Janse, Mark

English

Ghent University Academic Bibliography

MISCELLANEATHE METRICAL SCHEMES OF THE HEXAMETERThe aim of this paper is a modest one. A new proposal is oﬀered forthe notation of caesurae in the early Greek hexameter.1) Before doing so,it is necessary to brieﬂy review a number of previous proposals, since thereis to date no generally accepted notation. Let us start with the metricalscheme. The hexameter is traditionally divided into six metra or feet, eachconsisting of a princeps, i.e. “a position in the verse that calls for a longsyllable” (West 1982: 199), and (with the exception of the last foot) abiceps, i.e. “a pair of short positions admitting of contraction” (West 1982:192):2)1ÓÔ¯Ô2ÓÔ¯Ô3ÓÔ¯Ô4ÓÔ¯Ô5ÓÔ¯Ô6ÓÓStructurally the hexameter can be regarded as consisting of two or morecola (‘members’) separated by one or more caesurae (‘breaks’). In the met-rical doctrine prior to the third century AD four caesurae were recognized(Bassett 1919: 351): after the princeps of the third foot, after the thirdtrochee, after the princeps of the fourth foot, and after the biceps of thefourth foot. The common Greek terms were (tomÆ) penyhmimerÆw, katåtr¤ton troxa›on, •fyhmimerÆw and boukolikÆ (Bassett 1919: 353), which havein turn produced the English terms penthemimeral, trochaic, hephthemimeraland bucolic caesura.3) The corresponding symbols—P, T, H and B, intro-duced by White (1912: 152)—are still current in modern metrical studiessuch as Sicking (1993: 75). The revised metrical scheme, incorporating thetraditional caesurae, can be represented as follows:1ÓÔÔ2ÓÔÔ3Ó|PÔ|TÔ4Ó|HÔÔ|B5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓA number of inﬂuential modern metricians assume one and only onecaesura located near the middle of the verse. For instance, West (1997:222) claims that “Every verse without exception has a caesura (word-end)at one of three places: (1) after the ﬁrst syllable in the third foot (‘mas-culine’ or penthemimeral caesura); (2) between the two shorts in the thirdfoot (‘feminine’ or katå tr¤ton troxa›on caesura); or (3) after the ﬁrst sylla-ble in the fourth foot (hephthemimeral caesura).” Sicking (1993: 77) goesso far as to claim that verses without a P or T caesura are without acaesura (zäsurlos).Whether we are prepared to accept this conclusion depends to no smallextent on the question of what is understood by the terms caesura andits corollary, colon.4) Bassett (1919: 345) distinguishes three diﬀerent meanings of the term caesura: (1) word-end, (2) rhythmical break, and (3)sense-pause. A proponent of the ﬁrst view is West (1982: 6), who deﬁnes© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2003 Mnemosyne, Vol. LVI, Fasc. 3Also available online – www.brill.nlMne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 343344 MISCELLANEAcaesura as “regular word-end” dividing the verse into two cola or “met-rical phrases” (ibid., 5). Sicking (1993: 54), on the other hand, deﬁnescaesura as rhythmically relevant word-end (rhythmisch relevante Wortgrenze)which, he adds (1993: 52), has a perceptive function ( perzeptive Funktion)and divides the verse into two rhythmical cola (rhythmische Kola).In an epoch-making article originally published in 1926, HermannFraenkel set out to demonstrate that in the Greek hexameter the articu-lation of the sense (Sinnesgliederung) and the succession of long and shortsyllables are geared for one another (aufeinander abgestimmt) (21960: 103). Heexplicitly deﬁnes caesurae as sense-pauses (Sinnesfugen) that are used for theinternal articulation (Binnengliederung) of the verse (21960: 111). He furtherassumes that each verse consists of four cola separated by caesurae at thefollowing three positions (21960: 104, 111): (1) after the princeps of theﬁrst foot, after the ﬁrst trochee, after the biceps of the the ﬁrst foot orafter the princeps of the second foot (the so-called A-caesurae), (2) afterthe princeps of the third foot or after the third trochee (the so-called B-caesurae, corresponding with the traditional P and T caesurae), and (3)after the princeps of the fourth foot or after the biceps of the fourth foot(the so-called C-caesurae, corresponding with the traditional H and Bcaesurae). In addition to these ‘canonical’ caesurae, Fraenkel (21960: 106 ﬀ.)also ﬁnds instances of ‘displaced caesura’ (Verschiebung eines Einschnitts or ver-spätete Einschnitt) after the second trochee or after the biceps of the secondfoot (displaced A-caesurae, marked with an exclamation mark); or afterthe princeps of the ﬁfth foot or after the ﬁfth trochee (displaced C-caesurae,again marked with an exclamation mark).5) This gives the following met-rical scheme (adapted from Fraenkel 21960: 104, 111):1Ó|A1Ô|A2Ô|A32Ó|A4ÔóA!ÔóA!3Ó|B1Ô|B2Ô4Ó|C1ÔÔ|C25ÓóC!ÔóC!Ô6ÓÓFraenkel’s notation is used especially in German metrical publications—for instance Korzeniewski (1968: 31) and Nünlist (2000: 111)—but has notgained wide acceptance, probably because of the lack of correspondencein numeration between the caesurae at A1/B1 versus A4 (after the prin-ceps) or A2 and B2 (after the trochee) versus C2 (after the biceps). Moreover,the A-caesurae are used to refer to two feet, the B-caesurae to a singlefoot, and the C-caesurae again to two feet if the displaced caesurae aretaken into account. Finally, as Higbie (1990: 15) correctly points out,Fraenkel’s system fails to include all the places in the verse where a clauseor sentence can end (assuming that either of these may coincide with acolon).The problems connected with Fraenkel’s notation were bypassed byEugene O’Neill in an equally epoch-making article published in 1942.Assuming that caesurae are not restricted to the traditional P, T, H andB, nor to Fraenkel’s A, B and C positions, O’Neill (1942: 113) devised analternative notation which has since gained fairly wide acceptance. Usingwhole numbers to refer to positions after either the princeps or the bicepsMne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 344MISCELLANEA 345and half numbers to refer to positions after the trochee, O’Neill’s nota-tion can be represented as follows:1Ó1Ô1.5Ô22Ó3Ô3.5Ô43Ó5Ô5.5Ô64Ó7Ô7.5Ô85Ó9Ô9.5Ô106Ó11Ó12A variant of O’Neill’s notation can be found in Sicking (1993: 69) (prob-ably after van Raalte 1986: xix):1Ó1Ô2aÔ2b2Ó3Ô4aÔ4b3Ó5Ô6aÔ6b4Ó7Ô8aÔ8b5Ó9Ô10aÔ10b6Ó11Ó12Hagel (1994-95: 78) proposes yet another numerical notation, but hisnumbers refer to moraic, not syllabic, positions:1Ó2Ô3Ô42Ó6Ô7Ô83Ó10Ô11Ô124Ó14Ô15Ô165Ó18Ô19Ô206Ó22Ó24The demerit of both Hagel’s and O’Neill’s system is again the relativeopacity, as there is no correspondence between the numeration and thetraditional division into six feet. The trochaic positions, especially, cannotbe easily deciphered if one is not using the notation frequently—the samebeing true of the odd numbers.O’Neill’s system is sometimes used in conjunction with other notations.Porter (1951: 16), for instance, assuming a variant of Fraenkel’s theory,superimposes the A, B and C symbols over O’Neill’s positions 2/3, 5/5.5,and 8/9 respectively, but with a numerical value diﬀerent from Fraenkel’s,thus adding to the confusion as noted by Higbie (1990: 15):A2 A1 B2 B1 C2 C11Ó1Ô1.5Ô|22Ó|3Ô3.5Ô43Ó|5Ô|5.5Ô64Ó7Ô7.5Ô|85Ó|9Ô9.5Ô106Ó11Ó12Beekes (1972: 2), on the other hand—assuming that caesurae are rhyth-mical breaks restricted to the traditional P and T positions (1972: 3)—superimposes White’s symbols over O’Neill’s positions 5 and 5.5:P T1Ó1Ô1.5Ô22Ó3Ô3.5Ô43Ó|5Ô|5.5Ô64Ó7Ô7.5Ô85Ó9Ô9.5Ô106Ó11Ó12Finally, mention should be made of the notation used by Kirk (1985:18) in the ﬁrst volume of the Cambridge commentary to the Iliad. Whileadopting traditional symbols for the canonical P and T caesurae (using Mfor ‘masculine’ and F for ‘feminine’), Kirk accepts Porter’s A-caesurae(which he marks as ‘secondary’—as opposed to the ‘main’ or ‘central’ Mand F caesurae—together with the traditional B and H caesurae, the lat-ter designated as R by Kirk 1985: 20), but with the numerical valuesreversed (Kirk’s A1 corresponding to Porter’s A2 and Fraenkel’s A3):1ÓÔÔóA12ÓóA2ÔÔ3Ó|MÔ|FÔ4ÓóRÔÔóB5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓIt is not necessary for our present purpose to engage in the controversyover the nature of the caesura and the colon.6) Suﬃce it to record thatthere is indeed a controversy and that there is need for a system à laMne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 345346 MISCELLANEAO’Neill which can accommodate every potential caesura position, but withmore transparency as regards the position of the caesura vis-à-vis the foot.The proposed notation is in fact so obvious that it is hard to believe thatno one has thought of it before. The numeration is based on the tradi-tional division of the hexameter into six feet, the symbols ‘a’, ‘b’ and ‘c’referring to the positions after the princeps, after the trochee, and afterthe biceps respectively ( Janse 1998: 138):1Ó1aÔ1bÔ1c2Ó2aÔ2bÔ2c3Ó3aÔ3bÔ3c4Ó4aÔ4bÔ4c5Ó5aÔ5bÔ5c6Ó6aÓ6cAs the use of the traditional names for the ‘canonical’ caesurae is sowell established, it may be found useful to append the corresponding sym-bols to the new numeration:1Ó1aÔ1bÔ1c2Ó2aÔ2bÔ2c3Ó3aPÔ3bTÔ3c4Ó4aHÔ4bÔ4cB5Ó5aÔ5bÔ5c6Ó6aÓ6cTo illustrate the applicability of the new notation, let us consider thefragment from the Iliad (1.43-52) as analyzed by Fraenkel (21960: 112).For our present purpose Fraenkel’s interpretation will be taken for grantedwithout further discussion:7)Õw ¶fatÉ | eÈxÒmenow | toË dÉ ¶klue | Fo›bow ÉApÒllvn 1c 3a 4c1ÓÔÔ1c2ÓÔÔ3Ó3aÓ4ÓÔÔ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓb∞ d¢ | katÉ OÈlÊmpoio | karÆnvn | xvÒmenow k∞r 1b 3b 4c1ÓÔ1bÔ2ÓÓ3ÓÔ3bÔ4ÓÓ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓ45 tÒjÉ |Övmoisin ¶xvn | émfhref°a te | far°trhn 1a 3a 5b1Ó1aÓ2ÓÔÔ3Ó3aÓ4ÓÔÔ5ÓÔ5bÔ6ÓÓ¶klagjan dÉ êrÉ | ÙÛsto‹ | §pÉ Övmvn | xvom°noio 2b 3b 4c1ÓÓ2ÓÔ2bÔ3ÓÔ3bÔ4ÓÓ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓaÈtoË | kinhy°ntow | ı dÉ ≥Ûe | nukt‹ §oik≈w 1c 3b 4c1ÓÓ1c2ÓÓ3ÓÔ3bÔ4ÓÔÔ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓ¶zetÉ ¶peitÉ | épãneuye | ne«n | metå dÉ ﬁÚn ßhke 2a 3b 4a1ÓÔÔ2Ó2aÔÔ3ÓÔ3bÔ4Ó4aÔÔ5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓdeinØ d¢ | klaggØ | g°netÉ érgur°oio | bio›o 2a 3a 5b1ÓÓ2Ó2aÓ3Ó3aÔÔ4ÓÔÔ5ÓÔ5bÔ6ÓÓ50 oÈr∞aw m¢n | pr«ton | §p–xeto | ka‹ kÊnaw érgoÊw 2c 3b 4c1ÓÓ2ÓÓ2c3ÓÔ3bÔ4ÓÔÔ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓaÈtår ¶peitÉ | aÈto›si | b°low | §xepeuk¢w §fie¤w 2a 3b 4a1ÓÔÔ2Ó2aÓ3ÓÔ3bÔ4Ó4aÔÔ5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓbãllÉ | aﬁe‹ d¢ pura‹ | nekÊvn | ka¤onto yameia¤ 1a 3a 4a1Ó1aÓ2ÓÔÔ3Ó3aÔÔ4Ó4aÓ5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓMne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 346MISCELLANEA 347It should be obvious that the new notation is far more transparent thanprevious ones. Compare, for instance, the notation of the ﬁrst verse in thevarious systems:Fraenkel     Porter     Kirk O’Neill    Sicking     Hagel      JanseA3-B1-C2     A2-B2-C2      A1-M-B 2-5-8 2b-5-8b    4-10-16   1c-3a-4cFinally, it may be noted that the ‘sense-pauses’ identiﬁed by West (1982:36) are identical with Fraenkel’s canonical caesurae—following the newnotation:1Ó1aÔ1bÔ1c2Ó2aÔÔ3Ó3aÔ3bÔ4Ó4aÔÔ4c5ÓÔÔ6ÓÓIt is the hope of the present writer that the new notation will facilitatediscussion and comparison in rebus hexametricis.U G/U  A M Jmark.janse@rug.ac.be1) The present notation, though speciﬁcally devised for the early Greek hexa-meter, can be (and has already been) applied to other hexametric poetry.2) The following metrical symbols are used: Ó = long, Ô = short, Ô¯Ô = con-tractable biceps, | = caesura, ó = displaced caesura.3) The penthemimeral and trochaic caesurae are sometimes called ‘masculine’and ‘feminine’ respectively, but the origin of the sexual metaphor is obscure (West1982: 195). On the use of the term bucolic ‘caesura’ instead of ‘diaeresis’ see West(1982: 192) and Sicking (1993: 54).4) Bassett (1919: 349) has shown that the Greek term tomÆ originally meant‘segment’ rather than ‘end of a segment’.5) On the notion of displaced caesura see West (1997: 223).6) A preliminary discussion of the author’s position can be found in Janse (1998:135 ﬀ.). A revised and extended English version of that chapter is in preparation.7) For a critical appraisal of Fraenkel’s theory see Janse (1998: 140 ﬀ.).BIBLIOGRAPHYS.E. Bassett, The Theory of the Homeric Caesura According to the Extant Remains of theAncient Doctrine, AJP 40 (1919), 343-72.R.S.P. Beekes, On the Structure of the Greek Hexameter, Glotta 50 (1972), 1-10.H. Fraenkel, Der homerische und der kallimachische Hexameter, in: Wegen und Formen früh-griechischen Denkens, 100-56 (München 21960).S. Hagel, Zu den Konstituenten des griechischen Hexameters, WienStud 107-8 (1994-5),77-108.C. Higbie, Measure and Music. Enjambement and Sentence Structure in the Iliad (Oxford1990).Mne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 347348 MISCELLANEAM. Janse, Homerische metriek. Orale poëzie in de praktijk, Didactica Classica Gandensia38 (1998), 125-51.G.S. Kirk, The Structural Elements of Homeric Verse, in: The Iliad. A Commentary. Vol.I: Books 1-4, 17-37 (Cambridge 1985).D. Korzeniewski, Griechische Metrik (Darmstadt 1968).R. Nünlist, Homerische Metrik, in: J. Latacz (ed.), Homers Ilias. Gesamtkommentar.Prolegomena, 109-14 (München 2000).E.G. O’Neill Jr., The Localization of Metrical Wordtypes in the Greek Hexameter, YCS 8(1942), 105-78.H.N. Porter, The Early Greek Hexameter, YCS 12 (1951), 3-63.C.J. Ruijgh, D’Homère aux origines proto-mycéniennes de la tradition épique. Analyse dialec-tologique du langage homérique, avec un excursus sur la création de l’alphabet grec, in: J.P.Crielaard (ed.), Homeric Questions. Essays in Philology, Ancient History and Archaeology,1-96 (Amsterdam 1995).C.J.M. Sicking, Griechische Verslehre (München 1993).M. van Raalte, Rhythm and Metre. Towards a Systematic Description of Greek Stichic Verse(Assen 1986).M.L. West, Greek Metre (Oxford 1982).——, Homer’s Meter, in: I. Morris & B. Powell (eds.), A New Companion to Homer,218-37 (Leiden 1997).J.W. White, The Verse of Greek Comedy (London 1912).TIMEO SIMULACRA DEORUM (OVID, HEROIDES 10.95)Deserted by Theseus on a lonely island, the Ariadne of Ovid’s Heroides10 is terriﬁed at the many possible threats to her life (79-98). In additionto fearing such animals as wolves (84), lions (85), tigers (86), and seals (87),she is afraid of being either killed (88) or enslaved (89-92) by other humanbeings. As she herself sums up the situation, si mare, si terras porrectaque litorauidi, / multa mihi terrae, multa minantur aquae (93 f.).1) However, land and seaare not the only scary venues: Ariadne adds brieﬂy, caelum restabat—timeosimulacra deorum! (95), before returning once more to the dangers posed bybeasts (96) and men (97 f.).This passage has attracted a certain amount of scholarly discussion onaccount of textual and grammatical problems, as well as the perceivedabsurdity of its content. Various remedies, such as expunging a numberof verses or positing a lacuna, have been suggested.2) In what follows, Ishall be concerned with just one of the many issues surrounding theselines, the one that is, perhaps, the most intriguing: Ariadne’s fear of thegods. The line caelum restabat—timeo simulacra deorum! raises three main ques-tions: (1) How does this verse connect to what precedes and, especially,to what follows?; (2) Why is Ariadne afraid of the gods?; and (3) Whatare we to understand by simulacra deorum?As for (1), the mention of the gods arises out of Ariadne’s astonishingly© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2003 Mnemosyne, Vol. LVI, Fasc. 3Also available online – www.brill.nlMne(DS)F13_msc_343-360  7/9/03  2:59 PM  Page 348

The metrical schemes of the hexameter

https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/218196/file/6773244

The metrical schemes of the hexameter

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Ghent University Academic Bibliography