the meaning of kertomeo

7/28/2019 The Meaning of Kertomeo

1/5

Iliad 24.649 and the Semantics of

Author(s): Jenny Strauss ClaySource: The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 49, No. 2 (1999), pp. 618-621Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Classical AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/639883 .

Accessed: 20/04/2011 05:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at .http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup. .

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Cambridge University Press and The Classical Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to The Classical Quarterly.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classicalhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/639883?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cuphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/639883?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=classicalhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=cup


2/5

ClassicalQuarterly9.2 618-648(1999)Printed n GreatBritain 618

SHORTERNOTESILIAD 24.649 AND THE SEMANTICS OF KEPTOMEQD

The meaning of KEpTro0LEwnd its congeners in Homer has been the subject ofdebate in this journal.' Jones has argued that 'to KEpTroLE'Womeone is to speak insuch a way as to provoke (whether intentionally or not) a powerful emotionalreaction', whether of anger or fear, and thus means '"to utter stinging words at[someone]", "pierceto the heart", "cut to the quick",rather than merely "provoke" .2This definition seems to work well enough for some cases,3but certainly not for all,and especially not for the passage from which the whole controversy began: Iliad24.649, where Achilles speaks to Priam E7TLKEpr70odwv. As Richardson says in hisIliad commentary, 'there is no sign that Akhilleus' speech has this direct effect[i.e. arouses fear] on Priam'.4 Jones's article was responding to an earlier one byJ. T. Hooker, who attempted to ascertain the sense of Achilles'7TLKEpTO0[E'WVbysurveying the usage of kertom- words throughout Homeric epic. He concluded thatthe basic meaning is 'to taunt' or, more abstractly, it 'indicates the provocation ofanother person into behaving in a certain way,whether that is the behaviour desiredby the speaker . . . or is not desired by the speaker'.5 The problem was that thisdefinition did not seem to fit the very line from which his inquiry began, the words ofAchilles to Priam. Hooker then hypothesized that the verse betrayed signs of an'imperfect adaptation' of a different version of the poem in which Achilles taunted adefeated enemy or perhaps preservedhis grudge against Agamemnon to its end. Thisexplanation is unpersuasive.I believe, however, that Hooker was on the right track, but would modify hisdefinition slightly but significantly: KEpTO/EIWnvolves a complex dynamic between aspeaker and his addressee; in speech-act theory it signals an indirect but intentionalperlocutionary act,6 and means 'to provoke or goad someone indirectly into doing

The etymology is uncertain. See Chantraineand Frisk s.v.; and J.-L. Perpillou,Rechercheslexicales en grec ancien (Louvain, 1996), 118-21.2 P. V. Jones, 'Iliad 24.649: another solution', CQ 39 (1989), 247-50; cf. A. Heubeck, 'ZweihomerischeTrrEpat',iva Antika31 (1981), 79. Heubeck 78 lists some of the varieddefinitionsputforth: 'joking', 'harmless teasing', 'teasing', 'bantering', 'taunting', and 'mocking'. He also citesW. Bergold, 'Der Zweikampf des Paris und Menelaos' (diss. Erlangen, 1977), 136, n. 1: 'DieBedeutungspanne von KEpT7dOta `7TEa ist gro3: vom fast gutmiitigen Sticheln (so etwa S2 649)iiber Schadenfreude (E 419) und gehdissigeVerh6hnung (B 256, 17 744) bis zur gekrinktenInvektive (A 539)'. Heubeck himself (79) defines KEp7rtLta E7TEraas 'wohliiberlegt auf einebestimmte Wirkung berechnete und dies Wirkung geradezu herausforderndeWorte', henceintentional, but he limits the anticipated reaction to a purelyemotional effect. See also A. W.H.Adkins, 'Threatening, abusing and feeling angry in Homeric poems', JHS 89 (1969), 21.3 E.g. Iliad 20.202 = 433; Odyssey7.17, 16.87, 18.350, 20.263, 22.194, and 24.240. Yet evenin these cases, the reaction anticipated is often something more precise than fear or anger: toprovoke a fight, whether verbal or physical, or to goad someone into a self-revealingemotionalreaction.

4 N. J.Richardson, TheIliad: A Commentary6 (Cambridge, 1993), on 24.649.'A residual problemin Iliad 24', CQ 36 (1986), 32-7, at 35. In turn Hooker is responding toC. W.McLeod, HomerIliad Book 24 (Cambridge, 1982), 142.6 Cf. J. L. Austin, How To Do Things With Words(Cambridge, MA, 1975), 101-32; alsoS. Davis, 'Perlocutions', Linguistics and Philosophy 3 (1979), 225-43; and J. R. Searle andD. Vanderveken,Foundationsof IllocutionaryLogic (Cambridge, 1985), 10-12.


3/5

SHORTER NOTES 619something', 'intentionally trying to elicit a response that one expects, anticipates, ordesires'. Some simple examples: if I ask someone 'do you know where the post officeis?', I want him to tell me the way to the post office; or if I say 'you'restanding on myfoot', I intend my auditor to remove his foot from mine. The provocation signalled bykertom- words is intended to produce a certain behaviour; t may,of course, succeed orfail if the addressee fails to hear the provocative statement,7does not rise to the bait,or simply does not 'get it'.Let us return first to the tent of Achilles. Hector's body has been put on Priam'swagon; the old king and the hero have shared a meal; sleep would seem to be the nextitem on the agenda, as Priam broadly hints to Achilles, who promptly orders a bedmade up for his guest outside. At this point, Achilles makes his provocative speech,E7TLKEpTOLEWYv; he tells Priamto sleep outside,which is perfectlygood Homericetiquette and not at all out of the ordinary.No provocation there. But Achilles addsthat one of the Greeks who frequently come to seek his advice might catch sight ofPriam and report it to Agamemnon. In that case, Achilles notes with delicateunderstatement, there might be some delay in the ransom of the corpse. Shortlythereafter,Hermes wakens the sleeping king and far more brutally instructs him of hisperilous situation.8 Yet after Priam had bluntly asked to go to sleep and pleadedexhaustion, Achilles could not refuse the request of the exhausted old man. Sucha refusal might indeed provoke the king's anger or perhaps fear, as Jones claims.But that is not what happens: well aware of Priam's danger in the present circum-stances, Achilles attempts indirectlyand gently to apprise him of it in order,surely,toget him to return to Troy under cover of darkness. Herein lies the provocation ofE7TLKEpTO7EWwv.The oldman,perhaps ut of fatigueorexcessiverust,does notgraspAchilles' hints; the action Achilles intended to provoke with his speech does not takeplace until after Hermes intervenes.Other Homeric passages are likewise illuminated-as well as complicated-oncethe intricatesemantics of KEp70roLE re understood. In Book 16, the famous simile ofthe boys who stir up a nest of wasps by the side of the road offers an example ofnon-verbal provocation (Iliad 16.259-65). Jones (247) claims that 'the point of thesimile is that the wasps react with great ferocity to the KEpr70oLEOV-ESoys'. Yet theemphasis lies elsewhere in the boys' indirect, but intentional, provocation-KEpTrotLw-Of

the wasps, not simply to rouse their anger, but to goad them intoattacking an innocent passer-by. Despite the non-verbal character of the action, thesame indirect intentionality signalled by KEpT-otdW lso obtains in this instance. AtOdyssey 8.153, a passage highlighted by Jones because it appears to support his viewthat KEpr70oEWneed not involve intention, Odysseus accuses both Laodamas andEuryalos: Aaocit4ca, r [E -ra7a-rKEAEVETEKEpT70oVTEs; Indeed, while the youngprinces have merely politely invited him to take part in the games, Odysseus hasmisinterpreted their words and taken offence where none was intended. His edginessbecomes even more pronounced when Euryalos subsequently rudely challenges him.Odysseus' overreaction reveals that he is a man to be reckonedwith. Again at Odyssey

7 Suchwouldseem the caseat Iliad 16.744,wherePatrocluspeaks mTLKEpTOLECOV over thebody of Cebriones,whomhe hasjust killed.Similarly,n Odyssey .323ff. he suitorsmock(ErrEAd)3fEvov)elemachus and KEpTO7LEOV 7TEEaLtv;pparently,however,Telemachusdoes nothear them.8 Note that even Hermes does not say the obvious: that Priam will be killed if found in theGreek camp.


4/5

620 SHORTER NOTES13.326, Odysseus accuses Athena of speaking KEp-TO/Lovaawhen, while disguised as ayouth, she earlier announced to him (13.237-49) that he had arrived in Ithaca. Thistime, he is quite correct: her lengthy speech in which she withheld the name of Ithacauntil the penultimate line was meant to make Odysseus lose his sangfroid and givehimself away.Despite her efforts, however,she does not succeed in throwing the wilyhero off his guard.9In several other instances, where Jones detects only the speaker's wish to arouseanger or some other emotional reaction in the addressee, KEp-70oTWndicates morecomplex ulterior motives. For instance, Athena's mockery KEpo70~loLS~)IEEU9L f thewounded Aphrodite to Zeus (Iliad 5.419) is not merelymeant to anger the god, but toprovoke him into becoming angry at Aphrodite's meddling on the battle field. Thesupreme god's smile indicates that he sees through Athena's ploy as he gently-andwithout anger-removes the love goddess from the field of battle. Likewise, in Book1.539, Hera asks Zeus KEpr70olOLULwith which of the gods he has been hatching plans,although she knows perfectly well that he has been conversing with Thetis. WhatHera hopes to accomplish is to provoke Zeus into revealing the contents of hisconversation, which she already suspects. She does not succeed. Another significantoccurrence of KEpT70oLEWomes at a critical juncture of the Odyssey (9.474), where,after escaping from the Cyclops' cave,Odysseus taunts Polyphemus.Odysseus intends,I believe, not merely to provoke the monster's ire; the hero's taunts KEpTO7lL'oLULare specifically meant to goad the Cyclops into asking Odysseus' name as hebroadly hints (cf. &vdAKL80savipds, 475). When, however,the incurious Polyphemus,who swallowed the Outis ploy and earlier evinced no interest in the mention ofAgamemnon (9.263-4), ignores the hint, Odysseus finally insists on revealinghis nameanywaywithout being asked (502-5)-with disastrous results.In Book 2.255-56 of the Iliad, Hooker claims (33) that when 'Odysseus harshlyrebukesThersites ... KEpTooEWVis in parallel to dvEL6'(wvn the previous line, andboth words refer to the bitter taunts which Thersites has hurled at Agamemnon'. Butwhen he accuses Thersites of KEpT70oEWVopE~LS, Odysseus refers more broadly tothe latter's provocative speech, which, as we have been told (2.215), usually aims ateliciting laughter from the Greeks; but in this particularcase, Thersites' words appearto go beyond merely raising a laugh, but aim to precipitate a potentially far moreserious consequence: the revolt of the Greek army against its leadership. For thisprovocation, Odysseus beats him.Perhaps the most illuminating demonstration of the dynamics of KEpT70LEWemerges from a passage from the fourth book of the Iliad. At the end of the precedingbook, Agamemnon had declared Menelaos the victor in his duel with Paris.Everything seems to be settled: the terms set down prior to the duel concerning therestitution of Helen and her goods are about to be fulfilled. The Greeks will returnhome and leave the Trojansin peace. The war is over-and so, for that matter, is theIliad. But if the truce between the warring parties is not violated, Zeus' plan,announced in the fifth line of the poem, will not be accomplished."0At that moment,Zeus proposes to the gods assembled on Olympus a reconciliation between Greeksand Trojans. But Homer tells us that Zeus speaks obliquely, KEpTO7lOLS~7TEEUGL

9 On the gamesmanshipf the entirescene,see J. S. Clay,The Wrath f Athena Princeton,1983),194-204."0 Cf. Hooker (n. 5), 33; and G. S. Kirk, TheIliad: A Commentary,vol. 1 (Cambridge, 1985),332.


5/5

SHORTER NOTES 6217rapaPflA84qv4.6),11with words intended to provoke Hera, who will predictably andangrily reject her husband's proposal and bring about the violation of the truce andthe continuation of the war. Zeus thus purposefully goads Hera into delivering herviolent response. He can then appear to give in to his bloody-minded wife, all thewhile getting his own way.To summarize:KEpT7OEdWhus means 'to provoke someoneinto doing something', to elicit a response that one expects, anticipates, or desires,and sometimes to make someone give himself away. In fact, it is a subtle way ofmanipulating someone to do what you want him to do without explicitly saying so.Universityof Virginia JENNY STRAUSS CLAY

[email protected]" Cf.H. Hermes 5-6, whereHermes riesout hisnewly nventedyreandimprovises song,just as young men at feasts rrapatld/o'AKEp-rotE'OUvw. The youths' oblique provocations elicitimprovisedounter-provocationso produce flyting ontest.

SIMONIDES, PMG 542.1-3av&p' ya8Ov 'v AcOE'wcEVECOaLXaAE7TOvXpcLvE KaL TOCLaLVOWL

Er~rpdywvov avEv 'yyov TErvytLEVOV'It is hard to become a truly good man': so Plato's Protagoras purports tounderstand the first line (Prt. 339d), and modern interpreters of the poem havefollowed him without exception.' Now it may be conceded that the words could bearthis sense in some contexts; but as Simonides explains dyaeOv ... &aOE'wcas'fashioned four-square in hands and feet and mind' (2-3),2 and as he can hardly haveconceived of a man's mind and limbs as being made on any occasion after his birth,it seems fairly clear that what I take to be anyway the more natural interpretation, 'itis hard for a truly good man to come to be', for which compare, besides line 21 r'u)yEVEcCatL vva-rdv,P1.R. 5.472d oc av ypd ac 7rapa/EtLyTalov av E'i70 KLAtcrTOCavlpwToc... .L77 EXrLtL7TO3ElatlWC KacL varOV yEVECOat roLOTOVvspa, 6.502captcra Lv ELvatL AEyO/LEV.., XaAETarrO.yEvEcOat, .528b r7Ttcrdrov... .v...yEvCOatLXahETrr0v,nd Laws 4.711d '- XaEarrv yEvCcuat,s to be preferred. It ishard for a perfect man to come to be,3and misfortune may at any moment destroysuch distinction as a man has been able to achieve; therefore the poet will not lookfor what is impossible, an entirely blameless man, but considers praiseworthy anyman who behaves as well as can be expected.Merton College, Oxford W. B. HENRY

' Bibliography(1928-94): D. E. Gerber,Lustrumr6 (1994), 139-44.2 B. Snell, Dichtungund Gesellschaft(Hamburg, 1965), 116 = Poetry and Society (Blooming-ton, 1961),51,translatesselbstwenn emandan ArmenundBeinenundSinn .. wohlgefiigt ndohne Tadel ist':but 'selbst wenn' is plainly not in the Greek.3 v may indicate that Simonides went on to say 'but there is no lack of men of inferiorquality' or the like:cf. 37-8 rc-v ydp -AthtO'wvdrEIt'pwvEvEOAa.

the meaning of kertomeo

Documents