² By ‘aristocracy’, I mean the people whom Homer calls ⋯γαθο⋯, ⋯σθλο⋯, or ἂριστοι.

³ Cf. LfrgE ἂναξ and βασιλε⋯ς

⁴ Cf. Leumann, M., Homerische Worter (Basilea, 1950), pp. 42–4;Google ScholarJ. Puhvel, 'Greek ANAS' in ZVS 73 (1956), 202–22, esp. 203, n. 4;Google ScholarChantraine, P., Dictionnaire etymologique de la langue grecque (Paris, 1968), ἂναξGoogle Scholar; Frisk, H., Griechisches etymologisches Worterbuch (Heidelberg, 1960), ἂναξ. LfrgE ἂναξ B, however, rejects this view on the ground that there is no evidence to support it other than the explanation of the name at II. 6.403.Google Scholar

⁵ LfrgE on ἂναξ and βασιλε⋯ς with the bibliographies. See also Calhoun, G. M., ‘Zeus the father in Homer’, TAPA 66 (1935), 1–17 [Calhoun hereafter], with whose view of ἂναξ I am very much in accordance. He argues that the primary meaning of aval; is ‘master of the hous’ and its use as a kingly title ‘lord, prince, chieftain, king’ is an extension. He also argues that Zeus is the ‘father’ and ‘ἂναξ’, but never ‘βασιλε⋯ς’, because he is a patriarch, not a king. The ἂναξ section of this paper may be regarded as a reinforcement of his claim that in a large proportion of instances of ἂναξ, the meaning ‘master of the house’ seems ‘clearly to have prompted the choice of this particular word’ (p. 4).Google Scholar

⁶ The World of Odysseus² (London, 1977), p. 84: ‘But the oscillation between basileus as king and basileus as chief–that is, as head of an aristocratic household with its servants and retainers–is duplicated elsewhere in the Homeric poems and by other early writers’Google Scholaribid., ‘Homer and Mycenae: property and tenure’, Historia 6 (1957), 132–59, at 141: Both anax and basileus are very frequent in the Iliad and Odyssey in the sense of “king”, “lord”, “master”. They are often interchangeable in the poems, but not always: in the more than one hundred appearances of basileus there is not one in the vocative case in the masculine, or one applied to the gods, whether male or female.' Apart from these two differences in application, he seems to regard the two terms as virtually synonymous. Cf. LfrgE βασιλε⋯ς B 2.Google Scholar

⁷ ‘Homeric words in Cyprus’, JHS 54 (1934), 54–74, at 60: ‘In Homer there is no distinction at all between the two words’;‘... so far as meaning is concerned, they are interchangeable.’

⁸ de Jong, I. J. F., ‘Studies in Homeric denomination’, Mnemosyne 46 (1993), 289–306, at 291, n. 10. The article as a whole is a valuable examination of literary effects created by varying denomination of Odysseus in the Odyssey, such as ἂναξ, father, husband, and sonCrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁹ Russo, J., in J. Russo, M. Fernandez-GaKano and A. Heubeck (edd.), A Commentary on Homer′s Odyssey Vol. III (Oxford, 1992) on 20.194Google Scholar

¹⁰ By setting the agenda this way, however, I do not assume that the poet′s choice of words is always fully consciously based on their original meanings and connotations. All that I assume is that somewhere in the poet′s mind must have been some awareness or recollection of the original connotations of words such as ἂναξ and βασιλε⋯ς, which could have prompted the choice of one rather than the other.

¹¹ ἂναξ: nom./voc. sg. [- -]; voc. sg. [- -]; dat. pi. [----]; other [- - - ] or [---]; jSaaiAeus: nom. sg. [- - -]; other [----]. For these and the following details of the metrical make-up and positions of the two words, cf. LfgrE ἂναξ M and βασιλε⋯ς M.

¹² In the following discussion, who is ἂναξ or βασιλε⋯ς to whom is established either from the; narrator′s/focalizer′s point of view (if the author describes a person as somebody′s/something′s j ἂναξ or βασιλε⋯ς) or the character′s point of view (if a character addresses or describes i somebody else as his/her/somebody else′s ἂναξβασιλε⋯ς). I am following the criterion illustrated, in de Jong, op. cit. [n. 8], 291–3.Google Scholar

¹³ Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 4–5. Cf. de Jong, op. cit. [n. 8], 291–7.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Or as the owner of (21.9) and (21.56) respectively. Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 6–7 on: 21.56.Google Scholar

¹⁵ The last example may be taken to overlap with his function as βασιλε⋯ς, but the context, his, arrival home after 19 years of wandering, emphasizes his attachment to his homeland rather than his power over its people.

¹⁶ Cf. LfrgE βασιλε⋯ς B.

¹⁷ This is my interpretation of 4.87–8: ἒνθα μ⋯ν οὒτε ἂναξ ⋯πιδευ⋯ς οὒτε τι ποιμ⋯ν/τυρο⋯. κα⋯ κρει⋯ν, οὐδ⋯ γλυκεροῖο γ⋯λακτος Cf. Hooker,iva Antika 29 (1979), 260. Similarly, I am i inclined to take, with Calhoun [n. 5], 7, ⋯ν⋯κτων παῖδες in Od. 13.223 along the same line, i.e. i the shepherd looking as elegant as landlords sons–not necessarily looking like a royal prince.

¹⁸ Cf. also Od. 18.299–300, ⋯κ δ’ ἃρα Πεισ⋯νδροιο Πολυκτορ⋯δαο ἂνακτος/ἲσθμιον ἢνεικεν θερ⋯πων, περικαλλ⋯ς ἂγαλμα, where ‘ἂναξ Peisandros’ is obviously presented as the master of his household.

¹⁹ I interpret 420–1 δειν⋯ν δ’ ἒβραχεε χαλκ⋯ς ⋯π⋯ στ⋯θεσσιν ἂνακτος/⋯ρνυμ⋯νου this way, pace LfrgE ἂναξ B 3bβ.

²⁰ The exceptions are II. 9.569, Od 10.534 and 11.47, i.e. when he is coupled with Persephone

²¹ Thephrase Htfyaiaroio ava/cros, which occurs twice at the line end (II. 15.214; 18.137) and once at the beginning of the line (here at Od 8.270) in Homei; may be regarded as a formula, and as such some may argue that it may well have slipped into the slot without much relevance to the immediate context. However, if we observe the exceptionally intense and relevant use of epithets of Hephaestus throughout this episode, it is difficult to maintain that the poet′s choice of avaKTos here is accidental. As Hephaestus leaves home after setting his trap, he is described as ‘renowned for his craft’ (KXVTOT4XVT}V, 8.286), and his house is ‘of highly renowned’ Hephaestus (irepiKXvrov, 287), which not only echoes the epithet before (and undoubtedly the house itself is one of his masterpieces that represent his renown), but also alludes to the context in which his famous story of cunning is being recounted by a singer. Once the t r ap is deployed, it is called the bonds or devices of 'very clever' Hephaestus (noXvlpovos, 297, 327). The poet′s fully conscious choice of adjectives is most evident in a god's remark at 329–32 that the slow Hephaestus has caught the swift Ares by his artifice (Tixvyoi, 332), highlighting the centrality of his craftsmanship in this episode. It is this Hephaestus, ‘renowned for his craft’ (KXvToepyov, 345), that Poseidon persuades to let go of the trapped pair, and it is t he 'mighty' Hephaestus Qxevos ' HtjialaToio, 359 who undoes the tight bonds. The unusually high concentration of his epithets (seven out o f nineteen instances of his name are accompanied by epithets in the Odyssey; of these six appear in this episode) also makes it likely that the choice of the epithets here is induced by their meanings.

²² It is possible to read the same connotation in II. 6.166, where Proetus is told of the alleged adulterous ambition of Bellerophon towards his wife and the wrath seizes the ‘ἂναξ (=Proetus)’ the lord of both his wife and his retainer. However, he is also fSaoiXevs at 6.163 in exactly the same context. Cf. n. 61 below.

²³ Zev irdrep occurs 25 times in the Iliad and 16 times in the Odyssey. Cf. //. 5.426, 77-cmjp avopwv re deuiv re; II. 8.245 and 17.648, warrjp

²⁴ Cf. II. 1.529, where Zeus is again ἂναξ.

²⁵ Cf. other instances of Zeus + avdoaeiv: II. 2.669,4.61,12.242,18.366, Od. 9.552, 13.25.

²⁶ Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 5: ‘... the use of the word as a kingly title is an extension of this original meaning [= master of the house]'. Incidentally, Aristotle says in his Politics I 1259b that the rule of the father over his children is of the same nature as that of the king over his subjects. To illustrate this, he points out that Homer calls Zeus '-nar-rip dvSpwv re Bedov re' as the king (fiamXevs) of all. Although he uses the word fiaoiXevs to describe the ruler in this context, his description fits better with the use of ava, the patriarchal ruler, than fiamXevs in Homer. Cf. ibid. 1285b, where he compares absolute monarchy to 17 oiKovop, iKr fiaoiXeia, and E. Benveniste, Le vocabulaire des institutions indo-europeennes II (Paris, 1969), p. 28.

²⁷ π⋯λςι Πρι⋯μοιο ἂνακτος Il. 2.373, 4.18, 290; ******** 7.296 (in Hector′s speech), 17.160,21.309, Od. 3.107.

²⁸ Cf. II. 24.202 olaiv avdootis (Hecuba talking to Priam). He is also called βασιλε⋯ς twice; at II. 24.680, when visiting Achilles' hut, and at 24.803, when hosting the funerary feast in honour of Hector, that is to say, when performing a public function specifically associated with βασιλε⋯ς rather than ava. See below for the examination of connotations of .

²⁹ He is the only person whose oath binds the Trojans as a whole. Hence the oath at II. 3.105–10 is to be taken by him. Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 16.

³⁰ For ἂναξ as protector, see Leumann, op. cit [n. 4], pp. 42–4; Puhvel, op. cit. [n. 4], 202–22.Google ScholarCf.Ruijgh, C. J., L′element acheen dans la langue epique (Assen, 1957), pp. 112–113: ‘... chez le roi-pretre des peuples primitifs, la protection et la domination ne sont que deux aspects de la meme puissance magique, grace a laquelle tout le pays prospere; par consequent, il n’ est guere possible de dissocier ces deux aspects de ἂναξ.Google Scholar

³¹ Cf. Od 3.163 where Odysseus, though implicitly, is the ἂναξ of his followers.

³² II. 11.322, Thymbraeus for Molion; II. 12.413–14, Sarpedon as (414) for the Lycians; Ii. 16.464, Sarpedon for Thrasymedes.

³³ Cf.Bonner, R. J. and Smith, G., The Administration of Justice from Homer to Aristotle I (Chicago, 1930), p. 4: ‘The chief also had the duty of avenging those of his followers who were slain in battle. In this case he stood in the position of a relative to his followers.’Google Scholar

³⁴ Kirk, G. S., The Iliad: A Commentary, vol. II: Books 5–8 (Cambridge, 1990), ad loc, proposes that Scamandrius, rather than Astyanax, is more likely to be his nickname.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³⁵ Cf. His reminiscence of a military expedition at II. 3.184–90.Google Scholar

³⁶ Cf. other examples of ἂναξ apparently simply as ruler of people: II. 5.546 Orsilochus; 13.452 Idomeneus; 20.230 Tros; other honorific/formulaic uses of ἂναξ: II. 2.405, 10.112, 15.301 Idomeneus; 2.725 Philoctetes (though the context implies that the Achaeans will soon need him as their helper); 5.794 Diomedes; 7.137 Areithous; 9.164 (though here Achilles is viewed as the only man who can save the Achaeans), 23.35 Achilles; 12.139 Asius; 13.582, 758, 770, 781 Helenus; 14.489 Peneleus; 23.859 Teucer.

³⁷ ἂναξ is applied also to Anchises (II. 5.268), Aeneas (II. 5.311), Eumelus (II. 23.288), the formidable king of Elis called Augeias (II. 11.701), and Euphetes, the king of Ephyra (II. 15.532). It is not necessarily a title of a king, let alone a great king.

³⁸ Cf. Bonner and Smith, op. cit. [n. 33], p. 4.Google Scholar

³⁹ On this occasion, of course, Agamemnon is personally responsible for the god′s anger, but as the head of the community which he (temporarily) represents, this role would have been his even if someone else in his camp were responsible for the offence. His status as the ἂναξ of the Achaean army is also clear from the fact that the whole army is punished by the god for his mistake.

⁴⁰ The clearest case of ἂναξ as βασιλε⋯ς is Minos in the Underworld, who holds a golden sceptre (the emblem of the βασιλε⋯ς) and settles disputes among the dead (Od 11.569–70). Cf. also a beggar (in fact, ironically, the disguised Odysseus) looking like βασιλε⋯ς ἂναξ in his cowherd′s eye (Od 20.194). Whatever the phrase′s superficial meaning might be (e.g. Russo, op. cit. [n. 9], ad loc.: ‘lordly king’; Calhoun [n. 5], 7–8: the appearance not merely of an avag, master of a household, but of an ἂναξ who is βασιλε⋯ς B as well, the ironical subtext that the poet is hinting at must be 'he looks just like my master, the king'. After all, it is likely that he is thinking of Odysseus when he talks about misfortunes that can befall even βασιλε⋯ς in the next two lines, 195–6.

⁴¹ Cf. Leumann, , op. cit. [n. 4], p. 42.Google Scholar

⁴² E.g. II. 14.326 in Zeus catalogue of his former consorts; Od 8.339 in Hermes light-hearted response to the god; 12.175–6 peydXr) both of which reflect human observation of divine power. Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 7, who takes the gods as ava, of the winds at 12.290.

⁴³ The case at II. 1.390, however, is ambiguous. Apollo may well be envisaged as the ‘lord’ of Achaeans (including the speaker Achilles himself) as well as the lord of Chryse, now that more than ever they find themselves under the power of the god as the deity of plague and healing. This ambiguity is present also at II. 1.444 where Odysseus delivers Agamemnon′s message to the priest Chryses. In this passage, Apollo may equally be the ἂναξ of Chryses or of the Achaeans or both.

⁴⁴ Aristarchus athetizes 212–17, but not 214 in isolation, and therefore I feel less uneasy about reading the line in its immediate context.

⁴⁵ Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 5.

⁴⁶ His address ‘ἂναξ’ to the ghost of Ajax at Od. 11.561, which implicitly admits Ajax′s superiority and reverses the result of the fatal contest between them, is another demonstration of Odysseus tact.

⁴⁷ E.g. Scholia, H and DindorfiusQ, G Q, G. (ed.), Scholia Graeca in Homeri Odysseam (Oxford, 1855)Google Scholar; Stanford, W. B., The Odyssey of Hornet, Books I-XII (London, 1959), on 6.149.Google ScholarCf. Hainsworth, J. B., in Heubeck A. and Hainsworth J. B. (edd.), A Commentary on Homer′s Odyssey vol. I (Oxford, 1988), ad loc. Other instances of avaaaa are found in Od 3.380 (Nestor to Athena); Hymn to Demeter 75 (Helius to Demeter), 492 (the poet to Demeter); Hymn to Selene 17 (the poet: to Selene); Hymn to Aphrodite 92 (Anchises to Aphrodite).Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Cf. Fanta, A., Der Stoat in der Mas und Odyssee (Innsbruck, 1882), pp. 28–29: ‘Der Anredende stellt sich dadurch gleichsam in ein untergeordnetes Verhaltniss zum Angeredeten’.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 5–6: ‘the effect of the unusual mode of address is a tone of marked personal deference’ ‘to address another simply as draf is to speak as one of the household to the master, to express a deference that is absolute and unqualified’. In my opinion, this unified definition makes a better sense than the common approach, e.g.Google ScholarDeger, S., Herrschaftsformen bei Homer (Wien, 1970), pp. 54–5, which separates the Iliadic use of ἂναξ; as an honorific title from the Odyssean connotation of the ‘master of the house’.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ However, rather as in the use of ‘lord’ in old-fashioned English, ἂναξ is not likely to be used to address a person of an obviously low status.

⁵¹ Cf. II. 6.193 (Titiijs PaoiArjtSos), 9.154–6, 12.310–21, Od. 1.392–3; Finley, The World of Odysseus2, pp. 95–7.

⁵² βασιλε⋯ς: II 9.160, 392; 10.239; Od. 15.533; βασιλε⋯ς: II. 9.69. Cf. Fanta, op. cit. [n. 48], pp. 23–4; Deger, op. cit. [n. 49], p. 58. It may be significant that Erichthonius, who became the richest of all mortals, is called fiaoiAevs, while Dardanus before him, who lived in a more modest condition of early days of Troy, is not (II. 20.215–20).

⁵³ Cf. von Pritzwald, Stegmann K., Zur Geschichte der Herrscherbezeichnungen von Homer bis Plato (Leipzig, 1930), p. 36.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ II. 1.176, 2.98, 196, 445, 4.338, 5.464, 14.27, 24.803, Od 3.480, 4.44, 63 (with 64), 7.49; II. 1.279,2.86, Od 2.231,4.64 (with 63), 5.9, 8.41, cf. II. 18.556–7 where the king is supervising a harvest in his Od 4.621, 691, 16.335. Cf. King Minos as Od 19.179.

⁵⁵ For a detailed discussion of what and Befits mean in Homer, cf. Yamagata, N., Homeric Morality (Leiden, 1994), pp. 61–79.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Agamemnon: II. 1.9, 80, 231, 277, 279, 340, 410, 3.170 (of his king-like appearance), 179, 4.402 (to Diomedes), 7.180 (of Mycenae), 8.236, 11.23, 46 (of Mycenae), 136, 262, 283, 19.182, i 256; Achaean leaders (as members of Agamemnon′s council): II. 1.176, 2.86, 98, 196, 214, 247, 250, 277, 3.270 (sealing the peace treaty), 7.106, 344, 9.59, 710, 10.166, 195, 19.309, 23.36; (as military leaders): II. 2.445, 9.334, 346, 14.27, 379, 24.404.

⁵⁷ The World of Odysseus1, p. 96, cf. also pp. 96–7: 'The effective, powerful king gave protection and defence, by his dealings with kings abroad, by his organization of such activities as the building of walls, and by his personal leadership in battle.

⁵⁸ In the sole example in the Iliad (11.23), it is the recipient of gewrjiav (Agamemnon), rather than the giver (Cinyras), who is called βασιλε⋯ς, though this is undoubtedly a case of a gift from one βασιλε⋯ς to another. Cf. the king of Sidon: Od. 4.618, 15.118; Alcinous: 7.46, 55 (his background explained to a visitor), 141; 8.157, 257, 469; 13.62 (cf. ftaoiXeia for Arete at 13.59); the Laistrygonian king: 10.110 (visitors' question as to who the king is); a potential host: 13.205, 20.222; an Egyptian king protects a suppliant as his f eivos: 14.278; the Thesprotian king: 14.316, 19.287; King Acastos: 14.336; Antinous: 17.415–6 (his kingly appearance); Echetus as a notorious 'host': 18.85, 116; 21.308. We may add to this list the example of Amarynceus, who is βασιλε⋯ς from the viewpoint of the guests at his funeral (II. 23.631), and a more general reference to a king's funeral at Od 24.88. See also LfrgE βασιλε⋯ς, B 41.63–4.

⁵⁹ This passage implies that Lycaon is counted among the βασιλε⋯ς, like his brothers (Paris at II. 4.96; cf. 5.463

⁶⁰ The other example at II. 24.680, too, is significant, since Priam is on a 'diplomatic mission' at Achilles' residence, having ransomed Hector's body and negotiated a truce necessary for his funeral.

⁶¹ The two functions can, naturally, overlap at times. For example, the use of the title βασιλε⋯ς of Proetus in relation to his wife Anteia and his retainer Bellerophon (II. 6.163) or of Polypoetes in relation to his companions (II. 23.849) might well have been replaced by ἂναξ. The use of βασιλε⋯ς, the feminine equivalent of βασιλε⋯ς, is even less clear-cut. Penelope is naturally βασιλε⋯ς to visitors from abroad and from outside her household (Od 4.770, 16.332, 337, 17.468 = 18.351 = 21.275, 18.314, 23.149), but even her servant Melanthius refers to her as βασιλε⋯ς (17.370), and Medon (4.697) and Eumaeus (17.513, 583), her other servants, even address her as βασιλε⋯ς, as if avaaaa, which we may expect here from the analogy of ava, is not suitable for this purpose. Arete is βασιλε⋯ς to both Odysseus and the Phaeacians (Od 11.345). Odysseus addresses her, his hostess, as flaoiXeia (7.241, 13.59) while he merely refers to Alcinous, his host, as βασιλε⋯ς (13.62). He addresses the king as 'XXKIVOW (7.208), (7.303), or 'AXKIVOS Kpeiov (8.382, 9.2, 11.355, 378, 13.38). xpeiwv appears to be a more suitable title than βασιλε⋯ς for addressing a king. The use of fiaaiXeia for a royal hostess is fully expected, but its use in the vocative–or rather the absence of its masculine counterpart–is striking. Nausicaa, in the narrator′s/Athena′s eyes before her first encounter with Odysseus, is also fiaoiXeia (Od 6.115), which no doubt is the word Odysseus himself could have used to address the princess had he known her status, instead of avaaaa, at 6.149 and 175. A peculiar title fiaoiXeia yvvaiKcou is applied to Tyro at Od 11.258, which evidently is a variation of Sia ywaiKwv, which in turn is a mortal equivalent of Sta 8edwv. This may well be an element from a somewhat different school of oral tradition.

⁶² Cf.Ventris, M. and Chadwick, J., Documents in Mycenaean Greek² (Cambridge, 1973), pp. 120–122 (with notes on pp. 408–9). The most up-to-date and helpful discussion of the Mycenaean wanax and gwasileus can be found in T. G. Palaima, 'The nature of the Mycenaean wanax: non-Indo-European origins and priestly functions', Aegaeum 11 (1995), 119–39.Google Scholar

⁶³ But see the reservations expressed by Hooker, J. T., ‘The Wanax in Linear B texts’, Kadmos 18 (1979), 100–11;CrossRefGoogle ScholarA note on Ziva Antika 29 (1979), 260.Google ScholarCf.Chantraine, P., ‘Consequences du dechiffrement du mycenien pour la philologie homerique, Athenaeum 36 1958), 314–27, at 327 (Risch′s comment)Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Cf. Bennett, E. L., Jr and Olivier, J.-P., The Pylos Tablets Transcribed Part 1 (Roma, 1973), ad loc; Ventris and Chadwick, op. cit. [n. 62], p. 221, pp. 358–9.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Jn 431, Jn 601, Jn 845, and Jo 438. Qa-si-re-u appears also on KN B779, which is an isolated fragment.

⁶⁶ However, since we know so little about the structure of Mycenaean society in which these terms were used, we cannot be certain of any conclusion that we may draw. Cf. Finley′s warnings in Historia 6 (1957), 132–59, esp. 159. We must also remember that there is a marked difference between Homer, where n o god is called βασιλε⋯ς, and Cyclic epics, Homeric Hymns, and Hesiod, where Zeus can be βασιλε⋯ς (Cf. Calhoun [n. 5], 14–5; LfrgE βασιλε⋯ς B 4).

⁶⁷ Cf. LSJadloc.