Greek Rhetoric Before Aristotle. Richard Leo Enos

and an indication of the need to examine its Homeric origin.

      In Homeric literature, an aoidos could represent any entertainer who chanted out a tale and who often kept rhythm with a lyre or staff. Both Homer and Hesiod provide several examples throughout their works (Homer, Iliad 9.186–89; Odyssey 8.65–67, 105, 254, 261–62; 13.28–30; 17.260–63; 22.330–33. Hesiod, Theogonia 29–32). In fact, the primary distinction of an aoidos from a musician seems to be only that the accompaniment is secondary to the oral work. Hesiod, for instance, distinguished an “aoidos” from an individual who specialized or limited himself only to playing an instrument such as the kithara (Hesiod, Incertae Sedes Fragmenta 1; Diogenes Laertius 8.1.25). In ancient lyric poetry, the common practice was for the aoidos to accompany his lay to a musical beat; virtually every form of Greek poetry was associated with music (Plato, Ion 530A; OCD 705). When translators arbitrarily distinguish among the Homeric bard, minstrel, and rhapsode, they obscure the unity that enabled an individual to blend song, music and poetry. Moreover, to impose the notion of specialization is to imply a refinement that had not yet occurred. Initially, Homeric aoidoi such as Phemius did not credit their oral ability to any systematic technique, as did later Rhapsodes such as Ion. Rather, as E.R. Dodds indicates, they attributed their ability to the “psychic intervention” of divine inspiration (10–11). In brief, it would be more precise to consider these Homeric chanters as “pre-Rhapsodes”; we should qualify the meaning within the context rather than obscure what is essentially the same phenomenon with various labels. There is little doubt, however, that Rhapsodes eventually took on a very specialized role as interpreters of Homeric literature, but such distinctions cannot reasonably be drawn in the Homeric age.

      Even ancient scholars were in a quandary over the etymology of the term “rhapsode.” This uncertainty is illustrated in the writings of the second century BCE grammarian Dionysius Thrax: “Rhapsody is the aspect of poetry embracing some proposed subject. Moreover, rhapsody is [derived] from the [term] ‘rod,’ from the fact that men traveled around with a baywood rod singing the poems of Homer” (Τέχνη γραμματική 5; see also, Pfeiffer 269). For Dionysius, the meaning of rhapsody (ῥαψῳδία) is derived from two words: “rod” (ῥάβδος), and “chant” (ᾠδή). Hence, for Dionysius, the term “rhapsode” came from the combined term “rodchanter,” one who beats out the metre of his chant with a staff. This interpretation is supported by archaeological evidence, for among the British Museum collection of Greek pottery is an early fifth century BCE Attic red-figure amphora (E. 27) which shows a rhapsode with a staff (ῥάβδος) chanting a poem (Kirk, Songs plate 76; Callimachus, Fragmenta 138; cf. Pausanius 9.30.3).

      Although Dionysius’s interpretation differs from the concept of Rhapsodes as “weavers of chants,” its etymology is not incompatible with the earlier explanations of Hesiod and Pindar, both of whom were closer in time to the Homeric age than was Dionysius (Hesiod, Fragmenta Dubia 3; scholia on Pindar, Nemean Odes 2.1, 2). In fact, annotators of Dionysius’s writing posit both of the above interpretations: early Rhapsodes not only wove together swatches of heroic verse but also often used a staff or lyre for rhythmic accompaniment (5, accompanying scholia 8, 9). Pindar even used a term for rod (ῥάβδος, see below) in a metaphorical sense to indicate the “standard” for measuring verse, and Homer indicated that divine inspiration (μένος) could be transmitted through a staff (Isthmian Odes 4.36–39). In the Homeric sense, a “ῥάβδος” is usually taken to be a sort of magic wand, such as those used by Circe, Athena and Hermes (Iliad 13.59ff.; 24.343. Odyssey 10.238, 319; 16.172; E. R. Dodds p.9.n.52).

      Etymological perspectives from such ancient authors as Dionysius Thrax provide important information for the interpretation of oral literature. With these terms in mind, Homer may be considered the father of Rhapsodes, for he was the first known aoidos to present a formal codification and canonization of heroic oral literature. The Homeric term “aoidos” first became associated with a conscious, rational system of oral discourse when, in the eighth century BCE, Hesiod called himself and Homer “ἀoidόi” who weave their compositions together (ῥάψατες ἀoiδήν) in order to compose (Hesiod Fragmenta Dubia 3; scholia on Pindar Nemean Odes 2.1, 2). Evidence cited above indicates that aoidoi such as Homer and Hesiod were the first Hellenic thinkers to advance formalized systems for both presenting and understanding oral literature–an activity that ought to be recognized as contributing to the evolution of rhetoric as a discipline.

      B. The Stabilization of the Rhapsodic Tradition.

      Two factors marked the rhapsodic tradition: the modification of the Greek language and the introduction of written literature. The Phoenician alphabet was introduced in Greece as early as the thirteenth century BCE, but the earliest extant “literature” is from the eighth century BCE and was used as an aid in storytelling (Ullman 22; Kirk, Epic 10; Pfeiffer 269; Kirk, Oral 19–39). Although types of script called Linear B and Linear A existed during the Bronze Age, Greece lapsed back into a preliterate level by the eleventh century BCE and lost the art of writing for several centuries. During this preliterate dark age, storytellers chanted heroic adventures similar to those in Homer but preserved and conveyed their tales orally. Homer thus wrote about other aoidoi like Demodocus and Phemius, who lived during the oral, preliterate period.

      Throughout the rise of Greek literature, the works of Homer maintained their popularity. The desire of listeners to hear the ancient, correct pronunciation of Homer’s works also endured—despite the influence of several dialects and foreign languages (Pfeiffer 11). Classical Greeks saw writing as a means to facilitate oral communication, and the fifth century BCE Pre-Socratic philosopher Kritias even claimed that the “Phoenicians invented writing as an aid to speaking” (Kritias, DK 88.B.2). This is a point of no small significance, for as the rest of the language went through the natural process of simplifying its structure, numerous Homeric terms became increasingly rare and obsolete (γλῶσσαι) and needed to be recorded so that their “proper” meaning and pronunciation would be insured for future listeners. Consequently, an everwidening gap emerged between the fixed language preserved in the works of Homer and the constantly changing Greek tongue.

      Despite the linguistic changes that took place in the Greek language from the eighth to the fourth centuries BCE (Maas 1), the desire to preserve the euphony of the Homeric tongue encouraged individual Rhapsodes to record, and thus preserve, the almost sacrosanct interpretation (Plato Ion 530C, D ff.; Pfeiffer 10–11). Pindar claimed that even in his time audiences required individuals who could explain and preserve literature (Olympian Odes 2.83–85; Pythian Odes 1.93–94; Isthmian Odes 7.16–19). In the twilight of this oral, preliterate period, Homeric interpreters relied strongly on memory, and their reputation for reciting entire sections of Homer was widespread (Pindar Nemean Odes 7.14–16; Isthmian Odes 6.98–110; Plato Ion 537A, B). Rudolf Pfeiffer argues that there is “no evidence for book production on a large scale, for the circulation of copies, or for a reading public in the lyric age. The power of memory was unchallenged, and the tradition of poetry and early philosophy remained oral” (25). Even the term rhapsody, in its earliest sense, came to mean the chanting of an entire book of Homer—or about five hundred lines at a single session (Liddell and Scott 1566; Kirk, Songs 306–307n2). In this respect, the Iliad and Odyssey are actually stories woven together with formulaic transitions. Moreover, the emergence of writing facilitated attempts to preserve Homeric literature and pronunciation, for interpreters were able to use texts or copies of passages to aid their memories.

      The efforts to stabilize the Homeric tongue, particularly through writing, enable us to view Rhapsodes with more precision. During the purely oral period, aoidoi entertained listeners and related heroic stories with an emphasis on creative improvisation as well as the transmission of familiar stories. Rhapsodes began to appear during the literate period. Herodotus was the first known writer of the fifth century BCE to use the term “rhapsode” (ῥaψῳδόus) as an individual who chanted Homeric poems (5.67; cf. Sophocles, Oedipus Tyrannus 391). Thus, somewhere between the late sixth and early fifth centuries BCE the term came into common usage. By the late fifth and early fourth centuries BCE of Plato’s Athens, it meant a professional interpreter who recited almost exclusively the works of Homer (Plato, Ion 530C; Leges 658B). In fact, a work in the corpus of Homerica, which is dated as early as the fourth century BCE, even