Table Of Content’
HOMER S ALLUSIVE ART
’
Homer s
Allusive Art
BRUNO CURRIE
1
3
GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP,
UnitedKingdom
OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford.
ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship,
andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof
OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries
©BrunoCurrie2016
Themoralrightsoftheauthorhavebeenasserted
FirstEditionpublishedin2016
Impression:1
Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin
aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe
priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted
bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics
rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe
aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe
addressabove
Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform
andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer
PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress
198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica
BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData
Dataavailable
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016934367
ISBN 978–0–19–876882–1
PrintedinGreatBritainby
ClaysLtd,StIvesplc
LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand
forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials
containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork.
For Katrin, Hannes, and Mattis
Preface
‘The whole concept of “allusion” needs to be cleared up in Homeric studies’
(Andersen 1990: 37 n. 21); ‘[t]he whole question of archaic intertextuality
needsfurtherwork’(R.L.Fowler2004:230).Thisbookisaresponsetothese
and similar calls, taking the perhaps optimistic view that ‘cleared up’ means
‘clarified’,not‘disposedof’.Itishardlythefirstsuchresponse;excellentones
have been made by (for instance) Jonathan Burgess, Georg Danek, Seth
Schein, and Christos Tsagalis. It is bound to be a controversial book, but
I hope it will not be perceived as polemical or not excessively so. I have
neverthelesstriednottoshirkthedutyofregisteringimportantdisagreements
withimportantscholars,whoareinmanycasesalsofriendsandcolleagues.
Most of thematerial presented in this bookis previouslyunpublished, but
Chapter2 is a heavily reworked version of ‘Homer and the Early Epic Trad-
ition’, first published in M. J. Clarke, B. G. F. Currie and †R. O. A. M. Lyne
(eds.),EpicInteractions:PerspectivesonHomer,VirgilandtheEpicTradition
Presented to Jasper Griffin by Former Pupils (Oxford, 2006), pp. 1–45, repro-
duced by permission of Oxford University Press, and Chapter3 likewise of
‘Perspectives on Neoanalysis from the Archaic Hymns to Demeter’, in
Ø.AndersenandD.Haug(eds.),RelativeChronologyinEarlyGreekEpicPoetry
(Cambridge, 2012), pp. 184–209, reproduced by permission of Cambridge
University Press. Chapter4 develops an idea first explored in nuce in Omni-
bus57(January2009),pp.25–7.Chapters1and5incorporatesomematerial
first published in ‘The Iliad, Gilgamesh and Neoanalysis’, in F. Montanari,
A. Rengakos, and C. Tsagalis (eds.), Homeric Contexts: Neoanalysis and the
Interpretation of Oral Poetry = Trends in Classics Supplementary Volumes 12
(Berlinand Boston,2012), pp.543–80.Iwouldliketoreiterate mythanksto
thosewhoadvisedmefortheoriginalpublicationsandtorecordfreshthanks,
forcommentingonindividualchapters,toFelixBudelmann,MichaelClarke,
DenisFeeney,IrenedeJong,andRichardRutherford.Aspecialdebtisowedto
JonathanBurgess, whoreadthe whole manuscript minutely, madeinnumer-
able telling criticisms, and proposed remedies to several shortcomings. The
text was also much improved by the suggestions of anonymous readers. As
always, no implication of responsibility for, or endorsement of, any of my
arguments accompanies these expressions of gratitude. I am also grateful to
MaryBachvarova,GeorgDanek,AntoniosRengakos,SethSchein,andChris-
tos Tsagalis for sharing, often in advance of publication, their research with
me. In Oxford I have benefited from many years of teaching early Greek
hexameterpoetrytosomeverystimulatingstudents,andfrommanyinvigor-
atingexchangeswithmyfriendandcolleagueAdrianKelly,aHomeristofvery
viii Preface
differentpersuasion.IalsohadthegreatgoodfortunetolearnAkkadianwith
Frances Reynolds. Charlotte Loveridge of Oxford University Press, to whom
IoncetaughtearlyGreekhexameterpoetry,hasguidedthebookthroughthe
publication process with great expertise and tact, and Donald Watt and
Timothy Beck did a stellar job as copy editor and proofreader respectively.
But the greatest support of all I have derived from my family, to whom the
bookisdedicated,inloveandgratitude.
Contents
ListofTables x
ConventionsandAbbreviations xi
HowtoUseThisBook xiv
1. HomerandAllusiveArt 1
2. TheHomericEpicsandtheirForerunners 39
3. TheArchaicHymnstoDemeter 79
4. PregnantTearsandPoeticMemory 105
5. AllusioninGreekandNearEasternMythologicalPoetry 147
I. AGreekTransference:FromAphroditetoHera 147
II. ASumerian–Akkadian–GreekTransference: Inanna,Ishtar,
Aphrodite 160
III. MythologicalCatalogues,Seductions,Plaintsin
Heaven:TypologyorAllusion? 183
IV. TheQuestionofAwarenessofNearEasternSources 200
V. ConsequencesforGreekandNearEasternPoetry 213
6. Epilogue:TraditionalArtandAllusiveArt 223
AppendixA: Proclus’SummariesoftheCyclicalEpics 229
AppendixB: TranslationoftheBerlinPapyrus
(CommentaryontheOrphicHymntoDemeter) 235
AppendixC: AllusiveDoubletsandInconcinnities 239
AppendixD: Pindar,theAethiopis,andHomer 247
AppendixE: ProspectiveLamentation 255
AppendixF: TypologicallyGeneratedRepetitionversus
SpecificReprise 259
References 263
IndexofPassages 309
GeneralIndex 327
Description:What kind of allusion is possible in a poetry derived from a centuries-long oral tradition, and what kind of oral-derived poetry are the Homeric epics? Comparison of Homeric epic with South Slavic heroic song has suggested certain types of answers to these questions, yet the South Slavic paradigm is
