DOCSLIB.ORG

Complete Issue

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Complete Issue _____________________________________________________________ Volume 16 March 2001 Number 1 _____________________________________________________________ Editor Editorial Assistants John Miles Foley Michael Barnes Adam Dubé Associate Editor Kristin Funk John Zemke Heather Hignite Heather Maring Marjorie Rubright Slavica Publishers, Inc. For a complete catalog of books from Slavica, with prices and ordering information, write to: Slavica Publishers, Inc. Indiana University 2611 E. 10th St. Bloomington, IN 47408-2603 ISSN: 0883-5365 Each contribution copyright © 2001 by its author. All rights reserved. The editor and the publisher assume no responsibility for statements of fact or opinion by the authors. Oral Tradition seeks to provide a comparative and interdisciplinary focus for studies in oral literature and related fields by publishing research and scholarship on the creation, transmission, and interpretation of all forms of oral traditional expression. As well as essays treating certifiably oral traditions, OT presents investigations of the relationships between oral and written traditions, as well as brief accounts of important fieldwork, a Symposium section (in which scholars may reply at some length to prior essays), review articles, occasional transcriptions and translations of oral texts, a digest of work in progress, and a regular column for notices of conferences and other matters of interest. In addition, occasional issues will include an ongoing annotated bibliography of relevant research and the annual Albert Lord and Milman Parry Lectures on Oral Tradition. OT welcomes contributions on all oral literatures, on all literatures directly influenced by oral traditions, and on non-literary oral traditions. Submissions must follow the list-of reference format (style sheet available on request) and must be accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope for return or for mailing of proofs; all quotations of primary materials must be made in the original language(s) with following English translations. Authors should submit two copies of all manuscripts. Most contributions will be reviewed by at least one specialist reader and one member of the editorial board before a final decision is reached. Review essays, announcements, and contributions to the Symposium section will be evaluated by the editor in consultation with the board. Oral Tradition appears twice per year, in March and October. To enter a subscription, please contact Slavica Publishers at the address given above. All manuscripts, books for review, items for the bibliography updates, and editorial correspondence, as well as subscriptions and related inquiries should be addressed to the editor, John Miles Foley, Center for Studies in Oral Tradition, 21 Parker Hall, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO 65211. Printed in the United States of America. EDITORIAL BOARD Mark C. Amodio Joseph J. Duggan Vassar College Univ. of Cal./Berkeley Old and Middle English French, Spanish, comparative Patricia Arant Alan Dundes Brown University Univ. of Cal./Berkeley Russian Folklore Samuel Armistead Mark W. Edwards University of California/Davis Stanford University Hispanic, comparative Ancient Greek Richard Bauman Ruth Finnegan Indiana University Open University Folklore, Theory African, South Pacific Dan Ben-Amos Thomas Hale University of Pennsylvania Penn. State University Folklore African Mary Ellen Brown Lee Haring Indiana University Brooklyn College, CUNY Folklore, Balladry African Chogjin Joseph Harris Chinese Academy Harvard University of Social Sciences Old Norse Mongolian, Chinese Bridget Connelly Lauri Harvilahti University of Cal./Berkeley University of Helsinki Arabic Russian, Finnish, Altai Robert P. Creed Lauri Honko Univ. of Mass./Amherst Turku University Old English, Comparative Comparative Epic Robert Culley Dell Hymes McGill University University of Virginia Biblical Studies Native American, Linguistics Thomas DuBois Martin Jaffee University of Wisconsin Hebrew Bible Scandinavian Univ. of Washington EDITORIAL BOARD Minna Skafte Jensen Shelly Fenno Quinn Odense University Ohio State University Ancient Greek, Latin Japanese Werner Kelber Burton Raffel Rice University Univ. of Southwestern Biblical Studies Louisiana Translation Françoise Létoublon Université Stendahl Karl Reichl Ancient Greek Universität Bonn Turkic, Old and Middle English Victor Mair University of Pennsylvania John Roberts Chinese Ohio State University African-American Nada Milošević-Djordjević University of Belgrade Joel Sherzer South Slavic University of Texas/Austin Native American, Anthropology Stephen Mitchell Harvard University Dennis Tedlock Scandinavian SUNY/Buffalo Native American Gregory Nagy Harvard University J. Barre Toelken Ancient Greek, Sanskrit, Utah State University comparative Folklore, Native American Joseph Falaky Nagy Ronald J. Turner Univ. of Cal./Los Angeles Univ. of Missouri/Columbia Old Irish Storytelling Susan Niditch Andrew Wiget Amherst College University of New Mexico Hebrew Bible Native American Walter J. Ong St. Louis University (Emeritus) Hermeneutics of orality and literacy Contents Editor’s Column.......................................................................................... 1 Linda White Orality and Basque Nationalism: Dancing with the Devil or Waltzing into the Future .........................................................................3 H. C. Groenewald I Control the Idioms: Creativity in Ndebele Praise Poetry ......................29 John F. Garcia Milman Parry and A. L. Kroeber: Americanist Anthropology and the Oral Homer ...........................................................58 Anatole Mori Personal Favor and Public Influence: Arete, Arsinoë II, and the Argonautica .................................................................................85 Guillemette Bolens The Limits of Textuality: Mobility and Fire Production in Homer and Beowulf ...........................................................................107 Derek Collins Homer and Rhapsodic Competition in Performance .............................129 Stephen A. Mitchell Performance and Norse Poetry: The Hydromel of Praise and the Effluvia of Scorn ........................................................................168 About the Authors .................................................................................203 Editor’s Column Over this and the next issue Oral Tradition will be following a double path it charted a decade and one-half ago and seeks still to follow. The present number houses a miscellany of articles on Basque, Ndebele, ancient Greek, Native American, Old English, and Old Norse traditions, and their authors employ perspectives as diverse as politics and nationalism, comparative anthropology, myth studies, lexicography and semantics, performance studies, and rhetorical theory. In this way we hope to encourage a “polylogue” that avoids the special pleading of disciplinary focus and welcomes a host of divergent viewpoints on what is after all a remarkably heterogeneous species of verbal art. Linda White begins the colloquy with her examination of the Euskara (Basque) oral genre called bertsolaritza, dealing not only with its language and structure but also with the history of its recording and its identity against the political background in the context of a society’s “rush to literacy.” Next in line is H. C. Groenewald’s study of creativity and innovation in the Zulu oral tradition of praise-poetry. Based on ten years of field research, his article shows how the practice of praising involves memorization and recitation, composition, and even the importing of poetry from other cultures. On a different note, John F. García reports on the fruits of his archival research to contend that Milman Parry’s groundbreaking work on Homer’s oral tradition had deeper roots in his graduate school training than has heretofore been realized, specifically that the anthropological writings and teachings of the Native Americanist A. L. Kroeber were of foundational significance for Parry’s theories on ancient Greek poetry. From anthropology Anatole Mori turns to historical reflections in ancient epic, exploring the link between the real-world Ptolemaic monarchy and the Phaeacian episodes in Homer’s Odyssey and Apollonius’ Argonautica against the backdrop of oral tradition. Guillemette Bolens investigates evidence of mobility, a phenomenon she sees as inherently a property of oral as opposed to written, textual expression, and finds evidence of movement and fire associated with Homer’s Hephaestus and the dragon in Beowulf. Derek Collins reinterprets the Homeric “rhapsodes,” once thought to be workaday performers of static versions of the epics, as competitive poets who used fixed texts as a basis for innovations in live performance; in doing so he makes reference to Turkish games of verbal dueling and other analogues. Finally, we are very pleased to present the Albert Lord and Milman Parry Lecture for 2001, on “Performance and Norse Poetry,” by Stephen Mitchell. Indeed, there is some special justice in Professor Mitchell’s having delivered this lecture, since he serves as Curator of the Milman Parry Collection, whose contents Albert Lord initially brought before us, as well as co-editor of the second edition of Lord’s The Singer of Tales. Here Mitchell advocates a performance-oriented approach to medieval sagas, which of course now exist only as artifacts, and shows convincingly how this approach goes well beyond traditional philology and mythology. In the next issue
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Euripides” Johanna Hanink
    The Life of the Author in the Letters of “Euripides” Johanna Hanink N 1694, Joshua Barnes, the eccentric British scholar (and poet) of Greek who the next year would become Regius Professor at the University of Cambridge, published his I 1 long-awaited Euripidis quae extant omnia. This was an enormous edition of Euripides’ works which contained every scrap of Euripidean material—dramatic, fragmentary, and biographical —that Barnes had managed to unearth.2 In the course of pre- paring the volume, Barnes had got wind that Richard Bentley believed that the epistles attributed by many ancient manu- scripts to Euripides were spurious; he therefore wrote to Bentley asking him to elucidate the grounds of his doubt. On 22 February 1693, Bentley returned a letter to Barnes in which he firmly declared that, with regard to the ancient epistles, “tis not Euripides himself that here discourseth, but a puny sophist that acts him.” Bentley did, however, recognize that convincing others of this would be a difficult task: “as for arguments to prove [the letters] spurious, perhaps there are none that will convince any person that doth not discover it by himself.”3 1 On the printing of the book and its early distribution see D. McKitterick, A History of Cambridge University Press I Printing and the Book Trade in Cambridge, 1534–1698 (Cambridge 1992) 380–392; on Joshua Barnes see K. L. Haugen, ODNB 3 (2004) 998–1001. 2 C. Collard, Tragedy, Euripides and Euripideans (Bristol 2007) 199–204, re- hearses a number of criticisms of Barnes’ methods, especially concerning his presentation of Euripidean fragments (for which he often gave no source, and which occasionally consisted of lines from the extant plays).
    [Show full text]
  • MONEY and the EARLY GREEK MIND: Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy
    This page intentionally left blank MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND How were the Greeks of the sixth century bc able to invent philosophy and tragedy? In this book Richard Seaford argues that a large part of the answer can be found in another momentous development, the invention and rapid spread of coinage, which produced the first ever thoroughly monetised society. By transforming social relations, monetisation contributed to the ideas of the universe as an impersonal system (presocratic philosophy) and of the individual alienated from his own kin and from the gods (in tragedy). Seaford argues that an important precondition for this monetisation was the Greek practice of animal sacrifice, as represented in Homeric epic, which describes a premonetary world on the point of producing money. This book combines social history, economic anthropology, numismatics and the close reading of literary, inscriptional, and philosophical texts. Questioning the origins and shaping force of Greek philosophy, this is a major book with wide appeal. richard seaford is Professor of Greek Literature at the University of Exeter. He is the author of commentaries on Euripides’ Cyclops (1984) and Bacchae (1996) and of Reciprocity and Ritual: Homer and Tragedy in the Developing City-State (1994). MONEY AND THE EARLY GREEK MIND Homer, Philosophy, Tragedy RICHARD SEAFORD cambridge university press Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo Cambridge University Press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, UK Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521832281 © Richard Seaford 2004 This publication is in copyright.
    [Show full text]
  • Select Epigrams from the Greek Anthology
    SELECT EPIGRAMS FROM THE GREEK ANTHOLOGY J. W. MACKAIL∗ Fellow of Balliol College, Oxford. PREPARER’S NOTE This book was published in 1890 by Longmans, Green, and Co., London; and New York: 15 East 16th Street. The epigrams in the book are given both in Greek and in English. This text includes only the English. Where Greek is present in short citations, it has been given here in transliterated form and marked with brackets. A chapter of Notes on the translations has also been omitted. eti pou proima leuxoia Meleager in /Anth. Pal./ iv. 1. Dim now and soil’d, Like the soil’d tissue of white violets Left, freshly gather’d, on their native bank. M. Arnold, /Sohrab and Rustum/. PREFACE The purpose of this book is to present a complete collection, subject to certain definitions and exceptions which will be mentioned later, of all the best extant Greek Epigrams. Although many epigrams not given here have in different ways a special interest of their own, none, it is hoped, have been excluded which are of the first excellence in any style. But, while it would be easy to agree on three-fourths of the matter to be included in such a scope, perhaps hardly any two persons would be in exact accordance with regard to the rest; with many pieces which lie on the border line of excellence, the decision must be made on a balance of very slight considerations, and becomes in the end one rather of personal taste than of any fixed principle. For the Greek Anthology proper, use has chiefly been made of the two ∗PDF created by pdfbooks.co.za 1 great works of Jacobs,
    [Show full text]
  • Sotades on Kings*
    «EIKASMOS» XXVII (2016) Sotades on kings* 1. There is a mouse crouching and a lion hiding in one of the many anec- dotes that Athenaeus collected for anyone who cares to listen. I hope to show that these two animals can tell us an intriguing tale – more and more so the further it proceeds – about powerful kings, a forgotten poet, and a lost book. Here is where the story begins (XIV 616d-e): καὶ Ταχὼς δ’ ὁ Αἰγυπτίων βασιλεὺς Ἀγησίλαον σκώψας τὸν Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλέα, ὅτ’ ἦλθεν αὐτῶι συμμαχήσων (ἦν γὰρ βραχὺς τὸ σῶμα), ἰδιώτης ἐγένετο, ἀποστάντος ἐκείνου τῆς συμμαχίας. τὸ δὲ σκῶμμα τοῦτ’ ἦν· “ὤδινεν ὄρος, Ζεὺς δ’ ἐφοβεῖτο, τὸ δ’ ἔτεκεν μῦν” (Sotad. fr. 22 Pow.). ὅπερ ἀκούσας ὁ Ἀγησίλαος καὶ ὀργισθεὶς ἔφη “φανήσομαί σοί ποτε καὶ λέων”· ὕστερον γὰρ ἀφισταμένων τῶν Αἰγυπτίων, ὥς φησι Θεόπομπος (FGrHist 115 F 108) καὶ Λυκέας ὁ Ναυκρατίτης ἐν τοῖς Αἰγυπτιακοῖς (FGrHist 613 F 2), οὐδὲν αὐτῶι συμπράξας ἐποίησεν ἐκπεσόντα τῆς ἀρχῆς φυγεῖν εἰς Πέρσας. «So too when the Egyptian king Tachos mocked Agesilaus, the king of Sparta, when Agesilaus visited him in the hope of forming an alliance, because Agesilaus was not very tall, he was reduced to a private citizen when Agesilaus abandoned the alliance. The mocking remark was as follows: “A mountain was in labour, and Zeus was terrified; but what it bore was a mouse”. When Agesilaus heard this, he became angry and said: “Someday I’ll look like a lion to you!”; for later on, when the Egyptians revolted, according to Theopompus and Lyceas of Naucratis in his History of Egypt, he refused to cooperate with Tachos, and deposed him and drove him into exile in Persia»1.
    [Show full text]
  • Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult
    ΑΡΣΙΝΟΗ ΕΥΠΛΟΙΑ Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult Carlos Francis Robinson Bachelor of Arts (Hons. 1) A thesis submitted for the degree of Master of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2019 Historical and Philosophical Inquiry Abstract Queen Arsinoë II, the Maritime Aphrodite and Early Ptolemaic Ruler Cult By the early Hellenistic period a trend was emerging in which royal women were deified as Aphrodite. In a unique innovation, Queen Arsinoë II of Egypt (c. 316 – 270 BC) was deified as the maritime Aphrodite, and was associated with the cult titles Euploia, Akraia, and Galenaië. It was the important study of Robert (1966) which identified that the poets Posidippus and Callimachus were honouring Arsinoë II as the maritime Aphrodite. This thesis examines how this new third-century BC cult of ‘Arsinoë Aphrodite’ adopted aspects of Greek cults of the maritime Aphrodite, creating a new derivative cult. The main historical sources for this cult are the epigrams of Posidippus and Callimachus, including a relatively new epigram (Posidippus AB 39) published in 2001. This thesis demonstrates that the new cult of Arsinoë Aphrodite utilised existing traditions, such as: Aphrodite’s role as patron of fleets, the practice of dedications to Aphrodite by admirals, the use of invocations before sailing, and the practice of marine dedications such as shells. In this way the Ptolemies incorporated existing religious traditions into a new form of ruler cult. This study is the first attempt to trace the direct relationship between Ptolemaic ruler cult and existing traditions of the maritime Aphrodite, and deepens our understanding of the strategies of ruler cult adopted in the early Hellenistic period.
    [Show full text]
  • SCS Plenary Session Saturday January 4, 2020 151St Annual
    SCS Plenary Session Saturday January 4, 2020 151st Annual Meeting Below you will find the complete versions of all award citations. Abbreviated citations may be read at the session: Precollegiate Teaching Award (This year the Precollegiate Teaching Award winners have elected to receive their prizes at the ACL Institute.) William Lee The Committee is delighted to bestow the SCS Award for Excellence in Teaching at the Precollegiate Level on William Lee. Since 2003 Mr. Lee has taught at Tom C. Clark High School, in San Antonio, where he has grown the program from a half-time teacher with fewer than 100 students to two full-time teachers of over 300 students in one of the largest Latin programs in Texas. His current and former students are effusive in their praise of his technologically innovative class activities as well as his dedication to rigorous Latin exercises while still making sure every student feels like they belong. A recurrent theme of letters on his behalf is the “family-like” atmosphere and “friendship” Mr. Lee cultivates in Latin classes and in the Latin club. In a school with a large and diverse student body in San Antonio, Mr. Lee creates a space where Latin speaks to everyone and everyone has a place. Mr. Lee is well-known for his work at the state and national levels of the Junior Classical League, serving as NJCL Certamen Chair and Communications Chair for lengthy tenures, and as State Co-Chair of the TSJCL continually since 2006. His students regularly bring home top regional, state, and national awards and, under his patient but firm guidance, all the certamen teams representing Texas since 2000 have finished in the top six places with four National Championships.
    [Show full text]
  • Heraclitus on Pythagoras
    Leonid Zhmud Heraclitus on Pythagoras By the time of Heraclitus, criticism of one’s predecessors and contemporaries had long been an established literary tradition. It had been successfully prac­ ticed since Hesiod by many poets and prose writers.1 No one, however, practiced criticism in the form of persistent and methodical attacks on both previous and current intellectual traditions as effectively as Heraclitus. Indeed, his biting criti­ cism was a part of his philosophical method and, on an even deeper level, of his self­appraisal and self­understanding, since he alone pretended to know the correct way to understand the underlying reality, unattainable even for the wisest men of Greece. Of all the celebrities figuring in Heraclitus’ fragments only Bias, one of the Seven Sages, is mentioned approvingly (DK 22 B 39), while another Sage, Thales, is the only one mentioned neutrally, as an astronomer (DK 22 B 38). All the others named by Heraclitus, which is to say the three most famous poets, Homer, Hesiod and Archilochus, the philosophical poet Xenophanes, Pythago­ ras, widely known for his manifold wisdom, and finally, the historian and geog­ rapher Hecataeus – are given their share of opprobrium.2 Despite all the intensity of Heraclitus’ attacks on these famous individuals, one cannot say that there was much personal in them. He was not engaged in ordi­ nary polemics with his contemporaries, as for example Xenophanes, Simonides or Pindar were.3 Xenophanes and Hecataeus, who were alive when his book was written, appear only once in his fragments, and even then only in the company of two more famous people, Hesiod and Pythagoras (DK 22 B 40).
    [Show full text]
  • Encyclopaedism from Antiquity to the Renaissance
    Encyclopaedism from Antiquity to the Renaissance There is a rich body of encyclopaedic writing from the two millennia before the Enlightenment. This book sheds new light on this material. It traces the development of traditions of knowledge-ordering which stretched back to Pliny and Varro and others in the classical world. It works with a broad concept of encyclopaedism, resisting the idea that there was any clear pre-modern genre of the ‘encyclopaedia’, and showing instead how the rhetoric and techniques of comprehensive compilation left their mark on a surprising range of texts. In the process it draws attention to both remarkable similarities and striking differ- ences between conventions of encyclopaedic compilation in different periods. The focus is primarily on European/Mediterranean culture. The book covers classical, medieval (including Byzantine and Arabic) and Renaissance culture in turn, and combines chapters which survey whole periods with others focused closely on individual texts as case studies. jason konig¨ is Senior Lecturer in Greek at the University of St Andrews. He works broadly on the Greek literature and culture of the Roman empire. He is author of Athletics and Literature in the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 2005) and Saints and Symposiasts: The Lit- erature of Food and the Symposium in Greco-Roman and Early Christian Culture (Cambridge, 2012), and editor, jointly with Tim Whitmarsh, of Ordering Knowledge in the Roman Empire (Cambridge, 2007). greg woolf is Professor of Ancient History at the University of St Andrews. His books include Becoming Roman: The Origins of Provin- cial Civilization in Gaul (Cambridge, 1998); Et tu Brute: The Murder of Julius Caesar and Political Assassination (2006); Tales of the Barbar- ians: Ethnography and Empire in the Roman West (2011); and Rome: An Empire’s Story (2012).
    [Show full text]
  • SOCRATES Information About the Historical Socrates
    SOCRATES Information about the historical Socrates Socrates was the son of Sophroniscus, a stonemason, and Phaenarete, a midwife, from Alopeke, belonged to the tribe of Antiochis and was born circa 470 BC. Young Socrates initially worked as a stonemason like his father. There was an old tradition that he had crafted the statue of the Three Graces that stood by the entrance of the Acropolis (Pausanias 1,22,8 and 9,35,7 – Comments on Aristophanes’ Clouds 793) but like the rest of the information about the philosopher that we have from sources of his time, it is probably not true. Tradition has it that in his youth he showed interest in the Ionian physical sciences, which had become well known in Athens and initially they may have aroused his enthusiasm. However, later in his maturity, he was won by physical philosophy. In Plato’s Phaedo Socrates admits that he had been greatly impressed in his youth by the teachings of Anaxagoras about the Mind (he was on friendly terms with Archelaus, one of the students of Anaxagoras). In Epidimies of Ion of Chios (fr. 11 Blumenthal) it is reported that Socrates travelled to Samos with Archelaus. Of course, this refutes what Plato mentions in Crito that Socrates never travelled away from his city except when he took part in military expeditions of his city. One compromising explanation is that perhaps this journey of his had to do with the Athenian expedition to Samos in 441/440 BC. As a historical figure Socrates is mainly known through the works of two authors of antiquity: Plato and Xenophon.
    [Show full text]
  • The Aesthetics of Dialect in Hellenistic Epigram
    The Aesthetics of Dialect in Hellenistic Epigram A dissertation submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Classics by Taylor S. Coughlan B.A. Carleton College M.A. University of Wisconsin—Madison March 18, 2016 Committee Chair: Kathryn Gutzwiller, Ph.D. Alex Sens, Ph.D. Lauren Ginsberg, Ph.D. i Abstract This dissertation is a study of dialect choice and dialect mixture in Hellenistic book epigram. The aims of the project are not only linguistic, but also literary; indeed, what motivates the study is an overarching interest in understanding how specific dialect choices can enrich the meaning of the poem in which they appear. Scholars have only recently started to include dialect in their readings of individual epigrams, but no one has systematically studied the entire corpus. In order to more fully understand Hellenistic book epigram and its flourishing during a period of great social, cultural, and literary change, we must confront the genre’s use of dialect or otherwise miss out on an important component in this self-conscious genre’s production of poetic meaning. Following an introduction that sets out the interpretive framework for the dissertation and explores issues of dialect transmission in the manuscript tradition, the study falls into two parts, each comprising three chapters. In the first part, I attempt to situate dialect choice and mixture in its poetic and literary-critical contexts. In the first chapter, I investigate dialect usage in pre- Hellenistic Greek poetry, not including inscribed epigram, arguing that dialect mixture for poetic effect existed in Archaic and Classical poetry.
    [Show full text]
  • The Euripides Vita
    The Euripides "Vita" Lefkowitz, Mary R Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1979; 20, 2; Periodicals Archive Online pg. 187 The Euripides Vita Mary R. Lefkowitz I. Introduction IOGRAPHY can serve as a convenient aid in literary inter­ Bpretation, explaining puzzling emphases, accounting for an author's choice of subject. It offers a chance to spy on the intriguing mysteries of the creative process and somehow, though perhaps only partially, to reveal its workings. Because biography informs so well about literature since the eighteenth century, readers of ancient literature instinctively search for information about authors' lives to interpret Greek and Latin texts, particularly for complex (Euvres like Euripides' which seem to drift until some biographical or historical framework is brought in to anchor them.1 For example, Bernard Knox, reviewing for non-specialist readers Cacoyannis' film Iphigenia in Aulis, begins not by discussing the drama but by speaking of Euripides the man.2 He first relates an anecdote from the ancient Vita of Euripides to show how much the Athenians respected him: when Sophocles heard that Euripides was dead, he put on mourning and brought his actors out at the proagon without their ceremonial crowns, and the audience wept. But then Knox tells another anecdote from the Vita that expresses the hostility experienced by the poet in his lifetime: how Euripides was attacked and killed by a pack of hunting dogs. Knox warns about the dubious authenticity of such sensational stories about the deaths of poets. But he adds: "anyone who has been chased on a Greek hillside by shepherd dogs will not dismiss the story out of hand.
    [Show full text]
  • {FREE} the Iliad and the Odyssey Ebook
    THE ILIAD AND THE ODYSSEY PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Homer,Jan Parker,George Chapman,Tom Griffith | 976 pages | 01 Aug 2000 | Wordsworth Editions Ltd | 9781840221176 | English | Herts, United Kingdom The Iliad and Odyssey Linguistic analysis suggests that the Iliad was composed slightly before the Odyssey , and that Homeric formulae preserve older features than other parts of the poems. The Homeric poems were composed in unrhymed dactylic hexameter ; ancient Greek metre was quantity-based rather than stress-based. These habits aid the extemporizing bard, and are characteristic of oral poetry. For instance, the main words of a Homeric sentence are generally placed towards the beginning, whereas literate poets like Virgil or Milton use longer and more complicated syntactical structures. Homer then expands on these ideas in subsequent clauses; this technique is called parataxis. The so-called ' type scenes ' typische Scenen , were named by Walter Arend in He noted that Homer often, when describing frequently recurring activities such as eating, praying , fighting and dressing, used blocks of set phrases in sequence that were then elaborated by the poet. The 'Analyst' school had considered these repetitions as un-Homeric, whereas Arend interpreted them philosophically. Parry and Lord noted that these conventions are found in many other cultures. C, B, A has been observed in the Homeric epics. Opinion differs as to whether these occurrences are a conscious artistic device, a mnemonic aid or a spontaneous feature of human storytelling. Both of the Homeric poems begin with an invocation to the Muse. The orally transmitted Homeric poems were put into written form at some point between the eighth and sixth centuries BC.
    [Show full text]