Callimanco Janko

8/13/2019 Callimanco Janko

1/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre

Author(s): Richard JankoSource: Hermes, 109. Bd., H. 1 (1981), pp. 9-24Published by: Franz Steiner VerlagStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4476188.

Accessed: 29/10/2013 18:24

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Franz Steiner Verlagis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toHermes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 193.204.40.97 on Tue, 29 Oct 2013 18:24:25 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fsvhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4476188?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/4476188?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fsv


2/17


3/17

10 RICHARDJANKO

1. IntroductionWhen we come to classify the Hymns in terms of the structure of the

middle section, it will become apparent that the form and length of theintroduction does not relate to the rest of the Hymn. Nor does the eventuallength of the Hymn affect the introduction. This is not surprising when weconsider the probable origins of the genre in oral poetry. We may thereforeexamine the introductions alone.

There are two Hymns which must have lost their Introductions - Hy. 1toDionysus, and the Hymn to Pythian Apollo. With three exceptions, the normsenunciated by WEISCHADLEappear to be correct. The exceptions are Hy. 21,24 and 29, which open with plain vocatives of the deity's name as first word.This seems to be a rare sub-type: it may be pure coincidence that all threehappen to be Attributive Hymnss.

As WEISCHADLE ays, it is usual for the god's name to precede the verb, butthere are exceptions - DAp. and Aphr.6. The proem of the Erga, otherwiseof Attributive type, is remarkable in that a whole line of invocation of theMuses precedes the name of Zeus, which is not dignified by any epithet. Theepithet is also absent in Hy. 25, wherethree gods are named, and in the secondproem to the Theogony (v. 36), as we shall see below. The verb of singing ispostponed to the beginning of the second line in Hy. 6 and 7 only.

On occasion the epithets are piledup to a considerable length, as in Herm.,Hy. 19 or Hy. 28, where up to three lines are so filled, almost approaching thestyle of the Orphic Hymns. Compare the instrusive Hy. 8, where epithetsoccupy more than five lines: it appears that in the evolution of the genre theintroductory and closing sections may have developed to such an extent thatthe middle section entirely disappeared (in Hy. 8 it may be represented by theclause with a main verb in v. 8, before xXi30 begins the conclusion). It isnoticeable however that Herm. is the sole exception to the generalisation thatin our corpus only short Hymns have Introductions of more than two lines.Herm., Hy. 18and Hy. 22 have nearlythree lines, Hy. 27 and 33 (each twentyor so lines long) have three whole lines of Introduction. This might be achronological pointer (but it might not ).

We have defined the Introduction as the material down to the first relativepronoun. The only cases where a relative clause does not introduce the middlesection are Hy. 7 (6; instead, unless this is a metagrammatic corruption of o6;heavy before a vowel, but cf. Hy. 19, 29, 27; 19), Hy. 25 (yap instead), andthe extremely odd Hy. 21 (in the other two cases where a vocative comprises

5 V. infra p. 13f.6 Note the following abbreviations: Dem., Hy. 2 to Demeter: DAp., PAp., Hymns to

Apollo, Delian and Pythian respectively: Herm., Hy. 4 to Hermes: Aphr., Hy. 5 to Aphrodite.

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


4/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre 11

the introduction, a relative pronoun follows). In Hy. 13 there is no middlesection: the relative clause is presumably lost in Hy. 1 and PAp.There is one irregular factor which disturbs the tidy schema of WEI-SCHADLE here: the optional Appeal to the Muse(s). This is found in eleven ofour Hymns, or about a third. Its presence cannot be correlated with any otherfeature - length of Hymn, internal structure, length of the introduction orperhapseven date. An invocation to the Muse is present in the Introduction offour non-Hymnic works we possess (Ii., Od., Thebais and Epigoni), andabsent in only one (Ilias Mikra), but this is rather too small a sample on whichto base a theory that the rightful place of the Appeal was in the work thatfollowed the Hymn, not in the Hymn itself, at any stage in the tradition.

2. The Middle SectionWEISCHADLE hints at a distinction between what he terms 'myth' and

>>general nd summary remarks


5/17

12 RICHARDJANKOis causedby the ambiguousnatureof St. Elmo's fire, the manifestation f theDioscuri, whichcould be thought of as a presentAttribute as apparentlybyAlcaeus, 34 L.-P.) or a past apparition,as here after the initial hesitation.Occasionallypast tenses are used for the choice by or allocation o a deity ofhis presentsphereof activity:Hy. 14, Hy. 22; Hy. 29, 3; cf. Aphr. 9. 10. 18.21. The verbs used areF,USa6cv,&ioctvto, ct.aXe nd Ue. The only use ofpast tenses in Attributeswhich cannot be explained n these ways is Hy. 19,12- 13, which will be discussedbelow9.Poems withno more than Attributive ectionsare never onger han abouttwenty-five ines, as of course the description ould not hold its interestforlonger. There s howevera method available or extending he Hymn, whichwe find seven times (including he Hesiodic proems in our corpus): simpleAttributiveHymns comprisefourteenof our thirty-fiveHymns1?.The typecontinuedto be imitated ater, e. g. in Aratus'proemto his Phaenomena.The AttributiveHymnmay be extendedonly by the additionof a Priamelleading nto a Myth. For obvious reasonswewillcall sucha Hymn 'Compo-site'.

b) The PriamelA Priamel s hardly ever found in the Hymnsexceptas a bridgebetweenAttributiveandMythicmaterial: heexceptionswill be discussedbelow. It isneverused to introduce he poem, as in Callim.Hy. I 4ff. However,some ofthe Priamelsarevestigial,and theseare later n our list:PAp. 207- 216, a choice offered betweenApollo's wooingand the founda-tion of his oracle.Hy. 1, 1 5, different birth-places or Dionysus, eventuallychoosing Nysa

(v. 8), where the myth surely begins.Aphr.2ff., 34ff. A remarkable ase,wherea condensedPriamelof the extentof Aphrodite'sreignsurroundsan Attributive?) passage,describinghe ex-ceptionsto it. The Mythis not directly ntroducedby it.DAp. 19A Priamel ine is offered,butthe fact of choice s thenglossedover.Hy. 19, 27ff. The song of the Nymphsaboutthe gods andOlympus,settlingon Hermes fatherof Pan.Th. 11 f. The song of theMusesaboutthe gods precedes,but doesnot intro-duce,the Mythof theirapparitiono Hesiod,which s introduced ya relativepronoun.

9 p.'9.10This total is obtained by omitting Hy. 8, and counting the two Hymns to Apollo, the proemto the Erga, and the double proem to the Theogony as two Hymns.



6/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre 13Th. 44ff. The song of the Muses about the gods precedes, but does notintroduce, the Myth of their birth, which is introduced by a relativepronoun.Th. 65- 67. An abbreviated ong of the Musesabout the gods precedes heMythof theirfirstappearance n Olympus,whichis introducedby a relativepronoun.The extent of the Attributivepassagespreceding he Priamelis thus asfollows:Hy. 1 unknown, PAp. 25+ lines, DAp. 18 lines, Hy. 19 26 lines, Th. A10lines, Th. B c.7 lines, and c.5 lines.

These lengths are reasonablefor completeAttributiveHymns. In eachone, insteadof proceeding o the conclusionat once, the poet smoothesthetransition o Mythwith a Priamelor device for focussingon one particulartheme.Onevarietyof thisis a songon many topics, as in Hy. 19.Evenwhenpoetsmaynothavewished o usea Priamel, racesof one canalwaysbe foundat this point. Thus the peculiarsongs in the Theogonycan be explainedasvestigialPriamelsof the songtype.Thisis corroborated y Hy. 27 to Artemis,which closes with a song of the Muses and Gracesdescribing he birth ofLeto'schildren.The songcould easilyhavebeenusedto lead intoa MythofArtemis'birth, but insteadthe poet chose to bring the Hymn to its close.Comparealso the song at PAp. 189ff.Apartfromthe strange ase of Aphr., thePriamel s foundonlyonce else-where,to modulatebackfrom Mythto Attributesat DAp. 140ff.: unlesswewish to explain the past tenses at Hy. 19, 12- 15 as a misplacedvestigialpriamel,comparingDAp. 141 142. In Aphr.the technique s retained,butusedby the poet in a startlingandoriginalmanner.

c) MythInmany Hymnsthe Mythfollows the Introduction irectly.Of thirty-fiveHymns,thirteenare of this type. As we haveseen, Myth may also be intro-ducedby a Priamelafteran Attributivepassage.WehavedefinedMythby its past tenses, but it maybeopen to a closer de-finition.Many Mythsincludethe birthof thedeity - thirteenout of twentyexamplesdo so. One prominent eature hatappears everal imes s the ama-zementof theonlookers,e. g. DAp. 134 f., Hy. 19,35ff. InHy.6 Aphrodite's

appearanceromthe seato amazedspectatorss depicted.Thisgivesus a clueto thecommonelementsharedby all the Myths: hat of apparition,of whichbirthis but the commonestform. Epiphaniesoccur in all poemswherenobirth s involved, except Hy. 20 to Hephaestus,who wasperhaps houghttoounprepossessing:



7/17

14 RICHARDJANKODem. 188ff., 275ff.; PAp. 440ff.; Aphr. 81ff. (?), 173ff.; Hy. 7, 2 etc.;Th. 22 - 34, where the Muses appear to Hesiod; Th. 68ff., where the Musesappear on Olympus for the first time.

The reason for this suppletive distribution of birth and apparition is readi-ly perceived: birth is a major type of apparition, and the onlookers are equallyamazed at both.

The development of the Myth may proceed unhindered by any forces ofgenre to whatever length the poet wishes or his audience might require. Poemswith a central myth vary from 5 to 580 verses. It may well be mere chance thatour two longest Hymns (Dem. and Herm.) belong to the type where the Mythstarts at once after the Introduction. Even a Myth in a Composite Hymn maybe short (e.g. Hy. 19, 28-47) or long (e.g. PAp. 214-544) as desired.

The study of narrative techniques within the Myth belongs with the studyof epic narrative in general, and cannot be looked at here. Note however thetendency to end the Myth with the words of the god (PAp. Aphr., Hy. 7)".

d) ProlongationAt the end of the Myth a few lines may be devoted to bringing it up to thepresent time 12. If this passage is extended we may feel that we are returningto

an Attributive passage, and there is evidence that the poets thought so too.The following list is arranged by length:Hy. 15, 7 - 8 The present bliss of Heracles on Olympus after his labours.Herm. 576- 578 The present activities of Hermes.Hy. 20, 5 - 7 The present improvements in man's comforts due toHephaestus.Dem. 485 - 489 The presentresidence of Demeter on Olympus, and her bless-ings to mortals.Th. 60- 67 (The Muses' birth, followed by) their present activities onOlympus.Hy. 31, 8- 16 (The birth of Helios, followed by) his present Attributes.(Hy. 33, 7 - 17 [Birth of the Dioscuri, followed by] their Attribute, St. Elmo'sfire; but owing to the nature of this phenomenon, the poet modulates back toa past tense, thus producing a unique sub-type).

1 Cf. RICHARDSON p. JHS 97 (1977) p. 175, who remarks that this supports the integrity ofthe closing lines of PAp.12 RICHARDSONad. Dem. 483 - 489, with a useful list of parallels. However, he incorrectlyrelates Prolongation to the past tenses in Attributive passageswhich have been shown above to beexceptional. Yet it is true that the analogy of Prolongation may account for the return to thepresent tense at DAp. 12, especially if we punctuate at the end of v. 11 (as he has pointed out tome in personal communication).



8/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre 15DAp. 140 - 164 Sly modulation to present tenses via a Priamel leads to a de-scription of Apollo's present festival on Delos.Th. 75- 104 After the Myth of the Muses' first appearance on Olympus, amodulation via a list of their names to their present Attributes.The length of these 'Prolongations', as we shall term them, does notdepend on the length of the preceding Myth. We can distinguish two types:'short' Prolongations, in effect of not more than five lines, where the Conclu-sion of the poem is unaffected, and the 'long' Prolongations of Hy. 31, DAp.and Th. 75 - 104, where we will find a more elaborate Conclusion typical ofAttributive Hymns. Long Prolongations are in fact a return to an Attributivepassage after the Myth, and the poets end as if they had just composed anAttributive Hymn.

3. ConclusionThe Conclusion may contain up to three elements: a) The Salutation,

xalp? or ?\lrOtor iX'nxot,DAp. 165). b) A Prayer or Prayers, often with refe-renceto the song. c) A reference to moving on to Another Song (Poet's Task).Where all three elements are present, this order occurs in nine out of tenexamples, if we allow that xU0t takes the place of the Salutation in the Erga,and a sphragis replaces the prayer in DAp. The only exception is Hymn 29,where the salutation and prayer are inverted.As already remarked, only Attributive Hymns or those ending in Attribu-tes tend to have a full conclusion of this sort. Nine out of seventeen suchHymns have this (excluding Hy. 12 which lacks a conclusion altogether, andHy. 13 that has no middle), while only two of the other Hymns have such anending (Dem. and Hy. 6). If a poem ending in Myth is given a Conclusion con-

sisting of three elements, the third will be a repetition of the Salutation(Hy. 1; 18): This type of ending is not found in Attributive Hymns.As WEISCHADLEnoted, the Poet's Task is often omitted from shorterHymns. Of Hymns under forty verses long, about thirteen have this andtwelve omit it. The uncertainty is due to the difficulty of distinguishing aprayer for the song from a reference to Another Song, in such cases as oi &Enil?onI / atit' tXiiOoptF04vo)cpfj; tFlgvfio3aGx tot8fi; (Hy. 1, 18-19). If thisis a prayer, then two longer Hymns (Hy. 1 and 7) have no reference to anothersong: this seems less likely. The absence of the Poet's Task from many shorterHymns may be due to chronological factors, as these have often been thoughtlater: but it is easy to think of other explanations.

It is very unusual to omit the Salutation: this occurs only in Dem., Hy. 24and of course the first proem to the Theogony, where it may be supposed thatHesiod already intended to proceed from his Hymn to the Muses of Helicon



9/17

16 RICHARDANKO

to the Hymn to the Musesof Olympus,at the end of whichthey receivedueSalutation. Its absencein Dem. can be accounted or by supposing hat thevocative n 492 serves nstead,and we also notice hat a vocativehas ust intro-duced he shortHymn24. Note the useof two prayersof invocation ngpx?o:the imperatives ere may be equivalent o the Salutation,whichof courseareformally mperatives.The greetingsXalpsand YTXStulfil the same function.Thisis clear fromthe fact that they have a suppletivedistribution, nd fromDAp. 165- 166:

6X1' 6-y?O' i%kxoI gtv 'Aiot6Xow 'ApT?@16t t3V,%aip?T? 6' 6gt7g raoatl ...

The phrasingsuggests that the two verbs are equivalent; he choir areflatteredby beingaddressedon the sametermsas the god, in a mannermostuntraditional or the genre.Inthe ErgaxX5iOttands n placeof the usualsalutation.Is this perhaps ntransition o theOrphicandlaterusage,as seen for exampleat Hy. 8, 9? Thisseemsmore plausible hanto suppose hat the later usage s developed romtheepic format for prayersas at e.g. E 115, wherexXfOtprecedes he deity'sname in the vocative, followed by a reference o past servicesbefore thepresentrequest.It is of interest to note that these prayersare found alone(Hom. Epigr.6 and 12M.), but theydo not seem o have nfluenced ur genre.However, heevidenceof both Prayers ndHymnscan be traced n the poemsof Sappho (e.g. 1. 2. 5 L.-P.) and Alcaeus(34. 45. 308 L.-P.); this wouldrepaycloseranalysis.

4. Notes on Particular HymnsHaving elucidatedthe general structureof the Hymns it remains tocommenton thepeculiarities f particularnstances.To avoidunnecessarye-petitioncross-referenceswill be givenfor minorHymnswhichhavealreadybeendiscussed.

Hymn 1 to Dionysus: Ofthis fragmentaryHymnwe possesspartof a Priamelleading nto a Mythof birth, togetherwiththeend of theMythandthe Con-clusion. This is enoughto enable us to presume hat this was a CompositeHymn;we havealmostcertainly ost the Introduction ndabouttwenty inesof AttributesbeforethePriamel,although t is impossible o gaugehow muchMythhas been ost. It seemsmostunlikely hatthe Priamelresembledhatatthe openingof Call. Hy. 1, whichis used to beginthe poem.Hymn to Delian Apollo: Inthe lightof the comparative videncegivenaboveit shouldnot benecessaryo argue hatthisis anindependentHymncomplete



10/17

The Structure f the HomericHymns:A Study n Genre 17in itself, although he contrary s still maintainedby a few scholars'3.None-theless, the Hymndisplayssome very remarkable eatures,in almost everysection of the poem.(i) After the Introductionthe poet clumsily chose an Attributive sceneincapableof narration n the present ense withoutabsurdity.He beganwithpresent enses in vv. 2 - 4, but then realised hat the scenedepictedcould nothappen once the gods were familiar with Apollo's appearance.Thus heswitched o the past tenses of vv. 5- 10, turning he passage nto somethingcloserto the common descriptionof a deity's first arrivalon Olympus(cf.WEST n Th. 68). M. L. WEST'Suggestion'4 hat thisdebAcle s due to thepoet attempting o outdo PAp. here is plausible;thereis certainlyno goodreason o absolve he poet from his blunderby assigning hese verses o an in-terpolator I.In v. 12thepoet returnso the present: his is opento two expla-nations. Perhaps he poet is simplyrecalling hat the scenewas meant to beAttributive, and wants to make this clear before the close. Alternatively,RICHARDSON 6has suggested hatthe return o the presenthere is equivalentto a Prolongation,as at Dem. 485, in preparationor theinvocationof Leto.The ideathat DAp. 1 18couldhaveformeda completeHymnis appealing:compare Hymn27 to Artemis.However,the poet was then facedwith theproblem hat he wasgivingSalutation o a deitywhom he had not introducedat the start. This s possible,as it is alsofound at Dem. 493 and Hy. 29, but wenever ind theoriginalgodleft out. So insteadof a Conclusion, he address oLeto becomes a 'trailer',which could have led straightinto the Myth ofApollo's birth(note that it is placedsecond). But instead he poet resorts o aPriamel ine (= PAp. 207).Awkwardnesss apparent ven here:fromthe contexttheo' of v. 19oughtto refer o Leto,not Apollo,andthepoet has to inserta vocative nto the nextverse o show that the latter s intended.Then, despite hePriamel ine, no realchoice s offered,andthe fact is glossedoverby a list of naturalfeatures hatdelight Apollo - almost a 'trailer' for the list of peaksand headlandsatv. 30ff. At v. 25 ff. the poet offers to tell of Apollo's birth on Delos - arepeated trailer'.Finallyat v. 30 the Myth begins - but this is not at onceapparent. RiCHARDSON has pointed out to me'7 that vv. 30ff. are bothAttributive and Mythical, >>i. . they seem at first to expand line 29, but at theend turn out to be the list of Leto'swanderings the asyndetonat 30 ought toindicatethat it is picking up 29)


11/17

18 RICHARD JANKOtreating raditionalelements n the genrein quite a novelmanner,althoughopinionsmay varyas to his success;clearly he structure f PAp. is far moretraditional,as there is no unique Salutationto Leto, a more normal and(I think)less awkwarduse of the Priamel,and no 'trailers'.(ii) The end of the Hymnis more competent,but structurally nique;it issomewhatsimilarto the second proemto the Theogony.It is interesting onote that both of these innovativepoets adorn theirwork with a sphragis.Here he peculiarities eginat the end of theMyth: wemayterm what followsa Prolongation o an Attributivepassage,followedby a full and uniqueCon-clusion. The first uniquefeatureis the use of a Priamelto move from theMyth back to the present:133- 139: The new-borngod walked off, causing amazementetc. (Past:Myth)140- 142: You, Apollo, wanderedon Delos and elsewhere. Past: Myth)143 145: Manytemples,groves etc. dearto you. (Pastor present?)146ff.: But you like Delos best of all, where... (Present:Attributes)The end of the Myth is carefullyblurred. 140- 142 have a hint of aPriamelabout them, althoughtechnically till in the Myth:an almost exactconversecorrespondences found at Hy. 19, 10- 15, where n an Attributivepassage the poet falls into past tenses in a descriptionreminiscentof apriamel,a list of the god's frequentactivities.The transitionn tenses s thenmediatedthrough143 145, where the predicativeverbis left to be under-stood:cf. the same deviceabove at vv. 30- 44, and alsoTh. 75- 79. WESTX8hasin fact suggested hat a true Priamelonce stood at thispoint, ashe thinksthat 143- 145 have replaced179-180. Note the common use of the secondperson n Priamels,cf. Hy. 1, 1ff.; PAp. 207 f., whichsupportshisidea. Theuse of the secondperson s no doubtdue to the shift to the secondpersonatthe end of the Attributivepassage,whencethepoet wouldbe ready or eitherthe Salutationand Conclusionor a PriamelandMyth.Here alone the deviceis employedto introducean Attributivepassage.The Conclusionof thepoem is also untraditional.Not only does the poethailthe chorusof Deliangirls on thesame termsas Apollo(165- 166)19,buthe thenabandons he usualpoetic anonymity o indulge n a sphragisat somelength (166- 176), in placeof the prayerusual here in Hymns thatend withAttributes.This s provedby the factthat he includes n the sphragis requestto the maidens to spreadhis fame, which is no doubt why they receive theSalutationat v. 166. At least he closeswith the usual reference o another ong(vv. 177- 178: 179- 181 are out of place).

18 Art. cit.19 V. sup. p. 16.



12/17

The Structure f the HomericHymns:A Study n Genre 19Hymn to Pythian Apollo: the conservative structure of this Hymn requireslittle comment, apart from that given above in relation to DAp. On theauthenticity of the ending cf. note 11.Hymn to Aphrodite: This Hymn is basically Composite, with Introduction,Attributive passage and then Myth: but the Attributive passage is remarkablein content, and the Myth is curiously introduced. After the Introduction wefind what one is tempted to class an abbreviated Priamel, of the extent of thepowers of Aphrodite: but instead of choosing one particular example (andthus being as untraditional as Callimachus by starting a Myth at once with aPriamel), the poet then details the three goddesses who are not subject toher, in passages resembling short Hymns - Attributive to Athene andArtemis, and a Prolonged Mythic type for Hestia (note the relative clause,v. 22). The poet then uses Ring-composition to return to the 'Priamel' themeof Aphrodite's invincibility. We now expect a detailed Mythic instance, andindeed we are told that she deceived even Zeus (36ff.). But to our surprise,this example is not extended, but diverted into an honorific mention of Hera.Then the poet stands his whole theme on its head by finally choosing as hisstory Zeus' revenge on Aphrodite, when he makes her feel desire The originalartistry and skilful manipulation of the audience's expectations is typical ofthis poet, and in my opinion more successful than that in DAp.Hymn 6 to Aphrodite: Uniquely, this Mythic Hymn has a full Conclusion.Hymn 12 to Hera: This Hymn alone has no Conclusion at all.Hymn 13 to Demeter: Only this Hymn has no middle section.Hymn 14 to the Mother of the Gods: This is an Attributive Hymn. The pasttense in v. 4 is explained above, p. 11 . It might be termed an 'Attributive' pasttense, as 'has been pleased by / has been allotted' equals 'has chosen' (asAttribute).Hymn 15 to Heracles: For a Myth of birth followed by exploits, and thenbrought up to the present, cf. Herm. Hy. 20 is derived from this type.Hymn 19 to Pan: This is the shortest Composite Hymn that we possess. TheAttributive passage continues to c. v. 30, where a Priamel 'Hymn' to Hermesis used to select the story of Pan's birth. Note that the past tense Evv*riovinv. 29 is used because the Nymphs cannot always be singing the same song; thesame holds for the past tenses at Th. 7 - 1020. The song is very close to aHymn: the god's name, epithets, verb, and then a relative ci)S, cf. Hy. 7, 2,used of a similar song at Hy. 27, 19. But instead of introducing the Myth atonce the poet has to refer to Hermes' present role of divine messenger beforehe can launch into the past tenses of 31 ff.

The unusual feature of this Hymn is the use of past tenses in theAttributive passage at 12-15, where a list of Pan's frequent pursuits is in the20 But cf. WESTad lOc.

2*



13/17

20 RICHARDJANKOpast. This follows a list of his frequentpursuits n the present, ntroducedbydlo'r?, ... cO)ots. This is reminiscentof Priamel, and DAp. 141 142 isclosely similar (dlXoTs ... dXXoTs, with past tenses). Perhaps the thought ofthe impending ransition o Mythinfluenced he poet here.Hymn21 to Apollo: On the openingvocative,and unique ack of a relative,see above pp. 10- 11.Hymn 22 to Poseidon: On the aorist A8aaavto see page 12.Hymn25: The middlesectionis uniquely ntroducedby y&p. Does this showthat the Hymnis merelya cento fromTh. 94 -97 ?Hymn31 to Helios: This is an interesting ase of Prolongation o Attributes,introducedby a relative pronounat v. 8 after the myth. Note that a fullConclusion ollows, as if the Hymnhad been Attributive.The reference o theexactsubjectof the nextsongis paralleledn Hymn32 and of courseTh. 105,cf. 33.Hymn32 to Selene: Here a Mythof birth is tacked on to the Attributivepassageby a relativepronoun vv. 15 16).This s untraditional, venthoughSelene'sown birth s not described.However, he Conclusion s a full one, asif a purely AttributiveHymnhadpreceded.Hymn33 to the Dioscuri:This hasan unusual tructure.The Mythof birth sprolonged into an Attributivepassageabout St. Elmo's fire, in the presenttense(vv. 6- 11),but thenthe poetdecides hatthis apparitions reallya casefor past narration(vv. 12- 17). The shorter Conclusion accords with theclassificationof what precededas Myth.Hesiod's Theogony:This displaysextraordinaryndividuality.Nonetheless,numerous scholars have already recognised its Hymnic form, andP. FRIEDLANDER21long since drew attention to its bipartite structure,dividing t at verse35. This s quitecorrect:wewillcall the two partsProemAandProem B, vv. 1- 34 and 36- 104respectively.Thetwo arejoinedby theunconvincingdevice of v. 35:

&XXdttlrl got 'raOTa niPri 6Pt3Vfj ipi 7t?1pilv;In fact both parts arecompositeHymns, the first to the Musesof Helicon,the second to those of Olympus.ProemA is uncomplicated.The Introduction(v. 1) leads by a relativepronoun nto an Attributivepassagedescribing heMuses (2- 10). The past tenses in 7- 10 are requiredby the fact that theycannotalwaysbe singingthis particular ong (cf. Hy. 19, 29). However,as

FRIEDLANDER remarked,Hesiod is also envisaging he goddesses'movementdown the mountainon thespecificoccasionwhentheymethim. There s lessawkwardnesshan in DAp., as there s no shift back to thepresent.Thus1do21 Hermes 1914, pp. 1- 16; for the extensive scholarship since then, v. WEST ad Th. I - 115.



14/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre 21not acceptWEST'S ssertion ad loc.) that thesepast tensesaretimeless,as hisparallels rom the Hymns have allbeen accounted or in otherways22.After this the Muses sing a song covering a wide range of deities(vv. 11 21). We arealready amiliarwith the song as Priamel(e.g. Hy. 19,29ff.) for the selectionof the Myth.Hesiodcould not do this here, giventheMythhe wishedto tell, andwas obligedto resortto a relativepronoun(22).The song howeverremains,a vestigialPriamel:comparethe song at PAp.190ff.Thepoet thendescribeshow the Musesonceappearedo him,andcasuallytells us his name. The use of a sphragisat this point is not traditional.TheMusesbid himsingtheTheogony,andof themselves irstandlast. Referenceto singingof a deityfirst and lastoccursbefore he Salutation n Hy. 1and21,and after it in Hy. 9. Thus this bears some resemblance o a concludingformula,and is in the rightplacehere. Of course Hesiodsuppresses he realConclusion,but we have a veiled reference o anothersong (theTheogony)and thisclosingformula.There is no Salutation,whichconfirms hat Hesiodhad alreadydecidedto continuethe proem whilecomposingtheselines.ProemB is lesssimple,andits structure ecallsDAp. Butat first all is familiar- Introduction,Attributes,a songas a vestigialPriamel moreabbreviated,but introducing he idea of the generations; here is no problemover thetenses), and then the Myth of the Muses' birth introducedas usual by arelativepronoun(vv. 53-60). At v. 60 Hesiod uses yet anotherrelativetousher n a return o the present(Prolongation):but this is brief, as at 65 theMusesaresingingagain(avestigialPriamel).Hesiodhurriespast this:it is notquite as clumsy as it sounds, as singing is prominentamong the Muses'Attributes.At v. 68 the poet againemploysa relativepronoun to begin theMyth of theirfirstappearance n Olympus,and how theythen sangof howZeuscameto power. Thissong is also not entirelyredundant,as we hearforthe first time, after slight and vague foreshadowingat v. 66f., of thedistributionof the gods' spheres of activity by Zeus. Thus despite theirapparentoriginsas vestigialPriamelswhichfit in with the Attributesof theMuses,Hesioduses these four songs for a gradualunveilingof thematterheintendedhis Theogony o contain.Thepasttensescontinue o v. 75, andthenthere s a subtle ransitionbackto thepresentviathe namesof theMuses,andthe statement hat Calliopeis the eldest. From v. 80 on a long Attributivepassage Prolongation o Attributes) tretches o the Conclusionat 104 105,which s a fullone, as weexpectwhenAttributeshavepreceded.ThusHesiod

22 The tense at Aphr. 261 can be accounted for by the influence of Th. 2 - 8 (with Th. 2 cf.Aphr. 258, which violates formulaic economy, cf. Aphr. 285: tppcx,avto transitive at Aphr. 261is secondary to the usage of Hesiod at Th. 8, and also to that of Q 616: but note that the peculiarpast tense there could indicate that this is a stereotyped usage in this verb).



15/17

22 RICHARDJANKOreduplicates the structure of what may be termed the Prolonged CompositeHymn seen in DAp. and Th. 36 - 67. This may be represented schematically:if DAp. is y abc z, then Th. 1 - 105 is y ab z/y abcbc z.Hesiod's Erga: This is original in both Introduction (the long address to theMuses, and the lack of an epithet for Zeus, for which cf. Aratus 1), and in theuse of xXi3O0Instead of a Salutation. Otherwise it is a normal AttributiveHymn23

5. Conclusion, and the prospects for further studyThe purpose of this paper has been to examine the formal elements in the

structure of the Homeric Hymns. Only by taking all the evidence into accountcan we hope to identify and evaluate what is traditional and what is less usualand therefore likely to be innovative: we can also classify the different typesof Hymn that existed. Fundamental to our analysis is the distinction betweenMyth and Attributes, based on past versus present narration.

As so few Hymns are reliably datable, either absolutely or in relation toeach other, the analysis of these traditional patterns cannot provide anindicator of date on which we may depend.

It is worth pointing out that the patterns described offer considerableflexibility and variety, and (except during a Myth) they can usually be broughtto a rapid close if necessary. This indicates that they may have arisen from thepressures of oral composition, where the poets did not know that they wouldbe able to continue singing for as long as they wish. Such uncertainty mayaccount for the hesitant beginning of the Hymn to Delian Apollo, which couldhave been brought to a hasty end anywhere between v. 14 and v. 44: the poettells us he was blind, which favours an oral origin for the poem. However,thepresence of the traditional patterns that have been delineated in any particularHymn must not be taken as evidence that it was composed orally.

The results of this study can be extended to later Greek literaturein two di-rections. Firstly we may look at the development of the genre as strictlydefined. The Hymns of Callimachus depart radically from the Homeric ca-nons: in particular they make no clear distinction between Mythic andAttributive material. The proem to Aratus' Phaenomena is far moretraditional, recalling that of the Erga; there is no epithet for Zeus, and aninvocation of the Muses, although these are untraditionally invoked at theConclusion, and given a Salutation of their own. Theocritus XVII is stronglyinfluenced by the traditional patterns, but there are innovatory tendencies inthe reference to first and last at the beginning. The end is formalised, butagain the classification of the middle causes difficulty. There is also room for

23 V. SUp.pp. Ilf.



16/17

The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in Genre 23furtherstudy in the evolutionof the Hymn towardsthe Orphic type, withxXi50for the Salutation,and the middlebeing squeezedout by the ends, inparticularby thepiling upof introductory pithets,as in Hy. 28: although tmightalso be worth consideringhow much the Orphic Hymn owes to thephraseology f the prayers ound in Homer,andwhich, along withthe Hymnas heredefined, clearlyinfluencedSappho and Alcaeus. Thereis plenty ofscope for morework in all these fields, which it wouldbe inappropriateodiscussat great ength here24.Of the fourgenres of earlyGreekhexameterpoetry - Hymn, epicnarra-tive, catalogueand didactic - the Hymn is the only one distinguishedby aformalstructure; ndeed,it was usedto providea formalopeningto each ofthe others25. It is also representedby the largest number of completeexamples,which gave us the opportunityfor this detailedanalysisof theformalelements n the genre,and how they wereobeyedor exploitedby thepoets who composedthe Hymns26.

Appendix:Analysesof the Hymns'StructureIt may assist the reader to appreciate the basic types of Hymns and the place of individual

poems if these are summarised in symbolic form. The following symbols are used. I =Introduction, as defined above. The number of lines (complete or incomplete) up to the firstrelative pronoun is given by the number following. 'm' denotes the presence of an invocation tothe Muse(s). V denotes the use of a vocative (instead of a full-scale Introduction: or instead of theSalutation, in Dem).M = Myth, as defined above (Myth ending with the direct speech of the godis marked 'M'). A Prolongation to the presentis marked -. If the Prolongation is so long that itaffects the Conclusion as Attributes do, it is marked -A. A stands for an Attributive passage, =for a Priamel. The Conclusion is marked off by /. The Salutation is marked x for Xalpe, i forW1x0t;he Prayer(s) are marked P, and the.reference to another song S. A reference to song in thefirst two is denoted by a following subscript s.(i) Mythic Hymns (Archetype (m) IM (-) / xS; length 5- 580 vv.)Dem. I2M- /VPS SHerm. m13 M- / x SHy. 6 12 M / x PS S (note full ending)Hy. 7 I2 M" / x SHy. l5 II M- / x PHy. 16 I2 M / x PSHy. 17 mI2 M / xHy. 18 13 M / x S x (note ending)Hy.20mIlM- /i PHy. 26 I2 M / x P

24 cf. E. NORDEN, gnostos Theos (1923) pp. 143- 176.25 For a recent discussion of this see RICHARDSON, Hymn to Demeter pp. 3 f.26 On the Hymns see now L. H. LENZ,Der homerische Aphroditehymnus und die Aristie des

Aineias in der llias (Bonn 1975),9 ff. and Appendix I, containing manyvaluable observations. OnErga I - 10, see WEST'snew commentary (Hesiod, Works and Days, Oxford 1978) ad loc.



17/17

24 RICHARDANKO: The Structure of the Homeric Hymns: A Study in GenreHy. 28 I4 M / x SHy. 31 mr2 M-A / x P S (Prolonged to Attributive)Hy. 33 m13 M-M / x S (Prolonged to Myth )(ii) Composite Hymns (Archetype (m) IA = M/xS; length 49- 365 vv.)Hy. 1 (m?I A) = M / iS x (I and A lost)PAp. (m?I)A = M" / xSAphr. mI2=A = M"/ xSHy. 19 mI2 A = M / xSTh. A II A = M / (S PS) (vv. 1-34)(iii) Composite Prolonged (Archetype prh. (m?) IA = M-A/xPS; length 69 - 178 vv.)DAp. I1A = M= A/ i sphragis STh. B I1 A = M- =M- = A/xPS(vv. 35-105)(iv) Attributive Hymns (Archetype (m) IA / x PSS; length 4- 22 vv.)Hy. 9 mI2 A / x P. SHy. 10 I1 A /x PS SHy. 11 I2 A / x PHy. 12 II A (x PS prh. lost)Hy. 14 mI2 A / xSHy. 21 Vi A /x PSHy. 22 I3 A / x PHy. 23 I2 A / iHy. 24 VI A / P PSHy. 25 I1 A /x PS SHy. 27 I3 A / x SHy. 29 VI A /X SHy. 30 12 A / x PS SHy. 32 mI2 A / x SErga mI2A /xXt3))iPS

(v) DefectiveHymnsHy. 12 I1 A (x PS prh. lost)Hy. 13 12 /x P S (A prh. lost)

The two basic types are Mythic and Attributive. The resultant blends are Composite andMythic Prolonged, as in Hy. 31: when these are conjoined we obtain the Composite Prolongedtype.

Trinity College, Cambridge RICHARDANKO

Documents

Callimanco Janko