The Iliad; ed., with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices online

. (page 1 of 102)
Online LibraryHomerThe Iliad; ed., with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices → online text (page 1 of 102)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at http : //books . google . com/|

Digitized by



■gitized by


Digitized by


Digitized by


Digitized by CjOOQIC

Digitized by



Digitized by


V '.-

Digitized by









MACMILLAN and CO., Limited


Ail rights resertfed

Digitized by


First JEdUion 1888
i^econd Edition 1902

Digitized by



This volume requires little preface beyond that which introduced
its predecessor. But attention may be called here to certain
systematic changes made in order to bring the accentuation
into closer harmony with the rules of the ancient prosodists.
Arbitrary though these rules seem, and freely as they are neglected
by modern editors, they are after all our final authority. In
obedience to them &<; is now written in place of oi?, except
in the phrases /cal A?, ovS^ «?, while rfroi is preferred to ^ roc,
and e^ayye has supplanted eyd ye. For similar reasons I have
returned to the vulgate vrfivfio^ in place of ^8u/to9.

In addition to Mr. Bayfield, whose help has been unfailing, I
have also to thank Mr. A. Pallis, who has kindly placed at my
disposal MS. notes on N-II, prepared for the forthcoming part
of his most interesting translation of the Hiad into modern
vernacular Greek. The commentary will show the free use
which I have made of his kindness.

Oct. 4, 1902.

Digitized by


Digitized by



1. Gold intaglio from Mykene (Schuchh. fig. 281, p. 277) . .595

2. Diagram of peplos, after Studniczka ..... 595

3. Hera's dress (drawn by Mr. B. B. Botheras) . .596
(2 and 3 are reproduced from Bayfield- Leaf Iliad vol. ii. )

4,5. Diagrams of the shield of Achilles .... 608,605

6. Design from Etruscan vase, after Benndorf, in Reichel Horn, Wafen

(ed. 1), p. 134 610

7. Coin of Knossos, after Head Hist. Nurrwruviy p. 391 . . .610

8. 9, 10. Diagrams to illustrate the harnessing of the chariot (repeated

from Isted.) . . . . . . .624

11, 13, 14. Diagrams to illustrate Reichel's theory {Horn. Waffeii^ ed. 2,

pp. 129, 135) ....... 625, 626

12. Do., do., from Das Jock des Homerisehcn Wagens in Jahreshefte dcs

Ost. Arch. Inst, il pp. 138 ff. . . . . . . .626

15, 16. Illustrations of the yoke, from Corinthian pinakcs in Berlin (Reichel

H. W. p. 135) 627

17. Assyrian harness (ibid. p. 138) . 627

18. Egyptian „ ,, „ .628

19. Chariot, from the Francois Vase (ibid. p. 134) . . .628

20. Ivory head from the graves in the lower town of Mykene (ibid. p. 103) . 629

Digitized by


Digitized by



I. — Analysis of the Iliad

The reader will find in the Introductions to the several books a
detailed analysis of the Iliad, with the grounds for the con-
clusions arrived at. It is proposed here to summarise these
conclusions in a form which will give a general idea of the
growth of the poem as conceived by the editor, while avoiding
such a minute partition of different epochs as would convey a
false impression of confidence in the power of critical analysis
to assign every line to its own definite epoch. It is enough if
we can indicate the stages at which new episodes, or imitations
of older ones, were introduced into the ever-growing epos, without
concerning ourselves about the transitional passages composed
only to adapt them to a narrative whose continuity was often
only the result of a conscious literary recension.

Some of these episodes, early as well as late, remained sterile,
and have reached us much as they were first composed ; others,
like the Iliad as a whole, have given birth to a fresh progeny,
till the entire poem assumes something of the aspect of a
genealogical tree. But in this important respect it differs ; that
all generations were alive together, and subject to mutual
reactions like the parts of a living organism. The ancestors
must have been modified by their descendants in a manner
which may defy our powers of analysis ; and until the final
literary redaction had come we cannot feel sure that any details
even of the oldest work were secure from the touch of the latest

If we confine ourselves too rigidly to details, such a con-
sideration will seem fatal to any critical analysis. It has in


Digitized by



fact wrecked every attempt to find a certain solvent that shall
automatically separate the old from the new, whether the test
is linguistic or historical. Many a method has been proposed,
which up to a certain point seemed irresistible ; but there has
always been a residuum which returned to plague the inventor.
All points to the long period of time through which the
poetic growth continued; and it is only in reference to the
poems themselves, not as marking any stage in the history of
Greek culture, that we can speak of the " Homeric Age." The
poems began when the digamma was a living sound, they lasted
till k had become for Ionia a dead convention. Vowels which
were open for the older poets had become diphthongs for the
new. The first rhapsodies were bom in the bronze age, in the
day of the ponderous Mykenaean shield — the last in the iron
age, when men armed themselves with breastplate and light
round buckler. The whole view of life and death, of divine and
human polity had changed. We meet with so many incon-
sistencies so closely interwoven that the tangle may well seem
beyond our powers to unravel

But when we regard the Epos in large masses we see that
we can roughly range the inconsistept elements towards one
end or the other of a line of development both linguistic and
historical. The main division, that of Iliad and Odyssey y shows
a distinct advance along this line ; and the distinction is still
more marked if we group with the Odyssey four books of the
Iliad whose Odyssean physiognomy is well marked. Taking
as our main guide the dissection of the motives of the plot as
shown in its episodes, we find that the marks of lateness, though
nowhere entirely absent, group themselves more nxunerously in
the later additions; and with this we must be content. The
growth of the Iliad has been vital, not mechanical; and to a
vital organism we must be satisfied to apply an approximate
method, recognising that the subtlety of the phenomena evades
any mechanical criticism.

For all these reasons I no longer give a tabular analysis of
the Iliad, feeling that it offers a false appearance of rigidity and
accuracy. It seems better only to group together the principal
motives and episodes in the order which may be roughly assigned
for their entrance into the Epic community. They may best be
classified in four main divisions : —

Digitized by



I. — Menis, The Quarrel and the Dream ; A and B 1-50.

The Aristeia of Agamemnon and Defeat of the Greeks —
A- This episode received accretions down to the latest
period, A 670-761 being distinctly Odyssean.

The Fight at the Ships and the Patrokleia— O 592-746
and n. This portion has been particularly fertile
in growth through all periods (Sarpedon, Euphorbos,
Change of Armour, Catalogue of the Myrmidons).

The Arming of Achilles, T 357-424.

[The Slaying of Polydoros and Lykaon? T 881-end,
4> 34-135.]

The Slaying of Hector ; [4) 540-€nd ?], X 1-404 with
but slight additions.

II. — First Expansions —

The Assembly in B 87-483 — violently adapted and
expanded at a late period.

The review of the army and opening of the battle,
A 220-544, introducing

The Aristeia of Diomedes, E-Z. The original nucleus
is no doubt old, but ha« given birth to a long lineage,
of which much is late — Sarpedon and Tlepolemos, the
Wounding of Aphrodite, the Wounding of Ares, and
the story of Lykurgos. The visit of Hector to Troy
shews affinity with the Ransoming of Hector.

The Duel of Aias and Hector, H 1-312.

The Aristeia of Idomeneus, N 136-672. This knows
nothing of the Wall, but we may admit that it is
possibly as late as M, only representing the development
of the battle on the older lines.

The Fight over Patroklos in P probably contains old
material, but has been so worked over and expanded
that it belongs substantially to later stages.

III. — Second Expansions —

The Battle at the Wall in M. This new conception
marks the third stage. It was probably at this point
that Sarpedon and his Lykians were first introduced.
The episodes in E and H where he reappears will
therefore belong to the later part of this period.
The Deceiving of Zeus, N 1-125, 795-837, B,

Digitized by



O 1-366. For the opening of B see Introduction to

that book.
The Making of the Anns, 2, T 1-39.
The Fight with the Eiver, 4) 136-304.
The Funeral of Patroklos, "¥ 1-256.
The Duel of Menelaos and Paris, F, A 1-219, may

possibly belong to the previous stage, but is later

than the Duel of Aias and Hector, and is therefore

probably to be placed here.
The Theomachy, T 1-74, 4> 305-513, is hard to date,

but is later than the Fight with the River, and if we

attribute it to this stage, it must come at the end

of it.

IV. — Latest Expansions —

The Embassy to Achilles, I. This itself has been con-
siderably expanded by the introduction of Phoinix, and
brought into the Iliad by its prologue, the koXo';
fjid')(7) in 0.

The Doloneia, K.

The Aeneid, T 79-352.

The Funeral Games, ^ 257-897, including the later
expansion in 798-883.

The Eansoming of Hector, H.

(The Eeconciliatiou, T 40-356, may belong to the pre-
ceding stage ; if so, it has been later adapted to the

I. The Menis has already been outlined and characterised
in vol. i. ; but one noteworthy fact must be added to what is
there said. The interest of the story from beginning to end is
almost purely human. The gods provide a background or under-
plot, but their interference is such as becomes the rulers of the
world, not partisans in the battles. They nowhere take any
part in the fighting ; indeed, they seldom appear at all on the
earthly stage. The intervention of Athene in the first book is
expressly confined to Achilles alone — " Of the rest no man
beheld her " — as though to let us know that this is the way in
which the gods speak to the mind of man. Apollo invisible
stuns Patroklos, and Athene appears for a moment in order to
bring Hector to a stand before Achilles. In other words, the

Digitized by



gods show themselves just so much as to let us know what are
the powers which control mankind from heaven ; but none the less
it is purely human motive and human action which guide the plot.
In this the Menis is markedly diflerent from the later
portions of the Iliad, Even in the Odyssey Athene is always at
hand, or Ino or Kirke, to give supernatural aid to Odysseus. But
in the Menis we are always among real men, and not in fairyland.
II. — Of the earlier expansions the most remarkable is un-
questionably the Aristeia of Diomedes. The addition of this, if
it is really as early as it seems, made the first rift in the unity
of the plot of the Eiad^. The feats of Achillea were over-
shadowed by those of Diomedes, and the perfect balance of the
story was gravely impaired. But it must not be forgotten that
we sufifer far more from this than did the original hearers. To
them the Menis as a^ whole was perfectly familiar; it had not to
be sought out under the mass of material by which it is now
overlain. The Aristeia of Diomedes was a new poem, and though
it was incorporated with the Menis, it was not liable to be
confused with it, as it is by us. The Menis itself could still be
demanded intact from the bard. Thus the addition of Diomedes,
though it had the obvious "intention of exalting him at the
expense of Achilles, was far less damaging to the unity of the
Menis than it now appears. And in its earlier stages it contained
none of the miraculous exploits which so far outbid Achilles —
those where Diomedes encounters and conquers the great powers
of heaven. Aphrodite and Ares. These enter the story only at a
later period, and can certainly not be earlier than the second
expansions, when the gods of Olympos were treated with far
scanter respect than in older days.

If the Aristeia of Idomeneus is rightly referred to this early
period, it must mark a period of languor and decadence in
poetical power. But even if the groundwork of it is so early,
there must be a great deal of later work in it.

III. — The second expansions shew us a great renascence of
Epic poetry, combined with an entirely new attitude towards the
original story. The chief marks of this period are two — the
introduction of the gods as essential actors in the story ; and of
the wall round the camp as a means of diversifying the battle
scenes. Both these conceptions are worked out with extra-
ordinary vigour and richness of imagination. The two great

Digitized by



poems of the Deceiving of Zeus and the Making of the Arms are
second to none, whether in conception or execution. It is
probable that we have them in something very like their original
form. They are clearly not so much expansions of the Menis as
new and splendid poems only superficially added to it, compositions
due solely to the joy of beautiful creation.

The Duel of Paris and Menelaos bears the same stamp of
individual conception, and must I tliink be classed with them.
The reasons for regarding it as later than its doublet, the Duel of
Aias and Hector, are given in the introduction to H ; we can
now add the treatment of Aphrodite at the end of F, which
is entirely in the spirit of the 'ATrariy. Whether we can iplace
the Theomachy (4>) in the same class is a matter for individual
judgment; the free handling of things divine is there pushed
into the region of burlesque. But the Fight Y^th the River in the
same book shews us, in the grandeur of its super-human elements,
the heights to which the conception of gods mingling with men
could raise heroic poetry.

IV. — The latest expansions are thoroughly in the spirit of
those which precede, and are only separated from them on
account of linguistic evidence, which definitely classes them with
the Odyssey rather than the rest of the Iliad, They contain
alike the height of rhetoric in the ninth book, and of pathos in
the twenty-fourth. They are a standing and eloquent reminder
that we must not regard lateness as any indication of inferiority.
On the other hand we may very often take inferiority as a sign
of lateness. For the combination of all these diverse elements
into a continuous whole involved the constant additions of '
transitional passages which, from the very nature of the con-
ditions that called them into existence, could hardly be inspired
by the Muse. They were rather the work of the editor inspired
by the statesman, and honestly shew their origin. It is needless
to discuss them as a class — they deserve consideration only in
detail and in their proper places.

II. — The Scholia

The scholia on the Hiad form a very large and hetero-
geneous collection of comments, critical, explanatory, and
illustrative. Like the poems themselves they are the work of

Digitized by



many generations of students, and received additions certainly
from the first till the twelfth century a.d. The unwieldy
collection of Eustathios (about 1160 a.d.) may perhaps be taken
as closing the scholiastic period — there is no evidence of fresh
material added since his day.

Two main sources of the scholia can ejisily be discerned.
There is first an epitome of the works of four scholars, Didymos,
Aristonikos, Nikanor and Herodianos. Secondly there are large
extracts from the 'OfirjpiK^ Zr^TTjiuiTa compiled by Porphyries
the neo-Platonist ^ • about 260 a.d. But after making allowance
for these, there remains a large mass of anonymous notes,
dealing with grammar, exegesis, mythology, and literary questions,
and lying beyond our powers of investigation.

The ^TjTijfiaTa of Porphyries may be briefly dismissed. They
are the last representatives of the " problems " which were a
favourite exercise for critical ingenuity, at least as far back as
the time of Aristotle, among whose lost works was a book called
airoprifiaTa 'OfjL7)pt,Kd, The idea of the aTroprnui was that a
critic stated some objection or difficulty in the poems ; and his
objection {evaraaL^) called forth an explanation (\vo-49). But
this debate gradually passed into a mere exercise of wits, and
pedants were accustomed to invent the flimsiest objections in
order to shew their ingenuity in refuting them. A specimen of
this futile exercise will be found in the note on F 313 ; and of
the results to which it led, in that on T 269-72. Porphyries
gives us a selection of his predecessors* work from Aristotle down ;
his work is of interest as an important contribution to the
history of the earlier criticism, but is of little value for the
elucidation of the text.

The scholia of the " quartet," Didymos, Aristonikos, Nikanor,
and Herodianos, are, however, of a very different order ; it is to
them almost solely that we owe our knowledge of Aristarchos,
and indeed of sound Greek criticism. Fragments of them are
scattered through various collections of scholia. Of these Schol.
A, SchoL B, and Schol. T have been published by the Clarendon
Press. Schol. B is a primary authority for Porphyries only —
it contains little else but what appears in a better form in A and
T. The remains of the Quartet are found mainly in these two ;

^ This identification haa been doubted, bnt without sufficient grounds. See
Schrader PorpK pp. 889-350.

Digitized by



and far more abundantly in A. T has a certain amount of
independent extracts from the same source, and though it is on
the whole less accurate, it often serves to correct A, and is
invaluable in those portions of the Iliad which A has lost. But
A still remains by far the most important authority for all these
critical notes.

Some important side-lights have recently been thrown upon
the question by the Genevese scholia, published by Prof, Nicole
(SchoL U), and the papyrus fragment bearing the name of
Ammonios, discovered by Messrs. Grenfell and Hunt. These
prove the existence of a much larger collection of Alexandrine
doctrine than that which we had learnt to know from SchoL A.
This was also based upon Aristarchos through Didymos and
Aristonikos; but whether it came from the same epitome of
their works as A or was independently extracted by Ammonios
or another we cannot telL It seems, however, that this collection
was the source of the statements as to Aristarchos and his
doctrine which are contained in Schol. T, Schol. U, and Eustathios,
but are not found in A. We have evidence of the full collection
only for one book, 4>, nor can we say that it ever included the
rest of the Iliad}

There can be no question as to the source of the critical
scholia, for the scribe of A has fortunately told us in similar
words at the end of every book of the Iliad, The following note
at the end of F may serve as a specimen : — irapaKenai tcl
^ApiOTOVi/cov arjfjLeca, /cal ra AiSvfiov irepl ttj^ ^ApLarapy^eCov
BiopOdxreo}^;, rivet Bk Kal ix t^9 ^iTua/crj^ irpoa-oiiBLa^ ^HptDBvapov
/cal ^iKdvopo<; ire pi (myfMrj^. Of the four authors named,
Nikanor and Herodianos are the latest; they lived under
Hadrian and Marcus Aurelius. Both were followers of
Aristarchos, though not always well - informed. Nikanor's
studies on punctuation earned him the uncomplimentary nickname
of XriyfjuiTia^. They often have an important bearing on inter-
pretation. The notes of Herodianos on prosody — which in the
Greek sense included accentuation — are naturally of less critical
value, but contain much valuable information.

It is, however, in the excerpts from Aristonikos and Didymos,
who were contemporaries under Augustus, that the chief value

^ See Allen in C, R, xiv. (1900) 14 ff., and Introduction to 4».

Digitized by



of the scholia is found ; for these profess to give us the direct
teaching of Aristarchos himself.

The great critic marked the lines of Homer upon which he
commented with various signs, of which only four are of importance
— the oySeXo? ( — ), the SLirXi] ( ^ — ), the BtTrXij 7r€pi€<rTtyfievi]
( }-T-), and the aa-repia-KOf; (-^jC-). Of these the first marked
lines which were "athetized" or condemned as spurious; the
second was a general mark of reference to notes on grammar,
Homeric usage, etc. ; the Bi'irXrj irepLeariyfjLevr) was aflBxed to
passages where Aristarchos differed from Zenodotos ; the
doTepia-Ko^ to those which recurred elsewhere in Homer. Where
Aristarchos regarded the repetition as faulty he also added the
ol3€\6<i {aarepLiTKos <tvv o/SeK&i). The work of Aristonikos irepl
T&v aijfieieov gave the notes of Aristarchos to which these marks

Didymos " on the recension of Aristarchos " addressed him-
self, with the colossal industry which earned him the name of
;^aXiC€in-€/oo9, to Aristarchos' textual criticism as exhibited in
the readings of his recension of Homer. He naturally often
touches on the same matters as Aristonikos ; where they differ,
there can be little doubt that Didymos is the safer guide.

Online LibraryHomerThe Iliad; ed., with apparatus criticus, prolegomena, notes, and appendices → online text (page 1 of 102)