Homeric and Attic Use of the Article

Book Nav

main

264. β0meric and Attic Article. After the account given in the preceding 5ἢ of the Homeric uses of the Article it is hardly necessary to show in detail where they diβfer from the corresponding uses in Attic Greek. VW hat ςwe have chiefΠy to observe is that the diference is often greater in reality than it appears to be at first sight. Familiar as vwe are with the defining Article of modern languages, and of Attic Greek, we naturally import it into Homer whenever it is not made impos- sible by the context. But even when a Homeric use falls under the general head of the 'defining Articleb (5 261), the eβfect is perceptibly different from that of the ' Definite Articleb propery so called. In Homer the Article indicates, not that a person or thing is a known or definite one, but that it iω presented to μua in an antiteςiς or contrast. Obects so contrasted are usually definite, in the sense that they are already knovwn or suggested by the context : and hence the readiness ςwith which the ater defining sense can be applied to passages in Homer. Thus αὐτὰρ ὅ γʼ ἥρως can usually be translated ὁt re ἄerο (before πmentiοnead), as though ὸ distinguished him from other heroes. But ςwhen ςwe find that αὐτὰρ ὁ in Homer constantly means bμut ἄε, or νt the οt2er, and that it may be fooςwed by an epexegetic Noαn (as αὐτὰρ ὁ βοῦν ἱέρευσεν ἄναξ ἀνδρῶν Ἀγαμέμνων), ςwe see that ὁ is- more important than a mere Article, is in fact a Substantival Pronoun, to which ἥρως is added as a kind of epithet-ὁut ἄε tἄe 2erο.

This point has been explained inn connexion with the use of the Attributive Article, 0 259, α. br may be further illustrated from instances in which the Article marks contrast, but ποί dgίnitiοn, and consequently cannot be translated by tao. Such are :

- ll. 15. 65πολέας ὀλέσαντʼ αἰζηοὺς τοὺς ἄλλους, μετὰ δʼ υἱὸν ἐμὸν 2δαρπηδόνα δῖον not re οtaerς, but οtἄerς as weίί, certain οtἀerς. Π. 5. 672 ἦ προτέρω Διὸς υἱὸν ἐριγδούποιο διόκοι, ἦ ὅ γε τῶν πλεόνων Λυκίων ἀπὸ θυμὸν ἕλοιτο or aἀοud taὲe re tiνes of πιοre bγcianς instead. Here οἱ πλέονες does not mean ' the greater number,' but b a greater number7 in contrast to the one person mentioned. Il. 22. 162 ὡς δʼ δι’ ἀεθλοφόροι περὶ τέρματα μώνυχες ἵπποι ῥίμφα μάλα τρωχῶσι· τὸ δὲ μέγα κεῖται ἄεθλον aπnd tἄere a great ρτi2e lies τeadγ. So Od. 20. 242 αὐτὰρ ὁ Il. Il. ὄρνις bνut a ὁird. The same thing is shοςwn by μνηστήρων τῶν μὲν κτλ. (ἢ 259, ὁ). Ibt is evident that τῶν is used, not because the suitors are definite persons, but because a contrast is made by μέν.

The same remark applies to the use ςwith Adjectives (ἢ 260), especially to the use by which they are turned into Substantives, as τὸ κρήγυον, τὰ κακά. Ihn Homer τὰ κακά is said because in the particular context κακά eνitσ are opposed to ροοd. In Attic τὰ κακά or τὸ κακόν implies that evils form a casς of thing6, distinguished from all other things. This again is a difference, which does not come out in translating Homer, and is therefore apt to be overlooked.

The use with Cardinal Numerals (ἢ 260, c) is to be simiarly explained. br is not pecαliar to Homer, but is regular in Attic also, vwhere it may be regarded as a survival of the Homeric use ob the Article.

The use of the Art. in Hesiod shovws some advance. Thus the use to form a cἰαss is no onger confined to the case of a particular contrast given in the context: Op. 280 τὰ δίκαιʼ ἀγορεῦσαι, hp. 353 τὸν φιλέοντα φιλεῖν καὶ τῷ προσιόντι προσεῖναι. The use vwith Adverbs is commoner, Op. 35 τὸ θύρηφιν, hp. 457 τῶν πρόσθεν. The Prepositional phrase in p. 364 τὸ ἐν οἴκῳ κατακεί- μενον is quite postHomeric. The same may be said of the b articularb Iknf. in p. 314 τὸ ἔργάζεσθαι ἄμεινον (ὁ 259, 3). Ll vwi be found that the Art. occurs nearly t2wice as often in Hesiod as in Homer.

It is a further question, and one that cannot be foully ddiscussed here, 2whether any uses of the Article found in our text of the Hind and Odyssey are post-Homeric, and evidence of a later origin of the books or passagges vwhere they occur. Ti swill be seen that in the case of the uses vwhhich have been noticed as rare or exceptional most of the examples come from books ix, 2, xxiii, and xxiv. See especially the uses treated of in 5 260 f,g, and 261, 3- Others again seem to belong to the Odyssey ; see 261, 3, and cp. § 259, 2- The use of the Article in the 10th book of the lied seems clearl y later than in any other part of Homer: e.g.- Il. 10. 97 δεῦρʼ ἐς τοὺς φύλακας καταβήομεν. 277 χαῖρε δὲ τῷ ὄρνιθ’ Oδυσεύς. 322 μὲν τοὺς ἵππους τε καὶ ἄρματα κτλ.(so 330). 40β πῶς δʼ αἱ τῶν ἄλλαν ράῶαν φυλακαί aκτλ.

Also πεδίον τὸ Γραωκόν (v. 11), ὁ τλήμαωνν Oδυσεύς (v. 231, 498), τὴννύκτα (V. 497). So in the Catalogue of the Ships vwe have 9άμυριν τὸν Sρήκα (. 2. 595), and τὸ Πελασγικὸν Ἀργὸς (2. 681).