previous next

[149] ἀναίνεαι, properly ‘refuse.’ Cp. the use of “μή” in oaths and strong denial.

158-162. These five lines recur in 19. 303-307, and form the conclusion of the speech in which Ulysses assures Penelope of his speedy return. The last line, “τοῦ μὲν φθίνοντος μηνὸς τοῦ δ᾽ ἱσταμένοιο”, even fixes the day; for it describes the day called at Athens “ἕνη καὶ νέα”, the last of one month and first of another, which was the very day following the dialogue with Penelope. The chronology is further emphasized by the fact that it was the feast-day of Apollo (20. 156, 276-278., 21. 258). Thus Ulysses ends his speech in the most effective way, promising his own return on the day then about to dawn. In this place the case is different. The speech does not end with “τοῦ μὲν φθίνοντος κτλ.”, but we have a sort of second conclusion in 163-164 “οἴκαδε νοστήσει κτλ.”, which is something of an anti-climax. These last lines have accordingly been questioned (but see the critical notes). It seems to me more probable that the two lines 161-162— or perhaps, as Kirchhoff held, the seven lines 158-164 that contain the oath— belong originally to the nineteenth book, and have been brought in wrongly here. This is a common form of corruption in Homer; whereas the interpolation of 163-164 would be difficult to account for. It is evident, too, on all principles of art, that in this place the prophecy about Ulysses ought to be general in its terms—“οἴκαδε νοστήσει καὶ τίσεται”—thus agreeing with the language of Helen to Telemachus in 15. 177. More threatening words are naturally used by Ulysses himself a little later (18. 146 ff. “μάλα δὲ σχεδόν κτλ.”). But the precise and emphatic “τοῦδ᾽ αὐτοῦ λυκάβαντος κτλ.” is best kept to heighten the interest at the last and most critical point in the story.

This view of 161-162 (in which I have been partly anticipated by Dr. Hayman) is strongly confirmed by the interpretation which it enables us to give of the word “λυκάβας”. The word is otherwise known only in Alexandrian and later authors, who doubtless took it from Homer. They explained it as meaning literally the ‘path of light,’ i.e. of the sun, and so as a poetical word for ‘a year.’ Admitting the etymology, we should rather expect it to mean ‘a day,’ or (more precisely) a “νυχθήμερον”, the period of time in which daylight goes and comes again. For “λυκάβας” is the ‘going of light,’—not of the sun (or moon). Further, this explanation of “λυκάβας” gives a much better sense in the Odyssey. Critics have already noticed the absurdity of the announcement that Ulysses will come ‘within this same year,’ followed by a mention of the day, which happens to be the very next day (Buttmann on Schol. H. Od.14. 162). In any case the words ‘within this same year’ must have sounded as a mockery to Penelope, who was literally on the eve of abandoning hope and consenting to accept one of the suitors. But if Ulysses said ‘within a day’ (in the sense of twenty-four hours), all is plain. The Slaying of the Suitors was on the day following the night of the dialogue with Penelope. Hence “λυκάβας” is correct, and indeed the only correct word (“ἡμέρα” being generally used of ‘day’ in contrast to night: cp. “ἤματι τῷδε” in 20. 116 after dawn). On the other hand in the dialogue with Eumaeus here Ulysses could not say “τοῦδ᾽ αὐτοῦ λυκάβαντος”, since it still wanted four days to the “μνηστηροφονία”.

The period of the “νυχθήμερον” was probably reckoned from sunset to sunset: see Il.19. 141.So in counting days, Od.14. 93ὅσσαι γὰρ νύκτες τε καὶ ἡμέραι ἐκ Διός εἰσιν”.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

hide References (3 total)
  • Commentary references from this page (3):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: