Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:22:59.443Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Homer's Iliad and Ours

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2018

G. S. Kirk
Affiliation:
Trinity Hall, Cambridge

Extract

Adam Parry's article ‘Have We Homer's Iliad?’ (Yale Classical Studies xx (1966), 177–216) is one of the most readable of recent discussions of Homer. As it happens, I disagree with much of it—but that is not surprising, since much of it is taken up with disagreeing with me. In the pages that follow I shall be primarily concerned to question the validity of some of the author's detailed arguments and to probe some of his underlying assumptions.

First we should note the general position that Adam Parry, by the end of his study, occupies. It is the apparently old-fashioned one that Homer wrote down, or had someone else write down, virtually every word of the Iliad (and presumably also the Odyssey) as we have it. Yet it differs from extreme Unitarianism, and takes account of Milman Parry, by accepting that Homer belonged to an oral tradition and composed his poetry, at least at the detailed level, by traditional means. He did not construct his verses like a fully literate poet, but used the new technique of alphabetic writing for the development of traditional, unlettered poetry into the extended form and complex texture of an Iliad.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s). Published online by Cambridge University Press 1970

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

page 59 note 1 I am grateful to Professor D. L. Page and Mrs Helena Foley for their comments.