The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR Additional services for The Classical Review: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here The Ara Pacis Amanda Claridge The Classical Review / Volume 49 / Issue 02 / October 1999, pp 528 ­ 530 DOI: 10.1093/cr/49.2.528, Published online: 12 April 2006 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X99125046 How to cite this article: Amanda Claridge (1999). The Ara Pacis. The Classical Review,49, pp 528­530 doi:10.1093/cr/49.2.528 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 134.219.64.158 on 24 Aug 2012 NOTICES H. Patzer: Die Formgesetze des Homerischen Epos. (Schriften der Wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe- Universität, Frankfurt am Main: Geisteswissenschaftliche Reihe, 12.) Pp. 230. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1996. DM 124. ISBN: 3-515-06999-2. Harald Patzer is a veteran scholar who has rendered good service to classical studies in the past. His new book attempts a survey of the formal principles of Homeric epic (in practice this means simply the Iliad—the virtual omission of the Odyssey is defended, though inadequately, on p. 21). It follows the lead of Arend, Fenik, Krischer, and others surveyed in the methodo- logical foreword. P. does, however, go beyond purely formalist analysis, with extensive sections on the use of similes, the conventions of the battlefield, and the intervention of the gods in the action. The book does not altogether fulfil the expectations aroused by the title. The first section (pp.23–86) is an extensive account of the hexameter and of the ways in which Homeric language is adapted to this metre and presumably to oral composition. While we would all agree that metre has an important influence on form, it is less clear why almost one-third of the book had to be devoted to this topic. Part 2 (pp. 87–151) deals with aspects of representation through the poetic language described in Part 1, and Part 3 (pp. 152–222) with the scope of the ‘reality’ so represented (but this enquiry concerns stylization and convention, rather than questions of historicity). There is a good deal here which, while well said, is not very novel: we are told that the narrative is presented in linear progression, and that the narrator is detached from his subject (the more sophisticated account of Homeric narrative given by de Jong’s work is not cited), that similes are often used to express the inner feelings of the characters or to sum up mass behaviour, that the speeches express the state of mind giving rise to impulses to action (even in P.’s own terms, more might have been done by way of analysing the typology of the speeches; it is surprising to find no citation of Latacz on ‘Kampfparänese’). The neglect of the Odyssey becomes especially damaging in Part 3, in which the life of the warrior is seen as the central concern of epic, and the hero’s highest aim is to test his own prowess incessantly through warfare. The one-sidedness of this picture becomes evident as soon as we look away from the main plot of the Iliad. Even there, P. writes as though the concept of ‘hero’ is unproblematic, the conduct of warfare uncontroversial. Although special cases are sometimes noted, they are not discussed at length. The schematic presentation of ‘rules’ effectively excludes consideration of how these rules are adapted or broken: this applies as much to ethical issues as to typical scenes and conventions. One example: gods normally aid mortals by inspiring them or guiding their weapons on course; they are not usually portrayed as killing human opponents. But 5.842, where Ares is stripping Periphas of his armour, carries divine involvement to extreme lengths: has Ares actually killed him? And what good is such armour to a god? P. does not discuss the point. A book of this kind might have been valuable for reference if it had given exhaustive documentation of the conventions here documented, but P.’s exposition too often gives merely a scattering of illustrative examples. The index locorum will be useful, but it also reveals how many important passages are not discussed. For instance, the relatively full discussion of the gods focuses on their rôle as helpers of heroes in battle. But they have other motives and functions as well, and e.g. 4.51–61 (Hera’s viciousness towards Troy), one of the most shocking passages in the poem, goes undiscussed, though it figures in a recurrent type of scene, a divine debate. The bibliography (twenty-nine items) was hardly worth including. One sympathizes with P.’s wish to avoid polemic, but more guidance to other treatments was needed; not even Lohmann on speeches is cited. It goes without saying that P.’s choice of passages is often excellent, his exposition lucid and informative. Nevertheless, this book is neither an original contribution nor a magisterial synthesis. It would be hard to make a case for an English translation. Christ Church, Oxford R. B. RUTHERFORD © Oxford University Press, 1999 554 the classical review I. F. Cook: The Odyssey in Athens: Myths of Cultural Origins (Myth and Poetics). Pp. xii + 216. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1995. Cased, £27.50. ISBN: 0-8014-3121-2. Athenian Homer? Homer is receiving his civic credentials. C.’s work is part of a recent trend in the historicization of Homer, which places the production and reception of the Odyssey in the context of state-formation in the Archaic age. C argues (Chapter V) that the ‘crystallization of the text’ (p. 168) took place in Athens in the latter half of the seventh century, and in a specific relation to Athenian cult practice. This is very much more than a dusting-down of the ‘Peisistratid recension’. C. makes a fascinating case for a link between the Ithacan narrative andthe myths and ritual practices surrounding the Erechtheum. The story of Poseidon and Athena’s contest for the patronage of Athens shadows the two gods’ relation to Odysseus. The heroic career of Erechtheus is mirrored in that of Odysseus (more might have been made of how Erechthean echoes could illuminate Odysseus’ final end ω 3µ¾Κ [11.134]). Two idiosyncratic objects of Athena’s cult make significant appearances—behind the mysterious and unique golden lukhnos the goddess uses to illuminate the hall in Book 19 lies that housed in the Erechtheum. Both function as assurances that the house of Odysseus/city of Athens will continue to stand under her support. While the sacred olive, in Athens an emblem of the city’s fate, serves a parallel function for Odysseus and his household. That cult practice sees the olive associated only with Attic Athena is enough to make one take the Athenian reverberations detected by C. seriously. Some of the planks in C.’s raft are less solid, though his acknowledgement of many problems is disarming. The charge of Athenocentrism, for instance. That the Athenian scene is so much better documented than anywhere else makes the detection of possible cultic links embedded in the epic all the more feasible. In the face of the unarguable panhellenism of the epic, C. entertains the possibility of access to it through parallel rituals in other places. But this comes dangerously close to undermining his own argument, which depends on particularity of time and place. However, even seventh-century Athenian festival practice could hardly be described as well documented. And C. at times plays rather loose with it in his illumination of Odyssean narrative by the patterns of the Athenian religious calendar. Contested interpretations of scanty evidence become unproblematic ‘givens’. Some connections are strained to the point of inefficacy: ‘In the conflation of athletic competition and warfare, the Odyssey has a direct parallel in games such asthose at the Panathenaia’ (p. 157). C. realizes the weakness of the analogy—important to hisargument—between the festival to Apollo held at the winter solstice as the slaughter of the suitors takes place and the Athenian festivals held around the year-end at the summer solstice. His response—that in some regions the new year was indeed celebrated at the winter solstice— seems again to shake his own argument for specifically Athenian genesis. I have concentrated on the last chapter of this book in recognition of the importance of its thesis. The first four chapters chart the development of the structuring opposition between metis and bie. Focused on the proem, apologoi, and revenge, these readings deploy a fruitful synthesis of structuralist and narrative-based approaches. C.’s overarching argument that the Odyssey is indeed coherently driven by these thematics (cf. p. 127) is a strong one, if perhaps today somewhat uncontroversial. He makes many telling points of detail in its elaboration (e.g. on the animalizing effects of lotos-eating, p. 57; and on Odysseus’ at last passing the test of sexual restraint with Nausikaa, p. 63), but the ‘Athenianness’ of this interpretation is not always evident, and there remains a certain unevenness between these chapters and the last. And the overall case might have emerged more forcefully had not so much space been devoted to, for instance, the incineration of Analytical straw men. None of this detracts from the importance of this stimulating new attempt to explain the genesis of the Odyssey in terms that respond adequately to the social and religious environment of its age. University of Warwick PETER WILSON © Oxford University Press, 1999 the classical review 555 L. Edmunds,R.W.Wallace (edd.): Poet, Public and Perform- ance in Ancient Greece, with a preface by Maurizio Bettini.