Procedimiento de recolección de datos.

While κέλομαι, ὀτρύνω, and θαρσύνω express the normal in-battle relationship between a

commanding hero and a group of hetairoi, the verbs ἀγείρω and λίσσομαι represent rare

95

speech), the context is accusatory and the result of gathering hetairoi is catastrophic.45 When λίσσομαι (beg, entreat, supplicate) takes hetairoi as object, the context is anticipatory and the supplication of the hetairoi is successful.46

Both instances of ἀγείρω with hetairoi as object are serious accusations. In the first, Hector accuses Paris of ruining Troy. In the second, Paris accuses Hector of destroying hetairoi.

Early in Book 3, when Paris shrinks back into the ἔθνος ἑταίρων in fear of Menelaus,

Hector upbraids his brother; but the scope of his reproach extends well beyond the cowardice

Paris has just displayed. The defender of Troy accuses his brother of bringing their father, the

city, and the people great suffering:

ἦ τοιόσδε ἐὼν ἐν ποντοπόροισι νέεσσι πόντον ἐπιπλώσας, ἑτάρους ἐρίηρας ἀγείρας, μιχθεὶς ἀλλοδαποῖσι γυναῖκ’ εὐειδέ’ ἀνῆγες ἐξ ἀπίης γαίης νυὸν ἀνδρῶν αἰχμητάων πατρί τε σῷ μέγα πῆμα πόληΐ τε παντί τε δήμῳ, δυσμενέσιν μὲν χάρμα, κατηφείην δὲ σοὶ αὐτῷ; (Iliad 3.46-51)

45_{Iliad 3.47 (Hector to Paris); 13.779 (Paris to Hector). In other Homeric contexts the object of ἀγείρω (most} commonly λαός) is generally passive and the connotation of the verb is neutral. To perform ἀγείρω seem to be harmful only when the object is hetairoi in particular. (For the passivity of the λαός see especially Haubold 2000, chapters 1 and 2.)

46 _{Representative examples: Iliad 9.581 (family and hetairoi to Meleager), 21.71 (family and hetairoi to Hector),} 22.418 (Priam to bystanders), 24.357 (Priam to Achilles). See Naiden 2005 for comprehensive treatment of supplication in Homer, including detailed discussion of λίσσομαι.

96

The mention of hetairoi is tangential to the substance of Hector’s charge; the use of the phrase “ἑτάρους ἐρίηρας ἀγείρας” serves a rhetorical and poetic purpose. Paris’ wrongdoing is the theft of Helen and her transport to Troy. The hetairoi scarcely participated in the crime and Hector never blames anyone but Paris. But Paris’ most recent retreat resembles another, a more

destructive act of cowardice. As he now shrinks back into the ἔθνος ἑταίρων, so he earlier carried

his stolen wife into the city that now risks itself to defend him. As Paris is now bringing ruin to

Troy by keeping Helen within the walls, so also he gathered (ἀγείρας) his hetairoi for his wife- stealing trip to Sparta. The result of this gathering of hetairoi, two steps removed, is the present disaster.

The second use of ἀγείρω with hetairoi as object swaps the accuser and the accused. Just as Hector blames Paris in Book 3 for endangering the city by capturing Helen with the help of

gathered hetairoi, so Paris blames Hector in Book 13 for gathering and leading hetairoi to their doom: Ἕκτορ ἐπεί τοι θυμὸς ἀναίτιον αἰτιάασθαι, ἄλλοτε δή ποτε μᾶλλον ἐρωῆσαι πολέμοιο μέλλω, ἐπεὶ οὐδ’ ἐμὲ πάμπαν ἀνάλκιδα γείνατο μήτηρ· ἐξ οὗ γὰρ παρὰ νηυσὶ μάχηνἤγειρας ἑταίρων, ἐκ τοῦ δ’ ἐνθάδ’ ἐόντες ὁμιλέομεν Δαναοῖσι νωλεμέως· ἕταροι δὲ κατέκταθεν οὓς σὺ μεταλλᾷς. (Iliad 13.775-780)

97

Here the blameworthy party is Hector, and again the use of ἀγείρω with hetairoi as object points to the crime. In Book 3, Paris’ harm was to Troy; in Book 13, Hector’s harm is to his hetairoi

themselves. Just as in Hector’s accusation Paris’ gathering of hetairoi presaged the destruction of Troy, so also here in Paris’ accusation Hector’s gathering of hetairoi for battle (μάχην ἤγειρας ἑταίρων) results in the deaths of the hetairoi he leads (ἕταροι δὲ κατέκταθεν οὓς σὺ μεταλλᾷς).

The narrative context sets Paris’ accusation of Hector strongly against Hector’s

accusation of Paris in Book 3. In Book 13, Paris is responding to a round of abuse from Hector

centering on the familiar picture of a beautiful, erotically obsessed, and militarily poor “Bad-

Paris” (Δύσπαρι εἶδος ἄριστε γυναιμανὲς ἠπεροπευτά: Iliad 13.769). This time Hector raises the stakes by openly threatening Paris’ life (νῦν τοι σῶς αἰπὺς ὄλεθρος: 13.773). But this time the

accusation of cowardice is simply false.47 When Hector encounters Paris in Book 13, Paris is

fighting like any other Iliadic warrior, rousing hetairoi in the normal language of heroic leadership:

τὸν δὲ τάχ’ εὗρε μάχης ἐπ’ ἀριστερὰ δακρυοέσσης δῖον Ἀλέξανδρον Ἑλένης πόσιν ἠϋκόμοιο

θαρσύνονθ’ ἑτάρους καὶ ἐποτρύνοντα μάχεσθαι…

(Iliad 13.765-767)

Within thirteen lines Paris appears as a successful leader of hetairoi and Hector appears as a destroyer of hetairoi, an inversion emphasized by the reversal of the accusatory use of ἀγείρω with hetairoi as object.

98

If ἀγείρω signifies selfish abuse of hetaireia, λίσσομαι (beg, entreat, supplicate)

represents an opposite extreme of respect for hetairoi. When a hero gathers (ἀγείρω) hetairoi, he leads innocent companions to catastrophe caused by his own foolishness. When he entreats (λίσσομαι) hetairoi, they do exactly what he asks. Like the two instances of ἀγείρω with hetairoi

as object, the two instances of λίσσομαι with hetairoi as object form a pair.48 In the first passage, Hector entreats his hetairoi to begin a particularly ambitious attack. In the second, Achilles entreats his hetairoi not to make him eat before he avenges Patroclus.

In battle, λίσσομαι with hetairoi neither implies authority nor signifies weakness. The first case demonstrates this clearly. In Book 12, as the Achaeans cower behind their besieged

wall, Hector assembles his troops for the assault:

ὣς Ἕκτωρ ἀν’ ὅμιλον ἰὼν ἐλλίσσεθ’ ἑταίρους

τάφρον ἐποτρύνων διαβαινέμεν… (Iliad 12.49-50)

As Hector assembles the men, he both rouses (ἐποτρύνων) and entreats (ἐλλίσσεθ’) the hetairoi

to cross the ditch. No desperation forces him to entreat rather than command: at the moment his

tactical situation is extremely strong. Indeed, the Achaeans have just been described as “shut in

next to their hollow ships in fear of Hector, mighty maker of fear” (νηυσὶν ἔπι γλαφυρῇσιν

ἐελμένοι ἰσχανόωντο : Iliad 12.38-39). Rather, Hector entreats his hetairoi because their self- motivation is maximally required when the Trojan force is very close to victory.

99

In battle, a hero can entreat hetairoi to attack; apart from battle, a hero can entreat

hetairoi to consider his emotional state. The second appearance of λίσσομαι with hetairoi as object comes in Book 19, just before Achilles returns to combat. Patroclus’ death having finally

roused him to fight, Achilles is interested only in revenge. The Achaean elders asks him to eat,

but he asks them to stop:

αὐτὸν δ’ ἀμφὶ γέροντες Ἀχαιῶν ἠγερέθοντο λισσόμενοι δειπνῆσαι· ὃ δ’ ἠρνεῖτο στεναχίζων· λίσσομαι, εἴ τις ἔμοιγε φίλων ἐπιπείθεθ’ ἑταίρων, μή με πρὶν σίτοιο κελεύετε μηδὲ ποτῆτος ἄσασθαι φίλον ἦτορ, ἐπεί μ’ ἄχος αἰνὸν ἱκάνει. (Iliad 19.305-307)

Achilles’ use of λίσσομαι echoes the elders’ request on the previous line. As if λίσσομαι were

not gentle enough, Achilles adds two more levels of non-authority. He concedes that they might

not obey/be persuaded by him; but if (εἴ) any of the dear hetairoi used to be persuaded (imperfect ἐπιπείθεθ’), then he asks that they not tell him (κελεύετε) to eat. The apodosis of Achilles’

conditional admits that commands might go from hetairoi to Achilles, since κελεύω frequently signifies direction, even in battle. As soon as Achilles entreats his hetairoi, he gives them an explicit reason (ἐπεί) for his desire not to eat and drink: terrible grief (ἄχοςαἰνόν) has come upon him. He asks his hetairoi to consider his personal feelings, and of course they do.49

49 _{This interpretation goes against Griffin 1980, 15 (claiming that Achilles simply will not share food with} Agamemnon) and Taplin 1992, 211.

100

With objects other than hetairoi, λίσσομαι does sometimes imply that the speaker is speaking from a position of weakness. In Book 15, during the Achaean rout, Nestor entreats

warriors who are not called hetairoi:

λίσσεθ’ ὑπὲρ τοκέων γουνούμενοςἄνδρα ἕκαστον·

ὦ φίλοι ἀνέρες ἔστε καὶ αἰδῶ θέσθ’ ἐνὶ θυμῷ ἄλλων ἀνθρώπων, ἐπὶ δὲ μνήσασθε ἕκαστος παίδων ἠδ’ ἀλόχων καὶ κτήσιος ἠδὲ τοκήων. (Iliad 15.660-663)

Here λίσσομαι clearly signifies supplication in battle. Unlike Hector in Book 12, Nestor cannot

safely assume that nearby warriors will do what he wants and what is needed for victory. They

are in no place to give protection and they expect to receive none. Thus hetaireia is not activated, and accordingly these supplicated warriors are not named hetairoi. Indeed, Nestor’s request explicitly depends on filial piety, not warrior companionship, insofar as he supplicates on behalf

of parents (ὑπὲρ τοκέων) and family (παίδων ἠδ’ ἀλόχων καὶ κτήσιος ἠδὲ τοκήων).50 Nestor’s

speech rouses the men (ὄτρυνε μένος καὶ θυμὸν ἑκάστου: 667), but Nestor’s auditors are not

given credit for the pause. Athena clears the air and Ajax intervenes to protect the ships, but he is

emphatically alone.51

50 _{This supplication prefigures Priam’s supplication of Achilles in Book 24: in both cases, a desperate old man} appeals to a young warrior’s feelings for his aged parents.

51 _{Ajax takes his heroic stand when he finds it unpleasant to remain where the other Achaeans are, i.e., in a rout} (οὐδ’ ἄρ’ ἔτ’ Αἴαντι μεγαλήτορι ἥνδανε θυμῷ / ἑστάμεν ἔνθά περ ἄλλοι ἀφέστασαν υἷες Ἀχαιῶν: Iliad 15.674-675). The sons of the Achaeans are amphi (ἀφέστασαν) but they are not with Ajax, so they are not called hetairoi. They retain the dynamic unity of any Iliadic warrior-group, signified by the simile in which they are described as an ἔθνος

101

Further analysis of leadership in the Iliad, classified by verb, context, participants, and content, appears in the appendix. All instances of human leadership are analyzed, whether or not

the warriors roused, encouraged, commanded, or entreated are called hetairoi.