in the context of discussing the interpretation of Nestor’s name and the meaning of forms from the root *nes- as “safe return home” or without “home” where it needed to be specified

commentary on Odysseus’ restraining and Nestor’s inciting the Achaeans, corresponding to the contrast between them on their nostos (as the mortal and immortal twins, respectively)

in the context of discussing the contrast between Odysseus and Nestor in terms of their referring to signs from gods (Odysseus recalls one interpreted by Calchas, Nestor one he saw for himself)

The narrative of Rhapsody 2 now follows up on the dire consequences of the quarrel between Achilles and Agamemnon as narrated in Rhapsody 1. Achilles has already withdrawn from the war because of his anger. So, now that this greatest hero of the Achaeans is out of the picture, what will happen next? How will the absence of Achilles affect the story of the Trojan War? Many new doubts and fears set in, and the resolve of the Achaeans is harshly tested. There is negative talk, and there are omens. Thus the story of the Trojan War, as told and retold countless times in the distant past, must now be retold yet again, and Rhapsody 2 will set the terms for the retelling still to come. For setting the terms, Rhapsody 2 will need a new Catalogue of Ships, now happening in the tenth year of the war, as a replacement for any old Catalogue that would have logically happened already in the first year. This new Catalogue is of course not really new: rather, it is the oldest possible Catalogue that is now being renewed for the newest possible retelling of the Trojan War, reconsidered in the glaring light of the grim consequences facing the Achaeans now that Achilles has withdrawn from the war. With these consequences in view, the Catalogue will reassess all the Achaean heroes involved in the Trojan War. Of special interest will be the role of Protesilaos, who had been the first Achaean to die in the war, as a model for Achilles. As the Master Narrator notes most ruefully, Protesilaos is now terribly missed by his fellow warriors. So too will Achilles be missed.

On the reverse side of the coin: Inscription: ΘΗΒΑΙΩΝ. Pictured: the Greek hero Protesilaos, the first Achaean to step on Trojan soil and, according to the myth, the first to die in the Trojan War. The myth is retold in Iliad 2.695–709.

Epic quotes here directly the poetry of blame as displayed by Thersites. His words of blame are introduced and concluded at I.02.224 and I.02.243 respectively by way of the word neikeîn ‘quarrel with’. Although Thersites addresses Agamemnon, insulting him directly, he insults indirectly all the Achaeans, including Achilles. Among the specific insults hurled at Agamemnon are accusations of greedy behavior, I.02.237.

Thersites directs his blame at the Achaeans, ridiculing them by feminizing them. The noun elenkhos ‘disgrace’ is meant to shame the persons insulted by the poetics of blame.

Here the words of blame uttered by Thersites insult Achilles, calling into question the motives of that hero. It is as if the anger of Achilles were not real. This kind of misrepresentation by way of blame poetry is described as ekhthrā parphasis ‘invidious side-wording’ in Pindar Nemean 8.32.

Thersites here is insulted by words of blame because he has used the words of blame to insult the noble. Nobility, when insulted by words of blame, can stoop to insult in return by way of using the same words.

The insulting language of Thersites is here being insulted in return: his discourse is described as a-krito-mūthos ‘having words that cannot be sorted out’. So, the blame poetry of Thersites is bad poetry.

Throughout this speech, Thersites is insulted by words of blame because he has used the words of blame to insult the noble.

Here again, the expression erizemenai basileusin ‘engage in strife against kings’ is a programmatic way of referring to the language of blame as a challenge to royalty.

Just as Achilles and Odysseus are the ‘best of the Achaeans’, Thersites is the ‘worst’, according to the insulting words of counter-blame spoken by Oydsseus.

This word kertomeîn ‘say words of insult’ is yet another term referring to the act of insulting by way of blame poetry.

Thersites, by blaming the heroes of the Iliad, had intended to turn them into objects of laughter by way of ridicule. But the blame is reversed, and now it is Thersites who becomes the object of laughter.

This word epes-bolos ‘thrower of words’ is yet another term referring to the act of insulting by way of blame poetry. A possible parallel is Latin iocus, if derived from iaciō / iacere ‘throw’.

one of Watkin’s three passages where menos is used as a functional equivalent of mēnis

The omen of the serpent in Iliad 2 is comparable to the omen of the serpent in Virgil Aeneid 2.199–227.

Here in the Iliad, the telos or ‘fulfillment’ of the plot is being realized only in the form of a prophecy—by contrast with the epic Cycle, where the conquest of Troy is the ultimate telos. On the epic Cycle, see the inventory of Words and Ideas. There are comparable themes in Virgil Aeneid 8.615-629, 729-731, featuring the Shield of Aeneas.

in a list of instances where phanai substitutes for eukhesthai where it is combined with comparative/superlative

Odysseus' speech to the Achaeans in Book 2, recalling the divine sign at Aulis, is introduced by Athena herself restraining the audience so that he may speak the elaborate muthos at 2.284-332 (Martin 1993:63-64). One could score the speech by noting the shifts in genres of muthos within it: Odysseus begins with flyting, comparing the troops to children or women anxious to get home; memory takes over, noting it is the tenth year at Troy; a command intrudes ("Bear up, friends," 2.299-300); and this triggers a long rendition of an earlier prophecy by Kalkhas at Aulis, when the sign of the snake who ate the swallows appeared (Martin 1993:81).

Precise details—the altar and the springs near it, the snake's color, the number of birds and their cries—are remembered in the service of dramatic rhetoric intended to convince the Achaeans of the authenticity of the event, but also to raise the status of the one who remembers it. For Odysseus, in recalling the words of Kalkhas, exhibits a seerlike ability to describe and interpret what is not present. Memory bestows a mantle on its practitioners (Martin 1993:81-82).

The crucial difference between this type of performance and that of Nestor in his long narrative in Book 2 (656-803) has to do with the self-presentation of the speaker. Odysseus foregrounds himself as performer, explicitly quoting another authority—Kalkhas—whom he then can be seen to overcome in the contest of speaking: Kalkhas, as we saw in Book 1, does not even cite his own previous acts, whereas Odysseus remembers all, apparently. Nestor, on the other hand, presents himself not as a speaker but as a heroic performer of both words and deeds. His narrative of personal experience is convincing because it calls for emulation, even challenge (Martin 1993:82).

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.

The first critical term to examine in the analysis of Thersites' speech is the insult Odysseus throws at him: akritomuthos (2.246). The admiring description of Menelaos' style, ou polumuthos (3.214), was correlated with a style that did not miss the mark by tossing words about aimlessly: oud' apharmatoepēs (3.215). When Thersites appears for the first time, the poet draws attention to qualities in his speech that directly oppose the good style of Menelaos: he speaks a great deal and he does not put his words in good order (epea . . . akosma . . . polla, 2.213). The implication that Thersites misses the mark of proportionate speech comes in Homer's observation that the blamer says whatever he thinks will get a laugh (2.215). In other words, he is just an entertainer, not a "performer" in the heroic sense (Martin 1993:109-10).

Thersites' style deserves no respect because he does not have the heroic martial performance record needed to back up his words: style for the hero is a total notion, a proportion of words and deeds. Because Thersites does not have a valid poetic memory for his own career, the audience of Achaean heroes and epic hearers cannot perform the critical judgment necessary to validate his muthos. It remains "indeterminate" or "undiscriminated." The verbal idea contained in the first part of the compound adjective akritomuthos is one of careful selection, what a commander must exercise to pick out the best troops (2.362, krin'), the opposite of massing things together—in a word, critical ability. The term, then, underscores a performance value: the capacity to judge one's own acts and be judged for them (Martin 1993:110-11).

In the other passage where muthoi are called "undiscriminated," the lack of connection between verbal behavior and martial performance is prominently foregrounded. Iris rebukes Priam (2.796-97): "Old man, to you unjudged words are always dear as once during peace. But war inescapable has arisen." "Unjudged muthoi" is a contradiction in terms; such words would be a masquerade of martial speech in the context of peace. Real muthoi require action (Martin 1993:110-11).

The evidence of meter reinforces the stylistic analysis. When Thersites' speech (2.225-42) is performed aloud, it contains massive correption—the reduction of long vowels and diphthongs from their usual metrical value as "heavy" syllables to "light," short values. A count of correptions per number of lines shows that Thersites' eighteen verses contain this feature ten times, a rate of 55 percent. By contrast, Nestor's correption rate in the speech of 1.254-84 is 30 percent (nine times in thirty lines). The average rate of correption for narrative verses in the poem is 20 percent; for speeches it is 40 percent. Nestor, "of sweet speech," sounds like Homer as we first hear him; Thersites is quite literally "without meter" in his performance, markedly more so than the average hero (Martin 1993:112-13).

References

Martin, R. P. 1993. The Language of Heroes: Speech and Performance in the Iliad. Ithaca.