Homer and the Epic Cycle: Dialogue and Challenge Ioannis Lambrou Thesis submitted for the degree of Ph.D. Department of Greek and Latin University College London 2015 I, Ioannis Lambrou, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. 2 Thesis Abstract In this thesis, we revisit a longstanding problem, the relationship between Homer and the fragmentarily preserved post-Homeric narrative poems of the so-called Epic Cycle. The approach adopted has affinities with the school of criticism known as Neoanalysis, which, originating in continental Europe as an alternative to the Parry- Lord oral-formulaic theory, sought to explain irregularities found in the Homeric text by assuming re-contextualisation of motifs taken from pre-Homeric epics which were often identified with either written versions or the oral predecessors of the Cyclic epics. Rather than Quellenforschung, however, our emphasis is on Homer‟s interactive engagement with the mythopoetic traditions which were eventually crystallised in the Epic Cycle. And where scholars have so far tended to focus on the inadequacies of the Cyclic epics in the form in which we have them or to consider the complexity that the poems exhibit in presenting Achilles and Odysseus to be later development, our interest is less in the epics themselves, either as aesthetic or as cultural phenomena, than in the poetic strategy through which the Homeric poet, in seeking to position himself within a competitive context of an oral performance culture, engages with this traditional complexity creatively, both synergistically and agonistically. CHAPTER ONE sets the scene by exploring what one may call circumstantial or situational rivalry between epic poets and, on the basis of a review of the evidence, both ancient and comparative, proposes that the circumstances of an early singer- poet were such that they encouraged the emergence of a high degree of competitive interaction among known individuals with a strong interest in personal fame. CHAPTERS TWO and THREE, shifting their focus from context to texture, explore how complex and manifold mythopoetic traditions about Achilles and Odysseus find their way into the narrative fabric of the Iliad and the Odyssey, respectively, through a sophisticated and self-reflexive type of poetic interaction that includes both compliance and contestation with the wider epic tradition. The competitive dimension of early epic storytelling has in the recent past been either overemphasised or seriously underestimated. This thesis argues that early epic competition, though much less pronounced than often assumed, is reflected in the artistically ambitious refining and distillation process that the Iliad and the Odyssey develop in adjusting divergent mythological and poetic traditions to their own idiosyncratic presentation of Achilles and Odysseus. A close intra-generic reading of the Homeric text and the fragments of the Epic Cycle in the light of suggestive evidence we have for the phenomenon of epic competitiveness can ultimately contribute to a critical understanding of the dynamics of the early Greek epic performance and of Homer‟s position within it. 3 Table of Contents Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... 5 List of Abbreviations .................................................................................................. 6 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 8 Chapter 1: The Competitive Dynamics of Epic Performance ............................. 23 1.1 Circumstantial / Situational Epic Rivalry ................................................ 23 1.1.1 Epic Rivalry and Performance Contexts ........................................ 23 1.1.2 Epic Rivalry and Poetic Itinerancy ................................................ 33 Poetic Itinerancy and Performance on Request ............................. 33 Poetic Itinerancy and Bard‟s Individual Kleos .............................. 37 1.2 Bardic Performance and Evaluation Criteria ........................................... 47 The Criterion of Enargeia (Vividness) ................................................... 49 The Criterion of Flexibility in Thematic Choice .................................... 53 The Criterion of (Presentational) Originality ......................................... 60 Chapter 2: The Iliadic Conceptualisation of Achilles and the Epic Tradition ... 66 2.1 Achilles and Eros .................................................................................... 68 Achilles‟ “Erotic” Rendezvous with Helen ............................................ 68 Achilles‟ “Erotic” Grief over Penthesileia‟s Death ................................ 90 2.2 Achilles and Magnanimity: the Case of Lycaon ................................... 120 2.3 Achilles and Brutality: the Case of Troilus ........................................... 128 Chapter 3: Homer and the Other Odysseus ....................................................... 140 3.1 In the Footsteps of the non-Homeric Odysseus .................................... 142 3.2 Homer vis-à-vis the Epic Tradition ....................................................... 162 3.2.1 Toning Down Odysseus: the Iliad ............................................... 162 3.2.2 Refashioning Odysseus: the Odyssey .......................................... 173 Conclusions ............................................................................................................ 205 Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 208 4 Acknowledgements I would like to extend my sincerest thanks and appreciation to all those who have been instrumental in the completion of this thesis. Without their kind support, this project would not have been possible. My special gratitude and thanks go to my supervisor Professor Chris Carey for everything he has taught me. His insightful advice, encouragement, positivism, and admirable devotion, have had a tremendous influence on me and have made my research journey a truly unique and indelible experience. One simply could not wish for a more competent supervisor. I have also benefitted enormously over the years from the intellectual support of many individuals, and I am deeply grateful to them all; Dr. Fiachra Mac Góráin (UCL), Prof. James Diggle (Cambridge), Dr. Renaud Gagné (Cambridge), Prof. Andreas Voskos (Athens), Dr. Sophia Papaioannou (Athens), Dr. Ioannis Konstantakos (Athens), Prof. Giambattista D‟ Alessio (KCL), Prof. Marco Fantuzzi (Columbia), Prof. Ettore Cingano (Venice), and Dr. Antony Makrinos (UCL). Prof. Fantuzzi also shared unpublished work that was of great help. In addition, I wish to thank various people at the Department of Greek and Latin, University College London, for being supportive in so many ways; Prof. Gesine Manuwald, Head of the Department; Dr. Stephen Colvin, Graduate Tutor; Dr. Nick Gonis, Dr. Jenny Bryan, Dr. Peter Agócs, and Dr. Rosa Andújar, for acting as my teaching mentors; Ms. Mary Moloney, Departmental Administrator, for kindly offering help and advice on dealing with bureaucratic tasks. I would also like to convey wholehearted thanks to the A.G. Leventis Foundation, the Arts, Laws, Social & Historical Sciences Sub-Committee of the UCL Graduate School, the UCL Faculty of Arts and Humanities, the UCL Department of Greek and Latin, the Classical Association, and the Thomas Wiedemann Memorial Fund, for providing the financial means. It is a delight, finally, to signal some personal thanks to my friends, especially Marios, Valentinos, and Dana, for their constant support and encouragement at various stages along the way. My greatest pleasure is to thank my parents Lambros and Thaleia, my brother Vassilis, and Despina, my fellow-traveller on the journey of life. This thesis is dedicated to them for their unconditional love and unstinting devotion. IOANNIS LAMBROU London, September 2014 5 List of Abbreviations All quotations and translations of the Homeric poems are based on the Loeb Classical Library edition. All quotations and translations of the Cyclic fragments and the Chrestomatheia of Proclus are by M. L. WEST 2003a (citations are also based on the edition of A. BERNABÉ 1987), of the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (referred to as H. Ap.) by M. L. WEST 2003b, of Hesiod by G. W. MOST 2006-7, and of the Posthomerica of Quintus Smyrnaeus by A. JAMES 2004. The term “cyclic” with a lower case refers to oral mythopoetic traditions behind the Homeric epics and the Cyclic poems; with an upper case it refers to the specific poems of the Epic Cycle and their oral predecessors or performance traditions. Commentaries are referred to by the author‟s name and date (e.g., KIRK 1985 on Il. 1.1). For Greek proper names, traditional, Latinised spellings are usually employed. Abbreviations for Greek and Latin authors usually follow those in the Liddell-Scott-Jones Greek-English Lexicon (LSJ) and the Oxford Latin Dictionary (OLD), respectively. All electronic sources were last accessed on 29 September 2014. Bernabé BERNABÉ, A., ed. (1987) Poetarum Epicorum Graecorum Testimonia et Fragmenta, vol. 1. Leipzig Davies DAVIES, M., ed. (1991) Poetarum Melicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, vol. 1. Oxford Dindorf DINDORF, G., ed. (1855) Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam, vol 1. Oxford (repr.,