¹ For the theoretical background, see Gregory, C.A., ‘Exchange and reciprocity’, in Ingold, T. (ed), Companion Encyclopaedia of Anthropology (London 1994) 911–39Google Scholar; Narotzky, S., New directions in economic anthropology (London & Chicago 1997), esp. Ch. 2.Google Scholar

² See Donlan, W., ‘Reciprocities in Homer’, CW 75 (1972) 137–75Google Scholar; “The politics of generosity in Homer’, Helios n.s. 9.2 (1982) 1–15Google Scholar.

³ Humphreys, S., Anthropology and the Greeks (London 1978) 70 f.Google Scholar; van Wees 218 ff.; von Reden 59; Hanson, V.D., The Other Greeks (New York 1995)Google Scholar.

⁴ Cf. n. 22 and 28 below. Weapons also feature as gifts and ornaments.

⁵ See Gernet, L., ‘The mythical idea of value in Greece’, in The Anthropology of Ancient Greece, tr. Hamilton, J.et al. (Baltimore 1981)Google Scholar; Finley 61; van Wees 53, 103 f., 244 ff.

⁶ The epithets are not used to describe any other metal. Note in particular the application of timēeis to golden or gilded gifts at Od. 4.614 (= 15.114), 8.393 (cf. Od. 1.312), and of eritimos to gold won as a prize by racehorses (Il. 9.126=268).

⁷ Od. 11.326: cf. 18.161 f. and Il. 9.125 ff., 18.475; contrast Od. 1.312,4.614=14.114,8.393, 13.128 ff. Note that as early as h. Dem. 132, timē itself is used to mean ‘value’ or ‘price’ in a commercial sense (cf the use of τίω at Il. 23.703 ff.). On the story of Eriphyle and other related myths, see most recently, Brown, A.S., ‘Aphrodite and the Pandora complex’, CQ 47 (1997) 26–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁸ At Od. 9.202 (cf. 24.274) and 13.11, talents of gold are described by the epithets poludaidalos, ‘intricate’ and euergēs, ‘wrought’ respectively. Od. 13.11 refers to the gold Odysseus receives from the Phaeacians, which does not consist exclusively of talents (Od. 8.393, 430-2); in 9.202 f. and 24.274 f., the talents of ‘wrought gold’ are balanced by a ‘solid silver mixing bowl’—the gold here is perhaps well-wrought in the sense of being refined and therefore pure, like the silver of the bowl (the purity or otherwise of gold as a result of refining is something of a topos in Archaic poetry: cf. e.g. Theogn. 415-8, 447-52, 1105-6; Ibycus PMG 282(a) 420-5). It is certainly possible to consider crafted artefacts merely in terms of their bullion value, as later temple inventories did, but I do not think that these three passages indicate that Homer considered them in this way. Alternatively, the epithets in these passages may convey proleptically the metal's suitability as a decorative material. Cf. Gray, D.H.F., ‘Metal-working in Homer’, JHS 74 (1954) 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁹ See Balmuth, M.S., ‘Remarks on the appearance of the earliest coins’, in Studies Presented to George M.A. Hanfmann (Mainz 1971) 1–7Google Scholar; Ventris, M. and Chadwick, J., Documents in Mycenaean Greek² (Cambridge 1973) n. 238Google Scholar; Keynes, J.M., A treatise on money (London 1929) 3–12Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Cf. Kurke, L., ‘KAΠHΛEIA and deceit: Theognis 59-60’, AJP 100 (1989) 535–44Google Scholar.

¹¹ See G. Kopcke, Handel (Göttingen 1990 = Archaeologia Homerica, H.-G. Buchholz and F. Matz (ed) Teil M) 97, 120 (Anm. 551).

¹² Chantraine, P., Dictionnaire étymologique⁴ (Paris 1968Google Scholar) s.v. ταλάσσαι.

¹³ There is a theory (cf. Ridgeway, W., ‘The Homeric talent; its origins, value and affinities’, JHS 8 [1887] 133–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Seltman, C., Greek coins² [London 1955] 4–8Google Scholar) that the Homeric talent was a precise historical weight of some 8.5 g. It is based chiefly on the assertion found in an Alexandrian source (Hultsch, F., ed., Metrologorum Scriptorum Reliquiae i [Leipzig 1864] 301Google Scholar) that ‘the Homeric talent weighed the same as the later Dane’. We have no reason to suppose that the anonymous metrologist who wrote this in the first or second century AD knew the exact weight of a Homeric talent any better than we do; for the rest, Ridgeway's theory largely depends on a misunderstanding of the nature of the copper so-called ox-hide ingots (on which see Kopcke [n. 11] 33). If the Homeric talent really did weigh 8.5 g. then whoever left a 500 g. hoard of gold in a pot at Eretria (Themelis, P.G., ‘An eighth century gold-smith's workshop at Eretria’, in Hagg, R. (ed.), The Greek Renaissance of the Eighth Century BC [Stockholm 1983] 157–65Google Scholar) would have possessed almost sixty ‘Homeric talents’ of gold—that is, more than are mentioned in the whole of the Iliad and Odyssey put together. Such a listener would not have been much impressed by the wealth of the epic heroes!

¹⁴ Il. 14.751: note that the high density of gold means that even a cubic inch of it weighs 320 g.

¹⁵ On the talent in general, see RE Suppl. 8, 791-848.

¹⁶ Later, in the foot race, the prizes are a Sidonian silver crater, a fine fat ox, and a half-talent of gold. This should not lead us to conclude that, for instance, 1 ox = 1 talent of gold, because what determine the prizes for the foot race are the very characteristic outcomes the poet has in mind for each competitor. Athene helps Odysseus to win the (unquestionably most valuable) first prize and humiliates Ajax the son of Oileus—see Taplin, O.P., Homeric Soundings (Oxford 1992) 253Google Scholar; while the tactful Antilochus gets his prize doubled. Ajax's prize is not only among the least distinguished in these games, but peculiarly reminiscent of the manner of his defeat: he slips in the cow-dung and wins an ox (Il. 23.775-81). Thus the ox, which was initially the prize for second place, becomes in effect the wooden spoon.

¹⁷ For the importance of the ‘personal history’ of items of symbolic exchange, and useful examples of ‘ordinal ranking systems’, see Gregory (n.1) 918-9.

¹⁸ Of course, later temple accountants did weigh gold and silver dedications (see for instance Meiggs, R. and Lewis, D.M., A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions² [Oxford 1988] No. 76Google Scholar; cf. the admittedly exceptional case of Croesus, Hdts. 1.50 f.), and doubtless those wealthy enough to make such offerings were as conscious of their precise weight—and as keen that others should be aware of it—as the mikrophilotimos of Theophrastus is to let his neighbours know that he has sacrificed an ox (Characters 21.7).

¹⁹ The context is also significant: we have here the germ of the Archaic controversy over the true value of athletic success and the proper form of the athletic competitor's reward (Tyrtaeus 12.1-4; Xenophanes 2; Hdts. 8.26.3)—see most recently Reden, S. von, ‘Money, law and exchange, coinage in the Greek polis’, JHS 117 (1997) 154–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar (esp. 164-8, with bibliography).

²⁰ Cf. Donlan, W., “The unequal exchange between Glaucus and Diomedes in light of the Homeric gift-economy’, Phoenix 43 (1989) 1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Traill, D.B., ‘Gold armor for bronze and Homer's use of compensatory TIMH’, CPh 84 (1989) 310–15Google Scholar; von Reden 26. On the episode as a whole, see also Jong, I.J.F. de, Narrators and Focalizers (Amsterdam 1987) 162–8Google Scholar.

²¹ So e.g. Il. 21.444 f.; Od. 10.84; 18.358; (cf. Il. 12.435). There is also the unheroic Dolon (Il. 10.303-31): to find parallels for his legalistic approach to Hector's call for volunteers we must look either to farmers in Hesiod (WD 370 f.) or the divine low comedy of Il. 14.270-79. All these (Dolon, the farmer, and Hypnos) nicely illustrate Bourdieu's observations on the need for guarantees as a function of social distance (Bourdieu, P., Outline of a Theory of Practice, tr. Nice, R. [Cambridge 1977] 173–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar). On misthos, see von Reden 89-92.

²² According to Agamemnon, Antimachus went so far as to argue that the ambassadors should be killed then and there. It is with some irony that the Trojan's sons plead for mercy from Agamemnon in the familiar terms (cf. Il. 6.46-50 and 10.378-81) that refer to the quantities of gold and other metals their father possesses. For gold as the distinctive metal of ransom-payments, cf. Thersites at Il. 2.229 ff., and n. 28 below.

²³ So it is that Odysseus’ men assume that the bag he received from Aeolus and of which he has been keeping such careful guard must contain gold and silver (Od. 10.35, 45): it is harder to hide a tripod.

²⁴ See e.g. Alcaeus PMG 69; Pind. Pyth. 3.54-6; Kurke, L., The Traffic in Praise (Ithaca & London 1991)Google Scholar; von Reden.

²⁵ Cf. Gernet (n.4) 83 ff.

²⁶ Von Reden 46.

²⁷ His attempts to avert the anger of the gods with lavish offerings (Od. 3.273-5) were, of course, ineffectual.

²⁸ As a prelude to final defeat, the futile erosion of the Trojans’ treasuries is highlighted more than once in the Iliad (e.g. 18.288-92). Valued items are needed both to pay the Trojans’ ransoms when they are captured, and to retain the support of their allies. The slow bleeding of these articles simply prolongs the war and hence the suffering of both sides. Cf. Il. 24.380-84, 543-48; Ilias Parva fr. 29; ∑ Od. 11.521; van Wees 39 f.

²⁹ Bloch, M. and Parry, J. (eds.), Money and the Morality of Exchange (Cambridge 1989) 24–7Google Scholar.

³⁰ For gold highlighting the values of xenia, see e.g. Il. 9.670, 18.385-87; Od. 1.136-42; its immortal lustre also makes it particularly appropriate for offerings to the gods (see e.g. Il. 24.304 ff; Od. 3.382-4).

³¹ Od. 11.359. Among the gifts that have been lost along the way are seven talents given to Odysseus by Maron when his life was spared (Od. 9.202).

³² Od. 14.323 f., 19.269 ff., 24.271-9 (this last including seven talents of gold).

³³ Od. 16.266-31, 23.338-41 and 355—note that the gifts are most often collectively referred to as khrusos, although they contain much else besides gold.

³⁴ See von Reden 36 f., and Ch. 3.

³⁵ Compare the poet's emphasis on how Menelaus’ wealth has been acquired at the cost of great suffering (Od. 3.301-5, 4.71-135, with R.B. Rutherford, ‘At home and abroad: aspects of the structure of the Odyssey (PCPS 31 [1985] 133-50, 140).

³⁶ Il. 9.308-77 answer the unrepeated 158-61.

³⁷ Cf. Taplin (n.16) 66 ff; Seaford, R., Reciprocity and Ritual (Oxford 1994) 23–5Google Scholar.

³⁸ Von Reden 21 f.

³⁹ Cf. Griffin, J., Homer on Life and Death (Oxford 1980) 99 f.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Il. 19.146-50. The importance of a formal handover of the gifts is not lost on Odysseus, as his two interventions in the scene show (see esp. 172 ff.). The importance of the gold is indicated by its being mentioned last of all (247).

⁴¹ It is interesting that Odysseus, sensitive to matters of tone, substitutes δίδωσι (Il. 9.261) for Agamemnon's more legalistic τελέσαιμι (Il. 9.157).

⁴² Bourdieu (n.21) 194. The result is an ‘endless reconversion of economic capital into symbolic capital’ through a process of ‘collective misrecognition which is the basis of the ethic of honour, a collective denial of the economic reality of exchange [which] is only possible because, when the group lies to itself in this way, there is neither deceiver nor deceived’ (195-6).

⁴³ References in n. 22 above. Cf. also Il. 21.34-135.

⁴⁴ Achilles’ behaviour towards Hector, though it eventually becomes excessively savage, is not without parallel: parts of Od. 22.54-64 are almost an imitation of Il. 9.379 ff., but the Odyssean episode lacks the moral and emotional complexity as well as some of the rhetorical intensity of its original. Cf. R.B. Rutherford, ‘From the Iliad to the Odyssey’ (BICS 38, 1993) 44 f.

⁴⁵ See Macleod on Il. 24.594 f.

⁴⁶ Note in particular Hera's concern that the timē of Achilles should be differentiated from that of Hector, Il. 24.55-63.

⁴⁷ Griffin, J., ‘Heroic and unheroic ideas in Homer’, in Boardman, J. and Vaphopoulou-Richardson, C.E. (eds.), Chios (Oxford 1986) 3–13, 8Google Scholar; cf. more generally Strasburger, H., ‘Der soziologische Aspekt der homerischen Epen’, Gymnasium 60 (1953) 97–114.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Homeric wealth depends on a genuine historical tradition, rather than pure fantasy: Gray (n.8). Really splendid items, like Agamemnon's corselet (Il. 11.19-31), are few and far between, and generally introduced for more reasons than simply to indicate an individual's wealth: cf. Kirk, G.S., ‘Dark age and oral poet’, PCPS 7 (1961) 34–48Google Scholar; Stella, L.A., Tradizione micenea e poesia dell'Iliade (Rome 1978) 38 ffGoogle Scholar; Griffin (n.39) Ch. 1.

⁴⁹ Gernet (n.4).

⁵⁰ Kurke (n.24).

⁵¹ Hdts. 6.130.2, 7.28 f.

³² Arch 19W; Pind. Nem. 8.37-9, fr. 221; Bacchyl fr. 21; Kurke (n.20).

⁵³ Donlan, W., The Aristocratic Ideal in Ancient Greece (Kansas 1980)Google Scholar; Murray, O., Early Greece (London 1980) 197–203Google Scholar; Kurke (n.24).

⁵⁴ Theogn. 119-26, 415-8, 447-52, 499-502, 1105 f.; cf. PMG 541, 901, 988; Hdts. 7.10a; D.L.1.71.

⁵⁵ Olymp. 7.1 ff., Nem. 7.77 ff.; cf. Pyth. 6.5-18, Isth. 5.1-10, Olymp. 1.1-7,3.42-4.

⁵⁶ Von Reden (n.19); cf. Bloch and Parry (n.29) 12-16.

⁵⁷ Contrast the profusion of gold in Irish epic, for instance: Gantz, J., Early Irish Myths and Sagas (Harmondsworth 1981) 41, 47 f., 52, 79, 85, 87-90, 148, 204, 235 ff.Google Scholar