INFORMATION TO USERS

This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original subm itted.

The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.

1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame.

3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until com plete.

4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.

5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as received.

Xerox University Microfilms 75-11.379 KUMPF, Michael Martin, 1945- THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA AND THEIR LITERARY USE BY LATER AUTHORS, ESPECIALLY EURIPIDES AND APOLLONIUS RHODIUS. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1974 Language and Literature, classical

Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48ioo

© 1975

MICHAEL MARTIN KUMPF

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED. THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA AJJD THEIR

LITERARY USE BY LATER AUTHORS, ESPECIALLY

EURIPIDES AND APOLLONIUS RHODIUS

DISSERTATION

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University

By

Michael Martin Kumpf, B.A., A.M.

The Ohio State University 197^

Reading Committee:

Dr. Stephen V. Tracy Dr. John W. Shumaker Dr. Robert J. Lenardon ' Adviser Department of Classics Meiner Frau

Gewidmet ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

To Professor Stephen Tracy, my adviser, a debt of gratitude

is due for suggesting the possibility of this study and for

closely guiding me in its development.

Gratitude is also due Professors John Shiunaker and Robert

Lenardon for the constructive criticism which they rendered.

An especial indebtedness is due my wife Sigrid whose assis­ tance and persistent encouragement have not only made this thesis possible but also my years of graduate study. 3 December I Ç h ^ ...... Born - Waterloo, Iowa

1 9 6 8 ...... B.A. magna cum laude. Classics Luther College, Decorah, Iowa

1 9 68-1970 ...... United States Army, The NATO Military Headquarters, SHAPE, Belgium

1971 -197 ^ ...... University Fellow, Department of Classics, The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio

1 9 7 2 ...... A.M., The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio

1972-1973 ...... Teaching Associate, The Department of Classics, The Ohio State University Columbus, Ohio

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Homeric epic

Latin Language and Literature. Professors Kenneth Abbott, Vincent Cleary, John Davis, Mark Morford, Carl Schlam, and Jane Snyder

Greek Language and Literature. Professors Angeliki Dracliman, David Hahm, Robert Lenardon, John Shumaker, and Stephen TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii

VITA ...... iv

LIST OF SYMBOLS AND TERMS...... vi

INTRODUCTION ...... vii

Chapter

I. THE TECHNICAL TERM "HAPAX LEGOMENON"...... 1

The Term as Used by Ancient Scholars A Stipulative Definition of the Term An Examination of the Homeric Hapax Legomena Themselves

II. THE COGNIZANCE OF THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA PRIOR TO ARISTARCHEAN SCHOLARSHIP...... Jl3

A Survey of the Critical Studies on the Homeric Vocabulary (6th Cent.-2nd Cent. B.C.) Homer and Greek Education

III. THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE HOfiERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA FOR LITERARY E F F E C T ...... 93

The Exploitation of the Homeric Hapax Legomena Euripides: The Cyclons Apollonius Rhodius: The Argonautica, Book I

APPENDIX

1. An Index of the Homeric Hapax Legomena .... l60

2. The Hapax Legomena in H o m e r ...... 275

3. Euripides and the Homeric Hapax Legomena . . . 278

k. Apollonius and the Homeric Hapax Legomena . . 201

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 282 LIST OF SYîœOLS M D TERMS

v.l...... varia lectio— a variant reading

"...... a verb compounded with a preposi­ tion which exists or might exist in a separated state (i.e. in tmesis)

+ ...... a Homeric hapax legomenon which, according to our knowledge, is a Greek singularity

"lexical vocable" . . a word, regardless of meaning, granted a distinct entry in one of the lexicons discussed in this INTRODUCTION

From the sixth century B.C. until the present, classical

philologists have paid particular attention to the Homeric hapax

legomena. Given the acute scrutiny granted the Iliad and the

Odyssey by ancient critics, it was perhaps natural that numerous linguistic singularities were detected in the highly repetitive diction of Homer. Because of their unique nature the hapax lego­ mena have often been criticized as non-Homeric expressions. For the most part, analysts from Aristarchus onward have examined them with this possibility in mind. Although granting the ].egitima.cy of such investigations, we shall attempt to demonstrate in the following pages that the Homeric hapax legomena were employed by later authors for various artistic purposes and thereby merit the examination not only of the philologist but also of the literary

On account of Homer's dominant place in many areas of Greek life (e.g. religion, education, entertainment), his poems were thoroughly studied and even memorized by every school boy. More­ over, scholars and school masters from the fifth century B.C. onward culled Homer's vocabulary for his rare and obsolete words

(called glosses) and often published their results in monographs.

Every student was expected to master these Homeric glosses. Thus

vii the writers of the fifth century and afterwards were able to use

the hapax legomena as one means of recalling the Homeric epics.

In spite of the fact that the technical term "hapax legomenon'

has been a conventional linguistic expression since the Alexandrian

scholars, no common agreement has ever existed concerning its pre­

cise meaning. Depending upon the critic using it, "hapax lego­ menon" has signified singularities ranging from unique words and phrases to exceptional literary occurrences. Because of the non-

restrictive nature of the term, I found it necessary in the first

chapter of the present study to formulate a working definition to be utilized in extracting the hapax legomena from Homer's vocab­ ulary (for the list of hapax legomena, cf. Appendix l). With this list it was then possible to examine the vocabularies of later authors to see which hapax legomena they selected for use in their own writings and the manner in which they applied them. The Cy­ clops of Euripides and book one of Apollonius' Argonautica were chosen for detailed analysis in order to show some of the ways in which a list of Homeric hapax legomena may be used. CHAPTER I

THE TECHNICAL TERM "HAPAX LEGOMENON"

The Term as Used by Ancient Scholars

The technical term ctnaÇ AeyohEVov (or aiiaÇ ecpnMevov) has always been a rather ill-defined linguistic expression. From its earliest recorded^ occurrences in the Alexandrian and post-

Alexandrian philologists the term seems to designate not only singular words, forms, and meanings, but also peculiarities of diverse sorts.^ In their acute analyses of the authors of the past, the Alexandrian scholars detected numerous things happening

1. Although we have no recorded mention of the use of the technical term before Aristarchus, it seems probable that earlier lexicographers and philologists detected singularities of numerous kinds in the works of various authors who were deemed worthy of analysis. This hypothesis will be developed in Chapter Two in regard to Homeric studies.

2. Even though not restricted to any one type of peculiar­ ity, the hapax legomena are, for the most part, linguistic sing­ ularities. For the use of the term to denote non-linguistic singularities (e.g. Hermes as the guide of the dead to Hades), see Wilhelm Dindorf (ed.), Scholia Graeca In Homeri Odysseam, Vol. 2 (Oxford : Typographeus Academicus, I8 5 5 ), Scholl Od. 2h.l, p. 72h. but once and made notations of these oddities. The term is not clearly defined in ancient literature; when the neuter Acyo" pevov is combined with the adverb auaÇ, the ensuing meaning can signify almost anything "being said" or "counted only once".

Thus the term, lacking further qualifications, is vague and neb-

Homer was the foremost author whose works were examined for hapax legomena by the Alexandrian scholars. However, before going further, we must admit that our knowledge of Alexandrian scholarship is extremely limited, considering that none of their commentaries survive.^ Rather their methodology and their critic; remarks on the text of Homer must be gleaned mostly from the scholia.^ The scholia of A = MS. Venetus 1+5^4 of the tenth cen-

3. Martinazzoli in his first fascicle on the term "hapax legomenon" (Folco Martinazzoli, Hapax Legomenon, Parte Prima (l) [Rome: Gismondi, 1953]) is primarily concerned with the peculi­ arities which the Alexandrians detected in Homer. Although I have cited specific instances of debt to Martinazzoli throughout this paper, I feel obliged to acknowledge that the first section of this chapter has, in general, been influenced by his work.

Some of the Alexandrian scholars (e.g. Zenodotus and Aristophanes of Byzantium), although editing the poems, did not write Homeric commentaries (see Chapter Two).

5. In analyzing the "scholia exegetica" Erbse writes, "Nimi- rum hodie in ruinis tantae doctrinae difficile est, circuitum origin- emque uniuscuiusque fragmenti certis terminis circumscribere vel definere." H. Erbse (ed.), Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1 (Berlin: Gruyter, I9 6 9 ), p. xii. Certainly this appraisal holds true for the "scholia maiora" as a whole. In addition to the scholiasts, commentators of the Byzantine period such as Tzetzes and Eustathius (12th cent.) offer information about the Alexandrians. tury,^ reveal that there were four ancient scholars who were

instrumental in transmitting Alexandrian criticism to later per­

iods: Aristonicus and Didymus (Augustan Age), and Herodian and

Nicanor (Antonine Age) But the quotations of the scholiasts

were not taken directly from the works of these scholars but

rather from an epitomizer who combined the commentaries of the

four men into one treatise.^ Furthermore, these four commentators

were themselves epitomizers of a long tradition of scholarship.^

6. "A is the best example of a learned copy of an author that has come down to us: the continuous series of critical signs (which in other minuscule MSS. exist only very sporadically); the double series of scholia— longer, in the margins, and shorter— the inter­ marginal, i.e. between the marginal scholia and the text; the prosodical signs ( — ,v-/); the furnishing of elided syllables (e.g. . . .); the interaspirations and hyphens; and the careful correc­ tion of the text wit): references to other copies in a second but contemporary hand on the extreme margin, show this." Thomas W. Allen (ed.), Homeri Ilias, Vol. 1, Prolegomena (Oxford: The Clar­ endon Press, 1 9 3 1 ), p. 1 6 3 .

7 . "Didymus maxime egit de variis lectionibus, Aristonicus de signis criticis, quibus lector Homeri ad commentarium revocabatur, Nicanor nova ratione interpungendi vias latiores ad Homerum intel- legendum aperire studebat, Herodianus denique do accentibus pro- sodiaque disseruit." Erbse, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol.

8. J.A. Davison, "The Transmission of the Text," from Alan J.B. Wace and Frank H. Stubbings (eds.), A Companion To Homer (London : Macmillan, 1962), p. 226. For a full discussion of the "Viermaen- nerkoraentator", see M. Van der Valk, Researches on the Text and Scho­ lia of the Iliad, Vol. 1 (Leiden: Brill, I9 6 3 ), pp. 107-132.

9 . Pfeiffer, in his remarks on Didymus, states, "Homer had been the chief subject of Hellenistic scholarship throughout two and a half centuries ; and Didymus' first achievement was to sum up all these Homeric studies." Rudolf Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I9 6 8 ), p. 275. Thus, we can readily agree with Ludwich's statement, . .so

wird man begreifen, dass hier ueberhaupt nur von 'Excerpten aus

Excerpten' die Rede sein kann."^^ Added to this already compli­

cated situation is the fact that the scholia also contain numerous

Byzantine interpolations. Therefore, we certainly must follow

Erbse's injunction, "Cautione diligentiaque etiam idcirco decet

uti",^^ in dealing with these explanatory notes.

With this uncertainty of knowledge in mind, we can now in­

spect the work attributed to Aristarchus which bears on the hapax

legomena in Homer. Aristarchus was extremely interested in Homeric

vocabulary^^ and apparently was quite aware that the diction of

Homer, with its high degree of repetition, was different from that of other authors. Pfeiffer states this scholar's critical aims in the following sentences :

10. Arthur Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik Nach Den Fragmenten Des Didymos, Vol. 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, I88 M , p. 95* Cf. Martinazzoli, Hapax Legomenon, Parte Prima (l), p. 32.

11. Erbse, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. xiii.

12. For his critical work on Homer Aristarchus earned the title Ô 'Oynptxds. Schol. Cod. Vindob. II. 3.125. Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, pp. 219-220. Lehrs deals specifically with Aristarchus' analysis of Homeric vocabulary in his chapter, "De Aristarchea vocabulorum Homericorum interpretatione". K. Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis, 3rd ed. (Leipzig: Hirzelium, IOO2 ), pp. 36-1 6 1 . *'He [Aristarchus]also observed what was not so obvious, that a large proportion of the commonest words had changed their meaning in the interval between Homer and the Attic age. He dis­ covered, for example, that in Homer (pdgos meant 'flight' not 'fear'; . . . ." D.B. Monro (ed.), Homer's Odyssey, Books 13-2!» ( Oxford : The Clarendon Press, I9 0 1 ), p. !+50. Aristarchus' main object was to discover the Homeric usage; for the explication of words and facts he collected all the parallels in the Iliad and Odyssey, treating any without parallels as ctnaÇ Aeydwcva of the poet. But when he encountered something which seemed not to fit at all into the pattern of the Homeric language or the Homeric life, he termed it xuxAuxwTcpov in contrast to 'Opp- puxcJTepov, the genuinely H o m e r i c . ^3

Thus, after he had drawn up his list of hapax legomena, some were

defended as 'Oynpuxwrepa while others were condemned as oùx 'Opp-

puxws.

Earlier Aristotle had separated the rest of the early epics, usually referred to as the epic cycle, with the exception of the

this Homeric purge, but now with a scrutinizing examination of the text itself, and found what he thought to be corruptions or later additions. He employed different signs in the text of Homer, usually placed in the margins, to designate words and lines which, because of their possibly spurious natui-e, seemed worthy of crit­ ical analysis. His explanations of these marked words were found in his ùnopvppara, or running commentaries.

We can see that at times in his attempt to regain the correct

13. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 227. For a more detailed discussion on the various categories of words con­ sidered by Aristarchus as hapax legomena, see Adolph Roemer, Die Homerexegese Aristarchs In Ihren Grundzuegen (Paderborn: Schoen- ingh, I9 2 H), p. 1 9 .

iH. Aristotle, Poetics lh39 b I6 . Homeric reading, he was oblivious to the literary nuance of the

word in question. One such occasion is the word yaxAoauvn, a

hapax legomenon (^. 2U.30), which was rejected by him because he

found it to be a word used only of women. However, it gains

credence as the correct reading, if we perceive that Homer employs

it to emphasize the effeminacy of Paris.

Although Aristarchus offered emendations in his commentaries

for words which he considered erroneous, he did not change the vulgate or textus receptus. Allen has pointed out that Aristar­ chus and other scholars of the period added critical signs on the margins of the text to indicate lines which they suspected as spurious and offered variant readings for words which they sus­ pected as modernizations. "The Alexandrians detected them and marked them but were powerless to expell them."^^ Therefore we find no Ptolemaic papyri containing Alexandrian readings, although

1 5 . Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott and Henry Stuart Jones (eds.), A Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed., rev. and enl. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 19^0), s.v. yaxAoauvn. Hereafter this work is referred to as L.S.J.

1 6 . Allen, Homeri Ilias, Vol. 1, Prolegomena, p. 206. "Aris­ tarchus did two things. He expressed his disapproval of lines by prefixing signs to them, signs which found their explanation in his commentaries, to which they referred; and he condemned by the same means modernizations in the language of the poems. His signs, which, as we now see from the papyri, were written on the margins of some MSS. and not of others, did not have the effect of removing lines from the text (or eliminating modernisms), and were nob intended to do so." Ibid., p. 1 9 7 . Cf. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, pp. Uh6-M49 . For a discussion of the evolution of the Homeric vulgate, see Thomas W. Allen, Homer: The Origins and the Transmission (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1924), pp. 302-327. The aperistictos (undotted) diple (>) was one of the critical

signs which Aristarchus utilized to mark, among other things,

some Homeric hapax legomena. In a MS., "qui olim Mureti fuit,

nunc [1 8 7 5 ] in hibliotheca Collegii Romani servatur", we have an

explanation of his signs apparently excerpted from Aristonicus'

treatise Ttcpu tmv ’Aptaxdpxou onpcuwv:

Tct napaTudeyEVoi toCs 'OynpDioCs otlxols ' ApuoTOtpxcua onyeua avayxaCov yvûivau Tohs èvTuyxâvovTas.

ôuïïAn âicepLaTuxTOS...... > ...... (other critical signs listed.)

> n yÈv o5v aTtepuoTLMTos ôuïïAh xapaTuOsTau itpôs Tohg yAcoaaoypdtpous n ÈTepdôoÇüJS Èx6eÇa;ae\)ous toO nouriToD xaL yfi xaAws ' n xpos t5s anag sLpnMevas Aegeus, n xpôs tù GvavTua nai yaxdyeva, xau ëtepot oxnyctTa xdyxoAAa xat çnTpyaTa.l®

Martinazzoli, in his chapter "Hapax legomena e diplai", investi­ gates the connection between these diplai and the hapax legomena.

1 7 . Allen, Homeri Ilias, Vol. 1, Prolegomena, pp. 211 and 1 9 8 . For two hypothetical explanations on how Aristarchean readings en­ tered family "h" of Homeric MSS., see Walter Leaf (ed.). The Iliad, Vol. 2 (London: Macmillan, 1902), p. xxiii and Allen, Homeri Ilias, Vol. 1, Prolegomena, pp. 213-216.

1 8 . Wilhelm Dindorf (ed.). Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I8 7 5 ), p. xliii. See ibid., pp. xliv-1 for similar lists and explanations of the critical signs found in other codices.

1 9 . Martinazzoli, Hapax Legomenon, Parte Prima (l), pp. 57-76. In doing so, he explores the relationship between many of the

papyri fragments, which contain diplai markings, and the text and

scholia of Venetus A. Since the use of the diple was not res­

tricted to the designation of hapax legomena, we find for example:

In tutto r abbiamo complessivamente 51 diplai: appena L di esse appaiono in coincidenza con h. 11. lessicali (v. 11 MAeitxri; v. 13 oteAXns; V. 31 HaTETiAnyn; V. 1+8 eùeoôeaK^®

At the same time we discover:

Gli scolii nei quali è denunciata la presenza d'uno h. 1. sono sempre in corrispondenza con un a diple nel testo, tranne qualche caso eccezionale.

Aristarchus, in short, did not use this diple-marking to designate all the hapax legomena in Homer, but he apparently did use it to signify hapax legomena which he suspected as «uxAuxtoTepa.

It is from the scholia, however, that we can more easily see

20. Ibid., p. 7 2 .

21., Ibid., p. 57.

22. "Ecco lo spoglio sistematico degli scolii A: A 10(5; B 217; r A 1+6; E 219; z I5I4; H 1 3 8 , 1+33; 0 250; K 2 2 6 ; A ll+7, li2l+; M 9 6 ; N 561+; 5 1+6 3 , 509; 0 393, 1+12; n 3!^, 7 I47; P 272, 599; Z 236, 519; T ll+9; Y 372; $ 282, 319, 550; X 31, 294, 1+9 6 ; Y 88, 9 I, 311, 1+8 1 , 531, 60 I+, 61+2, 7 9 1 , 81+5; n 12h, 30I+." Ibid., pp. 26-27. Once again we must reiterate Monro's caveat, that there is a ". . . dif­ ficulty of determining exactly what came from the master himself and what from disciples and followers." Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 1+1+0. in Schol. A we find the following scholium attributed to one of

Aristonicus' quotations of Aristarchus:

MuSapus: OTU tuves yn eupJaxovres naja Tpv TtObnoLV TÔU ’AAeÇavôpov ML^apuÇovxa WETEypa#\) {oùx àv TOE iiXUôapLs" toDto 6È ïïlAou yevos eevoe AEYOuauv xoAAot 6e eotev 23 anag AEYoycva Ttapct l ÿ KounxQ

Here in a debate whether xuOapus, a common Homeric word, or xlô- apts, a hapax legomenon, is the correct reading Aristarchus has emphasized the fact that there are nxunerous hapax legomena in

Homer.

In Schol. A we can see various ways in which words were designated as hapax legomena. We find, therefore, the following:

A 1 0 6 , xpnyuov: oxu axag Eupnxotu xô xpnyouv; B 21%, cpoAxds: oxl ctuag ELpnxat; H ^33, àycpuAûxn (vug): h SunAri ôè oxu aitag ydvov

êvxaûôa xÿ As'geu xe'xPOTau; Y 531, oxu xo n'xuoxos xwv ctxag Eupp-

2 3 . Erbse, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, pp. 369 -3 7 0 . "Unlike any of his predecessors, Aristarchus, by sur­ veying the epic usage in its entirety, was able to pick out those words, which occurred only once in Homer; Aristonicus preserved the Aristarchean sentence in Schol. A f 5^» noAAà 6e èoxuv axag Aeyo'- PEva itapa xÿ xoupx^. Dealing with the problem of these many sin­ gularities was an integral part of his interpretation . . . ." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 229.

2k. The sentence noAAd 6e' eoxuv anag AeyopEva uapot xÿ noupxp does not occur in the scholia of B and T at 21 - 3.5^i. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 3, p. l62 and Ernst Maass (ed.). Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem ToTOleyana, Vol. 1 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I8 8 7 ), p. 101. pevüjv c o t C; and fi 30U, xEpvugov: êvoou 6è ôunXç onpetoOvTau ws

ctïïttÇ évTauôa eùpnpevov. As noted, some of the hapax legomena were

designated by diplai while others were not.^^

Although acknowledging that there were many hapax legomena

which were 'OpnpuxwTcpa, Aristarchus, at times, seems to have

argued against the inclusion of a word partly because it was a

hapax legomenon. Therefore at Iliad 1^.509 in Schol. T we find:

àvôpctYPua: àSexouaL ôuà t o Çévov TPS XÉÇeiüs MOL, pn Meupevov ctAAaxoü 26

Perhaps if the word had occurred elsewhere in Homer, Aristarchus might have been less critical of its presence here.

Moreover, Aristarchus did not only designate ctnaÇ Aeyopeva

Ttapoi tijj uotriTg but also ânaÇ Aeydpeva itapoi ' lAudôu «au tg

2 5 . Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, pp. 21, 9 2 , 2 6 5 ; and Vol. 2, pp. 26h and 2 8 5 . For an explanation of the absence of many critical signs in the MSS., see ibid., Vol. 1 , pp. xix ff.

2 6 . Maass, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem Toimleyana, Vol. 2, p. 99- Similar scholia are found in A and B. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 2, p. 58 and Vol. h, p. 71. 11

'OôuooEcy.^^ The texts were examined so thoroughly that something

happening but once in either epic was noted. At Iliad 5-219 we

find this scholium in MS. A:

V(5 : cinaÇ ôè Èv ’IAlôôo Mau aitraÇ EU ’O 6U0 OEL(Jt.-°

Here Aristarchus has noted that the dual vol3 is employed just once

in both the Iliad and the Odyssey, even though the word in its

Ionic form vmo is quite common in Homer. We do not then have a

case of a hapax legomenon in the poet nor, strictly speaking,a

case of a hapax legomenon in each epic. Rather, we have an occur-

2 7 . I have restricted my study of these hapax legomena to an analysis of the scholia of the Iliad only and have merely touched upon the hapax legomena of the Odyssey when mentioned in the scholia of the Iliad. There was apparently ". . . a lesser popularity of and demand for the Odyssey. This is clearly shown by the smaller number of MSS. (over one hundred less than the Iliad) which contain it (and the very scanty scholia on it); and as variants grow by copying, the less copied book underwent a less wide and frequent exchange of them." Allen, Homeri Ilias, Vol. 1, Prolegomena, p. I8 8 . Although MSS. A, B, and T (in that order) are considered the best of all the MSS. of the Iliad, no fiSS. of the Odyssey are rated above others. "At first there was a tendency to ascribe special value to the two oldest MSS. (F and G of Ludwich). . . . It appears, how­ ever, on closer examination that no difference can be made and no MSS. is appreciably better than its colleagues." Marchinus H. A. L. H. Van der Valk, Textual Criticism of the Odyssey (Leiden; Sigthoff, 191 *9 ), p. 5 1 .

2 8 . Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. 208.

2 9 . As mentioned earlier (p. 2) the technical term "hapax lego­ menon" can, without any qualification, signify almost anything being said or counted but once. Apparently Aristarchus used the term in this indefinite sense. For my stipulative definition of the term, which is more restrictive, see pp. 22-23. 12

rence of a hapax of dialectical form employed in both the Iliad

and the Odyssey. Monro pointed out that Aristarchus did much work

in the analysis of dialectical forms in Homer.

On the other hand there are hundreds of anno­ tations bearing on the meaning and usage of the grammatical forms. Every use of a case that does not conform to Attic practice is duly noted.30

In this instance it is the Attic form which occurs only once in

each work that receives annotation.

The formula gvti5vovto aptCTov contains the word apcarov^^

which occurs, as Aristarchus observed, only once in the Iliad and

once in the Odyssey. Accordingly he made notation of this fact

as is seen in the scholium at Iliad 2k.l2h of MS. A:

OTU anaÇ vüv èv ’lAtctôt xotù axaÇ èv ’Oôuoaeti? (16.2) tô âpuoTov "èvTÛvoVTO apuoTov."33

It is possible that Aristarchus used this and similar evidence

30. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. J+51.

31. "As Aristarchus pointed out the use of some Attic forms and words in the epic language, it has become one of the common­ places of modern literature on Homer that Aristarchus for this reason regarded him as an Athenian by birth." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 228.

32. Such a word can be called a 6ts Acyoueva in Homer since it is a lexical vocable employed only twice. In this instance the word, as noted by Aristarchus, is also a hapax legomenon of each epic.

33. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 2, p. 280. against the Chorizontes^^ in his defense of Homer's single author-

We know that besides writing uitoyvnyaxa Aristarchus also

wrote auYYpawwaxa one of which was entitled npbs to Eevmvos napci-

ôoÇov.^^ This was a polemic against the Alexandrian grammarian

Xenon who apparently had used internal evidence to prove separate

authors for the epics. Words which occurred only once in each poem could be used by Aristarchus as confirmation of a single poet.

In addition, Aristarchus used as evidence in his refutation of the separatists words which were common in one epic but a hapax lego­ menon in the other. Consequently we find at Iliad T.13O the fol­ lowing scholium in MS. A:

OTU Kuxval £V ’lAuaôu ai cnavaAii({,cus,

3^. For a discussion of the Chorizontes (où xwpuçovTes) and the considerations of modern separatists, see D.B. Monro (ed.), Homer : Iliad, Books 1-12, 3rd ed. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I8 9 0 ), pp. xxxvi-xxxviii. See also G.S. Kirk, The Songs of Homer (Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press, 1962), pp. 288-300, especially pp. 293 -29 !+.

35. Stanford shows how the Chorizontes used hapax legomena in their arguments for distinct authors of the epics. "It [xoüvuÇ; Od. 1 9 .2 8 ] occurs only here in Homer. To judge from the Scholiast some ancient critics regarded it as a low (lit. 'cheap*: euxeXes) term and based a Chorizontic argument on it. The Scholiast rebuts this by citing even 'lower' terms from the Iliad, oApos (^. ll.l^t'f), àoTpctYaXou (^. 23.88), and htuov (ll. 13.588)." W.B. Stanford (ed.). The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 2, 2nd ed. (London: Macmillan, 1958), p. 3 1 7 .

3 6 . Schol. All. 12. !+35> Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p.T32. ânaÇ 6è év 'Oôuooe

’EïïûxAnats occurs here at Iliad 7.138 and is also found in numerous

other places in the Iliad. Yet it is a hapax legomenon in the

Odyssey (5.273).

From this review of Aristarchus' work, we are able to see

that he was extremely interested in Homeric singularities. He

drew attention not only to the hapax legomena of the poet but

also to the hapax legomena of each epic. Even though Homeric

diction is highly repetitious, there are countless peculiarities.

As Ludwich stated:

Es giebt, dass kann nicht oft genug wieder- holt werden, Tausende von Singularitaeten der verschiedensten Art in den Homerischen Gedichten . . . .38

However, as stated earlier (cf. p. 1, n. l), we have no proof that

Aristarchus was the first Homeric philologist to become cognizant of and to designate the many hapax legomena. With the long tradition

37. Ibid., p. 257. Other scholia in MS. A show similar argu­ ments of using a hapax legomenon in one epic and its repetitive occurrence in the other as proof against the Chorizontes. Schol. A II. 1 2 .9 6 , OTU uAeovctÇeu èv 'lAuctôu tas enavaAncJieus, év 'Oôuoocuqt àc~ana^. Ibid., p. *418. Cf. Schol A 6.13k, ibid., p. 233.

3 8 . Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik, Vol. 2, p. 325. Cf. Martinazzoli, Hapax Legomenon, Parte Prima (I), p. 1 I4. Out of a total of approximately 9 ,0 0 0 separate lexical words found in Homer (Georg Authenrieth [ed.], A Homeric Dictionary, trans. Robert Keep [New York: Harper and Brothers, I88 O], p. vi, n. *) there are about 2 ,7 0 0 hapax legomena (cf. Appendix 2). of Homeric studies which preceded his work, it is probable that an awareness of the hapax legomena had existed centuries before

Aristarchus. It is a great misfortune that our knowledge of the study of Homeric language by earlier scholars is even more frag­ mentary than that of the Alexandrians.

After Aristarchus countless scholars,in their lexico­ graphical undertakings, used his work on the Homeric hapax lego­ mena and probably that of previous Homeric glossographers. (in conjunction with the analysis of the Homeric hapax legomena, we know that other authors were now being examined for hapax lego­ mena.^®) Besides being influential in the transmission of Aris­ tarchus' work on the Homeric language, Didymus and Nicanor also did lexicographical work of their own in which the Homeric hapax legomena probably played an important part. Didymus wrote a work on "words of doubtful meaning"while Nicanor wrote one entitled

3 9 . No attempt is made to enumerate the many minor post-Alex­ andrian grammarians and lexicographers whose works on Homeric lang­ uage may have included analyses of the Homeric hapax legomena. For a survey of numerous such scholars, consult John Edwin Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press, 1921).

Ho. We find therefore the following: Erotian I8 , t ù anaÇ eCpp- yeva; Phrynichus 226, t o u s «naÇ eupnyevous; and Sextus 32.2, t o O t o ÔÈ ôLxtüS AeyeTaL, aiiaÇ yêv . . . xaQ' etepov 6c Tpduov. E.A. Soph­ ocles (ed.), A Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods (Bos­ ton : The Little Brown and Company, I87 O), s.v. ctnaÇ.

hi. Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vol. 1 , p. lltl nepL povnpous Xg Çeüjs.^^ But three post-Alexandrian scholars, in

particular, are known to have made the Homeric hapax legomena an

integral part of their work: Apion,Apollonius Sophista, and

Hesychius.

Apion, a pupil of Didymus, was a Greek grammarian of the

Julio-Claudian era. He became the head of the philological school

at Alexandria, although he also spent some time teaching and lec­ turing in Rome. "With the aid of the writings of Aristarchus, he compiled a Homeric glossary which is frequently quoted by Hesy­ chius and EustathiusWe have only fragmentary remains of this glossary but we can gain an idea of its content and scope since the lexicon of Apollonius Sophista seems to have been based upon it. It appears certain, therefore, that Apion recognized and ex­ plained many Homeric hapax legomena.

It is the Lexicon Homericum of Apollonius Sophista that is our earliest ext ant work which uses the technical term airaÇ Xeyo- pevov or ânaÇ eÉpnpevov in regard to Homeric vocabulary. Although the dates of Apollonius are uncertain, he is usually placed as a contemporary of Apion and thus a successor to Didymus. Martinazzoli

k2. Ibid., p. 321.

i+ 3. Ibid., p. 2 9 6 . For the tradition of Homeric glossaries, see Chapter Two of this thesis.

itU. Actually the lexicon is extant in an abridged form only, with a fragment of the original work existing in a Bodeian papyrus. H.G.L. Hammond and H.H. Scullard (eds.), The Oxford Classical Dic­ tionary, 2nd ed. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1970), s.v. Apol- lonius Sophista. Hereafter this work is referred to as O.C.D. in his second fascicle on the terra "hapax legoraenon" has analyzed

the lexicon in regard to the Apollonian glosses of rare words which

are designated as hapax legomena.

Su un totale di 59 notazioni di h. 11. (. . .), ben 50 casi presentano la dizione rwv (6’) a. eûpnwevwv: ai quali casi sono consentanei due altri casi in cui troviamo le dizioni alquanto piu analitiche tüv . . . anaÇ etpnyevrav AeÇecüv (s.v. eiL'peov 6U, 13) e n AeÇls tSv a. eùpniJevtüv (s.v. TpuxtitMEs 155,

The first word in the lexicon, designated a hapax legoraenon, is

âgaxGW.

ùgdxnoav. Tü)V anaÇ eùpnMevrav.^'^

Since our knowledge of Aristarchus' work on the Homeric hapax

legomena comes to us from derived sources, this is our first sur­

viving application of the terra to any Homeric word.

One of the last of the ancient lexicographers, of whose work

we have a substantial part,^® is Hesychius, a 5th century A.D.

^5. This work further reveals the critical raetliods of Aristar­ chus from whom Apollonius borrowed much. Folco Martinazzoli, Hapax Legoraenon, Parte Prima (ll), II Lexicon Homericum Di Apollonio Sofista TSari: Adriatica Editrice, 1957).

U6. Ibid., p. 23.

1*7. Immanuel Bekker (ed. ), Apollonii Sophistae Lexicon Homeri­ cum (Berlin, l833; reprint— Hildesheim: 01ms, 1967), p. 2.

Î+8. "The existing lexicon, large as it is, is an abridgement only; in its original form, it apparently included the names of the authorities for each statement." Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vol. 1, p. 378. scholar from Alexandria.His lexicon, which includes words from

authors of diverse times (i.e. from Homer to New Testament authors

and ecclesiastical writers), was based upon numerous previous

works.He himself, in the preface of the lexicon, acknowledges

the lexicons of Apion and Apollonius Sophista as sources for his

work on Homeric vocabulary of which the hapax legomena played a

very significant part.

à X X ’ oi ycv Tois 'Ownpuxds ydvas ws ’Atiuluv Hal ’AïïoXXcîvlos 6 toD 'Apxuguou.51

We have only to review a few pages of this lexicon to realize

that almost every lexical Homeric hapax legomenon receives an en­ try. However, the technical term "hapax legomenon" is not,used and all the Homeric words are interposed amongst the other words of the lexicon. Nevertheless, Hesychius did make a marginal nota­ tion to designate every Homeric word included in the lexicon. Also the word's location in the text was noted so that, if one carefully examines the registered words, a hapax legomenon can be detected

i*9. After Hesychius' lexicon, it was the Byzantine age which carried on the lexicographical work on the Homeric language. For a survey of various scholars interested in these matters, see Book V, "The Byzantine Age", of Sandys. Ibid., pp. 386-^4 39- Cf. J.A. Davison, "The Transmission of the Text," pp. 226-229.

50. The lexicon was probably based upon an abridgement of Pam- philus; moreover, he may have borrowed upon Pamphilus via Diogeni- anus. Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vol. 1, pp. 295 and 378.

51. Kurt Latte (ed.), Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon, Vol. 1 (Hauniae: Munksgaard, 1953), p. 1. by the one citation of its occurrence in Homer. Accordingly ve find, for example, the following hapax legomena:

aayES (A 575) àSotxnoav (6 249) ’A3ap3apen (Z 22) &3U0L (N 6) 03AnTa (A 117 ) à'3AnT0S (A 540) a3popoo (N 41) à3poTdÇ(jüpev (K 55) aBpdin (5 78) ”A3u6os (B 836) ’A3u6ddev (A 500)52

Thus, out of the first thirteen hapax legomena from my index (cf.

Appendix l), Hesychius has listed eleven. The Homeric vocabulary, including an analysis of the hapax legomena, had been studied by the great Alexandrian philologists from the 3rd century B.C. and, therefore, Hesychius' work on Homer serves as a sort of conclusion to a long chapter of Homeric linguistic analyses at the famed capital of learning.

5 2 . Ibid., pp. 3-10. A Stipulative Definition of the Term

The foregoing survey reveals that ancient scholars used the

term "hapax legoraenon" rather loosely. Even though the terra was

frequently employed, it was never explicitly defined. Hence we

find a broad spectrum of application of the terra to singularities

ranging from lexical vocables to dialectical forms. In extracting

the hapax legomena from the Homeric vocabulary, one must arrive at

a definition of the term "hapax legomenon" which will serve as a

criterion for the words to be included in the list.

Marouzeau has given a modern lexical definition of the term

in his Lexique De La Terminologie Linguistique. "Hapax. Adverbe

grec. (= une seule fois) employé comme substantif, par abréviation

de la formule complète 'hapax legomenon' (= dit une seule fois), pour désigner un mot, une forme, un emploi dont on ne peut relever qu'un exemple.By the inclusion of the unqualified "un emploi", he exhibits the same lack of circumscription which we found in the ancient scholars. Using such a broad definition of the term, it would be almost impossible to draw up a full list of Homeric hapax legomena.

Petrusevski has restricted, somewhat, his use of the term.

He recognizes two sorts of Homeric hapax legomena: l) words and grammatical forms found only in Homer, 2) words known elsewhere.

53. J. Marouzeau, Lexique De La Terminologie Linguistique (Paris: Geuthner, 19^3), p. 36. but which occur only once in H o m e r . B u t he then goes on to in­

clude as hapax legomena unique meanings of words quite common in

themselves. "II y a en outre un nombre considérable de mots qui

ont chez Homère un sens inconnu d'ailleurs et qui représentent en

ce point-ci un hapax a u s s i . Although modified from Marouzeau's

all-encompassing use of the term, Petrusevski's hapax legomena

still embrace singularities of three sorts: lexical vocables,

grammatical forms, and word meanings.

At times scholars have disregarded the strictness of the ad­ verb anaÇ in the term and have designated as hapax legomena even words which occur more than once. Thus Possum, discussing his criteria for drawing up a list of hapax legomena in Plato, states:

"Occasionally a word occurred two or more times within a small space and nowhere else in the 26 dialogues. If the distance was not great and there was a close connection, I thought I might look

5^*. "L'auteur souligne qu'il y a dans le texte de l'Iliade et de l'Odyssée d'Homère des auaÇ AsYopeva de deux sortes: (l) des mots et formes greimmaticales qui ne se recontrent que chez lui, . . . ; (2 ) des mots connus d'autre part, mais qui ne sont employés dans le texte d'Homère qu'une seule fois, . . . ." M.D. Petrusevski, 'Quelques Mots Sur Les “AiiaÇ Aeyopeva Homériques", Zi va Antika 17 (1 9 6 7 ), p. 1 0 5 .

55. Ibid.

5 6 . Andrew Possum, "Hapax Legomena in Plato", American Journal of Philology 5 2 .3 (1 9 3 1 ), p. 2 0 6 . mitigate the constrictions of the term.

"AïïaÇ ELpnyeva nenne ich auch woerter die sich mehr als einmal finden, wenn ihr mehrmaliger gehrauch auf nahe beisammenstehende stellen mindestens auf ein und denselben gesang beschraenkt ist; ferner wenn sie zwar mehr- mals aber nur in woertlichen wiederholungen desselben verses vorkommen; endlich wenn alle stellen in denen sie stehn bis auf eine von den alten kritikern fuer untergeschoben erklaert sind oder ihnen unbekannt waren.^'

In addition Friedlaender presents a good summary of the types of singularities often designated as hapax legomena by modern schol­ ars. Most scholars, as is seen in Petrusevski and Possum, have used at least several of these classes in their employment of the term. Thus, besides the lexical vocable, the only commonly agreed upon use of the term, Friedlaender categorizes as hapax legomena the following;

2) Woerter die sonst nur an verdaechtigen stellen und in wiederholungen vorkommen. 3) Woerter die sonst in andrer bedeutung vorkommen. U) Namen. 5) Grammatische ei- genthuemlichkeiten.58

Realizing that no accepted limitations of the term "hapax lego­ menon" are held in common by modern scholars, it behooves an in­ dexer of the Homeric hapax legomena to provide a stipulative definition of the term. I therefore restrict the use of the term

57. J. Friedlaender, "Ueber die kritische benutzung der homerischen ctTiaÇ eupntieva", Philologus 7 (1 8 5 1 ), p. 228.

5 8 . Ibid., p. 2 3 0 . "hapax legomenon" in this thesis to denote only lexical words

occurring once in the text of Homer. Even after limiting the

term in this way I found that, in regard to procedure, there were

few precedents to follow in developing a list of hapax legomena.

As Eossum stated: "I had before me thousands of words that I did

not know how to organize. It was a big task and bigger because

I did not know how to go about it. No one had ever studied the

hapax legomena in any author and I had no method or suggestion

to follow.

The method used in drawing up the following list of Homeric hapax legomena was to start with Authenrieth's A Homeric Diction­

ary,^^ in which hapax legomena were indicated by a dagger notation.

Although the words designated by Authenrieth provided a basis

from which to work, they also revealed that his use of the term

"hapax legomenon" was less qualified than my ovm (infra). Further­ more, he did not note numerous words which are hapax legomena.

59- Fossum, "Hapax Legomena in Plato", p. 2l6. For my indebt­ edness to Fossum's methodology, see note 89 of this chapter. Earlier scholars seem to have limited themselves to an analysis of the hapax legomena of select portions of an author. Cf. Friedlaender, "Ueber die kritische benutzung der homerischen ctuaÇ eupnyeva", p. 2 2 9 .

6 0 . Georg Authenrieth (ed.), A Homeric Dictionary, trans. Robert Keep, rev. Isaac Flagg, new ed. (Norman: University of Okla­ homa Press, 1 9 5 8 ).

6 1 . The first few pages of the dictionary reveal countless un­ designated hapax legomena. 'Agapgapen, "Agag, "Aguou, "AgAppog, 'Ay- dôtüV, ’AyaxXe'nSj 'Ayayndn, ’AycmnvwPj ’Ayaode'vns, jAyaUn, ’AyXaun, "Aypuos, àypoTns, âyxovoos, 'AôpnoTEta, ’AôpnaTHj cteAAng. Ibid., Therefore, this preliminary list was modified and refined by an exhaustive study of Gehring's Index Homericus.^^ As a result numerous words were added to or subtracted from the provisional list. However, an anguis in herba presents itself in dealing with the different Homeric lexicons, concordances, and indices since they are the products of various times and, thus, are based upon different texts. Because I chose to use the Oxford Classical

Texts of Horaer^^ as my basic Homeric text, I next checked the hapax legomena against Marzullo's revisions of the concordances of Homer,for which he also used the Oxford Classical Texts

Even with all these checks and counter-checks I found it difficult, at times, to distinguish whether I was dealing with a unique word or simply a unique form.^^ The policy followed, for the most part.

6 2 . Augustus Gehring (ed.). Index Homericus, new ed., rev. and enl. Ulrich Fleischer (Hildesheim: Olms, 1970).

6 3 . David B. Monro and Thomas W. Allen (eds.), Homeri Opera. Vols. 1&2, Iliad, Books l-2k, 3rd ed. (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 19 2 0 ) and Thomas W. Allen (ed.), Homeri Opera, Vols. 3&*+, Odyssey, Books l-2kj 2nd ed. (Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1917).

6H. Guy L. Prendergast (ed.), A Complete Concordance to the Iliad of Homer, new ed., rev. and enl. B. Marzullo (Hildesheim: Olms, 1 9 6 2 ) and Henry Dunbar (ed.), A Complete Concordance to the Odyssey and Hymns of Homer, new ed., rev. and enl. B. Marzullo (Hildesheim: Olms, I9 6 2 ).

6 5 . Ibid., p. vi.

66. "So ist z. B. bei den sog. anaÇ Aeyopeva (oder eùpnucva) zwischen wirklichen (. . .) und scheinbaren (. . .) zu unterschei- den." Eduard Schwyzer, Griechische Grammatik Auf Der Grundlage Von Karl Brugmanns Griechischer Grammatik, Vol. 1 (Munich: Beck, 1939), p. 3 6 . in distinguishing a unique word from a unique form was to see

whether such reliable Homeric lexicographers as Ebeling^^ and

Cunliffe^® had accorded the form in question a separate lexical

entry or not. If they did, I have considered the word a hapax lego­ menon; if not, not. Finally each word was then compared against

its entry in the lexicon of Liddell, Scott, and Jones^^ to make

certain that its form in the index corresponds to its regular lexicographical composition.

Although it is impossible to survey all the decisions made in selecting the list of hapax legomena, I offer the following paradigms, illustrative of the problems encountered and the cri­ teria employed. Since Friedlaender, Authenrieth, and Fossum had counted as a hapax legoraenon a word which occurred twice or more within a relatively few lines and nowhere else in the author, I was, at first, inclined to follow their example. However, an inherent difficulty arises— i.e. one must at once face the problem of deciding the limits of the so-called "few lines". We have the same dilemma which Horace confronted in trying to determine the terminus ad quem of "ancient" literature.

6 7 . H. Ebeling (ed.). Lexicon Homericum, 2 vols. (Leipzig: Teubner, I8 8 5 ).

68. Richard J. Cunliffe (ed.), A Lexicon of the Homeric Dia­ lect, new ed. (Norman: The University of Oklahoma Press, I9 6 3 ). For proper nouns I used Richard J. Cunliffe (ed.), Homeric Proper and Place Names (London: Blackie and Son, 1931).

6 9 . L.S.J. (Cf. p. 7, n. 15.) Utor permisso, caudaeque pilos ut equinae paulatira vello et demo unum, demo etiam unum . . . .TO

This figurative examination of how many hairs one can pluck from

a horse's tail, and still have the tail, is apt. Instead we must

ask how many lines should he allowed in which a word can occur

more than once and still he considered a hapax legomenon. "Oaaa

meaning a mountain range in Magnesia occurs only in Odyssey 11.315;

however, it occurs twice in that line. The aforesaid scholars

would prohahly have considered the word a hapax legomenon; Authen­

rieth did. Authenrieth also designated as hapax legomena the

following words: BoumoAlojv, Iliad 6.22 and 23; ’ la y e v d s , Iliad

12.139 and 193; 'luKOTcxSns, Odyssey 10.2 and 36; opMniJa, Iliad

2 .3 5 6 and 5 9 0 . Thus we can see that no definitive limits were

established hy him. It has therefore seemed the most prudent

course to restrict the term to words which occur literally once only.

Authenrieth designated as a hapax legomenon (or as hapax legomena, as the case might he) a proper noun which refers to two different persons or things, one or hoth of which occur only once in Homer. Hence ’Aaxdvoos 5.1^^) and’Aaxuvoos (^. 15.^^55), heing two different people, are considered hy him as hapax lego-

70. Horace, Epistulae 2, 1.45-46. when a proper noun and a regular noun have the same spelling and one or both occur only once in Homer, each or both are included in the list. Therefore auymv (^. 5.*^9) and AÛ'ymv (ll. h.2 9 6) are both counted as hapax legomena.Also, when a proper noun and a proper adjective have the same spelling and one or both are Homeric singularities, each or both are counted as hapax legomena. Al­ though AÙyûktuos (adiectivus) occurs often in Homer, AÙyÛTiTUos (vir) is found only once (Od. 2.15) and consequently is considered a hapax legomenon.

I have not included in the register what may be called a hapax of meaning. The word n'oa usually means "food" and occurs seven times in the Iliad and the Odyssey; it occurs only once with the meaning "grain chaff" (Od. 5-368). Authenrieth differentiated the occurrence at Odyssey 5-368 from the others and designated it a hapax legomenon. Liddell and Scott, Ebeling, and Cunliffe

7 1 . There are countless examples of such proper nouns desig­ nated as hapax legomena in Authenrieth. Auyeuau (l) town in Laconia, II. 2 .5 8 3 , (2 ) town in Locris, II. 2.532; A û t ô v o o s (l) a Greek, II. 1 1 ,3 0 1 , (2 ) a Trojan, II. 1 6.69^ Apuas (l) king of Lapiths, 11. 1.263, (2 ) father of Lycurgus, 6.130; etc.

7 2 . Other instances of similar hapax legomena are«a^uAos,II. 1 1 .1 5 5 and ’'AÇuAos, 13^. 6.12; ypaCo, Od. l.i*38 and fpaCa, II. 2 .I198 ; ôriXos, Od. 2 0 .3 3 3 and AnAog, Od. 6.162; xaXnTwp, n. 21».577 and KaXnTüjp, 15.1+19; oxwXos, II. 13.561» and ZxwXos, 2.1+92; etc.

7 3 . Cf. "laoos (vir) and laaog (adiectivus) ; ' Ixctpuos (vir) and ’ixctpuos (adiectivus); "lygpuos (vir) and "lygpcos (adiectivus) ; 28

have all considered it just another meaning and hence have in­

cluded it under the general heading Accordingly, it is

not indexed in this present study as a hapax legomenon. Likewise, we have not admitted aùôoCa (ll. 13.568), the substantive neuter plural of the common Homeric adjective aùôoCos, even though

Authenrieth reckoned it a hapax legomenon.Occasionally, how­ ever, we are not dealing with different meanings but rather with separate words. Tvra or more words, although orthographically the same, are accorded separate and distinct lexical entries in

Liddell and Scott, Ebeling, etc. because of their dissimilar meanings. ’AAea - escape (^. 22.301) and àXéa - sunshine (Od.

1 7 .2 3 ) are two such separate lexical units and both are thus taken as hapax legomena.Following Ebeling, and Liddell and Scott who have not granted adverbs derived from adjectives separate lexical entries, but rather have included them under the general heading of the adjectives, I have not considered an adverb de­ rived from an adjective a separate lexical unit. For this reason

ETEpms (Od. 1 .23 ^) is not indexed in the register since the adjective

7^. Cunliffe has, however, included in parentheses the note that with this meaning, it is, perhaps, a separate word. Cunliffe, A Lexicon of the Homeric Dialect, s.v. nua.

7 5 . Another notable instance of this phenomenon is Authen­ rieth 's notation on xaTaSctXAto at Od. 17.302. Although the word occurs often in Homer, this is the only place where it means "to drop (one's ears)" and thus he gave it the dagger notation.

7 6 . "Oxos (portus), Od. 5.^0lt and oxos (currus), ^ h,297, 5 .2 1 9 , 9 .38 ^ are also two distinct lexical words. GTcpos is quite common in Homer. But, when only the derived ad­

verb occurs in Homer, the word is admitted in ,its adverbial form,

thereby signifying that the adjective is not found in Homer.

Therefore, the adverb auxdeTes (Od. 3.322) is so listed rather

than under the non-Homeric aûxdexns. On the other hand, adverbs

derived from nouns are listed under their adverbial form, not

under the noun. Consequently, "Agudos (ll. 2 .8 3 6 ), ”Agu6d9ev

(1 1 . ii.5 0 0 ), and "Agudo-Ou (ll. 17.58^) are all considered sepa­

rate hapax legomena. So too is dadxn^ev (Od. 10.216) included

in the list although the noun dadxn is not a hapax legomenon.

This concurs with the practice of Liddell and Scott who have con­

sidered, for example, such words as ctAs and aAdOev (^1. 21.335)

separate lexical units.

Dialectical forms are usually catalogued under their regular

77. Chantraine discusses the adverbial endings -cpt, -Qu, -Oe -de, etc. and their relation to ancient cases in his chapter, "Formes Adverbiales": Pierre Chantraine, Grammaire Homérique, Vol. 1, 3rd ed. (Paris: Klincksieck. 1958), pp. 234-251. Ernst Risch, Wortbildung der homerischen Sprache, new ed. (Berlin; Gruyter, 197^), pp. 355-362.

7 8 . Numerous adverbs of this type occur in Homer, many of which are hapax legomena. Cf. AdvdQev (li^. I1.520); auvo'Sev (ll. 7 .9 7 ); KpnxnOev (1 1 . 3 .2 3 3 ); Kpnxnvde (Od. 1 9 .1 8 6 ); AuHunQev TÏ1. 5 .1 0 5 ); AuMunvde TYl. 6 .I6 8 ); vn'ade (Od. 13.19) ; etc. 30

lexical composition.'^^ The Ionie àyjjopûn (Od. 20.76) is listed

under the regular - loi termination; the Ionic avouoog (Od. lk.235)

under avooos; the Ephesian ÔLaKTouetD (Od. I8 .3I+O) under ÔLaTiToem,

etc. Yet some times, even though a word is recognized as a dia­

lectical form, it is granted a separate lexical entry in L.S.J.

with meanings and citations included. This usually happens when

the dialectical form has gained a life of its own, apart from

its regular form, through repeated use as a poetic word.®^ Hence

it exists as a separate word synonymous with its cognate When

this happens both are considered as separate words each of which may be a hapax legomenon. The Ephesian âxiipâouos (Od. 9*205) is

listed in the index since both it and ùxnpuTos, the regular form

(aTpLS Xeyoyeva), are accorded full lexical entries in Liddell and

Scott. The same is true of the Ephesian aya^os (ll_. 5.58?) and

7 9 . By dialectical I mean Ionic, Ephesian, etc. as opposed to the regular literary dialect (Attic) used in general Greek lexicons. L.S.J. usually refers one from the dialectical to the regular form by the expression quod vide (e.g. Ionic ènacLôn [Od. 1 9 .5)17] to èit({)ôn). However, when a word is known only in its dialectical form, Liddell and Scott have catalogued it thus. This is the case with the Ephesian aXAo(pos (^. 10.258); the Ephesian nnuTa (ll. 7 .38 )4); the Ephesian ÇuveeL'xoaL (Od. 1)4.9 8 ); etc.

8 0 . Leumann looks at the relation between mere dialectic forms and poetic words. "Steht der dichterische Gebrauch fest, so bleibt die Kernfrage, wie we it solche Woerter daneben dialektecht sind und demnach ihr Dialektvorkommen ererbt und altuebe rkommen ist." Manu Leumann, Homerische Woerter (Basel: Reinhardt, 1950), p. 262.

8 1 . English, likewise, has synonymous cognates one of which, at one time, was apparently derived from or was a variant form of the other. Cf. repetitious and repetitive. ayyos (non-Homeric).

Slight variations of form, "being neither dialectical nor

heteroclitic, are not included in the index. The following are

examples of these variations of form: Aodvuoos (Od. 11.32!?) in­

stead of Alc5vuoos (the regular Homeric form) ; "HXtos (Od. 8.271)

instead of 'HeAtos (the regular Homeric form); liuOojv^^ (^. 2.519)

instead of HuSm (the regular Homeric form); ulnpecpns (ll. 9-582)

instead of ù({,epE(piis (the regular Homeric form) ; etc. Many of

these variant forms occur because of metrical n e c e s s i t y A l s o

omitted from the list are singularities of gender. The neuter

"lAuov,^^ found only once (_0. 15.71), instead of the regular masculine "lAuos, is not considered a hapax legomenon. The same

is the case for dveupov (Od. U.8Ul), a singularity which occurs

instead of ovecpos found elsewhere in Homer.

In compiling the list of hapax legomena, I have used indices

and concordances in which verbs compounded with prepositional prefixes are catalogued in their compounded state only. Thus

there is the possibility that many compound verbs might also exist

elsewhere in Homer in a state of tmesis. However, due to the

82. Shipp sees this as a much later form than ituQm in his analysis of the late features in "the Catalogue of the Ships". G.P. Shipp, Studies in the Language of Homer, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: The Cambridge University Press, 1972), p. 235-

8 3 . See Chantraine, Grammaire Homérique, Vol. 1, pp. 9*+-H2.

8U. See Shipp, Studies in the Language of Homer, p. 2 8 7 . lexical tools used, I have included as a hapax legomenon any-

compounded verb, provided that it occurs just once in its com­

bined state, even though it may be found somewhere else in Homer

in its separated form (i.e. in tmesis). I rely on Monro's anal­

ysis of Homeric tmesis for justification of this resolution.

We must not suppose (as the name Tmesis would imply) that a compound already formed was divided again into its elements. The usage represents a stage in the formation of Compound Verbs at which the meaning of the Preposition and the Verb had blended into the meaning of the compound, but the place of the Preposition was not yet fixed.

Nevertheless, notation (see infra) has been made in the index next to each compound verb, which, according to Liddell and Scott, might also exist in a state of tmesis elsewhere in Homer.

I must admit that, at times, some rather arbitrary decisions, concerning a word's inclusion in the index, had to be made. When different lexicographers were in disagreement over a possible hapax legomenon, I have followed the evidence and arguments of the one who seemed most reliable. The word eoipev (^1. 19.^02)^^ provides an illustration. Authenrieth described it as an unin-

8 5 . Monro, Homer: Iliad, Books 1-12, p. Ixviii. Cf. Fried­ laender, "Ueber die kritische benutzung der homerischen ctnaÇ Eupn- pe'va", p. 2 3 2 , and L.R. Palmer, "The Language of Homer", from '//ace and Stubbings, A Companion to Homer, pp. 139-1^0.

86. This word proved to be a difficulty for ancient philolo­ gists as is seen in the scholium of MS. A at 11^. 19.^02. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 2, p. 19 I. telligible word and designated it a hapax legomenon. Ebeling gave it a full separate lexical entry, although acknowledging its possible relationship to am. Liddell and Scott did not con­ sider it a separate word but rather an irregular second aorist subjunctive of aw. Buttmann^^ fully analysed the tradition and various possibilities of the word and concluded that it might be an irregular form of unpu (thus the rough breathing) or a derived form of aw. Faced with such a divergence of treatment by lexi­ cographers, I have been induced to consider it as a form derived from a common Homeric word, be it uppu or aw and hence have not included it in the'list. These examples perhaps reveal some of the difficulties encountered in deciding whether or not a word should be considered a Homeric hapax legomenon and I trust, at the least, illustrate the guidelines employed in compiling the list.

The index (Appendix I), therefore, consists of ail Homeric hapax legomena (as defined supra) in alphabetical order with citation of book and line number included.Any verb which might occur in tmesis elsewhere in Homer is noted by an asterisk (*).

Words which, besides being Homeric hapax legomena, are thought to be singularities of Greek in general are designated by the sign

8 7 . Philip Buttmann, Lexilogus, trans. and ed. F.R. Fishlake, 3rd ed. (London: Murray, 18^6), pp. 25-27.

88. For a further description of the data contained in the index, see Chapter Three. 3i+

Although only hapeix legomena which are in the Oxford Classical

Texts have been used in the statistics provided in appendices 2~h,

numerous hapeix legomena which are mere variants in the apparatus

criticus have also been included and noted as such by the desig­

nation "v.l." (varia lectio).

8 9 . In this matter I have followed Possum's precedent in which he designated the Platonic hapax legomena which were also Greek hapax legomena. Fossum, "Hapax Legomena in Plato", p. 205. V/hen Liddell and Scott have cited no other literary use of the word in question, it is taken as a Greek singularity. If such a word is noted in Homer and also in an ancient Homeric lexicographer (e.g. Apollonius Sophista, Hesychius, etc.) and nowhere else, it is still considered a Greek hapax legomenon. Of. Petrusevski, "Quelques Mots Sur Les “AïïaÇ Aey6\xeva Homériques", p. 105 - Since the majority of Homeric proper nouns are not catalogued in L.S.J., I have not examined them as possible Greek singularities. In order to do this, one should consult W. Pape (ed.), Woerterbuch Der Griechischen Ei- gennamen, 2 vols., 3rd éd., rev. Gustav Eduard Benseler (Braun- schweig: Bieweg and Son, l88^).

9 0 . I have included variant words which, because of the dif­ ferent texts used, were listed in Gehring, Authenrieth, and the un­ revised concordances. The utility of these words might be realized if, in the analysis of the use of the Homeric hapax legomena by ancient authors (cf. Chapter Three), we can see that an author em­ ployed a particular Homeric hapax legomenon for its noticeable Homeric flavor. If this were discovered, it would be probable that the variant was the accepted Homeric word at that time rather than the reading of the OCT. An Exajnination of the Homeric Hapax Legomena Themselves

Before closing our discussion of the term "hapax legomenon", we might say a few words about the hapax legomena per se. In addition to the Homeric hapax legomena which are also Greek sin­ gularities, numerous others are words rarely found elsewhere in

Greek.Because of this infrequency of use, the meanings of some are obscure as is the case with x^ouvns (^. 9-359) > called by

epithet of a wild boar. Liddell and Scott have given various interpretations of its meaning: "castrated, solitary, and foaming."

As Leumann writes:

Viele homerische Woerter geben dem Betrachter hinsichtlich ihrer Bedeutung und ihrer mor- phologischen Gestalt noch heute Raetsel auf.93

Apparently the word is very old and its meaning was lost in the

91. We must always take into consideration, in such matters, the slight amount of Greek literature extant in comparison to the immeasurable amount lost.

92. Cunliffe, A Lexicon of the Homeric Dialect, p. vii.

93. Leumann, Homerische Woerter, p. 1. Leumann has dis­ cussed or at least touched upon 86 Homeric hapax legomena in his study of Homeric words. 36

long period of oral transmission.^^ Quintilian (inst. Orat.

1.6 .1*0), likewise, reveals that certain parts of the Carmina

Saliaria were no longer understood by reciting priests due to

their long history of oral transmission. ’'iÇaAog (^. I1.IO5),

an epithet of the wild goat, is a similar hapax legomenon with

forgotten meaning. Liddell and Scott give its various possi­

bilities and suggest that it might be a loan word from Asia Minor.

Moreover, the antiquity of some of the hapax legomena can be seen

by their occurrence in the Linear B tablets. Chadwick has found

the Homeric hapax legomena aynuÇ (Od. 22.1*69), poôdeus (I3^. 23.

186), and Tavoto's (ll. I6 .589) in the Pylos tablets.

Some of the hapax legomena, on the other hand, appear to be of late origin and are perhaps even nonce words created by Homer.

Therefore, Stanford sees ôuadavns (Od. 12.22) not as an old word,

9 I*. "The language of the Homeric poems contains, as is well known, a large number of old poetical words, mostly preserved in certain fixed or traditional phrases and often only half understood by the poet himself. Of these words much the greater part are con­ fined to the Iliad." Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 33>*. For an anal­ ysis of these words with forgotten meaning, see Miijnan Parry, "The Homeric Gloss: A Study in Word-sense" from Adam Parry (ed.), The Making of Homeric Verse: The Collected Papers of Milman Parry (Ox- ford: The Clarendon Press, 1971) > pp. 2^*0-250.

9 5 . Chadwick points out that the precise meanings of âjjnuf; and Tovads are uncertain in the context of the inscriptions; podoeug, "scented with rose" exemplifies the -eus adjectival ending, frequent in Mycenaean Greek but progressively rarer in later Greek. 'Pdôuvos is the later Greek adjective employed to denote this meaning. John Chadwick, "Mycenaean Elements in the Homeric Dialect", from G.S. Kirk (ed.). The Language and Background of Homer (Cambridge: Heffer, I96 I*), pp. 1 2 1 , 121*, and 1 2 5 . 37 handed down through generations of bards, but as a new poetic invention. "Normally to enter the realms of Hades meant death.

Ata^avEES occurs only here in Greek: perhaps a Neologism coined by Homer for this almost unique situationIt is generally agreed, as Shipp points out, that Attic features are a late develop­ ment in the evolution of the Homeric dialect.Monro saw the hapax legomenon undpxm (Od. 2U.286) as an Atticism and thus of late vintageShipp has pointed out numerous hapax legomena as words of late composition (cf. p. 3 1 , n. 8 2 ).

At times scholars have attempted to explain some of the hapax legomena as errors caused by the incorrect word-divisions of early editors. This is always a possibility since the early MSS. con­ tained no word-divisions. Stanford thinks that OEuAditEôov (Od.

7 .1 2 3 ) can be so interpreted. "SEuAditEÔov: the word occurs only here and is hard to explain by etymology. Bechtel's a' e ÉA o'k e ô o u is probably the true reading . . . Petrusevski, likewise, follows similar arguments in explaining away some of the hapax

9 6 . Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 1, p. U0 6 .

97* Shipp, Studies in the Language of Homer, p. k.

9 8 . Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 275.

9 9 . Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 1, p. 235. Shipp also views this word as an editorial or scribal creation caused by the transcription of Homer from the early alphabet. Shipp, Studies in the Language of Homer, p. 8 . 38

Whereas the Chorizontes and Aristarchus used the Homeric hapax legomena in their arguments for or against the single authorship of the two epics (cf. p. 13), modern analysts have been interested in their frequency of occurrence and their possible lateness of origin, especially in certain parts of Homer suspected as spurious.

Neuere kritiker pflegen ihre zweifel gegen einzelne theile der homerischen gedichte durch anfuehrung der darin vorkommenden anaÇ etpn- yeva zu unterstuetzen, und schwerlich wird denselben eine gewisse beweiskraft nicht immer abzusprechen sein.^^l

Although numerous sections of Homer which are thought to be late have been examined for their use and frequency of the Homeric

100. He thinks that AEKHPA was originally the correct reading rather than AEAfiPA (6' eXmpa) which according to his use of the term is a hapax legomenon (^. 18.93). Petrusevski, "Quelques Mots Sur Les "AnaÇ Aeyoyeva Homériques", p. 105.

101. Friedlaender, "Ueber die kritische benutzung der homer­ ischen anaÇ etpnuéva", p. 228. "Geist hat sogar geglaubt die spae- tere entstehung des ganzen fuenften gesanges der Iliade fast ausschliesslich durch aufzaehlung der àuaÇ ctprtyeva die er ent- haelt erweisen zu koennen, und Haupt ist der meinung, dass ’der spaete ursprung des fuenften liedes’ nach diesen beobachtungen nicht mehr zweifelhaft sein koenne." Ibid. 39

■ book ten of the Iliad, the so-called "Doloneia",

and the ending of the Odyssey (23.297 ff.) appear to be the favor­

ites of analytic scholars for critical scrutiny.

The "Doloneia" has been suspected as a later addition to the

Iliad since the days of the early Greek commentators.^®^ As Monro

writes, "it is not likely, indeed, that the book ever existed as

a separate poem; but that it is later than the bulk of the Iliad

is almost certain.In analysing what he considers to be its

peculiar vocabulary Monro calls attention to the following anaÇ

eùpnMEva: xaTOÛTuÇ (2 5 8 ); uCAos (2 6 5 );^®^ aaupmrnp (153); ènu-

ôtcppucts (U7 5 ); èxTaôu'n (13^); xTUôen (335 and ii58 [sic]); Auxen

102. Monro points out "... those parts of the Iliad and Odyssey which are generally regarded as later than the rest of the poem. Such are— in the Iliad, the Catalogue, the 'Doloneia', the story of Nestor in II.67 O-7 6 2 , the last book: in the Odyssey, the song of Demodocus (8 .266-3 6 9 ), the Nexuua, the 'continuation' (23. 297ff.)." Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 328. Shipp has looked at the poems for abnormal features, with special emphasis given to the similes. "it was immediately apparent that similes were full of rare late forms, whereas archaisms were very few and mostly uncer­ tain." Shipp, Studies in the Language of Homer, p. 3.

1 0 3 . The scholium of MS. T at the beginning of book ten of the Iliad reads: 4>aab Tpv poa),q)ôuav ucp’ 'Oynpou Ù6uy TEiax^au xaL yh eïvau yepos xns ’lAtctôos» ùnô 6è nEUOuoTpctTou TETax-Sau eÉs Tpv nobnotv. Maass, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem Townleyana, Vol. 1, p. 3^1.

104. Monro, Homer: Iliad, Books 1-12, p. 353.

1 0 5 . This hapax legomenon occurs in the description of the famous boar's tooth helmet (261-265) given by Meriones to Odysseus. For a discussion of the "literary" helmet and its reality as an actual Mycenaean armament, see Frank H. Stubbings, "Arms and Ar­ mour", from Wace and Stubbings, A Companion to Homer, p. 516 and plate 32. 1*0

(1*59); 'pûÇi'S (311, 398 and 1*1*7 [sic]); ôlouthp (562); ôuonTeûtD

(1*51); à3poTâÇ(jj (6 5 ); àn^Goaw (1*93); ôpauvw (96); and ôceAos

(1*66) Many of these words are technical terms associated with armor, words which one would expect to find throughout the numerous battle scenes of the Iliad, but which exist only here in the "Doloneia" as Homeric hapax legomena.

The ending of the Odyssey has likewise received much critical attention.

The greatest of the ancient critics, Aristo­ phanes and Aristarchus, maintained that the Odyssey of Homer ended at 23.296: t o D t o t g A o s Tfis Oôuaoeuas (pncrtv ’ApuoTapyos xctu 'ApuoTo- (pavns (Schol. HMQ); 'ApuoToçduns àe xaL 'Apuo- xapxos Ttepas t p s ’Oôuaoeuas t o D t o ïïouoüuTau (Schol. MWind. 133)

Thus since Alexandrian times, the possibility of Odyssey 23.297 ff., as a later continuation of the poem, has provided a never-ending

with many other factors, the Homeric hapax legomena, included in

1 0 6 . Monro, Homer: Iliad, Books 1-12, p. 35I* • It is inter­ esting to note that the frequency of hapax legomena in this book is not exceptionally different from that of numerous other books (cf. Appendix 2). However, the hapax legomena included in this book are strikingly peculiar as Leaf points out. Leaf, The Iliad, Vol. 1, p. 1*21*.

1 0 7 . Denys Page, The Homeric Odyssey (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1 9 5 5 )) p. 101. Cf. Wilhelm Dindorf (ed.). Scholia Graeca In Homeri Odysseam, Vol. 2, p. 722.

1 0 8 . See Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 2, pp. l*0l*-l*06 for a brief summary of the various arguments of numerous analysts and Unitarians. the ending of the Odyssey, have heen used as material pro et

contra.M o n r o in his "the continuation (Od. 23.297 ff. )"

finds a high degree of post-Homeric language, of which the hapsix legomena play an important part. His citations of and comments upon such Homeric hapax legomena as ûncxpxm (2h.286; cf. p. 37) and ZoxavLn (24.307) serve as evidence for the lateness of this section.Denys Page upholds that numerous short passages from

Odyssey 23.297 ff., in which the Homeric hapax legomena are very frequent and unusual, confirm the lateness of the ending. Tims he writes of 24.250-253:

aùxueüs TE xaxws xaù àeuxe'a eoaau. où yèv àcpY?nS yc civaÇ êvex’ où oc xoyù^EU, oùôe' TU TOU SoùAeuov ênuxpcïïeu euoopdaoQau

The author's vocabulary is not that of the old Epic, aùxyeùv and its cognate are foreign to the Homeric poems; so are ôoùAeuos (Homeric ôoùXuos) and èxuitp^Tteuv. The new formation aepyun, itself no more remarkable than xaxoep- yun in Od. 22.374, is thus seen to be in con-

By contrast, Stanford, a Unitarian, can also pick passages from the

109. For a detailed discussion of all the hapax legomena ("In sequentibus vix credo unum alterumve cxna^ eupnyevov me fugisse." [p. 120]), see Volkmann's "De vocabulis novis et anaF, Eupnyevous in postremis Odysseae libris usurpâtis." Richard Volkmann, Commenta- tiones Epicae (Leipzig: Weigel, 1854), pp. 115-151.

110. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 322. See also ibid., p. 275 and p. 2 7 6 .

111. Page, The Homeric Odyssey, p. 105. ending of the Odyssey which contain numerous Homeric hapax lego­ mena and "explain away" their alleged problems. Hence we find

the following justification for the three Homeric hapax legomena

included in Odyssey 24.229-230:^^^

All three are unique uses in Homer. But what of it? There is no other picture of a des­ titute king working on the land elsewhere in Homer— or indeed in any well known Greek author— and consequently no need for such words. The uniqueness of the scene is more in favor of Homer's authorship than against it.113

We can see from these two notable cases that the study of the

Homeric hapax legomena has been used in the investigation of pas­ sages of doubtful authenticity. Indeed, the indices of this study

(the list of Homeric hapax legomena in Appendix 1 and the statis­ tical analysis of these hapax legomena in Appendix 2) can be uti­ lized as tools in the investigation. In addition, they may also be valuable for analyses of a more literary character. Thus it is my hope to demonstrate in Chapter 3 of the present study that post-

Homeric poets often employed a Homeric hapax legomenon for poetic reasons, namely in order to recall a range of associations con­ nected with the context of the word in Homer's poem.

112. Kvnyüôas (hapax of meaning, not of lexical entry); ypuTt- tDs > and xEupûôâs. Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 2, p. 420. It is curious that he maJtes no note of gdtTwu, a hapax legomenon, which is also found in line 230.

113. Ibid., pp. 4 2 0 - 4 2 1 . THE COGNIZMCE OF THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA PRIOR TO ARISTARCHEAN SCHOLARSHIP

A Survey of the Critical Studies on the Homeric Vocabulary (6th Cent. - 2nd Cent. B.C.)

Before we can look at the exploitation of the Homeric hapax legomena for literary effect by later authors, we must tentatively prove that authors (at least from the fifth century onwards) were aware of the Homeric hapax legomena to the extent that they could and did employ them to allude to Homer; we must also prove that their audiences (or readers) were well-versed enough in Homeric epic to detect these words as Homeric (see section two of this chapter, "Homer and Greek Education"). Because Aristarchus is the first ancient philologist who is known to have been cognizant of and to have commented upon the Homeric hapax legomena, modern scholars are inclined to succumb to the fallacious argument, nost hoc ergo propter hoc. In all likelihood, however, critics as early as the sixth century were detecting Homeric sinjv;ularities

The existence of the early Homeric rhapsodists and glossographers, of the sophists with their keen interest in verbal criticism, and

1. "Eine feste Tradition ueber die Bedeutung verschollener homerischer Woerter reicht bis in das sechste Jahrhundert herauf." Kurt Latte, "Glossographika", Philologus 80 (1925), p. lH8,

i+3 of the Peripatetic linguists makes it highly probable that the

study of the Homeric hapax legomena did not originate with Alex­

andrian scholarship. Rather earlier Homeric scholars were, it

seems, conscious of the Homeric hapax legomena and noted them in

their writingsTheir works would then have been available to

students, scholars, and poets ali^e for use as lexical aids on

Homer.

The earliest students of the Homeric poems were apparently

the so-called Homeridae.^ Although our information about who

they really were and what they actually did is vague, these Hom­

eric enthusiasts certainly constituted what Allen calls the first

Homeric "school"Whether they were professional reciters or

merely avid students of the poems (or both) has not been agreed

upon by modern scholars. Allen viewed them as reciters; Jebb as

2. Certainly I do not contend that all the Homeric hapax legomena were recognized by the earliest critics. Successive works, in all likelihood, contained additional notations on newly discovered singularities. Very probably, however, the "list" was rather considerable by the end of the fifth century.

3. In regard to date Allen writes : "The Homeridae, there­ fore, take us to Chios and to a Homer living there. But as to date, all we can yet say is 'earlier than Acusilaus', which means the sixth century . . . ." Allen, Homer: The Origins and the Transmission, p. 50.

U. Ibid., p. ^9. Allen gives a full chapter, "The Homeri­ dae", to an analysis of the ancient sources which mention these "Sons of Homer". Ibid., pp. ^2-50. Cf. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, pp. 398-1*02. simple ’’’votaries’ or ’students’ of Homeric poetry”." In either

case, it is possible that the Homeridae started to recognize some

of the difficulties inherent in Homeric diction. It seems prob­

able that some of the hapax legomena, being anomalies to the gen­

eral Homeric practice of repetitious vocabulary, would have been

noticed and analysed.^

The early rhapsodists were not only professional reciters of

r but also Homeric critics. Thus

famous censure upon Homeric theology:

5. "In the island of Chios, there was a family or clan called Homeridae, and it has generally been supposed that they were .rhap­ sodists; but this is doubtful. . . . The term ’Homeridae’ as used by Pindar and Plato, seems to have nothing to do with a gens in Chios, but to mean simply ’votaries' or 'students' of Homeric poetry, . . . ." B.C. Jebb, Homer: An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey (Boston: Ginn and Co., I8 87 ), p. 78. ^ [ . it seems necessary to believe that the Ionian Homeridae already had texts of the poems, . . . Cedrick H. Whitman, Homer and the Heroic Tradition (New York: Norton, 1958), p. . For numerous references to the Homeridae by present day scholars, see "Homeridae” in the index of V.'ace and Stubbings, A Companion to Homer, p. 58 O.

6. We must confess that, given the indefinite information on the Homeridae, it is impossible to substantiate this hypothesis with any evidence. Also we must acknowledge that it was Theagenes (infra) who was accredited to have been the first wi'iter on Homer. Schol. B, 21" 2 0 .6 7 : . . . àno Geayevous toD 'Pny^'^oUj og upwTOS eypai^e Ttept 'Opnpou .... Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 4, p. 231.

7 . "There is no clear evidence that Xenophanes recited 'Ho­ mer', but the possibility can hardly be denied that he began his long career as an itinerant poet and philosopher by reciting Ho­ meric poems ; . . . ." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Gcholarship, p. 9 . r.âvta ^Gots avc'^riHav “Oynpos 'Holoôos tg ôaaa nctp’ avOpionoLatv ôvGUÔGa xaù tl^oyog c o tg v , mAcktglv yoGxevJGtv tg xaù àXAnAous ctuaTGUGtv.°

Such an attack naturally precipitated a defense from another rhapsodist. Theagenes of Rhegium, a contemporary of Xenophanes, is the first attested scholar who is known to have employed allegory to explain parts of Homer which were thought to he

"morally" questionable.^ However, he was also very interested in strictly philological matters (a point often overlooked by schol­ ars) as is witnessed by his variant reading for Iliad 1.381.“*^

Furthermore, he is accredited as the originator of grammatical studies on Homer's language.Unfortunately this is all we know of his work on Homeric diction. However, as Davison writes:

8. SEXr. adv. math. IX 193., Hermann Diels (ed.), Die Frag­ mente Der Vorsokratiker, Vol. I, 2nd ed. (Berlin: Weidmann, 193^+), frag. 11, p. 132.

9. He allegorized, for example, "The Battle of the Gods" as is seen in the scholium to MS. 3 at 11^. 20.67. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. .U, p. 231. Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Clas­ sical Scholarship, p. 10. The use of allegory to interpret Homer was continued by Stesirabrotus (5th cent.), by Crates, the leader of the stoic school at Pergamum (2nd cent.); and by neo-Platonic and Christian writers up to and following the Allegories of Tzetzes (l2th cent. A.D.). For a fourteenth century A.D. attempt to allegorize Homer in Christian concepts (e.g. Achilles as an Adam figure), see ^tyre's discussion of Pierre Bersuire's (a Franciscan monk) work. John L. Myres, Homer and His Critics, ed. Dorothea Gray (London : Routledge and Paul, 1958), pp. 34-35.

10. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. 50.

11. dUTTri GOTUV n YpayyaTLxn' n yÈv . . . n 6 g itepù t o v eAAriVLaydv, h t u s xau VGditepa Goxtv, àpÇajJG'vn y e v ànb OG a y e v o u s , .... SCHOL. DIONYS. THRAC., Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorso­ kratiker, Vol. 1, frag, la, p. 51. . . . his successors included Stesimhrotus of Thasos, Metrodorus of Lampsacus, one Glaucus (. . .)j Thrasymachus of Chalcedon, and Democritus of Abdera. All these were concerned primarily with questions of inter­ pretation, especially the meanings of un­ common words. . ,

From our knowledge of these "successors" (infra), it is extremely likely that Theagenes was conscious of numerous Homeric singular­ ities, some of which he no doubt examined in his grammitical writings.

The use of an accepted Homeric text for recitation by rhap­ sodists at the early Greek festivals^^ makes it probable that some form of "textual criticism" was being practiced as early as the late seventh and early sixth centuries. Since little is known about the early pan-hellenic festivals (e.g. the Delia, the Pani- onia, and the Ephesia), one must look to the Panathenaea for in­ formation concerning the development of an officially recognized text of the Homeric poems.Although our knowledge of the Pisi-

12. Davison, "The Transmission of the Text", p. 220. Cf. Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorsokratiker, Vol. 1, frags. 1 and la, p. 51.

13. Some scholars hold that the city editions ( xaTot TidXets or noALTuxau) or Argos, Chios, Cypros, Massilia, Sinope, etc., known to have been in existence by 300 B.C., were originally the official texts of said places for their local festivals. "The former (Vil- loison) (Homeri Ilias, 1788, Proleg. XXVI) saw in these books edi­ tions owned by communities or written at tlieir order; . . . ." Allen, Homer: The Origins and the Transmission, p. 291.

ll*. Allen believes that there was a commonly accepted Homeric text prior to its use in the Panathenaea. "We therefore conclude that Homer was canonical and intangible before the sixth century." Ibid., p. 2^5. stratean recension comes to us from relatively late and contra­

dictory sources,it is plausible, as Kirk claims, that during

the time of Pisistratus, Homeric critics established a reliable

and exact text for the reorganized Panathenaic festival. In his

view, this was one of the only two ancient attempts to restore

the poems to the "original" text of Homer.

Assuming that the main stage of large-scale composition was completed for both poems be­ fore TOO B.C., . . . it may be concluded that the poems subsequently passed through two distinct periods of comparative inaccuracy and flux, each being ended by a determined attempt at stabilization and restoration of an accurate text.l®

In all likelihood, the early editors were those in a position to

know Homer the best— namely the professional rhapsodists. Lycur-

gus the orator (ilth century) bears testimony to this early edi­

torial work by relating that there was an ancient law (6th cen­ tury) stating that Homer alone should be recited by the rhapsodists

at the Panathenaea.

ouTW Y“P ùïïcAaHov ùyïiv où naTcpes OTtoudaCov eùvoL nooriTf|V m r e vdpov eQevro M a d ’ ÈMCtOTriv neVTGTnpi>'6a t w v IlavaOnvaomv

1 5 . A very thorough survey of these ancient sources is given by Allen in his chapter "Pisistratus and Homer". Ibid., pp. 225- 2 U8 . Of. "Festivals, Pisistratus, and Writing", Wliitman, Homer and the Heroic Tradition, pp. 65-86.

1 6 . The earlier attempt is associated with Pisistratus and the later with the Alexandrians. Kirk, The Songs of Homer, p. 301. y d v o u Tûiv aAXuv itounTÛv paijitpôEÛa^au Ta enn, èuuôeuÇtv uobouyevou n p b s t o î )s “EAXnvas dxb Tot xdXXuaTa t û v Epywv npoi;ipo0vTO

This ordinance, presumably promulgated by Pisistratus, indicates that an accepted text then existed which was to be faithfully followed by all reciters.^® This Pisistratean text of Homer was probably just as authoritative as the official Athenian text of the dramatists of which we hear from Plutarch.

EÙonvEYXE 6è Mat voyous, t 6v ytv itEpt T&v Mwyqjôüv . . . TÔV 6ê ms xaXnâç ELxdvas àvaÔEtvau t û v nouriTmu AÙaxûAou, Z o (p o m A e'o u s , EÙpuuûôou, Mat xhs Tpaytpôuas a ù x m v Êv MOLvÿ YPcnI'Otydvous cpuXdxxEuvMat xbv x n s

17. Lycurgus, in Leocr. 102. Cf. Allen, Hone'-: The Origins and the Transmission, p. 226.

18 . "... the creation of the rule implies the existence of an official text to which both judges and competitors could refer. It also seems necessary to suppose that this text was so authori­ tative that the competitors, even in the sixth century when the Panathenaea was a festival of very little importance, were willing to submit to the rule in order to compete." Davison, "The Trans­ mission of the Text", p. 219. Or as Pfeiffer writes: "In the sixth century, therefore, a traditional text must have been avail­ able to which rhapsodes were compelled to keep; they now became professional reciters of established literary works ascribed to 'Homer'." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 8. ïïoA eüis YPaiiyoïTea n a p a v a y L v w o x c L V t o u s unoHpuvoiJEVousj oÙm èÇeCvat y“P ^ap' aUTcts ùnoxpu- veoôau.19

Undoubtedly in the "editing" of the Pisistratean text numerous

decisions had to be made on correct wording. Because a high per­

centage of the Homeric hapax legomena are troublesome words, the

early editors, in all probability, were cognizant of and made

critical judgments upon them.

The rhapsodists then were reciters, interpreters, and verbal

critics of the Homeric poems. Although there is the possibility

that they took (or were even allowed) a great deal of license in

their presentation of the epics, the establishment of an official text for the festivals at which they competed argues for the con­

trary.^® Furthermore, as the philological writings of Theagenes

show, the earliest of lexical tools were already being established for the interpretation of Homeric vocabulary. Hence Pfeiffer writes

1 9 . Plutarch, vit. X Or. (Lycurgus) 8^1 F. Cf. Allen, Homer : The Origins and the Transmission, p. 291. Allen also points out, citing Aeschines In Timarch.14%," that the court probably used this official text whenever Homer was to be quoted for documentary evi­ dence. Ibid. An anecdote found in Diogenes Laertius (9.13) affirms that this old text (or another of contemporary age) was authorita­ tive even in Hellenistic times. Timon, the teacher of Aratus, told his student to use the old Homeric text (xa àpxaCa àvxuypa(pa) and not the new editions of the present (n6n ôuwptwpsva). Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 9 8 .

20. It is often stated that the ancient quotations of Homer reveal a text varying widely from that of today. Ludwich, however, collected all the known Homeric quotations (U80 verses) of the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. and concluded that the text of this period differed only very slightly from that of the MSS. See the analysis of these quotations by Monro: Monro, Homer's Odyssey, pp. i|26-)430, and l+itT. of the rhapsodists* early concern with the difficult word so common in Homer:

, . . they [the rhapsodists of the sixth cen­ tury] may have used written collections of rare and obsolete epic words, yAwaoau as they were called from the fifth century onwards; .... One is tempted to assume that the explanation of Homeric proper names and ob­ scure words by 'etymology' were further deve­ loped, collected, and transmitted by rhapso­ dists, perhaps together with the glosses.

We know that in the fifth century, with the supreme importance of Homer in formal education (see the second section of this chap­ ter), scholars and pedagogues were producing numerous Homeric glossariesThe vocabulary of Homer, with its abundance of ar­ chaic words and forms, now proved to be quite troublesome to Hom­ eric students, young and old alikeMany of the oldest Homeric words had long since passed out of general use and therefore were often unintelligible. Thus an uncertainty of meaning and inter­ pretation regarding them existed which necessitated glossographical

21. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 12.

22. "Die meisten dieser Homerdeuter des fuenften und vierten Jahrhunderts bleiben fuer uns Namen, . . . ." Latte, "Glosso­ graphika", p. ll*8.

23. "Dies muss um so wunderbarer erscheinen, als dieses Volks- und Schulbuch von Jahrhundert zu Jahrhundert dem Verstaendnis immer groessere Schwierigkeiten in den Weg stellte, so dass selbst 'die Gelehrten' nur zu haeufig rath- und hilflos waren um wieviel mehr die armen Schulbuben die wahrlich ihre liebe Noth batten mit den 'OpnpELOu yAwTTOtu." Ludwich, Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik, Vol. 2, p. 1 1 8 . explanation.

The gloss iyXmaa) has been defined as follows: "By the earliest Greek commentators and editors of texts, -yXmooa denoted any word in an author that required definition or explanation.

Such were (a) archaisms; (b) auaÇ Xeyovieva and newly-coined words;

(c) provincialisms; (d) barbarisms; and (e) technical terms . .

. Usually the early glossographers explained the difficult word by giving it a synonymous word (ovopa xupuov), familiar to the general public.That the interpretations of these fifth century glossographers were authoritative for centuries is attested by the fact that Aristarchus actually commented upon (usually in

2h. Harry Thurston Peck (ed.), Harper's Dictionary of Clas­ sical Literature and Antiquities, new ed. (New York: Cooper Square, 1 9 6 5 ), p. 7 3 7 .

2 5 . Marrou cites an excerpt of a Homeric glossary, or as he calls it a ovopotoTuxov 'Opnpou, of Hellenistic date, as follows: A 1 HnXnuâôsm Tiaoôl tou HriXeajs ’AxoArjos to D ' AxuAAemg 2 ouAopEvriv oAeôpcav

yupua TtoAAc! ’AxauoCs ToCç "EAAnou aAyEct xaxoi É0PXGV èitoonoev POslo, 12; Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, trans. from 3rd ed. George Lamb (New York: Sheed and Ward, 195(5) , p. l6j . The words included in this glossary reveal that it is very difficult for us, possessing a knowledge of literary Greek only, to detect words which were considered glosses in antiquity. Although many of the aforementioned words (e.g. yupua, cOpxsv) seem to be quite common in both classical and post-classical prose and poetry (cf. L.G.J.), they were not, apparently, a part of the vulgar Greek of the Hellen­ istic period. (One must take into consideration, however, that this is a school glossary.) from the studies of the Alexandrians, in which one can only sur­ mise an earlier glossographical influence, our knowledge of their methods comes primarily from the D Scholia and from the later

fragments of Homeric glossaries found in the papyri.

The D Scholia, although often neglected by modern scholars

(one must still work with the first edition done by Lascaris in 1517), seem to give us some of the earliest examples of Homeric criticism.

Erbse describes these scholia as follows:

2 6 . Lehrs lists all the scholia in which the oi yXmaoypdffOL are mentioned by Aristarchus. Lehrs, De Aristarchi Studiis Homer- icis) pp. 37-38. He also points out that this terra does not refer to the famous glossographers of later centuries (i.e. Philetas, Zeno- dotus, etc.) since "... illustres grammatici suo puisque nomine refutandi erant, . . . ." Ibid., p. 37. For a view which differs from that of Lehrs, see Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 7 9 .

2 7 . Pack numbers twenty-six fragments which include sections of Homeric glossaries (3rd cent. B.C.-7th cent. A.D.). Some are wordlists for given sections of Homer while others (e.g. #1219) are glossaries arranged in alphabetical order. Roger A. Pack (ed.). The Greek and the Latin Literary Texts from Greco-Roman Egypt, 2nd ed., rev. and enl. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1 9 6 5 ), pp. 69 -7 1 » See note 25 of this chapter for an example of such glossaries.

2 8 . "... Scholia minora vel Scholia Didymi (d) vocatur (quam- quam haec ab illo grammatico neque collecta neque conscripta sunt); . . . ." Erbse, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. xi. "Prominent Homeric scholars think that large portions of D (especial­ ly the part which concerns the interpretations of words) belong to the oldest Homeric material we have at our disposal." Van der Valk, Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad, Vol. 1, p. 202. This new appraisal of the D Scholia contrasts sharply with Jebb's view that they were "almost worthless". Jebb, Homer: An Introduc­ tion to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 101, n. 1. Scholia D praeter interpolationes leviores e narrationibus (uatoptaus) constant et ver- borum singulorum explicationibus. Haec illis vetustiores sunt; nam reliquias eorum inter­ pret amentoruin continent quae pueri Athenienses Homeri intelligendi causa inde a quinto a Chr. n. saeculo in scholia discebant. Hoc e ratione concludemus, qua poetae Attici et Alexandrini verba rarirora Homeri interpre- tabantur•29

The scholia thus contain the early attempts of schoolmasters and

Homeric critics to render meanings to Homeric words, incomprehen­

sible to Athenian schoolboys; suffice it to say, the glossary- writing pedagogues and their young students were certainly con­

fronted with countless hapax legomena (cf. p. 9 1 ).

It is with the sophistic movement that Homeric philology

takes on a scientific character. Even though the sophists main­ tained a wide variety of interests, the analysis of language was paramount. 30 "One subject at least they all practised and taught in common: rhetoric or the art of the logos.This artful (or

2 9 . Erbse, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. xi. For the interlinear scholia of TiS. A, see Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 2, pp. 297-3^.

3 0 . "The Sophists can be regarded, in a sense, as the heirs of the rhapsodes. . . . The Sophists explained epic and archaic poet­ ry, combining their interpretations with linguistic observations, definitions, and classifications on the lines laid down by previous philosophers; . . . ." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarsliip, p. 1 6 . Plato devotes most of the Cratylus to an examination of the correctness of diction and the origin of language. For specific references to Homer's vocabulary, see 391d-393b; l

3 1 . W.K.C. Guthrie, The Sophists (Cambridge: Cambridge Uni­ versity Press, 19 7 1 ), p. 55

as they termed it, "correct") use of language vas their most valu­

able commodity; therefore they advocated the pedagogic doctrine,

"’the investigation of vords is the beginning of education', àpxn

TiauôevJoEüJS n TÔ)V ôvoydxmv ÈRUoxE(j,usArguments for and against different usages of language were contained in their handbooks

(xExvau); works in which, as our evidence suggests, the study of

Homeric language was dominant.

The term opOoEHEua or "correctness of diction" became a common expression in the writings of the sophists. Protagoras, a true sophistic iconoclast, attacked the opOoEXEua of Homer, always before considered as hallowed. Aristotle relates that Protagoras disapproved of Homer's use of the imperative cielôe in the first line of the Iliad on the grounds that a wish was more appropriate in an invocation.A detailed examination of the Homeric vocab­ ulary was carried out by him to the extent that numerous "mistakes" in gender were discovered in the poems. Protagoras concluded that such nouns as pn'vus and TipAnÇ should have been masculine and not feminine, as used by Homer.The educated man, according to

32. Art. script. B XIX 6 . Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 37.

33. "... but their interest in Homeric or lyric poetry as well as in language always had a practical purpose, 'to educate men', . . . ." Ibid., p. l6 .

3^. Aristotle, Poetics lli56b l6-20.

35. Aristotle, Sophistici Elenchi 173b 18-25. For a discussion of and bibliography upon Protagoras' criticism of Homeric gender, see Oithrie, The Sophists, pp. 221-222, n. 2. Protagoras, ought to be able to detect readily these fine points in the Homeric epics.This scrutiny of the Iliad and the Odyssey for Homeric opQoenecot, or lack of it, without doubt, brought Pro­ tagoras into contact with many hapax legomena.

In addition to Protagoras, many other sophists (fifth cen­ tury through the third century) are known to have studied and to have written upon problems (often quite minute) of the Homeric language. The work of Democritus of Abdera, the famous Ionic philosopher, serves as another example of the keen analysis of

Homeric diction which was practised in the fifth century. One of his numerous publications was îtepù 'Opnpou n ’Op^oenEuns xau yAwo- oe'ojv.^® Although we know very little about this work, the title suggests that he was following in the analytic direction, set by his fellow countryman Protagoras, of examining the problems of correct usage in Homer, giving special attention to the many rare and difficult words in the poems. That he was interested in the

3 6 . "... Fehling has drawn attention to the significance of Prat. 338 eff., where Protagoras claims that an educated man ought to be skilled in this subject (epos) so as to understand when a poet is composing correctly and when not . . . ." Ibid., p. 205.

37. Metrodorus of Lampsacus is known to have written on the problems of Homeric language; Antisthenes analysed Homeric epithets; Antidorus of Cyme wrote On Homer and Hesiod and is also known to have compiled a Lexis ; etc. Cf. Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorso­ kratiker, Vol. 2, 61a 5; Diogenes Laertius 6, 17.18; Schol. Diony- sius Thrax (see Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 157).

3 8 . DIOG. IX, Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorsokratiker, Vol. 2, p. 9 1 . 57

hapax legomena can be inferred from one of his few extant examples

of Homeric criticism. ’AAXo(ppoveo) is an infrequent word in Homer

occurring only once in each epic (^. 2 3 .6 9 8 ; Od. 10.37^). Appar­

ently the word had come under attack by critics as an instance of

incorrect usage; Democritus, however, defended it as the correct

term for mental derangement.^^ Even though the word is a ôus

Aeyoneva in Homer, rather than a anaÇ Aeyonevov, we can see that

Democritus gave rarities of vocabulary close analytical attention.

The sophists also had a propensity for the compilation of

various sorts of catalogues or indices (ntvaneg) Hinpias of I Elis, who is attested to have had a definite interest in antiqui­

ties,^^ was the first to draw up a list of Olympic victors (’OAup-

ïïLovoMüjv àvaypaqjp). Other registers assigned to him are the Nomen­

clature of Tribes ('EQvwv ovopaquau) and the Collection (Euva-

ywyn)Very probably he compiled other catalogues of which we

have no notice. Plato reveals that he was a proficient Homeric

39- Guthrie, The Sophists, p. 206, n. 1.

I4O. "Instead, the proper form of all the antiauarian writings of Hippias and his contemporaries seems to have been the catalogue, the list, the TtuvaÇ. The Sophist was in need of this knowledge as orator and teacher ; . . . ." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 52.

4l. (ouAAiiBônv ndons tps àpxctuoAoyûns), Plato, Hinpias Mai or 285 d.

1»2. PLUT. Num. 1; SCHOL. APOLL. 3.1179; ATHEN. 13.608 P., Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorsokratiker, Vol. 2, frags. 3, 2, and k,pp. 330-331. scholar and we know that in one of his works he collected

parallel passages from the venerable poets Orpheus, Musaeus,

Homer, and Hesiod.It is not unthinkable, then, considering

the love of the Sophists for catalogues, their interests in

antiquities, and their concern about Homeric opOosKsua and

glosses, that one of them (perhaps even Hippias himself) com­

piled an index of the Homeric hapax legomena.

During the fifth century one also hears of various attempts

at new editions of the Homeric poems.Plutarch relates that

some of the schoolmasters of this period, who apparently had particular interests in Homer, were actually doing editions of the text.^^ Perhaps these editors were simply trying to remove difficulties of language from the poems (a critical objective of some later editors, e.g. Zenodotus, cf. p.6 6 ), Euripides the younger, the nephew of the famous dramatist, likewise is

43. Plato, Hippias Minor.

kk. CLEM. Strom. 6.15., Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorsokra­ tiker, Vol. 2, frag. 6, p. 331.

4 5 . For the view that the terms EMôoaus and 6i,dp8mous are not synonymous, see Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 9 4 . Monro, however, thinks that no difference existed between these terms and that they were used interchangeably, with the full expression for a revised text being é' kôools ths ôtopOmaems. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 431. For another analysis of these two words, see Allen, Homer: The Origins and the Transmission, pp. 307-309.

46. Plutarch tells of a schoolmaster with a text of Homer edited by himself (ù(p' aûtoD ôumpQwpévov). Plutarch, Alcibiades 7. attested to have produced an edition of Homer. Furthermore,

the earliest of the editions m ut ’ avôpa, used by the Alexandrians

author of an epic poem entitled the Thebaid and a collection of

elegies entitled the Lyde, edited a text of Homer, the readings

of which were often quoted by the scholiasts. That he dealt

with Homeric glosses and in particular hapax legomena is con­

firmed by his variant readings; out of a total of thirteen, five

concern hapax legomena.In a few instances Antimachus removed

hapax legomena from the text by replacing them with common Homeric

words. Hence we find him substituting at Iliad 22.336 the familiar

Homeric adverb xaxws for the hapax legomenon auxmg. Likewise, at

Iliad 23.6o4 he supplanted the hapax legomenon vcoun with the

common Homeric word vdnpa. Conversely, he at times changed a

regular Homeric vocable for a hapax legomenon. This is the case

hj. One finds in Suidas that Euripides the younger, besides being a tragic poet, also edited Homer. EùpuuLôns, Tpayoxds, toO npoxepou àôeAtptôoOs,ms Auovuauog êv tous XPo^t^^oCs eypailie ôè 'Opnp- uxnv è'xôoauv, .... Ada Adler (ed.), Suidae Lexicon, Vol. 2 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1931), s.v. Eùpunuôns. Hereafter this lexicon is simply referred to as Suidae.

1+8. "Aristarchus had at least six such editions, ranging from the end of the 5th to the beginning of the 2nd cent. B.C., . . . ." Jebb, Homer: An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 9 1 , n. 2 .

1+9. Allen has collected the readings of Antimachus found in the scholia. Allen, Homer: The Origins and the Transmission, pp. 297 -2 9 9 . Cf. Bernhardus Wyss (ed.), Antimachi Colophonii Reliquiae (Berlin: Weidmann, 1936), pp. xxix-xxxi, and frags. 129-11+2, pp. 61-6 5 . for his introduction of the hapax legomenon 'nyuAunv at Odyssey

1 .8 5 in place of ’fiyuYi^av, a frequent Homeric word. Some of

his analytic judgments on correct wording found him merely ex­

changing one hapax legomenon for another. Thus he replaced at

Iliad 2 1 .3 9 7 the hapax legomenon itavd(l)Lov of the vulgate text with a new hapax legomenon ûnovôacpLov. In addition, at Iliad

2 4 .7 5 3 he substituted the hapax legomenon yuxOaXo'eooav for à|jux- daXdeooav, the hapax legomenon of the textus receptus. One can easily imagine that, similar to Antimachus, most of the early

Homeric editors confronted and made critical decisions concerning the hapax legomena.

The analytic endeavors of Aristotle and the Peripatetic school embraced multitudinous spheres of learning. Naturally one of these areas was Homeric scholarship.^^ The high regard in which Aristotle holds the Iliad and the Odyssey can easily be detected throughout the Poetics. Unfortunately very little of

Aristotle's direct work on the Homeric language remains ; however, our knowledge of his six books ’AnopnMaxa (or çnxnMaTa, or npog-

Anpaxa) 'Opnpuxd reveals that he was concerned with the old problem

5 0 . "Dio Chrysostom says in his speech on Homer (llept 'Opn- pou or. 3 6 .1 , . . .): ’ApooTOTeAns à

as follows:

Probably over a long period of time Aristotle had drawn up for his lectures a list of 'dif­ ficulties' of interpretation in Homer with their respective 'solutions'; .... Aris­ totle's collection was afterwards published, as it seems, in six books, ’AnopniJaTa 'Opn- PUMCX . . . .52

His statement in the Poetics that glosses (of which a high percen­

tage are hapax legomena) are appropriate in heroic poetry indicates

that Aristotle was familiar with these problematic words in Homer.

Thus, unquestionably, the 'AnoptipaTa 'Opnpuxd included critical

examinations of many of the hapax legomena.In addition, it is

possible, given our scanty information on the overall content of

this treatise, that he even incorporated in one of its six books

5 1 . See Valentinus Rose (ed.), Aristotelis Fragmenta (Leip­ zig: Teubner, I8 8 6 ), frags. 1^+2-179, pp. 120-137-

5 2 . Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 6 9 .

5 3 . Aristotle, Poetics lk39a. 12-l4.

5^. For fragments which deal with Homeric hapax legomena or lines in which they occur, see Rose, Aristotelis Fragmenta, frags. 146, 1 5 4 , 1 6 0 , and 1 7 1 , pp. 1 2 3 , 1 2 6 , 128, and 133. 62

a separate "list" of the hapax legomena.

As indicated in Chapter One, Aristarchus and his successors

did much work on the Homeric hapax legomena. However, Aristarchus

was not the first of the Alexandrians to concentrate upon this

area of Homeric scholarship, having numerous precursors in Phi­

letas, Simmias, Zenodotus and Aristophanes of Byzantium, to name

but a few.It is a matter for regret that our information

concerning these Homeric critics is even more remote and more

fragmentary than that of Aristarchus himself; much of our knowledge

concerning their work comes from the extracts of Aristarchus'

commentaries.

Philetas of Cos, whose life spans the end of the fourth and

55. Following the direction set by the sophists, Aristotle compiled TtuvaxES on various topics. Complimenting Hippias' list of Olympic victors Aristotle catalogued the Pythian winners; his ALôaoKxAuau was a collection of dates and details on the dramatic contests of Athens ; his HoXuTeCa was a collection of information on the constitutions of 158 cities; his Mdytya gapgapuxd was a col­ lection of non-Greek customs. His pupils continued his work of collecting various sorts of information in register form. Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, pp. jg-Bh.

5 6 . Numerous other Alexandrian critics did much work in the area of Homeric language. Callimachus probably included a list of glosses in his Pinakes and his Qnomasticon certainly included many Homeric names. Ibid., p. 132 and 135- Of Apollonius Rhodius we shall hear in Chapter Three. Editorial work on the texts is also thought to have been done by Rhianus, Philemon, Sosigenes, and Aratus. There are about 100 references in the scholia (including those of Antimachus) to pre-Zenodotean editions of the Iliad and the Odyssey. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. i*31.

5 7 . We have seen in Chapter One that many intermediary steps stand between us and Aristarchus' original words. 63

the beginning of the third centuries, was described by Strabo as

itouriTfis aya Hat xpuTuxds.^^ Although he certainly was not the

first to be both a poet and critic (e.g. Xenophanes) or even the

first to place erudite commentary within his poetry (see Cnapter

Three), the reservation of this expression for him indicates that

now an extremely pronounced importance was being given to the

fusion of poetical creation and critical analysis, a combination

which became a salient feature of much of Hellenistic literature.

To be sure, he was a polished poet whom Callimachus and Theocritus, poets of the next generation, not only imitated but also directly

praised.For the present purpose, however, it is his glossary

(rXwooao) which is pertinent to an analysis of Homeric vocabulary

The work was not limited to Homeric glosses but also included a variety of old rare words.Athenaeus, in a mock description of

Philetas, gives us a picture of his ceaseless efforts at inter­ preting these difficult words.

5 8 . Strabo iH, c 657-

5 9 . Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 8 9 . For a listing of his writings, both poetic and prosaic, see Guilelmus Kuchenmueller, Philetae Coi Reliquiae, Dissertatio Inauguralis (Berlin: Bornen, 1928).

6 0 . Ibid., frags. 29-59, pp. 91-110. That this glossary was considered a scholarly and authoritative work is attested by Aristarchus' criticism of Philetas' interpretations. See Schol. A at I.52I4 and 2.111. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, pp. 6l and 8 I.

6 1 . See, for example, Athenaeus 7, 327 c; 11, 783 d; 15, 678 a; etc. «Lvôuveûeus oSv ïïote 6toi xauxas Tois (ppovxtôas üjoKep b )((jjos ‘J’lA J to s ÇnTÜv xôv xaAoupevov 4<0u6oAdYov xwv X â y u i V ôpouwg ÈHeuvip. ct^auavOnvau . ùaxvos y o L p nctvu xb aCjpa 6 u b xàg ÇnTnaetç yevopevos àuE'SavEV, ü)s xb itpb xoD pvnuetovj aùxoü ÈTtuYpapya ônXoû. ÇeLVE, <î>uAuxaS EÙpU . AoYWV 6 (l^EUÔdjJEVOÇ PE (IjAeoe MaÉvuMxüv (ppovxuÔES ÉanE'puoE.°2

From the few remaining fragments of the glossary one can easily see that Philetas gave special attention to many of the Homeric hapax legomena: È'aQpuov (Od. I8 .3OO), ncAAa (^. 16,6^2), and itpdÇ (Od. 1 7 .2 9 5 ) are Homeric hapax legomena which Philetas in­ cluded in the fAmaaau.^^

From Athenaeus we likewise learn that the poet Simmias of

Rhodes, a contemporary of Philetas, was a glossographer who dealt with the same type of words which concerned Philetas.Very little is known about his efforts in this field; one can note, however, that of the four surviving words, upon which we know that he gave critical comment, two are Homeric and one is even a Hom­ eric hapax legomenon.’'lodptov (Od. I8 .3OO), the same hapax legomenon which provoked analysis by Philetas (supra), was inter-

62. Athenaeus 9, 1*01 e.

6 3 . Athenaeus 15, 677 c; 11, 1*95 e; and Schol. Ap. Rhod. 2. 2 7 9 . For a full commentary upon these words, as interpreted by Philetas in his glossary, see Kuchenmueller, Philetae Coi Relicmia frags. 1*1, 33, and 1*8, pp. 100-1 0 1 ; 9^-95', and 105-1 0 6 .

61*. Athenaeus (infra) ; cf. Suidae, s.v. Euypuas

6 5 . The two non-Homeric words are xâôoç (Athen. 11, 1*72 e) and tpcxYPos (Athen. 7, 327 3); the one Homeric word, not a hapax legomenon, is xoxuAn (Athen. 1 1 , 1*79 c). preted by Simmias as a synonym for OTetpavov.^^

Zenodotus, a pupil of Philetas, was the first of the famous

Homeric critics at Alexandria (Zenodotus, Aristophanes of Byzan­

tium, and Aristarchus). Although he was a scholar with wide

literary interests (he did critical editions of Hesiod and the

Lyric poets), he is primarily known as a Homeric glossographer

( 'Opnpuxaù Y'^'^ooau)^'^ and Homeric editor. Suidas referred to him

as Ô TipwTos Tü)V 'Opnpou fiuopQmrns; from our survey so far, we must conclude that either this statement is erroneous or at the least a strong exaggeration. Monro explains this overstatement by arguing that ". . .in Roman and Byzantine times the name of

Zenodotus was associated with the very beginnings of criticism", with the accomplishments of many of his predecessors being over­ looked.^® Unfortunately, our scanty information upon his scholarly work comes mostly from Aristarchus who rarely mentions Zenodotus

66. Athenaeus 15, 6?7 c-d.

6 7 . Jebb, Homer: An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 9 2 . For a discussion of and bibliography upon Zenodotus' glos­ sary, see Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 115, n . 2. Athenaeus (ll, 1*78 e) reveals that Zenodotus also analysed the word «oxuAn (cf. p. 6h, n. 6 5 ) and understood it to be synonymous to xuAuJ;

68. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. k36.

6 9 . Ibid. "Radically opposed theories are held by modern schol­ ars concerning Zenodotus' Homeric criticism, because our so-called evidence, coming from the polemics of his adversaries has often been misunderstood." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. 105. employed one of his critical signs, the SuiiXn TtepueoTUYlJevn (^),

to designate Zenodotean readings with which he differed.In

regard to critical signs, however, it was Zenodotus who intro­

duced the first marginal notation of which we are aware. This

was the ogeXo's (-), the function of which was to mark lines that

Zenodotus felt were un-Homeric; to our dismay, he left no commen­

tary in which he explained his critical judgments.It appears,

nevertheless, that one of his critical aims was to render the language of the Homeric poems into the language of his o;/n day

(exactly the opposite from Aristarchus' critical aim— to remove modernisms of language from the poems). As Monro states: "He

shows an evident readiness to make Homer easier— to remove small difficulties by prosaic changes, and to replace archaic and poetical forms by words taken from the vocabulary of the timePerhaps in his text Zenodotus supplanted the actual Homeric gloss with the ovopa MupLov taken from his own 'Opnpuxa[ yXwooau. At least that appears to be the case for his variant reading at Iliad l8.3^K

Here, instead of ànapnoEUE, a hapax legoraenon which was later defended by Aristarchus, Zenodotus substituted ànoTpnÇeuE, a common

70. Leaf, The Iliad, Vol. 2, p. xvii. Cf. Dindorf, Ccholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 1, p. xliii.

71. Davison, "The Transmission of the Text", p. 222.

72. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. 439- fï

Homeric word."^^

Aristophanes of Byzantium was a pupil of Zenodotus and, like

his teacher, held the position of head librarian at Alexandria.

He continued and improved the lexicographical and editorial under­

takings of his mentor.As a lexicographer he compiled a general

dictionary (AeÇeus) which included, of course, the glosses found

in the poets of old (itaXauou); however, the work also contained

words of recent origin (xauvoTepai. Pfeiffer describes

the lexicon as follows: "... under the neutral title AeÇcus

every word which was peculiar in form or significance and there­

fore in need of explanation could be listed, whether it was out

of date or still in useQuoting from the AeÇeus Athenaeus pre­

sents numerous examples of Aristophanes' interpretation of words

That the Homeric hapax legomena were given analytic treatment is

witnessed by his judgment that axutpos (Od. 1 ^1.1 1 2 ) was a neuter

73. Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Odysseam, Vol. 2, p. 1^9. Cf. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. ^39. Jebb appraises Zeno­ dotus as follows: "In the dawn of the new scholarship, he appears as a gifted man with a critical aim, but without an adequate crit­ ical method." Jebb, Homer: An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 92.

7^. Preiffer dubs him "the perfect scholar". Pfeiffer, His­ tory of Classical Scholarship, p. 173.

75. Ibid., pp. 197-202. For a discussion of and bibliography upon the fragments of this lexicon, see ibid., p. 1 9 7 , n. 3 .

76. Ibid., p. 198.

77. Athenaeus 3, 85 f; 9, 38 ^ d; 9, itlO c; p, h83 d; etc. 68

Although Aristophanes did critical editions of Hesiod, the

Lyric poets, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, and Aristophanes,

the comic poet, his primary editorial interest seems to have been

Homer. He increased the number of critical signs employed by

textual critics of Homer with the addition of the ceraunion (t )

which marked sections of the text to be athetized; the antisigma

(o) which indicated tautology; and the asterisk (cSc.-) which denoted

unclear passages.As was the case with Zenodotus, our knowledge

of his critical work comes mostly from Aristarchus, who normally

quotes an Aristophanean reading only when he disagrees with it.

Since Aristarchus mentions him far less than Zenodotus, one can

conclude that Aristophanes and Aristarchus were often in accord on textual matters in Homer. Their agreement that Odyssey 23.296 was the nepas or teAos of the poem helps to confirm the view that their critical judgments were often in concert.Since modern scholars have analysed the possible lateness of the ending of the

Odyssey by examining very carefully many of the hapax legomena included therein (cf. Chapter One), it is not an unreasonable

T8. Ibid. 9, ^498 f. This word will be treated much more fully in Chapter Three.

7 9 . Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, Vol. 3, pp. 126-1 2 8 .

8 0 . Davison, ''The Transmission of the Text", p. 223.

8 1 . Schol. Od. 2 3 .2 9 6 , Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Odysseam, Vol. 2, p. 722. Aristophanes, Aristarchus (cf. Chapter One) cumulated the long tradition of philological work on the Homeric epics. That he borrowed much from earlier critics in his analysis of the Homeric hapax legomena seems, in light of the present review, undeniable.

This has been a very brief survey of the study of Homeric vocabulary with particular attention paid to rare and obsolete words from the sixth through the second centuries B.C. (pre-

Aristarchus). In conclusion, then, we have seen that the Homeridae

(Tth-6th cents.) may have observed and commented upon problematic words in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Moreover, documented evidence exists which shows that rhapsodists of the sixth century (e.g.

Theagenes) were actually writing formal works on Homeric grammar and were offering variant readings to the text. The accepted city editions of Homer attest that editorial work had been done on the poems as early as the sixth century (e.g. Pisistratean recension). That the Homeric hapax legomena were recognized very early seems probable if one considers the testimony of Aristotle.

He bears witness to the fact that these ancient Homeric critics

(apxaCoL 'OynptMoo) examined the poems so thoroughly that the

8 2 . We know that Aristarchus (who was perhaps following Aristophanes) used the term hapax legomenon in analysing late features in the ending of the Odyssey. See Schol. Od. 2U.1, ibid., p. 72U. TO most minute trivia were noticed.Schoolmasters of the fifth

century, the où YÀwaooYPcIçou, attempted to explain the difficult word in Homer by supplying each with a synonym taken from the

common speech of the day. The Homeric opQoeueua, or lack of it, occupied the critical endeavors of many sophists. Aristotle and his school studied the Homeric language with special emphasis placed upon the gloss. In Alexandria the pre-Aristarchean critics did much scholarly work ip both the textual and the lexical areas of Homeric criticism. Thus it can be seen that throughout the entire period the study of the Homeric language was of great im­ portance.®^ Because of the uniqueness of the hapax legomena in the Homeric vocabulary and because of the problems of interpre­ tation inherent in many of them, it is certainly no "leap of faith" to assume that a great number of these singularities were detected quite early and were given acute analysis by scholars in their critical treatises. These works whether in the form of Homeric

8 3 . "OyouoL 6fi Hat o S t o l t o C s àpxotuous "OpnPuxoCs où puxpàs èyouÔTriTas opmat psyciAas 6è uapopmaLV. Aristotle, Metaphysics 1093 a 33-3 5 .

8 )4. We also find that Roman philologists were interested in the strange old words of their early poets. L. Aetus Stilo, Varro, Quintilian, etc. all gave analytic attention to the rare and ob­ solete words of the past. Marcus Verrius Flaccus (Augustine Age) compiled a lexicon of the Latin language, with particular analytic emphasis being placed upon old and unusual words. The second half of this work exists in an abridgement done by Festus. J. Wight Duff, A Literary History of Rome from the Origins to the Close of the Golden Age, ed. A.M. Duff, 3rd ed. (London : Benn, 1953), pp. 4$8-(]0. glossaries (Y^Sioaao), sophistic handbooks (xExvat), or critical commentaries (ùnopvnpaTa) vould certainly make their users, be they students, scholars, or poets, extremely cognizant of the

Homeric hapax legomena. Homer and Greek Education

A thorough knowledge of Homeric epic served as the basis for

a fomal education in antiquity, Greek and Roman alike.Perhaps

no literary work, the Judeo-Christian Scriptures included, has

ever been so thoroughly known, not only by professional scholars

and men of letters but also by a majority of people, as were the

Iliad and the Odyssey. In Greece the Homeric poems were studied

and learned by all, not so much for their artistic qualities,®*^

but rather for their educational merits. As Jaeger writes in the

Paideia: "The Greeks always felt that a poet was in the broadest

and deepest sense the educator of his people. Homer was only the noblest example, as it were, the classic instance of that general

conception.To be sure, there were many poets who were held in high regard or even revered by the Greeks, but the title ô twv

8 5 . This section of the thesis is included in order to sub­ stantiate my hypothesis that the Greek audience was astute enough in Homeric matters to discern an author's use of the Homeric hapax legomena.

8 6 . In the Poetics (e.g. 1I46O a 5 ff.) one sees that Aris­ totle unquestionably appreciated the literary qualities of the poems. Basset has pointed out that Homeric structure was studied and imitated by Aeschylus to the extent that in proportioning the number of lines of dialogue to the number of lines of choral lyric in the Suppliants, he employed the same ratio (3/5) as that of speeches to narrative in Homer. Samuel E. Bassett, The Poetry of Homer (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1938), p. 6 0 .

8 7 . Werner Jaeger, Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture, Vol. 1, trans. Gilbert Highet, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 19 )46), p. 35. 73

KOLnTÛv gotoüAEÛs vas reserved for Homer alone.He vas the

authoritative source for information upon Greek religion, ethics,

history, military matters, etc.; thus the poems were mandatory

study for young and old alike.

As religious documentsthe Homeric epics were thought to contain the orthodox conception of the Greek gods. Herodotus

(2, 53) pointed out that Homer and Hesiod had created the Greek theogony and had delineated the divinities by supplying epithets, descriptions, and occupations for each one. Although the Homeric gods were usually accepted without question by most Greeks, period­ ically a few sceptics arose to find fault with them. We have al­ ready seen that Xenophanes (cf. p. k6) denounced the immorality of Homer's gods. His contemporary, the philosopher Heraclitus, probably concurred with this reproof; he thought Homer unacceptable for recitation at public festivals.Plato, however, became the most famous of Homer's disparagers by maintaining that Homer cer­ tainly had to be censored if used as literature in schools. For, in the unpurged epics, Homer (and other poets) present the gods as doing that which is unquestionably morally wrong.

88. Athenaeus 2, 1+0 a 4. Homer was also called "the poet". Strabo 1, c 21.

8 9 . It has become one of the commonplaces of modern criticism to call the Homeric epics the "Bible of the Greeks". See, for example, Myres, Homer and His Critics, p. 20.

9 0 . DIOG. 9 .I) Diels, Die Fragmente Per Vorsokratiker, Vol. 1, frag. 1+2, p. 1 6 0 . oüs 'Hatoôos t e , e ï n o v , moÙ "Opripos nwCv ÉAeyeTriv xaù où aAAou KouriTau, o5xou yâp' TIOU pÛÔOUS TOUS CtVÔpCJÏÏOUS (^EUÔeCs aU V T U dèV T E S é'Ae y o v t e xaL AE'youaE.^l

Nevertheless, these critics were infrequent and often times not

tolerated by the people.The sophist Protagoras had written a

treatise nspt 9eô3v^^ expressing an agnostic approach towards be­

lief in any supreme being. Accordingly, he was charged by Pytho-

dorus with impiety and had to flee for his life. His books were

publically burnt in the agora.Moreover, Homer always had count­

less defenders who were forced very often to employ rationalization

to eliminate moralistic problems.Theagenes (cf. p. ^6) utilized

91. Plato, Republic 377 d U6; cf. all of 377 d-380 d. Per­ haps Homer's most bitter critic was Zoilus of Amphipolir. who found fault with almost everything in Homer and hence earned the nick­ name 'OpppopdoTLg. His works xaxot xps 'Opppou and (Jidyos 'Opnpou were answered by Aristotle in his ’Auopppotxa 'Opnptxd (cf. p. 6 o ) . 0.C.D., s.v. Zoilus.

92. Stesichorus' "Palinode" (frag. 192), written to placate Helen for the poet's slanderous treatment of her, reveals that in the 6th century even Homeric heroes were not to be vilified.

93. This work contained his famous statement: ïïepl. pèv 0Ewv oùx é'xü) EÛÔEvau oüO’ wg Euatv ou9' mg oùx EÉaùv ou9’ ônoüou tuves LÔE'av ïïoAAà yàp td xmAdovta EÙôèvau n T' àônAoTns xat gpaxùg iiv 6 Rlos xoü àvôpmnou. DIOG. 9.51.» Diels, Die Fragmente Per Vorso­ kratiker, Vol. 2, frag. l, p. 265.

9k. DIOG. 9 .51-5 2 ., ibid., p. 253. The charges of impiety levelled against Socrates by Meletos, Anytos, and Lyeon serve as a prime example of the power of a conservative approach towards the Homeric gods.

9 5 . ". . . - and as it [the Homeric text] could not be decently taught as meaning what it said, it must be supposed to mean some­ thing else." Myres, Homer and His Critics, pp. 33-3^. 75

allegory to counteract the ethical faults which Xenophanes and

Heraclitus had found in the poems. Centuries later Isocrates joined the ranks of Homeric champions. To the charge that a true god should never have to lower himself to such a human action as actual deliberation (like Homer's gods often do), he answered that Homer merely feigned these situations. His real purpose, asserted Isocrates, was to teach men that if the gods cannot fore­ see the future and therefore have to deliberate upon courses of action, men must certainly expect to do likewise.^”

Besides furnishing a canonical picture of the gods, Homer offered paradigms of exemplary behavior which the Greeks hoped their youth would attempt to emulate. Likewise, they hoped that the Homeric student would avoid certain examples of improper behavior which the poems also present.The use of heroic stories from the past to teach morality already existed in Homer himself.

The story of Meleager, told by Phoenix (^. 9.522-605), was designed to point out to Achilles the destructiveness of unbridled

9 6 . Isocrates, Against the Sophists 2. Cf. Jebb, Homer : An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 83.

9 7 . Of. "Art and Morality", chapter five of G.H. Butcher (ed.), Aristotle's Theory of Poetry and Fine Art, With a Critical Text and Translation of the Poetics, If ed. (New York: Dover, 1951), pp. 215-2 3 9 . Aeschylus and Euripides both agree in Aristophanes' The Frogs (1 0 0 9 ) that the poet's duty is to teach virtue. 76

wrath.Following this method of education parents and teachers

wanted their children, through the study of Homer, to try to rival

the heroic qualities of Achilles, the wisdom of Nestor, the intel­

ligence of Odysseus, the hospitality of the Phaeacians and Eumaeus,

the friendship of Patroclus, the filial devotion of Telemachus,

and the faithfulness and domesticity of Penelope. Protagoras

emphasized the importance of imitation as an educational goal in

the study of Homer as follows;

. . . è v o £ s TtoXAau vièv u o u ô eT n a eu s Ë uEunu, ïïoAAau ôê ôteÇoôou xaù eitauvou xat eyxwijua naAauüiv àvôpw v àyaQ wu, uua 6 xaC s ÇnAwv yuynxat xat ôpeynTau t o u o ü t o s yeveaQcxu

Of course a student was also supposed to see that it was best to

refrain from the ill-advised behavior of Agamemnon and Achilles,

Paris' breach of friendship, Helen's infidelity, the ruinous be­ havior of the suitors, etc., most of whom Homer presents as being

9 8 . Two other notable examples of the utilization of stories of past heroes to serve as action patterns for Homeric characters are the following: Athene's mention to Telemachus of Orestes' deed (Od. 1.290-299) and Achilles' citation to Priam of Niobe's acceptance of food (^. 2 U.60I-6 0 3 ).

9 9 . Plato, Protagoras 326 a. The imitation of paradigms of exemplary behavior was still a very real educational goal of the Middle Ages as is witnessed by Thomas A. Kempis' Imitation of Christ.

100. For a discussion of the terms aùôms and veyeaus in regard to Homeric characters, see Gilbert Murray, The Rise of the Greek Epic, itth ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 193^), pp. 02-90. 77

could garner numerous paradigms of proper action and speech^*^^

upon which to pattern his life.

In addition to these standards of moral behavior, Homer was

thought to be of great value for the practical knowledge which he

could impart. Xenophon relates the belief that Homer could teach

one many profitable things, as, for example, how to rule one's

house, how to be a good orator, how to be a competent general,

etcIt was this last area of expertise, i.e. how to be a good

general or merely how to be a good soldier, for which Homer was

chiefly known. Aristophanes in the Frogs confirms this point as

he has Aeschylus categorize the old poets in regard to the useful knowledge which they impart. Orpheus taught information on mystic rites; Musaeus taught one about the oracles; Hesiod taught farming; but Homer taught men how to fight (rd^euas, àperds, ÔïïAlogls

àvôpûiv).^^^ In the Ion, Ion is forced by Socrates to acknowledge that an actual expert in a particular field (e.g. chariot-driving, fishing, etc.) could perhaps offer better advice in his specific area of specialization than Homer could. However, in regard to generalship. Ion holds firmly to the belief that Homer is the best

101. To be a "good speaker and doer of deeds" (pu9to\) tc ppTnp’ É'pevau Ttpn«Tfipct TE Epywv) was also the prime object which educators in the Homeric poems themselves hoped to inculcate to their stu­ dents. See .

102. Xenophon, Symposium H.6.

103. Aristophanes, Frogs 1030-1036. 78

which depended upon a citizen army, whatever practical military

knowledge Homer contained was deemed of great educational signi­

ficance.

The Greeks always considered Homer their earliest histor-

historical documents which, if need arise, could be safely con­

sulted for precedents. Thus, in the Athenian-Megarian dispute

over Salamis, Athens cited Iliad 2.558 as historical evidence

that the island had Homeric approval for Athenian control.

Moreover, as Herodotus relates (5, 9^), Athens also justified her

possession of Sigeion, against the claims of Mytilene, on Homeric

grounds. Because of Athens' pai't in the Trojan War she felt she

had as much right to this Trojan territory as anyone else. Another

example of recourse to Homer as historical precedent appears in

Herodotus (7, 159-l&l) where the Athenians and Spartans, in anti-

lOU. Plato, Ion 5^1 a-b.

105• Xenophanes wrote that Homer had taught everyone from the beginning (èç àpxhs). HERODIAN., Diels, Die Fragmente Per Vorsokratiker, Vol. 1, frag. 10, p. 131.

106. According to some sources the Megarians charged that Pisistratus (or Solon or Hipparchus) had interpolated lines 557- 558 into the text. Allen analyses the sources and concludes that Megara had lost Salamis to Athens in the time of Pisistratus. Since Megara was powerless to regain the island, she had one alternative left— to do what she could through slander. Thus we have the charge of 2.5 57 -5 5 8 as an Athenian interpolation. Allen, Homer : The Origins and the Transmission, pp. 2^5-2^8. 79 cipation of Xerxes' imminent invasion, came to Syracuse to ask for Gelo's aid. However, upon hearing Gelo's condition that he he in charge of all forces, the Spartan envoy replied to the

Syracusan tyrant that Agamemnon would certainly groan aloud (cf.

II. 7 .1 2 5 ) if such a thing ever took place. In conjunction with the Spartan answer, the Athenians also rejected Syracusan aid.

To Gelo's mitigated demand that he only he granted the admiral- ship of the fleet, the Athenian envoy objected by quoting Iliad

2 .5 5 2 where Homer claimed that the Athenians had sent to Troy the man most able to marshal troops. Even the historian Thucydides treated the Homeric poems as historical documents.It was not until Hellenistic times that the truthfulness or validity of

Homer's historicity was seriously challenged. Eratosthenes claimed that the locations mentioned in Odysseus' wanderings were merely poetic creations and that the poems should be read for entertain­ ment and not for historical knowledgeThat this view did not prevail is attested by Strabo's defense of Homer against such attacksThere were, then, many reasons why Homer was deemed

1 0 7 . See Thucydides I, 3.2, 5.2, 10.If, and III, lOh. For Homer as authoritative evidence in judicial proceedings, see note 19 of this chapter.

1 0 8 . TOTE ctv eupeCv t l v o leyEu ïïoü ’Oôuoaeùo itEnAdtvriTctu, OTUV eupiji TÔV OHUTEOt Tov 0uppct(|)avTa Tov Twv àve'pmv àcHov. Strabo 1, c 2I4. KooriThv yap ecpn itdvTa OToxdçeoOau (^uxayüJYuaç, où ôuôaa- xaAoas. Strabo 1, c 15-

1 0 9 . Ibid. ff. worthy of prescribed study by every Greek school boy. It was

hoped that if the students studied the Homeric poems thoroup;hly

enough, Homer's divine wisdom would become an integral part of

them and they thus would be able to find answers to the multi­

farious problems of life. One finds a good summation of Homer's

educative influence upon the Greek people in the following lines:

. . . xnv 'EXXdiôa neitaudeuxev o5tos o iiounTns «at ïïpos 6 to t« n o tv Te «at n atôetav xwv avbpu)- ïïtvtüv ïïpaypdxüjv aÇtos àvaXa3dvxt pavQdvctv XE «at «axa xoüxov, xüv notrixnv ndîvxa xbv aûxoü Stov «axaoMEuaactpevov çnv, . . .

The use of or reliance upon the written text was very slow in

gaining acceptance in antiquity. Although there was, at least

from the fifth century onwards, a gradual transition of confidence

from the spoken to the written word, the conversion was far

from complete even in the first century A.D. Thus .Murray explains the tardiness of a written text of the Gospels in an age when books

1 1 0 . Plato, Republic 6o6 e.

111. "It is partly due to facts like this that, the oral repe­ tition of stories continued so extremely late in human history to be the normal way of keeping alive the records of the past even if the past was vitally important. In the case of the Gospels for instance, where a modern would have considered it of absolutely overwhelming importance to have a written record as soon as possible of the exact deeds and sayings of the Master, we find, as a matter of fact, that it was left for a considerable time to oral tradition. Compare the well-known phrase of Papias (died c. A.D. 135), deliberately prefer­ ring a third-hand oral report to the witten word: - . . . In the time of Papias there were libraries with books by the hundred thou­ sands, yet a book is still to him a dead and troublesome mode of com­ munication." Murray, The Rise of the Greek Epic, p. 95, n. 2. on the Homeric texts of Zenodotus and Aristophanes can also be accounted for by a strong faith in oral preservation. To be sure, there were a few pioneers in the fifth and fourth centuries who strongly believed in and perhaps even advocated a greater use of books in literary affairs; the majority of people, however, were slow in being so persuaded and continued to hold a greater trust in the oral tradition. Moreover, the continued reliance upon the oral tradition actually had its champions. Socrates, who left us nothing in writing, viewed the book as a certain enemy to one's powers of memorization.

TOÜTO yap TÜV paôdvTmv Ap^nv pèv èv t^oxats uapéÇsL pvnpns âpEAsTnadcy . . .

Besides the distrust with which the written word was often regarded, the use of the book was limited due to its certain high cost. We know of no commercial publication firms in the fifth and fourth centuries so that all books were probably copied by the author's own slaves. Socrates' remark that the gugAuot ’AvaÇ- aydpou could be bought for one drachma^^^ has often been inter­ preted that books were cheap and common in the latter part of the fifth century. However, knowing Socrates' habitual disdain for the sophists and his contempt for the written word in general

(supra), this statement surely should be viewed as a piece of

112. Plato, Phaedrus 275 a; cf. 27^ e-275 b .

113. Plato, Apology 26 d. Socratic irony, expressing what Socrates thought to be the books'

worth and not their actual cost. That this is highly probable is

substantiated by the fact that in Ü08 B.C. the known cost of a

single roll of blank papyrus (x“PTns) was 1 drachma 2 obols.^^^

Since very few pieces of ancient literature, especially those of this period,^^^ could have been written on one papyrus roll, the mere paper upon which Anaxagoras' "books" were witten would have far exceeded the cost of 1 drachma to say nothing of the cost of scribes and author's profit.Thus books were undoubtedly very expensive with the result that private possession of numerous vol­ umes was rare. Certainly to have a complete Homer was, with a few

llU. Around li08 B.C. (l*08-ii06?) the commissioners of the Erechtheum bought 2 rolls of blank papyrus, upon which to copy their accounts, at a price of 1 drachma 2 obols apiece. E.G. Tur­ ner, Athenian Books in the Fifth and Fourth Centuries B.C. (London: Lewis, 1952), p. 21.

115. Evidence shows that earlier writing was of a larger hand than that of later periods. "... it may be observed that the earliest extant literary papyrus (that of Timotheus' Persae, of the end of the Itth cent. B.C.) is in a much larger hand than later manu­ scripts." Frederic G. Kenyon, Books and Readers in Ancient Greece and Rome (Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1932), p. 17.

116. That the sophists were extremely concerned with earning a high profit is attested by the fact that Prodicus charged 50 drachma per person for his course on correct diction (Plato, Cra- tylus 381* b). Moreover, Guthrie writes: "Judging by what we know of the Sophists' standards, 50 dr. would have been rather little for a whole course. Euenus (. . .) charged 5 minae, and Isocrates about the year 390 mentions 3-1* minae as the price for which Soph­ ists are prepared to impart their secrets." Guthrie, The SonhisLs, p. 1*2, n. 1. For the great wealth accumulated by some of the soph­ ists, see Plato, Meno 91 d and Hippias Maior 282 d. 83 exceptions, common only amongst school teachers and professional rhapsodists. Probably only true men of letters would consider the worth of any book to outweigh its cost.^^®

The sound of the spoken word proved to be desirable even for those who had and used books. In fact "to read" was almost syn­ onymous with "to read aloud". Eucleides of Megara, as Plato tells us, had recorded a conversation which had taken place between Soc­ rates and Theaetetus. But, when he wanted to review his transcript,

Eucleides made his slave read it aloud so that the human voice could be heard.Almost all pieces of literature were composed for oral presentation. Plays were primarily written to be heard from the stage and not, as Senecan plays, to be read in the study. His­ torians such as Herodotus travelled around reciting portions of

1 1 7 . Socrates asks Euthydemus if he is going to be a rhapso- dist, . . . Y“P Tot 'Opnpou ae tpaauv enn KctVTa xsHTna0au. Xenophon, Memorabilia It, 2.10. Plutarch tells (Alcibiades 7) that Alcibiades struck a schoolmaster for not having a text of Homer.

1 1 8 . We know very little about ancient libraries prior to the great collection done by Aristotle who is described as npiÜTOS uv Lopcu ouvayoiYmv BugXua (Strabo 13, c 6 0 8 ) . Athenaeus (l, 3 a) men­ tions that Polycrates and Pisistratus apparently had some sort of court libraries. However, there were certainly no early public libraries and the few large book collections of private citizens, of which we have record— e.g. Euripides (ibid.), Euthydemus (Xen. Mem, ij, 2 .1 ), etc., were exceptional enough to receive special no­ tice. On the other hand, this is not to deny the circulation of the various types of technical treatises which were mentioned ear­ lier in this chapter. Very probably, a scholar or poet would actually need such works more than a literary text for which he could rely on his memory (infra).

1 1 9 . Plato, Theaetetus 1^3 a-b. reading of his nepu ôeôiv at the house of Euripides,it seems

probable that it was a customary procedure for sophists to give

readings of their works to select groups. Of course the problems

inherent in the written text made audial reception preferable to

visual. Marrou describes the textual difficulties with which the

reader had to grapple as follows :

The words are not separated, and the absence of punctuation made reading much more dif­ ficult than it is today; the words had to be divided— and this could not always be done without ambiguity; the phrases and sentences had to be found, questions had to be dis­ tinguished from plain statements . . .

To be sure, a complete divorce from the oral tradition had not

been accomplished nor was it desired, apparently, even by lovers

of books.

Due then to the dearth of available written texts and to the

120. "One reason for the episodic, apparently disjointed structure of the Histories is that they were written to be read aloud. Herodotus recited extracts of the work at Olympia and Athens, and he made his living by readings and lectures of this kind. . . . In any case silent reading, if not totally unknown, was still infre­ quent. It is first attested in 1(05 B.C., and people could obviously read in silence minor compositions such as letters, but the practice of dealing with literary works in this way continued to be rare throughout antiquity." Michael Grant, The Ancient Historians (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1970), p. 29.

121. DIOG. 9»5l+., Diels, Die Fragmente Der Vorsokratiker, Vol. 2, p. 25I*.

122. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, p.ll6. strong importance of the oral tradition, Greek school hoys were

accustomed to memorizing substantial portions of literary works.

Protagoras relates this fact as follows:

. . . TtapaTu9eaauv aÙTOÜç ènu t û v gctôpmv avayuyvwoxEUU KounTwu àya%(hv Kotnpata Mal sMpav^aveuv âvaYMCtçouaLV . . . .123

Because the schoolmaster, in the maintenance of discipline, was known to be more than generous with whippingseach student undoubtedly took these assignments quite seriously.

The Iliad and the Odyssey were foremost among the pieces of literature memorized.Utilizing the Greek love for the àywv, teachers and even city officials held student contesie in Homeric recitation in which prizes were awarded to the best declaimer

By reason of Homer's remarkable influence upon so many areas of

Greek life, parents took a keen interest in their child's mastery of the poems. Marrou, quoting a papyrus fragment (POxy., 930, 15),

123. Plato, Protagoras 325 e; cf. Plato, Laws 8 ll a.

12k. Aristophanes, Clouds 96 I-9 8 2 .

1 2 5 . Papyrus ff26h2 (Pack) of the 3rd cent. B.C., a manual for study in the schools, reveals Homer's importance in education. Papyrus ff2107 of the 2nd cent. A.D. is a school exercise in which the student had to write (apparently from memory) sections of Homer and Hesiod. Pack, The Greek and Latin Literary Texts from Greco- Roman Egypt, pp. 137 and 139»

1 2 6 . Documentary evidence exists that in the 2nd cent. B.C. Teos and Chios held such contests. (This was probably a general practice which reached back to the fifth century.) See Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, p. 1 6 6 . 86

points out that even a mother would often check up on her young

son's progress in Homeric studies: . .a mother who asked the

teacher how her son was getting on felt a thrill of pride when

she was told, 'He is studying the sixth'— to Çnra— 'i.e. canto

Z of the Iliad'."^^7 Xenophon confirms this parental concern

about a child's proper education in Homer when he tells of a father

who made sure that his son could recite the whole of the two epics

verbatim:

HotL VÜV duvauynv av 'lAuctôa oAnv xau ’Oôûoaeoav àïïô aToyaios

Isocrates, for whom Homer was a symbol of Greek unity, lays stress

upon the generality of Homeric memorization. For generations, he

states, everyone learned Homer by heart.Not long after Iso­

crates, even Cassander, the ruler of the Macedonians (who were al­ ways considered rather unsophisticated) could recite Homer from memory.

nv cpuAdnnpos ms 6uà OTopaxos ëxEuv tûv etiSv tù ïïoAAâ.130

In Rome centuries later, Homer, in the Latin dress of Livius

1 2 7 . Ibid., pp. 162-1 6 3 .

1 2 8 . Xenophon, Symposium 3.5.

1 2 9 . Isocrates, Panegyricus 15 a.

1 3 0 . Athenaeus iL, 620 b. Andronicus, was still being memorized by every school boy. (As

Horace painfully recalls, he was prodded along in these studies by his strict teacher, "plagosus Orbilius"However, through their Greek studies, children of good families certainly became very familiar with the Iliad and the Odyssey on a first-hand basis. Educated men, reports Cicero, went to school in Greece and learned her famous poets by h e a r t . ^^2 Chrysostom dis­ closes that Homer was still being learned by school boys at the close of the first century A.D. In fact, Homer was the first author studied (euObg èç âpxns).^^^ Likewise, Quintilian placed

Homer (quem ut Achillem semper excipi par est) at the head of his list of authors worthy to be studied and learned.Even the emperors Augustus and Vespasian could easily quote substantial portions of HomerSurely der Homerverderb, which takes place at Trimalchios’ banquet, coincides with all else that Petronius portrays as being anathema to a properly educated man of social

131. Horace, Epistulae 2, 1.69-71.

132. Speaking of Greek poets Cicero says, "non legantur modo, set etiam ediscantur. . . . At veros nos, docti scilicet a Graecia haec a pueritia et legimus et discimus, hanc eruditionem liberalem et doctrinam putamus." Cicero, Tusculan Disputations 2, 27.

133. Dio Chrysostom, Orations II. Cf. Jebb, Homer: An Intro­ duction to the Iliad and the Odyssey, p. 8 3 .

1 3 *+. Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria 10, I .65 and 1.H6.

1 3 5 . Suetonius, Octavian 6 5 ; Vespasian 23. background.

That works of such length as the Iliad and the Odyssey could

actually be put to memory seems incredible to modern man. How­

ever, Socrates' fears (cf. p. 8l) have certainly proven true,

with man now existing under the tyranny of the printed word. Nearly

every one, even today, would agree with Quintilian's statement:

Memoriam quidam naturae modo esse munus existimaverunt, estque in ea non dubie plurimum,_

The astonishing part, however, is the degree to which the ancients

are attested to have developed their power of memory. Quintilian

offers various mnemonics which were recognized as aids in learning

or memorizing.In Greece Simonides, Hippias, in fact most of

the sophists, taught the art of memory.With these aids and

surely with years and years of recitational practice, the memori­

zation of Homer became a reality for the educated. Kenyon calls

attention to the fact that as late as the nineteenth century com­ plete memorization of the Iliad and the Aeneid was not totally

1 3 6 . Petronius, Satyricon 59.

1 3 7 . Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria 11, 2.1.

138. Ibid., 11, 2.

1 3 9 . Plato, Phaedrus 275 a; for the yvriMovuxhv TGXvqpa, see Plato, Hippias Minor 368 d and Guthrie, The Sophists, pp. 1*5 and 282 -2 8 3 . 89 uncommon "when such feats of memory were encouraged at Winches-

Having once learned Homer, one was not allowed to forget him. The study of the Homeric epics did not terminate with a student's school days, but rather was continued throughout one's life. As Myres writes:

. . . not only were the Homeric poems taught to boys as an essential element in the normal programme of education, but the great majority of people could and did "keep up their clas­ sics", so far as Homer was concerned, by attending public performances, some of them official, by professional reciters . . l4l

In regard to the most important of these public performances, namely the Panathenaea, we have seen that a law existed already in the sixth century that only Homer was to be recited by the rhapsodists.However, rhapsodic recitation of Homer was not

out fail a Greek could always expect to find somewhere in the agora a rhapsodist reciting Homer 'perfectly' Also, whenever

iLO. Kenyon, Books and Readers in Ancient Greece and Home, p. 13.

ihl. Myres, Homer and His Critics, p. l^t.

l42. Our last recorded instance of these rhapsodic perfor­ mances occurs with Sulla's games at Athens in 86 B.C. Allen, Homer The Origins and the Transmission, p. 326.

1^3. Xenophon, Symposium 3.5-

lUl+. • Idem, Memorabilia I4, 2.10. 90

a banquet was held, a professional rhapsodist was usually engaged

to recite excerpts from Homer 1^5

Another factor which prompted an adult to retain his Homer

was his child. Traditionally parents have "relearned" through

their children their own half-forgotten school lessons. By

assisting each child in his Homeric studies, parents were able to

constantly review and thus maintain their own mastery of the great

poet. In view of our knowledge of two fragments of a Homer cate­

chism, we can easily imagine a parent examining his child on Homer

in the following manner:

Q. Which gods were favourable to the Trojans? A. (In alphabetical order) Aphrodite, Apollo, Ares, Artemis, Leto, Scamander.

Q. Who was the King of the Trojans? A. Priam.

Q. Who was their general? A. Hector.

Q. Who were their counselors? A. Polydamas and Agenor.

Q. Their soothsayers? A. Helenas and Cassandra, Priam's children.

Q. Their heralds? A. Idaeus and Eumedes the father of Dolon; and Dolon himself . . . ,1^°

11+5- Athenaeus It, 620 b.

lH6. Marrou cites this section of a Homeric catechism (PSI, 19; PSchwartz) to show by what methods Homer was learned. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, p. l68. 91

Moreover, and of primary importance for our purpose, a parent would help his child learn the Homeric glosses. A school boy was expected to know, as Plutarch points out, that the Homeric hapax legomenon pLyedavo's (^. 19-325) means doomed to a bad death and that xappovun

(a 6ts Aeyoyeva: 22.257 and ^l- 23.66l) was the Aeolic word for a victory produced by patience and endurance.Aristophanes in the AauraAns presents a father examining his son on rare old words in Homer. He asks, for example.

npôs taOta oh AeÇov 'Opnpeuous yAmiTas. TL xaAoüoL «dpuuga;!^®

Kdpopga is a hapax legomenon (]Q. 9.2^1); this accentuates the fact that many of these Homeric singularities must have been very familiar to parent and child alike.

From the foregoing we have seen that the Homeric epics played a very important part in Greek life. The poems were thought by all but a few sceptics to contain authoritative information on religious, historical, and practical matters. Homer's most signi­ ficant function seems to have been the moral guidance which he was thought to impart. In order to interpret the poems, however, one had to understand Homer's rare and obsolete vocabulary. Hence the

1 U7 . Plutarch, De Audiendis Poetis 6.

IU8 . Frederic H.M. Blaydes (ed.), Aristophanis Deperditarum Comoediarum Fragmenta (Halis: Orphanotrophei Libraria, 1 8 8 5 ), frag. 212, p. IO8 . 92 study of the Homeric gloss was emphasized. Moreover, the scarcity of written texts and the strong belief in the oral tradition prompted the verbatim memorization of the poems. In the light of this and the preceding section we may safely conclude, I think, that our two cardinal assumptions— i.e. that technical works, in which one could find notation of Homeric hapax legomena, existed already in the fifth century B.C. and that almost every Greek was well enough versed in Homer to be cognizant of many of the hapax legomena— are well founded. CHAPTER III

THE EMPLOYMENT OF THE H0r4ERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA FOR LITERARY EFFECT

The Exploitation of the Homeric Hapax Legomena

Due to the widespread knowledge of Homeric epic^ and to the existence of critical studies on Homeric diction, later authors often used Homeric vocabulary, especially rare or unusual words, as a literary device to exploit the Homeric learning of their audiences. By including the stately and lofty Homeric glosses, for example, poets could add an archaic tone to their own compo­ sitions. Moreover, Homer's use of the word, i.e. the context in which he used it, would often be remembered thus adding further to the evocative force of the Homeric reference. Hence, by the mere employment of a Homeric hapax legomenon an author could, in a rather concealed manner, endow his own work with additional degrees of meaning. The Homeric connotation of the gloss could aid a writer in developing parallels or contrasts between his own material and

Homer's.

In antiquity, as Dover points out, there were distinct classes of vocabulary for various categories of literature, "in particular.

1. Plato reveals (Laws 3-680 c) that the Cretans were unique in being the only Greeks ignorant of Homer. 9l(

many words and terminations are associated with certain specialized

vocabularies, e.g. with medicine or philosophy or formal rhetor­

ic; . . . . The word type most suitable for and characteristic

of heroic poetry was, according to Aristotle (cf. p. 6l), the gloss.^

He emphasized the stateliness which the rare word could offer a line

of epic poetry^ by citing two Homeric lines (Od. 9-515 and Od. 20.

2 5 9 ) both of which contained words no longer used in the every day

speech of Aristotle's time. Having agreed that these lines, by

reason of their effective use of the gloss, are beautiful (xaAdv),

Aristotle then substituted ordinary words for each of the rare ones.

The resultant effect, concluded Aristotle, was that the ordinary

2. K.J. Dover, "Greek Comedy", from Maurice Platnauer (ed.). Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship (Oxford : Blackwell, 199 ^), p. 9 9 .

3 . Aristotle, Poetics ll+59 a 13. Aristotle did not, how­ ever, think the use of the gloss appropriate for the orator. Idem, The Art of Rhetoric lli06 a 8-12. Cicero held that a restricted use of the obsolete word was advantageous to the prose writer even though it was generally considered to be the property of the poet. Cicero, De Oratore 3, 153.

U. Aristotle divided all nouns into one of eight categories. Every noun was either ordinary (xdpuov), rare (yAwTTa), metaphorical (pGTacpopct), ornamental (xdopog), invented (ïïeïïounpEvov), lengthened ( ènexTeTaydvov), curtailed (ùcpnpnydvov), or altered (cCnAAaypEVov). Aristotle, Poetics ll+57 b 2-h. It is, according to Aristotle, of fundamental importance to make proper use of each type of noun, especially the double word, the gloss, and the metaphor. Ibid. lit 59 a 6-8.

5 . Ibid. li»58 b 17-3 3 . Note that oAiTyos (lit58 b 25 and 29), a word quite common in prose and poetry (cf. L.S.J.), is considered by Aristotle a gloss. Apparently puxpds was the vulgar term. Cf. p. 5 2 , n. 2 5 . 95 whelming influence of the Homeric poems, Homeric diction became the vocabulary of epic or heroic subjects in general. Succeeding generations of poets (whether lyricists, dramatists, writers of epics, etc.) seem to have believed that they could dignify their own poetic creations or even authenticate them in the genre of heroic poetry by the effective use of the Homeric gloss. Further­ more, writers of prose at times found the gloss to be subservient to their own literary purposes. Although it is far beyond the scope of this thesis to give even a brief survey of the utilization of Homeric glosses by various ancient authors, the following com­ ments, presented in chronological order, may serve to reveal the widespread nature of their use.^

One or i : earliest writers who actually possessed a repu­ tation for his use of the gloss was Pindar. According to Plutarch,

Pindar was so fond of utilizing the rare and obsolete word that he was actually chided for this practice by his contemporary, the poetess Corinna.^ The dramatists Aeschylus and Sophocles (of

Euripides we shall speak in the following section) seem to have intentionally used Homeric hapax legomena to recall Homer.® We

6. In the 2nd and 3rd sections of this chapter we shall look in detail at Euripides' and Apollonius Rhodius' use of the Homeric hapax legomena.

7. Plutarch, Moralia 3^6-3^8 d.

8. "The influence of Homer on tragedy is often underesti­ mated." L.A. Post, From Homer to Menander (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1951), p. 56. 96 have already seen (cf. p. 7 2 , n. 86 ) that Aeschylus must have examined both the Iliad and the Odyssey in a very analytic manner to have been able to model the structure of his Suppliants on the ratio of speeches to narrative in Homer.^ Another important

Homeric influence upon the poet is pointed out by Stanford who shows that the language of Aeschylus was highly colored with Homeric words including the gloss.

9 . Athenaeus' statement (8 , 3^7 e) that Aeschylus' plays were "slices from the feasts of Homer" (toD hqAoD «at Xapncü AÙaxûAoo, Ss t5s auToO Tpaytpduag Tcpaxn e£vau è'Aeycv tûv 'Opppou peyaAwv ôeûuvmv) indicates the heavy influence of Homer upon this dramatist. Aeschylus' technique of delaying the entrance of a very important character (if not the most important) in some of his plays (e.g. the Agamemnon, the Persians) was apparently modelled on the Odyssey where Homer deliberately withheld for four books Odys­ seus' active ingression into the narrative. Furthermore, his use of the catalogue (e.g. the Persians) is an artifice highly reminiscent of Iliad 2.

10. "Epic forms, probably obsolete in the current speech of Aeschylus' time, are fairly common in his work." William Bedell Stan­ ford, Aeschylus in His Style: A Study in Language and Personality (Dubliiâl Dublin University Press, 1942), p. 19- Earp devotes a spe- cial chapter entitled "Rare and Epic Words" to Aeschylus' conscious use of words which would be detected as exotic or epic or both. In a play such as the Supplices where the Chorus is composed of Egyptian women, "the strange words certainly contribute to the exotic color­ ing; . . ." (p. HI*). Of epic words he says, "Others are more famil­ iar, but have not become part of the common stock and are presumably meant to carry Epic associations" (p. i+O). In writing about the Pro­ metheus Vinctus Earp states, "We must also note that the proportion of Epic words, and those not the most common, is higher than in any play but the Supplices; and Homeric words from their associations are especially appropriate in the mouth of gods" (p. ^6). F.R. Earp, The Style of Aeschylus (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19^8), pp. 39-53. Franklin points out that numerous scholars have found "epic reminiscenses" in many Homeric loan words. "These find in each Ho­ meric word, phrase and figure and even in each Homeric form, some dis­ tinct mark of epic spirit, some trace of conscious imitation of Homer" (pp. 3-it). For Aeschylean passages apparently designed to "recall 91

The Homeric hapax legomenon ànoOaupcîçu) (Od. 6.kg) is a rare

word in Greek tragedy (as the editors of L.S.J. point out) occurring

but twice. One of its tragic uses is found in the Agamemnon at line

3 1 8 .^^ The context is as follows: Early in the morning the Chorus, having come to Clytemnestra to inquire about the meaning of the beacon-message of the past night, hears the queen announce that

Troy has fallen. She also describes the numerous steps by which the signal relayed this information to her. Although the Chorus had previously been in a foreboding mood, it now is tricked into believing that Argos’ evil days are almost over. It praises heaven and, while marvelling (MaitoOaupdaau) at the good news, begs the queen to repeat this happy announcement. In Homer the word occurs in a passage describing Nausicaa who, upon arising, is amazed (àne-

âaupaa’) at her dream of the past night. During her sleep Athene had called attention to the fact that the clothes of the royal family lay uncared for and that her marriage was not far off. Nausicaa was thus deluded by this nocturnal message into thinking that she would the thought of Homeric verses" see pp. 66-6 8 . S.B. Franklin, Traces of Epic Influence in the Tragedies of Aeschylus (Baltimore: Frieden- wald, 1 8 9 5 ). '

11. Its other tragic occurrence is found in a messenger speech in Sophocles' Oedipus Coloneus (1 5 8 6 ). Its use here is probably also due to Homeric influence. "The Homeric flavour of messenger speeches in tragedy is a well-known example." Palmer, "The Language of Homer", p. 10^. Apart from Herodotus who may have selected and repeatedly employed this word for its epic quality, Greek authors make little use of ômoôauijctçio (cf. L.S. J. ). very soon experience the joys of a bride. Therefore, the presence of the Homeric hapax legomenon in the Agamemnon seems to offer significant comparisons to the Homeric passage. In both Homer and

Aeschylus a message has come during the night, a message which appears to bring good news— Nausicaa's marriage, Agamemnon's re­ turn— but which in actuality brings harm— Nausicaa's disappoint­ ment, Agamemnon's murder. In both cases someone is deceived—

Nausicaa, the Chorus. Moreover, Aeschylus' employment of this

Homeric word, which certainly possessed for many a connotative image of the princess Nausicaa, in a passage dealing with Clytem­ nestra, seems purposely calculated to contrast these two women.

Whereas both are of royal blood, they are of extremely dissimilar natures. Nausicaa is innocent, trustful, and forgiving while Cly­ temnestra is adulterous, deceiving, and revengeful. In conjunction with this comparison of female dispositions, Aeschylus' use of a word vhich in Homer occurs in a passage centering upon the hope of marriage (yctpos; Od. 6.27) accentuates Clytemnestra's profanation of the conjugal state. Considering the subsequent bath given Aga­ memnon by Clytemnestra in the Agamemnon, Aeschylus may also have desired the word to evoke the contrasting scene in Odyssey 6, in which Nausicaa offers Odysseus a bath. In all likelihood, Aeschylus has used other devices to substantiate and further develop the com­ parisons just outlined. However, from this analysis alone, we can see that the Homeric hapax legomenon ùnoOaupd^w, used only once by

Aeschylus and only twice in all of Greek tragedy, serves to enrich measurably the ironic force of this passage from the Agamemnon.

Already in antiquity scholars noted that Sophoclean tragedy

vas heavily modelled upon Homer and in particular the Odyssey.

To O s M U C O U S (pepEL w o t ’ l'xvos TOÜ n ounToD. Mat T?)v ’Oôûaaeuav 6’ tv itoAXots ôpctyaotv ànoypacpeTat.12

Ancient critics recognized that the plays of Sophocles revealed ,

poet possessing a truly analytic acquaintance with the Homeric

epics and consequently dubbed him (puAdyripos (Eustathius 1^0.38)

and paôriThs 'Oynpou (Vit. Soph. 1.97). Homeric influence upon

Sophocles has been succinctly appraised by Webster as follows:

Sophocles was called 'the most Homeric of poets ', he was the tragic Homer just as Homer was the epic Sophocles. There is no doubt that Homer is of the first importance as an artistic influence. Sophocles based whole plays on Homer, for instance the Nausicaa. In the surviving plays, we can find many literary reminiscences, such as the reminiscence of Ho­ mer's Hector and Andromache in the scene be­ tween Ajax and Tecmessa. The index to Homeric quotations fills over a page of the Teubner text of the scholia to Sophocles. Besides these literary reminiscences, Sophocles' char­ acter drawing, prologues, technique of pre­ paration, and language, all show the influence of Homer.13

The Homeric hapax legomenon nepupputos (Od. 19-173) offers an

apt example of Sophocles' utilization of a specific Homeric word

12. Vit. Soph. 1.:

13- T.B.L. Webster, An Introduction to Sophocles (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1936), p. k9. with the apparent purpose of recalling its original Homeric con­ text. In Homer, Odysseus makes use of this word in his fic­ titious narrative to Penelope. Still in the disguise of a beggar and under the pseudonym Aethon, Odysseus cunningly reports to

Penelope that he had once entertained her husband in sea girt

(ïïepûppuTOs) Crete. The fact that Crete is selected as the loca­ tion for this falsehood further develops the mendacious aspect of the whole passage; Cretans were, relates St. Paul, always con­ sidered proverbial liars.The word occurs only once in Soph-

tetes. Once again it is uttered by Odysseus. The crux of the play is the dilemma which Neoptolemus faces: should he or should he not deceive poor Philoctetes. Odysseus, true to his Homeric characterization ( "loxe (),Eu6Ea uoAAci ÀEymv Èiupouauv opoCa [Od.

19.203]), is ready to use every means of deception to get Philoc­ tetes to Troy. At first Neoptolemus plays a role in the devious scheme. However, his true hereditary nature comes forward and

ill. "It is natural that Sophocles, the most Homeric of the tragedians, should also borrow from Homer's vocabulary, . . . Ibid. , p. II+5 .

1 5 . Titus 1:12. Cf. Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 2, p. 2 0 9 .

1 6 . Fridericus Ellendt (ed.). Lexicon Sophocleim, Vol. 2 (Regimontii Prussorum: Borntraeger, 1835), s.v. HEpcppuTos. If Sophocles had merely wanted a Homeric word meaning "sea girt", he probably would have selected apcptaAos which occurs numerous times in the Odyssey. Only the hapax legomenon TtEpuppuxos, however, offered the desired Homeric allusion. like his father who once looked Odysseus in the eye and uttered,

Éx^pos Y“ P pot heC vos ôyûs ’Aûôao nuAgotv / oo %' eTepov yèv

èvt cppEOLv, ctAAo 6e Euin] (il. 9*312-313), he refuses to play any further part in this collusion. Thus the presence of n E p tP p u -

Tos in the first line of the Philoctetes seems designed to focus the attention of the audience immediately upon the importance of

"deception" in the play.

'PÔ0UOS, a Homeric hapax legomenon at Odyssey 5-^12, is another word which Sophocles employed in order to heighten the audience's empathy for Philoctetes and its disdain for Odysseus. In the

Odyssey, it is found in the scene where Odysseus, in a completely broken state, cries out his woes while desperately trying to land on the coast of Phaeacia. The only time Sophocles uses the word is at Philoctetes 688.^^ Here the Chorus relates how Philoctetes has endured on the forlorn coast of the "plashing" sea all his suf­ ferings, especially his life-consuming pains. The word evokes then a picture of Odysseus' helplessness in the Homeric scene, thereby underlining his lack of concern for another's similar helplessness in the Sophoclean scene. Also the word helps present two contrasting situations. In the one a man intensely wants to reach an island

(Phaeacia) while in the other a man just as intensely wants to leave an island (Scyros). From these two examples we may conclude that

Sophocles employed the Homeric hapax legomena for conscious artistic

IT. Ibid., s.v. pdôuos. effect.

Antimachus of Colopho;. (cf. p. 5 9 ), the late fifth century

B.C. editor of Homer and author of the Lyde and Thebaid, became

one of the most famous pre-Alexandrian poets for his display of

erudition through the subtle employment of the Homeric gloss.

Lesky, in his assessment of Antimachus, calls him the first of the

true poetae docti: a poet who "was at the same time a Homeric

philologist."^^ Antimachus even used his studies of Homeric dic­

tion in his own poetry. In fact he actually interwove critical

comment on Homer's diction into the verses of his Lyde and Thebaid.

A good example (Pfeiffer calls it his "most remarkable example") of

this practice appears in a fragment of the Lyde (frag. 5 7 ) where,

in a skillfully written passage, Antimachus offered a variant reading

for Odyssey 21.390. Instead of the common Homeric word onAov in the

phrase oitAov veog, 'the rope of a ship', he thought the correct

Homeric word for 'rope' to be oSaov, which, if adopted, would then

be another Homeric hapax legomenon.(This example concurs with

1 8 . "His intensive study of Homeric language is shown by the many glosses with which he adorned his own verses." Pfeiffer, His­ tory of Classical Scholarship, p. 9^- Antimachus had a few critics in antiquity who thought his poetry inelegant. Callimachus (frag. 7k b) found his style ponderous while Catullus dubbed him tumidus (9 5 .1 0 ).

1 9 . Albin Lesky, A History of Greek Literature, trans. James Willis and Cornelis de Heer (New York: Crowell, I9 6 6 ), p. 6 3 8 .

20. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, pp. 9^4-95, n. f Cf. Wyss, Antimachi Colophonii Reliquiae, frag. 57, pp. 32-33. 103

one of his editorial practices— to exchange common Homeric words

for hapax legomena [cf. p. 59])- Antimachus had now added another

function to the usage of the Homeric gloss; besides ennobling poetry

it became a vehicle for critical comment. Lesky appraises Anti­ machus ' abstruse utilization of the Homeric gloss as follows:

The rare word, 'select' in the true sense, the gloss, is now considered the special ornament of speech, a tacked-on ornament which only the connoiseur can appreciate.

At times authors employed the Homeric hapax legomena for the purpose of parody and burlesque.The use of lofty epic diction in ludicrous situations was certainly calculated to create pure farce.Aristotle attests to the conscious exploitation of the gloss for comical effect. He points out, for example, that authors, by applying the rare and obsolete word (yAmTTai-s) to poetry of a jocular nature, could inevitably elicit a laugh (ènù yeAoua) from their audience.Our examination of Euripides' Cyclops (to follow in the next section) will serve as a good example of the use of Homeric hapax legomena for humorous effect. However, we may

21. Lesky, A History of Greek Literature, p. 639.

22. Parody of Homer is thought to have originated with Hippo- nax. Athenaeus 15, 698 b-c.

2 3 . "... and the humor of paratragedy lies not in the choice of the particular tragic passage but in the use of tragic language as such in a comic context." Dover, "Greek Comedy", p. 101.

2k. Aristotle, Poetics 1I458 b 15-17- lOil

first look at a more direct employment of the Homeric glosses

designed for straightforward fun,

Athenaeus (9, 382 b-383 b) gives information on a comedy by

Strato (third century B.C.) entitled the Phoenicides in which pure

and unadulterated fun is made of the rare and outdated Homeric word. In the play a highly educated cook utters nothing but Ho­ meric glosses when conversing with his very countrified (dypouxd-

TEpos; 382 c 6) employer. The poor master understands nothing of what is being said and hence must tell his hireling, aitXms you

SuaAeyou (382 e 6). Since the cook refuses to refrain from Homeric speech, his confused master finds it necessary to resort to Philetas'

Homeric glossary ( tS v toD $tAuTua AaygavovTO gugAcwv aMoneuv exaaia;

383 b 2-3) in order to understand what this Homeric pedant is saying.

Assuredly the audience of this play, the majority of whom had cer­ tainly learned quite thoroughly the Homeric gloss, found this verbal buffoonery amusing.

The Hellenistic poets continued in and further refined the artistic use of the Homeric gloss.In the creation of the Idyls

Theocritus seems to have amused himself and also the discerning reader by a conscious change in gender of some Homeric hapax lego-

2 5 . Alfred Koerte, Hellenistic Poetry, trans. Jacob Hammer and Moses Hadas (New York: Columbia University Press, 1 9 2 9 ), p. 168. mena.^^ The hapax legomena âxepôos (Od. li+.lO) and axuAog (Od.

10.2lt2) provide two notable examples (cf. L.S.J. , s.v. axepôos and

ctMuXos). Although both words occur in Homer without qualifying

adjectives, we can, with some degree of certainty, ascertain their

Homeric gender through their use by subsequent authors. Whereas

axepôos is usually feminine, Theocritus (2i|.90) treats it as mas­

culine. In reverse manner, Theocritus is unique (5-9^) in making

ctMuAos, a word generally considered masculine, feminine. Further­ more, it is likely that Theocritus occasionally utilized a Homeric

hapax legomenon with its meaning intentionally altered.From his school days on almost every Greek, through the study of Homeric glossaries, had learned the accepted meaning for the rare and archaic word in Homer. By employing the Homeric gloss with altered meaning.

26. As viewed earlier (cf. p. 55) Protagoras had questioned Homer's use of gender in regard to certain words. No examination has been made of Theocritus' vocabulary to see how general this practice is. The two words cited as examples (infra) were found in L.S.J. by checking the Homeric hapax legomena beginning with the letter "a". If Rumpel's Lexicon Theocriteum were used and all the Homeric hapax legomena were examined for a possible change in gender by Theocritus, one would expect numerous examples to appear.

2 7 . Couat, discussing the Alexandrian poets' use of archaic language, writes, "They also sought to preserve the language by al­ tering it and by combining in their composite style the styles of pre­ vious times with the methods of composition used by modern writers." Auguste Couat, Alexandrian Poetry Under the First Three Ptolemies, trans. James Loeb (London : Heinemann, 1931), p. TO. Likewise Pfeif- fer writes, "The great epic, lyric, dramatic forms should not be imi­ tated in a strict sense, indeed that above all should be avoided; but one could learn from them, borrow from them, shape and reshape, and refine reminiscences." Rudolf Pfeiffer, "The Future of Studies in the Field of Hellenistic Poetry", The Journal of Hellenic Studies 75 (1 9 5 5 ), p. 7 2 . KpnyuoSj a hapax legomenon at Iliad I.IO6 , is not used by Theo­

critus (2 0 .I9 ) in its Homeric sense of "good" but rather, as the

editors of L.S.J. note, with the altered meaning of "true".

This subtle development or handling of Homeric hapax legomena is particularly fitting for a poet who openly^^ praises at Idyl 7.^0

Philetas, the famous Homeric glossographer (cf. p. 6 2 ). It is a

strong possibility, moreover, that Theocritus actually entitled

Idyl 7 (often considered his masterpiece) GotAuoJa— a Homeric hapax legomenon (^. 9-53^)— in tribute to Philetas and his lexicograph­ ical work on the Homeric gloss.

The hapax legomenon t|,nAcnpc!w (W. 9-^16) occurs in Homer in the description of the blinded Cyclops' attempt to feel his way

2 8 . "The study of vocabulary, which had begun in the fifth century as a necessary aid to interpretation, served now mainly to provide curiosities of diction for the court poets ; . . . ." Myres, Homer and His Critics, p. 27.

2 9 . Although it is possible, as L.S.J. claims (s.v. xpnyuos), that Theocritus simply misunderstood the Homeric meaning of this word and thus misused it, I think it is more probable, considering his propensity for slight variation from Homeric usage (e.g. alterations of gender, supra), that the deviation was intentional. The emperor Augustus, lamenting the promiscuous nature of Julia (Suetonius, Oc- tavian 6 5 ), specifically altered the meaning of the Homeric hapax legomenon ayovos (ll. 3.4o). In Homer the word means "unborn" but Augustus, in order to make the hapax legomenon apply to his daughter's situation, purposely changed its meaning to "childless". Cf. L.S.J., s.v. ayovos.

3 0 . Koerte discusses the various historical personages of the poem, hidden by Theocritus under poetic masks. Simichidas, for ex­ ample, is Theocritus himself; Sicelidas is an alias for the epigramma­ tist Asclepiades; etc. However, Philetas is given the distinctive honor of direct reference. Koerte, Hellenistic Poetry, p. 297. about the cave. Stanford has drawn attention to the possibility

that the Apostle Paul employed this word for its Homeric allusions.

4'nXa(pcta) (^l6) was the word used by St. Paul (Acts IT, 2 7 ) in his speech to the Athenians on the Areopagus to describe their 'groping after God'. As it is a fairly rare word in classical Greek (only here in H.), it probably suggested the image of the blinded Cyclops to the audience. 31

Oftentimes a speaker will fashion his oratorical style to the edu­ cational level of his audience. Since the Athenians always en­ joyed a reputation for high learning, Paul felt it proper in ad­ dressing them to make critical use of numerous classical references.

Norden in his Agnostos Theos provides evidence that Paul's mention of "the altar to the unknown god" (Acts 17:23) was an allusion to a philosophical treatise by Apollonius of Tyana entitled Hept Guaumv in which he discussed the erection of altars by the Athenians to special unknown divinities.Moreover, Acts 17:28 shows Paul quoting two ancient poets, Epimenides and Aratus.^^ The fact then that Paul's speech to the Athenians abounds in classical references makes Stanford's hypothesis of the apostle's conscious use of the

3 1 . Stanford, The Odyssey of Homer, Vol. 1, pp. 361-362.

3 2 . Eduard Norden, Agnostos Theos: Untersuchungen Zur Formen- geschichte Religioeser Rede (Leipzig: Teubner, 1913)7 pp. kl-%.

3 3 . For a discussion of these two quotations, see Nolan B. Harmon (ed.). The Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 9 (New York: Abingdon Press, 195^+), Acts 17:23-28. Homeric hapax legomenon all the more credible.

A fine example of the use of a Homeric hapax legomenon for the purpose of evoking a Homeric foil is Philo's employment of

ônMoBdpos (^. 1 .2 3 1 ). In 39 A.D. Philo came to Rome at the head of a delegation sent by the Jewish community of Alexandria.

The purpose of his mission was to try to persuade Caligula to re­ tract his order that a statue of the deified emperor be placed in the synagogues of Alexandria. Philo's efforts proved abortive.

Later on, while writing of this affair, Philo selected the hapax legomenon 6nuo3c5pos--a word which had found no other users, according to our knowledge, since Homer (cf. L.S.J., s.v. 6nyo3dpos^^)— to describe Caligula. In Homer Achilles, opposing the arrogance of

Agamemnon, called the commander-in-chief of the Greek forces 6nyo-

3dpos. Philo's application of the same word to the Roman emperor subtly points out how closely his own situation coincided with that described by Homer. Both Agamemnon and Caligula are seen as poor leaders who, in the insecurit - of their positions, desperately needed to flaunt some materialistic symbol of their authority, be it a girl or a statue. Both leaders have committed religious crimes.

Agamemnon, against the advice of all the Greeks, had deliberately

3^. Philo, De Legatione 5 6 1 .

35- A Greek 6ts AsydyEva, one of whose occurrences is Homeric, besides emphasizing its own rarity precludes the possibility of any other connotational force the word might have attracted to itself in the intervening period prior to its second employment. angered Apollo by refusing to release the daughter of one of the

god's priests even though adequate ransom had been offered. Cali­

gula's decree was, in the estimation of the Jews, an abhorrent act

of sacrilege. The constructive roles of both Achilles and Philo

present another parallel in the two situations. It was Achilles,

the employer of the word in Homer, who first took the initiative

to call the assembly of Achaeans in hope of righting Agamemnon's

religious offense. Philo repeats the role by leading the Jewish

embassy to Rome for the purpose of dissuading Caligula from his

profane course of action. Both fail in their attempts.Thus

Philo's careful use of the Homeric hapax legomenon brings into focus

the comparisons which I have just outlined far more forcefully than

simply stating them.

That the Homeric language, and in particular the use of the

rare and obsolete word, remained in vogue for writers of epic through­

out antiquity is shown by Nonnus ' epic poem, the Dionysiaca (5th

cent. A.D.). The influence of Homeric diction can be seen through­

out this poem. At times Nonnus interjected complete Homeric lines

within his narrative: Iliad 23.373 was used by Nonnus at 37.373;

while Iliad 23.764 is repeated in the Dionysiaca at 37.634.He

3 6 . Although Agamemnon does relent and allows Chryseis to re­ turn to her father, he exchanges his first sin for another— the theft of Achilles' Briseis.

3 7 . K. Lehrs, Quaestiones Epicae (Regimontii Prussorum: Born­ traeger, 1 8 3 7 ), p. 2 8 5 . also employed Homeric hapax legomena as a cursory review of a few of the hapax legomena ("a-" through "ay-" in L.S.J.) reveals.

Accordingly, we find, for example, the following:

ayxdcoyau 17.772 Dio. 7.3l8 àyxuGuSnS 11. 5.H13 Dio. 10.166 âôeEÛ II. 18.353 D^. 7-178 ctddpo) n. 1 5 .36I4 Dio. h^.2kh aùxpa'çü) n. l*.32lt Di^. 35-178 àxepoGxdynS 20. 39 Dio. 10. 29 àxLxnxos n. 17- 75 Dio. 1*5-236

We also have evidence that Nonnus employed a Homeric hapax lego­ menon, unused, as far as we know (cf. L.S.J., s.v. ùyuTpoxuTwvGs) since Homer himself. ’AyuTpoxtTmves was used by Homer at Iliad

1 6 .1*1 9 ; Nonnus utilized it at 1*8.509 of the Dionysiaca. This examination of just a few words from Nonnus' vocabulary verifies the fact, then, that the conscious use of the Homeric gloss was not a short-lived phaenomenon.

Having considered certain uses of the Homeric hapax legomena, let us ask, for a moment, how much of all this subtle employment of words would actually have been detected by an author's audi­ ence.^® We have seen that most Greeks (certainly some more than others) were educated in Homer to the degree that they had most

(if not all) of the poems held in memory. Moreover, they had

3 8 . "... we must always ask whether the poet is writing pri­ marily for the audience in the theatre or primarily for the audience who will read and see with the mind's eye." T.B.L. Webster, "Greek Tragedy" from Platnauer, Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship, p. 7 8 . experienced years of special home and school training in the

Homeric gloss. Marrou, quoting Sextus Empiricus, writes as fol-

In antiquity an educated man was in the first place and sometimes essentially, someone who knew that ntoupes was "Homeric" for TEOoapes— "four"— that puyeôavôs [a Homeric hapax lego­ menon at 1 9 .3 2 5 ] meant "frightful (death)", 3hoea or ayxos "a deep ravine".39

Protagoras (cf. p. 5 5 ) had said that the mastery of epic (ènmv)

was by far the most important part of one's education. A learned

man ought to be able, according to this philosopher, readily to

detect any linguistic mistakes in the words of the poets (xa ùnb

Tüiv TtounTüiv AeyoMEva).^® If one were expected to be able to notice

fine points of grammar (and for Protagoras this even included mis­

uses of gender), the detection of the Homeric gloss— always a rather

striking word— in the verses of later authors does not seem unbe­

lievable.^^ The free use of parody by the writers of comedy clearly

3 9 . Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, p. 1 6 7 . Cf. Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos I, 78; 59•

i+0. Plato, Protagoras 338 e-339 a.

^1. Vitruvius (Pe Architectura VII praef. 5ff•) tells a story of Aristophanes of Byzantium's great powers of literary detection. While listening to a competition of young writers, Aristophanes recognized in the pieces of the contestants direct borrowings from earlier authors. To prove that the contestants were guilty of plagiarism, he went to the library and found the source for each of the literary thefts. Of. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholar­ ship, p. 1 9 1 . indicates that their audiences were quite discerning in literary matters.Admittedly, the very fine alterations of meaning and gender which Theocritus imposed upon his use of the Homeric hapax legomena would only be recognized, in all probability, by other highly learned poets. Perhaps occasionally a poet would even employ a word so subtly that no one would detect its use.^^ This, however, would probably be the exception.

In conclusion the use of the Homeric hapax legomena for various artistic effects became a common occurrence amongst post-Homeric authors. Their presence helped to create a high style of poetry especially suitable for epic material. If employed in poetry of a humorous nature, they could elicit laughter. In the hands of the

Alexandrian poets, the hapax legomena became show pieces of one's erudition. Furthermore and perhaps most important, they often possessed the power of evoking, for the purpose of artistic com­ parison and contrast, the original Homeric context. For all these reasons (and probably for many more) authors could and did utilize the Homeric hapax legomena.

h2. "The case for literary discrimination of the Athenian audi­ ence rests on the fondness of Comedy for literary topics and above all for parody. . . . Even if they recognized the original and remem­ bered its source, it may be that the majority of the allusions in Com­ edy are allusions to lines which the poet knew from experience were widely disseminated; . . . ." DoVer, "Greek Comedy", p. 10.

"Again, the poet may often have amused himself by recon­ dite allusions which he did not expect his audience to appreciate; . . . ." Ibid. Ars est celare artem. Euripides: The Cyclops

Euripides had the reputation amongst his critics of being the

most "bookish" of the fifth century B.C. playwrights.^^ In an age

when very few people owned books, he had at his disposal a per­

sonal library of ample size (cf. p. 83, n.nS). Considering the

numerous compositions on Homeric diction by glossographers, soph­

ists, etc. which existed in the second half of the fifth century,

it is highly probable that Euripides owned books in which the Ho­ meric hapax legomena were designated and discussed. Furthermore,

it is likely that he was conscious of them as possible literary ornaments for his own poetry. Aristotle helps to confirm this hypothesis by citing an example of Euripides' use of a Homeric hapax legomenon. Euripides (frag. 792) directly borrowed a com­ plete line from Aeschylus' Philoctetes. However, Euripides al­ tered the Aeschylean line slightly by replacing Êo0ûw, a word in common use at that time, with the hapax legomenon Oolvcxu) (Od. It.36).

In so doing, states Aristotle, he transformed a line which had seemed trite into one which seemed beautiful:

oîov TÎ) aùtb nounaavTos ûay3etov AÙoxuAoo iiat Eûptuûôou, 6s pdvov ovopa psTaTLOevTOO, àvTL xuptou ebfjOdxos yAwTTav, to pev (paouetau xaAov TO 6’ eÙteAes. AloxuAos pÈv y«P Èv x'D

Aristophanes ridicules Euripides' book knowledge in the Frogs (9^3, 11+09). Ill*

^uXoMTnri;) EitouTioe (payeôcxuva ri you aapnas Èo0UEU noôo's, . 6 Ôê aVTÙ TOÜ ÈodbEU TÔ dOLVâTaU yETE0riXEV. ^

As one can see by the frequency of their occurrence, Euripides made use of Homeric hapax legomena in all of his plays (cf. Ap­ pendix 3). Although he employed more hapax legomena in some plays than in others, their presence is not due to accidental inclusion.

The Cyclops, which we shall examine in detail, is a good example of Euripides' artistic use of Homeric hapax legomena.

In order to isolate the Homeric hapax legomena which occur in Euripides' plays and in particular in the Cyclops, each item in the index of Homeric hapax legomena (Appendix l) was checked against the concordance of Euripides by Allen and Italic.Every one used in Euripides, excluding the Cyclops, is marked by the notation "Eur" in column three of the list. If a hapax legomenor occurs in the Cyclops, a "Cy;" and the line number are entered in column three. Consequently, whenever a hapax legomenon occurs in one or more of Euripides' dramas and in the Cyclops, the designa-

1+5. Aristotle, Poetics 1 I+58 b 21-27.

U6. This analysis of the Homeric hapax legomena in the Cyclops, although incorporating major additions and revisions, originally served as a paper written in partial fulfillment for the Master of Arts Degree at The Ohio State University (degree was granted August 1 9 7 2 ). The Cyclops was selected in order to illustrate the ways in which the hapax legomena are used. In dealing with this play I have relied upon the Oxford Classical Text : Gilbert Murray (ed.), Euripi- dis Fabulae, Vol. 1 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1902).

1*7- James Allen and Gabriel Italie (eds. ), A Concordance to Euripides (London: Cambridge University Press, 195^)^ tion is "Eur; C^". If, however, the hapax legomenon is used only

in the Cyclops, "Cy" alone appears.

Having recorded all the Homeric hapax legomena found in Euri­

pides' extant plays, it was then possible to calculate the fre­

quency of their occurrence (lines per hapax legomenon) in each

individual drama (cf. Appendix 3).^^ In the Cyclops, a play which

takes its story line quite directly from the Odyssey, hapax lego­

mena occur more frequently than in any other of the eighteen plays.

In fact, in the Cyclops a Homeric hapax legomenon occurs on the

average every lines of text; the play with the next highest

frequency of hapax legomena is the Bacchae in which one occurs

every 13.92 lines of text. The play with the lowest frequency of

hapax legomena is the Heraclidae which exhibits a ratio of 17.88.

One would perhaps expect Euripides to have used more Homeric hapax

legomena in plays related to the Trojan war. This does not seem

to have been the case since the Helena ranks seventeenth in the

use of hapax legomena. It seems notable, however, that the Rhesus,

a play like the Cyclops with its story material drawn directly

from Homer, in this case the "Doloneia", reveals a frequency of one

hapax legomenon per 15-56 lines of text, thereby ranking fourteenth

48. Only separate Homeric hapax legomena were utilized in these computations. A hapax legomenon was counted only once for a play even though it might have been used several times. If each occurrence of the same word had been counted, a distorted picture would certainly have resulted. For a critical appraisal of uncontrolled word counts, see William E. Bull, "Natural Frequency and Word Counts", Classical Journal 44 (1949), pp. 469-484. amongst the plays. This fact may be a further bit of evidence

for the denial of Euripidean authorship to this play. At least

it sheds some new light upon Ritchie's analysis of the internal

evidence of the R h e s u s Be that as it may, the high frequency

of Homeric hapax legomena in the Cyclops suggests that Euripides

is deliberately using them to create certain effects.

Although we have fragments of Aeschylus' Dictyulci and Soph­

ocles ' Ichneutai, the Cyclops is the only satyr play which has sur­

vived the ages in its entirety.As the fourth play in a tetra­

logy, its purpose seems to have been to lighten the heavy mood,

created by the three tragedies which preceded it, with the flip­

pant treatment of a well-known Homeric tale. In selecting a

Homeric story for his satyr play, Euripides appears to have been

following a conventional practice.

U9 . William Ritchie, The Authenticity of the Rhesus of Euri­ pides (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 196 ^), pp. 1^1-192.

5 0 . I concur with Lattimore's statement, "Alcestis is no satyr play, but a tragi-comedy which in part anticipates the lighter escape- dramas (iphigenia in Tauris, Helen) still to come." David Grene and Richmond Lattimore (eds.), The Complete Greek Tragedies, Vol. 5, Euripides I (New York: Washington Square Press, 1955)j p. 5- We do know, however, that the Alcestis took the place of a satyr play in H38 B.C. Cf. T.B.L. Webster, The Tragedies of Euripides (London: Methuen, 19^7), p. 5- "Today we know 8 titles of the satyr-dramas by Euripides : The Autolycus, Busiris, Eurystheus, Theristai, Cyclops, Sisyphus, Sciron, Syleus, and the ninth one is known only by its first letter (n ...... ) preserved in Marmor Piraeicum." Victor Steffen, "The Satyr-Dramas of Euripides",~Eos 99 (1971), P- 205. It should be noted, however, that the sub­ jects of Satyric dramas are not uncommonly Homeric. We know of the Ku'pxn and nprnxeus of Aeschylus, the Kpuous and 'EXeuns Y“hos of Sophocles, the Cyclops of Euripides. Evidently the attraction of these plays lay in the familiarity of the audience with the poems of which they were virtually parodies.51

Euripides has taken his story for the Cyclops from book 9 of the

Odyssey, certainly a perennial favorite for young and old alike, but he has altered the details and interjected new characters with the result that, out of a tale of adventure, he has created a humorous play.

The mere inclusion of the satyrs in the Homeric story adrls inevi­ table hilarity. Their comical appearance, as depicled upon vase paintings,^^ was probably followed as closely as possible in the

51. Monro, Homer's Odyssey, p. Il5- In addition, Monro shows (ibid.) that Old Comedy itself borrowed heavily upon Homeric epic. He lists, for example, the following poets together with their comedies, the plots of which were undoubtedly based upon episodes from the Iliad and from the Odyssey and from stories tangential to the Homeric poems: Epicharmus: Eeuphves, ’Oôuooeùs vauctyds, Tpwcs, XeCpwv, «ttAoMTnxas. Cratinus: ’Oôuoans. Theopompus: ’Oôuaoeus, HnveXdnn, Eeuppves* P hilylliu s: liXuvTpuau n Nauouxda. Callias and Diodes: KuxXwxes. Plato: MevdXaos.

52. "It [Odyssey 9] was even more familiar (one assumes) to the audience who saw this play presented. Many would still have vivid recollections of lines learnt in childhood in the class-room: . . . ." R.G. Ussher, "The Cyclops of Euripides", Greece and Rome Ser. 2, l8 (1 9 7 1 ), p. 1 6 6 .

53 . Ibid., plates 5 and 6. 118

staging. The audience very likely expected the satyrs to be por­

trayed as semi-human beings who were scantily clothed. (Euripides

does give them a of goats' hair, BO.) They would pro­

bably have worn a mask with a blunt nose, pointed ears, and a full

head of hair. Silenus, however, being much older than the other

satyrs, was certainly represented as bald on top (cf. Ç^. 2 2 9 ) but

still retaining bristly hair around the side of his head. A horse's

tail^^ and a phallus (perhaps their most distinguishing mark) would

also have been a part of their costume. Inasmuch as they were fol­

lowers of Dionysus, they were usually portrayed drunk and in a

state of sexual excitement. They are certainly characters whose

presence would have appealed to the comic sense of the audience.

Silenus' overpowering eagerness to taste the wine from which he

had involuntarily abstained for so long (Cy^. 139-17^) provides a

good example of their potential for humor. His gestures (one must

5^. Arrowsmith's statement, "... the satyrs are boisterous, childlike 'horse-men' (not 'goat-men'). . . ." (William Arrowsmith, "The Cyclops" from Grene and Lattimore, The Complete Greek Tragedies, Vol. 6, Euripides II, p. 5) agrees with Ussher's view that a satyr had the tail of a horse. Cf. Ussher, "The Cyclops of Euripides", p. l68 and plates 5 and 6.

55. Euripides was not the first to adapt book nine of the Odyssey to a satyr play. Aristias had also used this Homeric tale for his satyr drama.- Hence there is the possibility that Euripides might have borrowed much from his predecessor, especially in regard to his presentation of the satyrs : Moreover, the comedies of Epi­ charmus and Cratinus would also have provided possible material to imitate. For an analysis of the influence of these three authors upon Euripides, see Jacqueline Duchemin (ed.), Le Cyclope D'Euripide (Paris: Champion, 19^5), pp. xii-xv. 119

remember the ever present phallus) as he spoke the following lines:

Cv’ EOTU TOUTt t’ 6p86v èÇavtOTavau yaoTOU TC ôpayyôs «at napeoxeuaoyEVOu (jjaûoau XEPoCv XEuymvos, opxnUTUS 0' aya Hanûiv TE XhUTus (Cy. 169-172) were clearly calculated to bring forth tumultuous laughter.

The introduction of non-epic characters to this Homeric tale

is not Euripides' only means of creating humor. He also treats the epic characters themselves in a comical fashion. Odysseus, for example, first comes on stage uttering three high-style lines (Cy.

96 -9 8 ), filled with words which occur often in Homer (Çe'vos, (ppcîçiü,

HO0EV, ôL(l)a, ctMos, Xaygdvm, xP“oyau).^^

g e v o u , (ppdoET ’ civ vciyci uoTciyuov ndOcv ÔL(|;nS a>iOÇ X d g O E y E V , eÜ te tus 0e'Aeu gopàv ôônoau vauTuAcus MEXPnyevous; — TU xPhpa; (Cy- 96 -9 9 ) •

These first three lines seem to be an Euripidean parody of the

Cyclops' first lines in Homer.

Ç eüvou, t u v e s È O T E ; no 0 EV ïïAeûQ’ uypà ke'Aeu0cï; n TU HüTot nprjÇuv ?i yatjjuôums ÙActAnoSE o ud TE AnUOTnpEf,- ÔïïEtp CtAtt, TOU T ' àAoWVTOtU (l^uxcts Tiap0 E'yEVOu, n a x d v àAAoôaïïoüau çEpovTEg; (Od. 9 .252-2 5 5 )

Having uttered these three rather heroic lines, Odysseus startles

5 6 . ". . .la langue du Cyclope porte très nettement la trace de l'imitation homérique." Ibid., p. xviii. three lines the audience is led to expect a continuation of Homer’s

characterization of Odysseus, but with tl xPHMot» Euripides sur­

prises the audience. Throughout the play Euripides creates humor

by leading the audience to expect a certain verbal or dramatic turn

and then presenting something else.One of the devices which

Euripides employs to aid in the development of this humor is the

use of Homeric hapax legomena.

We know, in any case, that the Greek audience was quite keen

in its ability to detect a poet's use of special words (cf. pp. 111-

112). Euripides, moreover, seems to have taken special care to

make certain that his audience did not overlook his use of Homeric

hapax legomena. Therefore, he often employs a succession of them

in a relatively short space. This is the case, for example, in

57. This short interrogative statement does not occur in Homer. It is, however, quite common in Aristophanes, being found in the Nubes (325, 8l6); the Thesmophoriazusae (270); the Vespas (266, 697, 83^)1 O.J. Todd (ed.). Index Aristophaneus (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1932), s.v. xPhPot. Duchemin points out that Odysseus also utters at Cy^. 626 two words (axapôaMuaaetv and xPeunTeoOaL) which certainly possessed a low, non-epic character. Speaking of these two words and others of a similar nature she writes, "... tous verbes empruntés à la langue de tous les jours, le dernier en par­ ticulier très usité chez Aristophane." Duchemin, Le Cyclope D' Euripide, p. xix.

58. Stanford, in the introduction to his edition of the Frogs, discusses how Aristophanes makes use of this comic technique termed napa npooôoHLav or "contrary-to-expectation" joke. W.B. Stanford (ed.), Aristophanes, The Frogs (London: Macmillan, I9 6 3 ), p. xxxv. Cf. R. Sri Pathmanathan, "A Playwright Relaxed or Overworked?" Greece and Rome Ser. 2, 10 (1 9 6 3 ), p. 128. lines 1 6 -1 7 of Silenus' opening speech in which he tells of his

sea journey in quest of Broraius. Here, in just two lines, Euri­ pides has placed four hapax legomena.

Tiaüôes 6 ' GpETpoLS npEVOU yXauxhv aXa PO0 UOLOL XeuMaLvovTes èçnTouu o’, avaÇ.

It appears that Euripides used these words for a two-fold pur­ pose: to create humor by giving noble, high-style vocabulary to a rather clownish character (cf. p. 10H)59 ^nd to direct the thoughts of the audience to Homeric epic and in particular to

Homeric sea adventures.

The four hapax legomena (two from the Iliad and two from the

Odyssey), out of which this two line account of Silenus' voyage is primarily composed, all possess overtones connected with the sea. rXauMo's is used by Homer only once (ll. 1 6 .3U); it signifies the gray color of the sea. (The usual Homeric word is noAuog.) ZnTem is found at Iliad 1 ^1.258 where Sleep is speaking to Hera. Having been asked for aid. Sleep reminds Hera that once before he had lulled Zeus to sleep at her bidding and at that time she raised up a terrible storm which ship-wrecked Heracles. On account of this, Zeus had "sought" him "out" and had almost killed him. The

59* Dover comments upon this use of parody as follows: "The second, and commoner, purpose of parody is to exploit the humorous potentialities of incongruity by combining high-flown tragic diction and allusions to well-known tragic situations with vulgarity or trivial domestic predicaments". K.J. Dover, Aristophanic Comedy (London: Batsford, 1972), p. 73. word pddüos recalls Odysseus* sufferings upon the sea (Od. 5. hl2)Just as Homer had the comrades of Odysseus "whiten" the water as they approached the domain of the Sirens in Odyssey 12.172, so the sons of Silenus "make" the gray sea "white" (AeuMauvovtes).

By the use of this hapax legomenon Euripides equates his chorus with Odysseus' crew. Note that Arnott has hypothesized that the chorus in the Cyclops actually fulfills the role which the comrades of Odysseus performed in the Odyssey. "To a large extent they play the part assigned by Homer to Odysseus' men, who are repre­ sented in the play by personae mutae."^^ Moreover, there seems to be some significance to the fact that Aeuxauvw occurs in Homer as

Odysseus and his crew are nearing the Sirens, who were, according to tradition, living somewhere between the Italian and Sicilian coasts.The presence of this word in the Cyclops could connote to the audience not only an episode of the Odyssey but also a location

6 0 . See p.lGl for Sophocles' possible association of this word with Odysseus' sufferings on the sea. Since the Philoctetes was pre­ sented in U08 B.C., it is likely that if any literary borrowing took place, Sophocles was the borrower. For a discussion of the possible dates for the Cyclops, see Duchemin, Le Cyclope D'Euripide, pp. vii-x, and Steffen, "The Satyr-Dramas of Euripides", p. 206.

6 1 . Peter D. Arnott, "The Overworked Playwright: A Study in Euripides' Cyclops", Greece and Rome Ser. 2, 8 (1 9 6 1 ), p. l6?.

6 2 . See Helen Thomas and Frank H. Stubbings, "Lands and Peoples in Homer" from Wace and Stubbings, A Companion to Homer, p. 309, for a critical analysis of ancient anu modern attempts to pin-point the actual geographical locations of Odysseus' wanderings. See also Strabo 1, c 22. near Sicily, the site of this play.^^ Therefore, these four hapax

legomena, so near the opening of the play, seem designed to create

humor and to allude to Homer, especially to passages in which the

sea plays an important part.

The humor created by this opening speech deserves further analysis. The first character the audience sees is that of Silenus, fat, bald, flat nosed, with broom in hand, resting a moment from 6k his housework to talk to himself. Certainly the first two words of the play Bpoyue (probably spoken quite loudly) had the imme­ diate effect of exciting the audience to laughter. So too, in all likelihood, did Silenus' interjection,

— tpèp’ tôw, t o u t ’ ùôaiv ovap Aeyw; (Cy. 8).

This question, directly following his declaration of past bravery, surely reveals the truth of the matter and unmasks Silenus for what he is and has always been— a coward. A creature associated with intoxication and similar pursuits, he is hardly the character one would expect to utter high-style Homeric language. Euripides,

6 3 . Thucydides VI, 2. Marrou, citing Sextus Empiricus (Ad- versus Mathematicos I, 258), points out that ". . .an educated man and even a well-taught child were expected to know" a poet's geo­ graphical locations. Marrou, A History of Education in Antiquity, p. 1 6 8 .

6k. Although we cannot ascertain the precise date of the pro­ duction of the Cyclops, the Greek audience was doubtless quite familiar with Euripides' prologues. The contrast between the solem­ nity of his tragic prologues (often spoken by a god) and the comic­ ality of this one is quite marked. 12h therefore, seems to he recalling the specific language of Odyssey

9 when on three occasions in a mere fifty-seven lines very early in the play he places the word nou'yvn, a Homeric hapax legomenon, in the mouth of Silenus 26, 37, 83) Homer used this word early in hook nine of the Odyssey in his description of the myster­ ious island just off the coast from the land of the cyclopes (Od.

9. 122). In other places Euripides preferred the synonym SooxnuaTa

(C^. 1 6 5 , 1 8 8 ; M . 57 6 ; El. 49 !*).

Another hapax legomenon, spoken hy Silenus early in the play, is ûôpnAos (C^. 88). This word seems to have the double function of recalling the language of Odyssey 9 and of providing some direct verbal humor. 'YôpnXos, like uouiivn, occurs in the description of the island opposite the domain of the cyclopses (Od. 9 .132). More­ over, Euripides seems to have intentionally misused this word. As a modifier for xpwoodg (water-pail), it seems incorrect or at least unnecessary. ’YôpnAds means "watery" or "moist" (cf. L.S.J. , s.v.

ÛôpnAos) and can hardly describe a water pot which is bone dry.

(Odysseus has brought this pot along in order to carry water back to his ship.) However, one can hardly expect a character such as

6 5 . For numerous examples of Homeric words from Odyssey 9 used by Euripides in the Cyclops, see Duchemin, Le Cyclope D'Euripide, pp. xviii-xix. Cf. Arnott, "The Overworked Playwright: A Study in Euripides' Cyclops", pp. I66-I6 7 .

66. In Homer it modifies Aeuymves. Silenus to have perfect command of his Homeric glosses.He knows

that the word has something to do with "water" and that is good

enough for him.

Euripides has placed two hapax legomena in line 1 5 2 , another

line spoken by Silenus.The first, êxTtaTCÎaoü), occurs in Homer in

the scene where Mêlantho scolds the beggar Odysseus (Od. 18.327).

The word is rather rare among Greek authors with this instance

serving as the only Euripidean usage.There were a number of more

commonly used words available which would have conveyed the desired

meaning "to open" or "pour out", such as avouyw-avouYvupu (^. 30^;

Or. 1 5 6 1 ; Pho. IO6 8 ; 100, etc.); ÔLOcym (Su. 1205); ocyw (HF.

332; M . 5^7). However, none of these would have recalled Homer

6 7 .• Polyphemus' use of apuorov (2l4) can also be so explained. The word is a Homeric 6 ts AEydpeva (cf. p. 12) occurring once in the Iliad (2^.12^) and once in the Odyssey (l6.2). Athenaeus (l, 11 c-d) points out that in Homer it, rather than the common axpcxTLapa, was the word used to designate a "breakfast". Arnott CThe Overworked Playwright: A Study in Euripides' Cyclops", pp. 168 -I6 9 ) and Ussher, (The Cyclops of Euripides", p. 175) have been especially troubled by the fact that Polyphemus asks for his "breakfast" when it is obviously evening. Arnott sees this as a mistake, thereby revealing hasty composition; Ussher as an example of a word whose meaning has changed since Homer. Pathmanathan ("A Playwright Relaxed or Overworked?" p. 1 2 8 ), I think, comes closer to understanding Euripides' use of this word when he says that it "is a simple case of comic napd Ttpoaôoxuav." And yet it is more. It is a humorous attempt to show that the Cy­ clops is ignorant not only of civilized customs but also of any know­ ledge of Homeric glosses— a distinctive mark of civilized man.

68. cpep’ EHnatagov, ws àvapvnoOü %uwv.

6 9 . In addition to its Homeric and Euripidean occurrences, Liddell, Scott, and Jones cite only one other instance of its use: Ant ip. Thess. 9 .309. L.S. J. , s.v. exiiaTctaaa). to the extent that the hapax legomenon does. The second hapax legomenon, avauuMvnoHU), also is from the Odyssey (3.211). It occurs in a passage where Nestor is questioning Telemachus about the suitors' abuse of hospitality back in Ithaca. Thus these two

Homeric words call forth a motif which is very important both in

the Çeüvos'^^. In Homer the Cyclops and the suitors are the prime abusers of the proper guest-host relationship. Both receive punish­ ment. Therefore, these two words, in a very comical line, present a Homeric motif which, in the hands of Euripides, becomes a literary plaything.

The chorus of satyrs utters numerous hapax legomena throughout the play. No less than the case with Silenus, is it out of character for them to use Homeric vocabulary. One rather comical passage in which hapax legomena play an important part is the following:

TO. "The wanderings of Odysseus and Telemachos' journey for news of his father make the pattern of guest welcome a frequently recurring motif in the Odyssey. Passages describing the arrival of a guest are built on a standard form in which the guest is welcomed, given food and drink, and finally asked about his name and origins." Cynthia W. Shelmerdine, "The Pattern of Guest Welcome in the Odyssey" Classical Journal 6$.3 (1 9 6 9 ), p. 124.

71. Both lines in Homer, in which the hapax legomena are found, begin with an address to the visitor. "geuve TaXav, ovj ye tuo tppevas £?ineKaTaYMe\)OS êaou." (Od. 18.327) "w cptX’ , èneù 6t"i Tauxct p ’ àveMvngaS xuù eetnes." (Od. 3.211) OÜXOV, ÊTIEtÔn Tnv VEâVUV EUXETE , ctïïavTES aÙTT^v ôuExpoTnaaT'72 êv pe'pee, ËKEi^ yE ïïo AX o l s nÔETau yayouuEvri; Tf|V HPOÔOTEV, ‘n TOÎ)S QuAâxOUS TOÎ)S HOUXÉAOUS TiEpL, TOËv okeAoüv iàovoa Mat, TÔv xPucJeov MA(p5v cpopoOvxa itEpt. jje'oov tôv auyeva ÈÇEiiTonân, Meve'Aeüjv, àv9pü3nuov Aipaxov, ALitoùaa. (C^. 179-186)

These lines, delivered by actors in phallic dress, provide a moment of pure farce;^^ once again the hapax legomena serve to create humor by calling attention to Homer's own words. Kpote'üj means "to rattle, to make a noise". It occurs in Homer in a scene where horses are rattling the empty chariot of the slain Cleitus

(ll. 1 5 .^5 3 ); it seems to be chosen here, especially if the chorus of satyrs are wearing horses' tails as part of their costumes, with the vividness of the Homeric context and meaning, particularly the sound, in mind.'^^ The fact that Euripides selects the hapax legomenon ome'Aos (%1. l6.31*+), an anatomical term signifying that section of the leg closest the groin, provides some risque humor by emphasizing that part of a man to which Helen was most attracted.

"Hdopau not only gives the idea of enjoyment but especially that

72. Euripides has formed this compound verb from the hapax legomenon mpote'w .

7 3 . "In Silenus' absence, the Chorus quizzes Odysseus on his exploits at Troy, but all it really wants to discuss are lascivious details about the wanton Helen." D.J. Conacher, Euripidean Drama: Myth, Theme, and Structure (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1 9 6 7 ), p. 318.

7^. Arrowsmith has caught the full force of this double entendre with his translation "bang her". Arrowsmith, "The Cyclops", p. 20. 128

of sensual enjoyment. In Homer it occurs in the description of

Polyphemus' intoxication (Od. 9*353). Consequently, it is possible

that the use here may be foreshadowing.'^^

Euripides also places hapax legomena taken directly from Odyssey

9, in lines spoken by the satyrs. AaaupaXXos, used only once by

Euripides (Cjr. 360) describes a goat's skin; in Homer it describes

the sheep under which Odysseus' men escaped from the Cyclops (Od.

9 .^2 5 ). The word seems selected here to foreshadow a similar escape

in this play. Euripides then presents a less daring but more comical

escape (C^. 663-703) Tpctyos (Cjr* 8 0 ) is an example of another hapax legomenon drawn from Odyssey 9 and used only once by Euripides.

Homer uses the word as he describes Polyphemus' care for his animals while Odysseus and his men are locked in the cave (Od. 9.239)* The unusually frequent occurrence of hapax legomena drawn from Odyssey

9 seems designed to keep the language and tone of this book con­ stantly in the foreground and thereby handy as a foil.

To be sure, the satyrs use some hapax legomena which do not come from the Homeric Cyclops story. Even these often come from the

75. "To foreshadow signifies to give information, in a more or less vague manner, but in a way to arouse curiosity as to what may happen in the future." D.C. Stuart, "Foreshadowing and Suspense in the Euripidean Prolog", Studies in Philology 15 (I9 1 8 ), p. 295*

7 6 . "If Odysseus here does not escape from the cave by clinging to a ram's belly, and if the immense boulder which in Homer blocked the cave has here been rolled away, these are clearly alterations demanded by the necessities of theatrical presentation." Arrowsmith, "The Cyclops", p. 5- 129

Odyssey and recall adventures of Odysseus. The hapax legomenon

a\3pa, for example, occurs in Homer in a passage describing Odysseus'

arrival at Phaeacia (Od. 5 .^6 9 ). Euripides uses it at line of the Cyclops rather than itveOpa, nvop, aveyos or oupos, which he

employs elsewhere.Another example is BAnxn ^8). In the

Odyssey Odysseus heard the bleating of sheep as he approached the island of Helius (Od. 12.266). The chorus of satyrs uses both these words shortly before the entrance of Odysseus. In Homer the two are used in passages describing the approach or arrival of

Odysseus to a location of one of his adventures. Here too apparently the words signal the near approach, arrival, and entrance on stage of Odysseus.

The original audience would have known very well the Homeric treatment of the two principal characters, Odysseus and Polyphemus; they would therefore react to the changes which Euripides presents.

Hence Ussher writes:

In any event, speculation would be eager as to how Euripides would represent him [Poly­ phemus]. Odysseus, of course, was well known on the stage, but his characterization there (as anyone could see) was markedly different from Homer's. How would the playwright treat him this time? Would he follow the Homeric

77. uveOya: Hi. 1*06, l663; H^. 2l6; 35k, 1317; Su. 55^1; He. 571; Or. 277; Pho. 85 I; alibi. Tivon: Or. l)i5; Hi- 1133; Tr. 815; An. ^78; 1^. 69; IT. 1 I+8 7 ; alibi, aveyos: HI. 150t; I.T. 139^; H.F. 102; JA. 10; Md. 839; alibi. o S p o s : ^ 1509; An. 55^" Tr. 20. story closely and thus as it were reinstate the epic hero?'^°

Right from Odysseus' entrance, as Arrowsmith points out, the audience

realizes that things are going to be somewhat different from Homer

Instead of claiming his Homeric paternity, Odysseus acknowledges

the disreputable Sisyphus as his father (Cy^. 10^-105). Likewise,

Odysseus' unmistakable panic as the Cyclops approaches certainly

does not reflect the Homeric "sacker of cities". The Homeric Odys­

seus would not be likely to utter in visible terror,

ànoAüjXayev y a p , <5 yepov ïïoü xPn (puyeCv; (Cyi. 19 !*)

The line certainly weakens his attempt to recover his heroic image when he declines Silenus' offer of refuge in the cave 198-202)

Euripides also characterizes Polyphemus in a manner much different from that of Homer. Although Homer does give the Cyclops a certain

7 8 . Ussher, "The Cyclops of Euripides", pp. 166-16T.

7 9 . Arrowsmith, "The Cyclops", p. 6.

8 0 . As Ussher points out, there is a sly humor in this feigned bravery since Odysseus, to be sure, has heard of Silenus' reputation and knows his two-faced conduct. For this reason he is wary of any suggestion from the old satyr. Ussher, "The Cyclops of Euripides", p. 1 7 2 . Silenus fits Whitman's description of a comic hero; ". . . the comic hero himself is wayward, and abides by no rules except his own, his heroism consisting largely in his infallible skill in turning everything to his own advantage, often by a mere trick of language. He is a great talker." Cedric H. Whitman, Aristophanes and the Comic Hero (Cambridge: Harvard University PressTT^P^^nTlp- 25- 131

affection for his pet ram (Od. 9.1+1*7-1+60), there is no comical side to

Homer's Polyphemus comparable to the drunken amorous episode with

Silenus (Cy;. 576-589) • Also, the slapstick comedy of the last

scene of the play, which reveals the lately blinded Cyclops stumbling

around the cave to the jeers of the Chorus only to crack his head,

has no place in Homer.In Homer Polyphemus is portrayed primarily

as a dreadful monster (Od. 9.1+80-1*86, 528-51*2).

Let us first look at Euripides' treatment of Odysseus. VHien

he places Homeric hapax legomena in the mouth of this character,

the contrast between his Odysseus and Homer's is stressed. In book

nine of the Odyssey the word uc+xos is used to describe the club of

the Cyclops which Odysseus and his men fashioned into a stake with

which they blinded Polyphemus (Od. 9-321*). with telling irony

Euripides has employed the word, used by him only here, to describe

the men whom Polyphemus chooses to eat (C^. ]8o). In doing so, he appears purposely to invert the Homeric usage. Tpunavov is another hapax legomenon from Odyssey 9 which Euripides uses only in the

Cyclops. In Homer the word occurs in a simile comparing the stake, used to blind Polyphemus, to a drill boring a timber (Od. 9-383-386).

8l. I cannot agree with Arrowsmith's view that Euripides is equating Polyphemus with Callicles and other sophists of the "might makes right" school and that the whole play has a very serious mes­ sage. Cf. Arrowsmith, "The Cyclops", pp. 5-9- Rather I concur with Conacher who writes, "... to take Polyphemus so seriously as to talk, as Arrowsmith does at the end of his essay, of 'a struggle for justice between two men [sic] who either distort justice or deny its existence . . .'is surely a distortion of Euripides's fun." Conacher, Euripidean Drama, p. 321. Euripides uses the same simile (although differently vorded) and

the same word when his Odysseus explains to the Chorus his plans

for escape:

vauTtnyi^av 6 ' woel tls àppdçwv àvhp ÔEuXoùv Tpunavov xuTtnXaTEu, OUTW xuxXwow ôaXôv ev (paeoepdpip . KûhXüjtxôs otI'EL n ai ouvauavw xdpag. (Cy^. H60-U63)

Both of these words recall specifically the blinding of Polyphemus

in Odyssey 9 and thereby give emphasis to the deed in the play,

the first by contrast, the second by similarity.

Homer uses 6ls in a passage describing how Odysseus and his men rowed "twice" as far distant from the shore before he mocked

Polyphemus with the revelation that it was Odysseus "sacker of

cities" who had blinded him (M. 9-^91-509). Euripides uses this word at line 1^1 when Odysseus tells Silenus that "twice" so much wine will flow from the skin. This word placed early in the play

8 2 . XaXuvds is also a hapax legomenon (%1. 19*393). In Homer and in most other authors it means the "bit" for a horse's bridle. Euripides, however, is the only known author who used it to mean the "strap" or "thong" for the carpenter's brace (cf. L.S.J., s.v. XaXuvos). "Attic comedy and Hellenistic poetry liked to play with the technical terms of the craftsman, especially the carpenter." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. l62. expect an ending similar to the Homeric one. Certainly the story line as a whole creates this expectation. However, due partly to the limitations of the stage and, one would suppose, partly to his desire to present the unexpected, Euripides ends his play with

Odysseus merely saying that he is going home (Cjr. 702-703). (Natur­ ally this assumption on Odysseus' part is itself humorous since the audience would doubtless be thinking "that is what you think".)

At times Euripides seems to employ a Homeric hapax legomenon in a way that only the most discerning spectator would detect its nuance. Such a word play occurs in the case of OMUepos. In Homer

(Od. lU.112) the word (accusative) was variously read as oxucpos

(neuter) or oMUcpov (masculine) by the time of the Alexandrian editorsHowever, from Athenaeus we learn that the debate over the word's gender had a long history prior to the Alexandrians.

Hesiod, Anaximander, Anacreon, Panyassis, Aleman, and Simonides are known to have treated it as masculine; Ion, Epicharmus (in his

Cyclops), Alexis, Epigenes, Asclepiades, Aeschylus (in Women of

8 3 . This adverb, being the common word in both prose and poetry for "twice" (cf. L.S.J. , s.v. 6 u's), apparently did not possess the character of a Homeric gloss. However, the fact that àCç occurs in Homer only in the Cyclops story makes it probable that Euripides employs this word with its Homeric use in mind. Although its associ­ ation with Odyssey 9 would certainly have escaped many, teachers and others very familiar with Homeric diction might have remembered Homer's use of this hapax legomenon. Cf. p. 52, n. 25 and p. 9**,

81*. Aristophanes of Byzantium interpreted the word as neuter (cf. p. ^7 ) ; Aristarchus as masculine. Athenaeus 11, 1*98 f. 13h

Perrhaebia) and Archippus as neuter.Hence it appears that

Euripides is exploiting the confusion over the word's gender by

employing it twice with its masculine (Cy^. 256, 556) and twice

with its neuter inflection (Cy. 390, ^11 ). Euripides' inconsis­ tency in using this Homeric hapax legomenon seems striking and perhaps recalled to some the debate over its gender.

Furthermore, the word oxvjtpos, as spoken by Odysseus and

Polyphemus,®^ serves once again to call up the guest-host motif so common in Homer. It is found in the Odyssey in the scene where the poor swine-herd Eumaeus graciously receives the disguised Odysseus and provides him with a good meal. Consequently, there existed an association between the word and the conception of proper hospi­ tality. The fact that Euripides employs this word four times®^ in the Cyclops accentuates Polyphemus' abuse of this social custom.

The contrast between Polyphemus' actions and Eumaeus' is especially defined in lines 1+10-1*11. The word avanunTU) (Cy. 1+10), Athenaeus relates, if used in the context of eating and drinking, signified acute impropriety.®® Its close juxtaposition to oxûçog (l+ll) pro-

8 5 . Ibid. 1+98 a-1+99 b.

8 6 . Odysseus : 2 5 6 , 390, 1+11; Polyphemus: 556.

8 7 . Athenaeus lists 107 types of Greek cups (ll, 782 d-11, 503 f [text reordered]). With so many words for "cup" from which to choose, the fact that Euripides selects oxutpos seems to further indicate his particular interest in Homeric hapax legomena.

88. Ibid. 1, 23 b-c. Cf. ibid. 1, 17 f. vides a good antithesis between the correct and incorrect modes

of feasting. Hence Euripides' use of a«v5(pos served two purposes:

to recall and exploit the uncertainty over the word's gender and

to evoke and emphasize the Homeric conception of proper hospi­ tality.®^

The use of hapax legomena to contrast the Cyclops' treatment of the Çeüvos with that which was considered proper is especially pronounced in the lines of Polyphemus. The first two hapax lego­ mena which he utters occur in lines

aXus XedvTwv éarû you Oouvwycuw ÉXcxcpcjv TE, xpo^^os 6 ' Euy ' a n ’ avdpmnuiv 3opcts.

Perhaps Polyphemus was eagerly rubbing his hands together or showing some sort of outward delight at the thought of once again tasting his favorite dish. Yet these two words, as found in their Homeric contexts, relate quite a different sort of banquet and hospitality.

Botuctu) (cf. p. 113) occurs in Homer when Menelaus censures Etoneus

8 9 . Exucpos or its Latin counterpart poculum (cf. Ebeling, Lexi­ con Homericum, Vol. 2, s.v. OMUcpos) seems to have become a convention­ al piece in scenes of proper hospitality. Bacchylides uses the word in a passage in which the Dioscuri are invited to a feast: oil 3o(Lv ndpeoTL omyotT' c u t e x P ^ o d s o u t e uop- tpupEOE TannTEs, aXXct Suyog EupEvns MoOact TE yXvneZa xaù 3ouwTÉOLOuu èv oxuipouOEv OLVOS f|6us (Athen. 11, 500 b). Euripides also uses the word in the Alcestis (798) to emphasize Admetus' hospitable treatment of Heracles and the hero's ignorant abuse of it. In the Aeneid (8.176 and 27^) the poculum is one of the poor but sincere marks of hospitality which Evander shows Aeneas. So too does Ovid use it (Metamorphoses 8 .67O) to help signify Baucis and Philemon's proper reception of Jupiter and Mercury. 136

for not showing proper hospitality to Telemachus. Menelaus orders

him to take care of Telemachus' horses and then bring him to the

feast (Od. ^.36). Xpdvuos occurs in a passage where Telemachus

tells his mother how Nestor received him as a long absent son (Od.

1 7 .1 1 2 ). Both words occur in passages which were recognized in

antiquity as describing the correct way of treating the travelling

stranger.Euripides employs these two words apparently to con­

trast the barbaric behavior of the Cyclops with the proper behavior

of civilized man.

Two other examples of Polyphemus' use of hapax legomena appar­

ently designed to contrast his barbarity with the courtesy expected

of cultured men are and cxMnexm. In Homer (Od. 8.207) nAnv

is associated with proper social convention; it occurs in the scene

where Odysseus has challenged all the young Phaeacian men except

(iiAnv) Laodamas to compete with him in athletic contest. Laodamas

is excluded, as Odysseus says,

ÇeCvos Y“P pot 06’ GOTu ' Tus <3u (puAeovTu paxouTo; (Od. 8 .2 0 8 )

In the Cyclops Polyphemus utters the word as he tells how he sacri­ fices to none of the gods except (nAnv; 33!*) his belly. The dif-

9 0 . Athenaeus cites Alcinuous, Menelaus, and Nestor as prime examples of the proper host. Athenaeus 1, 9 a-b.

9 1 . For the possible detection of nAnu (quite common in poetry and prose, cf. L.S.J. , s.v. iiAnv) and its Homeric association, see my argument for dug, p. 133, n. 8 3 . 137 ference, then, between the proper and improper is certainly stressed by the presence of this hapax legomenon. The second hapax lego­ menon, àwTiGxw, recalls the cordial reception which the indigent

Odysseus received from Nausicaa. The princess tells her attendants that this stranger must be given food and drink and also bathed,

itpbs Y“P Auds eùauv aitavTss Çeüvot TE TtTüJxoL TE, (Od. 6.207-208) .92

Odysseus gladly accepts this hospitality but opts to take his own bath apart from the maidens; he goes to the river and scrapes away (ctynEXEv) the brine from his body (Od. 6.225)- Euripides uses the word to describe another "bath", that in which Polyphemus plans to roast Odysseus and separate (àycpE'Çcu) his bones from his body (Cy^. 3^^). Thus the opposition of circumstances is developed and strongly emphasized by Euripides' use of ciyixexw. The Homeric scenes of proper hospitality, evoked by numerous hapax legomena, are particularly fitting foils in this play, a play in which at the exact center (line 35^) Odysseus calls out ZeO Çe'v e ’.^^ Of course one must view Euripides' employment of these subtle com­ parisons not as serious comments upon morality but rather as dramatic

92. For a similar view, held by the ancient Hebrews, name]y that Yahweh was the protector of strangers and sojourners, see Deuteronomy 10:18-19.

93. "The monster has offended horribly against the laws of hospitality and it is by Odysseus' 'hospitable' treatment of him ('dearest of guests', the drinking Cyclops calls him, v. In8) that he is undone ; . . . ." Conacher, Euripidean Drama, p. 32l. 138

attempts to prepare the audience for the comic justice which Poly­

phemus receives at the end of the play.

In conclusion it is evident that Euripides made conscious use

of the Homeric hapax legomena in his plays. Because the formal

education of his audience had been based upon Homeric epic, Euri­ pides was able to use Homeric vocabulary, especially hapax lego­ mena, in a dynamic way to produce certain literary effects— in the

Cyclops primarily to create contrast and humor. I completely agree with Wetzel's interpretation of the Cyclops. In short, I view the play as pure comedy with the amusement of the audience its primary goal.

9^. "Concludimus igitur poetam scaenicas quasi rimas argute resarsisse, satyricae suffecisse arti, arte comica excellere: ad risum movendum omnia spectant, non ad pervulgandas poetae doctrinas aut sophistarum vulgive superstitiones refellendas. Quaecumque huius generis inveniuntur, non rem quandam impugnant ludibro, sed rem ipsam ad risum adhibent efficiendum, id quod ab Homeri austera narratione omnino abhorret. Homerici poematos membra scitius revincta sunt, cum Euripideae fabulae partes leviter sint coniunctae, Sed nihil re- fert poetae nec consequentia tueri nec doctrinam quandam pervulgare nec artiflcLose opus perficere: ad risum spectat, risum movet, omnia deridet: deridet ipsum Homerum, ipsum Bacchum, deridet for- tasse etiam nos, nec se ipsum non ludificatur." Guilfridus Wetzel, De Euripides Fabula, Satyrica. Quae Cyclops Inscribj tur, Cum Homerico Comparata Exemplo (Wiesbaden; Harrassowitz, 1965), pp. 15^-195. Apollonius Rhodius: The Argonautica. Book I

Apollonius Rhodius vas, in many ways, both a rebel from and

a product of the poetic tendencies of the Hellenistic Age. In

opposition to the doctrines of Callimachus^^ (certainly the dominant

figure amongst Alexandrian poets) who wrote,

’Aoaupuou noTapoCo peyas poos, àXXà Tct noXAa , A upara yns xau noAXov sep’ uSotl ouptpeTov cXhcl ,

and of Theocritus who wrote.

ÜJS pou Mat TEMTojv pcy' anGx^oTau, ootls êpeuv^ îoov opeus Mopucpqi TeXeaap6 dpov ’npopeôovTos, Mat Mouadv dpvoxes, dooou rtoTU XCov ânôw àvTUa MOMMÛÇOVTeS ÈTWOua poxôdçovTU ,97

95. The friction which existed between Callimachus and Apol­ lonius is succinctly appraised by Barber as follows: "Certainly Apollonius is convicted of plagiarizing (Pfeiffer, Callimachus, vol. II, pp. xli-ii) from the Argonaut episode in tne Aetia, as well as from the Hecale, and this fact coupled with personal fric­ tion due to Callimachus' position at the Library being subordinate to that of Apollonius, who was apparently Chief Librarian (P.Oxy., 12^1), goes a long way to explain the trouble." E.A. Barber, "Hellenistic Poetry" from Platnauer, Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship, p. 229. See also George W. Mooney (ed.). The Argon­ aut ica of Apollonius Rhodius (London: Longmans, 1912), pp. t-9.

9 6 . Hymn to Apollo IO8 -IO9 . Callimachus is also accredited with the remark that a large book is a large evil. "Otu KaXXupaxos 6 YpappaTLMÔs TÔ peya gugXCov uaov eXeyev eCvau tw peydXw MaMij). Rudolf Pfeiffer (ed.), Callimachus: Fragmenta, Vol. 1 (Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 19^9), frag. U6 5 , pT 353.

9 7 . I ( ^ 7, It5-U8. 1^0

Apollonius still believed in the possibilities oi the epic.^®

Hovever, although differing on this matter, Apollonius and the

writers of the Callimachean school share certain similarities.

Their poetry is artificial, self-conscious, and very erudite.

Thus it reflects the third century B.C., an age in which the

Museum— that combination of Library and society of resident schol­

ars and poets— cast its shadow over all areas of artistic output.

Apollonius was a scholar as well as a poet. His academic

interests seem to have included the study of language, particularly

that of the ancient poets. At least this is what our knowledge

of his critical treatises on Hesiod and Archilochus would imply.

Living during the zenith of Homeric scholarship,it is no sur­

prise that he wrote a work on Homer's diction. Zenodotus, whom

Apollonius succeeded as head librarian, had edited a text of Homer

in which, as we have seen (cf. p. 66 ), he often substituted con­

temporary words for obsolete ones. Apparently Apollonius objected to this and other practices of his predecessor in a monograph

9 0 . "The true difference between him and Callimachus was that Apollonius adhered more closely to tradition; the day of the long heroic epic poem was not yet over for him." Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. lUs.

99- Schol. Theogony 26 and Athenaeus 10, Jj51 d. Cf. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. iHl;.

100. "His date lying between that of Zenodotus and Aristarchus he was probably acquainted with both, and his criticisms on Homer are interesting as those not only of a Homeric student, but also of a contemporary of the famous trio Zenodotus, Aristophanes and Aris­ tarchus." B.C. Seaton, "On the Imitation of Homer by Apollonius", Journal of Philology 19 (189 I), p. 1. entitled npos ZnvôôoTov.^*^^ Apollonius' previous experience

teaching Homeric glosses, provided him with an exceptionally acute

insight into these difficult w o r d s F o l l o w i n g the precedent of

Antimachus of Colophon whom he greatly admired and perhaps imi­

tated,Apollonius made the Homeric hapax legomena subservient

to his own artistic purposes. In order to see how he did this, we

shall examine the Homeric hapax legomena found in book one of the

101. Schol. A., 13.657-, Dindorf, Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem, Vol. 2, p. 27.

102. See Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarship, p. ll(l.

103. Speaking of Apollonius' use of the Homeric glosses Erbsc writes: "Bei Vokabeln, die nur in der Odyssee auftreten, fehlt uns die Kontrolle der D-Scholien. Aber auch hier haelt sich Apoll. an die Schulerklaerung.Again he vrrites, "Folgende Homerwoerter sind im Sinne der D-Scholien bzw. der Schulerklaerung gebraucht: . . . ndpxbs [a hapax legomenon at 5-162] - - . Hartmut Erbse, "Homerscholien und Hellenistische Glossare bei Apollonios Rhodios", Hermes 8l (1953), pp- 172 and l8l.

10^4. "When, for example, in speaking of the dragon who guards the golden fleece, the scholiast points out the resemblance between the accounts given by Antimachus and Apollonius— aujKprnvms 'Avtl- yctx4)— we may assume . . . that the latter had imitated the former-" Couat, Alexandrian Poetry, pp. 309-310. Cf. Schol. 4.156. More­ over, Apollonius is attested to have written a formal treatise TtepC: ’AvTupdxou in which he dealt with the gloss. Wyss, Antimachi Colophoni Reliquiae, frag. 158, p. 71- At least in one instance Apollonius borrowed a Homeric hapax legomenon, together with its line, from Antimachus- This is the case for ’Aôpnateua (^. 2.828). In Antimachus (frag. 532) the line runs . . . noTapoCo napd pdov Auonnouo / suQa xexupnTau xe xaù -’Aôpnaxeca xaXeCxau, whereas in Apollonius (1.1115) it is refashioned as . . . èx 6' éxepns noxapou poos Auonnouo / aoxu xe xaD nsôuov Nnxnuov ’Aôpnoxedns. Ibid., p. xlviii. 11(2

However, before commencing upon this investigation, we must

once again state our modus operandi in extracting from the list

of Homeric hapax legomena those used by Apollonius. Adopting a

method similar to that employed in dealing with Euripides, each

hapax legomenon of Appendix 1 was checked against Wellauer’s index verborum of ApolloniusEvery hapax legomencn which occurs only once in Apollonius is signified in column four of my index by the notation "AH". If it is found more than once, it is designated by "ARR". Because of our special interest in book one, each hapax legomenon occurring therein is marked by "AR" and its line number or numbers.

That the Argonautica is heavily modelled upon the Iliad and

1 0 5 . Since an analysis of all of the hapax legomena in Apol-' lonius was beyond the scope of this thesis, restrictions had to be decided upon. It seemed natural for me to start at the beginning even though the temptation existed to look at book four in which the Odyssean influence is especially heavy. As Koerte writes, "For the succeeding portion of their wanderings the rule obtains that the Argonauts must experience all the dangers and miracles which Odysseus had to undergo: Circe, Aeolus, the Sirens, the Wandering rocks (Planctae), Scylla, Charybdis, the Oxen of the Sun, the land of the Phaeacians . . . ." Koerte, Hellenistic Poetry, p. 2 3 2 .

1 0 6 . August Wellauer (ed.), Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica: Index Verborum (Leipzig, I8 2 8 ; reprint— Hildesheim: 01ms, 1970). This index is based upon Wellauer's text of Apollonius: August Wellauer (ed.), Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica, Vol. 1 (Leipzig: Teubner, 1 8 2 8 ). Whenever I have given analysis to a hapax legomenon which occurs in the text of Wellauer and not in that of Mooney or Fraenkel (Hermann Fraenkel [ed.], Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica [Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1 9 6 1 , reprint with corrections I96 L]), I have noted the fact. 1^3

the Odyssey is a well recognized fact. Mooney puts it as follows:

The Homeric poems constitute in the truest sense the Knyn ««V àpxn of the Argonautica. Though the matter of the work is not derived from them, yet the diction and the form in which the particular incidents are set forth continually recall to our minds the words of 'the poet,' as the ancients reverently described H omer.

Concerning Apollonius' diction Merkel has noted that the poet

tended to make abundant use of the Homeric glosses. In fact he

pointed out that Apollonius often imitated Homer by employing just once many of the hapax legomena.In an analysis of a more lit­

erary nature Webster argues that Apollonius utilized Homeric material

in such a way that it would frequently call forth Homeric parallels or contrasts.

It would be interesting to know whether he expected his audience to remember the original and therefore often to make the further com-

107. Mooney, The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius, p. 13.

108. Examples of such words are “otyns, a3^ns, ayspaoTOS, àpcpuôupos, yauXds, yAhvos, etc. See Merkel's "Prolegomena" in R. Merkel (ed.), Apollonii Argonautica (with Scholia edited by Henrich Keil) (Leipzig: Teubner, l8 $^), pp. v-cxc, especially pp. clvi- clix. Of. Mooney, The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius, p. 1^4. In addition, Apollonius employed many of the hapax legomena more than once. "... not only do familiar Homeric expressions appear on every page, but even the anaÇ Aeydpeva of the Iliad and Odyssey, sometimes of doubtful meaning, are seized upon, and employed often more than once." Charles J. Goodwin, "Apollonius Rhodius: His Figures, Syntax, and Vocabulary" (Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, I89 O), p. 10. ihlt

parison that private emotion can be as des­ tructive as war. Jason comes to Medeia as beautiful and as devastating as Seirios (3, 957); so Achilles in his shining armour appears to Priam before his last battle with Hektor (Iliad 22, 26). . . . Homer does not often use similes to explain emotions, and when Medeia's heart warms and melts like the dew on the roses in the dawn light (3, 10 1 9 ), the audience surely is meant to remember how Mene- laos' spirit was warmed like the dew on the ears of corn when Antilochos gave him the horse (Iliad 23, 597). The memory would point the likeness and the unlikeness between the tough warrior's sudden gratitude and the girl's sudden joy at hearing Jason speak to her.^®9

The combination of these two studies— i.e. Merkel's philological

analysis of the Homeric hapax legomena in the Argonautica and

Webster's literary analysis revealing that much of the Homeric

material borrowed by Apollonius was used to evoke specific Homeric

reminiscences— deserves to be attempted; in the following, I hope to do this by examining Apollonius' use of certain hapax lego­ mena in Argonautica 1.

The first hapax legomenon of note used by Apollonius is

ÙAÛOS (lO). In Homer (^. 21.318) the word occurs in the prepo­ sitional phrase ' lAuos as the poet describes how the river

Scamander asks the Simoeis for help in defeating Achilles. Apol­ lonius borrows the same phrase in relating how Jason, on his way to Pelias, saved one of his sandals from the mud. The hapax lego­ menon then serves to delineate two analogous situations. In both

1 0 9 . T.B.L. Webster, Hellenistic Poetry and Art (New York: Barnes and Noble, 196^), pp. 73-7^* Ih5

Homer and Apollonius the hero of the story is about to experience

destructive forces: the combined forces of the rivers against

Achilles, the machinations of Pelias against Jason. In both cir­

cumstances it is Hera who helps the heroes through their ordeals.

It is she who gets her son Hephaestus to aid Achilles against the

rivers and it is she who, throughout the Argonautica, helps Jason whenever trouble is present

The next hapax legomenon which Apollonius surely used with

its evocative power in mind, is énuxAGLouauv (l8).^^^ In Homer

(Od. 1 .3 5 1 ) Telemachus tells his mother that it is not wrong for

Phemius to sing of the sad nostoi of the Achaean heroes for every­ one "praises" the newest song. When Apollonius uses the word very early in his own poem, he is, I think, suggesting by implication that his is now the newest rendition in a long series of works

110. For a discussion of Hera and the development of the role she is to play in the poem, see Donald Norman Levin, Apollonius' Argonautica Re-examined, Vol. 1, The Neglected First and Second Books (Leiden: Brill, 1971), pp. 15-19.

111. Due to the argument presented below, I disagree with Fraenkel's reading etl xAeuououv with which he supplanted the hapax legomenon in his OCT edition of Apollonius. For his dis­ cussion upon this decision see Hermann Fraenkel, Noten Zu Den Argonautika Des Apollonios (Munich: Beck, I9 6 8 ), pp. 38-39. Mooney and Wellauer include the hapax legomenon. ll»6 dealing with the Argonaut expedition.^^^ Moreover, the fact that he uses the Homeric word as he glosses over the construction of the Argo which, as he says, former bards had "related", shows that his story will differ from previous accounts. Apollonius will select, omit, and add details as his poetic purposes dictate.

The Catalogue of Argonauts (23-227) is probably the most obvious Homeric artifice employed by Apollonius in this poem.

Its many similarities to the Catalogue of Ships in book two of the Iliad are manifestDelage points out the Homeric influence, especially in regard to geographical arrangement, as follows:

L'imitation d'Homère est flagrante. La Thessalie occupe chez les deux poètes la plus grande place; ils passent de la Loc-

112. For a survey of the use of the Argonaut story in earlier literature, see Couat, Alexandrian Poetry, pp. 315-320. Huxley discusses post Homeric but pre-Apollonian epics in which the Argo­ naut expedition played some part. G.L. Huxley, Greek Epic Poetry from Eumelos to Panyassis (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 19^9)» pp. 60-73; 80-82; 106-107. The success of Apollonius' poem probably caused the neglect and loss of many earlier ones on the same subject, as Myres points out. Myres, Homer and His Critics, p. 2 2 .

113. "It is generally agreed that Apollonius is deeply in­ debted to Homer's Catalogue; nor is there any indication that Apol­ lonius had any desire to disavow that indebtedness. Indeed he seems almost to have tried to call attention to it, for more than a quarter of the proper names of his catalogue are derived from the Homeric model, and fourteen of the Argonauts are ancestors of heroes in the Iliad, a constant reminder of the chronological relationship between the Argo's voyage and the siege of Troy, and possibly implying that Apollonius hoped to attract to his Argonauts the praise so largely and imperishably granted to their descendants." John Frederick Carspecken, "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic", Yale Classical Studies 13 (1952), p. ^4^4. Ih7

ride à Salmine par I'Eubee et I'Attique et ils énumèrent dans le même ordre les régions du Péloponnèse.

And yet Apollonius' catalogue does more than simply imitate Homer

or satisfy the demands of epic convention. Carspecken draws atten­

tion to the fact that the list of Argonauts was far from canonical

in Apollonius' time. Because the Argonaut story had received much

prior literary treatment, the number of those who had, in one ac­

count or another, been a part of the expedition exceeded one hun­

dred. Since the ancient ship was a fifty-oared vessel, Apollonius was forced to select his crew from a multitude of candidates.

Therefore, in presenting a catalogue of a new composition, Apol­ lonius clearly reveals his originality in handling this old tale.

The first hero mentioned by Apollonius in his catalogue is

Orpheus.His primary position is well appraised by Carspecken who writes:

Orpheus, with his divinely powerful gift of music, stands first, the subject of many

Hi*. Emile Delage, La Géographie Dans Les Argonautiques D'Apol­ lonios De Rhodes (Bordeaux! Feret and Son, 1930), p. 39-

115- Carspecken, "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic", p. 1+2.

Il6 . Parry argues that Apollonius, although disdaining the for­ mula, does allow his catalogue to reveal its influence. "His cata­ logue of the heroes who came to the quest of the fleece, by repeating verses of which the idea is 'and there came . . . ' , gives to these verses much the unperiodic force that we find in the like verses of the Catalogue in B— 'these were led by Milman Parry, "Enjambement in Homeric Verse", from Parry, The Making of Homeric Verse, p. 26l. legends and associated with religious rites, suggesting something of the air of magic which will pervade the whole poem and, as son of Calliope, an appropriate link with the invocation to the Muses which prefaces the catalogue; . . .

In describing this fabled musician (26 ff.) Apollonius relates a

few of his famous deeds; he had charmed with his music the rocks,

the rivers, and the oak trees. But it is the use of a Homeric

hapax legomenon which draws attention to his most famous exploit—

his visit to the underworld. Apollonius at line 32 calls Orpheus

an enapojyo'v (helperin Jason's trials. This word recalls the

Odyssean nekyia for Homer utilized it (Od. 11.1*98) in Odysseus'

visit to Hades. Here Achilles laments to Odysseus that he is

unable to be a "helper" to his aged father Peleus. Undoubtedly

Apollonius, in his attempt to portray fully the character of Or­ pheus, employed this Homeric word for its contextual association with a MaxcxBaoLS sùs "Acdou.^^^ In addition, this hapax legomenon

serves an auxiliary purpose by previewing a perfect example of a

son's concern for an aged father which contrasts noticeably with

1 1 7 . Carspecken, "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic", p. 1*6.

1 1 8 . Fraenkel sees the use of this word differently. "Die Wen- dung vom 1Heifer' die hier programmâtisch im ersten Abschnitt der Liste steht, wiederholt sich pluralisch am Schluss der Liste . . . ." Fraenkel, Noten Zu Den Argonaut ika, p. 1*5, n. 55-

1 1 9 . By using this word Apollonius subtly includes the idea of i katabasis, a marked feature of the Odyssey and of many subsequent epics, otherwise absent from the Argonautica. li(9

the Jason-Aeson scene in lines 263-26h (of. p. I5 0 ).

Throughout the Catalogue of Argonauts Apollonius intersperses

Homeric hapax legomena borrowed from the Catalogue of Ships. All

of these are proper nouns. Thus we find the following:

’Aldni;! Argon. 1 . 51 1 1 . 2 .6 8 2

KnpuvSov Argon. 1. 79 1 1 . 2 .5 3 8

OÙxaXt'nS Argon. 1 . 87 1 1 . 2 .7 3 0

Aùycvns Argon. 1 . 92 1 1 . 2 .5 6 2

’Apxaôt'ns Argon. 1 .1 2 5 1 1 . 2 .6 0 3

Teyenv Argon. 1 .1 6 2 1 1 . 2 .6 0 7

nsAAnvns Argon. 1 .1 7 7 1 1 . 2 .571+^^°

Also, Apollonius seems to be calling attention to the other Homer; catalogue, i.e. the Catalogue of Women in Odyssey 11 (225-330); from this Odyssean catalogue he selects these hapax legomena:

Hnpw Argon. 1 .1 1 9 Od. 1 1 .2 8 7

An6 n Argon. i.i1j6 Od. 1 1 .2 9 8

nepLHXupevos Argon. 1 .1 5 6 Od. 11.286

Hence Apollonius, in the use of hapax legomena in his catalogue, reveals a seemingly careful combination of elements drawn from the catalogues of both the Iliad and the Odyssey.

Apollonius uses two hapax legomena in depicting Jason's

120. Simpson and Lazenby believe that the inclusion of the Argonaut ’Aaxeptujv (35) in the catalogue shows the influence of the Homeric hapax legomenon ’AoTeptov (O. 2.735) found in Homer's Catalogue of Ships. R. Hope Simpson and J.F. Lazenby, The Catalogue of the Ships in Homer's Iliad (Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1970), p. IU2 . 150

sorrowing parents; both words recall Homeric scenes of lamentation.

The first word (26^) is the adverb évTUïïcts ("being closely wapped").

It describes Jason's father who, lying in bed "all wrapped up", groans

at the thought of Jason's departure. In Homer (ll^. 2U.I6 3 ), Iris

comes to Troy and finds Priam "wrapped tightly up" in his mantle la­ menting Hector's death. Certainly the Homeric word as employed

by Apollonius was calculated to suggest a father's extreme con­

cern for a son. This concern is made very poignant by the fact that

Apollonius has taken this hapax legomenon from the last book of the Iliad and used it in the first book of the Argonautica. In

so doing he has purposely inverted the general Homeric practice of developing the father-son relation at the end of an epic (e.g.

Odysseus-Laertes in the Odyssey; Achilles-Peleus, Hector-Priam in the Iliad). However, the word is designed to emphasize Aeson's fears, i.e. that Jason's departure and probable death will signal his own doom just as Hector's death signalled that of Priam. The second hapax legomenon is àpqu-neaaoOoa (270), used by Apollonius in a simile comparing Jason's mother to a young maiden: Alcimede, weeping, "clings" to her son's neck; the maiden, weeping, "clings" to her nurse's neck.^^^ In Homer (Od. 8.523) the word also occurs in a simile. Here Odysseus, listening to Demodocus' song, weeps like a woman who "clings" to her dead husband, knowing that, befeft

121. See Levin's argument "that YOUNG JASON: OLD ALCI.Ke DE = OLD NURSE: YOUNG GIRL". Levin, Apollonius' Argonautica Re-examined, Vol. 1, pp. 12-1*3. of a protector, she will shortly hecorae a slave. In using this

word which recalls the Homeric scene of a helpless woman, Apol­

lonius accentuates Alcimede's real fears; without Jason she has

no real guardian.

Two further hapax legomena which Apollonius used to recall

Homeric scenes are ènaveatav and éXeuKaûvovTO. Selected leader

of the expedition (at the bidding of Heracles who willfully ab­

stained), Jason addresses an assembly of the Argonauts. Upon

completion of his speech the men "rise" (ènaveoTav; 3 62) and

begin preparing the Argo for her voyage. In Homer (^. 2 .8 5 ) the

word also occurs in an assembly. Agamemnon calls a meeting of his

chieftains and tells them that the array must be tested by an order

to return home. (Having just received Zeus' message that the

Achaeans would now be victorious, Agamemnon's decision seems puzzling if not absurd.) After his speech Nestor says a few words whereupon the assembly "rises" and obeys the order. Apollonius' use of this hapax legomenon seems to support Hawaii's belief that much "of Book 1 is deliberately handled to present Jason as a weak and irresolute leader.The word helps to identify Jason and his situation with Agamemnon and his, thereby modelling the one

122. From antiquity until quite recently parents, experiencing the problems attendant with old age, depended completely upon their children for security. The loss of Jason, their only son, would be a severe blow to Aeson and Alcimede.

1 2 3 . Gilbert Hawaii, "Apollonius' Argonautica: Jason as Anti- Hero", Yale Classical Studies 19 (I9 6 6 ), pT 1^9» Cf. Carspecken, "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic", pp. 100-102. poor and insecure leader on the other. Apollonius employs the

second hapax legomenon, ÈXeuxatvovTO, as a literary show-word

fitting for the conventional scene in which a hero and his crew

propel their boat through the sea. In Homer (Od. 12.172), Odys­

seus' men "whiten" the water as they row their boat towards the

Sirens. Euripides (cf. p. 122) created a certain level of humor

by using this hapax legomenon in connection with Silenus and the

satyrs who "whiten" IT) the water in their quest for Bromius.

Apollonius' Argonauts row the Argo forward as the wake "gleamed white" (5^5 ) behind them. Later Vergil borrowed and slightly altered the scene as he wrote:

Vix e conspectu Siculae telluris in altum vela dabant laeti, et spumas sails aere ruebant.^^

Apollonius signals the important role "deceit" will play in his Leranian episode when at line 6OI "A9m (Mt. Athos) appears to the sailors as they near Lemnos. In the Iliad (lU.229) Hera, in her attempt to seduce her husband, leaves Olympus and touches down on "Mt. Athos" on her way to Lemnos. Here she asks Sleep to help her beguile Zeus. This word, because of its Homeric association with deceptive sex, introduces well the spirit which permeates the

Argonauts' stay on the island. Both Hypsipyle and Jason are por­ trayed as false characters. Not only does Hypsipyle lie to Jason about the fate of the Lemnian men, but also she has deceived her

124. Aeneid 1.34-35. fellow countrywomen about the fate of her father. Moreover, while

addressing the assembly of women (657-6 6 6 ) she counterfeits reasons why they should receive the Argonauts; the reader, however, detects the real reasons— the young woman's deprivation from sex.^^^ Her role as a deceitful person is further developed by Apollonius' em­ ployment of the hapax legomenon atpuXLOS- The Lemnian queen addresses Jason (792) with yuOouau aùwuXuoucLV ("flattering" or

“deceiving words"). AÙpûAuos is used in Homer (Od. 1.56) by Athene as she tells Zeus that Calypso is detaining Odysseus on Ogygia with giLpuAuoou Adyouau. Surely the word reveals a woman's power, often deceitful, to hold a man back from his set objective, be it home or the fleece. Analysing Jason Carspecken writes, "... his one significant contribution to the quest, apart from the fact that it is undertaken on his account, is his supreme beauty, which gains for him the love of women.Aware of his attraction and cer­ tainly of Hypsipyle's condition, he dons his heroic armor— a finely embroidered cloak^^^— and goes to meet the queen. He uses and

125. Lawall sees sex to be pervasive throughout this episode. "Jason mates with the queen, and the other Argonauts choose women at random. The scene teems with sexual imagery, involving such sym­ bols as plowing, sowing of seed, sleek cattle, and double gates. Even the name of the queen is symbolic: Hypsipyle, 'High Gates'." Lawall, "Apollonius' Argonautica: Jason as Anti-Hero", p. 150.

126. Carspecken, "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic", p. 1 2 1 .

127. The irony is blatant. Achilles' gift from the gods was his shield; Jason's a fancy outfit. Both reveal the nature of their bearer's heroism. 15)4

enjoys Hypsipyle but leaves her with little regret. Hera's de­

ception in the Homeric scene has become in its Apollonian counter­

part a two-edged sword.

In the assembly of Lemniades old Polyxo, her back "bent"

(xucpoCo; 67)4) with age, also stands up and addresses the women.

She voices that which Hypsipyle dared not utter, i.e. men are

needed for procreation.^^® In selecting the hapax legomenon xucpo's

Apollonius recalls the first assembly held at Ithaca in twenty years; here, too, an old member of the community (Aegyptius) "bent"

(Od. 2 .1 6 ) with age speaks to his fellow Ithacans. However, it is the next hapax legomenon, uttered by Polyxo in this speech, which possesses even more significant Homeric overtones. The old woman warns that the Thracians may appear just as "unexpectedly" (ùvwuo-

TCüs; 6 8 0 ) as the Argonauts have. This word hints at the final result of Jason's association with the young Lemnian queen. Al­ though the possibility exists that Hypsipyle may bear Jason a son

(896 -9 0 9 ), Apollonius avoids any direct mention of his birth. How­ ever, by selecting a hapax legomenon which in Homer (ll^. 21.39) describes a hostage caught "unaware" by Achilles, a hostage for whom

. . . ULOS ’Inaovos (Lvov è'ôüjme* (11^. 2 1 .)tl),

Apollonius has indirectly reminded us that Hypsipyle did, in fact.

1 2 8 . A marked difference exists, however. Polyxo sees men as a necessary means for producing a new generation. Hypsipyle and the younger women undoubtedly have their thoughts upon carnal pleasures. 155

bear Jason a son,

Apollonius places within the same line (8o6) two hapax lego­

mena— ôopuxTnTOtus and napuauov— both of which evoke a Homeric com­

parison. Hypsipyle narrates to Jason the story of the Lemnian

men's preoccupation with their Thracian concubines. She says

that these men, paying no attention to their lawful wives, "lay"

only with the "captives of their spears". Both words are found

in Homer in Iliad 9 . There Achilles informs Odysseus that Aga­ memnon's offer to return Briseis is not acceptable. He tells the three man embassy that now Agamemnon can "lie" (336) with her.

However, he goes on to relate that he had actually loved the girl even though she was a "slave of his spear" (3^3). Clearly Apol­ lonius has employed these words to underline the problems which

"spear won" concubines may present.

In his development of the Hylas episode, Apollonius includes three main characters; Hylas, Heracles, and Polyphemus. Al­ though the story is not borrowed from Homer, Apollonius makes effective use of the hapax legomena in telling it. Of course Apol­ lonius' Polyphemus is not the famous Cyclops of Odyssey 9. How­ ever, the Alexandrian poet seems specifically to select hapax lego­ mena which might recall the Homeric character. With the purpose of fashioning a new oar Heracles uproots a tree, great in both

1 2 9 . For a survey and analysis of arguments on who borrowed the episode, Theocritus or Apollonius, from the other, see Webster, Hellenistic Poetry and Art, pp. 65-6 6 . See also Levin, Auollonius' Argonautica Re-examined, Vol. 1, p. lli*, n. 1. 1%

length and "thickness" (ïïdxos; 1193). In Homer (Od. 9.324) the

vord describes Polyphemus' club. (Cf. p. 131 for Euripides' use

of this/hapax legomenon.) Vfhen Polyphemus, the Argonaut, hears

Hylas cry, he rushes off like a wild animal after sheen (TiocyvnaLv;

1246). This word is also found in Homer's Cyclops story (Od.

9.122). (Cf. p. 124 for Euripides' use of this word.) Thus Apol­

lonius appears to be displaying his erudition by selecting words

from Homer's tale of Polyphemus and using them in connection with

his own Polyphemus even though the two characters have only a name

in common.

Apollonius also employed Homeric hapax legomena quite fre­

quently in contexts where their meanings are clearly and carefully

altered from the Homeric meanings.

In zahlreichen Faellen sind homerische Woerter nicht nur in der ueblichen Bedeutung, sondern auch in abweichendem Sinne gebraucht. Eine solche Preisgabe der Norm pflegt man auf ein Missverstaendnis oder auf eigenwillige, be- wusste Umdeutung zurückzufuehren.130

For a long time it was the common assumption of scholars that the

Alexandrian poets used many Homeric words differently because they

and now generally accepted that these poets purposely altered the

130. Erbse, "Homerscholien und hellenistische Glossare bei Apollonios Rhodios", p. 175•

131. Seaton takes Buttmann to task for this practice. Seaton, "On the Imitation of Homer by Apollonius Rhodius", pp. 1-13. Homeric meanings in their efforts to create variety and contrast.

Moreover, occasionally they would use a Homeric word in two or

more different senses thus revealing alternative interpretations

given the word by ancient critics. Of all the hapax legomena

used in Argonautica 1 the following seem to be employed most

clearly with these purposes in mind:

Çuvoxn Argon. 1 .1 6 0 , 11. 23.330 7F4 , 1006

èitauTOos Argon. 1.4l4 n . 1 :3 3 5

OtpWLTCpOS Argon. 1.643, n^. 1 .2 1 6 1286

GTin3oAos Argon. 1 .6 9 4 Od. 2 .3 1 9

ÙTîogXnônv Argon. 1 .6 9 9 1 1 . 1 .2 9 2

napaugcxTus Argon. 1 .7 5 4 1 1 . 2 3 .1 3 2

àyauôyEVOs Argon. 1 .8 9 9 Od. 2 0 . 16

An analysis of ocpwuTcpos, ùioglnônv, and ayctLo'yevos will serve to reveal the manner in which Apollonius used these Homeric hapax legomena. ZcpmuTepos, a dual possessive adjective in Homer, receives varied treatment by Apollonius.

Now acpGTEpos [aqxüLTGpos] has, 1. the relation of the third person (not reflective) in all numbers; and thus acputiEpos stands for his in Apollon. 1.643. . . . 2. that'of the reflec­ tive third person in all numbers; thus again aq)ü)üTepos is used for 'his own' (suus) 3 .6 0 0 . . . . and 3. that of the pure reflective without a person, consequently relating equally to either; and so we find oçwuTEpos for thine, 3, 3 9 6 .^ 3 2

Homer uses the adverb ùnogAn'dnv to mean "interrupting" (cf. L.S.J. ,

s.v. ùnoBAnônv):

Tov 6 ’ a p ’ ùîiogAndnv npcugcTO ôCos ’AxuAAeus (II. 1.292).

But Apollonius employs it in the sense of "in reply":

. . . «at ToCov uno3An6nv enos nüôa (Argon. 1.699)-

The editors of L.S.J. cite Quintus Smyrnaeus, a fourth century

A.D. epic poet, as the only other author to use the word in its

Apollonian sense. Of àyauopau Seaton writes as follows :

ayauoyau. Of this Merkel says "u l6 cum duplici explicatione Scholl, ayav QauyaÇov- Tos n X“AenauvovTDS, yeyepoyevou n è«TiAnT- Toyevou. Apud Ap. 1.899 videtur esse yeycpeoQat, III.IOI6 QauydtCeuv. In u I6 the sense is clearly "being indignant at," cf. 3 67 âyaaoctyevou «axà è'pya. A good example, not of real extension of meaning, but of preservation of two rival interpretations.^33

From this study we may conclude that Apollonius made critical use of the Homeric hapax legomena in composing the Argonautica.

1 3 2 . Buttman, Lexilogus, p. 1*22, n. 6 . Cf. Erbse, "Homerschol­ ien und Hellenistische Glossare bei Apollonios Rhodios", pp. I66-I6 7 .

133. Seaton, "On the Imitation of Homer by Apollonius Rhodius", p. 8 . Cf. Merkel, Apollonii Argonautica, p. dix. Oswald finds it difficult to understand how Apollonius could utilize Homeric words so effectively "without the aid of a

Gehring or Ebeling".^^^ He overlooks, however, the fact that countless lexical aids on Homer's vocabulary did exist and were certainly used by Apollonius. But the irony of the situation may lie in the fact that these old Homeric words, now critically employed by Apollonius in his story of Jason and the golden fleece, were first borrowed by Homer himself from that old tale of the 'Apyw naotycAouaa (Od. 12.70)

13^. Michael M.F. Oswald, "The Use of the Prepositions in Apollonius Rhodius Compared with their Use in Homer" (Ph.D. dis­ sertation, University of Notre Dame, I90 U), p. 20L.

135- For the view that Homer borrowed much from the older tale of the Argonaut expedition, see Page, The Homeric Odyssey, p. 2. APPENDIX I

Index of the Homeric Hapax Legomena

aayns Od 11.575 AR

àgaxÉw (+) Od 1|.2!+9

’ABapBapen 11 6.22

"ABas 11 5 .1^8 AR 1.

"ABuou 11 13.6

"ABAnpos 11 6.32 ctBAns 11 H.UT AR aBAriTOS ( + ) 11 ^.5^0 aBpopos 11 13.1+1 AR

àBpoTclÇü) ( + ) 11 10.65

CtBpOTOS 11 1 I+.78

’ABuôdôev 11 I+.500

’ABuôdÔu 11 1 7 .581+

"ABuôos 11 2.836 AR 1.

’ AyctOuv 11 2I+.2I+9 ayadopaL Od 20.16 AR 1. AR ’AyaMAenS 11 16.571

’AyapepvoVLônS Od 1.30

’ Ayaprîôn n 1 1 .71+0

âyayos n 3 .1+0 Eur Ifil

âyavôcppwv ^2 0 . 1*67 AR

’Aycmnvwp II 2.609

’AyaaÔEVnS II 2.621*

à y â o T o v o s Od 12.97

’Ayauri ^ 18.1*2 Eur

àyeAnôov II I6 .I6O AR 1.1050 AR ayepaoTos ^ 1.119 Eur AR

àyMdçopat II 17.722

’AyAcxu'n n 2 .6 7 2

âyAauçopau II 10.331

àyvüjs Od 5 .7 9 Eur ayovos ^ 3 .1*0 Eur AR 1.601*

àyopnTÛs (+) Od 8 .1 6 8

"Aypuos II ll*.117

àyptôtpwvos M 8 .29 I*

àypovôpos Od 6 .IO6 aypoTps Od 1 6 .2 1 8 Eur ARR (fern.)

àypôiaaü) Od 5-53 aypwoTLS Od 6 .90

àyupTctÇw ( + ) M 1 9 .201*

àyXLSotôns Od 5.1*13 AR

àyx^voos Od 13.332

âyxü) II 3 .3 7 1 à ô an y o v u a Od 2h.2hh

àôdtyotOTOs Il 9 .1 5 8

àôrîpuTos n 1 7 .it2

’AôpnaTELa Il 2 .8 2 8 AR 1 .1 1 1 6 AR ’AôpnoTn Od U.123

’AôpnaTuvn Il 5 .1+12

àexnAtos (+) Il 1 8 .7 7

àeXXns (+ ) Il 3 .1 3

àeX nns (+) Od 5 .1+08

àeXïïTeu) Il 7.310

«EVCtOlV Od 1 3 .1 0 9

àepYÔa Od 24.251

àEOLcppoaûvn Od 1 5 .1+70

â ç a Od 22.184

’A ç eJ ôds Il 2 .5 1 3

açü) ^ 4.487

ànôwv Od 1 9 .5 1 8

an^Eoao) n 1 0 .4 9 3 AR 1 .1 1 7 1 AR ànauXos (+) 0 5 .8 7 6 ariTos n 21.395

à^EEU Od 1 8 .3 5 3

àôXnTn'p Od 8.164

' A9ows n 14.229 AR 1 .6 0 1 aô u p o s Od 10.463 163

Il I5 .36I1 Eur ARR

AÙaxds Il 2 1 .1 8 9 Eur AR

Atyatuv Il l.Î40ii Eur AR 1 .1 1 6 5

AÛYEÛôns Il 1 .2 6 5 auYEOs Od 9 .1 9 6

AÔYtâAeua Il 5 .^ 1 2

AuYEAu(|, n 2 .6 3 3

AuYLva Il 2 .5 6 2 Eur

AÙ'yeov Il 2 .571*

ALYditTEOs (vir) Od 2 .1 5 aÉ'çnAos (v.l.) n 2 .3 1 8 aù'riTOS ( + ) Il I8.1il0

AÜ9LXES Il 2 .71*1*

Audpn n 3 .11*1 Eur auOpnYEVETDS (+) Od 5 .2 9 6 aiLxn Il 1 5 .7 0 9

OtLXWS Il 2 2 .3 3 6 aupotpdpoxTOS Od 2 0 .31*8 aûyuAcos Od 1 .5 6 AR 1 .7 9 2 ARR aCpojv Il 5 .1*9 Eur

Aupaiv n 4 .2 9 6 Eur aùvapE'TDS ( + ) Il 1 6 .3 1

AËVUOS 2 1 .2 1 0

AÙvdOEV n 4 .5 2 0 l6H

aCvddev (+) Il 7.97

aôvoTiaôns Od 18.201 AR

aùdXAüJ Od 20.27

aùoAoMUTpns Il 5.707

auoAdïïCüAos Il 3.185

aônneus Il 21.87 ARR

Au nu Il 2.592

AÙnÛTLos Il 2 .60I+

"Aupos Od 1 8 .7 3

aû'auos Il 214.376 Ear AR

aùauAdepyos (v.l.) Il 5.1+03

AÙoupn^ev Il 8.301»

aûauyvriTnp Il 2l».3l»7

aùouyvriTns Od 8 .2 5 8

AÙ'aupvos Il 1 1 .3 0 3

Auowu Od 1 1 .2 5 9 AR 1. 253; 899; ARR

aùxpctÇü) n l».32l» Ear atü) ( exspirare) ( + ) Il 1 5 .2 5 2 Ear a«av9a Od 5 .3 2 8 ARR

"AnaoTos Od 11» .336 Eur AR 1. 321; 1082

âxGpoExùyns Il 20.39 axEoya Il I5 .39 I+ 165

’AMEaaauevos Il 21.lk2 aMEOxds Il 13.115 aHpAnTOS Od 10.329

à x p p a a u o s Od 9.205

â xôxnTos Il 17.75 axAnpos Od ll.i»90

àxpn Il 10.173

à xpnvds Od 23.191

â x v p a x ts Od 1 0 .1 6 1 cîxoAos Od 1 7 .2 2 2

âxopLOTca Od 21.281»

étXOVTUOTÛS ( + ) n 2 3 .6 2 2 ax o o p o s Il 2.213 a xoupos Od 7.61»

à x p ts n 2 1 .1 2

’Axpuauwvn n 11».319

àxpLTOcpuAAos ( + ) ^ 2 . 8 6 8

àxpoxeAauvtâü) n 21.2kg

â x p d x o p o s Il 1».533

'AxpovEws Od 8.111

àxpoTidpos Od 3.1»63

' Axxaun Il 18.1»1

’AxTopuôns n 1 6 .1 8 9 AE 1.72 ARR ’AxTopÉs Od 23.228 i66

cÎmuAos Od 10.21*2

àXaAv5HTnyotu ( + ) ^ 1 0 .91 ^

’ AMaaropL'ôns Il 20.1*63

àXatüTu's ( + ) Od 9 .5 0 3

âAônoMü) Il 2 3 .5 9 9

ÔAea ( fu g a ) n 22.301

ôAea (calor) Od 1 7 .2 3

’AAeynvopuôns Il 11*.503 ctA etas ( + ) Od 2 0 .1 0 8

’AA emtpuwv 11 1 7 .6 0 2

’ AA emtujp Od 1*.10

àAeÇdtveiJos Od 11* .529

à A eÇ ntnp Il 2 0 .3 9 6

ôAeÇu-HaMos Il 10.20

àAGTpei3oj Od 7 .IOI*

ÔAETpUS Od 2 0 .1 0 5

o Aeü) Od 2 0 .1 0 9

' AAnuov n 6 .2 0 1

’AAôaua Il 9 .5 5 5 ÇL 39

âAOopau Il 5 .1*17

ôALans (+ ) Od 1*.36i

'A A uapTos Il 2 .5 0 3

•AAu'n Il 1 8 .1*0

àALOTpE(pnS ( + ) Od 1*.1*1*2 1^7

àXuïïAoos n 12.26 AR

’AAMolvôpn Od U.I26

"AAMavôpos II 5 «678

"AAxnoTLS II 2 .7 1 5 Eur

'AAxupuôns Od 22 .2 3 5

’AAxtnnn Odl|.12it

’AAxpotu'wv (v.l.) Odl5.2it8

’AAhuovh II 9 .5 6 2

âAMUojv ^ 9 .5 6 3 Eur AR I.IO96 AR àAAdyvwTos (+) Od 2.366

àAAoetôns Od 13.19^

àAoâü) n 9*568

àAddev (+) Il 21.335

’AAditn n 2.682 AR 1.51

"AAos n 2 .6 8 2

ÜAAoços II 1 0 .2 5 8

’AAû3as Od 2U.30i»

’AAden II 2.8 5 7

àAuoMCïVü) Od 2 2 .3 3 0

àAuCTOü) n 2 2 .7 0

àAcpeaugobos ^ 18.593

'ApctôELa II lB.^8 ctua^os n 5.5 8 7 ARR

àpaQdvü) ^ 9*593 AR 168

ôwaÇLTds I l 2 2 . l l t 6 Eur ARE

àyctpa I l 2 1 .2 5 9

àpapToeitns Il 13.821+

AycxpUYKEVÎs n 2 3 .6 3 0

àyaTpoxcxüJ ( v . l . ) ( + ) Od 15.1+51

àyotxnTu' I l 2 1 . 1+37

àyBAnônv (+) n 22.1+76

ày3oAâônv Il 2 1 . 361 +

àyEvnvoü) ( + ) Il 13.562

àyeTpoeni^s Il 2 .2 1 2

à y n x n p n 1 1 .6 7

cîynTos I l 1 9 .2 2 3

àynxavL oi Od 9 .2 9 5 AR 1 .6 3 8 ; 1233; 1286 ARR

’ A yuoüjôapos I l 1 6 .3 2 8

àyuTpoxtxwves n 16.1+19

ayuxOaAdets n 21+.753

âyyopuci Od 20.76

à y v u o v Od 3 . 1+1+1+

’ A yvL ods Od 1 9 .1 8 8

àyoynT L I l 1 1 .6 3 7

à y d ô e v Od 1 .1 0

àyougds Od 1I+.52I

à y o t g d s I l 1 3 .7 9 3 169

’ AyoKctaiv I I , 8 .2 7 6

àyTtexü) Od 6 .2 2 5 E u r ; Cjr 3l+it AR 1 . 32L AR apïïuÇ I I 2 2 .lt69 E u r

’ AyuôdcûV Od 1 1 .2 5 9

'AyuxAau II 2.58H Eur AR

àvKpayetpopao ^18.37 AR

àycpapctgeü) ( + ) n ,2 1 . 1*08

àpcpDpetpns ^1 . 1*5

àpcpuâxw ^ 2.316

âp(pu3a a ü s ( + ) ^ 5-623

’ ApeptYEVeuot ^ 2 .5 9 3

àptpuôauw (") Il 6.329 AR

àpcpuôoiaus II 15.309

àptpuôpucpns ^ 2.700

àpcpu'ôpucpos ( + ) ^ 1 1 .3 9 3

àpipuôupos Od1*. 81*7 AR 1.91*0

àpcptçâvü) ( + ) I l 1 8 .2 5

àpiptôaXns n 22.1*96

’Apcptôen Od 19.1*16

àptpuôéüj Od 10.1*13

’ AptpLQdn , ^ 18.1*2

àpqiUMGCxÇü) ( + ) Od i l * .12

"ApçLxAos n 16.313

àpcptxopos II 17.677 ( + ) Od 2h.2h2

' ApipuXoxos Od I 5 .2 U 8

àycpbXÛHn n 7.1*33

àycpbpctoyab Od 2 0 .1 5 2

àyçuyuxdoyau (+) Od 1 0 .2 2 7

’ AycptvcÎMn Il i S .ltli

àyçtÇ E ü) ( + ) Od 2 3 .1 9 6

âycpbïïeXoyai. Od 1 .3 5 2

âytpbuepbO T É tpoyat ( + ) Od 8 .1 7 5

â y (p b n e p b a T püjcpdü) U 8.31*8

ÔytpbTlbTtTü) Od 8 .5 2 3

àycpbixoTctoyab I l 2 .3 1 5

àycpb-OTpciTdioyab ( + ) n 1 1 .7 1 3

àycpbG TpcçnS ( + ) n 11.1*0

àycpbTpoyéü) ( + ) Od 11.820

àycpbtpoBÉoyab (v .l.) I l 1 6 .2 9 0

ô y ç b x d o x w n 2 3 .7 9

àytpb'xUTOS n 2 0 .1 H 5

’ AytpÔTepos I l 16.1+15

ày tp o u ô b s ( + ) Od 1 7 .2 3 7

dycpwTOS Od 22.10

àywyryros Il 1 2 .1 0 9

àvaBÉBpuxE ( y.i.) ( + ) n 1 7 .51*

’ AvotBncjdvEüJS Od 8.113 àvaSpexii) Il 17.5»+

àvaôepxoyau Il li*.i+36

àvaôeopn Il 2 2 .1+69

àvotônAe'ü) ( + ) Il 1 .2 3 6

àvaôpüjoxo) Il 1 3 .1 I+O Eur

àvaupojv Il 5 .3I+2

àvaxovTtÇü) Il 5.113

avaMoitTO) Od 21.1+7

àvaMpctÇü) Od llt.lt67

àvaxpepdvvupu Od 1.1+ltO

àuaxTopuos Od 1 5 .3 9 7

àva«uy3oiALCtÇü) ( + ) n 1 6 .3 7 9

àvapaLyâo) ( + ) Il 2 0 .1+90

àvayâaoü) Od 1 9 .9 2

âvapevo) Od I9 .3I+2 Eur; Cjr 5llt

àvayeTpEü) Od 12.1t28 Eur

àvayLyvnoHO) Od 3.211 Eur; Cjr 152

âvayopyOpü) Od 1 2 .2 3 8

àvveoyau (+) Od 1 0 .1 9 2

ôtvavTot ( + ) Il 2 3 .1 1 6

àvaÇnpotcvüJ Il 2 1 .3I+7

àvanaûüj Il 1 7 .5 5 0 Eur; Çjr 582

àvomeupü) n 2 .1+26 Eur

àvaiteTctvvuyL (») n 1 2 .1 2 2 Eur àvannàdu) ^ 1 1 .3 7 9

àvctnouvos ( + ) 11 1 .9 9

àvâïïuaTos Od 11.274

àvaoeûoyau (+) ^ 11.458

àvaoïïdüj II 13.574 Eur AR (*)

àvaoTEvaxtÇtD ( + ) Il 10.9

àvaaTpcütpctu) 0 ^ 2 1 .3 9 4

àvotaxETÔs Od 2.63 Eur

àvaTéXXüi ^ 5.777 AR 1.501; 601 ; 7 7 6 ; 810 ARR

àuctTuenyu II 22.100 Eur AR 1.1237 ARR (* )

âvaToXn pd 12.4 Eur AR I.85

àva(pav6(5v ^ I6.I78

àva

âuôpcÎYPua ( + ) I l 1 4 .5 0 9

’Av6pou.yovL6ns ^ 7.188

àvôpaMcts W 13.14

àvôpânoôov 7.475

à v ô p ax ^ n s Od 1 0 .1 2 1

âvôpoMyriTos ( + ) I l 1 1 .3 7 1

àvôpocpâyos Od 1 0 .2 0 0

àveÉyüJV ( + ) Od 3 .3 4 8

àveyooH eitns ( + ) ^ 1 6 .2 2 4 ’Aveuüjpeua 2.521

àveptüTcîü) Od L .251 Eur

âvEOTuos II 9 .6 3

àvE(peAos Od 6.1*5

àvnpEAMTOs ( + ) Od 9 .1*39

àvnvo9E(v) Il 1 1 .2 6 6 (v.l.) Od 1 7 .2 7 0

àvnvuuTOs Od 1 6 .1 1 1

’AvdEpJôns 1*.1*88

’AvôEputüv ni*. 1*73

àvôE'puÇ 11 2 0 .2 2 7

àvÔE'ü) Od 1 1 .3 2 0 Eur

’Av9nôüjv II 2 .5 0 8

av^uvos Od 9.81*

âvOpaHua n 9.213 358

àvUÔpWTL ^ 1 5 .2 2 8

ÙVtTtTÔTIOUS ^ 16.235 avüitTos II 6.266

àuLXVEUW ^ 22.192

àvoÀEÔpos (+) n 13.76

àvoTiaüa Od 1.320

â v o a o s Od il*.255 Eur

à v doT uyos Od l*.l82 Eur

â vooT os Od 2l*.528 Eur

àvoÛTaxos Il_ l*.5l*0

àvouxnTU II 2 2 .3 7 1 n h

"Avxeua II 6.I6O

àvTEXw 0^ 22.7^ Eur avTnoTUS (+) 0^ 2 0 .3 8 7

àvTtôupos Od 1 6 .1 5 9

'AvTUMAeua Od 1 1 .8 5

"AvtlmXos Od it.286

’AvTLOTtri Od 1 1 .2 6 0 AR 1.735 ARR avTUTtepauos Il_ 2.635 ARR

’AvxJtpovos ^ 2 it. 250

'Avxpwu ^ 2 .6 9 7

àvüj^Eüj Od 15-553

àvuuoxL ( + ) Od it. 92

àvtüuaxos n 2 1 .3 9 AR 1 .6 8 0 ARR àvùjvupog Od 8 .552 Eur aÇuAos n 1 1 .1 5 5

"AguAos n 6.12

âoLôupos ^ 6 .3 5 8 Eur aouxos 11^ 1 8 .5 3 6

ùtidÎYXw Od 1 9 .2 3 0

ânaetpu) 21.5^3

’Anauods ^ 2 .8 2 8

àuduaaü) II 21.23it

ànauxuçü) Od 2.78

àïïdAapvos n 5 .5 9 7 Cjr 598 175

àïïaXoctü) Il 1». 522

ànaAoTpetpns Il 2 1 .3 6 3

ànapctm (») Il 1 8 .3 !*

ànavuo) Od 7 .3 2 6

àïïapeoxü) Il 19.183

àncxTnAôs n 1.526

àitaTupdü) ( + ) Il 13.113

àiteuAriTnp Il 7.96

'AneupaCos Od 7.8

’Aueûpn^ev Od 7.9

àuEbpuTOS Od 10.195

àTte«Aav9ctvopat ( + ) Od 21*. 39!*

àTieyÉu) n 11*. 1*37

ànepwEÛs (+) Il 8.361

àuEptjüEüJ ( + ) Il 16.723

àitnpavTos Od 19.282

(iïïn'üJpos ( + ) Od 1 2 .1*35

ântOTE'ü) Od 1 3 .3 3 9

ànuoxü) Od 11.95

à'nvEUOTOs Od 5.1*56

âno0AûÇ(jj Il 9.1*91

anoyULOw n 6.265

anoyupvdw Od 1 0 .3 0 1

àïïoôE'xopau n 1.95 Eur AR 176

ànoôi-dpat ( + ) Il 5.763

àuoôoxpdü) Od 9.372

âïïoôdvü) ( + ) Od 2 2 .3 6 k

àïïoetxü) ( + ) Il 3 .W

àTto9aupdÇü) Od 6 .1*9

àndôeoTos Od 17.296

ànodupLos Il 11*.261

àjlOLxdÇüJ Od 12.135 Eur

ànoMEUpü) (*) Il 2 3 .11*1 Eur

ànoxnÔEW Il 23.1*13

àïïoxAdvü) Od 19.556

aitoMoapeo) Od 7.232

ànoHpepdvvupu Il 23.879

aTtoMpdvü) Il 5.12 Eur m 1.1351

âïïoAedgü) Od 7.107

ânoAeïïo) n 2 1 .1*55 a : 2 3 7

ànoAuxpâopai. Il 2 1 .1 2 3

âitoAouü) (*) Od 6.219

àîiopLpvnoxopotu Il 2 l*.l*28 Eur

ànopuôeopau Il 9.109

àuoÇdü) Il 9.1*1*6 (v.l.) Od 9.326

ànonanTadvw (+) ^ 11*. 101

ânonAnaoü) (v.l.) Od 1 0 .1*1*0 àitoitAvJvo) Od 6 . 9 5

à ïïo ïïp o a u p e ü ) ( + ) Od 17.457

ànoïïpoTeyvü) Od 8.475

ctTidpOntos I l 1 2 . 1 1

à ïïd p v u p a c I l 5.105 AR 1.8 AR à n o p p u y e u ) ( + ) Od 2.52

aTtooMuôvripo I l 2 3 . 4

(SmooMUôyauvüJ ( + ) I l 2 4 . 6 5

ânooTuAgü) Od 3.4 o 8

aitO TpAoD Od 9.117

cinoT pü3(ü Od 17.232

âïïÔTpOTtOS Od 1 4 . 3 7 2

âïïoupoço) ( + ) n 2 2 . 4 8 9

ànoxâçopai. Od 11.95

anpoTupaoTos Il 19.263

à iiT n v I l 9.323

àïïTOGTtpS ( + ) n 8.209

âïïiîpYüJTOS ( + ) Od 1 1 . 2 6 4

"ApaBes (v .l.) Od 4 . 8 4

ctp a B o s I l 1 0 . 3 7 5

’ A p a t^ u p e n I l 2.571

’ApyecxôriS n 16.417

àpY ^ T tous n 2 4 . 2 1 1

"A p Y u ooa I l 2.738 178

apYwa (+) Od lit.1*1+6

"Apyoaôe n 2.31*8

’ApYüî Od 12.70 AR 1 .1*; 386 525; 59i; 633; 72!*; 953 ARR ' A pédouaa Od 13.1*08 ctpeMTOs Il 19.150

’ ApeTcîtüV Il 6.31

âpnoxTâpevos (+) Il 22.72

àpSpeü) Il 7.302 AR 1.131*1*

âpô y o o s Od 16.1*27 AR

"Apupou Il 2.783

'ApLOgas Il 17.31*5

àpuatpaAns ( + ) Od 17.196

’ Apu'ojv Il 23.31*6

’ApMaôua Il 2.603 AR 1.125

"Apya n 2.1*99

àppaTonriYÔS n i*.i*85

àppüTpoxua Il 23.505

' A ppovbôns Il 5.60

’ApvaCos Od 18.5

CtpOTOS Od 9.122 AR

àpnctKTnp Il 2U.262

' ApnaAuüJV n 13.61*1* apnn Il 19.350 ARR a p p n to s Od l4 .!t6 6 AR 1.917 AR ’A paLvoos n 11.626

’ ApTOMt'n Od 1 0 .1 0 8 AR 1.957

àpTüETinS n 22.281

àpTuq)pü)V Od 2If.261

' A pûgas Od I5.H26

apXEMOMOS n 5.63

’AaaCos 11 11.301

aanpoiVTOS n iG.if85

' AOUMTI n 2.560

’ Aouos n 2.If61

CtPUS 11 21.321

Od If.788 ctpneppos n 20 .3 0 3

’ AaïïlnôtüV n 2.511 ctaxaxus 11 2 .1 4 8

’ AOTÉptOV 11 2.735

’A a x e p ts Od 4 .8 4 6

’ Aax\5aXos 11 6.29 aaxuSowTns (+) 11 24 .7 0 1

’ AaxudxGua n 2.658

’Aaxuo'xn 11 2.513

’AaxunuXos n 21.209

’ AocpaAdwv Od 4.216 àacpcxpayos II 22.328

àaxdXXüi Od 2.193 Eur

àxaActtppaiv ^6 .hOO

aidXXti) Il 13.27

àTcpgns II 13.299 AR 1.1012

ctxdpGnTos II 3.63

ÔteXtis Od 17.5^6 Eur

ÛTepapvos Od 23.167

ctTepiios ( + ) I l 6.285

àxéü) ^ 20.332

ÙtuÇü) ^ 20.166 Eur AR 1 .478; 6l5 ARR aTuyoa Od 13.1^2 Eur

oxpancTog Od 13.195 ARR

ctTpuKTOs Od 21.151

'ATuyvudôns 21 5.581

’ATÛyvuos II 16.317

aùauva) Od 9*321

aùydçui II^ 23.458 Eur AR 1 .155; 1231 AR AÙYnudôns ii_ 2.624 avoaxds II. 13.4l

aüpa Od 5.469 Eur; 44 AR 1.1159 ARR aÙCTTaXeos Od 19-327 ARR auTctypETOg Od l6.l48 ARR aùxoôuôaMTOs Od 22.347 I8l

aÔTcJôtov ( + ) Od

auTOETES Od 3.322

auTOKaauYvnTn Od 10.137 Eur ARR

AUTOvdn Od 18.182 Eur

auTOVuxd II 8.197 AR 1.1019 AR aÛToaTotôLn ( + ) 1 3 .3 2 5

auToaxEôct ( + ) ^ 16.319

AuTocpovos ^ 4 .3 9 5

auToxdo)VOS ( + ) ^ 23.826

auxdvtos Od 3.450

aùxwEw Od 24.250

aüü) (aüo) v.l.), Od 5.490 (incendere)

atpaAos ^ 10.258

âcpanapTOETins ( + ) II 3.215

oKpavôctvü) Od 16.387

àtpapiictÇü) Il 13.189 Eur AR

atpdpTEpos II. 23.311

à(pdü) n 6.322

’AcpELôas Od 24.305

acpnpau ( + ) ^ 15.106

àçn'Tüjp II 9 .4o4 dcpAauTov n 15.717 AR 1.1089 ARR àcpAouopds ^ 15.607

à(poïïAdÇüJ ^ 23.26 àifpéüi Il 11.282 AR 1.1327

àcppHTüip ( + ) Il 9.63

àcppovetü n 15.101+ Eur cttpuXAos n 2 .1+25 Eur

àpuoyETOs n 11.1+95

«xepôos Od ll+.io

’Axepüjv Od 10.513 Eur AR 1 .61+1+ ARR «xoXos Od 1+.221

ôiXPnMoaûvn Od 17.502

àxupyua Il 5.502

’ Aijieuôns n 18.1+6

à(ljES Il 5.1+87 Eur AR ctüjpos Od 12.89 Eur

Bdôpv Il 13.516

Ba^xAns Il 16.591+

Bot^uAnuos (v.l.) n 18.550 AR 1.830

Baôûvti) n 23.1+21

BaOuppcuins Il 21.195

Baôûaxobvos Il 1+.383

BapBotuvu) Il 10.375

BâïïTü) Od 9.392 Eur AR 1.183 AR BapBapdqxüVos Il 2.867

Bctpûdu) Il 16.519 AR 1 .1+3 ARR

BaauAnbS Il 6.193 Eur ARR gaTLEua 11 2.813

gtXTOS Od 24.230

3naact 11 2.532 gunvwp 11 11.92

3AnTpov 11 15.678

3Anxn . Od 12.266 Cjr 1,8

3Aoaup5iTius ( + ) 11 11.36

3oaypuos 11 2.533

SonAaaua n 11.672

3onxûs Od 1.369

3ou3n ^ 2.712

3ou3nus n 2.711

3oaus 11 19.268

3oTn'p Od 15.504

30T0V 11 18.521 Eur; Cjr 333

3oTpu6dv 11 2.89

3oTpus 11 18.562 Eur; 192, 469 3ovj3otos Od 13.246

3od3pwoTus 11 24.532

3ou3o5v n 4.492

3ou6euPV n 16.572

3nu«oAu'6riS 11 15.338

3ouAeuTns 11 6.114

3ounAnÇ n 6.135 18L gOUtpOVEü) ( + ) Il JM 6

SOWTHS Od 5 .2 7 2 epaôuTTÎs Il 19.HU

3pe'(pos Il 2 3 .2 6 6 Eur gpexpôs Il 5 .5 8 6 gpucxpGws Il i .Hob gpo'ço) H H. 223 Eur gpun'nuos ( + ) Il 1 3 .5 2 1 gpoyeü) ^ I6 .6H2 AER

3po'yos n 1 H.396 Eur ARR gpÔTEOS Od 1 9 .5H5 AR

BpoTo'opau Od 11.Hl gpuoEuaû Il 2 .5 8 3

Bpûü) Il 1 7 .5 6 Eur gûgXuvos Od 2 1 .3 9 1 Eur gûMTns Od 10.20 AR guoads Il 2 H.8 O gduj Od H.I3H

BwAos Od 1 8 .37H Eur ARR gWOTpEW Od I2 .I2H gü)TtC(VEtpCl Il 1 .1 5 5 rclunuos Od 7 .32H raXaiEua Il 1 8 .H5 yauXos Od 9 .2 2 3 AR 185

YeXaatds Od 8.307

yeXodos II. 2.215

yevGLcis Od l6.1j6 Eur AR I.Ut U

YevvoiLOS II 5 .2 5 3 Eur; C;^ 1+1, 28 6 ,6 5 6

repauaxds Od 3.177 Eur; Cjr 295 AR

YHpus ^ 1+.1+37 Eur AR 1.121+1+ AR YXaMTOcpc+Yos II 13.6

rXadxn 1 8 .3 9

YXauHtdü) ^ 2 0 .1 7 2 yXauxds ^ I6 .3I4 Eur; I6 rXaçdpau ^ 2 .7 1 2

YAnvos II 2I+.192 AR rAuacts II 2 .50I+

YAuxdOupos 11^ 2 0 .1+67

YAwxds II 2I+.27I:

Yvwpupos Od 1 6 .9

Yo'pcpos Od 5 .21+8 AR 1 .3 6 9 ; 1005 ARR ro v d e a o a ^ 2 .5 7 3

FopYuQdijjv I^ 8 .3 0 2

Fouvgûs ^ 2 .71*8 Eur

YPo+Ca Od 1 .1+38 Eur

FpaCa ^ 2 .1+98

Ypa+tTds Od 21+.229 AR

Fpnvtxos ^ 1 2 .2 1 186

Y O vat«eüos Od 11.1*37 E u r

rOpau Od I1.5OO

rupotbn Od U.5OT

YUpds Od 19.21*6

rupTüdôriS n 11*.512

rupxwvn n 2.738

YüJpvÎTOS Od 21.9I*

A atôaX os 11 18.592 E u r

ô a uxn^e v Od 10.216

ôauxpdv (+) Il U.262

ôatxpoaùvn (+) Od 16.253

ôauxvjs ( + ) n 22.1*96

Aauxojp Il 8.275

ÔOMpOïïAüJü) ( + ) Od 19.122

Actyaaos Il 12.183

Aavdn n 11*.319

ôavo's Od 15.322

Aapôavun Il 20.216 E u r AB 1.931

ôap^âvü) Od 2 0 .ll*3

ô a a y d s n 1.166 E u r

ôotaïïXnxbS Od I5.23I*

ôctadpaXXos Od 9.1*25 360

AauXb's Il 2.520

ôdipvri Od 9.183 E u r ARR 187

ôacpoLveds Il 1 8 .5 3 8

6e a T (o ) Od 6 .2l»2

ô e eAos 11 1 0 .1*66

ÔEÜ Il 9 .3 3 7 Eur; C;^ 201, !*72 ôetônyw v Il 3 .5 6

ôeue Abdto Od 1 7 .5 9 9

ÔEuAn Il 2 1 .1 1 1

ôedAoyaL (+) Od 7.289

ôeCya n 5.682 AR 1.632; 979 ARR ôeÉuvnoTos Od 17.170

Aeuonvùjp Il 17.217

ÔEMTnS (+ ) Od l*.2l*8

ôevôu AAü) Il 9.180

AeÇayevn n 18.1*1*

AeÇ tdôns Il 7.15

ôepTpov Od 11.579

6d,j,w Od 1 2 .1*8

ôéüi ( c a r e r e ) Il 18.100 Eur; Cy 5^0

AnuonuTns n 1 1 .1*20

Andoxos Il 15.31*1

AnunoAos Il 5.325

Anuxdwu Il 5.531*

ônAnyot Od 12.286

AnAos Od 6.162 AR 1.308 ônAos Od 20.333

6nyo3dpos n 1.231

ônyddEv Od 19.197 AR 1 .7

Anyoxdwv Il k.h99

AnyoAdüiv n 20.395

AnyoOxos Il 20.1*57

ônvauds Il 5.1*07 AR 1 .31*1* ARR Ada Od 11.325

ôtayAdcpo) ( + ) Od 1*.1*38

ôtcÎYü) Od 20.187

ôuaôepKoyau Il ll*.3l*l*

ôuaônAeoyaL Od 11*.37 ARR

ôuaôeudü) ( + ) Od 2 2 .1*91 *

ôuadpdnTU) Il 3 .3 6 3

ôuaxEupu Il 8 .8 AR 1.1*30

ÔLaxAdü) Il 5 .2 1 6

ôuayETpEw Il 3 .3 1 5

ôuayETpnxds Il 3 .31*1*

ÔLayotpcxu) Od 11*.1*31* Eur AR 1.395

ôuavdü) Od 1 7 .5 1 7 Eur AR 1 .9 3 5

ôuanopOE'ü) n 2 .6 9 1 Eur

ÔUaUTOEW Od 1 8 .31*0 AR

ÔLapnctÇu) n 1 6 .3 5 5 Eur

ôuappditTü) Od 1 9 .5 7 5 ôuaoxuôvnnu Il 5.526

ôtaxpvjytos ( + ) Od 24.342

ÔLEUpyü) n 12.424

ôteÇeuyL Il 6.393 Eur

ôueÇep^opau Il 10.432

ôiTçü) n 16.713 AR 1.1303 AR ÔUMTUOV Od 22.386 Eur

ÔLolAupu Od 2.64 Eur

Auoyn'ôri Il 9.665

A l'o v Il 2.538

ÔUOTtTEÛü) n 10.451

ÔUOTtXnp ^ 10.562

Auos Il 24.251

ôt's Od 9.491 Eur; AR 1.741 AR ôtaôavns (+) Od 12.22

ÔLOXEü) Od 8.188 Eur

ôtaxoupa (+) Il 23.523

ÔLcpaü) Il 1 6 .7 4 7

Ôt(l)CXüJ Od 11.584

ôuùjQe'ü) ^ 21.244 Eur

ôpnaus (+) n 17.476

ôpnxeupa Il 14.259

Apn'xwp Od 17.443

ôotn n 9.230 ôoAt'xoluAos ( + ) Od 9 .1 5 6

ôoAtxEYxns (+) n 2 1 .1 5 5

ôoAovinTps _I1 1 .5^0

AoAoites ^ 9.it8l»

AoAoïïowv ^ 5.77

ôovaMeds II 18.576

ôopLXTriTos II 9 .3 4 3 AR 1 .8 0 6

AôpuxAos ^ 11.489

ôodAeuos Od 24.252 Eur

ôouAoavîvn Od 22.423 Eur

ôoupnvexns (+) Il 10.357

ôoupoôdxn (+) Od 1 .1 2 8

ôdxycos jQ 2 3 .1 1 6 Eur AR I.II69

ôoxpos ^ 12.148

ôpayyedü) ( + ) Il_ 18.555

ôpauvü) ^ 1 0 .9 6

Apaxuos II 1 3 .6 9 2

ôpatds (+) Il 2 3 .1 6 9

ôpdüj Od 1 5 .3 1 7 Eur; 131, 132, 1 6 3 , 1 9 3 , 341, 539, 5 5 2 , 5 6 5 , 6 5 4 , 6 6 2 , 701 ôpeitctvn 11^ 1 8 .5 5 1

ôpEJiavov Od 1 8 .3 6 8 394 AR

ôpdiicü Od 1 2 .3 5 7 Eur

Apnoos II 6 .2 0 ôpnoToaûvn Od 15.321

ô p td s Od lit.353 Eur AR

ô p u tv o s Od 21.lt3 Eur AR AR

ôpdoxoL Od 19.571* AR

Apdo(|, Il 20.1t55

ÔUCtü) ( + ) Od 20.195

Auvapdvn Il I8 .1t3

ôuaapcaTOTOMetot ( + ) Il 18.51*

ôdaçnA os Od 7.307 AR

ôuaôaA nns Il 17.51*9

ôuoHeXaôos Il 16.357 Eur AR

ôuoMnôns Od 5.1*66

ôuaynTnp Od 23.97

ôuaneytpeAcs Il 16.71*8

ôuaïïovns Od 5.1*93

ôuoüjpeoyau Il 10.183

6uü)6eMC(3obos ( + ) Il 23.703

6uü)«aüeL«oaûyeTpos( + ) Il 23.261*

ôUüixateLMoaunrixus ( + ) Il 15.678

Aüjôüivatos Il 16.233 Eur

ôwpew Il 10.557

ôüjpnTo's Il 9 .5 2 6

A upuees Od 19.177

Awpuov Il 2.59I* AojpiTs Il 1 8.1*5

ôiü xnp Od 8.325

Aüjtüj Il 1 8.1*3

ÔWTWP Od 8.335

GYYGLVWTaC ( + ) Il 19.26

ÊYYuâw Od 8.351

ÈYYÛn Od 8.351

ÈYxocrannY^'upu (*) Od 11.98

EYHEupau Il 22.513 AR (v.l.)

ÊYHEpdvvupu n 8.189

Èy m A u' vu) Il 6.78 AR 1.62 (v.l.)

Èymoomeüj Od 15.218

ÉYXpÛKTW Od 5.488

EYHdpO) Il 13.11*5

ÈYPnY0P(^wv ( + ) Od 20.6

ÈYpnYopTÉ (+) n 10.182

È ô a v d s Il 11*.172

E ôacpos Od 5.21*9

Gôvdo) Od 2.53

Ê ô v c jT n s ( + ) Il 13.382

É0EÉpW Il 21.31*7

È ^e Ao v t iîp ( + ) Od 2.292

E Ù ôctA u yos Od 21*.279

EÙ6 o0En Od 4.366 eÛMoacÎMus Il 9.379 etMOOUVnpUTOS (+) Il 22.3(49

Eb M o a o p o s Od 9.322

GÙXaïïbvaoTns Il 17.577

E Ô A e a u o v Il 2 .1+99 euXupa Od 6.179 eùXutpâçü) Il 10.1+92

GbXucpdo) Il 11.156 e ùd v u x e s (+) Il 9.I470

E bpY V U y u (+) Od 10.238 eù'pepos ( + ) Od 8.529

EupETpuot Il 2.537

EÉ'pn Il 18.531

EU p O M O y O S n 3.387

E Û o a Q p E W Il 3.1+50

EbOaMOÛü) Il 8.97

E L O a v d y w Od 8.529

EÙactVEtyb Il 7.1+23 AR 1.1092

EÛaô û o y a c n 23.622

EÊ a E p û w (+) Od 12.317

EL a L Ç o y a t (+) n 13.285

EÙoÉ n y u Od 22.1+70

EÛOL Ô y n Od 6 .261+

ELOnaTaPauvü) Od 2I+.222 Od 10.90 e uooôos Il 21.149!* eùoTteToyat Il 15.653 ELOconds Od 3.8 ÈxctaToOc n 1.75 ÉxaTngeXETns n 1.102 ÊxaTOYXELpOS (+ ) I l 20.2U7 èxaToçuYOS (+) Il 23.164 EMaTOMiteôos Il 2.649 ÈMaTOMitoALS Il 9.383 èxaTopTtuAos Od 5.410 Exgaous n 11.604 ÊxgAwoxw (+ ) Il 23.477 éxôe'pxopau (v .l.) Od 10.19 êxôe'pü) n 13.710 êxôe'xopau Il 5.2 è'xônAos n 10.198 ÉxôuaSadvü) ( + ) Il 3.459 éxôdôtüpu Od 17.10 Éxe CQl Il 5.54 ÈxngoAda Od 18.100 éxdvnaxo) n 2.153 ÊxxaQaupw Il 4.109 ÊxxauÔGxdôüipos ( + ) Il 19.351 ÈxxaTaxâAAtü ( v . l . ) ÉMMÀeTlTü) I l 5.390 Eur

EMXnOLS (+) Od 2I+.I+85

ÊKpeûpopat (v.l.) Od 5.335

ÈMpuçdu) n 4.218 eMnaucpdaaoj ( + ) I l 5.803

ÈHTlCtXXu) n 20.483

ÉKTiaTdaoü) Od 18.327 QL 152

ÉMnoTadpau I l 19.357

ÉMnpEïïns I l 2.483 Eur

ÈxitpoxaXEopau Od 2.400

ÊxnpoXEuxcü Od 8.515

ÈXÏÏTUCÜ Od 5.322 AB

ÈXOTPEÇW I l 17.58

EXTdôüOS I l 10.134

ÈXTtdnPl. Od 23.179 Eur

'ExTopÉôns n 6.401

ÊXTOOE (+) Od 14.277

ÊxcpÔE'YYopau n 21.213

Èxcpuw n 11.40 Eur

"EXaaos n 16.696

ÊXdoowv n 10.357

ÈXaOTpEW I l 18.543 Eur

ÉXa(pn3c5Xos n 18.319

ëXehpcjv Od 5.191 196

èAedôpenTos Il 2.776

g Aeos Il 2h.kh

ÈAexds ^ 9.1*09

’EAeuauvuos (v.l.) Il 18.551 (a:

' EAlmcÎwv Il 3.123

’EAtMCJVLOS 11 20.1*04

g Auç (arrailla) Il 18.1*01

é A«exltüj\) n 13.685

ÈAxnôyds (+) Il 6.1*65

ÉAAeôavds Il 18.553

“EAAnvGS Il 2 .681*

ÊAAds Od 19.228

ÈAwpLOV Il 1 .1*

épSaôdv Il 15.505

ÉyBpe'poyau ( + ) Il 15.627

êye'ü) Il 15.11

Eyyopos Od 8.1*80

ÉpnAnyôriv ( + ) Od 20.132 eynAnv Il 2.526

ÉynouEW Il 7.438 eyJtoActo) Od 15.456

èynuptSnTns (+) n 23.702 eyçuAos Od 15.273

èvcÎMUs Od 14.230 evapeAyo) ( + ) Od 9.223

EvavTO ^ 2 0 .6 7 Eur

èvapapuoxüj (*) Od 5.236

èvÔEüMVUpu ^ 1 9 .8 3 Eur

Évôu'npu ( + ) I]^ 18.584

Evôuva (+) ^ 2 3 .8 0 6

ÉVEvn'xovTa ^ 2 .6 0 2

ÈVEPEUÔO) Od 9 .3 8 3 AR 1.428; 1198 (*)

EVEOiTa n 5 .8 9 4 AR 1.7; 956 ARR ÈVETP 21 l^'l80

’Evetui: 1 1 2 .8 5 2

ÉvriEon 2 2 1 7 .6 7 0

EVnpolu Od 4 .2 7 2

ÊvnvoôE Od 1 7 .2 7 0

EVÔvîpcos Od 13.421 Eur

ÈvtadoLos Od 16.454 Eur

’EvonvEs 2 1 2 .7 4 9

’EvuoTin 2 1 2 .6 0 6

ÉvVEdgOLOS 2 1 6 .2 3 6

ÉvvEaxapôExa 2 1 24.496

ÈuvEÔpyULOs Od 11 .3 1 2

EwnxovTa Od 1 9 .1 7 4

Evvuxos 2 1 11-716

ÉVÔÔUOS 21 16 .2 6 0 190

EVOPXOS I l 2 3 . 11*7

èvCTTCtÇüJ Od 2.271

êvoTnpÉÇü) Il 21.168

évarpeipu) n 5.306 E u r

é v T a O d a I l 9.601 E u r

evTcaucpyos (+) I l 21*.277

ê v T e v îâ e v Od 1 9 . 5 6 8 EU2’

évT p e'xw n 1 9 . 3 6 5

é v T U itcîs I l 21* .1 6 3 AR 1 . 261* AR 'E v u e û s n 9 . 6 6 8

è v ü iita I l 1 5 . 3 2 0

évtü icaôu üis ( + ) Od 2 3 . 9I*

èÇayYEXAo) Il 5.390 Eur

èÇ û Y op eû a) Od 1 1 .2 3 1 *

'E Ç d ô o o s n 1 .2 6 1 *

éÇctGTGS Od 3 . 1 1 5

é Ç a v a3a tv ü ) I l 2 l*.97

è Ç o tv a c p a v ô ô v ( + ) Od 2 0 . 1*8

é Ç a v u n y u I l 1 8 .1 * 7 1 E u r ARR

èÇaT to3ctdvü) Od 1 2 . 3 0 6 ARR

êÇaiioôûvüj ( + ) Od 5.372

êÇaïïovtÇw (+) Od 1 9 . 3 8 7

éÇanoTuvw (+) n 2 1 . 1*12 eÇcÎTiTUxos (v.l.) Il 12.295 eÇapxos n 24.721 Eur

èÇacpaupe'ü) O d 22.444

éÇaipuü) O d 14.95

èÇeûôov Il 20.342

èÇepüJEO) n 23.468

èÇeupuoMü) n 1 8 . 3 2 2 Eur

ÈSnyGopaL n 2 . 8 0 6 Eur

èÇnXoiTOS ( + ) I l 1 2 . 2 9 5

èÇnpouPds Od 8 . 2 4 9

éÇuddvo) n 15.410 AR 1 . 5 6 2

êÇü'axü) Od 1 2 . 9 4

éÇOLXVEÜJ ( + ) n 9.384

ÊÇdAAupu Od 1 7 . 5 9 7 Eur;

GÇovopa«An6nv O d 1 2 . 2 5 0

ÉÇopyctü) O d 12.221 Eur gÇocpe'AAw ( + ) O d 1 5 . 1 8

ÉgunavdoTnyu n 2 . 2 6 7

ETtaYctAAayau n 1 6 . 9 1

ÉnaYYGAAo) O d 4 . 7 7 5

ÊnaYedpü) (*) I l 1 . 1 2 6

ÈnciYAauCw n 18.133

ÈnauTEW I l 2 3 . 5 9 3 Eur

ÊjiadTLOS I l 1.335 Em- AR AR

ETtaAaffTEü) Od 1 . 2 5 2 ènaXXdaaiti I l 13.359 Eur

’ EïïctXxns I l 1 6 .1 + 1 5

È nayaonau Od 5 .1 + 8 2

èitapocgotôJs Od 5 .1 + 8 1 AR

ÉnapiîVTtDp Od 1 6 . 2 6 3

èïïavaTtdnpu I l 2 1 . 5 3 5

èitavuaTnyt I l 2 . 8 5 Eur AR 1 . 3 6 3

a a p , ( n 9. 1+56

èiicîpoupos Od 1 1 .1 + 8 9

ÊTcapTOo) ( * ) Od 8 . 1+1+7

ÈTtapüjyos Od 1 1 .1 + 9 8 AR 1 . 3 2 ARR èTtaoxeü) Od 1 7 . 2 6 6

enauA os Od 2 3 . 3 5 8 AR 1 . 8 0 0

éna(pûaaü) ( + ) O d 1 9 . 3 8 8

’Ek ely e 'ÎS I l 1 6 . 5 7 1

è n e u ô d v I l 1 3 . 2 8 5

énepBauVü) I l 9 . 5 8 2 ARR

ènevTavdü) ( + ) Od 2 2 .1 + 6 7

ènepiîcü (*) O d 1 . 1+1+1 AR

èïïEoBoALa Od I + .1 5 9

ÈKEaBdAos n 2 . 2 7 5 AR

É u E in a to s Od 7 . 1 1 8

ÈïïrîBoAos Od 2 . 3 1 9 AR 1 .6 9 1 + ARR ETinYxevLÔES Od 5 . 2 5 3 èïïnTtvîo) Il 18.502

’E nnpuT os Od 2I+.306

ÈTtnTiis ( + ) Od 21.306

ÉïïudtAAü} ( * ) Od 2 2 .1+9

Èiti^3a ô p o v Od 15.1+1+9 AR 1.1+21

éïïLgctaKO) ( + ) n 2.231+

é ïïte X n s Il 2I+.I+53

èïïbgpéyü) Il 17.739

È ïïl3(j5tü)p ( + ) Od 1 3 .2 2 2

Ènuyo'YVoyat n 6.11+8

ênuY P â36nv n 21.166

’Eïïu'ôaupos I l 2 .5 6 1

énuônyeûtü ( + ) Od 16.28

énuôueppuâs ( + ) Il 1 0 .1+75

è n u ô p o y o s Il 6.1+31+

ÉTiuTi'pavos Od I9.3I+3

éïïodapoiîvü) n 1+.183

én u d n y a n 21+.228

G+CUUOTWp Od 21.26

ÉKLMCÎP ■n 16.392

ÉKOMCXpaLOS Od 9.70

’ EuLKctarn Od 11.271

ênuMeupü) (*) Il 16.391+

énoM eXoyaü Il 9.1+51+ èntMGpcîVVUML Od l.l6h

énuMAeilü) Od 1.351 AR 1 .1 8 ARR ’EïïtMAeriS Il 12.379

ènuHAu'vü) n 12.121 Eur AR

ÉTtbHOnTül Od 3 . W

ÉïïUHOupetü n 5.6l4 Eur

ÈnbAdtMTtü) n 1 7 .6 5 0 ARR

éïïbAeu3cü (*) Od 3.341 AR 1.1133 AR ÈTtuAeiJaaü) ( + ) n 3.12

ênb'Anôos Od 4.221

ÉncAnMeo) ( + ) Od 8 .3 7 9

éïïuAbyônv Il 1 7 .5 9 9

ÊTlLAAb'Çü) Od 18,11 AR 1.486 ARR ÉTibAü)8 eûü) ( + ) Od 2 .3 2 3

èïïbpaiTvü) ]Q 6 .1 6 0

éïïupdpTupos Il 7 .7 6 AR (v.l. ) Od 1 .2 7 3

èïïtyaaTos (+) Od 20.377

êïïupnôoyab Od 4 .4 3 7

Ènupnvbcü n 13.460

èltLVGÇPb'ôUOS ( + ) Il 21.204

ÉnbÇuvos (+) n 12.422

èllLOpHEÜ) n 1 9 .1 8 8

êitudaaopau Il 1 7 .3 8 1 AR (A)

ÊiiundAvapau (+;*) Od 6.44 ÈUbuXâçoiiaL Od 8.1U

énunobpnv (+) Od 1 2 .1 3 1

énbnpéïïu) Od 2 Î+.252

ênuTtpotaXXü) n 11.628

ênuïïTatpü) Od IT.5I+5

ÈTttpp^Çü) Od 17.211

ÉTtuppénoj Il 1 4 .9 9

ènupptïïTa) Od 5.310

êituaxi5vuov n 17.136

eTttOTdTns Od 17.455

ÉTttaTGVâxü) (*) n 4.154

êlILOTnpUJV Od 16.374

ènuoTbov (+) Od 6.265

èntOTOvaxew (+) Il 2 4 .7 9

ÈnuoTp^ipw Il 3.370 Eur; 299

èTii^aTpo(pos Od 1.177 AR (v.l.) Od 8 .1 6 3

ÊnuaTpwcpctü) Od 1 7 .4 8 6

’Eïïi^aTOjp n 16.695

Eituaxeata ( + ) Od 21.71 eTtLaxEOLS Od 17.451

ÊntTepTiopau Od 1 4 .2 2 8

ÉUUTtpnTüJp ( + ) Od 9.270

Étiltovos Od 1 2 .4 2 3

ETitToÇcîçoyat Il 3.79

ènLTpaKeü) ( + ) ^ 1 0 .4 2 1 20k

énucpdovEü) Od II.1 U9

éïïutppoveo) ( + ) Od 19*385

éïïu(ljav3ü) Od 8.5^+7 eTtLwyao Od 5 .^01* AR

ÉTiovicpcxXuos ^ 7 .2 6 7

ÉïïoïïuÇopat Od 5.1^6

énoTtTCxü) Od 1 2 .3 6 3

énoïïTEiîü) Od 16.1UO

énope'Yü) (*) II 5 .3 3 5 AR 1.1313 AR ènxaïïôôns ^ 15*729

'ETiTctitopos ^ 12.20 enxaxa Od l4.^3^

èïï(f)6n Od 1 9 .4 5 7 Eur; 646

épaxds II 3.64 Eur AR 1.1224 AR épeBtvÔos 1 1 1 3 * 5 8 9

’Epey3ou' Od 4.84

’Epexpeds Od 8.112

GpugpGpExnS II 13*624

Èpuôpat^Vü) ^ 1 6 .2 6 0 AR

Êpuvdv (v.l.) 0 1 5 * 2 8 1

Êptopa II 4 .3 8

’EpucpdAn 0^ 11*326

ÈpxELOS Od 2 2 .3 3 5 Eur

“Eppauos 0^ 1 6 .4 7 1 Epyos II 20.392

èpïïETo'v Od Eur AR 1.502 AR ÉpÛYPnAos ^ 1 8 .5 8 0

’EpuôCvou II 2.855 AR

’Epudpau' ^2.1+99 Eur

’EpOXaos II 16.1+11

êpupa ^ 4 .1 3 7 Eur

’Epûpav^os 0^ 6 .1 0 3

ÉpuounToXus(v.l.) 11 6 .3 0 5

èpxctxdoyau ( + ) Od l4.15

êpvôuds n 1 0 .2 7 4

êodos n 24.94

EOTÜJP n 2 4 .2 7 2

’Eteox X heuos ^ 4 .3 8 6

'E teom phtes Od 1 9 .1 7 6

ÊTEpnpEpOS Od 1 1 .3 0 3

’Et EüJVOS II 2 .4 9 7

EÙav^ns Od 11.320

Eûdvdris Od 9-1 9 7

EugoTos Od 15.406 AR e5 yp« Od 2 2 .2 4 9

EUYvapjtTOS Od 1 8 .2 9 4 AR

EÛôtHÛot Od 1 9 .1 1 1 AR

EÙEtôns 11 3.48 Eur ARR eùriYECTo'n (+) Od 19.ni»

GÙïixns Il 22.319

Eùnvtvn Il 9.557

Eônvds Il 2.693

euôuyos Od 14.63

Euuimos Il 16.417

euxeoTos Od 5.60

EÛxXnus (v.l.; +) Il 24.318

eùxdapws Od 21.123 AR 1.530; 1120 èdxTLTOS Il 2.592

eûxTos n 14.98

eùXEupaiv Od 4.607

EuAnpa n 23.481

EÙpEVE'xns Od 6 .1 8 5

EÜpnAos Od 1 5 .4 0 6

EÙvn^EV Od 20.124

EÛvopu'a Od 17.487 AR

eônriYnS Od 21 .3 3 4 ARR

ÊUïïAEtOS (+) Od 1 7 .4 6 7

EUX Aota n 9 .3 6 2

EÛïïpnoTos (+) Il :8.471

Euxpupvos n 4.248

EunupYos Il 7 .7 1

EÎpOS Od 11.312 390 AR 1.371 AR Eùpuâôns Od 22.267

EùpuôJxn Od 3.h32

Eûpuyeôouaa Od 7.8

Eùpupu'ôns Od 9.509

eùpvîvu) Od 8.260

EupupEE^pos (+) n 21.lltl

Eupuxüwv Od 21.295 AR 1 .71;

EÙputpuns (+) Od it.6ült

Êûoxap0yos n 13.31

'Eiîaaojpos Il 6.8

EUOWTpOS (v.l.) Il 24.578

EÛTEUXnS n 16.57

EUXpnOL-S ^ 2.502

Êûxpnxos Il 14.182

EÔçnyeü) n 9.171

Eûtpnyos n 2.846

Eùcpnxns Il 15.532

EÙçpaÔEüis Od 19.352

EÛxn Od 10.526

Eûxn'vüjp n 13.663 eûxpons (+) Od 14.24

É(papydÇü) n 19.385

ÉqjtxvEoyau ^ 13.613

ÈtpdXxotLov ( + ) Od 14.350 étpoppt^ Od 22.130 ARR

ÉçuBpu'çu) ^ 9-368 Eur

ëçuôpos Od lU.îl56

"Ecpupou n 1 3 .3 0 1

éxëâupos (+) Od 8 .3 2 0

’ExEKXéns II 16.189

’Exeppiüv 12^ 5 .1 6 0

ÊX0OÔOTIGW ( + ) n 1 .5 1 8

'ExCvau ^ 2 .6 2 5 Eur

êü)aq)dpos II 23.226

ÇdtwoTOS II 3.220

çaepAeyns II 2 1 .U65

çeDyos II 18.5^3 Eur

ÇE(pupûn ( + ) Od 7.119

çnAnpcjv Od 5-118

çnTEO) ^ 1 4 .2 5 8 Eur; Cjr 17

çuYdôEOpov ^ 2 4 .2 7 0

çiüpds II 9-203 AR 1.477

çûoTpov (+) Od 6.38 nôopat Od 9.353 Eur; Cy 18I, 420, W 6 , 583 nôuETtns 1.248

’HEpÉgoua n 5-3 8 9 nepdcpüjvos ^ 1 8 .5 0 5 nuoELs ^ 5 .3 6 ’Hudves n 2 .5 6 1

lÏMuaTOS ( + ) Il 2 3 .5 3 1

’HXeCot Il 1 1 .6 7 1 AR 1 .1 7 3

?iAuÇ Od 18.373 Eur ARR

nXtTOMTIVOS n 1 9 .1 1 8

’HAdauov Od il. 563 AR

’HAwvn Il 2 .7 3 9

?iyot ( + ) n 2 3 .8 9 1

’Hjjaôdn Il 111.2 2 6 (v.l.) Od il. 702 nyepds Od 5 .6 9 AR ntjepos Od 1 5 .1 6 2 npuôans n 1 6 .2 9 I1 AR npdôeos Il 12.23 Eur AR 1 .51*8 AR npuTEAns n 2 .7 0 1 ripwv ( + ) Il 2 3 .8 8 6 nvLMa Od 2 2 .1 9 8 Eur; 3 AR

’HvuonEds 11 8 .1 2 0

’Hvondôns n iii.iiiiii nJiEpoïïEiîs Od II.36I1 AR rinEdôupos n 6 .2 5 1 nndta Il 7 .381 I

’HïïUTLÔnS Il 17.321I ripoov Il 2 3 .1 2 6 AR 1 .1 1 6 5

'Hpuôavds (v.l.) Il 1 6 .1 5 1 Eur ARR nouxûa Od 1 8 .2 2 nauxLos Il 21.598

Qaupds Il 1 2 .1+59 daAcîpn Od 5 .1*32 Eur

%dXea Il 2 2 .501+

QdXeLO. Il 18.39 daXAds Od I7.22I+ Eur

ôdAnudo) Od 19.319

BdAïïtos 11 2.620

ôaAdota Il 9.53I+

SaAuauctôns n 1+.1+58

Sdpupts Il 2.595 Eur ddopat (admirari) Od 18.191 daupadvü) Od 8 .1 0 8

SaupaMun Il 2.716 decAôneôov Od 7.123

ôévap Il 5.339

QedôpriTos Il 8.519 Eur dedôev Od 16.1+1+7 Eur

ôepanedo) Od 13.265 Eur deapds Od 23.296 Eur

Geoneta Il 2.1+98

BeaoaAds Il 2.679

GeoTup Il 16.1+01 0n3ao6e Il 23.679

^nnxnp Od 21.397

•ônleo) Od 5.73

ônyûv Od 5.368

ônpâTüjp Il 9.5UU

•ônpeûü) Od 19.1*65 Eur; Çjr 71

0ns Od 1*.61*1*

0b'o3n n 2.502 exûgw Od 17.221

0o'n n 18.1*0

0OLVCIÜ) Od 1*.36 Eur; 21*8, 377, 550 eoo'cü Od 9.327

0dü)oa Od 1.71

0paauos 21.210

ôpdaos Il 11*. 1*16

0paadynAos n 16.1*63 dpnvos n 2U.721

Opuyxdm Od 11*.10

0pdVLOV Il 2.533

ôpdvov n 22.1*1*1

ôpdos Il 1*.1*37 AR 1.697 AR ôpuAdaoü) Il 23.396

0pudeaaa ^ 11.711

Opdov Il 21.351 Gpiov n 2.592 euEOTtdôns Od 1(.518 dunXn Il 9.220 AR I.36I; U20; llUO ARR GupgpaCos Il 11.320

Guygpn 11 10 .1(30

ôupnYEp^üJv ( + ) Od 7.283

ôupnôns Od 16.389 AR 1 .21(9 ; 663; 836 ARR duyoôoiMns Od 8.185

Guyourns Il 3 .11(6 duôets Il 15.153 dOov Od 5.60

ôudü) Il ll(.lT2

Qupawpds (+) n 22.69 ddpaôu (+) Od ll(.352 diîoôAa Il 6 .13l(

Gôüv Od k.223

"laupa n 18.1(2

’ Idvotaoa n 18.1(7

'Idveupa n 18 .1(7

’Idoves n 13.685 AR 1 .959 ; 10T6

’IdKETOS Il 8 .1(79 AR

’ Iaauü)v Od 5.125

"laoos (adiectivus) Od l8 .2l(6 iyv^a 11 13.212

"I6ns 11 9.558 AB 1.151; 1|62; ItTO; H85; lO^it ABB LôCw Od 20.201»

ùdpEua 11 6.300

' inXvjods 11 2.656

ÙQauyEVens (v.l.) Od IU.203

’IQauwEvnS 11 16.586

"l9axos (vir) Od 17.207 tdya 11 5.778

ÈdUTtTUüJV ( + ) 11 21.169

’I0WMH 11 2.729

’iMctpuos (adiectivus) n 2.ll»5

'iMExaovtôns 11 15.546

LMExnatos Od 13.213

’iMpaAuos Od 19.57

ÈMpâs n 17.392 ABB

ÈAaôdv n 2.93 AB

ÙActopau n 2.550 ABB

’lAntos (adiectivus) 11 21.558

ÈAiixw Od 21.365 uAAds 11 13.572

’ IAtd(pL n 21.295 tAds n 21.318 AB 1.10 ABB 2lk

' In3pcxat6ns Il k.320

"Ipgpuos (adiectivus) Il 21.43

ÙPEPTÔS n 2.751 bÇaXos n 4.105

'IÇbovtos Il 14.317 bdeus n 23.850 bOV Od 5.72 bovQcts ( + ) Od 14.50 bouAos Od 11.319 AB 1.972 ARR bnndçopab n 23.426

"innaaos n 11.450

' IjinnpoAyob Il 13.5 bnnboxoibTns ( + ) U 6.469

* Imtoôdpas Il 20.401

' Initdôapos Il 11.335 biiTtdôpopos Il 23.330

'lunoMouv n 10.518 bïïTtdpaxos Il 10.431

'lïïïïdpaxos ^ 12.189

' Initdvoos Il 11.303 boQpbOV Od 18.300 bodpopos Il 15.209 bodneôov n 13.142

’^loos n 11.101 L.aocpdpos Od 18.373

tado) Od 7 .2 1 2 Eur

'l o T t a t a 11 2 .5 3 7

tOTO ô d x n 11 1 .4 3 4

iaxaXéoz Od 1 9 .2 3 3

"It u Ags Od 1 9 .5 2 2

'iTU p O V E d s 11 1 1 .6 7 2 AB I.IOI16 AR "iTtUV 11 2 .6 9 6

L-uvyds n 1 8 .5 7 2 Eui-

’itpEUS 11 1 6 .417

'icpSdyn Od 4 .7 9 7

' ItpuyEÔEua Od 11 .3 0 5

' Itpdvoos 11 7.14

11 9 .6 6 7 Eur

’i Ç L T L Ô n S n 8 .1 2 8

’ IcpUTUWV n 2 0 .3 8 2

Cxvos Od 1 7 .3 1 7 Eur AR 1.184 ARR t(|j Od 2 1 .3 9 5

ûü)Yn (+) Od 14.533

K a S n a d ^ E V 11 13.363

Kdôyos Od 5 .3 3 Eui-

KctEtpa n 4.142 xaôcxAXoyau n 1 1 .2 9 8

MadcÎTiaÇ Od 2 1 .3 4 9 216

Madet))bdoyau ( + ) Od 19.372

Kaduôpdü) Od 20.257 Eur; Cjr 318 xaÔLçdva) Od 5.3

Katvetôns n 2.746

Kauveds n 1.264

MatpooecüV Od 7.107

MOMCÇü) 24.214 xaxoEupwv Od 18.41

XUMÔÇeLVOS Od 20.376

KaMoTexvos Il 15.14 xaxoupyûot Od 22.374 xaxoüpyos Od 18.54 xaxocppaôns n 23.483 AR xaXaüpo(|, Il 23.645 ARR

KaXnotos Il 6.18

KaAriToptôns Il 13.541 xaAnxüjp ( + ) n 24.577

KaAnTiüp Il 15.419

KaAAudvaaaa n 18.46

KaAAudvELpa n 18.44

KaAAtapos n 2.531 xaAAtxpiîôEyvos Od 4.623 xaAAt'xopos Od 11.581 Eur xdAitus Od 7.20 Eur AR 1.1207; 123it KaXiîôvat n 2 .67?

KctXupjja ^ 21;.93

HdtXuÇ niS.itoi

«dXujs Od 5 .2 6 0 Eur AR I.5 6 6 ; 1277 AR KctuaÇ 1 8 .5 6 3 Eur

«ctyeopos II 2 .6 5 6

Mayuvo) ( + ) Od 10.27

Mavaxe'ü) Od 1 9 .^ 6 9 AR (v.l.) Od 17.5Î+2

xotuaxJ^w 11 1 2 .3 6 (v.l.) Od 1 0 .3 9 9

KaTtavnuctôns 11. 5-109

Monvuçüj ^ 2.399

Kctitus ^ 20.239

xaïïuo) ^ 2 2 .1+67

Mctp ^ 9 .3 7 8

Kdpnoos II 12.20

xapxaupw ^ 2 0 .1 5 7

Kdpuatos II 2 .5 3 9

xapxaXdos ^ 21.5^41 ARR

Kdaos n 2 .6 7 6

KaaTudveupa ^ 8.305

xaxa3Xcjaxü) Od I6 .U66 AR 1.322 AR

xaxaPpdxw Od 1+.222 AR xaxayLvéü) Od 10.10^ «aTaôepxopau Od 11.16

MaTuôevjü) Il 9.490

MaTaônpoBopeo) ( + ) Il 18.301

xaxaçaüVü) ( + ) Od 11.587

xaTa^EÀyw Od 10.213

MaTacBards (+) Od 13.110

xataCTuÇ (+) Il 10.258

MaTaxaupuos n 11.439

xaTaxAtvo) Od 10.165

xaxaAeuBü) n 18.109

xaxaAnôoyau (+) Il 22.389

xaxaAocpâôELa ( + ) Od 10.169

xaxapdu Il 24.165

xaxapvîaoüj Il 5.425 xdxavxa Il 23.116 xaxctïïauya Il 17.38 xaxaïïEoaü) Il 1.81 xaxaïïAE'ü) Od 9.142 xaxaTcAnaoo) Il 3.31 xaxanûSüJ n 23.328 xaxapLynAds (+) Od 14.226 xaxdpxo) Od 3.445 xaxaoBE'vvuyt (’>) n 2].. 381 xaxaoEiîoyoïL Il 21.382 xoTaoxudw Od I2.U36

xcxxaoTUYEü) (") n 17.691*

xaiacpepo) n 22.1*25 AR

xaTaipXeyu) Il 22.512 AR

xaTatpuXaôdv n 2.668

xaxaxQdvuos Il 9.1*57 AR

xaxevaupoyau Od 11.519

xaxevavxuov Il 21.567 AR

xaxepoxctvü) ( + ) n 2i*.2i8

xaxeuvdÇüj n 3.1*1*8 Eur AR 1 .

xaxEçctXXopotu Il 11.9I* AR

xaxnnudtü) ( + ) Il 5.1*17

xaxqtpns Od 2l*.l*32 Eur AR 1 . ARR xaxnçwv (+) n 21*.253

xaxupdôuos n 23.1*31

xaüpot Il 5.865

Kadaxptos Il 2.1*61

Kedôns Il 2 .81*7

XEÔpuvo's n 21*.192 Eur

xdôpos Od 5.60 Eur

XEu'u) (scindere) ( + ) Od 11*.1*25

XExpdçaXos n 22.1*69

KEXdôwv Il 7.133 xe'Xhs Od 5.371 220

MeAriTÛÇü) Il 15.679

xG w ds Il 10.361 APR

H e v e a u x n s n 8.230

MEVTe'ü) Il 23.337

HcpaCü) Il 9.203

M e p ap e x Js Il 18.601

M e p ao Ç cîo s 11 11.110

K e p 3 e p u o L Od ll.llf

MEOTO'S Il 111.21 11

HEUÔCtVü) ( + ) Il 3.I153

MEUÔpds n 13.28

M nÔEtOS Il I9.29I1

MnÔEOS ( + ) n 23.160

« n x d ü ) Od 5.455 AR 1 .389 ; 5h2; 1262 ARR x n A e u o s Il 15.744

«n'ç Od 15.479

M n p e a a ttp d p n T o s ( + ) Il 8.527

K d p u v Q o s Il 2.538 AR 1.79

Kt it e u o l Od 11.521

K n c p to L s Il 5.709

x n iü ô n s n 6.483

M b ô a p d çü ) Il 18.570

M b ô a p L O x O s n 2.600

XLXUS Od 11.393 KtpMEpUOU Od 11.lit

KLVv5pr)S n 11.20

M u v u p d s 11 17.5

K u a o n t s 11 6.299

K u o o fis 11 11.223

x u o T n Od 6.76

Hu'xAn Od 22.1t68

nXayynàov (+) n 2 .1t63

M AebOTOs Od 2 .3ltlt

K A e d g o u A o s n 16.330

K A EO ïïdxpn 11 9.556

xA ETtxns n 3.11

xAETtToauvn Od 19.396

KAEüJvotd n 2.570

x A n ô n v (+) 11 9.11

x Al v t h p Od 18.190

x A d a u o v Od 2It.208

x A d ïïu o s Od 13.295

xAOTOÏÏEdü) n 19.11+9 xAvjôùJV Od 12.1t21

KAdpEVOS Od 3 .1+52 x A u T O E p y d s Od 8.3I+5

K A u T o p n d n s n 23.631+

KAw0ES Od 7.197 KXuliaHÔets ( + ) Il 2.729

MVCXO) Il 11.639

HvnoTts n ll.ÔltO

HVLOI^ELS Od 10.10 AR 1.858

Kvuçn^po's Od 16.163 AR

MVüJÔaXov Od 17.317

xvwoow Od i*.809 AR 1.1083 AR Od 19.31+1

KoXXneus n 15.389

MoXXolJj Od 21.1+07 x(fX0S n 16.117

KoXüiâü) n 2.212

KoXipds Il 1.575 AR 1.1281+ AR MopTtecü Il 12.151

MovaSos Od 10.122 AR

KOVTds Od 9.1+87 Eur

Konpeds Il 15.639

MonpdÇü) Od 17.299

Kopaxos Od 13.1+08

HOpéül Od 2O.1I+9 xopôûu) Il 9.7 AR

Kdpcvdos n 2.570

Kopuv^dôL ^ 13.661+ xopyds Od 23.196 Eur; 381+ xopuWug ( + ) Il 22.132

Kopuygos II 9 •‘2kl Eur AE

Hopucpoü) %1 k.k26

KopwvGua ^ 2 . 5 0 3

Kdpojvos 1^ 2 .7^6 AE 1.57

KooynTo's ( + ) Od 7.127

MOTneus II 5 .1 9 1

HOTuAnôaîv Od 5.^33

MOTuXnpuTos II 2 3 .3^

Mouptrçu) Od 2 2 .1 8 5 AE 1 .1 9 5 AEE

MoupuÇ Od 2 2 .1 8 8 AE

«oupoTpdcpos Od 9 .2 7 Eur AE

Kpavdn II 3 .4 4 5

Mpavuov 8.84 647, 683

Kpditaôos n 2 .6 7 6

xpaTauYxîoiAos ( + ) ^ I9 .36I

xpotTauds ( + ) Od 1 1 .5 9 7

Kpoxauts Od 12.124 AE

Mpaxadneôos (+) Od 23.46

Hpaxeuxad ^ 9.2l4 xpeûov ^ 9 .2 0 6

KpELOvxudôns ^ 19.240 xpTÎYUos ]a 1 .1 0 6

Mprjvauos Od 17.240 Eur Kpn'xnOev Il 3.233

Kprtmvôe Od 1 9 .1 8 6

HPLÇÜ) n 1 6 .4 7 0

KpLMOS n 24.272

KpCaa Il 2 .5 2 0

Kpoüapos Il 1 5 .5 2 3

MpOKOS Il 14.348 AR

KpoMÛXeta Il 2 .6 3 3

MpOTaXuÇü) n 11.160

MpOTEtl) ^ 1 5 .4 5 3 Eur ARR

Kpouvoü Od 1 5 .2 9 5

KpvîSôa n 1 8 .1 6 8

XPUTITOS Il l4.l68 Eur AR

Hpûyva Il 2 .8 5 5 AR

Ktnauos Od 15.4i 4 hthto's ^ 9 .4 0 7 Eur

Kxuyevn Od 1 5 .3 6 3 AR 1.

Miîajjos n 1 3 .5 8 9

Muctvditeça ( + ) n 11.629

Muavoïïpqjpeuos ( + ) Od 3 .2 9 9

Kuavüiïïus Od 1 2 .6 0

«ugepvdü) Od 3.283

Mu3epvnxnp Od 8 .5 5 7 ARR

KudnpôâEv n 15.438 MO mX eü) Il 7.332

K uX X nvn Il 2.603

M v5yuv6LS Il lk.291

K upoôoM n Il 18.39

K u p o a d ri n 18.Ui

K iJ v e o s Il 9.373

M u v n y e T n s Od 9.120

KovopauoTns Od 17.300

KÜVOS n 2.531

MUVCüTinS ( + ) Il 1.159

KonapLoaneus Il 2.593

Munapuoauvos Od 17.3^0

« u n d p u a a o s Od 5.6U

Kuïïdpoaaos Il 2.519

K d n p o v ô e ^ 11.21

MUPTOÜ) Od 1 1 .241+ AR 1.1278

KlJpTüJpOS n 2.853

MUipds Od 2.16 AR 1.67k

K\3(pos Il 2.748

MÜÔËtC* n 14.499

Kcükutos Od 10.514

xwXn4' Il 23.726

K ü n a ü ^ 2 . 5 0 2

K ws Il 2.677 226

Aâas n 2.585

Aagpaydpns (+) 11 23.1+79

Xa^tHnôns 11 22.83

Xacveos n 22.151+ Eur

Atxpos Od 10.81

Aayjiett^ôns 11 15.526

Aaoq)dpos 11 15.682

XcÎTtTü) n 16.161

Adpos Od 5.51

Actxetoi (v.l.) Od 9.116

Xdxvos (+) Od 9.1+1+5

Xeuyti)V(5de(v) 11 2I+.I+5I

AeuwxpuTos n 17.31+1+

Agmtov n 11+.28I+

XeiiTaXeos n 18.571

Xdno) n 1.236

AeagdSev n 9 .661+

Xeoxn Od 18.329 • Eur

XEUMadvo) Od 12.172 Eur; 17 AE 1 .5^5

Aeumcxs Od 2I+.II Cy 166

XEUMUaTttS 11 22.291+ Eur

Aeumo^g'h Od 5.33I+ Eur

Aeümos 11 1+.1+91

XEUpds Od 7.123 Eur 227

An'ôn Od 11.298 Eur ÆR l.lhô

Xn^ctvu) Od 7.221

^ 2.33 Eur AR I.6U5 AR

Xntds ^ 2 0 .1 9 3 AR 1.612; 806; 823 AR XriuGoTiip Od 18.29

Xn^OTüjp Od 1 5 .4 2 7

AnuTLS n 10.460 AR 1.818

XtYotLVü) I]^ 11.685 AR 1.74g

xu'yyü) n 4.125

XtYônv (+) Od 22.278

XuYÛtpwvos ^ 1 9 .3 5 0

Xb'QaÇ Od 5.415

XbMpdü) ^ 5.500

XtxpnTHp (+) ^ 1 3 .5 9 0

AüM\îyvuos II 2 .6 6 3

Auôata n 2 .5 2 3

Aupaüjpeua l8.4l

Alvôos n 2.656

Xtvos ^ 1 8 .5 7 0

XtnapoMpnôepvos ^ 18.382

XtnaponXoHopos II I9.I26

XunaüS Od 19.72

Aloop (v.l.) 013.293 AuaTpeûo) ( + ) Od 2k.227

XuoTpov Od 22.1t55

Ao3ds II lit.182 Eur

Aoujids 111.161 AER

AoCodos n 23.536

Aonos Od 19.233

Aocpta Od 19. Itlt6

Adxpn Od 19.1+39 Eur

Auxaaxos II. 2.61t7

Auxen II. 1 0 .1t59

AuML'n^ev II 5-105 AR

AuMtnvôE ^ 6.168

Auxotpdvxns II. 8.275

Au«d(ppu)V ^ i5.lt30

Aunpds Od 13.2^3 Eur

Adaavôpos II ll.lt91

Auoonxnp ^ 8.299

AuaoüJÔns II. 13.53 Eur

Aûxvos Od 19.34 514

AwgqTOS II. 24.531

Aü5nn Od 13.224 AR

Awxdeus (+) n 12.283

MctyvnTes H 2.756

Maüa (v.l.) Od 1.38 Eur AR Matavôpos II 2.869

Motuâs 0^1H.U35 Eur

MatyaXtôns ^ 1 6 .I9 I+

ycttvcîs il. 22.460 Eur

Md«ap II 24.544

pa«e6v(5s Od 7-106

ydwEAXa II. 21.259

MotÀEOU (v.l.) Od 3 .2 9 6

paÀôaMo's II 1 7 .5 8 8 Eur

yavTEÜov 0 1 1 2 .2 7 2 AR

MavTLVÉn 1 1 . 2 .6 0 7

Mapa^wv Od 7 . 80 Eur

yapyauvw II 5.882

Mdpus II 1 6 .3 1 9

yapyapUYn Od.8 .2 6 5 ARR

Mapnnaon 11. 9-557

yapTupta Od 11.325

Mdpüjv Od 9.197 l4l, ?1 2 , 616 Mdons 11. 2 .5 6 2

MdoTwp H 1 5 .4 3 0

ViaTEv5(ü 11. 14,110 - Eur yaïua Od 1 0 .7 9 AR 1.005 AR yaxnywv 11.1 2 .2 4 7 paxnTos (+) Od 1 2 .1 1 9 paxAoavJvn Il 24.30

Meyctôns Il 16.695

MEyctpn Od 11.269

Meôewv Il 2.501 peôaupe'ü) ( + ) Od 8.376 ye^nyat (+) Od 1.118 yedoyLAe'ü) ( + ) n 1.269 yey'Auyya Od 10217 yeuAüxua n 15.741 ARR yeAayxpouns (+) Od 16.175

MeActyKous - Od 15.225 AR 1 . yEActVÔETOS Il 15.713 Eur

MeAoveûs Od 24.103 yEAdvü) n 7.64 AR

MÉAas n 14.117 AR yÉAôû n 21.363 yEAEÔwv Od 19.517 AR

MEAugoua Il 2.717 AR 1 . yEAu'ynpus Od 12.187

Me Autii n 18.42 ARR

Mepvüjv Od 11.522

MEVEaSns Il 5.609 yEVE'xotpyos ( + ) Il 14.376

Me'vwv Il 12.193 MepyepJôns Od 1 .2 5 9

Mépuepos n l U .513

p e p p L S Od 1 0 .2 3

yeaatïïoAuos Il 13.361

peaneus (+) Il 12.269

peaonaYns n 21.172

M e a o n Il 2.582

Meoonus Il 6 .1*57

Meoanvn Od 2 1 .1 5

M e a a n v b o u Od 21.18

peaaouaXns (v .l.) Il 21.172

PEOcpa n 8.508 ARR

P E T a 8 a b v w (*) Od 8.1*92 Eur AR

P etcx 8 o u X e \Î ü) Od 5.286

PExaôdpTtbos Od U.I9I*

PETOÔpopâônv n 5.80

PE x a b Ç ü J ( + ) Od 16.362

PExaxXoibü) Il 11.761* pExaM AbV ü) Il 11.509 pExapctÇbos Il 5.19

P E x a Ç u Il 1.156

PExaïïoiûopab Il 17.373

PExanauawAn (+) n 19.201 pExanpETins ( + ) Il 18.370 PETaaoat (+) Od 9.221

pETooT^vü) Od 4.261 Eur

PETOTuOnpu Od I8 .I1O2 Eur

PEToiTpoïïaAtçopotL ( + ) II 20.190

PETacppccÇü) ^ l.lHO

PEt o m AcîÇü) ^ 13.281

P E T P E W Od 3.179 Eur AE 1.12k-, 930 ARR pndELS ^ 1 8 .5 0 0 Eur; Cy 2 8 5 , 31!*, 338, 355, 570, 651 MndEOLXCtOTn II 1 3 .1 7 3

Mn^wvri ^ 2 .7 1 6

MriMuaTLCîôns II. 6 .2 8

pnxwv ^ 8 .3 0 6 pnAogoTnp ^ 1 8 .5 2 9 AR pnAoi). (+) Od 7 .10U

MgovÉs II !*.l!*2 p n P 'J o p a u Od 1 2 .1 7 0 AR

MrioTwp II 2k. 231 pnTtoEus Od U.227 pnTpondxijjp 11 1 1.22k priTpwbos Od 19.!*10 puapds n 2lt.If20 Eur; 677 pcYctçopau Od 8.271

MdÔEua II 2 .5 0 7 233

Mb'pas Od 3 .1 7 2

M bvun'bos 11 1 1 .7 2 2 AR 1 .7 6 3 AR ybOYCtYKEba n 1+.1+53

P b oeo) 11 1 7 .2 7 2 Eur; Cjr 529

PbTOS 11 2 3 .7 6 2

p v n p o a u v n n 8 .1 8 1

M v n a o s ^ 2 1 .2 1 0

p v n o T b s Od 1 3 .2 8 0 AR 1.61+3 ARR po'y o s 11 It. 27 pobpnYEvns (+) 11 3 .1 8 2 pobxc+YPua ( + ) Od 8.332 p d A b g o s 11 11.237 p o X u g ô a b v a jQ 2 It. 80 p d p b p o s ^ 2 0 .3 0 2 p o p d o a u ) Od 1 3 .1+35 p d p cp vos n 2 It. 316 pdaxos (adiectivus) 11 1 1 .1 0 5 p o x ^ d w n 1 0 .1 0 6 pox^ dÇ ü) 11 2 .7 2 3 poxA dii) ( + ) 11 1 2 .2 5 9

M v j y ô w v n 3.186 p u ô a A e o s 11 1 1 .51+ p u e X d e b S Od 9 .2 9 3

M uxdXn n 2.869 23U

M oM aA nood s n 2 .1*98

MuMnvn^>ev 11 9.41*

yûA aÇ n 1 2 .1 6 1

MuXricpaTOS Od 2.355

U u X o e u ô d s 11 7 .2 7 0

u d v n (+) Od 21.111

y u p d M L v o s 11 6.39

M updvn n 2.814

M d p a u v o s n 2 .6 1 6

y d x t o s Od 21.146

y u x p d s (+) Od 24.4i6

p u xd vÔ E Od 2 2 .2 7 0

ymXu Od 1 0 .3 0 5

y w y cto y a u 11 3.412 y w y e d w Od 6 .2 7 4 y w y o s Od 2.86 vdMD Od 14.530 votpxctw 11 8 .3 2 8 vctaoo) Od 21.122 vauauMAGtTos Od 6.22

N a u x e d s Od 8.112 v a u x uA d a Od 8 .2 5 3 AR 1.16; 189; 2 1 0 ; 335; 8 6 2 ; 981 ARR Ne'aupa Od 12.133 veapôs 2.289 Eur

veudde(\)) 0 10.10 AE 1.385; 1 1 9 7 ; 1288; 1313 ARR

vELoQu II 2 1 .3 1 7 AR 1.63; 255; 990; 1 0 9 8 ; 1326 ARR VEUcpü) Il 12 .2 8 0

VEMCXS ^ 5 .8 8 6

ve]ié%bi II 11 .6 3 5

veyos ^ 1 1 .1(80

veoapôns (+) ^ 2 1 .3^6

veoyuAo's Od 12.86

vEoônAns O llt.3*+7

vEoun ( + ) Il 2 3 .60 I1

VEOïïEvdns Od 1 1 .3 9

VEonXuTos Od 6.6h

VEdnpuoTos (+) 0 1 8 .^0^

VEdapHMTos ^ 13.3^2

VEdaTpoipos ( + ) I l 15.469

VEdxEUKTOS II 21 .5 9 2

VEOTEUXnS ^ 5.194 ve'ïïoôous 01 4 .4o4 AR

VEPXEPOS ( v . l . ) Il 15 .2 2 5 ve' üj (nere) 01 7.198 vndôE 2 1 1 3 .1 9 236

v n ô u L u 11 lT.52 lt AR

N n u o v Od 1 .1 8 6

v nM ouoT e'ü) ( + ) Il 2 0 .lit

N n A e tô n s Il 23.652 AR 1 .

N n p E p T n s n 18.1*6

v n v e y o s Il 8.556 E u r AR 1 . ARR v n n e v ô n s Od 4.221

vniitaxeiîüj Il 22.502

N n p tM o s Od 2 4 .3 7 7

N n p tT o s Od 17.207

N n a a u 'n n 18.4o

v r iT o s ( + ) Od 2.338

N uaoi Il 2.508

N t a u p o s Il 2.676

Nopi^lüV Il 2.871 v o T u a Il 8.307

N u a p u o s Il 6 .1 3 3 ARR v ü id n s ‘ Il 11.559 E u r

V ü Jx eA ta Il 19.411 g a J v o , Od 2 2 .4 2 3 E u r AR

ÇetvoaOvn (+) Od 2 1 .3 5

Ç e p o 's Od 5 .4 0 2 AR gUVEELXOOU (+) Od 14.98

Ç upo'v ^ 10.173 E u r oa puoT ns Od 1 9 .1 7 9

O Y H t O V Od 21.61

’OyxncJTo's Il 2.506 AR

ôôeûü) Il 11.569 ARR

ÔÔOUÏÏOpUOV Od 15.506

ô ô o u n o p o s Il 2I1.375

'O ôuoïiuos Od 18.353

oÔpcÇ n 2.765

oCog n 2I4.269

oûôeü) Od 5 A 5 5

OLETHS Il 2.765

O Ù H W V E À U a Od 1I+.223

o îp o s ^ II.2I1

oÈ vo3a p n s Il 1.225

OÙ'VOTILÔnS Il 5.707

oùvoïïXn^ns (+) Od 15.406 o ù v onoxnp Od'8.456 o£vo(j) Od 2 1 .1 4 4

OÉOXLTWV Od 1 4 .4 8 9 oCaxpob' Od 22.300 AR 1 .1 2 6 9 AR o to iî tv o s Od 5.256

O txuX os Il 2.585

OÉxaXun Il 2 .7 3 0 AR 1 .8 7

OuxotAun^ev Il 2.596 238

OMpudoviau Od 1 8 .3 3

ÔMTCtMVnpOS ( + ) Il 5.723

ôXguoôaupwv (+) Il 3.182

oXernp n 1 8 .1 1 4

oAtynTteXua ( + ) Od 5 .4 6 8

’OAtÇüiv Il 2.717

oApos n 1 1 .1 4 7

ÔAOLTpOXOS Il 13.137

ÔAoAuyn Il 6.3 0 1

’OAooooüJV Il 2.739

’OAupnuâs n 2.491

ôpaAds Od 9.327

ôpapTHÔnv (+) Il 1 3 .5 8 4 opnyupu^opaL (+) Od 16.376

opnyupcs Il 2 0 .1 4 2

ôpnpÉii) Od 16.468

ôpddev Od 5.477 AR 1.91

ôpoaTLxdw (+) Il 15.635

ôpdxupos n 15.186

ôpdtppwv ^ 22.263

ôpdo) n 1 4 .2 0 9 op(paÇ Od 7.125

ôpojvupos Il 17.720 oycüs Il 1 2 .3 9 3 239

OVEUpELOS Od U.809 ovnoEs Od 2 1 .1+02

’Ov’nTopiiôns Od 3.282

’OvnTwp n 16.601+ ovoyaMXnôriv Od I+.278 ( c f. ÉÇovopaMAnôriv)

OVOpCtMXUTOS n 22.51 ovos Il 11.558

OVOOTOS Il 9.161 +

ôÇu3eAns Il 1+.126

ôïïaüos (v .l.) Od 1 .3 2 0 (cf. àvonaua)

’OitÉTns n 11.301

ônds Il 5.902

ôïïdaE (+ ) Od II+.139

ônoTÉpmôEV n 11+.59

ÔpEXTds Il 2.51+3

"OpEoBcos Il 5.707

èpEOTtCXS n 6.1+20

ôpExOdw Il 23.30 AR 1.275 AR ’Opôauos Il 13.791

"Open n 2.739 opeuos n 11.11

àpyadds Od 21+.8

’G p p e ' v l o v Il 2.731+ ’Opveuau Il 2 .5 7 1

ôpveov Il 1 3 .6 ii

ôpocpn Od 22.298

opocpos n 2 4 .1*51 Eur

opTcnÇ Il 2 1 .3 6 Eur AR

ôpcpavds Od 2 0 .6 8 Eur AR

ôpxnaxnp Il 18.1*94

ôaocÎTbos Il 5 .758 AR 1

'Oxpeds n 3.186

’OxpuvTeds Il 2 0 .3 8 4

oùôevdaoüpos Il 8 .1 7 8

oÙÔGXEpWOE Il 1 4 .1 8

’OuKaXEycüV n 3 .1 4 8

oùXau Od 3 .4 4 1

oüAtos n 11.62

oÙAoxdpnvos Od 1 9 .2 4 6

oÛAu) Od 2 4 .4 0 2

oùpaCos Il 23.520 Eur AR

oûpavdÔL (+) Il 3 .3

oùpavoynMns Od 5.239

oùpds Il 2.153 Eur

ô V s Il 1 2 .2 0 8 Eur ARR

ÔypudEUS Il 2 2 .4 1 1

ôxexnyo's Il 21.257 2hl

’ O xn'auos n 5 .81*3

Il_ 21.261

6'xos (tutor) Od 5 .1+01*

6 # u w 11 11* .37 o(|jupos 11 2.325 o(j

J la u o d s n 5.612

Ttaucpdaao) ^ 2.1*50

ïïaA atO T n s Od 8 .21*6

TiaAtXAoYos ( + ) 11 1.126

TiaXuvdYPeTos n 1.526

TiaXtvdppevos (v .l.1 ](+) n 11.326

TtaXtvopaos 11 3 .3 3 AR 1.1*16 AR n d X p u s 11 13.792 n dppw v 11 21*.250

TidvaYPos 11 5 .1*87

TtdvaLÔos ( + ) n ll*.372 ita v d n a A o s Od 13.223 navacpdXuÇ ( + ) ^ 22.1*90

Tiavaojptos 11 2l*.5 l+0

ï ï a v ô n p to s Od 18.1

IlavO Luv 11 12.372 n dvôoM os n 11.1*90 riav^XAnves 112.530 Eur AR itavnpap ( + ) Od 13.31

Ttavdupaôdv ( + ) Od 18.33 navoptpaCos Il 8.250

Ilotvdnn Il 18.1+5 nctvoppos ( + ) Od 13.195 navdtljLos Il 21.397 navuKepTOTOS Od 9.25 AR 1.1122 nannctÇü) n 5 .1+08 uctTtnas Od 6.57

TtapagâXXü) (*) ^ 9.322 AR (•'•)

TiapctgdaMüJ ^ 1 1 .101+ AR

ïïapagXnônv n 1+.6 AR 1 .8 3 5 ARR ïïapagX(54> Il 9.503

TiapaytYVopaL Od 17.173 napaôéxopao n 6 .1 7 8 napaôpctü) ( + ) Od 1 5 .32I+ napaôdopau n 2 3 .1+16 napaELôü) ( + ) Od 2 2 .31+8 napaeLpü) Il 1 6 .31+1

TtapctugctxriS n 2 3 .1 3 2 Eur AR 1 .751+ (fem.) Ttapadouos Il I+.38 I

ïïapaMpepctvvupu ( + ) Il 1 3 .5 9 7 napapeugü) Od 6 .3 1 0 AR 1.1+50; 933 ARR 2l+3 napavnxopau Od 5*^17

TidpavTa (+) ^ 2 3 .1 1 6 itapontacpuoKüJ (") ^1 U.36O AE uapauéuTtü) Od 12.72 itapoinAew Od 1 2 .6 9

Tcapaïïve'ü) Od 10.2U napaacpctAAw II 8.311 napaxpew (+) ^ 5.295

TtapaTpoTCEü) Od k.h65 AR

ïïapaTpüJïïctü) ( + ) ^ 9 .5 0 0 napaxoYxâvü) ^ 1 1 .7)+ uapauxddb (v.l.) II 12.302 napatpedyw ( + ) Od 1 2 .9 9 napeMTipocpEVJYiD ( + ) ^ 23.31^ napeuvctÇopaL Od 2 2 .3 7 napdevuos 21 2.85^ napQEVontnns (+) II 1 1 .3 8 5

Ttapuadw (*) II 9 .3 3 6 AR I.806 napu'ço) (*) Od U.311 napunvit II 2 3 .8 6 8 Eur; 310, 591 nappaoun II 2 .6 0 8

Ttctpipaaus II 1^.217 naouôE'n II 1 4 .2 7 6 (v.l.) TÏ1 1 4 .2 69 ] naaupÉAtüV Od 12.70 Ü.U.157 AE

natpdOev ^ 10.68

nciTpocpdvos (v.l.) 9.1+61] Eur

TtauaüJÀn II 2.386 nacpXdçü) n 1 3 .7 9 8 nct(pos Od 8 .3 6 3 Eur

Kcîxvn Od 11<.1|76 AR

Ttuxvdw ^ 1 7 .1 1 2 Eur AR

ïïdxos Od 9.321* cjr 380 AR 1.1193 neôn n 1 3 .3 6 ueôdôev Od 13.295 Eur AR I.II99 AR ne ça n 2^.272 ARR

TteCva Od 15.1+07

IlELpadôriS ^ 1+.228 ueCoa Od 20.23

TieXendü) Od 5.244 ueXcKKOs 1^ 1 3 .6 1 2

ïïéXXa II 16.642

nexxdvn II 2 .5 7 4 AR 1 .1 7 7

UGiiudÇü) Od 4.412 ARR

neyuxaCos Od 14.257

TtEvua Od 1 4 .1 5 7

iiGVLXpds Od 3.348

TiEVxaETns Od 3 .1 1 5 21*5

n e VTaxa n 1 2 .8 7

ïïevinMOVTo'YUos Il 9 .5 7 9

lïep au gou n 2.71*9

nepaedü) Od 24.1:37 AR

nepciTn Od 23.243 AR 1 .1 2 8 1 AR n ep y a a u ô n s Il 5 .5 3 5

uepuctYVUpu Il 1 6 .7 8 AR

nepoYXaYns (+) n 16.642

nepLYvdiJTiTa) Od 9 .8 0 AR

ïïepLôe'ÇL.os n 2 1 .1 6 3

ïïepuôtve'o) (v.l. ) Il 2 2 .1 6 5 AR 1 .1 0 5 9

ItepUÔpÛTtTüJ Il 23.395

ïïepuôvjü) n 1 1 .1 0 0

Jlepunpns Il 1 6 .1 7 7

ïïepunxe'üj Il 7 .2 6 7

nepbMXujjevos Od 11.286 Eur AR 1 .1 5 6

TtepuMTUxau Od 1 1 .2 8 8 AR

Ttepupauydd) Od 1 2 .9 5

nepuyctpvapau (v .l.) n 16.497

H epuyos n 16.695 nepuvaue'Tns ^ 24.488 AR 1.1149; 1222 ARR ïïepuÇeoTos (+) Od 1 2 .7 9 nepuueuMns (+) Il 11.845 nepuïïAn^ns Od 1 5 .4 0 5 ïïEpbitpoxGoyau ( + ) n 11*.316

nepuppeo) Od 9.388

ïïepuppnôns Od 2 2 .81*

TtepuppUTOs Od 19.173 E u r

nEpLodeve'ü) ( + ) Od 22.368

ïïEpuaTaôdv Il 13.551 E u r

ÏÏEpüOTEb'xW Od 1*.27T

HEpbOTEÀAü) Od 2l*.293 E u r

TCEpbOTE'vtü n 16.163

TCEpbTbônPt (*) Od 3 .2 0 5 E u r

ÏÏEpbTpE'xW Il 22.369

KEpbTpEW (+) Il 11.676

lïEpbTpopEW Od 18.77

KEpbTpOXOS Il 2 3 .1*55

nEpbtppctçopab Od 1.76

TtEpMvds Il 21*.316

ndpan Od 1 0 .1 3 9

TtEcads Od 1.107 E u r

IIetewv Il 2.500

HETpObOS Od 1 2 .2 3 1 E u r ; 1*01 TtEUMËÔavds n 1 0 .8 nnYEObpaAlos (+) Il 3.197 nriyuAbs Od 11*. 1*76

Jlnôabov 1 1 11*. 172 2hl

Iln ô a L O S Il 5.69 llnXeLiJüvâôG n 2U.338

ïïnvLov Il 23.762

UnpEun Il 2.766 nnpo's Il 2.599 iinpw Od 11.287 AR 1.119

TtCôaÇ Il 16.825 E u r ARR ntônEus (+) n 11.183

üLôOTns n 6.30

ïïüXos 11 10.265

ïïupTtAâvoyat ( + ) Il 9.679

Tiuvvîaoü) Il 1 4 .21*9 ntaaa Il i*.277

ütTÔeiîs n 3.11*1* E u r ritHÎEUOl n 2.829 AR 1.933

TiAaYMT(5s Od 21.363 E u r uAaY«Toaûvn Od 15.31*3

ïïAavctü) Il 23.321 n A d i a u a n 2.501* nAEvîycüV Il 4.528 E u r (v.l.) n 20.1*86 uAEupdv n 4 .1*68 E u r ;

ÜAeupüjvuos n 23.635 uAriHTÉçoiJat n 21.499

ïïAnpupt's Od 9.486 E u r 2Î+8

KAn'v Od 8.207 Eur; 13I+ 33I+, 59I+ TiXuoooijau Od 6.318

ïïXdMayos n 11.176 Eur

Od 3.169 AR 1.108 ARR

TtXoxyo's n 17.52 AR

ïïXüJTOS Od 10.3 ARR

ïïoôtSMeca Il 2.792 Eur

IIOtâVTUOS Od 3.190

KOÜXUXXü) Il 18.590 Eur; Cjr 339

ïïouyvn Od 9.122 Eur; 26, 3 7 ,83 TiouyvnLos n 2.1+70 icdxos 11 12.1+51 Eur

TCoXeûoj Od 22.223

TtoXuntns n 2.806 Eur AR 1.867 ( fern. ) uoXtoxpdTatpos n 8.518 noXuauyovLÔriS Il 8.276 noXuctvônS Od II+.353

TioXdapvu 11 2.106 itoXuynôns n 21.1+50 noXuôctxpuos Il 17.192 Eur noXdôayva Od I+.228

Tt0XUÔL4

IloXuôwpti 11 16.175

TtoXÛÇUYOS Il 2.293 2^9

TtoAunyepns ( + ) 21 H*56i+

IIoAudepaEtôns Od 22.287

noXuLïïTtos II 13.171

noXuMayxns II 11.642

noXuxâoTTi Od 3.464

noAuxepôns Od 13.255 AR

ïïo Ai3mgotos ( + ) 11^ 3.371

TioAdxAnpos Od l4.211

noAuxAns (v.l.) Il 2.855(a)

noAûxvnpos II 2.497

TtoAoxoupavua 11^ 2.204

noAuxTHpwv II 5.613 Eur

TtoAuAnuos II 5 .6 1 3 AR I.5I; 5 8 0 ; 937 ARR noAdAAuaxos Od 5.445

IIoAupnAn 11^ 1 6 .1 8 0

noAüpnAos 12 1 6 .4 1 7

TtoAuynxavi-'ct Od 23.321

noAuveu'xns II 4.377

IIoAdvrios Od 8.1 1 4

noAdÇetvos II 2 .6 2 3

TCoAuîiaLTtaAos Od 15.419

noAuïïdpüJV ( + ) 21 4 .4 3 3

üoAunnpovtôns Od 24.305 noAÛTtuxpos Od 16.255 250

noAunous Od 5 .1+32

noAOppnvos Od 1 1 .2 5 7

ïïoAi3o«ap^pos Il 2 .811+

noAOTAriTos Od 1 1 .3 8

IloAu(pnTns Il 1 3 .7 9 1

noAucpdvins Il 1+.395

ïïoAuüiTids Od 2 2 .3 8 6

ïïopnedo) Od 1 3 .1+22

IlovTevjs Od 8 .1 1 3

ÏÏOVTOÔEV (+) Il 11+.395

TtOVTOHOpéü) Od 1 1 .1 1

HopSeus Il 11+.115

ïïopôpevjs Od 20.187 Eur

ïïdpES Od 1 0 .1+10 Eur ndpitn n 18.1+01 Eur

ïïdpTaÇ (+) Il 1 7.1+

ïïdpTUS Il 5.162

üoauôntov Od 6.266

Iloouônuos Il 2.506 AR 1.1279

ïïoaanyap (+) n 21+.657 ndoTos Od 2I+.288 ndiepos Il 5.85 Eur; noTH Od 5.337

ïïOTriTds Od 12.62 npCÎMTUOS Il 2 .8 3 5

TtpeaBeCov Il 8.289

TtpEaBuyevns Il 1 1 .21*9 npoaXns ^ 21.262 npoBaous Od 2.75 upoBÉBouXa Il 1 .1 1 3

ïïpoBoâü) Il 12.277 upo'BoAos Od 12.251 npoYbyvopai. n 18.525 npoyovos Od 9.221 npoôofjvau Od 1».396 AR 1.106

Ttpo6o«n ( + ) Il 1*.107

ïïpoeepyü) n 11.569

Ttponxns ( + ) Od 12.205 npo0dwv Il 11*.515

Tipoduyta Il 2.588 itpobOTnpt Il 1*.156 Eur; Cjr 319

ïïpoKaduÇü) Il 2.1*63 npoMXuTos (+) n 20.201*

Updxpus Od 1 1 .3 2 1 npdxpoaoot n 11*.35

TipoxuXdvôopai. Il 11*.18 npoXeyü) ^ 13.689 npopedyvoyu (+) Il 9.1*52 Ilp d voos Il 1 6 .3 9 9

TtpdÇ Od 17.295

Tipoodyw Od I7.UH6 Eur

TCpoaaXedcpu) Od 10.392

npoacÎKTO) n 2 it.ll0 Eur

npoaapapLOHoj n 5.725

upooEuXdw Il 1 0 .31*7 Eur

TipoaEpEdyopaL n 15.621

npdoKEuyau (+) n 18.379 Eur

TcpooHnôns Od 21.35 ARR

npoaXÉyü) Od 1 2 .3lt AR

TtpoapuÔE'oyoïu Od 1 1 .11*3 AR 1.876 ARR npoavdaaopau Il 9.381

ïïpOOKEXdÇü) Od 9.285

TipooudXvayat ( + ) Od 13.95

TipoaiiTnaau) ( + ) Od 13.98

npdaaoÔEV Il 23.533

ïïpoaoTEtxw Od 20.73

n p o o T E 'p u a ) ( + ) Il 15.1*01

npooTuOnyi- Od 9.305 Eur

TtpdaçaTos n 21*.757

itpoatpuns Od 19.58

ïïpoaepcùvnEts ( + ) Od 9.1*56 npOTudojv Il 15.1*55 ïïpoTpnoLs II ll.i+2li upoTponctônv ^ lé.30i* npupveds Od 8.112

ïïpdpvnSev 13^ 1 5 .7 1 6 Eur AR upupviDpeûa ^ 1 )4.307

IlpuTUVos 5 .6 7 8 npiJüLÇos ^ 2 .3 0 3

TtpwLos ^ 15 .)+70

Ilpwpeds Od 8 .1 1 3

Ttpûpa Od 1 2 .2 3 0 Eur AR 1.372 ~ (v.l.) AR Ttpo)TonX6os Od 8.35 Eur

ïïptüTOTOxos II 1 7 .5 nptüTCü ^ l8.)»3

ïïTatpü) Od n .3^1

ïïxepvn n 22.397

ïïToe'ü) Od 2 2 .2 9 8 Eur AE 1.1232 AR ÜToAeyaCos ^ h.228

ïïTÔpdos Od 6 .1 2 8 Eur AR ntvÎYpa II 5.315

ïïTüxTo's II 6 .1 6 9 nxûov 11 1 3 .5 8 8 nxûw II 2 3 .6 9 7 AR

ïïxüjaKctÇü) ( + ) Il h.312 nuypaCot ^ 3 .6 T iu y y a x o s Od 8.2)46

u u Y y n Il 23.669 Eur; Çjr 53^4

T uieX os Od 19.553

ÜUdüJÔE Od 11.581 AR 1.209

ïïUKuynôns Od 1.438

JIu A aC o s ^ 2 .8 4 2

llu A n v n Il 2.639

I lu A d ^ e v Od 16.323

K u A o s ( + ) Il 5 .3 9 7

nûAoüv Il 12.187

ïïd Ç u v o s n 24.269

TtUpaXTEO) Od 9.328

ïïu p y d ü ) Od 1 1 .2 6 4

H U pETo's n 2 2 .3 1

u u p D tp d p o s Od 3.495

u u p u n M n s (+) Od 9.387

ÏÏUpdMaUOTOS Il 1 3 .5 6 4

n d p L s n l6 .4l6

lïupuçAEYÉQwv Od 10.513

KUPH o Ae' ü) Od 10.30 i tu p o d s n 1 8 .2 1 1 AR

Ttlüxâopcit n 12.287 AR 1.1085 p a ô L v d s Il 23.583 AR p a t a x n 'p n 18.477 AR paipiî Od 22.186 Eur AR pâx<^5 ^ 9 .2 0 8 Eur; Çjr 61*3

'PeZdpov Od 1 .1 8 6 pn«Tos Il 1 3 .3 2 3 AR

’ Pnvn Il 2 .7 2 8 pnÇnvopun (+) Od lit.217 pnobs Od 2 1 .2 9 1 pnaoü) Il 1 8 .5 7 1 AR 1 pnTiip , Il 9.^î+3 pnxds Il 21.1+i*5 Eur pn'Tptx Od lit.393 pbyeôavds Il 1 9 .3 2 5 AR pbYt-oxos Il 5 .8 7 3 ARR

'PbYpos 11 20.1*85 pÜYOS Od 5.1*72 puydw Od il*. 1*81 pbvoîdpos Il 2 1 .3 9 2

•Pbitn n 2 .6 0 6 pbnTcîÇü) Il 11* .257

Od 5 .2 5 6 poôavds (+) Il 1 8 .5 7 6

'Poôbos 0 1 2 .2 0

’PdôbOb n 2 .651* poôdebs Il 2 3 .1 8 6 Eur p d d L O S Od 5.1*12 Cur ; 17

pOügÔEU Od 12.106

poLÇe'üJ Il 10.502

p u ô d v Od 15.1*26

pUTtOS Od 6.93

p u a u o v Il 1 1 .671* AR 1.1351; 1357 puads Il 9 .5 0 3

puaxaxTus (+) Od 1 8 .221*

'PUTGOV ^ 2.648 ptijÇ ( f i s s u r a ) ( + ) Od 22.143 pioxuds n 23.420

OKMeanoXos Il 5 .1 2 6

EaApaivsug Od 1 1 .2 3 6 adXïïtYÇ Il 1 8 .2 1 9 oaXïïdçü) Il 21.388 ados Il 1.32 (v.l.;> n 1 .1 1 7 aapôdvtos Od 2 0 .3 0 2

EdiVLOs Il 14.443 oaupwTiip Il 1 0 .1 5 3 a e 3 o p a u Il 4.242

ZéXaYos Il 5 .6 1 2

EeXnïïtdôns Il 2 .6 9 3

E e XX o l Il 1 6 .2 3 4 anxdçü) Il 8.131 OriMOMOpOS Od 1 7 .221*

Enaapos Il 2.853

Enaxds 11 2.836 odevapds Il 9.505

EdeveAaos n 16.586

Etôdves Il 23.71*3

EbSovun Od 13.285

Euôovtn^GV Il 6.291

Euôdvuos n 6.290

Euôüiv Od 15.1*25

OLÇ ü) Od 9.391+

Euxavtn Od 21*.307

EuxeXob Od 20.383

EuïïuAos n 21*.615

OLTéui Od 2 U . 2 0 9

OüTOCpOtYOS Od 9.191

OLçAdu) ( + ) n ii*.ii*2

EMdvôeuoi Il 10.268

Exdptpn Il 2.532 oxatpus Od 9.223 oxcAAw Il 23.191 oxeAos n 16.311* Eul’; Cjr 183 axeitctüj Od 13.99 axLcîçü) n 21.232 258 ohoXlôs n 16.387 Eur ARR

OMOTtos ^ 6 . 2 1 Eur AR I.8 IO ARR OMOTOlJnVUOS ( + ) Od

OHUôpauvü) ( + ) Il 2^.592 anOuvos n 18.319 E u r

ZMupo'ôev II 19.332

O M Ü T O S Od 1 ) 4 .3 ^

OKUTOTÔIJOS II 7 . 2 2 1

UMUipos Od 1 )4.112 Eur; 256, 3 9 0 , 1411, 556 OHÛAriÇ 11 I3 .65I4 omSAos ^ 1 3 .5 6 1 4 oMü)(j) Od 5 .66 opiixw Od 6.2 2 6

Eyuvôeûs II 1.39 aopds ^ 23.91

EoOvuov Od 3 .2 7 8 Cjr 293 aocpua ^ 1 5 .1*12 Eur

EnctpTnvôe Od I.285 a n d p T O V II 2.135

EïïGttü n I8 .I4O anépua Od 5.1*90 Eur oïïuôns ( + ) n 1 1 .751* oTtuv^nP n 1*.77 o n o ô t c t Od 5.1*88 Cjr 615 OU06ÔS Od 9.375 E u r

OToyLV Od 5.252

OTatpuAn (plumbum) 11 2 . 7 6 5

OTCtXUS 11 2 3 . 5 9 8 E u r ; 121 AR 1.688 ARR

O T eA eti Od 21.422

a i e A e d v Od 5.236

Z xevT w p 1 1 5 . 7 8 5

axepGO) O d 1 3 . 2 6 2 E u r

oxcponnYGpdxa ^ 1 6 . 2 9 8

a x E tp a v o s 1 1 1 3 . 7 3 6 E u r ; Cjr 5 1 7 , 559 a x u A n v d s 1 1 14.351

a x o v a x d ü ) n 1 8 . 1 2 4

E xp a x d r i n 2.606

axpEqjEÔLvem 11 1 6 . 7 9 2

o x p d y R o s n 14.413

oxpocpotAdÇü) O d 1 8 . 3 1 5

Expd(puos 11 5.49 E u r

ExdycpnAos ^ 2.608

E x d p a 1 1 2 . 5 3 9 ouyxA ou E W 11 1 3 . 7 2 2 ouYKUpdm 1 1 2 3 . 4 3 5 E u r

E u y n ^ e v 1 1 2 . 6 7 1 auyydpnxo) (*) n 10.467 Cjr 397 aupyEÉYVOyt 11 2.753 E u r ; Cjr 578 260

auyyriTLdoiJau ( + ) li^ 10.197

auyïïHYVUyu ^ 5.902 Eur

oupnXaTaYéü) II 23.102

aupcpepTo's n 13.237

aupqjpctôpoiv ^2.372

ouvaeupo) ( + , *) ^ 15.680

auvat'vupotu ( + ) ]Q 21.502

o u v E u p u Od 7-270 Eur auveoxpos ( + ) II lli.465 ouvépuôos Od 6.32 AR

®vjveous Od 1 0 .5 1 5 Eur ouvnpooiîvn 1 1 2 2 .2 6 1 AR I.300 AR auvnopos Od 8 .9 9 Eur ouvSeu) Od 20.21+5 aovLainpt ^ 1 I+.96 Eur auvopu'vu (*) n I+.332 AR auvoxn n 2 3 .3 3 0 AR 1 .1 6 0 ; 71*1+; 1006 ARR auvxpeus Od 9.1+29

Zupcn Od 1 5 .1+03 Eur oupppYVupu Od 8 .1 3 7

0(pai-pn6dv ^ 1 3 .2 0 I+ oipEVôdvn ^ 1 3 .6 0 0 Eur ocprindü) II 17 . 5 2

EcpîiXos n 1 5 .3 3 8 acpoôpûs Od 12.].2l+ a(pov6i3Xuos II. 20.483

ocpOpa Od 3.434 AR 1.734 AR

acpojLTepos ^ 1.216 AR 1 .643; 1286 ARR axeôu'nv II 5.830

axoLVos Od 5.463

ExoCvos n 2 .4 9 7 aüKos ^ 2 0 .7 2

xayds (v.l.) n 23.l60 Eur

TaAauyevns IJ^ 2.865 xaAaïïevôns Od 5.222 xaAdq)pü)v ^ 13.300 xavads ^16.589 Eur AR 1.1192 ARR xavadnous Od 9-464

TctvxaAos 0^ 11.582 Eur xavdyAcjaaos ( + ) Od 5.66 xavuyAtüxts ^ 8.297 xavuoxds (+) Od 21.112 xavdipAoLos ^ 1 6 .7 6 7 xapSoodvn Od 18.342

Tctpvn n 5.44

Tdptpn 112.533

Tdcpos Od 1.417

Teyen n 2.607 AR 1.162; 398 xeyeos ^ 6.248 262

te Cpos n 18.1*85

TEUXUCW Il T.1*1*9

TEXTOVUÔnS Od 8 .111*

TEKToaOvn Od 5 .2 5 0

Témtüjv Il 5 .5 9

TEiiéon Od 1 .181*

TEVôpnôüîv Il 2 .7 5 6

TEpKLCtÔnS Od 2 2 .3 3 0

TEpïïuAn Od 1 8 .3 7

TEpaauvü) n 16.529

TEoaapagotos (+) n 23.705

TETEUxrioSau ( + ) Od 2 2 .loi*

TETpCÎMüS Od 5.306

TETpCtOpOS Od 13.81

TETpauX^ n 1.128

Tdtxa ^ 1*.1*12

Il 3.151

TEUdpavLÔns n 6 .1 3

TEvîôpas Il 5.705

îEUTotpi'ôns n 2 .81*3

TfldOS Il 16.71*7

TnHEÔaiv Od 1 1 .2 0 1

Tn'AEpos Od 9.509

TnAEipctvns Od 2 l*.83 263

TnlEçûôns Od 1 1 .5 1 9

TnAOTCXTO) Od 7.3 2 2

TnpEun 11 2 .8 2 9

TniJyeTov Od 6.103

T u 0 a u g w a o w Od 1 3 .1 0 6

Tuytos Od 1 0 .3 8 Eur; 532

TCpuvs Il 2 .5 5 9

To'xavos Il 2 .7 3 5

Tuxapncjads 11 2 .7 5 1

Tuxapn'auos (v.l.) Il 2 .7 5 1 AR 1 .6 5

Tuxnves Il 1 U.279 AR 1 .5 0 7 ARR xXnxds n 2k.k9 Eur xynônv (+) ^ 7 .2 6 2 xdSu Od 1 5 .2 3 9 AR 1.210 ARR xoMds Od 11».16 Eur; 1»2 xoyn Il 1.235 Eur x o Çe u x t îs 11 2 3 .8 5 0 x o Çeu o ) Il 23.855 Eur xoÇoadvn Il 13.311» Eur xoÇdxns Il 1 1 .3 8 5 Eur xoÇotpdpos n 21.1»83 Eur x o p e ' ü) 11 1 1 .2 3 6 xpdyos Od 9 .2 3 9 80 xpaueü) Od 7 .1 2 5 Tpnxi^'s 2 .6 8 2

T pnxos 11 5 .7 0 6

TpuXAuoTos n 8.488

TpÛTiXaÇ ( + ) 11 18.480

TpUKA^i 11 1 .1 2 8

Tpu'uTUXOS 11 11.353

TpLOTOUXU ( + ) ^ 1 0 .4 7 3

TPUOTOLXOS Od 1 2 .9 1

TpuaxuAou n 20.221

T p L xaoxes Od 1 9 .1 7 7

T pouçnv n 2 .5 6 1

T p ou çn vos n 2.847

TpOTtetü ( + ) 11 18.224

Tpoun' Od 15.4o4

Tpdtpos n 1 1 .3 0 7

Tpoxao) Od 1 5 .4 5 1

Tpdçu) 11 9 .3 1 1

T punavov Od 9 .3 8 5 E u r; Cjr k6l

Tpuitdu Od 9.384

Tpdcpos Od 4 .5 0 8

Tpmyw Od 6 .9 0

TpwuAos n 24.257

TPOITOS n 2 1 .5 6 8

TUpgoxoeo) (v .l.) 11 21.323 265

TUM3oxo'n ( + ) n 21.323

TUïïn n 5.887 ARR

TucpXds n 6.139 Eur; l*9l*, 6 7 3 , 671*, 6 9 7 , 706 T u x to s Il T.220

*Yd6es Il 18.1*86 Eur

ÛcÎMUVdOS Il il* . 31*8 AR ]

* YdpnoXts n 2 .5 2 1

uyi/HS n 8 .521* Eur; 259

ûôaTOxpecpns ( + ) Od 1 7 .2 0 8

“Y6n n 2 0 .3 8 5

ùô pnxds Od 9-133 Eur; 89

üôpos Il 2 .7 2 3

UETOS n 1 2 .1 3 3 AR

ÔAayyds Il 2 1 .5 7 5

' YXaMuôns Od ll*.20l*

"YXXos n 2 0 .3 9 2 Eur ARR

ÛpEVaLOS n 1 8 .1*93 Eur ARR

üpvos Od 8 . 1*29 Eur AR

ùïïaXeuopau Od 1 5 .2 7 5

ùitavTtdÇü) ^ 6 .1 7

ùndpxü) Od 2l*.286 Eur

'Ynetpoxtôns Il 1 1 .6 7 3

'Y nELpoxos Il 11.335

* YïïELpüiV Il 5 .1 I4I+ ÙTteMTipoAv 5tü ( + ) Od 6.88

ùneMTipopeü) ( + ) Od 6.87

ùïïEMaoiÇü) n 2 3 . 2 9 2

û n E p vn yu M e n 22.^91

ùnEÇdYüJ ("') Od iB .ll+ T

ÛTCEÇotXE'aaôau ( + ) n 1 5 . 1 8 0

ùiiEÇavaôOoyau I l 1 3 . 3 5 2

û n d p a Od 5 . 2 6 0

ÙTiE pans ( + ) n 1 1 . 2 9 7

ÙKEpÔEnS n 1 7 . 3 3 0

ÙUEpEtItU) I l 2 3 . 6 9 1

ÙltEpE'nXÜ) I l 2 1 . 2 7 1

ÙïïEpntpCtVEü) n 1 1 .6 9 1 +

ÙîlEpQdpUOV Od 7 . 9 0

ùn E p u 'n p t O d 8 . 1 9 8

ùnEpuMTotvoyat (+) Od 2 3 . 3

’ YitEpuovÉôns Od 1 2 . 1 7 6

ÛTtEptiEVEÜJV ( + ) Od 1 9 . 6 2

ù n E p o n X ta n 1 . 2 0 5

Ù T tE p on X u çoyai, ( + ) Od 1 7 . 2 6 8

ÙlIEpTEpta Od 6 . 7 0

ûnE p y a n 22. 1*95

ÙltEpiOLÔÔEV (t) Od 1 . 3 2 8

ûito3Xn6nv ^ 1 . 2 9 2 m 1 . 6 9 9 AHR 267

ûuôBpuxa Od 5 .3 1 9

ùïïoôeÇLn (+) n 9.73

ùuoôpws Od U.386

ùuoôpdü) Od 1 5 .3 3 3

ù^oôpnoTnp Od 15 .3 3 0

ÙTioCGÛyvupL (*) Od 1 5 .8 1

' YuùOr)3au Il 2 .5 0 5

ùnoôupnooopat (+) n 1 8 .5 1 3

Ùïïo k X lvü) Od 5 .^ 6 3

OïïoxXovEOMau Il 2 1 .5 5 6

ùitoMXouéopau ( + ) Od 2 2 .3 8 2

ÙïïOMpÛTlTa) n 1 5 .6 2 6

Ùko ' muh X os Od U.13I

ùnoXeuMauvopau Il 5 .5 0 2

ÙKOXUÇÜJV Il 1 8 .5 1 9

ùïïoyvâopat (+) Od 2 2 .3 8

ùnovnLos Od 3 .8 1 (v.l.) Od 1.186

ùnoTiepMdÇü) Od 7 .1 2 6

ÔïïOïïXcxXtOS Il 6 .3 9 7

ùïïOïïTnoaü) Il 2 .3 1 2

ôïïdpvuyu (*) Od 2 U.62

ùndppnvos (+) Il 1 0 .2 1 6

ôïïooedü) Od 9 .3 8 5

ùïïoaxaxdopat Od 20.212 Ù T tooT evoixtÇ ü) ( + ) Il 2.781

onooTopvuyi, (») Od 20.139

ù n o a x e o u n Il 13.369

û n o T a p g é ü ) ( + ) Il 17.533

ùnoTopTCxpuos n lit.279

ù n o (p au v o ) Od 17.U09

ÙTtotpépo) Il 5.885

ÙTtotpeûyü) (" ) n 22.200

ÙTCoepnTns Il 16.235

ùitoxeuptos Od 15 .1tlt8

ù itd ^ jL o s Il 3 .1t2

ÙlttüïïUOV n 12.U63

ù n w p E u a 1 1 20.218

Ùltü)P0(pU0S n 9.6U0

'Y p u 'n ^ 2.1I96

'Y p y o v n n 2.616

"YpTUOS Il lit.511

ùaytvnvôE (+) I l 2 .1t77

ü ç c ta jja Od 3 .27lt

ûcpe'AHüJ n llt.lt77

û ç n v û o x o s n 6.19

ùçunyï/ (“) n l.lt3lt

Ù(J;LMCÎpnVOS n 12.132

Ù(j,ÛXEpWS Od 10.158 269

'Y(j,unûXn ' IlT.i+69 AR 1 .6 5 0 7 1 3 ; 718 7 8 6 ; 836 853; 873 8 8 6 ; 897 900 AR (padvTaxos 0& 13-93

«ta^ôouaa W 12.132 AR

$aÉ%wv Od 23.21+6 E u t ARR tpauôuydecs ( + ) II. 13-686

<î>ab 6 pn Od 11.321

$aüOTos II. 5-^3 tpaXaYYOÔdv ^ 15-360

(pdXapov ^ 1 6 .1 0 6

(paXnpudo) ^ 13.799

$ôpLs n 2 .5 8 2 tpapydtaao) Od 9-393 ARR

$âpos Od 1+.355 Eur

(paooocpdvos ^ 15-238

^auaLctôns II. 11-578

4>Eat Od 15-297

$ELd 1 1 7 .1 3 5

$ELÔas II 13 -6 9 1

4>Eu6uTmos II. 2 .6 7 6

(pELÔwXn ^22.21+1+

$EVEC)S II. 2 .6 0 5

«tÉpEMXüS ü 5-59 $Épns Od 1 1 .2 5 9

•ÎEpouaa Il 1 8 .1^3

(pdpxpov Il 18.236

cpnyuvos n 5.838

$0upwv n 2.868

4>LAnTopLôns n 20.1+57

cpuAoxepTopos Od 22.287

(ptXoMTeavos ( + ) n 1.122 cpuXoTtauYPwv Od 23.131+ tpuAoxnauos Od 1 1 .21+6 cpoAo(ppaaiîvri Il 9.256

(puAo(|jEu6ns n 1 2.16k tpAE'yya n 21.337

$AEYUau ^ 1 3 .3 0 2

(pAÉ(|, n 13.91+6

(pAuâ Od 17.221 ipAoüds Il 1 .2 3 7

(pAuü) n 21.361

(pOÉVLOS Od 18.97

4>oÉvuaaa Od 15.1+17 cpoLvds Il 16.159

(poAxos ( + ) Il 2.217 tpoÇds n 2.219 cpopEds n 18.566 ipopiîvü) 2É. 22.21

tpopvjoaii) 1 8 * 3 3 6

(ppaôns 11. 2U.35^

4>pa6po v u 6riS — 8*257

(ppdôviiüv 1 1 ^ 1 6 . 6 3 8

^pôvTüOj -uôos — 3*282

$pdvTua, -LOS 11.17*^0 ARR

cpuYOïtToAepos Od 1^.213

(puçaxLvds ( + ) 11. 1 3 .1 0 2

(puMLoeLS — 2 3 . 6 9 3

(pÜMOs 11. 9*7

(pu'XaHos II 21*.566 AR 1.132

(puXua Od 5*^77

4>uXope6ouaoi 11. 7*10

(piîçnXts 11 1 7 * 1 ^ 3

(pdÇtpos — 5 *359

(pdoLS Od 10.303 Eur; Çjr 61*9

Xda (v.l.) 117*135

XaXEUTO) Odl*.l*23 AR 1.131*1 ARR

XaXuvo's 1 1 1 9 * 3 9 3 Eur; Çii 1*61 AR

XotXLçpovEW ( + ) Od 2 3 .1 3 xaXLtppoaûvn ( + ) Od 16.310

XaXxEoçwvos 11. 5*785 XaÀHevjü) n 18. W o AR

XaXMeoüv Od 6.273 AR

XaX xL S I l 1^.291

XaAHoyXwxus (+') ^ 22.225

XaAMOMvn'pus ( + ) n T .U i

XaAMOTUTCOS n 19.25

X ccA moiv I l 16.595

X a p a u e u v n s I l 16.235

X a v ô d v Od 21. 29U

XdpL S n 18.382

X a p o ïïo 's Od 11.611 AR 1.

X ctp o iio s n 2.672

Xdpo({, I l 11. 1+26

X E L p u s Od 21+.230

Xépaôos I l 21.319 AR 1.

XEpvfÎTUS I l 12. 1+33 AR

x d p v u B o v ^ 21+ .30I+

XepvtitToyau n 1. 1+1+9 Eu t

X e p o u ô d p a s n 11. 1+23

X e p a o v ô e n 21.238

XEÛpa I l 23.561 Eu t ARR

X n p a y d s I l 21. 1+95 ARR x n p E d w Od 9. 121+ Eu t ; 1+1+0 xnpùü aT ad I l 5.158 X^'yaupa 11 6 .1 8 1

XloCvns 11 9.539 xXwpnus (+) Od 1 9 .5 1 8

XXtiptS Od 1 1 .2 8 1 xvdos Od 6 .2 2 6

Xdavos 11 I8 .UTO

XoCvtÇ Od 1 9 .2 8

XOUPELOS Od IU.8 I

XoCpos Od 1U.7 3

X0p6n Od 21.Î407

XopoLTUTtua 11 2 U.261

XPavbj 11 5.138

XPeyETLÇüj 11 1 2 .5 1

XPuyitTu Od 1 0 .5 1 6 Eur; ^ l406 ARR

Xpoud ^ 11». 161; Eur; Cjr 517 ARR

Xpdyaôos (+) ^ 2 3 .6 8 8

Xpdyus n 2 .8 5 8

XPdvbOS Od 1 7 .1 1 2 E\ir; Cjjr 2k9

Xpuooud6i-Xos Od II.6 0 I4 xpuaoxdos Od 3.1*25

XUiXdw Od 6 .8 0

(|>dyyos Od 12.21*3

(jjEôvds 11 2 .2 1 9

(l.Eu6dYYelos n 1 5 .1 5 9 27 U

^jEuôns n U.235 Eur; Cjr 271

4

(IfEUOTnS n 21,.261

(jiriAoitpctü) Od 9 .1*16

Il 2 1 .2 6 0

(jiUCtS n 16.1,59

I'upL'n Od 3 .1 7 1

# x o s Od 1 0 .5 5 5

^ 20.1*1,0

(jjuyds Od 9 .371,

'nyuAdn (v.l.) Od 1 .8 5

ûôbS Il 1 1 .2 7 1 AR 1.11,9; 975

'OxalEri ^ 2 .5 0 1

’ n xdaA os (vir) Od 8.111

ÜJXVÎnTEpOS n 1 3 .6 2

"fiAEVOS Il 2 .6 3 9

(I)AE0bKapnos Od 1 0 .5 1 0 wpoyEpwv Il 2 3 .7 9 1

üivnTÔs Od il,.202

’ fipE bôuta n 1 8 .1,8

ü p to s Od 9.1 3 1

■’’îîp o s n 11.303

(Lxpdü) Od 1 1 .5 2 9

&XPOS Il 3.35 Appendix 2

THE HAPAX LEGOMENA IN HOMER

A. The number of hapax legomena and the ratio of hapax legomena per lines of text for each book of the Iliad:

Hapax legomena Lines/hapax legomenon

1 ItB 611 1 2 .7 5

2 259* 877 3^9

3 1»5 lt6l 1 0 .2 lt

It 59 5ltlt 9^^

5 100 909 9 .0 9

6 5i* 529 9 .8 0

T 29 lt82 1 6 .6 2

8 38 565 lit. 87

9 Tit 713 9.61t

10 lt8 579 1 2 .0 6

11 91 81t8 9 .3 2

12 39 ItTl 1 2 .0 8

13 8 lt 837 9 .9 6

lit 69 522 7 .5 7

15 56 7lt6 1 3 .3 2

16 85 867 1 0 .2 0

* The extremely high frequency of hapax legomena in this book is due to the unique character of the Catalogue of Ships. 27(^

Hapax legomena Lines/hapax legomenon

IT it2 761 1 8 .1 2

18 99 617 ^.23

19 27 lt2lt 1 5 .7 0

20 it3 503 1 1 .7 0

21 79 611 7 .8 6

22 it5 515 1 1 . it it

23 90 897 9^ ^

2h 67 80 !t 1 2 .0 0

The number of hapax legomena and the ratio of hapax legomena per lines of text for each book of the Odyssey:

Book Hapax legomena Lines Lines/hanax legomenon

1 25 it it it 1 7 .7 6

2 19 it3it 2 2 .8 it

3 35 it97 lit. 20

it 58 8it7 lit. 60

5 75 ii93 6 .5 7

6 35 331

7 33 3it7 1 0 .5 2

6 58 586 1 0 .1 0

9 6l 565

10 lt5 57it 1 2 J ^

11 65 6 ito 9.69

12 51 it53 8 .8 8 Hapax legomena Lines/hanax legomenon

13 3i* I+I40 1 2 .9 4

Ih 5^ 533 9^^

15 557 1 2 .6 6

16 26 481 1 8 .5 0

IT 1)5 606 1 3 .4 7

18 37 428 11.57

19 55 6o4 1 0 .9 8

20 31 39 I) 12.71

21 3I) 434 1 2 .7 6

22 1)5 501 11.13

23 17 372 2 1 .8 8

2h 3I) 548 1 6 .1 2

The compaP-Son of the Iliad and the Odyssey regarding the numher and ratio of hapax legomena:

Hapax legomena Lines/hapax legomenon

Iliad 1,670 1 5 ,6 9 3 9.4o

Odyssey 1 ,0 1 6 1 2 ,1 0 9 1 1 .9 2

Iliad and Odyssey 2,686 2 7 ,8 0 2 10.35 Appendix 3

EURIPIDES AMD THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA

A. The numher of Homeric hapax legomena used in the extant plays:

Play No. of hapax legomena

1. Phoenissae 117

2. Orestes 112

3. Ion 111

1*. Hippolytus 103

5. Bacchae 100

6. Helena 98

7. Iphigenia in Tauris 97

8. Iphigenia in Aulis 96

9. Hercules Furens 9h

10. Hecuba 92

11. Electra 89

12. Troades 88

13. Supplices 82

ll+. Medea 81

15. Alcestis 77

1 6 . Cyclops 75

l6. Andromache 75

17. Rhesus 6h

1 8 . Heraclidae 59

278 B. Plays listed in order of their use of Homeric hapax legomena per lines of text:

Lines/hapax Plays legomena Lines legomenon

1. Cyclops 75 709 9.i+5

2. Bacchae 100 1392 13.92

3. Hecuba 92 1295 Ik. 08

k. Hippolytus 103 lk66 Ik. 23

5. Ion 111 1622 Ik. 61

6. Supplices 82 123 k 15.05

7 . Phoenissae 117 ■ 1766 1 5 .0 9

a. Alcestis 77 1163 1 5 .1 0

9 . Orestes 112 1693 1 5 .1 1

10. Troades 88 1332 1 5 .1 k

11. Hercules Furens 9k lk28 1 5 .1 9

12. Electra 89 1359 15.27

13. Iphigenia in Tauris 97 lk99 1 5 .k5

Ik. Rhesus 6k 996 1 5 .5 6

1 5 . Iphigenia in Aulis 96 1629 1 6 .9 7

1 6 . Andromache 75 1288 1 7 .1 7

1 7 . Helena 98 1692 1 7 .2 7

1 8 . Medea 81 lki9 1 7 .5 2

1 9 . Heraclidae 59 1055 1 7 .8 8 280 C. Plays listed in order of date* together with the number of hapax legomena and hapax legomena per lines of text:

Lines/hapax Plays Date legomena legomenon

Alcestis 1*38 77 1 5 .1 0

Medea 1*31 81 1 7 .5 2

Heraclidae c. 1*30-20 59 1 7 .8 8

Hippolytus 1*28 103 ll*.23

Hecuba c. 1*25 92 111. 08

Supplices c. 1*20 82 1 5 .0 5

Hercules Furens c. 1*20-16 91 * 1 5 .1 9

Andromache c. 1*19 75 1 7 .1 7

Troades 1*15 15.1k

Electra c. 1*15-13 1 5 .2 7

Helena 1*12 98 1 7 .2 7

Iphigenia in Tauris c. 1*12 97 1 5 .k5

Phoenissae 1*10-09 117 1 5 .0 9

Orestes 1*08 112 1 5 .1 1

Ion c. 1*08? 111 lk.6l

Iphigenia in Aulis 1*06 1 6 .9 7

Bacchae c. 1*06 1 3 .9 2

Cyclops 75 9.k5

Rhesus 61* 1 5 .5 6

■ Dates are from Geoffrey S. Kirk (trans.), The Bacchae by Euripides, with intro, by Eric A. Havelock (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 19 7 0 ), p. Vi. Appendix î;

APOLLONIUS AND THE HOMERIC HAPAX LEGOMENA

The number of separate hapax legomena and their ratio per lines of text for each book of the Argonautica:

Hapax legomena Lines/hapax legomenon

1 177 (Od. T 3 , 1,362 7.69 11. lOlt)

2 153 (Od. 62, 1,285 8 .4o 1 1 . 91)

3 150 (Od. 7 0 , 1 ,4 0 7 9.38 11.80)

k 211 (Od. 9 3, 1,781 8 .4 4 n . 118)

B. The number and ratio of separate hapax legomena in the Argonautica*

Hapax legomena Lines Lines/hapax legomenon

hj2 5 ,8 3 5 12.36

* The apparent discrepancy of these figures with those above is due to the fact that I considered each book of the Argonautica as a separate entity in computing its number and frequency of hapax legomena. Here, however, all four books of the Argonautica were treated as a whole. Cf. p. 1 1 5 , n. I48 .

281 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

I . PRIMARY SOURCES

Adler, Ada, ed. Suidae Lexicon. vols. Leipzig: TeuBner, 1928-35.

Allen, Thomas W., ed. Homeri Ilias. 2 vols. Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1931.

ed. Homeri Opera. Vols. 3 & Odyssey. 2nd ed. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1917.

Bekker, Immanuel, ed. Apollonii Sophistae Lexicon Homericum. Berlin, 1833; reprint ed., Hildesheim: 01ms, 1 9 6 7 .

Diels, Hermann, ed. Die Fragmente Der Vorsokratiker. 3 vols. 2nd ed. BerllrTl Weidmann, 193^-37.

Dindorf, Wilhelm, ed. Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem. I4 vols. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1875-77.

ed. Scholia Graeca In Homeri Odysseam. 2 vols. Ox­ ford: Typographeus Academicus, 1855.

Ducherain, Jacqueline, ed. Le Cyclope D 'Euripide. Paris: Chamnion, 19h5.

Erbse, H., ed. Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem. Vol. 1. Ber­ lin : Gruyter, 1 9 6 9 .

Fraenkel, Hermann, ed. Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica. Oxford : The Clarendon Press, I96 I: reprint with corrections 196 I4.

Kuchetunueller, Guilelmus, ed. Philetae Coi Reliquiae. Disser- tatio Inauguralis. Berlin: Bornen, 1928.

Latte, Kurt, ed. Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon. Vol. 1. Hauniae: Munksgaard, 1953.

Leaf, Walter, ed. The Iliad. 2 vols. 2nd ed. London: Mac­ millan, I9 OO-O2 . 283

Maas, Ernst, ed. Scholia Graeca In Homeri Iliadem Townleyana. 2 vols. Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1887-88.

Merkel, R., ed. Apollonii Argonautica (with Scholia edited hy H. Keil). Leipzig: Teubner, 185^.

Merry, W. Walter and Riddell, James, eds. Homer's Odyssey. Vol. I. 2nd ed. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1886.

Monro, D.B., ed. Homer: Iliad. 2 vols. 3rd ed. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I89 O.

______, ed. Homer's Odyssey. Books 13-21. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I9 OI.

Monro, David B. and Allen, Thomas W., eds. Homeri Opera. Vols. 1 & 2: Iliad. 3rd ed. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1 9 2 0 .

Mooney, George W., ed. The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. London: Longmans, 1912.

Murray, Gilbert, ed. Euripidis Fabulae. Vol. 1. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1902.

Rose, Valentinus, ed. Aristotelis Fragmenta. Leipzig: Teubner, 1 8 8 6 .

Seaton, R.C., ed. and trans. Apollonius Rhodius: The Argonautica. Loeb ed. Cambridge : Harvard University Press, 1912.

Stanford, W.B., ed. The Odyssey of Homer. 2 vols. 2nd ed. Lon­ don: Macmillan, 1958.

Wellauer, August, ed. Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica. Vol. 1. Leipzig: Teubner, I8 2 8 .

Wyss, Bernhardus, ed. Antimachi Colophonii Reliquiae. Berlin: Weidmann, 1936.

II. SECONDARY SOURCES

Allen, James T. and Italie, Gabriel, eds. A Concordance to Euri­ pides . London : Cambridge University Press, 195^. 281*

Allen, Thomas W. Homer: The Origins and the Transmission. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1921*.

Arnott, Peter D. "The Overworked Playwright: A Study in Euri­ pides' Cyclops." Greece & Rome Ser. 2, 8 (1 9 6 1 ), I6U-6 9 .

Arrowsmith, William, trans. "The Cyclops." In The Complete Greek Tragedies. Vol. 6 . Euripides II. Edited by David Grene and Richmond Lattimore. New ed. New York: Wash­ ington Square Press, I9 6 8 , 2-1*1*.

Authenrieth, Georg, ed. A Homeric Dictionary. Translated by Robert Keep. Revised by Isaac Flagg. New ed. Norman: The University of Oklahoma Press, 1958.

Bassett, Samuel E. The Poetry of Homer. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1938.

Buttraann, Philip. Lexilogus. Translated and edited by J.R. Fishlake. 3rd ed. London: Murray, I8 U6 .

Carspecken, John Frederick. "Apollonius Rhodius and the Homeric Epic." Yale Classical Studies 13 (1952), 35-11+3.

Chantraine, Pierre, Grammaire Homérique. 3rd ed. with new con­ clusion. Paris: Klincksieck, 1958.

Conacher, D.J. Euripidean Drama. Toronto : University of Toronto Press, 1 9 6 7 .

Couat, Auguste. Alexandrian Poetry under the First Three Ptolemies. With a supplementary chapter by Emile Cahen. Translated by James Loeb. London: Heinemann, 1931.

Cunliffe, Richard J., ed. A Lexicon of the Homeric Dialect. New ed. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 19<)3.

______, ed. Homeric Proper and Place Names. London: Blackie and Son, 1931.

Dover, K.J. Aristophanic Comedy. London : Batsford, 1972.

Dunbar, Henry, ed. A Complete Concordance to the Odyssey and Hymns of Homer. New ed. Revised and enlarged by Benedetto Marzullo. Hildesheim: 01ms, I9 6 2 .

Earp, F.R. The Style of Aeschylus. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1948. 28$

Ebeling, H-, ed. Lexicon Homericum. 2 vols. Leipzig: Teubner, 1880 -8 5 .

Erbse, Hartmut. "Homerscholien und hellenistische Glossare bei Apollonios Rhodios." Hermes 8l (1953), 163-96.

Possum, Andrew. "Hapax Legomena in Plato." American Journal of Philology 5 2 .3 (1 9 3 1 ), 205-31.

Fraenkel, Hermann. Hoten Zu Den Argonautika Des Apollonios. Munich: Beck, I9 6 8 .

Friedlaender, J. "Ueber die kritische benutzung der homerischen anaÇ etpniJeva." Philologus 7 (185 I), 228-53.

Gehring, August. Index Homerieus. New ed. Revised and enlarged by Ulrich Fleischer. Hildesheim: 01ms, 1970.

Goodwin, Charles J. "Apollonius Rhodius: His Figures, Syntax, and Vocabulary." Ph.D. dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, I89 O.

Guthrie, W.K.C. The Souhists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1 9 7 1 .

Huxley, G.L. Greek Epic Poetry from Eumelos to Panyassis. Cam­ bridge: Harvard University Press, 1 9 6 9 .

Jaeger, Werner. Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture. Vol. 1. Translated by Gilbert Highet. 2nd ed. Oxford: Black- well, 191 +6 .

Jebb, R.C. Homer : An Introduction to the Iliad and the Odyssey. Boston : Ginn, I8 8 7 .

Kirk, G.S. The Songs of Homer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 19627

______; ed. The Language and Background of Homer. Cambridge: Heffer, 1964.

Koerte, Alfred. Hellenistic Poetry. Translated by Jacob Hammer and Moses Hadas. New York: Columbia University Press, 1 9 2 9 .

Latte, Kurt. "Glossographika." Philologus 80 (1925), 136-175. Lawall, Gilbert. "Apollonius' Argonautica; Jason as Anti-Hero." Yale Classical Studies 19 (1 9 6 6 ), 121-69.

Lehrs, K. De Aristarchi Studiis Homericis. 3rd ed. Leipzig: Hirzelium, l882.

Quaestiones Epicae. Regimontii Prussorum: Borntraeger, 1 8 3 7 .

Lesky, Albin. A History of Greek Literature. Translated by James Willis and Cornelis de Heer. New York: Crowell, I9 6 6 .

Leumann, Manu. Homerische Woerter. Basel: Reinhardt, 1950.

Levin, Donald Norman. Apollonius' Argonautica Re-examined. Vol. 1. The Neglected First and Second Books. Leiden: Brill, 1 9 7 1 .

Liddell, Henry George; Scott, Robert ; and Jones, Henry Stuart, eds. A Greek-English Lexicon. 9th ed. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 19^0.

Ludwich, Arthur. Aristarchs Homerische Textkritik Nach Den Frag- menten Des Didymos. 2 vols. Leipzig: Teubner, 188 ^-8 5 .

Marouzeau, J. Lexique de la Terminologie Linguistique. Paris: Geuthner, 19^*3.

Marrou, H.I. A History of Education in Antiquity. Translated from the 3rd ed. by George Lamb. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1 9 5 6 .

Martinazzoli, Folco. Hapax Legomenon. Parte Prima (l). Rome: Gismondi, 1953.

Hapax Legomenon. Parte Prima (ll). II Lexicon Homericum Di Apollonio Sofista. Bari : Adriatica Editrice, 1957.

Murray, Gilbert. The Rise of the Greek Epic. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1934.

Myres, John L. Homer and His Critics. Edited by Dorothea Gray. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1958.

Oswald, Michael M.F. "The Use of the Prepositions in Apollonius Rhodius Compared with their Use in Homer." Ph.D. disser­ tation, University of Notre Dame, 1904. 287

Pack, Roger A., ed. The Greek and the Latin Literary Texts from Greco-Roman Egypt. 2nd ed. Revised and enlarged. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1965-

Page, Denys. The Homeric Odyssey. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1955.

Parry, Adam, ed. The Making of Homeric Verse: The Collected Papers of Milman Parry. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1971.

Pathmanathan, R. Sri. "A Playwright Relaxed or Overworked?" Greece & Rome Ser. 2, 10 (1 9 6 3 ), 123-30.

Petrusevski, M.D. "Quelques Mots sur les "Auaf, AEydpeva Homér­ iques." Ziva Antika 17 (1 9 6 7 ), 87-108. •

Pfeiffer, Rudolf. History of Classical Scholarship from the Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age. Oxford : The Clarendon Press, 1 9 6 8 .

Platnauer, Maurice, ed. Fifty Years of Classical Scholarship. Oxford : Blackwell, 195^.

Post, L.A. From Homer to Menander. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1 9 9 1 .

Prendergast, Guy L., ed. A Complete Concordance to the Iliad of Homer. New ed. Revised by Benedetto Marzullo. Hildes­ heim: 01ms, 1 9 6 2 .

■Risch, Ernst. Wortbildung Der Homerischen Sprache. New ed. Revised and enlarged. Berlin: Gruyter, 197^.

Roemer, Adolph. Die Homerexegese Aristarchs In Ihren Grundzuegen. Paderbornl Schoeningh, 1924.

Sandys, John Edwin. A History of Classical Scholarship. Vol. 1. 3rd ed. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1921.

Seaton, R.C. "On the Imitation of Homer by Apollonius Rhodius." Journal of Philology 19 (I8 9 1 ), 1-13.

Shipp, G.P. Studies in the Language of Homer. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972.

Simpson, R. Hope and Lazenby, J.F. The Catalogue of Ships in Homer's Iliad. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, I9 7 0 . stanford, William Bedell. Aeschylus in His Style: A Study in Language and Personality. Dublin: Dublin University Press, I9 U2 .

Steffen, Victor, "The Satyr-Dramas of Euripides." Eos 59 (l97l), 203-2 6 .

Ussher, R.G. "The Cyclops of Euripides." Greece & Rome Ser. 2, 18 (1 9 7 1 ), 166-7 9 .

Van der Valk, Marchinus H.A.L.H. Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad. 2 vols. Leiden: Brill, I963 -6U.

Textual Criticism of the Odyssey. Leiden: Sigthoff, I9 H9 .

Volkmann, Richard. Commentâtiones Epicae. Leipzig: Weigel, 105^.

Wace, Alan J.B. and Stubbings, Frank H., eds. A Companion to Homer. London: Macmillan, I9 6 2 .

Webster, T.B.L. An Introduction to Sophocles. Oxford: The Claren­ don Press, 1 9 3 6 .

Hellenistic Poetry and Art. New York: Barnes and Noble, 1 9 6 WT

Wellauer, August, ed. Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica: Index Ver- borum. Extract from the 2nd vol. of Wellauer's text of Apollonius. Reprint ed., Hildesheim: 01ms, 1970.

Wetzel, Guilfridus. De Euripidis Fabula Satyrica, Quae Cyclous Inscribitur, Cum Homerico Comparaia Exemplo. Wiesbaden : Harrassowitz, I9 6 5 .

Whitman, Cedrick H. Aristophanes and the Comic Hero. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I96 U.

'____ . Homer and the Heroic Tradition. New York: Norton, 1 9 5 8 .