¹ All dates are BCE. Translations (often adapted) are taken from Lattimore, R., The Iliad of Homer (Chicago 1951)Google Scholar; The Odyssey of Homer (New York 1975)Google Scholar. Earlier versions were presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Ancient Historians in Atlanta in May 1996, in a workshop on ‘Narrating History’ at the University of New England in Armidale in July 1996, at the University of Washington in Seattle and in the ‘George Washington University Seminar for Ancient Mediterranean Cultures’ in Washington DC in October 1996. I thank the participants in these events, especially Victoria Pedrick, as well as Walter Donlan, Greg Stanton and an anonymous referee for useful comments. Deborah and I owe special thanks to the colleagues in Classics in Armidale, especially Minor M. Markle III and Greg Horsley, and the Dean of Arts, Graham Maddox, for offering us a Visiting Fellowship that allowed us to spend unforgettable weeks in their midst in the winter of 1996.

² By ‘Homer’ I mean the poet or poets by whom the extant epics were composed; whether or not these are the works of the same ‘monumental’ poet, they are close enough in time to be considered together. For the date of composition, see below n.29. See Raaflaub, K.A., ‘Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought in Greece’, in The Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 4 (1988) 1–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar (a slightly expanded version in German appeared in HZ 248 [1989] 1–32Google Scholar); ‘Homer und die Geschichte des 8. Jh.s. v. Chr.’, in Latacz, J. (ed.), Zweihundert Jahre Homer-Forschung: Rückblick und Ausblick (Stuttgart 1991) 205-56Google Scholar; ‘Homer to Solon: The Rise of the Polis’, in Hansen, M.H. (ed.), The Ancient Greek City-State (Copenhagen 1993) 41–105Google Scholar; ‘Homeric Society’, in Morris, I. and Powell, B. (eds), A New Companion to Homer (Leiden 1997) 624-48Google Scholar; ‘Soldiers, Citizens, and the Evolution of the Early Greek Polis’, in Mitchell, L. and Rhodes, P.J. (eds), The Development of the Polis in Archaic Greece (London 1997) 49–59Google Scholar; ‘A Historian's Headache: How to Read “Homeric Society”?’ forthcoming in Fisher, N. and van Wees, H. (eds), Archaic Greece: New Approaches and New Evidence (Cardiff and London 1997)Google Scholar.

³ Finley, M.I., The World of Odysseus (London² 1977)Google Scholar, first published in 1954. See also Finley's Presidential Address to the Classical Association (1974), repr. in World, 142-58. On Finley's contribution, see, e.g., Shaw, B.D. and Saller, R.P., ‘Editors' Introduction’, in Finley, Economy and Society in Ancient Greece (New York 1982) ix–xxviGoogle Scholar.

⁴ Finley, World (n.3) 98-9.

⁵ I am aware that terms such as ‘citizen’ or ‘city’ are anachronistic for the period. 1 use them here in a loose, non-technical sense. For bibliography on the question of the historicity of ‘Homeric society’, see nn.26-30 below.

⁶ On the origin of this story, perhaps a Pylian epic, and the location of these actions (not Messenian but Triphylian Pylos, farther north), see Bölte, F., ‘Ein pylisches Epos’, RhM 83 (1934) 319-47Google Scholar; Hainsworth, B., The Iliad: A Commentary 3 (Cambridge 1993) 296-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷ Debt: Il. 11.688 (), cf. 686, 698; Od. 3.367, with West's, S.comment, in Heubeck, A.et al., A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey 1 (Oxford 1988) 183Google Scholar: ‘used especially of the obligation to restore or offer recompense for stolen cattle or other plunder’. Hainsworth, Commentary (n.6) 296 (‘the Epeioi had taken advantage of Pylian weakness to renege on their debts’) seems less plausible.

⁸ Boēlasiē (672), rhysia (674); on the latter, as referring to private rights of reprisal, see Pritchett, W.K., The Greek State at War 5 (Berkeley 1991) 86–116Google Scholar with bibl. 86-7.

⁹ van Wees, H., Status Warriors: War, Violence and Society in Homer and History (Amsterdam 1992) 195-8Google Scholar with references to earlier interpretations.

¹⁰ See (with other examples) Nowag, W., Raub und Beute in der archaischen Zeit der Griechen (Frankfurt am Main 1983), chs. 3–4Google Scholar; Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 207-17Google Scholar; Jackson, A., ‘War and Raids for Booty in the World of Odysseus’, in Rich, J. and Shipley, G. (eds), War and Society in the Greek World (London 1993) 64–76Google Scholar.

¹¹ Bölte, ‘Ein pylisches Epos’ (n.6) 344.

¹² 704-5, that is, not only to Nestor's or other leaders’ own hetairoi vel sim., as one would expect if it had been an act of personal revenge on the part of one or several wronged nobles.

¹³ So too Baltrusch, E., Symmachie und Spondai: Untersuchungen zum griechischen Völkerrecht der archaischen und klassischen Zeit, 8.-5. Jh. v. Chr. (Berlin 1994) 92-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; more generally, Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 191-9Google Scholar.

¹⁴ I do not think these ‘chiefs’ were ‘kings’; on basileis as a ‘proto-aristocratic’ élite and the paramount basileus as a sort of ‘chief’, see the bibl. in Raaflaub, , ‘Homer und die Geschichte’ (n.2) 230-8Google Scholar, esp. Donlan, W., The Aristocratic Ideal in Ancient Greece (Lawrence, Kansas 1980), ch. 1Google Scholar; ‘The Social Groups of Dark Age Greece,’ CP 80 (1985) 293–308Google Scholar; ‘The Relations of Power in the Pre-State and Early State Polities’, in Mitchell, and Rhodes, (n.2) 39–48Google Scholar; Gschnitzer, F., Griechische Sozialgeschichte von der mykenischen bis zum Ausgang der klassischen Zeit (Stuttgart 1981) 38–47Google Scholar; Qviller, B., ‘The Dynamics of the Homeric Society’, SO 56 (1981) 109-55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stein-Hölkeskamp, E., Adelskultur und Polisgesellschaft (Stuttgart 1989), ch. 2Google Scholar; Barceló, P., Basileia, Monarchia, Tyrannis: Untersuchungen zu Entwicklung und Beurteilung von Alleinherrschaft im vorhellenistischen Griechenland (Stuttgart 1993), ch. 3Google Scholar. Carlier, P., La Royauté en Grèce avant Alexandre (Strasbourg 1984), pt. 2, esp. 187Google Scholar, and Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 281-98Google Scholar argue, although with modifications, for the traditional view that they were kings and rulers.

¹⁵ On this scene, see Kirk, G.S., The Iliad: A Commentary 1 (Cambridge 1985) 286-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

¹⁶ On the interpretation of 11.123-4, esp. of as ‘expecting to receive’, see Hainsworth, , Commentary (n.6) 238Google Scholar.

¹⁷ See below n.22.

¹⁸ E.g., Il. 3.46-9, 444; see Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 172-3Google Scholar with references in n.17.

¹⁹ Compensation is mentioned by Agamemnon (Il. 3.285-9, 458-60) and Hector (22.117-21) and presumably taken for granted elsewhere; see Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 382Google Scholar n.28. Contrary to van Wees’ assumption (ibid.), the embassy most likely took place not after the Achaeans landed in Troy but before they even started to prepare seriously for the war.

²⁰ So too Carlier, , Royauté (n.14) 165-72Google Scholar.

²¹ Truce and treaty: p. 24 below. Pandaros’ shot: 4.86 ff. Trojan assembly: 7.345-78. Citizens’ sentiment: 7.389-93 (cited below). Just cause: that Paris’ violation of the rules of hospitality, protected by Zeus and thus by customary law, have given the Achaeans a just cause from the beginning is clear throughout: e.g., Il. 3.351-4; cf. 39-57.

²² Hainsworth, , Commentary (n.6) 298Google Scholar, recognises that the ethos of this tale corresponds to that of Nestor's story. On the relationship between epic and real-life experiences, see Raaflaub, ‘Soldiers’ and ‘Historian's Headache’ (n.2). On the ‘panhellenisation’ of the Trojan War story as a recent (even eighth-century) elaboration, see Patzek, B., Homer und Mykene (Munich 1992), pt. 3CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kullmann, W., ‘Homers Zeit und das Bild des Dichters von den Menschen der mykenischen Kultur’, in Andersen, O. and Dickie, M. (eds), Homer's World: Fiction, Tradition, Reality (Athens 1995) 57–75Google Scholar.

²³ Personal obligations: p. 20 below. Temporary polis: p. 22 below. The ‘Lelantine War’ on Euboea offers a good analogy. More on changing perspectives below at the beginning of section III.

²⁴ See esp. Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 167-82Google Scholar.

²⁵ For discussion, see below at n.61.

²⁶ E.g., Long, A.A., ‘Morals and Values in Homer’, JHS 90 (1970) 121-39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; A. Snodgrass, ‘An Historical Homeric Society?’ ibid. 94 (1974) 114-25; Kirk, G.S., ‘The Homeric Poems as History’, CAH 2.2 (³ 1975) 820-50Google Scholar; Sherratt, E.S., ‘“Reading the Texts”: Archaeology and the Homeric Question’, Antiquity 64 (1990) 807-24CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Cartledge, P., ‘La nascita degli opliti e l'organizzazione militare’, in Settis, S. (ed.), I Greci 2.1 (Turin 1996) 681-714, at 687-8Google Scholar; see also Thomas, C.G., ‘The Homeric Epics: Strata or a Spectrum?’ in H., and Roisman, J. (eds), Essays on Homeric Epic, Colby Quarterly 29.3 (1993) 273-82Google Scholar; Osborne, R., Greece in the Making, 1200–479 BC (London 1996), ch. 5Google Scholar.

²⁷ Finley, World (n.3) 34, 48, 156. Other scholars who think, with Finley, that the oikos ‘was the centre around which life was organized, from which flowed not only the satisfaction of material needs, including security, but ethical norms and values, duties, obligations and responsibilities, social relationships, and relations with the gods’ (ibid. 57), are listed by Scully, S., Homer and the Sacred City (Ithaca, NY 1990) 100Google Scholar (in addition, Rihll, T., ‘“Kings” and “commoners” in Homeric Society’, LCM 11 [1986] 86–91Google Scholar).

²⁸ E.g., Adkins, A.W.H., ‘Homeric Values and Homeric Society’, JHS 91 (1971) 1-14, at 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Donlan, W., ‘Reciprocities in Homer’, CW 75 (1981/1982) 137-75, at 172Google Scholar; ‘The Homeric Economy’, in Morris, and Powell, (n.2) 649-67, at 649Google Scholar; Carlier, P., Royauté (n.14) 211Google Scholar; id., ‘La Procédure de décision politique du monde mycénien à l'époque archaïque’, in Musti, D.et al. (eds), La transizione dal miceneo all'alto arcaismo (Rome 1991) 85-95, at 91Google Scholar; Morris, I., ‘The Use and Abuse of Homer’, CA 5 (1986) 81–138Google Scholar; Herman, G., Ritualised Friendship and the Greek City (Cambridge 1987) xiGoogle Scholar. See now Ulf, C., Die homerische Gesellschaft (Munich 1990)Google Scholar; Patzek, Homer und Mykene (n.22); van Wees, Status Warriors (n.9); Raaflaub, ‘Historian's Headache’ (n.2); ‘Homeric Society’ (n.2) 625-8.

²⁹ Second half 8th cent.: e.g., Kirk, , Commentary (n.15) 1–10Google Scholar; Latacz, J., Homer: His Art and His World (Ann Arbor 1996) 56–65Google Scholar. First half 7th cent.: recently, e.g., Taplin, O., Homeric Soundings (Oxford 1992) 33–5Google Scholar; van Wees (n.9) 54-8; id., ‘The Homeric Way of War’, G&R 41 (1994) 1-18, 131-55, at 138-46; West, M.L., ‘The Date of the Iliad’, MH 52 (1995) 203-19Google Scholar; J.P. Crielaard, ‘Homer, History and Archaeology’, in id. (ed.), Homeric Questions (Amsterdam 1995) 201-88. But see n.39 below.

³⁰ Hoffmann, W., ‘Die Polis bei Homer’, in Festschrift Bruno Snell (Munich 1956) 153-65Google Scholar; Thomas, C., ‘Homer and the Polis’, PdP 21 (1966) 5–14Google Scholar; Morris, , ‘Use and Abuse’ (n.28), esp. 100-4Google Scholar; Scully, Homer (n.27), ch. 7 (arguing strongly, e.g., against Halverson, J., ‘Social Order in the Odyssey’, Hermes 113 [1985] 129-45Google Scholar) and passim; van Wees (n.9), ch. 2; Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ (n.2) 46–59Google Scholar; Olson, S.D., Blood and Iron: Stories and Storytelling in Homer's Odyssey (Leiden 1995), ch. 9Google Scholar. See n.100 below.

³¹ Finley, World (n.3) 78-83.

³² Bibl. in Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ (n.2) 54-7, espGoogle Scholar. Havelock, E.A., The Greek Concept of Justice from its Shadow in Homer to its Substance in Plato (Cambridge, Mass. 1978), chs 7–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gschnitzer, F., ‘Der Rat in der Volksversammlung’, in Händel, P. and Meid, W. (eds), Festschrift Robert Muth (Innsbruck 1983) 151-63Google Scholar; ‘Zur homerischen Staats- und Gesellschaftsordnung’, in Latacz, (ed.), Zweihundert Jahre (n.2) 182–204Google Scholar; Ruzé, F., ‘Les tribus et la décision politique dans les cités grecques archaïques et classiques’, Ktema 8 (1983 [1986]) 298–306Google Scholar; ‘Plethos. Aux origines de la majorité politique’, in Aux origines de l'Hellénisme: La Crète et la Grèce. Hommage à Henri van Effenterre (Paris 1984) 247-63Google Scholar; Cartier, , Royauté (n.14) ch. 2, esp. 182-7Google Scholar; ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 89-91. See also Bannert, H., ‘Versammlungsszenen bei Homer’, in Bremer, J.M.et al. (eds), Homer: Beyond Oral Poetry. Recent Trends in Homeric Interpretation (Amsterdam 1987) 15–30Google Scholar. See also n.100 below.

³³ Gschnitzer, ‘Staats- und Gesellschaftsordnung’ (n.32) surveys both positions. The following section is developed from thoughts first expressed in my ‘Homeric Society’ (n.2) 641-5.

³⁴ Finley, World (n.3) 78-83, 113-16 (cit. 80, 82, 114).

³⁵ E.g., Finley, ‘Anthropology and the Greeks’, in id., The Use and Abuse of History (London 1975), ch. 6; Ancient History: Evidence and Models (New York 1986)Google Scholar; cf. Shaw and Sailer (n.3); Brunns, H. and Nippel, W., ‘Max Weber, M.I. Finley et le concept de cité antique’, in La cité antique? A partir de l'œuvre de M.l. Finley, Opus 6-8 (1987–1989) 27–50Google Scholar.

³⁶ Calhoun, G.M. puts this well: ‘Polity and Society’, in Wace, A.J.B. and Stubbings, F.H. (eds), A Companion to Homer (New York 1962) 431-52, at 431Google Scholar.

³⁷ This applies equally to other puzzling features of Homeric society (see Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ [n.2] 45-6Google Scholar), for example, the intricate rules and implications of gift exchange, brilliantly decoded recently by Donlan, W.: ‘The Unequal Exchange between Glaucus and Diomedes in Light of the Homeric Gift-Economy’, Phoenix 43 (1989) 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Duelling with Gifts in the Iliad: As the Audience Saw It’, in Roisman, and Roisman, (n.26) 155-72Google Scholar.

³⁸ Carlier, ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 91.

³⁹ I have argued for this in ‘Historian's Headache’ (n.2) and am pleased to see that Carlier, ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 91, comes to the same conclusion; cf. my ‘Homeric Society’ (n.2) 628, suggesting that ‘we should consider Homeric society near-contemporary rather than contemporary with the poet and date it within the time-span that could be covered by the audience's collective memory: in the late ninth and eighth centuries’.

⁴⁰ This is what I mean by ‘ideological’ (as in ‘ideological distortion’); Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 82-3, 88-9, 152-3, 156-7Google Scholar, uses this term in the sense of an idealising representation of élite values and behaviours. Latacz, J., ‘Das Menschenbild Homers’, Gymnasium 91 (1984) 15-39, at 18-20, 26-9Google Scholar; Homer (n.29) 32-5 and Morris, ‘Use and Abuse’ (n.28) 120-9, stress the poet's aristocratic perspective, while Donlan, W., ‘The Tradition of Anti-Aristocratic Thought in Early Greek Poetry’, Historia 22 (1973) 145-54Google Scholar, P. Rose, ‘Class Ambivalence in the Odyssey’, ibid. 24 (1975) 129-49, and I (‘Homer und die Geschichte’ [n.2] 247-50 with bibl. in 248 n.141), among others, have emphasised as well a more critical attitude toward the élite.

⁴¹ The picture has been corrected by Latacz, J., Kampfparänese, Kampfdarstellung und Kampfwirklichkeit in der Ilias, bei Kallinos und Tyrtaios (Munich 1977)Google Scholar; Pritchett, W.K., The Greek State at War 4 (Berkeley 1985) 7–33Google Scholar; Snodgrass, A.M., ‘The “Hoplite Reform” Revisited’, DHA 19 (1993) 47–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; van Wees, ‘Homeric Way of War’ (n.29) and earlier publications listed there; ‘Homeric Warfare’, in Morris, and Powell, , A New Companion (n.2) 668-93Google Scholar; Raaflaub, ‘Soldiers, Citizens’ (n.2). See also Nowag, , Raub (n.10) 40-3Google Scholar.

⁴² See the lists in Carlier, Royauté (n.14) 183 nn.219-20. Il. 2.84-394; 9.9-79; Od. 2.6-257; 8.4-45 are especially important.

⁴³ Carlier, Royauté (n.14) 186; ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 89.

⁴⁴ Hector: Il. 8.489-542; cf. 18.243-313. Odysseus: Od. 9.171; 10.188; 12.270-303, 319-24; exception: 12.294. On Eurylochos’ opposition, see also Patzek, , Homer (n.22) 133-4Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ So too Finley, World (n.3) 78.

⁴⁶ These assemblies, three times called agorē(Il. 4.1; 8.2; 20.4), once thōkos (8.439), are listed in Carlier, Royauté (n.14) 183-4 n.219, and Flaig, E., ‘Das Konsensprinzip im homerischen Olymp. Überlegungen zum göttlichen Entscheidungsprozess Ilias 4.1-72’, Hermes 122 (1994) 13-31, at 18 n.16Google Scholar.

⁴⁷ Od. 20.146; cf. 10.114-15, 15.466-8; cf. Carlier, , Royauté (n.14) 184Google Scholar.

⁴⁸ Od. 16.377-82; 24.420-71. Whether we should really see in the latter ‘une Assemblée du peuple spontanée’ (Carlier, , Royauté [n.14] 184 n.220 ad loc.Google Scholar) is open to discussion. See Heubeck, A., in Russo, J.et al., A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey 3 (Oxford 1992) 407 at 24.420Google Scholar: ‘the meaning here initially is a meeting of the suitors’ families; as the scene develops the poet wishes to give the impression (by the appearance of Halitherses and Medon) of a regular assembly of the people …’. See also n.100 below.

⁴⁹ See the descriptions of assemblies listed in n.42. Benches: Il. 2.99; Od. 8.16 (hedrai); Il. 18.503-5 (stone seats for gerentes); cf. Od. 2.14; 8.6; perhaps reflected also in the word thoōkos, ‘sitting session’, cf. West, S., Commentary 1 (n.7) 131 at 2.26Google Scholar; Scully (n.27) 101-2; Olson (n.30) 193. Staff: ibid. 505; cf. 2.101-9; Carlier, Royauté (n.14) 190-2; Easterling, P., ‘Agamemnon's skēptron in the Iliad’, in Mackenzie, M.M. and Roueché, C. (eds), Images of Authority: Papers Presented to Joyce Reynolds [PCPhS Suppl. 16] (Cambridge 1989) 104-21Google Scholar. Gods: Od. 2.68-9; cf. Gschnitzer, , ‘Staats- und Gesellschaftsordnung’ (n.32) 196Google Scholar.

⁵⁰ Trojans:Il. 8.489; 18.243-5; Odysseus’ followers: n.44; Achaeans: see, e.g., 1.15-16, 54; 2.72, 83, 86 ff.; 7.382; 9.11.

⁵¹ The function of the council is described best in 9.8-76, 96-103. See Gschnitzer, ‘Rat in der Volksversammlung’ (n.32); Carlier, , Royauté (n.14) 145-50, 185-7Google Scholar.

⁵² E.g., a visitor is asked whether he is travelling on public or private business (Od. 3.82; 4.314).

⁵³ Od. 2.41-79, 229-41; cf. Raaflaub, , ‘Political Thought’ (n.2) 11–15Google Scholar. Walter Donlan suggests, however, ‘that in the assembly in Od. 2 the matter is by nature dēmion because it involves the oikos of the paramount leader, i.e., that Telemachos is being disingenuous, and that his ploy falls flat because the people choose to take his words at face value and thus avoid the difficulty of having to take sides in what could become a messy stasis’ (Email message, 14 July 1997). See also n.100 below.

⁵⁴ See esp. Havelock, , Concept of Justice (n.32), chs 7–8Google Scholar.

⁵⁵ See Detienne, M., ‘En Grèce archaïque: géométrie, politique et société’, Annales ESC 20 (1965) 425-41Google Scholar; Nowag, , Raub (n.10) 36–50Google Scholar; Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 35Google Scholar.

⁵⁶ See also the assembly's witnessing the resolution of a conflict at Patroklos’ funeral games: Il. 23.566-95; cf. Havelock, , Concept of Justice (n.32) 133-5Google Scholar.

⁵⁷ Land: e.g., Il. 12.310-28; cf. Hennig, D., ‘Grundbesitz bei Homer und Hesiod’, Chiron 10 (1980) 35–52Google Scholar; Donlan, W., ‘Homeric temenos and the Land Economy of the Dark Age’, MH 46 (1989) 129-45, espGoogle Scholar. 130 with more examples. Trials: Il. 18.497-508; cf. Carlier, , Royauté (n.14) 172-6 and n.100 belowGoogle Scholar. Compensation: Od. 13.13-15; cf. Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 32-3, 35-6Google Scholar.

⁵⁸ This is rightly emphasised by Ruzé, , ‘Plethos’ (n.32) 248-9Google Scholar; Carlier, , Royauté (n.14) 186 n.231Google Scholar; ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 90Google Scholar. Both authors point to Od. 24.463-6 as the first case of identifying a majority in an assembly (‘more than half, ). On the interpretation of the passage, see Heubeck, , Commentary 3 (n.48) 410Google Scholar.

⁵⁹ Carlier, , ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 90Google Scholar, referring to Benveniste, E., Le vocabulaire des institutions indo-européennes 2 (Paris 1969) 35–42Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ Ruzé, , ‘Plethos’ (n.32) 248Google Scholar: ‘Dans l'Iliade, le désir d'unanimité tourne à l'obsession; sans elle, rien d'efficace ne pourra se faire car le désaccord crée l'anarchie. Il faut donc que l'approbation spontanée de tous se manifeste de façon éclatante, ou encore que tous aient été convaincus.’ Cf. van Effenterre, H., La Cité grecque des origines à la défaite de Marathon (Paris 1985) 242-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁶¹ Flaig, ‘Konsensprinzip’ (n.46), with references to relevant bibliography.

⁶² Ibid. 26-7, 30; cf. Adkins', A.W.H.distinction between competitive and collaborative values: Merit and Responsibility (Chicago 1960), ch. 3Google Scholar; Moral Values and Political Behaviour in Ancient Greece (London 1972), ch. 2Google Scholar and ‘Homeric Ethics’, in Morris, and Powell, (n.2) 694–713Google Scholar.

⁶³ Flaig, ibid. 30-1. In my study of ‘Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought’ (n.2) I suggest that this discrepancy was one of the main stimuli for the emergence of political reflection.

⁶⁴ Flaig, E., ‘Die spartanische Abstimmung nach der Lautstärke. Überlegungen zu Thukydides 1,87’, Historia 42 (1993) 139-60Google Scholar. See also n.100 below.

⁶⁵ Flaig, , ‘Konsensprinzip’ (n.46) 26 n.47Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ Patzek, , Homer und Mykene (n.22) 132-5Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ Nestor's and Diomedes’ credentials: Il. 1.247-74; 9.52-62; 14.109-27. Eris not used kata kosmon: 2.214; see also Havelock, Concept of Justice (n.32) 124-6. Thersites and Eurylochos: Patzek, , Homer und Mykene (n.22) 132-3Google Scholar. Hesiod on eris: WD 11-24.

⁶⁸ See, e.g., Kennedy, G., The Art of Persuasion in Greece (Princeton 1963) 35-9Google Scholar; Vernant, J.-P., The Origins of Greek Thought (Ithaca, NY 1982) 45–50Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Havelock (n.32) 130-3.

⁷⁰ I thank Victoria Pedrick for some of these references. Olson (n.30) 188, too, emphasises the power of public opinion that makes the people ‘more significant politically and socially than they might at first appear to be’.

⁷¹ See Raaflaub, , ‘Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought’ (n.2) 13–15Google Scholar, and n.100 below.

⁷² See Donlan, ‘Relations of Power’ (n.14) who concludes that the situations described by Homer ‘indicate a high refusal cost to the power-holders’. See generally Nicolai, W., ‘Rezeptionssteuerung in der Ilias’, Philologus 127 (1983) 1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁷³ Cf. Carlier, , ‘Procédure’ (n.28) 91Google Scholar; Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ (n.2) 67Google Scholar with earlier bibl.; Donlan, ‘Relations of Power’ (n.14). Ruschenbusch, E., ‘Zur Verfassungs-geschichte Griechenlands’, in Kinzl, K.H. (ed.), Demokratie.: Der Weg zur Demokratie bei den Griechen (Darmstadt 1995) 432-45, at 433-6Google Scholar, emphasises democratic elements in Homeric politics. Hölscher, T., ‘Politik und Öffentlichkeit im demokratischen Athen’, in Sakellariou, M. (ed.), Colloque international: Démocratie et culture (Athens 1996) 171-87, at 177Google Scholar, neatly illustrates the difference in set-up between the Homeric and democratic assemblies.

⁷⁴ Tausend, K., Amphiktyonie und Symmachie: Formen zwischenstaatlicher Beziehungen im archaischen Griechenland [Historia Einzelschrift, 73] (Stuttgart 1992) 64-9Google Scholar; Baltrusch (n.13) 4-7.

⁷⁵ Helen's suitors: Hesiod, Cat. 5.1-200 (fr. 196-204 Merkelbach/West); cf. West, M .L., The Hesiodic Catalogue of Women (Oxford 1985) 114-19Google Scholar; Thuc. 1.9.1; Apollod. 3.10.9; ignored by Homer: van Wees, Status Warriors (n.9) 173-4. Theagenes of Megara and Peisistratos’ supporters: Herman (n.28) 97-105; ibid, for xenia through the centuries. Kleisthenes of Sikyon: Her. 6.126-30.

⁷⁶ Il. 6.119-236; cf. Donlan, ‘Unequal Exchange’ (n.37).

⁷⁷ Antenor: Il. 3.205-24; Melaneus: Od. 24.102-19. Cf. Od. 21.15-17 (with 3.489; 15.187), 31-6; Finley, World (n.3) 102-3Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ Chantraine, P., Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque 3 (Paris 1974) 764Google Scholar: , ‘citoyen qui sert de ’; Meiggs, R. and Lewis, D., A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions (²Oxford 1988)Google Scholar no.4 (7th cent. Corcyra) is the earliest example; cf. van Effenterre, H. and Ruzé, F., Nomima: Recueil d'inscriptions politiques et juridiques de l'archaïsme grec 1 (Rome 1994) 144-5 and nos. 34-40 (pp. 146-61)Google Scholar; Ph. Gauthier, , Symbola: Les étrangers et la justice dans les cités grecques (Nancy 1972) 18–27Google Scholar; Gschnitzer, F., ‘Proxenos’, RE Suppl. 13 (1974) 629-730, at 632Google Scholar; Herman (n.28) 130-42.

⁷⁹ Her. 1.69; Finley, World (n.3) 100.

⁸⁰ Od. 16.427: , from see the comment by Hoekstra, A. in Heubeck, A. and Hoekstra, , A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey 2 (Oxford 1989) 284Google Scholar ad loc. Olson (n.30) 189 even translates ‘joined in alliance’.

⁸¹ Catalogue: Il. 2.484-760; Kirk, , Commentary (n. 15) 173Google Scholar. Temporary polis: Thomas (n.30) 7; Murray, O., Early Greece (²Cambridge, Mass. 1993) 63Google Scholar; Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ (n.2) 47-8Google Scholar. Wars between neighbouring poleis: e.g., Il. 9.529-99; 11.670-751 (Nestor's story, discussed pp. 2-3 above); 18.509 -40.

⁸² See, e.g., Murray (n.81) 51-2; Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9) 174-5Google Scholar. See n.100 below.

⁸³ Il 13.663-70; on thōē, see Vatin, C., ‘Poinè, timé, thoiè dans le droit homérique’, Ktema 7 (1982) 275-80Google Scholar.

⁸⁴ Similarly, one of four sons of Aigyptios on Ithaca went to Troy with Odysseus (Od.2.15-22), although in this case we know neither why this was the case nor how it was determined.

⁸⁵ Various concepts of war: Raaflaub, , ‘Homer und die Geschichte’ (n.2) 222-5Google Scholar; id., ‘Citizens, Soldiers’ (n.2) 51-3 with references to private and public wars in early Greek history and a sketch of how the development of the polis and that of communal wars might have been connected. On status warfare, Wees, van, Status Warriors (n.9), ch. 4Google Scholar. On the development of the polis, Raaflaub, , ‘Homer to Solon’ (n.2) 75–82Google Scholar.

⁸⁶ On wars of annihilation in the epics: van Wees (n.9) 183-90; in early Greek history: Raaflaub, ‘Homer und die Geschichte’ 223-5.

⁸⁷ See pp. 10-11 above.

⁸⁸ See, e.g., Karavites, P., Promise-Giving and Treaty-Making: Homer and the Near East (Leiden 1992)Google Scholar; Baltrusch (n.13) 104-8.

⁸⁹ Since this is pure speculation, it does not matter whether or not Iliad 10 (the ‘Dolon-eia’) was part of the poem's original design: see Hainsworth, , Commentary (n.6) 151-5Google Scholar.

⁹⁰ Wéry, L.-M., ‘Die Arbeitsweise der Diplomatie in Homerischer Zeit’, in Olshausen, E. (ed.), Antike Diplomatie [Wege der Forschung, 462] (Darmstadt 1979) 13–53Google Scholar (orig. in French in RIDA 3rd ser. 14 [1967] 169-205), at 49 n.75.

⁹¹ Baltrusch (n. 13) 7-8.

⁹² Karavites, P., ‘Philotes, Homer and the Near East’, Athenaeum n.s. 64 (1986) 474-81Google Scholar; Stanton, G., ‘Philia and xenia in Euripides' Alkestis’, Hermes 118 (1990) 42–54Google Scholar; Konstan, D., Friendship in the Classical World (Cambridge 1997), esp. 33-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹³ Meiggs and Lewis (n.78) no.17, with Ehrenberg, V., ‘When Did the Polis Rise?’, JHS 57(1937) 147-59, at 151CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁴ See Donlan, W., ‘The Pre-State Community in Greece’, SO 64 (1989) 5-29, at 14CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁵ Malkin, I., Religion and Colonization in Ancient Greece (Leiden 1987) 138CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹⁶ Phokaia and Teos: Her. 1.163-8; Athens: 7.139-43; 8.41.

⁹⁷ Raaflaub, , ‘Homer and the Beginning of Political Thought’ (n.2) 1–2Google Scholar.

⁹⁸ Protection of heralds and ambassadors: Wéry (n.90) 15-21, 31-6; Adcock, F. and Mosley, D., Diplomacy in Ancient Greece (London 1975), ch. 1Google Scholar. Zeus Xenios: Weinreich, O., in Roscher, W.H., Ausführliches Lexikon der griechischen und römischen Mythologie (Leipzig 1924–1937, repr. Hildesheim 1965) 6.522-5Google Scholar; Schwabl, H., RE Suppl. 15 (1978) 1028Google Scholar; cf. Havelock (n.32), ch. 9. Politai, xenoi, metanastai: Gschnitzer, Griechische Sozialgeschichte (n.14) 29.

⁹⁹ So too Baltrusch (n. 13) 92-9.

¹⁰⁰ See above n.39. Two excellent articles, published while this essay was in press, add important evidence and interpretations and lend strong support to my argument that the Homeric assembly is communally indispensable and its will far from negligible. Flaig, E., ‘Processus de décision collective et guerre civile: L'exemple de l'Odyssée Chant XXIV, vv. 419–470’, Annales HSS 52 (1997) 3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar, offers compelling new interpretations of the assemblies in bks 2 and 24 of the Odyssey, further elaborating on the concept of ‘decision by consensus’; Hölkeskamp, K.-J., ‘Agorai bei Homer’, in Eder, W. and Hölkeskamp, K.-J. (eds), Volk und Verfassung im vorhellenistischen Griechenland (Stuttgart 1997) 1–15Google Scholar, emphasises the importance of the community in Homeric society and the function of open debate in clearly structured assemblies to create and integrate such community, to make explicit and overcome tensions and conflicts, and to maintain communal order; moreover, he points out that Nestor's emphasis, in Il. 2.339 ff., on oaths, contracts and binding agreements presupposes a collective decision, prior to the war, by all Achaeans on the war against Troy (3). For further useful observations, see Hölkeskamp, , ‘Arbitrators, Lawgivers and the “Codification of Law” in Archaic Greece: Problems and Perspectives’, Metis 7 (1992 [1995]) 49–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘Tempel, Agora und Alphabet. Die Entstehungsbedingungen von Gesetzgebung in der archaischen Polis’, in Gehrke, H.-J. (ed.), Rechtskodifizierung und soziale Normen im interkulturellen Vergleich (Tübingen 1994) 135–64Google Scholar.