Homer and the Nibelungenlied: Comparative Studies in Epic Style

Review Reviewed Work(s): Homer and the Nibelungenlied: Comparative Studies in Epic Style by B. Fenik Review by: Erwin Cook Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 109 (1989), pp. 209-210 Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/632056 Accessed: 10-02-2019 19:45 UTC 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 forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies This content downloaded from 131.194.151.130 on Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:45:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms NOTICE OF BOOKS 209 inthe the figure of theOlympian supreme Olympian in the two epics. in figure of the supreme in the two epics. motives return just vengeance. A highly motives ofof return and and just vengeance. A highly As Aschief chief controller controller of events he ofremains events essentially he remains the essentially the is that ingenious suggestion is that theofpoet of the ingenious suggestion the poet the Iliad madeIliad up made up same, same, although although he appears hemore appears selfish in more the pursuit selfish of in the the pursuit ofWrath the story of Achilles as a counterpoint, or story ofof thethe Wrath of Achilles as a counterpoint, or his hisspecial special plan in plan the Iliad in and the more Iliad of aand moralmore power in of a moral power in cross-current, cross-current, against against the straight the straight progression progression of the of the the the later later poempoem because he because supportedhe thesupported just cause of the main just cause of main theme theme of of the the DiosDios Boule,Boule, thereby thereby creatingcreating tension tension Odysseus' Odysseus' return return and punishment and punishment of the suitors (254). of the in suitors (254). in the thenarrative narrative (296). (296). It It isis clear clear that that E. believes E. believes the Iliad thetoIliad haveto been have the been the As Asbenevolent benevolent father of father the gods,of preserver the gods, of order preserver and of order and guardian guardian of justice, of justice, a functionawhich function he already which work he already work ofofa single a single poetic poetic genius. genius. One would One like would him like to him to exercises exercises in thein Iliad, the he Iliad, foreshadows he foreshadows Hesiod's figure of Hesiod's figure of then be be right, right, because because then one poet one could poet be could recognised be recognised as as Zeus Zeus (2I3). (2I3). In Homer, In Homer, however, according however, to E., according Zeus to E., father Zeus the thefounding founding father of classical of classical Greek Greek religion.religion. and and thethe otherother members members of the Olympian of the family Olympian are family are B. C. DIETRICH invariably invariably perceived perceived as literary as figures literary and theirfigures funcand their funcAberystwyth tions tions as poetic as poetic inventions inventions in order to serve in order the designs toofserve the designs of the poet. FENIK (B.) Homer and the Nibelungenlied: comThe Judgment of Paris was fundamental to the epic, parative studies in epic style. (Martin classical E. believes, constituting the major driving force of the lectures, 30.) Cambridge, Mass. and London: Iliad and its divine activity. Homer first connected the myth with the story of the rape of Helen (296), thereby Harvard University Press (for Oberlin College), motivating Hera's and Athena's unrelenting hatred of 1986. Pp. xvii+2II. 18.95. Troy and support of the Achaean cause. The curious fact that the poet only mentions the judgment in passing in HNL is a diagnosis of certain underlying structures the last book can apparently be explained on subtle literary grounds.4 Aphrodite is ranged on the Trojan which organise epic narrative. The book's essential points are that 'form makes content' and that this is side as Paris' protector and not because of her oriental background, as is generally reasoned. The other gods are evenly and sensibly ('sinnvoll') divided without regard something Homer shares with the author of the NL and indeed, to a greater or lesser extent, with any author of integrated narrative. The devices analysed by Fenik can be placed under two principal headings: parallelism and to origins or cultic history. This purely literary argument is not at all persuasive in the case of Apollo, whose Trojan allegiance is surprisingly traced to his role as archer god in a 'famous' pre-Homeric ballad celebrating the death of Achilles. The evidence for such a composition is thin, to say the least, and would ring-composition. His comparative analysis will prove of special importance to students of oral poetry, since some of his texts are manifestly non-oral and exhibit patterns which are also to be found in Homer. This should serve as a caution against reflexively assigning contradict E.'s own belief that Homer defined the gods' functions. E. also unconvincingly returns to the unten- any and all patterns one is able to isolate to oral practice, able view of Apollo as Dorian god on the grounds of a been greatly exaggerated. The title ofF's work is somewhat misleading, since in addition to H. and the NL it contains shorter discussions long discredited etymology (I89). The history of Apollo's festivals in Greece and his cultic nature do not support E.'s view. It is not possible in a review to dojustice to the closely argued account of all the gods who in essence obeyed the same rules set by the poetic composition. The concept of fate, which is considered in the third chapter, also fits into E.'s coherent perception of Homeric religion with no concession to 'Volksreligion', except perhaps for the numinous power of the usually hostile daimon. Curiously E. also derives from popular belief the concept of the Klothes, the Spinners of Fate, who, judging from funeral inscriptions and their position in later literature, do actually look like epic invention. Aisa and supports F.'s thesis that Homer's 'otherness' has of e.g. the Kudrun, Parzival, the Roland poems, the Gospel of Mark and Gotthelf's Uli. It is divided into three sections, one on the Iliad, another on the NL (which also contains discussions of other German medieval epics) and one entitled 'other texts'. The section on Homer consists of three chapters devoted to books I I, I2 and 13 of the Iliad, followed by an excursus on the Adrestos incident. F.'s treatment of the NL, on the other hand, is arranged by the compositional techniques of symmetry, correlation, ring-composition, prolepsis and accumulation. The third section contains a comparison of the Chanson de Roland and Rolandslied and concludes with a chapter entitled 'beyond the epic' devoted to prose authors. and the virtually synonymous moira, however, most directly expressed the power of fate in Homer (284). Fate was neither subject nor superior to the gods but represented the guardian of the balanced order of the orality, there is one point on which he cannot afford not Homeric theological system. Fate, then, is not identical to take a stand, i.e. H.'s apparent approval of Agamemnon's exhortation to Menelaos to kill Adrestos. He world and therefore the court of first instance in the with the exigencies of plot but fulfils a loftier function in the poet's scheme of things as the 'Grundsatz der homerischen Religion' (287). There is a fine distinction between the plot as mundane requirement of the story or myth and as a quasi-religious force by which both gods and heroes were ultimately bound. The latter is true for both epics whose gods therefore are intrinsically moral beings. The moral element is more pronounced in the Odyssey, according to E., because of its central 4JHS ci (I981) 56-62. Although F. endeavors to skirt the question of argues that 'there is nothing in Agamemnon's deport- ment in the Adrestos scene, or in his behaviour before or afterward, to win respect or command our assent. If the phrase aisima pareipon signals the poet's approval, he has blocked the door to our own. His depiction of Agamemnon runs counter to his own assessment, if that is what it is' (25). Noting that these same words occur in book 7, F. concludes that 'they are a formular reflex, stimulated by associations of situation and character.' However, if F.'s interpretation of the scene is correct, then this is no small 'formular mistake' along the lines of This content downloaded from 131.194.151.130 on Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:45:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 2I0 NOTICE OF BOOKS provides provides nono pointers pointers to the to meaning; the meaning; F. has shown F. has asshown no as no using using 'pitiless 'pitiless bronze' bronze' to chopto wood, chop butwood, one diametribut one diametriotherwhich how how it it may may be used be used to emphasise to emphasise inherent inherent cally callyopposed opposed to a major to a major theme of theme the poem, of which the poem, theother the meaning, meaning,especially especially by eliciting by eliciting comparisons comparisons which which poet poetis is in in thisthis very very scene developing. scene developing. F.'s interpretation F.'s interpretation underscore or expose latent meanings, but not it does not accepted, accepted, if H. ifwere H. were a writing a writing author, was author, there ever was aunderscore there or ever expose a latent meanings, but it does verse verse that that so cried so cried out for out the for blot?the blot? providea asense sense emphasis tell one provide of of the the emphasis or tellor one how to how to compare. In Inhis his analysis analysis of Iliad of i Iliad and 12, i and F. shows 12,that F. shows thecompare. that the events events areare organised organised as a series as aofseries parallelof scenes: parallel in book scenes: Thereare in aretimes book times when F.'s desire for schematic There when F.'s desire for schematic clarity clarity this consists of aristeiai four aristeiai and inthree book I2 inof three II this consists of four and in book I2 of results results inoversimplifying oversimplifying the organisation the organisation of the books of the books assaults camp. In ithat F. shows that the assaults on on the the GreekGreek camp. In i F. shows theunder underdiscussion, discussion, an especially an especially risky risky enterprise enterprise consider-considersymmetry which naturally attaches the the purpose ofof HNL. For example, he labels symmetry which naturally attaches to the seriesto ofing ing theseries purpose of HNL. For example, he1.284labels 1.284400 asasthe of Diomedes, although 284-308284-308 also 400consciously thearisteia aristeia of Diomedes, although also killings killings comprising comprising Agamemnon's Agamemnon's aristeia is consciously aristeia is contains harangue of Odysseus prompted byofa rout of contains a aharangue of Odysseus prompted by a rout exploited exploited by by the poet the to poet underscore to underscore his negativehis negative thethat Greeks, Greeks, followed followed short a short scene scene in which in 0.which and 0. and characterisation characterisation of theof king. theHeking. then argues He then that H. argues alsothe H. also by aby D. both both take take their their menmen before before O. is allowed O. is allowed to fade to intofade into meant meant thethe parallels parallels between between the aristeiai thetoaristeiai elicit D. to elicit the the background. background. Given Given the emphasis the emphasis on the on metis theofmetis O. of O. comparison comparison among, among, and therefore and therefore to provide to commenprovide commen- in in his hisown own aristeia, aristeia, his his counsel counsel to D. in to this D. in scene thismust scene be must be tary taryon, on, thethe individual individual heroes. heroes. In 12, the In most 12, successful the most successful treatment, treatment, as well as well as the as shortest, the shortest, F. demonstrates F. demonstrates that incorporated that incorporated into into thethe analysis, analysis, with the with result the that result D.'s that D.'s parallels parallels between between the three the Trojan threeassaults Trojan 'frame, assaults aristeia'frame, seen be framed by of that of O. This must aristeia isisseen to to be framed by that O. This must weigh weigh into whatever whatever conclusions conclusions one reaches one reaches concern-concernilluminate illuminate and and contrast' contrast' one another. one F. another. uses 13 toF. argue uses 13into to argue that thatH.H. does does not always not always rise above rise theabove mechanical the level mechanical level ing H.'s H.'sportrait portrait ofItD.isIt in setting this setting D. is ing of D. in is this that D. that is in a manner meant to evoke the death of of ofcomposition. composition. He abandons, He abandons, regrettably, regrettably, an analysis ofwounded an analysis of the thestructure structure of the ofentire the book entire and book focusesand on the focuses on Considering the Achilles. the role played by 0. in Achilles' aristeiai aristeiai of of Idomeneus Idomeneus and Menelaos and Menelaos in the second inhalf. the second fate this canhalf. hardly be coincidental (though the fact that F. F.has has proven proven that that one is one meant istomeant use the to parallels use 0.the and parallels D. are regularly paired in the Iliad should not be between between scenes scenes in books in books I I and I I2 Itoand relate I 2 characters to relate oroverlooked). charactersWhatever or conclusions one cares to draw it as is clear that the structure of I I relates D. situations. situations. Whether Whether or not,or however, not, however, parallels such parallels ason that score, such those those in in I I equate I I equate or contrast or contrast characterscharacters is another issue. is more another issue. closely to 0. than to Agamemnon. F. F.seems seems to assume to assume that they that arethey generally are meant generally to In short, meant F. to in aiming for clarity has occasionally the rich structure of the composition and equate equate (cf.(cf. also also his treatment his treatment of Poseidon ofand Poseidon Zeus in oversimplified and Zeus in Studies Studies in in the the Odyssey, Odyssey, 208 ff.);208 and he ff.); usesand the parallels he uses in the placesparallels that have very much of relevance to say to the between between thethe aristeiai aristeiai of Diomedes of Diomedes and Agamemnon and Agamemnon tothemes which to he treats. The result is an explication of structure In which makes Homer look a bit like the support support hishis negative negative interpretation interpretation of D.'s character. of D.'s In the character. this thisF.F. is surely is surely incorrect, incorrect, and it well and illustrates it wellthe illustrates the paratactic poet F. so vehemently (and correctly) rejects. dangers dangers inherent inherent in thisin sort this of work. sort To of confine work.myself To confine myself The chief problem with HNL is its lack of thoroughto topassages passages discussed discussed by F., he bymisrepresents F., he misrepresents D.'s ness, and this D.'s is more or less responsible for each of the wounding wounding by Paris by Paris to conform to conform to his theory: to his n.b. theory: I 1.378objections n.b. I raised. 1.378It also detracts from his treatment of the NL and other texts. For example, correlation f., f.,inin the the voxvox poetae, poetae, where ai6Xa where q'8?u ai6Xa yEAa<aaS/hK q'8?u yEAa<aaS/hK X6XoU X6XoU a&pTrrTqraE a&pTrrTqraE is telling. is telling. Diomedes' Diomedes' infuriated between infuriated the use of episodic parallelism in H. and the is after all what comparative studies are all ro6oTa ro6oTa (385), (385), as is as well isrecognised, well recognised, voices a deep-seated voices NL-which a deep-seated prejudice prejudice which which the audience the audience either shared either or undershared or underabout-is virtually non-existent. F. contents himself stood stood as as a justifiable a justifiable heroic heroic sentiment. sentiment. with an (admirable) exposition of the phenomenon in and leaves it to the reader to discover the F. F.isiscompelled compelled by his by reading his reading to undermine to undermine the both texts, the and dissimilarities between them and to characterisation characterisation of D. of in Iliad D. in 5 asIliad well. 5 'Wounding as well.similarities 'Wounding Aphrodite Aphrodite was was not enough. not enough. He allowed Hehimself allowed the ponder himself theirthe significance. HNL remains the sketch of same sameabuse abuse against against her that her he that flings he at his flings humanat human thehis much larger book that needed to be written, and opponents opponents in book in book i . He even i . He disregarded even disregarded Athena'swhichAthena's perhaps only Mr. Fenik could write. For all that, it is still a most interesting and valuable contribution to warning warning (I29) (I29) and tried and repeatedly tried repeatedly to thwart Apollo's to thwart Apollo's of the epic. rescue rescue of of Aeneas Aeneas (432). (432). It took It a direct tookrebuke a direct fromrebuke the the study from god godhimself himself to bring to bring the man the to his man senses' to his (I7). senses' (I7). Errata: In Inbook book 5, D. 5, isD. a portrait is a portrait of the limits of the of human limits of human accomplishment, accomplishment, represented represented by transgressing by transgressing them. I I 'for example, them. Othryoneus (14.363) and Alkathoos For Fora a day day the the mist mist limiting limiting his mortal his vision mortal was lifted vision wasshould liftedread I3.363 and I3.427 respectively (I4.427)' I 'that at' should read than at and andhehe diddid battle battle with the with gods the themselves, gods themselves, woundingio6, line wounding II5 'Roland see,' Aphrodite Aphrodite and and Ares Ares (antithetical (antithetical powers implying powers theimplying theshould read Roland sees same samething), thing), the gods the of gods human of misery human in misery the Iliad. D.'s in the Iliad. D.'s ERWIN COOK verbal verbal abuse abuse reflects reflects that understanding. that understanding. H. did not University H. did not of California, Berkeley expect audience joininApollo in finger-wagging at expect hishis audience to jointo Apollo finger-wagging at D.'s impetuosity, but to gasp in amazement and admiration: this is as far as man can go, the god himselfGRIFFIN (J.) Homer: the Odyssey. (Landmarks of had marked the limit. The juxtaposition of Iliad 5 and 6 world literature.) Cambridge etc.: University is not intended to contrast the humanitas of Hector with Press, I987. pp. vi+ 107. 1I2.50 (bound), 3-.95 the foolhardiness of D., but the tragedy of war with a celebration of heroic virtue, and there is more of (paper). paradox than irony in the juxtaposition. The impor- This volume on the Odyssey is published in a series tance of all the above for assessing the uses and usefulness intended to provide 'a substantial library of textbooks of structural studies such as F.'s is this: structure itself on some of the most important and widely read literary This content downloaded from 131.194.151.130 on Sun, 10 Feb 2019 19:45:47 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms