[35-6] Epic Poems of Non-traditional Style

7TPWTOV '03vC1crija yAaif)Vpfjs iK II1'/OS aELpaV

oi 3f XfY'IftaT' ifta yAaif)Vpfjs iK II1'/OS £A6vTES

The fact that vija Oo�v is found several times in Homer, as in ApoUonius,
at the beginning of the line and before the hephthemimeral caesura, may
be oflittle importance, since it may be the result of a coincidence. On the
other hand, it should be pointed out that some of the lines in ApoUonius
containing this or another epithet of VY}vs have a complex word order in
which the relative positions of noun and epithet are such as we should
never find in Homer :

i. 1 328 7Topif")PEOV, KotA,,!V Of 3'f, dAos EKAvC1E vfja

i. 855 �W8EV Of 80fjs 7TPVftV�C1La AVETE v,,!6s

We should also observe the absence of the most common formula

types of the Iliad and Otfyssey, those which exactly fill the space between
a caesura and either the beginning or the end of the line. But although we
thus find no direct imitation of Homer in the case of some of these epi­
thets, it is none the less quite evident that expressions containing KOL�T/,
y�acPvp�, and Oo� in ApoUonius are inspired by reminiscences of his
predecessor. Only EV(J'TELPT/S (once), LEP� (once), and )tPYWLT/S (twice),
words which could stand as epithets of no ship other than the Argo, seem
to be due to the originality ofApollonius. As far as epithets are concerned,
the Rhodian poet created little or nothing that we can regard as a tech­
nique of diction.

§ 2. THE USE OF T H E E P I T H E T I N T H E AENEID

We could deal more easily with the point in question if we had some
hexameters written by a Greek poet who did not know Homer; but there
undoubtedly never was such a poet. The best way, therefore, of deter­
mining to what point the originality of a poet who did not have Homer as
a model could have I created a technique of diction, is a study of the
Aeneid or of another Latin poem in hexameters. To be sure, the Roman
poets, and not least Virgil, were familiar with Homer ; but his particular
style and expressions do not easily admit of exact imitation in another
language.
The name Aeneas is used by Virgil with and without epithet in the
foUowing proportions :1

I The figures for the names Aeneas, Achates, and Turnus are based on the index o f names in
O. Ribbeck's edition of Virgil, Leipzig 1867; those for navis are based on the uxicon zu
Vergilius by Merguet, Leipzig 1907.
30 The Traditional Epithet in Homer [j6-7]

with with no
epithetic word epithetic word
Aeneas 49 1 03
Aeneae (gen.) 3 18
Aeneae (dat.) 3 10
Aenean 5 30
Aenea (ab!.) 3
Aenea (voc.) 2 8
62 172

Inscius (vi. 711), ignarus (x. 25, x. 85), hospitis (vii. 463),jerus (iv. 466),
[aetum (vii. 288), andjatalem (xi. 232), are all too particularized to count
as ornamental epithets. Virgil is closer to Homer than Apollonius in the
frequency with which he uses the epithet here. Aeneas is accompanied by
an epithet one half as often as ·08vaaEv�.
The cases listed in the following table as without epithet include
occurrences of the word navis with tarda (v. 280), solitae (ii. 462),Jessas (i.
1 68, v. 29), these being too particularized to be ornamental. With this
word Virgil uses an epithet even less often than does Apollonius with
VTJV�:I I
with with no
epithetic word epithetic word
Navis
Navis
Navem 5
Naves
Navis 19
Navibus 9
3 38

Without dwelling on the obvious fact that Roman poetry owes its entire
conception of the epithet to Greek poetry, we can see the direct influence
of Homer in the epithets used by Virgil with the words in question.
Aeneas Anchisiades in the line

vii. 52I Aeneas Anchisiades et fidus Achates

shows memory of the Homeric lines
I To be exact, Homer has an epithet with �1Jii> between 6 and 7 times as often as Virgil
has with navis.
[37-8] Epic Poems of Non-traditional Style
P 754 Alv£Las 'T' J1YXLUtl101/S Ka� q,aLoLILos 'EK'TWP
Y 160 Alvdas 'T' J1YXLuLao1/S Ka� oios J1xw\An$s

Magnanimum (i. 260, ix. 204) may be derived from ILEY&'(}V}LoS, but it is
more likely an exact reminiscence of }LEyaM/,ropos AlvEtao which appears
four times in Homer. Magnus (x. 159), magni (x. 830) seem to have been
inspired by Homer's frequent use of }LEyaS. Aeneas heros (vi. 1 03) can be
compared with A�L'TOS' 7JPwS' (Z 35), T7JU}LaxoS' () 7JPwS' (8 2 1 , 303),
'

II7JvE>'Ewv () 7Jpwa (N 92), etc.

'

Bonus (v. 770, xi. 1 06) could have been suggested by aya(}oS' ; but if it
was, we should have to suppose that the Roman poet badly misunder­
stood this epic word, attributing to it the moral sense which it bore in the
Greek language of his own I time. When the poet uses bonus in these two
cases, he is thinking of the kindness which his hero was wont to show. It
may be better to consider this an original idea. Even if he owes a portion
of his epithets to Homer, Virgil attained in the choice of some of these
words that originality which makes of his poem much more than a mere
Roman version of the Iliad and the OdySSf)'. The expressions pius Aeneas ( 1 7
times) and pater Aeneas ( 1 6 times) derive from the most profoundly
original aspect of Virgil's thought.
Thus we find in the Aeneid a not infrequent use of non-traditional
epithets ; but this leaves us very far from finding in it what could be called
a system. There is not, in Virgil, the necessary variety of expressions
designed to serve in different parts of the line; and what is yet more
conclusive, there is an abundance of expressions identical both in metre
and in sense. Pius Aeneas and pater Aeneas are of like metrical value, and if
we regard the Virgilian epithet as a true ornamental word, we must
conclude that their sense is the same.
The expression pius Aeneas most often begins in the first foot. We find

At pius Aeneas (4 times)

Turn pius Aeneas (4 times)
quam pius Aeneas (twice)
quem pius Aeneas (once)
hoc pius Aeneas (once)
quid pius Aeneas (once)
sum pius Aeneas (once)

It also occurs in two other positions :

praecipue pius Aeneas (twice)
actutum pius Aeneas (once)
vii. 5 At pius exsequiis Aeneas rite solutis
32 The Traditional Epithet in Homer
Pater Aeneas, being of the same metrical value and beginning in the
same way with a single consonant, does nothing to facilitate versifica­
tion : I it only makes possible a series of expressions similar to those listed
just above :
At pater Aeneas (4 times)
Turn pater Aeneas (twice)
quos pater Aeneas (once)
hinc pater Aeneas (once)
iam pater Aeneas (twice)
et pater Aeneas (once)
huc pater Aeneas (once)
cum pater Aeneas (once)
sic pater Aeneas (once)
Bonus occupies the same position, and has the same metrical value :

quos bonus Aeneas (twice)

Note finally that Tros in Tros Aeneas (xii. 723) could be replaced by
pius or pater or bonus.
The other expressions containing Aeneas in the nominative with an
epithetic word of different metrical value from those listed above are :

i. 59b Troius Aeneas, Libycis ereptus ab undis

vi. 1 03 Incipit Aeneas heros: non ulla laborum
viii. 521 Aeneas Anchisiades et fidus Achates
x. 1 59 hie magnus sedet Aeneas secumque volutat
xii. 938-9 stetit acer in armis
Aeneas, volvens oculos, dextramque repressit
iX·40-1 namque ita discedens praeceperat optimus armis
Aeneas

Thus out of 41 cases in which an epithetic word is used with Aeneas in

the nominative, 35 exhibit an epithet of the measure �, and in 3 1 the
�

whole expression has the measure - - -, and begins in the first foot.
� �

A comparison with the series of noun-epithet formulae on Table I (TE,

p. 39) will show the difference between the style ofVirgil, who I employs
the epithet solely as an artifice of style, and Homer, whose use of the
epithet is guided by his desire to make versification easier. In the case of
certain names, which occur less frequently in the Iliad and Odyssey com­
bined than does Aeneas in the Aeneid, it can be observed that the majority
of noun-epithet expressions containing them are of the same metrical
value with formula types which we can call principal, on the grounds
that they are by far the most common. The metre of all these formula
types is such as to fill the space between a caesura and the beginning or
 Epic Poems of Non-traditional Style 33
end of the line, so that they can be switched about III the manner
described in the preceding chapter. Thus we find :

formulae of
principal types other measures
Aeneas ( 1 52 times in the Aeneid) 2 39
7!fYTI' (43 times in Homer) 15 12
L1tofL�S'1/' (42 times in Homer) 34 7
ityafLtfLvwv (100 times in Homer) 63 15
it1T6Mwv (II I times in Homer) 51 15
Ntu'Twp (55 times in Homer) 32 7

In two cases Virgil uses for Aeneas a noun-epithet expression extending

exactly from a caesura to one of the extremities of the line. One of
these is the expression Aeneas Anchisiades, borrowed from Homer, which
leaves only the expression Troius Aeneas as more or less the product
of the poet's originality. Without these principal formula types, it is
hardly possible to set up a system offormulae. Undoubtedly the formula­
series at pius Aeneas, turn pius Aeneas, etc., and at pater Aeneas, turn pater
Aeneas, etc., were helpful to Virgil in his versification ; we can be certain
that their frequent use was in part determined by their convenience. But
if these formulae, all of the same metrical value, attest the influence of
verse on style, they still do not constitute of themselves a system. I
Another indication of the absence in Virgil of anything that might
constitute a system of noun-epithet formulae is the presence of formulae
alike both in metre and in sense. For a single noun in Homer, there are
sometimes noun-epithet formulae which are metrically the same ; e.g.
B£a '\£VKW,\£VO' "Hp'Y/ along with {3owm. 1T6'TVLa "Hp'Y/, etc., cases which
themselves can be explained by the influence of metre (cf. Chap. V). But
these cases are exceedingly few in comparison with the number of unique
noun-epithet formulae, and they almost invariably shqw either an epithet
borrowed from another formula in which its metre makes it indispensable,
or an epithet that can be applied to any noun of a given category. Many
heroes, as we know, make their appearance in Homer ; and yet there is
but one case in which two noun-epithet formulae of a single hero which
have the same metrical value both contain an epithet peculiar to that
hero : 1To8clpK'Y/S'
• J4XL'\'\£vS' '" 1To8wK'Y/S' . . . J4XL'\'\£V. (cf. TE, p. 1 78).
• .

Whereas in Virgil we find that four epithets peculiar to Aeneas have the
same metrical value : pater, pius, Tros, and bonus. The influence of metre in
epic style on the one hand determined the abundance of noun-epithet
formulae, as we have had occasion to point out ; but on the other hand, it
S141S15 D
34 The Traditional Epithet in Homer
determined a rigorous simplicity for the whole set of these formulae,
excluding with very few exceptions any formula which might match
another in both sense and metre. Thus of the 723 formulae indicated on
Table I (TE, p. 39) , only 8 1 show the same metrical value as another
noun-epithet formula used for the same person. When we compare with
these figures the proportion of equivalent formulae for Aeneas-of 4 1
noun-epithet formulae in the nominative case, 3 9 repeat the metrical
value of others-we find a proportion so different as to make plain that it
would be impossible to establish, in terms of the noun-epithet formulae of
Aeneas, a system characterized at once by great extension and great
simplicity.
A comparison of a different sort between the works of Virgil and of
Homer will demonstrate with equal certainty that the former poet uses
the epithet for reasons entirely apart from convenience of versification. It
makes little difference to Homer I if he uses a greater or smaller number
of epithets with the names of his several heroes. Epithets being for him
no more than a device to facilitate the handling of nouns, the frequency
with which he uses them with a particular noun will be a function of the
metrical value of the latter. Epithets can be of service to the poet in the
disposition of some names. They may be less useful to him, and even an
encumbrance, in the case of others. For example, epithets are used in
Homer with the nominatives of a number of names whose measure is
� - - in fairly constant proportion :

with epithet without epithet proportion

'08VUUEV<; 202 1 83 1 :0·8
J481}v7] 1 39 105 1 :0·8
J41T6'\'\wv 66 45 1 :0' 7
J4X"UE"v<; 1 02 83 1 :0·8

Similarly, the proportions are generally the same for the use of
epithets with names whose metrical value is .1 __

I The name NEUTWP, which appears with epithet in a proportion quite different from that
of other names of heroes of the same metrical value, is a good example of why we must not lose
sight of the action of the poem when we make numerical comparisons; and at the same time
it shows us how rough these comparisons are. This name is used 39 times with epithet and 13
times without, a proportion of 1 : 3. The explanation for this unusual proportion is not far to
seek. Nestor is most likely to be mentioned under circumstances requiring him to address an
assembly or in some way or other to give advice. Thus ofthe 52 times that the name N'UTWp
appears, it is found 21 times at the end of a line announcing the beginning of a speech; and
the subject expression of such lines, as we have shown, regularly consists of a noun-epithet
formula. Had the lord of the Pylians been less of an orator, he would doubtless have received
fewer epithets.
 Epic Poems of Non-traditional Style 35

with epithet without epithet proportion

"HpY"J 47 1 :0·8
"EKTWP 87 1 : 0 ·9
Ai'as 43 I: I

For names whose measure is � � - -, the proportion changes radically,

because these words do not need epithets :

with epithet without epithet proportion

)tyafl-'/LVWV 78 22 1 :0·3
Lho/L�SY"Js 41 1 :0·03
M£v£Aaos 86 19 1 :0·2

Names of metrical value - �� - show a different proportion:

with epithet without epithet proportion

'ISo/L£v£vs I: 1 ·7
MY"JPLf�V7JS I: 1 ·6

Finally, the proportions of the use of epithets with names of the same
metrical value with Aeneas are consistent among themselves, but at
vanance with the proportions found for names of different metrical
value :
with epithet without epithet proportion
Alv£las 5 26 1 :5"2
llaTpoKAos 5 39 1 :7.8
.Eap7TTJS<!JV 5 11 1 :2·2
"Hg,aLfTTos 4 20 I : 1 ·5

The proportion of the use of epithets with Aeneas in Virgil is 41 : I I I , or

1 :2·7. If we remember what has already been explained, that a small
discrepancy in proportions is not an important factor, we may be led to
conclude that this proportion is virtually the same with that of names of
like measure in Homer. But the fact that this proportion holds only I for
the protagonist of the Aeneid shows us how Virgil made a point of using
epithets in the very situation where Homer, whose guide was facility of
versification, used them least. The case of the name Tumus, for example,
gives us an indication of the normal use of the epithet in Virgilian
 The Traditional Epithet in Homer
style. The Rutulian warrior's name is found 58 times in the nomina­
tive, and on two occasions only is it accompanied by a word which could
be classed as an ornamental epithet.! The conclusion is only too obvious.
Where Virgil did not use the epithet by way of exception, as in the case
of Aeneas and Achates, he hardly made use of it at all. Inspired by his
reading of the Iliad and the Otfyssey, the Roman poet wished to endow
Aeneas with ornamental words analogous to those possessed by the heroes
of Homer. He did not appreciate, or even suspect, that the use of these
words depended on the help they provide in the handling of names ; and
so he did without them in the case of Turnus, where they would have been
of great service, and used them abundantly with Aeneas, where they were
less advantageous for the making of verse.
1 Dux (ix. 28), princeps (ix. 535) ; ingms (xii. 927), Turnus' third epithet, cannot be orna­
mental.