The story of the Wooden Horse is told by three different characters in the Odyssey. It is first told by Menelaos at δ 266-289, then by Demodokos at θ 499-520, and lastly by Odysseus at λ 505-537. Previous studies on these three passages have shown that the details of these three accounts are so composed that each account fits its context. In the present paper, I would like to further the observations in those studies by comparing the three passages, especially in terms of whether what is happening outside or inside the Wooden Horse is described in each account, and by considering the inter-relationship between these accounts. In Menelaos' account, both Helen's behaviour outside the Wooden Horse and Odysseus' behaviour inside are depicted. Menelaos' depiction of Helen as behaving irrationally and endangering the Greek soldiers undermines her own favourable depiction of herself (δ 244-264) as a woman who kept the secret of Odysseus' identity and whose sympathy was already on the Greek side. On the other hand, the depiction of Odysseus in Menelaos' account emphasizes his steadfast resistance to temptation. The detail of Odysseus seizing Antiklos' mouth enhances this effect. Odysseus asks Demodokos to sing of the Wooden Horse. The wording employed in his request to Demodokos (θ 494-5) indicates that Odysseus desires to hear especially of his own brilliant prowess as the leader of the enterprise of the Wooden Horse. Demodokos, however, concentrates on the fatal meeting of the Trojans outside the Wooden Horse, not Odysseus' leading role among the Greek soldiers inside. In relation to the contrast between Odysseus' request and the actual content of the song, it should be noted that Odysseus asks Demodokos to sing of the Wooden Horse 'which godlike Odysseus led to the acropolis' (θ 494-5), whereas it is stated in Demodokos' song that it was the Trojans themselves who brought it to the acropolis (θ 504). The song of Demodokos emphasizes the suffering of the war, especially on the Trojan side, rather than Odysseus' prowess. The simile of a captive war widow attached to Odysseus (θ 523-530) points up the suffering of the Trojans in Demodokos' song. Since Odysseus' account of the Wooden Horse is a reply to Achilleus' question about his son, it contains detailed description of Neoptolemos' prowess. The description of Neoptolemos' exploits suggests that father and son played similar roles among the Greeks. This account also contains descriptions of Odysseus' own exploits. Especially, Odysseus claims that he was responsible for opening the Wooden Horse at the right moment for the attack, and for keeping it closed until then (λ 524-5). Like Menelaos' account, Odysseus' account of the Wooden Horse has two foci (Neoptolemos and Odysseus), though the two accounts differ in that Menelaos, whose foci are Odysseus and Helen, describes both the inside and outside of the Wooden Horse, whereas Odysseus concentrates on the inside. As we have observed above, Odysseus' key role does not feature in Demodokos' account of the story, even though Odysseus specifically requests to hear it. In this respect, it is notable that both Demodokos' song and Odysseus' account of the Wooden Horse, which is a part of his lengthy story of his wanderings (the apologoi), are presented to the same audience at Alkinoos' palace on the same evening. Though a long stretch of Odysseus' story of his adventures intervenes between the two accounts of the Wooden Horse, the fact that the apologoi are addressed to the Phaiakians at the court of Alkinoos is brought back to our attention by the intermission in Odysseus' narrative at λ 333-377. It is conceivable that Odysseus adds the detail of his own leading role inside the Wooden Horse in order to correct the song of Demodokos.

抄録全体を表示

it is generally admitted that the mam theme in the latter half of the Odyssey is derived from the tale of a wanderer's return and reunion with his wife such as would be seen in folk-tales the world over In the Odyssey, however, Penelope knows nothing about her husband's return until the killing of the suitors is over Now there arises a question why Odysseus does not take his wife into his confidence while making himself known to his son Telemachus According to the view of the so-called analysts, there existed another version of the Odyssey where the heio was recognized and helped by his wife before the killing of the suitors If, however, this view were right, there would have been two (') persons who helped Odysseus to kill the suitors Now the situation in the latter half of the Odyssey requires that there should be at least one person who helps the hero from within Then there would be no place for a grown-up son like Telemachus if the wife helps her husband from within as would be seen in folk-tales If, however, the hero's helper is his own son, there would be no place at all for the wife, as in the Odyssey From this and other observations the present writer supposes that in the Odyssey Telemachus must have taken upon himself the role played originally by the wife in folk-tales and that he must have played a very important part in the making of the Odyssey as a heroic epic The view of the analysts, on the one hand, cannot be accepted as a true picture of the Odyssey, as they confuse the element of a folk-tale (i e the wife) with that of a heroicepic (i e the son) When we observe closely the role played by Telemachus in the first half of the poem we find that the main purpose of his journey lies in connecting closely with the heroic world the hero of the Odyssey whose sphere of actions lay originally in the fantastic world of folk-tales Here it is to be noted that the return of the Atreides, especially that of Agamemnon as told in the first four books and then in Books 11 and 24, makes a strong contrast with that of Odysseus Now in Book 11 Agamemnon advises Odysseus to be cautious with his wife when the latter returns home With this warning still fresh in his ear, Odysseus could not have taken his wife into his confidence as the analysts suppose Penelope, on the one hand, could not have easily forgiven her husband who kept not only his own identity secret until the very last moment but also tried to put her faithfulness to the cruel test (19 221 ff) Such psychological conflicts between husband and wife as are found in Book 23 could only be possible when the role of helping wife was given to Telemachus and not to Penelope The present writer, considering in what relation the tale of the Atreides' return as told in the Odyssey would have stood with the so-called νοστοι of Agias, comes to the conclusion that there must have existed another epic poem concerning the Atreides' return before the poet of the Odyssey composed Such an epic must have had two threads, i e that of Agamemnon on the one hand and that of Menelaos on the other, the latter being subordinated to the former Here the present writer supposes that such a constiuction of two threads must have influenced the peculiar structure of the Odyssey which is formed from the stoiy of Odysseus and that of Telemachus And while the tales of the Atreides' and other heroes' return are told again and again, the Odyssey becomes not only a tale of Odysseus' adventures and return, but also an epic of the Greek army's direful return And in this connection Telemachus is seen playing a role which links the world of folk-tale with that of the heroic poetry which developed around the war of Troy

抄録全体を表示

A special feature of Plutarch's Parallel Lives is that although individual lives are sometimes read as independent histories, each pair of biographies, one Greek and one Roman, forms a single unit. Some scholars see them as parallel lives: Erbse and Lamour, for example, held that certain pairs share a proem and a postscript that together offer central points for interpretation; Stadter thought that each pair contained an important keyword; Duff took the view that each pair dealt with an identical moral problem. In this paper, I treat the Lives of Themistocles and Camillus as a single unit with a pair of contrasted heroes and offer an interpretation in terms of literary influence. Some scholars have already pointed out that several of Plutarch's Lives show literary influences. De Lacy noted that Plutarch used tragic expressions to indicate antipathy towards certain persons, while Mossman found traces of tragedy and epic in the Life of Alexander; Zadorojnyi discovered the same thing in the Life of Crassus. One of Greek mythology's most famous pairings of contrasted heroes is that of Achilles and Odysseus: they are respectively (1) emotional and rational, (2) marked by powerful soliloquy and ingenuous speech, (3) brave and tricky, (4) dying young in battle, surviving war and wandering for many years. In Plutarch's Lives of Themistocles and Camillus, Themistocles plays the role of Odysseus, Camillus that of Achilles. In similar situations, they act in contrary ways: Themistocles' first political success is achieved with a trick, while Camillus succeeds through brave military action; Themistocles does not hesitate to make use of a betrayer, while Camillus rejects such a man; Themistocles is skilful at self-justification, while Camillus is poor. While the Life of Themistocles contains many episodes that recall Odysseus, such as the metaphor of the Trojan Horse, bribery of his enemy and the drift to Sicily, the Life of Camillus alludes directly to Achilles: 'just like Achilles'. At the same time, the structure of the Life of Themistocles echoes the legends of Odysseus, while the Life of Camillus is similarly modelled on the acts of Achilles. The Life of Themistocles highlights the battle of Salamis during which his tricks are emphasized, while one third of his Life is devoted to his romantic wandering, with episodes that suggest the Odysseus legends, as when Themistocles presents himself unidentified at Court. The Life of Camillus includes some stories that call the Iliad to mind, such as his absence from the battlefield, the plight of his country and eventual victory following his return; we may note especially that during the Gallic invasion Camillus became angry and cursed the Romans, a curse overheard by a god who exacts due punishment, an episode which is totally absent in Livy. Why did Plutarch model Themistocles on Odysseus and Camillus on Achilles? We can suggest three motives: (1) to illuminate their fundamental characters, (2) to compact each Life by extracting the specific heroic elements, (3) to make two Lives a single unit by means of contrast.

抄録全体を表示

Studiando il canto 26mo dell' Inferno, non mi e mai sembrato che ci fosse un vero contrasto, fra l' Ulisse della tradizione classica, cambiato in fiamma, pre avere istigato il tranello del cavallo di Troia e la confessione che Ulisse stesso fa, raccontando la storia del suo naufragio. che secondo Dante e anche la causa della sua discesa nell' Inferno. Alcuni commentatori troppo abituati a leggere la Divina Commedia, come un racconto oggettivo di un viaggio immaginario del poeta, che una esperienza intima esistenziale di Dante, hanno sentito il contrasto, e per spiegarlo hanno dovuto ricorrere all' ormai troppo vecchio strattagemma, di dividere la personalita del poeta in due, facendolo giudicare alcune volte come poeta ed altre come teologo. Secondo me, Ulisse, che non e altro che un simbolo, per Dante, simbolo di un male da evitare, comincia con insegnare inganni e termina ingannando se stesso, attribuendosi falsamente, e qui l' inganno, la forza di poter sorpassare i limiti fissati dagli Dei.La confidenza esagerata, frutto del successo avuto ingannando gli altri, lo conduce naturalmente ad avere una tale fiducia nel potere della sua intelligenza da osare persino di sorpassare i limiti fissati da Dio.Mi sembra dunque, che il secondo Ulisse non sia che una conclusione logica del primo, perche infondo fra il primo Ulisse, quello della tradizione classica, ed il secondo quello inventato da Dante, c' e la medesima relazione di quella che esiste fra causa ed effetto, e chi oserebbe vedere un solo contrasto anche se non contradizione, fra la causa e l' effetto ?

抄録全体を表示

In the scene of the bow contest in Book 21 of the Odyssey, several questions are raised, among which are why Telemachus joined the contest for choosing the husband of Penelope, and what he really means by his speech at 21. 113-7. It is the aim of this paper to consider how the motif (story pattern) of "the conflict between father and son" is working behind this scene, and how the poet of the Odyssey incorporated this motif into his story. In the first section, the characterisation of Telemachus is looked at. The main feature of his identity that is given emphasis is the son who is like his father. In the first four books of the Odyssey, the emphasis is on the similarity of his appearance to his father, as Telemachus is still a powerless youth at this stage. But at the same time, it is hinted at that he is to become a true hero like his father. Viewed from this context, the narrative that he could have strung his father's bow if Odysseus had not given a warning nod and stopped him (Od. 21. 128-9) shows that Telemachus is now similar to his father in power as well. Since no proof of identification is shown to Telemachus for him to recognise Odysseus, this episode functions as a proof of their identity as father and son; stringing his father's bow would be the most definite demonstration of their similarity. In the second section, Telemachus' speech (21. 113-7) is examined, where he talks of the reason for his joining the contest. The ambiguities in his speech are (1) whether ου (115) should be taken with μοι αχνυμενω (115) or with λειποι (116); and (2) what αεθλια (117) actually means. On the first point, it is concluded that ου (115) goes with λειποι (116), and on the second, it is argued that αεθλια (117) denotes "the prize" instead of "the contest" or "the weapon". Thus Telemachus joins the contest in order to gain Penelope and the kingship of Ithaca. The third section points out the reasons why the motif of father-son conflict could have intruded into this epic. The relevant factors are: (1) the poet's knowledge of the episode in the Telegony, in which Odysseus is killed by his son by accident; (2) the close contact between the Trojan and Theban epic cycles, as is shown by mention of Teiresias (Od. 11. 90-151) and Oedipus (Il. 23. 679-80; Od. 11. 271-80), in which the motif of father-son conflict is the basic pattern of the story; (3) the parallel relationship of Telemachus and Telegonus to Odysseus; (4) the widespread motif of father-son conflict throughout the Indo-European world. Thus, in this scene of the bow contest, the poet of the Odyssey seems to have alluded to the story of Odysseus' death by his own son, but also presents us with the new relationship between father and son, narrating Telemachus' acceptance of his father's warning nod. This interpretation of their momentary crisis and reconciliation well explains the episode of the two eagles, who come flying close together and depart in the same way, but in the meantime harm each other (Od. 2. 146-56). Although this episode has been regarded as difficult to interpret, it fits well with the situation of Odysseus and Telemachus at the bow contest; the son is now equivalent in strength to his father, which might cause dangerous tension between them, but they are reconciled at once and establish a new relationship. In this way, the motif of father-son conflict seems to underlie the bow contest scene.

抄録全体を表示

The author has inquired into the implications and functions of απατη and δολοζ in Hom, by examining their usage in their context Among the four examples of απατη in Il we first scrutinize the one in B (114) Agamemnon says to the Greeks that Zeus, who had once promised him the sack of Troy, has now devised κακη απατη in bidding him retreat to Argos in disgrace (the same lines are repeated in I) In these scenes as well as in the one in 0 where Zeus warns Hera against απατη, the deed is not of human agency, but divine This is true as well in the case in Δ 168 where the word apparently refers to the truce-breaking of Pandarus, which is in fact instigated by Athena It should also be remembered that Zeus' απατη in B and I is depicted as ατη from Agamemnon's point of view In Od, on the other hand, the word appears only once in ν, and here it is applied to a human being, Odysseus, who is praised by Athena for this quality Through investigation it is proved that the same holds true of the derivatives of απατη (απαταω, εξαπαταω, απατηλιοζ, απατηλοζ), in Il they refer to divine deeds or to human deeds resulting from divine intervention, whereas in Od they depict or relate to human actions which in most cases are characteristic of the persons concerned and often have much to do with the development of the story Remarkable is the difference in the frequency of the use of δολοζ between Il and Od, i e 11 times in the former versus 32 times in the latter In Il, except for two scenes where gods' actions are mentioned (Hera's in O and Apollo's in Φ), the word is found only in small episodes and digressions which are of little or no importance in the plot In this respect Od is rather different from Il Firstly, in Od the word is used mostly to describe the tactics of human beings , the only exceptions are in the "Ares-Aphrodite song", the "Kirke-story", a small episode in δ and Odysseus' lamentation in e Secondly, δολοζ as a human strategy is generally significant in the narrative, e g in the case of Penelope it stands for the "Scheme of Weaving", in that of Aigisthus-Klytaimnestra for the "Murder of Agamemnon" and in that of Telemachus for "Vengeance upon the suitors" These repetitions of the word δολοζ, pointing up "contrasts" and "parallels" between different characters, including of course Odysseus himself, must have contributed much to the audience's appreciation of the orally recited poem Thirdly, the word is employed effectively to delineate the characters of the persons concerned The derivatives of δολοζ, as well as ψευδοζ and its derivatives, are morefrequently and significantly applied in Od than in Il Striking is the equivalency of "δολω" and "αμφαδον" in the advice given by Athena and Teiresias (α 296 a= λ 120 a) Here can be seen quite another norm of moral values than that in Il (cf H 243) As observed also from Athena's applause of Odysseus in ν where the goddess places the hero on a par with herself by using the "dual-number" (296 f), the words απατη and δολοζ in Od are not tinged with a negative import but generally with a rather positive one Nevertheless δολοζ may be regarded as having a negative implication when its agents, like Aigisthus and Clytaimnestra, are devoid of the virtues of patience and self-possession It is indeed with these virtues that Odysseus and Penelope resort to δολοζ, especially the former who, by being πολυτλαζ and πολυμητιζ, succeeded not only in reestablishing his status in Ithaka but also in establishing himself as a "hero" entirely different from Achilleus in Il

抄録全体を表示

The author has tried to examine the Nausicaa scene in ζ, in order to interpret her function in the narrative as well as to explore the poet's elaboration of her description. In the interventions of the Homeric gods we can generally recognize "a pattern" : the narration of their approach to the human world, their appearance and removal from the scene. In addition to these, the motifs of transformation and sleep(or mist)are remarkable where Athena helps and advises throughout the Odyssey. Considering these elements, her entrance at the beginning of the Nausicaa episode is a "typical" one. The process of acquaintance between Nausicaa and Odysseus and the growth of her goodwill towards him is prepared by the goddess at every stage 25f., 1121, 139f., and especially, 229f. after which she not only introduces herself but also gives him detailed advice. Here we should remember that the goddess' help and advice are given only to the main characters in the Odyssey. Her maiden beauty is fully depicted in the simile of φοινικο&b.sigmav; νεον ερνο&b.sigmav;(162 f.)as well as in 15f., 102f., and 0 457. Her inner excellence is also noteworthy; even before the unclothed foreigner she is wise enough to judge his personality from his words(187 f.). Her prudence is to be seen in her manner of leading him to the city(257 f.) , which will ward off the gossip of those whom she calls CnrspcpiaAoi (274) , while nevertheless judging their assumptions to be not unfounded (286 f.). Above all, shyness characterizes her(66). Only indirectly in the form of an imaginary rumour can she reveal her name to the hero(276f.). Though she seems rather affected towards him(239 f.) , she bids a brief but impressive farewell(461 f.). Such a farewell is also possible because they have not fallen in love with each other (cf. ε 203 f). Now she stands before him as a trial, a trial of a kind he has never experienced. He has to gain her advice, as well as food and clothes, to make his homecoming possible. Thus he gives his most eloquent speech in the entire Odyssey(149 f). The simile of the lion(130 f.) could be interpreted as preparing this demonstration of his uflTis, i.e., to introduce his apicrTEicc. He has so far been "a hero in a fairy tale" in finding his way out of danger, but is here confronted with a "realistic" trial, which leads by means of her gift of clothes to another trial in the Phaeacian court; both trials seem to make him ready for those to come in Ithaca. We should also like to note 230-4, 235b=ψ 157-61, 162b. In ψ Athena beautifies him before he is recognized by Penelope, in ζ the goddess does the same before he is received by the princess(which results in the first step of his success in homecoming)-both groups of the verses, so to speak, are preludes to the climaxes of the former and the latter half of the story respectively(cf. Athena's influence on both through dreams, the motif of marriage in both cases). Through the elaborate portrayal of Nausicaa the poet seems to have tried to represent an ideal of maidenhood.

抄録全体を表示

本論は,民話から詩的にすぐれた叙事詩が創作されている実態を,『オデュッセイア』におけるぺネロペイアの再婚問題に関連して,見ていくものである.ただし,本論においては,妻の婚礼をあつかった説話として,民話のみならず文学的水準がそれほど高くない叙事詩をも,『オデュッセイア』との比較の対象にしている.

抄録全体を表示

Excavated wrecks of ancient Mediterranean ships revealed technical methods of Mediterranean shipbuilding Among them was the so-called "shell-first method" with which modern Western Europe had not been at all familiar By the "shell-first method" they erected first a strong shell of planks by jointing edges together closely with mortises and tenons and then inserted a complete set of frames to stiffen the shell tight The constructing procedure is quite the reverse of the traditional European so-called "skeleton-first method" The discovery of the "shell-first method" brought a new phase in the interpretation of classical literary texts the passage Odyssey 5 234-61 that has puzzled classical scholars turns out to be explicable Odysseus builds his σχεδια with mortises and tenons by the "shell-first method" Carefully reading the passage with the eye of a shipbuilder, I suggest his σχεδια is not a raft, but a real boat and build a tentative model Rudimentary as it is, it is built firmly enough to be seaworthy But for the intervention of Poseidon, Odysseus could have arrived safe at Ithaca by this boat The new findings enabled the project team to reconstruct the Athenian trireme Olympias, too Many specialists in archaeology, nautical history, classical studies and maritime engineering engaged in the reconstruction project found that the υποζωματα previously believed to be outside the hull were inside The υποζωματα are listed in the Piraeus naval inventories and seem to be very important hanging-gear of the triremes, but we have no further prescription in the inventories about how and where they were fitted Relevant passages in the literature are few except Plato's Republic and Laws So far classical scholars had speculated that the υπρζωματα were fitted round outside the hull, but this is overturned by the "inside" theory of the reconstruction project team However, a doubt remains The υποζωματα in the tenth book of the Republic have an important function, being compared to the band of light holding the universe together The light seems to pass not only through the center of the Universe, but also, since it holds the heaven together, round the outer surface of the heavenly sphere In the Acts also, when the freighter St Paul is boarding meets a storm, ropes undergirding(υποζωννυντεζ)the ship are used These ropes seem to be outside the hull In the Argonautica, the Argonauts in launching the Argo strongly gird the ship with a well twisted rope This rope can be recognized as a υποζωμα and must have been outside the hull Moreover in some passages of the Odyssey and the Trojan Women, there are ropes recognizable as υποζωματα girding round outside the hull lengthwise from stem to stern It can be safely said that the "inside" theory of the reconstruction team does not always hold I test it by reappraising as much relevant literature and as many iconographical representations as possible

抄録全体を表示

Circe is given much weight in the Apologoi of the Odyssey ; she occupies approximately four-fifths of Bk. 10 and one-third of Bk. 12. The goddess makes her appearance in two sequences : the first runs from 10. 133 to 486, and the second from 10. 487 to 574 and from 12. 1 to 150. In terms of plot the importance of the Circe-episodes derives mainly from the latter one, in which she provides Odysseus with an instruction to pay a visit to Hades and practical advice to cope with the risks awaiting him on his homeward journey. It is often pointed out that 10. 487 to 574 and 12. 1 to 150 are tightly connected with Bk. 11 and Bk. 12 respectively, and that her warnings, in constructing a framework for his adventure in Bk. 12, associate the episode with the story of the Argo. In comparison with the latter, the former one, at first sight, seems to have nothing to do with the development of the entire narrative. However, it contains the impressive episode of the transformation of Odysseus' companions into swine by Circe. A careful scrutiny of the first Circe-episode will reveal that it is tightly incorporated into the rest of the narrative and the motif of transformation foreshadows Odysseus' disguise in Bk. 13. The first clue to clarify a firm link between her first sequence and other books is to be gained from an extraordinary resemblance between Circe and her doublet in Bk. 5, Calypso. It is true that both goddesses are exactly like each other, but Circe does not display these similarities in both of the Circe-episodes. It is only in the first of her episodes that one finds not only affinities in the environments surrounding the goddesses, but also much of the same diction is used to describe them. Their relationship is often discussed by the critics : which of them was modeled on the other. There has been the same kind of argument over Odysseus' visit to Hades in Bk. 11 and Menelaus' trip to Pharos in Bk. 4. Both journeys are based on the same narrative pattern, and one of them is said to be derived from the other. It is remarkable that the doublets in terms of characters are placed in Bk. 5 and the first Circe-episode, and the doublets in terms of plot are presented in Bk. 4 and the second Circe-episode. It means that two different kinds of doublets are repeated in successive books and the Circe-episodes. Polyphemus provides a second clue. His story in Bk. 9 has its origin in folktales, just as Circe's does. Both stories show a close affinity in narrative sequence ; many of the same details in the stories are arranged in identical order. Besides, the scenes of Polyphemus and those of Circe share a peculiar feature of deceit, which is not found in ordinary hospitality scenes in the Odyssey. A third similarity between their stories can be found in the manner both hosts recognize Odysseus' identity : they recall a prophecy told beforehand. The first Circe-episode serves to make the hero's character clear. The appearance of the huge stag preceding the transformation scene reminds us of Odysseus as a stout warrior in the heroic world by means of diction used in typical battle scenes in the Iliad. The process of his encounter with Circe sheds light upon his awakening consciousness as a leader of a group. At the same time, the diction describing the parallel situations of Odysseus' and his companions' encounters with her gives a contrastive illustration of his superiority to them. The motif of transformation in the first Circe-episode comes originally from a folktale, but magical elements peculiar to fairy stories are reduced to a minimum in the Homeric epic. His manner of dealing with the motif is innovative, in that the transformation of Odysseus' companions by Circe realizes the function of foreshadowing the essential device of his disguise as an old beggar in Bk. 13. Although his disguise does not coincide in every respect with the

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示