Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:57:46.542Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Traditional Style of Early Demotic Greek Verse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 January 2016

E. M.  and
M. J. Jeffreys
E. M.
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
M. J. Jeffreys
Affiliation:
The University of Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The subject of formulaic repetition in early demotic Greek verse has often been raised, but till recently has not been seriously studied. In two articles, one on Imberios and Margarona and the other on the Chronicle of the Morea, we have tried to take the first steps in such an analysis.

Type
Research Article
Information
Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies , Volume 5 , 1979 , pp. 115 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © The Centre for Byzantine, Ottoman and Modern Greek Studies, University of Birmingham 1979

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

1. E. and Jeffreys, M., ‘Imberios and Margarona: the manuscripts, sources and editions of a Byzantine verse romance’, Byzantion, XLI (1971), 122-60 Google Scholar; Jeffreys, M. J., ‘Formulas in the Chronicle of the Morea’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, XXVII (1973), 164-95 Google Scholar (cited hereafter as Formulas). To the bibliography given in these papers add: Baud-Bovy, S., La Chanson populaire grecque du Dodécanèse, I (Paris, 1936), pp. 342-64 Google Scholar; D. A. Petropoulos, Σ. K. IV (Thessaloniki, 1953), 532-45; G. I. Kourmoules, II, 5 (1954-5), 212-60; Trypanis, C. A., ‘Byzantine oral poetry’, Byzantinische Zeitschrift, LVI (1963), 1-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar (a seminal article, unaccountably missing from our previous bibliographies); D. Holton, ‘The Tale of Alexander’, I (Thessaloniki, 1974), pp. 56-7; Mohay, A., ‘Schriftlichkeit und Mündlichkeit in der byzantinischen Literatur’, Acta Classica (Debrecen), X-XI (1974-5), 175-82 Google Scholar; G. Spadaro, ‘Problemi relativi ai romanzi greci dell’età dei Paleologi’, XXVIII (1975), 302-27.

2. All references to this text or to its individual manuscripts are by the numbering of the critical edition of E. M. Jeffreys and M. Papathomopoulos, to be published in the In cases of ambiguity, references are preceded by War of Troy. Previous editions: D. I. Mavrophrydes, (Athens, 1866), pp. 183-211 (prints MS. B, Parisinus Graecus 2878, for lines 323-670, 801-1020, 7014-53, 7116-312, 10412-57); Gidel, G. A., Etudes sur la littérature grecque moderne (Paris, 1866), pp. 197-229 Google Scholar (MS. B for 335-9, 364-6, 388-90, 400-8, 411-598, 625-32, 738-40, 801-6, 3397-428); L. Politis, (Athens, 1967), pp. 134-7 (text critically established of lines 7117-230; in the second edition [Athens, 1975], the same lines are republished with corrections on the basis of the Jeffreys-Papathomopoulos edition); L. Politis, XXII (1969), 227-34 (publishes MS. R, a fragment from the Vrondis collection covering lines 2671-752, with corrections and variants from MSS. B and X, Bologna Univ. Gr. 3567).

3. This view is forthrightly put by Trypanis, C. A. in his review of E. Trapp’s edition of Digenis Akritas, Gnomon, XLVI (1974), 614-17 Google Scholar. For different analyses of the problem see Sigalas, A., ‘Révision de la méthode de restitution du texte des romans démotiques byzantins’, Annuaire de l’Inst. de phil. et d’hist. orient, et slaves de l’Université de Bruxelles, XI (1951), 365-410 Google Scholar, and Beck, H.-G., ‘Die Volksliteratur’, in Hunger, H. et al., Geschichte der Textüberlieferung, I (Zurich, 1961), pp. 470-93.Google Scholar

4. Roman de Troie, 6 vols., ed. L. Constans (Paris, 1904-12); references to the text are to this edition, by line-number alone. For the wide influence of this romance see Highet, G., The Classical Tradition (Oxford, 1949), pp. 50-5 Google Scholar; Buchthal, H., Historia Troiana (London, 1971), pp. 1-8 Google Scholar. The following discussion of textual relationships between Greek and French versions is summarized from the introduction to the forthcoming edition, where full documentation is given. (For a fuller summary see E. M. Jeffreys, ‘The Manuscripts and Sources of the War of Troy’, Actes du XIVe Congrès International des Etudes Byzantines 1971, III (Bucharest, 1976), 91-4.

5. Cf.Lord, A. B., The Singer of Tales (Cambridge, Mass., 1960), pp. 99-123 Google Scholar (cited hereafter as Singer).

6. Formulas, 175-7.

7. We must record grateful thanks to Miss Isabella Tsavari, of the University of Ioannina, who shared with us the labour of searching for formulas in the War of Troy.

8. Formulas, 175.

9. Breakdown of figures, by half lines: (i) 1026-75: 37 definite, 6 borderline; (ii) 9157-306: 33 definite, 4 borderline; (iii) 11349-99: 18 definite, 7 borderline.

10. Formulas, 190.

11. Formulas, 178-81 (but note that that table includes all repetitions with more than eight examples).

12. Formulas, 191-5.

13. See Haynes, E. R., Bibliography of Oral Literature (Cambridge, Mass., 1973).Google Scholar

14. Among the most aggressively negative views one may cite Delbouille, M., ‘Les chansons de geste et le livre’, in La Technique littéraire des chansons de geste (Actes du Colloque de Liège, Paris, 1959), pp. 295-407 Google Scholar, and Siciliano, I., Les Chansons de geste et l’épopée (Turin, 1968), esp. pp. 137-99.Google Scholar

15. The basis for these judgements is laid by Lord, Singer, and they are applied to mediaeval epic in Chapter 10 of that work, pp. 198-221.

16. A sketch of the lines of conflict in mediaeval studies, designed particularly for application to early demotic poetry, was attempted in Formulas, 168-75.

17. See Lord, A. B., ‘Homer as Oral Poet’, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, LXXII (1967), 20-1 Google Scholar (cited hereafter as Homer as Oral Poet); J. J. Duggan, ‘Formulas in the Couronnement de Louis’, Romania, LXXXVII (1966), 343-4; idem, The Song of Roland (Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1973), pp. 29-30.

18. Several cases, for example, of formulaic translations into Anglo-Saxon are given by Benson, L. D., ‘The Literary Character of Anglo-Saxon Formulaic Poetry’, Proceedings of the Modern Language Association, LXXXI (1966), 334-41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and for Middle English by Baugh, A. C., ‘Improvisation in the Middle English Romance’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, CIII (1959), 431-4.Google Scholar

19. This point is probably best made by the huge range of Bowra, C. M., Heroic Poetry (London, 1952), esp. pp. 215-53.Google Scholar

20. E.g. Singer, pp. 130-3, but cf. Horneras Oral Poet, p. 13: ‘Literary poets who imitate oral poetry exist. I have not found as yet a literate oral poet, that is to say a good oral poet who has learned to write, who has in fact written either imitations of oral poetry or oral poetry.’

21. This is a rash statement, given the diversity and obscurity of the societies in which the earliest demotic texts were produced. One can only say that we know of no indication before the sixteenth century of the use of vernacular Greek in education.

22. See the various mediaeval vernaculars studied in H. Hunger et al., Geschichte der Textüberlieferung (Zurich, 1961).

23. Lord, Singer, pp. 136-7. In Homer as Oral Poet, pp. 2-3, note the instructive case of the Moslem priest in the region of Pešter who learned his songs from his father. ‘After [he] had read the songbook versions of songs he had learned from his father, he changed his father’s version to agree with those in the songbook. Fortunately a fair number of songs that his famer sang are not in the songbooks.’ Not only did the translator of the War of Troy not find the poem in a songbook, he lived in a society with very few written versions of any work in the style and metre of contemporary oral poetry.

24. On the importance of the fifteen-syllable political verse in early demotic literature, see Jeffreys, M. J., ‘The Nature and Origin of the Political Verse’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, XXVIII (1976), pp. 142-95, esp. pp. 161, 173.Google Scholar

25. See the relevant pages of standard histories, e.g. Roger, J. and Payen, J.-E., Histoire de la littérature française, I (Paris, 1969), pp. 48-9 Google Scholar; Fox, J., A Literary History of France: the Middle Ages (London, 1974), pp. 134-9.Google Scholar

26. Though brief in comparison widi Greek formulas, this phrase fills a regular division of the line and so meets the requirements of the formulaic definition.

27. Especially in the Achilleis, ed. D. C. Hesseling, L’Achilléide byzantine (Amsterdam, 1919); Troas, eds. L. Norgaard and O. L. Smith, A Byzantine Iliad (Copenhagen, 1975); and Constantine Hermoniakos, La Guerre de Troie, ed. E. Legrand (Paris, 1890), where Achilles, Priam, Agamemnon, Paris, etc., appear.

28. E.g. , etc., etc.

29. There are several quotations of single lines, unmistakable because of their formal linguistic level: e.g.

(War of Troy 739, cf. 18). See also War of Troy 10094-5, 13245, cf. 1406-7, 1325.

30. Twenty examples in the War of Troy; cf. the list given by Mohay, op. cit., p. 177.

31. There are more than one hundred examples of this formula in our files, including eighteen in the War of Troy. Cf. E. and M. Jeffreys, op. cit., p. 147; Holton, op. cit., p. 56; Mohay, op. cit., p. 177; Spadaro, op. cit., p. 326.

32. E.g. Spadaro, op. cit., pp. 325-6.

33. See the lists on pp. 119-20 above, and Formulas, 178-81.

34. Evidence for the use of phrases outside the War of Troy is cited from the following editions:

Ach.: L’Achilléide byzantine, ed. D. C. Hesseling (Amsterdam, 1919);

Belis.: ‘Il poema bizantino del Belisario’, ed. E. Follieri, La poesia epica e la sua formazione (Accad. Naz. dei Lincei, anno CCCLXVII, 1970), quad, 139, 583-61;

Chron. Mor.: The Chronicle of the Morea, ed. J. Schmitt (London, 1904);

Imb.: ‘Imberios and Margarona’, ed. E. Kriaras, (Athens 1956), pp. 213-32;

Lib.: Le Roman de Libistros et Rhodamne, ed. J. A. Lambert (Amsterdam, 1935);

Phlor: ‘Phlorios and Platzia-phlora’, ed. E. Kriaras, (Athens, 1956), pp. 141-77;

Tam.: ed. Wagner, G., Mediaeval Greek Texts (London, 1870), pp. 105-9 Google Scholar;

Troas:.A Byzantine Iliad, eds. L. Norgaard and O. L. Smith (Copenhagen, 1975);

Thren.: ed. Wagner, G., Mediaeval Greek Texts (London, 1870), pp. 141-70.Google Scholar

Negative statements – that we have been unable to find other examples of a given phrase – are of course impossible to substantiate. We have searched carefully dirough the texts listed above and several others, but it is likely that readers may turn up cases mat we have missed.

35. War of Troy 372 (cf. 1381), 1099 (cf. 2753), 1112 (cf. 2772), 1486 (cf. 3567), 1896 (cf. 4665), 4846 (cf. 11672), 5212 (cf. 12436), 5378 (cf. 12863), 7407 (cf. 16894), 8241 (cf. 18860), 8248 (cf. 18877), 11019 (cf. 24252), 12084 (cf. 26003). Ach. 1552; Chron. Mor. 203, 482, 548, 753, 845, 1092, 1734, 2524, 2923, 4055, 4842, 8569; Tam. 80.

36. See our list in E. and M. Jeffreys, op. cit., p. 143; Holton, op. cit., p. 56; Mohay, op. cit., p. 177; Spadaro, op. cit., p. 325.

37. For etc.: War of Troy 911 (cf. 2398-9), 3122 (cf. 7476-7). 3534 (cf. 8605), 3728 (cf. 9007), 3739 (cf. 9025), 4037 (cf. 9885), 4058 (cf. 9932), 4517 (cf. 10915), 4767 (cf. 11523-4), 5047 (cf. 12099), 6789 (cf. 15738-9), 6897 (cf. 15930), 7473 (cf. 17137), 7501 (cf. 17210-1), 9488 (cf. 21142), 10711 (cf. 23602-3), 10718 (cf. 23625), 10783 (cf. 23753-4), 10857 (cf. 23907), 11030 (cf. 24285). For etc.: 3042 (cf. 7309-10), 3479 (cf; 8496), 3791 (cf. 9140), 4139 (cf. 10081-2), 4488 (cf. 10854), 4705 (cf. 11364-5), 5066 (cf. 12136-8), 5988 (cf. 14005-6), 6215 (cf. 14461-3), 6743 (cf. 15642-4), 6843 (cf. 15834-5), 7549 (cf. 17299), 8140 (cf. 18608-9), 9666 (cf. 21494-6), 10315 (cf. 22723-5), 10731 (cf. 23650); for etc.: 987 (cf. 2560), 3522 (cf. 8579), 4431 (cf. 10697-8), 4447 (cf. 10735), 5026 (cf. 12051-2), 6773 (cf. 15692-4), 9398 (cf. 20991-2), 9714 (cf. 21577-8).

38. Ach. 1333, 1498; Belis. 456; Chron. Mor. 1123, 4020, 5034, 5123, 7047; Imb. 126, 311, 415; Lib. 2273, 2315, 3221; Phlor. 667; Troas 938.

39. 3072 (cf. 7372), 3166 (cf. 7545), 3181 (cf. 7565), 3188 (cf. 7585), 4152 (cf. 10110), 4627 (cf. 11201), 4761 (cf. 11509), 4807 (cf. 11596), 5344 (cf. 12718-20), 5330 (cf. 12731), 5996 (cf. 14014), 6194 (cf. 14394), 6229 (cf. 14507), 6830 (cf. 15809), 6896 (cf. 15930), 6929 (cf. 16008), 6942 (cf. 16029), 6950 (cf. 16037), 7148 (cf. 16373), 8292 (cf. 18968), 8380 (cf. 19090), 8930 (cf. 20020), 10328 (cf. 22754), 10820 (cf. 23818), 11916 (cf. 25756), 12636 (cf. 26940). The exceptions are: 6910 (cf. 15966), 13104 (cf. 27706).

40. See Chron. Mor. 1111, 1159; the phrase is used for a rest-day from battle at Chron. Mor. 1478, 5468, 8865; it can also be used in laments, for the dread day on which the City was captured or the leader slain: Tam. 7; Thren. 50, 62, 102.

41. 3132 (cf. 7497), 3468 (cf. 8463), 5204 (cf. 12424), 6034 (cf. 14091), 6774 (cf. 15698), 7499 (cf. 17208), 8199 (cf. 18783), 8982 (cf. 20128), 9194 (cf. 20482), 9415 (cf. 21024), 9462 (cf. 21101), 9478 (cf. 21123), 9985 (cf. 22192), 10345 (cf. 22794), 10712 (cf. 23605), 10728 (cf. 23639), 10891 (cf. 23970), 13926 (cf. 30106).

42. This pattern of argument has been developed in connection with the Homeric poems; see e.g., Nagler, M. N., Spontaneity and Tradition (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1974), pp. 27-63.Google Scholar

43. 1018 (cf. 2617), 3024 (cf. 7246), 5058 (cf. 12123-5), 5380 (cf. 12810-1), 5398 (cf. 12837), 6788 (cf. 15734), 6824 (cf. 15793-4), 7004 (cf. 16154), 7259 (cf. 16626), 8917 (cf. 20002-5), 9350 (cf. 20873-4), 9366 (cf. 20920-1), 9476 (cf. 21122).

44. War of Troy 3643 (cf. 8843-9), 3792 (cf. 9137-8), 4655 (cf. 11251-2), 6078 (cf. 14153-5). 6744 (cf. 15642-5), 6747 (cf. 15647-8), 10965 (cf. 24124-5).

45. See also War of Troy 3044 (cf. 7309-11), 4757 (cf. 11500-3), 4767 (cf. 11531-2), 5047 (cf. 12102), 7502 (cf. 17213).

46. See also War of Troy 11010 (cf. 24231-3).

47. War of Troy 4138-9 (cf. 10084-6), 7474-5 (cf. 17139-40), 3406-7 (cf. 8337-41).

48. Add to those given in notes 44-7 above: 7513, 8344-5, 8784-5, 11239-40, 11394-7. 12059-62.

49. E.g. 14003-6, 21494-6, 2579-80; cf. the similar pattern where the spear pierces the shield but is stopped by the breastplate; e.g. 9012-3, 10697-700, 11359-63.

50. This is stated or implied by, e.g., Lord, Singer, 68-98; Baugh, A. C., ‘Improvisation in the Middle English Romance’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, CIII (1959), 440-54 Google Scholar; Kailasapathy, K., Tamil Heroic Poetry (Oxford, 1968), pp. 187-238 Google Scholar; Duggan, J. J., The Song of Roland (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1973), pp. 160-212 Google Scholar; Peabody, B., The Winged Word (Albany, 1975), pp. 179-215.Google Scholar