¹ Das Parisurteil, first publ. in 1938 as vol. xi of Wissenschaft und Gegenwart (Frankfurt): republ. in Von Werken und Formen (Godesburg 1948) 11–36Google Scholar and Tradition und Geist (Göttingen 1960) 16–36Google Scholar. A useful summary and critique of Reinhardt's views (and a list of those scholars who have accepted them) is provided by Stinton, T. C. W., Euripides and the Judgement of Paris, Soc. for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies Suppl. Paper xi (1965) 2Google Scholar ff; cf. Griffin, J., CQ xxviii (1978) 15Google Scholar n. 49. Reinhardt was particularly impressed by the representation of the scene on the famous Spartan comb now dated to the second half or the end of the seventh century (cf. Dawkins, R. M., The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta [B.S.A. Athens 1929] 223Google Scholar and fig. 127). The latest examination of artefacts depicting this story is by Raabe, I., Zu den Darstellungen des Parisurteils in dergr. Kunst, Arch. Stud. i (Frankfurt/Bern 1972)Google Scholar.

² The views of ancient scholars on this passage are conveniently collected by H. Erbse in his monumental edition of the Iliadic Scholia (Berlin 1977), v 520 ff. Aristarchus was particularly hostile to the idea that Homer knew the story (see Severyns, A., Le Cycle Épique dans l'École d'Aristarque [Liége 1928] 261Google Scholar ff.) and resorted, as have so many since, to athetesis.

³ On the uniqueness of the Homeric poems' austerely heroic world see especially Griffin, J., JHS xcvii (1977) 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar ff.

⁴ Stinton (n. 1) 3.

⁵ Griffin (n. 1).

⁶ See e.g. the remarks of Lloyd-Jones, , CQ xii (1962) 190Google Scholar ff. and 197 ff. (esp. 198: ‘Cassandra supplies us … with the vital piece of information that gives the missing clue for which we have so long been seeking’). Compare too Aegisthus' rôle at the play's very end. The suspense I refer to particularly concerns the question why the gods impose upon Agamemnon his horrific dilemma at Aulis. For comparable postponements in drama of the motivation behind a divinity's anger cf. Eur. Her. 1308 ff. (Hera's hatred of Heracles due to jealousy of his mother: contrast the motivelessness of her anger as described by Iris at 831 and 840 ff.) and Soph. Aj. 758 ff. (Athena's anger against Ajax: cf. Fraenkel, ad loc., Due seminari romani di Eduard Fraenkel, Sussidi Eruditi xxviii [Rome 1977] 26.Google Scholar)

⁷ So, e.g., Wilamowitz, , Hermes lxv (1930) 242Google Scholar = Kl. Schr. iv 510 (effectively demolished by Reinhardt, Trad. u. Geist 28 n. 14), or Rose, H.J., Humanitas iii (1950/1951) 281Google Scholar ff. (cf. his Handbook of Greek Mythology ⁶ [London 1958] 107)Google Scholar. There is no need even for the modified suggestion made by Stinton (n. 1), 3 n. 4, that ‘there may well have been a version in which Paris added insult to injury by open abuse’.

⁸ ‘Threatening, Abusing and Feeling Angry in the Homeric Poems’, JHS lxxxix (1969) 20, part of an interesting discussion of the Homeric implications of νεικείειν. It must be added that Adkins himself believes there are other reasons for supposing the relevant lines to be late.

⁹ Hence the variant ἀρΧῆϛ for ἄτηϛ here: see Stinton (n. 1) 72 for a defence of the latter. For the meaning of ἄτη here see Barrett on Eur. Hipp. 241.

¹⁰ Stressed by Hampe, R., Neue Beiträge zur Klassischen Altertumwissenschaft, Fest…. Bernhard Schweitzer (Kohlhammer 1954) 85Google Scholar f. among others.

¹¹ Trad. u. Geist 28: ‘Poseidon wird schuldigerweise wie cine Parenthese mitgennant’. One explanation of this feature is that Homer obviously wishes to remind us of the trio of pro-Achaean deities mentioned at Il. i 400: Poseidon is far more relevant to that context than to the actual judgement of Paris. Compare the trio of gods overcome by the power of love at Soph. Tr. 499 ff. Hades is mentioned there because, as it were, he has been ‘attracted’ to his two brothers Zeus and Poseidon: the poet is more concerned to stress the omnipotence of love in every area of the Universe than to suggest that Hades’ abduction of Persephone really justifies ranking him with his brothers as a seducer and rapist.

¹² Another phrase whose difficulty is attested by the existence of a varia lectio, ἐρατεινήν for ἀλεγεινήν. Aristophanes preferred to have the line end ἥ οἱ κεχαρισμένα δῶρ òνóμηνϵ (v 523 Erbse). That would indeed be much more normal. But is Homer striving for a ‘normal’ effect?

¹³ Who add that its occurrence in Il. xxiv was ‘rejected by Aristarch[us] as a word peculiar to women, but [is] used of Paris as effeminate’ (cf. passages like Il. iii 39: Δύσπαρι, εἶδος ἄριστε, γυναυμανές, ἠπεροπευτά or xi 385: κέρᾳ ἀγλαέ, παρθενοπῖπα. Stinton (n. 1) 3 n. 4 alleges that μαχλοσύνη is ‘used of men’ in ‘Lucian, Alex, ii’, I presume what he means is that we find the phrase ὁ Ποδαλεἰριος μάχλος καὶ γυναικομανὴς τήν φύσιν in Lucian Alex. (42) 11 (sic) (ii 336 Macleod). μάχλος too is usually restricted to women. ‘῾Ησιόδειος δ᾿ἐστιν ἡ κέξις says Σ A of μαχλοσύνη referring to its use in the Eoeae of the punishment inflicted by Hera upon the daughters of Proetus (frr. 131–2 MW): cf. Henrichs, A., ZPE xv (1974) 301Google Scholar n. 17.

¹⁴ As Sosicrates FGrH 461 F 6, = Σ Eur. Hipp. 47 (ii 11 Schwartz), puts it: τὸ δὲ αἵτιον ὅτι πάσαις ταῖς ἀφ᾿ ῾Ηλίου γενομέναις ἰμήνιεν ᾿Αφροδιτη, διὰ τὴν μηνυθεῖσαν ύφ᾿ . Further instances of human lust as a punishment due to Aphrodite's anger in Apollod. iii 14.4 ( = Panyassis fr. 25 K) on the legend of Smyrna, in Parthenius περὶ ἐρωτικῶν παθήματων ν 2. etc. I cite numerous other examples of such victims (who include males as well as females) à propos of the above-mentioned fragment of Stesichorus in my forth-coming commentary on that poet. The word μαχλοσύνη is not actually used in any of these cases but the concept it represents is obviously there.

¹⁵ A sensible recognition of a degree at least of planned symmetry in Kirk, The Songs of Homer (Cambridge 1962) 261 ff., who rejects the more extreme attempts that have been made to establish fairly exacts responsions. Add now to the works he cites on p. 401 Reinhardt, , Die Ilias und ihr Dichter (Göttingen 1961) 63Google Scholar ff., the important book by Beck, G., Die Stellung des 24 Buches der Ilias in der alter Epentradition (Diss. Tübingen 1964)Google Scholar, and Lohmann, D., Die Komposition der Reden in der Ilias (Berlin 1970) 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar ff.

¹⁶ See especially Reinhardt, Trad. u. Geist 23 ff; cf. his book on the Iliad (n. 15) 96 ff.; Burkert, W., RhM ciii (1960) 140,Google Scholar etc.

¹⁷ On the significance of Hera and Athena's reception of Thetis at 97 ff. see, e.g., Griffin (n. 1) 12: ‘the gods … receive her with a golden cup and cheering words.… Among these gods even a mourner must drink and be of good cheer’; cf. Braswell, B. K., CQ xxi (1971) 23Google Scholar f.

¹⁸ Kirk (n. 15) 366.

¹⁹ Apollo's speech at xxiv 33 ff. lays down how Achilles should behave, but our view of this intervention is very considerably modified by his constant hostility to Achilles, of which we are again reminded by Hera's taunting reply.

²⁰ Note especially the contrast between Achilles and Apollo as regards the charge of ἀπιστία which is levelled against both of them in Il. xxiv. Hecuba warns Priam of Achilles at 207: ὠμηστἠς καὶ ἄπιστος ἀνὴρ ὅ γε but the prediction is not fulfilled. Hera's criticism of Apollo in 63 is all too true.

²¹ Griffin (n. 1) 13, paraphrasing and summarising important remarks by Erbse, H. in AuA xvi (1970) 110Google Scholar.

²² See, e.g., Reinhardt, Trad. u. Geist 30 ff. and Die Ilias und ihr Dicker 446, Griffin (n. 1) 7 etc.

²³ The Homeric nuances of this scene have already been explored from a different angle by Griffin (n. 1) 10 and n. 31. The continuity between Euripides, Homer and the other early Greek poets is rightly stressed by Lloyd-Jones, , The Justice of Zeus (California 1971) 144Google Scholar ft. (148 ff. on the Hippolytus).

²⁴ In YCS xiii (1952) 29Google Scholar ff. (repr. in Euripides: a collection of critical essays ed. Segal, Erich (Prentice-Hall 1968) 112Google Scholar f. (sans footnotes) and in Knox's, collected essays, Word and Action (Baltimore/London 1979) 227Google Scholar f.

²⁵ In particular, the Hippolytus lacks the clement of the Διὀς βουλή found in Iliad xxiv (where Hermes returns to safeguard Priam's journey back to Troy) and has an additional, characteristically Euripidean, degree of bitterness.

²⁶ In both passages the deity provides his or her own explanation of the need to depart (Hermes at 463 f. claiming

νεμεσσητὀν δέ κεν εἴη ἀθάνατον θεὸν ὦδε βροτοὺς ἀγαπαζέμεν ἄντην

and Artemis at 1437 ff. maintaining that it is not θέμιϛ for her to behold a mortal's death), but it is hard not to detect a deeper poetic reason: cf. Reinhardt, Trad. u. Geist 234 on the Euripidean passage (‘Es gibt kaum eine zweite Szene, die unter dem Mantel des Heiligen und Rührenden so anklagt’) and Griffin (n. 1) 10, n. 31.

²⁷ In his commentary on Aeneid vii–xii (London 1973)Google Scholar, on Aen. xii 79 ff.

²⁸ A brief bibliography in Williams (n. 27).

²⁹ Of course I am here far from doing justice to the complexities of the end of the Aeneid, or even to the numerous Homeric echoes and resonances which Vergil combines in the closing scenes of his work, on which see (for instance) Knauer, G. K., Die Aeneis und Homer Hypomnemata vii (Göttingen 1964) 322Google Scholar ff. But note that Turnus' appeal to Aeneas (932 ff.), like Priam's to Achilles (486 f), turns upon an appeal to the hero's father; and the death of Pallas, unlike that of Patroclus on whom he is in many ways modelled (see Knauer 298 ff.) annuls the force of this supplication.