It has been customarily assumed that Homer uses three terms interchangeably to designate the Greeks of the heroic age who fought at Troy. Nevertheless, even a cursory glance at the distributional properties of these three terms reveals prag- matic differences. In the first book of the Iliad, distinctions are drawn, even if their import is not as clear as one might like. The first occurrence is in the proem, where the poet states that —
οὐλομένην, ἣ μῡρί᾽ Ἁχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε (1.2)
— it was the curselike wrath of Achilles that inflicted myriad pains upon the Achae-
ans, as though a generic term for all the Greeks at Troy, the collective identity of
the Bronze Age Greeks (Finkelberg 2005). The line does not mean that Achilles inflicted pain on his own people, but not necessarily the rest of the heroic Greeks. The second use, likewise, seems to be generic. The context involves Chryses, the priest of Apollo, whom the son of Atreus dishonored:⁴0
Ἀτρεΐδης· ὁ γὰρ ἦλθε θοα�ς ἐπὶ νῆας Ἀχαιῶν (1.12)
‘Atreides (dishonored him): for he came to the swift ships of the Achaeans’ Next, Chryses addresses all of the Achaeans, in particular the sons of Atreus:
40 The specific form of the dishonor, involving threats to an ‘old man’ (γέρον) at 1.26 is sig- nificant, given (i) the tradition that a king is to prompt αἰδώς ‘respect; shame’ — indeed Martin (1984: 43) sees the Iliad as “a poem almost wholly about kingship and its abuse”, and (ii) the fact that Agamemnon violates every one of Cú Chulainn’s instructions on the proper verbal behavior of kings (cited by Martin 1984: 38): ‘Be not haughty in contradiction. Be not loud in telling. Do not play the buffoon. Do not mock.’, and ní faithchither senóri ‘Do not threaten old men’ (Serglige Con Culainn 278 ff., ed. Dillon 1953). Martin (1984: 38‒48) cites early Greek parallels for the ex- pected behavior of kings. Lynn-George (1988: 87 ff.) develops the theme of Agamemnon’s abuse of power. In book 9 Agamemnon asserts and reasserts his power and kingly status, reminding Achilles that he is βασιλεύτερος (9.160) ‘more kingly’ (§11.2, end). Agamemnon “seeks in the giv- ing of restitution to recover for himself his loss as ruler: the magnanimity of the lord over many is an attempt at reacquiring ‘the man worth many’, a man the equivalent of a realm” (Lynn-George, p. 90). In Agamemnon’s alleged restitution, moreover, Achilles is never named: “the king’s list of gifts is a construct in language which bears anonymity, absence, silence, distance and even death” (ibid., p. 90 f.).
What’s in a name? 107
… καὶ λίσσετο⁴¹ πάντας Ἀχαιούς
Ἀτρεΐδᾱ δὲ μάλιστα δύω, κοσμήτορε λᾱῶν
Ἀτρεΐδαι τε καὶ ἄλλοι ἐϋκνήμῑδες Ἀχαιοί (1.15 ff.) ‘… and he kept entreating all the Achaeans,
but especially the two sons of Atreus, marshalers of troops, “Sons of Atreus and you other well-greaved Achaeans”’
Chryses evidently thinks that all of the Greeks in his presence are ‘Achaeans’ and includes the sons of Atreus among them. The poet then affirms (1.22) that ‘all the
other Achaeans (ἄλλοι μὲν πάντες … Ἀχαιοί) shouted assent’ to honor the priest and
accept the ransom, but Agamemnon did not like the idea and insulted the priest. In the first five references to the Greeks at Troy (four by the poet, one by Chryses, priest of Apollo), the only word used is Achaean. That suggests that the poet wants the audience to think of Achaean as a quasi-generic term, intended to include Agamemnon.
The first use of one of the other terms occurs in Chryses’ prayer to Apollo, when, in anger, he asks Apollo to punish the Danaans:
τι�σειαν⁴² Δαναοὶ ἐμὰ δάκρυα σοῖσι βέλεσσιν (1.42) ‘let the Danaans pay for my tears with your missiles’
Since the Achaeans become ‘Danaans’ when they are uncooperative and insult- ing, a point missed by Plato’s paraphrase with τοὺς Ἀχαιούς (Republic 3.394a), one surmises that the Danaans were a group of Greeks particularly noted for their recalcitrance. Alternatively, since the Achaeans agreed that Chryseis was to be
41 While Aristarchus eliminated augments after vowels, this reading is preferable to Plato’s ἐλίσσετο (Republic 3.393a) because elsewhere in the Iliad the augmented form is ἐλλίσσετο (6.45, 21.71) etc., and the initial λ- otherwise frequently makes position, e.g. 1.394, 4.379 (La Roche 1869: 51 f.).
Ἀτρεΐδᾱ in the next line is Plato’s reading, which is generally accepted. Wackernagel (1916: 56 f.) labels it an Atticism. Chantraine (GH i. 203) calls it Aeolic. There are no epigraphic examples of the dual in Ionic but, since it remained alive in Attic inscriptions until c.409 (Schmitt 1977: 110), Ionic must have also inherited it, and the evidence suggests that the dual remained a liv- ing category through much of the epic tradition. As to the form in question, the fact that *-a + e otherwise yielded /ā/ (GH i. 51 f.), as in ἄεθλον > ἆθλον ‘contest’ (§13.1(6)), there is no reason to take Ἀτρεΐδᾱ as anything other than Old Ionic.
42 The aorist ἔτῑσα is a late spelling for ἔτεισα established epigraphically and etymologically < *(e)kʷei-s- (LIV 380), as opposed to ἔτῑσα which is correct for τι�ω ‘value; esteem; honor’ (GH i. 13, 412) < *kʷi-ye/o- (LIV 377 f.). Modern editors emend τι�σειαν to τείσειαν (GH i. 465).
108 Argives, Danaans, and Achaeans
given back to Chryses, perhaps he is singling out a specific group of Agamemnon supporters as Danaans. The next reference to the Greeks at Troy occurs a few lines later, and it is also to the Danaans:
κήδετο γὰρ Δαναῶν, ὅτι ῥα θνῄσκοντας ὁρᾶτο (1.55)⁴3
‘for she [Hera] was concerned about the Danaans, because she saw them dying’ One could invoke the notion of formulaic clustering (Hainsworth 1976), but that seems too facile here. Recall the discussion regarding the Danaans, servants of
Ares (§9.5). Here, likewise, the Danaans are engaged in their prototypical suffer-
ing (dying!) on account of war. Hera was mother of Ares and closely affiliated with Argos, Sparta, and Mycenae (3.52). The Heraeum, her main temple, stood three miles southeast of Mycenae. While this is 8th century (Drews 1979: 127 f.) and 3.52 is a ‘late’ line (Shipp 1972: 242), there can be little doubt that her epithet Ἀργείη ‘Argive’ (3.8, 5.908) was reinterpreted in connection with the Argolid. Because of her hatred of Troy (23.27 ff.) and desire to have it obliterated (3.21‒72), she not only supports the warring Danaans in their Trojan campaign, but even takes credit for gathering the army (3.26 ff.). From her perspective, of course, the Greeks occupy the high moral ground. Consequently, in the close of her spat with Zeus, she twice contrasts the Trojans with the Achaeans (3.65 f.), reiterated by Zeus to Athena (3.70 f.). The same contrast is made again at 3.80, when Athena comes to earth to fulfill Hera’s request to Zeus, and again at 3.85, in a comment by the poet, suggesting that this is indeed the appropriate contrast.
Hera gets Achilles (the best choice for starting a fight; see Redfield 1994) to open the assembly, and in his brief and pointed nine-line speech (1.59‒67), he suggests that they should retreat if they wish to escape death, ‘if indeed war and pestilence are to subdue the Achaeans’ (1.61). This appears to be a counterexam- ple to the suffering Danaan motif. However, as noted above, these terms are used relative to a given character’s perspective.⁴⁴ Achilles, who is in effect voicing his own fears here, considers himself the prototypical Achaean, which becomes clear in his confrontation with Agamemnon.
43 The ι in θνῄσκ- ‘die’ is secondary / Attic (GH i. 317; LIV 145). Zenodotus reportedly read ὅρητο (ὁρῆτο?); cf. Sappho’s athematic ὄρημι ‘I see’, handed down as ὄρημμ᾽ at Sappho 31.11 (§20.6; GH i. 305 f.). Leaf (1900: 8) claims ὁρᾶτο is Attic, citing ὅρηαι ## (xiv. 343) ‘you see’ (cf. Wackernagel 1916: 71), but denominal *sorā-ye- (§20.6) should yield Ion. ὁρᾱ- (§13.1(6); ftn. 41 above). 44 For perspective as a driving force, see De Jong (1997, 2001), who argues that focalizing (per- spective) rather than speech/narrative determines distribution. Perspective also figures in Fried- rich (2007).
The language of polarization 109
In the credentials of the expert seer Calchas, the poet uses Achaean either generically or in an implied contrast to the Trojans:
καὶ νήεσσ᾽ ἡγήσατ᾽ Ἀχαιῶν Ἴ̄λιον εἴσω (1.71)
‘and (Calchas) guided the ships of the Achaeans inside Ilion’
In his address to the assembly, Calchas sets up an apparent contrast between Achaeans and Argives:
Ἀργείων κρατέει καί οἱ πείθονται Ἀχαιοί (1.79)⁴5
‘he [Agamemnon] rules over the Argives, and the Achaeans heed him’ This contrast is denied by Drews (1979: 123), who takes both terms as equiva- lent generics. Nothing, however, precludes a few passages in which a technical distinction is drawn, correctly, since Agamemnon’s authority was greatest in the Argolid, and Agamemnon speaks of himself as an Argive, i.e. one from the Argolid, at 1.119.