Aristos Achaion, Heroic Death and Dramatic Structure in the Iliad

ESTRATTO Nuova Serie17, N. 2-1984 (vol. 46 della serie continua) Aristos Achaion: Heroic Death and Dramatic Structure in the Iliad Anthonv T. Edwards In his recent study o{ Greek concepts of the hero, Gregory Nagv has argued convincingly that the phrase aristos Achaidn serves as a title, and that in the Iliad it belongs to Achilles 1. Yer, because N"g)', n hose discussion I acknowledge as the starting point of the present inquiry, is preoccupied with aristos specifically as it relates to the figures of Achilles and Odysseus, he leaves aside a number of instances where the epithet aristos appears independent o{ any limiting genitive, as rvell as other usageswhich parallel "best of the Achaeans", such as "best of the Phocaeans"ot "best of the Aetolians" 2. The article on aristos in the Lexikon d.eslrilhgriechischen Epos (LlgrB) does, however, undertake to provide a general account of the word's usage3. It is pointed out here that the epithet can function as a title, and that most of its bearers are leaders of contingents (archoi). The LfgrE identifies three aspects of the word's usage: the agonistisch, the stilistisch, and the sozial. The first o{ these, which includes the use of the word as a title, designatesrhose insrances for which the group or activity which limits the force of aristos (i.e. "best of X", "best at X") is at leastimplicit. The "stilistischerAspekt" includes those instances where aristos appears merely to emphasize the significance of a ceftain thing or event, the death of some minor warriot, for instance. This distinction runs into some difficulties, however. For instance, though it is acknowledged that it is Achilles I i I 1 G. Nagy,The Bestot' tbe Achaeans, Bahimore1980; seepp. 26-58.Cf. - Griffin,Homeron Lile & Death,Oxford 1980,pp.52-53. ' N"gy, pp. 3A-34,esp.32 n. 7. 3 BrunoSnelled.,LexikondesFriihgriechischen Epos,G6ttingen1979,cols. ::- il0l, esp.,1289.1290. A, T. Edwatds ,-: -:.-'- : : .-: ..'. nl' - r" '_ li - ,:.s:, \1'eafe askedto ' :':-e tiloltistisch sense .-: Yet Periphas,who ' -: .; s.ridtobe Aitolon, : .:. to emphasizethe ' - . be the best of the j A rcs -..c - .:..,, --y not -trh. - : -'.,ieeory,the sozial, Achle.r:. -: -. Periphas1. '..'... : . '.\ A^^* - ,- ;r L nganremnon iLn hasthe purpo:: f: ,.-: :. eoithet's usage. :.:, : which otherwise e1'--.1: -^ _:_-. ,,.L:l e the :.: .,- : :.Thus, Nagv's anai,.'s:'.'.. :r :. : :riirely ., convincing. presenrs ceI.:-':.rs LlgrE's article In what follows, I will first at:en:: :.- .::.,-jri for occurrencesof aristos in terms of only two usages,l-hrch i c.r1lthe titular and the ernphatics. The first of these designatesihrt irgure within a group who is "best" both on the field and in the council; the emphatic usage desmibesthe atfinity of aristos for the context of the hero's death. Subsequently,an analysisof the telationship between these two usages of. aristos will broaden the scope of our inquiry. At this point we will be concerned rvith both the dramatic ordering of the Iliad's battle narrative as well as the telationship between Hector, Achilles, and Patroclus as chatacter types. As I hope to show, the Iliad is organized as a catalogue of fitst Achaean and then Trojan aristoi who serve as foils for Achilles and Hector, each properly the aristos of his respective atmy. The aristoi as a group within the Achaean and Trojan warrior societiescompdse an elite associatedwith two spheresof activity: the council and the battlefield. In battle, moreover, the aristoi are identical with the promachoi, the group of champions who customarily make up the first rank of the Homeric phalanx 6. Yet in view of - - ,!r r r l L Jr w tr l r a As wi'll be discussed later, Thoasis properlythe best of the Aetolians. s My analysisis trimitedto masculineoccurrences ol aristos and aristeus in the singular,the dual, and the plural usedas a dual. 6 J.Latacz,Kampfpariinese, und Kampluirklicbkeitin der Kampldarstellung 66), Miinchen1977,pp. 143-146. Ilias, bei Kallixosund Tyrtaios(Zetemata it Problbmes de et controverses', Cf. M. Detienne,'La phalange:problbmes la guerreen Grice ancienxe, J.-P.Vernanted., Paris1968,pp. L19-142,138; Le uocabulaire desinstitutionsindo-europtennes l, Paris1969, E. Beneveniste, p. 37). 63 Aristos Achai1n the Homeric ideal of being a "speaket of words and a doer of deeds" (IX 443), an identification of the aristoi with these two fields of activity is not remarkable. \fhen aristosf aristeus is used as a title to name the "best man" of a certain group, it designatesthat person who is both the dominant warrior for his group as well as the dominant speaker in the agorC. By dominant warrior, I mean the figure who consistently serves as the prornos anEr, the front-fighter, for his contingent. The dominant speaker is the figure whose opinion habitually holds sway in the council, the locus of political authority ?. The words which inuoduce Thoas at one point in the narative illustrate this double aspectoL aristos: Tolor 6' 'dnet'c'&.76peue @6aq,,Av6pat1r,ovo6, ui,6q, plv Airt.r)"6v '6y' &pua'coc,, inr,ot&p,evo6 &xovru, iar)Iiq 6' iv ota6irlu' d,1opfir. 66 6 nalpor,'Ayar6v vixurv,6;n6te xo0poripi,aoeuav zlepiprri8ov' 8. (xv 281-284) Thoas'abilities asa fighteranda speaker explainthe title Aitolonoch' aristos. As one would expect, Zeus, who clearly surpassesthe other gods in authority and might, is aristos tbeon. In Zeus' casethese two 7 The wotd proffios,servesas the singulat of the word promachoi, which appears only in the plural in Homer (see F. Bechtel, Lexilogus zu Homer, Halle 1914, p.285; P. Chantraine,Dictionnaire |tymologiqae de la langae grecque III, Parris1968-L977,p. 94I), and, suictly, designatesthe figure who fights out ,in {ront of his armyls ranks, often as its chosenchampion (see III 44; Y'lI 75; XY 293; cf. Latacz, p. L52 n. 54). \Yllile promos does not necessarilydenote any mor€ than a certain position and role in the battle line, this position and role ,tend to be identi{ied with a specific figure during a given section of the ,battle narrative. So, for instance,Diomedes is consistently the Achaeanchampion rin books V, VI, VtrII, and XI, while Ajax takes on this responsibility during the battle arou rd the Achaean wall. Hector serv€sconsistendy as the Trojan plotTtosanir. Any walrior enjoying an aristeia servesas plomos. The identification of this role of promos aner with specific characters (1.e.Itrector and Achitrles)will be consideredin more detail later. By "dominant speaket" I mean the figure who typically holds sway in the agorE,as 'distinct from the person who might generally give the best counsel, as Agarnemnonis disti'nct from Nestor (see XVIII 249-252; cf. LlgrE, col. L29L). In general tetms, this figute is the political leader o{ a group. E Cf. V'I 77-79; IX 5)-54; and XV 104-109,where Hera speaksin coonection with Zeus' ,injunction against the gods taking part in batde. - 64 A. T. Edrvards ' r ,, -::-.e adds weight to his capacities aie:.--::r-: : t. ' - '"-.'.:.'',saristos. He is their opinion -{r:,r:.: :: -' I . l--.ri: tramos anEr, and a preeminentiruh:.: surveyof Trojan co::.- . .. . :.:",:-:sl:eis dominancein that atena as well ro. This brings us to li:: :-. :- - : - -. :r:::lcn of the "best of the Achaeans". \X/ho that mi;:.: :. . '-'. ,..",r,r, a matter of de'r 11. '.':.: bate Within the first iri-". -.:. : I.:;d. Agamemnonand Achilles are each calied aristos :-.-,-o occasions,and three ^:,:..:-,; -.. of theseoccurrences are in the conteri r.: ::--ec:ariel sceneof book I. Let us consider these{our insta'ces ind^rcluailr-, First, Agamemnon: Achilles offers to protect Caichas' parrhesia in rhe assembly even against Agamemnon, hos nun pollon aristos Achaion euchetai einai (I 91) 12. Later, Nestor advisesthe Achaeansto heed the dream senr by Zeus since it is Agamemnon telling of ir, "who claims to be best of the Achaeans" (II 82), though the same report coming from another man would not be believed. Achilles refers to himself as aristas Achaion twice in book I, both times to claim that when the e For Zeus as arisios,see: XIII 154; XIV 213; Xy 10g; XIX 25g; xxlil 43 (an exceptionalcase:xIX 413). For Ze's as dominanrin council andbattle,andthe relati.on betweenthe two, see:I551-567; andxv r5g-L67. Cf. the scenebetweenPoulydamas andHector atXlI 208-250. 10For Hecrorin the council,,see:II 786-8i0;VIII 499-i42; X 299-332; F'/,rlr 243-)11.At vrr 344-379,Hector doesnor appear.For Hector as the mainstay of Troy'sdedences, see:VI 77-79,399-403; XXIV 24I-246,3gL_3g5, and 499-50L.Hector is called aristoson five occasions:VI 7g; XWI 513; xxr 279; xxrv 24L-242,and 184. In responseto the objecrionthar Hector is nowherecalledspeoificallyaristosTroon, on€ can cite XXI 279, where,in the phraseenthadeg'etraph'aristcs,the adverbenthaderestrictsaristosin the sameway that Trodn wauld (LfgrE, col. 1297; cf. VI 77-79).It,is clear, froreover, that the epithet aristos per se can imply ,,best of X" from the {act that Zeus, for example, is called "best of the gods" on four occasions,but simply aristos twice. tt Nrgy, pp. 26-41. 12 The appearanceof the verb eacho'maiin these passagesis not significant. A.s Ireonard Muellner has shown, though this verb indicates that a hero is proud of what he says,it is also invariably a claim for the tuthfulness and accuracyof an assertion: L. Muellner, The Meaning of Horneric Euchomai through its Forrrzulas(Innsbrucker Beitriige zur sprachwissenschalt13), Innsbruck 1976, pp.76-83 (esp,78, 83 n. 27). Seealso IL76-580, Aristos Achaiin 65 Achaeans miss his watcraf.t, Agamemnon will regret that he did not "honor the best of the Achaeans"(I244; 4I1.-4I2). \7hat is striking here, in light oi the dual application of aristos to battle and council, is that the phrase o..rrm both times with Achilles in contexts where his peculiar role ,as the Achaean prornos aner is stressed. Both occurrenceswith Agamemnolr, however, are in contexts v'hich underline his authority in the agorE. The implication is that in the case of the Achaeans the role of the aristos has been split between Agamemnon and Achilles. This vier.vis supported by Agamemnon's norice in the Catalogue of Ships (II 576-580)t'. The men vrho follow him are pleistoi and -;,:.:.,i. and he too "was aristos,for he lead by far the most numerous :-s:- II t80). This passagedesignatesAgamemnon as aristos in l:. c.i::ci*' of archos for the entire expedition. Nestor, moreover, x'ould seem io take such a distinction for granted in his contrast of Achilles as the Achaean'sbulwark against war, ,and Agamemnon as basileus and "pberteros because he rules more men" (I 290-284). This distinction is corroboraredby Donlan's recenr analysisof leadership authority in the lliad, in which he shows that the quarrel between Agamemnon and Achilles is nothing less than a confronration betureen the former's inherited "position" as king and the latter's acquired "standing" through martial achievementla. Among the Achaeans, the two spheres of action which define the preeminence of the aristos have been split between tv/o characters: Achilles, the promos anEr, and Agamemnon, the arclsos of the Achaean forces, accounting for the use of the epithet with both heroes ls. 13Cf. the similarlines usedto describeHector at II 816-818,and the commentson them at LlgrE, cols.L2B9-1290, suggesting the parall,elpolitical status o{ the two. 1a \(/. Donlan,'The Structureof Authority in the lliad,, ArethusaL2, 1979, pp. 51,-66;esp.p'p. 53, 58. 1s Cf. LfgrE, col. 1295 (9-14). See Nrgy, pp. 26-41. Though this analysis departs at some points from Nagy's, I am in general agreementwith his statement of the problem. The LlgrE commentsin connectionwith this quarrel' ,,Hier 'werdenzwei \)flertvorstdllungengegeneinandergeserzr, die vielleicht noch nicht getennt waten, wenn z.B. der Anfiihrer eines Kontingents ohne weiteres a\s aristos, der besteKrieger,gilt" (col. 1289).Donlan suggests a similar historicaldevelopment from a time when autholity was only to be gained through,,stand,ing,, to a time when "standing" had becomeinstitutionalizedas ,,position", and the A. T. Edwards Ot) In the p:::-'-1. a title, it ha: i-..:. Agamemnonrnii .:^-both best on th. r.,',-.-l usageis complem.::.,i ' the emphatic. This its--.:-.' : be atttibutedto a tvarrii': :,::-: death while fighting as the ,-'' ''" in which Thoas is named as tiearlief passage: ' rr-'j .::3 ol aristosf aristeusas . - :: :-. i:ie exceptionalcasesof :. ,i:sis:ratethe figure who is - ..i :-:'s: in council. This titular - .rr.:;irer usage which I term .rr-r.i rendencyof the word to , ..: ::.- non-jentof his wounding or to the passage .,.:., t'. For instance, Aetolians, compafean the i,t;t.;i oi ilevapr,(ev, ii'uou6 pr,ivflepirgav=a -et-'l.'c'.cv Aitct),6v '6y' &puotc't.'Oy.r1ti-c't&1)"abv uf,6v' tbv pliv "Aprlq 3v&pu(epr,aLgSvcq. ' . . (v 842-844). \il/hereasThoas is mentioned in the Catalogueof Ships as the leader of the Aetolians(II 638), Periphasis otherwiseunknown. Yet, when he falls facingAres, who is leading the Trojan fotces at that moment' he receivesthe epithet aristos, though it does not belong to him as a titLe. S7hile it is clear from this example that the titular and emphatic usagescan opefate independently,such casesare exceptional; it is typically an archo.sof one of the contingentswho setves as the subject of an emphatic usage. The tendency for the archos and the promos anEr, and, there{ore, for the titular and emphatic usages,to ioincide illustrates the normal unity of "position" and "standing" 17. within the warior society stagewas set for a conflictbetweenthe tvro (Donlan,pp. 64-66).Yet, in arguesforcefully that "Leistung" contfastto those views, Latacz (pp. 152-1,53) is stitr1more rimportantthan "Rang" in the Iliad, while Detienne(pp' 136'140) shows that in archaicSpartamembershipin a cofps of elite troops (standing) derived historically{rom membershipin a hereditarvpolitical elite (position), and not uice-uersa.I prefer to regatd the convention that physical and social power naturally go togetheras the ideologicaljudgmento{ an intenselyaristocfatic poem, and a judgment whose relation to historical events ancl development is probably rather complex. 16 The llgrE (co,is.1289,1294)has alreadynoted the association ol avistos with wounding and death, though its "stilistischerAspekt" is not resttictedto this context as my emphatic usageis. 17 SeeDonlan,p. 53. Aristos Acbai6n Let us now make a brief survey of the emphatic attestations: first I will summarize the evidence of the fighters from the minor contingents, then a more detailed account will be given of the emphatic occlrfrenceswith the Trojans and the Achaeans1,. It is immediatelv observedin the casesof theseminor fighters that, with the exceptior-roi Leonteus and Polypoetes, al1 are called aristos in the specifrcc.r:rie\r of death in battle 1e. Five of thesefigures-crethon .i:j o:.:l-'--hus,Periphas,Alcathous,and Patroclus-are not eligible :-: -:,:.:tt as a title, though the caseof Patroclus,as we shall see, is not so clear cut. Alcathous, schedius,paffoclus, Asteropaeus,and I : =::s and Leonteusare all facing an opponent having an aristeia : i'. ,:.:. designatedas aristos, and the rest are opposing heroes : Moreovet, the contexts seem to indicate - .' .1,',,1q5 6177iy. :- : -1.- :: .rs.Polr.poetes and Leonteus,paffoclus,periphas,Astero_ p'rcis. L:.:::o:r and orsilochus, and Adrastus and Amphius are likels I omrr rhose artestations vrhich a-reresricted to a specific activity or qualitv ourside rl.reimmediateconceln of the batie narrative (e.g. r 69; xrr 447; XXIII 6)9). There are fcur exanrplesof titular usagesof iristos duing battle narative (VI 78; XII 102-104;xv 282, ancrXVIL 51i). of these,the first three occuf at momenisin the fighting nhen one side,hopesto turn the tide of battle, and the appearance o{ aristosseemsto undertrinethe ability of certain figures to bring this about. Regardingxv 489, see xI,II i1,3-3r4. The attestationat xr'r 417-449refers to "the two besr n.renof the land, sucb as tfte?tare notD", who could not lift a stonelifted by Hector, and is thus removed from the cutrent action and the narrarivepresent. re rhe charactersin question ar'e: crethon and orsilochus (y 54r-543); Periphas(Y 842-844);Acamas(V,I 7; cf. II S;14);Adiastus and Amphius (XI 328334; cf' II 828-831);Polypoeres and Leonteus(XII 127-129:ct. rr 73g717); Alcathous(XIII 413); Schedtus(XVtrI 306-307;cf. Il 517, XV i1i_ 516); Patroclus(XVIII 10); Asteropaeus(XXI 205-207;cf. XII 102-104, Ii 8,tr8a). crethon and orsilochus, and Alcathousoffer some difficulties. The first .'i'o are designatedas the best of the Danaans.Yet neither they nor their rou,n, -'-::re (of rvhich they me.yrvell be the best men), is mentionedelservherein ' r roem. Likeu'ise,Alcathous,called the best man in Troi', appearson only ^.i other occasionin the Iliad (though admittedly among the aristoi). Aside ' - his death,his only claim to notoriety in the presentpassage is his status '::chises'son-in-law,I prefer to class theseobscurefigures amongthe minor ..:-\ A. T' Edwards ::e position of the prontos '.','irhseveralof the Trojan l. ::- ' .' - aristeu: Ii- :.: been sl'rini':- , -,--- : - - --i::.:eanscall him the Trojan : :. s:::ed that Patis would have .-i ::.:r :III 373-375). - -i.' ,;tJr d'Sristos ololef Sarpedon 2, Glrul.::1...:' : (XVI 521-522)". hasslainEuphotbus,Trodn 3. Apollo tellsHe ::-: :-:: 1.1::-:--r'-:s (XVII 80). ton ariston 4. Achilles and Aeners .::e ;:s:ribed as duo d'aneres exoch' aristoi (XX 158-159): it is stated le:er that Aeneas avoided death only through a divine tescue(XX 290 ff .). 5. Hermessaysof Hectorr anEr oristosolole (XXIY 384-385)23. It remains to examine the emphatic use of aristos and aristeus with Achaeanwarriors: 1. Pandarusstateshe has shot the two "best men" to no avail, naming Menelaus and Diomedes (V 205). 2. Diomedes is elservheretwice called aristos in predictions of his death (V 10, and 414). He is called aristos for the fourth time 20The positionsof Polypoetes and Leonteus,and of Patrocluson the field V 835-841' seeXI'II 436,448;2' Perriphas: 1. Alcathous: areclear.Regarding whereDiomedesand Athenamustride to the {font in a chariotto reachAres, XXI L39'l5l; and 848 whereP. is calledprotott (cf. 841); 3. Asteropaeus: amongthe to be the action show V 559'562 Otsilochus: 4. Crethon and andOdysseus pronacboi;5,AdlastusandArnphius:XI 313'3L9showDi.omedes to await the onset of the Trojan phalanxes,and so to conftont those fighting in the front. 21 For rny purposes,it makes no difference whether an emphatic use of aistos occuts in the natrative voice or in that of one of the characters: the two modesfollorv the sameconventions. 22 There is no difficulty in regarding Sarpedon,a Lycian, as best qf the Trojans here; cf. YI 77-79; and XVIII i.0, as compared to XVtrI 689-690. 23 See XXIV 24t-242, to which cf. XXIV 255'256' Note the sirnilarity of this ph1ase to those used of Sarpedon (XVI 52L-522) and Patroclus (XVII 589-690). Aristos Achai1n 69 as he and Athena press their attack against Ares, an attack which has already been describedas exrremely dangerousfor Diomedes (v 839; cf..V 'J.29-132,601-606, and VI 128-14I). 3. Helenus suggeststo Hector that he challengeAchai1n hos tis aristos (vII 50). Hector's desciption o{ the tomb his opponenr will have (vII BL-91), and the general {aintheartedn.rt-of th. Achaeans(Yrr 92-93; 1.24-160),all contribute to a senseof peril for the one lAjax, as it turns out) rvho will be the Achaean Droios aner t_TT 11l llOl_ ,11 4. Agamemnon instructs Diomedes to choose as a companion ::: :he night mission pbainomenonton ariston (X 2i5-236). Later 'i-';:-: ir:r:esseshis fear that Argeion boi aristoi may have suffered : T: :-- \ tl9). Both contexts in which aristos occurs stressthe j - ->- -j r.lootl-, i. \fhen Agamemnon'swound forces him from battle, Hectof vaunts: "anEr dristos is leaving,Zeus has given me a great eilc/)os,, (xr 288). 6. The case of Patroclus remains: Menelaus sends Antilochus to Achilles with the messagepepbatai d'1ristos Achaidn,/patroklos (xwl 689-690). 411 but Polypoetesand Leonteus among the minor fighters, as already noted, are called aristos at the *o*irrt of their deaths, and in the_majorityof these casesaristos is used emphaticallyof a fignr. who- deserves the epithet as a title. In the case of the Trojans, alr of those called aristos are elsewherementioned as members of the Trojan aristoi. Three of these five charactersare slain, and the remaining two are rescuedby gods from a certain death. In this group, however, the emphatic and titular usages actually converge onty in the figure of Hector, the best of the Troians. \7hile onlv one of the Achaeansis slain, the others are designatedas aristos either they are wounded or in circumrtrn..r-of great peril. Thev are -hen aU, moreover, called aristos during their aristeias, with the exception of Patroclus, whose aristeia ends shortly before his death r,. As *,e see, the usage of the epithet aristos supports the observation that -';hilemajor Ttojanheroes may be slain,only Paroclus of the Achaeans :s permitted to die. In addition, the precedingdiscussionarguesthat 2aKrischerplacesParoclus'.aristeia at XV 278-502(T. Krischer,Forn.ire t'',;r'entiotlen der homerischen Epos lZetemata56.'1,IV{iinchen 1971.p. l0). A. T. Edwards 70 although the poet ii.. r ' Achaeanheroes,he n:'.'.:: ' , - ' the death evoked bv the ri,-. Leavingasidethe mirr: : . :-r' which the Trojan and Achae.r: ..'r .pattern: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. " : - j:spose of any of the ": :o associatethem with : ::e moment, the order in :'r:',).i reveals an interesting Paris Menelaus Diomedes Ajax Odysseusand Diomedes Agamemnon Sarpedon Patroclus Euphorbus Aeneas Hector Except for Paris, the first group of. aristoi is entirely Achaean(2-6), whereasthe secondis entirely Trojan (9-11)25.The two groupsover26. Norman Austin has lap in the figures of Sarpedonand Pauoclus shown that the double catalogue,here a list of first Achaeanand then Trojan watriors, is a figure u'hich is characteristicof the Homeric style 27. Typically, such a cataloguemight be of the form: A, B, and 2s The duel betwee Paris and N{enelaus takes place before the battle narrative reaily gets under u'ay. As an eplscde, it serves to recapitulate the source of the vrar urhich the poet has be,gun to relate; cf. the similar role of the final scene of TII uis i uis the rape of Heien. 16 The pattern would be neater ftom a formal standpoint if the death of Sari.edon follorved that of Patroclus. Hou'evei, as Krischer has shcwn (pp. 2335,75-85), the central feature of the aristeia is a single combat betweon the hero having the aristeia and one o'f his foes $,ho attempts to defend his own arm)/. According to the narrarive l)attern of the at'i.;tcia.then, it rvould be sutptising for Paroclus to fal1 before his victory in s':ch a single combat. Sarpedon serves as the foe suppllning Patloclus rvith this victory, and opens the way to the subsequent victory of Hector in a moncmachy with Paffoclus' Sarpedon's overlapping into the Achaean series {orms a hinge, formally and thematically, betrveen the tr,vo sequences compiising the u'hole cafalogue. 2? See N. Austin, Catalogues attd tbe Catalogue of Sbips in the Iliad, Diss. University cf Califor,nia at Berkeley t965, pp. 45-59. See also C.R' Beye, Aristos Achaidn IL C; D, E, and F, where C and F occupy the emphatic positions in the series. In this double catalogueof aristoi, ir is Patroclus and Hector who serve as the emphatic terms. The entry of Pamoclusinto the fighting, a"ndthe subsequenrdeath of Sarpedonopen the list of Trojan aristoi. The resulting death of Patroclus then brings the Achaean catalogueto completion. The Trojan catalogue,intoduced by Sarpedon, culminates,of course,in the death of Hector. This catalogue {orm reinforces two important themes in the lliad; 1. in the first r-rrt of the poem, the inability of so many Achaeanheroesto make-do in Achilles' absencefrom battle; and 2. the inevitability of a combat beru'eenHector and Achilles in the secondportion of the poem. Sr !r.. t$'o Lrsagesof the epithet aristos have been outlined. r,. :.-,i .-'j:ence of Agamemnon,Achilles,Hector, and Thoas argues, :.:. :.:;..:: :sage is reservedfor that figure within a political unit t.i" ::r. Phccaeans,Trojans) who is preeminentboth in the agorE and on the batrlefield. For its part, the emphatic usage of aristos typically includes these features: 1. 2. 3. the leader of one of the contingents; the role of promos anEr; and the death of this figure in a combat rvith the opposing promos anEr. Taken together, these elementscomprisewhat I term the hero's death'8. Both the titular and the emohatic usases stand as features of the narrative which are themselu., ind.p.rrd"ent of the specific charactersthat becomeassociatedwith them. \7e must now inquire into the relationship betrveen these two usages of. aristosf aristeus. One point of contact betu'een the two is the role of the plornos aner, which links the figure who is aristos by title to the conrext of the hero's death. Let us begin by examin-ingthe instancesof the emphatic Haru.Stud.Class.Philol. 68, 1964, 'HomericBattleNanativeandCatalogues', pp. 345-374. 28Cf. Nagy,pp. 774-AA;E. Vermeule, Aspecttol Deatbin Early Greek Art and Poeny,Berkeieyt979, pp. 1.45-178; J.-P. Vernant,'fiANTA KAAA d'Hombre ) Simonide', Ann. ScuolaNonn.Sup.Pisa9,1979, pp. 1365,1374; andGrif{in, pp. 90-95,138-143. Seealso,for instance, YII 77-91;XII 310-328; XVIII 98-100,714-l2L; XXII 300-305;Od. Y 306-312;Od. XXIY 35-97; Pindar,N. IX 16-40(Sne11-Maehler); TvrtaeusXII 21-34West= IX Gent.-Pr. 72 A. T, Edwards usagewith the minor {ighters. It is possible, as has been noted, for ar occurrence of. aristos to be purely emphatic-for instance, the e-rarnpleof Periphas2e. Yet, in the majority of these instances,the r=:::-::ic usageis reservedfor those who also deserve it as a title, :----! s ;s3sring an affinity between this preeminent figure and the rc: r j.-r::': tt. This tendency towards a unity of title and context -: '-:€ -i"ii. ti -;ristos is underlined again by the f.act that although *rr ::r :.:-. :: ::.e.e minor fishters deservesaristos as a title. the " * ' : - i ':-', :::ion deemsmost appropriatefor it to be awarded =r-i::I]-: "{ ::::r 1 .;: :::i,: Ce:lh in battle. Indeed, all this suggeststhat : ",:' . :r'"..:, .-,:i iCeologythe destinyof the hero's death - :.1 i: - '- '-: : :,r- ',;::ichan aristosbeafs, r- - n .: * .,. :' '-. ,:. -::J Hector both die in battle, the sug:. ' ' : ;'" : ,. Z:::' erplanation of his plan reveals, iXV 6Bt cf. VI 441.-465\.Like: :: :-. ::: i-r'-:isei i','lse.r:.:--.-. : -:...:-. ..-t:: ,-:.: l:s or'.'nfate is {amous(IX 41,0-416 XVIII 9)-96'. Ir,.crl, Hc:;oi's death closesthe gap which had openedbetrveenthe titulrr and emphaiicusagesfor the Trojanswithin the framework of a catalogueof Trojan aristoi. However, although the Achaeancataloguesdoes climax in the only death of an Achaean aristos, Paftoclus, the gap between the emphatic and titular usages still remainsopen at this point. For in spite of the prominent position given the theme of Achilles' mortality within the lliad, it is natated in the poem only indirectly, through prophecy. In view of the suggestion, then, that the titie aristos carries with it the destiny of a herors death, it must first be asked horv the emphatic and titular usages can be reconciled rvith each other u'ithin the {ramev/ork of the catalogueof Achaean and Trojan aristoi; and second, what the rektionship is between Paroclus, as the final term in the Achaean cai:tlogue,and Achilles, who is prcperly aristos Achaion. There are 'a number of similarities betr.veenHector and Achilles, 2eConversely, thereare purelytitular attestations, rhoughwhen one omits thoseoccurringw,ith Agamemnon and Achilles,rvhichcan be regardedas the side-effectof their q',rarrel,only six such artestationsrerrlain(YI 77-79; IX 53-54;Xfi 1A2-104, XV 281-282: 447-448; XVII 511). 30Cf. the caseof Schedius, w-hodies rwice: once ag archonph1kCon (XV 516);later asPhok€on/och' aristor (XViI 307) Aristos Achai1n 7) which might be usefully noted at this point. It is largely the question of the fates of these two figures which draws the Iliad on to its conclusion, and this effect is stengthened by the linking of their destinies: Achilles insures his orrn doom through his vengeanceon Hector (XVIiI 95-96). It is a commonplaceof the Iliad that Hector is the mainstay of Tro.,,'sdefense,rvhile Achilles tatr<es a similar place in the Achaean ranks u'hen he fights 31. Related to the equivalent standing of Hector and Achilies, and the interweaving of their fates, is the repeatedtheme that thesetv/o are destined opponents32. \fhat rve knou. o{ the Troy Cycle provides us with further evidenceof a similarity beir.,-een Hector and Achilles as types. It is stiking ::...: iollol'ing the deaths of Achilles and Hector, they afe not suc::. l:i bi' the heroesrr'ho ere acknori'ledgedto be next in line behind :::r':n, Ajax and Aeneas les-ctcii-.'ely.Rather, they must be replaced bl new charactersbrought in speciallyfor the purpose. \fhen Achilles has petished, the Achaeancau-se is lost unless they can recruit NeptoIemus to take his place. lvloleover, the armor which is outrageously deniedio Ajax, the second-best of the Achaeans,is immediatelyhanded over to this nex' Achaean cha.mpion. The list of Trojan champions is rather impressive: (Telephus),Cycnus, Hector, Penthesileia,Memnon, and Eurypvlus 33. This sticcessionof special figures to fill a specificrole in the Achaea,nand Trojan armies,that of the preeminent v/arrior, suggeststhat this role exists as an objective feature of the epic narrative, independentof the specificcharacterswho fill it. Each of these figures can be thought of as a character type: the supreme champion of his (or her) armv to. Not only in ierms of the llio.d itself , then, but within the con31For Hectorseen. 10 above.For Achilies,see,for instance:I 283-284; IX 348-354; X\"rIII 102-105. 32SeeI 24A-244; IX 300-3C6; XVII,I257-265,3053A9; andXXI 279-280, whereFtrector is mentionedas aristos. 33T.\f. Allen ed.,HotzeriAperaY, Oxford1971,pp. n2-rc9. Cf. A. Severyns,Le cycle1piqued.ans l'lcoled'Aristarque, Libge1928,pp. 303,314-315, 318-319, 337-338,342. 3aThis argumeotis corroborated by Kakridis'demonsrationof the fotmal similaritiessharedb,rtMeleager,Hector, and Achilles as preeminentwarriors who knowinglyrisk their lives in defenceof their peopleand cities (or ships, in Achiiles'case).SeeJ. Th. Kakridis,HomericResearcbes, Lund 1949,pp. 43-60.Cl. B. Fenik,Iliad.X andthe Rhesus. TheMytb (Collection Latomus73), Brussels1964,pp. 34-38;Latacz,pp. t49-t51.. 1A A. T. Edwards ventions of the Troy Cycle as a u'hoie. Fle;:c: and Achilles possess a special status rvhich both separrltesihen ::om other heroes and equates them with each other. This speci,rlsr.rrus shared by these heores is an acknowledgedidentification s-irh the role of promos alxsv-kIsslor and Achilles are each the pronzosttrter for their respective groups. If, however, both the title aristos TroonlAchaiSn, and the role which it implies o{. promos anEr, are identified with the figures of Hector and Achilles in the lliad, what is to be made of the catalogue already outlined of Trojan and Achaean aristoi? Is there some principle at rvork in the llio"d which subordinates its catalogue form to the recognizedprimacl' of Hector and Achilles? One possibility is that the other rvarriors rvho are designatedas aristos in the emphatic senseare to be regardedas substitutes,or place-holders, for Achilles and Hector. They are not, however, substitutes in the sensethat they actuall;rreplaceeither of these characters,as Penthesileia replacesHector after his death. Rather, they temporarily occupy a role rvhich itself exists as an independentfeature of the epic narrative, but v'hich is also identified in the lliad with specific figures other than thesecharacters. In order to discover evidencein support of this suggestion,we must consider these "substitutes" for Hector and Achilles in the context of a specific ethical norm. The speechwhich Apollo delivers to Hector after Menelaus has slain Euphorbus in XVII suggeststhat Hector is always expected to serveas the Trojan pfo??tosanErhimself. and that it is to his discredit if anyoneelse should do so: ''Exrop, vUv o'Upr,iv66e tletq &xtyq.ca 8rd.rxulv ilnrouqAiar"t8ao8aippovog'o[ 5' &],e1sr,voi riv6p&or1e Evrlroior 6aprjpe.rer, {6' 6xdeoDar,, &),).ror,f i) 'AXr,),frr,, rlv d.}avct:*1rlxe p{tlp. r6<ppa6d tcr, Mev6),acq, &.pi1,.oq'Arpdoq ui6q, Ilcr,rp5x)"o'" nepupaqTpdruv tbv ctprcrovSnerpve, flavloi6r1.,rEUrpopBov, Hnavoe6t 0c0pr,6oq &'Lxic, (xur 75-81). This speechoccursin a common scenepattern in which a god rebukes a hero for not fighting, and exhorts him to return to battle 35. Apollo 3sSee:V 800-811; XM64-377;XY 244-245; XX 8l-85; ct.Yl326-33I; XIII 249-253. Also, cf. Fenik'sdiscussion of the "rebukepattern" (B. Fenik, Aristos Acbai1n t) contrasts the folly of Hector's present activity with the seriousness of what has happenedsince he left the battle line. The god suggests that Hector's thoughts for himsel{ have resulted in the death of his companion, Euphorbus. It makes little sense for Apollo to hold up the death of Euphorbus as a reproach to Hector unless it is presupposedthat Flector's ptesencewould have, and should have, prevented this misfortune from befalling Trodn ton ariston. For so much is implicit in Apollo's taunting designation of Euphorbus by Hector's own title, "best of the Ttojans" 36. Although Achilles' absencefrom battle, in contrast to Hector's, is motivated by his desire to enhancehis timE, his failure to defend his comradesneverthelessatouses similar miticism of his behavior. In book XI (656-665 and ff,) Nestor makes a speech to Patroclus in ',vhich he reproachesAchilles' lack of kedos and eleos (XI 665) {or his comrades, Nestor is outraged that Achilles remains in his camp even though the Achaean aristoi (XI 658) have now all been wounded. The o1d man's speechimplies that Achilles has abandoned the responsibilitiesvrhich attach to his status as the greatest of the Achaeanchampions,and the result has been calamity for the Achaean aristoi 37. As we see,Achilles and Hector are held responsiblefor the death or wounding of the other figures appearing as aristos. Theit culpability makes sense only on the assumption that these other figutes are shouldefing a responsibility rvhich properly belongs to Hector and Achilles, and that they are regarded for that reason as substitutes for those rvho are aristos by title. Moteover, the reproachful tone of Apoltro's and Nestor's speechesrenders unmistakable the ethical burden of the tide aristos. It is incumbent upon these {igures to defend their comrades before they take thought for themselves, a TypicalBattleScenes 211,\(iesbaden1968, in the lliad lHerruesEinzelschrift pp.49-50 and B. Fenik,Studiesin the OdysseylHermesEinzelschrift 301, \Tiesbaden 1974,p. 188). 36For a parallelto this scene,SeeXVI 508-551(esp.521);cf. XVII (esp.142). 140-168 37Achillesacknovrledges his culpabilityat XVIII 98-106,regardingwhich, BeiseeD. Sinos,Achilles,Patroklos, and the Meaningol Philos(Innsbrucker tuAgezul Sprachuissenschaft 29), Innsbruck1980,pp. 29-46; and Nugy, pP. 104-108.Seealso A.\7.H. Adkins, Merit and Responsibility, Oxford 1960, pp.34-36. T { A. T" Edrvards rk already observed between _-.: : .:-:;tci. It is, of course,Hector t'ho -.- :: i,..licv.,ing Zeus, revelation of his p..i:..:' ..'. : : s dearhis a certaintv-onlv its tinrir.j -," :: r,,-irhthe flight of Hector, and Sarpedo:.- ::. :-.. Trojans himself (XVI 419425),eachT:..'...-..." :- i .^ :... rhoughtof Hector, for whom he standsin. rrnc :. - ::1..1gs. \Y"/ithinthe framework of the catalogue,rhr'::.:.,-.- ,:, :-- .._ ."::r.sriltion of aristosforeshadows Hectot's destiny,oi .r,r.r': : -_:..:.r.,..: simultaneously postponesit sinceit martrrsa mere su:-.r::.-:-.-. Tire Trojan."tuiog.r..li*u*., when the titular and empharic ',:s,r.ies ccincide to unno,ri..e Hector,s death38. The initial terms of the earlier. Achaean,catalogueonly suggest through wounding or dangerthe death rvl.richis reservld for iis climax. Moteover, though the Achaean catalcguedoes curminate in a death. it is not the death 1veexpecr-rhat of the aristos Achaion-but that o{ his therapdn, Parroclus. At the conclusionof this catalogue,then, the trvo usagesof arisios are still out of step: there haJbeen no -ailstos emphatic usage of aristos v'ith Achilles, the Achaion. This us to the problern of the relationship behveen patoclus and httlgl Achilles rvithin the context of the lliad's.utulogrr. of aristoi. Formally, the relations of Hector, Achilles, and patroclus are paradoxical. For, on the one hand, Hectol and Achilles parallel each other in terms of the roles they play *.ithin their respectire societies. Each is the promos mtEr for his group, and so eachis also the aristos, though in Achilles' case this title is shared .u.rithAgamemnon. on the other hand, horvever, Patroclus and Hector are equated as the final terms of the Achaean and Trojan cataloguesof aristoi. Related to this, moreover, is the final emphatic use of a.ristoswith each. It would seem that the fig,re of Parcclus fills the slot in this nanative pattern of a double cataloguev'hich is marked out for Achilles as the Achaean equivalent of Hector. put othervrise, in the absence 38 Regarding the emphatic character of the final term in Homeric cata. logues, and the status of eariier terms as "foirs', {cr the final term, see Austin, p. 127. Aristos Acbaiin of an emphatic attestation of aristos urith Achilles, the use of that epithet suggeststhat Patroclustakes Achilles' place in death 3e. This absenceof Achilles' death vithin a cerrain formal scheme, the catalogue of. aristoi, is underlined and balancedby the assertion of this theme at another level of rhe narrative rvell in advance of Patroclus' death-u'hich is itself, by contrast, presentedas an unexpected event 40. It can be noted that Hector's death, which is implicit in the titj.e aristos, is explicitlv acknowledgedby Zeus' propecy (XV 68). Achilles' death ,is also fixed rvithin the plot of the Iliad in definite terms, since it is made directly contingent upon events which occur in the poem. For, once Achilles has resolved to seek revenge against Hector, Thetis warns him that his own death will follow shortly thereafter (XVIII 95-96) in a prediction which echoesAchilles' earlier revelation of his dual fates (IX 412-41,6;ct. XIX 408-417, XXI 273-278). Thus, the significance attached to the absenceof Achilles' death, an event rvhich rve have already observed to be implicit in his title aristos Achai6n, and in the role rvhich the catalogue of aristoi plays in the formal otganization of the poem, manifests itself at the level of the story-linein the form of a prediction. It has been suggestedthat the absenceof an emphatic use of aristos with Achilles, counterbalancedby the prediction of his death, is in some way connectedwith the prominence afforded the death of Patroclusby its place in the catalogueof aristoi. As already noted, the aristoi other than Hector and Achilles serve as olace-holdersfor them in that they temporarily assumea role which functions as an independent feature of the nalrative, but is at tl-resame time identified with those trvo heroes. The cataloguecan operate to foreshadow and create suspencein the poem precisel,vbecausethese other aristoi are recognizably not Ftrectoror Achilles, for u'hom thev stand in. Yet the relationship between Patroclus and Achilles. bv conrrasr, seemsto be one of identity rather than the overt non-identirv shared 3e Regardingthe notion that Patoclus becomesidentifieC s'i:-: ^{c:::"rs in death,see,for instance,Kakridis,pp.60-71; Nugy,pp ,.2922.ej: S::---: pp.29-38,62; and C. \ilhitman, Homer and the Heroic Tradrtror.C:=::..:;: Mass.1958,pp. 100-102. a0 For the lliad's fotesltadou"ingof Achilles' death, see G. D-:.:!r:-r::l Foreshadouingand Suspenseix the Epics of Honaer,Apollonius, ixd \':,g:; New Yotk L966 (: Diss. Princeton t9331, pp.28-33. b '. - - '.- .- \\'e might consider several point : ::. : \\-r- s tent in VI, he asksAchilles to ler hin .. :ile, formulatinghis request '.,.':ilnot go yourself,Achilles, in theseterm. -: : then sendme in:., : -: . 'I 'r'..irns. And let me wear your armor so thar i[ rhe T. they will be driven from - r: '.'!r,,r. battle" (XVI 36-13). Ti:. :- : :hen me" form of Patroclus' proposition marks him rrs \.:-.: :. :\r\ri\-: Achilles sendspatroclus into battle instead of going h::r..-:. \chilles, armof, moreover, is both the emblem and the mech.rn:smof paroclus' identity with Achilles. Patroclus' role as a substiture can be successfulonlv if the fact of the substitution remains hidden. There are t'''o occurrencesof aristosfaristeus durine the battle over Paroclus' corpse which do not easily submit to classification. on the one hand, they occur in connectionwith patoclus' death. on the other, they refer to Achilles, and so combine elements of both the titular and the emphatic rsages. Folloiving patoclus' d,efeat, Glaucusrefersto him as therapdn...afieroshos ieg' aristosfArgeion (XVII 164-1.65). Later, Zeus, refe*ing to Achilles, speaks of the armor stripped from Paroclus as teuchea...fandros orlirteo, (XVII 202'203), In thesepassages, Patoclus' identit-ras both Dromosa,Er and a corpseis defined in relation to Achilles as aristos Achaion, ve seethesefigures merged here in attestationsof aristosf aristeuswhich would be emphaticif they referred to Parroclusdirectlv. The sceneof mourning, when Achilles first heais the news of Paroclus' death, is also of interest. Kakridis' analysisof this episode has revealedseveralimportant features: - - 1' \x/hen Thetis hears_themoaning of Achilles, rarher than going to his side immedrately, she begins to lament him (XVIIT i5-37). 2' Though her fi{ty sistersaccompanyher to the Achaeancamp to no apparent purpose in this scene, in the odjssey's account Jf {:h1ll._t_'lneral they,accompanyThetis to take part in the mourning (I/. X\IIII 65-67; Od. XXIV 47-j9). 3. Thetis' posrure, taking Achilles' head in her hands from behind as he lies on the ground, is that of the mourner of the dead in Homer (XVIII 70-72). 4. As Achilles lies in the dusr, he is described: negas rnegal|sti Aristos Achaidn tanustheisfkeito (XVIII 26-27). In the Odyssey's description of Achilles' death, he is described keiso nxegasnaegalosti(O/. XXW 40) nt. Kakridis concludesthat this scenefunctions as a prophetic representationof Achilles'own funeral and mourningo'. This proleptic vision of Achilles'deatharisesfrom Pattoclus'deathas Achilles'proxy within the framervork of a catalogueof Achaean aristoi. Keeping in mind the instancesnoted above where Achilles is re{erted to as aristosfaristeus in connection with Patoclus' death (XVII, 1.64-765,202-203),let us consider a linal feature of this mourning scene. \fhen Thetis hears Achilles moaning, she begins her lament with these words: o.lpr,ou i1c'l 6eu),t,ul pr,ou 6uaapvqror|xetu (xvrrr54). Variants of the phrase o moi ego deilE in the lliad introduce the lament made over a corpseo'. With this formula Thetis speaks of her son as if he were dead-.The remarkablecompound dusaristotokeia repeats in dus- the tone of the opening hemistich, and joins it to aristos. As Nagy points out, this juncture of dus- and aristos adapts an epithet of praise to a context of mourning aa. In view of the emphatic usage of aristos, dus- makes explicit from the perspective of the mother the necessity aheady borne within the praise confered by the title aristos. In this compound,Thetis sumsup Achilles' entire life: his semidivinity as the child of her womb (-tokeia); his ill fate of a premature death (dus-); and his peculiat place in the world of men as aristos. By means of this striking compound, Thetis refets to an event still to come-Achilles' death in battle, Yet in view of the convergenceof Achilles and Patoclus in this mourning scene, and the significanceof the opening hemistich o{ the line, one recognizes here the otherwise absent emphatic occurrenceof aristos with Achilles, though it surfacesobliquel,v,and through the oxymoton of Thetis' compound. This prophetic sceneissuesfrom the Iliad's deal A variationof this phraseis usedto describe in the a corpseelservhere iliad (XYI 776), andthe participletanustheis is consistently usedof the dead : the lliad. a2 Kakridis,pp. 60-71. {3 See:XIX 287; XXII 411; cf. Od. V 299, tn N.gy, pp.,8,6,1,Ln.3. SeealsoSinos,pp, 72-73, 80 sire to tell the whole storr eba;t its Acbaidn. A. T. Edwards his destiny as aristos As we have seen, the connotation of the epithet aristos forges an identity of political hegemonr and mardal preeminencewithin the Iliad's aristocratic ideolog-v. The fusion of this epithet's titular and emphatic usages,moreover, inscribes the hero's death within the status of the aristeus. The poer of the Iliad exploits the interplay between the strictly emphatic and the titular usages of the epithet to order the poem's narrative as a catalogue,a virtual priamel, through which he builds suspenseand foreshadows. This care{ul deployment of.aristos enablesAchilles to play out his fate on a bodly tragic scale, though vicariously, within a framework of proxy and prediction. University of Michigan