CHAPTER TWO RELATIONS OF MANNER 1. Malthakos/Trachus The relations which we have studied up to this point have all been quantitative: they deal with the duration or position, in space and time, of both the victor's and poet's achievements. "Relations of manner," on the other hand, can be said to be those which describe the quality or character of their activities. Perhaps the fundamental qualitative polarity is the ethical-that of agathos and kakos. Ethical overtones will almost in­ evitably be mapped into any dichotomy of qualities, as can readily be observed from the Pythagorean table of oppositions discussed in the previous chapter. But even this ethical context does not justify unilateral emphasis on one side of a polarity over another. The "good" exists only in contrast with the "bad"; without its contrary, neither term has any meaning. All ethical polarities must therefore remain in perpetual tension. Although defying description as "good" and "bad," the activities of victor and poet must reflect "good" and "bad," i.e., react to the "good" and "bad" elements which necessarily compose the human condition-good fortune and bad fortune, glory and mortality, victory and toil, pleasure and pain. The polarity of µcxA9cxx6~ and 't'pcxxu~ is one of Pindar's most common translations of this ethical dichotomy into an epinician context. Like so much else in ancient literature, the origins of the opposition are to be found in Homer. The most common reference of the term "gentle" (µcxA9cxx6~, µcxAcxx6~, fLELALXLO~, fL&LALXO~) in Homer is to language, which is of course the subjective application which we shall find in Pindar. Homer's fLELALXLOt~ &7tttaat and their various formulary allomorphs 1 are almost as frequent as his famous "winged words." But there are also "harsh words," and these are often counterpoised to the "gentle 1 This formula allows numerous different metrical positions and lexical substitutions, usually with the adjective µuA(x10~ (µdA1xo~) sometimes with µ0tA0tx6~, usually with l1to~, but sometimes with A6yo~ or with the adjective used substantively after a verb of speaking. It would probably be better to regard this' phrase as a formulary group (what Nagler would call a "Gestalt") rather than as a formula per se. For various "gentle words," cf. ll. 1.582, 4.256, 6.214, 6.337, 6.343, 9.113, 10.288, 10.542, 11.137, 12.267, 17.431, 21.339, Od.1.56, 6.143, 6.146. 6.148, 9.363, 9.493, 10. 70, 10.173, 10.422, 10.442, 10.547, 11.552, 12.207, 15.374, 16.279, 18.283, 19.5, 19.415, 20.165, 21.192, 24.393, H. Ger. 336. For the motif of "gentle speech" in later traditions, cf. Hesiod Th.84, 90; Semonides 7.18; Solon 27.15; Aeschylus, Ag.95; and of course, the obviously Homeric µuA1x(ma1 A6yo1~ of Pindar, P.4.128 and 240. 72 RELATIONS OF MANNER words." In /l.12.267, Ajax and Teucer rebuke warriors slack in battle, cxUov fLELALXtmi;, cxAA.011 O"ttptoti; t'ltttaaL. In 17.431, the charioteer Automedon coaxes the horses of Achilles after Patroclus' death, 1toAA.a 8E fLELALXtOLaL 1tpoa7Ju8cx, 1t0Ua 8' &pu'fi. In 2 l.338f., Hera exhorts Hephaestus not to let the river Xanthus turn him away either with kindly or threatening words: l,LT}8£ at 'lt<XfL'ltCX\I fLELALXtoLi; t'ltttaaLV &1to'tp£1tt'tw xcxi &ptCn. In 11.137, the sons of Antimachus supplicate Agammemnon for their life fLELALXtoLi; t'ltttaaw, but receive an "ungentled" reply: &µtC• ALX'tOV 8' cxxouacxv. 2 Homer also uses the antithesis to structure entire passages: in 6.325, Hector rebukes Paris cxlCJXPot'i; t'ltttaaL, while twelve lines later, Helen encourages him µcxAcxxoti; t'ltttaaL. Exhortation can be either negative (shame before one's fellows, like Hector) or positive (like Helen's encouragement to an ideal of behaviour). But the antithesis can also reflect the object addressed as well as the subject speaking: in 4.241, Agamemnon addresses the slack in battle xoAw'tofoLv t'ltttaaw, but fifteen lines later he addresses the chieftain Idomeneus, who is excelling, µuALXtOLaLV. This last antithesis is nothing less than the polarity of praise and blame which we have confronted throughout Pindar. It is interesting to note that although "gentle words" occur frequently in the Odyssey ( even more so than in the Iliad), "harsh words" do not oc­ cur there, and accordingly the antithesis of gentle and harsh language is absent. Although the Odyssey is a work very much preoccupied with problems of language and communication, "harsh words" seem less at home in its domestic environment than in the more martial Iliad. Nevertheless, the antithesis of the gentle discourse and the harsh discourse was transmitted through Pindar and other fifth-century poets to later rhetorical tradition. There is an appropriate style for saying "gen­ tle" things and an appropriate style for saying "harsh" things. Whoever confuses the two categories is guilty of sophistry - attempting to cast a deceptive shade upon one's true intentions. Hence, the exile Oedipus ac­ cuses Creon of "speaking harsh things softly" (Soph., OC 774 aXATJp<X µcxA8cxxwi; At1wv). Dionysius of Halicarnassus criticizes Demosthenes for the same: I disapprove of the smooth (Atfov) and soft (µcxAcxxov) quality of the language. For it ought to be harsh ('tpcxxticxv) and bitter (mxp<111) and make something close to a blow; but it is moist and even, just like olive-oil flowing through the ears without a rattle, indeed seeking to charm (8tA-ytw) and delight our ears. (De Demosthene 20) Aristotle also uses this stylistic antithesis (Rhet. III, 1408b9f.). 2 For nearly the same line, compare Hector's supplication and Achilles' "ungentled" reply in 21. 98. .