syllable and be followed by a unusual, by inverting the components of the formula a neat
word with initial vowel. That a member of the w w - w class connective phrase can be created: βίηφί (τε) ήφι φ 3J5> θεοΐσι
should fulfill these conditions is almost inconceivable. (How (δέ) πάσι Ξ 3 3 4 >a n d λ ο ε τ ρ ά ( τ ε ) θερμά θ 249· Similarly constructed
many monosyllabic nouns with vocalic initial have regular is φίλησι (δε) χερσί Σ 27 which is placed before the caesura.
Homeric employment? There are no adjectives, for 6 ς has a most The w w - w class needs no adjustments to secure this shape with
persistent digamma.) A member of the - w w - w class would connectives, but to begin the phrase at the masculine caesura re
have to follow the pattern of βοΰς αγελαίας, but although half quires some ingenuity and good luck in the alternatives available:
a dozen regular formulae do conform to this structure not one one example only, γλυκερός (δε μοί) ύπνος ε 472, cf. γλυκύς ύ.
suffers the intrusion of a connective. Very occasionally a for Formulae with an infixed connective at the verse-end are
tunate accident makes it possible to modify the formula, take in rare, the reason being that sentences do not regularly begin at
' For a detailed study of the particles αντάρ, ISi, and vv in formulaic usage see 1 I count the groups Si οί. Si at, etc., among connectives; their use is often
C. J. Ruijgh, L’Element achien dans la langue epique, Assen 1957, 29-67. parallel to that of the compound connective Si re.
102 S E P A R A T IO N S E P A R A T IO N 103
the 4th foot caesura while the space after the diaeresis, where it may play an intimate part in some modifications.1 Generally
sentences do often begin, is insufficient for an augmented noun the shorter formulae leave the poet with adequate space for pre
epithet formula. I count only one formula in each of our two positional constructions and figure only to a small extent among
classes νήάς (je) προπάσας B 493, cf. ν. άπάσας; and ταχείς (84 the modifications made to formulae for this purpose.
μιν) ΐπποι X 464, cf. ταχε ΐππω. It is in the first half of the verse that difficulties are most
Finally there are two odd examples that lie before the 4th foot cae likely to arise, since the natural thing is to place the preposition
sura : άλλοι ( 8 έ)>θεοί 1 535 ; and ημετερην (τ ε ) πόλιν ζ 19 1, cf. π. ύμην. in front of the formula. Some first-half formulae are forced into
Since the modification of formulae in these circumstances is by a medial position by the need for a prepositional construction,
no means an extensive technique, it is natural to ask how the e.g. μετ άγροτερας ελάφους ζ 133 (ist-qth feet), but initially and
enclitic connectives are normally introduced into the formulaic without preposition at Φ 486. Indeed the disyllabic prepositions
phraseology. In many cases the answer is that they are not; they are a special problem at the beginning of the verse, a problem
are embodied in phrases that are in no way formulaic at all, that is met very largely by postponing the preposition, so that
e.g. εκλαγξαν δ’ άρ' όϊστοί. . . A 46. O r they are arranged to be expressions of the structure exemplified by νηος άπο πρύμνης,
outside the formulae and placed with one of the functional words πετρης προς μεγάλησι, and τύμβω επ’ άκροτάτω are frequent.2
of the sentence, e.g. ευ δ’ οϊκάδ' Ικεσθαι A lg . Some functional Into this pattern are fitted four highly modified members of the
words indeed seem to have a special affinity for connectives, —^ w—ij class: ασκώ εν αίγείω Γ 247, £ 7^, cf. αΐγεον ασκόν; ήμετερον
e.g. πολλά 8 ε A 35, which appears no less than thirty-eight times προς δώμα ν 192, cf. ήμετερον δώ; δώμα καθ’ νφερεφες δ 46, η 85, cf.
in the first foot. There are also many quasi-formulaic phrases νφερεφες δώ; and δεξιτερον δ' ύπέρ ώμον Κ 373j cf. δεξιόν ώμον.
such as δ γάρ A 9, 6 8 4 A 47, or συ δε A 76, which are by no The remainder fall into no marked pattern of prepositional
means confined to hexameter writing. Whole-sentence formulae, construction, but conform to shapes which it is evidently desirable
often quite short, are common, which being whole sentences to obtain by modification : fjaiv ενϊ φρεσί in 3rd-4th feet A 333
necessarily incorporate the connective, e.g. κρατερόν δ’ επί μύθον etc. 4 X , cf. φ. ήσι; after the caesura we have μέγα προτί άστν
ετελλε A 25 etc. 4 X · But we also find phrases that are not regular Ο 681, cf. μ. άστν ; μέσην κατά γαστέρα Ρ 313, an<3 in dative (with
themselves with the connective, but that use and adapt formulaic δ’ εν) Ν 372, 39^5 cf· Ύ· μόσσην; πολνν καθ' όμιλον Ρ 462, cf.
material, e.g. Άτρειδης τε άναξ άνδρών A 7.1 πουλάν όμ. ; and 4μής εν χερσί aut sim. Φ 104 etc. 5 X , cf. χ. εμήσι.
Construction with the prepositions presents nothing like the In the - υ υ - y class are 14 formulae separated by connectives
same problems, because in the normal way the preposition may and 7 by prepositions, and in the w w - w class 11 by connectives
be expected to fall beside the formula, not in it. The problem, but only two by prepositions.
if any, is one of space. In the second half of the verse, except for The poet’s willingness to use separated formulae can be sum-
the very longest formulae, all is easy: κατ ασπίδα πάντοσ είσην, 1 Notably in prepositional formulae that alternate between the second and first
επίχθονϊ πουλυβοτειρτ], παρά, νηϊ μελαίνη, εις άλα δΐαν. Notoriously half of the verse, the preposition being infixed in the first half, e.g. £v €ΐλιπόδ«σ<η
the preposition at this point may become a regular adjunct to the βάεσσι—βονσϊν £π* «ιλιπόδεσσι, από κράατος άθανάτοιο—κρατοζ άπ* άθανάτοιο, 4νϊ
formula, effectively increasing its length and restricting its τρτ)Τθΐσι λεχεσσι— τρητοΐζ £ν λίχεεσσι, 4νι μ€γάροισι τεοΐσι, (4οΐσι)—σοΐσιν (οΐσιν)
£νΙ μ€γάροισι. The alternation παραϊ / πάρ Διος cάγιόχοιο points to an unexploited
capacity for movement. Expansion may take place before it, and artifice. There are also shifts between the initial and a medial position, e.g. avSpos
f? άφν€ίθΰ—4v άφνειοΰ avSpos, πόντον err’ άτρνγετον—επ’ άτρνγετον πόντον) πυργψ
1 There is no developed technique for connectives that we should want to call ύφηλώ—άφ* νφηλοΰ πύργον. For expansions made outside the preposition see
improvisatory. The connectives are naturally the most formulaic part of any p. 78.
language by reason of sheer frequency, so that repetition in Homer of similar con 2 The three examples quoted are all regular without the preposition (-πρύμνηs
nective phrases (e.g. εξ oS 8ή A 6 and ξ 379) is without significance unless correlated νεόί, πετρησιν μεγάλησι, άκροτάτω τύμβω) but the infixing artifice cannot be relied
with extension and economy (e.g. αύτάρ επεί [pa, 8η, 8rj p’]), or very high frequency on. The numerous first-half formulae which regularly have the infixed preposition
(e.g. ourip επειτα 52 x , the hallmark of run-of-the-mill epic versifying, Anth. Pal. tend to be an independent class using material peculiar to themselves, e.g. άσπιδ’
xi. 130). ivl κρατερ-fj, δηΐω έν πολεμώ, etc., and not the normally j uxtaposed epithets.
io4 S E P A R A T IO N S E P A R A T IO N 105
marized with more precision than his willingness to modify or The filiation is obvious. Here the separation of noun and epithet
expand. Separations normally occur but once and show very arises through the multiplicity of word-associations that the poet
little tendency to become regular, so that more obviously than employs, so that much of his phraseology is a conflation of two
other kinds of adaptation separation is an adjustment in the face or even three formulae. Naturally such conflations must often
of a particular exigency. Since, however, discrete formulae do mean the disruption and adjustment of some of the components.
exist it must be allowed that a separated word-group might
become regular in that form or might even be the primary form
of a formula, so I make the usual allowance in calculation.
APPENDI X
Total Separations Proportion (%)
Shape formulae Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum The Division of Formulae by the Verse-end,
319 57 43 18 14 A s p e c i al case of separation is that of a noun-epithet formula
WW- kj 140 46 38 4° 27 divided, with or without the intrusion of other words, by the verse-end
itself. The case is special because if, as is usually the case, the term in the-
A separation is hardly ever likely to be opportunist in the way second verse is the epithet, then the usage falls under a prominent and
that a modification might be used to fill a space that happened well-defined sentence-pattern: the prolongation of a sentence by
to be available. The formula is split by pressure of the intruding means of one (or sometimes two or three) ‘runover’ epithets, which in
word, which the poet needs to use equally with the formula. It is their turn may be followed by a relative clause or its equivalent, e.g.
very rare to encounter a gratuitous separation, one that necessity A 1-2. There is no comparable pattern of separated noun and epithet
has not enforced upon the poet.1 But as with modification, up within the verse in Homer, the so-called Leonine verse being alien to
to a point the poet’s difficulty is of his technique’s own making. his art. The runover epithet, as a noteworthy case of enjambement,
Consider such groups of phrases as the following: has been extensively studied,1 and its function elucidated.2 However,
veas άμφιελίσσas 5 X as usual, little attention has been paid to the source of the vocabulary
vfjas αλαδ’ ελκεμεν άμφιελίσσας 2 X in the runover phrases. Using the same arguments as he did for separa
vfjas ίϋσσίλμους αλαδ’ ελκεμεν άμφίίλίσσας I X tion within the verse, Parry himself insisted that an epithet placed in
vfjas ίϋσσέλμους αλαδ’ ελκεμεν 2X such a position by being thrown into relief had to be functional, and
so fell outside his investigations.3But there are a few normal-looking
κακά ίργα II X
formulae straddling the verse-end, e.g. άχλύν | θεσπεσίην 2X,4
κακά μήσατο ίργα IX
φαρετρη (-r/v) | Ιοδόκος (-ον) 3X.
κακά, —<->w μηδετο έργα 2X Divided as it is, the over-all shape of a runover phrase is different
κακά μησατο 3Χ from that of most normal groups, and the vocabulary is consequently
κακά μηδετο 4Χ often quite distinct, e.g. εγχος . . . βριθύ μόγα στφαρόν 6 X, where
ποντοπόροισι ν€€σσι 2X the epithets make a runover phrase regularly associated with the noun
νηνσι ν€ωμ€0 α ποντοπόροισι IX 1 La Roche, Wiener Stud, xix (1897) 169-75; H. W. Prescott, CP vii (1912)
νηνσι νεώμεθα 2X 35-58; S. E. Bassett, ΤΑΡΑ lvii (1926) 116-48.
2 The function according to Bassett is ‘to add a new idea, either to be expanded
νηνσιν €77t γλαφυρησι νεώμεθα IX by what follows, or to act in some other way as a bond between this and the pre
1 There is one point where the artifices of separation and continuation overlap, ceding idea’ (op. cit. 122).
the complex formulae of the structure ‘noun+ third term+ epithet’ shaped 3 E T 207, with an exception made for the ‘quasi-independent’ epithets like
w— — The long epithet is omissible and the first element of the διίφιλος. But what, for example, are we to say of the special epithet in Χίμαιραν |
complex follows the word-order normal for words of that shape in that position, - ^ αμαιμακότην Π 329, juxtaposed within the verse at Z 179?
viz. nounT verb or dependent genitive+ noun. So we have Διός with δόμον, νόον, ♦ The epithet, being formulaic in our sense, persists even when the construction
πάϊί, τόκος, and τόρας, both with and without a following αίγιόχοιο. of the noun is changed: νόφος αχλνος . . . θεσπόσιον Ο 668-9·
ιο 6 SEP A R A TIO N S E P A R A T IO N 107
but unused outside this sentence-pattern. But when the poet’s thought Split formulae (all of the —<-»w —<=<class) passing their second term
is cast into any marked verse-pattern the choice of vocabulary may into the next verse are as follows. I omit to specify some minor and
reflect any of his established word-associations, so that in the runover obvious modifications.
pattern one repeatedly encounters such phraseology as άρουραι \ πυρο- άλγεα . . . | πολλά, μάλ' T 264-5, λ 279~8θ >
φόροι Ξ 122—3, cf. άρουρης πυροφόροιο; βροτών . . . | Βαλών Φ 463— 4) cf άνέρες . . . | άλλοι a 176—71
Βαλοΐσι βροτοΐσι etc. When the grammatical cases of the juxtaposed δάκρυα . . . | θερμά Ρ 4 3 7 ~6 >
and separated word-groups are different the use of the same epithets δώματ’ . . . | καλά Ζ 313—4 5
illustrates only (but forcibly) the persistence of formulaic groups once είματ . . . | καλά η 234_5)
they have been formed. I am concerned here rather with those in εντεα . . . | καλά Κ 4 7 1-2 etc. 3 X >
stances of separation where the compulsion of a new grammatical κτήματα . . . | πάντ’ Η 3 ^ 3 - 4 ) Η 3 ^ 9 - 9 1 (κτήματα in 1st foot) ;
case is lacking and the poet has chosen to split a formula which he could κτήμαθ’ . . . | πάντα μάλ’ X I Ι 4_ Ι 5 > a° d πάντα . . . | κτήματα
perfectly well have juxtaposed within the verse but for the pressure γ 315-16 = ο I 2 - I 3 J
of other words that he required to use. τεΰχεα . . . | . . . | καλά Σ 82—4.
The clearest instances of such separation are those where the noun
(or epithet) terminates one verse and the epithet (or noun) begins The following formulae pass their first term into the next verse,
the next. Without modification this requires very precise conditions of inverting the word-order. The original second term is then normally
over-all shape and word-division, e.g. άνδρών | -ηρώων E 746-7, juxta drawn back into the body of the first verse.
posed in the ist~3rd feet. The verse-end formulae of any length have αίγες . . . | άγριοι i IlS -1 9 ;
no alternative but to modify themselves, since a word —w cannot be άνδρ’ . . . I άγριον i 2 14—15, and άνδρες . . . | άγριοι a 198-9;
passed into the following verse without leaving an impossible —ww, γυναίκας . . . | επτ T 245—6;
ww—ww, etc., to be drawn to the verse-end. Thus we have Bovpa | δώρα . . . I καλά o 75“ 6, cf. κάλλιμα δ.
μακρά χ 148-9 and δοΰρε \ μάκρ’ μ 228-9, modified from Bovpara μακρά, εγχος . . . | χάλκεον Ο 126—7, X 285-6;
an isolated piece of versatility. However, the shape - ww | —w is ideal εταίρος . . . | εσθλός θ 584—5 >
for splitting across the verse-end if the elements are reversed: hence ίπποι . . . J ϋηλεΐαι Υ 221-2;
ήτορ I άλκιμον Φ 571-2 ; θυμω \ πρόφρονι Θ 39-40 = X 183— 4; *ππον$ | πολλά . . . I κτήματα Σ 291—2;
ώκεας Ν 535“6, 3 429-3° (and ίπποι \ ώκνποδες Ε 295-6 etc. 4 X >0Γ πάσας | . . . νήας Ξ 33 “ 4 ) ν· άπάσας;
ίπποι (-οvs) | —>-/wώκόποδες (-as) Κ 568-9 etc. 4 X)! and ώμον | δεξιόν νύξ . . . I άμβροσίη Σ 267-8;
Ε ι88~9· The shape —w | ^ ^ would be equally amenable to inver όρμον . . . I χρνσεον σ 295-6;
sion, but I find only άρίστην (predicative) | μήτιν φ 124-5. ύπνον . . . I ήδεος φ 16-17;
These expressions are like simple modifications in that the words πολλά . . . I χρηματ’ ξ 285-6.
are not physically separate. But we have seen that there is no reason
why they should be juxtaposed in the flexible style. Such physical The intervening words are o f all parts of speech, following no obvious
separation has almost limitless possibilities, even if the runover word patterns, and the position of the first term of the formula is also
conforms to the usual pattern and is first word of its verse. All that is extremely variable. In some instances it may even stand at the
necessary is that the formula contain a dactylic or trochaic word (a very beginning of its verse. The prevalence of certain words will
true monosyllable not elided is very rare as a runover). Almost all be no ted : the mildly cohesive πολύς 3 X and the established runover
members of the —ww—w class fulfil this condition, and many ac word καλός 6 X .
cordingly are split. The —!=> class ought to be well enough re T he use of the runover word is compatible with the presence of
presented also. (Why not a κλέος ουρανόν ίκει | εσθλόν . . .?) Its handi a normal juxtaposed noun-epithet group in the first verse. This pro
cap is that the — element is normally the noun, whereas the runover duces a sort of expansion:
word is regularly an epithet.1 Examples thus are rare. the noun was deferred less than too times, the epithet more than 430 times. (At
1 La Roche (op. cit., p. 105, n. 1) calculated that in noun-epithet combinations 0 308-9 ξύλα . . . [ αία is a true plural, not a modification of ξύλον avov.)
S EP ARATI ON S E P A R A T IO N 109
ιο8
Ιξάλου αίγός | άγριου A 105-6; fished formula, yet at δ 287-8 the old poetical epithet is replaced by
όλκιμα δοΰρε δύο) . . . | οξέα Λ 43—
4; a commonplace vernacular word χερσϊ πίεζε | νωλεμεως κρατερβσι.
χαλκοβατές δώ | ΰφερεφες ν 4 —5> If these formulae are counted in with the formulae split within the
ε ϋ κ υ η μ ίδ α ς ε τα ίρ ο υ ς | π ά ν τ α ς φ 3 19 ~ 2 0 > a n d εσ θ λ ο ι ε τ α ίρ ο ι | π ά ν τ ε ς verse the —w —v class has considerably augmented numbers of
Ψ 33Γ- 2 ; split formulae (78 maximum and 62 minimum, giving a range of
π ισ τ ό ν ε τα ίρ ο υ | εσ θ λό ν Ρ 5^ 9^ 9(-) > 20-25 Per cent, of the total), but the w o - w class is hardly affected.
ά θ α ν ά το ισ ι θ ε ο ίσ ι . . . | π α σ ι μ α λ ’ λ 133—4 >
ά ρ σ εν ες ίπ π ο ι | Τ ρ ώ ϊο ι Ψ 377“ ^ >
μ ε λ α ν ό ς οΐνοιο | ή δ εο ς ι ig 6 —7>
θ ε σ π ιδ α ε ς π ΰ ρ | . . . α κ ά μ α τ ο υ Ο 597“ ^ >
χ ά λ κ ε α τ ε υ χ ε α \ κ α λ ά X 322-3,1and κ λ υ τ ά τ ε υ χ ε α . . . | καλά Τ ΐο-ι I.
A curious and isolated instance in which the runover repeats the
juxtaposed epithet in the next verse but one occurs at δ 724-6 =
814-16, π ό σ ιν εσ θ λό ν | | εσθ λόν. Since the runover technique
is an artifice of continuation, not of anticipation, it is very unusual to
find the noun-epithet group in the second verse. One example only,
π ά σ α ι | ν η ες ε υ σ σ ε λ μ ο ι ι 5 5 4 —5·
Another kind of expansion is that applied to the runover word itself.
The pattern is common, and from time to time vocabulary is drawn
from the regular juxtaposed formulae to put in it.
δέρμα . . . | . . . μ ε γ α και δασύ ξ 5 0 -Ι, cf. μ ε γ α δ .;
δ ο υ ρ α τ ’ . . . | ό£εα π α μ φ α ν ό ω ν τ α Ε 618—19, °ί· °· δοΰρα ;
ίπ π ο υ ς . . . J π ά σ α ς θ η λ ε ία ς Λ 68ο—I, cf. θ η λ εα ς ί. ,'
and κ ΰ μ α . . . I π ο ρ φ υ ρ εο ν μ ε γ α ν 8 4 -5 , c£ μ ό γ α κ.
» &Λέξοχεων „ tv I πρηνή,
ηριπε b {^εν
, κονιησι
, ηριπε δε1δ ί[εξοπιε
,ί /
s , (στήθεσφιν)
VIII οια!
"(ζωστήρος J>ελασσε' αντίκρυ jg, όπαλοΐο δι’ αύχενος.
There can be no quarrel with drawing attention to such realities,
THE FLEXIBLE F OR MU L A but we should not be too easily satisfied. For these patternings
are too much like the substitution-patterns of ordinary speech, and
o what part of the diction should we turn to see Homeric without much refinement cannot tell us much about the poetical
the hands of the poet. It would be arbitrary to specify the thres e.g. βοών w ΐύρυμΐτώπων (juxtaposed in accusative plural); to
hold, but clearly if we were to put on one side those parts of the receive a connective, e.g. κλζιτοί τ’ επίκουροι (normally accusa
diction where the poet is as it were freewheeling and concentrate tive or genitive plural); and very commonly indeed to change
on those parts where he is actively working at the composition the over-all shape of a formula, e.g. χρύσΐον δεπας—χρυσόω δόπαΖ
then the proportion of data to creation and adaptation will be — χρυσόοις δεπάεσσι.
much diminished. How much diminished can only be guessed Except for the faults in metrics and morphology declension of
at. The stock will certainly be providing less than two-thirds of the same word-group has not attracted much attention. On the
requirements, but usually, I should think, not less than one half. other hand certain amplified declensions which change their
An estimate of greater precision would conceal assumptions about constituents while preserving the same shape, e.g.
the extent ofre-creation in the formulae themselves and in repeated πατρις άρουρα πζρικλυτός Άμφιγυήίΐς μοΐρ’ όλοή
‘adapted’ uses as well as about the self-induction of frequent πατρίδα γαΐαν πςρικλιποΰ Ήφαίστοιο κήρ’ όλοήν
formulae. Such assumptions could only be made plausible, if at πατρίδος αΐης
all, by an evaluation in favourable circumstances of each par πατρίδι γαίτ)
ticular formula. have long figured in the handbooks, without any clear conclu
The point of these calculations was to impugn the idea that sions being drawn from them. It is possible that there are no
the regularities of the Homeric diction, though vastly greater profound conclusions to draw. From the standpoint of the com
than those of any subsequent Greek poetry, are so regular that
posing poet, which it is necessary always to assume so far as it
any departure from the norm is an insignificant exception. This can be imagined, πατρις άρουρα is distant from πατρίδα γαΐαν
does not mean that the part of the diction which is not composed
by several steps and analogies. They share no complex formulae
of regular formulae is sheer extemporization. Our examination together, much less with the mainly prepositional (από) πατρίδας
of the Homeric diction was bound to begin in terms of concepts
αΐης. But the associated context must be the factor in the sugges
already familiar. Hence the juxtaposed words of the familiar
tion of diction, which is to say that it is the series of formulae of
formula were taken as a datum. This has its justification in the
the same grammatical case that are associated with each other.
fact that such formulae do play a cardinal role in the poet’s craft.
The homoeomorphic declension has no utility in itself, and arises
But the role has limits. Now the more flexible the formula
only because certain shapes have an inherent convenience.1 On
appears the more striking is the persistence of the word-associa
the other hand the value of a declined formula where the dif
tion that survives such vicissitudes. Recognizing this we ask if
ferent case-forms result in different shapes or in the separation
word-association is not exemplified in other directions. The de
of the terms cannot be metrical. The economy of the diction as
clension of a formula is an obvious point, but worth a moment’s
a whole is served, but I prefer to see declension as a generative
thought. Even if the over-all shape of the formula is unchanged,
mechanism whereby a basic stock of formulae can be generously
as is very often the case, a new case-form means a different amplified as the occasion demands.
sentence-pattern and some rearrangement of complex formulae.
The persistence of a word-association in declension is itself
It is thus not so easy as may be thought.1 The only metrical ad
only a case of the persistence of the same association of ideas
vantage to the poet is that the new case-form retains whatever
throughout a formula-series. This would be part of the study of
inherent usefulness the first may have possessed. Formulae of
1 This is not to say that the cases of an amplified declension have no impact on
course change case in much more dramatic circumstances. De each other. The declensions obey the law of economy, generalizing the same
clension is permitted to overrule bad metre, e.g. μόροπες άνθρωποι epithet where possible. The economy is practical rather than absolute and must be
(normally genitive plural); to pervert morphology, e.g. evpea understood in terms of a dominant case. Thus ασπίδας ΐΰκΰκλους 4 x as the type
form requires (until -ου became available) a different genitive, άσπίδος άμφιβρότης
πόντον (after the dative); very commonly to separate a formula, 3 X . This explains why we have πατρίδα γαΐαν, the dominant case, but never
1 Cf. Parry at HSCP xli (1930) 83-4. *πατρίδ’ άρουραν after πατρις άρουρα.
124 T H E F L E X IB L E F O R M U L A T H E F L E X IB L E F O R M U L A 125
synonymy in Homer, a large subject. Synonymous adjectives vultures become swift, yet only because the pariahs precede,
qualify the same noun1 (ερεβεννη / κελαινη νυξ, νύξ . . . μελαινα); κύνες ταχεες τ’ οιωνοί cf. κύνες ταχεες, ταχεες κύνες, etc. 6 X :
synonymous nouns are qualified by the same epithet (άορ j ξίφος / similarly δώροισίν τ’ άγανοΐσιν επεσσί τε I 11$, cf. άγανοΐς επεεσσι
φάσγανον οξύ); synonymous adjectives and synonymous nouns 3 X . A special case of this kind of verbal suggestion is to be seen
can give a fine series (δούρατα / εγχεα μακρά, δόλίχ’ εγχεα, δόλιχόν in such lines as Σάτνιον ούτασε, δουρι μετάλμενος όξυόεντι Ξ 443*
δόρυ, δολιχόσκιον εγχος. It is probably correct to think of these where in view ofούτασε δουρί 11 χ , δουρί might almost be taken από
as spreading from a central term, in some cases doubtless with κοινού with both phrases. This is by no means an isolated instance.1
re-creation of the derivative phrases. The association of ideas must Association must be incorporated into our picture of Greek
thus be vital. An ossified phrase spawns no progeny; there is no heroic improvisation alongside the formula. The Homeric text
*δβριμα δοΰρα after οβριμων εγχος, only αλκιμα δοΰρα with the weak requires it as part of the solution, and it is on the evidence of the
generic epithet. When an association is strongly felt it need not text alone that our model of the improvising method must first
always be realized in phrases of the same syntactical structure. be contructed. Perhaps then in the hands of a skilful and prudent
Thus ‘heart’ and ‘hope’ go together: we have both ελπετο θυμός practitioner of the comparative method it may shed light on the
and ελπετο θυμώ; similarly ήθελε θυμός and ήθελε θύμα», cf. λάμπετο craftsmanship of other heroic traditions and receive in its turn
χαλκός and λάμπετο χαλκοί, εντεα μαρμαίροντα and εντεσι μαρμαί- illumination. But the first step has to be the understanding of
ροντα. An alternation of the noun between subject and object of the Greek on its own terms.
a verbal form is seen in θυμόν όρινε (-ω etc.) and όρίνθη θυμός and I have spoken often of the ‘further associations’ of formulae,
ώρίνετο θυμός, κΰμα κύλινδον (nom.) and κΰμα κυλίνδων. The con with an implication that the association of, say, a noun-epithet
struction of an epithet may shift to words outside the phrase: formula with a verb was looser or in some way subordinate to
χλωρόν δέος and χλωρός ύπαι δείους, τανόφυλλος ελαίη and (θάμνος) the association of the members of the formula. This is generally
τανΰφυλλος ελαίης. φρενες εσθλών has a substantivized adjective, true as an analysis of the typical epic sentence, and will serve
cf. φρένες εσθλαί. There is also from time to time some interchange as a model for the poet’s synthesis of the sentence, always assum
between verbal and nominal or adjectival expressions of the same ing that the sentence is not hardening into a complex formula
thought. The phrase εύρυναν αγώνα θ 260 owes something to and is produced as a unit. The grammar, form, and position of
ευρύν αγώνα Ψ 2$8; nor should we wish to separate μενοεικεα the secondary term are very variable, e.g. φάνη μεγα εργον Άρηος
δαΐτα I 90 from τάφον μενοεικεα δαίνυ Ψ 2Q or μενοεικεα πολλά | Λ 733) but νυν δε πεφανται | φυλόπιδος μεγα εργον Π 20J—8 ; ΟΓ
δαίνυσθ’ I 227-8. The noun έργα and verb ρεζειν alternate in γήθτησε δε μοι φίλον ήτορ η 269, but εγελασσε δε οί φίλον ητορ |
their αίσυλα-,1
2κακά-, and peppepa-formulae. Sometimes the vary γηθοσύντ) Φ 389-90· This is precisely what we should expect, for
ing syntax may look more mechanical in origin: άγγελος ώκύς this is how word-association works generally. There is no need
π 468 only, is perhaps formulaic (also at H. Dem. 407, derivative at this point to bring in the sentence-pattern, if this is to play
from ταχύς (-ύν) άγγελος (-ον) 4Χ ), but at ω 413 we have άγγελος a role in the poet’s craft. For the location of the formula is de
ώκα κατά πτόλιν ωχετο, as if the following consonant disarranged termined, in so far as it is determined by technique at all, by the
the poet’s formula. Other lines reveal a mechanical linkage of 1 Cf. Τρωσι φερειν ιτοτι άστυ, μεγα κλέος Ρ 131 ί ττροτι άστυ, μεγα φρονεων X 21;
words even more clearly. At I 360 Ελλήσποντον επ’ Ιχθυόεντα παθών κακά, πολλά δ’ αληθείς π 205 > <8 φίλοι, άνάρες εατε Ε 529 etc· > εξαιρευμην
μενοεικεα, πολλά δ’ όπίσσω ξ 2β2; ίππους, ημίονοι δε Ω 697) cf· ίππους θ’ ημιόνους τε
celebrates a quality of the deep sea, cf. πόντον επ’ Ιχθυόεντα 5 X, Ψ 26ο etc. With the usual punctuation Άρχεπτόλεμον, θρασύν "Εκτορος ήνιοχήα
rather than the Dardanelles. The Homeric bird (οιωνός) θ 3ΐ2 is similar, but we may take this as a conflation, cf. Άρχ. θρασύν θ 128 and
as a scavenger has normally no ornamentation, but at ξ 133 the θρασυν ηνίοχον θ 891 likewise Iιάνθου υιόν έϋμμελίην Εϋφορβον Ρ 59) where εϋμμ.
Εΰφορβον looks like a second-half phrase, but cf. Πάνθου υιός έϋμμελίης P g (and
1 See W. Whallon, ‘The Homeric Epithets’, Tale Classical Studies xvii (1961) nom. pi. P 23); άγριον αίχμητήν, κρατερόν μήστωρα φόβοιο Ζ 97 = 278, cf. κρατερός
97—142, for this feature in the ornamentation of personal names. (-ω) τ’ αίχμητής (-ή) Γ 179 etc-> and as a runover δεξιός ορνις, \ αίετός N 821-2,
2 The nominal formula has the by-form άησυλα έργα E 876. ο ι6 ο -ι.
126 TH E F L E X IB L E FO RM U LA TH E F L E X IB L E FO RM U LA 127
shape of the complex word-group into which it is incorporated. λΰσε δε γυΐα Δ 469 etc.
O f course the sentences are patterned, but only in the sense that ύπέλυσε δε γυΐα Ο 581 etc.
all speech is patterned and all hexameter speech patterned in υπέλυσε μένος καί φαίδιμα γυΐα Ζ 2"]
certain ways. There is nothing to show that the poet is working
within abnormal limits in this respect in what I feel to be the and correspondingly in the passive
typical situation. There are indeed special contexts in which the λυντο δε γυΐα Η ΐβ etc.
sentence-pattern is important, but there is no basis for our ύπέλυντο δε γυΐα Π 341
generalization of their technique. Can we say that the poet’s λυθεν δ’ υπό φαίδιμα γυΐα Π 805.
looser thought-associations show any limitations or other features
that entitle them to a special place in our model of his improvising As we have seen, the adaptability of the formula is already
craft ? Provisionally it appears to me that the status of the further needed at this level if its further associations are always to be
associations is like that of the theme, of which after all it may given expression. This is the level of the manipulation of data,
be regarded as the very minimal form. The theme has its and it is a level to which Homeric technique cannot by any means
place in oral poetry because certain themes are more frequent be reduced completely. The economy of the technique as a whole,
and certain set thematic sequences are more regular than one not to mention the free ranging of the poet’s thought, requires
would expect them to be other things being equal. Nor must we the existence of generative devices. It is at this point that the
overlook the negative side of this frequency. Each use of a theme substitution-systems or phrase-patterns, properly controlled, have
implies the lack of any wish or ability to channel the thought validity. The control and validity mean the degree to which we
into any less familiar mode. It seems to me that a quantitative can establish a contrast between the Homeric diction and a hexa
argument in parallel terms could be used of the looser word- meter diction which does not belong to an oral tradition. Con
associations. However, an association of any kind, no matter how sequently it will not usually suffice to list nouns of every class used
loose it may be, is a formula in the making; and the more with a given verb, or such like. The nouns must have something
regular the association is, the more effective are the pressures for in common with each other on the strength of which we may posit
economy in diction and the extension of the formula-series. We a filiation between the phrases, otherwise the phrase-pattern will
can sometimes witness the results of these processes. Thus the be indistinguishable from normal speech versified. If this require
association of ‘tears’ with ‘eyes’ is inevitable. But why is οφθαλμός ment is fulfilled the substitution-technique provides the poet in
so rare in association with δάκρυ and the very precise βλέφαρου so this field of limited creativity with the equivalent of the complex
common? Moreover the βλέφαρον-phTases arrange themselves formulae among his stock expressions. There can be nothing cor
into a related group: responding to the further associations of the formulae, because
δ ’ από δάκρνον ηκε
a word- or idea-association is not transferable, or at least not
βλεφάρων Φ 33 transferable in a casual way.1 But as soon as thoughts harden
από δάκρυα πίπτει, ξ 129,
into a stable verbal form then substitution is easy. In this way
and with a note of the tear’s destination: a central concept, as Άργεΐοι, lends some phraseology to a peri-
δάκρυ δ ’ από βλεφάρων χαμάδις βάλε δ 1 1 4
1 T o ta k e a n i m a g in a r y c a s e , i f a Θησηΐ; w e r e t o b e m o d e lle d o n a Ή ρακληις,
δάκρυ χαμαί βάλεν εκ βλεφάροιϊν ρ 490 t h e n a m e Θησεΰς m ig h t c o m e to m e a n a s m u c h to th e p o e t a s d id Ή ρακλέης, b u t
δάκρυα δε σφι | θερμά κατά βλεφάρων χαμάδις ρέε Ρ 437"8. n o t q u ic k ly . I t m a y e v e n b e t h e c a s e , i f t h e I lia d ic p l o t is o f r e la tiv e ly r e c e n t e m e r
g e n c e i n t h e h e r o ic t r a d i ti o n a n d o w e s s o m e th in g to a Μελεαγρίς o r a n e a r ly
This is too amorphous for us to speak yet of extension and AW ioms, t h a t s u c h tr a n s f e r e n c e a c tu a lly h a p p e n e d . B u t th is is v e r y d if f e r e n t f ro m
t h e s i t u a tio n o f a p o e t a c c u s to m e d to th in k in g of, sa y , Ά ργείοι a n d Τρώες w h o fin d s
economy, but we may certainly do so of the association of λύω h im s e lf fo r a s h o r t s p a c e a n d i n a s in g le in c id e n t w is h in g to te ll o f Θρήΐκες (in K ) ,
and γυΐα. We have in the active Κύκλωπες, o r Φαίηκες.
128 T H E F L E X IB L E F O R M U L A
pheral one, such as Φαίηκες.1 Besides this there is required some
means of making formula-like short phrases around which the
sentence may be constructed. The role of free creation cannot be
ignored, but the talent for free creation is, of course, God-given NO TE TO TH E TABLES
and is not part of technical craftsmanship. In that sphere are
several productive artifices: the generic epithet, most prominent Q uantitative allegations about Homeric diction are not useful
among the personal names but by no means absent elsewhere; without precise definition of the field considered, otherwise the different
synonyms, a usual aid among common noun systems; and the totals will be as many as the counting scholars. The following lists
adaptation of existing material, besides minor and incidental are therefore in the nature of an ostensive definition of the material
devices. At this point we must now stop. Beyond lie the tech used in the present study. The aim in their compilation is to bring
niques of elaborating themes and building incidents and stories, together a mass of material of which one could reasonably assume
at which the genius of the poet must be most obvious. Yet even that the problems presented to the poet by its use would be uniform.
The basic criterion of selection is that the expressions are made up
at the humbler level of the traditional diction there is ample room of a noun, other than a proper name or ethnic term, with a juxta
for virtuosity and skill or their opposites. The language may posed attributive epithet whether decorative or functional. This leaves
be flat or vigorous, dextrous or cumbersome. In άοιδή there are one many decisions of inclusion and exclusion to make. I include:
necessarily already planted the seeds of ποίησις.
(i) Expressions with substantivized adjectives. There is no fluctua
1 Thus: Φαιηκ€σσι φιληρςτμοισί tion between nominal and adjectival uses in our two classes,
Άργείοισι φιλοπτολίμοισι
Φζαηκων but this does sometimes occur, e.g. μενοεικεα πολλά nominal
Άργ*ίων ήγήτopes ηδε μ&οντες at I 227, adjectival ε 267.
Φα^ήκων
οί άριστοι.
(ii) All apparent constituents of complex noun-epithet phrases.
Άργζίων Thus αιθοπα οίνον ερυθρόν provides an instance of αΐθοπα οίνον
and οίνον ερυθρόν.
(iii) Expressions which sometimes suffer elision in medial positions.
Such elision is fairly common without being in anyway typical.
(iv) Expressions which without changing their shape occasionally
change their adjective to a predicative use.
I exclude:
(i) Personifications.
(ii) Complex groups, e.g. αΐμ’ ετι θερμόν, Sv φίλον υιόν.
(iii) Participial phrases.
(iv) Expressions which invariably suffer elision, e.g. α’ίσχεα πόλλ'.
(v) Expressions of dubious metrics, e.g. 18ρω πολλόν.
(vi) Expressions incorporating an enclitic connective, e.g. δυο δ’
άνδρες, χερσί τ’ εμ·ρσι.
The lists are supplemented, I hope not excessively, with certain
symbols. The ciphers in the lists of regular formulae indicate the gross
total of occurrences in the shape and cases quoted. In the tables of
mobile formulae the four ciphers indicate the totals in the ist-2nd,
2nd~3rd, 4th~5th, and 5th-6th feet respectively (two ciphers for 3rd-
4th and 5th-6th feet in Table X). The prefixed letters Μ, E, and S
814845 K
N O TE TO TH E TABLES
13° N O TE TO TH E TABLES
indicate that the expression is involved in modification, expansion, or and δ ίπ λ α κ ι δ η μ ώ , ε λ κ ε ϊ λ υ γ ρ φ , and π ιό ν ι ν η ω with their nomina
ά ργετι
separation and is noted in the appropriate chapter. tive and accusative forms) occur twice only but in different and diver
Each principal table is divided into three parts. In the section A sifying cases. I group ά ν δ ρ ί χ ε ρ ψ (VI. B) with χ ε ίρ ο ν ο ς ά νδ ρό ς (IV. C),
are put unique expressions, i.e. those phrases which have no im and π α τ ε ρ ι φ (IX. Β) with π α τ έ ρ α σ φ ό ν (XIV. Β). In summary form
mediate antecedents extant in the diction. I ignore here remoter the consolidation gives the following results:
possibilities of derivation which may be indicated by the play of
synonymy, the generic epithet, association of ideas or the handling Position is ts n d and-pprd jr d -jlh 4th~5 th 5 th- 6th Mobile Total
of substitution systems. In the section B are put expressions that ap — KJ —W
otherwise attested. The classification of these depends on the value p re s s io n s '4 36 4 20 "9 •93
.Possible
ascribed to relative frequency. If the attestation is once in the quoted f o r m u la e 1 8 6 23 38
form and once in another form we may speak of a ‘possible formula’, R e g u la r
since expressions of the quoted shapes are usually clearly primary. f o r m u la e 3 16 I 12 147 102 281
— t-/
Otherwise the phrase in its uniquely occurring shape is likely to be
U n iq u e ex
derivative. Declension is a common source of this class of expression. p re s s io n s 4 33 13 23 73
In the section C are placed the repeated formulae attested only in P o ss ib le
that position. Some of the mobile formulae will, of course, be found f o r m u la e 8 I 3 14 26
there also. R e g u la r
Ε S ε ίλ ίπ ο δ α ς ß o ü s 2 νηΰς ενεργής 3
T A B L E II Ε π α τ ρ ί δ ι γ α ίη 7 ποντοπόρος νηΰς 4
γ ή ρ α ϊ λυγρω 4 ώκύαλος νηΰς 2
Expressions shaped - -------- in 5th-6th feet δ α ΐ τ ’ ε ρ α τειν ή ν 2 νυκτϊ μελαίνη 5
S
δ α ιτό ς (-a s) έ'ισης (~a s ) 11 Μ S άμβροσίη νύξ 3
π ιό ν ι δ ή μ ο ) 8 Μ νύζ έρεβεννή 2
A. Unique expressions
δ ο υ ρ ι φ α ειν ω 22 S ήδέος (-εϊ) οίνου (-ω) 4
θέαφατος αήρ νηλέϊ δεσμό) μητέρι κεδνή αίθοπι οϊνω 3
Μ S ή μ έ τ ε ρ ο ν ( ύ μ -) δ ώ 7
δεινός άήτης δήμος άπειρων νηί έκαστη δεζιός όρνις 4
Ε S ύφ ερεφ ές δώ 3
αίετός αίθων ένδεκα δίφροι ένδεκα νηών Μ δσσε φαεινώ 6
χ α λ κ ο β α τές δω 6
αίετός όρνις πάσαν έδωδήν νόστος άπήμων παρθένος άδμης 2
εγ χ ε ϊ μακρώ J
άσπετος αλκή θήλυς εέρση άμφιλύκη νύζ πένθεϊ λυγρω 2
S ά λ λ ο ι ε τ α ίρ ο ι 3
άνδρες άλήται άφρονι θυμώ όξέες όγκοι πηχέε λενκώ 2
δ ΐο ι ε τ α ίρ ο ι 2
άνδρι δικαιω ήσσονας ίππους άλλος όδιτης εύρέϊ πόντω 6
εσ θ λο ΐ ε τ α ίρ ο ι “]
άνδρι προίκτη ιχθύες άλλοι παίδ’ ερατεινήν οίνοπι πόντω 7
Ε S π ά ν τ ε ς (-a s)
άνθεϊ λευκό) ιερόν ίχθυν εννέα ταύρους Ε πρά)ονε5 (-ας) άκροι (-ους)
ε τ α ίρ ο ι (-o vs) ΐ 6
φνηγινος άξων είναλίη κήξ χάλκεα τεύχεα
ε ΐκ ο σ ’ ετα ίρ ο υ ς 2 , 3,
χάλκεος άξων ήπύτα κήρυξ όβριμον ύδωρ S άκάματον πΰρ g
άσπίδος αυτής νηλέϊ ΰπνω
Μ S ή έ ρ α (-ι) π ο λ λ ή ν (-ή ) 6
κλίμακα μακρήν θεσπιδαες πΰρ 8
ή μ ά τ ι κεινιρ 5
οΰλιος άστήρ άφρονα κούρην φάρεϊ λευκω υδατι λενκώ 2
άγριον άτην χεΐρα άραίην
S θ υ γ α τ έ ρ α (-ος) ή ν (ή ς ) 6
κρατί έκάστω S αγλαόν ΰδωρ 3
Ε θ υ μ ό ς ά γ ή ν ω ρ 24
θήλυς άϋτή κυματι κωφώ φαιδίμω ώμω αλμυρόν ύδωρ 8
«£\ >.. /
Ύ)θυς αντμη μητέρα χηρήν
ν η λέϊ θυμω 3
τ α ρ φ έ ε ς (-α ς ) Ιο ί (-ο ύ ς) 3 υΐε κραταιώ 2
γαστζρι μαργτ] υίες (-as) αριστοι (-ους)
ά ρ σ εν ες ί π π ο ι 2
μ ώ ν υ χ ε ς (-a s ) ίπ π ο ι and υιός άμείνων 4
Β. Possible formulae and derivative expressions υιός άμύμων 2
(-ο υ ς) 34
αίπόλος άνήρ πιόνι δημώ μήτις άμύμων άσπετον ύλην 3
Μ Ε S ώ κ έ ε ς (-α ς ) ί π π ο ι (-ο υ ς)
βουκόλος άνήρ έλκεϊ λυγρω S νήας άπάσας δάσκιος (-ον) όλη (-ην) 2
αστέρι καλώ Ε S πολλοί εταίροι πίονι νηώ 3 Ι,
χ α λ κ ο π ο δ ’ ιπ π ω 2 φύλοπις (-ιν) αΐνή (-ήν) 12
βοΰς έριμύκους S πρόφρονι θυμώ Μ πότνια νύμφη άλλότριος φως 3
κ υ δ ά λ ιμ ο ν κ ή ρ 4
S γαστέρα μέσσην S θήλεας ίππους οΰρος άπήμων Μ κ ίο να μ α κ ρ ή ν 2 ισόθεος φως 14
S δαιτι θαλείη Μ κηρί μελαίνη υίέας εσθλονς κ ύ μ α τι π η γώ 2 φώτες (-as) αριστοι (-ους)
άργέτι δημώ S λήιδα πολλήν Μ χειρι βαρείη λ α α ς α ν α ιδ ή ς 2 4
δίπλακι δημώ λ α ίλ α π α (-ι) π ο λ λ ή ν (-ή ) 2 Μ φωτι έκάστω 3
μ ά v t is ά μ ύ μ ω ν 3 χαλκός άτειρής 3
C. Regular formulae confined to 5th-6th feet π α ντί μ ετώ π ψ 2 αίθοπι χαλκώ 11
πίονες (-as) αγροί (-ovs) 3 S άνέρες (-as) ά'λλσι (-ovs) 2 π ό τ ν ια μ ή τ η ρ 33 ήνοπι χαλκώ 3
πάσαι άγυιαί J άνδρι εκαστω 3 Μ μ ή τ ι ν ά ρ ίσ τ η ν (ά μ ε ίν ω ) 3 νηλέϊ χαλκώ 19
Ε πατρίδος αίης ι 6 καρτερός άνήρ 3 Ε μ ο ίρ α κ ρ α τ α ιή 9 νώροπι χαλκώ 3
aσπετος αιθήρ 2 θέσπιν άοιδήν 2 μΰθος άπήμω ν 2 οξεϊ χαλκώ 37
αίματι πολλώ 2 Μ πάντες (-as) αριστοι (-ovs) Ε ν η ό ς (-es, - a s , -υ σ ιν ) Μ Ε χεΐρες (-ας) άαπτοι (-ους)
θούριδος αλκής 22 ι6 ε ΐσ η ς ( - a t, - a s -r/s) 19 Γ3
άνδρα κορυστήν 3 S ήδε γε βουλή 2 Ε ν η ί μ ε λ α ίν η 2 Q χειρϊ παχείη ι 8
S άνδρας άρίατους 2 βουν (-s) άγελαίην (-as) 5 νή σ ο ν (-ω ) ε ρ ή μ η ν (-η ) 2 S «Wes (-ας) ώμοι (·ους) 6
T A B L E IV •35
Β. Possible formulae and derivative expressions
TABLE I I I Μ « ^ ί λ τ α τ ο ι άνδρες Sεπτά γ υ ν α ί κ ε ς Correpted:
S α'ΐγεον ασκόν εννέα νήας άνδρί έκάστω
Expressions shaped - - ^ - in ist-2nd feet S άστεα πολλά Μ δσσε φαεινά πρόφρονι θυμώ
S ήφι βίηφι δεινά πέλωρα
A. Unique expressions γοΰνασιν οΐσι Μ σοΐσι πόδεσσι
άμβροτα δώρα τλήμονα θυμόν C. Regular formulae confined to 2nd~3rd feet
άξια δώρα κήρ άτέραμνον
Correpted: Μ άλκιμον άνδρα 2 έβδομον ήμαρ 2 S πυρ αιδηλον 2
άφρονα τούτον κρημνόν άπαντα
μυρία δώρα λύματα πάντα αίόλαι εύλαι
Ε χείρονος (-ας) ήμερη ήδε 3 S ταΰτά γε πάντα 8
άσπετα πολλά νείκεα πολλά χώρον έρημον C. Regular formulae confined to 4th~5th feet
δήμιον άλλο οΐκον άτιμων ψενδεα πολλά
τόνδε γ ’ όλεθρον άθρόα πάντα 3 ήματα μακρά 3 δμματα καλά 2
δέρμα βόειον
αιόλος οΐστρος Correpted: Μ άλφιτα λευκά 4 ήματα πολλά 2 άφρονι φιοτι 2
χρυσεα δώρα
ειρια καλά σφοΐς όχέεσσι τεσσαρες άρχοί άρμασιν οΐσι 3 Μ κίονα μακράν 3 νείατον ώμον 2
δώδεκα παΐδες α γ λ α ά έργα 4 Ε μείζονα λ ά α ν 2
άνσχετά έργα άσπετα) όμβρω Correpted:
Μ ήέρα πουλάν 2 « 3 ρέα νώτα 10
έργα βίαια σΰν άκαμαντα μείλανι πόντιο
δοΐα τάλαντα άνέρες έσθλοί 2
έργα γελαστά
T A B LE V I 137
C. Regular formulae confined to 5th-6th feet
μέσσον αγώνα 2 οβριμον έγχος 13 άσπετον οδδας 4
TABLE VI E S άγριον (-ου) μυρία έδνα 3 μακρόν όχηα 3
αίγα ( - o r ) 3 S είματα καλά 6 Μ Ε 7 7 - a i S d r έοΐο
Expressions shaped - - -------in 5th-6th feet μηκάδες (-ας) υγρόν έλαιον 4 (έμοΐο) 3
αίγες (-ας) 5 καρτερά έργα 2 πατρί γέροντι 3
πίονος (-ας) S μέρμερα έργα 2 ση (ην) παρά-
A. Unique expressions αίγός (-ας) 6 πίονα έργα 2 κοιτις (-tv) 2
άγγεα πάντα εχθεα λυγρά πίονα οίκον άλγεα λυγρά 2 S έσθλόν εταΐρον 5 καλά πέδιλα 1 2
άγγελος ώκύς ζώμα φαεινόν αίνον ονειρον πλησίον άλλον Q m o r o r (-όν) Μ καλά πρόσωπα 3
εύρύν αγώνα δείελον ήμαρ νείατον δρχον Μ ης άλόχοιο 3 εταίρος (-ον) 8 πώεα καλά 4
άγλα άεθλα πάσα θάλασσα κάλλιμος οΰρος S άγριον άνδρα 3 ιερόν ημαρ 3 αιπα ρέεθρα 2
μεΐζον άεθλον δεξιόν ίππον αιόλον δφιν βώτορες (-ας) νηλέες ημαρ 9 ρηγεα καλά 5
τόνδε γ ’ άεθλον αιόλος ίππος παΐδ’ άίδηλον άνδρες (-ας) 3 α γ λ α ό ν Ιστόν 2 επτά τάλαντα 2
χείρον άεθλον ιστία πάντα παΐδα συφορβόν S τέκτονες άνδρες3 υγρά κέλευθα 5 τείχεα μακρά 3
αΙγίδα θοΰριν αίθοπα καπνόν παιδός εηος πηκτόν άροτραν 3 Ε κηδεα λυγρά 3 Μ σοΐσι (οίσι)
ίξάλου αίγός λευκά κάρηνα αίνά πέλωρα πατρίς άρουρα 3 Ε κηρα μέλαιναν 1 7 τέκεσσι 5
φοίνιον αίμα ξανθά κάρηνα δεινά ρεεθρα Ε ασπίδα θοΰριν 2 εύρεα κολπον 3 νήπια τέκνα 1 4
όλβιον άνδρός μηλοπα καρπόν σήματα λυγρά άφεα πάντα 2 λαόν άπαντα 5 νηπιον υιόν 3
αγκύλον άρμα αύτά κέλευθα σίτον άπαντα γαστέρ ’ άναλτον Ε S μηδεα πυκνά 2 άλκιριος (-ον)
καμττύλον άρμα κήπον άπαντα στείνεϊ τώδε 2 Ε S πίονα μήλα 6 νίός (-όν) 1 5
οβριμον άχθος άκρα κόρνμβα ίρά τάλαντα Ε φαίδιμα γυΐα J νέκταρ ερυθρόν 2 υιός εηος 3
πικρά βελεμνα καμπύλα κύκλα τεύχε’ άριστα δαίδαλα πάντα 2 S τοΰτο νόημα 2 φάεα καλά 3
ffoi βόεσσι κύμα κελαινόν νίε δαίφρον δαΐτα θάλειαν 2 οίκον άπαντα 2 Μ φώτα έκαστον 4
βρώαιν άπασαν πτώκα λαγωόν χάλκεον ύπνον πίονα δήμον 2 Ε οίνος (-ον) νώροπα χαλκόν 5
δΐε γεραιέ όξεϊλα ϊ φάρμακον άλλο όνδε δόμονδε 8 ερυθρός (-όν) "] χεΐρα βαρεΐαν 2
αγλαά γνΐα είκοσι μέτρα σοΐο φονηος μείλινα δοΰρα 2 πικρός ( - ο ν ) S χερσ'ιν έμησι
δέρμα κελαινόν χίλια μέτρα φωτός εηος S κάλλιμα δώρα 3 όϊστός (-όν) 1 1 (έησι) 4
εϊδεΐ τωδε άρσενα μήλα χαλκόν ερυθρόν μείλινον έγχος 6 καρτερόν όρκον 6 χώρον άπαντα 2
ποικίλον έλλόν μοΰσα λιγεΐα μυρίον ώνον
πασιν έπεσσι νεΰρα βόεια ώρυα πάντα
σοΐσιν έτησι πάντας όδόντας
TABLE V II
άνδρες S δήμον άπαντα πίονα νηόν άμβροτον αίμα —: ι : I σοΐο (οΐο) άνακτος
βουκόλοι άργετα δημόν Μ άρσενος οίός αίσιμα πάντα —: I : 2 —: ι :ι
άνδρες δίπλακα δημόν Μ ιτημα μεγιστον όξύν άκοντα —: 3 : ι άνδρα έκαστον — : ι : g
άνδρί χερηϊ Μ πάσι δόλοισι τοίσδεσι πάσι Μ S άλγεα πολλά — : 2 : 5 δηϊον άνδρα — : I : I
J e s p e r s e n , O ., 3 5 n . S c h o e c k , G ., 1 n .
S c h o lia , 7 4 n ., 76 n .
K ir k , G . S ., 2 n ., 5 n ., 7 n ., 8 n ., 14 n ., S c h w y z e r, E ., 8 0 n ., 115 n .
2 0 n ., 3 5 n ., 3 9 n ., 9 0 n ., 116 n ., 117 n . S e n te n c e - p a tte r n s , 13, 23 f., 2 6 -8 ,
Kunstsprache, 3 7 , 6 3 . 3 1 , 4 3 , 4 7 , 5 0 , 1 2 6 ; i n th e o r ie s o f
im p ro v is a tio n , 1 4 -1 6 , 19 f., 3 5 , 5 2 ,
L a b a r b e , J . , 21 n ., 3 3 n .
113, 1 2 5 ; e x a m p le s of, I 4 f . , 2 5 f . , 5 i ,
L a R o c h e , J . , 7 4 n ., 105 n ., 106 n .
5 5 . 8 5 , 1 0 5 6 , 108, 1 15 f.
L e u m a n n , M ., 63 n .
S e v e ry n s , A ., 2 1 , 33 n ., 53 n .
L o r d , A . B ., i n , 16 η ., 17 η ., i8 ,
S h ip p , G . P ., 4 0 n ., 108 n .
19 n ·. 33 η ·> 4 1 η ., 73 η ., 74 η . S o m m e r, F ., 6 4 n .
L u c ia n , 7.
S te lla , L . A ., 1 n .
M e ille t, A ., 16 n . S ty le , a d d itiv e , 8 8 , 91.
M e is te r , K ., 6 3 n ., 8 5 n . S u b s titu tio n -s y s te m , 18, 73, 110 -1 2 ,
M e tr e , in f lu e n c e of, 3 f., 6 , 13, 4 8 , 6 0 , 127.
S u r a llo n g e m e n t, 12, 2 7 n ., 115.
62 n .
M e t te , H . J . , 1 n . S y n o n y m s , 3 8 , 7 2 , 124, 1 3 0 ; a s a
te c h n ic a l a r tific e , 6 0 , 8 2 f., 111, 128.
M in to n , W . W ., 17 n .
M u n r o , D . B., 4 2 n . S z e m e r e n y i, O ., 6 8 n .