Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T21:13:26.733Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Widowing the Streets of Troy (Il. 5.642): Notes on the Conceptual Basis of a Unique Metaphor in Homer's Iliad

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2020

Fabian Horn
Fabian Horn*
Affiliation:
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues for an approach based on the cognitive linguistic theory of conceptual metaphors (CMT) by demonstrating its potential for the discussion and interpretation of Homeric metaphors. CMT provides a theoretical framework for analysing metaphors in a conceptual context, and even with unique, i.e. apparently non-formulaic, metaphors in Homeric poetry the possibility of a conceptual basis always needs to be considered for comprehensive study. Even unusual expressions such as the phrasing of Il. 5.642, χήρωσɛ δ’ ἀγυιάς, where Heracles is said to have ‘widowed the streets’ of Troy can be related to other metaphors (esp. Τροίης ἱɛρὰ κρήδɛμνα in Il. 16.100, where the phrasing is formulaic) drawing on the same conceptualization of the city is a woman. This appears to be a contextually specified version of the personification of locations which not only provides the basis for poetic extensions but also has the potential to reflect back on the literal usage of certain salient terms and imbue them with particular, ominous meaning (such as κρήδɛμνον in Il. 22.470).

Keywords

conceptual metaphor theory (CMT)Homeric metaphorthe city is a womanontological metaphor/personification
Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 54 , 2020 , pp. 1 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © The Australasian Society for Classical Studies 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allan, W. (2012), Homer, The Iliad. London and New York.Google Scholar
Ameis, K. F., and Hentze, C. (1927), Homers Ilias, für den Schulgebrauch erklärt. Erster Band, zweites Heft: Gesang IV-VI. Eighth edition. Leipzig and Berlin.Google Scholar
Beekes, R. S. P. (2010), Etymological Dictionary of Greek. 2 volumes. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar
Ben-Porat, Z. (1992), ‘Poetics of the Homeric Simile and the Theory of (Poetic) Simile’, Poetics Today 13, 737–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brügger, C. (2016), Homers Ilias. Gesamtkommentar. Band 8: Sechzehnter Gesang (Π), Faszikel 2: Kommentar. Berlin and Boston.Google Scholar
Brügger, C., Stoevesandt, M., and Visser, E. (2003), Homers Ilias. Gesamtkommentar. Band II: Zweiter Gesang (Β), Faszikel 2: Kommentar. München and Leipzig.Google Scholar
Chantraine, P. (1968), Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Paris.Google Scholar
Coffey, M. (1957), ‘The Function of the Homeric Simile’, AJPh 78, 113–32.Google Scholar
Deignan, A. (2010), ‘The Cognitive View of Metaphor: Conceptual Metaphor Theory’, in Cameron, L. and Maslen, R. (eds.), Metaphor Analysis. Research Practice in Applied Linguistics, Social Sciences and the Humanities. London and Oakville, 44–56.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. W. (1987), Homer: Poet of the Iliad. Baltimore and London.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. W. (1991), The Iliad: A Commentary. Volume V: Books 17–20. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, M. W. (2005), ‘Homer's Iliad’, in Foley, J. M. (ed.), A Companion to Ancient Epic. Malden, MA, and Oxford, 302–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelberg, M. (1989), ‘Formulaic and Nonformulaic Elements in Homer’, CPh 84, 179–97.Google Scholar
Foley, J. M. (1999), Homer's Traditional Art. University Park, PA.Google Scholar
Fränkel, H. (1924), Die homerischen Gleichnisse. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Frisk, H. (1960–1970), Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. 2 volumes. Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Garcia, L. F. Jr. (2013), Homeric Durability. Telling Time in the Iliad. Cambridge, MA, and London.Google Scholar
Haakh, H. (1959), ‘Der Schleier der Penelope’, Gymnasium 66, 374–80.Google Scholar
Heubeck, A., and Hoekstra, A. (1990), A Commentary on Homer's Odyssey, Vol. II: Books IX–XVI. Oxford.Google Scholar
Horn, F. (2014), Held und Heldentum bei Homer: Das homerische Heldenkonzept und seine poetische Verwendung. Tübingen.Google Scholar
Horn, F. (2015a), ‘Visualising Hom. Il. 3.57: ‘Putting on the Mantle of Stone’’, RhM 158, 1–7.Google Scholar
Horn, F. (2015b) ‘‘Sleeping the Brazen Slumber’ – a Cognitive Approach to Hom. Il. 11.241’, Philologus 159, 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, F. (2015c) ‘Ἔπɛα πτɛρόɛντα Again: A Cognitive Linguistic View on Homer's ‘Winged Words’’, Hermathena 198, 5–33.Google Scholar
Horn, F. (2018) ‘Dying is Hard to Describe: Metonymies and Metaphors of Death in the Iliad’, CQ 68, 359–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, F. (forthcoming) ‘Motif Transference and Poetic Technique: The Death of Achilles in the Iliad’, Mnemosyne.Google Scholar
Janko, R. (1994), The Iliad: A Commentary, Volume IV: Books 13–16. Cambridge.Google Scholar
de Jong, I. J. F. (2012), Homer, Iliad Book XXII. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Keith, A. L. (1914), Simile and Metaphor in Greek Poetry from Homer to Aeschylus. Chicago.Google Scholar
Kelly, A. (2007), A Referential Commentary and Lexicon to Homer, Iliad VIII. Oxford.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. S. (1990), The Iliad: A Commentary, Vol. II: Books 5–8. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kövecses, Z. (2015), Where Metaphors Come From: Reconsidering Context in Metaphor. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. (1993), ‘The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor’, in Ortony, A. (ed.), Metaphor and Thought. Second edition. Cambridge, 202–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M. (1980), Metaphors We Live By. Chicago and London.Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., and Turner, M. (1989), More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lonsdale, S. H. (1990), Creatures of Speech: Lion, Herding and Hunting Similes in the Iliad. Stuttgart.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mahon, J. E. (1999). ‘Getting Your Sources Right: What Aristotle Didn't Say’, in Cameron, L. and Low, G. (eds.), Researching and Applying Metaphor. Cambridge, 69–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Minchin, E. (2001), ‘Similes in Homer: Image, Mind's Eye, and Memory’, in Watson, J. (ed.), Speaking Volumes: Orality and Literacy in the Greek and Roman World. Leiden, 25–52.Google Scholar
Monsacré, H. (1984), Les larmes d'Achille. Héros, femme et souffrance chez Homère. ParisGoogle Scholar
Moulton, C. (1974), ‘Similes in the Iliad’, Hermes 102, 381–97.Google Scholar
Moulton, C. (1977), Similes in the Homeric Poems. Göttingen.Google Scholar
Moulton, C. (1979), ‘Homeric Metaphor’, CPh 74, 279–93.Google Scholar
Muellner, L., (1990) ‘The Simile of the Cranes and Pygmies: A Study of Homeric Metaphor’, HSCPh 93, 59–101.Google Scholar
Nagler, M. N. (1974), Spontaneity and Tradition. A Study in the Oral Art of Homer. Berkeley, CA, Los Angeles, and London.Google Scholar
Nieto Hernández, P. (2011), ‘Metaphor’, in Finkelberg, M. (ed.), The Homer Encyclopedia. Malden, MA, and Oxford, 516–17.Google Scholar
Parry, M. (1928), L’épithète traditionelle dans Homère; Essai sur un problème de style homérique, quoted from the English translation The Traditional Epithet in Homer in The Making of Homeric Verse. The Collected Papers of Milman Parry, ed. Parry, A. (Oxford 1971) 1–190.Google Scholar
Parry, M. (1931), ‘The Homeric Metaphor as a Traditional Poetic Device’, TAPhA 62, xxiv (= The Making of Homeric Verse. The Collected Papers of Milman Parry, ed. Parry, A. [Oxford 1971] 419).Google Scholar
Parry, M. (1933), ‘The Traditional Metaphor in Homer’, CPh 28, 30–43 (= The Making of Homeric Verse. The Collected Papers of Milman Parry, ed. A. Parry [Oxford, 1971] 365–75).Google Scholar
Pragglejaz Group (2007), ‘MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically Used Words in Discourse’, Metaphor and Symbol 22, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ready, J. L. (2011), Character, Narrator, and Simile in the Iliad. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ready, J. L. (2017), The Homeric Simile in Comparative Perspectives. Oral Traditions from Saudi Arabia to Indonesia. Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reece, S. T. (2009), Homer's Winged Words: The Evolution of Early Greek Epic Diction in the Light of Oral Theory. Leiden and Boston.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, I. A. (1936), The Philosophy of Rhetoric. New York and London.Google Scholar
Richardson, N. (1993), The Iliad: A Commentary. Volume VI: Books 21–24. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Scott, W. C. (1974), The Oral Nature of the Homeric Simile. Leiden.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scott, W. C. (2009), The Artistry of the Homeric Simile. Hanover, NH, and London.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segal, Ch. (1971), ‘Andromache's Anagnorisis: Formulaic Artistry in Iliad 22.437–476’, HSCPh 75, 33–57.Google Scholar
Semino, E. (2008), Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Stanford, W. B. (1936), Greek Metaphor: Studies in Theory and Practice. Oxford.Google Scholar
Steen, G. J. (2011), ‘The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor – now New and Improved!’, Review of Cognitive Linguistics 9, 26–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steen, G. J., Dorst, A. G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., Krennmayr, T., and Pasma, T. (2010), A Method for Linguistic Metaphor Identification: From MIP to MIPVU. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Thiel, H. (2010), Homeri Ilias. Second edition. Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Turner, M. (1987), Death is the Mother of Beauty: Mind, Metaphor, Criticism. Chicago and London.Google Scholar
de Vaan, M. (2008), Etymological Dictionary of Latin and other Italic Languages. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar
Verity, A. (2011), Homer, The Iliad. A New Translation. Oxford.Google Scholar
Wærn, I. (1951), Γῆς ὀστέα. The Kenning in Pre-Christian Greek Literature. Uppsala.Google Scholar
Zanker, A. T. (2019), Metaphor in Homer: Time, Speech, and Thought. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar