Homer and the Resources of Memory: Some Applications of Cognitive Theory to the Iliad and the Odyssey

128 Pages·2001·72.956 MB·English

by  Elizabeth Minchin

Homearn dt he
ResourocfMe esm ory
SonAipep licaotfCi oognnsi Tthievoer y
tot hIel iaanddt hOed yssey
ELIZABETHM INCHIN
OXFORD
UNIVERSIPTRYE SS
OXFORD
uNIVBRS!PTY!Ui SS
GreCalta reSntdroeOnex tfo,ro dx 2 6DP
O1tx u forfretU dr n. sih a U" n.nce dPlrd1 r\suhe"ic'.cssctaa .b ,5s·rydmt y • sp ep io -•1 uo,e, tbn·fc•ryl erle iolmnsf·techi •hncinU ret nn c gisi vcnweas oorrcrfscOhl ihxodr,foldwy ra.i r dsch ip, Tot hmee moroyfm yg randmoHtohpeHere ,l y
OxfoNredwY ork
CaNA�paTth c�oh7;n I�P.,: K �a ��u:riaS�i Llãs•uPa�o :am : u.gp.�l�ouSM:to ria�d n:rdg�it MDaá�Te�pal�oib�rnpo�eTeeu� Mo ir:ekn ,xy�T.oio�oC� c�ri�o�oto: M��ny\u;tl V�moa�b r:as;,ab wu l
witahs soccioamtpeadin niB ecsr llibna dnn
Oxforidasr cgisttreamrdaeerd ok fO xforUd� iverPsricrsys
int hUeK a ndc ertoarihcneo ru netsn
Publiisnth heUedn itSetdn tes
byO xfoUrndi vePrrscilstns)cN •.e ,wY ork
© ElizaMbientcnh h2 i001
i
Them orarli gohfrt hsae u trhh onvbee cans scrted
DarabraisgOchx tf oUrndi vePrrsci(stmsya kcr)
Firpsutb li2s0h0c1d '
Alrii grhetsse rNvope adro.tf t hpiusb licmaatybi cro cnp roduced, '
stoirnear d c trsiyesvtaoelrtm r,a nsmiinat ntfyco dr,om rb ya nmye ans,
wirhtohupetr ipocrr miisnsw irointo ifOn xgfo rUdn iverPsrictsys , 11
oraesx prcpsesrlmyib 1yl1 aewod,r u ndrecrr amgsr cweidtt hh aep propriate
reprhoigcrrsai gohrtgsa nizEantqiuoicnrosin.cc sc rrneipnrgo duction li
ourstpihsdcce o opfte h aeb osvheo ublesd e nttot hRci ghDtesp artment, ! I
OxfoUrndi vePrrsciastttsy h, ne d draebosvse !
Youm usnlo cti rctuhlbiaosto eik na noyt hbeirn doirnc go ver
adny omuu sitm potshseea rnceo ndiotnia onnaysc quirer '
BritLiisbhraC raylto aguining P ublicDaattiao n '
1
Dataav nilable
LibroafCr, o•n grCeastsa liongP iunbgl icDaattiao n
MinhcinE,l izabeth.
Homearnr dh ree souorfmc eemso rsyo:ma ep plicoafct oigonnitsth ievoterot y h1 e/ iad
antdh Oed yssey/Ei'll'ilzianbcehtihn .
p.c m. 1
lnclbuidbelsí oglr reafpehri(ecpn)a.ac neidsn dexes.
1.H om_r-eTecnihquez..E pipco etGrrye,e k-Hiasntcdor riyt icism.
3·S tory'.ntge-lPl�hsoylogaiscpaelc4 t.Os r.lat radition-5G.Or reaelc­e.
formulaaniacl y6s.C1 osg.n iptsiyvceh ol7o.Mg eym.o ryI..T itle.
PA4175.2M05061 8 8'3. -d0c121 00-0440 06 11
ISB0N- 19-841 5257-
1 3 1508 76 94 2 i"
li
byJ PoTrsyihApnusietasnGise o rnedIce t mLiBa ptartrdriO i.etxn,safot ir nd Il'i'
. ona cid-pfarpbeeyer
B,ddLltedGs.u ,i ld&fo Kridn gL'ysn n
.1
'
Preface
Howc ouladp oewth ow orkeidna no ratlr adimtaiionnt ain
them omentuomf h iss ongH?o w coulad p oestu cahs
Homerw eavaet alweh icfihl laende venionrgp, e rhaap s,
wholleo nngi ghTth?e a nswleire isnm emoray,sw ek now.
Butt hibsa ledx planadtoieonsno td oj usteiicteh teotr h e
complexoifmt eym oroyr t ot her ichnoefst sh eH omeric
epicNso.w thasto m uchm orei nformathiaosbn e come
availtaobul sef, r oms everfiae}l dasb,o utth ew orkinogfs
them indi tw ilble u seftuolu st oi dentwiifyt ghr eater
precistihoonsc eo ntribuwthiiocmnhes m ormya ketso t he
composiatnidpo enr formoafno creat lr aditsioonnga.l
lnr eceyneta rlhs a vbee eenn gagienad s ystemraetviice w
ofa n umbeorfc ompositionalc oemlmeomtneo tn htIes l iad
andt heO dyssleh ya.v tea keena cohf t hep rincimpoadle s
whicwhe c ani dentiintfy h eep ics-ptoheet i'nsv ocations,
hitsy pisccaeln heisls,i satnsdc atalohgiussem sa,ld le scrip­
tivpea ssagheisss,í milaensdt, h ea necdowtheisca hr teo ld
withtihnse tructouftr hele a rgeepri c-alnh da vaen alysed
thema se lemenotfas s torwyh icwha sp erformfeodra
listernaitnhgte hra anr eadianugd ienlch ea.vs eh owtnh at
thed emandmsa deo nt he poetw,h od oenso rte loyn r ote
memorwyh enh ep erforamnsd,h isa mbititoosn i nag
'monumenstoanlhg'a evl ehdi mt oa dopcte rtmaeimno ry­
basesdt ratewghiiechsha vlee tfth etirra cients h tee xWth.a t
we discoivset rh atth ep oeitn a no ratlr aditmiaokne s
intenasnedc reaet uisveo ft hosree sourocfem se mory
whicahr ea vailatboul sea ll-epismoedmiocr ya,u ditory
memorvyi,s umaelm orayn,d s patmieamlo ry-atsos ihsitm
botihn t hep rpearatioofnh isso nagn da tt hem omenotf
performanlcnce o.n ducttihnisgst udlhy a vder awhne avily
onw orikn t hneo wv asfite lodfc ognitpisvyec holaongdiy n
1
twos u-bdiscipolfil niensg uisdtiisccso,ua rnsael yasnids 1
-
1,,
1
Preface
Vlll
aprlalugo•st mws. oi1\a u ,1v Ytnd de 1 sS·rcc1t nud asm nso iiernto h'cIe li tegoahhfspret url croyhesc sseero escf, aeh wp .i1c! l·
comp·o s·m1 tna1o ·0r nac lo ntta enxdt oa. c cofuo nrct re atm
remarfekaatbsul orefte htee xotft h!el zaandd t e h dysO- Contents
sey-s-oamnoedf ptlhseuear wee fi ndm them.. .
Thcee ntcrhaalpo tfte hrbisos o eka cbhe gtahne l1tervsm
ad iffeforremnC.th apIt,ne orw m ucehx pan,wd ae�dfi srt
publeidis nCh lassi�uciatl�hy a;Ap nt2tea irp peeadmr an
eargluiieinsr Ie a Wno rthmsgv toolnu omyfea J?erfsor m Abbrenvsi atio x
thfiesrt OraanldLi ittye croancfeyr eVonicceze,n tToe ;xt
Chaepr3t ,no we xpanidnea d n umbeorfw aysw,as lntroduction
publiisnhA endnM ea ckavyo'lsu mSei,g ofn sO raHty, WorkifnrgoM me mory? I
fromt hseeoc nds uccho nfereEnpcoaesn, Ld o goCsh;a eprt 1.HomerT'ysp iSccaelsn: He omerTihce maen d 32
4 s tioa paprei nt hpea peorfts h teh imrede tiinnJg a,n et CogniStcirviep t
WatsoSnp'esa kingC hVaopl5tu,oem nrie nsv;o cnaswt,ai so 2.OnW orkiunngd Perre ssTuhrePe e:r foromfa n7c3e
publiisnah nee da rlfioerirmnt hCel assicala ndJ ournal;
Lisatnsd Catalogues
Chap6t,en rroi cnomgp ositfiiroasnpt,p eairnte hjdeo urnal
3.HomerD'ess criSpetgimveeTn htesi:r 100
HelIit ohsa.tn hkee d itanodrp su bliosfht ehrevsso el umes
Composiatnitdoh neR iorli ent hNea rrative
fora llomweit nodg r aownt hmiast erlinoa rld.e rb ritnog
'
thecshea pttogeertshi enrta om onograac pohn,s iderabl4e.S ímiilnHe osm eIrm:a gMei,n sd Eyea,n d 132
amontuo fw ritrienwgr,i atndi nrge,s haphiansbg e en Memory
necesIst ahraytn.hk re e adaeprp oibnytO exdf oUrndi ­ 5.HomerS'csr ifoprSt t orytTehlelE ivnigd:eo nfc 1e6 1
versPirste foysr h si or hevra lusaubglgee sotnih oonwIs the Invocations
migahcth itehvgieos a l.
6.TheS tyoF rormaanttd h Gee neraotf'i Roisn'n g181
Iw isthoa cknowtlheeedn gceo urnatog fean m uembeorf
pt_oehpwilaoseyv C :eto�e rlyM mea aysirrnshcI owbe fehe rogst, aemh ntei o nnatk bhioipnHusagot t mB herer;i y nl E'pSipleocSgituaoelr 'y tHeolmleirn''gBs:l ams Tealleess'2 03
R_awsoFrna,n cMeuse cakneOd,l ivTearp lwihnoi, n th eir Bibliography 225
snl;apdLaust�posatt"1· ltto�ytpros rffwd1as �as nsoo cr t�edccnnteo,otftan tm1.wlet,a fKa mafey ycm y �etmv aysrairn 1 m fana ncs terd�oparnaesor .uvsh�.iahts,weytt Oeel sln't thay hha; r eh, t o1o Jherg;a 0sbur O ··udaase n� gBreªa ayvterfkbSvlhmn la e I1 eei nteefhuue ? v·ae tG t a, t em rrtdnny ond hbt Wah ds JL o ee';Iathyetp·nonif raio,hp uedttH msWt oneo eGm haidrrr esbetnfoispoaaarorfortnto.arnycdTg �dAstr ;gsa ya oa tt fo n neh n-nnddyehhrrdidEe i'n IGnednLeeIoxrnc adoleru xm 224451
Canbrear
Septemrb99e9r, E.M.
lntroduction
Abbreviations
WORKING FROM MEMORY?
AJP AmerJiocuarnnoa fPl h ilology TheI liaandtd h Oed ysasrereye markwaobrlkTesh .es cope
BICS Bulloeftt hiIenn stoiftCu ltaes sSitucdeaisl, angdr andoeftu hpreo emasnt dh epierr sudaespiivceot fai on
LondUonnei rvsity largiemlayg ihneerdow iocr lhadv een aggeadn da bsorbed
CJ ClasJsoiucranla l audietnhcreostu hgcehe ntuBruitte hse.ay r ree markable,
CQ ClasQsuiacratle rly alsaosp, o emwsh iwcehr ceo mpoasnepdde rforwmietdh out
cw ClasWsoircladl thaei odfw ritEipnigtc.a laebso tuhtqe u arorfAe clh illeus
G&R GreaencRdeo me anAdg amemannoadnb otuhtae d ventoufOr deyss sweeurse
GRBS GreReokm,aa nnB dy zanSttiundei es toladn dr etofloadru dieinnct ehAsee gewaonr lidnt he
HSCP HarvSatruddi inCe lsa sPshiiclaoll ogy periodfo lwlhoitwchehced o lloaftp hsMeey cenaweoaronlf d
JHS JouronfHa ell lSetnuidice s thLea tBer onAzgeet ;h ewye rpea ssferdog me nerattoi on
TAPA TransaacntPdir ooncse eodfti hnAegm se rican generbaytsi ionng oerbr asr,ad nsad;ts omlea ptoei inntt h e
PhiloAlsosgoicciaalt ion liofeft hoirsta rla ditthiewoyen rp ee rfoornmag e rda sncda le,
TLS TimeLsi teSruaprpyl ement ast wmoo numesnotnaglbs yt, h sei ngwehorm w ek noaws
YCS YalCel asSstiucdaile s Home1rH .o metr'asl esi ntw hecero eu rosfte i mree corsdoe d,
thaiittps o ssfioburls me,o rteh atnw toh ousan!da tyeera,r s
tor eaadv ersoifeo anco hft hogsree paetr formaTnocu ess .
todtahyse i ngoifan n ga rraptoievomef s uclhe ngitnah ,
metrliacnaglu aangwdei thtohusetu ppoofwr rti tntoet,ne s
reprenetsasn e xtraoradcihniaervyeA mnedin trt a.i tshees
qu esthioowcn o:u Hlodm eorra, n syi nogfte rra tdiiot naalle s,
havpee rforamshe edd idr,e lgy foirnt hmeo spta rotn
memor2 Iyt?i st hqeu estwihoinc h untdheibrsop oiiknn,s
whicIch o nsitdhreeer s ouorfmc eemso wrhyi scuhp ported
thpeo eatsh ec ompoasnesdda ng.
1 For bar ibeuft xecelldeínstc usosfti hobena ckgrotuotn hdee p icsse,eG . S.
KirkTh,e l liaAd C:o memntai(r Cya,m briCdagmeb:r iUdngiev erPsriets1ys9 ,8 5),
1-16S.e ea lsOo. D ickinn,'s Hoomert,h eP oeotft hcD arAkg e'i,n1 .M cAusnl a
andP .W alco(te dsH.o)m,e (rO xford: UOnxifvoerrdPs riecys 1s9,9 81)9,- 3e7s,p .
at3 5--'(7A ddendum).
2 For suam maroyfa rgumeangtasi tnhsleti keliohfeo xotde nesu isvoef w riting
byt hepo eotf tIhlei aanddt hOe dyssanedyf o,br r iceofm menotnt hpco ssiyb ilit
thtaH omeru sewdr itionnag s malslc aliena, r edrt or ecotrhde metso,p iocrs ,
ponitss,e eK irkT,h eIl iaAd :C omme1i,1a tt1 a3.ry ,
II
Introduction
Introduction
2 3
on research in three areas: Homeric I'
My stud y d raws . . . I . the influence of the anthropologist and psycholinguist,
. · · psychology and linguistics. n this
studies cogmt1ve , . Marcel Jousse, Parry perceived the broader significance of
. d ' h ter I shall single out for attention a
mtro uctory c ap . · · fi his observations; he recognized that a diction marked by the I;
num b er o f sc holars whose work . m their rfie spectfi veh eld.s metrical language patterns which he had isolated in Homeric I
line of enquiry. The rst o t ese is
h as opene d Up my . . verse was consistent with the nature of oral poetry.4 He
Milman Parry. His invest1gat10ns of ~he languag~ of argued that this recurrent formulaic language which charac
Homer, over sixty years ago, a~~ the frui_tful compan~~ns terizes the epics had been developed over generations
w hI.C h he made with the then hvmg Serbdia. n orTalh tradition specifically for the transmission of traditional epic songs.
have changed the course of Home~ic stu i~s. e second Parry claimed, in short, that the Homeric style is typical of
scholar, contemporary with Parry, is Frederick Bartlett, an the style of oral poetry. 5
experimental psychologist. His work on_m emory~r, more Parry's oral-formulaic theory is now widely, although not
accurately, the activity of remembering-has m recent universally, accepted. Most scholarly discussion concerning
'
years been reconsidered and developed in ways which are the nature of the Homeric epics has, in Parry's wake, been
highly relevant to the Homerist or, indeed, to the student founded on the assumption that they are the work of an
I,
of any oral tradition. The third and fourth are Erving orally-trained poet.6 It is an assumption which is funda
Goffman, a sociologist, and J. L. Austin, a philosopher. mental to my own study.
Goffman's accounts of the ways in which people interact in Before his death, Parry had extended his interest beyond 1,
conversation and Austin's important discussion of the ways
in which we use discourse to achieve our goals in trans Traditional Epithet in Homer', in A. Parry (ed.), Homeric Verse, 1-190. A valuable
supplement to Adam Parry's introduction to his father's collected works is the
actions of all kinds have been taken up in the newer
discussion in J. Miles Foley, The Theory of Oral Compositio11 (Bloomington and
research fields of sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, and Indianapolis: Indiana University Press, 1988), ch. t.
pragmatics; and developments in these fields have in turn 4 See M. J ousse, Le Style oral rythmique et m11emotechnique chez les Verbo i
opened the way to new appraisals of the oral aspects of moteurs (first published Paris, 1925), trans. E. Sienaert and R. Whitaker (New '
i
York: Garland, 1990). For Parry's debt to Jousse, see e.g. 'The Traditional Epithet
traditional epic.
in Homer', in A. Parry (ed.), Homeric Verse, esp. at 22-3.
5 On this see M. Parry, 'Studies in the Epic Technique of Oral Verse-Making.
I. Homer and Homeric Style', HSCP 41 (1930), 73-147, reprinted in A. Parry
(ed.), Homeric Verse, 266-324. Ii
HOMERISTS ON HOMER: FORMULAS 6 Throughout this volume I shall use the terms 'poet', 'narrator', and 'singer'
interchangeably to refer to Homer. For discussion in narratological terms of the
AND THEMES
identity of poet and narrator in the epics, sec l. de Jong, Narrators a11d Focalizers:
The Presentation of the Story in the Iliad (Amsterdam: B. R. Gruner, 1987), ch. t.
It was Milman Parry wh d h . . For a survey of literature on the formula in Homer, see M. Edwards, 'Homer and
o rew toget er earlier studies of
metre and language 1 h . Oral Tradition: The Formula, Part I', Oral Traditio11, 1 (1986), 171-230; 'Homer
A ntom. e M e1. 1let and, nMam te· .Y Mt ose of Hemrich Duntzer' and Oral Tradition: The Formula, Part II', Oral Tradition, 3 (1988), 11--60. I
. , a 1Ja urko to set out for us in Amongst Homerists who are sceptical of Parry's proposals, see D. Shive, Naming :
systematic form comp Ir .d Achilles (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987), who reassesses
the H • . e mg evi ence that the language of '
Parry's evidence of formulas as a first step towards re-establishing Homer as a
3 omenc epics was in substantial part formulaic. 3 Under literate poet. On the question of whether Homer himsel_f composed orally: see
The development of Parry's thou ht R. Finnegan, Oral Poetry: Its Nature, Sig11ifica11ce a11d Socral Context (~ambndge:
0chti1,•oero lxfnluoae, cm-ie1 tmse pdta .1 w1a otP rpakprsr.:y' LxA x(.'O i.iP -xax.f rxoriyrvd .(·· e OdC n·l) a, tr "he,'.'ne h d ei o oMrnm gap uk r1 .mea s1m.gs c ' ao 1sy 1y' H9sb7to ee1mm )t·•re a,na c·nc he d d'v s ehmer seoe s:t hdtT e ch oeend •Cvi teoonllrie'escn tietnldyt rP oiandp uhecri•ss- sCneoaetm etshb e(r6i rd9eg-ce7e 2nU)t ntwihvoaetrr ksf oiotryfm MPurl.ea isScsa ,sl e1ty,9 l7'eI7 ni)s , Dwneohftoe an incn esi inosftfas l Mloinb1l lame nsa inog_rnPa lao-rlfri oyte:r raRal teceno c~mow~nmtomsg_1 utt_thou~mn ; O ab_nruadtl II
stYle heo mer,c rsieqeu e', eTphttehseet ep toruadr i1t:'o ~ne1 1c da~s Homevre :1 cE susani seurrpa mu ns tphreo bHleommee rdice sTthuedoiersy 'a, nOd rtahle Tarragduitmioenn,t s1 b1 a(s1e9d9 o6)n, t3h7e4m-4, 1w7e. aInre tm~e al igphost_1 t~1of nS atole asr gquuea nthtiatat ttihvee '
Lettres de l'Univcrsite de Paris (Po c_torat cs lettres prcsentee la Faculte des Homeric poems are indeed part of an oral tradition.
ans, 1928), appearing in translation as 'The
-
I,
Introduction
Introduction
4 5
t. phonological unit of composition, the
the smaller, syntac IC- . . 1 d h We have, therefore, ample data, formulaic and thematic
r unit which he inferred, p aye t e same
formu Ia , to a Ia rg e , f . which might serve as evidence of the compositional proces~
but at the level o narrative structure.
role as t h e fo rmu la , 1 · which produced the Homeric epics. We recognize the
w
· lter Arend he referred to these arger units as
Fo II owmg a ' . p . formulaic language of Homer as the language of an oral
, typ1·c a 1 seen es' •7 A typical scene ' accordinhg" tho arhr y·, is ·a poet who composes in performance; and we have come to
· t. of a recurrent action sequence w 1c , eac time it
d escnp 10n . , . see that the poet's typical scenes were an economical strat
.. ,·th,·n the Iliad or the Odyssey, 1s narrated with many
occurs ., 1 , s p egy for effecting the forward movement of his song. Parry's
f the same details and many of the same words . arry and, interpretation of the evidence, however, for a time created
~ubsequently, Albert Lord, his field assistant, proposed that problems for those Homeric scholars for whom the aesthetic
the typical scene or, in Lord's terminology, the th_eme, was merits of the poems were paramount. He believed that the
similar to the formula. Like the formula, each typical scene sole function of the ornamental epithet was to serve the
was learned by an apprentice singer so that he might repro demands of metre, and that, as a consequence, it had
duce an action sequence in song with relative ease.9 Thus the virtually no meaning of itself. And because the typical
oral poet could readily generate a standardized account of the scene was linked by Parry and Lord with the formula,
harnessing of horses, the preparation of a meal, the making of since they viewed the type-scene as an extended formula,
a bed, or the procedures of dressing. Parry's thinking on the it became subject to the same limitations. If we accept
nature of the theme was taken up by Armstrong, Gunn, Parry's view that typical scenes are learned for the sole
Edwards, and Fenik, all of whom have explored typical purpose of singing traditional epic, the formula and the
scenes in a variety of ways.10 And Lord continued to develop typical scene alike are no more than prefabricated, multi
his own thinking on this characteristic feature of oral epic. As purpose, units of composition. It was an unhappy corollary
a result we have studies which identify typical features in of Parry's hypothesis, therefore, that for some years we
Homeric narrative structures, studies which emphasize the almost lost sight of Homer, the poet who, as was once
L atypical in the midst of the typical, and a comparatively small thought, had shaped his own individual versions of the
number of longitudinal studies which describe and assess the quarrel of Achilleus and Agamemnon and the return of
thematic content of a sustained passage. Odysseus to his homeland. Parry had emphasized the
binding force of tradition, to which, he argued, the 'poets'
7
BuchSheaen dWlu.n gA, r1e9n3d3,) . Die typische11 Sce11e11 bei Homer (Berlin: Weidmannische of each generation of necessity conformed; Parry's poet was,
8 M._Pardry.' 'On Typical Scenes in Homer', Classical Philology ( 6) 357- at best, a craftsman who built a song from his repertory of
6re 0v, ierewp nonf tAe rcmnd 'As . Parkr yv (e· d.) ' H.o meric Verse • 4 o4 -?, at 404. Thi'.s 3 1.1 s a1n9 3ext'e nded learned phrases and themes: the extent of his repertory
p , . wor , ze typ1sche11 Scene11 bei Homer.
Ho9m ear raryn,d TSyopuitchasll aSv·c enEe s' ' ,a t T4Ao6P· A · B· L ord , 'Co mpos1.t 1. on by Theme m. orefp ar ecsoennfteindi ntgh et rlaidmiittiso no fb ehcisa mcaep aa cciotyn ftion esminegn. t Tinh ei tsneoltfi;o int
(Cambridge Mass. H:~ ~osU, . _A 82 (i95i), 71-80; The Singer of Tales
4. L ord has 'a lways ··i nsisteda rt h t tmhv ers1ty Press• 196o·, Athe neum e d n., 19 6 5 ) , c h . discouraged scholars from considering the Homeric epics as
'Homer as an Oral-Traditional pem,es_arc learned but not memorized: on this see the products of a creative mind. And criticism in the wider
an d London: Cornell Unive a.t y po ct ' tn Epic Si1 1gers and O raI T radzt.1 0. 11 (Ithaca sense-that is, the attempt to understand and to evaluate
10 S ec e.g. J. Armstrong 'rTs,h e Ar ess. ' 1991) ' .7.2 - 103 ' at 77.
works which have aroused admiration and affection over the
54; B. Fenik, Typical Batt/~ Scenes :i;;;I~ot1f tn t~e I_liad', AJP 79 (1958), 337-
o/ Homeric Battle Description (W' b d iad: Siud,es 111 the Narrative Techniques centuries-seemed to many scholars to be, in Griffin's
'(N11 9a 7r0r)a,u .v1 e9 2I-n2c0o3n;s iMste.n Ecyd wanadrd tsh e 'OT1rea s1 0a ~.e cnt··a tFerdaTnz e xSt tienm· theer,H 1o9m68e)r; icDE.p Mic'., AGJuPn9n1, word s, ' na.i.v e or 1. mpossi. ble , . , 1
105 (1975), 51--72. For a comp;ehe~p_e- cencs and Homeric Hospitality' TAPA 11 See J. Griffin, 'Freshly Perceived Epics', TLS 4, 433 (March 18-24, 1988),
see M. Edwards, 'Homer and Oral ;•v~.s~rvey of the literature on the ty~e-scene, 312. On this point see also J. Miles Foley, lmmaz!ent Art_: Fr?m Structure to
(i992), 284-330. ra ition: The Type-Scene', Oral Tradition, 7
Meaning in Traditional Oral Epic (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991),
·-~
I
Introduction
6 Introduction 7
·mes however there have been moves to
In more recen t t1 , ' "d h Bakker has for the most part used current studies of
re-focus ora1 - 1c or mulaic theory and to cons1f er It e poems everyday discourse to elucidate certain surface features of
oems but as records o ora commun-
not as texts o f Oral P f the epic. Although the language of the Homeric poems
· · R. hard Martin and Egbert Bakker, or example,
1cat10n. 1c . h · might be described as 'special speech', to distinguish it
·zed the value of trymg to recapture t e expen-
h ave reco gnl . . . . from the 'ordinary speech' of everyday, the two modes-:
ence of traditional oral epic. That 1s, m the1~ different ways, 'special' and 'ordinary' speech-have much in common. For
each attempts to place the words of the poet m the context of they both translate the workings of the mind into language
performance giving consideration both to the poet who for a listener.15 lVIartin, on the other hand, has chosen to
12
sings and t~ the audience w?ich foll~ws the, tale. This study the utterances of the heroes themselves. In consider ! /;\
general issue was raised and discussed m L~rd_ s stu?y, The ing Homer's heroes as poetic performers in their own right,
Singer of Tales. Lord there provided many m~1ghts mto the he aims to 'discover the parameters' of their performance
singer's understanding of his role, through his accounts of and to compare Greek notions of performance with our
interviews with his subjects in the field. But, as Martin own.16
observes, the question of communication in performance I propose in this volume to follow the path which has been
has on the whole been neglected by Homerists.13 Indeed, it laid out by these two scholars, taking as my starting point
has only recently become apparent that research of great the hypothesis that these great epics were songs performed
relevance to the ancient epics is being conducted in the fields before a live audience; and that it is essential to take this into
of cognitive psychology and linguistics, and that a close account in any analysis of the poems. I shall bring to the fore
understanding of cognitive and pragmatic issues-those further evidence for the close parallels that exist between
issues which are central to communication in general and 'ordinary', everyday storytellings and the 'special' story
to oral communication in particular-is crucial if we are to telling of Homer; and use these parallels to illuminate
ap~reciate the style, as well as the quality, of the Homeric certain surface features of the poems. My approach to this
ep1c_s. As Bakker observes, the poet's interaction with his task is in some ways similar to Bakker's, since, for reasons
audience sho~ld be no less important to us as a subject for which I set out below, I base my discussion on findings in
17
study than his mastery of his formulaic language.14 cognitive psychology and linguistics. But whereas Bakker
is interested in analysing in terms of spoken discourse
?t PP· xii, 2-:-s; I. De Jong, 'Homer as Literature: Some Current Areas of Research'
m J. P. Cnelaard, Homeric Questions (Amsterdam· J C c· b ) 6, certain features of Homeric style, such as the singer's use
esp. at 130--2 Griffin's cla' . . . . ie en, 1995 • 127-4 •
• f Ed. un is, nevertheless, overstated. De Jong gives the of particles, or the demonstrative ouro~, o: the apposi~ional
examp 1e o wards, whose research into the ( , d
Homeric Hospitality') h d type-scene e.g. Type-Scenes an nature of his discourse, my interest hes m larger umts of
makes of the traditional as el monl s,tr(ated Homer's artistry 'precisely in the use he
,ora stye 132). discourse: typical scenes, anecdotes, lists,_ invocatio?s,
12
See e.g. R. Martin The Langua e if H descriptive passages, and similes. Like Martm, I examme
aIlnicaed , ,( Im•t h aEc. aB aankdk eLro annddo ~A-· CKo arhn e II U m~dv se.0tr s 1.U• t y e r.Po reess:s S, p1e 9e8c9 h ) ;a •nsd·1 m P1-e 1er sfo arnmda npc eer f i no rtmhe- these elements in their performative context; but, by con
ance, Tradition and the Epic T, a~e(~ 'ntten Voices, Spoken Signs: Perform- trast with Martin the focus of my interest is the poet, whose
nd
1997), 138-66; 'E. Bakker Poet ex. Sam h ge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, circumstances ar; perhaps much as Albert Lord described
ainn dI. LM oon drr oisn :a nCdo rBn.e lPl oUwneil•vl e(ersd1"stT.y)Y pt~n ~•Pe e1c96 ··7 O); r'aTl~itey Satnud d Hy oomf eHrio·c m Dez.rs icco uDrissec (oIuthrsaec'a, them. Here is a man who needed to earn his keep through
91499 (71)9, 9298),4 -13-0149;. 'Homeric OYTOE an; 't h e o;poaet?iczso no tfo D Heoixmise'r, (CLleaisdseicna:l EP.h Jil.o Blorgilyl,, 15 Bakker 'Homeric Discourse', 300-1.
SS eh."1nn 3 t geBSsn, ea ce'keW k, M ,e rCri a,t ltra'etHsmn. s oi,ac mnaLdlea rPnSigchp uioOlaokgYleoenTg ooyL 'fa" 8H'n 7eg ru(o 1aeg9s9e •··2 4) A .• n9c, 5fE. - x1teh0re9c ,i·i. s naett mr •9 o5 dt.hu ec tPorrayg cmoamtimcse onfts t hoef G Sr ·e Rek. VA p1.11 sp16u rasMo 11ae· zacearh tt1e•·i , on. gn'T' . L'na "Ea.nP n .d gA Bu" aa P.I kgr2eke0 se oer(f n•1 Hc9'eH9e"r0o o)1 m"•e ns1 e, -Hr21ioc01 .m ·• De'Dirsiiccso cPuooruserets reya 'na,. ndCd lEaPnm eJ. r•ca fma ol r bmAe am1n1etc·zn qe1t::1 · 1 It Any, v 1oC2I ov (ge 1mn9i.e9t.in3v )t e ,,
~, at 4. 1-29; and, most important, Poetry i11 Speech, pass,m.
Introduction
Introduction
8 9
. erform before an audience which had
.- ng His task was tro p f . . unified phenomenon. Frances Yates, for example, in The
· so · d d ten and whose span o attention was in
, to be persua e to is . f h. . h. Art of Memory, uses 'memory' in this general way;23 and I
' . · h. to the quality o 1s song, 1s only
direct re 1a t10ns ip . ' . l' . d' l h. have used the term in a similar fashion, in the sub-title of
. voice his spec1a epic 1a ect, 1s
resources were his '. 1s this introductory chapter. But, as cognitive psychologists
( repertoire of stories, and his memory. . observe, memory is not one system; it comprises a range of
arrator is the focus also of Scott R1chard-
The poe t , Or n , . • · 19 R · h complementary systems, which have in common the capa
son , s recen t di·scussi·on of Homeric c. ompos1t1on. 1c ard- city for storing information. 24 As we live our lives in the
son's analysis of the epics has been influenced by a number everyday world, much of the data we acquire and store are
of theorists, principally, Gerard Gen~tte an_d Seymour fed into memory by our senses. When we hear a sound or
Chatman. For Richardson, the narrator 1s the lm_k between when we see an object, for example, we register auditory or
story and discourse. 20 His study is a doc~m~ntat1on from. a visual information. This material will be held briefly in the
theoretical perspective of the act of narration m the Homeric auditory or the visual systems of short-term memory,
epics. He has gathered information on the poet's habits of which contribute to the functions of working memory.25
narration, his conception of his task as creator of illusion, But it is possible also that some of this information will
and his role as guide to the tale he tells. 21 And he examines pass into the long-term memory systems for the storage of
the narrative for signs of Homer's presence in the discourse: sights and sounds; these are the systems which give us
he observes those occasions on which the poet has chosen to j access to auditory memories, of voices and tunes, and visual
stand back from the story and keep his activity hidden and memories, of faces and scenes. 26 A further function of
those on which he has chosen to show his hand. 22 A number visual memory, or possibly a separate memory system, is
of the conclusions which Richardson has drawn about the spatial memory; this is a form of memory which has been
poet's habits and intentions are echoed in my discussion, recognized, and exploited, from early times.2 7 The spatial
especially in later chapters. But his approach is quite system is concerned with our memory for places and their
different from mine. Whereas Richardson has taken little relationships to one another.28 The last of the memory
account of oral-formulaic theory and has confined his study systems relevant to this study is by no means the least
to the activity of the narrator as revealed by the text on the
page, I shall_ be considering the narrator as a performer; and 23 See F. Yates The Art of Memory (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1966).
Yates is in fact describing two of several systems of memory: spatial and visual
I .s hall begin my study not with the printed word, as ' '
memory. .
Richardson does, but with the poet's mind. 24 See A. Baddeley, H11ma11 Memory: Theory and Practice (Hove and London:
Lawrence Erlbaum, 1990), 4-8. . .
25 \,\larking memory, with its limited capacity, is that _com_plex s_yste':1 which 1s
designed to cope with the present situation; its function 1s, quite simply, the
WHAT IS MEMORY? exercise of remaining alert. On short-term memory, see Baddeley, Human Memory,
ch. 3.
When we use the term 'm , · 26 See Baddeley, H11man Memory, ch. 2, at 13.
discourse w e~ory m everyday, non-specialist 27 On the ancient world's interest in spatial memory, se_e Yates, _T_he Art _of
,. ' e appear to imply that memory is a single 1n,,,e. mory, esp. c h s. 1 an d 2,- J• p · Small • Wax Tablets of the Mmd: CogmtR,v e SIt udd ies
of Memory and Literacy in Classical Antiquity (London and New York: out e ge,
19 See Lord, Singer, ch. 2• 1997), chs. 7-9. , . S G G h I
ve~;itSy. PRreicshs,a r1d9s9oon)' . The Home n.c N arrator (Nashville, Tenn.: Vanderbilt Uni- C .2 sK Se I eIee y,U B . . NS teei·sp sh e e rn, s 'D(eodsm.)a, inJ\st leomfo rMy: eImntoerryd i,s cmip linPa. ryR Ao l pobpm. rooanJc,\h t l es .( ,N e ow· e tyO ao rsk ,l
Ri;hard~on draws on structuralist th . . and Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1988), 67-83, _at 76-7. D. u m, _emory 111 ra
tmer~mnse: ~ sotof rtyh e rceofemrsm tuon wichataito nis. d epi. cted m. ethoery n atorr adtiivstei;n g'duiisscho ubrestew' ereefne rtsh eto ttwhoe (TN readw 1· tYr· oonsr:k Ta·nI' led CO oxgfmo·r 1id ·v : eO Pxsfyocrlido loUgn.·," i v0e~$ rsEiptyic 'P rBeaslsl,a d19s• 9 5a)n,d 5 C7o-191,1 1dtrmagw-_osu t8 Rchayremf ues I
Richardson ' Homeric N arrator, 197-8. distinction, with references, between spatial memory and memory for image.
22 Ibid., 5·
Introduction
IO Introduction
1· mportant. It 1·s the system which processes .a nd stor.e s o.u r I I
general knowledge about the world: semantic, or ep1sod1c, STUDIES OF MEMORY FOR
memory. . · NARRATIVE IN PSYCHOLOGY AND
All oral traditions depend on the resources of memory for COGNITIVE SCIENCE
the preservation and the transmission of t_heir songs. My aim
in this study of memory and oral song 1s to throw further The cognitive sciences have been particularly interested in
light on the processes of storytelling in the epic tradition how peo_rle ~nderstand and remember narrative, since
which we associate with Homer. My procedure will be to research m this area may open the way to a broader u d _
d' f • . n er
draw on the results of research into the nature and functions stan mg o cognitive processes. As a Homerist I too am
of the different memory systems which I have described interested in the understanding and recall of 'narratives·
above and to develop these findings in the specific context of hence my re~diness to explore the ideas of cognitive psycho~
the Homeric epics. My first point of reference will be the logy and to import them into an investigation of the Iliad
work of those cognitive psychologists who are interested in and the Odyssey, two fine examples of the art of storytelling.
ho\', we remember sequences of events, the components of a I shall not, however, be the first to do so. In Memory in Oral
list of items, or of place-names; my second will be work on Traditions, which I have cited above, David Rubin has
visua~ and auditory memory, which will throw light, re summarized much relevant work in cognitive psychology
spectively, on how we recall and generate descriptive pas for those who are interested in transmission in oral tradi
sages and similes and how we 'learn' and recreate list-songs. tions of all kinds, including the oral epic tradition which
I_ sha_ll _refer a_lso to research in certain sub-disciplines of produced the Homeric epics. I shall be making reference to
lmgu1_st1cs, which are concerned, amongst other things, with his important book throughout my discussion of how
wh~t it means to perform before an audience ( even before an memory has supported the singer of the Iliad and the
aud'.ence of one) and with the ways in which we shape the Odyssey.
s. tone. s we. tel.l so that they will be memorable . Th.1 s exerci.s e Since the 1970s evidence has been accumulating which
is pnm~r_ily mtended to advance our understanding of the suggests that knowledge of everyday activities and of con
chompositi~n of the epics and our appreciation of their art· at ventional actions and reactions is fundamental to the process
tt e sabm e ti.m e' howe ver, th e app1 i-cati. on of cognitive theo' ry of comprehension. It has become obvious to the cognitive
bo suf _stantia 1s egmen~s-of texts of acknowledged quality will psychologist that people understand new experiences and
preo ov idienste ar edsett to·1 cdo gn1t1ve psy e h OI o gi.s ts, as such an exercise new material in terms of existing structures in memory. 30 It
Let us b . a1 ~ hcase-study of the activities of the mind. 29 has become clear, too, that if memory guides the processes
egm wit an accou t f . . of comprehension, it guides also the processes of composi
memory, that particular s sten o . ep1so~ic, or semantic,
tion. The starting point for any study of composition,
hension and generat· fy m _which guides the compre
mn o narrative. therefore, should not be the language in which the story is
ultimately expressed (which has until recently been accepted
as the pathway to understanding the creative process);
!~2• See W. Chafe's statement of e ;:! . rather, we should begin with the mind which generates the
:!.1.1 Us abo_ut the Mind', in B. Britr;~0 views in '~0:ne Things that Narratives whole. Storytelling, as I have suggested above, is a 'mind
s9cv ieo,n: ~caearsnr o daftn C1ov eteE L tahneg ureacgeen ( tH ciollnstdna.b leu 't 1N.o Jn·. tLoa i wAntr. eeP ndecl.le e E.g. rrmlrb 1a u(emd• s. I) ,9 N9°a) r , r7a9ti-v9e8 ,T ehsopu.g hatt based' activity.31
Clarendon p. mmott, Narrative Comprehensi r _1~1b '.nary work in the cognitive 30 See Baddeley, Human Memory, 335- , . .
role in read1• :;s;u, 1;-~9e7n)g,t hw hteoxstes ' a(imxi) .i s to 'sho\:11;ha t t ~sec omu7m:sed P pelrasypse catniv ei m(Opxofrotarndt: Str31a teTghiees : pBhreatswee eins DDaisvciodu rLsee vayn'sd. SSeyen taDx.' , Line vyT, . CGoivmamn u(medc.a),t1 vDe1.s Gcoo11a1lsse aa1n1dd
Syntax (New York: Academic Press, 1979), 183-210, at 184.