Archilochus and Odysseus Seidensticker, Bernd Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Jan 1, 1978; 19, 1; ProQuest pg. 5

Archilochus and Odysseus 
Bernd Seidensticker 

I 

PLUTARCH REPORTS that Archilochus, when he came to Sparta, 
was expelled because he had stated in a poem that it was better 
to throwaway one's arms than to be slain.1 As evidence for the 

Spartan charge Plutarch adds four lines (5 W.=6 D.), which even 
today, more than 2000 years after they were written, have lost nothing 
of their fresh liveliness and provocative unconventionality: 

, ,~ , 'P'" ""\ "\ .. , f)' 
aC7TW£ }LEV ..:.-a£wv T£C ayaI\I\ETa£, T)V 7Tapa afLvw£, 

" " '"\ "\ "f) '"\ EVTOC afLWfLT)TOV, Kal\l\£7TOV OVK E EI\WV' 

.1. ' ~" c' , '"\"" 't'vXT)v 0 E~Ecawca. 'T£ fLo£ fLEI\U aC7T£C EKUVT)j 

" 'I: - , "2 EppETW' E~aV'T£C KTT)cofLa£ OV KaK£W. 

Not only do the unusually large number and the variety of ancient 
testimonia bear witness to the popularity of the poem,3 but Alcaeus, 
Anacreon, and even Horace more than 600 years later, decided to 
follow the lead of the great ancestor of personal lyric poets and throw 
their shields away toO.4 Aristophanes also paid tribute to the famous 

1 pluto Inst.Lac. 34, 239B; for a variant of the story see Val.Max. 6.3 Ext.l. 
2 Editions: E. Diehl, Anthologia Lyrica Graeca 1.38 (Leipzig 1952); F. R. Adrados, Liricos 

griegos, elegiacos y yambografos arcaicos I (Barcelona 1956); F. Lasserre, Archiloque, Fragments 
(Paris 1958); M. Treu, Archilochos (Miinchen 1959); G. Tarditi, Archilochus (Rome 1968); 
M. West, Iambi et Elegi Graeci I (Oxford 1971). For the difficult textual problems in line 3 of 
fr.5 W. (6 D.) cf L. Weber, "EVK(% ~4" 'Epl-'~"" Philologus 74 (1917) 92-98; A. Colonna, "Su 
alcuni frammenti dei lirici greci," SIFC 21 (1946) 23-30; V. de Falco, "Note ai lirici greci," 
ParPass 1 (1946) 347-59; and esp. M. Gigante, "n testo del fr.6,3 di Archiloco," ParPass 11 
(1956) 196-200, who gives a good survey of the extensive discussion. With Treu and 
Lasserre I prefer the beginning of line 3 which is attested by Ar. Pax 1298f, 1301: .pVX~v 8' 

E~W%WC(%. 

3 For the testimonia see West ad fr.5. Most critics think that the four lines form a com· 
plete poem; but see H. Frankel, Dichtung (infra n.6) 152; and earlier F. Jacoby, Hermes 53 
(1918) 277 n.1, and M. Theunissen, "A propos des fragments 2 et 6 (Diehl) d'Archiloque," 
AntCl 22 (1953) 406-11, who fancies the idea that 2 D. and 6 D. belong together. 

4 Alcaeus fr.428 L.-P., cf D. L. Page, Sappho and Alcaeus (Oxford 1955) 153ff; Anacreon, 
PMG 36 (51 D.); Hor. ad. 2.7.9f, cf E. Fraenkel, Horace (Oxford 1957) llff. Most critics will 
agree that here (at least in the cases of Anacreon and Horace) we are dealing with a literary 
topos and not with a biographical detail; for Archilochus see infra pp.l9f. 

5 



6 ARCHILOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

lines in his own way. He ridiculed them at the end of Peace (1298ff), 
while at about the same time the philosopher and conservative 
politician Critias, in his attack on Archilochus, branded this poem and 
the event and attitude celebrated in it as "especially revolting and 
disgraceful."5 It seems therefore that already in antiquity the shield 
poem was of crucial importance for the image of Archilochus. 

This is certainly the case in modern criticism, as a brief look at some 
of the most influential interpretations and evaluations (Snell, Frankel, 
Treu) will show.6 "No one today," says Russo? correctly, "reads the 
early lyric poets without an acute awareness that he is hearing the 
first utterances of the 'personal' voice in early Greece, and no com­
mentary on these poets fails to call attention to the dramatically 
expanded self-awareness of the seventh century, which expresses 
itself in its emphasis on new personal values in lieu of -or in deliberate 
contradiction of.-the traditional Homeric values." The aC1Ttc poem, 
together with the other equally famous quatrain, the iambos about 
the bowlegged commander (114 W., 60 D.), is a key witness for this 
development of a new un-Homeric spirit. 

Snell's diachronic model (epos to lyric to drama) and his insistence 
on a strong cleavage between epic and lyric have been questioned, 
however, by many scholars.8 Russo, to give a recent example, has 

Ii Critias 88 B 44 Diels-Kranz (= Ael. VH 10.13). 
• D. A. Campbell, Greek Lyric Poetry (New York 1967) 1-8, 136-61; K. J. Dover. "The 

Poetry of Archilochus." Entretiens Hardt 10 (Geneva 1964) 183-222; H. Frankel. Wege und 
Formen fruhgriechischen Denkerul (MUnchen 1968) 1-96 [hereafter, FRANKEL. Wege]; id., 
Dichtung und Philosophie des frUhen Griechentumsl (Munchen 1962) 147-70 [hereafter. FRANKEL, 
Dichtung]; D. E. Gerber. Euterpe (Amsterdam 1970); W. Jaeger. Paideia I' (Berlin 1959) 
160-86; G. M. Kirkwood. Early Greek Monody (Ithaca 1974) 2~52 [hereafter. KIRKWOOD]; 
A. Lesky. Geschichte der griechischen Literatur· (Bern 1971) 132-43; D. Page, "Archilochus and 
the Oral Tradition." Entretiens Hardt 10 (Geneva 1964) 119-79 [hereafter. PAGE]; G. Perrotta/ 
B. Gentili. Polinnia l (Messina/Florence 1965) 63-97; A. Scherer. "Die Sprache des Archi­
lochos," Entretiens Hardt 10 (Geneva 1964) 89-116; B. Snell. Die Entdeckung des Geistes' 
(Gottingen 1975) 56-81 [hereafter, SNELL. Entdeckung]; id .• Dichtung und Gesellschaft (Ham­
burg 1965) 56-112 [hereafter. SNELL. Dichtung]; M. Treu, Von Homer zur Lyrik2 (Zetemata 12. 

Munchen 1968); ad 5 W. (6 D.) cf edd.citt. (supra n.2) and W. Klinger, "Do fragmentow 
elegijnych Archilocha." Eos 24 (1919/20) 26fT; N. Terzaghi. "Abiecta non bene parmula," 
BFe 34 (192.8) 13fT; Chr. Karathanasis. "'H aC1T1c TOil )lPX''\0XOV Kai 'r7 N£o/Jov'\TJ:' Platon 14 
(1955) 296fT; G. Broccia.lIo8oce ,pOyoc. Ilframmento 6 D. e l'opera d'Archiloco (Rome 1959); for 
further literature see Gigante, op.cit. (supra n.2). 

7 J. Russo, "The Inner Man in Archilochus and the Odyssey." GRBS 15 (1974) 139. 
8 The Archilochus symposium of the Foundation Hardt (Entretiens sur l' antiquitt! classique 

10, Geneva 1964) brought together the opposing views (Snell, Treu versus Dover. Page) in 
an ideal way. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 7 

tried to show that the poem about the two captains is much closer to 
Homer's world, especially the world of the Odyssey, than is commonly 
allowed.9 Although I feel that here, in the attempt to correct an 
extreme, Russo pushed his argument too far and has underestimated 
the difference in tone and spirit between the Odyssey and Archilochus, 
his observations and COllllllents are in principle correct. A close look 

at the other poem, which has been used-in Russo's words-as 
"prima facie evidence for the conceptual gap supposed to exist between 
Homer and Archilochus" may therefore not be inappropriate. 

II 
In a detailed analysis of the fragments Page has shown to what 

degree Archilochus was influenced by the traditional epic language 
not only in his elegies and epodes but in the iambics and trochaic 
tetrameters also.10 Fragments 13 W. (7 D.) and 3 W. (3 D.) are par­
ticularly impressive examples for this thesis. But Page, as several 
critics have pointed out, tends to overstate the importance of the 
Homeric element.H With regard to 5 W. (6 D.), the shield poem, he 
states: "The theme is (or seems) modern, but there is no attempt to 

express the matter in any but the commonest traditional terms."12 
Now, it is true that "all the words are Homeric" (Page) or, to be 

more prudent, that they can be paralleled in the Homeric epics. 
But as Scherer, Dover13 and others have pointed out, this does not 
necessarily mean that Archilochus is using traditional poetic language 
when he says Jg€cawca or JppE-rW, Jgav-nc or K7"~COJ.L(u. In fact, it is 
more likely that he is using the contemporary Ionic dialect spoken by 
him and his fellow Parians. Page's observations of the sort that, e.g., 
"Jppl.7"W begins the line in II. 9.377" or "Jgav-nc occupies the same 
position more than once in the Odyssey" are certainly correct in them­
selves, but they do not justify his rather bleak conclusion: "The poet 

• Russo, op.cit. (supra n.7) 141. 
10 Page 144, 154 (and passim). 
11 Cf. e.g. Kirkwood 219 n.26, 220f n.29; D. A. Campbell, Arethusa 9 (1976) 152-54; and 

already Dover, Snell and Treu in the discussions following the papers of Page and Scherer 
(supra n.6). 

11 Page 132. 
18 Scherer, op.cit. (supra n.6) 97; Dover, in the discussion following Scherer's paper, 108, 

110. 



8 ARCI-llLOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

neither intends nor achieves any special effect by the contrast between 
contemporary theme and traditional phrasing. He composes in this 
manner because he has no choice; his technique is wholly that of oral 
Epic."14 The only convincing pieces of evidence on which Page could 
base such an assumption-the typical formulaic combinations-are 
scarcely crammed cheek by jowl into these four lines; they occur only 
in the poem's second line, where Archilochus appears to have created 
a formula (EVTOC afLclJfL"I}Tov)15 and used an existing epic combination 
(OVK E8iAwv), not because he was limited by choiceless fatality but 
precisely because he wanted to produce a "special effect." The epic 
coloring is particularly appropriate in this line, which describes the 
precise moment of the break from the heroic convention; the playful 
irony of EVTOC afLclJfL"I}ToV (the blameless shield of a blameworthy 
owner) is slight but nevertheless clear, and the two epic phrases form 
a nice ironic frame around the crucial word KaAAmov. 

Further, it seems likely that line 1 contains another deliberate and 
significant use of a Homeric word. Page says16 that "ayaAAETaL in this 
position [i.e., before the bucolic diaeresis] is traditional" and quotes 
Iliad 17.473 and 18.132. In both cases the reference is to Hector, who, 
after he has killed Patroklos, is said to exult in Achilleus' beautiful 
armor. The second passage (18.130-32) is of special interest for our 
poem: Thetis reminds Achilleus, who wants to return to the battle­
field immediately to take revenge for Patroklos, that he needs new 
weapons: 

'\\'" \' ''11' " al\l\a TO£ EVTEa Kal\a fLETa .l PWECCtV EXOVTa£. 
'\ ' " II , \ "E xal\KEa fLapfLa£pOVTa' Ta fLEV Kopvua£ol\oc KTWP 

, '" JI "\, aVTOC EXWV wfLOLC LV ayaI\l\ETa,· 

If one remembers that in the following lines Thetis promises Achilleus 
new weapons which, made by the god Hephaistos himself, will be 
better than the ones he lost, the parallel to Archilochus' poem is seen 
to be remarkably close. Thetis: you lost your splendid armor (EV'TEa), 

but I will get you new and better ones. Archilochus: I lost my shield 

a Page 133. Page's statement about 3 W. (3 D.), "nothing but the metre distinguishes 
these lines from any five average lines of the Iliad" (132), could certainly not be repeated for 
5 W. (6 D.). 

16 The words are epic, form and combination are not. Homer does not have the singular 
£V'TOC (only £v'T€a and £V'T€C&), and a.p.c/Jp.TJ'TOC (II. 12.109) is used of a person, whereas for 
objects Homer prefers a.p.up.wv. 

1. Page 132. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 9 

(the blameless gear), but I will buy a better one. Is it possible that 
Archilochus is making an ironic allusion to the famous scene from the 
Iliad, evoking the greatest heroes of the Trojan war as contrasting foil 
for his own little Saian adventure? 

The language may indeed be largely traditional, but it is the 
pointed and playful use of the traditional medium which reveals the 
originality of Archilochus as a poet no less than his new ideas and 
attitudes. 

The simplicity of language, syntax and argument and the direct 
immediacy of the tone have led (or misled) critics to concentrate 
mainly on the content of the poem and to neglect the artistic form of 
this little masterpiece. The two distichs form a carefully constructed 
antithesis, held together by JL€V (1) and S~ (3): I left my shield behind 
(1-2), but I saved my life (3-4). The words which are central for the 
antithesis aC7T£St and r/Jvx~v (or ath6v) are emphasized by their position 
at the beginning of each distich; against the Saian soldier who boasts of 
the shield he has only found behind a bush, Archilochus sets his 
scornful 'T'£ JLOt JL~>"€t; secondly, Ka>">"L7TOV OUK EfU>..wv is effectively 
.:ontrasted with the forceful and resolute eppe-rw, and finally the slight 
ironic regret which seems to lie in €V'T'OC aJLcfJJLTJ'T'OV is squelched by 

, " K'T'TJcoJLat ov KaKLW. 

Syntactical structure, style and tone are antithetical tooP The first 
distich is formed by a single period (main clause, relative clause, 
locative phrase, inserted apposition and added participle); the crucial 
word Ka'\'\L7TOV is held back almost to the end of the sentence; the 
style appears traditionally poetic (especially line 2), and the tone is 
deliberate, almost hesitating. The second distich has a totally different 
syntactical rhythm and tone. Four short sentences follow each other 
in rapid movement; the central point (r/JvX~v S' E~€Cawca) is placed at 
the beginning; the style appears to be more personal, almost col­
loquial ;18 the tone is self-assured and determined. 

The artistic possibilities of word order are employed in the same 
masterful manner. I have already pointed to the accentuated position 
f ' flO:! d .1. ,,, " d ' '0 ''\ d . I o aC7Ttot an 'l'VX'YJV; ~"JI'T'OC aJ-twJ-t'YJ'T'OV an OVK E E wv correspon nICe y 

with each other at the beginning and the end of the pentameter; the 

17 The unequal pair of distichs are bound together not only by the correlative particles 
p~v - 8l and by the careful arrangement of the corresponding elements of the antithesis 
but also by the sound repetition in lines 2 and 4: Killi1TOV O~K I.8lAwv = KT.qcopai o~ KaKlw. 

18 Cf especially Tl pOi plAE'i and I.pplTW. 



10 ARCHILOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

contemptuous EK£lVTj is also stressed by its position at the end of line 3, 

and in the last line the words which carry the emotion are again 
placed in the stressed positions of the pentameter. 

The little poem is an ideal example of Archilochus' artistic skill at 
creating, by the use of all stylistic tricks which the four lines can hold, 
the effect of natural simplicity and personal immediacy. As pointed 
out, however, it is not the form but the content which has absorbed 
the main interest of biographic and literary critics from Critias to 
Kirkwood. 

III 
Jaeger, Snell and Fdinkel,19 to name only the most influential 

critics, have stressed the personal tone and the unreserved frankness 
with which Archilochus speaks about his questionable behavior and 
attitude in the raid against the Saians. They emphasize the strong 
self-confidence with which the poet in these lines sets his personal 
judgement against the traditional ideology. "The traditional code of 
honor, as the Spartans long maintained it, prescribed death in such a 
case. 'With it or on it' the Spartan mother adjured her son when she 
handed him his shield as he went forth to battle: come back a corpse 
rather than shieldless! ... Archilochus seriously balances the value of 
life against an exaggerated notion of honor, draws a realistic con­
clusion, and acts accordingly; and at once, in a tone of aggressive 
challenge, he proclaims to all the world what he has done."2o 

We should perhaps not call Archilochus' attitude anti-Homeric but 
it certainly seems to be un-Homeric21 or, to be even more precise, 
un-Iliadic. Frankel points to the famous scene in the Iliad where 
Achilleus toys for a moment with the idea that his life could mean 
more to him than his honor.22 This shows that the possibility of an 
Archilochan decision can be envisaged by the hero, but only as 
negative foil, as unheroic contrast, only to be pushed aside. An 
Achilleus (or Diomedes or Aias for that matter) who would actually 

11 Jaeger. op.dt. (supra n.6) 166; Snell. Entdeckung (supra n.6) 61f; Frankel. Dichtung (supra 
n.6) 152f. 

10 Frankel. Dichtung (supra n.6) 153 (quoted from the English translation. p.137). 
11 Cf Kirkwood 33. The tone is not polemic but playful and ironic. Archilochus does not 

attack Homer but rather uses him as an implicitly underlying foil, against which his own 
value system stands out more clearly. 

II II. 9.307ff (356ff, 408-18). 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 11 

leave his shield behind to save his life is unimaginable.23 Granted; and 
yet, is Archilochus indeed the ancestor of all poetic pU/J(xcmo€c, as is 
always maintained? 

In the second half of the Odyssey the polymetis Odysseus invents four 
Cretan tales, lie-stories, to hide his true identity.24 In the most 
elaborate of these amusing mixtures of fiction and truth he tells his 

faithful old swineherd Eumaios, among other things, about a raid 
which he and his comrades undertook after the Trojan war. After a 
successful start they are attacked and put to flight by an overwhel­
mingly superior Egyptian force. In this hopeless situation, while his 
companions are killed or enslaved, the 'false' Odysseus saves his skin 
by putting aside his weapons, helmet, spear and shield, and surrender­
ing to the Egyptian king (Od. 14.276ff): 

"'" \ I J/ "() aVTLK a7TO KpaTOC KVV€71V €VTVKTOV € 7]Ka 

" " •• ~ I ~'" Q'" I Kat caKOc wP.OtLV, Oopv 0 €KfJaI\OV €KTOC€ X€LpOC 
, , , 'Q \ ~ , I "\ () ., 

aVTap €yw fJaCLI\7]OC €vaVTLOV 7]I\V OV t7T7TWV 

" I ()' f'\' t~'" , "\' Kat Kvca yovva €I\WV· 0 0 €pVCaTO Kat p. €1\€7]C€V, •• 

Thus the Cretan Odysseus, in a situation which is, to be sure, not 
identical but in principle quite comparable, acts like the Archilochus 
of our poem: he puts his shield aside and saves his life. Like Archil­
ochus he does not portray himself as coward; his martial spirit and 
valor are stressed repeatedly in the story; he is maybe acting 
dishonorably but, under the circumstances, pragmatically and 
reasonably.25 

We may thus call not only the vocabulary but also the theme of 
Archilochus' poem 'Homeric'. But again 'Homeric' does not mean 
more than the theme can be paralleled in the Homeric epic. The 
flippant irony with which Archilochus talks about the blameworthy 
loss of his "blameless shield" and the provocative independence with 

23 Hector's monologue in the 22nd book when he is waiting for Achilleus is another 
instructive example. 

240d. 13.256ff, 14.192ff, 17.415ff, 19. 165ff (24.244ff). 
26 An important difference between the Homeric and the Archilochan loss of a shield 

lies in the fact that Odysseus' pragmatic action is inspired by Zeus (Od. 14.273-74 u?JTap Eftol 
Zeve U?JTOC Evl .ppedv ~.se v6'f/ftu I 7TO{'f/C'), whereas Archilochus simply says: l<aAAl7Tov o?J1< 
E8EAwv; for this difference see Snell's comments (in Entdeckung, supra n.6) on the nature of 
the decision-making process. 



12 ARCI-llLOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

which he informs the world about his decision against the traditional 
code of honor are totally absent in Odysseus' story.26 

A closer look at the context of the Homeric parallel (14. 191ff) reveals 
further surprising points of contact with Archilochus. Odysseus opens 
the story with the statement that he is a bastard, the son of a rich and 
respected father and a slave mother (199ff); after the death of his 
father, his legitimate brothers grant him only a very small part of the 
inheritance; he nevertheless manages to win the daughter of a rich 
man for his wife (211ff). Ships and battles, spears and arrows are his 
world (224ff); before the Trojan war he has already put to sea nine 
times to raid foreign countries (229ft); after the war he again fits out 
ships, hires a crew, feasts and drinks with his companions for six 
days, and sets sail once more (245ff). Then follows the account of the 
battle in Egypt mentioned above, and he finally concludes with a 
long-winded story containing many more adventures, all as an answer 
to Eumaios' initial question: "how did you get to Ithaca, stranger?" 
In 1968 Latte27 pointed out how well this story illustrates the 'life' of 
Archilochus, and it is indeed strange (as Latte himself indicated) that 
the striking correspondence had not been noted earlier. In addition to 
the shield parallel, which Latte does not mention, there is the 
illegitimate birth, the slave mother, the marriage into a rich family 
(Odysseus' successful, Archilochus' not), and the restless adventurous 
life in wars and marauding seafaring expeditions. "Die Erzahlung der 
Odyssee und die Reste des Archilochos zeigen eine Welt, in deren 
Mittelpunkt der Beutezug und die daran teilnehmenden Gefahrten 
stehn."28 Latte confines his interest to the general socio-historical 
parallelism between the fictitious life which Odysseus designs for 
himself and the life of Archilochus as it has been reconstructed by 
ancient and modern critics.29 The surprising degree of correspondence 
suggests, however, the question whether this parallelism is indeed 
accidental. Before I try to answer this question and its implications, 

IS The same is true, KaT' aVaAoylav, for Archilochus' mocking attack on the bowlegged 
commander. The theme can be paralleled in Homer. But the difference in tone and spirit 
between Archilochus' ironical antithesis of seeming and truth, outer appearance and inner 
quality, and the various Homeric parallels which Russo (op.cit. [supra n.7]) adduces, is 
considerable. 

27 K. Latte, "Zeitgeschichtliches bei Archilochos," Hermes 92 (1964) 385-90. 
18 Latte, op.cit. (supra n.27) 386. 
19 F. Jacoby, "The Date of Archilochus," CQ 35 (1941) 97ff; Treu, op.cit. (supra n.2) 150ff. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 13 

let us look at some further interesting resemblances and possible 
connections between Archilochus and Odysseus. 

IV 

In 1 W. (1 D.) Archilochus introduces himself as squire of Lord Ares 
by being at the same time a poet who knows the Muses' lovely gift: 

, \ "-' , \ () I \ 'E \ I " EtJLL 0 €yw €pa7TWJI fUJI JlVal\LOW aVaK'ToC 
\ liS I , \ '" - , I KaL lr.LOvc~v €pa'ToJl owpov €7TLC'TaJL€Voc, .. 

For modern criticism the most interesting aspect of the distich has 
been the fact that in these two lines for the first time, as far as we can 
see, two hitherto separate activities are paired, those of the warrior 
and the bard or poet. Page30 uses strong words, "A social revolution 
is epitomized in this couplet"; and Kirkwood31 maintains that "by 
pairing the two traditionally separated activities Archilochus is 
asserting a new role in society, characteristic of the century that 
followed him, and played by the elegist-politician Solon and the 
lyricist-politician Alcaeus, a role that makes the poet no longer the 
onlooker." As parallel and contrast, both Page and Kirkwood refer to 
Achilleus and Patroklos, who in Iliad 9 (185ft) try to entertain them­
selves during their boring leisure by singing heroic songs.32 "In the 
Epic,"-so Page33_"a man may be as good in speech as in action 
(II. 9.443), and a great warrior might pass the time singing a song 
(II. 9.189); but it is inconceivable that the same man should be both 
soldier and poet .... there is no bridge over the gulf between a Phemius 
and an Ajax." 

There is, however, a Homeric hero who comes close to the double 
role Archilochus claims for himself, and again we do not find him in 
the Iliad but in the Odyssey, and again it is Odysseus himself. Already 
the introduction formula €lJLt S' EYW recalls the famous €iJL' 'OSVC€vC 

80 Page 134. 

31 Kirkwood 3l. 
82 Apparently they are reproducing, not producing epic poetry (cf. also Aleman, PMG 41, 

praising the Spartans for being good warriors who are nevertheless able to play (and sing to) 
the cithara: lp1Tn yap aVTa TW n8apw TO KaAWc KdJaplc8'T}v). 

88 Page 134. 



14 ARCI-llLOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

with which Odysseus opens the narration of his adventures (Od. 
9. 19f) :34 

" "O~ \ A I~" A ~ ',\ €£Il- aVC€VC a€pTut.aTJC, ac 7Tac£ aO O£C£V 

'{} 1 1\ , ,\ 1 • \., 
av PW'TTO£C£ Il-€I\W, Ka£ Il-€V K EOC ovpavov £K€£. 

More important, however, is the fact that Odysseus, for more than 
2000 lines in Books 9-12, does indeed turn into a 'poet' of his own life. 
There is, to be sure, no lyre; Odysseus does not sing, he speaks; but 
that is soon forgotten. He takes over the role of Demodokos, who 
shortly before sang scenes out of the life of Odysseus, first his quarrel 
with Achilleus and then, asked by Odysseus, the story of the Trojan 
horse and the final conquest of Troy (8.73ff; 8.499ff). Like Phemios in 
the first book Odysseus tells the story of the "bitter homecoming of 
the Achaeans" and thereby creates, so to speak, a part of the epic 
cycle. The effect is appropriate. When, in the middle of the nekyia, 
he stops, his audience is sitting in absolute silence, spellbound 
(1l.333f): 

" ".J.. {}' .~." 1 • \ • 1 A wc €'f'a ,a£ a apa 7TaJITEC aKTJv EyEVOVTO c£W7TrJ, 

,\ {} A~'" \ 1 1 
KTJ TJ Il-CfJ a ECXOVTO KaTa Il-Eyapa CK£O€VTa. 

Odysseus' story has enchanted them like the songs of the Muses, the 
Sirens, or a good bard, and when Alkinoos after a short intermezzo 
asks him to continue, he adds (367ff): 

\ ~, " \ ,..J.. \ " "~\.J.. 1 '{},\ 1 
COL a E7T£ Il-EV 1l-0t"f'TJ €7T€WV, €V£ a€ 'f'p€V€C €C a£, 

A{} ~,. f1" ~ \' 1 1\ C 
Il-V OVa WC OT aowoc €7T£CTaIl-EVWC KaTEI\€~ac, 

, ~A 1 '" A I~ ,\ 1 
7TaVTWV ~yE£WV CEO T aVTOV KTJa€a vypa. 

The king (or better, Homer through the mouth of the king) thereby 
confirms the impression of the listener (and reader). Odysseus has 
indeed performed like a skilled bard. Six books later, Odysseus is 
again praised in a quite similar way, this time by Eumaios, whom he 
has impressed with his Cretan story. Summoned by Penelope to bring 
the old beggar to her so that she may ask him about Odysseus, the 
swineherd says (17.518£1): 

• ~'f1" ~ \ • \ ~ , " {} A "'c 
WC a OT aO£aoV aVTJp 7TOTWEpK€Ta£, oc T€ €WV E~ 

, ,~ ~ ~ \ " •• 1 f3 A 

aE£a'(J o€aaWC E7TE /,1l-€pOEVTa POTO/,C£, 

'"' ~, " ", r I" I~ 
TOV a all-oTOV Il-€Il-aac£v aKOVEIl-€V, 07T7TOT a€wrJ' 
a ,\ .... tI{},\ 1 • 1 

WC EIl-E KE/,VOC € E yE 7TapTJIl-EVOC EV Il-EyapO£C£. 

84 R. Harder, "Zwei Zeilen von Archilochos," HeTl1Ies 80 (1952) 381-84; Treu, op.cit. 
(supra n.2) 189£'. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 15 

Again we hear about the enchanting quality of Odysseus' words, 
again he is compared to a skilled bard, and this time the parallel to 
Archilochus (line 2) is even clearer. Odysseus, hero and victor over 
Troy, veteran of many battles and storms, here 'is' a skilled and 
inspired bard.35 

In Horner it is only a comparison, of course; Odysseus does not 
really combine the two activities as Archilochus does. But the narra­
tion of his adventures, the so-called 'Apologoi', and the various Cretan 
stories he invents in the second half of the epic present this Homeric 
hero as a 'poet'. This, and the fact that he is not speaking about the 
deeds and feelings of others but about his own life makes him the 
poetic ancestor of and possible model for Archilochus. 

That Archilochus did indeed have a certain liking for Odysseus is 
apparent from the fact that he frequently took up Odyssean thoughts. 
The linguistic and thematic connections between Homer and Archil­
ochus have been much studied since antiquity.36 The linguistic 
influence is pervasive,37 motif allusions are not rare,3S and sometimes 
Archilochus seems to quote a Homeric gnomic statement;39 but only 
in very few cases, as far as we can see, is the thematic connection 
explicit and fundamental for Archilochus' world view, and in these 
cases we are again and again led back to passages in which Odysseus 
formulates his experience and knowledge, won in long years of 
fighting :md travelling, bitter hardship and sudden reversals of luck. 

35 Note that in Od. 19.203 Homer comments on one of Odysseus' Cretan tales by saying: 
'{CKE" ifmJ8E"a 1To,ua Mywv JTVfLOLCLV OfLOra. At Theog. 27 very similar words are used by the 
muses of Mount Helicon to characterize the gift they are going to bestow on the future poet 
Hesiod. 

88 Arist. 141Top~fLaTa 14pX,A6xotl, EVPL1Tl8otl, XOLplAotl (V. Rose, ed. Arist. Fragmenta [BT, 
Leipzig 1886] p.16,144); Heracl.Pont. llE"pl'OfL~POtl Kal14pXLA6xotl fr.178 Wehrli; P.Hibeh II 
173 = 219,220,221 W. (cf Treu, op.cit. [supra n.2] 6f and 174-76); Vell.Pat. 1.5; [Longinus] 
llE"pi vifJOtlC 13.3; AP 7.674; Oio Chrys. Or. 33.11; cf O. von Weber, Die BeZiehungen zwischen 
Homer und den iilteren griechischen Lyri/eern (Oiss. Bonn 1955); G. Tarditi. "Motivi epici nei 
tetrametri di Archiloco," ParPass 13 (1958) 26ff; Scherer, op.cit. (supra n.6); Page; E. Oegani, 
"Note sulla fortuna di Archiloco e di Ipponatte," QUCC 16 (1973) 79fT (87f); Kirkwood, 
passim; and, in connection with the new Archilochus, J. van Sickle, "Archilochus, A New 
Fragment of an Epode," CJ 71 (1975) Iff; id. QUCC 18 (1975) 123ff; Campbell, op.cit. (supra 
n.ll) 151-54; J. Henderson, Arethusa 9 (1976) 159f, 165ff. 

87 Cf especially Page and Treu, op.cit. (supra n.6). 
88 e.g. 119 W. (72 0.)-11. 13. 130ff; 191.3 W. (112.3 0.)-11. 14.217; 193.2f W. (104.2f O.)-Il. 

5.399. 
at 38 D.-II. 18.309; 111 W. (57 0.)-11. 7.102; 25.5 W. (41 O.)-Od. 14.228; 134 W. (65 O.)-Od. 

22.412; 131 W. (680.)-Od. 18.136ff. 



16 ARCI-nLOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

Given the scarcity of the remains, this can of course be mere coinci­
dence; but it is certainly a strangely significant coincidence. 

Fr.25 W. (41 D.) contains the gnome: &A,\' aAAoe aA,\wt KaJP8l'Y]v 

lalvL€J'TaLL Sne1l40 calls this perception "eine Grundeinsicht der 
archaischen Zeit" and begins his interpretation of early Greek lyric in 
Die Entdeckung des Geistes with this line. The thought which becomes a 
topos of Greek and Roman lyric poetry from Solon and Sappho to 
Horace is first to be found in the Odyssey. It is, of course, Odysseus who 
"saw the towns and learned the minds of many distant men," who 
was first to formulate the experience that all men are different and 
have different pleasures and goals. He tells the swineherd Eumaios 
that he always preferred ships and fighting to the quiet life of a farmer 
and adds the general statement (Od. 14.228): aAAoe yap 'T' aAAOtCW &v~p 

E'TTt'Tlp7T€'Tat [pyote. It certainly cannot be proven beyond doubt that 
Archilochus took over this gnome directly from the Odyssey, but the 
similarity suggests that he had Odysseus' words in mind.41 We have 
already seen the context of the quoted lines. It is the fictitious Egyptian 
adventure; the shield parallel follows shortly afterwards. 

Archilochus (131/132 W.=68 D.) shares more, however, with 
Odysseus than the conviction that men and their ways of life are 
different. 

'Toioe av8pcimotCt 8vfLoe. rAaVK€ A€17''Tlv~ 17'a1:. 
I 8 A' I Z \ ,./,.,., .. 

YW€'Ta, V'Y]'TOtC. 017'O''Y]V €ve €'f' 'Y]fL€P'Y]V aY'YJ'. 
\ "L' .... ,' I , , " 

Ka, 'f'POV~Ct 'TOt 017'OtOte €yKvp~etV €pYfLactv. 

Frankel42 has shown the fundamental importance of these lines for 
Archilochus and his view of human life. Again the theme comes from 
the Odyssey, and again it comes from a speech by Odysseus the beggar. 
In 18.130ff he addresses Amphinomos, one of the suitors: 

,~\ • ~ , A './,.' 8 ' OVO€V aKWVO'T€POV yata 'TP€'f'€, av pWTTOW 

[ 
I ., ...." , \ fI ] 

17'aV'TWV. occa 'T€ yatav €17" 17'V€t€' 'T€ Kat €P17'€'. 
, \' ''/'' \, 8 " OV JL€V yap 17'0'T€ 'f''Y]Ct KaKOV 17'€,e€C a, 017"CCW. 

U'" , a \ , "" vo.yp ap€'T'Y]v 17'ap€XWCt U€Ot Ka, yovva'T opwprr 

'0 Snell, Entdeckung (supra n.6) 59. 
U The gnome was known from different ancient sources (West, testimonia ad 25 W.); 

a papyrus (P.Oxy. XXII 2310 fr.l coLi 40-48, ed. Lobel) has recently provided bits and scraps 
of what appears to be a typically Archilochan priamel context. 

U Frankel, Dichtung (supra n.6) l48ff; Wege 23ff. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 17 

'\\." "" '\ '()' 1 \' al\l\ 07E 071 I<at I\vypa EOt l-"al<apEC 7EI\EWC£, 
, '.J.. ' , Y' \ , 8 ~ 

Ka£ 7a <pEP€£ a€l<a':,0I-"€VOC 7€7/\7107£ VJ.LCfJ. 
..... , I , , , ()' , () 1 

70WC yap vooc Ecnv €7T£X ov£wv av pW7TWV, 

., """ ,,~ ..... 8~ OLOV €7T 71J.Lap aYTlct 7Ta771P avopwv 7€ €WV 7€. 

This realistic view of man's frailty and the instability of his feelings 
and moods must have been attractive to Archilochus, and the lin­
guistic similarity between fr.131 W. and lines 136f is so strong that a 
direct connection between the two passages can hardly be doubted. 

Three times Odysseus stresses the fact that he too has been a blessed 
and wealthy man once. But Zeus, out of sheer willfulness (i}{)€A€ yap 

7TOV), has taken everything away and turned the man who used to give 
generously to wandering beggars into a beggar himself (17.419ff; 
19.7Sff; 18.138). Like Odysseus, Archilochus is deeply convinced of the 
fickle unreliability of fortune and the impermanence of human 
affairs ;43 like Odysseus, Archilochus calls upon his friends and himself 
to «fight despair and endure" (13 W.=7 D., Sff): 

'\\'{) , '" ~ a/\I\a €OL yap aV7J1<€C70LCL l<al<OLCLV 
.,. .J.. '\ , , , '\ 1 "() 

W <pL/\ €7Tt I<pa7Ep71V 7/\71I-"0CVVTJV € €cav 

.J.. 1 "\ \ "\ \" '''' ~ , , t , 
<papl-"al<ov. al\l\07E a/\/\oc €X€£ 700€' VVV I-"€V €C 71J.L~C 

, 1 ()' C' I ~) I'f\ ' I 
€7pa7T€ , CXtJ.LCX70€V 0 €/\I<OC CXVCXC7€VOJ.L€V, 

,t. ~ "',. 1 , ',I. ' \ \ \ I 
€!, cxvnc 0 €7€POVC €7TCXJ.L€£'t'€7CXL. CXI\I\CX 7CXXLC7CX 

\~ ~ '() , I 
71\7J7€, YVVCXtl<€LOV 7T€V OC CX7TWCCXJ.L€VOL. 

In a quite similar way Odysseus tries to comfort and encourage his 
comrades after the terrible adventure with the Laistrygonians 
(10. 174ff) and before the dreadful encounter with the Skylla (12.208ff). 
Closer, however, is the thematic connection with the Odyssey and 
Odysseus in Archilochus' famous address of his BvJ.Loc (128 W.=67 D.). 
The first line (BVI-"E, ()VI-"" aJ.L7Jx&'vOtCL I<~S€CtVI<Vl<cfJl-"€V€) seems to recall 
the equally famous self-address of the 7TOAVTACXC Odysseus at 20.18: 
TETAa{)t S~, I<pcxSl7J, I<CX~ I<VVTEPOV aAAo 7TOT' ETA7Jc.44 It certainly would 
not be surprising if Archilochus in this poem intended to allude to 

the figure of Odysseus. For the concept ofTA7JJ.L0CVV7J, of patient endur­
ance, and the idea of a pvBJ.Loc, a constant change of ebb and flow, 

u 130 w. (58 D.); 122 W. (74 D.); 128 W. (67 D.); Kirkwood 36; Frankel, Dichtung (supra 
n.6) 160. 

4.\ R. Merkelbach, Untersuchungen zur OdysseeB (Zetemata 2, Munchen 1969) 231; Treu, 
op.dt. (supra n.2) 221; but see J. A. Davison, "Quotations and Allusions in Early Greek 
Literature," Branos 53 (1955) 125-40. 



18 ARCHILOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

failure and success, happiness and misery, and for the seastorm 
imagery, he could not evoke a better and more powerful poetic 
paradigm.45 

Kirkwood46 has pointed out correctly that Archilochus shares not 
only therA'Y/JLocVV'I} ofthe7ToAvrAac '08VCCEVC but also the other central 
quality of the hero's character which Homer has honored with 
formulaic epithets, "the resourcefulness and the belief in action that 
characterizes Odysseus the 7ToAvrpo7Toc" (and the 7TOAVJL7JXavoc). The 
preserved poems and fragments present a man who knows his way 
around (on the battlefield and at home, with his hand and with his 
sharp tongue), and in his animal fables Archilochus has apparently 
cast himself repeatedly in the role of the fox. Stanford47 considers the 
possibility that "the pseudonym AUJwv which [Odysseus] assumes in 
Od. 19.183, refers to a fox's proverbially torchlike tail." Is Odysseus 
perhaps calling himself 'redfox' ? Could 'fox' perhaps be a characteriza­
tion already used for the hero in the epic tradition outside Homer? 
This is, however, highly uncertain. As far as we can see, Odysseus 
receives this title of honor-and blame-for the first time in Sophocles. 
when Aias calls him "that knavish fox" (Aj. 103 rOtJ7TlrpE7Trov Klva8oc). 
But although the name 'fox' is still absent from the Odyssey. all the 
qualities of a fox are certainly there. We need only remember the 
ironic characterization of Odysseus by Athena at their first er.counter 
in Ithaca (13.291fI). 

v 
That the 'younger' Odyssey is closer than the Iliad to the world of 

Archilochus and the spirit of his poems has been stressed by many 
scholars and is hardly surprising. Neither the Odyssey nor the lifetime 
of Archilochus can be dated precisely, but it is, if not likely, at least 
possible that not more than a generation and possibly less separates 
the epic poem and the first lyric poet we have.48 It is therefore perhaps 

U I do not intend to play down the small but very significant differences between the 
Homeric passages and Archilochus, repeatedly stressed by Snell (see e.g., "Wie die Griechen 
lernten, was geistige Tiitigkeit ist," )HS 93 [1973] 172ff ad Archil. 128 W. [67 D.], 173/74). 
Archilochus does not merely quote Homer, he adapts him for the expression of his own 
ideas and attitudes. 

u Kirkwood 36. 
"w. B. Stanford, The Ulysses 'I'hem£1 (Oxford 1963, repro Ann Arbor 1968) 262 n.8. 
"For the date of Archilochus cf Jacoby, op.cit. (supra n.27); for the date of the Odyssev 

now W. Burkert, "Das hunderttorige Theben und die Datierung der Ilias," WS 89 {1976} 
5-21. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKER 19 

not astonishing to find that there are points of contact between 
Archilochus and Odysseus, who as the hero of the Odyssey embodies 
the spirit of that epic. What is remarkable, however, is the number 
and the importance of parallels and connections which can be drawn: 
(1) Latte has observed the striking similarity between the <life' of the 
pseudo-Odysseus in the Cretan tale (14.191fl") and the life of Archil­

ochus as it appears; (2) Archilochus as he presents himself in his 
poems shares the central character traits and attitudes of both the 
true and the false Odysseus, endurance and resourcefulness; and 
(3) the poet reveals an unmistakable liking for this one epic hero. 
We have seen that in the several cases in which we are justified, or at 
least tempted, to assume a direct and important thematic influence, 
we are always led back to Odysseus. Archilochus always adapts lines 
from speeches Odysseus makes in the second half of the Odyssey. 

It appears then quite likely that Archilochus felt (and followed) a 
congenial spirit in Odysseus, the 7TOAV'TA<XC and 7TOAVfL~X<Xvoc, the heroic 
soldier, curious adventurer and pseudo-poet, the "untypical hero" 
(Stanford), who talks so much about the vicissitudes and constraints 
of human life and who nevertheless, clever like a fox, always knows a 
way out. 

This, finally, brings us back to the starting point of our considera­
tions, Odysseus' Cretan story and the shield of Archilochus. Dover49 

has reminded critics and readers of Archilochus that it is not correct 
to assume that Hwhenever a fragment of an early Greek poet contains 
a first person singular, it comes from a genuinely autobiographical 
poem." The simple truth that the JycP of a poem is not necessarily the 
ego of the poet is indeed often forgotten.5o Quoting a number of 
examples from preliterate song, Dover has shown that "assumed 
personality and imaginary situation" are as old as the lyric expression 
of feelings, attitudes and events. He consequently asks: HAre we 
sure-to take a crucial example-that Archilochus himself threw 
away his shield in combat against the Saioi ?"51 The Homeric precedent 
strengthens these doubts. We certainly cannot rule out the possibility 
that the parallel is accidental, that Archilochus indeed talks about a 
personal experience. But the poetic parallel and the fact that it comes 
from a literary context which was not only well known but, as I have 

49 Dover, op.cit. (supra n.6) 209. 
60 An instructive recent example is R. Merke1bach's (mis)use of the new Archilochus, 

ZPE 14 (1974) 113; cf West's answer, ZPE 16 (1975) 217ff (and Catullus 16). 
61 Dover, op.cit. (supra n.6) 209. 



20 ARCHILOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

tried to show, very attractive to Archilochus make it appear much 
more likely that we are, in fact, dealing with an "imaginary situation." 
It is at least possible that the poet, who repeatedly evokes or even 
quotes Odysseus, here also consciously identifies himself with his 
model. 

The new Archilochus papyrus has rekindled the old doubts about 
the historical authenticity of the traditional Archilochus biography. 52 
Is the story about Lycambes and his daughters true and not rather a 
literary 'Wandermotiv' of iambic poetry?53 Was the name of Archil­
ochus' mother indeed Enipo or is 'Evt7TW a 'speaking name' by which 
the writer of invective and satirical squib called himself-quite 
appropriately-the son of mother Blame ?54 Was Archilochus really 
a bastard, or is the illegitimate birth an assumed poetic role, a 
'persona'? And now a minor detail: did he really lose his shield in 
Thrace? We cannot answer these questions. Most if not all we know 
about Archilochus, whether it comes from ancient sources or our own 
speculations, is derived from his poems.55 Therefore it is evident that 
we are dealing not with the 'rear but with the so-called 'poetiC 
personality' of the poet. To what degree the two are identical cannot 
be verified on the basis of our present evidence. And what does it 
matter anyway? What is interesting and informative for the 'Geistes­
geschichte' of the archaic period is the spirit of Archilochus' poetry, 
the attitudes and opinions which manifest themselves in his verses, 
and not the question whether a certain individual two and a half 
millennia ago did actually throw his shield away and buy another one. 

VI 
I conclude with an observation, the importance of which is difficult 

to judge. Hesychius under the lemmaE&io£ gives the brief explanation 

iii A fairly complete bibliography for the new Archilochus now by E. Degani, "SuI nuovo 
Archiloco {Pap.Colon. inv. 7511)," in Studi in memoria di M. Barchiesi 1977, repro in Poeti 
greci giambici ed elegiaci, Letture critiche (Milano 1977) 15-43; for Archilochus' biography see 
M. Lefkowitz, "Fictions in Literary Biography: The New Poem and the Archilochus 
Legend," Arethusa 9 (1976) 181-89, and in the same volume, Henderson 160 and G. Nagy 
191-94. 

68 M. West, Studies in Greek Elegy and Iambus (Berlin 1974) 25-27. 
5' G. Nagy, "Iambos, Typologies ofInvective and Praise," Arethusa 9 (1976) 192f; this is 

an idea which was first promoted by F. Welcker, "Archilochos" (1816) =Kl. Schriften I 
(Bonn 1844) 72ff. 

16 Lefkowitz, op.cit. (supra n.51) 181f. 



BERND SEIDENSTICKBR 21 

ot 7Tp6npov KtKOVEC. The Odyssey again. The unfortunate encounter 
with the Kikones is the first of Odysseus' adventures after the Trojan 
war. The wind carries him to Ismaros on the coast of the Kikones. 
He storms and plunders the town and shares the booty with his men. 
But when he tells them to leave they refuse and start to feast by the 
shore, eating and drinking excessively. Meanwhile fugitives alarITl the 

Kikonian king, who soon arrives with a huge army to take revenge, 
and Odysseus, having lost many of his men, barely manages to get 
away (Od. 9.39-61). Only as an aside I note that Odysseus here is 
drinking wine from Ismaros as does Archilochus in fr.2 W. (2 D.): 

• '" " ~ r ,. '" ''''. l EV OOP' JLEV JLOt JLa."a JLEJLaYJLEVTJ. EV OOpt 0 0 voc 
• T I I ~.. C;:-' \ I l.CJLCtP'KOC' 7TLVW U EV uOP' KEKIUJLEVOC. 

At this moment Odysseus has not yet been driven out of reality into 
the fairy tale world of the Lotophagoi and the Cyclops, of Circe and 
the Sirens. This is Thrace, and Ismaros, the town Odysseus and his 
companions plunder, is well known, espedally well known to 
Archilochus, who lived so close by and probably had his own adven­
tures in Thrace.66 It is of course impossible to say how old the equation 
Saioi=Kikones67 is, but even if Archilochus did not identify the Saians 
with the Homeric Kikones, it is more than likely that he was aware of 
the fact that he, unsuccessfully raiding the Saians near Ismaros, was 
treading in Odysseus' footsteps. 

We may even be able to pursue our argument one step further. 
One of the most charming aspects of the Cretan tales and the one 
which, I think, is most neglected is the shrewd and amusing way in 
which Odysseus, in a silent conspiracy with the audience, uses material 
from his 'true' adventures (Books 9-12) to build his false experiences. 
Listening to the Cretan stories we are constantly led back to the stories 
we heard at the Phaeadan court. Now, the Egyptian adventure of the 
pseudo-Odysseus is clearly modelled after the real Odysseus' un­
propitious encounter with the Kikones. The dramatic structure of the 
two stories is almost identical: (a) arrival, (b) plundering of the dty 
or fields and villages, (c) futile warning of the companions, Cd) call for 
help, (e) arrival of a huge army, (f) Odysseus and his companions are 

68 The island Thasos had a bridgehead on the Thracian coast; cf Strabo VII C 331, fr.44; 
RE 9 (1916) 2134f s.v. Ismaros (Oberhummer). 

57 The equation is known only from Hesychius; the Saioi are not attested anywhere else 
in ancient literature. 



22 ARCI-llLOCHUS AND ODYSSEUS 

routed and Odysseus barely manages to escape disaster. The only 
major difference is that in the Egyptian adventure (b) and (c) appear 
in reverse order. 

The structural and thematic parallelism is so complete that no one 
hearing or reading the Egyptian adventure can fail to realize that 
here the disguised Odysseus is offering his Kikones adventure in an 
Egyptian set-up. As we remember. however. it is the Egyptian story 
in which Odysseus gets rid of his shield and saves his life. and it is 
intriguing to think that Archilochus perhaps connected the two stories 
as we do and consequently was even more attracted by the Egyptian 
ptt/Jac'Tf'£c Odysseus. 

UNIVBRSITAT HAMBURG 

January. 1978